You are here

Traveler's View: The National Park Service Failed Its Mission With Plan For Addition Lands at Big Cypress National Preserve

Share

With its management plan for the Addition lands of Big Cypress National Preserve, the National Park Service has placed more emphasis on off-roading than on protecting the Florida panther, one of the most-endangered mammals in North America. Top photo of swamp buggy ruts in the Bear Island area of Big Cypress by Matthew Schwartz, middle photo NPS, bottom photo of Florida panther by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Faced with a wondrous opportunity to truly preserve a large swath of Florida still bearing wilderness characteristics, one that can play a critical role in the recovery of North America's most endangered mammal, the National Park Service instead looked the other way.

In doing so, the agency seems to have both ignored its mandate from the National Park Service Organic Act to, above all else, conserve "the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wild life therein" for future generations, and tossed dirt on Interior Department promises to "ensure and maintain the integrity of scientific and scholarly activities used in Departmental decision making."

At stake was the future of 147,000 acres in the northeastern corner of the preserve, a section of land known as the "Addition" for its connection to the preserve in 1996 as the result of a land swap with the state of Florida. At the time, Congress directed the Park Service to ban off-road vehicles and hunting in the Addition until a management plan could be developed. That plan was released in its final form in November, and officially approved by the Park Service's Southeast regional director earlier this month.

By adopting its preferred alternative, one criticized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, members of Congress, and conservation groups, the Park Service chose to "maximize motorized access, provide the least amount of wilderness, and develop limited new hiking only trails." With this approach, the Park Service apparently was not swayed by moderate, long-term adverse impacts to water flows, to the control of non-native vegetation, or to the Florida panther the plan would deliver.

Cast aside was the "environmentally preferred" alternative, which would "emphasize resource preservation, restoration, and research while providing recreational opportunities with limited facilities and support. This alternative would provide the maximum amount of wilderness, no ORV use, and minimal new facilities for visitor contact along I-75."

Under the selected plan, more than one-third of the Addition could be accessed by motorized vehicle, either ponderous swamp buggies used by hunters and wildlife tours or motor boats. To provide for that access, preserve officials have agreed to allow up to 130 miles of primary ORV trails -- centered in a half-mile wide corridor -- in the area, along with as many as 650 ORV permits annually. What's uncertain, though, is how many miles of secondary trails might be creased through the landscape, how big of a footprint would be occupied by two "primitive" campgrounds, and whether the trails will turn proposed wilderness into "islands."

Critics such as U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Florida, can't understand why the Park Service authorized so many miles of ORV trails in light of the ORV access elsewhere in Big Cypress.

"Most of the 582,000 acres of the preserve are ... open to motorized recreation for up to 2,000 permitted ORV owners who can enjoy motor vehicles as a way of experiencing the Big Cypress National Preserve," the congressman wrote in a letter to Park Service Director Jon Jarvis.

In light of the existing off-road-vehicle opportunities in the preserve, and when just 7 percent of Big Cypress visitors are interested in off-road-vehicle travel, as noted in a 2007 survey conducted for the Park Service by the University of Idaho's Park Studies Unit, can this increased ORV network be justified by the Park Service?

But this is not an issue solely of ORV access versus wilderness preservation. At risk to this management plan is a biologically rich and diverse landscape of plants, animals, fish, and birds that already is surrounded by pressing, and stressing, development. The West Indian manatee, an endangered species, relies on waterways in the Addition, while the red-cockaded woodpecker, also endangered, utilizes its forests. And then there's the Florida panther, a creature that has struggled to survive the urbanization of Florida.

At one point there were so few panthers in the region that the Park Service brought in cougars from Texas to bolster the gene pool. While there currently are thought to be 100-120 Florida panthers in the wild, perhaps a third of those residing in Big Cypress, continued population growth requires suitable habitat. Allowing the Addition to be sliced up with ORV trails does not aid this endeavor.

While Big Cypress Superintendent Pedro Ramos has said the preserve has all the panthers it can possibly contain, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in critiquing the Park Service's preferred plan for the Addition, said it would create "long-term, moderate, adverse and mostly localized impacts on (likely to adversely affect) the Florida panther..."

In other words, while Big Cypress might have all the panthers it can hold, this plan is not in the best interests for those that reside there. Is this how endangered species should be treated?

Already Big Cypress's panthers are showing signs of being crowded. According to the Florida Panther Net, which tracks Florida panthers, in 2010 at least three panthers died in the preserve, all the result of "intraspecific aggression," which arises when males fight over territory. One of those deaths occurred in the Addition tract.

Along with placing more pressure on panther territories, the half-mile-wide ORV routes and hunting pose a risk to populations of white-tailed deer, a key part of the panthers' prey base, something else the EPA voiced concern over. Indeed, in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's 3rd revision of its Florida Panther Recovery Plan, published in November 2008, the agency noted the importance of an abundant deer population to panther recovery, and how hunting pressure in the past had impacted that abundance.

The size, distribution, and abundance of available prey species are critical factors to the persistence of panthers in south Florida and often determine the extent of panther use of an area. A resident adult male puma generally consumes one deer-sized prey every 8 - 11 days; this frequency is 14 - 17 days for a resident female; and 3.3 days for a female with three 13-month-old kittens. Historically, hunting in the Big Cypress physiographic region has been a major traditional activity with many hunt camps throughout the region. With establishment of national and state parks, the numbers of hunt camps were decreased and additional hunting regulations that reduced hunting pressure on deer were implemented. Although deer densities are difficult to determine, the deer population appears to have steadily increased.

Despite data on the importance of wild-tailed deer to Florida panther survival, despite the absence of clear data on the current deer population, and despite information on how hunting can reduce that population, Big Cypress officials want to allow hunting to return to the Addition.

Add to the habitat issues concerns over what ORV use could do to the preserve's water quality. In 2001 the U.S. Geological Survey had this to say about ORV use in Big Cypress:

ORV use in Big Cypress National Preserve (BICY) has impacted wildlife populations and habitats through modifications to water flow patterns (direction and velocity) and water quality, soil displacement and compaction, direct vegetation damage, disturbance to foraging individuals, and, ultimately, overall suitability of habitats for wildlife.

In its comments to the Park Service, the EPA, in generalizing ORV impacts to public lands, said:

EPA is concerned about the impacts of motorized traffic that is growing rapidly on the public lands. Large segments of the hunting and fishing community, for example, believe that off-road vehicles are taking a toll on the land and its wildlife and are detracting from the experience of non-motorized visitors. Evidence is mounting that ORVs pose a serious threat to wildlife, water, soil, plants, and the rest of the natural world.

Of primary concern to EPA is that ORV's use is fragmenting the landscape into a disorganized and destructive web of trails and roads. They point to severe impacts to the soil, the spread of invasive plant seeds, and the disruption to sensitive and endangered wildlife as cause for regulatory intervention. Insufficient enforcement of existing regulations has resulted in thousands of miles of unauthorized routes across the landscape.

The dramatic increase in ORV use on public lands can be responsible for a host of adverse impacts on wildlife, vegetation, soils, water quality, and nonmotorized recreationists. The contamination of air, water, and soil by ORV pollution is among the most significant of these impacts.

Oddly silent has been Park Service Director Jarvis, who, immediately after being confirmed by the U.S. Senate, cited stewardship as one of four areas he wanted to stress during his tenure:

Stewardship of our natural and cultural resources has always been a core value of mine. Our mission is to manage these treasured landscapes unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations. This mission is being challenged, particularly by global warming. But at the same time, these challenges are pushing us to think and act at the ecosystem scale, creating unprecedented partnerships with other land managers. We must apply the very best science and scholarly research. To do so, I will create the position of Science Advisor to the Director. As stewards of our national parks, especially considering the challenges of climate change, we must be visible leaders using the sustainability of our facilities and operations, to demonstrate the best in energy and water conservation.

While national preserves are indeed open to different uses than national parks, the Park Service nevertheless is bound to the over-arching mandate of its Organic Act. There is no shortage of off-road lands to enjoy in the country, but there is a shortage of officially designated wilderness and, in the case of the panther, precious few acres of habitat to help this cat survive.

When you consider the fate of the Florida panther, the sprawling development elsewhere in Florida and the impacts that is having on the Everglades, and the overall lack of sub-tropical wilderness, this plan doesn't make sense and should be overturned by Mr. Jarvis.

Featured Article

Comments

I should also point out that USFWS and the NPS have done more damage to south floridas eco system than any of our traditional uses
Examples Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow for over 15 years the agencies artificially dried out the rattle snake ridge area of the Big Cypress they declared it critical habitat for the Sparrow, even though this was never at any point in time cape sable habitat. but using our public lands for this single species management practice resulted in hundreds of thousands of acres flooded far longer than what is necessary for the eco sytem destroy thousands of hammocks, killing off nearly all the fur bearing animals north of 41 further endangering other endangered or threatened species.
These hammocks are gone forever, the wildlife and the plants are gone, We have replanted some heads trying to save them but again they were flooded out.


Welcome to the club Eric the NPS is doing the same in Cape Hatteras. Though due to open pocket judges and money hungry environut lawyers the place I once planned on retiring to is being closed for the same single species management. These people will not stop. They finally succeeded on their third attempt in Cape Hatteras. My warning is to always be aware of someone claiming to want to protect some type of animal while killing off thousands to do so. They did the same thing in Cape Hatteras by killing off several species in an attempt to protect a few birds. There is supposed to be a seperation between church and state but the NPS is playing GOD.


WOW
I sure wish I had the time and fortitude to actually read the history on all the Parks, Preserves and Recreation Areas. Is it possible that there is a trend where a lot of people were promised a lot of things and then in actuallity, somewhere along the line, someone decided that there was no need to live up to those promises. It didn't fit their agenda. Kind of reminds one of where this country is going, don't you think.
You know, there was a time when, if a man gave his word on something and he wasn't here to fulfill it, his son, friend, associate or successor would. What happened.

Ron (obxguys)


Christi M. roadside emergency parking is legal in Florida. The emergency causing traditional visitors to park on the side of the highway is one of the many negative unintended consequences of the ORV plan in Big Cypress National Preserve. When rules that are not well thought out but guided by eco-centric fools prevail this is what happens anywhere. Stupidity sometimes is impossible to hide. Possibly a bit of anthropo-centric balance might have prevented the oh so dangerous situation you encountered. The simple solution is for you to refuse to allow yourself to be exposed to such danger by resisting the temptation to visit there. The Fakahatchee Strand Preserve State Park is very similar terrain that you might consider more safe for yourself to visit. Be sure not to give a thought to the poisonous snakes, panthers, bears alligators and most of all the many WASPS that await you in either of our inviting South Florida Swamps.


Hi Kurt - nice editorial. Keep up the good work. Glad to see my friends from Big Cypress with a somewhat different point of view here as well.

I noticed you had a post on the Traveler a while back on Richard West Sellars. Apparently, the NPS has put his entire book - Preserving Nature in the National Parks - online at the following website. An excellent read for those deeply interested in these very special places and the story of conservation of natural resources vs. "other factors" in National Park Service management.

http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/sellars/index.htm

Sellars' book is not exactly the view of the National Park Service portrayed in the recent Ken Burns documentary. In reality, the NPS has always had a difficult time choosing natural resource protection over recreation - in spite of the lofty words of the NPS Organic Act. The battle of the Big Cypress National Preserve Addition Lands is just one more page in that somewhat tortured history (which included the eradication at one point of all cougars, wolves, and coyotes from virtually all National Parks out west in order to have more elk and deer for the tourists to look at). It will be interesting to see if Dr. Sellars covers the story of Big Cypress in the sequel to the book you indicated he is writing.

Also - as the photographer who took the above photo of the ruts (it appeared in the Naples News and has gotten quite a bit of exposure over the last 3 years) - here's the story behind it. It was taken a few days before NPS had re-opened a part of the Bear Island section of the preserve to off-road vehicles. The eastern section of the Bear Island is largely wet prairie and the trail photographed was closed by Superintendent John Donahue right after the signing of the Off-Road Management Plan for the preserve. This was done in order to protect the fragile soils and vegetation as well as provide the endangered Florida panther with some undisturbed habitat. The closure was stipulated by the ORV Management Plan.

Although NPS declared the above trail "sustainable" (i.e. could handle the impact of ORVs), NPS was forced to close it after less than one season of use after much of it had been converted into a 100 foot wide mudpie. It remains closed to this day and is the subject of ongoing litigation. NPS has also applied for a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District to dredge out the muck on the trail, line the resulting pit with geotextile, and fill it with gravel.

Matt Schwartz
South Florida Wildlands Association


Ron,

"Is it possible that there is a trend where a lot of people were promised a lot of things and then in actuallity, somewhere along the line, someone decided that there was no need to live up to those promises."

If you would like to live by this credo, then all white Europeans should pack up and leave, as this country has promised the Indians the world for the past 400 years and gone back on their word just about every time. Just a thought.


Ryan

Well said and well taken. I've got no problem with that.

Ron (obxguys)


Hi Kurt,

From what I can tell there is little similarity between ORV use at CHNS and Big Cypress. ORV use is not identified or sanctioned by the CHNS’s enabling legislation on the National Seashore’s approximately 70 miles of relatively narrow ocean beach.
ORV users like to cite from the enabling legislation “other recreational activities of similar nature” as validation for ORV access but neglect to include the implication of, “no development of the project or plan for the convenience of visitors shall be undertaken which would be incompatible with the preservation of the unique flora and fauna or the physiographic conditions now prevailing in this area”. Additionally ORV use not only impacts native flora and fauna and the day to day physiographic conditions but also visitors who expect and are entitled to experience an undeveloped natural beach with National Park aesthetics. In the past all the remote dramatic beaches in CHNS can become parking lots full of parked ORVs and the beach leading to these areas a rutted churned up mess. ORV groups do not willingly compromise on anything that restricts ORV access and would rather have no one accessing the Seashore if they cannot drive when and where they want. They do nothing to promote alternative forms of access.

I am not familiar with Big Cypress and wonder if the traditional swamp buggies use has not increased to the point where it is impacting other essential values for why the Preserve was created?

Big Cyprus National Preserve and Cape Hatteras National Seashore issues do coincide when it pertains to impacts to nonmotorized recreationists. And I assume National Seashores (Cape Hatteras National Seashore) are held to an even higher standard than National Preserves?

CHNS enabling legislation
“Except for certain portions of the area, deemed to be especially adaptable for recreational uses, particularly swimming, boating, sailing, fishing, and other recreational activities of similar nature, which shall be developed for such uses as needed, the said area shall be permanently reserved as a primitive wilderness and no development of the project or plan for the convenience of visitors shall be undertaken which would be incompatible with the preservation of the unique flora and fauna or the physiographic conditions now prevailing in this area . . .”

Southern S !


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.