The URL can be used to link to this page

VEGETATIVE ANALYSIS AND GOPHER TORTOISE MONITORING (3) ECOLOGI(~i\L COf\JSUL-rAr,rrS 7301 SUMMERBRIDuE DH f,;r,APA FL .Lc14 (81-1) 0011L 10 October 1988 Ms Carolyn Kindell Florida Department of Environmental Regulation Twin Towers Office Bldg. 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Fl. 32399-2400 RE. Permit No. 501268889 Dear Ms. Kindell: Thank you for the comments regarding the management plan for the Quantum Park project in Boynton Beach I have ordered the arsenal and will apply this herbicide within the month or under low wa t ere 0 n d i t ion s as you in die at ed I h a v e a 1 so i n c 1 u de d a response to your comments in the September 20, 1988 letter to the owners as follows 1 & 2. A sampl ing program will be establ ished for each preservation area that includes line-transect and quadrat analysis. A 50 meter line-transect will be installed from the shore of the wetland out towards the deeper water. A 11 plant material breaking the plane of the transect will be recorded in order to determine percent cover. In addition, 6 one meter square quadrats will be established along one side of ea<Jh transect line Percent cover by species will be recorded in order to monitor changes in the wetland A plan view of each wetland showing the location of the transects and the quadrats is included 3 Fixed photographic stations will be established along each transect with photographs of each quadrat Stations will also be established at randon intervals along the edge of each wetland (See plan view). 4 Percent cover estimates will be taken for exotic, planted and native wetland plants. Estimates regarding Melaleuca mortality will also be included 5. All Melaleuca seedlings will be hand pulled on a quarterly basis. For all seedlings or saplings that cannot be removed by hand, arsenal will be applied to each tree 6 A semi-annual program wIll be utIlized to morlltor the preservation areas A longer Interval such as t'.vice a jear in the dry season will be included in the maintenance program . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 7. Water levels will be maintained at elevation 8 0 Hithin the lake system by a control structure which links the pond~ to the E-4 canal. No specific structure other than normal ground water levels from rainfall will be utilized to maintain a specific elevation in each wetland Each system has shown the nornmal cycle of periods of inundation and no standing water This will be recorded in each monitoring event and if water table fluctuations become detrimental to the preservation areas, control measures will be taken to correct the problem. 8. As indicated, at least one monitoring event will occur in the wet and dry portions of the year. Maintenance and monitoring will begin following the completion of the mitigation areas in late November. The first monitoring report will be submitted in February or March of 1989 9. Monitoring reports will include all maintenance since the last report. The above comments should answer most of your concerns about the preservation areas. If you have any additional questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, /;/& ~ Donald Richardson, Ph.D. DRR/jlr - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . (, ') 'I' '. ........, u> ..: ~ ~ n ~ :. Lon ~-;) r'1'U - . .. -1-1 E .. >- r- Ci:Vl l>O xVI t n DO ;::z " %-n 00 ~ ~ C_ Ul" :~~~ . -- ...,.., N .. ~ ~ Ln ,. N ~ l> X 0 n ~ ::0 M X VI ~ >> .. '" , CD (; , -< ~ c.:' .. 1 ... ! ~ '^ Ul = 1 . , '" ~ 0 .. '" N & ., "tl o (") 141~'3' ~ rJ S~~ ,- ~~ ..n ~~ ..x .... '" ~ '"Dr" ~ Z ;; Z 9 N_O..~.~.ww . . ..a -c c ~ =r QI 0 0- c-+ ~ '<;11- " 0 QI lO c-+ ~c::..: ~ Ul ~ QI -0 QI ~~ =r ....... ...... 0 n ::s 't- lO t/) c-+ r- QI ...... c-+ ::s ...... (l) 0 ::s -I Ul ~ QI ::s Ul (l) n c-+ e ... .. '" : ! ~ j . . ~ o~~~~~~~~~28822~~ _~.Z__~________r_ w =2~~X%%%::X%X:Z~~ ..- >> ~;~i:~::~~~~;:=~: )0 0 r>> .. . .. . n _ _. c. >> .~% ~.~~o-o-__o~~ "'... n.......--..o.o.X .... ~ _ C . O"'IolI. ... 'Wt'" .<--..........--00. e oo..~~~...._-~~.~~ % : ~~-~~.~~~~~~~..~~ -.. ~~....,....)>......~,.... i !.~~:~:::~:::~=~~ : ~~~~..~.....>~.~~ .... ~ ooooooooooo~~ w...,-____________r o=j~:;;;;~~:~:~o .:..UH~d..~H..2 ......."""",.,....~~....,...,"''''I''''IO~ ~~~OCOw~O~~~oo~~ ~....::.....,~~"'.......~......il e.~- - -- t ,...:...~ca~':~~::=~:.;:::c ..... .... 1 - ....mgl....._......o...-~"".= ~~~::::::::::::~ .... -~:;:;:::;:~::;:;;::...~' ....r........_.....___....__...... C... .._________~ ~ .. ::: " .. i ~ .. n . ~ .. ~ J: ~ :: w ~ ... w ./ :j " J ;g n "I ~ ::. :. r. ....-0_ o .3. O. \ ... ... .: ""I,.~(Il~.i-n ~!~~~~':'.:'! !=;!=~~~~ !;;:Hwi;~~ _.. >> a ... )0. .... ...... l~,.n nz!~ 'Y1l"~-C."'- !~~...":=J:,l ....,....< ,. 0 .. ~,..... OO~ .... a . - 11\ . 0....0-..,.,.. 'W...o.. -.....- t'I~ ,......z ~:~i:20~i II'Z -......~... ,.._..W'"o~... I ..~~~;J:=~~ t ...,S-zo... &...... z '" z ..... ~..-'~ :::~; :~i~~: ~i e>>"'''o-.~- ,;::^ ,.1.0"'- ,.. ,. ~... - -: (, :::> __........0 _ .......:.' T'" ::a ~...,,1l,.....:z ::~_8~~; ;~~~~,....o ~::~6~~i: .!. - - -.. > EU - _;::~~-oo ~t)"'-OO :>~ - . . -.;... ~ - ," :. I ~ ... o z z ; ~: I~_: ~~~ .. e:~ I~ ~~i .z .... 0" :. :./"'\;' n51> ~l& co .. ~ .... C ~ 0.. .,. "'..1- ~> ~ii s::~ ...n -,,~ x- i .. M 0"3 . ~ ~;; ~ x ,- ;:; ~ ';:; ~2 ~ J .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. ~ -c om =r c 0 QI c-+ 0. 0 ~ lO QI ~ c-+ QI Ul -0 =r QI ...... ....... n 0 ::s t/) l.Q c-+ QI r- c-+ ..J. ...... ::s 0 (l) ::s III -I ~ QI ::s III CD n c-+ 00 "n (J'I "'~ 1"\- -1'0 r~ l>0 ZZ o "'0 .., Ul Ol t> n ::0 ,., IJl t" ! : \\~ { ~, l (\<'('[1 L: '..,. _________ tIP I?, 'c; t~ --~~.c..,___" (^'Jltl ___ (I Of)" I'J1 f lir --__ ~ . -"- (A, II -.------~.J~~ ! '; :' ~ ,,'" :~~ -.o. ;~ ~ . . '" ~:~ _ c_ ?:~ ~ ~M '~VI \: . " ;r . . . a :;- t . ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~< i -,] .. - -.l , ~ .. ~ p ~ J ,\ ~ ~~J':, j) ~,::--"~1 "./ ,,!~~C Ill; i . ~... I: t ~ ~ ~ ., , I . I 1 . . { ~ "1 'S- " -< r l> Z o '" ~ . F"OOl. 11 = ; . ~ -. .. ., C - T r: S ... t . ~:. . c o ~ !; ,1 _ . ~ ~ 1 . ! 1 - , .. I ~ . '? . - , " : . 5 ; , - ~ - . ! ! ~ < - . ~ " " . ;: i, ! - ~ j :. ( '1 '" '" '" U oJ ~ % 1: .. r "- ,. . . ,," It ... . " I i !1 '" ." ~ ~; n . ~u ~ ~~ . v ~~ ~ ~J .. ~i ~ u ~ \ ~ i.\ \1 : ...~ ':\_ u ~:.: ;\~ ~- ,.'.) ... o . ~. i~ ., ~t ~\--: r~\\ :n ,I ',. o';!. pO: 0".. \~ .:'. \. ;; 0 _0'.:..- ~ :11\ J ...' -g'. "', ~I ~-; : 0\ .IP'- t.n . r. ~ f"'\ ~\ $; :C) ~::J ~ 'D t,1 ~ ~ ~p ~;. CD r-:-- ~ Z # c....z" u ... >> " 1 '" - _~:!I"~t~. --",6"'i~==-==-=[-- --'--==~I- I )' "O'C'OC. Ef' ---I II -- - ~ ~\.~;::,~=-~ ';\1' \ \ n~rf? ~"y\-~ 'C:P r II 'G'lili.> .. ,- ""<t ,. I .......- .. ~. 'Ii_~l " '-'M"; ~ , '~~~"--_' ' I, ~--- ; 'I -...;;~:.... ~ ~ ~_::-~ c,",- -;; 1 )'-" ~~. "'''' Co: "'''' <'- ,.,... ..n ... ,",' 0'" ..., ...... --------------- ~ ~ -r~ ; ; ;: ~ ~ i ;... :~ t~;e:: .~ !-~! :~ I --!.-!~ :~: ~~ -. =~.;: .-:__ ;:~ro~-~ .:. ~.. Ie:; :: ~ . ; ..:.... :~r;! _~_=_ I ~~~~ :i!-_ -{ ~:::_...!.. ~! -~~i! ~ ~ . ~ ~ ';c E: ~ h:;-~ e.:; ~~i:;~.:-, ,. If; I' ..... - ~!_~:e c:.. ~,:!~-';;-=~'" .:!~' ~~II"~~-::' ;! - .f~ o~ t. _i-=... iw!i~j~~~~~1:!j :~F;t>i::~ ~:.!- !:::E~c:g-;:er ! "'i~. .v:~ if: _ W'''':fri~; S;-=~ i::-,:,- ;- l~ I i~:~~{€{~tt{rE~ ::: i -~::::: ...; ~~~~'; -:":;~-~ OOoe.... ...::...... c ~:~... ~ ....,......... ..... .., .... ... u....._ Q..,.... 1'1' . - . f~ --:~ ! - ! ~ >> . >> ':'rc"::':::-::~coce~':I --------------- .,.,..,.".,. ..,..,. or " ---- - ------- ,..,,"~,.~.,.... _,__!~~~:~~;~!~S ....~! ;:::~ - ~ = !: r I - z . " ... .. "".,. or...., - ...---- Z~~~ ~ ~::=c ":.~<i .......,.. e. w ~ ~;...~:~~:.:!.~ :;:: ; . ... --.. ..0:..,........ i I .. ... -..-..... --...--....--------- ......----...--...-............ = E _ s - .. - .. .. .. - - .. .. .. VEGETATION ANALYSIS AND GOPHER TORTOISE MONITORING OF THE SAND PINE PRESERVE AT QUANTUM PARK, BOYNTON BEACH. FIFTH QUARTERLY REPORT 25 May 1988 by Ecological Consultants 730l Summerbridge Drive Tampa, Florida 33614 - .. .. .. .. .. - - - - II 2 VEGETATION ANALYSIS AND MONITORING OF THE QUANTUM PARK SAND PINE PRESERVE FIFTH QUARTERLY REPORT. INTRODUCTION Prior to any development of the Quantum Park properties (DRI), approxima~ely 40 acres of sand pine scrub habitat was set aside as a nature preserve. The intent was to preserve through management, a portion of the scrub ecosystem, both plant and ani mal s pe c i e s . At the request of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, one large contiguous parcel was established as a preserve north of N.W. 22nd Avenue (Figure l). Since the existing preserve contained approximately 33 acres of sand pine scrub, 4-7 addi t ional acres of scrub were created using a topsoil overburden mulching technique used by the phosphate industry, in order to meet the acreage as requ i red by the Development Order. The entire parcel was fenced off from outside encroachment and extant populations of gopher tortoise, Florida mice and Florida scrub lizards were relocated from other scrub areas into the preserve for future management. Methods A checklist of the vascular flora of the preserve was prepared by sampling permanent quadrats, line transects, and ground truthing the site on two week intervals between December 1985 and June 1987. Special attention was given to the occurrence of obligate scrub species which may be an indication - .. .. - .. .. - .. .. - . 3 of past disturbance and/or recovery potential. Two permanent survey lines (designated east and west for loca t ion purposes) were establ i shed in a north- so u th d i r ec t ion within the preserve. Reference points were established every l00 feet along each of the survey lines. These points would be important for the location of gopher tortoise burrows within the preserve and permanant location of selected vegetation quadrats. Four (4) nested quadrats were randomly located throughout the preserve wi th i n the canop i ed areas (F igure 2). The size of the quadrats varied with the strata of the forest to be sampled. Trees were measured using a 20 x 20 m quadrat; shrubs using a 5 x 5 m quadrat; and herbaceous species using a 1 x 1 m quadrat. The 5 x 5 m shrub quadrat was nested in the northeast corner of each tree quadrat. Two 1 x 1 m quadrats were nested within the shrub quadrat in the northeast and southeast corners. The number of stems or individuals were determined for each measured species. Average height was indicated for shrubs and % cover was determined for herbs. For all trees within the 20 x 20 m quadrat, dbh and basal area were measured. A permanent l00-meter line transect along the west survey line was established. In each area, the vegetation was sampled using the line-intercept method; recording the length of the transect line intercepted by each plant shoot encountered. Density, dominance, frequency and importance values of the relative measures) were calculated for herbs along the transect. (as the sum and shrubs - .. - - .. .. - - .. .. . c. 4 Results VEGETATION Disturbances to plant communities have long been viewed as an outside threat to the normal functioning of the community. In the sand pine scrub community, the resilency of most of the indic~tor species has been attributed to recovery via sprouting from preexisting root stocks, as very few species in the scrub recover via seed (Ceratiola ericoides, Pinus clausa). In contrast to other mature sand pine scrubs in the area, the preserve has a total of ll9 species of which 41% are obligate to sand pine scrub (Table l). The vegetation of the preserve area is characterized as young or early successional sand pine scrub~with scattered areas of dry prairie. Although clearing of the understory and thinning of the sand pine occurred prior to 1983, community recovery is rapidly occurring. The overstory trees are dominated by widely spaced sand pine (pinus clausal (138 trees per acre) of at least two different age classes (HJ-2e years and 213-313 years). Tree core data from established permanent plots indicates that the average age of sand pine is 18.34 years old, with the oldest trees (l9-26 years) -& in the northeastern corner of the preserve (Table 2). There were no trees greater than 3l years, however, hundreds of young sapling are scattered throughout the preserve. Trees vary in s i z e fro m 2. 7 - 3 6 . 7 em db h, rea chi n g he i g h t s 0 f 37 - 4 6 fee t . There has been considerable speculation regarding what seems to be the formation of even-aged stands of sand pine in central ., - .. 'I - - .. .. .. - .. - - .. 5 and south Florida due to the presence of serotinous cones on the Ocala variety of sand pine (pinus clausa var. clausa). In northern Flor ida, Choctawhatchee sand pine (Pinus clausa var. immug ina ta) ex its in stands 0 f sever al age c lasses because most of the cones open on the trees throughout the year and seed release occurs annually. In contrast, the Ocala sand pine have serotinous cones which only open following severe fires, resulting in what appears to be even-aged stands However, a closer look at south Florida scrubs indicates that many of the Ocala sand pine have open cones or in fact, some s u gge s t t ha t some of the sand pines in south Florida may be the Choctawhatchee variety. Therefore, 150 randomly locat~d sand pines were sampled within the preserve for open vs closed cones. The data indicates that 46% of the cone bearing trees have open cones. The data also shows that most of the trees with open cones are greater than 20 years of age. The fact that the older sand pines have open cones may be attributed to age of the cones and the effect of summer temperatures on cone opening or that a low intensity ground fire swept through the site several years ago with sufficient heat to open the cones. This may also explain some of the regeneration observed within the preserve. , During the fifth quarter of sampling, 3 mature sand pines have died within the preserve and more than 30 have died in the disturbed areas south of the fence. It appears that the drought has weakened many pines which have fallen prey to beetles. This situation occurs naturally in most east coast populations of sand .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 pine, however, if more trees begin to die, the site may have to be sprayed for the beetle pests. N The shrub layer is dominated by widely spaced scrub oaks (Quercus myrtifolia, Quercus geminata), palafoxia feayi, jointweed (Polygonella polygama) and scrub mint (Conradina grandiflora). During the fourth quarter, average stem densities were highest for myrtle oak (93.8 stems per 5 x 5 m quadrat) and sand live oak (79.8 stems per 5 x 5 m quadrat), while average height was 21.3 - 68.5 em (Table 3). Due to the slow change associated with scrub vegetation, no quadrat monitoring for shrubs or herbs was conducted during the fifth quarter. During the fourth quarter, stem densities slightly decreased for both species of oaks, but showed some increase for jointweed (Polygonella polygama) and Palafoxia feayi. Average height also showed an increase of l3% and 17% for plots 1 and 2, respectively, but decreased slightly for plot #4 (2%). Plot #3 increased in stem densities by ll4% over last years sampling. Changes in shrub stem densities over time for the Quantum Park scrub communities is consistent with other scrubs in south Florida. Recent data collected from l0 year field plots at Jonathan Dickinson state Park indicate that scrub species composition remains fairly constant in mature scrub, however, stem densities in oaks shows a 2-3 fold increase. Changes in shrub densities within the preserve may not change much over the next few years since most of the understory was reduced to the ground surface in 1983. Seed inputs from existing oaks will .. - - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7 require longer intervals before new seedlings can be detected. The overall diversity is much higher than compared with other mature scrubs or other areas within Quantum Park (Richardson et ale 1986). Except for the oaks, other characteristic shrubs have begun to germinate in the open areas of the preserve. These shrubs include rosemary (Ceratiola ericoides), rusty lyonia (Lyonia ferruginea), scrub mint (Conradina canescens), tallowwood (Ximenia americana), and jointweed (Polygonella ciliata and ~ gracilis) . Probably the most interesting observation concerns the establishment of Ceratiola. Rosemary often does not germinate until 2-5 years postfire, and its seedlings do not reach reproductive maturity for l~ to 15 years. To date, more than 35 2-3 year old shrubs have been observed throughout the preserve area. Johnson (l986) has shown that stand biomass increases slowly from 2 to 4 years, rapidly from 4 to l~ years and less rapidly between l0 and 35 years. Love vine (Cassytha filiformis) is found throughout the preserve on most of the shr ubs and some herb s. However, the parasitic nature of this species has eliminated several hundred Conradina and polygonella shrubs. In cases where the vine is removed from the shrub, new growth begins to appear rapidly. These observations indicate the need for a monitoring program to assess the rate at which Conradina and other shrubs become parasitized by love vine. The herbaceous component of the preserve area is represented 8 by 93 species, including a large proportion (35%) of weed species that have colonized disturbed areas (i e., brush piles, trails and even gopher tortoise mounds). The most common herbs include broomsedge grass (Andropogon virginicus), Cyperus retrorsus, Dichanthelium sabulorum, silkgrass (Pityopsis graminifolia), innonence (Euphorbia polyphylla), and hairsedge (Bulbostylis ciliatifolia) . Average percent cover for the 8 permanent 1 x 1 m2 plots was 34% in 1987 and 3l% in 1988, showing a slight decrease which was largely attributed to a loss of broomsedge grass from the plots (Tables 4a and 4b). Even though the percent cover decreased from 1987 to 1988, the number of species within the 4 sampl i ng plots increased from 15 to 19. Thi s change was due to an increase in the number of scrub endemics that have germinated throughout the preserve. Some of the more notable species include Bulbostylis, Lechea, Euphorbia, Dichanthelium, Aristida, Croton, and Liatris. 'Since no visual change in species composition was observed during the fifth quarter, so no actual quadrat sampling was conducted. Since community change is a slow process in scrub, quadrat sampling will not occur until the 8th quarter monitoring period.' Ruderal components have invaded the margins of the preserve due to past disturbance from livestock. Several horses and goats from the adjacent property have periodically entered the preserve. This has resulted in some areas being completely den uded from horses roll i ng in the sand for insect protect ion. Also the adjacent properties have been disturbed for such a long 9 time that the ruderal components are well established and potential seed banks are high. SCRUB FINGERS To date, scrub reclamation is currently in There is little information or current research its infancy. on the site- specific, edaphic, biological and meteorological circumstances that may ultimately determine the types of xeric ecosystems (sand pine scrub, sandhill, pine flatwoods) that can evolve on disturbed lands (i.e , pastures, mined lands, mechan ically altered sites). Studies have been conducted to determine the structure and composition of the major components of scrub pinelands (Austin 1976; Kurz 1942; Laessle 1958 and others). The vegetative component is easily assessed, easily quantified and, therefore, relatively well-documented. The hydrological component (rainfall and ground water levels) al so is assessable, but requ ires long- term monitoring efforts to document adequately. The edaphic component likewise is measurable, but the interaction of these three components in the text of restoration is not well known. The purpose of this preliminary report is to evaluate the recolonization success of the newly created scrub fingers. Three separate scrub areas were created on the northern boundary of the existing sand pine scrub within the preserve at Quantum Park. An area of approximately 4-7 acres (l6,"""-l8,""0 cubic yards) was created to become an extension of the already existing sand pine scrub ridge. The reclaimed scrub was created l0 not toe xc e ed the n a t u r ale I e vat ion s f 0 un d wit h i nth e ex i s tin g sand pine scrub. Approximately 24 inches of St. Lucie fine sand was used as base material for the harvested topsoil, rich in seed material, root sprouts and local mycorrhizal populations. To further enhance the recruitment of scrub species, clumps of scrub vegetation were removed from the harvest sites and placed on all mitigated scrub areas. A watering truck was provided for the first week to stimulate root sprouting of scrub oaks and local seed banks. Monitoring of species establishment within the mitigated scrub areas will be accomplished by creating at least l6 permanent 1 x 1 meter plots along an established north-south transect. Species richness, species diversity, and % cover will be monitored quarterly, if necessary. As of 20 May 1988, a combined total of 80 species have been observed on the three scrub fingers. This represents an increase of only one species over a 3 month period. Ruderal species, such as, Cyperus retrorsus, Urena lobata, scoparia dulcis, phytolacca americana, and Catharanthus roseus are still prevalent on the scrub fingers and in some areas along the western and northern borders may pose a problem for native establishment. Observations from mined sites in central Florida using this mulching technique showed similar results but at somewhat decreased densities. M However, the results from Quantum Park do show that 40% of the total number of species present were indicator or early 11 successional scrub species (Table 5).MII The most notable scrub species included Froelichia floridana, Bulbostylis ciliatifolia, pinus clausa, Palafox ia feayi, Euphorbia polyphylla, Quercus geminata, and Quercus chapmanii. The occurrence of these scrub species were the result of root sprouts associated with live harvested plant materials. A few species, such as Lechea cernua, Liatris chapmanii and Commelina erecta, have come up in open areas from seed that was released last year or from local seed banks. Average percent cover for herbs within the western 8 m2 plots was 5l% at the end of the 3rd quarter, but had increased to 7l% by the end of the 4th quarter. The eastern plots were slightly higher (59%) at the end of the 3rd quarter, but nearly 73% by the end of the 4th quarter (Table 6). The substantial increase in percent cover was largely attributed to Dichanthelium sabulorum, Paspalum notatum, Cyperus retrorsus, and panicum sp. During the winter months, several thousand young pine seedlings have been observed throughout the scrub preserve in areas that have been enhanced by topsoil from the donor sites. However, most of these seedlings have disappeared due to low soil mo i s t u r e con d i t ion s . D u r i n g the m 0 nth s 0 f Mar c h and A p r il , hundreds of Lechea cernua seedlings germinated in the open areas of the fingers. It is interesting to find this species in such large numbers since many scrubs are lacking. Most of the young oaks have died over the past several months due to the lack of water. Of the woody species, Palafoxia feayi and Polygonella ._~ ------ ---------------~------- l2 polygama seem to be the most drought resistant and abundant on the fingers. It seems that many of the woody species reach about 12 2 Ill' h . h' h t d h b' h . f. I ? wl \j - vIne es In eIg an t en egIn to s ow SIgns 0 WI t. . I Although the overall species establishment of indicator scrub species has increased steadily, several pest species have caused some problems within the newly created sand fingers. Caesar-weed (Urena lobata) and Sida cordifolia have become a threat, forming large stands several feet in diameter. Probably the most troublesome species has been the invasion of bahia grass from the surrounding pasture. "This species tends to dominate disturbed soils and will probably out-compete the scrub plants without a maintenance program. During the following months, the areas of dense bahia grass will be herbicided and burned as per the proposed management plan for the 40 acres of sand pine scrub. Once the growth of this species has been curtailed, the entire area will be mulched with scrub topsoils from donor sites within the development.", ~ _ Animal species have also been observed on the scrub fingers. Two gopher tortoise have taken up residency within the scrub fingers. One tortoise has occupied a burrow along the eastern edge of scrub finger #3 for about 7 months. During last quarter, a new burrow appeared in the northeast corner of finger #l and is still occupied.~~i-weeklY observations of the scrub fingers has yielded as many as 51 scrub lizards per visit during the summer months and about 6-8 individuals in the winter months ~ The open nature of the fingers is prime habitat for ground foraging by l3 scrub lizards. )(... (The results, to date, ind icate that recovery of the sand pine scrub fingers is a slow process that will probably require some installation of nursery grown stock, such as sand live oaks, scrub mint and rosemary. In an effort to increase scrub densities, approximately 500 sand pines will be planted in late February or early March on each of the 3 scrub fingerS~ Most of the clumps of vegetation that were added by the front-end loader during the construction phase have died due to root damage to the plants and lack of water initially. Past research efforts indicate that most scrub species germinate in the winter when soil temperatures are reduced and moisture levels marginal. It appears that species such as sand pine remain dormant until soil moisture levels approach 1-2% before germinating. Delayed germination guarantees that some of the emerging seedlings will survive into the summer months when soil temperatures reach l400F. Other endemic scrub species such as Ceratiola ericoides and Lechea cernua have also germinated from seed sources within the soil. Germination of these early successional species indicates that soil conditions are favorable for scrub recovery. Ins u mm a r y, the 0 v era II r e co v e r y 0 f the san d pin e s c rub fingers is far better than we expected for only 15 months after construction. Recruitment of scrub endemics has occurred over most of the newly created areas. Several species such as Pal a fox ia and L ia tr is have produced seed dur i ng the 19 8 7 season l4 and new seedlings have appeared in the bare areas. We will continue to monitor the viability of these new seed inputs. As indicated above, pest and pasture species prove to be the biggest concern to date. (The establishment of Bahia gras~ on finger #1 ~ has occurred much more rapidly than expected and will require some type of short and long-term maintenance~ FLOWERING AND FRUITING To further evaluate the overall success of the preserve area, a bi-weekly monitoring program was established to document the seasonal response of flowering and fruiting of the vascular flora (Table 6). This data would provide information which could be used to harvest native seed for replanting selected areas or to determine what proportion of the recruitment within the preserve is from seed germination vs root sprouts. EXOTIC SPECIES REMOVAL The invasion of exotic species into the preserve could have very serious effects on the native vegetation if not controlled and monitored on a regular basis. Several exotic plant species have been observed within the preserve Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), punk tree (Melaleuca quinquenervia), and earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculaeformis) Efforts for their eradication were initiated on the 20 May 1987 by treating the base of each shrub or tree with herbicide (Garlon 4). Within 10 days following application of the herbicide, symptoms of chlorosis, leaf loss, and wilting were evident on most treated individuals. In some cases, a second application was needed to l5 produce the desired effects. Approx ima tely 47 trees 0 r s hr ubs were treated with the herbicide within the preserve To date, about 75% of the treated shrubs have been killed by the treatments. (we anticipate that the eradication process will be 1( extended to all non- s cr ub spec i es t hrougho ut the pre serve in order to reduce unwanted seed banks which may affect the long- term survival of the scrub community.) l6 Figure 1. Location of the Sand pine Scrub Preserve at Quantum Park, Boynton Beach. Figure 2. Location of the permanent vegetation quadrats within the Sand Pine Preserve at Quantum Park, Boynton Beach. l7 l8 Table 1. Checklist of the vascular flora for the Sand pine Preserve at Quantum Park, Boynton Beach Scientific Name Common Name Trees Acacia auriculaeformis Ficus aurea Ilex cassine Melaleuca quinquenervia pinus clausa Pinus elliottii Sabal palmetto Earleaf Acacia Strangler fig Dahoon holly Punk tree Sand pine Slash pine Cabbage palm Shrubs Asimina obovata Asimina reticulata Befaria racemosa Ceratiola ericoides Conradina grandiflora Gelsemium sempervirens Ilex glabra Lantana camara Licania michauxii Lyonia ferruginea Lyonia lucida Palafoxia feayi Quercus chapmanii Quercus geminata Quercus myrtifolia Rubus trivialis Sabal etonia Schinus terebinthifolius Serenoa repens Vaccinium myrsinites Ximenia americana PawPaw PawPaw Tarflower Rosemary Scrub mint Yellow jassamine Gallberry Lantana Gopher plum Rusty lyonia Staggerbush palafoxia Chapman's oak Sand live oak Myrtle oak Blackberry Scrub palm Brazilian pepper Saw palmetto Huckleberry Tallowwood Herbs Abrus precatorius Ambrosia artemisiifolia Andropogon virginicus Aristida gyrans Aristida spiciformis Aristida stricta Asclepias curtissii Aster tortifolius Balduina angustifolia Bulbostylis ciliatifolia Roasary pea Ragweed Broomsedge grass Wiregrass Bottlebrush threeawn Wiregrass Curtiss milkweed White-topped aster Yellow buttons Hair sedge 19 Cassia chamaecrista Cassia nictitans Cassia occidenta1is Cassytha fi1iformis Catharanthus roseus Cenchrus incertus Centrosema virginianum Chrysopsis scabre1la Commelina erecta Conyza canadensis Crotalaria rotundifo1ia Croton glandulosus Crotonopsis linearis Cuthbertia ornata Cynodon dactylon Cyperus haspan Cyperus planifolius Cyperus retrorsus Dalea feayi Dichanthelium dichotomum Dichanthelium sabulorum Digitaria serotina Diodia teres Eclipta alba Emilia fosbergii Eragrostis atrovirens Eragrostis scaligera Eupatorium capillifolium Euphorbia milii Euphorbia polyphylla Euthamia minor Froelichia floridana Galactia regularis Gelsemium sempervirens Gnaphalium pensylvanicum Hedyotis procumbens Helianthemum nashii Heliotropium polyphyllum Heterotheca subaxillaris Indigofera hirsuta Lechea cernua Lechea deckertii Liatris chapmanii Linaria canadensis Mollugo verticil lata Momordica charantia Opuntia humifusa paspalum notatum Paspalum setaceum Phytolacca americana Pityopsis graminifolia polanisia tenuifolia Partridge-pea wild sensitive plant Coffee senna Love vine periwinkle Sand spur Butterfly-pea Goldenaster Dayflower Dwarf horseweed Rabbit-bells Croton Rushfoil Roseling Bermudagrass Nutsedge Blanket crabgrass Poor Joe Cupid's shavingbrush Dogfennel Crown-of-thorns Spurge Cottonweed yellow jassamine Cudweed Innocence Heliotrope Camphorweed Hairy indigo Blue toadflax Indian chickweed Wild balsam apple prickly-pear cactus Bahia grass Thin paspalum Pokeweed Silkgrass 213 Polygala incarnata Polygonella ciliata Polygonella fimbriata polygonella gracilis Polygonella polygama polypremum procumbens Portulaca pilosa pterocaulon virgatum Rhynchelytrum repens Rhynchospora megalocarpa Richardia brasiliensis Schrankia uncinata Scoparia dulcis Selaginella arinicola Setaria geniculata Seymeria pectinata Sida cordifolia Sisyrinchium solstitiale Smilax auriculata Solanum americanum Solidago chapmanii Solidago stricta Spartina bakeri Spermacoce assurgens Spermacoce verticillata Stipulicida setacea Tillandsia recurvata Tillandsia usneoides Tillandsia utriculata Trichostema dichotomum Urena lobata Vitis munsoniana Procession flower Wireweed Sandhill wireweed Wireweed Jo intweed Rustweed Pink purslane Rabbit tobacco Natal grass Scrub sedge Sensitive briar Sweetbroom Sand spike moss Foxtail grass Blue-eyed grass Sawbriar Common nightshade Goldenrod Goldenrod Sand cordgrass Ball moss Spanish moss wild pine Forked blue-curls Caesar weed wild grape 2l Table 2. The number of sand pine and average age per 212J x 212J meter tree quadrat for the sand pine scrub preserve at Quantum Park, Boynton Beach. Quadrat # Density ReI Dom ReI Avg. Avg. # Den. Basal Dom. dbh Age 1 6 l3.12J 212J54 l5.8 l8.7 18.6 2 18 39.1 3322 25.6 14.5 17.8 3 l3 28.2 2712J3 212J.7 15.7 l6.3 4 9 19.5 4947 37.9 25.6 2l.8 Total 46 112J12J.12J 1312J26 ll2Jl2J.12J 18.6 l8.3 22 Table 3. Number of shrub stems per each 5 x 5 m2 quadrat sampled in 1987 and 1988 within the Sand Pine Preserve at Quantum Park. plot Number Totals 1 2 3 4 Species (Yea r) 87 88 87 88 87 88 87 88 87 88 Quercus myrtifo1ia 298 288 1 3 26 2 50 38 375 331 Quercus geminata 195 216 84 96 l4 6 26 19 319 337 Pa1afoxia feayi l4 l4 1 2 4 8 4 4 23 28 Po1ygone1la po1ygama l2 9 10 l7 22 26 Opuntia humifusa 7 3 2 2 3 3 12 8 Smilax auricu1ata 2 6 1 8 1 Quercus chapmanii 1 6 4 6 5 Vitis munsoniana 1 4 5 Pinus c1ausa 2 3 1 3 3 Solodago stricta 3 2 3 2 Conradina grandiflora 2 2 2 2 Serenoa repens 1 1 1 1 Commelina diffusa 1 1 Total # Species 3 3 8 6 9 9 7 6 Average Height (em) 36 41 59 69 21 45 69 67 Table 4a. Number of stems and percent cover per I x 1 m2 herbaceous quadrats within the Sand pine Preserve at Quantum Park, 1987. Species Andropogon virginicus Selaginel1a arenicola Dichanthelium sabulorum Cyperus retrorsus Euphorbia polyphy11a Bulbostylis ciliatifolia po1ygonella po1ygama Sisyrinchium solstitiale Palafoxia feayi Smilax auricu1ata Helianthemum corymbosum Quercus geminata Opuntia hunifusa pinus clausa (seedling> Stipulicida setacea Number of Species % Coverage 1 a l53 101 8 2 29 19 6 1 1 2 b Plot Number 2 3 b a a 21 4 7 2 2 6 4 5 4 54 49 33 l4 4 6 1 3 1 3 1 3 b l4 6 1 7 II 3 2 1 4 a 3 1 1 2l 6 10 1 2 3 3 II 3 1 3 1 1 4 8 10 8 6 54 30 32 b 1 1 23 Totals 277 47 44 44 28 l4 12 II 7 4 3 2 2 2 1 l5 34% 24 Table 4b. Number of stems and percent cover per 1 x 1 rn2 herbaceous quadrats within the Sand pine Preserve at Quantum Park, 1988. Species Plot Number Totals 1 2 3 4 a b a b a b a b Andropogon virginicus 63 43 1 un Selaginella arenicola 3 1 If/J 1 4 8 27 Dichanthelium sabulorum 1 l3 6 3 2 4 1 1 3l Euphorbia polyphylla 8 1 I 1 II polygonella gracilis 1 6 2 1 If/J Aristida gyrans 6 2 8 Palafoxia feayi 4 2 2 8 Bulbostylis ciliatifolia 3 2 2 7 polygone1la polygama 1 2 3 1 7 Cyperus retrorsus 2 1 2 5 Smilax auriculata 5 5 Sisyrinchium solstitiale 1 3 4 Liatris tenuifolia 2 2 4 Helianthemum corymbosum 3 3 Stipulicida setacea 2 2 Quercus geminata 1 1 Serenoa repens 1 1 Opuntia humifusa f/J pinus c1ausa ( seed 1 i n 9 ) 0 Number of Species 7 5 5 4 5 9 7 7 19 % Coverage 59 61 34 18 6 26 14 20 3f/J% 25 Table 5. Plant Species colonizing the Sand pine Scrub Fingers. 1987 Scientific Name D J F M A M Trees Pinus clausa + + + + + + Pinus elliottii + Schinus terebinthifolius + + Shrubs Befaria racemosa Ceratiola ericoides + + + + + + Ilex cassine + + + + + + I lex glabra + + + Lyonia ferruginea + + + + + + Lyonia lucida + + + + + + Palafoxia feayi + + + + + + Polygonella polygama + + + Quercus chapmanii + + + + + Quercus geminata + + + + + + Quercus myrtifolia + + + + + Rubus trivialis + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + + Herbs Asclepias curtisii Ambrosia artemisiifolia + + + Andropogon virginicus + + + + + + Aristida gyrans Aristida spiciformis Aristida stricta + + + + + + Balduina angustifolia + + + Bulbostylis ciliatifolia + + + + + Catha ran thus roseus + + + + Cenchrus incertus + + + + + Chrysopsis scabrella + COlDIDelina erecta + + + + + + Conyza canadensis Crotolaria rotundifolia + + + + Croton glandulosus + + + Crotonopsis linearis + Cuthbertia ornata + + + Cyperus haspan + + + + + Cyperus retrorsus + + + + + + Dalea feayi + + + + Dichanthelium sabulorum + + + + + Digitaria serotina + + + + Eclipta alba + + + Emilia fosbergii + + + + Eragrostis atrovirens 26 Table 5. continued Eupatorium capillifolium + + + Eupborbia polyphylla + + + + + Froelichia floridana + + + + + Galactia regularis + + + Gelsemium sempervirens + + + + + Helianthemum na s hi i + Heterotbeca subaxillaris + + + Lecbea cernua + + + + Lechea deckertii Liatris cbapmanii + + + Linaria canadensis + + + + Mollugo verticillata + + + + Momordica charantia + + Opuntia humifusa + + + + + + Paronycbia americana paspalum notatum + + + + + + Phytolacca americana + + + + + Pityopsis graminifolia + + + polanisia tenuifolia + + + Polygonella gracilis Polypremum procumbens + + + + + Portulaca pilosa + + pterocaulon virgatum + + + Rhynchleytrum repens + + + + + Rbyncbospora megalocarpa + + + + + + Richardia brasiliensis + Scoparia dulcis + + + + + + Serenoa repens + + + + + + Setaria geniculata + + + + + + Sida cordifolia + + + + + + Sisyrinchium solstitiale Smilax auriculata + + + + + Solidago stricta + + + + + + Spermacoce assurgens + + + + Stipulicida setacea + + + Trichostema dichotomum Urena lobata + + + + + + Vitis munsoniana + + + + + + 27 Table 5. continued. 1987 Scientific Name J J A S 0 N D Trees Pinus clausa + + + + + + + Pinus elliottii + + + + + + + Schinus terebinthifolius + + + + + + + Shrubs Befaria racemosa + + + + Ceratiola ericoides + + + + + + + Ilex cassine + + + + + + + Ilex glabra + + + + + + + Lyonia ferruginea + + + + + + + Lyonia lucida + + + + + + + Palafo%ia feayi + + + + + + + Polygonella polygama + + + + + + + Quercus chapmanii + + + + + + + Quercus geminata + + + + + + + Quercus myrtifolia + + + + + + + Rubus trivialis + + + + + + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + + + + + + Herbs Asclepias curtisii + Ambrosia artemisiifolia + + + + + + + Andropogon virginicus + + + + + + + Aristida gyrans + + + + Aristida spiciformis + + + + + + Aristida stricta + + + + + + + Balduina angustifolia + + + + + + + Bulbostylis ciliatifolia + + + + + + + Catharanthus roseus + + + + + + + Cenchrus incertus + + + + + + + Chrysopsia scabrella + + + + + + + COlDIDelina erecta + + + + + + + Conyza canadensis + + + + Crotolaria rotundifolia + + + + + + + Croton glandulosus + + + + + + + Crotonopsis linearis + + + + + + + Cuthbertia ornata + + + + + + + Cyperus haspan + + + + + + + Cyperus retrorsus + + + + + + + Oalea feayi + + + + + + + Dichanthelium sabulorum + + + + + + + Digitaria serotina + + + + + + + Eclipta alba + + + + + + + 28 Table 5. continued Emilia fosbergii + + + + + + + Eragrostis atrovirens + Eragrostis scaligera Eupatorium capilli folium + + + + + + + Eupborbia polyphylla + + + + + + + Froelichia floridana + + + + + + + Galactia regularis + + + + + + + Gelsemium sempervirens + + + + + + + Helianthemum nashii + + + + + + + Heterotheca subaxillaris + + + + + + + Lechea cernua + + + + + + + Lechea deckertii + + + + Liatris cbapmanii + + + + + + + Linaria canadensis + + + + + + + Mollugo verticillata + + + + + + + Momordica charantia + + + + + + + Opuntia humifusa + + + + + + + Paronychia americana + + + + + + + Paspalum notatum + + + + + + + Phytolacca americana + + + + + + + Pityopsis graminifolia + + + + + + + polanisia tenuifolia + + + + + + + Polygonella gracilis + + + + + Polypremum procumbens + + + + + + + Portulaca pilosa + + + + + + + pterocaulon virgatum + + + + + + Rhynchleytrum repens + + + + + + + Rhynchospora megalocarpa + + + + + + + Richardia brasiliensis + + + + + + + Scoparia dulcis + + + + + + + Serenoa repens + + + + + + + Setaria geniculata + + + + + + + Sida cordifolia + + + + + + + Sisyrinchium solstitiale + + + + Sm il a x auriculata + + + + + + + Solidago stricta + + + + + + + Spermacoce assurgens + + + + + + + Stipulicida setacea + + + + + + + Trichostema dichotomum + + + + Urena lobata + + + + + + + Vitis munsoniana + + + + + + + 29 Table 5. continued 1988 Scientific Name J F M A M J J Trees Pinus clausa + + + + + + Pinus elliottii + + + + + + Schinus terebinthifolius + + + + + + Shrubs Befaria racemosa + + + + + + Ceratiola ericoides + + + + + + Ilex cassine + + + + + + Ilex glabra + + + + + + Lyonia ferruginea + + + + + + Lyonia lucida + + + + + + Palafoxia feayi + + + + + + Polygonella polygalDa + + + + + + Quercus chaplDanii + + + + + Quercus gelDinata + + + + + + Quercus lDyrtifolia + + + + + + Rubus trivialis + + + + + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + + + + + Herbs Asclepias curtisii Ambrosia artemisiifolia + + + + + + Andropogon virginicus + + + + + + Aristida gyrans + + + + + + Aristida spiciforlDis + + + + + + Aristida stricta + + + + + + Balduina angustifolia + + + + + + Bulbostylis ciliatifolia + + + + + + Catha ran thus roseus + + + + + + Cenchrus incertus + + + + + + Chrysopsis scabrella + + + + + + COlDIDelina erecta + + + + + + Conyza canadensis + + + + + + Crotolaria rotundifolia + + + Croton glandulosus + + + + + + Crotonopsis linearis + + + + + + Cutbbertia ornata + + + + + + Cyperus haspan + + + + + + Cyperus retrorsus + + + + + + Dalea feayi + + + + + + Dichanthelium sabulorum + + + + + + Digitaria serotina + + + + + + Eclipta alba + + + + + + Emilia fosbergii + + + + + Eragrostis atrovirens + + + + + + 30 Eragrostis scaligera + + + + Eupatorium capillifolium + + + + + + Euphorbia polyphylla + + + + + + proelichia floridana + + + + + + Galactia sp. + + + + + + Gelsemium sempervirens + + + + + + Helianthemum nashii + + + + + + Heterotheca subaxillaris + + + + + + Lechea cernua + + + + + + Lechea deckertii + + + + + + Liatris chapmanii + + + + + + Linaria canadensis + + + + + + Mollugo verticillata + + + + + + Momordica charantia + + + + + + Opuntia humifusa + + + + + + Paronychia americana + + + + + + Paspalum notatum + + + + + + Phytolacca americana + + + + + + Pityopsis graminifolia + + + + + + polanisia tenuifolia + + + + + + Polygonella gracilis + + + + + + Polypremum procumbens + + + + + + Portulaca p ilosa + + + + + + pterocaulon virgatum + + + + + + Rhynchleytrum repens + + + + + + Rhynchospora megalocarpa + + + + + + Richardia brasiliensis + + + + + + Scoparia dulcis + + + + + + Serenoa repens + + + + + + Setaria geniculata + + + + + + Sida cordifolia + + + + + + Sisyrinchium solstitiale + + + + + + Smilax auriculata + + + + + + Solidago stricta + + + + + + Spermacoce assurgens + + + + + + Stipulicida setacea + + + + + + Trichostema dichotomum + + + + + + Urena lobata + + + + + + Vitis munsoniana + + + + + + 3l Table 6. Frequency of occurrence and percent cover for colonizing plant species on the sand pine scrub fingers. SPECIES l100W l100E l200E l200W l400E 1400W l500E l500W E W E W E W E W E W E W E W E W D. sabulorum 24 8 4 40 33 43 34 36 20 23 32 10 44 56 45 4l paspalum notatum 2 3 3 36 22 45 45 25 1 45 46 Cyperus retrorsus 2 2 12 7 3 l0 8 24 33 17 24 11 9 5 3 panicum ? 87 92 - 2 9 2 26 3 6 3 P. tenuifolia 1 Lechea cernua 1 1 1 4 2 1 5 Smilax auriculata 1 1 1 1 Palafoxia feayi 1 2 1 1 A. virginicus 1 1 E. polyphylla 2 5 7 5 7 1 P. polygama 1 1 1 1 1 Helianthus nashii 1 1 3 1 B. ciliatifolia 1 8 4 8 2 1 1 Aristida gyrans 1 1 1 2 1 Urena lobata 1 Total % Cover 28 100 100 75 59 83 77 71 58 77 63 64 65 78 88 82 Average % cover 73% 32 Table 7. Flowering and fruiting response of the vascular flora within the sand pine scrub preserve at Quantum Park, Boynton Beach. Species Dec.86 Jan.87 Feb.87 Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Asclepias curtissii Abrus precatorius Andropogon virginicus + + + Aristida gyrans + + + Asimina reticulata + Befaria racemosa + + + Bulbostylis ciliatifolia Cassia nictitans Cassia chamaecrista Cassia occidentalis Cassytha filiformis + + + + + Catharanthus roseus + + + Cenchrus incertus + + Centrosema virginianum Chenopodium ambrosioides Commelina diffusa + + Conradina grandiflora + + + Crotalaria rotundifolia Croton glandulosus Crotonopsis linearis Cuthbertis ornata Cyperus retrorsus + + Cynodon dactylon Dalea feayi + + + + Dichanthelium sabulorum + + + Emil ia fosbergii Euphorbia polyphylla + + + Froelichia floridana + + + + + Gelsemium sempervirens + + + Helianthemum corymbosum Helianthemum nashii Heliotropium polyphyllum Heterotheca subaxillaris + + Ilex glabra Indigofera hirsuta + + Lechea deckertii + + + Liatris chapmanii + Licania michauxii Linaria floridana Lyonia lucida + + Lyonia ferruginea + + + Mollugoa verticillata + + + 33 Species Dec.87 Jan.87 Feb 87 Flw. Frt. Flw Frt Flw. Frt. Momordica charantia Opuntia humifusa + + + Palafoxia feayi + + + + + Paronychia americana Phytolacca americana Pinus clausa + + + + + + Pityopsis graminifolia + + + + Poinsettia cyathophora polanisia tenuifolia + + + Polygonella ciliata + + + Polygonella gracilis Polygonella polygama + + + Polypremun procumbens + + Portulaca pilosa pterocaulon virgatum + + Quercus chapmanii Quercus geminata + Quercus myrtifolia Rhynchelytrum repens + + + Rhynchospora megalocarpa + + + Richardia brasiliensis + + Ricinus communis + Schinus terebinthifolius + + Scoparia dulcis + + + Setaria geniculata + + + + Sida cordifolia Sisyrinchium solstitiale + + + + Smilax auriculata + + + Solanum americanum + + + + + + Solidago stricta + + Spermococe assurgens Spermococe verticillata Stipulicida setacea + Trichostema dichotomum + Urena lobata + + + + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + + + Vitis munsoniana Ximenia americana 34 Table 7 . continued for March, April, and May, 1987 Species Mar 87 Apr.87 May.87 Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Asclepias curtissii Abrus precatorius + + + + Andropogon virginicus Aristida gyrans Asimina reticulata + Befaria racemosa + + Bulbostylis ciliatifolia + + + Cassia nictitans + Cassia chamaecrista + + + + Cassia occidentalis + + + + Cassytha filiformis + + + + + Catha ran thus roseus + + + Cenchrus incertus + + + + + Centrosema virginianum + + + Chenopodium ambrosioides + Commelina diffusa + + + Conradina grandiflora + + + + Crotalaria rotundifolia + + + Croton glandulosus + + + Crotonopsis linearis + + + + Cuthbertis ornata + + Cyperus retrorsus + + + + Cynodon dactylon + + Dalea feayi + + + + Dichanthelium sabulorum + + + Emilia fosbergii + + + Euphorbia polyphylla + + Froelichia floridana + + + Gelsemium sempervirens + + + Helianthemum corymbosum + + Helianthemum nashii + + + Heliotropium polyphyllum + + Heterotheca subaxillaris + + + + Ilex glabra + + + + + Indigofera hirsuta + + + Lechea deckertii Liatris chapmanii + + + Licania michauxii + + Linaria floridana + + Lyonia lucida + + + Lyonia ferruginea + + + Mollugoa verticillata + + + Momordica charantia + + + + + Opuntia humifusa + + + + Palafoxia feayi + + + + 35 Species Mar.87 Apr.87 May 87 Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt Paronychia americana Phytolacca americana + + + + Pinus clausa + + + Pityopsis graminifolia + + Poinsettia cyathophora + + + polanisia tenuifolia + + + + + + Polygonella ciliata + + + Polygonella gracilis + Polygonella polygama Polypremun procumbens + Portulaca pilosa + + + + pterocaulon virgatum + + + Quercus chapmanii + Quercus geminata + + Quercus myrtifolia + Rhynchelytrum repens + + + + Rhynchospora megalocarpa + + + + Richardia brasiliensis + + + + + Ricinus communis + + + + Schinus terebinthifolius + + Scoparia dulcis + + + + + + Setaria geniculata + + + Sida cordifolia + + + + Sisyrinchium solstitiale Smilax auriculata + + Solanum americanum + + + + + + Solidago stricta + + Spermococe assurgens + + + + Spermococe verticillata + + + Stipulicida setacea + + + + Trichostema dichotomum Urena lobata + + + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + + vitis munsoniana + + + + Ximenia americana + + 36 Table 7 . continued for June, July, and August 1987 Species Jun.87 Jul.S7 Aug.87 Flw Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Asclepias curtissii + + Abrus precatorius + + + Andropogon virginicus + + + + Aristida gyrans + + + Asimina reticulata Befaria racemosa + + + + + + Bulbostylis ciliatifolia + + + Cassia nictitans + + + + + Cassia chamaecrista + + + Cassia occidentalis + + + + Cassytha filiformis + + + + Catharanthus roseus + + + Cenchrus incertus + + + + Centrosema virginianum + + Chenopodium ambrosioides + + + + Commelina diffusa + + + Conradina grandiflora + + + + Crotalaria rotundifolia + + Croton glandulosus + + + + Crotonopsis linearis + + + + Cuthbertia ornata + + Cyperus retrorsus + + + + Cynodon dactylon + + + Dalea feayi + + + Dichanthelium sabulorum + + + Emilia fosbergii + + + + Euphorbia polyphylla + + + + + + Froelichia floridana + + + + Gelsemium sempervirens + + + Helianthemum corymbosum + + + Helianthemum nashii + + + Heliotropium polyphyllum Hetherotheca subaxillaris + + + + + + Ilex glabra + + + + Indigofera hirsuta + + + + + Lechea cernua + + + Lechea deckertii + + + Liatris chapmanii + + + + + + Licania michauxii + + + Linaria floridana + + Lyonia lucida + + + Lyonia ferruginea + + + + Mollugoa verticillata + + Momordica charantia + + + + Opuntia humifusa + + + + Palafoxia feayi + + + + + 37 Species Jun.8? Jul.8? Aug.8? Flw Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt Paronychia americana + + + + Phytolacca americana + + + + Pinus clausa + + + Pityopsis graminifolia + + + + Poinsettia cyathophora + + + + + + polanisia tenuifolia + + + + + + Polygonella ciliata + + + + Polygonella gracilis + + + + Polygonella polygama + + + + + + Polypremun procumbens + + + + Portulaca pilosa + + + pterocaulon virgatum + Quercus chapmanii + + + Quercus geminata + + + Quercus myrtifolia + + + Rhynchelytrum repens + + + + Rhynchospora megalocarpa + + + Richardia brasiliensis + + + + Ricinus communis + + Sabal etonia + + + Schinus terebinthifolius + + + + Scoparia dulcis + + + + + Setaria geniculata + + + + Sida cordifolia + + + Sisyrinchium solstitiale + + Smilax auriculata + + + Solanum americanum + + + Solidago stricta + + + + + Spermococe assurgens + + + + Spermococe verticillata + + + + + Stipulicida setacea + + + Trichostema dichotomum + + Urena lobata + + + + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + + vitis munsoniana + + + ximenia americana + + + 38 Table 7 . continued for September, October, and November, 1987. Species Sep.87 Oct.87 Nov.87 Flw Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Asclepias curtissii Abrus precatorius + Andropogon virginicus + + + Aristida gyrans + + + Asimina reticu1ata Befaria racemosa + Bulbostylis ciliatifo1ia + + + Cassia nictitans + + + Cassia chamaecrista + + + + + + Cassia occidentalis + Cassytha fi1iformis + + + + Catharanthus roseus + + + + Cenchrus incertus + + + Centrosema virginianum + + Chenopodium ambrosioides + commelina diffusa + + Conradina grandiflora + + + + Crotalaria rotundifolia Croton glandulosus + + + + Crotonopsis linearis + + + + Cuthbertis ornata Cyperus retrorsus + + + Cynodon dactylon + + + + Dalea feayi + + + + Dichanthelium sabulorum + + + Emilia fosbergii + + + + Euphorbia polyphylla + + + + Froelichia floridana + + + + Gelsemium sempervirens + + + + + Helianthemum corymbosum + Helianthemum nashii + Heliotropium polyphyllum + Hetherotheca subaxillaris + + + + + + Ilex glabra + + + Indigofera hirsuta + + + + + Lechea cernua + + + + + Lechea deckertii + + + Liatris chapmanii + + + Licania michauxii Linaria floridana Lyonia lucida + Lyonia ferruginea + Mollugoa verticillata Momordica charantia + + + Opuntia humifusa + + + Palafoxia feayi + + + + + 39 Species Sep.87 Oct.87 N ov . 8 7 Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Paronychia americana + Phytolacca americana + + + pinus clausa Pityopsis graminifolia + + + + + Poinsettia cyathophora + + + + polanisia tenuifolia + + + + Polygonella ciliata + + + + + Polygonella grac il is + + + + Polygonella polygama + Polypremun procumbens + Portulaca pilosa + + + Pterocaulon virgatum Quercus chapmanii Quercus geminata Quercus myrtifolia Rhynchelytrum repens + + + Rhynchospora megalocarpa + + + Richardia brasiliensis + + + + Ricinus communis Schinus terebinthifolius + + + Scoparia dulcis + + + Setaria geniculata + + + Sida cordifolia + + + Sisyrinchium solstitiale + + + + + Sm i 1 a x auriculata + + + Solanum americanum + Solidago stricta + + + + + Spermococe assurgens + + + Spermococe verticillata + + + Stipulicida setacea + + + + Trichostema dichotomum + + + + + Urena lobata + + + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + + Vitis munsoniana + + Ximenia americana Table 7. continued for December, 1987 and January and February, 1988. Species Dec.87 Flw. Frt. Jan.88 Flw. Frt. Feb.88 Flw. Frt. Asclepias curtissii Abrus precatorius Andropogon virginicus Aristida gyrans Aristida speciformis Asimina reticulata Befaria racemosa Bulbostylis ciliatifolia Cassia nictitans Cassia chamaecrista Cassia occidentalis Cassytha filiformis + Catharanthus roseus + Cenchrus incertus Centrosema virginianum Chenopodium ambrosioides Commelina diffusa Conradina grandiflora + Crotalaria rotundifolia Croton glandulosus Crotonopsis linearis Cuthbertis ornata Cyperus retrorsus Cynodon dactyl on Dalea feayi + Dichanthelium sabulorum Emilia fosbergii Eragrostis atrovirens Eupatorium capillifolium + Euphorbia polyphylla + Froelichia floridana Galactia regularis Gelsemium sempervirens + Helianthemum corymbosum Helianthemum nashii + Heliotropium polyphyllum Hetherotheca subaxillaris + Ilex glabra Indigofera hirsuta Lechea cernua Lechea deckertii Liatris chapmanii Licania michauxii Linaria floridana Lyonia lucida + Lyonia ferruginea Mollugoa verticillata + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 40 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4l Species Dec.8? Jan.88 Feb.88 Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw Frt. Momordica charantia + Opuntia humifusa + + + Palafoxia feayi + + + + Paronychia americana Paspalum notatum Phytolacca americana + Pinus clausa + + + Pityopsis graminifolia + + + + + Poinsettia cyathophora polanisia tenuifolia + + Polygonella ciliata + + + Polygonella gracilis + + Polygonella polygama + Polypremun procumbens + + + + Portulaca pilosa pterocaulon virgatum + Quercus chapmanii Quercus geminata Quercus myrtifolia Rhynchelytrum repens + + + Rhynchospora megalocarpa + Richardia brasiliensis + Ricinus communis + Schinus terebinthifolius Scoparia dulcis + + Setaria geniculata + + + Sida cordifolia Sisyrinchium solstitiale + + + + + Smilax auriculata + + Solanum americanum + + Solidago stricta + + + Spermococe assurgens + + + + Spermococe verticillata Stipulicida setacea + + Trichostema dichotomum + Urena lobata + + + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + vitis munsoniana Ximenia americana 42 Table 7 . continued for March, Apr il , and May, 1988. Species Mar.88 Apr.88 May.88 Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt. Asclepias curtissii Abrus precatorius + + + + Andropogon virginicus Aristida gyrans Asimina reticulata + Befaria racemosa + + Bulbostylis ciliatifolia + + + Cassia nictitans + Cassia chamaecrista + + + + Cassia occidentalis + + + + Cassytha filiformis + + + + + Catharanthus roseus + + + Cenchrus incertus + + + + + Centrosema virginianum + + + Chenopodium ambrosioides + Commelina diffusa + + + Conradina grandiflora + + + + Crotalaria rotundifolia + + + Croton glanduloslls + + + Crotonopsis linearis + + + + Cuthbertis ornata + + Cyperus retrorsus + + + + Cynodon dactylon + + Dalea feayi + + + + Dichanthelium sabulorum + + + Emilia fosbergii + + + Euphorbia polyphylla + + Froelichia floridana + + + Gelsemium sempervirens + + + Helianthemum corymbosum + + Helianthemum nashii + + + Heliotropium polyphyllum + + Heterotheca subaxillaris + + + + Ilex glabra + + + + + Indigofera hirsuta + + + Lechea deckertii Liatris chapmanii + + + Licania michauxii + + Linaria floridana + + Lyonia lucida + + + Lyonia ferruginea + + + Mollugoa verticillata + + + Momordica charantia + + + + + Opuntia humifusa + + + + Palafoxia feayi + + + + 43 Table 7 . continued for March, April and May, 1988. Species Mar.88 Apr.88 May.88 Flw. Frt. Flw. Frt Flw. Frt. paronychia americana Phytolacca americana + + + + Pinus clausa + + + Pityopsis graminifolia + + Poinsettia cyathophora + + + polanisia tenuifolia + + + + + + Polygonella ciliata + + + Polygonella gracilis + Polygonella polygama Polypremun procumbens + Portulaca pilosa + + + + pterocaulon virgatum + + + Quercus chapmanii + Quercus geminata + + Quercus myrtifolia + Rhynchelytrum repens + + + + Rhynchospora megalocarpa + + + + Richardia brasiliensis + + + + + Ricinus communis + + + + Schinus terebinthifolius + + Scoparia dulcis + + + + + + Setaria geniculata + + + Sida cordifolia + + + + Sisyrinchium solstitiale Smilax auriculata + + Solanum americanum + + + + + + Solidago stricta + + Spermococe assurgens + + + + Spermococe verticillata + + + Stipulicida setacea + + + + Trichostema dichotomum Urena lobata + + + + Vaccinium myrsinites + + + Vitis munsoniana + + + + Ximenia americana + + 44 GOPHER TORTOISE MONITORING OF THE QUANTUM PARK SAND PINE PRESERVE INTRODUCTION Because of the general loss of habitat due to urban growth and predation of this species by humans, the numbers of gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) has declined in south Florida. As part of the development plan for Quantum Park, an improved habitat (Preserve #l) was established and a concerted effort was made to maintain a viable population on-site. The entire 560 acres of the project was first surveyed for location of active and inactive burrows, then each animal was relocated to a holding pen, and later released into the fenced preserve area. Almost half of the tortoises (25) were fitted with telemetry and followed on a weekly basis for the first four months, and then twice a month for a year and monthly thereafter, to evaluate the relocation project Methods with regard to the initial survey for gopher tortoise, line transects were visually established every l0 meters for a systematic search, with the objective of locating all burrows on the 560 acres of the Quantum site. Each burrow encountered along or near the transect line was flagged for field identification and located on an aerial map. Every burrow was also classified as either act i ve, i nact i ve, or abandoned (Auff enbe rg and Franz, 1982). A total of 119 burrows were located of which 66 were 45 classified as active, l2 as inactive, and 37 as abandoned. Four of the burrows located in the northeast corner of the project had been previously poached by humans. Within this total, there were approximately 43 burrows within the preserve (31 active, 1 inactive and 11 abandoned). Since gopher tortoise utilize multiple burrows, an estimate of the population could be made using a multiplier of 0.6 x active and inactive burrows (Auffenberg and Franz, 1975). This represented a theoretical population of 46.8 or 47 gopher tortoise or l.17 tortoise per acre of preserve. When the actual capture and removal of the tortoises was initiated, a total of 42 tortoise <1.05 per acre of preserve) were found. Most of these animals were hand captured using a professional "puller" with others being bucket trapped using pitfall traps placed in the mouth of the burrow. Each captured tortoise was permanently marked by drilling small (2-3 mm diameter) holes in the margipal scutes according to an established numbering system. Thus, each animal was individually marked for later identification. In addition, each tortoise was also measured and weighed following the procedure as outlined in McRae et.al. (1981). When it could be determined clearly, the approximate age was recorded using the annuli of the abdominal scutes For many of the large animals, the annuli had been worn smooth and age estimates could not be accurately determined. In order to reduce their homing instincts, it was necessary to maintain the tortoise in capivity for approximately six weeks. 46 This was accomplished on-site using a specially designed pen constructed by the developer. The pen had a concrete floor with several inches of sand over it, and a shallow depression in one corner to hold water. The complex was enclosed with a chain linked fence and three sides, as well as the top, were covered with shade cloth to provide security and shelter from direct sunlight. Supplemental food (e.g., lettuce, apples, bananas, etc.) was prov ided every three days by the local catering company. Large clumps of wiregrass were also planted in the sand as an addi toional source of food. For added secur i ty, the pen was locked and built within an enclosed maintenance facility. As directed by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, radio transmitters were to be used to track 25 of the tortoise in order to monitor their survival and movement for a 2 year period. The transmitters were mounted on the marginal scutes of the carapace just behind the head on both males and females. They were attached to the torto ise by a wi re loop on each side of the transmitter which was inserted from the underside of the carapace in holes predrilled through the marg inal scutes. After the wi re was firmly secured through the base plate of the transmitter, both the wire and the edges of the plate were covered and smoothed over with florist I s clay. The area was then covered with a clear Orthodontic resin (L.D. Caulk - Dentsply, Milford, Delaware). This protected the tortoise from abrasions on the underside of the carapace and reduced the probability of the transmitter 47 catching on obstructions. The antenna of each transmitter extended posteriorly around the left side of the carapace and was attached with the resin. All telemetry equipment was obtained from Wildlife Materials, Inc., Carbondale, Illinois. The receiver was a Model TRX-leeeS and was used with a folding Yagi antenna. Oft he 0 rig in a 1 4 2 tor t 0 i s e, 2 5 released, mainly at the south end of released after being measured, 6 were capture without being measured because poor condition and 2 died in captivity. All the tortoise equipped with transmitters were followed on a weekly basis for 4 months commencing November l5, 1986. At the end of that time period, they were then followed bi-monthly for one year and thereafter once a month. On each data collecting day in the field, the exact location was determined for each tortoise using the two permanent survey lines that had been previously established within the preserve (previously described in the vegetation report). A compass reading and a measured straight line distance was taken with a 165 foot tape from the nearest reference point that was established every l00 feet along the survey line. This data was then plotted directly onto an individual aerial photograph for each tortoise. In addition to monitoring the radio tagged tortoises, other relocated animals without radios were recorded as to their location whenever they were observed in the field. were rad io-tagged and the pre s e r v e, 9 w ere released shortly after they appeared to be in 48 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Because of the general decline of gopher tortoise in south Florida, there is widespread interest in preserving established sites, as well as creating new, favorable environments for these animals. Also, there is concern by environmental agencies regarding where to place confiscated tortoises and what to do with individuals that are displaced from land that is being developed. Currently, Quantum Park is unique as a research site for relocated tortoise in that all animals are enclosed in a fenced preserve. In other research dealing with gopher tortoise relocation, the measure of a successful project is the number of tortoise who established residency on the site as many often move to other locations which may be off-site. This is usually the case in marg inal or poor habitat. Because of the fence, the success of the Quantum Park project will have to be measured differently, but like other sites, it will ultimately be determined if their movement and range are not atypical, if burrow usage by different individuals is normal, and most importantly, are the tortoise gaining weight and reproducing. During the first three months after release of the tortoise, some of the data that was gathered on the individuals, while they were in captivity was analyzed and the first field reports were systematically collected. The data was first complied as to carapace length (Table l) to determine if there were any juvenile tortoises based on a size of under 150 rom (McRae et. ale 1981). 49 All 25 tortoise were found to be adults. Initial body weight was also collected for each tortoise as a baseline to determine gain or loss at future captures in the field (Table 2), plus body size relationship was studied in order to assist in determining sex (Table 3). Because of the need to measure reproductive success of the relocated tortoises and to predict home ranges of certain ind i vidual s based on sex, an effort was made to determine the sexuality of each tortoise using the discriminant function (McRae et. ale 1981) and plastral concav i ty size (Table 4). Of the 25 individuals, only 14 correlated positive in both categories as either male or female. This lack of confirmation will make it more difficult to determine the sexual maturity of individuals. In general, males having carapaces over 240 rom and females having ones over 250 rom were considered mature (Landers et. ale 1981). For the first 4 months after release, the tortoise were tracked on a weekly basis. However, no attempt was made to consider their wanderings as their home range until the second month of data collecting. Then for the next three months, the total linear distances traveled and total home ranges were recorded weekly, and thereafter, on a bimonthly basis for the fir s t yea r and thereafter monthly (Append i x 1). The ranges of the tortoise were computed using a Planix Digital Planimeter that measured minimum polygon or triangle traveled, plus a distance of 30 meters (98', 51/4") from the burrow being used for the feeding radius (McRae et. ale 1981) (Table 5). 50 Lastly, shared ranges of individual gopher tortoise were computed using each of the separate range maps (Table 6) and co- occupancy of burrows as noted in the field was tabulated (Table 7). The 1 a t t e r sit u a t ion i s not co mm 0 nun d ern a t u r a I fie I d con d i t ion s , and 0 n c e the m a Ie, f em a Ie, mat u r e , i mm a t u red a t a develops a better confidence level, it may prove to be one of the more interesting aspects of this relocation study. In any relocation effort, success is often based on the reproductive success and the overall health of the relocated species. One parameter that is important in evaluating the suitability of a species to its new envrionment is net weight loss or gain over a long time period. Twelve telemetry gopher tortoise from the preserve were captured and weighed from July 1987 to present (Table 8). All The data indicate that all twelve showed substantial increases in body weight.~ These preliminary findings indicate that the habitat within the preserve is suitable to support the relocated gopher tortoise, especially on a short term basis. ~urther measurements will be taken to determine weight loss or gain for the remaining tortoise) )}~uring the past 9 months, 7 transmitter failures have occurred within the gopher tortoise population at Quantum park') (Table 9). The Flor ida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission suggested that replacement was not necessary at this point in the monitoring program since other projects were not being required to replace failures. The agency did indicate that if a large number of transmitters failed over a short time interval, that it 51 may be necessary to terminate data collection on the population or replace some of the transmitters. 52 Table 1. Drilled number, carapace length, and body weight of 25 gopher tortoises radio-tagged at Quantum Park, Palm Beach County, October-November 1986. Tortoise No. Carapace Length (mm) Weight (gm) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 l4 l5 16 l7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 229.9 289.0 235.0 3l5.0 26l.0 228.0 302.0 298.0 258.0 258.0 270.0 285.0 301.0 262.5 265.5 266.0 226.0 237.0 244 0 246.0 252.5 251.0 236.0 242.0 229.0 2,300 3,450 2,050 4,900 3,900 2,l00 4,500+ 4,450 3,900 2,750 2,800 3,100 4,450 2,700 3,650 3,000 2,050 2,450 2,400 2,600 3,300 2,600 2,500 2,450 2,l50 Note: Due to apparent poor physical health, No. II was released after measurements were recorded without waiting for the installation of a transmitter (Carapace length-l88 rom and weight- 1 , l5 0 gm). 53 Table 2. Drilled number and body weight in decreasing order of 25 gopher tortoises radio-tagged at Quantum Park, Palm Beach County, October-November 1986 Tortoise No. Weight (gm) 4 7 8 14 5 9 16 2 22 l3 17 IllJ 15 21 23 24 19 25 211J 1 26 6 3 l8 12 4,900 4,500 4,450 4,450 3,900 3,900 3,650 3,450 3,300 3,l00 3,000 2,750 2,700 2,600 2,600 2,500 2,450 2,450 2,400 2,300 2,150 2,l00 2,1IJ50 2,050 2,000 54 Table 3. Body size (body size being carapace length x body width x body thickness x 1~-6) of 25 gopher tortoise radio-tagged at Quantum Park. Tortoise No. Body Size 4 7 8 l4 2 l6 l3 9 5 10 15 12 l7 22 23 21 25 19 20 3 24 1 6 26 l8 9.602775 9.2~8584 8.968608 8.l00587 7.8l2248 6.45l65~ 6.43188~ 6.4l49l2 6.344388 5.9118l2 5.7330~0 5.4737l0 5.464704 5.225613 4.58853l 4.537224 4.411902 4.045353 4.005504 3 856326 3.8488~6 3.76l274 3.689496 3.649344 3.509893 Note: Generally, females have a significantly greater body size than males. 55 Table 4. Determination of sex of 25 gopher tortoise radio- tagged at Quantum Park. Tortoise No. Discriminant Function Plastral Concavity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 19 l2 13 l4 15 16 l7 l8 19 29 21 22 23 24 25 26 M (0 = +.9517984) M (0 = +.6469587) M (0 = +l.5246919) M (0 = -.37519) M (D = +.4739639) M (0 = -.9745691) M (D = -.6258847) M (D = +1.96075l1) M (0 = +1.5929093) M (0 = +.22ll698) M (D = +l.2826248) M (0 = -.l938598) M (D = -.6814224) M (0 = +.8926564) M (D = -.3135151) M (D = -.74l4258) M (D = +.6746097) M (D = +.3306382) M (0 = +.559293) M (D = +l.056) M (D = +.14697) M (D = +.5591513) M (D = +.2844289) M (0 = +.3258309) M (D = +.6725629) F (PC = 2) M (PC = 19) M (PC = 7) F (PC = 4) M (PC = un F (PC = 2) M (PC = 8) M (PC = 19) M (PC = 12) F (PC = 6) M (PC = 9) F (PC = 5) F (PC = 6.5) M (PC = 9.5) F (PC = 5) F (PC = 2) F (PC = 3.5) F (PC = 3) F (PC = 4) M (PC = 9) F (PC = 5.5) F (PC = 6) F (PC = 4) F (PC = 4) F (PC = 4) Sex ? M M F M F ? M M ? M F F M F F ? ? ? M ? ? ? ? ? Note: Discriminant function is based on the ratios of plastral concavity/body volume, anal width/anal notch, and anal thickness/body volume to determine sex of individual tortoises (D = 3.44963 + 9.88423 (PC/V) + 9.96566 (AW/AN) + 0.62822 (AT/V). A positive value usually denotes a male and a negative value a female. Plastral concavity is a factor in determining the sex in tortoises with a measurement greater than 6.8 mm usually a male and less usually a female. 56 Table 5. Total linear distances and range size for each of the 25 gopher tortoises radio-tagged at Quantum Park from December 19, 1986 to June 25, 1988. Tortoise No. Linear Distance (Ft. ) Range Size (Acre) 1 l30 0.87 2 4335 7.64 3 1280 2.28 4 860 2.12 Radio dead 5 3155 5.03 6 85fl1 2.3l Radio dead 7 2700 5.35 Radio dead 8 6875 9.78 9 6480 7 04 10 l800 1.75 12 940 l.62 Radio dead l3 480 2.07 14 2030 7.28 Faint radio 15 l400 3.l5 16 370 1.69 l7 1940 3.16 l8 98 0.81 Radio dead 19 1120 2.99 2fl1 475 2.63 Radio dead 21 1630 3.67 22 2350 5.75 23 1535 2.95 24 1300 3.68 25 2865 5.08 26 1190 2.54 57 Table 6. Shared ranges of 25 gopher tortoises radio-tagged at Quantum Park as recorded from December 19, 1986 to October l7, 1987. Tortoise No. Shared Range 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 23 24 25 2,5,10,l2,17,21,22 l,4,5,7,8,9,l0,l2,l3,14,17,20,21,22,23,24,25,26 6,7,8,9,l4,19,21,23,24 2,5,8,13,l4,22,24 1,2,4,7,8,9,l0,l2,l4,l6,17,20,2l,22,23,24,25,26 3,8,14,15,l9,21,23,24,25 2,3,5,8,9,l3,l4,16,17,l9,20,2l,22,23,24,25,26 2,3,4,5,6,7,9,l3,l4,15,l7,l8,19,20,2l,22,23,24, 25,26 2,3,4,5,7,8,13,l4,16,17,19,20,2l,22,23,24,25,26 1,2,5,l2,l7,21,22,25 1,2,5,l0,17,20,2l,22,25 2,4,7,8,9,l4,22,23,24,25 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,13,15,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26 6,8,l4,19 5,7,9,17,20,22,25,26 1,2,5,7,8,9,10,l2,l6,20,21,22,24,25,26 8,14,25 3,6,7,8,9,14,15,21,24,25,26 2,5,7,8,9,l2,l4,16,17,22,23,24,25,26 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,l0,l2,14,17,l9,22,23,24,25,26 l,2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,l2,13,l4,l6,17,20,2l,23,24,25, 26 2,3,5,6,7,8,9,13,14,20,21,22,24,25,26 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,l3,14,l7,19,20,2l,22,23,25,26 2,3,5,6,7,8,9,l0,12,l3,l4,16,l7,1S,l9,20,2l,22,23, 24,26 2,5,7,8,9,14,16,17,l9,20,21,22,23,24,25 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 l7 18 19 20 2l 22 26 59 Table 7. Cont. Date Checked Burrow Number Co-Occupancy Tortoises 138/139/87 67 5 & 16 138/29/87 60 2 & 22 139/26/87 213 9 & 23 l0/17/87 213 23 & 25 l13/l7/87 30 1 & Unmarked ll/l4/87 8 5 & 26 l1/l4/87 16 3 & 23 ll/l4/87 44 113 & l2 ll/l4/87 48 l5 & 19 l/23/88 48 15 & 19 l/23/88 59 17 & 22 l/23/88 713 23 & 25 2/13/88 70 23 & 25 3/l2/88 64 8 & 14 3/12/88 50 l5 & 19 3/26/88 55 2 & 4 3/26/88 64 8 & l4 4/l6/88 613 2 & 4 4/16/88 64 8 & l4 4/l6/88 41 9 & 13 4/l6/88 50 15 & 19 5/l1/88 53 2 & 25 5/ll/88 64 8 & l4 5/ll/88 48 l5 & 19 6/25/88 78 8 & l4 60 Table 8. Body weight of radio-tagged gopher tortoises when first measured (October-November 1987) compared to weight measured at last capture. Tortoise No. weight ( gm) when Date last Weight (gm) at Radio-tagged Weighed last capture 2 3450 03/12/1988 4900 4 4900 l0/l7/l987 6000 7 too heavy for scale 03/12/1988 6250 9 3900 06/25/l988 4050 l0 2750 11/14/1987 3600 12 2800 06/25/1988 3750 l5 2700 07/11/1987 3650 l6 3650 06/25/1988 4150 19 2450 04/16/1988 3100 20 2400 10/l7/l987 3250 23 2600 06/25/l988 3300 24 2500 04/l6/1988 3700 61 Table 9. List of individual tortoise and date of transmitter failure. Tortoise Number Date of Failure 4 05/l1/l988 6 01/23/1988 7 In/23/1988 12 09/26/l987 l4 ll/14/l987 18 01/23/1988 20 05/11/1988 62 APPENDIX 1 Home ranges for marked tortoises Tortoise #1 Tortoise 12 " Tortoise 13 ... . .. .. - .. .. .. .. .. . Tortoise '4 .. . .. - .. .. .. .. .. . Tortoise #5 . . . . - .. - .. .. .. . Tortoise 16 Tortoise #7 ,/s Tortoise *8 ---------------------- Tortoise .9 i I · ') I I -r ft1 c.c. 7/'1 J 13 1(, Tortoise #10 fence Tortoise 112 . Tortoise 113 Tortoise 114 Tortoise 115 Tortoise '16 Tortoise .17 Tortoise 118 .. ~/g, Tortoise .19 Tortoise 120 .r.,c.(. Tortoise 121 . . Tortoise .22 Tortoise 123 .. Tortoise 124 Tortoise 125 . . ."-"-1-"'--'--' ~. . .;,.. -- Tortoise 126