Click here to return to Second Nature
Click here to read the press release
Click here to read the executive summary

A decade ago, the state of Florida compiled a statewide plan which identified lands that must be conserved in order to sustain declining wildlife species and natural communities.

The report, Closing the Gaps in Florida’s Wildlife Habitat Conservation System, assessed the status of species and habitat that encompass Florida’s biodiversity. The project mapped two categories of strategic land: areas that were already under some form of conservation protection (20 percent of the state’s area), and areas that needed additional protection (an additional 13 percent). Closing the Gaps was the first statewide conservation program of its kind, built upon a sophisticated process with a strong scientific approach. Notably, it included the assembly and analysis of numerous data sets and assessments of focal species and population viability. The project has played a key role in guiding land acquisition decisions. Since publication in 1994, the state has acquired 20 percent of the previously-unprotected strategic habitat areas.

Following the 1998 adoption of TEA-21, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) began efforts to expedite projects without sacrificing environmental concerns. Building upon directives in TEA-21, FDOT teamed up with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and other government agencies to develop a refined and improved methodology for making transportation decisions while complying with all federal and state environmental regulations. The result — FDOT’s Efficient Transportation Decision Making Process (ETDM) — redefines how the state plans and builds transportation projects while protecting Florida’s natural assets.

Each of the seven FDOT regions has an Environmental Technical Advisory Team (ETAT) composed of representatives from the relevant planning, consultation, and regulatory agencies. Proposed road projects are screened by the ETAT, based upon a checklist of criteria, including social and environmental impacts. Data from Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are used to perform evaluations, and are accessible to all agencies, as well as to the public through the Florida Geographic Data Library (FGDL).

One point of analysis is the compatibility of the proposed project with the state habitat plan. By overlaying maps of strategic habitats with FDOT’s short- and long-range transportation plans, the ETAT can easily identify potential environmental concerns at the earliest stage of planning (see graphic). At that time, options for avoiding or minimizing environmental impacts are greatest and the costs of addressing conflicts are nominal.

As of early 2003, four other states had completed statewide biodiversity plans: Oregon, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey. (See Appendix A for summaries.) However, those plans had not yet been incorporated into statewide transportation planning.

In 2002, the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (IAFWA) teamed up with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Defenders of Wildlife and several other organizations to develop flexible guidance for states to complete their Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Plans.⁴ Remaining states are expected to complete their plans by 2005, or risk losing eligibility for federal funding under the State Wildlife Grants Program.

While states are in the process of developing their conservation plans, transportation officials can look to other large-scale planning endeavors for information on ecologically valuable areas to be avoided. Due to development pressures and a need to address conservation issues, many localities have undertaken efforts to develop regional biodiversity plans.

Endnotes

4. IAFWA’s President’s Committee on CARA Implementation created a Working Group of State, Federal, and nongovernmental representatives to craft a guidance document that IAFWA encourages all States to consider as they implement the State Wildife Grant Program and create their required comprehensive wildlife conservation plans. The working group consisted of: State fish and wildlife agency staff from eight states (WA, GA, TX, NE, MT, WI, MO, VA, AZ), IAFWA staff, Federal agency staff from FWS, FS, and BLM, and NGO staff from 9 organizations (Defenders of Wildlife, TNC, NWF, ELI, NatureServe, WMI, Isaac Walton, Trout Unlimited, NRA). The final guidance document was produced in September 2002.