patrickbdevaney/mia9 · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 6.44k
Coastal Uplands 85,834 0.23%
Exotic Plants 66,089 0.18%
Rockland Forests 36,186 0.10%
FLORIDA LAND USE AND LAND COVER CHANGE IN THE PAST 100 YEARS • 75
Table 2.2. Current natural community types based on Florida Cooperative Land Cover data (2015).
Land Cover Class Acres
% of
Statewide Land Cover Class Acres
% of
Statewide
Freshwater Forested
Wetlands 2,676,694 17.21% Cypress/Tupelo 92,145 0.59%
Marshes 2,435,732 15.66%
Isolated Freshwater
Swamp 74,557 0.48%
Wet Prairies and
Bogs 1,736,441 11.16% Floodplain Marsh 49,974 0.32%
Mixed HardwoodConiferous 1,329,657 8.55% Dome Swamp 48,862 0.31%
Mesic Flatwoods 1,325,011 8.52% Strand Swamp 44,236 0.28%
Sandhill 775,755 4.99% Tidal Flat 43,950 0.28%
Wet Flatwoods 761,947 4.90% Scrub Mangrove 42,388 0.27%
Cypress 637,310 4.10% Maritime Hammock 29,654 0.19%
Mangrove Swamp 571,710 3.68%
Other Coniferous
Wetlands 26,800 0.17%
Floodplain Swamp 421,270 2.71% Sand Beach (Dry) 24,386 0.16%
Salt Marsh 378,678 2.43% Xeric Hammock 24,211 0.16%
High Pine and Scrub 290,829 1.87%
Other Hardwood
Wetlands 23,022 0.15%
Isolated Freshwater
Marsh 276,763 1.78% Palmetto Prairie 21,131 0.14%
Hydric Hammock 240,562 1.55% Coastal Scrub 19,554 0.13%
Upland Hardwood
Forest 224,388 1.44% Rockland Hammock 19,320 0.12%
Sand Pine Scrub 220,967 1.42% Pine Rockland 16,866 0.11%
Basin Swamp 192,634 1.24% Coastal Uplands 16,570 0.11%
Upland Pine 164,839 1.06%
Non-vegetated
Wetland 13,828 0.09%
Scrub 159,788 1.03%
Keys Tidal Rock
Barren 8,519 0.05%
Dry Prairie 155,891 1.00% Coastal Strand 6,703 0.04%
Freshwater NonForested Wetland 138,786 0.89% Slope Forest 5,875 0.04%
Mesic Hammock 126,285 0.81% Dry Flatwoods 2,459 0.02%
Baygall 111,861 0.72%
Outcrop
Communities 507 0.0033%
Pine Flatwoods/Dry
Prairie 105,838 0.68% Upland Glade 34 0.0002%
Scrubby Flatwoods 93,619 0.60% Total 15,553,254 100.00%
76 • MICHAEL I. VOLK ET AL.
Table 2.3. Acres of natural and semi-natural wetlands and uplands in conservation lands.
Description Acres Percent of Category
Natural Uplands in Conservation Lands 2,397,767 44.3%
Natural Uplands not in Conservation Lands 3,010,844 55.7%

Wetlands in Conservation Lands 6,155,458 56.2%
Wetlands not in Conservation Lands 4,798,293 43.8%

Semi-natural Uplands in Conservation Lands 1,167,281 14.9%
Semi-natural Uplands not in Conservation Lands 6,675,938 85.1%

Possible Future Changes in Land Use and Land Cover
Although the focus of this chapter is on historical land use and land cover changes to date, it
would not be complete without a brief discussion of potential future changes from population
growth and development. Climate change may also have significant impacts on land cover and
land use throughout the state, but those topics are discussed in other chapters.
Though the rate of growth fluctuates, as of 2015 the population of Florida was increasing by
approximately 1,000 people per day (O’Donnell 2015), requiring additional housing and
infrastructure be built to accommodate them. A 2016 study of future population allocation and
development scenarios for 2070 (Carr and Zwick 2016) showed the extensive impacts that
continued development and land use change will have on existing agricultural and natural
landscapes if current growth rates and development trends continue. In addition to creating a
scenario that mapped future development at current trends and densities, Carr and Zwick (2016)
created an alternative scenario that showed how future population growth in the state might be
accommodated using higher densities and rates of infill. A baseline scenario that identifies 2010
land use patterns within the state was also created for comparison. Table 2.4, adapted from Carr
and Zwick (2016), provides an acreage comparison of the 2010 baseline, a future “trend”
scenario, and an alternative scenario for 2070, which shows the significant reduction in acreage
of agricultural and other undeveloped lands that will occur if current population growth and
development trends are maintained.
Coastal development will, at least in some places, be required to relocate inland in response
to sea level rise, compounding the development pressure and impacts on existing undeveloped
agricultural and natural landscapes. Where this occurs, the character and ability of inland
landscapes to provide important agricultural and ecosystem services will be altered. Vargas et al.
(2014), and Noss et al. (2014) have provided scenarios that show the potential impacts from “inmigration” of human population, combined with additional development to accommodate
continued population growth. Figure 2.6 shows one such scenario for 2060, where future
FLORIDA LAND USE AND LAND COVER CHANGE IN THE PAST 100 YEARS • 77
population growth was allocated throughout the state based on current trends and densities, and
coastal populations impacted by a 1 m sea level rise were forced to relocate elsewhere within the
state. Where coastal development remains in place, coastal protection and hardening structures
may be used to stabilize the shoreline, which has been shown to cause significant damage to
coastal ecosystems (Pilkey et al. 2009). Specific studies on the combined impacts of future
development and sea level rise on biodiversity, natural communities, and landscape-level
ecological priorities have been conducted by Noss et al. (2014) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (2008), with results showing that it is more critical than ever to
carefully conduct future land use planning in a way that protects the resources critical to our state.
Table 2.4. An acreage comparison of Florida 2070 alternative population allocation scenarios not

Coastal Uplands 85,834 0.23%

Exotic Plants 66,089 0.18%

Rockland Forests 36,186 0.10%

FLORIDA LAND USE AND LAND COVER CHANGE IN THE PAST 100 YEARS • 75

Table 2.2. Current natural community types based on Florida Cooperative Land Cover data (2015).

Land Cover Class Acres

% of

Statewide Land Cover Class Acres

% of

Statewide

Freshwater Forested

Wetlands 2,676,694 17.21% Cypress/Tupelo 92,145 0.59%

Marshes 2,435,732 15.66%

Isolated Freshwater

Swamp 74,557 0.48%

Wet Prairies and

Bogs 1,736,441 11.16% Floodplain Marsh 49,974 0.32%

Mixed HardwoodConiferous 1,329,657 8.55% Dome Swamp 48,862 0.31%

Mesic Flatwoods 1,325,011 8.52% Strand Swamp 44,236 0.28%

Sandhill 775,755 4.99% Tidal Flat 43,950 0.28%

Wet Flatwoods 761,947 4.90% Scrub Mangrove 42,388 0.27%

Cypress 637,310 4.10% Maritime Hammock 29,654 0.19%

Mangrove Swamp 571,710 3.68%

Other Coniferous

Wetlands 26,800 0.17%

Floodplain Swamp 421,270 2.71% Sand Beach (Dry) 24,386 0.16%

Salt Marsh 378,678 2.43% Xeric Hammock 24,211 0.16%

High Pine and Scrub 290,829 1.87%

Other Hardwood

Wetlands 23,022 0.15%

Isolated Freshwater

Marsh 276,763 1.78% Palmetto Prairie 21,131 0.14%

Hydric Hammock 240,562 1.55% Coastal Scrub 19,554 0.13%

Upland Hardwood

Forest 224,388 1.44% Rockland Hammock 19,320 0.12%

Sand Pine Scrub 220,967 1.42% Pine Rockland 16,866 0.11%

Basin Swamp 192,634 1.24% Coastal Uplands 16,570 0.11%

Upland Pine 164,839 1.06%

Non-vegetated

Wetland 13,828 0.09%

Scrub 159,788 1.03%

Keys Tidal Rock

Barren 8,519 0.05%

Dry Prairie 155,891 1.00% Coastal Strand 6,703 0.04%

Freshwater NonForested Wetland 138,786 0.89% Slope Forest 5,875 0.04%

Mesic Hammock 126,285 0.81% Dry Flatwoods 2,459 0.02%

Baygall 111,861 0.72%

Outcrop

Communities 507 0.0033%

Pine Flatwoods/Dry

Prairie 105,838 0.68% Upland Glade 34 0.0002%

Scrubby Flatwoods 93,619 0.60% Total 15,553,254 100.00%

76 • MICHAEL I. VOLK ET AL.

Table 2.3. Acres of natural and semi-natural wetlands and uplands in conservation lands.

Description Acres Percent of Category

Natural Uplands in Conservation Lands 2,397,767 44.3%

Natural Uplands not in Conservation Lands 3,010,844 55.7%

Wetlands in Conservation Lands 6,155,458 56.2%

Wetlands not in Conservation Lands 4,798,293 43.8%

Semi-natural Uplands in Conservation Lands 1,167,281 14.9%

Semi-natural Uplands not in Conservation Lands 6,675,938 85.1%

Possible Future Changes in Land Use and Land Cover

Although the focus of this chapter is on historical land use and land cover changes to date, it

would not be complete without a brief discussion of potential future changes from population

growth and development. Climate change may also have significant impacts on land cover and

land use throughout the state, but those topics are discussed in other chapters.

Though the rate of growth fluctuates, as of 2015 the population of Florida was increasing by

approximately 1,000 people per day (O’Donnell 2015), requiring additional housing and

infrastructure be built to accommodate them. A 2016 study of future population allocation and

development scenarios for 2070 (Carr and Zwick 2016) showed the extensive impacts that

continued development and land use change will have on existing agricultural and natural

landscapes if current growth rates and development trends continue. In addition to creating a

scenario that mapped future development at current trends and densities, Carr and Zwick (2016)

created an alternative scenario that showed how future population growth in the state might be

accommodated using higher densities and rates of infill. A baseline scenario that identifies 2010

land use patterns within the state was also created for comparison. Table 2.4, adapted from Carr

and Zwick (2016), provides an acreage comparison of the 2010 baseline, a future “trend”

scenario, and an alternative scenario for 2070, which shows the significant reduction in acreage

of agricultural and other undeveloped lands that will occur if current population growth and

development trends are maintained.

Coastal development will, at least in some places, be required to relocate inland in response

to sea level rise, compounding the development pressure and impacts on existing undeveloped

agricultural and natural landscapes. Where this occurs, the character and ability of inland

landscapes to provide important agricultural and ecosystem services will be altered. Vargas et al.

(2014), and Noss et al. (2014) have provided scenarios that show the potential impacts from “inmigration” of human population, combined with additional development to accommodate

continued population growth. Figure 2.6 shows one such scenario for 2060, where future

FLORIDA LAND USE AND LAND COVER CHANGE IN THE PAST 100 YEARS • 77

population growth was allocated throughout the state based on current trends and densities, and

coastal populations impacted by a 1 m sea level rise were forced to relocate elsewhere within the

state. Where coastal development remains in place, coastal protection and hardening structures

may be used to stabilize the shoreline, which has been shown to cause significant damage to

coastal ecosystems (Pilkey et al. 2009). Specific studies on the combined impacts of future

development and sea level rise on biodiversity, natural communities, and landscape-level

ecological priorities have been conducted by Noss et al. (2014) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife

Conservation Commission (2008), with results showing that it is more critical than ever to

carefully conduct future land use planning in a way that protects the resources critical to our state.

Table 2.4. An acreage comparison of Florida 2070 alternative population allocation scenarios not