Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan

              Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
1339 20th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3559
Phone: (772) 562-3909
Fax: (772) 299-3101
Station email: pelicanisland@fws.gov
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
1 800/344 WILD
http://www.fws.gov
September 2006
I N W R
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - 1 800/344 WILD
http://www.fws.gov
1339 20th Street
Vero Beach, Florida 32960-3559
I
W R
USFWS Photo
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Pelican Island
National Wildlife Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long-term guidance for
management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies
needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and identify the Fish and
Wildlife Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail
program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above
current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service
strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans
do not constitute a commitment for staffing increases, operational
and maintenance increases, or funding for future land acquisition.
PELICAN ISLAND NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
U.S. Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Southeast Region
Atlanta, Georgia
September 2006
Table of Contents i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION A. COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
I. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................1
Introduction..................................................................................................................................1
U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service......................................................................................................4
National Wildlife Refuge System ..................................................................................................4
Legal Policy Context.....................................................................................................................5
Ecosystem Context.......................................................................................................................6
Relationship To State Partners.....................................................................................................6
II. THE REFUGE..................................................................................................................................9
Introduction..................................................................................................................................9
Purposes And Designations Of The Refuge.................................................................................9
Ecological Threats And Problems ..............................................................................................10
Refuge Environment...................................................................................................................15
Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Populations.................................................................................16
Habitats .............................................................................................................................18
Land Protection and Conservation....................................................................................24
Education and Visitor Services .........................................................................................24
Refuge Administration.......................................................................................................26
Cultural Resources............................................................................................................27
Social And Economic Environment ............................................................................................27
Physical Environment .................................................................................................................31
III. PLAN DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................................33
Overview....................................................................................................................................33
Public Involvement And Planning Process .................................................................................33
Scoping Of Issues And Concerns...............................................................................................34
Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Populations.................................................................................35
Habitats .............................................................................................................................36
Land Protection and Conservation....................................................................................36
Education and Visitor Services .........................................................................................37
Refuge Administration.......................................................................................................37
Cultural Resources............................................................................................................38
IV. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION ........................................................................................................39
Introduction................................................................................................................................39
Vision.........................................................................................................................................39
Goals, Objectives, And Strategies..............................................................................................39
Goal A: Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Populations...................................................................40
Goal B: Habitats ...............................................................................................................46
Goal C: Land Protection and Conservation......................................................................55
Goal D: Education and Visitor Services ...........................................................................61
Goal E. Refuge Administration.........................................................................................67
Goal F. Cultural Resources..............................................................................................71
ii Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
V. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................................................................73
Background ...............................................................................................................................73
Funding Needs..........................................................................................................................73
Step-Down Management Plans..................................................................................................80
Partnerships ...............................................................................................................................80
Plan Review And Revisions .......................................................................................................82
SECTION B. APPENDICES
I. GLOSSARY....................................................................................................................................83
II. REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................91
III. RELEVANT LEGAL MANDATES ..................................................................................................97
IV. BIOTA...........................................................................................................................................99
V. COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATIONS.........................................................................................107
VI. AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION OF IMPACTS TO FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES............123
VII. SERVICE’S RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS .................................................................125
VIII. CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION.................................................................................139
IX. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT...................................................................................145
Table of Contents iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Refuge location and acquisition boundary...........................................................................2
Figure 2. Status map (as of October 2003).........................................................................................3
Figure 3. South Florida Ecosystem.....................................................................................................7
Figure 4. Conservation lands ............................................................................................................11
Figure 5. Pelican Island proper erosion over time ............................................................................13
Figure 5. Pelican Island proper erosion over time ............................................................................13
Figure 6. 2010 and 2020 Pelican Island proper erosion predictions.................................................13
Figure 7. Decline of colonial nesting birds on Pelican Island proper. ...............................................15
Figure 8. Land use/land cover of the refuge .....................................................................................20
Figure 9. Current visitor facilities.......................................................................................................25
Figure 10. Land use/land cover of the area ........................................................................................29
Figure 11. Aerial view of refuge ..........................................................................................................30
Figure 12. Proposed habitats of the refuge.........................................................................................47
Figure 13. Jungle Trail visitor facilities and restoration project ...........................................................51
Figure 14. Land acquisition priorities (as of October 2003) ................................................................56
Figure 15. Core Kroegel homestead tract...........................................................................................59
Figure 16. Existing and proposed refuge visitor and office facilities ...................................................64
Figure 17. Proposed organizational structure .....................................................................................68
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Number of nesting pairs and types of species found on Pelican Island proper ..................14
Table 2. Service-owned and managed lands and waters within the refuge’s acquisition boundary
(as of October 31, 2003) ....................................................................................................16
Table 3. Land use/land cover within the refuge’s acquisition boundary............................................19
Table 4. Characteristics of the main habitat types of the refuge.......................................................21
Table 5. Proposed land use/land cover within the refuge’s acquisition boundary in 15 years ..........48
Table 6. Current staff and costs........................................................................................................74
Table 7. Current unfunded Maintenance Management System projects..........................................74
Table 8. Current unfunded Refuge Operating Needs System projects.............................................75
Table 9. Proposed additional staff and costs ....................................................................................76
Table 10. Prioritized project needs and costs .....................................................................................76
Table 11. New step-down management plans....................................................................................80
iv Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 1
SECTION A. COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
I. BACKGROUND
INTRODUCTION
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge in Sebastian, Florida, is the birthplace of the National Wildlife
Refuge System (Figure 1). What happened on this tiny island that made it so important, that it
became a catalyst for what is now the world’s largest network of lands and waters managed for fish
and wildlife–the National Wildlife Refuge System? By the end of the 1800s, plume hunters, egg
collectors, and vandals had nearly exterminated all the egrets, herons, and spoonbills from Pelican
Island proper (i.e., the original 5.5-acre rookery island). Paul Kroegel (who was to later become the
first Refuge Manager) protected the last nesting brown pelicans on the east coast of Florida and
petitioned ornithologists and naturalists to help him. At the urging of researchers, concerned citizens,
the Audubon Society, and the American Ornithologists’ Union, President Theodore Roosevelt signed
an Executive Order that set aside Pelican Island as a preserve and breeding ground for native birds
on March 14, 1903, thus establishing the first national wildlife refuge (originally 5.5 acres) and the
National Wildlife Refuge System.
Pelican Island is both the name of the refuge and the name of the original 5.5-acre rookery island.
While Pelican Island proper (i.e., the original rookery island) eroded by more than half from 5.5 acres
in 1943 to 2.2 acres in 1996, the refuge has grown to encompass ±5,445 acres (as of September 30,
2002). Within the ±6,184-acre acquisition boundary (Figure 2), the Fish and Wildlife Service owns
±363 acres and leases or otherwise manages the bulk of the refuge (i.e., ±5,062 acres), while
remaining inholdings total ±409 acres. (This leaves ±330 acres unaccounted. These acres are most
likely part of the lease with the State of Florida.)
Located in the Indian River Lagoon on the east coast of Florida, Pelican Island National Wildlife
Refuge now supports important bird rookeries, key fish spawning sites, and a globally important
juvenile sea turtle nursery. Primarily comprised of lagoonal waters, the refuge includes aquatic,
transitional, and upland habitats supporting a diversity of species, including 14 federally listed
threatened and endangered species. This complex ecological system also supports hundreds of
species of birds, fish, plants, and mammals. When the refuge was established at the beginning of the
20th century, as many as 10,000 brown pelicans occupied the tiny 5.5-acre Pelican Island as a last
stronghold for this species along the east coast of Florida. Today, the number of brown pelicans
using the Island has dwindled in magnitude to less than 100 nesting pairs. And today at least 16
different bird species nest on Pelican Island proper, including brown pelicans, wood storks, egrets,
herons, ibises, anhingas, oystercatchers, and cormorants. Beyond the tiny rookery of Pelican Island
proper, over 130 species of birds use the refuge as a rookery, roost, feeding ground, and/or loafing
area. Further, federally protected West Indian manatees and sea turtles inhabit the lagoonal waters
of the refuge, alongside some 30,000 annual boaters. A growing human population, along with
ongoing development and other human activities, currently threaten the fragile, but highly productive
waters of the Indian River Lagoon and the refuge.
2 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 1. Refuge location and acquisition boundary
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 3
Figure 2. Status map (as of October 2003)
4 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Beyond being the birthplace of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the refuge is also designated as a
National Historic Landmark (1963), one of the smallest units of the National Wilderness Preservation
System (with a 5.5-acre Wilderness Area encompassing Pelican Island proper) (1970), and a Wetland
of International Importance (1993). The refuge is also listed as a candidate Marine Protected Area
(2000). Beginning in 2001, facilities have been and are being constructed on the eastern side of the
refuge on the barrier island through partnerships (e.g., with Indian River County) to view the historic
Pelican Island rookery and interpret the natural and cultural history of the refuge, the area, and the
Refuge System. Another currently active partnership activity is focused on refuge habitat restoration
efforts with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Indian River County.
This Comprehensive Conservation Plan for Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge was prepared to
guide future refuge management. A planning team developed a range of alternatives that best met
the goals and objectives of the refuge. Following a public review and comment period on the draft
plan, a final decision was made by the Fish and Wildlife Service that will guide refuge management
programs and projects over a 15-year planning period.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
The Fish and Wildlife Service is the primary federal agency responsible for the conservation,
protection, and enhancement of the Nation’s fish and wildlife populations and their habitats. Although
the Service shares some conservation responsibilities with other federal, state, tribal, local, and
private entities, it has specific trustee obligations for migratory birds, threatened and endangered
species, anadromous fish, and certain marine mammals. As part of its mission, the Service
administers the National Wildlife Refuge System, a national network of lands and waters for the
management and protection of these resources.
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM
To date, the Refuge System is comprised of more than 540 national wildlife refuges and over 3,000
small waterfowl breeding and nesting sites covering more than 95 million acres, the world’s largest
collection of lands and waters specifically managed for fish and wildlife. The majority of these lands,
77 million acres, are in Alaska. The remaining acres are spread across the other 49 states and
several island U.S. territories. The mission of the Refuge System is:
“...to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation,
management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife and plant
resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and
future generations of Americans.”
- National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997
The wildlife and habitat vision for national wildlife refuges stresses that wildlife come first; that
ecosystems, biodiversity, and wilderness are vital concepts in refuge management; that refuges must
be healthy; that the growth of refuges and the Refuge System must be strategic; and that the Refuge
System serves as a model for habitat management with broad participation from others. This broad
participation includes local, state, and federal government partners; organizations; the local business
communities; individuals; and volunteers. Volunteers continue to be a major contributor to the
success of the Refuge System and in 1999, some 36,000 of them contributed more than 1.3 million
hours on refuges nationwide, representing an economic value of more than $20 million.
The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 established, for the first time, a clear
legislative mission of wildlife conservation for the National Wildlife Refuge System. Activities were
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 5
initiated in 1997 to complement the direction of this new legislation, including an effort to complete
15-year management plans (i.e., comprehensive conservation plans) for all refuges. These plans,
which are conducted with full public involvement, help guide the future management of refuges,
including providing management direction for natural resources and recreation and education
programs. The Improvement Act states that each refuge shall be managed to:
• fulfill the mission of the Refuge System;
• fulfill the individual purposes of each refuge;
• consider the needs of fish and wildlife first;
• fulfill the requirement of developing a comprehensive conservation plan for each unit of the
Refuge System and fully involve the public in the preparation of these plans;
• maintain the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System;
and
• recognize that wildlife-dependent recreation activities, including hunting, fishing, observing
wildlife, photographing wildlife, and participating in environmental education and interpretation,
are legitimate and priority public uses of national wildlife refuges.
The National Wildlife Refuge System hosts over 35 million annual visitors. Economists found that
these refuge visitors contribute more than $400 million annually to local economies. In 2001, on
conservation lands throughout the nation, approximately 37.8 million people participated in wildlife-related
activities, most to observe wildlife in their natural habitats. These visitors represented nearly
40 percent of the country’s adults who spent $108 billion on wildlife-related pursuits in 2001,
according to the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation (U.S.
Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census
Bureau 2002). As visitation continues to grow on conservation lands and waters in general and
specifically on refuges, adjacent local communities are realizing important economic benefits.
LEGAL POLICY CONTEXT
Administration of national wildlife refuges is guided by the mission and goals of the National Wildlife
Refuge System, Congressional legislation, Presidential executive orders, and international treaties.
Policies for management options of refuges are further refined by administrative guidelines
established by the Secretary of the Interior and by policy guidelines established by the Director of the
Fish and Wildlife Service. Management options are guided by a refuge’s establishing authorities;
Public Law 104, Stat. 2957 (§108, H.R. 3338); and the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement
Act of 1997 (see Appendix III for more information on legal and policy guidance for the operation of
national wildlife refuges).
Key guidance and direction can be found in:
• National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966;
• Refuge Recreation Act of 1962;
• Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations;
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Manual; and
• National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997.
6 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Since refuges must be managed for wildlife first, lands and waters within the National Wildlife Refuge
System are closed to public uses unless specifically and legally opened under specified conditions
allowing compatibility with the refuges’ purposes. All programs and uses of a refuge must be
evaluated based on mandates set forth in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act,
including those that:
• contribute to ecosystem goals, as well as to refuge purpose(s) and goals;
• conserve, manage, and restore fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats;
• monitor the trends of fish, wildlife, and plants;
• manage and ensure compatible wildlife-dependent visitor uses as those uses which benefit
the conservation of fish and wildlife resources and which contribute to the enjoyment of the
public (these uses include hunting, fishing, observing wildlife, photographing wildlife, and
participating in environmental education and interpretation); and
• ensure that visitor activities are compatible with refuge purpose(s).
ECOSYSTEM CONTEXT
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge is part of the South Florida Ecosystem (Figure 3). Comprising one
of the 52 ecosystems around the country, the Fish and Wildlife Service’s South Florida Ecosystem
encompasses more than 26,000 square miles, 19 southern Florida counties, and over 7 million people.
The South Florida Ecosystem has undergone numerous human disturbances, including alteration of
hydroperiod, fire history, and drainage patterns. Developing and dredging the canal system and
expanding agricultural operations have eliminated and diminished natural systems. Exotic species such
as Old World climbing fern, melaleuca, Australian pine, and Brazilian pepper are further contributing to
wildlife population and habitat declines. Over the last 50 years, the South Florida Ecosystem has
undergone dramatic changes, which are largely attributed to various human activities and growth.
Despite the ongoing landscape alteration and rapidly expanding population, the scrub, hardwood
hammocks, cypress swamps, salt marshes, mangrove islands, coral reefs, and seagrass beds of
south Florida support one of the most ecologically diverse systems on the planet. The majority of the
remaining wildlife and habitats of the South Florida Ecosystem are found on national interest lands,
including sixteen national wildlife refuges, three national parks, one national preserve, and one
national marine sanctuary. Despite tremendous human development, the South Florida Ecosystem
supports more than 600 rare or imperiled species, where 68 are federally listed as threatened or
endangered, including 8 mammals, 13 birds, 10 reptiles, 2 invertebrates, and 35 plants.
RELATIONSHIP TO STATE PARTNERS
The Fish and Wildlife Service is committed to encouraging and maintaining partnerships with others to
improve the environmental health of ecosystems and the National Wildlife Refuge System. Partnerships
are recognized by the Service as vital to fulfill our mission and help share our advocacy for fish and
wildlife resources. Some of our current partners include federal and state agencies, environmental
organizations, outdoor sporting groups, industry, local governments, and private landowners.
A provision of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 and subsequent agency
policy provide that the Service shall ensure timely and effective cooperation and collaboration with
other federal agencies and state fish and wildlife agencies during the course of acquiring and
managing refuges. For Pelican Island Refuge, state fish and wildlife management is administered by
the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (http://www.floridaconservation.org/) and the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/). These state agencies
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 7
Figure 3. South Florida Ecosystem
8 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
are charged with enforcement responsibilities relating to migratory birds, trust species, and fisheries,
as well as with management of natural resources of the state. Both the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection manage state
lands and waters. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission manages 4.3 million acres
of public lands and 220,000 acres of private lands for recreation and conservation purposes. The
Florida Department of Environmental Protection manages 150 state parks covering nearly 600,000
acres and 57 coastal and aquatic managed areas, totaling over 5 million acres of submerged lands
and coastal uplands.
Since the 1960s, the State of Florida has been an important partner with the Service at Pelican Island
Refuge (by leasing open waters and islands of the state to the Service, comprising the majority of
property within the refuge). The State of Florida has helped champion the refuge through various
efforts, including participation in the Pelican Island Working Group, an active working group
comprised of a variety of public and private partners dedicated to improving the refuge and the
resources it protects. For example, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Indian
River County have been invaluable partners in securing and funding habitat restoration activities on
the refuge. Various agencies within the state government have also participated in a mix of other
refuge projects, including the planning process to develop a 15-year management plan for the refuge.
The State of Florida’s participation and contribution throughout this comprehensive conservation
planning process provide for ongoing opportunities and open dialogue to improve the ecological
sustainment of fish and wildlife in Florida. An integral part of the comprehensive conservation
planning process is integrating common mission objectives, where appropriate.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 9
II. The Refuge
INTRODUCTION
Part of the South Florida Ecosystem, Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge is located within the
southern Indian River Lagoon (Figure 1). The Indian River Lagoon is located along a transition zone
between the warm-temperate climate to the north and a more subtropical climate to the south. The
area of the Lagoon surrounding the refuge is the focus of the planning study (Figure 1). The
Lagoon’s location, combined with its large size and other physical characteristics, make it the most
diverse estuary in North America.
PURPOSES AND DESIGNATIONS OF THE REFUGE
Currently over 5,400 acres, Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1903 on 5.5
acres “as a preserve and breeding ground for native birds” through an unnumbered Executive Order
and expanded in 1909 by Executive Order 1014. The Pelican Island Refuge “shall be administered
by him (the Secretary of the Interior) directly or in accordance with cooperative agreements and in
accordance with such rules and regulations for the conservation, maintenance, and management of
wildlife, resources thereof, and its habitat thereon” [16 USC §664 (Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act)]. The refuge shall “conserve fish, wildlife, and plants, including those which are listed as
endangered species or threatened species” [16 USC §1534 (Endangered Species Act)]. Further, the
refuge serves “...the development, advancement, management, conservation, and protection of fish
and wildlife resources... [16 USC §742(f)(a)(4) (Fish and Wildlife Act)] ...for the benefit of the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, in performing its activities and services...” [16 USC §742(f)(b)(1)
(Fish and Wildlife Act)].
Later, the Refuge Recreation Act was also applied to the refuge “...for (1) incidental fish and wildlife-oriented
recreational development, (2) the protection of natural resources, (3) the conservation of
endangered species or threatened species....” [16 USC §460k-1 (Refuge Recreation Act)]. The
existence of the refuge serves the “...conservation, management, and restoration of the fish, wildlife,
and plant resources and their habitats for the benefit of present and future generations of
Americans....” [16 USC §668dd(a)(2) (National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act)]. Finally,
the Pelican Island Wilderness Area “...shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the
American people in such manner as will leave them (wilderness areas) unimpaired for future use and
enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of
their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use
and enjoyment as wilderness....” [16 USC 1 1 21 (note) (Wilderness Act)].
On October 23, 1970 under Public Law 91-504, the 5.5-acre Pelican Island became one of the
smallest wilderness areas in the National Wilderness Preservation System. All management
activities occurring within the original 5.5-acre wilderness boundary must meet the standards and
criteria set forth in the Wilderness Act. Currently, about 3.3 acres of the wilderness area are
submerged due to the erosion of Pelican Island proper.
The refuge is also designated as a National Historic Landmark, a Wetland of International
Importance, and a candidate Marine Protected Area. Because of its status as the first federal area
set aside specifically to protect wildlife, the refuge was designated a National Historic Landmark by
the Secretary of the Interior in 1963. Thirty years later in 1993, Pelican Island Refuge was
recognized by the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands as a Wetland of International Importance for its
support of endangered species and large assemblages of migratory birds, as well as for its support of
10 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
species at critical stages in their biological development. In 2000, the refuge was listed as a
candidate Marine Protected Area for its protection of estuarine waters.
ECOLOGICAL THREATS AND PROBLEMS
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge is in a critical location to serve and support biological diversity
in the Indian River Lagoon and South Florida. Human impacts and underlying causes and threats to
biological diversity include:
• the direct loss of habitat due to development and other human activities;
• the simplification and degradation of remaining habitats, including habitat alteration and
fragmentation;
• the loss and decline of species and biological diversity;
• the effects of constructing navigation and water diversion facilities;
• the introduction and spread of exotic, nuisance, and invasive species;
• the lack of environmental regulation and enforcement; and
• the cumulative effects of land and water resource development projects.
As a result of these causes and threats, many species endemic to the southern Indian River Lagoon
have become extinct, endangered, or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The refuge
supports at least 14 federally threatened or endangered species. Further, the refuge also supports
45 species listed by the State of Florida as either threatened, endangered, special concern, or
commercially exploited; 54 species listed by the Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants
and Animals; 54 species, 3 communities, and 2 sites listed by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory;
and 11 species listed by the Audubon WatchList for Florida. (See Appendix IV for a complete listing
of these species.) Nationally, 1,262 species are federally listed, with 986 listed as endangered (388
animals and 598 plants) and 276 listed as threatened (129 animals and 147 plants). Further, 257
species are listed as candidates for federal listing.
Habitats in and around the refuge serve a variety of species and are highly important in this
developed landscape. A number of biodiversity hotspots are located in and around the refuge.
These hotspots are areas with a high degree of overlap for 54 kinds of declining wildlife species with
known occurrences of flora, fauna, and natural communities (Cox, Kautz, Maclaughlin, and Gilbert
1994). St. Sebastian River State Buffer Preserve (including impoundments and wetlands), seagrass
beds in and around the refuge, and privately owned mangrove islands south of Wabasso bridge are
hotspots identified as the most critical. Adjacent conservation lands are also critical to many species
of wildlife that also use the refuge (Figure 4).
The high productivity and biological diversity of Pelican Island Refuge have been altered by people,
which, in turn, have altered the way the Indian River Lagoon functions. The refuge faces ongoing threats
from contaminated air, soil, and water; erosion and sedimentation; and cumulative habitat impacts from
land and water resource development activities. Rapid population growth and development have resulted
in long-term negative effects to the Pelican Island Refuge. By the year 2010, about one million people will
reside in the Indian River Lagoon area. Terrestrial habitats that once dominated upland areas include
hardwood hammocks, which are very important for mammals and migratory birds. Urbanization and
agricultural operations (e.g., large citrus groves) now dominate land uses in upland areas. Stormwater
inputs, saltwater exchange through fortified ocean inlets, pollution, habitat destruction, and continual land
and water use practices are constant threats to fish and wildlife.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 11
Figure 4. Conservation lands
12 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
The reduction of ecological function and connection is a major problem in areas where the modification of
inland waterways has caused major declines in fisheries and aquatic resource productivity. Beaches,
seagrass beds, salt marshes, mangrove islands, and hammocks are subject to further loss or elimination.
Causeways, the Intracoastal Waterway, beach and shoreline development, and fishing activities dominate
aquatic uses in transitional and aquatic communities and habitats. Causeway construction, canal
dredging, and commercial agricultural operations have contributed to the long-term loss and elimination of
aquatic resources and habitats. Wetlands (former salt marshes and mangrove swamps) on the refuge
were converted and managed to aid in mosquito control. Until recently, these impoundment areas were
cut off from the rest of the Lagoon, isolating fish and other aquatic organisms from accessing this highly
productive area. Reconnecting impoundments and restoring natural flow and biological interchange,
while maintaining mosquito control and migratory bird habitat, are challenges to resource managers. As
water quality declines in the Lagoon due to sediment and nutrient runoff, seagrasses decline, resulting in
declines in fish and mollusk production.
Erosion of Pelican Island proper has increased management concerns of the Fish and Wildlife
Service regarding the primary impacts from boat wakes and the potential for secondary impacts from
dredging a deeper channel near the refuge. The rapid increase in coastal development is also of
major concern. With the continual loss of Pelican Island proper, long-term impacts are experienced
by many declining species. Predominantly due to the growth of the human population and the
associated increases in public use activities and wildlife and habitat impacts and disturbance, the
land base of Pelican Island proper (i.e., the original 5.5-acre rookery) decreased from 1943 to 1996
by more than 50 percent to 2.2 acres (Figure 5). Erosion predictions show grave consequences for
this rookery island (Dunlevy 1996) (Figure 6). However, current shoreline stabilization efforts have
increased the size of the Island to 2.8 acres (as of 2004).
Habitat conditions on Pelican Island have been changing over the last century. In 1903, when the
refuge was established, the 5.5-acre Island functioned as a brown pelican rookery with some 10,000
pelicans counted during the peak nesting season. At that time, Paul Kroegel focused on keeping
market hunters and egg collectors from decimating the population. One hundred years later, more
than a dozen species nest on the Island with less than 100 nesting pairs of pelicans on the Island in
the spring. Table 1 and Figure 7 clearly show a decline for the numbers and types of species nesting
on Pelican Island proper. From 1910 to 1999, the total number of nesting pairs has decreased nearly
94 percent. Even from 1995 to 1999, the total number of nesting pairs has decreased by nearly 44
percent. This decline is related to the erosion of the rookery island and the general decline of wildlife
species in the South Florida Ecosystem. Today, managers focus on limiting disturbance to the
rookery and restoring and stabilizing the shoreline from further loss.
On many of the lagoonal islands and within other refuge habitats, exotic plants have displaced the
majority of the native species. Problem and invasive exotics such as Brazilian pepper and Australian
pine cover much of the refuge. Citrus trees for agricultural harvest cover other large areas.
Commercial and residential development, feral animals and free roaming pets (including feral and
domestic cats and dogs), commercial fishing and shell fishing, recreational boating and marinas, as
well as elevated nutrient loading and pollution on the waterways are increasing.
Continual disturbance of fish spawning areas, nesting birds, and manatees and the reduction of water
quality from pollutants and watercraft are continual management problems. With a limited number of
full-time staff (i.e., staff increased from one to four in 2001), a continual challenge is the ability to
coordinate conservation management with the more than 100 agencies and organizations who share
responsibility of managing the Indian River Lagoon watershed (Indian River Lagoon National Estuary
Program 1996). Management overlap of refuge lands and waters is shared by many agencies. The
refuge was set aside for conservation, yet without adequate levels of staff to enforce regulations.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 13
Figure 5. Pelican Island proper erosion over time
Figure 6. 2010 and 2020 Pelican Island proper erosion predictions
14 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Table 1. Number of nesting pairs and types of species found on Pelican Island proper
Number of Nesting Pairs
Species
1910 1920 1941 1965 1976 1986 1995 1999 2004
Brown Pelican 5,000 800 500 300 300 200 153 80 47
Wood Stork 200 250 150 220 135 167
Great Blue Heron 100 20 25 15 10 24
Tri-colored Heron 500 50 45 15 3 10
Little Blue Heron 300 50 5 5 1 1
Black-crowned
Night Heron
25 25 4 4 10 3 1
Great Egret 25 150 50 48 50 15 10
Snowy Egret 500 200 40 35 20 6
Cattle Egret 10 400 5 5 9
Cormorant 75 125 50 50 40 25
Anhinga 4 20 0 0 3
Reddish Egret 2 4 4 3
American
Oystercatcher
1 1 1 0
Green-backed
Heron
2 2 1 0 0
Total 5,000 800 1,854 1,160 751 992 564 317 306
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 15
Total Number of Nesting Pairs on Pelican Island Proper
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1910
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
Year
Number of
Nesting Pairs
Figure 7. Decline of colonial nesting birds on Pelican Island proper
Today, the lagoonal portion of the refuge is being utilized primarily for recreation. Lagoonal islands in
and around the refuge are overrun with exotic plants, trash, and debris, but thanks to the efforts of
several private groups and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, some of the islands
of the Indian River Lagoon are being restored and protected.
The lack of Service ownership of most of the refuge presents a difficult management challenge (i.e.,
the Service owns ±363 acres and leases the bulk of the over 5,400 acres from the State of Florida).
Current long-term lease and management agreements between landowners with properties within the
approved refuge acquisition boundary tend to favor stipulations and mission requirements of the
owner, making it difficult for the Service to fulfill its mission, the refuge’s purposes, and trust
responsibilities. For instance, the management agreement between the State of Florida and the
Service stipulates that many activities, including boating, sun bathing, commercial and sport fishing,
and shell fishing would continue to be allowed within most of the refuge boundary. These traditional
activities continue to contribute to a diverse economy and provide recreational opportunities to its
residents, but at a cost to fish and wildlife resources. To manage in support of fish and wildlife
conservation (e.g., to regulate activities to protect colonial nesting birds, juvenile fish, and threatened
and endangered populations), refuge managers need additional authority to protect fish and wildlife
resources to meet agency mission and legal requirements.
REFUGE ENVIRONMENT
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge is located along the southeast coast of Florida in the most
productive estuary in the country--the Indian River Lagoon. The Lagoon has more species of plants
and animals than any other estuary in North America, including over 2,200 animal species and over
2,100 plant species. Since it is located where the temperate and tropical zones overlap and located
within the Indian River Lagoon at the confluence of freshwater and saltwater sources, the refuge is
uniquely situated to support a wide variety of resident and migratory species.
Although Pelican Island Refuge was established in 1903, land purchases did not begin until 87 years
later in 1990. To date, only ±351 acres have been acquired. As of September 30, 2002, the refuge
manages over 5,400 acres of the ±6,184-acre acquisition boundary. Table 2 summarizes the Service-owned
and managed lands and waters within the refuge, while Figure 2 delineates these areas.
16 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Table 2. Service-owned and managed lands and waters within the refuge’s acquisition
boundary (as of October 31, 2003)
Entity Method Acreage
USFWS ownership 363.493
Bureau of Land Management withdrawal 37.500
Orchid Island Golf and
Country Club
easement 127.280
Windsor (27.19 acres total) easement 19.161
Indian River County Management agreement 122.480
State of Florida (Pelican Island NWR lease) Lease 4,737.540
State of Florida (Archie Carr NWR leases) Leases 37.210
Total Acreage under Pelican Island NWR Management (as of October 31, 2003) 5,444.664
Management efforts from 1903 until 2002 focused on coordinating with partners controlling exotic and
invasive species; securing staff to operate the refuge; managing volunteers; and initiating
conservation programs that benefit migratory birds and federally endangered and threatened species.
During this planning process, in 2001, the refuge expanded its staff from one to four. Two more
positions were also added during this planning process in 2002. The now six-person staff addresses
a variety of refuge projects, including recent conservation management projects such as:
• recruiting and training staff and volunteers;
• developing visitor facilities;
• coordinating shoreline stabilization and restoration of Pelican Island proper;
• coordinating habitat restoration and facility improvements on the barrier island to showcase
Refuge System Centennial events (in March 2003) and to provide opportunities for on-site
wildlife viewing, environmental education, and cultural history interpretation;
• removing exotic, invasive, and nuisance species; and
• contributing to the recovery of federally threatened and endangered species (e.g., by posting
refuge boundary signs and conducting patrols).
FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PLANT POPULATIONS
Pelican Island Refuge serves as a critical repository of gene pools, species, and communities that is
very important to the overall contribution and health of the Indian River Lagoon and the South Florida
Ecosystem. Named after the original pelican rookery that currently occupies a 2.8-acre lagoonal
island and that serves as the focal point of the refuge, Pelican Island Refuge provides an important
ecological niche for fish, wildlife, and plant species. The Service manages refuge resources and
coordinates with neighboring land managers and agencies to conserve biological diversity in the
Indian River Lagoon region.
The refuge serves as an important site for the recovery of federal and state listed threatened and
endangered species. The refuge’s location and habitat features are important for the future of 14
federally listed threatened and endangered species, as well as for the future of 45 species listed by
the State of Florida (see Appendix IV). Restoration efforts on the refuge, coupled with a combination
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 17
of protected and managed public and private lands, could provide the necessary conditions for
endangered species to live with minimal disturbance, despite the high level of human development
and use in and around the refuge. Beyond the 14 federally listed species and despite limited data,
the refuge is known to support hundreds of species of birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians, fish,
invertebrates, and plants, with many more species suspected to occur on the refuge.
Avian species are highly important wildlife resources identified on the refuge with more than 140
species of birds using the refuge as a nesting, roosting, feeding, or loafing area. At least 16 different
species of birds nest on Pelican Island proper. And at least 39 bird species using the refuge are listed
by federal or state governments, Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals,
Florida Natural Areas Inventory, or Audubon WatchList. (Refer to Appendix IV for a listing of these
birds.) The federally endangered wood stork is of special interest to Service managers. Wood stork
populations have declined sharply in Florida, from 60,000 in the 1930s to 5,000 pairs today. Wood
storks have been nesting on Pelican Island proper since 1950. The Pelican Island colony has been one
of the most consistently active rookeries in the State of Florida (Rogers, Wenner, and Schwikert 1987).
Currently, between 90 and 150 pairs of wood storks nest on Pelican Island proper each year.
At least 18 mammals are known to occur on the refuge: short-tailed shrew, least shrew, nine-banded
armadillo, opossum, bobcat, river otter, eastern wood rat, cotton mouse, southeastern beach mouse,
raccoon, black rat, gray squirrel, hispid cotton rat, spotted skunk, marsh rabbit, eastern cottontail,
West Indian manatee, and bottlenose dolphin. The Lagoon is used extensively by Atlantic bottlenose
dolphins and West Indian manatees and both are commonly seen on the refuge.
And 27 reptiles and amphibians are known to occur on the refuge: eight snakes, eight frogs and
toads, five sea turtles, and three lizards, as well as the gopher tortoise, diamondback terrapin, and
American alligator. As a juvenile sea turtle nursery, the lagoonal waters of the refuge serve critical
needs for threatened and endangered sea turtles.
A variety of fish species also utilize the refuge. One hundred and six different fish species were
identified in 1897 during the first fisheries survey ever conducted in the Lagoon (Evermann and
Bean). Surveys conducted in 1994 (Gilmore 1995) listed 782 fish species for east central Florida,
with at least half of this amount occurring at some point of their life history in the Indian River Lagoon.
Over 200 fish species are known to occur on the refuge. One federally endangered fish species
occurs on the refuge: smalltooth sawfish. In addition, the refuge supports 10 fish species listed by
the State of Florida, Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals, or Florida
Natural Areas Inventory, including sturgeon, pipefish, goby, rivulus, and snook. Other fish using the
refuge include tarpon, spotted sea trout, flounder, black mullet, red and black drum, ladyfish,
mackerel, and bluefish. The American eel also occurs on the refuge and is currently under
consideration as a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act. And, although not federal
or state listed, fat snook and tarpon snook are included in Florida’s Wildlife Legacy Initiative as part of
Florida’s species of greatest conservation needs. Fish species within the refuge are important not
only to commercial and recreational interests, but also to the ecology of the area. Important fish
habitat, such as fish spawning and fish larvae settlement sites in the refuge, must be protected to
ensure healthy, sustainable fish populations.
A wide variety of marine, freshwater, and terrestrial invertebrates are found within the refuge’s
boundary. For example, the mangrove crab is found on the refuge and is listed by the Florida
Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals. Some of the more common invertebrates
include conchs, snails, oysters, land crabs, dragonflies, butterflies, and cicadas.
18 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Beyond wildlife species, the refuge supports an estimated 300 plant species, including 18 species
listed by the federal government, State of Florida, Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants
and Animals, and/or Florida Natural Areas Inventory: giant leather fern, Curtiss’ milkweed, hand fern,
Christmas berry, butterfly orchid, beach creeper, Johnson’s seagrass, crested coralroot, pineland
lantana, Simpson stopper, shell mound prickly pear cactus, cinnamon fern, pepper, inkberry, inflated
wild pine, giant wild pine, coastal vervain, and Tampa vervain.
HABITATS
The primary habitats of the refuge fall into three categories: aquatic communities, transitional
communities, and upland communities. Lagoonal waters, including estuarine waters, seagrasses, drift
algae, and exposed bottoms, cover over 75 percent of the refuge (see Lucode = 5400 in Table 3). The
remaining habitats of the refuge include agriculture (i.e., citrus groves), hardwood forest, Australian
pine, lakes, mangrove swamps, forested wetlands, scrub-shrub wetlands, non-vegetated wetlands,
rural land in transition (e.g., former citrus groves that are currently in early successional stages), spoil
areas, and roadways. Existing land uses within the refuge’s acquisition boundary, but not currently part
of the refuge, include residential, commercial, and agricultural uses, as well as roadways. See Table 3
and Figure 8 for a breakdown of the land use/land cover types within the refuge’s acquisition boundary.
(The land use/land cover types were obtained from the St. Johns River Water Management District and
represent 1995 conditions. Habitat surveys on the refuge may yield slightly different results.) See
Table 4 for the characteristics of the main habitat types of the refuge.
Aquatic communities of the refuge are in a mix of habitats, including lagoonal waters (e.g., exposed
bottoms, drift algae, seagrasses, and open estuarine waters) and the open water portion of the
impoundments. Exposed bottoms and oyster bars provide cover for invertebrates and small fish,
providing a forage base for a variety of wildlife along the food chain (this habitat supports key species
such as segmented worms, brittle stars, clams, oysters, stingrays, and flounders). Drift algae is free
drifting algae that collects in response to wind, water currents, and bottom topography and which
contributes to the primary productivity, and overall complexity of the Lagoon ecosystem (this habitat
supports key species such as juvenile green sea turtles). With seven species found in this area,
seagrasses are a key habitat of the Lagoon system, playing a prominent role as a nursery (key species
supported in this habitat include manatees, red drum, spotted sea trout, sea horses, blue crabs, clams,
shrimp, sea urchins, and wading and diving birds). In seagrass meadows, 214 fish species have been
identified, with 87 percent of the species in a juvenile stage. Providing a transition from fresh water to
salt water, the open estuarine water of the Lagoon provides the basis for the diversity of wildlife found
on the refuge (this habitat supports key species such as manatees, bald eagles, sea turtles, ospreys,
dolphins, pelicans, cormorants, waterfowl, black skimmers, terns, and a variety of fish).
Aquatic communities adjoin a variety of transitional communities on the refuge, including high salt
marsh, mangrove swamp, mud flat, perennial and ephemeral freshwater wetlands, and impounded
wetlands. Salt marshes are areas of salt tolerant wetland vegetation, often containing ponds, natural
depressions, and creeks that are utilized by fish, crabs, and shrimp. Other key species in salt
marshes include diamondback terrapins, fiddler crabs, marsh rabbits, Atlantic salt marsh snakes,
clapper rails, and wood storks. In mangrove swamps and fringes, mangroves trap and collect
sediment to help stabilize shorelines and reduce flood damage. Over 100 fish species and shellfish
are dependent on mangroves. Key animal species found in this habitat include mangrove water
snakes, river otters, raccoons, mangrove crabs, snook, pelicans, wood storks, herons, egrets,
shorebirds, periwinkle snails, and juvenile and predatory fish. Freshwater wetlands created with
water control structures that ultimately connect to the Lagoon could allow for anadromous fish
migration, benefiting pipefish, snook, and gobies. This could result in the recruitment of 10 fish
species unique to this area. Seasonally fluctuating ponds would benefit frogs, salamanders, crayfish,
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 19
Table 3. Land use/land cover within the refuge’s acquisition boundary
Primary
Land Use/
Cover
Code
(Lucode)
Secondary
Land Use/
Cover Code
(Lucode2)
Land Use/Land Cover Code Description Estimated
Acreage
1100 0 Residential, low density, <2 dwelling units per acre 55.7
1200 0 Residential, medium density, 2-5 dwelling units per acre 2.2
1300 0 Residential, high density, >5 dwelling units per acre 8.1
1400 0 Commercial and services 6.8
1850 0 Parks and zoos 3.8
1900 0 Open land 6.2
2210 4370 Agriculture, citrus groves, Australian pine 380.4
2430 0 Agriculture, ornamentals 4.3
3300 0 Mixed rangeland (old field, cabbage palm) 5.7
4200 0 Upland hardwood forest 6.3
4250 4220 Temperate/tropical hardwood (maritime hammock),
Brazilian pepper 69.1
4370 4220 Australian pine, Brazilian pepper 106.7
5100 0 Streams and waterways 0.9
5200 0 Lakes 31.8
5340 0 Reservoirs <10 acres 8.1
5400 0 Bays and estuaries 3,697.5
5400 6450 Bays and estuaries, submerged aquatic vegetation 879.1
6120 4370 Mangrove swamps, Australian pine 2.5
6120 6420 Mangrove swamps, saltwater marshes 737.3
6120 6500 Mangrove swamps, Non-vegetated wetland 3.3
6300 0 Wetland forested mixed 18.1
6410 0 Freshwater marsh 1.1
6420 0 Saltwater marsh 56.6
6460 0 Mixed scrub-shrub wetland (predominantly willow and
wax myrtle) 65.5
6500 0 Non-vegetated wetland 16.0
7430 0 Spoil areas 4.7
8140 0 Roads and highways 6.2
Total acreage within the refuge’s acquisition boundary 6,184.0
20 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 8. Land use/land cover of the refuge
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 21
Table 4. Characteristics of the main habitat types of the refuge
Community Habitat Type Characteristics Key Species
Exposed
Bottoms
Exposed bottoms lack rooted plants,
yet support algae communities.
Oyster bars are another important
component of this community. Both
areas provide cover for
invertebrates and small fish (which
provide a forage base for a variety
of wildlife along the food chain).
Segmented Worms,
Brittle Stars, Clams,
Oysters, Conch,
Stingrays, and
Flounders
Drift Algae Drifting red, green, and brown algae
collect in response to wind, water
currents, and bottom topography
and contribute to the primary
productivity and overall complexity
of the Lagoon ecosystem.
Juvenile Green Sea
Turtles
Seagrasses Seagrasses are flowering plants that
live underwater (submerged aquatic
vegetation). The depth in which
these plants can grow is limited by
water clarity and sunlight
penetration. Seven species of
seagrasses are found in this area,
each occupying a different
ecological niche. Seagrasses play a
prominent role as a nursery and are
a key habitat of the Lagoon system.
In grass meadows, 214 fish species
have been identified. Of these, 87
percent (i.e., 187) is juveniles.
Manatees, Redfish,
Spotted Seatrout,
Sea Horses, Blue
Crabs, Clams,
Conch, Shrimp, Sea
Urchins, and Wading
and Diving Birds
Aquatic
Open
Estuarine
Waters
The refuge is part of the Indian River
Lagoon system, which is fed by
several freshwater rivers, creeks,
and canals. The transition from
freshwater to saltwater provides the
basis for the diversity of wildlife
found in this area.
Manatees, Bald
Eagles, Sea Turtles,
Ospreys, Dolphins,
Pelicans,
Cormorants,
Waterfowl, Black
Skimmers, Terns,
and a Variety of Fish
Transitional High Salt
Marsh
Bordering the Lagoon between the
mean daily high tide and the annual
high tide line, salt marshes are
areas of salt tolerant wetland
vegetation. Salt marshes often
contain ponds, natural depressions,
and creeks that are utilized by fish,
crab, and shrimp.
Diamondback
Terrapins, Fiddler
Crabs, Marsh
Rabbits, Atlantic Salt
Marsh Snakes,
Clapper Rails,
Roseate Spoonbills,
and Wood Storks
22 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Community Habitat Type Characteristics Key Species
Mangrove
Swamps
Mangrove swamps are found below
the mean high tide line. A
mangrove fringe is found along the
developed shorelines of the Lagoon.
Mangrove detritus is a critical source
of estuarine productivity. Further,
mangroves trap and collect
sediment to help stabilize
shorelines, as well as reduce flood
damage. Over 100 fish species and
shellfish are dependent upon
mangroves.
Mangrove Water
Snakes, River Otters,
Mangrove Crabs,
Snook, Pelicans,
Wood Storks,
Herons, Egrets,
Periwinkle Snails,
and Juvenile and
Predatory Fish
Transitional
(Cont’d)
Impoundments During the 1950s and 1960s,
impoundments were created by
constructing a low earthen dike
around a salt marsh. This allowed
for the regulation of water levels for
the control of mosquitoes.
Herons, Egrets,
Shorebirds,
Waterfowl, Reptiles,
River Otters, Wood
Storks, Ibises,
Peregrine Falcons,
and Bald Eagles
Islands Lagoonal islands provide
environmental, recreational, and
aesthetical qualities. Natural islands
are typically low in elevation and are
colonized by mangroves. Spoil
islands are higher and include more
upland plants, including exotics such
as the Australian pine.
Wood Storks, Ibises,
Egrets, Herons,
Ospreys, Brown
Pelicans, and
Shorebirds
Hammocks Coastal hammocks occur on the
barrier islands where the air
temperatures are moderated by the
surrounding waters. Hammocks are
dominated by live oaks and cabbage
palms, but include an understory
with a diverse assemblage of
tropical and temperate plants.
Neotropical Migratory
Birds, Woodrats,
Eastern Indigo
Snakes, Land Crabs,
and Bobcats
Uplands
Citrus Groves Existing and former citrus groves of
the refuge serve as habitat for a
variety of species. These are
characterized by sandy soils,
herbaceous cover, and early
successional vegetation.
Ground Doves,
Marsh Rabbits,
Painted Buntings,
Indigo Buntings,
Loggerhead Shrikes,
and Hawks
land crabs, rivulus, red-bellied sliders, mud turtles and snapping turtles. The created freshwater
wetlands would provide foraging grounds for nesting and wintering birds. Restoration is planned on
the barrier island near Jungle Trail to mimic the natural conditions once found in this area. Beyond
these natural and restored aquatic habitats, the refuge also manages impounded wetlands. Under a
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 23
management agreement, Bird’s and Pete’s impoundments are actively managed for mosquito control
by the Indian River Mosquito Control District. In addition, the refuge currently coordinates with the
Indian River Mosquito Control District to regulate the water levels in Pete’s and Bird’s impoundments
on an alternative rotation schedule for wading bird feeding. The North and South Deerfield
impoundments are breached and therefore function according to the natural rhythms of the Indian
River Lagoon. Key species supported by these impoundments include herons, egrets, shorebirds,
waterfowl, reptiles, river otters, wood storks, ibises, peregrine falcons, and bald eagles.
Finally, transitional communities give way to upland communities on the refuge, including lagoonal
islands, spoil islands, coastal hammock, citrus groves, refugia habitat, and developed and
interpretative lands.
The refuge manages three spoil islands and 23 natural islands and islets. While both the natural and
spoil islands have natural and exotic vegetation, the spoil islands tend to be dominated by exotic
plants. Many of the spoil islands off the refuge are used for recreational activities such as day use
and overnight camping and these uses tend to spill over onto the spoil islands managed by the
refuge, which are managed under the lease agreement with the State of Florida and which are open
to the traditional public uses specified in the lease agreement. The most well known natural island of
the refuge is Pelican Island proper. From 1943 to 1996, Pelican Island proper eroded to less than
half its original size (i.e., from 5.5 acres to about 2.2 acres) (see Figure 5). However, recent shoreline
stabilization efforts have restored the Island to 2.8 acres in 2004. The total number of nesting pairs of
birds on this historic rookery has declined nearly 94 percent since 1910 (Figure 7). In an effort to
combat these losses, shoreline stabilization efforts began as a multi-partner effort in 2000 to protect
Pelican Island proper from eroding and losing its functionality as a rookery. Depending on the
success of the shoreline stabilization efforts, additional actions to limit erosion may or may not be
necessary to protect this historic rookery. These efforts are expected to reduce the loss of lands from
erosion, aid in the accretion of sediment, and help in the revegetation of the original 5.5 acres. This
loss of land and habitat has led to decreased populations of nesting birds on the Island, including
brown pelicans, wood storks, herons, and egrets. The mangroves which provide prime nesting
substrate are also declining.
To provide a buffer to the historic rookery, the refuge is acquiring lands within the acquisition
boundary on the barrier island, including citrus groves. Dependent upon available Service, partner,
and grant funds, the refuge plans to restore existing and acquired citrus groves to mimic natural
conditions and hydrology. Coastal hammocks represent much of the native habitats that previously
existed on the barrier island. Coastal hammocks are dominated by live oaks and cabbage palms,
and include an understory with a diverse assemblage of tropical and temperate plants. Key wildlife
species in coastal hammocks of the refuge are neotropical migratory birds, woodrats, eastern indigo
snakes, land crabs, and bobcats. In general, and especially within the Indian River Lagoon, tropical
hardwood hammocks have been greatly reduced by conversion to other land uses (from historically
agricultural uses to predominantly urban and suburban uses), fragmentation, and increased distance
between forest patches, resulting in the decline of breeding birds. Tropical hardwood hammocks are
severely threatened by invasions of non-indigenous animal species (Snyder, Herndon, and
Robertson 1990). Established non-indigenous animal species in tropical hardwood hammocks
include 7 mammals, 30 birds, 4 amphibians, and 25 reptiles (Snyder, Herndon, and Robertson 1990).
As a remnant of former agricultural operations, an old field habitat exists on the refuge. Although not
a native habitat, this old field habitat is managed and maintained by the refuge as refugia habitat for
the federally listed southeastern beach mouse. This old field habitat occupies small parts of upland
areas and is also valuable for grassland guild migrants such as bobolinks and loggerhead shrikes.
By increasing management, this old field habitat will better support southeastern beach mice, ground
doves, gopher tortoises, and migrants such as bobolinks and loggerhead shrikes. The refuge
24 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
contributes to recovery efforts for the southeastern beach mouse by protecting this old field habitat
and coordinating with researchers to conduct baseline surveys on the refuge.
Also, non-native habitats, developed, and interpretative lands do occur on the refuge. The refuge is
currently involved in habitat restoration and facility development in the Jungle Trail area. Refuge
facilities in this area include dike trails, a boardwalk, and observation tower, serviced by county-built
and maintained parking areas, a restroom facility, and the Jungle Trail roadway. Proposed, but
unfunded facilities include a wildlife drive, additional boardwalks and trails, informational kiosks, a
hummingbird/butterfly garden, and other interpretative lands, as well as a visitor center (where four
potential sites exist for this facility).
LAND PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION
The Service is involved in a variety of land protection and conservation activities at Pelican Island
Refuge, including a lease agreement with the State of Florida, management agreements,
conservation easements, partnership land acquisition efforts, and Service land acquisition efforts.
The refuge leases the majority of the lands and waters of the refuge from the State of Florida. So it is
important that the refuge and the State of Florida coordinate management to minimize injury,
mortality, and disturbance of the West Indian manatee and trust species, as well as native wildlife and
habitat in general. Under the current lease agreement, public uses including traditional navigation,
boating, bathing, shell fishing, and commercial and sport fishing are not restricted with the exception
of a 410-foot buffer zone surrounding Pelican Island proper. (This buffer zone is measured from the
mean high water line.) The current lease agreement does not specify control of using personal
watercraft and camping on spoil islands, which are currently uncontrolled on the refuge. Beyond this
lease agreement, the Service has other agreements addressing refuge management, including
agreements with Indian River Mosquito Control District for the impoundments and with Indian River
County for 122.5 acres. And a conservation easement with Orchid Island Properties allows the
refuge to manage an additional 127 acres.
Beyond existing agreements, the Service is pursuing new agreements and acquisitions, especially for
the buffer properties located on the barrier island. Given the ongoing and growing development
pressures experienced in this area, acquisition of the buffer for the Pelican Island rookery is already a
priority. Without acquisition of these barrier island properties by the refuge and/or its partners and
given the growth pressures of the area and current development activities, it is likely that these
properties will be developed privately in the near future.
To the west, on the mainland, the Service is working with Indian River County and other partners to
pursue acquisition and management of the Kroegel Homestead, since it is an integral piece of the
history of the National Wildlife Refuge System and the local community. Ongoing negotiations are
underway with the Kroegel family.
EDUCATION AND VISITOR SERVICES
Consistent with the provisions outlined in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act, the
Service can provide high quality compatible wildlife-dependent recreation programs. At Pelican
Island Refuge these include fishing, observing and photographing wildlife, and participating in
environmental education and interpretation (see Figure 9). These priority public uses provide the
public with an opportunity to learn about, enjoy, and appreciate natural resources, but not at the
expense of the natural environment. Any allowed use of the refuge, including these priority public
uses, must be determined to be compatible with the refuge’s purposes and with the mission of the
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 25
Figure 9. Current visitor facilities
26 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
National Wildlife Refuge System (see Appendix V for the compatibility determinations).
Fundamental and supreme to the provision of these uses is the provision of viable and diverse fish
and wildlife populations and the habitats upon which they depend. Those uses that do not support
the purposes of the refuge, that threaten or disturb fish and wildlife populations, or that are not
compatible public uses will be phased out on the refuge.
Priority public use activities currently occurring on the refuge include fishing and observing and
photographing wildlife (see Figure 9 for current facilities and facilities under construction). Fishing is
permitted in the open water areas of the Indian River Lagoon under the lease agreement with the
State of Florida and opportunities exist for catching a variety of sport fish, including redfish, snook,
seatrout, mangrove snapper, and Jack Crevalle. Fishing on the refuge includes fishing from a boat,
as well as bank and wade fishing in the Indian River Lagoon. State fishing regulations apply. Bank
fishing currently occurs in the Indian River Lagoon. However, the locations of these activities are not
managed by the Service because of the lack of staff and the conditions of the lease agreement,
resulting in wildlife loss and disturbance (e.g., bank fishing can flush nesting birds, leaving the nest
and any eggs or young subject to predation and direct sunlight for prolonged periods). Wildlife
observation and photography are highly popular activities, with visitors attracted to the area on a
year-round basis. Facility development and improvements are underway, including a boardwalk and
observation tower off Jungle Trail. Environmental education programs are not offered on the refuge,
however, the staff does conduct occasional on-site interpretive programs and off-site outreach
activities. The refuge also offers a web site and several brochures describing refuge program
activities.
Under the existing lease agreement with the State of Florida, fishing and boating are not restricted by
the refuge, except for a narrow buffer area around the 2.2-acre Pelican Island. Current uses include
those which are negatively impacting wildlife and habitats (e.g., using personal watercraft and
camping on the spoil islands). Also, current boating, personal watercraft use, and camping activities
are negatively impacting key bird nesting sites (e.g., these activities flush birds from nests, resulting in
nest abandonment and nest predation).
REFUGE ADMINISTRATION
Historically, the refuge was managed by one staff member, a single boat, and a shotgun, or less. For
nearly 100 years, the refuge was sustained by the partners, including state and local government
agencies and conservation organizations such as the Audubon of Florida, Indian River Area
Preservation League, Pelican Island Audubon Society, and the Indian River County Historical
Society. Most recently, the refuge has been aided by the efforts of the Pelican Island Preservation
Society. The Pelican Island Preservation Society has been instrumental in providing volunteers to
increase public awareness and to increase support from local, state, and federal agencies regarding
pressing issues. Preservation Society volunteers also provide support for other refuge management
activities (e.g., exotic plant control activities). Supplementing the efforts of the volunteers and the
partners, refuge staff has grown to six full-time employees.
Numerous research activities by a variety of entities currently occur on the refuge. However, due to
the lack of staff, the refuge has historically not managed nor has the refuge been aware of all the
research conducted within its boundary, the data collected, or the wildlife and habitat impacts from
conducting this research. As a result of this planning process, the refuge began issuing special use
permits for research activities in May 2002; however, research activities continue to occur without
refuge permits.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 27
Adopted in 1986, the Wilderness Management Plan outlines existing objectives and management
actions for the Wilderness Area located on Pelican Island proper. Predominantly utilized by colonial
nesting birds, the 2.2-acre Pelican Island Wilderness Area includes an estimated cover of 50 percent
red and black mangroves interspersed with smooth cord grass, salt grass, sea oxeye daisy, prickly
pear cactus, and Christmas berry. The shallow waters surrounding the Wilderness Area contain beds
of widgeon and shoal grasses. The Wilderness Area is closed year-round to the public to protect the
variety of colonial nesting birds. Although public use is prohibited within this small wilderness area,
wildlife viewing just outside the wilderness boundary is popular.
A survey for soil contaminants was conducted June 15-17, 1999, near the vicinity of the Jungle Trail
(on the Kennedy, Surman, and Pryor tracts). Materials such as fertilizers and low levels of copper in
localized areas were removed from the soil. The refuge also removed debris and paint cans. As new
citrus groves are acquired, the Service will conduct additional contaminant surveys.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Although the refuge is 100 years old, its history is a bit older. Florida’s terrestrial vertebrate life dates
back 25 million years (Myers and Ewel 1990); human inhabitation of the Indian River Lagoon region
extends back at least 12,000 years; and Indian shell middens throughout the area date from 1,000
BC to 1,000 AD. Since the refuge includes several archaeological sites and since these sites are
fairly accessible to disruption, vandalism, and theft, several archaeological surveys have been
conducted on the refuge since 1981. The refuge and Indian River County are currently working
together to list midden sites in the Florida Master Site File. Some of these sites are eligible for listing
in the National Register. In the event that a previously undetected archaeological site is uncovered,
activity must stop and the refuge must coordinate with the Service’s Regional Archaeologist and
Florida’s State Historic Preservation Office.
Recognized for its historic significance as the first refuge and the birthplace of the National Wildlife
Refuge System, Pelican Island Refuge was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1963. The
Kroegel Homestead is locally and nationally historically significant as the home of the first Refuge
Manager. Yet, the historic Kroegel Homestead is facing mounting development pressures. The
Kroegel Homestead was settled in 1881 and is located directly across the Indian River Lagoon from
Pelican Island proper and the rest of the refuge. The refuge and the Kroegel Homestead are integral
elements of the local community. Descendants of the Kroegel family are still active in the local
community and continue to live on what remains of the original Homestead.
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
The refuge is located along the Indian River Lagoon region, which was generally unaffected by
human activities until the early 1800s. Early activities included growing citrus, harvesting palmetto
berries, and growing pineapple. By the late 1800s, commercial fisheries opened up the Lagoon’s
resources. With repeated freezes devastating agricultural crops, cattle grazing increased in the
region. Various military facilities were developed in the region during World War II. By the 1960s,
NASA’s space program instigated considerable growth in the area. The modern economy of the
Indian River Lagoon is based on tourism and agriculture, as well as on fishing, manufacturing, real
estate, services, and government. Today, citrus is a $2.1 billion industry in the Lagoon region (Indian
River Lagoon National Estuary Program 1996).
The Indian River Lagoon is renowned for its recreational and ecotourism opportunities. The marsh
beds act as nursery grounds that support an $800 million dollar industry to the local economy.
Commercial and sport fishing, tourism, and real estate development are the mainstay in this area. In
28 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
1995, residents and tourists valued the Indian River Lagoon at more than $733 million, including
spending on recreational activities (e.g., rental of fishing boats), commercial fish landings (e.g.,
seafood sales), and Lagoon-front property (e.g., home purchases) (Apogee 1996). [Of this $733
million, access to the resources, valued at $200 million, is not reflected in market transactions
(Apogee 1996).] An estimated $54 million was spent on recreational fishing in the Lagoon in 1990 with an
anticipated escalation to $87 million by 2010 (Milon and Thunberg 1993). The Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission estimates that non-consumptive bird use (e.g., observing, photographing,
drawing, and painting) annually generates $477 million in retail sales in Florida (Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission 2000). The Indian River Lagoon region figures prominently in the Great
Florida Birding Trail with over 40 sites throughout the Lagoon region and a main gateway at Merritt Island
National Wildlife Refuge. Over 15 percent of Florida’s restaurants and hotels are located within the Indian
River Lagoon region (Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program 1996).
In 1990, the Indian River Lagoon region supported a population of about 750,000. By 2010, this
population is anticipated to reach 1 million (Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program 1996).
Although a smaller county in the region, Indian River County’s population increased by over 25
percent over the last 10 years from 90,208 in 1990 (U.S. Census Bureau 1991) to 112,947 in 2000
(U.S. Census Bureau 2000e). During this same time period, the city of Sebastian grew at a rate of
58.6 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 2000e). Median household income for Indian River County in
1997 was approximately $35,895 (U.S. Census Bureau 2000d). While this value is above the
national average, it is estimated that approximately 11.2 percent of the population of Indian River
County live at or below the poverty level (U.S. Census Bureau 2000d). Further, in October 2000, the
unemployment rate for Indian River County was more than double (i.e., 7.5 percent) either the Florida
or the U.S. unemployment rate (i.e., 3.7 percent for Florida and 3.6 percent for the U.S.) (Florida
Department of Labor and Employment Security 2000). The county’s population continues to be
predominantly white and older, with considerable increases in the Hispanic and Asian race
categories. The county’s median age rose in the 1990s to 47 years of age (Eljera 2001b). The
adjacent counties are generally larger than Indian River County: to the north, Brevard County’s 2000
population was 476,230; to the south, St. Lucie County’s 2000 population was 192,695; and to the
west, Osceola County’s 2000 population was 172,493 (U.S. Census Bureau 2000e). By 2015, Indian
River County’s population is forecasted to reach 144,000 (Lenze 2002).
Natural and agricultural lands of the area are increasingly being converted to urban and suburban
uses. This rapid growth and its associated impacts dramatically affect the refuge and its resources.
This growth even extends to the borders of the refuge. See Figure 10 to view the land use/land cover
classifications in and around the refuge (St. Johns River Water Management District 1995). See
Figure 11 for an aerial view showing the development surrounding the refuge–image taken in 1999
with 1 meter resolution (Florida Department of Environmental Protection 1999c). To the west of the
refuge, across the Indian River Lagoon and the highly utilized Intracoastal Waterway is the City of
Sebastian. Development west of the refuge includes residential uses (e.g., single-family homes,
condos, and mobile home parks), the City of Sebastian’s Riverview Park, commercial uses (e.g., gas
stations, restaurants, automobile and boat dealers, and small businesses), minor undeveloped lands
(e.g., Duck Point), citrus groves, plant nurseries, and sand mining operations. To the north of the
refuge are residential uses, Sebastian Inlet, and the highly utilized Sebastian Inlet State Recreation
Area (the annual visitation to the Recreation Area is approximately 750,000). The County Road 510
Bridge (i.e., Wabasso Causeway), the Environmental Learning Center, Disney’s Vero Beach Resort,
and commercial uses are to the south of the refuge. Residential developments (e.g., towns of Orchid
and Windsor), residential lots (up to 3 units per acre), active agricultural operations (i.e., citrus
groves), Indian River County beach front parks (e.g., Treasure Shores), and Archie Carr Refuge line
the eastern border of the refuge.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 29
Figure 10. Land use/land cover of the area
30 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Figure 11. Aerial view of refuge
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 31
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
The climate, topography, geology, air quality, soils, and waterways form the foundation of the
physical environment of the refuge.
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge’s climate is subtropical and temperate. The average
temperature is 67 degrees Fahrenheit with long, warm, humid summers and mild winters. Tropical
storms impact the area, especially from May through mid-November. Generally, the area averages
between 55 to 60 inches of rain annually, mostly in the summer and early fall.
On the refuge, elevation rises east to west sharply from sea level to 15 feet, and then drops more
gradually back to below sea level in the Indian River Lagoon. Generally, the elevation of the area
between the Lagoon and St. Sebastian River is 20 feet. West of that, the ancient dune elevation
rises from 20 to 30 feet.
The surface formations of the Pelican Island Refuge area are of Pleistocene (Glacial) and Holocene
(Recent) origin. Previously submerged lands were exposed during the late Pleistocene period,
providing for the spread of flora and fauna from the peninsula. Wetlands, salt marshes, mangroves,
and other swampy formations lined the margins between uplands and submerged lands. The tropical
hammocks and coastal shrubs of the area were most likely nourished by the prevailing West Indies
with substantial influences on the flora, birds, and insects from Cuba and the Bahamas (summarized
from Myers and Ewel 1990).
The air pollutants of major concern in Florida are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone,
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide (Florida Department of Environmental Protection 1999a). The
primary sources of these pollutants are vehicle emissions, power plants, and industrial activities. In
1999, all areas of Florida were air quality attainment areas (Florida Department of Environmental
Protection 1999a). The Indian River Lagoon area is considered to have good air quality. However,
occasional temperature inversions, lasting up to 48 hours, can temporarily degrade local air quality
below acceptable levels.
The general soils of the refuge include Canaveral-Captiva-Palm Beach, which is characterized by
gently sloping, somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained sandy soils with shell fragments,
and McKee-Quartzipsamments-St. Augustine, which is characterized by level, somewhat poorly
drained soils mixed with sand and shell fragments (Wettstein, Nobel, and Slabaugh 1987). Specific
soils found on the refuge include: Canaveral Fine Sand, 0-5 percent Slopes; Quartzipsamments, 0-5
percent Slopes; Captiva Fine Sand; McKee Mucky Clay Loam; and Kesson Muck (Wettstein, Noble,
and Slabaugh 1987).
With numerous small rivers, creeks, and canals flowing into it, the narrow estuarine Indian River
Lagoon stretches from Ponce de Leon south of Daytona Beach to Jupiter Inlet near West Palm
Beach–about 155 miles. The Intracoastal Waterway is the deepest part of the Lagoon. Near the
refuge the St. Sebastian River and Turkey Creek contribute fresh water to the brackish Lagoon. The
Fellsmere Farms and Sebastian River water control districts feed water through the St. Sebastian
River to the Lagoon. The St. Sebastian River flows into the Lagoon nearly opposite of Sebastian Inlet
along the northern edge of the refuge. The Lagoon has several identified water quality parameters of
concern: cadmium, lead, mercury, nutrients, selenium, thallium, and dissolve oxygen (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency 2000b). Water circulation within the Lagoon is affected by the
Intracoastal Waterway (e.g., navigation channel maintenance and boat usage), winds, inlets, and
causeways. The water quality within the refuge boundary is generally better quality (with Class II
water) than nearby portions of the Lagoon.
32 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 33
III. Plan Development
OVERVIEW
It began at Pelican Island with one man, Paul Kroegel, and a small group of concerned citizens and
scientists. From their efforts rose the largest collection of lands and waters for managed wildlife, the
National Wildlife Refuge System.
Although the Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge comprehensive conservation planning effort
officially began in 2000, the planning process was preceded by nearly a decade of preplanning
activities. In 1993, the first management plan was developed for the refuge. This first plan was 19
pages and outlined limited refuge management actions. In 1996, a public meeting was held to
determine the refuge management activities and facilities desired by the public. Subsequent to this
meeting, the Pelican Island Planning Group was created to prepare a plan for refuge facilities. A draft
plan was completed in 1997. In 1998, building on the success of the Pelican Island Planning Group,
the Pelican Island Working Group formed as a subcommittee of the South Florida Ecosystem Team
and focused on pressing refuge management issues (e.g., erosion of Pelican Island proper) and on
the Centennial of Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge and the National Wildlife Refuge System.
Following a series of meetings, the vision document, “Pelican Island: Honoring a Legacy,” was written
by existing and former Fish and Wildlife Service employees, with the cooperation of a variety of
partners and the public, and published in November 1999. This vision document set the foundation
for the comprehensive conservation plan and clearly outlined the steps needed to protect this refuge.
The refuge has been and will continue to be sustained by the public and its partners. More recently,
the public was involved in an array of refuge activities ranging from conducting shoreline stabilization
efforts for the historic Pelican Island rookery to preparing for the 100th anniversary of the refuge and
the National Wildlife Refuge System.
As it has over the past 100 years, the public will continue to play an integral role in the refuge over
the next 100 years, including being involved in the development of this comprehensive conservation
plan. The planning process provides for public involvement in developing a plan for the future
management of a refuge. Plans are revised every 15 years, or earlier, if monitoring and evaluation
determine that changes are needed to achieve refuge purposes, vision, goals, and/or objectives. The
basic steps of the planning process involve gathering information, scoping public input, developing
the draft plan, gathering and reviewing public input on the draft plan, developing the final plan, and
implementing and monitoring the proposed actions identified in the final plan.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PLANNING PROCESS
January 2000 officially began the planning process with preplanning activities such as gathering data
and information, meeting with Pelican Island Refuge staff and Merritt Island Refuge Complex staff
since the refuge was managed as part of the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge Complex until
2002, meeting with intergovernmental partners, visioning, and preparing for the public scoping phase
of the planning process. To include the governmental partners in the planning process, an
Intergovernmental Coordination Planning Team was formed. Team meetings were conducted on
January 20, 2000; February 18, 2000; March 16, 2000; April 12, 2000; and May 4, 2000. The
Intergovernmental Coordination Planning Team identified items such as existing and needed data,
refuge resources, issues, concerns, affected members of the public, vision ideas, and public
participation issues. As a group, this Intergovernmental Team prioritized its top issues to be
addressed by the refuge over the 15-year life of the plan.
34 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
A Service Core Planning Team was assembled and held a series of meetings in preparation for
conducting the planning effort and in advance of public scoping. Public scoping commenced on
April 24, 2000, including notices in the Federal Register (on April 24, 2000 and May 12, 2000) and in
local newspapers (on April 28-30, 2000 and May 19-20, 2000). Additional information about the
planning process and public scoping was provided through informational flyers, planning updates,
several articles in the local newspapers, and postings on the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Internet web
sites (http://merrittisland.fws.gov and http://pelicanisland.fws.gov). Given the proximity of the two
refuges, several shared issues, and many overlapping interested parties, joint public meetings were
held for Pelican Island and Archie Carr refuges.
Utilizing existing public mailing lists of the refuge, as well as public mailing lists from various
governmental partners, more than 1,200 informational flyers were initially mailed. This first flyer
invited participation in the planning process through a variety of means, including public meetings,
letters, faxes, telephone calls, e-mail messages, and personal visits. The flyer also announced the
times and locations of the public meetings, provided other information, and described the purposes of
the two refuges. Afterwards, three neighborhood meetings were conducted on May 3, May 25, and
June 1, 2000. Outlining the planning process and highlighting the issues and concerns raised to
date, a June 2, 2000 Planning Update was mailed out to over 2,800 interested parties. Following this
Planning Update, two summary, countywide meetings were held on June 14 and June 15, 2000, in
Sebastian (Indian River County) and Melbourne (Brevard County).
The public meetings were attended by a total of 90 individuals representing a variety of interests and
organizations. Approximately 117 individuals, organizations, and governmental entities submitted
comments regarding the plans for Pelican Island and Archie Carr refuges. Letters, faxes, email
messages, and phone calls were received from across the country. Comments from the public were
submitted by a variety of entities, ranging from a local middle school student to a coalition of six
organizations representing more than 700,000 members.
Members of the Service’s Core Planning Team met periodically to review public comments, data, and
information collected to write the plan. Professional reviews of the refuge were conducted to
determine the status, trends, and conditions of refuge resources and facilities. Experts from the
Service, State of Florida (including Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Department of
Environmental Protection, and St. Johns River Water Management District), Indian River Mosquito
Control District, University of Central Florida, and NASA’s Kennedy Space Center/Dynamac
participated in a 3-day wildlife and habitat management review of the refuge. The information
garnered from this review helped the planning team analyze and develop recommendations for the
draft plan and environmental assessment. A wilderness review was conducted on August 15, 2000,
by Service staff. In review of the federally owned lands within the legislatively defined boundary of
the refuge, no additional lands were found suitable for designation as Wilderness at this time. A
public use review was conducted on November 7-9, 2000, involving Service public use specialists
and outdoor recreation planners. This review focused on existing activities and provided specific
recommended actions to improve program development and facilities for sport fishing, wildlife
viewing, environmental education and interpretation.
SCOPING OF ISSUES AND CONCERNS
During the preplanning and public scoping phases of plan development, a myriad of issues,
concerns, and opportunities were raised by the public, the Service, and other public agencies. Issue
identification is a major factor in determining future management goals and objectives, as well as
future projects. In addition to the general public scoping meetings, a series of meetings were
conducted with federal, state, and local governmental agencies. Coordination with the governmental
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 35
partners and the public is essential to ensure support for the plan and identified projects. While some
of the issues and concerns raised during scoping are important to the future of the refuge, many are
not within the Service’s management jurisdiction or authority, and some are completely outside of its
control. Several opportunities raised during scoping are addressed by the Service in this plan. A
Service planning team evaluated the long list of issues raised, identified the priority issues to be
addressed over the next 15 years, evaluated steps to rectify these issues and resource needs, and
measured the impact of plan implementation. The Core Team then developed a list of goals,
objectives, and strategies to shape the management of the refuge for the 15-year life of the plan.
The priority issues are divided into six categories: fish, wildlife, and plant populations; habitats; land
protection and conservation; education and visitor services; refuge administration; and cultural
resources.
FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PLANT POPULATIONS
Much of the wildlife using the refuge are declining, including threatened and endangered species,
neotropical migratory birds, shorebirds, and native wildlife in general. The decline and loss of wildlife
and habitats; the fragmentation of habitats; the increase in disturbance to wildlife and habitat; and the
spread of exotic, invasive, and nuisance species are negatively impacting the wildlife resources of
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge.
Wildlife utilizing the rookery on Pelican Island proper are negatively impacted by a variety of factors,
including erosion of the Island, loss and decline of the nesting substrate, and ongoing disturbance from
public use activities (due to the constraints of the lease agreement and due to a lack of sufficient staff
for patrol and enforcement activities). Figure 5 shows the loss of half of Pelican Island proper since
1943. Figure 6 shows the predicted continued loss of Pelican Island proper without intervention. The
erosion of the Island is due in large part to wave energy from increased boat traffic in the Intracoastal
Waterway. The resultant increased wave energy from Sebastian Inlet may also play a role in the
erosion of the Island. In other words, these impacts were man-made. The figures and data portrayed
in Figures 5 and 6 spurred the refuge to act. Shoreline stabilization efforts began in February 1996 with
the planting of 100 mangrove propagules encased in cut bamboo stalks. The mangroves did not
survive a subsequent freeze. A follow-up replanting in August was also unsuccessful due to birds
perching on the bamboo stalks. A study by Florida Tech and a partnership with Lewis Environmental
Services produced a different strategy for protecting Pelican Island’s shoreline. In February 2000, 165
feet of clam and oyster shell, bagged in burlap, were placed by hand on the northeast shoreline of
Pelican Island. Operation Save Pelican Island, in February 2001, not only added shell and vegetation
to further the shoreline stabilization efforts, but also helped broadcast on a national scale the threats
facing this refuge and other refuges around the country. Monitoring must be conducted to ensure that
these efforts continue their initial successes at stabilizing and rebuilding the Island. Evaluation of
additional activities is also required (e.g., the §1135 alternative for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to
scrape down and restore specific spoil islands and use that material to raise the bay bottom in a
targeted area offshore of Pelican Island proper).
The ongoing increases in human population translate to ongoing increases in human activities and
use in and around the refuge. Lethal and sub-lethal impacts to wildlife stem from commercial,
residential, and recreational use of the waterway, natural and spoil islands, barrier island, and
mainland. Ongoing development of the landscape is consuming and fragmenting remaining off-refuge
habitats, which are also used by numerous refuge wildlife (e.g., for feeding, migrating, and
dispersing). This development further pollutes area waterways, including on the refuge and
increases public use of the refuge, further impacting and disturbing wildlife (e.g., island rookeries are
disturbed by shell collecting and picnicking activities). Development also fuels the spread of exotic,
36 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
invasive, and nuisance species, further impacting wildlife resources (e.g., free roaming pets and feral
cats prey on refuge wildlife). If these activities are not controlled, refuge and area wildlife and
habitats are in imminent danger of harm.
HABITATS
Refuge habitats are facing increased recreational pressures; negative impacts from disturbance; and
the spread of exotic, invasive, and nuisance species. Pelican Island proper has been eroding, which
could result in the loss of this historic rookery. The Indian River Lagoon system lost 18 percent or
12,400 acres of seagrass from 1943 to 1992, resulting in an estimated negative economic impact of
$120 million per year (St. Johns River Water Management District 1999). The refuge has a mix of
stable seagrass, increased seagrass, and lost seagrass, while Indian River County experienced an
overall 61 percent gain and southern Brevard County experienced an overall 73 percent loss from
1943 to 1992 (St. Johns River Water Management District 1999).
The majority of the refuge is leased from the State of Florida and is not governed by refuge regulations.
High public use of the waterway portion of the refuge is governed by this lease, highly constraining or
eliminating the refuge’s ability to ensure compatibility of these uses. Consequently, wildlife and habitat
impacts and disturbances are occurring. Outstanding shellfish leases still exist within the refuge. This
planning process identified the need to investigate and develop methods to ensure better protection of
the resources associated with the lands and waters leased from the State of Florida, to investigate
strengthening and expanding the lease, and to monitor impacts of aquaculture activities to ensure no
adverse impacts are experienced by important resources of the refuge.
Encompassing more than just native habitats, the refuge also includes exotic species and disturbed
sites, such as the citrus groves that once covered much of this area of Florida. Of immediate concern
are two exotic plant species: Australian pine and Brazilian pepper. Australian pine and Brazilian
pepper cover many of the refuge’s natural and spoil lagoonal islands and are found throughout the
barrier island portion of the refuge. These exotics have direct negative impacts to wildlife by
aggressively out-competing native vegetation and growing uncontrollably. Beyond exotic species,
citrus groves cover large portions of the refuge. To better serve resident and migratory wildlife, the
refuge must remove exotics and must restore native habitats. Current habitat management activities
plan for the restoration and creation of mangrove forests, tidal marsh, freshwater wetlands, palm
prairies, hydric hammocks, and maritime hammocks. To do this, the water table and topography
should be restored to mimic historic, natural conditions.
Through this planning process, management recognized the need to better coordinate with a variety
of partners at various landscape scales to address long-term habitat management and restoration.
Through this planning process, the refuge delineated the need to restore and manage habitats to
benefit native species (e.g., remove exotics and replant with native vegetation; manage
impoundments for specific wildlife benefits, especially for wood storks; and restore citrus groves to
freshwater marsh and maritime hammock); restore and manage habitats to aid in the recovery of
threatened and endangered species; develop and implement data gathering and monitoring
programs; restore and manage shorebird nesting habitat; and protect important foraging, loafing, and
fish spawning sites.
LAND PROTECTION AND CONSERVATION
The refuge exists in a highly developed landscape with properties within the acquisition boundary of
the refuge under serious threat of development, with existing habitat fragmentation, and with limited
ocean to river connectivity. Further, the existing lease agreement with the State of Florida restricts
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 37
refuge management and prevents opportunities for controlling wildlife disturbance and negative
habitat impacts.
Urban and suburban developments continue to sprawl across Florida, degrading and destroying
wildlife, habitats, and the natural functions of ecosystems. Indian River County grew over 25 percent
between 1990 and 2000 to 112,947 (U.S. Census Bureau 2000e). The city of Sebastian grew at a
rate of 58.6 percent between 1990 and 2000 to 16,181 (U.S. Census Bureau 2000e). This growth
extends to the borders of the refuge and properties within the acquisition boundary (that are not
currently part of the refuge) face tremendous development pressures. If the buffer needed to protect
Pelican Island proper is not purchased, it is very likely that these lands will be developed. This
planning process crystallized the need to acquire the remaining inholding tracts of lands over the next
3-5 years as a buffer for the historic rookery to secure a needed connection between Pelican Island
and Archie Carr refuges, providing habitat for migratory birds, threatened and endangered species,
and other native wildlife.
EDUCATION AND VISITOR SERVICES
The refuge is facing a variety of negative impacts from public use activities that stem from increased
boat traffic along the Intracoastal Waterway and elevated fishing pressure. Further, limited
opportunities exist for wildlife observation, photography, and interpretation. Although environmental
education activities are conducted in the area by refuge partners, education efforts do not sufficiently
address wildlife. These factors hinder the ability of the Service to increase awareness and
understanding of wildlife and habitats.
This comprehensive conservation planning process identified the importance of addressing the
increasing impacts from human activities and use (e.g., lethal and sub-lethal impacts from boating
activities; personal watercraft use; collisions; wildlife disturbances; decreased water quality; erosion;
development; and increased pollution, runoff, trash, and illegal access). The refuge must work with
its partners to develop solutions such as designating and enforcing waterway speed limits and zones,
increasing the presence of law enforcement personnel, and posting signs for the refuge. Further, the
planning process identified that the refuge should provide education, outreach, and public use
opportunities; create visitor facilities to provide these services to the community and visitors (e.g.,
visitor center, trails, and observation tower); and showcase the birthplace and tell the story of the
National Wildlife Refuge System. Only through education will people change their behaviors. During
the public scoping process, the need for environmental education surfaced repeatedly as one of the
top concerns of the public, especially for the local schools. Support for the resources and for the
refuge will be found through educational programs, outreach efforts, and compatible wildlife-dependent
recreational opportunities.
REFUGE ADMINISTRATION
Few staff, funds, facilities, and equipment are available to address the myriad of issues facing refuge
management. Further, uncontrolled or unknown research activities on the refuge have the potential
for negative wildlife and habitat impacts. Exotic species introduction, global climate change, erosion,
and other human activities and influences affect the ecological character and function of the
Wilderness Area. A difficult challenge is simply having the resources necessary to administer/restore
the natural conditions of the 5.5-acre Wilderness Area, given all the human influences that are
beyond the control of the Service. Since 1903, this globally and historically significant refuge has
operated with a staff of either one or none. Only in 2001 did the refuge move beyond a single staff
member, predominantly due to the upcoming Centennial in 2003, the vision document, and the
comprehensive conservation planning process. Funding for this refuge has historically been minimal
38 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
or nonexistent. Since the 1960s, funds have been diverted from the Merritt Island National Wildlife
Refuge Complex and the South Florida Ecosystem Team to cover needed management projects and
more recently to cover the salary of the Refuge Manager. Hence, this refuge has been sustained by
the public and the partners.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
The refuge has not only been an integral part of the local community, but it has been and continues to
be a source of pride and a city symbol. Given the long history of the refuge in the community and
given the development pressures of the area, the historical and archaeological resources protected
by the refuge are important. Issues to be addressed involving the refuge’s historical and
archaeological resources include high development pressure facing the historically significant Kroegel
Homestead, the home of the first Refuge Manager and the high potential for disturbance, vandalism,
and theft from archaeological and cultural sites on the refuge.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 39
IV. Management Direction
INTRODUCTION
The Service manages fish and wildlife habitats considering the needs of all resources in decision-making.
However, first and foremost, fish and wildlife conservation assumes priority in refuge
management. The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 requires the Service to
maintain the ecological health, diversity, and integrity of refuges. A refuge is a vital link in the overall
function of an ecosystem. Refuges in the South Florida Ecosystem include imperiled coastal areas and
lagoonal islands, like those protected at Pelican Island Refuge. To offset the historic and continued
loss of habitats within the ecosystem, the Pelican Island Refuge and other public lands and waters
provide a biological safety net for native species, trust resources, and federal and state listed species.
VISION
Pelican Island. This is the place where it all started. It began in 1903 with a President named
Theodore Roosevelt in a swampland called Florida at a rookery known as Pelican Island. It was at
this small island that a promise was made to the American people to preserve wildlife and wild places
for their own intrinsic values. Over 100 years later, we are indebted to this President for fulfilling his
promise to allow future generations the opportunity to enjoy our wildlife heritage.
The 1999 vision document, “Pelican Island: Honoring a Legacy,” sets forth the future for Pelican
Island National Wildlife Refuge (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999b). This future is a haven for
pelicans, egrets, herons, wood storks, and other colonial waterbirds; a restored, healthy, and
stabilized Pelican Island; a place where manatees and dolphins thrive and where threatened and
endangered species are protected; clean lagoonal waters, abundant seagrass beds, open mud flats,
thick mangrove islands, sandy shores, freshwater wetlands, managed salt marshes, and lush
maritime hammock; a nursery for juvenile sea turtles; a persistent stopover for migratory wildlife; a
highly biologically diverse estuary and fishery; a protected and secure wilderness area; and a place
for appropriate and compatible research, wildlife-dependent recreation, and environmental education.
Pelican Island is the birthplace and showcase of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the first refuge,
the original rookery, the impetus for national wildlife protection. Pelican Island National Wildlife
Refuge reminds us of our past and the national legacy originating at this rookery and inspires us to
honor that legacy by reaching out to partners for the conservation, protection, and enhancement of
wildlife and wild places for current and future generations.
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge continues to be protected, conserved, enhanced, and
restored, providing high-quality, functional habitats managed to help sustain abundant populations of
native species and to help recover threatened and endangered species. As the landscape continues
to be developed, the importance of Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge increases through time, as
part of an interconnected system linking the Indian River Lagoon to the Atlantic Ocean through the
Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge, and linking other public lands, habitats, refuges, and nations for
global species protection.
GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND STRATEGIES
The goals, objectives, and strategies delineated are the Service’s response to the resource problems,
issues, concerns, and needs expressed by the Service, the public, and the governmental partners.
They reflect the Service’s commitment to achieve the purposes and vision of Pelican Island National
40 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
Wildlife Refuge, the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System, and the mandates of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. The implementation of all goals, objectives, and strategies outlined will
follow the refuge’s best management practices and will pursue avoidance and minimization of
impacts to federally threatened and endangered species, to the extent possible and practicable (see
Appendix VI for more information regarding avoidance and minimization). The Service intends to
accomplish these goals, objectives, and strategies over the 15-year life of the comprehensive
conservation plan.
GOAL A: FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PLANT POPULATIONS
Continue working with the partners to maintain viable populations of those wildlife species endemic to
the sub-tropical barrier island and lagoonal system of the refuge, especially sea turtles, West Indian
manatee, eastern indigo snake, Atlantic salt marsh snake, wood stork, and other migratory and
resident birds.
Discussion: Since the refuge lacks data regarding almost all refuge fish, wildlife, and plant
populations, inventory and monitor activities dominate refuge management actions during the 15-year
life of the comprehensive conservation plan. Satisfying these data needs will require considerable
coordination within the Service and with refuge partners.
Objective A.1: Sea Turtles
Throughout the 15-year life of the plan, contribute to the efforts of the Service’s South Florida
Ecological Services Office to protect sea turtles and foraging areas through management,
enforcement, and scientific research in the lagoonal waters of the refuge. Within 5 years of plan
approval, develop baseline data for sea turtles in the lagoonal waters of the refuge.
Discussion: The refuge is a globally important juvenile sea turtle nursery with high catch per unit
efforts by researchers. With the addition of staff, the refuge will take a more active role in the
recovery of these species. In the past, Kemp’s ridley and hawksbill sea turtles have been rare visitors
to the protected lagoonal waters of the refuge. Refuge staff will work with the South Florida
Ecosystem Team and South Florida Ecological Services Field Office to determine the need for action
and to potentially develop and implement recovery plans for these species, if warranted. The refuge
will continue to acquire all applicable permits related to management activities regarding federally
protected sea turtles. For additional information about the recovery plans for these species, see the
South Florida Multi-species Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999c).
Disease (fibropapillomatosis) is affecting more than half of the juvenile green sea turtle population
(Ehrhart and Redfoot 1995). Sea turtles are also impacted by boat strikes and propellers, discarded
nets, discarded monofilament fishing line, plastic bags, balloons, and other litter.
Strategies:
• Continue to gather and encourage research into species and population biology of these sea
turtle species.
• Encourage continued and expanded research into the fibropapilloma disease occurring in sea
turtles in this area.
• Encourage the investigation of the role of contaminants in disease in juvenile green sea
turtles.
• Continue working with the University of Central Florida to research the foraging needs and to
study genetic diversity and movement of juvenile green sea turtles on the refuge.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 41
• Document the occurrence and distribution of the Kemp’s ridley and hawksbill sea turtles on
the refuge and coordinate with area researchers for this documentation, including the
University of Central Florida, Florida Institute of Technology, Marine Resources Council, and
Hubbs-Sea World Research Institute.
• Coordinate management with the South Florida Ecological Services Field Office and the
environmental education partners to increase public awareness and education for sea turtles.
Objective A.2: West Indian Manatee
Within one year of plan approval, increase coordination activities with the State of Florida and the
Service’s South Florida Ecological Services Office to reduce manatee injury, mortality, and
disturbance and to increase public awareness of manatees. Within 15 years of plan approval,
develop baseline data for manatees in the lagoonal waters of the refuge.
Discussion: With the addition of staff, the refuge will take a more active role in the recovery efforts
for the West Indian manatee identified in the South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service 1999c). The refuge will continue to acquire all applicable permits related to
management activities regarding the federally protected manatee.
Given the small size of the refuge, the developed character of the surrounding landscape, and the
broad boating access to refuge lands and waters in the Indian River Lagoon, the refuge experiences
considerable impacts and faces numerous threats from human activities on and around the refuge.
Boat strikes and propellers especially impact manatees. Discarded monofilament fishing line,
discarded nets, and other litter also impact manatees.
Strategies:
• Coordinate management within the Service, including implementing rules and regulations, law
enforcement training (e.g., salvage and necropsy program), and new technologies; installing
signs; and improving reporting and investigations.
• Encourage research into the physiology, life history, and ecology of the manatee, as well as
research into habitat components.
• Coordinate management with the South Florida Ecological Services Field Office and the
environmental education partners to increase public awareness and education for the
manatee.
• Evaluate the quality of manatee habitat in the refuge.
• Develop approaches to implement research, identify potential threats, and collect scientific
data.
• Develop approaches to limit or eliminate the threats and impacts to manatees (e.g., patrol and
enforcement activities).
• Work with the Indian River Lagoon partners to address water quality impacts to manatees.
Objective A.3: Eastern Indigo and Atlantic Salt Marsh Snakes
Within five years of plan approval, contribute to federal recovery efforts for eastern indigo snake and
Atlantic salt marsh snake populations by encouraging and conducting research, population surveys,
and monitoring on the refuge and by conducting environmental education on the refuge and in the
local community. Within 10 years of plan approval, develop baseline data for eastern indigo and salt
marsh snakes on the refuge.
Discussion: Eastern indigo snakes have been found on the refuge. The Atlantic salt marsh snake
has been surveyed near the refuge and intergrades have been sighted on the refuge. With the
42 Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge
addition of staff, the refuge will contribute to recovery efforts identified in the South Florida Multi-species
Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999c), as appropriate. The refuge will
continue to acquire all applicable permits related to management activities regarding federally
protected indigo and salt marsh snakes.
Strategies:
• Identify, evaluate, and protect against the threats to these species.
• Encourage and manage research on the biology and ecology of the eastern indigo snake.
• Work with the partners to increase awareness of and improve behavior towards the eastern
indigo snake.
• Provide informational brochures and lectures regarding both of these species.
• Coordinate with others (e.g., adjacent landowners and Indian River County) to discourage the
use of rat poison in and around the refuge.
• Coordinate monitoring and survey protocols with researchers and governmental partners.
Design and conduct surveys to determine the presence and relative abundance of these two
species on the refuge. Document and monitor the occurrence of these two species.
• If appropriate, direct research into the biology of the Atlantic salt marsh snake and coordinate
studies to measure contaminants with partners.
Objective A.4: Wood Stork
Within five years of plan approval, evaluate the refuge’s role in wood stork recovery, develop baseline
habitat information for wood stork foraging areas and roosting sites, and develop and implement
appropriate restoration plans.
Discussion: The refuge has served as one of the most consistent wood stork rookeries in Florida.
However, wood stork nesting on Pelican Island proper has declined from 900 in 1980 to 85 in 1990.
It is currently estimated that a total of 90-150 pairs of wood storks breed on Pelican Island proper.
With the addition of staff, the refuge will take a more active role in this recovery plan. The refuge will
continue to acquire all applicable permits related to management activities regarding the federally
protected wood stork. For additional information about the recovery plan for this species, see the
South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999c).
Strategies:
• Work with South Florida Ecological Services Field Office to identify and map wood stork
foraging and roosting sites on the refuge.
• Restore wood stork feeding areas and rookeries on the refuge and locate foraging and
roosting habitat for wood storks off the refuge.
• Participate in wood stork annual nesting surveys. Locate foraging and roosting habitat for
wood storks using the refuge. Utilize standardized census procedures where disturbance is
minimal. Contribute to meeting the population goals of the Southeast U.S. Regional Waterbird
Conservation Plan.
• Encourage research on the biology and life history of wood storks, including research into
productivity of wood stork nesting, survivorship, age structure, movement patterns of
fledglings and post-breeding adults, foraging ecology and behavior, importance of roost sites,
and impacts of contaminants.
Section A. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 43
• Encourage research into essential habitat components necessary to trigger successful nesting
by wood storks, including research into the densities, species composition, and size classes of
fishes necessary and research into the effects of natural and human-caused influences, such
as impoundment water levels, on the ecology of the prey base.
• Continue managing the impoundments for multiple objectives, including for wood stork
foraging.
Objective A.5: Migratory and Resident Birds
Within 10 years of plan approval, develop baseline data and monitoring programs to evaluate the
status and trends of migratory and resident bird species on the refuge to support healthy populations
of the migratory and resident birds of the Peninsular Florida Physiographic Region.
Discussion: The refuge has collected data for Pelican Island proper (i.e., the original 5.5-acre
island) for nearly 100 years, but lacks data coverage for the rest of the refuge. The refuge currently
conducts a few bird surveys (i.e., two to three annual roost counts, two to three annual colonial
waterbird surveys, and the annual Audubon Christmas Bird Count), but this information is insufficient.
Further, the federally listed piping plover and bald eagle occasionally occur on the refuge. With the
addition of staff, the refuge will contribute towards recovery efforts for these species as identified in
the South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan. The refuge will continue to acquire all applicable
permits related to management activities regarding migratory and resident birds.
Strategies:
• Coordinate surveys, data collection, and monitoring protocols to determine baseline
populations on the refuge as part of the standardized region-wide monitoring protocols for all
waterbird groups. Continue to survey brown pelicans, roseate spoonbills, white ibis, reddish
egret, little blue heron, and other colonial nesting birds on Pelican Island proper to monitor
trends.
• Establish point count stations to determine population changes with emphasis on species of
refuge management concern (e.g., those identified on the Audubon Watch List and the
Partners-in-Flight Watch List for this area).
• Conduct nest productivity studies and other research for priority species, including monitoring
predator disturbance during the nesting season in rookeries, woodlands, hammocks, and
citrus groves.
• Develop volunteer training and programs to survey and monitor birds. Encourage partners
and volunteers to assist in surveys. Investigate utilizing Sebastian River High School students
(to help satisfy their community involvement requirements).
• Monitor bald eagle nesting and foraging activities in the refuge.
• Coordinate management to increase outreach and education opportunities, including
increasing public awareness of the habitat related issues that affect the recovery of the bald
eagle in South Florida.
• Determine the presence of nesting or wintering painted buntings in coastal hammock habitats
on the refuge.
• Manage adequate acreage of shrub communit