bata

j
‘

Hid}

=
=

CTA

1}
'

Heh

i
‘i

IRTE

FLORIDA STATE GEOLOGICAL-SURVEY
HERMAN GUNTER, STATE GEOLOGIST

TERT eN TH ANNUAL REPORT

PUBLISHED FOR
THE STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

TALLAHASSEE, 1921

DELAND, FLA ve
‘THE E, O. PAINTER PRINTING 0
M (1921

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.

To His Excellency, Hon. Sidney J. Catts, Governor of Florida:
Sir:—In accordance with the law establishing the State Geo-
logical Survey I submit. herewith, my annual report, being the
Thirteenth in the series of annual reports thus far published by
this Department. The report contains a detailed financial state-
ment showing the expenditures up to June 30, 1920, together with
a result of those investigations undertaken during the past year.
_ Appreciation of the interest you have shown in the work of
the State Geological Survey and the assistance you have rendered
is herewith expressed.

; Very respectfully,

HERMAN GUNTER,

State Geologist.
November, 1920.

CONTENTS
Administrative report: <2=.52282 5 -S2= EN ase oe ee eee 5
Introduction: :2 2: SaS te ek oe ae ee ak ee 5
Recommendations 2025-6 sae ee See ee II
Oil Sprospectirig? 252 2.22 Me ee as ee 14
Financial: statement’ 22522224 Ae ee 20
Statistics “of mineral production ducing, 1916 2--==--—) = ee 25

Foraminifera from the deep wells of Florida, by Joseph A. Cushman (with
fig. (t and: plates =3) (wes -e et ee es ed Ee eee ae
Geography of Central Florida, by Roland M. Harper (with figs. 2-43) -- 71

099

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT.

HERMAN GUNTER, STATE GEOLOGIST.

INTRODUCTION.

The act establishing the Florida State Geological Survey was
passed by the Legislature of 1907, being approved on June 3rd
of that year. Among other provisions of the law is one requiring
the State Geologist to make annually to the Governor a report
of the progress made by the Survey. Since its establishment the
following reports have been issued, the subjects treated being in-
dicated by the titles of the separate papers listed under each an-
nual report which make up the whole volume.

Those annual reports followed by an asterisk (*) are no longer
available for distribution as a whole volume, owing to exhaustion
of supply. It is frequently the case, however, that although the
report as a whole is not available some of the separate papers
making up the volume may be obtained. When this is the case
such separates making up the respective annual reports as are still
available are indicated by the dagger sign (7).

PUBLICATIONS OF THE FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

First Annual Report, 1908, 114 pp., 6 pls.*

This report contains: (1) a sketch of the geology of Florida; (2) a chap-
ter on mineral industries, including phosphate, kaolin or ball clay, brick-mak-
ing clays, fuller’s earth, peat, lime, cement and road-making materials; (3)
a bibliography of publications on Florida geology, with a review of the more
important papers published previous to the organization of the present Geo-
logical Survey.

Second Annual Report, 1909, 299, pp., 19 pls., 5 text figures,
one map.*

This report contains : (1) a preliminary report on the geology of Flor-
ida, with special reference to stratigraphy, including a topographic and geo-
logic map of Florida, prepared in co-operation with the United States Geo-

5

6 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

logical Survey; (2) mineral industries; (3) the fuller’s earth deposits of
Gadsden county, with notes on similar deposits found elsewhere in the State

Third Annual Report, 1910, 397 pp., 28 pls., 30 text figures.”

This report contains: (1) a preliminary paper on the Florida phosphate
deposits; (2) some Florida lakes and lake basins; (3) the artesian water sup-
ply of eastern and southern Florida; (4) a preliminary report on the Flor-
ida peat deposits.

Fourth Annual Report, 191'2, 175 pp., 16 pls., 15 text figures,
one map.

This report contains: (1) the soils and other surface residual materials
of Florida, their origin. character and the formations from which derivedy;
(2) the water supply of west-central and west Floriday; (3) the production
of phosphate rock in Florida during 1910 and 1911.

Fifth Annual Report, 1913, 306 pp., 14 pls., 17 text figures,
two maps.*

This report contains: (1) origin of the hard rock phosphates of Flor-
idat; (2) list of elevations in Florida; (3) artesian water supply of eastern
and southern Floridat; (4) production of phosphate in Florida during 1912;
(5) statistics on public roads in Florida.

Sixth Annual Report, 1914, 451 pp., 90 figures, one map.*

This report contains: (1) mineral industries and resources of Floriday;
(2) some Florida lakes and lake basins; (3) relation between the Dunnellon

and Alachua formations; (4) geography and vegetation of northern Flor-
idaf.

Seventh Annual Report, 1915, 342 pp., 80 figures, four maps.*
This report contains: (1) pebble phosphates of Floridat; (2) natural

resources of an area in Central Floridat; (3) soil survey of Bradford
countyt; (4) soil survey of Pinellas countyf.

Eighth Annual Report, 1916, 168 pp., 31 pls., 14 text figures.*

This report contains: (1) mineral industries; (2) vertebrate fossils, in-
cluding fossil human remainsf.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 7

Ninth Annual Report, 1917, 151 pp., 8 pls., 13 figures, two
maps.

This report contains: (1) mineral industries; (2) additional studies in
the Pleistocene at Vero, Floriday; (3) geology between the Ocklocknee and
Aucilla rivers in Floridaf.

Tenth and Eleventh Annual Reports, 1918, 130 pp., 4 pls., 9
figures, two maps.*

This report contains: (1) geology between the Apalachicola and Ock-
locknee rivers; (2) the skull of a Pleistocene tapir with description of a new
species and a note on the associated fauna and flora; (3) geology between
the Choctawhatchee and Apalachicola rivers; (4) mineral statistics; (5) mol-
luscan fauna from the marls near DeLand.

Twelfth Annual Report, 1919, 153 pp., four maps.

This réport contains: (1) literature relating to human remains and arti-
facts at Vero, Floridat; (2) fossil beetles from Verot; (3) elevations in
Floridat; (4) geologic section across the Everglades of Floridat; (5) the
age of the underlying rocks of Florida as shown by the foraminifera of well
borings}; (6) review of the geology of Florida with special reference to
structural conditions}.

Thirteenth Annual Report (this volume) 1921. -

Bulletin No. 1. The Underground Water Supply of Central
Florida, 1908, 103 pp., 6 pls., 6 text figures.*

This bulletin contains: (1) underground water. general discussion; (2)
the underground water of central Florida, deep and shallow wells, spring and
artesian prospects; (3) effects of underground solution, cavities, sinkholes,
disappearing streams and solution basins; (4) drainage of lakes, ponds and
swamp lands and disposal of sewage by bored wells; (5) water analyses and
tables giving general water resources, public water supplies, spring and well
records.

Bulletin No. 2. Roads and Road Materials of Florida, 1911,
31 pp., 4 pls.* |
This bulletin contains: (1) an account of the road building materials

of Florida; (2) a statistical table showing the amount of improved roads
built by the counties of the State to the close of I9gI0.

8 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

In addition to the regular reports of the Survey as listed above
press bulletins have been issued as follows:

No. 1. The-Extinct Land '!Animals of Florida, February 6, 1913.

No. 2. Production of Phosphate Rock in Florida during 1912, March 12,
1913.

No. 3. Summary of Papers Presented by the State Geologist at the At-
lanta Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
December 31, I913.

No.4. The Utility of Well Records, January 15, 1914.

No. 5. Production of Phosphate Rock in Florida during 1913, May 20,
IQI4.

No. 6. The Value to Science of the Fossil Animal Remains Found Em-
bedded in the Earth, January, 1915.

No. 7. Report on Clay Tests for Paving Brick,s April, 1915:

No. 8. Phosphate Production for 1917, May 2, 1918.

No. 9. Survey of Mineral Resources, May 10, 1918.

No. 10. Phosphate Industry of Florida during 1918, June 5, Ig19. .

No. 11. Statistics on Mineral Production in Florida during 1918, Octo-
ber 6, 19109.

DISTRIBUTION OF REPORTS

The reports of the Florida Geological Survey are sent with-
out cost to the citizens of the State and may be obtained by ad-
dressing a request to the State Geologist, Tallahassee, Florida.
Postage should accompany requests from those living outside of
Florida or if preferred reports can be sent by express collect.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 9g
RESIGNATION OF E. H. SEILLARDS AS STATE GEOLOGIST.

After serving the State of Florida for almost fifteen years,
three years as Professor of Geology and Zoology at the Univer-
sity of Florida and practically twelve years as State Geologist,
Dr. E. H. Sellards tendered his resignation which became effective
April 18, 1919. Dr. Sellards did not leave the services of the
State without regret, for the work was most attractive, the field
of labor and investigation rich and the associations formed in the
prosecution of the great work that he had accomplished most pleas-
ant. It was, however, the mounting cost of the daily necessaries
and comforts of life with the decreasing purchasing power of the
dollar that was the compelling force and deciding factor in the
acceptance of a more attractive offer with the Bureau of Economic
Geology and Technology of the State of Texas. No one was more
familiar with the geology of the State of Florida and its economic
resources than was Dr. Sellards and in his leaving the State has
lost the services of a most thorough, painstaking, conscientious
and scientific investigator.

PERSONNEL OF THE SURVEY.

Upon the resignation of Dr. E. H. Sellards as State Geologist,
Mr. Herman Gunter, who has been with the Survey since August,
1907, was appointed as his successor. On July 1, 1919, Mrs. L.
B. Robertson entered upon the duties of Secretary of the Depart-
ment and served in this capacity until August I, 1920. Dr. Joseph
A. Cushman of the Boston Society of Natural History, a recog-
nized authority on foraminifera, minute fossils of great importance
in identifying geologic formations, has prepared a detailed repdrt
on the species of this group as represented in samples of drillings
from several deep wells in the State. Dr. R. M. Harper has served
as Assistant on the Survey in the capacity of botanist and geog-
rapher since April 1, 1920. A paper on the Geography of Central
Florida by Dr. Harper accompanies this report, which is in contin-
uation of a study and report on this subject covering northern Flor-
ida, contained in the Sixth Annual Report, published in 1914.

.

IO FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT
CHANGE OF LOCATION OF THE GEOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT.

Through the courtesy of the State Chemist the Geological De-
partment occupied two rooms in the Chemical Building from early
in 1908, or shortly after its organization, until March 1, 1920.
One of these served as office and library while the other was used
for the exhibition of geological material and for other purposes.

The legislature of 1919 provided for the inspection and anal-
ysis of gasoline and kerosene, carrying also the provision for
appointment of an additional Assistant State Chemist to take care
of the analytical work. Although the rooms occupied by the Geo-
logical Survey were at the expense of the State and even though
they had been needed by the Chemical Division for some time, it
was not until the law mentioned became effective that it was neces-
sary for the Geological Department to find quarters elsewhere.

There being no available space in the Capitol building or in
one owned or controlled by the State there was no other alterna-
tive than to get office and museum space in a building privately
owned. In this the Geological Survey was fortunate for the Per-
kins Building on Monroe Street was at that time under construc-
tion, and quarters were arranged to suit the convenience of the
Department, both as to office, library and museum space.

In its new location the Survey has one room containing 750
square feet which is now used for the exhibition of geological ma-
terial and for the main working library. The other space, equal in
area, is divided into four rooms, the offices for the State Geolo-
gist, Assistant and Secretary, while the fourth serves the purpose
of mailing room and for storage.

MUSEUM.

In its new location the room used for the exhibition of geo-
logical material and for the main library occupies approximately
750 square feet. Six cases have been built which serve both the
purpose of exhibition and storage, but much other material now
in storage could be placed on exhibition if more space and ad-
ditional cases were provided. The, present cases are filled, both
as to exhibition and storage space, and specimens collected in the
future will have to remain packed in boxes until such time as ad-

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 1 ip

ditional space becomes available. The collection of fossils and
minerals will be added to as rapidly as they can be properly cared
for.

LIBRARY.

The Survey library now contains several thousand volumes,
and is a fairly complete reference library for our purposes. Many
volumes, particularly those of foreign Geological Surveys, are
stored elsewhere temporarily owing to an insufficient number of
bookcases to accommodate them in the library.

RECOMMENDATIONS.
CLAY TESTING LABORATORY.

The clays of Florida should be investigated and reported upon.
As is shown by the number of requests, demand for information
on the properties of the clays of the State is increasing. The phys-
ical property of a clay can only be determined by proper clay
testing machinery, with which the Geological Survey is not equip-
ped. A clay testing laboratory should be installed so that a
thorough, systematic investigation of the clays of the State could
be made. At present space in which to install clay testing machinery
is not available and the State Survey cannot make tests of clays
until adequate provisions are made.

MEASUREMENTS OF STREAMS AND SPRINGS.

The water powers of the State should receive attention. A
systematic study of these requires a knowledge of the drainage
systems, which in instances are quite complicated. Gauges should
be installed on the more promising rivers and streams and records
should cover a sufficient period of time to give accurate data for
seasonal variations of flow.

Likewise, the springs of the State should be gauged. In
Florida are found the largest springs in the world, and estimates
of flow from these should be available. Estimates of the volume
of flow from many of these, particularly the larger ones, have
been made at different times but it would be of considerable inter-

I2 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

est and desirable to have data on the fluctuation of flow which
could be gotten only by records covering a stated period.

Co-operation in the matter of the gauging of streams could
be arranged with the Water Resources Branch of the United States
Geological Survey and it is urged that provision be made for enter-
ing into such co-operation.

CO-OPERATION WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS.

The Florida Geological Survey has co-operated with the United
States Geological Survey, as in former years, in the collection of
statistics on the mineral production in Florida. This co-operation
has been found highly desirable and advantageous since it elimi-
nates the possibilities of discrepancies in statements which might
occur when such statistics are collected separately by each Survey.

TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING.

In this day of rapid development in the State coupled with
undertakings of vast magnitude such as the enormous drainage
projects, the plans for and the construction of permanent systems
of highways, renewed activity in railroad extensions, etc., nothing
could better serve as an essential aid in this development than de-
tailed topographic maps. These maps are as accurate as the scale
used (approximately a mile to the inch) will allow, showing every
natural surface feature, such as rivers and creeks, springs, lakes,
swamps and marshes, hills and valleys, sink-holes and rock out-
crops in addition to artificial features as cities and towns, schools,
churches and other buildings, railroads, highways, as well as minor
roads, and bridges. In fact, such maps as these prepared by the
United States Geological Survey are indispensable to the most in-
telligent development of many of the State’s resources and indus-
tries. With their aid the construction engineer can lay out a right-
of-way for either highway or railroad without the expense of the
preliminary survey and the drainage engineer can lay out a system
of canals and ditches in the office almost to better advantage than
in the field. To the general public, and particularly to those who
travel, the maps are of great convenience and benefit, for 4 mo-
ment’s glance reveals the exact physiography and general nature
of the country mapped.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT We

As a base map on which to show the distribution of differ-
ent soil types topographic maps are of very great assistance. Not
only do they serve as an exact base map for the area to be soil
surveyed, thus reducing the cost of the soil map itself, but they
facilitate the study of the soils which, as is known, bear close re-
lations with drainage and moisture conditions. They are practically
indespensable in the preparation of detailed, final geologic maps
and reports.

The accumulation of oil or gas in commercial quantity is
greatly dependent upon favorable geologic structure of formations.
With the constant increase of interest in the problem of oil and
gas being found in Florida, topographic maps could facilitate ac-
curate work on geologic structure. In a state like Florida, with
comparative little relief and consequently but few continuous ex-
posures of the different geological formations, evidence of struc-
ture must be gotten from many single disconnected exposures. The
working out of structure so as to determine anticlines, synclines
and folds in the strata is no easy problem at best, but these maps,
showing as they do elevations by means of contours at 10-foot
intervals, would make the problem easier of solution.

CO-OPERATION WITH UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY IN TOP-
OGRAPHIC MAPPING.

It is with an appreciation and realization of the value of such
maps that the Florida Geological Survey is desirous of co-operat-
ing with the United States Geological Survey in their preparation.
As many as 24 quadrangles lying wholly or partly within the State
and covering about 250 square miles each, have already been topo-
graphically surveyed. According to an estimate by the United
_ States Geological Survey the mapping so far completed covers

seven per cent of the total area of the State. From the same source
it is learned that only one other State in the entire United States
falls below this percentage. All of the areas mapped, except seven
lying in central peninsular Florida embracing a portion of the hard
rock phosphate belt, and surveyed shortly after the discovery of
phosphate, have been mapped in recent years. In fact, it was due
primarily to military necessity for the information gained from such
maps that the War Department co-operated with the United States

I4 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Geological Survey during the recent war and prepared the greater
number of the maps embracing a portion of northeastern Florida.

The usefulness of these maps calls for the continuation of
work along these lines, with the State bearing its proportionate
part of the cost. To do this increased funds must be made
available. The willingness on the part of the United States Geo-
logical Survey to aid in this work is shown by the offer to co-
operate with the Florida Geological Survey on a dollar for dollar
basis. In addition, the expense of printing and engraving is borne
by the Federal Survey. It is recommended that at least $5000.00
be appropriated each year by the State for the prosecution of
field work in order that the mapping may progress and be com-
pleted within a reasonable number of years.

OIL PROSPECTING.

Interest in the probability of finding oil and gas in Florida
is increasing and much money is being spent in drilling test wells
at the present time. During the past several years a number of
such wells have been drilled in the State, particularly in the pen-
insular portion, the deepest in that section being one near Bush-
nell, in Sumter County, which reached’ a depth of 3080 feet.

The area in which prospecting is now most active is in the
northern and western portion of the State. Wells are being drilled
near Burns in Wakulla County about fifteen.miles south of Tal-
lahassee, near Clarksville in northern Calhoun County, near Chip-
ley in northern Washington County, and two in Walton County,
near Mossy Head and Bruce. Other wells are to be commenced
in the near future, locations having been decided upon, operations
only awaiting the delivery and placing of the drilling rig and other
necessary machinery.

It is becoming more and more generally recognized that the
accumulation of oil and gas is dependent upon the character and
structure of the underlying geological formations. A detailed
study of the geology of the region should be made before a loca-
tion for a test well is decided upon. These studies should cover
a large territory in order to make it possible to properly correlate
the different formations and the structure within them. Some
of the promoters of the wells that have been and are being drilled

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 15

in Florida have appreciated this fact and have decided upon a
location only after considering reports on the geology covering
- their properties and surrounding country.. In order, however, that
the reliability of such reports be unquestioned they should be pre-
pared by one who is a geologist of recognized standing thereby
not only demanding but meriting that confidence be placed upon
the results of his investigations.

_ The State Geological Survey in the regular course of its in-
vestigations has accumulated considerable data relative to the struc-
ture of formations in Florida. Much of this has been published
in the various papers on geology as contained in the several an-
nual reports but such data are constantly being added to. A study
of the structure of formations in Florida is a rather tedious task
owing to the comparative slight relief with correspondingly few
continuous geologic exposures. In addition, erosion, especially by
solution and subsidence, has been most active in our formations
thus increasing the difficulty of working out structure in any
particular formation or horizon, It is thus only through detailed
work and cautious interpretations that the most. reliable results
can be obtained.

Of invaluable assistance in the furtherance of these studies
would be topographic maps on which all surface exposures and
other related data could be located and on which structure con-
tours could be plotted. In addition accurate well records, based
on samples of the drillings taken at frequent intervals, have con-
tributed important data to our knowledge of the succession of
formations in Florida. Efforts on the part of the Survey to se-
cure well samples have had results and such sets of drillings as
have been procured have been studied in detail, one paper being
published in the Twelfth Annual Report and a second being in-
cluded in the present volume. Through the courteous co-opera-
tion of well contractors and promoters the Survey is at present
receiving excellent sets of carefully taken well drillings and it is
a privilege to acknowledge this co-operation which will add much
to our present knowledge of the geology of the State. It is urged
that those who contemplate drilling any wells, particularly those
that may go to exceptional depth, save samples of the cuttings and
submit them to the State Geologist, Tallahassee, Fla., who will
study them and submit a descriptive log. Too much emphasis

tip 6) FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

can not be placed on the importance of saving samples of the drill-
ings from all the deep wells that are drilled for whatever purpose.
These should be carefully collected at frequent intervals regard-
less of whether there is a change in the formation or not and
properly labeled as to the depth from which they were taken.

Of interest in consideration of the subject of oil in Florida
is a Press Bulletin of the United States Geological Survey which
appeared during April 1920. This bulletin relates to Peninsular
Florida, in fact that portion of the State lying from Suwannee
County eastward. The title as first published is misleading in
that it includes the entire State but from the subject matter it is
readily seen that the area lying from Suwannee County westward
is not treated. The bulletin referred to is herewith republished
with the insertion of the word “Peninsular” in the title:

DRILLING FOR OIL IN PENINSULAR ELORIDES

ADVICE GIVEN BY GOVERNMENT GEOLOGIST.

Wells have been drilled for oil in every State in the Union ex-
cept the New England States and possibly four others—North
Carolina, South Carolina, Nevada, and Idaho. Only sixteen states,
however, can be called oil-producing. A number of deep wells
have been drilled in Florida, the deepest being one near Bush-
nell, in Sumter County, which was carried to a depth of 3,080 feet.
This well and one near Waycross, in southern Georgia, which
was drilled to a depth of 3,045 feet, are two of the deepest wells
in the Atlantic Coastal Plain.

GEOLOGISTS NOT HOPEFUL OF SUCCESS.

Although the deep wells drilled in Florida have yielded no
indications of oil the interest in the possibility of finding oil there
has not been diminished by their failure but has actually increased
with the increase in the prosperity of the State, so that much
money has been spent in drilling test wells in areas where oil
is not likely to be found. As additional wells will no doubt be
drilled in Florida the results of geologic field work done by O.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT W7,

B. Hopkins, and other members of the United States Geological
Survey, Department of the Interior, in co-operation with the
Florida State Geological Survey, may have some value in future
exploration.

The geologists of the United States Geological Survey are not
very hopeful that oil will be found anywhere in the Atlantic Coastal
Plain, because the stratigraphy and the structure of the beds of
rock in that area are in many ways different from those of the
beds in the Gulf Coastal Plain, where oil has been found.

GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS IN FLORIDA.

The intelligent selection of a location for drilling-a test well
involves the consideration of (1) the character of the formations
that underlie within a reasonable drilling depth the area to be
tested and (2) the structute of the beds, which controls the ac-
cumulation of oil. The beds in Florida lie nearly flat and are
poorly exposed at the surface, so that the information thus far
obtained in regard to both these features is meager. The forma-
tions that underlie the center of the peninsula of Florida at a
relatively shallow depth do not, so far as known, appear anywhere
at the surface in the State, but beds of the same age outcrop 250
miles to the north, in central Georgia. As these formations vary
widely in character from place to place the only knowledge of
their character in this part of Florida must be obtained from
well borings.

The Ocala limestone, of Eocene age, found near Ocala, in
central Florida, is the oldest formation exposed in the State. Oul
will probably not be found in it or in any of the other younger
formations that outcrop in Florida, for none of them contain
much bituminous matter. They consist largely of limestone. The
formations below the Ocala, which have been drilled into at a
number of places, consist chiefly of white limestone, of Lower
Cretaceous age. At Bushnell more than 2,800 feet of limestone,
interbedded with thin beds of fine sand, of Lower Cretaceous age,
has been penetrated by the drill. These limestones are probably
underlain in this part of Florida at no great depth by old crystal-
line rocks, such as form the Piedmont ‘area of northern Georgia.

18 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

If any showings of oil have been found in the wells so far
drilled they were small, and the great thickness of limestone under-
lying the surface formations in Florida does not encourage an
expectation that oil will be found there in commercial quantities,
for oil is usually associated with thick deposits of shale, in which
it presumably originated. The evidence available at the present
moment does not seem to justify sanguine hopes of developing
an important oil field in this State.

STRUCTURE OF THE ROCK BEDS.

The dominant structural feature of eastern Florida is an an-
ticlinal fold, or arch, which.trends south-southeastward and forms
the axis of the peninsula. The axis of this arch passes near
Live Oak, 10 to 20 miles west of Gainesville, and an equal distance
west of Ocala, and is the southern continuation of the broad an-
ticlinal area of south-central Georgia. Along this anticline there
are two high areas. The highest part of one, called the Ocala up-
lift, appears to be in eastern Levy County; that of the other is
near Live Oak. The Ocala uplift is the larger and the higher. On
this uplift the Ocala limestone is found 120 feet above sea level.
From that elevation it dips toward the east to a depth of 200
feet below sea level at St. Augustine and 500 feet below sea level
at Jacksonville.

The Ocala uplift is separated from the uplift near Live Oak
by a low area, or saddle, which runs parallel to the axis of the
anticline to a point near Santa Fe River, in southern Columbia
County.

From that point the beds appear to rise gently to form a dome-
shaped fold near Live Oak. The Ocala limestone is found at Su-
wannee, FEllaville, Dowling Park, and Luraville, on Suwannee
River, at elevations ranging from 35 to 45 feet above sea level,
whereas the Chattahoochee limestone, which overlies it, is 120 feet
above sea level at Live Oak. As the Chattahoochee here has an
estimated thickness of 30 to 40 feet, the Ocala is probably 4o feet
higher at Live Oak than at any of the exposures on the Suwan-
nee or at Bass, a fact which suggests the inference that a dome-like
uplift centers at Live Oak. This inference is strengthened by the
fact that the top of the Chattahoochee limestone stands at an ele-

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Ig

vation of only 75 to 80 feet above sea level along the Georgia-
Florida line, or about 40 feet lower than it is near Live Oak. The
existence of this dome appears to be indicated also by the swing
of Suwannee River around Live Oak; instead of continuing its
southerly course, it bends to the west-northwest near White Springs
and circles around Live Oak before continuing its course toward
the Gulf. The existence of the Okefenokee Swamp, which 1s
drained chiefly by Suwannee River, may be due in part to the de-
flection of the river by the Live Oak uplift. From an elevation
of about 80 feet above sea level at Live Oak, the Ocala limestone
dips eastward to about 500 feet below sea level at Jacksonville
and about 300 feet or more below sea level at Waycross.

BEST PLACE TO DRILL.

As the Live Oak uplift is smaller and somewhat better de-
fined than the Ocala uplift it may offer more favorable con-
ditions for the accumulation of oil or gas, if any exist in this re-
gion. The highest part of this uplift appears to be near Live Oak,
and a well sunk near that place would therefore be structurally
most favorably located. A well drilled here to a depth of more
than 3,000 feet will probably penetrate limestone, thin beds of fine
sand, and perhaps some shale.

“Wildeatting,”’ as drilling for oil in an area not known to be oil
bearing is called, is the wildest kind of speculation, and it should
be indulged in only by those who are able to lose money. The
United States Geological Survey does not recommend wildcatting
in Florida; it merely suggests that the structure at Live Oak may
be as favorable as at any other place in the State for the accumu-
lation of oil, and that any company which desires to drill a test
well in Florida should consider this locality.

In view of the increasing interest in the possibilities of find-
ing oil in Florida and the insistent demand for information on this
subject provisions have been made whereby it is planned to have
a report ready for printing in our next annual report.

20 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

EXPENDITURES OF THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE PERIOD FROM
JANUARY 1, I9Q19Q TO JUNE 30, 1920.

There is given below a detailed list of the warrants issued
showing the expenditures of the Survey from January 1, 1919 to
June 30, 1920. A list of warrants previously issued has been
published in the various Annual Reports. The total amount ap-
propriated for the maintenance of the State Geological Survey is,
as it has been from the beginning, $7,500 per annum; which was
sufficient at first, but is wholly inadequate for maintaining an ef-
ficient department now since the dollar has shrunk to about one-
half its former value. All accounts are approved by the Governor
and are paid only by warrant drawn upon the State Treasurer
by the Comptroller, no part of the fund being handled direct by
the State Geologist. The original bills and itemized expense ac-
counts are on file in the office of the Comptroller, duplicate copies
being retained in the office of the State Geologist. The paid
warrants are on file in the office of the State Treasurer.

/
LIST OF WARRANTS ISSUED FROM JANUARY 1, 1919 TO
JUNE 30, 10920.
JANUARY, IQIQ.

Herman Gunter, assistant, salary for January, 1919 ~----_-----__- $150.00
Herman Gunter, assistant, expenses for January, I919 ---------_-- 18.05
Bredse Collins we wfanitOn eServices ae ee ee 10.00

FEBRUARY, IQIQ.

Herman Gunter, assistant, salary for February, 1919 ~-----_-__--_- 150.00
Bred)Collinis, sjanttor. setvices* <=" - 22-82 ee ee ee 10.00

MARCH, I9QIQ.

Herman Gunter, assistant, salary tor March,.19190)--= 4 === Se 150.00
Bredi Collins ajanitones ctv Cesige see eee ee 10.00
Economic Geology Publishing. Co: subscription == _--=_--2_222223 3.50

APRIL, IQIQ.

E. HH. Sellards; State Geolovist, April, 1-18, ‘salary 2222) = ee 123.63
Eletmanin GunteriassistantemSalataysme AN pile — oe ee 90.00
Herman Gunter, assistant, expenses, ‘April, 1919 ~---------------_- 4.85

Daisy. (Gwaltney, stenogtaphic (services) {225 = eee 6.00

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 21

BredeGollinse janitor asetvices.4--2.-22- eee 10.00
H. F. Wickham, services in identifying’ fossils --..__----._________- 25.00
Wiiwleveineravine ana eiectrotype Co. —..-----_----..-.2---+.-. 18.17
Fines Terni. ESMIDICGR eae a aa ae ce 4.26
esrras ys Oavic. postmaster. postage, —s.-% 22-2252 .--.---.. 23.95
Pee dinter ee tintin ice.» Printing 224 7 371.00
Wiectanm mUthOn: DeleetapintCO.. 25222. .002 52 aan ane 1.21
MAY, IQIQ.
Daicw waiter, Stehograpiic. Services (22 s02 0. 24.00
Eream@oltis, wanton: Seavices 25-2225. sens oe ek 10.00
ee Oe iter. brutingy Cr aao2- 28 ee ho ke 21.25
Wee wenckcom treieht sadds.drayage. © § 2622. 2 fs a 3.80
aromas Win ViswanOSEMaShetn ae se a 33.84
Precier wi iavasr nostinasteiy 2 Seen eS en 5.70
Winiversiniror |Chicazo . Press... 52.28" 2222 2222 2 3.60
Sees Opler s sorint eis ee ee 31.50
JUNE, I'gI9.
Herman Gunter, State Geologist, April I9 to June 30 ~--_-_-__--__ 501.37
Herman Gunter, State Geologist, expenses April to June —-__--_- 34.65
Daisy, Gwaltney.. stenographic: services _-.-___-.- 2 2 = 36.00
rere Olulisae felnliton (SeGyiCes. lee oe te ek 10.00
POM erawiter erinting Gos, printing: 212.70. =o a 400.60
Wie CoauDixone trom andednavage: 28 eo 13.84
Waecer-ktiodes wtidw: “@o:foftice “supplies ~2-_ 2-2-2 6.56
Pehla ian or heer supplies 2 = ao ek 11.95
Hee Ge Gnesley air ero nice Supplies: = 202.2 2 3775
ie aaeApplevarde stationery, printing, éfc. {222222202 04.--.0. 2. 30.50
enteceia Daviseestamped venyelopes —2--2-—<2-2 222) a 67.24
Pimericanm kalway er xphess ps2 Pe oe ee eG 2.52
}
FULY,. TOTO.
Mrs. L. B. Robertson, stenographic services ~-.------------------ 100.00
Brede Waiansnmiciiieie Senyices 322. te Ve ek 2 ee 10.00
Ei eee wee Lew... COL oiice sipplies: a5 iJ oee 8 et 3.01
Pome se Litiemoiicer stppiies: = —--s=%. 5-0 Se et ey Pee 4.50
AUGUST, IQIQ.
Herman Gunter, State Geologist, expenses July and August______ 36.40
Mrs.-L.. B. Robertson, stenographic services —+-.---..-.-£_--L._2__ 100.00
Sr SEIRICES: pete ks cae) 2) i 9 ES we eS 19.50
tigen: Colitis. janitor, Servicesy ao. 8 el ee a ed 10.00

Pinewicain Peat, SOvictySupscripion~ o-oo ee 3.00

22 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Hog: We BaD rewaGonmOticersuppliccue sss = sues LUNES pet a 1.08
ID aly alopnyiohoeys ned ous sha, Givoyetsdoveyno 47.95

SEPTEMBER, I9Q1Q.

Herman Gunter, State Geologist, salary July 1 to Sept 30 -______- 625.00
Herman Gunter? State Geologist; expenses =.=. eee ee 34.06
Missy Cab aRobertson ss stenograpliic ssenviCes) 22a an 100.00
SammnCobhmesenvices y+ - 22s sa ous aa ee ee ce eae 2.25
Racal Coiling, jevoihwone snares te ek 10.00
Weel Marshall- work. in; storeroom <*222) 55 eneens ass eee ee 60.30
Aan ericanem Railways wx ESS see eee eae een cy ee 1.07
Goala Davis; postage, 222 52 Fe ease ee oe oe ek ene Lee 26.00

OCTOBER, IQIQ.

Herman Gunter, State Geologist, expetises October —~-L 2-22. B22
Msvols BasRobertsons stenogtaphic servicest sae 100.00
red, Collins, anitor ssenvices\: a2 2 a. oe ee ee eee 10.00
John Waley ‘&: sSons; publications: (22=. = s== ef es Se eee 5.00
Eee Wie Ba new GomaSup p ile sien 25.65
Americans Ratlwary, wp ress ya ee eee ee 89
1... tAppleyard.1-000' press bulletins e225 =. see a ee 20.00

NOVEMBER, IQIQ.

Herman Gunter, State Geologist, expenses November ____---_____ 29.00
Mrs..l., B. Robertson," stenographic services 25-2222 -e oe eee 100.00
Fred: (Collins) janitor services, Ae eee ee. ea eee 10.00
Miss E. W. Marshall, copy tabulations mineral resources ___--____ 8.13
G. D: Harris; Bull) 31 of ‘Americans Palaeontology. 2-2 es ae 5.70
Joseph. Al ‘Cushman, special! senvicess: es ee ee 500.00
Dik. Cox’ Furniture: Co: bookcases? Ue 5s. Stes ae ee 60.75
DECEMBER, I'QIQ.
Herman Gunter State Geologist, salary, Oct.49 to Dec: 30". =2. ae 625.00
Herman Gunter, State Geologist, expenses December _____________ 32.20
Mrs. LB. yRobertsonstenogiaphictservices, oa". eel 100.00
red’ Collins, Nanitorsenvicesqes = 1245-4 soot A as > ee 10.00.
American Journal: ot Science, subscription 22-2=5-—- eee 6.00
Bi. Ry iKauinian! Supplies!) shee ae sy aad. OSs 1.20
JANUARY, 1920.
Herman Gunter, State Geologist, expenses January ~--------_--__ 32.32
Mrs:. L..B. Robertson; stenogtaphic.services:..222) 2 aes eee 100.00

Fred) Collins: “janitor servicesns:c2a es ei. a ee 10.00

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 23

Geowmlee Davisvapostimaster, postage o-ea2 =) = tee eee 24.00
Eeononic nr ucolory] subscription) 32 2-- Lest eee ene 4.00
American Peat ‘Society, subscription -2--1++-=.-----=.--2---_.-_-- 3.00
Scientistic (Viatenalss Gonaspecinen| jars (22-22--<.---L2-._2s.--.-_- 15.84
AMenicanee allwavaubecphesSitasse sn aaa ans oo lel lesen al BAG,

FEBRUARY, 1920.

Mis lb. Rabertsom, stenograpNicrservices: -.2---..+..-...--.--=- 100.06
Ered Collimcamyanthonmsenuicesnm= sere =a ne See eee 10.00
Orville Barnes, extra janitor services ---------------------------- 4.50
VithiSerr eine. WSUPDNeSmee se sek se oS 32.79
Ee meine: oniniGhinahloGrss oes c—s nee oo oS se 25.00
Punch canimeathwavinubapresaw aoerie ss Te ai 8 oe Sa 2.10
Southern Telephone & Construction Co. ~------------------------ 3.50
Dixon) Dransies, smovineuoiice yiurniture) 222520 Fol) ee 41.50

MARCH, 1920.

Herman Gunter, State Geologist, expenses March ____--_________- 23.54
Herman Gunter, State Geologist, salary Jan. 1 to March 31 ___-_- 625.00
Mrs. L. B. Robertson, stenographic services’ __-__--__--___________- 100.00
Pipe MOONINS wiaiMOrrset vices p14 02. Fok oo. st Ce bbe oe "15.00
SHIGE iy (COIN FS SEIR CO ee EE ee oe eee ae 14.25
Ged DapEeh ins WoOlice mentees esos 0k ee ue ee 41.66
De gae@os wnnmiture wo... stipplies 25-08 o 2 ba 34.00
eG me nesley-w lite Stppliess eases ano oS ae Te 42.25
Suuthermeeephone cen Construction Co). 2222-20 ke 3.50
Naezer-Rhades Hasdware. Go. supplies, 2.222522. Se 10.45
H. R. Kaufman, cleaning typewriter and supplies ---------------_- I1.0¢
Devan Nosttand o5, publicationy 222-422) en ee 2.0¢
Plc Applevard. printine vand™ supplies, 2202 2k Se 15.59

APRIL, 1920.

Herman Gunter, State Geologist, expenses April ~-__-_--__--_--___ 62.38
ReeVieklanpersassistant, «salary for Aipril 222-02) 228 ee eee 175.00
Row Moehianpenmdssistant, expenses \April. ~~ 2-2-2222 s-=L 53.68
Mrs. ee Dewobertson, stenographic. services ...<22.=2-.-o2-2-.- 100.00
Satie OO ln mmce tru Cosme te ers ere he ST ee 9.00
reds Collins ranitommsenviCes (2-22-22 ae ee eee 15.00
Gene ber emulicwoulco rel fan= 25-222 ele ee eee 41.66
Samihern weclephotie co. Construction, Cos 22-2 obs. eee 3.5¢
ian Matsa TOME WOK cot-—2-2—2— 2S cece see eee eee eae 9.25
Srienticic MMaterials Gos «supplies * = 20.2 oa Se eee ea 40.86
CommercialedenttlizenwSapScriptione sss s= see =e eee ee ee 2.00

D. R. Cox Furniture Co., office and library supplies -----------_- 90.50:

24 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Leon #lectrical Supply (Coy, asupplies? se. = 2— esas 2s Se ee 1.65

American) “Railway! =prescecs == ee ee ee ees 8.74
Clarks. Book) Store) «suppliess == a ee a ee 4.54
Tt: J. Appleyard, mounting, amaps, letter neads,{-- == <2 5 S25 eee 12.50
Tallahassee Wartety Works, 3.Sshoweasés: ="... -=s2 es) See 308.15
WeaGs Dixonssdraydaremence=*—= =o see = ee a eS Se ees 2.00
E.G; Chesley, i esuppliess2 2 = 22 42s 52 ee 4.5¢
MAY, 1920.
Re. Moublame.sassistant, vsalary, tor, May. 2-22 Sess ee ee 175.00
Mrstale = Be Robertson, Services” =. 222-4 a2 = eee ee eee 100.00
Geos cba Perkins: -ofbice rent. 222-55". 3523 ee ee ee 41.66
MiddlesHlonida Ice Company, coupon) books 22 esse = 10.00
Ho VEseboniler, "siens =i. aise. Coe eee ee ee ee eee 16.0¢
Southesn ‘helephone &_ ConstructionsCo: #222 = 2 eee 3.50
University of Chicago” Press: subseription: =2522 === = ees 3.60
EeGan WV: JDreweiCos Ssupplies=— 2 as=- 2 ee eee 3.55
Sam (Cobb services 2 = a= ee a aS As See ee ee 9.00
DP Re Cox munities COs sotip plies eee eee eee ea 3.00
fn Ga Chesley, rc suppliest\2ase- = me ee oo fe SE ee eee 5.00
Dixon ltanster,, drayage s=2 5 se Se ee A eee ee 4.5¢
JUNE, 1920.
Herman Gunter, State Geologist. salary April 1 to June 30__-____-_ 625.00
Ro M: sharper. assistant, Salary (for Jimne 2.2) 2s e = eee Dee 175.0C
Mrs... Bo CRobertson: "services juste es ee ee 100.0¢
Geo) B:), Perkins. othice-remte a= see a? ee ga ee Re ee 41.66
Southern “Delephone '& sConstriction Go. 225-255 423. a ee 3.50
Yaeger-Rhodes: Hardware Go.,. ‘supplies. 22s = 1.00
Geo: 71. Davis; postmaster, box “rent. and! stampsseaes = eee 31.00
Geo. I. Davis, postmaster, 2,000 stamped envelopes ~------------_- 43.44
is 82> Week. sDrew- Co:,-oficersuppiies, 22. = a eer ee 4.90
American Railway” xpress ves - 2 6 Se ee 12.13
W.=1, Marshall} repatrstand job work: ~2=e => = eee rs a ee 5.00

Scientific Materials Co., supplies

STATISTICS ON MINERAL PRODUCTION IN FLORIDA
DURING 10918.*

HERMAN GUNTER

COLLECTED IN CO-OPERATION BETWEEN THE FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL
SuRVEY AND THE U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.

The total value of the mineral production in Florida during
I9L8, as shown by statistics recently compiled, is $8,009,646, an
increase over that for 1917, amounting to almost one-half mil-
lion dollars, the total for this latter year being $7,534,834.

The total mineral production in 1918 shows a decrease when
compared ‘with the output for 1917. This decrease in quantity
is attributable to general labor conditions, transportation fa-
cilities and to governmental restrictions in force during the war
period. Increased production costs were attended with an in-
crease in price of the commodities marketed which is shown
by the increase in the total valuation stated above.

BALL CLAY OR PLASTIC KAOLIN

The ball clays of Florida are white burning, refractory clays
of high plasticity. The clay is quite widely distributed in central
peninsular Florida being commercially produced in Putnam and
Lake counties. The manner of occurrence is in association with
a rather coarse sand and quartz pebbles, from which it is sep-
arated by washing. During 1918 three plants were engaged in
mining ball clay in Florida. These were the Edgar Plastic
Kaolin Company, Edgar; the China Clay Corporation, Oka-
humpka; and the Lake County Clay Company, Okahumpka.
‘The value of the clay produced is not separately given, but is
included in the total mineral production of the State.

*First published as Press Bulletin No. 11, October 6, 1919. Reprinted here
with a few additions.

25

26 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

BRICK AND TILE

The conditions prevailing during the year 1918 were unfavor-
able to the brick and tile industry, due to governmental building
restrictions, which of necessity reduced the demand and resulted
in a decided decrease in the volume of business. The total num-
ber of common brick manufactured in Florida during 1918 was
17,561,000. In addition to building brick, there was also produced
tile, drain-tile and fire-proofing brick. The total value of brick
and tile products for the year 1918 was $181,339.

The following firms in Florida reported the production of brick
during 1918:

Barrineau Bros., Quintette.

Campville Brick Company, Campville.

Clay County Steam Brick Company, Green Cove Springs.
Dolores Brick Company, Molino.

Florida State Reform School, Marianna.
Gamble & Stockton Co., 108 W. Bay St,, Jacksonville.

G. C. & C. H. Guilford, Blountstown.
Glendale Brick Works, Glendale.
Hall & McCormac, Chipley.

Keystone Brick Company, Whitney.
Law & Co., Brooksville.

Lee Miller, Whitney.

Joe Messina, Palm Beach County.

Ocklocknee Brick Company, Ocklocknee.

Tallahassee Pressed Brick Company, Havana.
Whitney Brick and Manufacturing Company, Whitney.
Wilson-Owens Brick Company, Callahan.

FULLER’S EARTH

The Fuller's earth industry of Florida was very active dur-
ing 1918. The abnormal demand for fuel oils and gasoline had its
reflection in the increased demand for Fuller’s earth. The prin-
cipal use of the Florida Fuller’s earth is in clarifying and filtering
mineral oils, although during recent years experiments with this
earth in the refining of edible oils and fats have proven very sat-
isfactory, and its use for this purpose is increasing. Florida has
been the chief producer of Fuller’s earth since the beginning of

STATISTICS ON MINERAL PRODUCTION 27

the industry, and is credited with approximately four-fifths of the
total production in the United States for the year 1918. ‘The sta-
tistics on production are not separately given, but are included with
the total mineral production of the State.

The following companies are engaged in the mining of Fuller’s
earth in Florida:

The Atlantic Refining Company, Ellenton.

The Floridin Company, Quincy and Jamieson.

The Fuller’s Earth Company, Midway.

The Manatee Fuller’s Earth Corporation, Ellenton.

ILMENITE

The production of ilmenite (an oxide of titanium and iron,
used chiefly in the manufacture of steel) from the beach sands at
Pablo Beach, which was begun in 1916 by Buckman & Pritchard,
Inc., was continued during 1918. The value of this product is not
included in the summary statement of mineral production for the
year. Considerable quantities of zircon and other rare minerals are
associated with it.

LIMESTONE

The total amount of limestone produced in Florida for quick
_lime, building, road-making, railroad ballast, and agricultural pur-
poses, and including also the flint rock associated with the lime-
stone, is valued at $365,293. The following companies in Florida
have reported the production of lime, limestone or flint for the
year 1918:

Florida Lime Company, Ocala.

Blowers Lime and Phosphate Company, Ocala.

Crystal River Rock Company, Crystal River.

Live Oak Limestone Company, Live Oak.

Florida Crushed Rock Company, Montbrook.

E. P. Maule, Ojus.

Pineola Lime Company, Pineola.

A. T. Thomas & Co., Ocala.

PEAT.

Production of peat in 1918 was reported from Marion County
by the Alphano Humus Company, Ocala, Florida. The peat pro-

28 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

duced by this company is placed on the market in the form of pre-
pared humus and is used largely as a fertilizer filler. This being
the only plant reporting for this year, the production is not listed
separately, but is included with the total for the State.

PHOSPHATE

The following statement on the production of phosphate in
Florida was issued by the State Geological Survey in June, 1919,
as Press Bulletin No. 10*:

“The amount of phosphate rock shipped from Florida, although
the production was very much curtailed during the European War,
was greater in 1918 than that of the preceding year. The statis-
tics, which are collected by the Florida Geological Survey in co-
operation with the United States Geological Survey, indicate that
during 1918 the total shipment of phosphate rock from Florida
was 2,067,230 long tons, as compared with 2,022,599 long tons
in 1917, an increase over that year of almost fifty thousarid tons.
Of this amount, 1,996,847 tons were land pebble phosphate, the
remainder being hard rock and soft phosphate. Of the total ship-
ments only 104,946 tons were consigned to foreign markets, show-
ing a decrease over the amount exported in 1917. The domestic
consignments, however, were more than 25,000 tons in excess of
those for the preceding year. ‘

“The increase in shipment was principally from the hard rock
mines, the output from this area being more than three times that
in 1917. The shipment from the pebble field for 1918 remained
practically the same as for 1917. The decided increase of ship-
ments from the hard rock over the pebble rock mines is quite the
reverse of the past few years, since it has been from the pebble
field that increases have been most rapid. During the period of
the war, production was greatly interfered with, some companies
closing for a portion of the time, others running periodically, still
others operating regularly but at a reduced capacity of output.
Regardless of market conditions, several mines operated during
the year on a reduced scale, with the result that at the close of the
year there were quantities of rock in storage awaiting shipment.

*The Phosphate Industry of Florida During 1918, by Herman Gunter,
Fla. State Geol. Surv., Press Bulletin No. 10, June 5, roro.

STATISTICS ON MINERAL PRODUCTION 29

* “The value of the phosphate shipped from Florida in 1918, ac-
cording to returns from the producers, is as follows: Land peb-
ble, $5,565,928; hard rock, including soft phosphate, $524,178,
making a total valuation of $6,090,106. The value of shipments
during 1917 was $5,464,493. An increase of more than $600,000
is thus indicated in total value of shipments for the year 1918 over
that of 1917. The total production of phosphate rock in Florida
since the beginning of the industry in 1888 to the close of 1918,
according to statistics collected by the Florida Geological Survey
and the United States Geological Survey, is estimated to be
35,210,314 tons, with a total valuation of $129,055,787.

“The quantity of rock mined during the year is necessarily not
the same as the amount shipped, for there are variable amounts on
hand and held in storage at the close of each year. The total quan-
tity of phosphate mined in Florida in 1918 was 1,884,891 tons.
The quantity mined in 1917 was 2,328,138 tons. This decreased
output of 443,247 tons in 1918, as compared with 1917, reflects
the conditions due to our entry into the war, such as difficulty in
getting labor, restrictions placed on and subsequent shortage and
increased cost of fuel and lack of shipping facilities.”

SUMMARY OF SHIPMENT OF PHOSPHATE IN FLORIDA FROM 1914 TO 1918,

INCLUSIVE
Pebble Rock: 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918
(BONES dic. hascaaxscctese Sonccvaak oecesews 625,821 185,846 172,427 138,010 64558
MW ORTIES TIO n ros tacves Sosraten nero ere 1,203,381 1,122,635 1,296,331 1,865,981 1,932,289
Total shipment.........e:s0000++ 1,829,202} 1,308,481] 1,468,758] 2,003,991] 1,996,847
Hard Kock: ¥
Reeridctedt tas ys oe woes 303,172 43,314 28,045 12,403 57,771
Daneshiete ee 6.517 6.816], 19/042 6.205 12/612
Total shipment: .....-<-c.0.-52-+.0. 309 689 50,130 47,087 %*18 608 *70,383
Pebble and Hard Rock Combined:
Bixpdiiddaktteiistieticon sk de 928 993 229,160 200,472 150,413 122.330
Domestic....-..se00+-+ 1,209,898] 1,129'451| 1,315,373] 1,872,186] 1,932,288

Total shipment 2,138,891] 1,358,611 1,5'5,8451 2,022,599 2,067,230
Total shipments from beginning of mining in 1888 to 1918, inc., 35,210,278.

—

*Includes soft rock phosphate.

30 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

LIST OF PHOSPHATE MINING COMPANIES OF FLORIDA, 10918.

Acme. Phosphate, Company === Morriston, Fla.

Alachua Phosphate Company ---------- Gainesville, Fla.

American Agricultural Chemical Co.--2 Rector -St.. New York, N. Y.. and
Pierce, Florida.

Americans Cyanamids Go. (2_ 52222252 511 Fifth ‘Ave., New York, N. Y., and
Brewster, Fla.
Armour Fertilizer Works ------------ Union Stock Yards, Chicago, IIl., and
Bartow, Fla.
BP.) Bassettw isan a se eee eee Newberry, Fla.
Peter B. and Robt. S. Bradley_-----_- 92 State St., Boston, Miass., and Floral
City, Fla.
JR Butrcenhachice no, 22a ee lee Elioldec nia:
Cue Catn pete a Bee es Set eS Ocala, Fla.
Charleston, S. C., Mining and Manu-
NEVE GUE Gri ary Glo) eee Uae eee Richmond. Va., and Ft. Meade, Fla.
Coroner “Phosphate Co," 22s eie see 99: John St., New York, N. Y., and
Plant City, Fla.
Cummer Lumber Co. __--------------- Jacksonville and Newberry, Fla.
Dunnellon: “Phosphate. Co,.22)- -2-=" 106 E. Bay St. Savannah, Ga., and
» Rockwell, Fla.
ExporeaenosphatenC one -2=—=—=——== = 8&7 Milk St., Boston, Mass., and Mul-
berry, Fla.
Florida Phosphate Mining Corpora-
(AGS aA) eee Sn St alae a seu oe ee See ee Dickson Bldg., Norfolk, Va., and Bar--
' tow, Fla.
Florida Soft Phosphate and Lime Co.--Ocala and Citra, Fla.
Brankiin (ehospiates CO.e sss =e Newberry. Fla.
Holdge, Phosphate ‘Come s-=2- 2 as 220 W.. Ninth St., Cincihnati, O., and

! : : Inverness, Fla.
International Agricultural Corporation-61 Broadway, New York, N. Y., and
Mulberry, Fla.

International Phospfiate Co. 2=-222-5-2 27 State St., Boston, Mass. and Ft
Meade, Fla.

akeland@ Phosphates Cone === aa Lakeland. Fla. y

Moatiial) (Mining Co, 22s =" ea Se eres toz KE. Bay St. Savannah, Ga., and
Floral City, Fla.

Ofismehosphates Gonna. ee ees Benotis, Fla.

Ralmettomehosphate Comm 2== a= == 812 Keyser Bldg., Baltimore, Md., and
Tiger Bay, Fla.

Phosphate Mining (Coy oJ. a ae ss Tohn St.. New York, N. Y., and
Nichols. Fla.

Seminole Bheeohate Co eee eee Croom, Fla.

Swavihanghar eiaah Wrage jee Ocala, Fla.

Societe Universelle de Mines, Indus-

trie, Commerce et Agriculture ______ Pembroke, Fla.
Southern Phosphate Development Co.__Inverness, Fla.
Shien eM Och Meare a FMS tr Ny Union Stock Yards, Chicago, Ill., and

Bartow, Fla.
HA OM pS Ole. ase eee ee Ft. White, Fla.

STATISTICS ON MINERAL PRODUCTION 31

SAND AND GRAVEL

The sand produced in Florida is used principally for building,
paving and road-making, filtering, molding, cutting, grinding and
blast purposes. The gravel produced is reported as used for roof-
ing material and for railroad ballast. ‘Deposits of clayey sands
and gravels occurring in the southern part of Jackson County have
also been quarried and used as road surfacing materials. The total
production of sand and gravel for 1918, as shown by returns from
the producers, was 158,489 tons, valued at $48,768.

The companies reporting the production of sand and gravel
in Florida during 1918 are the following:

Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company.
Akerman & Ellis, Lake Weir.

Interlachen Gravel Company, Interlachen.
Tallahassee Pressed Brick Company. Havana.
Tampa Sand and Shell Company, Tampa.

SAND-LIME BRICK

The materials used in the manufacture of sand-lime brick are
sand and lime. The bonding power of the brick is due to the chem-
ical reaction between these ingredients. The chemical changes oc-
cur in the presence of heat, pressure and moisture and result in
the formation of hydro-silicates of calcium and magnesium.

The sand used in the manufacture of sand-lime should be com-
paratively pure and preferably with some variation in the size of
the grains. The mixture of lime, sand and water is cut in the form
of bricks and conveyed to a hardening cylinder. Necessary heat
and pressure are obtained in the hardening cylinder adapted for
the purpose. The sand-lime bricks are placed in this cylinder and
subjected to a pressure and temperature which vary according to
the method of treatment.

Two companies were actively engaged in the manufacture of
sand-lime brick in Florida during 1918 as follows:

The Bond Sandstone Brick Company, Lake Helen.
The Plant City Composite Brick Company, Plant City.

The production of sand-lime brick in Florida during 1918, al-
though not separately listed, is included in making up the total min-
eral production of the State.

32 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT
WATER

The total sales of mineral and spring water in Florida dur-
ing 1918, as shown by the returns from the owners of springs and
wells, amounted to 164,630 gallons, valued at $12,883.

The companies reporting the production of water for com-
mercial purposes during 1918 include the following:

Espiritu Santo Springs Company, Espiritu Santo Springs, Safety Harbor,
Florida.

Good Hope Water Company, Good Hope Mineral Water Well, Jackson-
' ville, Fla.

Hampton Springs Water Company, Hampton Springs, Hampton Springs,
Fla.

Purity Spring Water Company, Purity Spring, Tampa, Fla.

Tampa Kissengen Well Company, Stomawa Well, Tampa, Fla.

Summary statement of mineral production in Florida during
1918:
Common or building brick, fire-prcoofing brick, tile and drain tile___-$ 181,339

Lime and limestone, including lime and ground limestone for agri-
cultural use, and crushed rock for railroad ballast, concrete and

mOad) material! 22=20 Soe ea ae 365,203
Minerale waters: 2.2232. 2 8h Dee ete ne kes. TEN aes ee ee a 12,883
Ten @splvatey to Clk. sie ot cae Ae eR ap fee ee ea 6,090,106

Mineral products not separately listed, including ball clay, Fuller’s
earth, pottery products, abrasive material, sand lime brick, and
sand. ‘atrd ‘gravels ant Se a Se ees 2a ae ee 1,360,025

Total mineral production during 1918 valued at —------__----=- $8,009,646

FORAMINIFERA FROM THE DEEP WELLS OF FLORIDA

(WITH MAP AND THREE PLATES IN TEXT) ;

JOSEPH A. CUSHMAN

A year ago I published the results of a preliminary study of the
foraminifera of a number of deep wells of Florida.* A general ac-
count of the geological formations encountered in the drilling was
given and but little attention was paid to the distribution of the
species themselves. This paper gives the systematic information
as to the foraminifera and especially those species of the Miocene
and Upper Eocene formations. Those of lower age are not specif-
ically described here as it is a rule of paleontology that new species
should not be described from well borings because of the uncer-
tainty of depth and the impossibility of giving a type locality from
which future collections may be made. As a result these are
simply placed in their genera and figures in most cases given in
order that they may be available for future comparisons. In the
previous paper already referred to mention was made of the sources
of error which should be kept in mind in the study of well borings.
Two things especially may again be noted: first that fossils may
fall down from levels above that at which the drilling is actually
taking place, especially when the well is not cased; and secondly,
that fossils cannot be encountered until the depth has been reached
at which they occur. Therefore fossils appearing below a hori-
zon which has already been definitely fixed must have come from
above and are accidental at that level. Many of the foramitifera
from the well botings are not well preserved and little can be
made out except the genus to which they belong. Also in several
genera the different species have not been closely studied by work-
ers on the foraminifera. Among numerous genera such as Poly-
stomella, Nonionina, Amphistegina, etc., there are many different
forms which are apparent in a study of the fossil material of
the Coastal Plain and West Indian areas. These are usually

*Twelfth Annual Report of the Florida State Geological Survey, 1919,
PP. 77-103.

33

34 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

rather definitely limited in their vertical distribution, and_ their
careful discrimination should make possible a definite placing of
these in their proper geological horizon. The various formations
shown by the foraminifera will be discussed in the notes that fol-
low. The location of the wells from which material was used are
given in the following list and the accompanying map shows their
distribution in the state. In the systematic portion of this paper
references are given to the original descriptions and to published
figures with a more complete reference to the distribution in the
Coastal Plain area and that of the West Indies, both of which are
related to the Florida well material. .

The approximate locations of the wells, and the depths from
which the material studied was obtained, are as follows, the num-
bers corresponding with those on the map. More detailed informa-
tion about each was given in the previous paper and need not be
repeated here. Samples were studied from the entire depth of the
well unless otherwise indicated.

I. Panama City, Washington County, 470 feet.

2. Bonheur Development Co., near Burns, Wakulla County,
2,152 1eet,

3. Jacksonville, Duval County, 980 feet.

4.) St. Augustine, St. John’s County, 160 to 1,051 feet:
5. Anthony, Marion County, 50 to 500 feet.

6. Eustis, Lake County, 100 to 180 feet.

7. Bushnell, Sumter County, 380 to 3,080 feet.

8. Apopka, Orange County, 50 to 390 feet.

g. Sanford, Seminole County, 95 to 113 feet.

to. Cocoa, Brevard County, a sample from 190 feet.

I1. Tiger Bay, Polk County, 30 to 770 feet.

12. Okeechobee, Okeechobee County, 41 to’ 500 feet.
13. Boca Grande, Lée County, one inadequate sample.
14. Fort Myers, Lee County, 200 to 950 feet.

15. Marathon, Monroe County, 2,300 feet.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 35

Fig. 1. Sketch map of Florida showing locations of wells from which
foraminifera were obtained. Wells numbered as in the text.

36 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

PEERS Toei N

From the known distribution of the Pleistocene of Florida sev-
eral of the wells, and especially those in the southern part of the
state undoubtedly penetrate Pleistocene sands for some distance
near the surface. There are, however, no foraminifera in these
sands which would give a definite clue as to their age.

PLIOCENE

In the earlier report | thought that there was a definite develop-
ment of the Pliocene in the upper part of the well at Okeechobee.
However, a study of the foraminifera from the upper levels—41
to 56 feet—shows that most of these have a Miocene relation rather
than a Pliocene one. Therefore, the well samples give no definite
information as to the distribution of the Pliocene below the surface.

MIOCENE

Only slight information was available at the time the previous
paper was written, but a detailed study of the foraminifera has
shown not only the occurrence of Miocene foraminifera in a num-
ber of wells, but that they have definite relations with the Miocene
of other regions. The accompanying table shows the distribution
of some. of these Miocene species; their distribution in the Florida
wells and their occurrence in related areas. As the table shows,
certain of the levels in a number of wells are very definitely related
to, if not identical with the Choctawhatchee Marl of Florida. This
is especially marked in the well at Okeechobee, and the upper lev-
els of the wells at St. Augustine, Fort Myers and Marathon.
The one species noted from the well at Jacksonville also seems
to have this same relation. A number of species, especially those
from the deeper parts of the wells at Fort Myers, Okeechobee
and Marathon, seem to be more closely related to the Miocene of
the Gatun formation of the Panama Canal Zone. -A number of
species also occur in the upper Oligocene of the Panama Canal
Zone. The relations to the Miocene Marls of Cuba, Santo Domingo -
and Jamaica are also indicated.

As a result of this study, and allowing for errors in drilling,
the Miocene may be rather definitely located at the following
depths from these wells:

FORAMINIFERA FRO

M DEEP WELLS

a7

DISTRIBUTION OF MIOCENE FORAMINIFERA.

F
mies
oo | O
yh te Pa Soe Fas oe
je|3/é }e\e
; Ss. aul a sls
B | ee [8 la |e
a 5 = 3) | 3 3
Fie eOn et a|§
B | yj r ov)
Pe hal acy geen bet of [ie |S
e * Si erp hie eee = o
3 g/41P e]/@) eis] 8
é| S)ele/}e2/ala]s]s
Slelal(eie(Sidlalaislrlels
> fs} ap fee i=} s n faq] [o} e,| a a}
s/o]; ° o |) & Sin41)A ai/a]O
S}/a}/hi/a)] 8 ela} 8] & o me
Gi | ee || SL Sh Ne el/sal a] s}ol/a|/s]5
EY Sear el tontoen Lean lege lh ee slp tue |, ey
o) qu s 2
i re eel ae a qa i=} 3 ‘=| a 3° Go Q
ayla|B/O!la | O/AlLOl/Hlal/Al/olp
Textulariidae | Pale halle |
Textularia abbreviata d’Orb, —~-----~~ [sees 20 ees |e |e ||---|---| 2<|---|---|---|---|
Textularia gramen d’Orb. --------~--- feral aeticcaealngial “aap ee ---|--- i as
Textularia agglutinans d@’Orb. -----~-_- PaNerhRats RoR ae Sar ||SSS hel x
| |
Textularia panamensis Cush, -~--~~~~-~ ase |-s=|(SOU 524-2 |ea|eee | ee ees ee ee ee ee
Verneullina spinulosa Rss. -~~~-~-~~~~-~ sael|e==||-5= PS) Set) | ee ee ee ea eae
Gaudryina flintii Cush, --~-------~--- S| (PANO) eae it i ---|---|---|---|---] X
Clayulina communis d’Orb, ---------~ cel | oS) See lle ee ec rales £2||- 22:
| |200]
Virgulina squamosa q@’Orb, ---~--~---- se|Ene|=e atl io |iile—||aa= a5) e2||2=|ES|| >\le==
245
Lagenidae | | |e
Cristellaria rotulata Lmk,. ---------~-- | ees | eee | me | ee cb eee | ees | reer ems eters | ee | ae
' Cristellaria, ‘americana vari) ==2-====—-— we Pa HU eee Ie: ae ee ee ees
Cristellaria spinosa Cush, -----_------ 458! |
Polymorphina lactea (W. & J.) ------ 020.0) 52 | 80) axel eal ee ee eS eee
550]
Polymorphinawelerantissima (be) aged.) |==—| 11 0a pale |||) oxa ES ee eee
Globigerinidae loa |
Globigerina bulloides @’Orb, _-_-----__ |---|---|---|380| 180|| X|---| X] X| X| X| X|.xX
fea 402| 398|| |
Orbulina Suniversayds@rby =——-- 22-222 | | ee es fee | eee | mee een DPN ENG | emer | NG | eee
‘ bea reins ii oll mcipil |
Rotaliidae ae eel ee | | haees|
Discorbis bertheloti (d’Orb.) -~-~~----_|+-- [ey es RpCAeT | El SG | NG | Se eae ee (ee
Feeaihe ll 54 tee ant)
Truncatulina refulgens (Mont.) —-~~_~-_ B= (200) |e ae >< ee (eee (eee Fee A
Truncatulina americana (Cush.) ~~~ ~~ Se |e HOU) ET at OH <<] | et] See ee (ED.
|200 458] 398|| | | ie
Truncatulina pygmaea Hant. ~---____ pee | eee 3.610) | eee [fd | eee | ee eee eee eee eee | KG) SKS
Truncatulina basiloba Cush, ~~~~--~-~~ | | ee fe a ee eC et (a ee aes | ee
ieee ieaievulcner st 4 | eal
Rotalia” beecarii (Linn.) —~-_-----__-_- ee |e 00 Als |e Se ee | ENS Ses eae |aee
Tc | |
Nummulitidae IScontee tee at ite Hgaralee ta ctl bl
Nonionina scapha (F. & M.) —~_______ Ee | eel Sel catesu| || oc] he > cle <= i) De el > Pe
an BAN ee thse Laat yl |
Nonionina depressula (W. & J,) ~~ ____ [eee AS ee aes yc) [a hae Has an
Polvstomellae ierispa Guinn): ee soe =e eee ales al Zaller Soff losis] [a 5) sae | 2sln==
ised | 561 Wace as apse a
Polystomella craticulata (F. & M.) —__|_-__] 88 B30 See ee [ee |e ea eee ee
Polystomella striato-punctata (F.&M.){___|___|___| SN Ses fips |) pos [pC | | es NaS
, iS bene tal Ne el ta aloe | Lee eA
Amphistegina lessonii d’Orb, ________ [a= |==e1500)e56)1.80)?||/eexel axe eae lee exe] GEE oS
¥ [eteral eeu amen] n6.21 (reales lade [kel
Asterigerina angulata Cush. ._________ (Rea See Ee S6 lees (sole tele OS Lee ee

$7

Figures are the depths in feet at which the species occur.

38 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

New City Well at Jacksonville, Duval County, Fla. The Miocene reaches
its lowest limit somewhere between 510 and 550 feet. In this same range
Lepidocyclina fragments occur, indicating that the line between these forma-
tions comes somewhere in those forty feet.

Ponce de Leon Well at St. Augustine, St. Johns County, Fla. Miocene
foraminifera very definitely shown at 88, 170 and 200 feet. I had no mate-
rial between 200 and 440 feet, therefore the lower limit of the Miocene can
not be definitely determined.

Well No. 3 of the Palmetto Phosphate Company, near pit No. 1, about
2°%4 miles northwest of Tiger Bay, Fla. Although the foraminifera were
largely lacking or poorly preserved in the upper 310 feet, it is probable that a
considerable amount of this should be placed in the Miocene.

City Well at Fort Myers, Lee County, Fla. From the specimens ob-
tained at 300, 360, 600 and 680 feet, it is very clear that the levels between
300 and 600 feet should be definitely referred to the Miocene: that at 680
feet may possibly be Upper Oligocene. The material at 300 feet seems to
be closely related to the Choctawhatchee Marl, while that at 360 and 600 feet
is related to the Gatun formation of the Panama Canal Zone.

Well of the Okeechobee Ice and Electric Company at Okeechobee, Okee-
chobee County, Fla. Allowing for possibilities of error, the specimens indi--
cate Miocene from 51 feet to 458 feet. Most of the species of the Okeecho-
bee Well are clearly related to those of the Choctawhatchee Marl, and a
few to the Gatun formation of the Panama Canal Zone. <

Well of Florida East Coast Railway at Marathon, on Key Vaca. Mon-
roe County Fla. Samples from 78, 180 and 308 feet all seem to be definitely
Miocene and very closely related to the Choctawhatchee Marl, especially
those from 78 and 180 feet; those from 398 feet are perhaps more closely re-
lated to the Gatun of the Panama Canal Zone. There is a considerable dif-
ference between the species found at Marathon and those found at the other
wells in the region, probably due in part to the difference in ecological condi-
tions, owing to the warmer waters in the southern part of the area.

MIDDLE AND UPPER OLIGOCENE

In the Tampa formation, which is now classed as Upper Oligo-
cene, and in the upper Oligocene of Panama, Anguilla and Cuba,
there are horizons characterized by species of Orbitolites. At An-
guilla and Cuba these occur with a large form of Gypsina globulus
Reuss. In the well at Marathon this same combination of Orbito-
lites and GYpsina occurs at a depth of 589 te 628 feet and probably
represents an equivalent of West Indian Upper Oligocene. Orbito-
lites is present in the well at Panama City, and may possibly rep-
resent this same general age in that well.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 39

LOWER OLIGOCENE

In a number of wells there are fragments of Lepidocyclina that
may possibly be of Lower Oligocene age but they are not suf-
ficiently well preserved to admit of specific determination. There-
fore the Oligocene must be very questionably placed in any of
these wells except in that at Marathon where at 852 and goo feet
there occurs the genus Heterosteginoides which I have found in
the Oligocene of Panama and the West Indies.

EOCENE

The Upper Eocene represented by the Ocala Limestone can now
be very definitely placed in a number of wells. The four species—
Lepidocyclina ocalana, L. pseudomarginata, L. pseudocarinata, and
L. floridana, together with Heterostegina ocalana, mark very defi-
nitely the facies of the Ocala Limestone which is developed in north
central Florida. The accompanying table shows the depth at which
these species occurred in a number of wells. There is no trace of
Orthophragmina or of the species of Lepidocyclina and Operculina
which are characteristic of the facies of the Ocala developed in
northern Florida and southern Georgia. As already noted in
the previous paper the Ocala Limestone seems very definitely
to be only about 4o feet thick in the various wells in which it
was found. Below the typical Ocala there occurs a horizon
characterized by a large species of Nummuulites and this in turn
in one well—that of the Bonheur Development Company at
Burns, Wakulla County, has a horizon marked by numerous
specimens of Rotalia armata which, however, does not seem
to be developed in any of the other wells.

In the well at Marathon on Key Vaca there are a number of
rather large specimens which may be Conulites americana, or a re-
lated species. C. americana is known from the Eocene of St.
Bartholomew, Leeward Islands, Haiti, Cuba and Panama. These
specimens in the Marathon Well may therefore represent an Eo-
cene horizon below that marked by the Lepidocyclina. The well is -
not cased below the point at which these appear, therefore this ac-
tual point of occurrence is somewhat vague. It, however, does
represent an Eocene which is apparently typical of Panama and the
West Indies, and unlike that of northern Florida.

40 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

DISTRIBUTION OF EOCENE FORAMINIFERA IN FLORIDA WELLS.

ov
od iS
= D d = é
: Sn eae ee ee A. |g
z ie < z | a a g 5 3
i) = r | n c ro) ~
5 = Siu eae |e etal re S 3
5 oH JL eet eto) a a
Lepidocyclina ocalana Cushman —---~~ —=--|510-550|=-—_|=—-=|"=__ || 143| 190/360=400|/2222
Lepidocyclina floridana Cushman —--~—-{~-~---|---~---~- ees | ae eee lS 9.036 0-4-0 0)
Lepidocyclina pseudomarginata Cush-| | | |
Tiel riigres ee eee eee A 2 2222 |b = 5150) === |e eee | See 5 ed) ees
Lepidocyclina pseudocarinata Cushman|____|_~-~~~~ Joes eee | See et 0360-20 Wes
Mepidocyelinay species ==) -=2--— =e. =e P, Bwi--= [2247'S 22S ee | Soe | el a ee eee
Heterostegina ocalana Cushman —_--~ 0) Se ee aa 13) 90) 360 = 4010 ere
NAMA. Soy Sa | 150] 50 |====|lero 0/13 S17 peas Pe
Kotalia armata d’Orbigny ----------- tt 310) Se ee ee eee ee ee _———
Conulites americana Cushman —-~-~--~_ eee ee nen (eee | eee a ieee (eer ee 10004

Figures are the depths in feet at which the species occur.

LOWER CRETACEOUS

As already noted in the earlier report a number of the wells
enter what seem to be Lower Cretaceous limestones characterized
by Orbitolina and numerous other associated species. A table is
given showing the distribution of these other species in the various
wells where a species occurs in more than one well. As a rule these
are from brownish crystalline limestones which come in below the
Eocene represented by the abundant Nuwmmulites, The conical and
broader concave forms are present in a number of the wells and
their relations have been noted in the earlier report.

DISTRIBUTION OF SPECIES OCCURRING WITH ORBITOLINA.

¥ a
6 | §
a) 2 : A =
E on eae lias o mie
wi mn 5 S) L “< +
is ad 4 a 3 a 5 S
mH oO ~ n o an =
= = ss S| 5 2, 3
m 5 nn <= ca} oH a =
DiMGInE aCeonical sae ee io nasa =| 325|/820-| 44] 110| 160] 115 reales
d |900 | |
Haplophragmium sp, —-—-——-—-—-==—=—————--==—-———-_— 1_o__ teal 440| 160|--__ Saal ae 1720
84
TesitulaniaeS Die eS = Se ee |) Ee ee ren) L —
PAUSINI Ra Se Re les ec Nes ape et a (Se pmoa-|o 9. les Le ga 6) eo) aie
[ 726 | | | |
Pee Rae eg £Neg AN el A bs | tes) 40) 1601 ao ol eee
EGU TRa oa Oe eee ics ee ER ee Jose 222) 440-2 01 25012 iin
Teripiansihose ) (yeh See ee ee a ee RSS RPV vist) [2S |Sa 8 a) a5 l(b
R45] | | |
@yvmoqeeofowibhee) Choy 2h eS [=== (SAD ad 0 ee ee | eelel |e ee
| 9¢0 | | | |

Figures in the columns indicate the highest points in feet
at which the various species were recognized in the wells.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 41

SYS TEMAIte LIST OR SPECIES

LITUOLIDAE

Genus Haplophragnium Reyss, 1860,
Haplophragmium sp.
Plate 1, figure I.
A coarsely arenaceous species, largely coiled, but the later
chambers showing the uncoiling character occurred at 1,027 feet

in the, Bushnell Well.
Haplophragnuum sp.

Plate 1, figure 2.

A few specimens of an elongate form, not well character-
ized were found at 1,720 feet in the well at Marathon.

Haplophragmium sp.
Plate 1, figure 3.

Very irregular specimens, rather variable in shape, were found
in the well at Anthony at 160 feet, and at Jacksonville, 820-845
feet.
Haplophragmium sp.

Plate 1, figure 4.

A single, rather poorly characterized specimen was found at
440 feet in the Ponce de Leon Well at St. Augustine.

Genus Conulites Carter, 186.
Conulites americana Cushman.

Conulites americana Cushman, Publ. 291, Carnegie Institution of Wash-
ington, 1919, p. 43, fig. 3 (in text).

In the well at Marathon on Key Vaca there are numerous
specimens which seem very close to this species described from St.
Bartholomew and Cuba, and known from Haiti and Panama.
This therefore represents an Eocene horizon, and is of interest if
the West Indies can be definitely correlated with Key Vaca by
placing more’ than a thousand feet below the surface fossils which
in Cuba are now considerably above sea level.

42 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Genus Orbitolina d’Orbigny, 1847.
Orbitolina species.

In a number of the wells a small conical species is found,
sometimes in considerable numbers. This occurs at the depths
indicated in the following wells: Bonheur Development Company,
Burns, first noted at 325 feet; New City well at Jacksonville, 820-
845 feet; Ponce de Leon Well, St. Augustine, at 440 feet; well
of Compagnie Generale des Phos. de la Floride, at Anthony, 160
feet ; well of J. Wiggins, at Eustis, 160 feet ; well of Dundee Petro-
leum Company, Bushnell, first occurrence noted at 890 feet, but
probably occurs much above this level; City Well at Apopka,
rus teet; Well No. 3,.Palmetto Phosphate “Company, 203-4
miles northwest of Tiger Bay, 550 feet; and well of Florida
East Coast Railway at Marathon, on Key Vaca, 1,248 feet.

This species seems very close to a species which is abundant in
the Fredericksburg series of the Comanchean of Texas, which in
turn is very similar to a species found in the Lower Cretaceous of
the Pyrenees of Spain.

Orbitolina sp.

In several wells at some distance below the conical species there
is a much larger species, broad, low with a concave base like
that of O. terana and species of the Lower Cretaceous of Europe.
O. texana is characteristic of the Trinity series of the Comanch-
ean of Texas.

It is found at the following depths in the Florida wells: Jack-
sonville, 900-980 feet; Bushnell, 1,000 feet, Marathon, 1,720 feet.

TEXTULARTIDAy

Genus Textularia Defrance, 1824.
Textularia abbreviata d’Orbigny.
Textularia abbreviata dOrbigny, Foram. Foss. Bass. Tert. Vienne, 1846,
p. 249, pl. 15. figs. 9-12 (7-12). Bagg, Bull. ‘Amer. Paleontology, vol. 2, No.
10, 1898, p. 18; Maryland Geol. Survey, Miocene, 1904, p. 470, pl. 132, fig. 4
Cushman.. Bull. 676, U.S. Geol. Survey, 1918; p. 46; Bull. 203, U..S. New
Nitise eLOnS pees le ple On ties ane

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 43

A specimen which seems to belong to this species was found
in the material from 200 feet in the Ponce de Leon Well, St. Au-
gustine, Florida.

It is recorded from the Culebra formation of the Panama Canal
Zone, and by Bagg from the Miocene of Maryland.

Textularia gramen d’Orbigny.

Textularia gramen d’Orbigny, Foram, Foss. Bass. Tert. Vienne, 1846, p.
248, pl. 15, figs. 4-6. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9,
1884, p. 365, pl. 43, figs. 9, 10. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918,
pps re, 45, Diet, 21.) 1; pl. 2, fe. rs pl. o@° figs: 245.

Specimens of this species were found in two Florida wells, the
Ponce de Leon Well, St. Augustine, at a depth of 200 feet, and
the well of Okeechobee Ice and Electric Co., Okeechobee, 403-458
feet. :

Besides being found in the Miocene of Maryland, Virginia and
South Carolina, I have recorded it from the Miocene of the Choc-
tawhatchee Marl of Florida, at Jackscn Bluff and one mile south
of Red Bay.

Textularia agglutinans d’Orbigny.

Textularia agglutinans d’Orbigny, in De la Sagra, Hist. Fis. Pol. Nat.
Cuba, 1839, ‘“Foraminiferes,” p. 136, pl. 1, figs. 17, 18, 32-34. Cushman, Bull.
676,-U452 Geol} Survey; 1918; "p..46, pl. 0, fig. 6; Bull, 103,.U.-S:> Nat: Mus.,
LOLS DS 2 ple lO LIS. 3.

The only specimens which can be referred to this species are
from the Okeechobee well at a depth of 380-403 feet.

The species is recorded from several localities in the Miocene
of the Coastal Plain and from the Culebra formation of the Pana-
ima Canal. Zone.

Textularia sagittula Defrance, var. fistulosa H. B. Brady.

Textularia sagittula Defrance, var. fistulosa H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Chal-
lenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 362, pl. 42, figs. 19-22.

Brady described this variety in which the outer borders of each
chamber in the adult are prolonged into tubular projections. He
records it from tropical and sub-tropical localities.

It is interesting to find this species in the southernmost locality,
that of the well at Marathon on Key Vaca, at a depth of 305 feet.

44 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Textularia panamensis Cushman.

Textularia panamensis Cushman, Bulletin 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., to18, p.
53); ple Zour Piast.

A single, rather typical specimen of this species was obtained
from the well at Fort Myers, at a depth of 600 feet. 2

The type of this species is from the Miocene of the Gatun for-
mation of the Panama Canal Zone.

Textularia sp.

An elongate species, generally quadrangular in transverse sec-
tion, gradually tapering toward the initial end, was found in com-
pany with Orbitolina in several of the wells.

They are as follows: City Well at Apopka, 250 feet; Ponce
de Leon Well, St. Augustine, 440 feet; and Well No. 3, Palmetto
Phosphate Company, 2 3-4 miles northeast of Tiger Bay, 720
feet.

Genus Verneuilina d’Orbigny, 1840.

Verneuilina spinulosa Reuss.

Verneuilina spinulosa Reuss, Denkschr. Akad, Wiss. Wien, vol. 1, 1850,
p. 374, pl. 47, fig. 12. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol, 9
1884, p. 384, pl. 47, figs. 1-3. Cushman, Publ. 291, Carnegie Institution of
Washington, I910, p. 34.

The only one of the wells at which this species occurred is that
at Marathon, on Key Vaca, where it is found at a depth of 180
neew

I have recorded it Fromm the Miocene Marl of Ue Yumuri River.
Matanzas, Cuba.

Genus Valvulina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Valvulina sp.

Plate I, figure 5. ‘

A single specimen from the well of the Bonheur Development
Company at Burns, Wakulla County, at a depth of 325 feet, seems
referable to this genus.

Chrysalidina ? sp.
Plate 1, figures 6 a, b.

At 1,262 feet in the well at Marathon, Florida, there is a
species, tapering in form, with rounded chambers, and in addition

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 4

ou

to the textularian aperture at the base of the chamber, the inner
portion of the wall has a number of small perforations. This is in
some respects like Chrysalidina gradata d’Orbigny, which he de-
scribed from the Cretaceous of Europe.

Genus Tritaxia Reuss, 1860.
Tritaxia sp.

A species with concave sides, rather sharp angles, but the
edges rounded, and the whole test rather short, with the sutures
indistinct, occurs in several wells with the Orbitolina. It was re-
corded from the following: Jacksonville, 702-725 feet; Apopka,
310 feet; and Tiger Bay, 720 feet.

Genus Gaudryina d’Orbigny, 1839.
Gaudryina flinttt Cushman.

Gaudryina subrotundata Flint (not G. subrotundata Schwager, 1866),
Ann. Rep. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1897 (1809), p. 287, pl. 33, fig. 1.

Gaudryina flintii Cushman, Bull. 71, U. S. Nat. Mus., pt. 2, 19tt, p. 63.
fig. 102a-c (in text); Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 56, pl. 20, fig. 4.

There is a single rather small specimen from the Ponce de Leon
Well, St. Augustine, Florida, coming from a depth of 200 feet,
which seems to represent this species.

A specimen from the Culebra formation of the Panama Canal
Zone was referred to this species, but it has not been previously
recorded in the American Miocene.

Gaudryina sp. ?
Plate 1, figure 7.
There is a species with a triangular early portion, and later

very rounded biserial chambers which occurred in the well at
Marathon, Florida, at a depth of 1,650 feet.

Genus Clavulina d’Orbigny, 1826,
Clavulina communis d’Orbigny.

Clavulina communis dOrbigny, Ann. Sci. Nat., vol. 7, 1826, p. 268; Foratn.
Foss. Bass. Tert. Vienne, 1846, p. 196, pl. 12, figs. 1, 2, Cushman, Bull. 103,
U. S. Nat. Mus., 1018, p. 57, pl. 20, fic. 6.

46 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The only records for this species from the Florida well borings
are the young specimens from Ponce de Leon Well, St. Augustine,
88 feet, and a more fully developed specimen at 200 feet.

Clavulina species.

There is a small specimen of this genus not well marked from
the well at Fort Myers, Florida, from a depth of 720 feet.

y Clavulina ? sp.
Plate I, figure 8.

There is a large coarse species, with the early portion ap-
parently triserial or coiled, and at a decided angle with the later
part, which is short and circular in transverse section. These are
not well preserved. They come from limestones in which Orbitolina
occurs and may not belong to this genus.

They occur with Orbitolina in the following Florida wells:
Anthony Well, 160 feet; Ponce de Leon Well, St. Augustine, 440
feet; and Tiger Bay Well, 720 feet.

Genus Bulimina d’Orbigny, 1826.

There are a number of species apparently belonging to Br-
limina of the arenaceous group which are characteristic of the
Lower Cretaceous, and which occur with Orbitolina.

Bulimina sp.
Plate 2, figure I.
Specimens of an elongate tapering form with close-set oblique

chambers occur at 440 feet in the Ponce de Leon Well at St Au-
gustine, Florida and at 250 feet in the well at Apopka.

Bulimina sp.
Plate 2, figure 2.

A coarse, thick, arenaceous species occurs at 138 feet in the
well of J. Wiggins, at Eustis, Lake County.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS A7

Bulimina sp.
Plate 2, figure 3.
There is an elongate species with very distinct somewhat re-
motely placed chambers which occurs at 160 feet in the well of J
Wiggins at Eustis, Lake County.

Bulimina sp.

Plate 2, figure 4.

A species of fusiform shape and concave apertural face, with
the rounded aperture near the middle, occurs at 2,310 feet in the
/ e Sao ~~
well at Marathon. Genus Buliminella Cushman, IQII.
eV
Buliminella sp. ?

’
Plate 2, figure 5.

Specimens from brown limestone at 1,720-feet in the well at
Marathon are distinctive and are figured. They are of,the Bul-
iminella elegantissima group.

Buliminella sp. ?

Plate 2, figure 6 a, b.

In the deepest part of the well at Marathon there occurred a
very low-spired form here figured, which seems like a very short
Buliminella of the B. elegantissimia group, but very low. A some-
what similar form of much larger size is found in the deeper por-
tions of the well at 1,421 feet.

Genus Virgulina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Virgulina squammosa d'Orbigny.

Vingulina squammosa d’Orbigny, Ann. Sci. Nat., vol. 7, 1826, p. 267, Mo-
deles, No. 64, 1826. Cushman, Bull. 71, U. S. Nat. Mus., pt. 2; 1911, p. 91,
fig. 145a, b; Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 58, pl. 21, fig. 6.

The only material which can be. referred to this species is that
from the well of the Okeechobee Ice and Electric Co., Okeechobee,
Florida, at depths of 158-175 feet, and 240-245 feet.

I have previously recorded it from the Miocene. of the Gatun
formation of the Panama Canal Zone.

48 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

LAGENIDAE

Genus Lagena Walker and Boys, 1784.
Lagena striata (d’Orbigny).
Oolina striata d’Orbigny, Foram. Amer. Merid., 1839, p. 21, pl. 5, fig. 12.
Lagena striata Reuss, Sitz. Akad. Wiss. Wien, vol. 46, pt. 1, 1862 (1863),
Dh e7h, Wikis}, inal, als Zi lh uray Mle, ya dela sv leheavahy, ING, Won (Clie i-
lenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 460, pl. 57, figs. 22, 24. Cushman, Bull. 71,
WSS, Net, IMItSY jh B, iO qo eMe}) iollbye eS, ul B

The only specimens of the genus were found in the well at
Okeechobee, at a depth of 380-403 feet.
Another variety of this species was found fossil at Panama.

Genus Cristellaria Lamarck, 1812.
Cristellaria americana Cushman, var. spinosa Cushman.

Cristellaria americana Cushman, var. spinosa Cushman, Bulletin 676, U.
S. Geol. Survey, 1918; p. 51, pl. 10, fig. 7.

Specimens of this variety were found in two of the lots, 380-
403 feet, and 403-458 feet, frotn the well of the Okeechobee Ice
and Electric Company, Okeechobee, Florida.

They are very similar to the type specimens described from the
Miocene of the Choctawhatchee Marl, one mile south of Red Bay,
Florida.

Cristellaria rotulata (Lamarck).

“Cornu Hammonis seu Nautili”? Plancus. Conch. Min., 1739, p. 13, pl. 1
ike ABUL

Lenticulites rotulata Lamarck, Ann. Mus., vol. 5, 1804, p. 188 No. 3; vol.
8, 1806, pl. 62, fig. 11.

Cristellaria rotulata d’Orbigny, Mem. Soc. Geol. France, ser. 1, vol. 4,
1840, p. 26, pl. 2, figs. 16-18. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology,

vol. 9, 1884, p. 547, pl. 69, figs. 13a, b. Cushman, Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus.,
HOUts) qo, Oo, wh 22 river, It. ;

’

The specimens which are from the well at Marathon at a
depth of 398 feet are very similar to those that were found in
the Miocene of the Gatun formation of the Panama Canal Zone.

Genus Polymorphina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Polymorphina lactea (Walker and Jacob).

Serpula lactea Walker and Jacob, Adam’s Essays on the microscope, 2d
ed. p. 634, ple 24, ‘tis. 4, 1708:

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 49

,

Polymorphina lactea (Walker and Jacob) Macgillivray. A history of the
molluscous animals of the counties of Aberdeen (etc.), p. 320, 1843. Brady,
Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 559, pl. 71, fig. 11. Bagg,
Maryland Geol. Survey, Miocene, 1904, p. 477, pl. 133, figs. 5, 6. Cushman,
Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918, p. 53, pl. 11, fig. 6.

Specimens which may be referred to this species were found
in the well at Jacksonville at 510-550 feet; in the Ponce de Leon
Well at St. Augustine, at 200 feet, and in the well at Marathon on
Key Vaca, at 180 feet. ,

I have already recorded this species from the Miocene of the
Choctawhatchee Marl, one mile south of Red Bay, Florida. It is
also known from the Miocene and Eocene of Maryland and New
Jersey.

Polymorphina elegantissima Parker and Jones.

Polymorphina elegantissima Parker and Jones, Philos, Trans., vol. 155,
1865, p. 438. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 4884, p. 566, pl.
72, figs. 12-15. Bagg, Maryland Geol. Survey, Miocene, 1904, p. 476, pl. 133,
fig. 3. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918, p. 54.

A single specimen of this species is from the Ponce de Leon
Well at St. Augustine, Florida, at a depth of 170 feet.

Bagg has recorded and figured this species from the Miocene
of the Calvert formation of Chesapeake Beach, Maryland.

GLOBIGERINIDAE

Genus Globigerina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Globigerina bulloides d’Orbigny.

Globigerina bulloides dOrbigny, Ann. Sci. Nat., vol. 7, 1826, p. 277, No., 1;
Modeles, 1826, No. 17, and No. 76; in Barker, Webb, and Berthelot, Hist. Nat.
Isles Canaries, 1839, pt. 2, Foraminiferes, p. 132, pl. 2, figs. 1-3, 28. H. B.
Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9,. 1884, p. 503, pl. 77; pl. 79, figs.
3-7. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Sufvey, 10918, pp. 12, 56, pl. 3, fig. 2;
Plo te hissed or Bull. | 103, U. S: Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 64; Publ. 2o1, Carnegie
Institution of Washington, 1919, p. 38.

A few specimens of this common species were obtained from
the well of the Okeechobee Ice and Electric Company, at Okeecho-
bee, Florida, at a depth of 380-403 feet, and from the Well at
Marathon on Key Vaca, at depths of 180 to 398 feet.

The species is also known from the American Miocene of Pan-
ama; the Coastal Plain of Florida and Virginia; Yumuri River,

50 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I1I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Mantanzas, Cuba; Cercado de Mao, Santo Domingo, and Bow-
den, Jamaica.

Gents Orbulina d’Orbigny, 1826.

Orbulina universa d’Orbigny.

Orbulina universa d’Orbigny, in De la Sagra, Hist. Fis. Pol. Nat. Cuba,
_ 1830, “Foraminiferes,” p. 3, pl. 1, fig. 1. H. B Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger,
Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 608, pl. 78; pl. 81, figs. 8-26; pl. 82, figs. 1-3. Cush-
man, Buall676)° Wes: Geol. Survey; 1018,-p. 12; pl.>3) fis. 35° Bull 203.90
Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 67; Publ. 291, Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1919,

p. 40.

The only record from the well samples examined is 380-403 feet,
‘at Okeechobee.

The species is known from the Miocene of the Gatun forma-
tion of the Panama Canal Zone; from Rio Gurabo, and Cercada
de Mao, Santo Domingo, and from the gorge of the Yumuri River,
Matanzas, Cuba.

ROTALITDAE

Genus Discorbis Lamarck, 1804.
Discorbis bertheloti (d’Orbigny).

Rosalina bertheloti d’Orbigny, in Barker, Webb, and Berthelot, Hist. Nat.
Iles Canaries, pt. 2, 1839, ‘“Foraminiferes,” p. 135 pl. 1, figs. 28-30.

Discorbis bertheloti (d’Orbigny) Cushman, U. S. Nat. Mus., Bull. 71, pt.
G, 1915, p: 20;%pl.-7; fig: 3; fies 23m. text-< Bulls 676;..U: “S. (Geol. Sumney;
1918, p. 58, pl. 15, figs. 1-3.

Discorbina bertheloti (d’Orbigny) H. B. Brady, Linnaean Soc. London,
Trans., vol. 24, 1864, p. 469, pl. 48, fig. 10} Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol.
9, 1884, p. 650, p.l 89, figs. I0-12.

' This is the only species of Discorbis found in the well sam-
ples. It is from the well of the Okeechobee Ice and Electric
Company, Okeechobee, Florida, at a depth of 41-56 feet.

I have recorded this species from the Miocene of Virginia and
South Carolina, and also from the Choctawhatchee Marl, one mile
south of Red Bay, Florida.

Genus Truncatulina d’Orbigny, 1820.
Truncatulina refulgens (Montfort).

Cibicides refulgens Montfort, Conch. Syst., vol. 1, 1808, p. 122.
Truncatulina refulgens (Montfort) d’Orbigny, Ann. Sci. Nat., vol. 7, 1826,
p..279, pl. 13, figs. 8-11; Modeles, 1826, No. 77. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Chal-

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 51

lenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 659, pl. 92, figs. 7-9. Cushman. Bull. 676, U. S.
Geol. Survey, 1918, p. 61, pl. 18, fig. 3.

A single specimen from the Ponce de Leon Well at St. Au-
gustine is the only record for the species in the well samples. I
have also had it from the Miocene in the Choctawhatchee Marl
from Coes Mill, Florida. —

Truncatulina americana Cushman,

Truncatulina americana Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918, p.
Gah mle 20h. Tinsl12, gs) Dl. QT}. fiey 177 Bull, 102," U. ‘S. Nat; Mus:, 1018, p. 68,
Dip 23. f18S, '2a-c

This species seems to be a common one in the Miocene and
Oligocene of America. It was originally described from the Mio-
cene of the Choctawhatchee Marl at Coes Mill, Florida, from the
Duplin Marl at Mayesville, S. C., and from Wilmington, N. C.
It is also known from the upper part of the Culebra formation
of the Panama Canal Zone.

In the borings from the Florida wells it has occurred as fol-
lows: Ponce de Leon Well, St. Augustine, at depths of 88 and 200
feet; well at Fort Myers, 300 feet; well of Okeechobee Ice and
Electric Company, Okeechobee, Florida, 41-56 feet; 87-94 feet;
240-245 feet; 245-276 feet and 403-458 feet; well at Marathon on

‘Key Vaca, 180, 305 and 308 feet.

Truncatulina pygmaea Hantken.

Truncatulina. pygmaea Hantken, Mitth. Jahrb. ung. geol. Anstalt, vol. 4,
1875, p. 78, pl. 10, fig. 8. Cushman, Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 68,
pl. 23, figs. 3a-c.

Truncatulina pygmaea H, B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Piaieeeee. Zoology, vol.
9, 1884, p. 666, pl. 95, figs. 9, Io.

Specimens occurred in the material from two wells, that from
Fort Myers, at a depth of 360 feet, and from the well at Marathon
on Key Vaca, at 308 feet..

It has been recorded from the Miocene of the Gatun formation
and ia Oligocene of the Culebra formation of the Panama Canal
Zone,

Truncatulina basiloba Cushman,

ey hae basiloba Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918, p.
64, pl. 21, fig. 2.

52 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

This species was originally described from the Miocene of
South Carolina, although the exact locality was not known. It is
therefore interesting to again find it in typical form from the Well
at Okeechobee, at a depth of 41-56 feet.

This is one of several species with the basal portions of the
chambers variously modified, which occur in the Miocene and Olig-
ocene of the Coastal Plain.

t
Truncatulina sp.

Plate 3, figtires I a, D.

There is a large species of Truncatulina which occurs in the
Bushnell Well at depths of 1,067 and 1,095 feet. Some. of the
specimens are well preserved and show a raised ridge along the
line of coiling and raised borders to the chambers, the surface be-
tween punctuate. The ventral surface is strongly convex and pe-
culiarly marked.

Genus Pulvinulina Parker and Jones, 1862.
Pulvinulina umbonata (Reuss).

Rotalina umbonata Reuss, Zeitschr. deutsch. geol. Gesellsch., vol. 3, 1851,
p. 75; ple Sy figs. 35a-c. .

Pujvinulina umbonata Reuss, Denkschr, Akad. Wiss. Wien, vol. 25, 1866,
p. 206. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 695, pl.
105, figs. 2a-c.

A single specimen which resembles this species in its general
characters was found in material from a depth of 200 feet in the
Ponce de Leon Well at St. Augustine, Florida.

Pulvinulina sp.

Pulvinulina hauertt H. B. Brady (not P. hauerii d’Orbigny) Rep. Voy.
Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, pl. 106, fig. 7a-c.

There is a single specimen in the Jacksonville Well which is
close to the figure quoted above, which is, however, certainly not
Pulvinulina hauerii dOrbigny. This particular form is at present
found in the Philippine and South Pacific regions and is one of a
considerable number of species which occur in the Oligocene of
America and are now living in the same or closely related form
in the Indo Pacific.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 53

Pulvinulina ? sp.
Plate 2, figures 7 a, DB.

Associated with the conical Orbitolina in three wells there is
a species which may be assigned to Pulvinulina. It is of small
size, the dorsal side strongly convex, the ventral side less so, and
when worn shows a peculiar series of openings about the umbili-
cal area.

It is found in material from the following: New City Well
at Jacksonville, at 820-845 feet; Ponce de Leon Well at St. Au-
eustine at 785 feet; and City Well at Apopka, Orange County, at
II5 feet.

This is another one of the species which is characteristic of the
fauna of the upper Orbitolina Zone.

Genus Gypsina Carter, 1877.
Gypsina globulus (Reuss).

Ceriopora globulus Reuss, Haidinger’s Nat. Abh., vol. 2, 1847, p. 33, pl.
Bye kias Fe

Gypsina globulus H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9,
1884, p. 717, pl. ror, fig. 8. Cushman, Publ. 291, Carnegie Institution of
Washington, I910, p. 44, pl. 4, fig. 7. :

Large specimens which may be referred to this species are
from the well at Marathon, on Key Vaca, at 598 feet. These are
similar to those which were found at Anguilla, Leeward Islands,
where, as in the Marathon Well, they occurred in company with
Orbitolites.

Smaller specimens of the form which is characteristic of the
Ocala limestone were found in the Jacksonville Well, at 680-702
feet, and occasionally below. These all probably came from the
level of 510-550 feet where the Ocala evidently is entered and
from which point downward there is no casing. Similar speci-
mens also occur in the well of the Bonheur Development Com-
pany at Burns, Wakulla County, at a depth of 50 feet, and in the
well of the Compagnie Generale des Phos. de la Floride, at An-
thony, Marion County, also at 50 feet. This latter well is known
to start in the Ocala limestone. Other species from Burns con-
firm the occurrence of the Ocala at 50 feet as indicated by the
Gypsina.

54 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The species of Gypsina referred to G. globulus in the Coastal
Plain and West Indian region need careful study to discriminate
between the different forms found in different horizons.

Genus Rotalia Lamarck, 1804.
Rotalia beccari (Linnaeus).
Nautilus beccarii Linnaeus, Syst. Nat., 12th Ed., 1767, p. 1162.
Rotalia (Turbinulina) beccarii d’Orbigny, Ann. Sci. Nat., vol. 7, 1826, p.
275, No. 40; Modeles, 1826, No. 74.
Rotalia beccarii Parker and Jones, Philos. Trans., vol. 155, 1865, p. 388,
pl. 16, figs. 29, 30. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884,
p. 704, pl. 107, figs, 2, 3. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918, pp.
18, 662 pl.25, te. 1, pls6, fig. 1; pl. 23, :cie. 3:09) 24, fies. a, 25 ipl. 25; die) as
Specimens of the forms figured from the Miocene of the Coast-
al Plain were found in material from the well at Fort Myers, at a
depth of 300 feet, and the well at Okeechobee, at a depth of 41-56
rect.
This has been recorded from the Miocene of Florida in the
Choctawhatchee Marl of Coes Mill, and Jackson Bluff, as well as
from the Miocene and Pliocene of several other states.

Rotalia armata d’Orbigny.

Rotalia armata d@’Orbigny, Ann. Sci, Nat., vol. 7, 1826, p. 273, No. 22;
Modeles, 1826, No. 70. ;

Rotalina armata Terquem, Mem. Soc. Geol. France, ser. 3, vol. 2, Mem.
TLE. 1882, p67, pl. 5. (13). tgs. 14, 15;

In a single well, that of the Bonheur Development Company at
Burns, Wakulla County, numerous specimens occur at 180 feet,
and scattered below as casts which are very close to this species
of d’Orbigny, which seems characteristic of the Eocene of the
Paris Basin at some horizons. ;

The specimens are in such numbers in this well that it seems
as though they may be later discovered somewhere in surface
deposits of this same age in the Gulf region.

Occurring as it does below the horizon marked by character-
istic species of the Ocala, it should be looked for elsewhere in a
similar stratigraphical position.

a ee ed

Vee
-

i as

a

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS

oi
ul

J

Rotalia sp.

In the well at Marathon, on Key Vaca, a species of Rotalia oc-
curs in some numbers at 1,273 feet. It is ‘unlike those found else-
where in the well samples, but is not well preserved as to details
of the surface characters.

Rotalia ? sp.

In two wells, the New City Well at Jacksonville, at a depth
of 680-702 feet, and that of J. Wiggins at Eustis, Lake County,
at a depth of 138 feet, there is a large rotaliform species which
seems more or less involute on both faces. The stttures are marked
by raised lines. The peripheral margin is angled, the dorsal surface

just within the periphery slightly concave.

NUMMULITIDAE

* Genus Nonionina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Noniona scapha (Fichtel and Moll).

Nautilus scapha Fichtel and Moll. Test. Micr., 1708, p. 105, pl. 19, figs. d-f.

Nonionina*scapha Parker and Jones, Ann. Mag: Nat. Hist., ser. 3, vol.
5, 1860, p. 102, No. 4. H. B, Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9,
1884, p. 730, pl. 109, figs. 14, 15 and 16.? Bagg, Bull, Amer. Pal., vol. 2, No.
10, 1898, p. 41 (335), pl. 3 (23), figs. 4a, b; Maryland Geol. Survey, Miocene,
1904, p. 460, pl. 131, figs. 1-3. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918,
p. 68, pl. 25, fig. 2; pl. 26, figs. 2, 3; Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 73,
pl. 25, figs. 6a, b.

In two wells, specimens evidently this species were obtained.

_ These are 87-94 feet in the well at Okeechobee, and 180 feet in the

well at Marathon on Key Vaca.

This species is known from the Miocene of the Choctawhatchee -
Marl of Florida, and from the Miocene of Maryland, Virginia,
and South Carolina. It occurs also in the Gatun formation of the
Panama Canal Zone.

Nonionina depressula (Walker and Jacob.)

Nautilus depressulus Walker and Jacob, in Adam’s Essays on the Micro-
scope, Kanmacher’s Ed., 1798, p. 641, pl. 14, fig. 33.

56 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Nonionina depressula Parker and Jones, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 3,
vol. 4, 1859, pp. 339, 341. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol.
9, 1884, p. 725, pl. 109,. figs. 6, 7. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey,
IQ&, pp. 10, 67," pl. 1, fieGe, pl. 26; fig’ 12 -Bull. 103, U--S, Nat. Mus, 1018
p..72, pi. 25; figs. 502° 0:

A single specimen which may be referred to this species was
obtained in the well sample from 88 feet in the Ponce de Leon
Well at St. Augustine.

It occurs in the Miocene of the Gatun formation of the Panama
Canal Zone and it has been recorded from the Miocene of Alabama
and Virginia. |

*e

Nonionina sp.
Plate 3, figures 2 a, b.

At a depth of 380-403 feet in the well at Okeechobee, there are
numerous specimens of a species of Nonionina which are very uni-
form in their characters.

Genus Polystomella Lamarck, 1822.
Polystomella crispa (Linnaeus).
“Cornu Hammonis orbiculatum’” Plancus, Conch. Min., 1739, p. 10, pl.
His pate 2 :
Nautilus crispus Linnaeus, Syst. Natebdh 125170725 paa moos
Polystomella crispa Lamarck, Anim, sans. Vert., vol. 7, 1822, p. 625, No.
1. d’Orbigny, Foram. Foss. Bass. Tert. Vienne, 1846, p. 125, pl. 6, figs. 9-14.
H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 736, pl. 110, figs.
6, 7. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918, p. 60, pl. 27, figs. 1, 4, 53
Bulls 1033s Se NateNids:, TOLom ph 70% plies shies: ene:

This species in Recent Seas is characteristic of tropical and
subtropical waters. In the Miocene of America it is known, es-
pecially from the Choctawhatchee Marl of Florida, the Duplin
Marl of North and South Carolina, and from the Gatun forma-
tion of the Panama Canal Zone.

In the Florida well samples it has occurred twice, from 41-56
feet in the well at Okeechobee, and from 78 feet in the well at Mar-
athon, gn Key Vaca. |

Polystomella craticulata (Fichtel and Moll).

Nautilus craticulatus Fichtel and Moll. Test. Micr., 1798, p. 51, pl. 5,

figs. h-k.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 57

Polystomella craticulata d’Orbigny, Ann. Sci. Nat., vol. 7, 1826, p. 284,
No, 3. W. B. Carpenter, Introd. Foram., 1862, p. 279, pl. 16, figs. 1, 2, H.
B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 730, pl. 110, figs.
16, 17. Cushman, Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 77, pl. 27, figs. 3a, b.

In its fully developed form this species-is characteristic of
tropical shallow waters. :

It has been recorded from the Culcbra formation of the Pana-
ma Canal Zone in a somewhat different form from the recent
species of the Indo-Pacific. This same form is.apparently present
in the Florida wells, specimens very similar having been found in
the Ponce de Leon Well at St. Augustine from 88 feet, and 680
feet in the well at Fort Myers.

Polystomella striato-punctata (Fichtel and Moll).

Nautilus striato-punctatus Fichtel and Moll. Test. Micr., 1798, p. 61, pl.
g, figs. a-c.

Polystomella striato-punctata Parker and Jones, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist.,
ser. 3, vol. 5, 1860, p. 103, No. 6. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology,
vol. 9, 1884, p. 733, pl. 109, figs. 22, 23. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol. Sur-
vey, 1918, pp. 10,60, pl. 8, fig. 4; pl. 26, fig. 4; ply 27, fig: 2;. Bull’ 103, U.S.
Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 74, pl. 26, figs. 3a, b; 4a, b; Publ. 291, Carnegie Institu-
tion of Washington, I919, p. 49.

To this species have been assigned most forms of Polystomella
which have a rounded periphery and short retral processes. In the
American Miocene it is known from numerous states of the Coast-
al Plain, from the Panama Canal Zone, and from Santo Domingo.

The only well record is that from 41-56 feet in the well of the
Okeechobee Ice and Electric Company at Okeechobee.

Polystomella sp. ?

At 880 feet in the City Well at Fort Myers, Lee County, there
occur numerous specimens of Polystomella which are almost all
casts and not at all well preserved. These, for the most part, have
rather short retral processes but have a large number of cham-
bers. Attention is called to them for possible later comparisons
with other localities.

58 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Genus Amphistegina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Amphistegina. lessont d’Orbigny.

Amphistegina lessonii d’Orbigny, Ann, Sci. Nat., vol. 7, 1826, p. 304, No.
3, pl. 17, figs. 1-4, Modeles, 1826, No. 98. H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger,
Zoology, vol. 9, 1884, p. 740, pl. 111, figs. 1-7. Cushman, Bull. 676, U. S. Geol.
Survey, 1918, pp. 20, 70,’pl. 4, fig. 3; pl. 26, fig. 5; pl. 27, fig. 3; pl. 28, fig.
1; Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 77; Publ. 291, Carnegie Institution of
Washington, 1919, p. 50, pl. 7, fig. 7.

There are various forms, varieties, or species of Amphistegina
in the American Tertiary which should be critically studied as from
the fragmentary evidence at hand they seem very distinct at dif-
ferent horizons.

As Amphistegina is a tropical genus the occurrence in the wells
would naturally be expected to be confined to those of the southern
part of Flerida. This is true of the actual records, it having oc-
curred as follows: City Well at Fort Myers at 300 feet; well of
the Okeechobee Ice and Electric Company at Okeechobee at 56-62
feet; and in the well of the Florida East Coast Railway at Mara-
thon on Key Vaca, at 180 feet.

It is know from the Miocene of the Duplin Marl of South Caro-
lina, the Choctawhatchee Marl of Florida, and the Miocene of
Santo Domingo and Bowden, Jamaica, and in the upper Oligo-
cene of the Panama Canal Zone.

Genus Asterigerina d’Orbigny, 1839.
Asterigerina angulata Cushman.
Asterigerina angulata Cushman, Publ. 291, Carnegie Institution of Wash-

ington, IOI; p. 45, pl. 13, fig. 4.

Numerous specimens from a depth of 786 feet in the well at
Marathon, Key Waca, are evidently this species, described from
the Miocene of Santo Domingo at Rio Cana, and Cercado de Mao.

Genus Nummulites Lamarck, 1801.
Nummutlites sp.
Numerous specimens of Nummulites occur in a number of the
wells, usually just below the Ocala limestone where that formation

is represented. The records in the various Florida wells are as
follows: a fragment probably Nummulites from 400-470 feet in

CC

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 59

the well at Panama City; especjally at 150 feet and at lower depths
probably derived from this level in the well of the Bonheur De-
velopment Company at Burns, Wakulla County; at 550 feet and
below in the New City Well at Jacksonville, Duval County; abun-
dant at 50 feet and scattering below in the well of the Compagnie
Generale des Phos. de la Floride, at Anthony, Marion County; in
the upper portions, probably above 138 feet in the well of J. Wig-
gins at) Eustis, Lake County; at 410 feet especially and scattered
below in Well No. 3 of the Palmetto Phosphate Company near
Pit No. 1, about 2 3-4 miles northwest of Tiger Bay.

Genus Operculina d’Orbigny, 1826.

Operculina sp.

The only specimen that may be referred to this genus -is from
the well at Marathon on Key Vaca, coming from a depth of 589
feet, but this is broken and not specifically identifiable. Where
Operculina was recorded in the earlier paper on the well samples,
(12th Annual Report, Florida Geological Survey, 1919, pp. 77-103)
a closer study has shown them to be Heterostegina ocalana,

Genus Heterostegina d’Orbigny, 1826.

Heterostegina ocalana Cushman.

Occurring with the various species of Lepidocyclina and also
characteristic of the Ocala limestone this species confirms the age
of the Ocala in the well borings. It occurred in recognizable
form as follows: well of L. E. Morrow, Sanford, Seminole
County, 113, feet; well of H. Bradford, Cocoa, Brevard County,
190 feet; and Tiger Bay at a depth of 360-400 feet. It is char-
acteristic of the Ocala, especially in north-central Florida and
is also found in the Ocala of Georgia.

Genus Heterosteginoides Cushman, 1918.
Heterosteginoides cf. panamensis Cushman.

_Heterosteginoides panamensis Cushman, Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1918.
p. 97, pl. 43, figs. 1-8.

This species is common in the Culebra formation of the Pan-
ama Canal Zone, and a related species has been described from
Crocus Bay, Anguilla, Leeward Islands.

60 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The only well from which specipnens of this genus were found
is that at Marathon on Key Vaca, where they occurred at a depth
of 852 feet. It would then seem that the well at this depth en-
tered or was in Upper Oligocene strata.

This genus may prove to be a synonym of Miogypsina which
is also characteristic of the Upper Oligocene elsewhere.

Genus Lepidocyclina Gumbel, 1868.
Lepidocyclina ocalana Cushman.

This species which is typical of the Ocala limestone of Flor-
ida is found in recognizable form in the several wells: Jackson-
ville, first appearing at 510-550 feet, and fragments occur from
this point downward, probably all having ‘their source at this
same depth as the well is not cased below this level. In the well
of L. E. Morrow at Sanford, Seminole County, at 113 feet, spec-
imens of L. ocalana occur in fragmentary form with other Ocala
species. At Cocoa, Brevard County, from the well of H. Brad-
ford, the species occurs in the only sample from 190 feet. In Ti-
ger Bay well at 360-400 feet abundant specimens of Lepidocyc-
lina, including “L. ocalana, were found.

The Ocala limestone is therefore definitely placed by this and
associated species.

Lepidocyclina floridana Cushman.

This*species occurs with L. ocalana in the following wells:
L. E. Morrow, Sanford, Seminole County, at 113 feet; H. Brad-
ford, Cocoa, Brevard County, 190 feet, and at Tiger Bay, 360-
400 feet and at various points below, evidently originating from
this: level.

Lepidocyclina pseudocarinata Cushman.

There are specimens of this species from two of the wells with
the preceding: Cocoa, 190 feet, and at Tiger Bay, 360-400 feet.

Lepidocyclina pseudomarginata Cushman.

Specimens which may be this species were obtained in the
Jacksonville Well at 510-550 feet, and a few fragments below.
More definite specimens were in the material from the well at
Tiger Bay, at 360-400 feet.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 61

Lepidocyclina sp. ?

Fragments of Lepidocyclina which are not identifiable were
obtained at numerous wells indicated in the previous report (12th
Annual Report, 1919). These are too small and too poorly pre-
served to be of more than generic value,

FAMILY MILIOLIDAE.

Genus Quinqueloculina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Quinqueloculina cf. poeyana d’Orbigny.
Ouinqueloculina poeyana d’Orbigny, in De la Sagra, Hist. Fis. Pol. Nat.

Cuba, “Foraminiferes,” 1839, p. 191, pl. 11, figs. 25-27. Cushman, Bull. 676,
U. S. Geol. Survey, 1918, p. 24, pl. 6, fig. 2.

A specimen from 41-56 feet in the well of the Okeechobee
Ice and Electric Company at Okeechobee, has a sculpture consist-
ing of longitudinal costae, somewhat similar to that figured in
the references given above. The specimen from the well.is, how-
ever, somewhat broader and shorter, and may not belong to this
species.

Specimens with similar sculpture but of different shape more
like Q. pulchella @Orbigny, occur in the well at Marathon on
Key Vaca, at a depth of 1,140 feet. By their appearance they
may have come from the sides of the well far above this point as
they are excellently preserved and do not look like other material
from this depth. :

Quinqueloculina sp.

~ Plate 3, figure 3.

There is a fairly large species found in several of the wells
which is very peculiar in its sculpture. The exterior is either
rough or covered with a secondary granular coating, Where this
is worn through, a peculiar sculpture is seen, consisting of short
longitudinal elongate pits filled with fine granular material of the
surface. Specimens are not well enough preserved to show the
apertural characters.

The species occurs with the conical form of Orbitolina in the
following wells: New City Well at Jacksonville, at a~depth of
845-900 feet; Ponce de Leon Well at St. Augustine, at 440 feet;

62 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

‘City Well at Apopka, Orange County, at 115 feet; and well at
Marathon, on Key Vaca at 1,720 feet.

Quinqueloculina sp.

Specimens of Quinqueloculina with a rough surface are found
at Apopka at 115-feet and in the well at Anthony ‘at 375 feet.
These are not well enough preserved to be identified specifically.

Genus Massilina Schlumberger, 1893.
Massilina sp.

Plate 3, figures 4, 5.

In the material from the well at Apopka there are specimens
of this genus rather poorly characterized as far as external char-
acters are shown. It is found with the conical species of Orbi-
tolina.

Genus Triloculina d’Orbigny, 1826.

Triloculina sp.

A single specimen with traces of longitudinal costae was
found in material from 138 feet in the well of J.Wiggins at Eus-
tis, Lake County.

Triloculina sp.

At a depth of 720 feet in the well at Fort Myers several
poorly preserved specimens of Triloculina were obtained. The
exterior is rough and irregular and no characters are preserved
which enable them to be specificaily identified with certainty.

Genus Biloculina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Biloculina sp.

There are specimens represented mainly by internal .casts
from the well at Jacksonville at 820-845 feet, and from the Ponce
de Leon Well at St. Augustine, at 440 feet, in both localities oc-
curring with the conical form of Orbitolina.

Genus Peneroplis Montfort, 1808.
Peneroplis arietinus (Batsch).

Nautilus (Lituus) arietinus Batsch, Conch Seesandes, 1791, p. 4, pl. 6,
figs. 15d-f.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 63

Peneroplis arietinus H. B. Brady, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zoology, vol. 9,
1884, p. 204, pl. 13, figs. 18, 19, 22. Heron-Allen and Earland, Trans. Zool.
Soc., London vol. 20, 1915, p. 602,

There are numerous specimens as this species from a depth
of 720 feet in the well at Fort Myers. They are somewhat
changed in character, showing traces of replacement by calcite,
which has somewhat altered the external characters, but the form
is very characteristic.

Peneroplis discoideus Flint.

Peneroplis pertusus (Forskal), var. discoideus Flint, Ann. Rep. U. S. Nat.
Mus., 1897 (1899), p. 304, pl. 49, figs. 1, 2. Cushman, Publ. 291, Carnegie In-
stitution of Washington, I919, p. 60.

This should take its rank with the other species of Peneroplis.
So far as known it is limited to the West Indian region, being de-
scribed by Flint from the shallow water of Key West Harbor,
Florida. I have recorded it from the Miocene of Bluff 3, Cercado
de Mao; Santo Domingo.

It occurred in material at 1,140 feet in the well at Mara-
thon on Key Vaca, but the tests.are unlike’most of the others from
this level and apparently came oefeavel by from some distance

above. -
Genus Orbitolites Lamarck, 1801:

Orbitolites americana Cushman.

Orbitolites americana Cushman, Bull. 103, U. S. Nat. Mus., 1918, p. 99, pl.
43, figs. 12-14;. pl. 44, figs. 1, 2; pl. 45.

There are fragments of Orbitolites from the well at Mara-
thon on Key Vaca at a depth of 589 feet which in the general
characters of the interior very closely resemble the species which
I have described from the Emperador Limestone and the Culebra
formation of the Panama Canal Zone.

Orbitolites is characteristic of the American Upper Oligocene
in the Tampa formation of Florida and the Anguilla formation
of Anguilla and Cuba. Therefore this level of the Marathon
Well should be, Upper Oligocene.

64 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Genus Alveolina d’Orbigny, 1826.
Alveolina ? sp.
Platé 3, figures 6 a, D.

In the well at Bushnell at 2,320 and 2,380 feet there are spec- '
imens which resemble Alveolina but instead of being fusiform are
compressed in the plane of the axis, They resemble in a general
way the Orbiculina rotella of dOrbigny (Foram. Foss. Bass.
Tere Vienne, 1620, pli. 7, tgs. 13, 14):

4

EXPLANATION OF PLAT Est.

Figure 1. Haplophragmium sp. X35. 1,027 feet, Bushnell Well.

Figure 2. Haplophragmium sp. X35. 1,720 feet, Marathon Well.

Figure 3. Haplophragmium sp. X35. 160 feet, Anthony Well.

Figure 4. Haplophragmium sp. X35. 440 feet, St. Augustine Well.

Figure 5. Valvulina sp. X35. 325 feet, Well at Burns.

Figure 6. Chrysalidina ? sp. X35. 1,262 feet, Marathon Well. a, side view;

b, apertural view. :
Figure 7. Gaudryina sp. X35. 1,650 feet, Marathon Well.
Figure 8. Clavulina sp. X30.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS

PLATE 1.

66 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Figure I.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.

Figure 7.

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 2

Bulimina ? sp. X35. 440 feet, St. Augustine Well.

Bulimina sp. X35. 138 feet, Eustis Well.

Bulimina sp. X35. 160 feet, Eustis Well. ‘

Bulimina sp. X50. 2,310 feet, Marathon Well.

Buliminella sp. X35. 1,720 feet, Marathon Well.

Buliminella ? sp. X50. 2,220 feet, Marathon Well, a, ventral view;
b, dorsal view.

Pulvinulina ? sp. X50. 820-845 feet, Jacksonville Well. a, dorsal
view; b, ventral view.

FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS

68 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

EXPLANATION OF PLATE 3

Figure 1. Truncatulina sp. X30. 1,067 feet, Bushnell Well. a, dorsal view;
b, ventral view.

Figure 2. Nontonina sp. X75. 380-403 feet, Okeechobee Well. a, side view;
b, front view.

Figure 3. Quinqueloculina sp. X35. 1,720 feet, Marathon Well.

Figure 4, 5. Massilina sp. X50. 115 feet, Apopka Well.

Figure 6. Alveolina ? sp. X35. 2,320 feet, Bushnell Well. a, side view; )D,
edge view.

. FORAMINIFERA FROM DEEP WELLS 59

~
.

INDEX, 1OcSPECIES OF -FORAMINIFER,

(Synonyms and extra-limital species in italics.)

A
Alveolina sp., 64, 68, 60.
Amphistegina, 33; lessonii, 37, 58.
Asterigerina angulata, 37, 58.

B

Biloculina sp., 62.

Bulimina sp., 40, 46, 47, 66, 67.

Buliminella elegantissima, 47;
66, 67.

Sp., 47,

C

Ceriopora globulus, 53.

Chrysalidina aradata, 45; sp., 44, 64, 65.

Cibicides refulgens, 50

Clavulina communis, 37, 45; sp., 40, 46,
64, 65.

Conulites americana, 39-41.

Cristellaria americana var., 37, 48; ro-
tulata 37, 48; spinosa, 37.

D

Discorbina bertheloti, 50.
Discorbis bertheloti, 37, 50.

G

Gaudryina flintii, 37, 45; subrotundata,
45; Sp.,.45, 64, 65.

Globigerina bulloides, 37, 49.

Gypsina globulus, 38, 53, 54.

H

Haplophragmium sp., 40, 41, 64, 65.
Heterostegina ocalana, 30, 40, 59.
Heterosteginoides, 30; panamensis, 59.

L

Lagena striata, 48.

Lenticulites rotulata, 48.

Lepidocyclina, 38-40, 59; floridana, oca-
lana, pseudocarinata, pseudomargin-
data, 3040); GOs sp; OL:

Lituus, 62

M
Massilina sp., 62, 68, 60.
Miogypsina, 60.

N

Nautilus arietinus, 62; beccarit, 54;
craticulatus, crispus, 56; depressu-

Nonionina, 33; depressula, 37, 55, 56;
scapha, 37, 553; sp., 56, 68, 69.
Nummulites, 39, 40, 58.

O

Oolina striata, 48.

Operculina, 39, 59.

Orbiculina rotella, 64.

Orbitolina, 40, 42, 44-46, 53, 61, 62; tex-
ana, 42.

Orbitolites, 38, 53, 63; americana, 63.

Orbulina universa, 37, 50.

Orthophragmina, 309.

lg

Peneroplis arietinus, 62, 63; discoideus,
pertusus, 63.

Polymorphina elegantissima,
lactea, 37, 48, 40.

Polystomella, 33; craticulata, 37, 56, 57;
crispa, 37, 50; striato-punctata, 37,
57; SD.» 57. :

Pulvinulina hauerti, umbonata, 52; sp.,
40, 52, 53, 66, 67.

Q

Quinqueloculina poeyana, pulchella, 61;
Sp,. 40, 61, 62, 68, 69.

R

Rosalina bertheloti, 50.

Rotalia armata, 39, 40, 54; beccarii, 37,
54; Sp. 55.

Rotalina armata, 54; umbonata, 52.

S

37; 49;

Serpula lactea, 48.
ms

Textularia abbreviata, 37, 42; aggluti-
mans, gramen, 37, 43; panamensis,
37, 44; Sagittula fistulosa, 43; sp.,
40, 44.

Triloculina sp., 62.

Tritaxia sp., 40, 45.

Truncatulina americana, basiloba, pyg-
maea, 37, 51; refulgens, 37, 50; sp.,
52, 68, 60. ;

Turbimulina, 54.

Vv

Valvulina sp., 44, 64, 65.
Verneuilina spinulosa, 37, 44.

lus, scapha, 553 striato-punctatus, 57.! Virgulina squammosa, 37, 47.
70

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

ROLAND M. HARPER

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ip EO Gt chlo mn mar eee eee a rae ee ee ee eee eh
@Plan of description and sources of information —------_-=.------
Selectiontio meullustrattons i Gtoy ssa see ee a es ae a

Be aomtoiial en chiptvo is: we mes tee eee Mone da ee
TP VESE COASE JS AHS ia eke ee he eRe go we CY

5 (Ciailhi sinevanvanvoyelter aessalonar (CIty oleae, 1) eee ee ee ee
pend cll ema ll onicl an etl crt wii Cl Sige cree eae ee ei eee
PPEIne Sim Lectonm bable. 2 )hpsee saat eee ens eee be Es See
eS Middlemhlonida shammocke belie lable es) aus =e ae
Milernandon hammock belts 1(laller A) ween a
, 1saiswillere delee. inser (Ale oie: i) eas Se ee
. Peninsular flatwoods, western division (Table 6) -----------
. Peninsular flatwogds;seastern division (Table 7) ----+--_--
TOs Hast .coast Stiip/MEMinRe)) 1 oo2 = Soto oo Sete ens
(Generalesteattr es ss2= 2 = ke ee a ee BS ee A ee
SSUBALEL Teg yas a eS gs ee Se a ee
HeotamierSeOlOsy : 28 se arent a Tee teen we eee Oe,
OPO GAIA eo ee LE SE OPE he Sp Ae 9 AB ls oN
Eividrographiy 1 Ot. edraimace my meee ee et au wet ie he eee ae

wS/ SEH GOP ce RE A a ae ee ENT,” aS ge RN rR PITS en PT
MARGOT) Wie y, SOUS yah ae os a nos Rete es et

Wrathipra soils <5 0 5 rank Se ALT eds a ee ee Oe eee Mg

EUG a i et eats SR ea ME, CRO Soe ARREARS SOOT, e
INTISCETIA EOS sSOilig. 25). ces eerie eee Nee ee LE
Mechanical “analysessCRablesivo= bay). ee cree eee ak eae
Chemical analyses.a( bables. 15-1 ahaa Sateen
Gitgiatee( bable tg irs 2 Pak. poeta ee pave Se BNO S 2 Senta
Vegetation : ___.____ eae SP ec aS ee Aah ik es ee Nl
Plices with-in verctanione so ca? Set ng i ee OT
ELeGbaceguss vewetationl eo cet = 9 to eS Aa ie a ba
SSMU me Vem el Aba Mtoe a Nase ee eee eee a ug LS
SanaliEreess Grr Tice tse eee ee ee pe ewe
Dalketrees con -fotestee nena staat oe oa ee eee teens eet ds je

Census of timber trees: s( bable.220), 2 222 eso ON
Utilization “of *native-plantsu@lables 21) 2.22 J)

71

ON Am BW b

Ko)

Page.
75- 83
77- 81
81-83
84-153
84- 87
87- 93
93- 94
95-103

104-110
IIt-118
IIQ-129
130-130
136-143
143-153
154-287
TSR USY,
157-16¢
160-165
166-170
170-104
17 IWS
175-178
178-179
179-180"
180-186
186-194
194-197
197-222

199
199-204
204-205
205-206
206-217
218-219

219-222

7/2 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—_I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

General Features—Continued. Page.
Wild sanimals# or <tauna 2 S2- seo a ol eS 2 A ee 223-233
Population, sete: = ae ee ee Se a at ee ee 234-257

Density-m compositional denabivitye se se = ae ee ee 234-236
Rutal and: urban? population -Clable 22) (2122222-22-=22 2-2 237-239
Cities, and Mtewnism able 23) reo. ee ee ee Oe
Waintenenesontommancd mtomnistmbimSiteSsy jae 241-245
Nbiteracy aa (@ablew2))\iee aaa sense lo bee ee ees 245-248
Schoolsisi@Rableswe25 4420) rats ate! Se eee 248-253
INGtedegpensOn sya ot ee eee ee ee 254
Relietotisnacnominations ~Clables27)) “.sseaee = ae ee 255-257
Ron tical a litte si etre Sta a ee mins ee aL a 257
VAS rACULE TIT eto ee ee ek ET oe oe le ee ele 258-280
Conditions at successive census periods (Tables 28-35) ------ 258-274
Watiations: ingsize Of itatins yee = = a ere eee eee ee oe 274-275
CLrONSi pate tees ae oe LR ae | aoe 3 SEA 275-278
Relative simp Orta cee (ilvalioleg3 0) eee eee eee 275-27
Averdveyields'(( Dablerggyu cee ss a onke er eee eae 276-278
Jspanvaneill carcino, (Cepia psy) yes ee ee 278-280
Mati Ese tin etia oe os 4 Se eae ea Le A ed eh ae 281-282
Rranspombatione see = bee eeu NE ee et ee eee ee OP Ot)
WWidEGE Weryis” poematc ts os eran Sa ee Oy ae ee
Ratlroads (GRablesspiin ce 2a 2 es eesk by se Sa ee ee eee 283-284
Roads" 220 Shc Sse eS NOS 2 a od RETA one 284-286
Automobiles? aoe er i ee eee Se ee 286
Newspapers andother periodicals 2 a 7s. ere ae eee 287
mdditions Wand. iGCOGTeCtOnS crews a: Beep ies Ey a ye A ea 288

nie eS S20 SoU ee ER ee! eS a0 sa ee i Be ee 289

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure. Page.
Pec eeibes nian Of Central) HlOtiOd yn ton alee nee an 82
West Coast Islands:

Seoaibeinafsies) on east side ToL) Way. Weyireo as se_o =~ 8
Poraimecstvanian veretation: ony Long Kev e222 ae 8

Gulf Hammock Region:

Reaticoad through taesGult ELammock) 2) Woo. 2 See peer eee 87
GmPower houses on Withlacoocheer Riven es e- seo naa aee ea 88
FaLLead moti omosassamRivieh eset ee eee ne aL ee ee 89
Lime-sink Region:
OES UNCER Sy 7 eae es is SE Dade IPI Ea cee ee ee Les 8p eee eee 96
Penal pine dand AGittus «County: oo-22=2-~252 0 2 eee 97
TOs shallow. pond sin pine, forest, Citrus ‘County 2222242 2 == 98
Hie © pene scrubsncitniis COUNT s= 2 eeae tene ee e S eeS 98
Middle Florida hammock belt:
(Zeit aot wlocidamle ines Commedin © calage esas ae eee 104
TieeeSeimi-calcaneous) hammock mear Ocala. 2-22) ae ee 105
PAssieaimenos aim enliivated oileld, 22-2 a2 ee ee 107

Hernando hammock belt :

i Lookin north wp hill near Sprite. Make. 2. ese 48. at 112
Ome Sink. of 9 Shoocochattee se talhleyeoo ee ee 113
17. Beginning of clearing in Choocochattee Hammock ---+----------- 114

Lake Region:

itchocm. sping. Ctancte Countyrio: a2. Feo 282k ee sk sa 120
insula Jake amone ‘high™ ills “Lake County 22-2220. -4-_---_.-_- 121
ea eake Alireds Pole Cotnty 2sck2 0 ot Riek Wee a 122
2s balmettaswon south, shore of Dake Monroe 2.2 ue 22822 Ls 123
22. Small lake near Ellsworth Junction, Lake County -~---- Mea tae Ste de 123

Western Flatwoods:

Peaeiieneutarwoodss asco. COlUMLy jaeneeoe ake ees So oe 131
Beale upress. pomde Pascoue Glitltys state ant hae et Ne ee 8 131
25. Low hammock near Peace River, Polk County -----»------------- 132

Eastern Flatwoods:

26,, erases bordering lake) Tohopekdliga 22.62. 8 137

27. Asphalt road through the wilderness, Osceola County ~----------- 137

28. Edge of St. Jchn’s River prairies; Brevard County ~-------------- 140
73

74 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY——I3TH ANNUAL REPORT
Figure. Page
East Coast Strip:

20. Turnbull Silammocks av olustam County” 225. 22-22 aes Se ee eee 144
30. Coquina rock on shore of lagoon north of New Smyrna —-_--_-- 145
21s SpEicen piness Ontoldadunesmwest OL Mitmigu =n eee 145
32; (Pool Mine palar tsavanna,. Viernes: [sland™ secs. 2 ae Ok ee eee 146
33. Outenmostadunesmnean) Melbourne beach: == == es ae nna 146
34. Shell mound on Indian River opposite Melbourne ~----_------___ 147
Vegetation types: ‘
35. Marshyemanein of LakevApopka,. Lake. County 222-22 = ees 199
20,,Saweertass marsh borderinoweake Parkisw sosese ee neo cee 201
37 eMangtove. Swamp. on” Long (Key, sce ee eee 205
esediypicalescrub: eale hCoumty, ceo ee a 210
go Sandy, hammock, Marton’ County: 23-5 03- 2 ee eee 214
40,,,Galcateous \hanimock, “Citrus County “22222222 ee 215
arccked i oak woodsssMariony Couttty v.25 ee 216
Statistical Graphs:
42) Density of population, total:and rural, 1850 to, 1920, 2222 eee 234
43: ‘School population ‘curves, 1OT5=16 72... =o A ee 253

INTRODUCTION.

This report is a sequel to one on the geography and vegetation of
northern Florida, published in the Sixth Annual Report, late in
v914, which covered that part of the state north of latitude 29°30.
The present investigation begins where the former left off and
covers 15 counties on the peninsula, extending south to about lati-
tude 27°40’. These Central Florida* counties, from Levy, Marion

- and Volusia on the north to Hillsborough, Polk, Osceola and Bre-

vard on the south, cover about 13,900 square miles or 26% of the
area of the state, and included 31% of its total population and
34% of its white population in I9gI5.

In the six years that have elapsed since the northern Florida re-
port was written considerable additional information about the re-
sources of.the state has accumulated, or been unearthed from var-
ious publications, and at the same time a number of improvements
in the methods of geographical description have been made. There
are only half as many natural regions to be described in central as
in northern Florida, and the regional descriptions in the present re-
port are more condensed, especially as regards vegetation, for
quantitative plant lists, although very significant to those who know
how to interpret them, can- probably be fully appreciated only by
a small minority of readers. Much greater use than before is here
made of statistics, and a multitude of fundamental facts about each
region, which it would take at least ten times as long to write out in
sentences, is presented in the form of tables, with enough explana-
tion to bring out the salient features.

On the other hand the general features of the whole area are now
treated much more fully than was done for northern Florida, and
some interesting general principles not widely known hitherto are
brought out by means of statistics and otherwise. Statistics indeed

*This part of the State is sometimes arbitrarily called “Middle Florida”
by persons unfamiliar with its traditions, but Middle Florida, by long-established
usage (dating from a time when the peninsula was almost uninhabited) is
that part of the State between the Suwannee and Apalachicola Rivers. Central

Florida is a more or less arbitrary designation, but it is now used in the same

sense by the State Agricultural Department in divididng the State into five
groups of counties approximately equal in area.

75

76 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

make rather dry reading, but besides their brevity, they. have the
great advantage of eliminating persona: opinions, which have been
rather too prominent in much that has been written about Florida
heretofore. The source of most of our statistics is the state and
federal censuses, and these of course are not and never can be
absolutely accurate, but their errors (except in completeness of en-
umeration) are just about as likely to be in one direction as another,
thus balancing each other to a considerable extent when sufficiently
large numbers are used. And as they represent the work of a multi-
tude of enumerators, no individual investigator can hope to ap-
proach them in completeness, or to detect errors (other than typo-
graphical, etc.) in them by merely going over the same ground once
or twice.

The aim of this report is to answer as many as is possible in 200
pages or so of the questions that a prospective settler or investor
might ask. There is already a vast amount of literature about this
and other parts of Florida, in books and magazines and in hand-
somely illustrated circulars issued by boards of trade, railroads.
real estate companies, etc., but most of that 1s devoted to some limit- |
ed area, which is usually painted in the most glowing colors, se
that it may not help the reader much in getting at the whole truth.
Every region on earth has its advantages and disadvantages, and
the well-nigh universal policy of minimizing or ignoring the latter
in the effort to attract settlers is rather short-sighted, for if a new-
comer finds conditions too different from what he had been led to
expect he is liable to give up in despair and give the region a bad
name.

The information in scientific works, soil surveys, census reports,
etc., is much more likely to be accurate and impartial than that de-
signed merely to entertain the reading public, increase the business
of railroads, etc., but it is relatively inaccessible, and not easy for
the average unscientific person to digest and interpret. And in spite
of all that has been published about Florida, it would be difficult
to find in previous works any definite statement about the prevail-
ing soil types, commonest plants, density of population, percentage
of illiteracy, leading religious denominations and foreign nationali-
ties, percentage of white and colored farmers, owners and tenants.
average size of farms, value of farm land and buildings, number of
animals of various kinds per farm, cost of labor and fertilizers.
leading crops and average yield of each, etc., for any of the regions

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 77

here described. But all of these points and many more are covered,
and some not only with reference to present conditions but alse
historically, i.e., the changes that have taken place in several de-
cades are outlined.

PLAN OF DESCRIPTION AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION

The description of each region follows as nearly as possible the
outline given under General Features in the table of contents, but
that of the smaller regions is necessarily less complete, on account
of the lack of census statistics for areas smaller than counties.

The information about geology and underground waters is taken
mostly from previous reports of this Survey, and that about soil
texture from government soil surveys, which as yet however cover
less than one-fourth of the area under consideration. The principal
soil series and texture classes in each region sufficiently covered
by soil surveys have been determined by picking them out from
the maps, but it is hardly worth while to calculate their percentages
until the work is more complete. Some of the chemical analyses of
soils are taken from roth century publications, and some were made
for the Survey in 1915, from samples collected by the writer, by
L. Heimburger, one of the assistant state chemists at that time.

The climatic factors discussed are only a few of the simpler ones,
some taken direct and some computed, from publications of the
U. S. Weather Bureau, chiefly Bulletins Q and W.

The descriptions of vegetation are almost wholly from the
writer's own observations, on about 100 different days, mostly in
the months of February, March, April and July, and in the years >
1908-1910, 1914, 1915 and 1920. ‘The importance of vegetation
as an indicator of soil conditions is probably more generally recog-
nized in Florida than in any other part of the United States; but in
order to make satisfactory correlations between vegetation and soils
it is necessary not merely to pick out certain species of plants sup~
posed to be characteristic of certain soils, but to study the vegeta-
tion quantitatively, as the census does population and agriculture.
The approximate relative abundance of the different species has
been determined by consolidating or digesting the field notes taken
in every county and region, on practically every mile of travel,
whether by train, boat, automobile or on foot.

78 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

In each region described the principal vegetation types (which
are discussed more fully in the general part of the report) are in-
dicated, and the commonest large trees (1.e., those large enough to
be sawn into lumber), small trees, woody vines, shrubs and herbs
are listed as nearly as possible in order of abundance; which besides
bringing out the general appearance of the vegetation also shows at
once each region’s resources in timber and other wild products of
the vegetable kingdom. There are of course all gradations between
trees and shrubs, and a species which is a small tree in one region
may be a large tree or a shrub in another, or even in different
habitats in the same region. But although no hard and fast lines
can be drawn, some sort of size grouping has to be used, for it 1s
impracticable to compare the relative abundance of plants differing
greatly in size, such as trees and grasses. Mosses, lichers, fungi,
etc., are omitted entirely, partly because they form such an insig-
nificant fraction of the total bulk of vegetation, and also because
only a few specialists (of whom the writer is not one) can identify
them positively in the field.

It did not seem worth while to assign percentages to nearly all the
species, as was done in the northern Florida report, on account of
the incompleteness of the data, but in the general discussion there
is a census of timber trees, giving within certain limits the propor-
tion that each is supposed to constitute of the total forest of each
region. And the percentage of evergreens in each region has been
estimated, as before, for that being made up of figures for a number
of species is more accurate than the percentage of any one species”
The significance of evergreens is that, other things being equal,
they are most abundant on the poorest soils; for a tree growing in
very poor soil has difficulty in getting enough nourishment to make
a complete set of leaves every year, and is almost obliged to keep
each leaf two or more years (sometimes a dozen years in the case
of some of the spruces of the far north, where the soil is frozen
about half the year) ; while a tree in rich soil may take up mineral
matter in solution so fast that it has to have large leaves to store
the surplus in and shed them every year to get rid of it*

*For additional notes on the relation of evergreens to soils see 6th Ann.
Rep. Fla. Geol. Surv., 175-177 (footnote) ; Science I]. 42 :500-503. Oct. 8, 1915:
Bull. Geog. Soc. Phila. 16:111. Dec. 1918; Geol. Surv. Ala. Special Rep. No.
mie ja), lo wey=f0) 2

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 79

To save space and avoid boring readers not interested in botanical
matters the plant lists are made rather short, omitting the rarer
species that one would not be likely to encounter every day, though
in a few cases the lists have been extended just far enough to take
in certain species that are especially characteristic. The trees listed
in each case are probably only about half the number of species rep-
resented in any region, but they make up at least nine-tenths of the
bulk of the forest. The shrubs and herbs are listed less completely,
partly because they are less important, and partly because some ot
them cannot be identified any day in the year as the trees can, and
the writer has not yet explored this area in the fall months, whep
many herbs bloom that would hardly be noticed in the spring.

For each plant there is given its technical name, its common name
(if any), and its usual habitat expressed in a word or two. The
technical names of evergreens are printed in bold-face type, and in
the case of semi-evergreens only the specific name (second word) is
thus printed. There is some uncertainty as to just which herbs
should be classed as evergreens, partly because some of them have
not been sufficiently observed in winter, and partly because it is im-
possible to draw a sharp line between evergreens and non-ever-
greens. Some herbs whose leaves die down completely in winter
farther north are partly evergreen in the area treated and entirely

so farther south; and many that are not ordinarily thought of as
evergreen have rosettes of leaves close to the ground that live
through the greater part of the winter.

The technical names of weeds and other plants that seem to grow
only in places that have been more or less disturbed by civilization
are enclosed in parentheses. Good examples of plants which are
ordinarily regarded as indigenous but behave rather suspiciously are
the two tall dog-fennels, Eupatorium compositifoluim and E.
capillifolium. The former is sometimes seen in apparently un-
disturbed high pine land, but it is rhore characteristic of roadsides
or even dim trails made by log-carts, and abundant in old fields.
The latter is common in lake basin prairies. etc., but may not have.
been there in prehistoric times, when such places were not closely
pastured as they are now.* Amone the trees the persimmon, a sup-
posed native! is far more frequent in cultivated or abandoned fields
than it is in swamps, which may be its natural habitat.

*See 3d Ann. Rep.; Fla. Geol. Surv., p. 318.

80 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

There is doubtless much room for improvement in the treatment
of common names, for the writer does not often stop long enough
in one place to interrogate the residents about the names they use for
wild plants. Such names enclosed in parentheses are either general
terms like grass and fern, or names used in Georgia or farther north,
which may or may not be in common use in central Florida. But
as a large proportion of the inhabitants of this area came from other
states, and some who will read this report are now living in other
states, these names ought to be more intelligible than they would
be in a region which has had very little immigration.

Statistics of population are taken from census reports, prin-
cipally the U. S. census of 1910. It would have been interesting to
carry the investigation back to 1830, when Florida first figured in
census returns, but previous to 1887 the counties in central Florida
were so few and large that it would be difficult to get an adequate
representation of any one region from county statistics. However,
some figures illustrating the growth and composition of the popula-
tion in the whole area in the early days are given in the general
discussion. Quite a number of additional data are taken from the
state census of 1915, which however does not go into as much detail
as the government censuses, and is not so free from typographical
errors. At this writing the only returns of population from the
U. S. census of 1920 available are the total population of all the
counties and some of the cities and towns, but those have been used
as far as they go. (It will probably be several months yet before a
full analysis of the 1920 population by race, nativity, etc., is ob-
tainable. )

The 191° census is also the main source of statistical information
about agricultural conditions, though others, as far back as 1850,
have been utilized as far as possible. The state agricultural depart-
ment took censuses of agriculture in connection with population in
1895 and 1905, and in recent, years has taken censuses of crops,
livestock, etc., at biennial intervals. These biennial enumerations
subdivide the crops more minutely than the government censuses
(which lump together most kinds of vegetables) ever did, and
indicate the value of each crop in each county, but give little or no
information about the number and size of farms, color and tenure
of farmers. value of land. buildings and other property, and expen-
ditures for labor. feed, fertilizers, etc. Worse still, they are marred
by so many clerical or typographical errors that they have to be

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA SI

used with caution. The principal use made of them here is to
determine the relative importance of different crops in 1913-14 and
1917-1918. Besides returning the crops in more detail, and giving
not only acreage but values by counties, another advantage of the
state census is that its crop year runs from July 1 to June 30, on
account of Florida’s most valuable crops being harvested in winter
and spring, while the government census naturally returns the
crops by calendar years in Florida, for the sake of uniformity with
other states, all of which have colder winters and mostly summer
crops.

On account of the appropriation for the Geological Survey re-
maining at the same number of dollars per annum that it was when
money was worth twice as much as it is now, rigid economy has
had to be exercised in the selection of illustrations. Out of several
hundred photographs available for the purpose, the choice has been
narrowed down to 25 new half-tones and 14 old ones. This leaves
without illustration such interesting physiographic features as the
supposed highest hill in the state (in Polk County), the limestone
caves of Marion County, the noted natural race-course of Daytona
Beach, salamander hills, and several beautiful lakes and rivers;
such vegetation types as grassy dunes, peat prairies and several
other types of prairie, the characteristic low hammocks of the Gulf
hammock and lake regions, the short-leaf pine and hickory woods
of north-central Marion County, calcareous swamps of various
kinds, and the flatwoods, bays, and lake shore vegetation of the
lake region; and such artificial features as phosphate mines (both
hard rock and pebble), the “diatomaceous earth” plants of Lake
County, clay pits, sawmills, turpentine stills, roads of crushed
limestone, brick, shells, or pine-straw, stone walls, rock chimneys,
cattle ranches, orange groves, sugar-cane fields, truck farms, types
of farm-houses, cities, towns, hotels, etc. And the counties of Sum-
ter and Hillsborotigh do not happen to be represented at all in the
illustrations, although many pictures have been taken in both. But
some of these features or places are well illustrated in previous pub-
lications of this Survey, or in easily accessible magazines and
pamphlets.

Figures 8, 7, 9, II-1'°3, 20-22, 29, 35, 36, 39 and 41 are from
earlier reports, and the remaining 25 are new. All are made from
photographs in the writer’s private collection of American geo-
craphical views, except three that are otherwise credited. They

8&2 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

are printed in the text instead of on special paper for the sake of
economy, and also to bring them as near as possible to the corre-
sponding text and save the trouble of fitting two or three on one
plate.

The map used herewith (fig. 2) is too small to show fine de-
tails, but larger maps showing the towns, railroads, etc., are easily
accessible.

REGIONAL MAP
- or

CENTRAL FLORIDA

REGIONS
LWEST COAST ISLANDS
2 GULF HAMMOCK REGION
} 3.MIDOLE FLA. FLATWOODS
|| 4 LIME-SINK REGION
S.MID, FLA. HAMMOCK BELT
6 HERRANDO HAMMOCK BELT €
| 7LAKE REGION
} & FLAT WO0DS (WESTERN)
3. FLAT WOODS (EASTERN) v4
1@ EAST COAST STRIP

Fig 2. Map showing boundaries of the regions described herein, and
various other geographical features. Scale about 1:2,500,000 or 40 miles to
the inch.

For various reasons, chiefly lack of time, no bibliography has
been prepared for this report, but those in the First, Third, Sixth
and Twelfth Annual Reports contain references to numerous im-
portant works dealing with central Florida or the whole state, and
a few other references are scattered through this report in the form
of footnotes. The natural resources of an area of about 1,00c
square miles around Ocala, with special reference to geology, vege-

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 83

tation and soils, were described by Dr. E. H. Sellards and others
(including the present writer) in the Seventh Annual Report
(1915), and that will be referred to occasionally herein, especially
under the head of vegetation types.

That this report has many shortcomings the writer is well aware
(and he, rather than the Survey, should be held responsible for
them) ; but those who may be inclined to condemn it as a whole on
account of a few misstatements or omissions with respect to some
particular locality should bear in mind that it is impossible for one
person to see all parts of such a large area in a few months or to de-
scribe it fully in 200 pages, and even if time and money were unlim-
ited it would be impracticable to go to all the important places with
in a few weeks of the time of going to press. Many places indeed
have not been visited by the writer since 1915, so that some condi-
tions described in the present tense may be things of the past now,
on account of the rapid development of this part of the state. Cur-
rent items in daily newspapers have been of considerable assist-
ance in keeping abreast of the times, however.

The writer (or his associates) will be glad to receive construct-
ive criticisms from any source, so that if another edition of this
work is ever called for; or if it should ever be incorporated inte
a geography of the whole State, it can be made as complete and ac-
curate as possible.

REGIONAL DESCRIPTIONS
I. THE WEST COAST ISLANDS
(issign 437.) Soll analyses; OvePs)

This includes the Cedar Keys archipelago in Levy County, the St.
Martin’s Keys and other small rocky islands along the coast o1
Citrus and adjoining counties, and a narrow line of barrier-beach
islands (the Anclote Keys, Long Key, ete.) lying from half a mile
to three or four miles off shore in Pinellas County; the whole coy-
ering perhaps not more than ten or twelve square miles.

The Cedar Keys islands are mostly of sand heaped up by the wind
(to a height of about 45 feet on Sea Horse Key), but there is con-
siderable calcareous material also, in the form of shell fragments.
Between them and the mainland the water is very shallow and dot-
ted with innumerable patches of salt marsh vegetation (fig. 3), and
much of the bottom is covered with oyster bars. There is a wagon
road from Cedar Key to the mainland which up to a few years
ago was rather unique in being submerged twice at day at high tide.
There were a few bridges across the deeper places, and between
them stakes were driven along the road so that it could be followed
when the tide was up.

The “keys” of Pinellas County are also very sandy, but seem to
have a larger proportion of shell material than the Cedar Keys
group, and there is more lime-loving vegetation. Dunes are not ex-
tensively developed. |

Some climatic data for Cedar Keys and Tarpon Springs are given
in Table 19, in the general part of this report. The climate re-
sembles that of the rest of central Florida in having mild winters
and wet summers, but the Gulf of Mexico doubtless makes the tem-
perature more uniform than.it is in the interior. The rarity of kill-
ing frosts is indicated by the occurrence of black mangrove at Cedar
Kevs and red mangrove in Pinellas County.

The principal vegetation types are the sparse coarse grassy vege-
tation characteristic of beaches and dunes, the salt marshes and
manerove swamps (fig. 27), scrubbv thickets difficult to classify,
and sandy hammocks: The sequence of the following plant list
cannot be regarded as very accurate, on account of the writer’s

84

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 85
limited explorations in the region, but it ought to give a person fa-

miliar with the species named a pretty fair idea of what the vege-
tation looks like.

Fig. 3. Salt marshes on east side of Way Key, about % mile north of Ce-
dar Key station, with oyster shells in foreground and black mangrove (Auvi-
cennia) bushes in middle distance. Apr] 26, 19c9.

Fig. 4.

Palm savanna vegetation on stetcnary dunes (containing many

shell fragments), on Long Key about 2 miles north of ‘Pass-a-Grille, Pinellas
Co. - March 11, 1915.

86 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL’ REPORT

COMMONEST PLANTS OF WEST COAST ISLANDS.

Sabal Palmetto
Pinus Caribaea
Pinus clausa
Juniperus Virginiana
Quercus Virginiana
Hicoria glabra?

Avicennia nitida

Rhizophora Mangle
Conocarpus erectus
Laguncularia racemosa
Quercus geminata
Persea littoralis

Smilax auriculata
Ipomoea Pes-Caprae
Ernodea littoralis

Serenoa serrulata
Myrica cerifera
Yucca aloifolia
Coccolobis uvifera
Batis maritima
Quercus myrtifolia
Scaevola Plumieri
Tlex vomitoria
Sophora tomentosa
Batodendron arboreum

Uniola paniculata
Juncus Roemerianus
Spartina glabra

Opuntia sp.

Andropogon glomeratus?
Munhlenbergia filipes
Chamaecrista sp.
Oenothera humifusa
Eustachys sp.

Cassytha filiformis

LARGER TREES.

Cabbage palmetto
Slash pine
Spruce pine
Cedar

Live oak
Hickory

SMALL TREES.
Black mangrove

(Red) mangrove
Buttonwood
White mangrove
Live oak

Red bay

WOODY VINES.

SHRUBS

Saw-palmetto
Myrtle

Spanish bayonet
Sea-grape

(Serub oak)
Yaupon

Sparkleberry

HERBS

Sea oats
(Rush)

(A grass)
Prickly pear
(A grass)

(A grass)
Partridge pea

(A grass)

Various situations
Various situations
Stationary dunes
Hammocks
Hammocks

Sandy hammocks

Mangrove swamps, and
scattered over marshes

Mangrove swamps

Edge of salt water

Edge of salt water

Stationary dunes, etc.

Sandy hammocks

Serubby thickets
Beaches, etc.
Dunes

Various situations
Hammocks, etc.
Dunes

Dunes

Sandy marshes
Serubby thickets
Beaches and dunes
Hammocks

Inner shores, etc.
Sandy hammocks

Dunes

Salt marshes
Salt marshes
Old dunes, etc.
Dune hollows
Dune hollows
Dunes

Dunes

Dunes
Thickets, ete.

Something like 98% of the trees and shrubs, but not so many.of

the herbs, are evergreen.

Population and Industries. Although there are no exact figures
for the population of such a small area, the density is probably above
the state average, owing to a world-wide tendency of people to con-
eregate along the coast (where the climate or topography does not

interfere) to engage in fishing, commerce, etc.

In “rors (Gedar

Key town had 800 inhabitants and Pass-a-Grille (on Long Key)
109, which together would make about 90 persons per square mile,
even if there were no other settlements.
lation of both towns was white.

About 70% of the popu-

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 87

Fish of various kinds, oysters and sponges are important pro-
ducts. Cedar for pencil wood was formerly cut in considerable
quantities at and near Cedar Keys, but the supply is nearly ex-
hausted now. The cabbage palmetto is or has been utilized for fiber
at Cedar Keys. A considerable part of the population makes a liv-
ing by catering to sportsmen and tourists, particularly at Pass-a-
Grille and other resorts in Pinellas County. There is very little ag-
riculture, but a few cattle are raised on some of the islands, and
there is said to be even a dairy on Long Key.

2. THE GULF HAMMOCK REGION
(Figs. 5-7, soil analyses 1-5.)

This extends along the Gulf coast from Wakulla County to the
southern edge of Pasco, with another area, entirely disconnected
from the rest but hardly distinguishable from it in any way, farther
inland along the Withlacoochee River, mostly in Sumter County.
Within our limits the coastal and interior portions are approxi-
mately equal in extent, together covering about 1520 square miles.
There is nothing very similar farther south, or in any other state

Fig. 5. Scene on railroad (Seaboard Air Line), through the Gulf Ham-
mock about 4 miles southwest of Ellzey, Levy County; showing out-cropping
limestone, and telegraph poles braced because they are not planted very deep in
the rock. April 16, 1910.

88 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

The portion northwest of the Suwannee River was described in the
6th Annual Report, pages 302-309, and a few of the vegetation
types in Sumter County in the 7th.

Pate ese

Fig. 6. Hydro-electric power-house with 20-foot dam (built in 1911), on
Withlacoochee River about 10 miles below Dunellon. March 4, 1915.

Topography and Geology. The region is mostly flat and less
than 75 feet above sea-level, and is underlaid throughout with a
hard limestone (Oligocene), that is exposed in innumerable boulder-
like or larger outcrops.* There are occasional irregular low sandy
ridges, scarcely distinguishable from parts of region No. 4, where
the depth to the rock is unknown. The coast is unlike any other of
equal extent in the world, as far as known, in being bordered by
marshes instead of sandy beaches; the reason being apparently that
the slope of the ocean bottom here is so gentle as to practically eli-
minate wave-action on the shore, just as if there was a barrier beach
a few miles off shore. Stern-wheel steamers from the Suwannee
River ply the open Gulf from the mouth of that river to Cedar
Keys. The same limestone rock that characterizes the region is said
to crop out on the bottom of the Gulf some distance out. Some of
the rivers have rocky shoals a few miles from their mouths, and
the one on the Withlacoochee is utilized for power purposes.

*See fig. 5. The soil survey of Hernando County shows one solid area
of rock outcrop in the eastern end of the county covering about half a square
mile.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 89

(Fig. 6.) Several of the smaller streams have large limestone
springs at their heads. (Fig. 7.)

Fig. 7. Large limestone spring at head of Homosassa River about a mile
northeast of Homosassa, Citrus County. May 23, 1909.

Soils. Only a small part of this region has been covered by soil
surveys (those of the “Ocala area” and Hernando County ), so that
it is hardly worth while to try to estimate the percentages of the
different types of soil. The principal series thus far named are the
“Leon”, “Norfolk”, “Portsmouth”, “Hernando” and “Parkwood”,
and the texture classes, in order of area, are fine sand (about one-
third of the total), swamp, sand, muck, fine sandy loam, tidal]
marsh, and clay loam. Rock outcrop, presumably all limestone,
constitutes about one-third of 1% of the total area as mapped.
Where the sand is not too deep, particularly in all the low hammocks
and swamps, the influence of lime is plainly shown in the native veg-
etation. Ina few such places there are deposits of gypsum on or
near the surface. No chemical analyses of the soils of this region
are available, but they are probably more calcareous than the aver-
age for central Florida.

Vegetation. The vegetation is mostly of the flatwoods type, with
a few lime-loving plants, but low calcareous. hammocks are. more
frequent and extensive in this region than in any other, with the
possible exception of the east coast. .(The great Gulf Hammock in
Levy County, shown in fig. 5, is the most typical example.) “The

go FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—_I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

hammocks often grade into swamps, which are more or less calca-

reous too.

The coast 1s bordered by marshes, as already stated,

and there are quite a number of shallow ponds and wet prairies,
particularly in Sumter County.
The commonest plants are about as follows:

COMMONEST PLANTS OF GULF HAMMOCK REGION.

Pinus palustris

Sabal Palmetto
Taxodium distichum
Pinus Caribaea
Taxodium imbricarium
Pinus Elliottii
Liquidambar Styraciflua
Pinus Taeda

Acer rubrum
Magnolia grandiflora
Quercus Virginiana
Juniperus Virginiana
Pinus clausa

Ulmus Floridana
Tilia pubescens?
Fraxinus profunda?
Quercus hybrida?
Quercus Michauxii
Quercus nigra

Celtis occidentalis?

Carpinus Caroliniana
Salis longipes?
Quercus Catesbaei
Magnolia glauca
Quercus cinerea
Quercus geminata
Fraxinus Caroliniana?
Persea pubescens
Osmanthus Americana
Ostrya Virginiana

Berchemia scandens

Rhus radicans

Gelsemium sempervirens
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Smilax laurifolia
Decumaria barbara
Ampelopsis arborea

Serenoa serrulata
Myrica cerifera

Tlex glabra

Cornus stricta?

Pieris nitida

Cholisma ferruginea
Quercus myrtifolia
Myrica pumila
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Asimina pygmaea?
Viburnum obovatum
Vaccinium nitidum
Quercus minima

Aralia spinosa

Sabal glabra

Itea Virginica

Rosa palustris
Hypericum fasciculatum

TIMBER TREES

Long-leaf pine
Cabbage palmetto
Cypress

Slash pine
(Pond) cypress
Slash pine

Sweet gum
Short-leaf pine
Red maple

Magnolia
Live oak
Cedar
Spruce pine
Elm

Lin

Ash

Water oak

Swamp chestn’t oak

Water oak
Hackberry

SMALL TREES.

Ironwood
Willow
Black-jack oak
Bay

Turkey oak

Live oak
Ash
Red bay

WOODY VINES.

Rattan vine
Poison ivy
Yellow jessamine
Virginia creeper
Bamboo vine

SHRUBS

Saw-palmetto
Myrtle
Gallberry

(Hurrah bush)

(Serub oak)
Myrtle
(Elbow bush)
Pawpaw

Huckleberry
(Oak runner)
Prickly ash
Palmetto

(Wild rose)
Sand myrtle

Pine lands

Low hammocks, ete.
Swamps and low hammocks
Low pine lands

Cypress ponds

Low pine lands

Low hammocks, etc.

Low hammocks, ete.
Swamps and low hammocks
Hammocks

Hammocks, etc.

Low hammocks, etc.

Serub

Low hammocks
Hammocks

Swamps

Low hammocks

Low hammocks

Low hammocks

Low hammocks

Low hammocks

Edges of swamps, etc.
High pine land
Swamps

High pine land

High pine land, etc.
Swamps

Swamps

Hammocks

Hammocks

Low hammocks
Low hammocks, ete.
Hammocks
Hammocks

Swamps

Swamps

Low hammocks

Flatwoods
Hammocks
Flatwoods

Low hammocks
Swamps and flatwoods
Sandy hammocks
Scrub, ete.
Flatwoods

Ponds and swamps
Flatwoods

Low hammocks
Flatwoods
Flatwoods
Hammocks

Low hammocks, ete.
Swamps

Swamps

Ponds, ete.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL

Tillandsia usneoides
Aristida stricta

-Cladium effusum
Pterocaulon undulatum
Juncus Roemerianus
Sagittaria lancifolia

Iris versicolor

Tillandsia tenuifolia
(Eupatorium capillifolium)
Saururus cernuus
Spartina Bakeri
(Piaropus crassipes)
Carphephorus corymbosus
Pontederia cordata
Nymphaea macrophylla
Mesosphaerum rugosum
Polypodium polypodioides
Rhynchospora miliacea
Mitchella repens

Pistia spathulata

Senecio lobatus

Tubiflora Carolinensis

HERBS

Spanish moss
Wire-grass
Saw-grass
Black-root
(Rush)

(Blue flag)
Air-plant
Dog-fennel

Switch-grass
Water-hyacinth

Wampee
Bonnets

(A fern)

(A sedge)
Turkey-berry
Water-lettuce

FLORIDA ie Oi

On trees

Pine lands

Wet prairies, ete.
Flatwoods

Brackish marshes
Wet prairies, etc.
Wet prairies, etc.
Low hammocks, etc.
Low prairies, etc.
Rich swamps
Around prairies, ete.
Lakes and runs
Flatwoods

Ponds and swamps
Ponds and streams
Marly flatwoods, etc.
On trees in hammocks
Low hammocks
Hammocks
Caleareous streams
Rich swamps

Low hammocks

About 75% of the large trees and shrubs, but not so many of
the small trees and vines, are evergreen.

Fisheries.

The shallow rock-bottomed waters of the Gulf ad-

jacent to this region afford a favorable habitat for many kinds of
fish. Besides the ordinary commercial fisheries, the region is visit-
ed in winter by many persons from outside the state who fish for
sport. Homosassa is a favorite winter resort for Georgia fisher-
men. The sponges brought in to Cedar Keys and Tarpon Springs
(which are in other regions) must also be counted among the sub-
marine resources of the Gulf hammock region. The bird guano
industry is described in the chapter on animals.

Population. his region does not cover enough of Levy, Citrus,
Hernando and Pasco Counties to enable us to get any accurate
statistics of the coastal portion from census reports, but the por-
tion along the Withlacoochee River is approximately coextensive
with Sumter County. Previous to 1887, when it was reduced to its
present, size, that county included a considerable part of the lake
region also, so that census returns from it for earlier periods have
little geographical value. The number of inhabitants per square ~
mile increased gradually from 9.1 in 1890 to 14.1 in 1920. None
of the population is classed as urban by the U. S. census, but 20.4%
of the people were living in incorporated places at the time of the
state census of 1915. In 1910 about 66% of the population was
native white, 0.4% foreign white, and 33.7% of African descent.
At the same time 3% of the native whites over ro years old, none ot
the foreign whites, and 26.9% of the negroes were unable to read °
and write.

g2 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

The largest towns in the Gulf hammock region in central Florida
in 1915 were Crystal River, with goo inhabitants, Center Hill, with
495, Coleman, 389, Bushnell’ 343, and Webster 307. In 1916 the
leading religious denominations among the white church members
in Sumter County were Baptist, southern Methodist, Church of
God, southern Presbyterian, and Church of Christ; and among tne
negroes, Baptist, African Methodist, Colored Methodist, Primitive

Baptist, and A. M. E. Zion.

Agriculture. For statistics of agriculture we are practically com-
pelled to depend on the returns for Sumter County, for the same
reason already given under population.
agriculture in that county in 1889-90, 1899-1900, and IC¢og-10 are

shown in Table 1.

TABLE, 1:

Agricultural Statistics of Gulf Hammock Region (Sumter Co.), 1890-1910.

The leading features of

E 1889 1899- 1909-1910

1890 1900] Total | White |Color’d
Per cent Aomeland tice tarmac pee bee see ee 22.8 21.8 20.5 19.4 1 e
Per cent, of land-improved: =_2+=2.+==<-— 6.2 5.5 6.1 5.5 0.7 ¥
Improved acres per inhabitant ~------- 4.3 3.3 3.4 4.7 1.3 £
Iimingnerie NAS! jOae wey oe ee 5.0 8.2 8.8 7.3 | 15.8
Perecent sor wranntercie wihihense hun 222 ee leh swe 22 83.6 81:0. | %s05 t
Per cent of farmers; owners ~~. ___ } | ( 89.7 82.4 83.4 | 79.0

86.3 | -
Per cent of farmers, managers ______-- 2) | | 09 0.4 05! O
Per cent of farmers, tenants ~_-_______ 13.7 | 9.4 Ufa L615 | 210
Average number of acres per farm ----| 80.2 | 109.2 101.2 118.2 28.1
Average improved acres per farm ____ 21.9 | 29.0 30.4 | 33:8 | 19:7
Value of farm land per acre ($) -----_| --=-- | 6.20/ °17.92| 17.90] 18125
Value of farm land per farm -__-___- | ( 678 1815 2121| 512

- 3450) -
Value of buildings per farm __________- \ 205 409| 472 138
Value of implements and machinery___| 30) 58 123} 144 34
Value of live-stock, poultry, ete. _____ 164! 338 490|- 2-22
Number of dairy cows per farm ______ 1.6 DS 8.4 10.2 0.6
Number’ of other cattle per farm _____ 11.1 28.5 14:0) | — 2333/2
Number. of horses per farm —._-______- 1.0 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.0
Number of mules per farm --__~______- 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1
Number tot hoes sper ranma eee 10.1 12.5 22.7 | 2. ae
Number of sheep per farm _____-_____ 2.1 1.5 | 2:6"), ¢ 22S S| eee
Number of poultry per farm —________ 16.3 42.5 24:3 | 2
Expenditures per farm for fertilizer-__| 17.00) 23.80 99/00 aaa | aaa
Expenditures per farm for labor -_____| —~____ 39:40| 18900 = =
Expenditures sper sfarmfor) feed) .28 2923). 7225 2a) ae AD () eens eee ee
Annual value of crops per farm _____-_ \ 895); 28222.
- 288 389 |

Annual value of animal products _____ \ | | 88) 2 eee
Expend. fertilizer per acre improved___ 0.77 0.86 326) cee 20s eee
Expend. labor per acre improved ______ Rtaeeee Soars 1.48 6:25 | eae eae
Value of crops per acre improved _____ l aeec eee 29:50) (2 ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 93

The figures for dairy cows per average farm in 1910 seem rather
excessive In comparison with other times and adjacent regions, and
may indicate an error of some kind, or some exceptional condition
not explained by the census, such as a temporary accumulation of
cows on one or two large farms.

The leading crops in 1909, in order of value, as estimated from
the U. S. census of 1910, were “vegetables” (about 72% of the
total), corn, oranges, grape-fruit, peanuts, hay, oats, sweet potatoes,
and sugar-cane (the value for the last representing the syrup made
from it). In 1913-14, according to the state agricultural depart
ment, the order was cucumbers, tomatoes, oranges, cabbages, corn,
(string) beans, hay, peanuts, sweet potatoes, watermelons, sugar-
cane (syrup), velvet beans, and lettuce. But of course if the lime-
sink portion of the county in the northeast corner, could be sepa-
rated this sequence might be changed a little. (There are no data
for 1917-18, because the agricultural enumerator for Sumter
County failed to make a report that year. )

3. THE MIDDLE FLORIDA FLATWOODS

This region extends from north of our limits through Levy
County to the Withlacoochee River a few miles west of Dunnellon,
where it seems to terminate abruptly. The greater part of it is in
Middle Florida (west of the Suwannee River), and it was describea
in the 6th Annual Report, pages 310-313. “About 300 square miles
of it lies within the area of the present report, and a small part
of it is covered by the soil survey of the “Ocala area.”’

It is a level region, perhaps nowhere more than 75 feet above
sea-level, with many shallow ponds and bays, and some sluggish
coffee-colored creeks. The ground-water is nearly everywhere close
to the surface, and there are no known outcrops of limestone, so that
the soil is rather sour. Most of the soil in this region within
the limits of the “Ocala area” has been classed as ‘Leon fine sand.”

The vegetation is mostly of the palmetto flatwoods type, inter-
spersed with numerous cypress ponds, bays, and non-alluvial
swamps. The commonest plants recognizable in February, March
and April seem to be as follows:

Q4 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

COMMONEST PLANTS OF MIDDLE FLORIDA FLATWOODS.

TIMBER TREES

Pinus palustris Long-leaf pine Flatwoods
Taxodium imbricarium (Pond) cypress Ponds and bays
Pinus Elliottii Slash pine Ponds and swamps
Pinus serotina Black pine Damp flatwoods
Acer rubrum Red maple Swamps

SMALL TREES.

Quercus Catesbaei Black-jack oak Drier spots
Magnolia glauca Bay Swamps and bays

WOODY VINES.

Smilax laurifolia Bamboo vine Swamps and bays
Smilax Walteri Swamps and bays
SHRUBS
Serenoa serrulata Saw-palmetto Flatwoods, etc.
Pieris nitida (Hurrah bush) Damp flatwoods, ete.
Ilex glabra Gallberry Flatwoods, etc.
Hypericum fasciculatum Sand myrtle Ponds
Aronia arbutifolia (Choke-berry ) Edges of swamps
Bejaria racemosa Flatwoods
Quercus minima (Oak runner) Flatwoods
Cholisma fruticosa (Poor grub) Flatwoods
Vaccinium nitidum Huckleberry Flatwoods
HERBS
Tillandsia usneoides Spanish moss On trees
Anchistea Virginica (A fern) Cypress ponds
Sarracenia minor Pitcher-plant Flatwoods
Pterocaulon undulatum Black-root Fiatwoods
Erigeron vernus Flatwoods
Aristida stricta Wire-grass Flatwoods
Polygala cymosa Cypress ponds
Andropogon scoparius? Broom-sedge Flatwoods
Pontederia cordata Wampee Ponds
Eriocaulon compressum Ponds
Nymphaea macrophylla Bonnets Creeks, ete.
Centella repanda Flatwoods
Bartonia verna Flatwoods
Syngonanthus flavidulus Flatwoods

About 80% of the trees and shrubs are evergreen, about one-
third of the shrubs (both individuals and species) belong to the
heath family (Ericaceae) and allied families, and leguminous
plants are very scarce, as already observed in the portions of this
region situated farther north.

This region does not cover enough of any one county to enable
us to study it statistically, but it is evidently very thinly settled.
Lumbering, turpentining and grazing seem to be the leading indus-
tries, and several of the shrubs could furnish a great deal of honey
if there were enough people living near to take advantage of the
fact.

ae To

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 95

4. THE PENINSULAR LIME-SIN‘K OR HARD-ROCK PHOSPHATE REGION
(Figs. 8-11, 40. Soil analyses 6-9.)

This extends from a few miles north of the northern boundary o1
the state southward through the western half of the peninsula to the
neighborhood of Tampa. Its southern limits are ill-defined, or a1
least insufficiently explored, but there is at least one area of con-
siderable size in Hillsborough County, entirely disconnected from
the rest. It reaches the coast in Pinellas County, which seems to
be the only place in peninsular Florida where any high land other
than dunes and shell mounds can be seen from the ocean. - Its area
in central Florida is about 2,400 square miles.

Geology. The greater part of the area is underlaid at no great
depth by a comparatively pure limestone now regarded as of upper
Eocene age, which is practically the oldest rock outcropping in
Florida. Toward the southern end of the region this is supposed
to dip southward and be overlaid by the Tampa limestone, of
Oligocene age. Extending nearly the-whole length of the region are
irregular deposits or pockets of hard-rock phosphate, apparently de-
rived mostly from a re-working of the underlying rock by geological
processes, but containing many vertebrate fossils of Pliocene age,
and designated by geologists as the Alachua formation. Practically
the whole surface is covered by several feet of incoherent sand
whose age is problematical, and there may be a stratum of clay
between the sand and rock in some places, not as extensive in
central Florida as farther north, however.

The underground water, tapped by many artesian wells at depths
usually from 50 to too feet below the surface, is good to drink.
but unsuited for boiler purposes on account of the large amount of
limestone dissolved in it. For this reason the Atlantic Coast Line
R. R. uses water-softeners at its tanks at Ocala Junction, Dunnellon
and Croom, and rain water cisterns are used in some of the towns

Topography and Drainage. The highest elevations known are a
little over 200 feet above sea-level. The topography is, everywhere
undulating, with many basins of various sizes and shapes, pre-
sumably formed by the solution of underlying limestone. Some of
these have sinks or caves in their bottoms, some are sandy and al-
ways dry, some are inundated part of the time, and some contain
permanent water, making ponds or lakes (fig. 10). The dry basins

13TH ANNUAL REPORT

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL: SURVEY

96

‘2061

cf

‘QUII IN)

pad

“a

Aq

“Aqyunoy

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA Q7

are commonest northward, and the lakes most numerous in Hills-
borough County, where the ground-water is nearest to the surface.
(This southern portion is not very different from the lake re-
gion farther east.)

Streams and swamps are rather scarce,,on account of most of
the drainage being subterranean, through the deep sand and cavern-
ous limestone. There are several large limestone springs, the
most noted being Silver Spring (fig. 8), a few miles east of
Ocala, which is one of the largest in the world.

Soils. The greater part of the soil is a cream-colored or lignt
buff fine-grained sand, varying toward white or brown, and usually
quite uniform in texture to a depth of several or many feet. About
half of this region in central Florida is now covered by soil sur-
veys, from which it appears that by far the greater part of the soils
are referable to the “Norfolk” Series, with a scattering of “‘Gaines-
ville,” ‘ “Hernando,” “Leon,” “Fellowship,” “St. Lucie,” etc
(which names however may mean little to persons not thoroughly
familiar with the publications of the U. S. Bureau of Soils, to which
they are at present chiefly confined). The leading texture classes
are fine sand (about 75% of the total), sand, fine sandy loam,

Fig. 9. High pine. land with scattered oaks (the most conspicuous one a

live oak, (Quercus geminata), about 5 miles west of Inverness, Citrus County.
March 14, 1914.

08 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Fig. 10. Shallow basin containing water, in open pine forests about 4 miles
west of Inverness. There is no fringe of bushes around this pond, a fact doubt-
less correlated with its considerable seasonal fluctuations, which make the
edge of the area subject to fire variable. (Compare with fig. 22.) March 14,

IgT4.

Fig. 11. Interior of rather open scrub about 5 miles west of Inverness,
taken from a point about 20 feet up a tree. March 14, I914.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 99
swamp, and loamy sand. Scrub, or white sand, under the various
designations of “Norfolk sand with scrub oak vegetation,” “Leon
fine sand, scrub phase,” “St. Lucie sand,’ and ‘Leon fine sand,
rolling phase,” makes up about 2% of the total. A few mechanical
analyses are given in the general chapter on soils, but no reliable
chemical analyses seem to be available yet.

Vegetation. High pine land, with or without a lower story of
black-jack or turkey oak or both, makes up at least three-fourths of
the total native vegetation. (See figs. 9, 10.) The oaks seem to
increase in numbers wherever the pines are cut off, perhaps chiefly
because that allows the ground to dry out a little more and they
prefer the driest soils. There are a good many hammocks, mostly
along rivers and on lake peninsulas and islands, and a few patches
of scrub (fig. I1), ranging in size from a few acres to several
square miles.

As there is more high pine land than all other vegetation com-
bined, a census of plants, especially herbs, for the whole region
bears considerable resemblance to that for high pine land in the
“Ocala area,” published in the 7th Annual Report (pages 166-167).
The commonest species seem to be as follows, except that herbs
that bloom in late summer and fall are probably not represented
as well as they should be, for lack of observations at that time of
year. The first tree listed is, or was originally, probably at least
fifty times as abundant as its nearest competitor.

COMMONEST PLANTS OF PENINSULAR LIME-SINK REGION.

TIMBER TREES ,

Pinus palustris Long-leaf pine High pine land
Taxodium distichum Cypress Swamps
Liquidambar Styraeiflua Sweet gum Aammocks, ete.
Pinus clausa Spruce pine Scrub

Quercus laurifolia
Quercus Virginiana

Magnolia grandiflora

Quercus falcata
Sabal Palmetto
Pinus Taeda

Taxodium imbricarium

Persea Borbonia
Acer rubrum
Hicoria glabra
Hicoria alba

\
Quercus Catesbaei
Quercus cinerea
Quercus geminata

Batodendron arboreum
Osmanthus Americana

Live oak
Magnolia

Red oak

Cabbage palmetto
Short-leaf pine
(Pond) cypress
Red bay

Red maple
Hickory

Hickory

SMALL TREES.

Black-jack oak
Turkey oak
Live oak
Sparkleberry

Sandy hammocks
Hammocks, ete.
Hammocks

Richer uplands, northward

Low hammocks, ete.
Hammocks, ete.
Ponds
Hammocks
Swamps

Sandy hammocks
Rich uplands

High pine land
High pine land

High pine land and scrub

Sandy hammocks
Sandy hammocks

100 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Quercus Margaretta
(Diospyros Virginiana)
Cornus florida
Quercus Chapmani
Salix longipes?
Crataegus Michauxii?
Ilex opaca

Magnolia glauca

Vitis rotundifolia

Rhus radicans
Gelsemium sempervirens
Vitis aestivalis
Decumaria barbara
Smilax auriculata

Serenoa serrulata
Cholisma ferruginea
Chrysobalanus oblongifolius
Myrica cerifera

Myrica pumila
Vaccinium nitidum
Ceratiola ericoides
Quercus myrtifolia
Ceanothus microphyllus
Tlex glabra

Phoradendron flavescens
Asimina speciosa?
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Rhus copallina
Hypericum fasciculatum
(Baccharis halimifolia)
Asimina reticulata?
Quercus Catesbaei (shrubby)
Callicarpa Americana
Viburnum obovatum
Asimina augustifolia
Rhus Toxicodendron

Aristida stricta

Tillandsia usneoides
Kuhnistera pinnata
(Eupatorium compositifolium)
Eriogonum tomentosum
Andropogon Virginicus
Carphephorus corymbosus
Chamaecrista fasciculata?
Actinospermum angustifolium
Eupatorium aromaticum
Pterocaulon undulatum
Pteris aquilina S
Croton argyranthemus
Cladium effusum
Sericocarpus bifoliatus
Lupinus diffusus

Stillingia sylvatica
Psoralea canescens
Spartina Bakeri
Helianthus Radula
Stenophyllus Warei
(Piaropus crassipes)
(Eupatorium capillifolium)

(and about 270 others)

About 83% of the large trees and still more of the shrubs are
evergreen, but Ericaceae (heath-like plants) are comparatively

Post oak
Persimmon
Dogwood

Willow
(Red) haw
Holly

Bay

WOODY VINES.

Muscadine
Poison ivy
Yellow jessamine
Wild grape

SHRUBS

Saw-palmetto

Myrtle
Myrtle
Huckleberry
Rosemary
(Serub oak)

Gallberry
Mistletoe
Pawpaw
(Elbow-bush)
Sumac

Sand myrtle

Pawpaw
Black-jack oak
French mulberry

Pawpaw
Poison oak

HERBS

Wire-grass
Spanish moss

(Summer farewell)

Dog-fennel
Broom-sedge
Partridge pea
Black-root

(A fern)
Saw-egrass

(Lupine)
Queen’s delight
Switch-grass .
(A sedge)
Water-hyacinth
Dog-fennel

High pine land
Old fields, ete.
Rich uplands
Sandy hammocks
Edges of swamps

High pine land, old fields, ete
Sandy hammocks, etc.

Swamps

Hammocks

Low hammocks
Hammocks
Hammocks
Swamps

Serub

Various situations
Sandy hammocks
High pine land

Low hammocks, ete.

Pine lands

High pine land, ete.

Serub, ete.
Scrub

High pine land
Low pine land
On oaks mostly
High pine land

Ponds and swamps

Uplands

Ponds

Low places
High pine land
High pine land
Hammocks, ete.
Low hammocks
High pine land
High pine land

High pine land
Hammocks, ete.
High pine land

Highpine land and oldfields

High pine land
High pine land
High pine land
High pine land
High pine land
High pine land
High pifie land
High pine land
High pine land

Along streams, ete.

High pine land
High pine land‘
High pine land
High pine land

Around prairies, ete.

High pine land
High pine land

Lakes and streams

Low prairies, ete.

hus

—

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA IOI

scarce, and Leguminosae (leguminous plants) seem to be more
abundant here than in most other parts of central Florida,
which indicates that the soil is not as poor as it might look to a
new-comer who had spent most of his life in clayey regions.

The long-leaf pine is, and doubtless will long continue to be,
an important source of lumber, fuel,and naval stores. Near some
of the phosphate mines it hag been cut off pretty completely to
furnish heat for drying the phosphate rock, leaving a very des-
olate-looking country, but it comes back as fast as it is allowed
to, without any assistance. The wire-grass and other herbage of
the pine lands afford an abundance of free pasturage for cattle.

Population. This region does not cover enough of any one county
to enable us to estimate the density of population very accurately,
but there-are probably at least thirty inhabitants per square mile.
It includes most of the settlements in Levy and Citrus Counties,
from the statistics of which we can approximate the composition
and some other characteristics of the population.

These two counties have no places with over 2,500 inhabitants,
and therefore no population classed as urban by the U. S. census, but
8.7% of the people were living in the three incorporated towns in
1915. The largest towns in the region at that time were Tarpon
Springs, with 1938 inhabitants, Clearwater, with 1932, Inverness,
with about 1000 (but not returned separately from the precinct in-
cluding the town), Dunnellon 979, Williston 800, Dunedin 429,
Anthony 406, and Wildwood 385. (The 1920 census puts Clear-
water ahead of Tarpon Springs, but returns for the smaller places
have not been published yet).

In Levy and Citrus Counties in 1910 about 50.1% of the inhabit-
ants were native white, 1% foreign white, and 49% negro. At the
same time 5.9% of the native whites, 14.8% of the foreign whites,
and 30% of the negroes were illiterate. The illiteracy percentage
for foreign whites is considerably higher than it usually is in pri-
marily agricultural regions, and probably indicates a considerable
number of foreign-born unskilled laborers employed in the phos-
phate mines. The foreigners came mostly from Italy, Greece,
England, Germany, Canada and Sweden; but of course there is no
telling how many of them are fishermen and spongers, living on
the coast of these two counties, and therefore entirely outside of
the lime-sink region. There is a large colony of Greeks, supported

102 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—_I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

mostly by the sponge business, at Tarpon Springs in Pinellas
County.

In 1916 the leading religious denominations among the whites
were Baptist, Methodist (southern), Church of Christ, Episcopalian
and Presbyterian; and among the negroes Baptist and African
Methodist.

Agriculture. Agricultural conditions here are more like those of
the typical South or cotton belt than in most other parts of centras
Florida. The ratio of farm land and improved land to total area
is indeterminate, for the same reason as density of population, but
in Levy and Citrus Counties in 1900 and 1910 there were 2.56 im-
proved acres per inhabitant, a lower figure than in a purely agricul-
tural region with American standards, and indicating the employ-
ment of a considerable part of the population in mining, lumbering,
fishing, etc. (This is especially noticeable in the case of the negroes,
who have less than one improved acre per inhabitant). Although
it is impossible to get any accurate data on the subject from existing
census reports, there are probably nearly as many families sup-
ported by phosphate mining as by farming, and even more may be
engaged in exploiting the forests for lumber and turpentine.

The salient features of agriculture for the last three census
periods previous to 1920 are shown in the following table.

The leading crops in these two counties in 1909, in order of value,
were “vegetables”, peanuts, corn, cotton (both kinds), sugar-cane,
oats, sweet potatoes, oranges, hay, peaches, grape-fruit, pears, and
Irish potatoes. Peanuts had probably increased in relative impor-
tance since 1899, judging by the increase in number of hogs per
farm.

7. fis ee

CN PRA ae ae SS las

£

as!

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 103

PARE 2:

Agricultural Statistics of Lime Sink Region (Levy & Citrus Cos.) 1890-1910.

1889- |1899- | 1909-1910

1890 1900) Total | White |Color’d
Improved acres per inhabitant ~_-----~ 3.83 2.56 2.56 4.4 0.64
inhabitants pers farm). 2222222 soe. 10.0 12.7 Wel 10.7 | 45.2
imerecent on farmers.white 2222-27 2 82 |) 2 ose 82.3 oA 2 AN at, ARES haps Ciel
Per cent of farmers, owners ~--------= } 92.4 |. 81.7 81.2 82.8 | 74.6
Per cent of farmers, managers ~------- j t 28 0.7 0.8 0
Per cent of farmers, tenants ~--------- 7.6 15.5 18.1 16.4 | 25.4
Average number of acres per farm ----| 136.3 109.0 | 159.0 | 180.0 | 68.7
Average improved acres per farm ~___-_ 38.8 32:7 43.9 47.3 28.8
Value of farm land per acre ($) ------| ----- 5.40 7.36 7.25| 8.63
Value of farm land per farm _-___-~_- 588 1170 1305 594

1905| -
Value of buildings per farm ___-__- “Ee | | 232 340 379 168
Value of implements and machinery__-| 46) 38| 98 113} 32
Value of live-stock, poultry, ete. ~---- | 253| 358}: = | a ene ee Seti
Number of dairy cows per farm __---- 4.9 | 3.0 3.3 3.6 1.4
Number of other cattle per farm _____ AC Tal AO (OM NA Beit ete see |
Number of horses per farm ___________ 1.6 ea 1.6 1.4. 1.2
Number of mules per farm ---------__ | 0.1 | 0.1 0.2 | OSA eOLk
Number of hogs per farm —~__-.-.-_.__ Pe aRU EG CAG Ps oe ee
Number of sheep per farm =J.2.._-*-. 1.8 3.0 CT eas a ae ==
Number of poultry per farm ___----__ 28.2 PARE Se aa I is = ees
Expenditures per farm for fertilizer___| 3.74 1] VO PE SS aaa
Expenditures per farm for labor ~--_-- | #2 2510 40 DOI. So 22 Wess
Expenditures per farm for feed ~_----- ing Sores dperaeee le PSCC yee eee a)
Annual value of crops per farm ____~_- | 620 —_———

| 272 340| -

Annual value of animal products ___-- S | | | PP, dy 3 eke (ees
Expend. fertilizer per acre improved__- 10 04 268 | ots pee
Expend. labor per acre improved __----| ~---- | STARA Ms Pia 02 Fe | A SS Sel Ses roe
Value of crops per acre improved -----| ~---- fren ate tg ee ee

In 1917-18, according to the state agricultural department,
the leading crops were sea-island cotton, peanuts, corn, sweet
potatoes, velvet beans, (including hay thereof), sugar-cane,
cucumbers, cow-peas (including hay), cabbage, oranges, (grass)
hay, oats, watermelons, pecans, Irish potatoes, peaches, egg-
plants, squashes, pears, castor beans (a “war crop,” not raised
much before or since), tomatoes, string beans, upland cotton,
lettuce and plums. If we had data for the lime-sink portions of
Hernando, Pasco, Hillsboro and Pinellas Counties no doubt
oranges would take a much higher rank and peanuts and cotton
a lower. This region leads the rest of central Florida in the rel-
ative importance of peanuts, as it does in hogs.

104 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

5o EEE MIDDLE FLORIDA HAMMOCK BELT

(Figs. 12-14, 39, 41. Soil analyses 10-26, A, B, Q-U)

This has its greatest development in northern Florida, and its
southern terminus in Marion County, where it covers only about
250 square miles. Unlike the portions in Alachua, Bradford.
Columbia and Hamilton Counties, which occupy a slope between
the high flatwoods on the east and the less elevated lime-sink region
on the west, the portion south of Orange Lake has sandy lime-sink
country on both sides of it, and is more or less interrupted, like a
row of fertile islands in a sea of sand. The difference in elevation
is not very marked, but the hammock belt averages a little higher
than adjacent portions of the lme-sink region.

Geology and Topography. In this belt the Ocala limestone, of
uppermost Eocene age, comes to the surface in many places, and as
it is usually pure enough to dissolve readily, and considerably

Fig 12. Pit of Florida Lime Co., near Ocala. By E. H. Sellards, Feb-
ruary, IQIO.

elevated above the ground-water level, there are numerous sinks,
caves, and subterranean streams. The limestone is quarried in
several places (fig. 12), and mostly burned for lime. Some of the
hills are partly capped by a friable sandstone of uncertain age.

+

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 105

Surface streams are few and small, and probably none of them
connect above ground with any river. Just north of our limits there
are a few large shallow lakes which become dry or nearly so at
times. The highest elevations in the region seem to be about 190
feet above sea-level.

Soils. By both chemical and physical tests the soils average the
best in central Florida, running pretty high in clay and in lime, as
can be seen from the analyses in another chapter. In the soil
survey of the “Ocala area’’ they are referred to the “Gainesville,”
“Norfolk,” “Fellowship” and “Leon” series, and the texture classes,
in order of area, are loamy sand, sandy loam, sand, and clay loam,
the first constituting about 38% and the last about 1%. Scrub
seems to be entirely absent.

Fig. 13. Semi+calcareous hammock about a mile southeast of Ocala. Feb.
13, I9I5.

Vegetation. The vegetation types of the southern extremity
of.the region were described in considerable detail and mapped In
the 7th Annual Report. In order of area the principal types seem
to be high pine land, red oak woods (fig. 41), high calcareous (or
semi-calcareous) hammocks (fig. 13), short-leaf pine and hickory
woods (this mostly north of the “Ocala area’), sandy hammocks

106

(fig. 29), and low calcareous hammocks.

are about as follows:

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The commonest plants

COMMONEST PLANTS OF MIDDLE FLORIDA HAMMOCK BELT.

Pinus palustris
Quercus falcata
Sabal Palmetto
Pinus Taeda
Liquidambar Styraciflua
Magnolia grandiflora
Quercus laurifolia
Persea Borbonia
Quercus Michauxii
Hicoria alba

Quercus nigra
Hicoria glabra?

Tilia pubescens?
Quercus Virginiana
Fraxinus Americana
Celtis occidentalis?

Cornus florida
Crataegus Michauxii?
Ostrya Virginiana
Cercis Canadensis
Carpinus Caroliniana
Osmanthus Americana
Tlex opaca
Batodendron arboreum

Rhus radicans

Smilax lanceolata

Vitis rotundifolia
Gelsemium sempervirens
Bignonia crucigera
Parthenocissus quinquefolia

Phoradendron flavescens
Serenoa serrulata
Myrica pumila

Myrica cerifera
Callicarpa Americana
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Ilex vomitoria

Cornus stricta?

Tillandsia usneoides*
Aristida stricta

Pteris aquilina
Tubiflora Carolinensis
Mitchella repens
(Eupatorium compositifolium)
Oplismenus setarius
Dryopteris patens?
Smilax pumila
Eriogonum tomentosum
Houstonia rotundifolia
(Cassia Tora)
(Gnaphalium purpureum)

TIMBER

TREES

Long-leaf pine
Red oak

Cabbage palmetto
Short-leaf pine
Sweet gum
Magnolia

Red bay

Hickory

Hackberry
SMALL TREES.

Dogwood
(Red) haw

Redbud
Ironwood

Holly
Sparkleberry

WOODY VINES.

Poison ivy

(Wild smilax)
Muscadine
Yellow jessamine
Cross-vine
Virginia creeper

SHRUBS

Mistletoe
Saw-palmetto
Myrtle

Myrtle

French muibverry
(Elbow-bush)
Yaupon

HERBS

Spanish moss
Wire-grass
(A fern)

Turkey-berry
Dog-fennel
(A grass)
(A fern)

Coffee-weed

High pine land

Rich uplands
Hammocks and fields
Woods

Various situations
Hammocks

Sandy hammocks
Richer hammocks
Richer hammocks
Rich uplands

Low hammocks, ete.
Sandy hammocks ¢
Rich hammocks
Various situations
Rich hammocks

Rich hammocks

Rich uplands f
Old fields, etc.

High hammocks
Caleareous hammocks
Low hammocks, etc.
Sandy hammocks
Sandy hammocks
Sandy hammocks

er ee

Low hammocks, etc.
Hammocks
Hammocks, ete.
Hammocks, ete.
Hammocks

Hammocks ‘

Hammocks

High hammocks, etc.
High pine land, ete.
Hammocks
Hammocks

Swamps, etc.
Hammocks

Low hammocks

On nearly all trees
High pine land

High pine land
Caleareous hammocks
Hammocks

Old fields, ete.
Hammocks
Calecareous hammocks
Sandy hammocks
High pine land

High pine land, ete.
Roadsides, etc.
Cultivated fields

*About ten times as abundant as the next.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 107

Only about 65 7 of the trees are evergreen, the lowest figure
of any region in this latitude in Florida. Ericaceous shrubs are
rather scarce, as in other calcareous regions, and leguminous plants
fairly well represented, especially among the weeds. Not much use
seems to be made of the native vegetation, except the pines for
lumber and turpentine, almost any of the trees for fuel, and the
Spanish moss for mattresses. In the early days the forest was
simply an encumbrance on the land, that the farmers had to get
rid of with much labor. At present it is customary in this and
other hammock regions in Florida to let cabbage palmettos grow in
orange groves and other cultivated ground wherever they will (see
fig. 14). Some of these may be remnants of the original forest,
but probably most of them have been planted by birds, and are
left because they indicate hammock land and are ornamental and
do not take much light and nourishment away from the crops.

a a ea ——
Ny. rs ‘

Fig. 14. Cabbage palmettos in cultivated field on hillside about 2 miles
south of Ocala. March 8, 1914.

Population. As this region covers only a small part of Marion
County, and contains a city of considerable size, it is not possible
to get any accurate information about the rural population from
census reports; but in number of inhabitants per square mile and

108 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

in proportion of negroes it is unquestionably above the average for
central Florida. In the whole county in to1o there were 38%
native whites, 1.3% foreign whites, and 60.7% negroes. The pre-
dominance of negroes is characteristic of many other fertile regions
in the South, but in all such places the whites tend to congregate
in the towns and cities, making the number of the two races more
nearly equal there. In Ocala there were in 1910 and 1915 almost
exactly as many whites as blacks, and in some of the smaller towns
the whites are decidedly in the majority.

The incorporated cities and towns in 1915 were Ocala, with
5,370 inhabitants, Citra, with 400; McIntosh, 206; Reddick, 191;
and Belleview, 182. The 1920 census showed a slight decrease tm
Ocala, probably due mainly to the migration of negroes from all
over the South to northern manufacturing cities during the recent
world war.

In 1880 (the latest year for which we have such data), when the
population of Marion County was still more concentrated in the
hammock belt than it is now, about 61% of the inhabitants of the
county were natives of Florida, 20% of South Carolina, and 7% of
Georgia, with Alabama, North Carolina and Virginia ranking next.
Less than 0.7% were foreign-born, the countries most largely
represented being England, Germany, Ireland, Canada and Sweden.
Thirty years later the proportions had changed but little, the leading
nationalities being English, German, Canadian, Scotch, Russian
(mostly Jews?), Italian, Swedish, and French.

In 1910 the percentage of illiteracy in Marion County was for
native whites over io years old 1.5, for foreign whites 1.7, and for
negroes 19.6. In the city of Ocala at the same time the census
enumerators found only one native white person over 10 who could
not read and write, while 6.3% of the foreigners and 5% of the
negroes were illiterate.

The leading religious denominations in the county in 1916 were,
among the whites, Baptist, southern Methodist, northern Metho-
dist(?)* southern Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Church of Christ,
Disciples of Christ, and Roman Catholics. Among the negroes,
Baptist, African Methodist, northern Methodist (?) A. M. E.
Zion, and colored Methodist.

*See explanation of statistical difficulties in the general chapter on re-
ligious denominations.

a, lil am

22 Seas &

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 109

Agriculture. On account of its fertile soil this is probably the
most extensively cultivated region in central Florida, although the
percentage of improved land cannot be estimated, for the reasons
already given. But as it probably contains most of the farms in
Marion County, the statistics for the average farms in that county
ought to represent conditions in the hammock belt pretty well. (If
we should add to—or subtract from, as the case may be—the
Marion averages the differences between them and those for Levy
and Citrus Counties already given, we would probably come still
nearer to the actual conditions in the hammock belt, for outside of
that belt nearly all the farming in the county is done in the lime-
sink region).

In 1850 about half the farms in central Florida were in Marion
County, and the average farm (or plantation) in the county had
169 acres, of which 34.8 were improved. Its land and buildings
were worth $1,055, its implements and machinery $94, and its live-
stock $531. In the next decade there was a great expansion, and
the amount of improved land increased more than 70%. In 1860,
when the ante-bellum plantation system ‘of the South had reached
its height, the average Marion County planter owned 450 acres,
of which 133.7 were improved, land and buildings worth $4,620,
implements and machinery-$205, and live-stock $1,094. At this time
considerable sugar was being produced, an industry made possible
by the abundance of cheap labor, which does not exist in Florida
now.* The Civil War of course made many former slaves farm
proprietors, and thus reduced the average size of farms consider-
ably; but unfortunately the census did not make any distinction
between white and colored farmers until 1900. By 1880 the aver-
age farm in the county had shrunk to practically the same size
as in the pioneer days of 1850, having 151° acres, with 36.8 im-
proved. The land and buildings were then worth $903, implements
and machinery $31, and live-stock $204. The expenditure for fer-
tilizers the previous year was 86 cents per farm or a little over
2 cents per improved acre.

Agricultural conditions at the next three U. S. censuses are
shown in more detail in Table 3.

*But for this difficulty tea and silk could probably be produced here too.

IIo FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

TABLE 3.
Agricultural Statistics of ee Florida Hemmock Belt (Marion Co.), 1890-1910.
ay rare USSD Lego: | 1909-1910
1890 1900| Total | White |Color’d

Improved acres per inhabitant ~------- 3.14 2.98} 3.24 6.13 1.37
Tne bites sp expuatenr reese eee os 9.6 Lar ee 283) 9.2) 16.3
Per cent ol fanimenrssawinipe sss = sm ss 2. [spo saene 49.4 5B el yan a alk eee
Per cent of farmers, owners —__-______ ( 82.3 | 86.7 87.8 | 85.6

. 89.8 | -
Per cent of farmers, managers -~------ \ | | 3.3 2.2 oat) Oe
Percent of, farmers)stenants) 22—— = 10.2 14.4 Iba 8.5 14.0
Average number of acres per farm ----| 97.2 79.9 | 101.5 | 151.0 | 45.3
Average improved acres per farm ----| 30.2 28.8 40.5 56.5 | 22.3
Value of farm land per acre ($) ------| ..---- 6.00) 14.21 15.24) 10.33
Value of farm land per farm ____--_-- ( 482 1441 2295 468

- 3925] - ?
Value of buildings per farm ___------- \ | ( 279) 462} 687| 206
Value of implements and machinery_-- 43 45 104 152 49
Value of live-stock, poultry, ete. ----- 225 206 PY | panei aN ERS 3D
Number of dairy cows per farm __---- 4.3 2.6 2.6 3.8 Hal
Number of other cattle per farm ___-- 7.5 | 9.5 IGS (i epee ee fe
Number of horses per farm ~_----__--- 1.1 | 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.0
Number -of mullesr per “farm =2--5- 204 0.3 0.2 | 0.4 0.6 0.1
Number ofehorsmpermtanme=s== 2-2 228 10.0 10.3 Tile Win ee
Number of sheep per farm ----_-____- 2.9 1.6 320.2 |e |e
Number of poultry per farm _/______ 27.7 31.0 30 '2) ||, 22 ee ee
Hxpenditures! per farm. for ‘fertilizers. |) 24:30| “1255/6760 aes ees
Expenditures per farm for labor ------| —---- 50.30) 146.00
Expenditures per ianm for? féed <2co222|" e222) see 26 NO ee a |
Annual.value of crops per farm _____~ |) \ $93) 2.2=2. |; eee

- 394 376] -
Annual value of animal products —__-- \ | | 173 ||
Expend. fertilizer per acre improved__- 81 43 KG Ti) ae oe
Expend. labor per acre improved ------| _____ 1.74 3.62| 7 eee eases
Value of) crops” per sacte improved 2-222) Le2 | 2s 22 21.00 Ss

The leading crops in 1909 were “vegetables,” corn, oranges,
peanuts, hay, oats, grape-fruit, sweet potatoes, cane syrup, cowpeas,
cotton (both kinds) and Irish potatoes.

In 1913-14 the order was, oranges, cantaloupes, sea-island cor-
ton, watermelons, corn, velvet beans, lettuce, tomatoes, (string )
beans, peanuts, sweet potatoes, cabbage, upland cotton, cucumbers,
cowpeas, cane syrup, (grass) hay, squashes, oats, egg-plants; and
in 1917-18 corn, sea-island cotton, peanuts, oranges, sweet potatoes,
Irish potatoes, string beans, syrup, velvet beans, (including hay),
upland cotton, watermelons, cowpeas, (and hay thereof), grass
hay, tomatoes, lettuce, oats, cabbage, cantaloupes, cucumbers, and
grape-fruit.

The leading animal products in 1909 were hogs, beef cattte,
poultry and eggs, milk, butter, wool, and honey.

ee ee ee Oe

-

——e ee ee ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA ros

6. THE HERNANDO HAMMOCK BELT
(Figs. 15-17. Soil analyses V, W.)

In the Third Annual Report this was treated as an outlier of
the Middle Florida hammock belt, but it differs from the southern
extension of that in Marion County in being much less calcareous
and more hilly, and in the entire absence of red oak (the commonest
hardwood tree around Ocala), and it seems to merit separate treat-
ment. It occupies high land about equally distant from the
Withlacoochee River and the Gulf coast, as if it was an erosion
remnant left by the deepening of the valley of that river in pre-his-
toric times. The portions immediately north and’ south of Brooks-
ville have been called Annuttalaga and Choocochattee hammocks
respectively, but they are considerably larger and more diversified
than typical hammocks. The area of the belt is about 200 square
miles.

Geology and Topography. Vhe Chattahoochee formation, an
impure limestone of Oligocene. age, is exposed around Brooksville,
and may underlie the whole area. It is pretty well covered up,
though, by clay (utilized for brick-making at Brooksville) and sand.
The topography is decidedly hilly, for Florida. Some of the hills
are among the highest in the state, though no reliable measurements
of them are available yet. The Atlantic Coast Line depot at Brooks-
ville is said to be 126 feet above sea-level, and the business portion
of the town must be about 100 feet higher, and other elevations
near by may be still higher. Blanton, in Pasco County, has an
altitude of 106 feet by the railroad survey, and some of the hills
a few miles northwest of there the writer would judge from walking
over them to be nearly 200 feet higher. Mirror Lake, near the
abandoned station of Lenard, a few miles northeast of Blanton,
was claimed in an advertisement a few years ago to be 330 feer
above sea-level; but the altitude of Lenard is given as 11°5 feet, and
the lake does not appear to be much higher than that, probably
not over 50 feet higher.

On account of the calcareous nature of the country rock, and the
still purer limestone of older formations below it, much of the
drainage is subterranean. There are a number of lime-sinks, the
best known of which is the Devil’s Punchbowl, in the woods a few
miles northwest of Brooksville, a conical depression perhaps 100
feet in diameter and 50 feet deep. Apparently no streams from

ITiz2 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

this region reach the ocean by open channels. There are several
small creeks and branches among the hills, but as far as known
they all ffow into sinks, or disappear in the sand at or near the edge
of the surrounding lime-sink region. (This phenomenon recalls
conditions in the arid regions of the southwestern United States,
where there are many well-watered mountain ranges surrounded by
deserts which no streams cross.) The permanent ground-water
level is in most places far below the surface. A well about 40 feet

Fig. 15. Looking north up hill about 75 feet high, on road from Brooks-
ville to Blanton, about a mile south of Spring Lake, Hernando County. The
most conspicuous trees are short-leaf pine (Pinus Taeda), and sweet gum.
March 9, I9QI5.

——

ee ee ee ee ee

ME Ree Ree oth 4 eee Cele, 4

eee es’ b-etewm- +2

Ne 3

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA ys

Fig. 16. Scene in Choocochattee Prairie, about 2 miles south-southeast of
Brooksville, looking toward the sink which drains it. A few sheep can be.
seen grazing. Feb. II, 1900.

below the summit of a hill a few miles northwest of Brooksville,
and about 50 feet deep, was observed in March, 1915, to be dry to
the bottom.

There are quite a number of lakes, some of them small and
permanent, much like those in the lake region to be described pres-
ently, and others large and shallow, becoming prairie basins in
dry seasons or whenever their lime-sink outlets are sufficiently free
from obstructions. (Figure 16 shows the sink end of such a basin,
a type more frequent in the Middle Florida hammock belt and
Tallahassee red hills.*) To the former class belongs Mirror Lake,
previously mentioned. It covers a few acres near the top of a hill,
and if the water should rise only five feet higher than it was in
April, 1920 (which was probably about the average stage), it would
run over and down into a dry sandy valley about 50 feet lower.
The lake doubtless has a relatively impervious stratum of clay
under it.

Soils. Most of the soil seems to be above the central Florida
average in fertility. In the most typical portions, within a few miles

*This type of lake basin was discussed at considerable length by Dr. Sell-
ards in the 3rd Annual Report, pp. 43-76, pl. 6-9. (Reprinted with a few ad-
ditions in the 6th Annual Report.) See also 6th Ann. Rep., p. 271.

IIi4 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

of Brooksville, it is usually rather loamy and retentive of moisture,
but in Citrus and Pasco Counties it is drier and sandier, though
often brownish in color. The central portion of this belt is covered
by the soil survey of Hernando County, published in 1915. In that
by far the greater part of the soils are referred to the “Hernando”
series (a name apparently not used elsewhere, so that it means
little to the reader). Other series in order of area are the “‘Gaines-
ville,” “Norfolk,” ‘Fellowship,’ “Portsmouth,” “St. Lucie,” and
“Leon.” The prevailing texture classes are fine sandy loam (about
60% ), fine sand, loamy fine sand, and stony clay loam. The scrub,
here called “St. Lucie fine sand,” makes up about 3% of the total.
Two chemical analyses are given in the general chapter on soils.

Vegetation. Wardwood forests, or mixed hardwood and pine
cover hundreds of acres in'the neighborhood of Brooksville (fig.
17), but toward the extremities of the region hammocks are chiefly
confined to depressions, and the uplands are mostly high pine land.
The vegetation is decidedly less tropical than that of some places
farther east in the same latitude, and nearly all the plants range
at least as far north as Georgia. The short-leaf or loblolly pine
(Pinus Taeda), which is probably the most characteristic tree of

Fig. 17. Part of Choocochattee Hammock in process of clearing, about
3 miles southeast of Brooksville. Trees mostly live oak and sweet gum. March
9, 1915.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA I15

the whole South, grews nearly throughout this region, but no far-
ther south. The reason for all this is not apparent, but may be
connected with geological history in some way.* The scrub is
nearly all in one patch, a few miles south of Brooksville, and has
not been examined by the writer. The absence of the red oak has
been mentioned above, and the species of trees seem to be fewer
than in the Middle Florida hammock belt.

Nearly all the plants seem to be of fairly common and widely
distributed species (as in the Tallahassee red hills of northern
Florida,; and many other places where short-leaf pines abound),
and the most abundant seem to be as follows:

COMMONEST PLANTS OF HERNANDO HAMMOCK BELT.
TIMBER TREES
High pine land, etc.

Pinus palustris Long-leaf pine

Pinus Taeda Short-leaf pine Hammocks
Liquidambar Styraciflua Sweet zum Various situations
Magnolia grandiflora Magnolia Hammocks
Quercus laurifolia Hammocks
Quercus Virginiana Live oak Hammocks
Quercus Michauxii Low hammocks
Hicoria glabra? Hickory Hammocks
Quercus nigra Water oak Various situations
Ulmus alata Elm Hammocks

Tilia pubescens? Lin Hammocks

Celtis occidentalis? Hackberry Hammocks

Ulmus Fleridana Elm ‘Low hammocks
(Diospyros Virginiana) Persimmon Old fields

Persea Borbonia Red bay Hammocks

Quercus Catesbaei

SMALL TREES.

Black-jack oak

High pine land

Carpinus Caroliniana Tronwood Low hammocks
Cornus florida Dogwood Hammocks

lex opaca Holly . Hammocks
Osmanthus Americana Hammocks
Batodendron arboreum Sparkleberry Sandy hammocks
Quercus geminata Live oak Sandy uplands
Ostrya Virginiana Hammocks
Magnolia glauca Bay Along streams
Serenoa serrulatat Saw-palmetto Hammocks

WOODY VINES.

Gelsemium sempervirens Yellow jessamine. Hammocks, etc.

Vitis rotundifolia Muscadine Hammocks
Rhus radicans Poison ivy Low hammocks
(Rubus trivialis?) Dewberry Old fields, ete.

Bignonia crucigera Cross-vine Hammocks

*The similarity of Hernando County (which then included the present ter-
ritory of Citrus and Pasco as well) to some places much farther north was
commented on nearly forty years ago by Dr. Eugene A. Smith (Tenth Cen-
sos) U.S. vol.'6, p..238., 1884):

tSee 6th Ann. Rep., p. 277.

tA form with ascending or erect trunk, sometimes ten feet tall.

16 1(0) FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Serenoa serrulata

Viburnum semitomentosum

Myrica cerifera
Viburnum obovatum
Myrica pumila
Phoradendron flavescens
Vaccinium nitidum
Azalea nudiflora?
Cholisma ferruginea
Ilex glabra

Callicarpa Americana

Tillandsia usneodies
Aristida stricta

Carphephorus corymbosus

Eriogonum tomentosum
Tillandsia tenuifolia
Pterocaulon undulatum
Pontederia cordata
Helianthus Radula

Polypodium polypodioides

Houstonia rotundifolia
Pteris aquilina
Chamaecrista fasciculata

(Gnaphalium purpureum)

Tubiflora Carolinensis

(EHupatorium capillifolium)

Sericocarpus bifoliatus
Salvia lyrata

Smilax pumila
Mitchella repens
Eryngium prostratum?

SHRUBS
Saw-palmetto
Myrtle
Myrtle
Mistletoe
Huckleberry
Honeysuckle

Gallberry
French mulberry

HERBS
Spanish moss
Wire-grass

Air-plant
Black-root
Wampee

(A fern)

(A fern)
Partridge-pea
Dog-fennel
(Sage)

Turkey-berry

Pine land, etc.
Hammocks
Hammocks
Low hammocks
Pine lands
Hammocks
Pine lands
Hammocks
Sandy hammocks
Pine lands
Hammocks, etc.

Hammocks, ete.
Pine lands

Pine lands

High pine land
Low hammocks
Pine lands

Lakes

Pine lands

On trees in hammocks
Pine lands, etc.
Pine lands

Pine lands

Fields and roadsides
Low hammocks
Lake prairies, etc.
High pine land
Hammocks
Hammocks
Hammocks

Lake shores, ete.

About 80% of the large trees and shrubs, but not so many of th«
small trees and vines, are evergreen. This difference is probably
due to the fact that the small trees and vines are chiefly confined
to hammocks with richer soil, as.in regions 2 and 5.

Population. In attempting to estimate the density of population
we encounter the same difficulty as in most of the regions previously
described, for this belt does not cover as much as half of any one
county. But there must be at least forty persons per square mile.
As this is evidently the most populous part of Hernando and
Pasco Counties, the figures for those counties may represent
the composition of the population fairly well. In 1910 they
had 56.5% of native whites, 1.6% of foreign whites, and
41.8% of negroes. The percentage of illiteracy (in the population
over IO) was 3.1 among the native whites, 8.9 among the foreign
whites, and 31.2 amoung the negroes. The last is the highest fig-
ure found in central Florida, and that for foreign whites is rather
high, too, but both may be due to a large number of unskilled la-
borers in the phosphate mines of Hernando County, which are en-
tirely outside of the hammock belt.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 117

The largest towns are Dade City, with 1296 inhabitants in Jan-
uary, 1920, Brooksville, with 1o11, and Zephyrhills (formerly Ab-
bott), with 577.

In 1880 nearly one-third of the inhabitants of Hernando County
were from other states, chiefly from Georgia, South Carolina,
Alabama, North Carolina, and Virginia, in the order named.

The leading religious denominations among the white people in
1916 were Baptist, southern Methodist, Roman Catholic, northern
Methodist (?), and southern Presbyterian ; and among the negroes,
Baptist, African Methodist, and northern Methodist (?). The
Catholics seem to be chiefly concentrated near the western edge ot
the region in Pasco County, where there are several places whose
names begin with “San” or “St.” founded about forty years ago,
and two Catholic schools.

Agriculture. The fertile soil attracted farmers at an early period,
and in 1850 Benton County (which corresponds with the present
Citrus, Hernando and Pasco) had 82 farms, averaging 167 acres
apiece, with 32.4 improved, land and buildings worth $966, imple-
ments and machinery $82, and live-stock $802. No returns were
received from this county in 1860, and those of 1870 are probably
not very accurate, but by 1880 the farms had increased in number
to 589, and diminished in size to 135 acres with 26.2 improved, land
and buildings worth $623, implements and machinery $16.80, and
live-stock $378. No fertilizer was reported as used there in 1879.
The cattle and hogs probably ranged mostly in the open pine lands
of the lime-sink region, as they do now.

Even yet farming in Hernando and Pasco Counties is chiefly
concentrated in the hammock belt, so that the following table, based
on the returns from these counties, ought to represent conditions in
this region from 1890 to 1910 pretty well.

118 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

TABLE 4.

Agricultural Statistics of Hernando Hammock Belt (Hernando & Pasco Cos.)
1890-1910.

Improved acres per inhabitant ~-------
Imbalbitancsmperiianimges se etme
Percent of farmers. white ~-.--_-_----
Per cent of farmers, owners —-------~-

Per cent of farmers, managers --------
Per cent of farmers, tenants ___-------

Average number of acres per farm ----
Average improved acres per farm -_--
Value of farm land per acre ($) ~-----
Value of farm land! per farms 222==="=

Value of buildings per farm ~_--------

Value of implements and machinery_~-
Value of live-stock, poultry, ete. ~--+-
Number of dairy cows per farm _-----
Number of other cattle per farm ___~-
Number of horses per farm -----------
Num berrotemules sperma
Number of hogs per farm ----~-------
Number of sheep per farm —-----~-__-
Number of poultry per farm

Expenditures per farm for fertilizer___

Expenditures per farm for labor ~-----
Expenditures per farm for feed ~~-----
Annual value of crops per farm _--~~-

Annual value of animal products -_---
Expend. fertilizer per acre improved_-_-
Expend. labor per acre improved _---~-
Value of crops per acre improved __---

1909-1910
Total | White
we Du,
12.9 8.2
OMG pee =e
83.8 84.5
1.9 2.0
14.3 13.5
76.8 77.0
22.4 22.3
19.65 19.75
1518 1520
494 isa)
87 87|
ATS |e
6s eae
DOU ee Dae

The leading crops in 1go9, by the U. S. census, were “‘vegetables,”
corn, oranges, sweet potatoes, cane syrup, tobacco (mostly near

Dade City), grape-fruit, peanuts, and strawberries..

In 1913-14, according to the state agricultural department, sweet
potatoes, oranges, corn, grape-iruit, tobacco, cowpeas, (including °
hay), syrup, velvet beans (and hay), peanuts, (string?) beans, and
watermelons; and in 1917-18, sea-island cotton, corn, oranges,
grape-fruit, sweet potatoes, syrup, peanuts, upland cotton, cowpeas
(and hay), velvet beans (and hay), castor beans, watermelons,

peaches, and Irish potatoes.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA IIg

7. THE PENINSULAR LAKE REGION

(Figs. 18-22, 35, 36, 38. Soil analyses 37-45, C-E, J-M.)

This is the largest and in some respects the most interesting
region in central Florida, with an area of about 4,000 square miles.
It extends along the axis or “‘backbone’ of the peninsula from Clay
County to DeSoto. County, and has no counterpart in any other
state, though ‘there is a small lake region in West Florida (describ-
ed in the 6th Annual Report) that resembles it in some particulars.

Geology. Geologists have mapped most of the area as underlaia
by Upper Oligocene strata, but that is largely hypothetical, for ex-
posure of fossiliferous rock are rare. There are also patches, belts
or pockets of Miocene and Pliocene formations in several places,
mostly not far from the St. John’s River and its tributaries. Rock
Spring, in Orange County (fig. 18) is of interest as being the local-
ity where the first Miocene fossils were found in Florida.* The
vegetation in many low places near lakes and rivers seem to indi-
cate limestone or marl near the surface, and there are a few large
limestone springs in Volusia, Seminole, Orange and Lake Counties.

On the summit of Iron Mountain there is a little ferruginous
sandstone or conglomerate, a kind of rock common on non-calca-
reous uplands in the coastal plain from New Jersey to Texas, but
rare in peninsular Florida. A hard sandy clay, tsually pinkish or
mottled (but bright red around Lake Wales in Polk County),
seems to be nearly everywhere present on the uplands, though nat-
ural exposures of it are scarce, for it is usually overlaid by a few te
several feet of loose sand. This clay is used in many places for road-
surfacing material, as is some of the marl. Still purer clays are
used for brick-making at Whitney, and some kaolin is mined near
Okahumpka. There are vast deposits of peat in all the counties
(described in some detail in the 3d Annual Report), bordering the
larger lakes and rivers and completely filling many of the smaller
lake basins. One or two of the peat bogs in Lake County are rich
in diatoms, and have been used ina small way for “infusorial
earth.”’

Topography. The Ocklawaha and St. John’s Rivers are border-
ed by flatwoods sometimes several miles wide, differing little from

*See E. A. Smith, Am. Jour. Sci. 121:309. April, 1881; Tenth Census U. S.
6:190. 1884; Dall & Harris, U. S. Geol. Surv. Bull. 84:125. 1892; Matson &
Clapp, 2nd Ann. Rep, Fla. Geol. Surv. 114. 1909.

I20 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

the flatwoods regions described elsewhere in this report; but most
of the region 1s rather hilly, with topography something like that of
the lime-sink region but on a larger scale. The highest known ele-
vation in the State is Iron Mountain in Polk County, about 325 feet,
and there are probably several other points above 300, though we

Es)

Fig. 18. Rock Spring, Orange County. The water rushes out audibly
from the base of a limestone cliff about 15 feet high. Feb. 11, tots.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA I2I

Fig. 19. A small lake akout a mile west of West Apopka, Lake County,
in a basin over 100 feet deep among sandy hills. Surrounding vegetation all
high pine land. March 9, 1914.
have no definite data on that point yet. In the southern part of
Lake County there are hills that rise even higher above the lakes
nearest them than Iron Mountain does. (See fig. 19.)*

There are a few dry funnel-shaped depressions, suggesting lime-
sinks, in the uplands of Orange and Polk Counties, but it has not
been demonstrated that they were formed by solution. There 1s
said to be some lime-sink country on the west side of Lake George.
which the writer has not yet visited. The scrub areas (described
farther on) are thought by some to represent ancient dunes, like
these of the east coast, but their topography is not typical dune
topography at all. However, it is quite possible that the wind has
moved the surface sands a little at a time through many centuries
and thus rounded off the hills and hollows.

The most striking characteristic of the region, and that which
contributes most to its scenic beauty, is its lakes, several thousand
in number, of all sizes from a few rods to several miles in diameter.
Some are traversed by or connect with rivers, while some have na

*An advertising booklet issued a few months ago by the Lake County
Chamber of Commerce (and paid for by the County Commissioners), which
contains a larger proportion of facts than many publications of its kind, gives
the altitude of Sugar Loaf Mountain, north of Minneola, as 312 feet, which
seems reasonable. (See chapter on topography, farther on.)

I22 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—_I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

outlet. They are comparatively deep, and never go dry, though they
may fluctuate a few feet from one year to another with the amount
of rainfall. Many of the smaller ones at higher elevations bea1
evidence, in the shape of young pine trees around their shores, ot
being a little lower now than they were a generation ago. (See
fig. 22). This may be due to a permanent lowering of the ground-
water level by numerous artesian wells with outlets at lower levels.
Unlike those in the lime-sink region and hammock belts, none of the
lakes are known to have any subterranean outlets.

Streams are not very numerous, for most of the rainfall sinks
almost immediately into the deep sand which covers the uplands.
They are nearly all sluggish and coffee-colored. The St. John’s ana
Ocklawaha Rivers are navigable for small steamboats all the way
through the lake region, and being bordered by tropical-looking
vegetation, are favorite scenic highways. |

Fig. 20. Lake Alfred, a clear lake in the highlands of Polk County, show-
ing a fringe of maiden cane and bonnets a few yards off the sandy shore and
parallel with it. May 18, IgIo.

Soils. The soil of the uplands is mostly a slightly loamy sand
several feet deep, usually creamy or light buff in color, but varying
to yellowish, brownish, and ashy gray, the last being found chiefly
a few miles south of Lakeland, near the edge of the pebble phos-
phate country. There is probably more pure white sand (scrub) in
this region than in any other, but there are no data yet for making

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 123

Fig. 21. Looking west along shore of Lake Monroe (part of the St.
John’s River system) about one-half mile west of Sanford, showing cabbage
palmettos. May 20, 1910.

Fig. 22. Small lake near Ellsworth Junction, Lake County, showing fringe
of saw-palmetto and gallberry, and long-leaf pine saplings encroaching on it.
Feb. 20, 1900.

124 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

an estimate of its area, for the region has scarcely been touched by
soil surveys yet.* In Marion County, northeast of Silver Springs,
are some clayey flatwoods, of unknown extent, which probably
belong to this region. The occurrence of marl and peat in low
places has been mentioned above under the head of geology. Some
of the low hammocks seem to contain gypsum deposits, as in the
Gulf hammock region.

Vegetation. The prevailing vegetation type on the uplands js
high pine land, very similar to that in the lime-sink region. (Fig. 19,
though intended for a different purpose, shows it pretty well).
Scrub (fig. 38) occurs in all sorts of situations topographically;
usually not far from lakes, but often on uplands remote from any
body of water. The level flatwoods bear the vegetation character-
istic of such places, and peat prairies and saw-grass marshes border
the larger lakes or completely fill small basins. Sandy shores of
lakes have quite a characteristic growth of sedges and other com:-
paratively small and wiry plants (as do similar places in New Eng-
land), merging gradually into that of peat prairies in many places.
Peninsulas jutting out into lakes are commonly occupied by sandy
hammocks, and marly low places by low hammocks, much like those
in the Gulf hammock region. Small and non-calcareous streams
are usually bordered by non-alluvial swamps or bays, containing a
large portion of evergreens.

The commonest plants in the lake region seem to be as follows:

COMMONEST PLANTS OF LAKE REGION.

TIMBER TREES

Pinus palustris Long-leaf pine Uplands

Sabal Palmetto Cabbage palmetto Low hammocks
Pinus Caribaea Slash pine Flatwoods, ete.
Pinus clausa Svruce pine Scrub

Pinus serotina Black pine’ Tow pine land
Taxodium distichum Cypress Swamps

Pinus Elliottii Slash pine Bays, ete.

Taxodium imbricarium (Pond) cypress Around lakes and- ponds
Liquidambar Styraciflua Sweet gum I.ow hammocks, ete.
Magnolia grandiflora Magnolia Hammocks

Acer rubrum Red Maple Swamps

Pinus Taeda Short-leaf pine _ Low hammocks, ete.
Gordonia Lasianthus Swamps and bays
Quercus Virginiana Live oak Hammocks

Quercus nigra Water oak ‘Low hammocks, ete.
Nyssa biflora Black gum Swamps and ponds
Ouercus laurifolia Sandy hammocks
Hicoria glabra? Hickory Sandy hammocks

*The National Forest in eastern Marion County is said to be mostly scrub.

|
|

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA I

Quercus Catesbaei
Quercus cinerea
Magnolia glauca
Quercus geminata
Cholisma ferruginea
Quercus myrtifolia
Persea humilis

Salix longipes?
Myrica cerifera
Osmanthus Americana
Prunus umbellata
Quercus Chapmani
Cornus florida

Ilex Cassine
Carpinus Caroliniana

Smilax laurifolia

Vitis rotundifolia?

Smilax auriculata
Ampelopsis arborea

Rhus radicans
Parthenocissus qguinquefolia
Berchemia scandens

Serenoe2 serrulata

Pieris nitida

Myrica cerifera
Chrysobalanus oblongifolius
. Hypericum fasciculatum

Ceratiola ericoides
Ceanothus microphyllus
lex glabra

Bejaria racemosa
Lupinus diffusus var.*
Myrica pumila
Cephalanthus occidentalis
Vaccinium nitidum
Garberia fruticosa
Cholisma fruticosa
Prunus geniculatay
Rhus copallina

Sabal glabra

Tillandsia usneoides
Aristida stricta
Kuhnistera pinnata
Cladium effusum
Spartina Bakeri
Pterocaulon undulatum
Pontederia cordata
Panicum hemitomon
Anchistea Virginica
Eriogonum tomentosum

SMALL TREES.

Black-jack oak
Turkey oak
Bay

Live Oak

(Serub oak)
Red bay
Willow
Myrtle

Hog plum

Dogwood
(Cassena)
Tronwood

WOODY VINES.

Bamboo vine
Muscadine

Poison ivy
Virginia creeper
Rattan vine

SHRUBS

Saw-palmetto
(Hurrah bush)
Myrtle

Sand myrtle
Rosemary
Gallberry
(Lupine)
Myrtle
(Elbow-bush)
Huckleberry
(Poor grub)

(Plum)
Sumac

, Palmetto

HERBS

Spanish moss
Wire-grass
(Summer farewell)
Saw-grass
Switch-grass
Black-root
Wampee

Maiden cane

\A fern)

to

oat

Sandy uplands
Sandy uplands
Swamps and bays

Scrub, ete.

Sandy hammocks, ete.
Scrub, ete.

Scrub

Edges of swamps
Hammocks, ete.
Sandy hammocks

Hammocks, ete.
Sandy hammocks
Hammocks
Swamps

Low hammocks

Swamps and bays
Hammocks and swamps
Serub

Low hammocks

Low hammocks, ete.
Hammocks, ete.

Low hammocks

Various situations
Scrub, bays, ete.
Low hammocks, ete.
High pine land
Around lakes
prairies
Scrub mostly
High pine land
Flatwoods
Flatwoods
High pine land
Flatwoods
Swamps, ete.
Pine lands
Serub
Flatwoods.
High sandy hills
Hammocks, ete.
Low hammocks

and peat

On most trees

High pine land

High pine land

Marshes, ete.

Around Jakes and prairies
Flatwoods, etc.

Lakes, ete.

Lake margins, etc.

Bays, etc.

High pine land

*This species is ordinarily an herb, but in Polk County and elsewhere it
grows bushy, about three feet tall, and is full of leaves and flowers in mid-

winter, or earliest spring.

+Apparently confined to the lake region, ranging from Lake County to De-

Soto.

In the original description (Torreya 11:64-67.

March, 1911) the flowers

were said to be in few-flowered umbels; but they are really solitary and sessile

or nearly so.

126 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

(Eupatorium compositifolium) Dog-fennel High pine land andold fields
Nymphaea macrophylla Bonnets Lakes and streams
Pteris aquilina ~" (A fern) High pine land, ete.
Sagittaria lancifolia Lakes and marshes
Osmunda cinnamomea (A fern) Swamps, ete.
Croton argyranthemus High pine land
Doellingeria reticulata Flatwoods
Actinospermum angustifolium : High pine land
(Piaropus crassipes) Water-hyacinth Lakes and rivers
Eriogonum Floridanum High pine land
Lupinus diffusus (Lupine) High pine land
Saururus cernuus Swamps, etc.

Andropogon sp. Broom-sedge ale Dee Ee
Carphephorus corymbosus Like ‘inateins vote
HEriocaulon compressum Sten Sa a
Berlandiera subacaulis Eee an

Castalia odorata Water-lily Lakes, ete.
Psoralea canescens High pine land
Acnida australis Careless Marshes
Aristida spiciformis (A grass) Low pine land
Andropogon Virginicus Broom-sedge High pine land
Galactia Elliottij (Pin-down) Flatwoods
Stenophyllus Warei (A sedge) High pine land
Centella repanda Lake shores, etc.
Osmunda regalis (A fern) Swamps
Helianthus Radula Pine lands
Syngonanthus flavidulus Flatwoods, ete.
Fuirena scirpoidea (A sedge) Lake shores, etc.

(and about 300 others)

About 85% of the trees and 95% of the shrubs are evergreen.
As in many other regions with mainly non-calcareous soils,
Ericaceae are relatively abundant and Leguminosae rather scarce.
The species that are more abundant in the lime-sink region than
here* probably prefer more calcareous or potassic or phosphatic or
ferruginous soils, while those with an opposite tendency + are more
characteristic of acid soils, swamps, bogs, marshes, etc.

A few of the plants in the list, such as Persea humilis, Prunus
geniculata, and Eriogonum Floridanum, and possibly fifty other
less abundant species not listed are confined to the lake region, or
nearly so, while probably an equal number occur in other regions
but not outside of Florida; the lake region being far ahead of other

*Such as Taxrodium distichum, Liquidambar, Quercus laurifolia, O-— ire
semiana, O. falcata, Hicoria alba, Quercus Margaretta, Cornus florida, Cercis,
Crataegus Michauxu, Vitis aestivalis, Asimina speciosa (?), Cephalanthus,
Carphephorus corymbosus, and Eupatorium aromaticum; nearly all of which
are deciduous.

tLike Pinus Caribaea, P. clausa,. P. serotina, P: Elliottii, Acer rubrum,
Gordonia, Nyssa, Magnolia glauca, Persea humilis, Smilax laurifolia, S. au-
riculata, Serenoa, Pieris nitida, Hypericum fasciculatum, Bejaria, Vaccinium
nitidum, Garberia, Cholisma fruticosa, Prunus geniculata, Cladium effusum,
Spartina Bakeri, Pontederia, Panicum hemitomon, Anchistea, Nymphaea, Os-
munda cinnamomea, and Doellingeria; most of which are evergreen.

°

en ee ee ee ee Ae

ITE Ee

ee ee oe

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 127
parts of central Florida in the matter of local or endemic species,
and contrasting especially with the hammock belts in this respect.

The pines are used for fuel, lumber, turpentine, etc., as in other
regions, but have not been exploited quite so ruthlessly, whether
wholly because of topographic difficulties or partly from a slight
regard for the beauty of the scenery is not quite certain. Plans are
just being perfected for utilizing the saw-grass, which abounds on
thousands of acres of marshes, for the manufacture of paper. As in
many other parts of Florida that are comparatively little cultivated,
honey-yielding plants are numerous and abundant, but that fact
does not seem to have been taken advantage of as fully as it might

be.

Population. The statistics of population are based on the re-
turns for Lake County, which is wholly in this region, and Semi-
nole and Orange, most of whose population is in it. No accurate
estimates can be made for periods previous to 1887, when there
were great changes in county boundaries, but in 1890 there were
g inhabitants per square mile in the area just defined. This in-
creased, somewhat irregularly, to 19.4 in 1920. In 1910 the pop-
ulation was divided according to race and nativity into 57.5% na-
tive white, 3.3% foreign white, and 39.2% negro. The foreign-
ers were mostly from England, Germany, Canada, Sweden, Scot-
land and Ireland. The percentage of illiteracy at the same time was
I.g among the native whites, 1.7 among the foreign whites, and
23.0 among the negroes.

The incorporated cities and towns in 1915 were Lakeland, with
7,287 inhabitants (reported as having decreased a little by 1920,
which is hard to believe) ; Orlando, with 6,448; Sanford, 4,998;
DeLand, 3,490; Leesburg, 1,360; Winter Haven, 1,226: Eustis,
1,148; Winter Park, 787 - ‘Take Helen, 786; Winter Garden, 648;
Mt. Dora, 615; Apopka, 598; Umatilla, 527; Auburndale, 511;
Orange City, 506; Tavares, 449, and Haines City, 378.°

The leading religious denominations among the whites in 1916
were Southern Methodist, Baptist, Southern Presbyterian, Episco-
palian, Roman Catholic, Northern Methodist, Congregationalist,
Northern Presbyterian, Seventh Day Adventist, Disciples of Christ,
and Primitive Baptist. Among the negroes, Baptist, African Meth-
odist Episcopal, A. M. E. Zion, and northern Methodist.

128 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Agriculture. Farming developed rather late in this region, and
is of a more specialized type than in the regions previously de-
scribed. Both in 1890 and in 1910 only about 16% of the area
was in farms and 3.2% improved. ‘The principal features of agri-
culture in this region since the establishment of Lake County are
shown in Table 5.

TABLE 5.
Agricultural Statistics of Lake Region (Lake & Orange Cos.), 1890-1910
: 1889- 1899- 1909-1910

1890 1900| Total | White |Color’d
Improved acres per inhabitant ~------- 2.22 2.28 1.65 2.51| 0.33
Inhabitants) per farm!) 2222222222 Sse | d.97 OS | am ES 7.55| 43.0
Perhcentrottarmers: (white: --=-—22 32a ieee 92.8 8900.) 222 2
Per centror farmers, owners. 222552 75s= / ( Tore 80.6 80.2 S3er

99
Per cent of farmers, managers ~------- \ | 18.4 11.9 12.6 5.7
Percent ot tarnmers: tenants) 2252.22" — 2a 6.4 eo ee. 10.7
Average number of acres per farm ----| 66.7| 84.0 92.8 98.9 | 39.5
Average improved acres per farm —-_-_- 13.5 20.7 URS E7Uie pay a ne Fe- 14.0
Value of farm land per acre ($) ------| ----- 19.30] 41.80) 41.55] 46.80
Value of farm land per farm —_---_-- } ( 1620 3880 4110} 1850

- 4850

‘Value of buildings per farm ___--___-- | 513 sts) 1070 495
Value of implements and machinery-~- 4] 57 147| 155 74
Value of live-stock, poultry, etc. ~---- 107 260 408) ti = [ee Sez
Number of dairy cows per farm __---- 2.3 105) it 12ers
Number of other cattle per farm --~-- 8.0 16.0 16:5) | S22 el eee
Number of horses per farm —------__-- 0.6 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.7
Number of mules per farm ----------- 0.2 | 0.2 0.3 | 0.3 0.2
INtimbervon thocsspen. tarnmige====== 2.2, 9.3 9.8.'|. ee Bee
Number of sheep per farm —-___-____- 0.1 | 0.8 | 03) eae | ae
Number of poultry per farm ____-__~- Weft 21.4 QUT, ||, es Ss
Expenditures per farm for fertilizer___| 87.00] 36.20] 165.00] --____ eae
Expenditures per farm for labor ------| ----- IY, 07.20)" AOS 000) aes | See
Expenditures sper farm ‘tor, feed! = 222i) ss ena) ees 86.40). 2. | Sees
Annual value of crops per farm __-~-- } ( 926|\\.= 22/2 eee

381 282] - |
Annual value of animal products __--- 121 2 ee [Lae
Expend. fertilizer per acre improved_-_-| 6.42 1.74 8:84) | col
Expend. labor per acre improved ~_---- Neppeceesres | 72 10:20 |p eee |; eee
Value of crops per acre improved _--~- ae es ee ee [. aD ON = eee | 2 eee

The census of 1910 reported two farmers in central Florida who
were neither white nor negro; one in Orange County and one in

Volusia. The writer has no information about the color of the

former, but the one in Volusia County is a Chinaman, who lives
near DeLand (therefore in the lake region), and has made some-
thing of a reputation with his oranges. By subtracting the re-

turns for negro farmers from those for all colored farmers, it .

ee a

x
|
*

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 129

appears that he had in 1910 115 acres, of awhich 20 were improved,
land worth $4,000 (or $34.80 per acre), buildings worth $1,000,
and implements and machinery $150. The one in Orange County
was probably Chinese or Japanese and a truck-farmer, for he had
only two acres, all improved, worth $100 or $50 per acre, buildings
worth $750, and no implements or machinery worth mentioning.

In several places in this region corporations have acquired large
tracts of land and sold it in small parcels, commonly of ten acres,
to persons who may have never been in Florida at all, to -be planted
to oranges or other citrous* fruits. For the sum agreed upon the
corporations set out the trees desired, cultivate them, market the
fruit when it matures, and remit the profits (if any) to the absent
owners; and this sort of business if efficiently managed may be
very satisfactory to all concerned. Technically each individual
holding is a farm, operated by a manager, without buildings or live-
stock ; but practically the owners are merely stockholders in a large
farming enterprise; and different interpretations of this point by
the census might make a considerable difference in the per farm
statistics.

The leading crops in 1909,~in order of value, by United States
census, were oranges (a little over half the total), “vegetables,”
grape-fruit, hay, corn, sweet potatoes, Irish potatoes, sugar-cane
(syrup), peaches, and pears. In 1913-14, according to the State
Agricultural Department, oranges (nearly half), celery, lettuce,
grape-fruit, tomatoes, watermelons, (grass) hay, corn, sweet pota-
toes, peppers, (string?) beans, cabbage and cucumbers. In 1917-
18, oranges, celery, corn, lettuce, cucumbers, peppers, tomatoes,
grape-fruit, watermelons, cabbage, Irish potatoes, “native grass”’
hay, sweet potatoes, string beans, cowpeas (and hay), egg-plants,
Natal grass hay, sea-island cotton, beets, squashes, and upland cot-
ton. Peanuts, which constitute something like a fifth of the to-
tal crop value in the lime-sink region, make less than a thousandth
in the lake region, perhaps on account of the scarcity of lime in the
upland soils.

*It is a common and apparently growing—but not altogether com-
mendable—practice to write the noun citrus, the generic name of oranges, lem-
ons, kumquats, etc., instead of the adjective citrous.

130 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

8. PENINSULAR FLATWOODS, WESTERN DIVISION
(Figs. 23-25. Soil analyses 27-36, H, J, X.)

Besides the flatwoods already described, there is a much larger
area, covering the greater part of the peninsula south of our limits,
which may be divided into several regions when it is more thor-
oughly explored. In the latitudes under consideration it is divided
by the lake region into two parts, which may conveniently be
treated separately. The western portion, which will be discussed
first, has an area of about 1,700 square miles.

Geology. he strata beneath the surface sands range from Up-
per Oligocene to Pliocene, and are more or less calcareous and phos-
phatic; and although natural exposures are comparatively rare, they
influence the soil perceptibly in many places. The Pliocene is rep-
resented by the Bone Valley formation, which includes the pebble
phosphate deposits, and is chiefly confined to Polk County. The
mining of this phosphate is perhaps the most important industry
in the region. Flowing artesian wells can be had almost anywhere
near the coast. There are a few mineral springs, such as Espiritu
Santo near Safety Harbor and Kissingen near Bartow.

Topography. The surface is comparatively level, as implied by
the name “flatwoods,” but fairly ‘well drained.” It has the ap-
pearance of having been uplifted a little in comparatively recent
times, for near the coast and rivers one can in many places ascend
25 feet in less than a mile, and numerous creeks and branches have
cut narrow valleys below the general level. San Antonio, at the
upper edge of the region in Pasco County, is said to be 160 feet
above sea-level. Shallow depressions a few acres in extent, which
hold a foot or two of water in wet seasons, are very common, es:
pecially northward, but there are very few lakes, the ponds being
in most cases well filled with cypress and other trees. There are
more streams in proportion to area than in the other regions, but
none of them are considered navigable.

Soils. The soil is nearly everywhere sand, of various colors
from white to brown, but the underlying rock or marl seems to be
usually within a few feet of the surface, making calcareous soils
in many low places. The soil surveys of Pinellas and Hillsborough
Counties (1914 and 1918) cover the greater part of the area. In
those publications the soils are referred to the “Leon,” ‘“Ports-

—s 2. ~s

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 131

mouth,” “Parkwood,” “Scranton,” “‘Plummer,”’ “St. Lucie’ and
“Fellowship” series, and the leading texture classes are fine sand
(about 80% ), fine sandy loam, muck, tidal marsh, swamp, “wate1
and grass,” and peaty muck.’ Swamp, marsh and muck together
constitute about 8%, and scrub, designated as “St. Lucie fine sand,”
and “Leon fine sand, rolling phase,” is about 3% of the total.

Fig. 23. Open flatwoods with pines mostly Pinus Caribaea (slash pine),
about two miles west of Odessa, Pasco County. April 18, 1909.

fiers"

Fig. 24. Cypress pond with no pines and very few shrubs, in flatwoods
about half way between Drexel and Odessa, Pasco County. April 18, 1900.

132 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Chemically, most of the soils seem to be pretty well supplied with
phosphorus, as would be expected from the occurrence of so much
phosphate rock.

Vegetation. The vegetation types include flatwoods with and
without saw-palmetto (fig. 23), a little high pine land, a few
patches of scrub, many cypress ponds (fig 24), wet prairies, high
and low hammocks (fig. 25), various kinds of swamps and bays,
and salt marshes along the shores of Tampa Bay. The cypress
ponds are chiefly confined to Pasco and Pinellas Counties, the
lowshammocks to Hillsborough and Polk, and the high hammocks
to the neighborhood of the Peace River. Swamps are not very ex-
tensive.

Fig. 25. Low hammock near Peace River about two miles southeast of
Bartow, showing cabbage palmetto, dwarf palmetto, sweet gum, rattan v-ne,
etc. March 13, 1915.

The commonest plants seem to be as follows, the first tree named
being.apparently about 15 times as abundant as its nearest compet-
itor:

COMMONEST PLANTS OF WESTERN DIVISION OF FLATWOODS.
TIMBER TREES

Pinus palustris Long-leaf pine Flatwoods

Pinus Caribaea Slash pine Flatwoods
Taxodium imbricarium (Pond) cypress Cypress ponds
Pinus Elliottii Slash pine Branch-swamps, etc.

Pinus clausa Spruce pine Scrub

GEOGRAPHY

Liquidambar Styraciflua
Taxodium distichum
Acer rubrum

Sabal Palmetto
Quercus Virginiana
Nyssa biflora
Magnolia grandiflora
Quercus nigra
Quercus laurifolia
Ulmus Floridana
Quercus hybrida?
Juniperus Virginiana
Gordonia Lasianthus

Magnolia glauca
Quercus cinerea
Quercus Catesbaei
Quercus geminata
Salix longipes?
Carpinus Caroliniana
Persea pubescens
Cornus florida

Smilax laurifolia

Rhus radicans
Parthenocissus. quinquefolia
Gelsemium sempervirens
Vitis rotundifolia
Ampelopsis arborea

Serenoa serrulata
Asimina pygmaea?
Myrica cerifera
Hypericum fasciculatum
Ilex glabra
Chrysobalanus oblongifolius
Myrica pumila

Ceratiola ericoides
Cholisma ferruginea
Viburnum nudum
Vaccinium nitidum
Pieris nitida

Stillingia aquatica
Viburnum obovatum
Cholisma fruticosa
Quercus minima’
Baccharis halimifolia
Phoradendron flavescens
Quercus pumila

Cornus stricta?
Cephalanthus occidentalis

Tillandsia usneoides
Aristida stricta
(Eupatorium compositifolium)
Pterocaulon undulatum
Cladium effusum
Pontederia cordata
Carphephorus corymbosus
Andropogon scoparius?
Tillandsia recurvata
Saururus cernuus
Tillandsia tenuifolia
Juncus Roemerianus
Lupinus diffusus
Syngonanthus flavidulus
Panicum hemitomon
Spartina Bakeri
Kuhnistera pinnata

OF CENTRAL

Sweet gum
Cypress

Red maple
Cabbage palmetto
Live oak

Black gum
Magnolia

Water oak

Elm
Cedar

SMALL TREES.

Bay

Turkey oak
Black-jack oak
Live oak
Willow
Ironwood

Red bay
Dogwood

WOODY VINES.

Bamboo vine
Poison ivy
Virginia creeper
Yellow jessamine
Muscadine

SHRUBS

Saw-palmetto
Pawpaw
Myrtle

Sand myrtle
Gallberry

Myrtle
Rosemary

(Possum haw)
Huckleberry
(Hurrah bush)

(Poor grub)
(Oak runner)

Mistletoe
(Oak runner)

(Elbow bush)
HERBS

Spanish moss
Wire-grass
Dog-fennel
Black-root
Saw-grass
Wampee

Broom-sedge
Air-plant

Air-plant
(Rush)
(Lupine)

Maiden cane
Switch-grass
Summer farewell

FLORIDA

Low hammocks, etc.
Swamps

Swamps

Low hammocks
Hammocks

’ Swamps

Hammocks

Low hammocks,
Hammocks

Low hammocks
Low hammocks, etc.
Low hammocks
Swamps and bays

etc.

Swamps and bays
Dry pine land
Dry pine, land
Serub, etc.

138

Edges of marly swamps

Low hammocks
Swamps
Hammocks

Swamps and bays
Low hammocks
Low hammocks
Flatwoods
Hammocks

Low hammocks

Flatwoods, etc.
Flatwoods
Hammocks
Shallow ponds, etc.
Flatwoods

Dry pine lands
Flatwoods

Serub

Swamps
Flatwoods

Cypress ponds
Low hammocks
Flatwoods

Edges of swamps
On hardwood trees

Marly swamps, etc.
Swamps and ponds

On nearly all trees
Pine lands
Pine lands,
Pine lands
Ponds, prairies, ete.
Ponds, streams, etc.
Flatwoods
Flatwoods

On trees

Swamps

Swamps

Brackish marshes
Dry pine lands
Flatwoods

etc.

Ponds and wet prairies

Margins of ponds, etc.

Dry pine lands

134 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Tillandsia fasciculata Air-plant Cypress ponds mostly
Osmunda cinnamomea (A fern) Swamps and bays
Sagittaria lancifolia Marshes and wet prairies
Actinospermum angustifolium Dry pine lands

Anchistea Virginica (A fern) Cypress ponds, etc.
Polygala Rugelii Flatwoods

Helianthus Radula Flatwoods

Sporobolus gracilis (A grass) Pine lands

About 88% of the trees and still more of the shrubs are ever-
green. Plants of the heath family are less abundant here than in
some other flatwoods regions that have less fertile soils.. The pines
have been very largely exploited for lumber and naval stores, as
usual. \

Population. A rough approximation of the population condi-
tions may be arrived at by subtracting the figures for Tampa and
West Tampa from those for Hillsborough County (which included
Pinellas up to 1911). On this basis there were in 1910 nearly 25
inhabitants per square mile, 12.8% of them in cities of over
2,500 population, 71.6% native white, 8.6% foreign white, and
19.7% negroes. (The foreign whites included a few hundred
Greeks at Tarpon Springs, which is in a different region, and now
in a different county.) In the population over 10 years old 1.7%
of the native whites, 19.9% of the foreign whites, and 19% of
the negroes were illiterate.

Excluding Tampa, which belongs partly to a different region,
and West Tampa, which is separated only by an imaginary line,
the largest cities and towns in 1915 were St. Petersburg, with
7,186 inhabitants; Bartow, with 3,412; Plant City, 3,229; Fort
Meade, 2,150; Mulberry, 1,121; Port Tampa City, 1071; Largo:
552; and Bradley, 295. The returns from the 1920 census, as far
as available, give these places the same relative rank, and St. Peters-
burg nearly double the population. But these figures should be
used with some caution, for St. Petersburg is one of the most pop-
ular winter resorts in Florida, and the 1915 census was taken in
July and that of 1920 in January. Oldsmar, in the eastern edge
of Pinellas County, which was not on the map at all in 1915, may
be larger now than some of the places listed.

Agriculture. The flatwoods region includes less than half of
Pasco and Polk Counties, and Pinellas did not exist in I9g10, so

that the best we can do for agricultural statistics is to use the |

figures for Hillsborough County. A considerable part of that be-

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 135

longs to the lime-sink region, and the city of Tampa makes farming
more intensive in its viinity, but there is some very intensive farm-
ing near Plant City anyway, so perhaps the results are not very
different from what they would be if we could separate the flat-
woods entirely from other regions.

The percentage of land in farms increased from 2.7 in 1850 and
8.8 in 1880 to 13.4:in 1910. In the latter year 3.7% of the area of
Hillsborough County was “improved,” or 0.4 acres per inhabitant.
(Without Tampa it would be about 0.8 acres per inhabitant.) The
prevailing conditions from 1890 to 1910 are shown in the following
table: .

TABLE 6.
Agricultural Statistics of Southwestern Flatwcods (Hillsborough Co.), 1890-1910.

1889-|1899- | ———s«1909-1910
1890 1900| Total | White |Color’d
er contwon farmers, white 22002 21. --|, fvae OA Tel re OH ity ree
Per cent of farmers, owners ~_---____- | ( 88.1 89.3 89.6 84.3
98.5
Per cent of farmers, managers ~------- / 3.4 4.2 4.2 5.2
Per cent of farmers, tenants ~_------_- 1.5 8.5 6.5 6.2 10.4
Average number of acres per farm ----| 100.0 | 71.6 | 57.5 | 59.1 | 32.1"
Average improved acres per farm —___- 17.4 | 15.5 15.8 15.9 13.6
Value of farm land per acre ($) ------| -----| 25.01 63.25| 63.40) 56.65
Value of farm land per farm -_~-_--- ] ( 1790 3640 3740| 1820
3810}
Value of buildings per farm __~-------- \ | 405 649 670 310
Value of implements and machinery_-_-|: 42 52 125 128 65
Value of live-stock, poultry, ete. ----- 294 252 AAO Fees pa to
Number of dairy cows per farm ------ 4.9 2.1 1.6 1.6 0.6
Number of other cattle per farm --_-- 20.8 | 14.8 DO ippats eee 2 |, ss
Number of horses per farm —~_--------- 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9
Number of mules per farm ----------- 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1
Number of hogs per farm _--_-------- 10.5 8.9 COS) (ee ala SS Se
‘Number of sheep per farm _----------- 3.7 3.9 OFS eee [ee
Number of poultry per farm _------~-- 34.1 42.3 Ag OM lie Dae = alte Jone
Expenditures per farm for fertilizer__- ESO S275 | PAL0S 00 Sees | es
Expenditures per farm for labor ------| ----- SOD0|\ee985 0m sees eoes
Expenditures per farm for feed ~------ \ | Zebea) eS 7.00 See ashe Se
Annual value of crops per farm ~_~_-- } ( G96 |r seers | eae
517| 461
Annual value of animal products —~--- e taaeneey ineeidia ep! <8
Expend. fertilizer per acre improved-_-_-| 1.02 2.25] 6:90) ee esa 2S
Expend. labor per acre improved ---~-- lFecesteee 2.37| 6.25 |p eee
Value of crops per acre improved _-~-~-- he eee | ie ee eee ee eee ee

The leading crops in 1909 were oranges, “vegetables,” grape-
fruit, corn, hay, Irish potatoes, cane syrup, strawberries, and sweet
potatoes. In 1913-14 oranges (about 45%), strawberries, toma-

s

10

136 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

toes, corn, grape-fruit, sweet potatoes, celery, beans, Irish potatoes,
cucumbers, syrup, guavas, cabbage, cowpeas, watermelons, rice,
peaches, egg-plants, grass, hay, pepers, and peanuts. In 1917-18
oranges (about 30%), corn, strawberries, celery, sweet potatoes,
velvet beans (includin hay), Irish potatoes, syrup, cabbage, field
peas (and hay), grape-fruit, string beans, peanuts, watermelons,
“native grass” hay, tomatoes, lettuce, cucumbers, rice, peaches,
ege-plants, grapes (scuppernongs?), Natal grass hay, plums, pe-
cans, peppers and onions.

Q. PENINSULAR FLATWOODS, EASTERN DIVISION
(Figs. 26-28. Soil analysis Y.)

The flatwoods east of the lake region cover about 3,600 square
miles in the counties under consideration (since Flagler and Okee-
chobee were cut off from Volusia and Osceola). At the north,
somewhere about the boundary between Flagler and Volusia Coun-
ties, there is a gradual transition from the peninsular flatwoods to
the East Florida flatwoods (described in the 6th Annual Report).
The most conspicuous difference between the flatwoods of East
Florida and those of the peninsula is that the cypress ponds of the
former nearly always have some slash pine in them, while in the
latter the pine usually stops several yards outside of the cypress,
leaving the ponds bordered by treeless strips. The cause oy this
difference is not yet known, but is probably connected with the
soil.

Geology. The strata near the surface are so featureless that the.
whole area is usually mapped as Pleistocene. Considerably older for-
mations occur at no great depth, however, the Ocala (Eocene) being
encountered in wells along the east coast within 200 feet of the sur-
face. The surface is generally covered with deep sand, but there
is marl, presumably Pleistocene, in some hammocks and low spots,
and peat in some of the prairies and around lakes. Flowing ar-
tesian water can be obtained near the coast and along the St. John’s
and Kissimmee Rivers and their lakes, but in about the latitude
of Titusville the water in some of the wells is salty.
~ Topography. The surface is for the most part monotonously
level, and seems to be nowhere more than 100 feet above the sea.
Near the east coast south of Titusville, however, the general level

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 137.

of the flatwoods is 10 to 25 feet above the Indian River, and there
are many little ravine-like valleys carved by short streams, as if the
area had been uplifted in comparatively recent times. Near the lake
region the topography is often a little undulating, and the transi-
tion from one region to the other gradual, though there are also
places where it is abrupt. Shallow depressions abound, ranging

> Hh
a al i

Hite dedivicd ind aa) Ptah

Fig. 26. Prairie bordering Lake Tohopekaliga about 3% miles east of
Kissimmee, with a few cattle grazing. Abrupt transition to flatwoods with
long-leaf pine and saw-palmetto in middle distance. Feb. 18, 1900.

Fig. 27. Asphalt road through flatwoods in Osceola County, about ten
miles southeast of St. Cloud (the nearest town) and a mile from the nearest
house. April 27, 1920.

138 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—13TH ANNUAL REPORT

in size from lakes covering several square miles (most of these near
the lake region) to small wet prairies and cypress ponds. Streams
are few and sluggish, and the rivers have extremely shallow val-
leys.

Soils. There are no soil surveys of this region yet, except a nar-
row fringe at the extreme eastern edge, but the soils are very sim-
ilar in texture to those of the western division, and would presum-
ably be classed mostly as fine sand. Chemically the average soil
is probably less fertile than in the western division, especially in
phosphorus (if the vegetation is a safe guide), but the Kissimmee
River prairies are said to be much better than the flatwoods, and
to produce some good crops without fertilizer.

Vegetation. The principal vegetation types are palmetto flat-
woods, prairies of several kinds, cypress ponds, low hammocks,
swamps, fresh marshes, and a few patches of scrub. The prairies
are several miles wide along the two largest rivers, and those along
the Kissimmee (which the writer has not yet had opportunity to ex-
plore) are said to have an abundant and varied native fauna and te
be great cattle ranges, thus resembling some of the western plains
Other and probably different prairies border the lakes near Kis-
simmee (fig. 26), and there are numerous small wet prairies in
shallow depressions. The cypress ponds usually have narrow prai-
rie-like margins, as stated in a preceding paragraph.

The commonest plants seem to be as follows:

COMMONEST PLANTS OF EASTERN DIVISION OF FLATWOODS.
TIMBER TREES

Pinus palustris Long-leaf pine Flatwoods

Taxodium imbricarium (Pond) cypress Cypress ponds

Pinus Caribaea Slash pine Flatwoods

Sabal Palmetto ; Cabbage palmetto Low hammocks

Pinus clausa Spruce pine Serub

Pinus serotina Black pine Damp flatwoods

Acer rubrum Red maple Swamps mee

Taxodium distichum Cypress Swamps

Pinus Elliottii Slash pine Bays, ete.

Gordonia Lasianthus Bays

Nyssa biflora Black gum Swamps and ponds

Quercus Virginiana Live oak Hammocks

Liquidambar Styraciflua Sweet gum Low hammocks

Magnolia grandiflora Magnolia Hammocks
SMALL TREES.

Magnolia glauca Bay Swamps and bays

Quercus Catesbaei Black-jack oak Drier spots

Quercus geminata Live oak Drier spots

Quercus cinerea Turkey oak Drier spots

Persea pubescens Red bay Swamps and bays

Fraxinus Caroliniana Ash , Swamps

Tlex Cassine (Cassena) Swamps

Hicoria glabra? Hickory Sandy hammocks

Salix longipes? Willow Along streams

GEOGRAPHY

Smilax laurifolia
Rhus radicans
Vitis aestivalis?

Serenoa serrulata
Hypericum fasciculatum
Myrica cerifera

Quercus myrtifolia
Pieris nitida

Tlex glabra

Myrica pumila

Cholisma fruticosa
Chrysobalanus oblongifolius
Vaccinium nitidum
Ceratiola ericoides
Quercus minima
Cholisma ferruginea
Bejaria racemosa
Asimina pygmaea?

Tillandsia usneoides
Aristida stricta
Pterocaulon undulatum
Spartina Bakeri
Cladium effusum
Tillandsia fasciculata
Sarracenia minor
Tillandsia recurvata
Doellingeria reticulata
Polygala cymosa
Anchistea Virginica
Pontederia cordata
Dichromena latifolia
Andropogon sp.
Polygala Rugelii
Syngonanthus flavidulus
Aletris lutea
Nymphaea macrophylla
Sabbatia grandiflora
(Euthamia Caroliniana)
Aristida spiciformis
Osmunda regalis

Iris versicolor
Centella repanda
Helianthus Radula
Chondrophora nudata
Galactia Elliottii
Tillandsia tenuifolia
Osmunda cinnamomea
Carphephorus corymbosus
Chaptalia tomentosa

WOODY

Bamboo vine
Poison ivy
Wild grape

SHRUBS

Saw-palmetto
Sand myrtle
Myrtle

(Serub oak)
(Hurrah bush)
Gallberry
Myrtle

(Poor grub)

Huckleberry
Rosemary
(Oak runner)

Pawpaw
HERBS

Spanish moss
Wire-grass
Black-root
Switch-grass
Saw-grass
Air-plant
Pitcher-plant
Air-plant

(A. fern)
Wampee

(A sedge)
(Broom-sedge)

Bonnets

(A grass)
(A fern)

(Pin-down)
Air-plant
(A fern)

VINES.

OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 139

Swamps
Low hammocks, ete.
Hammocks

Flatwoods

Ponds and wet prairies
Hammocks and swamps
Scrub

Flatwoods, ete.
Flatwoods

Flatwoods

Flatwoods

Drier spots

Flatwoods

Scrub

Flatwoods

Scrub

Flatwoods

Flatwoods

On most trees
Flatwoods
Flatwoods
Prairies, ete.
Marshes, etc.
Cypress ponds
Flatwoods and prairies
On trees
Flatwoods .
Cypress ponds
Cypress ponds
Ponds, ete.
Shallow ponds
Flatwoods
Flatwoods
Flatwoods
Flatwoods
Lakes and streams
Ponds and prairies
Flatwoods, etc.
Flatwoods
Swamps
Swamps, etc.
Flatwoods, ete:
Flatwoods
Flatwoods
Flatwoods
Swamps
Swamps, etc.
Flatwoods
Flatwoods

About 90% of the trees are evergreen, and Ericaceae are rela-
tively numerous among the shrubs, which indicates that the average

flatwoods soil is not the richest in the world.

A very instructive

comparison of the soil conditions in the eastern and western di-
visions of the flatwoods can be made by noting which species of
plants are more abundant in one than in the other, as has already

140 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

been done in comparing the lime-sink and lake regions.* The spe-
cies that are commoner in the western division are more charac-
teristic of drier or more calcareous or more phosphatic soils, and
nearly all of them grow in Georgia if not farther north; while
those commoner eastward are more characteristic of cypress ponds,
bays, scrub, and sour soils generally, and are of somewhat tropical
affinities, some of them being confined to Florida and others nearly
so. The former list includes more trees, vines, oaks, and legumi-
nous plants, and the latter more evergreens, pines, palms, and Eri-
caceae. In fact this plant list resembles that for the lake region
about as much as it does that for the western division of the flat-
woods,

Fig. 28. Nearly treeless prairie in Brevard County about 7% miles west
of Melbourne and four miles from the St. John’s River, looking northwest.
The few scattered slash pines (Pinus Caribaea) are the outposts of the pine
forests which extend eastward to the Indian River. Between this point and
the St. John’s River there are practically no trees. Feb. 5, 1915.

*The following seem to be more abundant westward: Pinus Elliottii,
Liquidambar, Taxodium distichum, Quercus Virginiana, Magnolha grandiflora,
Quercus nigra, QO. laurifolia, Ulmus Floridana, Juniperus, Magnolia glauca,
Quercus cinerea, O, Catesbaei, Salix, Carpinus, Cornus florida, Rhus radicans,
Parthenocissus, Gelsemium, Ampelopsis, Asimina pygmaea, Viburnum nudum,
Stillingia aquatica, Viburnum obovdgum, Phoradendron, Quercus pumila, Cornus
stricta, Tillandsia usneoides, Eupatorium compositifolium, Pontederia, Carphe-
phorus, Saururus, Tillandsia tenuifolia, Juncus Roemerianus, Lupinus diffusus,
Panicum hemitomon, Kuhnistera, Sagittaria lancifolia, Actinospermum, ané@
Sporobolus gracilis.

The reverse is true of Taxodium imbricarium, Pinus Caribaea, Sabal Pal-

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL. FLORIDA I4I

Population. As Osceola County is almost entirely in this region,
its population is probably typical enough of the whole. The num-
ber of inhabitants per square mile ranged from 1.7 in 1890 to 3.1
in 1910 and 6.1 in 1915, since when there seems to have been a de-
crease, though the cutting off of Okeechobee County in 1917 makes
exact comparisons between 1915 and 1920 impossible. In 1910 the
proportion of native whites was 80.2%, the highest in central Flor-
ida; of foreign whites 2.9% and of negroes 16.8%. The only
incorporated places in the whole region were Kissimmee, with 4,221
inhabitants, St. Cloud, with 2,080 (all white, with a considerable
number of Union veterans), and Taft, with 216 (mostly negroes).

The leading religious denominations among the whites in 1916
were Baptist, Southern Methodist, Northern Methodist (?), Dis-
ciples of Christ, Northern Presbyterian, and Catholic; and among
the negroes Baptist, African Methodist, Northern Methodist (?),
Primitive Baptist, and A. M. E. Zion.

Agriculture. There are great variations in size and type of farms
in this region, from small truck farms and orange groves such as
are found all over central Florida, and larger’sugar-cane plantations
near the edge of the lake region, to enormous cattle ranches with
very little cultivated land, these last mostly near the Kissimmee
River.* On account of these variations the bare statistics for Os-
ceola County, or any similar area that we might have data for, give
a rather imperfect picture of the conditions.

metto, Pinus clausa, P. serotina, Gordonia, Ilex Cassine, Serenoa, Hypericum
fasciculatum, Quercus myrtifolia, Pieris nitida, Cholisma ‘fruticosa, Bejaria,
Spartina Bakeri, Tillandsia fasciculata, Sarracenia minor, Tillandsia recurvata,
Doellingeria, Polygala cymosa, Anchistea, Dichromena latifolia, Polygala Rug-
elu, Aletris lutea, Nymphaea, Sabbatia grandiflora, and Aristida spiciformis.

*Most of the cattlemen depend mainly on free range, and own very little
land, but there is one company with headquarters in the southeastern corner of
Polk County that is said to have 226,000 acres fenced and to own 36,000 cat-
tle. As in some of the grazing regions of the West, there have been some con-
flicts between the cattlemen and the small farmers who are gradually encroach-
ing on the free range, with occasional bloodshed.

142 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The farms in Osceola County average the largest in central
Florida, and 4.3% of them were over 1,000 acres in extent in IQIO.
If free range could be counted as farm land it would swell these
figures greatly. The ratio of farm land to total area in the county
increased from 0.6% in 1890 to 8.2% in 1910, and of improved
land from 0.16% to 0.5% in the same interval. And although
the average size of owners’ farms in 1910 was 244 acres and of
tenant farms 234, farms operated by managers (doubtless niostly
cattle ranches) averaged 2,667 acres.

The status of agriculture in Osceola County since its establish-
ment in 1887 is summarized in the following table:

TABLE 7.
Agricultural Statistics of Southeastern Flatwoods (Osceola Co.), 1890-1910. -

1889- 1899- 1909-1910
1890 1900) Total | White |Color’d
Improved acres per inhabitant __------ 0.58 1.53} 1.05 1.25), 0.07
Iinhapibancs asp ere te ean ae eee 40.7 9.73] 18.3 15.6 | 10.3
Per cent of land anefarmp, 2-24. 2: 0.60 4.9 8:2) vasa (eee ee
Per centcot land imiprovedy = == 22 <u) |. 0.16 0.5 0:55 ies eee= | eee
Per cent: of darmerdewiiter ss. 225 -|)) suse 99.2 97.0)! || “eases
Per ‘centwor farmers sowmers) sess | \ 90.1 89.4 89.4 | 100.0

92.2
Per cent of farmers, managers --___~_- | | 03 2.7 2.1 0
iPericent ok tarmerssabenants sees 7.8 9.6 7.9 8:2) pe O

Average number of acres per farm ---- 88.0 | 155.7 | 307.0 | 315.6 | 35.3
Average improved acres per farm ____| 23.4 14.9 19.1 UC Rays e2fal
Value of farm land per acre ($) ------| _____ 7.66] 21.35] 21.30] 33.90
‘Value of farm land per farm _______- i] | ( 1190 6550 6720| 1197

- 2920] |
Value of buildings per farm __________ \ lt P2877 589 598} 269
Value of implements and machinery—_- 38 31 99 101) 57
Value of live-stock, poultry, ete. __!__ 621 2210 2090) 2222-4 | Se eeee
Number of ,dairy cows per farm ______ 15.7 5.3 30E eee |
Number of other cattle per farm _____ Oe eZ Os 6 8/0 |= = ss eee
Number of horses per farm ___________ 2.3 2.7 2.5; ae | aaa
Number of mules per farm —-_~______- 0.3 0.1 0:3. 2525)
Number of hogs per farm =_--_______= 13.9 19.0 16:3. | a ee
Number of sheep per farm ___________ 13.1 9:8" 23 ee
Number of poultry per farm _________ 3.0 14.9 23.1. }) eo | eee
Expenditures per farm for fertilizer___| 22.80 7.65|> 48.00) 22) =a
Expenditures per farm for labor ---_--| --~-- 113:92])) 11'3:00 (52222 | aes
Expenditures) per. tarm? Tonsiced gees sens seete ae | Mae S000) sas | ae
Annual value of crops per farm _____- | ( 593] Le ele

; 380! 647| - |
Annual value of animal products ___-- |! 240| es weet as
Expend. fertilizer per acre improved__- .97| 52 2.02) eee S|
Expend. labor per acre improved ~--_~- per ede 94! 6:20) “LAs eee
Value of crops per acre improved -----| _____ pee ae 31:00|) 222 eee

ee ee ee ee ee ee ee

ee ee ee ee Peer. ee ee

> ni

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 143

The marked variations between different census periods are not
easy to explain, but are probably due largely to changes in the num-
ber of orange groves and truck farms, which greatly affect the av-
erage number of cattle, etc., per farm. At all three censuses, how-
eyer, this region leads all the others in number of cattle per farm.

The leading crops in 1909 were oranges, grape-fruit, “vegeta-
bles,” corn, sweet potatoes, hay, and Irish potatoes; and the princi-
pal animal product beef cattle. In 1913-14 the order of value of
crops was oranges, grape-fruit, corn, sweet potatoes (grass) hay,
Irish potatoes, egg-plants, cane syrup, beans, celery, cabbage, vel-
vet beans (including hay), and watermelons; and in 1917-18 or-
anges, corn, Irish potatoes, grape-fruit, “native’ hay, sweet pota-
toes, syrup, cabbage, pineapples, cowpeas (and hay), and straw-
berries.

IO. THE EAST COAST STRIP:
(Figs. 29-34. Soil analyses 46-51, ‘N, Z.)

This includes the islands and barrier beaches of the east coast,
‘and a narrow strip of mainland averaging only a mile or two in:
width, a total land area in Volusia and Brevard Counties of about
500 square miles. It extends both north and south of our limits
a considerable distance without much change. The boundary be-
tween this and the adjacent flatwoods is not always sharp, but is
marked for a considerable part of the distance by a line of ancient
dunes of white sand. Near the “head” (north end) of the Indian
River the dunes are two or three miles back from salt water, with
low hammocks and flatwoods east of them scarcely distinguishable
from some much farther inland. And Merritt’s Island, although
presumably built up in comparatively recent times by the gradual
shifting eastward of barrier beaches, has large areas of flatwoods
very similar to those of Osceola County, except for containing no
long-leaf pine (a tree which is hardly ever found on islands of any
kind).

Geology and Topography. Geologically the region is very young,
having probably nothing older than Pleistocene very near the sur-
face. The material is mostly sand, but there are shells and shell
fragments mixed ‘with it in many places, sometimes predominating
and hardened into coquina rock (fig. 30). ;

144 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-1I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Shell mounds built up centuries ago by the aborigines are rather
common along the lagoons, and many of them have been excavated
for road-surfacing material (Fig 34). Flowing artesian wells, with
more or less sulphurous water, can be had anywhere, and in some
places the pressure is sufficient to run dynamos or other machinery.

The ancient dunes west of the Indian River (fig. 31) are in
some places about 50 feet above sea-level, but this is probably due
largely to an uplift in comparatively recent times, for the modern
dunes next to the ocean are much lower. The outer beach in Vo-
lusia County is one of the most noted natural automobile race-
courses in the world, and speeds of 156 miles an hour have been
recorded there. The Indian River and other shallow salt lagoons
behind the barrier beaches are navigable for small vessels, and in re-
cent years they have been connected by dredging canals through
intervening marshes and strips of sand, so that there is now an in-
side passage all the way up the coast to South Carolina. There
is practically no tide in these lagoons, on account of the inlets being
small and far apart.

Fig. 29. Scene in Turnbull Hammock, a typical low hammock, about a
mile west of Daytona, Volusia County. By E. H. Sellards, May 21, toto.

Soils. The soil survey of the “Indian River area,” published in
1915, covers most of Merritt’s Island and the neighboring barrier
beaches, and a little of the near-by mainland, giving a very typical

°

. GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 145

Fig. 30. Looking north along rocky shore of Mosquito Lagoon, or North
Indian River, about a mile north of New Smyrna, Volusia County. (The rock
is coquina.) May 17, 1900.

Fig. 31. Looking east-southeast on old dunes about a mile west of Mims,
Brevard County, showing spruce pines of two different ages, the younger prob-
ably having come up since the last fire. Feb. 9, 1915.

146 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

section of the soils of the east coast. Separating the Brevard
County portion from that south of our limits, we find that the soils
are referred to. the ‘St. Lucie,” ‘“‘Portsmouth,” “‘Palm Beach,”
“Parkwood,” “Norfolk,” and “Gainesville” series, and the prevail-
ing texture classes are sand (over 50% without the coastal beach),
fine sand, tidal marsh, fine sandy loam, coastal beach, muck, and

| =e 7

Fig. 32. Small pool in vast damp calcareous palm savanna near head of
Newfound Harbor on Merritt’s Island, showing cabbage palmettos and switch-
grass (Spartina Bakert), Feb. 7, 1915.

Fig. 33. Looking north along crest of outermost dunes, 15 or 20 feet high,
about a mile south of Melbourne Beach, Brevard County. Vegetation mostly
saw-palmetto and sea-oats. Feb. 4, 1915.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 147

clay laam. Old dunes with scrub vegetation, mapped as “St. Lucie
sand” and “St. Lucie fine sand,’ make up a trifle more than a third
of the total. A few mechanical and chemical analyses are given in
the general chapter on soils.

rs
Sf 1 ;

'
icant Patt <n te ji |

Fig. 34. Shell mound covered with tropical hammock vegetation and
partly excavated for road material, on east side of Indian River about oppo-
site Melbourne. The shells are nearly all Chione cancellata, a small clam, and
there are many layers of humus in the mound. Feb. 4, 1915. (For a de-
scription and another view of the same place, taken a year or two later, see
J. F. Kemp, Econ. Geol. 14:311, pl. 5 b. 1919.)

Vegetation. The flatwoods of the east coast differ from those
previously described in having more slash pine than long-leaf. The
old dunes (fig. 31) are generally covered with spruce pine and other
scrub vegetation much like that of the lake region, passing into
_sandy hammocks where sufficiently protected from fire by the prox-
imity of water-courses, etc. In marly places there are large areas
of low hammock (fig. 29), passing into swamps where traversed
by streams. The dunes near the ocean have vast thickets of saw-
palmetto (fig. 33). Less extensive types are the palm savunnas
on Merritt’s Island (fig. 32), and a little salt marsh and mangrove
swamp. The shell mounds are commonly covered with dense ham-
mocks of a decidedly tropical character.

The commonest plants are listed below, but on account cf the
indefiniteness of the inland boundary of the region in some places

the sequence cannot be guaranteed as accurate.

148 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

COMMONEST PLANTS OF EAST COAST STRIP.

Pinus Caribaea
Sabal Palmetto

Pinus clausa

Pinus palustris
Pinus serotina

Acer rubrum
Juniperus Virginiana
Quercus Virginiana
Magnolia grandiflora

Quercus myrtifolia
Hicoria glabra?
Quercus Catesbaei
Salix longipes?
Quercus geminata
Quercus cinerea
Anamomis dicrana
Magnolia glauca
Avicennia nitida

(Xanthoxylum Clava-Herculis)

Smilax auriculata
Vitis rotundifolia?
Rhus radicans

Serenoa serrulata
Myrica cerifera

Iva frutescens
Ceratiola ericoides
Batis maritima
Pieris nitida

Myrica pumila
Ximenia Americana
Chrysobalanus oblongifolius
Cholisma ferruginea
Vaccinium nitidum
Bejaria racemosa
Cholisma fruticosa
Rhus copallina
Borrichia frutescens

Spartina Bakeri
Aristida stricta
Tillandsia usneoides
Juncus Roemerianus
Cladium effusum
Salicornia sp.

(Bidens leucantha)
Andropogon sp.
Sagittaria lancifolia
Aristida spiciformis
Cassytha filiformis
Flaveria sp.
Pterocaulon undulatum
Sericocarpus bifoliatus
Blechnum serrulatum
Erythrina herbacea
Acrostichum aureum
Pteris aquilina
Solidago fistulosa

TIMBER TREES

Slash pine

Cabbage palmetto

Spruce pine
Long-leaf pine
Black pine
Red maple
Cedar

Live oak
Magnolia

SMALL TREES.

(Serub oak)
Hickory
Black-jack oak
Willow

Live oak
Turkey oak

Bay

Black mangrove

WOODY VINES.

Muscadine
Poison ivy

SHRUBS

Saw-palmetto
Myrtle

Rosemary

(Hurrah bush)
Myrtle

Huckleberry
(Poor grub)
Sumac
HERBS
Switch-grass
Wire-grass
Spanish moss
(Rush)
Saw-grass
(Samphire)
Broom-sedge

(A grass)

Black-root
(A fern)
(A fern)

(A fern)
Goldenrod

Flatwoods, etc.

Low hammocks and savan-
nas

Old dunes

Flatwoods on mainland

Damp flatwoods

Swamps

Edges of marshes

Hammocks, etc.

Hammocks

Old dunes

Old dunes

Driest spots

Edges of swamps
Old dunes

Driest spots
Tropical hammocks
Swamps

Salt marshes
Hammocks, ete.

Old dunes
Hammocks, ete.
Low hammocks

Various situations
Hammocks and swamps
Edges of salt marshes
Old dunes

Sandy salt marshes
Old dunes, etc.
Flatwoods

Flatwoods, etc.

Pine lands

Old dunes

Pine lands, etc.
Flatwoods

Flatwoods

Hammocks, ete.

Salt marshes

Edges of marshes, savanna
Flatwoods .
Hammocks, etc.

Salt marshes

Fresh marshes

Sandy salt marshes
Streets and vacant lots
Flatwoods

Fresh marshes

Flatwoods

Old dunes, ete.

Marly flats

Flatwoods

Dry pine land

Swamps

Hammocks

Edges of salt marshes
Pine lands

Damp flatwoods

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 149

Something like 96% of the vegetation is evergreen. A consid-
erable number of the species are mainly tropical in distribution, and
not found north of Florida. Comparatively little use is made of
the native plants. There is some lumbering and turpentining, but
that belongs more to the neighboring flatwoods, 1. e., what few
sawmills and turpentine stills there are along the railroad get
part of most of their raw material from the flatwoods. More
honey in proportion to area is produced here than in other parts of
central Florida, but it may come from orange blossoms as much
as from native plants.

Climate. This is the warmest part of central Florida, at least
in winter, on account of the proximity of the Gulf Stream. Often
a whole winter passes without frost, in the southern portions at
least. As compared with other regions described herein, the total
rainfall seems to be a trifle less, but the proportion of it that comes
in late summer is a little greater.

Animals. Fishing is an important industry in the Indian River
and other lagoons, but no statistics of it have come to the writer’s
notice. Titusville seems to be the principal center. Mosquitoes
seem to be more abundant here than in the other regions, and on
Merritt’s Island they are in evidence practically every month in
the year, on account of the rarity of frost. But they are more an-
noying than dangerous, for those of the malaria-bearing species
seem to be rare or absent, being more characteristic of regions with
fertile soil.*

Population. There have been some white settlements on the
east coast ever since the early Spanish days; and the bringing of a
colony of Greeks and Minorcans to New Smyrna by Dr. Andrew
Turnbull shortly before the American Revolution is a well-known
episode of Florida history. But the population remained sparse
until the coming of the railroad in the ’80’s. There is no way of
estimating the density of population accurately, but if we assume
that half of the inhabitants of Volusia County and all those of Bre-
vard are concentrated in the coast strip we will not be very far off.
That would give about 13 per square mile in 1890, 16 in rgoo, 26
in 1910, and 40 in 1920. These figures are considerably above the
average for central Florida and the whole State, showing that not-

*See 6th Annual Report, page 288, last footnote.

I50 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

withstanding the poor soil, a large part of the population gets its
living from the water, as is the case on most coasts all over the
world. The winter tourist business is a very important item here
too, and what farming there is is very intensive, as will be shown
presently.

About one-third of the population would be classed as urban by
the United States census definition, but about two-thirds of the peo-
ple live in incorporated places, the largest of which in 1915 were
Daytona, with 4,250 inhabitants; New Smyrna, with 2,012; Titus-
ville, 1,310; Ormond, 857; Cocoa, 807; Daytona Beach, 582, Eau
Gallie, 543; Seabreeze, 443; Melbourne, 408; Holly Hill, 378; Port
Orange, 296; and Hawks Park, 178. All of these are on the main
line of the Florida East Coast Railway, or on the barrier beach
east of it. (Stations on that railroad in central Florida average
about 3% miles apart.) They are all popular winter resorts, and
their combined hotel capacity, according to the latest estimates, is
ever 6,000.

The composition of the population may be deduced approxiniately
from the figures for Brevard County, although that contains less
than half the total. In 1910 that county had 65.5% of native
whites, 4.7% foreign whites, and 29.7% negroes. If similar figures
for the eastern half of Volusia were available the proportion of for-
eigners (already the highest in central Florida outside of Hills-
borough County) and of negroes would doubtless be increased.
In the incorporated places above listed 37% of the population in
the summer of 1915 was colored, and Daytona and Ormond had
more negroes than whites. The leading foreign nationalities 1p
Brevard County in 1910 were English, German, Danish, Canadian.
Irish, Italian, Scotch, and Swedish, and in Brevard and Volusia
together “English, German, Canadian, Swedish, Italian, Irish.
Scotch, Danish, Russian, Norwegian, and Swiss. Some of the na-
tive whites are descendants of Minorcans brought from the Pal-
earic Islands by Dr. Turnbull in the latter part of the 18th century.

On account of the dense population, mostly living in towns, and
the fact that a large proportion of the people (not ascertainable
for any census since 1880, however) have come from other states
and therefore almost necessarily learned to read before making the
journey, the illiteracy percentages are low. Among the persons

————

ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA I5I

over 10 years old in Brevard County in 1910, only 1.1% of the na-
tive whites, 4.5% of the foreign whites, and 17.1% of the ne-
groes were illiterate. The figures for native whites and negroes
are the lowest in central Florida.

The leading religious denominations among the whites in Bre-
vard County in 1916 were Baptist, Southern Methodist, Northern
Methodist (?), Catholic, Episcopalian, Northern Presbyterian, Ad-
vent Christian, Disciples of Christ, and Congregationalist; and
among the negroes, African Methodist Episcopal Zion, Baptist,
A. M. E., and Northern Methodist.

Agriculture. Dr. Turnbull’s Minorcan colony was primarily an
agricultural one, and it is said that in 1772 they had about 3,000
acres of hammock land planted in indigo. But the modern intensive
agriculture goes back only about thirty years. On account of the
rather dense population, the mild climate, and the fact that most of
the farms are within a mile of a railroad that can take express ship-
ments to New York in less than two days (with double track most
of the way), farming is now more intensive and specialized here
than in any other region in Florida, although the soil probably av-
erages the poorest in the State.

The ratio of improved land to total area cannot be estimated ac-
curately, because the region does not cover as much as half of any
county, but the statistics for Brevard County illustrate agricultural
conditions very well in other respects.

' The specialized farming that prevails here evidently sets too fast
a pace for the average negro, as shown by the considerably higher
proportion of whites among the farmers than among the total pop-
ulation. The proportion of farms operated by managers is very
large, and this probably indicates that quite a number of orange
groves are owned by people who do not live in Florida at all, or
spend only the winter season here. (The census of 1900 was taken
in June, and that of 1910 in April.) The managers’ farms in 1910
averaged 79 acres with 16.8 improved, and land and buildings worth

$15,375.

II

152 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

TABLE 8.
Agricultural Statistics of East Coast Strip (Brevard Co.), 1890-1910.

f1889- |1899- | 1909-1910

| 1890 1900| Total | White |Color’d
Improved acres per inhabitant -------- 0.68 1.41 1.02 1.31| 0.33
inhabitants, per rarm 2222. 2=0 oe 21.8 8.4 11.0 8.8 | 26.4
Per cent of farmers white ~-.-------._| ~-=-- 94.1 87:6) 23 eae
Per cent of farmers, owners ---------- | 80.0 | 76.4 79.0 | 58.5

100
Per cent of farmers, managers -~------- \ | 16.1 | 19.9 18.6 | 28.4
Per cent of farmers, tenants ~--------- | Ue 3.9 | 3.7 2.4 | 13.2
Average number of acres per farm ----| 114.5 62.0 | 59.7 | 63.8 | 31.4
Average improved acres per farm ----| 148 UE Des aaa ip MEGS | fei:
Value of farm land per acre ($) ------|, ----- | 43.20) 97.76) 96.00] 123.00
Value of farm land per farm -------- q ( 2680! 5830 al 3860
10,800

Value of buildings per farm —-_------- 735 1475| » 1590| 656
Value of implements and machinery--- 27 43| 81 83 63
Value of live-stock, poultry, ete. ----- 233 260 2AQ| SES ee
Number of dairy cows per farm ------ 1.7 a LA (el be [ $2
Number of other cattle per farm ---_- 18.5 15.8 11:1 |\- 222 222|Saaeee
Number of horses per farm ~----~------ 0.6 0.4 05° |) 225352) 2328
Number of mules per farm ----------- 0.2 0.1 02; |Pa=ess |. sence
Number of hogs per farm -_--~------- | 1.8 | 8.3 6:9\k= eee
Number of sheep per farm ~_~-----~--- | 0 Owes OR
Number of poultry per farm -_------- eects! 19u 18.40)" £2 Ses eee
Expenditures per farm for fertilizer-_--| 54.60) 62.30) 148.00) ------ | ee
Expenditures per farm for labor ~---~- epee os 220029400 aa eee
Expenditures per farm for feed ~------ ae | ate §1.00|'.. =. 222) ee
Annual value of crops per farm __-~-- } | ( 1355|> 22222 | eee

- 852 338] - | |
Annual value of animal products __--- i 66), 2 S228 (eon
Expend. fertilizer per acre improved-_-_-| 3.68 5:26) “1S-15|— 82eee | see
Expend. labor per acre improved ~----- ib, tee = 9:48 |e 20:10 |e | ae
Value of crops per acre improved ~--_-~- ee oe (2120.50)5 eae |e

The number of improved acres per inhabitant is low, on account
of the large town population, the importance of other industries
than agriculture, and the intensive farming. The farms average ©
the smallest in central Florida, but have the most valuable land and
buildings. Live-stock is relatively unimportant, the rather large
number of beef cattle per farm being probably due to a few cattle
ranches in the flatwoods part of Brevard County. (It is a curious
fact that neither State nor government censuses have ever found
any sheep in this county.) The number of work animals averages
less than one per farm, showing that some farms are worked by
hand labor only. The expenditures of all kinds per farm an per
acre are very high, but so are the profits, in favorable seasons.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 153

The leading crops in Brevard County in 1909 were oranges (over
half the total), grape-fruit (about one-eighth), “vegetables,” sweet
potatoes, Irish potatoes, pineapples, corn, cane syrup, and hay.

In 1913-14 oranges (nearly two-thirds), grape-fruit (nearly one-
fourth), (string?) beans, sweet potatoes, Irish potatoes, tomatoes,
watermelons, cucumbers, strawberries, cabbage, peppers, guavas,
bananas, onions, Japanese persimmons, egg-plants, and lettuce.

In 1917-18 oranges (about five-sixths), grape-fruit, Irish pota-
toes, velvet beans, string beans, tomatoes, sweet potatoes, corn,
sorghum, dasheens, cabbage, lima beans, cowpeas, onions, and grass
hay.

The average farm in 1909 produced only 43.3 gallons of milk,
4.5 pounds of butter (and sold 1.5, leaving only 3 pounds per farm
family per year), 25 chickens, 86.5 dozen eggs, and about one cow
and one hog, but led all the rest of central Florida many times in
honey, producing 72.2 pounds per farm.

GENERAL FEATURES

Under this head the various geographical features of central
Florida will be discussed by topics, and each subdivided by regions
as far as is possible or desirable. This naturally involves some re-
iteration of facts already brought out in the regional descriptions,
but the two treatments supplement each other just as the ground
plan and elevation of a building do, and this second part is best
adapted to illustrating general principles.. It will also be useful
to persons who are interested primarily in one thing, such as min-
eral resources, water, soil, climate, timber, population or agricul-
ture, and do not care to look through ten regional descriptions to
pick out the desired information.

The treatment begins with the structure of the earth’s crust,
which as far as we know has not changed materially for ages, and
proceeds to topography, which changes a little more rapidly—
though almost imperceptibly in a human lifetime—to soil and cli-
mate, to vegetation—which is changing slowly all the time even
where man does not interfere with it—and finally to such very
changeable features as population and agriculture. Soil, which is
the top of the earth’s crust, might perhaps most logically be treated
immediately after stratigraphy, but in the area under considetation
its character seems to depend as much on topography as on the na-
ture of the underlying rocks, so topography is taken up first.

A complete account would treat every topic historically as well
as geographically ; but the changes in stratigraphy, soil, topography
and climate are so slow, and exact information about them so mea-
ger, that it is hardly worth while to speculate about them at all in
a work of this kind. Vegetation changes more rapidly, and in the
last 25 years there have been published hundreds of pages on the
supposed trends of development, or “succession,” of vegetation in
various parts of the country, particularly the Middle West. But
in this report vegetation -is regarded as essentially static, except
for the depredations of civilized man and some comparatively short
cycles of succession after fire in pine lands, scrub, hammocks, etc.,
which will be alluded to at the proper places.

Population and agriculture have developed from almost nothing
to their present stage in less than 100 years, and we have abundant

154

°

a a eS

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 155

information about them in census reports, for several decades past.
However, previous to 1887 most of the counties in central Florida
were so large that statistics based on them give a very imperfect
idea of conditions in any one region, so that the statistical tables
in the foregoing pages begin with the census of 1890. But some
data from earlier censuses for the area as a whole are given in
the following chapters. And even if the counties had been reduced
to their present size much earlier, the information in the older cen-
suses is considerably less detailed than that in recent ones, and the
remote past does not concern us as much as the recent past anyway.

Some of the tables that follow contain the same ratios and per-
centages already given in the eight regional tables, but they are
arranged in an entirely different manner. In the preceding tables
one could follow the development of any phase of agriculture in a
given region through three census periods, while in the following
ones conditions in different regions at the same time are tabu-
lated side by side to illustrate the influence of different enyiron-
ments. There are also a number of additional tables to illustrate
conditions whose historical aspects are unknown or not considered,
such as soil analyses, climatic data, a tree census, illiteracy, schools,
religious denominations, relative importance and yield per acre
of different crops, and animal products of farms.

In all the statistical tables where different regions are contrasted
the highest ratio or percentage for each feature is printed in heav-
ier type and the lowest in italics (unless two or more numbers are
so nearly equal that it is impossible to decide between them); a
scheme which assists materially in picking out the salient features
of each region and also in locating the best and worst places within
our area for any particular thing, such as large and small farms,
farm machinery, mules, sheep, bees, cotton, oranges, sugar-cane,
etC.;

SURALIGRAPH Y

Although a great deal of geological work has been done in this
and other parts of Florida in recent years, our knowledge of strat-
igraphic details is still very imperfect, on account of the scarcity
of outcrops of rocks that can be identified by their fossils or other-
wise. And even if deep wells had been drilled on every square mile
and all the strata penetrated by them identified and measured it
would still be quite a problem to map the formations, because they

156 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

are in most places so nearly horizontal that they make very small
angles with the comparatively level surface, so that their edges
must always be ill-defined.

The oldest formations known in central Florida appear at the
surface in the northwestern quarter, and dip gently southward and
eastward from there. The oldest rock is a nearly pure limestone of
uppermost Eocene age, known now as the Ocala formation (per-
haps a continuation of the Marianna limestone of West Florida, the
St. Stephens limestone of southwestern Alabama, and the Vicksburg
and Jackson limestones of Mississippi), which is exposed about as
. far east as Ocala and Sumterville and as far south as Tarpon
Springs. Most of the caves in our area are in this formation, be-
cause it is almost the only limestone pure enough and thick enough
and sufficiently elevated above the ground-water to form caves.
It is quarried in several places (fig. 12), either for road-surfacing
material, for fertilizing purposes, or for burning into lime. The
eastward dip of this formation seems to be very slight, for it has
been encountered within 200 feet of the surface in wells drilled near
_ the east coast.

Next above it is the Tampa limestone, of Oligocene age, in our
area principally confined to Hillsborough County. Its exposures
are very limited and more or less silicified, so that it is of little ec-
onomic importance. The Miocene area of central Florida seems
to be approximately co-extensive with the lake region, but ex-
posures of the strata are very scarce. Perhaps the best one is the
limestone bluff at Rock Spring (fig. 18) in the northern part of
Orange County, where the first Miocene fossils in Florida were
found.*

The Pliocene is represented by the Nashua marl along the St.
John’s River between Palatka and Sanford, and by the hard rock
and pebble phosphate deposits overlying the Eocene and Oligocene
in patches west of the lake region. The Pleistocene includes some
shell marls near the coast and rivers, and probably much if not most
of the peat and surface sand.

Most of the surface is covered by fairly homogeneous unconsol-
idated sand averaging several feet in thickness. A generation ago
this was commonly regarded as a Pleistocene deposit, and called the
Columbia formation; but the trend of opinion in recent years has

*See references on page 120.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 157

been toward treating it as a mere product of weathering froin the
sandy clay or rock underlying it. There are some objections to
both hypotheses, however, and the question must be regarded as still
unsettled.

ECONOMIC GEOLOGY

The most important mineral resource of central Florida is phos-
phate rock, which is of two principal kinds, occurring in distinct
regions. The “hard rock,” which is the highest grade, contain-
ing usually from 77% to 80% of tricalcium phosphate, occurs in
deposits of supposed Pliocene age in the lime-sink region, chiefly
in Citrus County and the western part of Marion (and north of our
present limits in Alachua). A variety known as “plate rock’’ was
formerly mined near Anthony, which is in the same region but east
of the Middle Florida hammock belt. A low-grade by-product
known as soft phosphate was formerly discarded in mining, but
is now saved in some places and used as a fertilizer in its raw
state.

“Land pebble,” containing usually from 65 to 77% of tri-
calcium phosphate, occurs in the Bone Valley formation (Pliocene),
which covers considerable areas in the flatwoods south of Lakeland
and Plant City. A variety known as “river pebble’’ was formerly
dredged out of the Peace River, chiefly south of our present limits.
Both the principal types of phosphate deposits are of considerable
scientific interest on account of containing many well-preserved |
vertebrate fossils, representing sharks, crocodiles, armadillos,
horses, elephants, mastodons, whales, etc.

In 1913, the last full year before the export of phosphate was
interrupted by the great war, there were 14 companies mining hard
rock in Florida (some of them north of the limits of this report,
however), and 16 mining pebble phosphate. The total reported
production for the State in that year was 489,794 long tons of hard
rock and 2,055,482 of pebble, together valued at $9,563,084, or
about the same as the farm crops of central Florida in 1909. The
hard rock, being of higher grade, brings a higher price, and the only
reason the pebble can be marketed in competition with it is probably
that the latter can be mined more economically, on account of the
deposits being more continuous, the use of hydraulic mining meth-
ods, etc. Much of the hard rock at present mined is below ground-
water level and has to be taken out with a dredge. Nearly all the

158 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

hard rock and about half the land pebble is exported to Europe in
normal times.*

Since the war the business has picked up again, and several new
mines have been opened in the flatwoods or pebble district, and more
attention is being paid to the soft phosphate formerly wasted in the
hard rock district. Another by-product, chiefly from the pebble
district, is a sandy rock containing too little phosphorus for ferti-
lizing purposes, but making a pretty good road-surfacing material.7

Limestone is probably next in importance to phosphate in our
area. It has long been quarried in several places around Ocala, and
recently in southeastern Citrus County. Some of it is burned for
lime and some used for road material, and in a few places it has been
sawed into blocks and used for chimneys, walls, etc. A variety
known as coquina, composed of shell fragments rather loosety ce-
mented together, occurs in a few places along the east coast, and
has been used locally for building purposes.

Bog iron ore is said to have been mined and smelted near Levy-
ville in Levy County. during the Civil War, for the Confederate
government.

Deposits of kaolin or porcelain clay are being worked on the
south side of Lake Harris in Lake County, and brick is made at
Whitney in the same county, and formerly at Brooksville and a few
other places. Sandy clay suitable for road surfacing is widely dis-
tributed, particularly in the lake region.

*The exportation of so much valuable fertilizing material has been viewed
with alarm, by some writers, but it is a natural result of the normal working
of the. law of supply and demand. Substantially the same arguments might
be used against shipping coal, iron or lumber from states that have them to
those that lack them; but if other states or countries need these things and
have something of greater present value to us to offer in exchange it is per-
fectly good business to make the trade. It seems to be generally true of min-
eral fertilizers that the soils near where they occur are pretty well supplied
with that particular substance, so that they have to be transported a consid-
erable distance to do the utmost good. By sending our phosphate to Germany,
Nebraska or California in exchange for potash both sides are benefited, pro-
vided the cost of transportation, etc., is not too great.

tFor a discussion of the Florida phosphates see papers by Dr. E. H. Sellards
in our Fifth and Seventh Annual Reports, and U. S. Geological Survey Bul-
letin 604, by G. C. Matson (1915). The first and last of these contain many
references to earlier papers, which need not be cited here.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 159

Sand abounds nearly everywhere, and the pure white variety,
such as characterizes the scrub, ought to be well suited for the man-
ufacture of glass. Sand-lime brick is made at Lake Helen, in Volu-
sia County.

The marl in low hammocks and the shell mounds are used to
some extent for road-making. Gypsum is found in a few low ham-
mocks, but apparently not in commercial quantities, unless in the
western part of Sumter County.*

Peat abounds in the lake region and occurs in most of the others,
but has been little used as yet. It was discussed at considerable
‘length in the Third Annual Report, which the interested reader can
consult for details.

Artesian water is easily obtained anywhere in the area, but it
does not rise above the surface except near the coast and larger
rivers and lakes, and at a few other places at low elevations. The
highest artesian pressure found in the State is along the Indian
River in southern Brevard County, where the water rises about 50
feet above sea-level, and is used in a small way for running dy-
namos, etc. Most of the water from deep wells contains consider-
able salt, lime, sulphur, etc., but hardly ever enough to make it un-
fit for drinking purposes, except in some places near the upper St.
John’s River, where the salt content is excessive. In the lime-sink
region, however, the water. is often too “hard” for boiler purposes,
and water-softeners are used by the railroads. Rain-water cisterns
for private residences are used where the water is too deep to be
reached by dug wells, as in the lime-sink region, or too highly min-
eralized, as in some places along the east coast. Force-pumps are
also frequent in the lime-sink region and the higher parts of the lake
region, while ordinary suction pumps prevail in the flatwoods.

/
*The latest account of the Florida gypsum deposits, containing references
to important earlier papers, is by R. W. Stone in “Mineral Resources of the
United States for 1918” (U. S. Geological Survey), part 2, pp. 293-206.

160 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

In recent years several test wells have been put down in the hope
of striking oil—one in Sumter County reached a depth of 3,080
feet before it was abandoned—but without success as yet.*

TOPOGEAPELY.

The subject of topography is not very well adapted to ‘syste-
matic or statisticaly treatment, especially in a region where so little
is known of the processes that produced the configuration of the
surface as is the case here. In most civilized countries the greater
part of the topography is evidently the result of either glaciation or
normal erosion or easily understood variations thereof, and persons
skilled in such matters can trace the developmental cycles with con-
siderable satisfaction; but surface erosion is probably an insignifi-
cant factor in our area, on account of the low altitude of some parts
and the very sandy soil or subterranean drainage of other parts,
and the origin of some of our topographic features is still an un-
solved problem. The treatment adopted here, therefore, is neces-
sarily somewhat empirical.

Uplands. Although the topography of central Florida seems to
have been shaped mostly by other means than surface erosion, as
just stated, the steepest average slopes are generally in the most el-

*It is a curious coincidence, perhaps not easily explained, however, that
all or nearly all the successful oil wells in the United States are in regions
where there is more rain in early summer (April to June) than in late summer
(August to October), and where the native vegetation is either predominantly
deciduous or treeless; a combination of conditions not found in Florida—-theugh
approached in the extreme northwest of the State—or anywhere near the coast
northeast of here.

According to an article by John K. Barnes in the “World’s Work” for
April, 1920, the cost of drilling for oil in the United States in recent years
has greatly exceeded the value of the oil produced. So apparently we would
be better off financially if no oil wells had ever been drilled!

TAt first thought it might seem impossible to apply any sort of statistics
to topography. But in areas covered by reasonably accurate topographic maps
one could at least estimate the average slope of the surface of a given region
by drawing straight lines across the map in various directions, counting the
number of contours crossed in a unit distance, averaging the results, and apply-
ing a factor of about three-fourths to make a correction for the fact that most
of the contours will not be intersected at right angles. It would also be pos-
sible to estimate the areas lying between sea-level and 50 feet, 50 and i00 feet.
etc.

ee ta

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 161

evated portions, as in most other parts of the world. As far as we
know at present the highest point in Florida is the summit of
Iron Mountain, about two miles north of Lake Wales, in Polk
County, which is said to be 324.3 feet above sea-level.* There
are some very similar high steep hills in the southern part of Lake
County, particularly between West Apopka and Clermont.;+ Cler-
mont is 105 feet above sea-level, and some of the hills northeast
of there must be 150 if not 200 feet higher; and from at least one
of them one can look directly westward over three lakes at once.
Col. Charles Ledyard Norton, in his Handbook of Florida (3d
edition, 1891, pp. 45, 274), referring to Lake County, says: “In
point of fact, the highest elevations in the State, nearly fiye hundred
feet above tide-water, are found in this county ;” but in the light of
present knowledge that appears to be considerably exaggerated.
The high hills of the Hernando hammock belt have been noted
. in the description of that region; and’there are points in the lime-
sink region and Middle Florida hammock belt nearly if not quite
200 feet above sea-level. The Hernando hills commonly have clay
near the surface, at least on their slopes (fig. 15), and Iron Moun-
tain and some of the hills near Ocala are a little rocky on top, but
those of Lake County and many others have summits and slopes
alike covered with deep sand. Some of these sandy slopes are re-
markably steep, about 30°, but the outlines of the hills are smooth
and rounded, as if the wind slowly and imperceptibly filled up with

*Early in 1915 the corporation owning this “mountain” and considerable
adjoining land advertised it to be 385 feet high, but this seems to have been
based on an erroneous assumption as to the altitude of points on the recently
completed branch of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad, which passed a little west
of the property. Revised figures seem to have been obtained from the railroad
a little later, and in the summer of the same year the corporation published a
small topographic map of the property, giving 324.3 feet as the altitude of the
summit, which seems reasonable. This was soon accepted by the U. S. Geotog-
ical Survey as the highest point in the State, and so published in the annual
“New York World Almanac, beginning with the issue for 19017 (p. 67). About
the same time, however, it became known that Iron Mountain has a close rival
in a point near Round Lake in West Florida, 322 feet above sea-level. (See
our 11th Annual Report, 1918, p. 81, and 12th, p. 53.)

+See E. A. Smith, Tenth Census U. S. 6:237. 1884; N. S. Shaler, Bull. Mus.
Comp. Zool. Harvard Coll. 16:151. 1890; Harper, Torreya 11:65. 1911; and fig.
19 of the present report. ‘

162 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT-.

sand any irregularities that might tend to be formed by erosion,
burrowing animals, uprooted trees, etc.*

Lake basins. The hills of the lake region are interspersed with
many saucer-like basins of various sizes and depths, some dry and
some containing water. Just how these basins were formed is an
unsolved problem. Some have ascribed them to solution and some
to the action of strong ocean currents when the land was sub-
mergedy but neither explanation fits all the facts. Basins of some-
what similar outline but usually shallower are very common in the
lime-sink region, and as some of those are known to have been
formed by a sudden caving in of the roof of a subterranean passage
and the subsequent smoothing of the sides by rain and wind, it may
be assumed that most of them originated in some such way. But
in the lake region sinks, caves, and other solution phenomena are
very rare, and no one seems to have ever observed the beginniug
of one of the basins in question. They could hardly have been
scooped out by the wind or the elevations around them piled up by
waves, either, for many of the hills have a hard clay substratum
in them considerably above the bottom of the basins. And lakes
a short distance apart often differ considerably in elevation, show-
ing that they rest on an irregular surface of clay or some other
impervious material.

Lime-sinks. This term is used for several different things.
‘Some lime-sinks are small dry sandy basins of the kind just de-
scribed, with no visible outlet, while others have rock outcropping
in them and a hole at the bottom through which water escapes,
and some have steep banks and are more or less permanently filled
with water, which is usually bluish from dissolved limestone. The
dry sandy type is most common in the lime-sink region and the

*TIt seems probable that the wind has had a much larger share in shapinz
the topography of the uplands of peninsular Florida than is commonly realized.
Although the sand does not move noticeably on windy days, except in culti-
vated fields (and even there there is little evidence of drifting after the wind
dies down), in the course of centuries any minor irregularities must be pretty
thoroughly smoothed out.

tSee pages 150-156 of the paper on the topography of Florida by Prof.
Shaler, cited on the preceding page.

ee ee ee ae ee ee ee ee ee

eS ee ee

ea oe ee ee ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 163

rocky type in the hammock belts. Those with permanent water in
them are apparently more common in northern than in central Flor-
ida, but examples can be seen near Sumterville and Lacoochee.
In the Hernando hammock belt some of the intermittent lakes or
prairies have a small rocky lime-sink at one end or edge, through
which the water drains off (fig. 16). There are said to be some
lime-sinks on the west side of Lake George, which the writer has
mapped as being in the lake region, but not yet explored.

Caves. Limestone caves are not uncommon in and near the
hammock belt in Marion County, and there are a few small ones
in the southeastern part of Citrus County,* hardly large enough
to contain stalactites and stalagmites or to be easily entered.

Natural bridges in central Florida are of two types, which might
be called wet and dry. The former is the commonest, and is caused
by a stream entering a subterranean channel made by solution of
limestone, which it may follow anywhere from a few rods to a few
miles. It is of course impossible to go under such a bridge, and
sometimes one cannot even be sure where a disappearing stream
emerges again. Bridges of this type are reported near Homosassa
and Tarpon Springs, and there must be many unrecognized ones
made by small streams. A rarer and very different type is formed
by blocks of limestone falling against each other when the ground
under them settles irregularly from the slow solution of still deeper
calcareous strata. A few of this kind can be seen in the neighbor-
hood of the caves of southeastern Citrus County, just mentioned.

Flatwoods. Most of the country within twenty miles or so of
the coast on both sides of the peninsula is essentially level, except
where shallowly dissected by streams. The dissection is most pro-
nounced near the, Peace and Alafia Rivers, and at certain points
near the coast where the general level of the country is 20 or 25
feet above the sea, as at Eau Gallie, Melbourne, and St. Petersburg.
The flatness is probably due to the fact that the sand and underlying
materials were deposited on a nearly level ocean bottom, and have
not been elevated high enough or long enough to be eroded much.

Beaches and dunes. The whole Atlantic coast of central Flor-
ida and the Gulf coast in Pinellas County, are bordered by rather

*For additional information about these see R. M. Harper, Am. Fern
Journal 6:68-81. 1916; Natural History (formerly American Museum Jovraal)
2:201. 1919; J. K. Small, Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard. 21 :34-37. 1920.

164 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

narrow barrier-beaches, with lagoons one to five miles wide be-
tween them and the mainland. On these beaches the wind has
piled up low sand dunes, rarely exceeding 10 or 15 feet in height,
which seem to be moving very little at the present time. (Dunes
are not as well developed in Florida, or anywhere in the tropics,
apparently, as they are north of latitude 40°, perhaps because in
our climate the vegetation covers the sand too quickly for the wind
to disturb it much. The wind has considerable force on the east
coast, however, as is indicated by the pines leaning inland at an
angle of ten degrees or more in many places. ) :
A mile or two back from the shore, at many places along’ the
east coast and also near Cedar Keys, Bayport, and probably else-
where on the west coast, are old dunes of thoroughly leached white
sand, which must have been formed at a time when the land stood
a little lower and the peninsula was narrower, for dunes do not
seem to be forming at present more than half a mile from the outer-
most beaches. The absence of such features farther in the interior
would seem to indicate that the land has not been depressed much
below its present position for a very long time; long enough for the
wind to level any dunes that might have existed and for the sala-
manders and other animals to mix the pure sand with the darker
sub-soil.*

Other shore features. The absence of barrier beaches along the
Gulf hammock coast has been commented on in the description of
that region. It seems to be correlated with the very gentle slope
of the ocean bottom along there, which keeps the waves from beat-
ing on the shore just as if there was a barrier beach a few miles out;
but just why that type of shore with a minutely irregular marshy
border, should be confined to the Gulf hammock region is an un-
solved problem. Very likely if there was as much wind on the Gulf —
coast as on the Atlantic coast the shore would be different; but there
is evidently not, for the pines grow perfectly erect near the Gulf
coast, instead of leaning inland as most of them do on the other side
of the peninsula. <

*The many patches of scrub (described farther on under soils and also
under vegetation) in the lake region are thought by some to represent old
dunes, but in many or most cases their topography seems to preclude any such
explanation.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 165

The larger lakes have sandy beach ridges on their more exposed
shores, and sand-bars forming across their embayments, as in lakes
with sandy shores the world over, but none of our lakes are large
enough to have any perceptible development of dunes around them.
Wave-cut cliffs are exhibited on a small scale in the clay bluffs
on the southeast side of Lake Weir, and perhaps on other lakes.

Minor topographic forms. In many places close to the Indian
River, St. John’s River, Tampa Bay, and other navigable waters
there are shell mounds several to many feet high and usually an
acre or less in extent, which are commonly supposed to be Indian
“kitchen middens,” though the possibility of some of them having
been partly built up by raccoons or other four-footed animals does
not seem to have been wholly eliminated. Some are composed
chiefly of oysters and others of other mollusks, especially along
rivers, where there are no oysters. One on the east side of the
Indian River about opposite Melbourne (fig. 34), which is being
excavated for road material (a fate shared by many others), shows
about ten feet of shells, nearly all Chione cancellata, a small clam-
like bivalve, resting on yellowish sand. There are thin layers of hu-
mus among the shells every few inches, presumably indicating that
the growth of the mound was frequently interrupted long enough
for a little vegetation to grow on it. Some of the mounds have
more sand than shells in them, and must have been formed in a
somewhat different manner; but the subject has not been suf-
ficiently investigated.

Terraces (?). The boundary between flatwoods and uplands
is sometimes gradual and sometimes rather abrupt, as for example
at or near Bronson, DeLand and Lake Helen. In recent years
these abrupt scarps have been regarded by some geologists as Pleis-
tocene shore lines, or terraces,* but they do not appear to be contin-
uous for any great distance, as terraces should be, and they lack
some of the characteristic features of shore-lines, such as dunes.

*See Matson & Sanford, U. S. Geol. Surv. Water Supply Paper 319 (1914),
Pp. 31-35, 210-211, and map (plate 5); and comment on same in Geog. Review
4 :224-225. IQI7.

166 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

HY DROGRAP HY -OR.DEAINAGE

Lakes. There is perhaps no essential difference between a lake
and a pond, but the former term, in Florida as elsewhere, is usually
applied to the larger and more permanent bodies of fresh water.
No close estimate of the number of lakes in central Florida has been
made, but it is certainly in the thousands. The majority are in the
lake region, as might. be expected, but they are common in several
other regions, particularly the eastern division of the flatwoods.
The largest are Lakes George, Apopka and Kissimmee, each cover-
ing something like 100 square miles. The smaller ones, some of
which are only a few acres in extent (and not as wide as some
parts of the St. John’s River) are approximately circular and have
no visible outlets, being merely depressions extending below the
ground-water level. But they can hardly be called stagnant, for the
water is doubtless constantly seeping through the sandy soil in the
direction of the nearest river. The larger lakes are irregularly
shaped and have streams flowing into or out of them, or both, sev-
eral being simply wide places in the St. John’s and Kissimmee Riv-
ers.

Few soundings have been made in our lakes, but judging from
the slope of their shores the deepest may not be over 50 feet deep.
Asa rule they do not fluctuate more than two or three feet in the
course of a year. A few which are connected with sink-holes may
be lowered suddenly at long intervals in the manner described
by Dr. Sellards in the 3rd and 6th Annual Reports, and those on the
St. John’s River of course share the fluctuations of that stream,
which however are only a few feet. Lake George, being just about
the head of tide-water on the St. John’s, of course cannot rise much.
but Lake Harney, about 200 miles by water from the mouth of
the river, is said to have an extreme fluctuation of about seven feet.

Besides the seasonal variations in level, some of the lakes among
the uplands are evidently lower now than they were a generation ot
so ago, as shown by the encroachment of young long-leaf pines or
their shores.* This may be due to a permanent lowering of the
ground-water level by numerous flowing artesian wells bored at
lower elevations, but the matter has not been sufficiently investt-
gatéd.

*See 3d Annual Report, p. 266.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 167

The water of most of our lakes is comparatively clear, and some
in Seminole and Orange Counties are used for city water supplies
in preference to the hard and sulphurous artesian water. The
clearest lake of any size in central Florida is probably Lake Weir,
in the southern part of Marion County. Two or three small coffee-
colored branches enter its eastern end and tinge the water there a
little, but its western end, which is in the lime-sink region, is se
clear that one can see the bottom where it is several feet deep. This
is probably correlated with a small amount of limestone in solution,
for a species of mussel (Unio Cunninghami) is common in the
western part of the lake.

Ponds and swamps. Shallow ponds, which may dry up com-
pletely in dry seasons, varying in size from perhaps one to a hun-
dred acres, abound in the flatwoods and are fairly common in the
lime-sink region. They nearly always have considerable vegetation
in them, sometimes only maiden-cane, wampee, bonnets, and
other herbs, but more often bushes or trees or both. (Additional
details are given in the chapter on vegetation. ) |

The various types of marshes and peat bogs have been pretty
fully discussed in the Third Annual Report, and some of them will
be referred to farther on under the head of vegetation. The same

might be said of swamps, which are not very extensive in central
Florida.

Springs. There is perhaps no equal area in the United States
that has more large springs than central Florida. Most of them are
the points of emergence of subterranean creeks or rivers, whick
usually come up through one or more irregular openings in the bot-
tom of bowl-like basins. They are most common in the lime-sink.
region and near its edges, but there are also several in the Gulf
hammock region and a few in the lake region, particularly near the
St. John’s River and on the edges of the great Wekiva River swamp
in Seminole and Orange Counties.

Silver Spring (fig. 8), a few miles east of Ocala, is one of the
largest springs known, about 200 feet wide and 35 feet deep. One
discharge measurement made of it gave about 150,000 gallons a
minute, or 333 cubic feet a second, and another, probably some dis-
tance down stream, about twice as much. The stream or “run”
issuing from it is so large that small steamers from the Ocklawaha
River can come right up into the spring; and this has been a fa-

12

168 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

vorite trip for sight-seers for many years. The spring is also used
for bathing. Blue Spring in the same county near Juliette has
nearly as large a flow, but does not make a navigable stream. Other
well known springs in the same region are Weekiwachee Spring in.
Hernando County and Sulphur Spring near Tampa. The former
is rather unique in being in the midst of a large area of scrub.

In the Gulf hammock region there are large springs at the head
of the Waccasassa, Crystal, Homosassa (fig. 7) and Chessahow-:
itzka Rivers. In the lake region the best known springs are DeLeon.
and Blue Springs in Volusia County, Palm and Hoosier Springs in
the western part of Seminole County, Clay or Wekiva Spring, the
main source of the Wekiva River, Seminole Spring, near Sorrento,
and Bugg Spring, near Okahumpka. Rock Spring, in the north-
western part of Orange County (fig. 18), differs from most other
Florida springs, and resembles some in the Appalachian Valley,
in that the water rushes out audibly from the base of a cliff, instead
of welling up from the bottom of a basin.

The water of all these large springs is highly charged with cal-
cium carbonate, and is very clear, with a slight bluish tinge. Its
temperature usually ranges between 70° and 75° the year round.*
Some have a very perceptible sulphurous odor too, particularly those
in Seminole County. Orange, Silver, Palm, Clay and Sulphur
Springs and perhaps others are used more or less for bathing pools.
Silver Spring, the largest and most accessible of all, is provided
with glass-bottomed boats, from which the bottom can be viewed.

The water of Green or Espiritu Santo Spring in Pinellas County
and one or two smaller ones is believed to have medicinal virtues.
There are a few salt springs near the St. John’s River and some ot
its tributaries, but little is known about them.

Streams. The streams of. central Florida may be divided,
chiefly on a basis of size, into branches, creeks, runs and rivers.
The branches, generally speaking, are those small enough to stop
running in dry weather, and they are not as numerous as in the
northern part of the State, where the effects of erosion are more ey-
ident. They are mostly clear or slightly coffee-colored. The creeks
flow throughout the year, and vary from a few feet to several yards

*The temperature of a large spring in any part of the world, unless it is a
thermal spring, is usually very close to the average annual temperature of the
locality, so that it seems warm in winter and cold in summer, by contrast.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 169

wide. They nearly all originate in and are bordered by swamps,
and are decidedly coffee-colored.

The outlets of the large springs, varying in size from creeks to
small rivers, are commonly called runs. They are clear and bluish
like the springs, but usually do not flow more than a few miles be-
fore they lose themselves in some larger coffee-colored stream or in
the ocean. Helena Run, in Lake County, is said to be transparent
when it flows eastward from Bugg Spring into Lake Harris, and
coffee-colored when it flows westward from the lake toward the
Withlacoochee River.*

The larger rivers are all coffee-colored in their natural state,
there being no naturally muddy water in peninsular Florida; but a
few like the Alafia and parts of the Withlacoochee are kept turbid
most of the time by washings from the phosphate mines in their vi-
cinity. The rivers are as a rule sluggish, because the highlands of
the peninsula are so narrow that streams originating in them get
down into the flatwoods before becoming large enough to be called
rivers.

There are, however, a few places where ledges of rock form
rapids, particularly in the Gulf hammock region within a few miles
of the coast. One such place on the Withlacoochee, about ten miles
from its mouth, and the same distance below Dunnellon, has been
made the site of a hydro-electric plant (fig. 6), with a 20-foot
dam, furnishing power to Dunnellon, Brooksville, several phosphate
mines, and even an orange packing house in Sumter County. There
is another such plant on the Hillsborough River a few miles from ~
its mouth (in what is regarded as a part of the lime-sink region).
which however is said to be used only for emergencies, as it cannot
furnish enough power for the whole city of Tampa. There is said
to be a spring near Sumterville which furnishes power for a mill.+

*See 3rd Ann. Rep., p. 281.

+According to U. S. Geol. Surv. Water Supply Paper 319, p. 406. There has
been some talk of damming up other springs in central Florida for power pur-
poses, but just why a spring should be selected for that purpose, rather than
the same stream farther down where it is larger, is not clear, unless it is merely
a manifestation of a mania some people have for destroying or defacing oiiects
of natural beauty. Some attempts of this kind in West Florida are said to have
had the unexpected result of merely forcing the water to find a new outlet.
through the cavernous limestone.

170 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I 3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Most streams in our area are too short or too near sea-level ta
fluctuate much with the seasons, and besides the excess of rainfall
in late summer (see chapter on climate, farther on) tends to coun-
terbalance evaporation and thus keep their flow uniform, so thar
floods are practically unknown. The St. John’s River, the largest,
is unique in several ways. It rises in great marshes or wet prairies,
resembling the Everglades, near the southern edge of Brevard
County, within 25 miles of the ocean in a direct line and not ovet
20 feet above it at low water, and flows northward approximately
parallel to the coast for over 200 miles, with a fall of only about
an inch to the mile. In the latitudes under consideration it is much
narrower than it is where influenced by the tide, except where it
expands into lakes. Lake Monroe, between Sanford and Enter-
prise, is said to be five feet above sea-level, with a maximum depth
(at low water?) of only eight feet. Between there and Lake Har-
ney, the next lake above, the river is said to have an extreme fluc-
tuation of seven feet, which is perhaps the greatest of any stream in
central Florida, unless it is exceeded by the Peace or the Alafia
River; but that of course is very little compared with some of the
rivers farther north. |

The Ocklawaha* and Withlacoochee Rivers resemble the St.
John’s in flowing northward most of their length, a phenomenon
that deserves more attention from physiographers than it has re-
ceived.

SOMES

The soils of central Florida, although prevailingly sandy, are
considerably diversified within certain limits. Alluvial and red
clayey soils are scarce, but we have soils ranging in chemical com-
position from nearly pure calcium carbonate and highly phosphatic
to nearly pure silica and peat.

The correlations between soil and vegetation in this part of the
country are so close, and the natural vegetation nearly everywhere

so prominent, that most previous attempts to classify Florida soils

*In recent years this has often been spelled “Oklawaha,” presumably by the
same sort of people who write “Suwanee’ for Suwannee, “Hillsboro” for Hills-
borough, “Okechobee” for Okeechobee, etc., but this should especially be dis-

couraged, for it tends to give an erroneous impression of the first syllable.

(For the benefit of strangers it might be well to explain that the main ac-
cent is on the third syllable. Also that Kissimmee is accented in the middle.)

i i

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 7s

have described most of them in terms of vegetation, such as pine
land, hammock, swamp, scrub, and prairie ;* and it is indeed diffi-
cult to avoid mentioning the vegetation in describing our various
soil types.

The leading texture classes of soils in each region, as far as
known, have already been noted in the regional descriptions. In
the following pages the principal soil types of the whole area will
first be classified roughly by water-content, color, etc., and then
some mechanical and chemical analyses presented. As in all class-
ifications of natural objects or phenomena, there are all possible
gradations between adjacent categories, so that no sharp lines can
be drawn; and a few types difficult to classify are not mentioned
at all.

UPLAND (MAINLY DRY) SOILS

White sand. This consists of nearly white quartz sand, usually
rather coarse, and with less than 2% of silt and clay. It varies in
depth from a few inches to several feet,£ and commonly passes rath-
er abruptly below into yellowish sand of similar texture. It is widely
distributed in central Florida, but most common in the lake region
and near the east coast. In the coast strip it is chiefly confined to
old dunes, but in the lake region, where it is very characteristic,
no constant relation to the topography has been made out. It has
been called “Norfolk sand with scrub oak vegetation” in the U. S.
soil survey of the “Ocala area” (1913)§, “Leon sand, rolling phase”
in that of Pinellas County (1914)8, “Leon fine sand, scrub phase”

*See for example a paper on the soils of Florida by Dr. E. H. Sellards in
our 4th Annual Report (1912), pp. 1-79. This was published in more con-
densed form the following year in the 12th Biennial Report of the State Ag-
ricultural Department, pp. 249-299, and has been reprinted two or three times as
a supplement to the Quarterly Bulletin of that department.

tJust before completing this chapter the writer had the advantage of a
visit from Mr. J. Otto Veatch of the U. S. Bureau of Soils (formerly assistant
on the Geological Survey of Georgia), who has been making a special study
of Florida soils for the last year or two. He has made some helpful criticisms,
but of course cannot be held responsible for any errors that may remain.

tIn some of the government soil surveys the white sand is stated to be
a mere veneer a few inches thick, but this was probably not intended to apply
generally to large areas, for in a railroad cut about four miles west of Bartow,
if not elsewhere, it extends without perceptible change to a depth of at least
eight feet.

§Reprinted in our 7th Annual Report, I915.

172 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

and “St. Lucie fine sand” in Hernando County (1915), “St. Lucie
sand” and “St. Lucie fine sand” in the “Indian River area” (1915),
and “St. ol wcie, ding sandicain, Hillsborough, (county, (L918). Some
ever, rather than different interpretations on the part of the soil
surveyors.

This sort of soil is represented in the tables a few pages farther
on by mechanical analyses 37, 38, 46 and 47, and chemical analyses
D and K (which unfortunately are incomplete). As compared
with other soils of the area it is very poor in potash, clay, humus,
and animal life, and it seems likely that in some cases at least it has
been derived from the creamy sand next to be described by long-
continued leaching out of soluble materials, a process which in the
creamy sand seems to be constantly counteracted by animal agencies,
as explained on the next page. Just what keeps these animals out
of the white sand remains to be explained; but it may be that they
are very slowly encroaching on it year by year.

The vegetation on the white sand on uplands is nearly always
of the scrub type, described farther on in the chapter on vegetation
Where it 1s low and flat, however, it may bear vegetation of the
flatwoods type, with pines and saw-palmetto predominating; and
there are various intermediate conditions. Whether the white color
extends down only a few inches or several feet does not make as
much difference in the vegetation as one might imagine; which
seems to indicate that the top soil is more important to plants than
the subsoil.

In the interior this soil is almost never cultivated, but along
the east coast great quantities of citrous fruits and pineapples and
even some vegetables are raised on it, of course with the aid of lib-
eral applications of fertilizers.

Cream-colored sand. This is by far the most extensive type of
upland soil in our area, especially in the lime-sink and lake regions
It includes most of the ‘‘Norfolk sand,’ “Norfolk fine sand” and
“Norfolk sandy loam” and some of the “Gainesville fine sand”
of the government soil surveys, and is represented in the tables by
mechanical analyses 6-9, 27, 28, 39, 40, and chemical analyses E.
leaned:

It consists of medium to fine-grained incoherent quartz sand,
with 3 to 8% of silt and clay, and is usually very homogeneous to
a depth of several or many feet, so that few if any roots go all the

|
|
|
|

— ee ee SU Tee ee

_—e es rll

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 173

way through it. The prevailing color is cream or light buff, ex-
cept that the uppermost inch or two is usually bleached a little by
the action of vegetation. In cuts and pits where the whole thick-
ness of the sand is exposed it rests sometimes on sandy clay and
sometimes on phosphate rock or silicified limestone, the latter some-
times protruding a few inches above the surface in boulder-like
outcrops without making any perceptible difference in the vegeta-
tion.*

_ Salamanders abound and gophers, ants, and sundry other bur-
rowing animals are common in this type of soil, so that practically
every particle of it within a foot or two of the surface must be
turned over by them every few years, and this may be a sufficient
explanation of its homogengity.

The vegetation is nearly always of the high pine land type. Al-
though the soil looks very unpromising to one accustomed to clayey
soils, it is very easily cultivated, and when properly fertilized yields
very satisfactory returns. Practically all the farming in the lime-
sink region, and most of the orange groves in the lake region, are
on this kind of soil.

Cream-colored sand with humus. Where the soil just described
is protected from fire by being partly surrounded by bodies of water
or hammocks (see chapter on vegetation), the forests become much
denser (sandy hammocks), and some humus accumulates, making
the top soil gray. This phase has been mapped as “Norfolk sand,”
“Norfolk fine sand,’ and ‘Leon sand, hammock phase;’ and it is
represented by mechanical analyses 41 and 42 and chemical anal-
yses C and Q. Salamanders seem to be absent and other subterra-
nean animals scarce, so that the soil is more leached than the typical
phase; and comparatively little of it is cultivated.

Brown, rusty, and ashy sand. In many places, for example
around Dade City, Brandon, Mount Dora, Montverde, and between
Bartow and Fort Meade, the loose sand of the uplands is brownish
instead of cream-colored. Mechanical analyses 29 and 30 and
chemical analysis H, all from near Fort Meade, probably represent
this type. In the vicinity of Fort Meade, where the soil is decidedly

*There is some difference of opinion as to whether this sand is a distinct
formation or a residual material from the underlying Tertiary strata, as stated
in the chapter on stratigraphy; but from the geographical standpoint that is a
matter of little consequence.

174 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

chocolate-colored, it commonly has phosphate pebbles scattered
through it, or underlying it at no great depth, and it is probable
that the same sort of soil at the other localities contains more phos-
phorus than the common creamy sand, though those in the lake re-
gion are remote from any known phosphate deposits, and the reason
for the difference in color there is not obvious.

The vegetation on the darkest phase near the Peace River is
usually of the semi-calcareous hammock type, while elsewhere it is
mostly high pine land, but differing from typical high pine land in
having more turkey oak than black-jack—or sometimes very few
oaks of any kind—and more Spanish moss on the pines than usual
(especially around Dade City). This being evidently a better soil
than those previously described, a good. deal of it is cultivated.

In a few places in the lake region, for example in southern Polk
County, the prevailing sand has a rusty yellowish color, presumably
due to iron, but is similar to the creamy sand in depth, texture, and
vegetation. A more remarkable type, occurring on high uplands
a few miles south of Lakeland, is ashy gray in color, with consider-
able silt or rather very fine material in it. This is close to the pebble
phosphate country but high above it, and its derivation and compo-
sition are unknown. The gray matter does not appear to be of the
nature of humus.* The vegetation is mostly of the high pine land
type, with turkey oaks exceptionally large and numerous. A large
part of this soil has been cleared and planted to orange groves.

Semi-calcareous hammock land. This is a makeshift term used
by the writer to cover a variety of upland soil that is mostly sand,
but has enough limestone within a few feet of the surface or out-:
cropping to influence the vegetation perceptibly. It is an inter-
mediate condition between the creamy sand already described and
the calcareous uplands described on the next page. It is comnjon in
the vicinity of Ocala, and has been mapped as “Fellowship sand,”
“Fellowship sandy loam,” Gainesville loamy sand,” “Gainesville
sandy loam,’ and Portsmouth sandy loam;’ and it is represented
in the following tables by mechanical analyses 10-14, 17, 18, 21-24,
48-51, and chemical analyses B, G, N and S.

*This soil in color resembles some near the center of Alachua County,
mentioned incidentally in the Sixth Annual Report, p. 370; and in texture it
reminds one of the loess of southwestern Mississippi, which is supposed to have
been transported by the wind. ©

al ee yO age eee ey

ee SE ae ee ae

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 175

It is characterized by hammock vegetation with evergreen and
deciduous trees approximately equal in numbers, as described far-
ther on. A considerable portion of it is under cultivation. Sala-
manders seem to invade this soil only where it has been cleared and
abandoned a short time, perhaps indicating that they do not like
shady places.

Calcareous uplands. Where the soft Ocala limestone crops out,
as near Ocala and in southeastern Citrus County, it grades into a
black sticky soil rich in humus. One such area a little south of
Ocala has been mapped as ‘Fellowship clay loam,” and a somewhat
similar soil occurs farther north near McIntosh, where no rock
outcrops are in evidence, and in and around lime-sinks in the Her-
nando hammock belt. It is represented by mechanical analyses
15, 16 (perhaps also 17 and 18), 25 and 26, and chemical analyses
ae and U:

The vegetation is of the hammock type, with the great major-
ity of the trees deciduous. The hackberry and a few other plants
of the same or allied families are very characteristic. Although this
is a very rich soil, it.is usually too hilly or rocky to be cultivated
much. Lettuce and other vegetables are raised on or near it on the
west side of Orange Lake, where there is very little rock.

Clay soils. Upland soils distinctly clayey at the surface, and
containing as much as one-fourth clay, are rare in peninsular Flor-
ida. The mechanical analyses farther on which show high percent-
ages of clay are nearly all calcareous hammock soils, and the “clay”
in them is probably mostly humus and marl. In the Middle Flor-
ida hammock belt, north of the “Ocala area” (e.g., around Fair-
field), and in the central part of the Hernando hammock belt, there
are some soils clayey enough to form clods when plowed. No me-
chanical analyses of these are available, but chemical analyses of
two of the Hernando County soils are given under V and W. On
such soils short-leaf pine, sweet gum and hickory are characteristic
trees, and a good deal of corn and other staple crops are raised,
with little or no fertilizer. The whole aspect of the country strongly
suggests some places in Georgia and Alabama.

DAMP SOILS

Sandy. Under the head of damp sandy soils are classed most of
the soils of the Gulf hammock region and the three flatwoods re-

176 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

gions, and limited areas in all the others. They vary in color from
white to dark gray or nearly black, usually without any trace of
red, yellow or brown. In many places shallow cuts or ditches
reveal a stratum of “hardpan” (sand cemented together by some
dark brown organic substance with perhaps a trace of iron)
within two or three feet of the surface, and borings made by soii
investigators seem to indicate that this is present in practically
all our flatwoods areas, unless clay or rock takes its place. The
hardpan is relatively impervious to water and not readily pen-
etrated by tree roots, but in some places it is said to be only a few
inches thick, with white sand below it, so that it can be perforated
by blasting or otherwise in preparing the land for agricultural
purposes.

The damp sandy flatwoods soils are classed in the government
reports as “Portsmouth fine sand,’ “Leon fine sand,” ‘Norfolk
fine sand, flat phase,” “Fellowship fine sandy loam,” etc. In the
following tables they are represented by mechanical analyses 19
and 20 and chemical analysis Y. Salamanders are found only in
the driest spots, and other burrowing animals are scarce.

The whitest of the damp sand has a vegetation nearly all ever-
green, something like that of the upland scrub, and this might be
called low scrub. Most of it, however, has a low pine land or flat-
woods vegetation, consisting mostly of pine and saw-palnietto.
Within a few miles of the larger rivers, particularly south of lati-
tude 29°, the pines may be absent over many square miles, making
palmetto prairies; and sometimes the palmetto too is wanting or

nearly so, but that probably indicates a Hee kind of soil, either .

wet or marly, or both.

A great deal of the damp sand is too wet for successful agri-
culture until artificially drained, but its level topography facilitates
the control of irrigation water and fertilizers, and some very. in-
tensive farming is carried on in places convenient to transportation
lines,

Sandy and rocky soils. In the Gulf hammock region the sand
seems to be underlaid at no great depth by limestone, and the rock
crops out in many places, sometimes thickly enough to interfere
seriously with plowing. This type is designated in the soil surveys
as ‘“‘Leon sand,” “Leon fine sand,’ Portsmouth fine sand,’ ‘‘Gaines-
ville sandy loam, pine woods phase,” “Hernando fine sandy loam,”

That Net ee

os ee

ie

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA WIL F/

etc. The amount of lime in the soil must be comparatively small,
for except where the rock outcrops are very abundant the vegeta-
tion does not differ greatly in aspect or composition from that of
the non-calcareous flatwoods. Only a small part of this soil is cul-
tivated at present, but it seems to be very well suited for vegetables
of many kinds.

Sand and rock with humus. The greater part of the soil of the
great Gulf Hammock of Levy County (fig 5), and perhaps
many other level hammocks, seems to have been originally
damp sand with limestone protruding through it, though the
relative amount of sand may have been less than in the flat-
woods, and indeed without extensive explorations it would be
hard to say how much of it belongs to the marly type described
a little farther on. Anyway, the dense forests now established
in such places furnish their own protection from fire and form a
great deal of humus, which differentiates the soil further from
that of the flatwoods. Mechanical analyses 4 and 5 (“Park-
wood fine sandy loam’’) represent this type pretty well. When
cleared it makes a good trucking soil, like the preceding.

Clayey soils. <A little north of the center of Marion County,
particularly around Burbank, there are a few square miles of flat-
woods with decidedly clayey soil. This type has been seen by the
writer only from the train, but its vegetation seems to differ from
that of sandy flatwoods chiefly in the scarcity of saw+palmetto.
The land has been utilized to some extent for truck-farming.
Toward Silver Spring this passes into a sort of low hammock with
short-leaf pine and cabbage palmetto,* somewhat suggesting a river
or creek bottom. This last, represented by mechanical analyses 44
and 45, is called “Fellowship clay” in the soil survey of the “Ocala
area,’ though it bears little resemblance to anything around Fel-
lowship P. O., which is on the uplands in a different region, sev-
eral miles away.

Marly soils. On and near Merritt’s Island there are consider-
able areas of damp or wet marly soils, whose texture, composition
and depth are little known. The vegetation is mostly of the type
designated farther on as palm savanna. Some similar vegetation,
presumably indicating similar soil conditions, occurs in the Gulf
hammock region within a few miles of the coast, for example be-

*Described in 7th Annual Report, pp. 178-170.

178 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

tween Crystal River and Homosassa. As most of this soil is within
a few inches of sea-level, and remote from settlements, it is not
utilized much if at all.

Many if not most of the low hammocks, particularly in the Gulf
hammock region, are evidently on marly soil, called “Parkwood
clay loam,” etc. This contains a large proportion of calcium car-
bonate, and its texture is shown by mechanical analyses I to 3. A
good deal of it is under intensive cultivation, for example near Cole-
man, and also near Lake Jessup, if that is properly classed as marly

soil.
WET SOILS

Wet prairies, ponds, etc. In the Gulf hammock region and the
three other flatwoods regions there are many areas depressed a few
inches or feet below the general level, and filled with water in wet
seasons. Some of these contain pond cypress and other woody
plants, but a great many are treeless, and known as prairies, or
sometimes as “sand soaks.”’ The soil differs little from that of
the surrounding flatwoods, except in being saturated with water
much of the time and having a little peat or muck overlying it and
more or less mixed with it. Some such areas have been mapped in
the soil survey of Pinellas County as “water and grass.” Their
present agricultural value is almost negligible.

Peat. In the lake region and less frequently elsewhere there
are many deposits of peat, often ten feet deep or more. They have
been described in considerable detail in the 3rd Annual Report,
which contains a table showing the ash and moisture content and a
few other features of many samples from various parts of the
State.* Some of our peat, particularly around Lake Panasoffkee,
is quite calcareous, but all, as far as known, is low in potash. The
vegetation on it may be either swamp, marsh, or prairie.

All peat needs to be drained before it can be cultivated, and very
little of the deep peat in central Florida is situated so that cultiva-
tion is profitable at present. An area of several hundred acres
along the Ocklawaha River southeast of Ocala was drained seven
or eight years ago by diverting the river, and part of it put under
cultivation. Some shallow peat or muck is both richer and more

easily drained, and therefore better adapted for agricultural pur-

*This table is reprinted in the 6th Annual Report, pp. ‘50-62.

f

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 179

poses; and it is hard to draw the line between this and some of
the low hammocks already mentioned.

Salt marsh muck. Along both coasts, in places protected from
wave action by outlying or projecting land masses or the shallow-
ness of the ocean bottom, are strips or patches of salt or brackish
marsh, characterized by coarse grasses and rushes. ‘The soil, a fine
silt or muck, would probably be quite fertile if it could be raised a
few feet above sea-level, but being saturated with salt water twice
a day (or all the time in tideless lagoons), little can be done with it.
And the marshes of central Florida are doubtless less fertile
than those near the mouths of muddy rivers farther north, as shown
by the prevalence of the evergreen rush, Juncus Roemerianus, rather
than the marsh grass, Spartina glabra, which has larger leaves and
renews them every year.

MISCELLANEOUS SOILS

Beach and dune sands. On the exposed portions of both coasts,
except the greater part of that bordering the Gulf hammock re-
gion, the sand has been piled by waves and wind into beaches and
low dunes, which are always more or less calcareous, owing to the
presence of fragments of sea shells. The sand is usually rather fine,
but contains very little silt or clay. Besides numerous mollusks,
crustaceans, etc., that live before high tide level, a few gophers
and ants make their homes in the beach sand, but salamanders are
absent. The available chemical analyses (O, P, Z) seem to indicate
that this soil is fairly well supplied with potash and other ingre-
dients of fertility, but it is practically worthless for agriculture,
on account of its instability, porosity, and lack of organic matter.

Shell mounds. As already indicated under the head of topog-
raphy, these are found in many places along the coast and navi-
gable rivers. They consist mostly of shells of oysters and other bi-
valves, one kind of shell usually outnumbering all the rest in any
one mound. The shells are usually little broken, and therefore
contribute little to the soil, which is usually a thin layer of humus,
with no sand or clay visible, though some of the mounds have con-
siderable sand mixed with the shells. The vegetation seems to be
always hammock of some kind, and on the east coast is usually de-
cidedly tropical in composition, south of Cape Canaveral at least.

Limestone cliffs and caves. Outcrops of tolerably pure and

180 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

hard limestone, where large enough to escape being swept by fire,
and well shaded, as in hammocks and deep sinks and moutns of
caves, usually have vegetation consisting mostly of ferns and
mosses; but just why ferns should be partial to such places is not
clear.* :

Red oak uplands. A very characteristic type of vegetation
around Ocala is the red oak woods (described in its proper place
farther on). This is not confined to one particular type ot soil,
but attains its best development on a type a little different
from that of the calcareous hammocks or any other above described.
In the soil survey of the “Ocala area” most of it is called “Gaines-
ville loamy sand,” though it does not seem to resemble closely
anything around Gainesville. Mechanical analyses 21 and 22 and
chemical analysis A probably represent phases of this type, and R
certainly does, for it was specially selected for that purpose. Its
most remarkable feature is the high percentage of phosphoric acid,
and it is also pretty well supplied with potash and iron.

Salamanders and gophers are rare or absent in this soil, perhaps
because it is a little too rocky as well as too shady, but there must
be other subterranean animals present, as in other fertile soils the
world over. Red oak, sweet gum-and hickory are the characteris-
tic trees, and where this soil merges into the ordinary sandy uplands
the long-leaf pine comes in. <A good deal of it, perhaps half, is
cultivated, mostly in, corn, cotton or vegetables. Little or no fer-
tilizer is used with the corn and cotton.

MECHANICAL ANALYSES

The following mechanical or physical analyses of central Flor-
ida soils and subsoils have been extracted from Bulletin 132 of
the Division of Soils of the U. S. Department of Agriculture (A
preliminary report on the soils of Florida, by Milton Whitney,
1898), and the soil surveys of the “Gainesville area’ (1905) and
“Ocala area” (1913). In the last named the localities and depths
of the samples are not given, but they were obtained by correspond-
ence with Prof. Whitney (who has been chief of the Bureau—for-
merly Division—of Soils since its beginning), and were used in the

*For a description of one of the finest rock fern localities in our area
see the papers referred to under the head of caves on page 163.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 181

reprint of that survey in our 7th Annual Report. The percentages
of organic matter are given in most cases, and of calcium carbon-
ate in a few cases, and the columns should total 100% without
the calcium carbonate.*

The samples are grouped by regions, in the same order as in the
other parts of this report. Descriptions of them follow, and the
analyses constitute Tables 9 to 14.

Gulf Hammock Region

1. Clayey low hammock (“Parkwood clay loam’), Sumter
Co. Average of two localities, viz., 2%4 miles s. w. of Wildwood
and 34 mile s. e. of Coleman. Depth 0-5 inches. (Ocala area)

2. Subsoil of same two localities, 5-20 and 5-18 inches.

3. Lower subsoil of same, 20-36 and 18-36 inches.

4. More sandy low hammock (‘‘Parkwood fine sandy loam’’),
Sumter Co. Average of two localities, viz., 2 miles n. w. of Cole-
man and 2 miles e. of Carlson’s Ferry. Depths o-10 and 0-12
inches. . (Ocala area.)

5. Subsoil of same 10-36 and 12-36 inches.

TABLE 9.

Mechanical Analyses of Soils and Subsoils in Gulf Hammock and Lime-sink Re-
gions. (From Soil Survey of “Ocala Area”).

Gulf hammock region | Lime-sink regicn,

pee a Sandy do. high pine land

ih an es ee 5 6 7 fs) 9
Sub-|Sub- Sub-|/Soil |Sub-|Soil | Sub-
Soil |soil {soil Soil |soil soil Soil

Fine gravel (2-1 mm.)---~------ 06) 2.8) 2.1 0.1] 0.2) 0.3) 0.6] 0.2) 0
Coarse sand (1-.5 mm.) ~--~----- 3.4, 6.0] 5.2] 6.0) 4.3) 5.5) 4.1/ 14 17
Medium Sand (.5-.25 mm.) -~---- 6.5| 6.7) 4.5} 20.7] 16.9] 17.6] 10.1] 8.4) 9.7
Fine sand (.25-.1 mm.) ~------- 24.9| 22.6) 13.1] 53.5| 40.6) 50.5) 32.2] 71.1) 73.5
Very fine sand (.1-.05 mm.) ----~- 9.8| 8.6] 6.1] 11.6] 9.1] 18.7] 11.6] 10.6). 8.1
ilteen(-05-.005 mim)" (22222 a2 =. 30.2] 26.3] 40.9) 5.6) 9.3] 3.3) 16.2] 2.5) 2.3
Clay (.005-.0001 mm.) ---------- | 24.6] 27.2| 27.9] 2.4] 19.4] 3.9) 24.8) 5.7| 5.0
STG Galan ee es Be ee 100.0/100.2| 99.8) 99.9) 99.8 99.8) 99.6) 99.9|100.3
Calcium carbonate -------~----- |15.75| 6.00|54.79| __--|14.38| ----| ----| ----| ----

*One sample reported on in Bulletin 13, representing rich heavy hammock
near Altoona, has been excluded because it totals less than 95% and it has been
impossible to locate the error after the lapse of so many years.

182 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Lime-Sink Region

6. Cream-colored sand or high pine land (‘‘Norfolk sandy
loam’’), Marion Co. Average of two localities, viz., 1 mile n. w.
of Flemington and % mile s. of Elmwood. Depths 0-18 and 0-10
inches. (Gainesville area. )

7. -Subsoil of same, gray stiff sandy clay and brown sandy
clay, 8-36 and 10-36 inches.

8. High pine land (‘Gainesville fine sand’) 6% miles n. of
Dunnellon, Marion Co. Depth 0-6 inches. (Ocala area.)

g. Subsoil of same, 6-36 inches,

Middle Florida Hammock Belt

10. “Light hammock’ near Ocala. Depth o-9 inches. (Bull.
12%)

11. Subsoil of same, 9-24 inches.

12. Lower subsoil of same, 24-36 inches.
- 13. Light hammock % mile s. of Ocala. Depth o-12 inches.
(Bull. 13.)

14. Subsoil of same, 12-30 inches.

15. Rich heavy hammock near Ocala. Depth o-12 inches.
(Bull. 13.)

16. Rich heavy hammock 2% miles s. of Ocala. Depth o-12
inches.
TABLE 10.

Mechanical Analyses of Soils and Subsoils in Middle Florida Hammock Belt,
Marion Co. (From U.S. Soil Bulletin 13.)

Rich heavy

Light hammock Tight
hammock hammock
10 Dip Elz esol s pallens 16
Sub-| Sub- Sub-
Soil soil | soil Soil | Soil Soil | Soil
Fine gravel (2-1 mm.) —-_~-- Trace | Trace| Trace |Trace| 0.28 0.27 1.58
Coarse sand (1-.5 mm.) —-_- 1.59} 1.80) 1.45] 3.07 3.30 26 2.62
Medium sand (.5-.25 mm.) --| 15.63} 18.25] 19.63] 21.44) 22.29) 17.01] 13.08
Mine wsandy(e2o=slems) 62.87| 65.37] 62.40) 53.54 55.29) 40.94] 46.32
Very fine sand (.1-.05 mm.)--| 15.70] 10.07| 11.65] 13.30 10.64] 20.26] 19.83
sults, (O54! renien,)) 2-3 =—-— | 145) 1.20] 1.80 2.68 2.62 5.61 3.38
Fine silt (.01-.005 mm.) ___~ 0.48] 0.55] o62 1633 |e 64 eee 1.50
Clay (.005-.0001 mm.) ~~-~-- 1 e0.61 1.39] 1.26 2.39 3.06 5.55 6.86
Orrunica matters=s==2=)==——e 1.16f 0.75] 0.65{ 1.36] 0.92) 4.94) 2.61
Moisture, air-dry 0222 0.35] 0.22} 0.30] 0.49] 0.82) 1.61 1.39
CS ee TE 99.64) 99.60) 99.76] 99.60] 100.36] 100.58[ 99.17

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 183

TABLE II.

Mechanical Analyses of Soils and Subsoils in Middle Florida Hammock Belt,
Marion Co. (From Soil Surveys of “Ocala” and ‘‘Gainesville” areas.)

High hammocks Flatwoods
Portsmouth | Gainesville | Gainesville} Fellowship | (Portsmouth)

Lz ts | 10s, 20 Zin nee eames, | 25 «1 20mm

Sub- sub- Sub- | Sub- Sub-

Soil | soil | Soil | soil | Soil} soil | Soil|\ soil | Soil| soil

Fine gravel ----- | 0.6, 0.7] . 0.6) 0.2) 08) 06) 1.3; 0.3) 04/ . 0.6
Coarse sand —---- | 4.6) 2.3] 12.9) 12.8] 14.0) 9.3) 10.2 2.6 9.7 8.6
Medium sand ---| 13.7| 4.0] 26.5) 25.6) 238.5 7071 12.7 5.8| 23.4] 24.9
ines Sande 22 ose 50.0] 20.9) 40.1] 39.4) 41.4/ 29.7) 25.1 9.5} 46.9] 45.6
Very fine sand-_| 15.5) 18.7; 10.4; 10.7) 11.8 8.3] 8.0 6.1} 14.5| 14.0
ST ae ee ee 11.3] 36.0| 43] 3.8 5.5] 4.9] 14.2] 13.4) .3.3 3.2
eo et ae 5.2| 7.5] 3.1] 32.4) 28.3] 62.0 1.6 2,
RGta le ae ee | 99.7] 99.7| 100.0] 100.0) 100.0} 100.0; 99.8] 99.7| 99.8) 99.1
Calcium carbonate} ----- Ei Leb) aes fess | pet | ee ee ee ee eee

17. High hammock (‘Portsmouth sandy loam’*) 2% miles
s. e. of Johnson Pond, Marion Co. A black sandy loam. Depth
o-8 inches. (Gainesville area.)

18. Subsoil of same. A stiff heavy marly clay. Depth 8-36
inches.

19. High hammock (or perhaps red oak woods, the two not
being satisfactorily distinguished in the report) 2 miles s.e. of
Ocala (“Gainesville loamy sand’’). Depth o-10 inches. (Ocala
area. )

20. Subsoil of same. Depth 10-36 inches.

21. High hammock (“Gainesville sandy loam’’) 5 miles s. of
Ocala. Depth o-12 inches. (Ocala area.)

22. Subsoil of same. Depth 12-36 inches.

23. High hammock (‘Fellowship clay loam”) 2 miles s. w.
of Ocala. Depth o-4 inches. (Ocala area.)
24. Subsoil of same. Depth 4-36 inches.
25. Flatwoods soil (“Portsmouth fine sand’+) in n. m. cor-
ner of Marion Co., 2% miles e. of Wacahoota. Depth o-10 inches.
(Gainesville area.)

26. Subsoil of same. Depth 10-36 inches.

*This would doubtless be classified differently by the Bureau of Soils
now. See 6th Annual Report, p. 255, footnote.

yInadvertently placed in a table headed “Gainesville sand.” See 6th Annual
Report, p. 256, footnote.

13

184 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Lake Region

“Etonia scrub” near Altoona (3 samples) and Orange City
Depths 3, 4, 4, and 6 inches. (Bull. 13.)
Depths 3-30, 6-18, 4-36,

270
Junction.

28. Subsoils of same 4 samples.
and 6-36 inches.

29. High pine land near Grand Island, Altoona (4 samples),
Winter Haven (2 samples) and Eustis. Depths varying from 4
to 8 inches.

Subsoils of same 8 samples. Depths varying from 18 to

30.
36 inches.
31.. “Light hammock” near Winter Haven, Polk Co. Two

samples, o-8 and 0-9 inches.

32. Subsoil of same, to 36 inches.

33. ‘Rich heavy hammock” near Orange Bend, Lake Co.
Depth o-8 inches.

34. Clayey low hammock or short-leaf pine and cabbage pal-
metto bottoms (‘Fellowship clay’’) 2 miles n. e. of Silver Spring.
Depth 0-4 inches. (Ocala area. )

35. Subsoil of same. Depth 4-36 inches.

Flatwoods, Western Division. (All from Bull. 13.)

36. High pine land near Bartow (average of 2 samples).
Depth o-g inches.

TABLE 12.

Mechanical Analyses of Soils and Subsoils in Lake Region.
(From Bulletin 13 and Soil Survey of “Ocala Area.’’)

High pine Mette Os Rich | Clayey low
Scrub ad Light ham’k Bers phil
27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Sub- Sub- ; Sub- Sub-
Soil | soil | Soil | soil | Soil | soil | Soil | Soil | soil
Binevpravel = 222 | 0.23 0.34 2.05 2.14;Trace| Trace! 0.45 0.3 0.5
Coarse sand 2222222 3.04 3.49| 7.65 7.66 4.92 5.10 4.92 TAs) || 3.3
Medium sand ps 222 27.43} 29.64| 28.18] 27.32) 39.17| 40.15] 35.77| 134 | 7.3
Hines sand ee ee 58.60| 57.47| 44.19) 44.97] 44.53] 43.48 42.85} 34.8 | 15.9
Very. fine sand --_~ 7.60 5.85| 13.73]. 14.37 6.17 5.82 6.49| 15.9 | 7.4
Sti eos 0.55 0.74 0.98 0.96 0.79 0.90 Paoes |
| | 16.4 | 11.3
Minewsiltare aes. 0.20 0.22 0.39 0.37 0.34 0.26 0.54 ]
Clary teas co eS 0.87 1.56 1.07 ] 24 1.89 2,.44| 4.58] 118 | 54.3
Organic matter ---- 1.24 1.24 1.43 0.59, 1.49} 0.75) 1.77| ? ?
Moisture, air-dry --| 0.22| 0.28] 0.30) 0.18 0.57) 0.25] .0.44| ? ?
Total eae 100.28! 100.73) 99.97) 99.80 99.87; 99.15] 100.14! 100.1 | 100.0

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

TABLE 13.

185

Mechanical Analyses of Soils and Subsoils in Southwestern Flatwoods.

(From U. 8. Soil Bulletin 13.)

High pine land |

Near Fort Meade

| Heavy gray
hammock
44 45
Sub-

Soil soil
0.33 0.38
2.16 2.85
10.34| 13.72
45.37| 47.79
33.95| 27.78
0.98; 0.89
0.50 0.20
2.76 2.30
2.51 2.61
1.16 1.05
100.06] 99.87

. . Mulatto

Near Bartow | Ist quality 3d quality Havas

36 37 38 3Y 40 41 42 43

Sub- Sub- Sub- Sub-

Soil | soil Soil soil | Soil soil soil | soil
aoavel -._-_.__-. 0.26} 0.17) 0.52) 0.52) 0.10) O.11{ 0.78, (0.70
Coarse sand ----- 2.26, 1.72) 2.94; 3.14) 0.65} 0.71] 2.85] 2.50
Medium sand ----| 20.29] 18.74| 16.00] 17.23) 4.58] 6.19} 14.35] 14.30
mine sand —__.__ 46.01] 48.82) 47.95) 49.29) 47.88} 64.37| 53.51| 53.00
Very fine sand__| 23.80; 24.32] 24.73] 23.14) 40.90] 24.59) 23.50} 24.46
EE 1.10) 0.71| 0.86] 0.62} 0.58) 0.73) 0.65] . 0.62
mane silt -_____-- | 0.40} 0.23] 0.38) 0.30] 0.23 0.40) 0.44| 0.34
a 2.94, 3.87| 2.62) 2.62) 1.68) 2.15) 2.07| 1.58
Organic matter -_| 2.90) 1.16] 3.02} 2.22) 1.60) 0.82) 1.53] 1.43
Moisture, air-dry_| 0.68} 0.45] 1.54) 0.48} ~=0.47/ —:0.30|_-—«:0.62| ~—0..47|
otal, 22222 100.64| 100.19} 100.56) 99.56) 98.67| 100.37) 100.30] 99.40

37. Subsoil of same. Depth 9-30 inches.

38.
Depth 0-20 inches.

39. Subsoil of same.- Depth 20-30 inches.

“First quality high pine land” 1%4 mile s. of Fort Meade.

Depth

40. “Third quality high pine land” near Fort Meade.
o-18 inches.
41. Subsoil of same. Depth 18-36 inches.
. 42. ‘“‘Mulatto hammock” near Fort Meade. Depth 0-12 inches.

TABLE I4.

Mechanical Analyses of Soils and Subsoils in East Coast Strip near Rockledge.
(From U. S. Soil Bulletin 13.)

aati Iee AO

Spruce pine { Heavy gray | Red coquina

scrub hammock hammock

47 49 51

ae Sub- = Sub- Ay Sub-

Soil | soil | Soil | soil Soil | soil
0 ae a ern eens 0.65| 0.66] 0.17) 0.15) 0.67) 0.64
MOIAESCR SANG oo 2 2 sets eee 12.36] 9.07) 4.15) 4.74) 10.65] 10.96
Medium sand 22252 es ee 41.42) 32.58] 32.16] 32.25) 32.67| 32.26
Beeterrbtieyeede.2 22 tke Sh A ee he, | 41.18] 52.13! 60.00) 59.27) 38.86] 44.02
Meee tier nan 25 72 ek eS | 240) 3.26) 1.52) 131) 7.72) 6.62
Lh a ais a ee ee ae 0.16] 0.23) 0.21; 0.08} 0.81) 0.80
LEW 2 2 a SIG AS REESS | 0.06; 0.18) 0.46) 0.10) 0.29) 0.36
A eee ane Seen one 4 oe ieee | 0.35] 0.51] 0.94) 0.13] 1.33] » 2.26
Berenine a IAECEE \ os 1.06] 0.45} 0.83] 0.60) 5.25} 1.35
UO COVSSUAU ACN seth SOS ec Sed 0.15 0.25 0.20 0.22 1.24 0.53
LEE OE es ea a ee | 99.79]: 99.32] 100.64] 98.85] 99.49] 99.78

186 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

43. Subsoil of same. Depth not given. _

44. “Heavy gray hammiock” near Fort Meade (average of
2 samples). Depth o-20 inches.

45. Subsoil of same. Depth 20-36 inches.

East Coast Strip. (All from Bull. 13.)

46. Spruce pine scrub near Rockledge, Brevard Co. Average
of 2 samples. Depth 0-6 inches.

47. Subsoil of one of these. Depth 6-36 inches.

48. Heavy gray hammock near Rockledge. Average of 2
samples. Depth o-18 inches. |

49. Subsoil of same. Depth 18-36 inches.

50. Red coquina hammock near Rockledge. Average of 2
samples. Depths 0-4 and 0-6 inches.

51. Subsoils of same. Depths 4-18 and 6-36 inches.

Comments on the Mechanical Analyses

The significance of the relative proportion of the different
sizes of sand grains does not seem to have been determined, except
in a very general way; but other things being equal, the soils hav-
ing the largest proportion of silt and clay generally have the most
available plant food and support the most luxuriant (or fastest
growing) vegetation, with the largest proportion of deciduous
trees. The clayey low hammocks of the Gulf hammock region
(analyses I to 3) and lake region (34, 35) lead in this respect,
the former having over 50% of silt and clay, and the latter over
25% in the soil and 65% in the subsoil, probably chiefly in the
form of marl. Some of the calcareous high hammocks of Marion
County also stand high in this respect. The white sand or scrub
of the lake region and east coast has the least clay, only about 1%,
and is the poorest soil in the list, its vegetation being nearly all
evergreen. ‘The moisture capacity and organic matter (given in
Bulletin 13, but not in the soil surveys) are seen to be highest in the
best soils, at least as far as the determinations go.

CHEMICAL ANALYSES id

No entirely satisfactory chemical analyses of the soils of our -
area are available, but some of varying degrees of accuracy and

~~

Cae’ ane

ttt Oe ees ee! ee

ale dl

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 187

completeness have been obtained from various sources. The best
seem to be three in the 6th volume of the Tenth U. S. Census (pp.
201, 204, 205, 214), which leave little to be desired except the ni-
trogen percentages and perhaps more exact information about the
topography and vegetation. The samples were collected by Dr.
Eugene A. Smith in the summer of 1880, and analyzed under his
direction at the University of Alabama, by John B. Durrett, by the
acid digestion method (described by Hilgard in Tenth Census 5 :72,
Soils 340-343, and elsewhere). The localities are as follows:

A. First class pine land, 9 miles north of Ocala, with long-
leaf pine, red oak, hickory and wire-grass. Depth 10 inches,

B. Dark gray high hammock soil one mile south of Ocala,
with live, white* and watery oaks, hickory, bay,f sweet and sour
gum, and magnolia. Depth Io inches.

C. Light gray hammock near Leesburg, with hickory, live and
water oaks, red bay, and “evergreen.’’ Depth 8 inches.

The analyses of these three are given in Table 15, to which
sample Q (described farther on) is added for comparison with C.
The first is evidently an intermediate condition between the high

pine land and the red oak woods described elsewhere. The second

|

TABLE I5.
Chemical Analyses of Four Central Florida Soils.

Marion Co. |Sandy ham’ks

Pine ; Ham-| Lake {Marion
land | mock] Co. Co.
A B C Q
Water and orcanic matter 22==4----_=_-_-_—____ = 1.884| 3.583] 1.675) 1.29
TBragbenslay © (TAO) Se ke eS eae | 189 112 052 021
Siaaley SINE O)) 2 eee ol ees Se ee ee .038 .035 015 ?
ibiniayer (CHONG Stas. ee ee eae | .072| .185] .O77| —-.06
Magnesia, (MgO): -------------------------------- | .039| —.038| .019| ?
wehospmonic acid (h.)e 2-2 -soen2 see 2 sek 110 110| = .079 O74
SSULpMUrIC Aci, A( SOs) .a—2—. =" eee een .091 054 .053 2
Brown oxide of manganese (Mn,0,) ~-------------- 055| 027 032) ?
Peroxide ot arone(He.O;) eens ee ee eee 821] 2.048] .214| ) 415
PNiigmumay = (sAl:O),) te eee es Sse Sak ER 915] 2.494) .628]-) ~
Solublasesilicaa 22-25 2. Aah ee ek 1.665| 1.380] .214| ?
insolisblermatver 22-22 soe wee fe Se eee | 94.460] 90.585] 97.350] 96.20
A DPay Fert ee ees Se NTRS 8 ea ER CT ee 99.839|100.646]100.408| _--__-

*Doubtless Quercus Michauxt.
, tProbably Quercus laurifolia.
tDoubtless Persea Borboma.

188 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

is fairly typical of what is here called semi-calcareous hammock
land, and the third and fourth of sandy hammocks.

Bulletin 43 of the Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, by
A. A. Persons (1897), contains many analyses of central Florida
soils, made by J. P. Davies, by essentially the method recommended
by the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists in 1895.
These have been made the basis of several published statements
about the average composition of Florida soils,* and at first glance
they appear to be valuable sources of information; but closer scru-
tiny shakes one’s faith in them. The samples were collected by sev-
eral different persons, apparently mostly without previous experi-
ence or expert supervision, and some of them are not described suf-
ficiently to make it clear just what type of soil they represent. Al-_
though the analyses cover almost every constituent that is commonly
considered in such work, except manganese, and are carried out to
four decimal places, they contain so many inconsistencies as to sug-
gest either careless work or typographical erors, or both. (Prof.
Persons a few years before his death informed the writer that he
was unavoidably absent from the State for several weeks while this
bulletin was going through the press, which may account for some
of the errors.) In many cases the analyses show more humus or
less potash, iron or alumina in the subsoil than in the soil, which
is strange if true, and much less potash and lime than is given in
analyses of somewhat similar soils in other publications. As there
is no analysis from central Florida in the bulletin that is free from
one or more of these defects, it has been thought best not to use any
of them.

In Whitney’s Bulletin 13, previously mentioned, the averages
of partial analyses of four to ten samples of several types of soil
are given. The method of analysis is not stated (and could not
be recalled by Prof. Whitney 17 years later), but the results seem
consistent with those obtained by the A. O. A. C. method (which
reveals considerably less potash than Hilgard’s acid digestion
method). The same bulletin also gives for several types of soil
the total amounts of soluble salts in the soil solution, a factor of
considerable significance. The results are set forth in Tables 16
and 17. In the former, D represents “Etonia scrub” and E high

*Some of them have been quoted in our 4th Annual Report, pp. 65-71.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 189
.

pine land, both from the lake region, and F “light hammock’’ and
G “gray hammock,” from various regions.

TABLE I6.

Partial Chemical Analyses of.Four Types of Soil.
(From U. S. Soil Bulletin 13.)

High | Light | Gray

Serub; pine | ham- | ham-
land | mock | mock

D E F G
INTRO Si Pye ES Eee ee ee ee | .028] 028] .042) .042
Oh als ina (UN) reese os ee Te a es ed ee .003 .007 .015 .009
We javele (CaO) sane ee Ee se 2 Baie oe .030 .060 .090 .090
Maonesian(Me@) vie S22 Seo © fue eee ee ee ee 013) .020) .040| .036
Ee DOSPHOLiIG AClO; wb. Oni ea eee eee elle | .008 .140 .090 320

TABLE 17.

Percentage of Soluble Salts in Several Types of Central Florida Soils and
Subsoils. (From U.S. Soil Bulletin 13.)

Lake REGION | Soil |Subsoil
Etarscrubenienr Altoona. 208. Aa thos tee ee ee | .00095| + .00094
I. High pine land near Grand Island ----------------------- | .00209| .00104
J. High pine land near, Winter Haven’ —-..--..2-=--+-----_-- | .00156| .00080
SOUTHWESTFRN FLATWOODS
K. First quality high pine land near Fort Meade ------~----- | .00114 ?
L. Third quality high pine land near Fort Meade_----------- | .00108| .00127
M. “Heavy hammock” near Fort Meade ---------------------- | .00116| .00136
East Coast Strip
Nee Gray hammock qear;hotkledgé 242225 = i oe | .00210| 00100

Several samples of central Florida soils collected by the writer
in I915 were analyzed in the same year by L. Heimburger, assistant
State chemist, in the same manner as those made for the 6th An-
nual Report, viz., the A. O. A. C. method for organic fertilizers.*
These samples, which are all rather exceptional, and not typical of
very large areas, are listed below, in regional order as before. The
numbers in parentheses are those under which the analyses have
been published in the report of the State Chemist for 1915.

West Coast Islands

O. (2136). Dry sand with considerable shell material, from
palm savanna on Long Key about 4 miles north of Pass-a-Grille.
Depth 12 inches.

*For further particulars see 6th Ann. Rep., p. 397.

I9O FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—~I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

P. (2137). Soil with larger shell fragments, near inner side
of Long Key, about 2 miles north of Pass-a-Grille. Depth 6 inches.

Middle Florida Hammock Belt

Q. (2104). Cream-colored sand with humus, or sandy ham-
mock (mapped as “Leon sand’’) about 6 miles south of Ocala, with
vegetation nearly all evergreen (fig. 39). Depth 8 inches.

R. (2105). Red oak woods, with no evergreens, about 1%
miles e. s. e. of Ocala (fig. 41). Depth 9 inches,

S. (2106). Semicaleareous hammock with many evergreens,
about a mile southeast of Ocala (fig. 13). Depth 8 inches.

T (2139). Calcareous high hammock with few evergreens,
about 2% miles south of Ocala. Depth 6 inches. This soil ap-
peared to consist mostly of limestone fragments and black humus.

U. (2107). Hammock with trees mostly hackberry, on hill-
side about 1% mile south of McIntosh, Marion County. Depth 6
inches. Soil black and waxy, with many small rock fragments,
though no outcrops of limestone were observed in the vicinity.

Hernando Hammock Belt

V (2134). Long-leaf pine woods with little underbrush, on
hillside about 14 mile north of Brooksville. Depth 6 inches. Soil
blackish, and quite different from that of typical high pine land.

W. (2135). Level forest in rather low ground about a mile
north of Brooksville, with sweet gum, ironwood, etc. Depth 6
inches. ‘This appears loamy and rather retentive of moisture, but
when dry looks much like ordinary cream-colored sand.

Flatwoods, Western Division

~

X (2138). Rich hammock with dogwood, lin, etc., on hillside
about 2 miles north of Fort Meade. Depth 9 inches. A chocolate
loam, with many rock fragments presumably derived from under-
lying pebble phosphate beds.

Flatwoods, Eastern Division

Y (2100): Comparatively dry prairie with scattered saw-
palmetto and various herbs, about 7%4 miles west of Melbourne,

a. ee Moe

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA I9I

Brevard Co. Depth 8 inches. Soil mostly sand, but underlaid
at no great depth by shell marl.

4
East Coast Strip

Z (2108). Crest of outermost dune, about 10 feet high, about
a mile south of Melbourne Beach, Brevard Co. (fig. 33). Depth
6 inches. A fine sand with finely divided shell fragments.

The analyses of these last twelve samples are given in Table 18.
The moisture is that retained by the soil after drying in the open
air for several weeks in the dry season, and the volatile matter in-
cludes both organic substatices (the nitrogen in which is determined
separately ) and carbon dioxide liberated from limestone, which
amounts to considerable in some of the samples. (Any one suf-
ficiently interested can determine approximately from the lime per-
centages just how much of the volatile matter is carbon dioxide. )
The iron and alumina are combined, on account of the difficulty
of separating them, and soda, sulphur, magnesia, manganese, etc.,
are omitted entirely, because they were not regarded as of suf-
ficient importance to justify the labor of determining them.

Comments on the Chemical Analyses

In the first three analyses, made by the acid digestion method,
A, from mixed red oak and pine woods, has more potash than any
other central Florida soil on record (and the comparison imight
be extended to the whole State, as long as we have no analyses of
the alluvial soils along the Apalachicola River). This soil sup-
ports a large proportion of deciduous trees, while on that repre-
sented by C, which has less than a third as much potash, the vege-
tation is nearly all evergreen. Sample Q is probably very similar
to C, but the analysis shows considerably less potash on accotnt
of the different method used. The highest potash percentages in
the analyses made by Mr. Heimburger are in the calcareous ham-
mock soils from near Ocala and McIntosh, where deciduous trees
greatly predominate.

Sample R, taken from red oak woods with no evergreens, would
almost certainly show more potash than A does if analyzed by the
acid digestion method, but the A. O. A. C. method does not do jus-
tice to the potash. In fact its indications with respect to this con-

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

192

(i) 866 | ¢0°00T! 9o'TOT) ¢zooT! 9 LOL 9F'L6 | TS'E0T! GF ‘oot! oF00t! 90°86 |(&)zo'06 | 9e001I-----------------— [840],
96°28 | 6T'86 | 29°68 | 99°26 | E226 g9'¢2 | ss'6c | 6¢°26 | cots | oz96 | ze92 | 00°96 |-------- Jaz}zeuL eTqnposuT
01s’ Ione: ee | 08 | 28°T 1L% | 298 | 18 | soc Ilcte |» 991 Ieee |-------- vurunye pure Uuory
Osi --izeo> err 080° Ee rss | 1a \sze | ces [p20 | ozs \gog |---------- plow ot1oydsoyg

(t)6ar | eovry| zr re .9 Poul eco Th eee. Op. aml eee: Q0ile lar see eS (O¥D) eury
FIO’ = |600°~—s [gto [20 an Zs0u- TLS s\GC0s S1ITG0s © \tzor| 4 (iam inaean eae eee (O*M) Ysej0g
1st —|90z.. 012. © |86T bee Gir 16 2 ie? 0ST see le pty oe ORz e- saeco eee WISO0I}IN
1G OGD (SiGe lee ea BO eeome | 2OT | 60% 1 0eh ale sOeOL eer lessee 19}}PVUL 9TTZRIOA
GO" 90° SG On a no 66'¢ | 06 | 9 GOT 60s le OT SolG0) es ese see (07H) aimgstoyy
% A x es a eli Ss ts Ieee fa) d O
ound | eared) Ad eq Yoourmey Syspowmuey |¥y,uey | spoom|] Y.uwey
700 6 0) = | Yaey eoneuas _ Shoareo[e) Yysrpy |yeo pay Apurg SPuryst

prwaoag, | PRAM | yory Bean Hog Yooumeyy “ELT [PPV qSBOD 480A,

“CLGT “VploLy [erzUeD woOIy [log Jo soydueg ZT Jo SosAyeuy [wormeyD [eyarg

‘QI ATavL

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 193

stituent appear somewhat contradictory, for some of the samples
in the last table show more of it than one could reasonably expect.
Taking everything into consideration, however, it is safe to say
that central Florida soils generally contain less potash than those
of northern Florida or any equal area a few hundred miles farther
inland. ‘The reason for this is probably two-fold: first, the remote-
ness of this area from igneous rocks which are the main original
source of potash, and second, the leaching effect of the copious
late summer rains. But this lack is partly compensated by the tem-
perature, for the plant food in any soil is liberated inore rapidly in
a warm climate than in a cold one. |

The scrub and dune soils are low in potash, as in almost every-
thing else.

The lime, like the potash, is as a rule most abundant in the rich-
est soils, and vice versa, but there are some important exceptions.
For example, the beach and dune sands are well supplied with cal-
cium carbonate in the form of shell fragments, but are practically
worthless for agricultural purposes, perhaps chiefly on account of
the scarcity of very fine particles for plant roots to draw nourish-
ment from (no mechanical analyses seem to be available, unfort-
unately), or of soil animals and bacteria. And the vegetation of
the calcareous hammocks near Ocala (sample T), with over 7%
of lime in the soil, does not seem as luxuriant as that near Mc-
Intosh (sample U), where there is less than 2%. However, prob-
ably the latter figure is more than sufficient, and any excess over
that therefore superfluous. The least lime is in the St. John’s
River prairie (Y), which seems rather strange, for ditches near
where the sample was taken show shell marl within two or three
feet of the surface.

Although lime (or more strictly speaking any calcium com-
pound) is not an important plant food, it is thought to improve the
condition of the soil in various ways, and as it dissolves readily it
liberates less soluble plant foods that may be combined or mixed
with it.

The phosphorus is almost incredibly high in samples R, T, U
and X, soils with more than half of one per cent of P:Os being
_ very exceptional.* The high percentage in X, which was taken

*See Hilgard, Tenth Census 5:78; 1884; Soils 355. 1906.

194 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

right in the phosphate country, is not surprising, but the still higher
figures for R, T, and U are not so easy to explain. Very likely
in each of these cases, however, the phosphorus is mostly combined
with iron, as ferric phosphate, which is almost insoluble.*

There is nothing in the analyses of the two soils from Long
Key (samples O and P) to indicate extreme sterility, and yet no at-
tempt seems to be made to cultivate them, and the woody plants
there are all evergreen.

Sample QO, from a sandy hammock, is deficient in nearly every-
thing, and its vegetation is nearly all evergreen. In everything ex-
cept potash its analysis resembles that for C about as closely as two
samples from different counties and regions collected by differ-
ent people about 35 years apart could be expected to; and the dif-
ference in potash illustrates the difference between the. Hilgard and
A. O.. A. GC. methods in that respect.

Sample R represents one of the richest upland soils in Florida.
S is not very different from Q, but the differences are all in the di-
rection that the vegetation indicates. T and U are rich calcareous
soils, well supplied with potash and phosphorus also.

The analyses make V a better soil than W in almost every re-
spect, though the vegetation indicates decidedly otherwise; a para-
dox for which no adequate explanation can be given at present.

X is a rich soil, and Y and Z are poor.

“CLIMATE

The climate of central Florida differs from that of northern
Florida, and still more from other parts of the eastern United
‘States, in being warmer in winter and wetter in summer, especially
late summer. The following table of climatic data for a number of
stations in the area is compiled mostly from Bulletin W (Sections
83 and 84) of the U. S. Weather Bureau, and the annual climato-
logical summary of the Florida section of the same Bureau for 1913.
The data given are the average temperature for January, July and
the whole year, in degrees Fahrenheit, the average length of the
growing season (period between killing frosts), in days, the av-
erage annual rainfall, in inches, the percentage of the total rainfall
that comes in the four warmest months (June to September ) and

*See Hilgard, Soils, p. 356.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 195

the six warmest months (May to October), and the excess of late
summer (August to October) rainfall over that for early summer
(April to June), in inches.*

TABLE IQ.
Selected Climatological Data for Weather Stations in Central Florida, Grouped
by Regions.
Temperature | | Rainfall
ak Per cent in ,;Excess
eason Fe Sl) ae ee IC
La LIA Rs (days) | nual | 4 mos| 6 mos." ah
sum’er
West Coast
Cedar Keys --------- | 57.6 SZ, 215 | hon Once hse | 51.53] 57.2 66.1 | 6.9
Tarpon Springs ----- iS ie| eeOULS teesOsG) eee 50.27; 63.1 | 70.8 | 7.8
LiME-SINK REGION | | |
Rockwell)... 005 os Pers Aele BL Syme a Oe hgees 27 52.55] 59.2] 70.1| 5.4
jnverness | 2222222225" 55.8 oh Wee 3g ee 51.74| 59.3 | 69.7 3.1
ite igen teint! See Br | 80.0 | 70.4 335, 51.49] 62.7] 72.7 | 6.4
Mip. Fra. HammMock| | | | | |
BELT | | | | | |
Geta eee el Se | 57.4 | 814] 70.2] 294] 51.64) 59.6 | 71 lo 48
HERNANDO Ham- | | | | | |
mMocK BELT | | | | | | |
Brooksville -___----- | 58.0| 80.8] 70.8| 311] 55.97| 621] 725] 49
TAT gaat ae GCSE eee heiress e 58.22| 60.9 | 13 | 3.7
LAKE REGION | | | | |
Orange City -------- | 58.2 S225 eden, Se 47.33] 55.9 71.4 6.4
WUIstiss 2 eee 58.4 | SP ay OE Ieee ee | 47.40| 56.3 68.8 6.2
©lermont __--__--_-- 5910 |. Sa SiPeiraiG | ewes | 48.71] 58.7] 71.3] 5.7
WestTERN FLatwoops| | | | | |
Memitya-o20 0 ctes P| | 574 | 80.0} 704] 335] 51.49] 62.7] 72.7] 64
Biante City leeks ee [GOO SOs 704 bse. 55.40| 61.5] 74.8| 6.8
Bartow (222.00 ee | 60.1 | 81.9] 72.4 | 315| 51.84) 60.6 | 74.1 5.8
Fort Meade —-_------ RR E24 eto iy (a oA ee 58.51} 62.6 | 76.3 6.0
EASTERN FLatwoops | | | | | | |
Kissmminies 2022-3 [GOS 5) 282.0M| 7 F220 7 eee 52.47| 55.6 70.5 6.3
East Coast | | | | |
New Smyrna ----_-- SO | 19:8") G97..| 311] 50.95} 49.3 68.0 9.1
Ditueville (e220 27+) Ki eSuPil« BOIShETO.Ot| Meee. | | 51.22} 543] 73.5 | 4.5
Merritt’s Island =---| 62.0 |. 81.4] 72.7 | -=---- | 50.54| 50.4 | 69.4] 5.7

Throughout the area under consideration the average tempera-
ture for any or all months varies only a few degrees from one place
to another, probably not as much as it does for the same place in
different years. The growing season varies more, though, from

*For a discussion of the significance of this seasonal precipitation factor
see Science II. 48:208-211. Aug. 30, 1918. Its relation to the distribution of
oil wells in the United States has been pointed out in the chapter on economic
geology (page 160).

196 _FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

294 days at Ocala (and doubtless still less a little farther north)
to practically 365 on Merritt's Island and south of there, where
often a whole year passes without frost. (The imaginary “frost
line” lies considerably farther south, however, for there is prob-
ably no place in Florida, with the possible exception of the Keys,
that has not had frost at some time within the memory of pérsons
now living. )

Although it is not feasible to present figures on that point, the
temperature of course varies from year to year, and some of these
variations have made the difference between success and failure
for those who are always trying to raise tender crops as far north
as possible. The severe freezes of 1895 and 1899 almost wiped
out the orange industry in Florida (which was then largely con-
centrated in the latitude of Ocala and farther north), but since then
many of the larger groves have been established farther south, and
more attention has been paid to locating them on high points o1 near
lakes for protection from frost, and installing heating devices to
use at critical periods, and there has been comparatively little trouble
from that source in the last twenty years. The lake region has
an advantage over most of the others in its abundance of hills and
lakes. .

Snow is of course practically unknown. The extreme variations
in rainfall from place to place are not great, but the lake region
seems to be a little the driest, perhaps because farthest from the
coast. Although there may be considerable variation from year
to year, it is hardly enough to cause any serious inconvenience, for
there is nearly always enough rain to prevent drought, and at the
same time the topography and soil make floods almost impossible.
On the sandy uplands the heaviest rain sinks into the ground al-
most immediately, to appear gradually later in swamps and springs.

Over half the rain falls in the four warmest months, and over
two thirds in the six warmest months, thus counterbalancing evap-
oration to a large extent and keeping the level of lakes and streams
more constant than in most other parts of the United States. A
slight correlation can be noticed between the late summer precip-
itation excess and soil fertility, the excess being less in the hammock
belts than in the lake region and flatwoods; as if the soil itself

i> a

ee eee ee ee ee

Se) oF eV beh Oar est, >

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 197

influenced the precipitation through the vegetation or in some other
way:*

The summer rain falls mostly in the daytime, in the form of
short, heavy showers.

Hurricanes visit this section occasionally, usually in late sum-
mer, the season of maximum precipitation. But they rarely do
much damage except near the coast, and even there they appear to
be less frequent and destructive than they are a little farther north
and south, though accurate statistics are not available. Torna-
does, popularly known as “cyclones,” are almost unknown here,
those being chiefly confined to those parts of the United States that
have considerably more rain in early summer than in late summer.

VEGETATION

The vegetation of central Florida is even more diversified than
the soil, and far more than in most areas of the same size in the
eastern United States. About thirty natural types are here recog-
nized, and that number could possibly be doubled without undue
duplication if one cared to go into such minute details. Just what
constitutes a vegetation type is a disputed point. Some botanists
have described a multitude of ‘“‘plant associations,’ some of them
consisting chiefly of a single species and occurring in strips or
patches only a few feet wide; but in this work nothing less than sev-
eral acres in extent is considered.

Even if there was no uncertainty about the size of the unit
it would still be difficult to devise a satisfactory classification, for
different types are related to each other in all sorts of ways, and
two apparently quite different ones may be merely different stages
of the same thing. In this work they will be taken up as nearly as
possible in order of complexity, beginning with places that have no
vegetation at all, and vegetation composed wholly of herbs, and
proceeding through shrubby types to dense forests made up of
trees, shrubs, herbs, mosses, epiphytes, parasites, etc.
ca Ni NET RSE SII LE ONC NY SS ew

*Some of the discrepancies in this respect observable in other parts of the
table may be due to records too short to be accurate enough, or even to ty-
pographical or other errors. It seems a little strange, for example, that New
Smyrna should have the lowest summer percentages and the highest late sum-
mer excess at the same time.

198 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

There are interesting analogies between all these types and dif-
ferent stages of human society. In deserts and polar regions there
is no permanent population; where conditions are a little less for-
bidding there are tribes with simple civilization and little educa-
tion, where nearly all men have the same occupation, like the Bed-
ouins and Eskimos; and at the other end of the series are highly
civilized communities, with a very complex division of labor, and
individuals varying in-ability and usefulness from criminals (anal-
ogous to the parasites of the vegetable world) and loafers to gen-
iuses and “intellectual giants,” analogous to the largest trees.*

No classification of vegetation can be final or complete, for
there are all sorts of intergradations between different types, and
some types which may be perfectly distinct or at least not inter-
mediate between any other two may escape observation on account
of occurring only in small patches or in out-of-the-way places. But
those here described probably cover at least 90% of the uncultivated
land area treated, and the omission of any others will hardly be no-
ticed by persons not intimately acquainted with the area.

Cultivated crops are not regarded as vegetation, for they do
not follow natural laws but grow where they are put. There is
more or less characteristic weedy vegetation in old fields, vacant
lots, along roadsides, etc., but that can be studied just as well after
the natural vegetation is all gone, and it is ignored for the present
(except that a few of the more abundant weeds have been in-
cluded in the regional plant lists). Of course it would be a mat-
ter of some interest to make a careful study of the weeds now,
and again every few decades to see what changes are taking
place, but limitations of time and money (if not enthusiasm)
have prevented.

A good description of each vegetation type would include a list
of all but the rarest species, arranged according to size and abun-
dance (as was done for those in the “Ocala area”’ in the 7th Annual
Report), together with notes on the prevailing times of blooming,
colors of flowers, modes of dissemination, rate of growth, economic
properties, etc., but to do that would increase the bulk of this report
beyond reasonable limits, and consequently the descriptions have
been made as brief as possible. Some of them are supplemented by

*For a rough classification of human occupations in ten grades see Sci-
entific Monthly (former Popular Science Monthly) 10:295-296. March, 1920.

i i a i et ee BO ae

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 199

illustrations, which tell many things that cannot be put in words.
The principal vegetation types seem to be as follows:

PLACES WITH NO VEGETATION

These include bodies of water too deep for seeds to germinate
in, caves too dark, small rock outcrops in pine woods swept by fire,
beaches continually washed by waves, and roads, fields, and other
artificial situations.

HERBS PREDOMINATING

Aquatic vegetation (fig. 35). In the deeper parts of lakes and
in sluggish rivers and runs there are quite a number of herbs, either
floating free like the water-hyacinth (which however is not native)
and water lettuce, or with floating leaves like the water-lilies and
bonnets, or all submerged except the flowers (species of .Sagit-
taria, Vallisneria, Potamogeton, etc.) or with both leaves and flow-
ers raised above the water (Sagittaria lancifolia, Scirpus, Ponte-
deria, etc.). Such vegetation is found in fresh water that does not
vary too much in level, in all countries that are not too cold or too
dry, and consists mostly of monocotyledons and rather simple dico-
tyledons. It has much the same aspect in all continents, and the gen-

Fig. 35. Marshy margin of Lake Apopka near West Apopka, Lake County,
showing water-lilies, wampee (Pontederia), etc. May 20, 1909.

14

200 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

era and even some of the species composing it are very widely dis-
tributed.

Marginal and shore vegetation (fig. 20). In shallow margins
of lakes and along rivers where they are not subject to much fluc-
tuation, as near their mouths, we commonly find a type of vegeta-
tion intermediate between the preceding and the saw-grass marshes
(described a little farther on), and grading into both. It consists
mostly of a few coarse monocotyledons with hollow or spongy stems
or petioles, like maiden cane (Panicum hemitomon), saw-grass,
wampee (Pontederia), and Sagittaria lancifolia. Then above the
usual water level on sandy and peaty shores of lakes we find a
greater variety of herbs, mostly monocotyledons, often with a few
scattered shrubs among them. A list of characteristic plants of such
places was given in the 3rd Annual Report, page 267.

Grassy dunes. On dunes where the sand is constantly moving,
apparently not so much on the east coast as on the west coast, there
is a sparse vegetation of coarse grasses and other herbs, chiefly sea-
oats (Uniola paniculata) and other plants belonging to families well
represented in tropical America. These renew their foliage every
year, necessitating comparatively rapid growth and presumably in-
dicating moderately fertile soil, though the bulk of vegetation
per square yard or acre is not large on account of its very open
structure. A little farther back from the shore, where the sand is
not moving perceptibly, and much of the plant food has been leached
down beyond the reach of roots, the vegetation is of a much slower-
growing type, described below under the head of shrubs.

Salt marshes (fig. 3). These are characteristic of shallow
bodies of salt water protected from wave action, where the veg-
etation builds up a foundation of muck just about to high tide
level. The characteristic plants are coarse grasses and rushes,
with a few-scattered bushes. In warmer climates the woody plants
become larger and more numerous, until the marshes are replaced
by mangrove swamps (described farther on).

Saw-grass marshes (fig. 36). When a lake or a large embay-
ment of one becomes filled with peat, especially if the water is a lit-
tle calcareous, the vegetation is often composed almost whoily of
- saw-grass (Cladium effusum or Mariscus Jamaicensis), an ever-
green sedge several feet tall. The same species also forms a fringe

—— = 7

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 201

Fig. 36. Large saw-grass marsh bordering Lake Harris, looking north
from about a mile east of Eldorado, Lake County. Pine land in distance is
over a mile away. Feb. 9, 19009.

along rivers that fluctuate little, which in favorable situations may
expand into marshes of considerable width. Some of the plants
commonly associated with the saw-grass have been listed on the
lower half of page 270 in the’ Third Annual Report. Such marshes
are common in the lake region, and often cover several hundred
acres; and they may be important sources of peat when that sub-
stance becomes more popular than it is now. Plans are just now
being perfected for manufacturing paper from saw-grass in Lake
County, where there are some of the largest saw-grass marshes to
be found outside of the Everglades. For such an industry to be
permanent requires that the “grass” shall grow as fast as is cut,
which can be determined by multiplying the annual growth per acre
by the acreage available. With marsh vegetation that dies down to
the ground every year, like cat-tails, it is a very simple matter to
cut, dry and weigh a square yard or so of it at the end of the grow-
ing season, and convert the results to pounds or tons per acre.*

*For a study of several types of marsh vegetation on Long Island made
in this way see Plant World 21:38-46. (April) 1918. The most luxuriant veg-
etation found there was reed-grass, Phragmites communis, which yielded at the
rate of about 24 tons per acre when fresh and 12 tons when air-dry. Saw-grass
is said to yield from 12 to 20 tons per acre (fresh) at the first cutting.

202 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

But saw-grass being evergreen, the foliage present at any one time
represents more than one year’s growth, so that the proper proced-
ure would be to first mow down a small patch of it in midwinter,
and then cut and weigh a measured area from the same patch a year
later.

Peat prairies. These are basins reaching a few to several feet
below the ground-water level which have become filled with peat,
and are covered with herbaceous vegetation other than saw-grass,
presumably on account of the water being purer or at least less
calcareous than in the saw-grass marshes. They are more com- —
mon in the lake region than elsewhere. In the course of develop-
ment from lake to peat prairie the vegetation has of course under- |
gone considerable change, beginning with none at all and passing ~
through the aquatic and marginal types above mentioned. That
growing on the surface of the peat at present is much like that of —
some of the lake margin prairies described on the next page, ex- :
cept for the frequent occurrence of dense clumps of bay (Magnolia —
glauca) and other broad-leaved evergreens, a few rods in diam-
eter. The most characteristic plants have been listed in the Third
Annual Report (pp. 274-275), and do not need to be repeated here.
The herbs are mostly grasses and other monocotyledons. The peat
in such places is among the purest to be found anywhere.

Basin prairies (fig. 16). The flat-bottomed lakes which drain
off at intervals through subterranean outlets, in the Hernando ham-
mock belt and farther north, are carpeted when dry with herbaceous
vegetation that has not been carefully studied, but consists largely
of plants whose indigeneity is under suspicion, for they grow also
in places that have obviously been altered artificially. The most
characteristic seem to be dog-fennel, Eupatorium capillifolium, and |
a grass, Anastrophus paspaloides, as stated in the Third Annual Re-
port, page 261. The weediness of the vegetation is doubtless largely
due to the fact that such areas have long been closely grazed by
cattle and sheep.

Lake margin prairies (fig. 26). Some of the larger lakes that
are so shallow that a small change in water level makes a great
difference in the position of the shore line have the area between
high and low water covered with grassy vegetation similar in aspect —
to that. just mentioned, and containing some of the same plants and —

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 203

usually a good many additional, which make nearly as good pasture.
This type is commonest in the eastern division of the flatwoods,
e.g.,around Lakes Harney and Tohopekaliga, but there are some
very interesting examples around Lake Tsala Apopka in Citrus
County. There are all gradations between this type and the shore
vegetation of smaller lakes already mentioned, and of course a con-
siderable variety of flora, depending on the soil and water. For ex-
ample, in the eastern part of Polk County one of the most conspic-
uous plants on the prairie-like margins of the smaller lakes is a
prickly pear (Opuntia ammophila?), while in very similar, though
perhaps a trifle wetter, situations in northern Osceola County a
pitcher-plant (Sarracenia minor) is equally common. Around Lake
Harney the vegetation shows a little influence of lime or salt or
both.

Shallow prairies. Small shallow depressions that dry up com-
pletely in the dry seasons usually have vegetation resembling the
two types last described. (See Seventh Annual Report, page 153
and fig. 57.) Such places are commonest in the lime-sink and
Gulf hammock regions, and they often have a few small outcrops
of flinty limestone in them. Those in the Gulf hammock region in
Sumter County seem to have more dog-fennel in them than the av-
erage. Those in the eastern division of the flatwoods, which ap-
proach the next type, are known locally as “sand soaks.”

Flat prairies (fig. 28). Scattered through the central portion
of Volusia County, and for several miles on either side of the upper
St. John’s and lower Kissimmee Rivers are large areas resembling
the neighboring flatwoods in soil and topography, but devoid of
trees or nearly so, for no apparent reason, unless such areas are a
little more subject to inundation than the flatwoods, or a little
more marly. Saw-palmetto and other shrubs are often less abun-
dant in such places than in typical flatwoods, apparently indicating
more fertile soil. Going westward from Melbourne one first passes
through continuous pine forests for a few miles, and then small
prairies begin to appear, gradually becoming larger, and the pines
between them smaller and more scattered, until at-a distance of
about seven miles from the Indian River or four miles frorn the
St. John’s River the trees are all left behind, and the prairie extends
beyond the horizon both north and south. The writer has not yet
seen the Kissimmee River prairies, on acount of their remoteness

204 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

from railroads, but the boundary between them and the pine forests
is said to be pretty sharp, and they are said to have some pretty fer-
tile spots, and more abundant animal life (both wild and domesti-
cated) than most of our prairies.

This type of prairie is subject to fire practically every year,
like the flatwoods. Its chief economic importance is as pasturage
for vast herds of cattle.

SHRUBBY VEGETATION ,

Saw-palmetto thickets (fig. 33). The outer dunes of the east
coast in the latitude of Melbourne are covered with an almost im-
penetrable growth of saw-palmetto about waist-high, with perhaps
1% of other shrubs* of about the same height, principally a small
oak, Quercus myrtifolia. The palmetto leaves in such situations, in-
stead of being yellowish green as in the interior of the State, are
covered with a thin gray waxy coating, making a strong contrast
with the bright green oak leaves. (This color phase of the palmetto
is common within a few miles of the coast, the green type gradually
replacing it farther inland, without any apparent intergradation. )
Just why trees are absent there is not certain, but the strong wind
probably has something to do with it. Fire must be a rare occur-
rence; and neither the vegetation nor the soil on which it grows
seems to be utilized for anything at present.

Some of the treeless areas described on the preceding page might
be classed as palmetto thickets instead of prairies, where the growth
of palmetto is dense, but the other species associated with it would
of course be mostly different from those on the dunes,

Scrub thickets. This term is used to cover various thickets -

of shrubs no higher than a man’s head, widely scattered over our
area, but usually of very limited extent. Those on the peninsulas
of Lake Tsala Apopka were described and figured in the Seventh
Annual Report (pp. 141-142, 155). Other thickets that may come
under this head are found near the mouth of the beautiful Pithla-
chascootee River in Pasco County. Wherever typical scrub (de-
scribed farther on) occurs there may be areas in it devoid of trees,

*The palmetto is not a shrub, strictly speaking, but its stiff evergreen
leaves occupy about the same position that the branches of ordinary shrubs
do.

ae es

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 205

and therefore to be classed as thickets. The shrubs are nearly all
evergreen, and the soil very poor and seldom cultivated.

SMALL TREES

Mangrove swamps (fig. 37). On the margins of shallow quiet
bodies of salt water from Brevard and Pinellas Counties southward
are swamps composed of salt-loving small trees and large shrubs
mainly tropical in distribution, particularly the black, red and white
mangroves (Avicenna, Rhizophora and Laguncularia) and button-
wood (Conocarpus). The first-named extends northward in
shrubby form to Cedar Keys and New Smyrna and perhaps far-
ther. In extreme southern Florida the first two become trees of
considerable size, and the red mangrove is used for tan-bark and
the buttonwood for fuel.

Fig. 37. Mangrove swamp on inner side of Long Key, Pinellas County.
The larger trunks at the left belong to the black mangrove (Avicennia), and
the innumerable erect pipe-stem-like objects are its aerating organs. The seed-
lings and smaller crooked trunks are red mangrove (Rhizophora): March 11>
IQI5.

_ Tropical hammocks (fig. 34). The plants growing on shell
mounds along the Indian River in southern Brevard County are
nearly all of tropical species, quite different from the species of
more northerly distribution on sandy soils nearby. . The forests
are very dense, and the trees rather small and crooked, though
they all grow larger in the hammocks south of Miami, and in the

206 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY——-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

West Indies. The trees are nearly all evergreen, and most of them
have small fleshy fruits, adapted for distribution by birds. Species
belonging to entirely different families often look much alike, and
are difficult to distinguish even when in bloom, for the flowers
are rather inconspicuous. Characteristic trees are the gumbo-timbo
(Bursera), mastic (Sideroxylon), rubber or wild fig (Ficus), and
pigeon plum (Coccolobis laurifolia). Shrubs and herbs make up a
very small part of the total bulk of vegetation. Fire is very rare,
as in other hammocks, and the ground is covered with a thin layer
of humus. These hammocks are too limited in extent in central
Florida, and the trees in them too small, to be of any economic im-
portance.
TALL TREES

Palm savannas (figs. 4, 32). These are of two principal types,
wet and dry. The first is found principally around the head of
Indian River and Newfound Harbor on the east coast, and near the
Gulf coast in Citrus and Hernando Counties, where there are thou-
sands of acres of damp and presumably marly flats close to sea-
level, on which the cabbage palmetto’ is almost the only tree, and
there are very few shrubs. On Merritt’s Island the herbaceous veg-
etation is mostly switch-grass (Spartina Bakeri), but elsewhere
there is greater variety. These savannas are evidently subject to
fire, but probably not so often as the pine forests.

The second type occurs among the dunes of Long Key in Pi-
nellas County, and probably elsewhere along that coast. The soil
is sand with a considerable admixture of shell fragments, and the
topography is diversified with miniature hills and hollows produced
by the wind. The trees are all cabbage palmetto, and there is a
sparse undergrowth of a few bushes.and vines and many herbs,
largely of the same species found in calcareous flatwoods and in
meadow-like dune hollows on Anastasia Island.* Some evidences
of fire were noted on Long Key, but nothing is known of its fre-
quency. The herbage affords a little grazing.

A transition between palm savannas and low hammocks is found
near the head of the Indian River and elsewhere, especially around
Homosassa, where there are dense shady forests composed almost
entirely of cabbage palmetto.

*See 6th Ann. Rep., pp. 304, ° 330, 308.

sy. ean,

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 207

Open flatwoods (fig. 23). In Georgia, Alabama and, Missis-
sippi the term “flatwoods” is commonly applied to rather dense
hardwood forests on damp clayey soils, but in Florida it always
means level forests of long-leaf or slash pine, Most of our flat-
woods have a dense undergrowth of saw-palmetto or other shrubs,
but in the western edge of the lake region in Marion County, and in
some places in the southwestern flatwoods region, particularly in
Pasco County and near the Peace River, the shrubs are scarce or
absent, presumably indicating a better or at least a finer-grained
soil than usual. And all through the eastern flatwoods there are
patches an acre or so in extent which have little or no palmetto,
and some herbs, such as the pitcher-plant, are very characteristic of
such places. This latter phase is usually a little damper than the
rest, and might be regarded as an approach to the shallow prairies
already described.

Palmetto flatwoods. These are of two or three kinds, depend-
ing on which species of pine predominates, but all have much the
same aspect: tall pines with very few other trees, and a dense
shrubby undergrowth from knee-high to waist-high, consisting
mostly of saw-palmetto and other evergreens. There are also many
herbs partly hidden by the shrubs. This type covers the greater
part of the three flatwoods regions and the Gulf hammock region,
and occurs in all the others, with the possible exception of the west
coast islands and the hammock belts. The pine is usually long-leaf,
but near the coast and near the larger prairies, especially if the
soil is a little calcareous, it may be completely replaced by slash pine
(Pinus Caribaea). Ina few damp spots in the eastern half of the
area black pine (P. serotina) predominates. The characteristic
plants of the flatwoods of Marion and Sumter Counties were listed
in the Seventh Annual Report, pp. 144-146.

Fire sweeps through the flatwoods every year or two, but does
not injure the pines unless they are very small or have been turpen-
tined, and the palmettos soon send up a new crop of leaves from
their thick creeping stems. The pines are an important source of
lumber and turpentine, some of the shrubs yield honey, and the
herbage affords pasturage for many cattle. On account of the rather
damp soil, and the difficulty of grubb:ng out the palmetto and other
shrubs, the farmers have encroached on the flatwoods very little,

208 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

probably not more than 5% being under cultivation at the present
time.

“Cutthroats’. In the eastern part of Polk County, about on the
line between the lake region and the flatwoods, there are several
examples of a little-known habitat or type of vegetation called lo-
cally by the above name. It seems to have been first made known
to scientific readers by Prof. C. V. Piper about three years ago.*
About two years later some of it was pointed out tu the writer,
who made a hasty examination while his host’s automobile waited.
A cutthroat seems to be a place in the flatwoods kept perpetually
moist by water seeping out from slightly higher ground near by,
and is almost the only thing in central Florida comparable with the
boggy slopes that are a characteristic feature of the West Florida
pine hills“; The trees are mostly slash pine, and the bulk of the
herbage seems to consist of “cutthroat grass” (Panicum Combsii,
also found in West Florida). According to Prof. Piper this grass
is reputed to be good forage for steers but not for calves, and it is
supposed to cause “‘salt sickness’? among cattle.

High pine land (figs. 9, 10, 19). This is one of the most exten-
sive types.of vegetation in central Florida, covering perhaps nine-
tenths of the lime-sink region and three-fourths of the lake region,
and considerable parts of most of the others. Typically it consists
of long-leaf pine, with a lower story of black-jack, turkey, and oc-
casionally other oaks, a sprinkling of saw-palmetto and other
shrubs but no woody vines, and a moderately dense carpet of wire-
grass and other herbs. Either the oaks or the shrubs may be absent
from many acres, though. The oaks are commonest on the high-
est and driest uplands, and they seem to increase in abundance after
logging operations, perhaps chiefly because the removal of the pines
allows the soil to become drier; but they are almost wanting in some
places where nearly all the pines have been removed, as in the hard-
rock phosphate country. The characteristic plants of high pine
land in the lime-sink region have been listed in the Seventh Annual
Report (pp. 166-167), and that in the lake region does not differ
much.

*Jour. Am. Soc. Agronomy 10:162-164. April, 1918.
tSee 6th Annual Report, pp. 232-233.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 209

As explained in the publication just cited, fire is a normal and
important factor in this type of vegetation. It comes at irregular
intervals, usually in early spring, but probably sweeps over each
spot about once in two years, on the average. The herbs, being
perennials, would probably not be injured perceptibly by fires every
winter, and the shrubs also have underground stems which soon
send up new sprouts after the parts above ground are burned. The
long-leaf pine is practically immune to fire after it is four or five
years old, and any one spot to have a continuous growth of pine
would merely need to escape burning for that length of time about
once or twice in a century.

The high pine land is of great economic importance. The pines
yield lumber of the finest quality, fuel, naval stores, etc., and the
grass furnishes pasturage for thousands of cattle. The soil is
easily tilled, and much if not most of the farming in central Flor-
ida is done on what was once high pine land. Probably one-fourth
of the original vegetation has been completely eradicated in this
way, and the remainder considerably damaged by lumber and tur-
pentine and phosphate men; but it restores itself pretty well when
given a chance.

Scrub (figs. 11, 38). This type of vegetation is almost con-
fined to Florida, but marked resemblances to it in one way or an-
other can be found in the sand-hills of Georgia, the pine-barrens of
New Jersey, the jack-pine plains of Michigan, the chaparral of Cal-
ifornia, the heaths of northern Germany, the scrub of western Aus-
tralia, etc.; all of which have either poor soil or deficient rainfall.
No accurate estimate of its area is possible at this time, but it prob-
ably covers something like 5% of the whole area under considera-
tion, and as much as 10% of the lake region. It is nearly always
on old dunes and other white sands, but occasionally on creamy
sand scarcely distinguishable from that of the high pine land.
Where it adjoins high pine land the boundary is often so sharp that
one can go from one type into the other in one step. It has been de-
scribed in many previous publications relating to Florida,* particu-

*But strange to say, two of the most complete descriptions of Florida,
namely, Col. J. L. Williams’ “Territory of Florida” (1837), and Dr. E. A. Smith’s
report on cotton production (1884), do not seem to mention the scrub at all.
(For full citations of these works see 6th Annual Report, pp. 415, 416.)

PAW FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

larly in our Seventh Annual Report (pp. 142-144), so that little
more needs to be said about it here.

lt

oe

ate

Fig. 38. Typical scrub, with bare white sand in foreground, about three
miles east of Tavares, Lake County. Feb. 21, 1909.

The dominant and almost the only tree is the spruce pine (Pinus
clausa), and there is an undergrowth of evergreen shrubs ,and
small trees, averaging about the height of a man, and very little
grass or other herbage. The density of the forest varies consider-
ably in different places. On the old dunes of the east coast, and in
a few places in the interior (see Seventh Ann. Rep., fig. 62*) the
pines are so close together as to make a moderately dense shade;
and the U. S. Geological Survey’s Ocala topographic sheet (used
as a part of the base-map for the soil survey of the “Ocala area,”
reprinted in our Seventh Annual Report) shows an area over a mile
in diameter about three miles west-southwest of Ocala, labeled
“dense scrub,” through which no contour lines were run. Sut in
the lake region it is often so open that large areas of dazzling white
sand can be seen, and such places are delightful to stroll through,
being so bizarre in appearance and so clean and free from briers,
snakes, mosquitoes, etc.

*The same cut was used previously in the Popular Science Monthly (now
called the Scientific Monthly), vol. 85, p. 358, Oct., 1914.

— =="

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 201

As in the jack-pine and spruce forests of the far north, but un-
like anything else in or near Florida, fire sweeps through the scrub
about once in the life-time of a pine tree and kills the pines, which
however soon come up again from seed. Sometimes two crops
of pine of different ages can be seen close together (fig. 31).

Scrub vegetation indicates very poor soil, which is usually left
uncultivated, but it is utilized along the east coast, as noted in the
chapter on soils.

Cypress ponds (fig. 24). These are a characteristic feature
of the pine-barren portions of the coastal plain from North Caro-
lina to eastern Louisiana, and they extend south in Florida to Palm
Beach County and the “Big Cypress” of Lee County. There seems
to be nothing similar in any other country on earth. In the area
under consideration they are very abundant in the flatwoods re-
gions (except in the pebble phosphate country), rare in the lake re-
gion, and practically unknown in the others. In northern Florida
and neighboring states they usually contain more or less slash pine
(Pinus Elliottii) or sometimes black gum, but south of Flagler
County the pines rarely enter the ponds, and there is commonly a
treeless strip a few yards wide around each pond, where the soit
is a little too dry for cypress and too wet for the common slash
pine of the peninsula (P. Cartbaea). In size the ponds may range
from one to a hundred acres or so, and the water may be as much
as three feet deep in the larger ones in wet seasons and disappear
entirely in dry seasons. The amount of seasonal fluctuation is in-
dicated roughly by the height of the enlarged bases of the trees.

The pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens, or imbricarium) is
usually almost the only tree. Sometimes it grows so densely as
to exclude nearly all other woody plants, and sometimes the cy-
presses are farther apart and there is a dense undergrowth of mostly
evergreen shrubs and a few vines, making an approach to the bay
type of vegetation. Air-plants of three or four species are often
abundant on the trunks and limbs of the cypresses, making a very
striking picture. In the shallow water below are a number of herbs
almost confined to such situations. A list of characteristic cypress
pond plants for the whole State was published in the Third Annual
Report (pages 262-263), and that would not require much modifi-
cation to fit central Florida alone.

212 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

In dry weather fire originating in the surrounding pine forests
occasionally sweeps through a cypress pond, but the pond cypress—
unlike its better-known relative in the river and lake swamps—has
such thick bark that it is not usually materially injured thereby.
The only economic importance of this vegetation at present seems to
lie in the value of the cypress for poles, cross-ties, shingles, etc,

Bays. The same sort of depressions that ordinarily contain cy-
press pond vegetation often have instead a dense growth of shrubs
and small trees, mostly evergreen. This sort of growth, with or
without a few scattered taller trees, in shallow stagnant or slow-
flowing water, is called a bay in Georgia and Florida, probably on
account of the usual presence in it of bay trees (Magnolia glauca.
Persea pubescens, or Gordoma Lasianthus). Whether a given de-
pression is to be occupied by cypress pond or bay vegetation, or no
trees at all, seems to be determined chiefly by the depth and seasonal
fluctuation of the water, as suggested in the Sixth Annual Report
(page 203); bays being in those whose water fluctuates least.

The bays in the lower parts of Middle and West Florida were
described in the Third Annual Report, pp. 264-265. In central
Florida they are less common, but occur in a number of places in
the flatwoods and the lake region. A variation with fewer shrubs
and a great deal of slash pine was described under the head of
slash pine bogs on pages 256-257 of the same publication. Some
of the peat prairies have dense clumps of bay-like vegetation dot-
ting their surfaces, as indicated on a preceding page, and on pages
274-275 of the report just cited.

Typical bays are practically exempt from fire, but slash pine
bogs are burned occasionally, The bays are of very little economic
importance, except that some of the plants in them yield honey.

Non-alluvial swamps. Wherever water that has percolated:
through the surface sands without coming in contact with any cal-
careous strata seeps out on the surface in sufficient. quantity
throughout the year there is likely to be a dense shady swamp con-
taining bay trees, maple, black gum, bamboo vines, etc. Such
swamps (described in the 3rd Annual Report, pp. 258-260) differ
from the bays just described chiefly in having a greater flow of
water and more trees and fewer bushes. They are widely distrib-
uted through the coastal plain from Long Island to eastern Louis-
iana, but not very common in peninsular Florida, where they are

— F

~~

1 ~~” aay >

a gen ee Oe ae ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 213

mainly confined to the lake region, and are sometimes called bay-
heads. About half the trees in them are evergreen, and fire is rare.
They are little utilized at present, but will probably be drawn upon
for some kinds of timber when the country is more thickly settled.

Calcareous swamps. Swamps whose water is somewhat cal-
careous on account of coming from limestone springs or standing
for awhile in contact with limestone or marl differ from the sour
or non-alluvial swamps just described in having more deciduous
and usually larger trees, particularly cypress (Taxodium dis-
tichum). They have been described in the Third Annual Report,
pp. 271, 279-281, and Seventh, pp. 176-178. They are most com-
mon in the Gulf hammock and lime-sink regions, and in fact are
almost the only kind of swamps in those regions. They also occur
in the lake region, around some of the larger lakes and along the
Wekiva River and its tributaries. They grade into the low ham-
mocks to be described next, the only fundamental difference ap-
parently being the amount of water present. In the lake region they
often pass abruptly into saw-grass marshes, on which they may
be gradually encroaching. Fire seems to be a negligible factor.

The cypress is valuable for timber, but the other trees are com-
paratively unimportant.

Low hammocks (fig. 25). Dense shady forests with soil per-
petually moist, but not quite wet enough to be called swamps, are
called low hammocks. Those in central Florida all seem to be more
or less calcareous, and they are especially characteristic of the Gulf
hammock region, but are quite common in the lake region and east
coast strip, and occur in most of the others. They have been de-
scribed in the 7th Annual Report, pp. 175-176. On the upland
side they often pass into semi-calcareous high hammocks (describea
farther on), or even into sandy hammocks. Fire is very rare, as
in all other hammocks.

Some of the trees are valuable for timber, and the soil is gener-
ally quite fertile, perhaps partly on account of washings from the
neighboring uplands; and where it can be easily drained it is often
cultivated in vegetables. Much if not most of the truck farming
in Seminole and Sumter Counties is in places formerly occupied
by this type of vegetation, and one of the largest orange groves
in the latter is in what seems to have been a low hammock, through
probably drier than the average.

Pq \ Wal FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

In the western edge of the lake region, northeast of Silver
Spring, there is a type of vegetation nearer to low hammock than
anything else herein described, but resembling also the swamps of
some rivers farther north. This has been described in the 7th
Annual Report (pp. 178-179) as short-leaf pine and cabbage pal-
metto bottoms.

Fig. 39. Sandy hammock about six miles south of Ocala, with holly, saw-
palmetto and other evergreens, Feb. 14, 1915.

Sandy hammocks (fig. 39). This is an interesting type of
forest, widely distributed through the sandier parts of the coastal
plain from North Carolina to central Florida and Alabama. In
the area under consideration it seems to be best developed in the
lime-sink and lake regions. The soil appears to be essentially the
same as in the high pine land, except for such changes as have re-
sulted from a slight admixture of humus, but the vegetation 1s en-
tirely different, the main reason being that the hammocks are in
situations partly or wholly protected from fire by lakes, streams,
swamps or naturally denser forests. This point is discussed more
fully in the 7th Annual Report, pp. 170-172, where a list of char-
acteristic species can be found.

The trees are mostly broad-leaved evergreens, so that the ground
is pretty well shaded throughout the year. They seem to grow

a ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 215

rather slowly, and many of them have crooked trunks. Shrubs
and vines are abundant and herbs scarce. The vegetation on the
whole is more ornamental than useful, and the soil is little used
for agricultural purposes.

Calcareous high hammocks (figs. 13, 40). Where there is
enough limestone near the surface to influence the soil perceptibly
the uplands commonly have vegetation similar in aspect to that
just described, except for having more deciduous trees and fewer
shrubs. This is a very common type in the hammock belt in Marion
County, and is found also in the Gulf hammock region, around some
sinks in the lime-sink region and Hernando hammock belt, and
(less typically ) near the Peace River in the southwestern flatwoods.
The characteristic plants have been listed in the 7th Annual Report,

pp. 172-175.

Fig. 40. Hammock on limestone rock at the fern’ grottoes on the With-
lacoochee River in southeastern corner of Citrus County, showing hackberry,
live oak, magnolia, box elder, grape vines, etc. March 6, 1915.

An extreme phase occurs where the limestone is nearly pure
and there is little or no sand on top of it, for example around caves
in Marion County and among the fern grottoes of southeastern’
Citrus County (fig. 40). Some hammocks on the west side of

15

216 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Orange Lake with black waxy soil but no visible outcrops of lime-
stone might also be classed here. The trees in such places are
mostly deciduous, and some of them are listed under the illustration,
Ferns of various kinds abound on the shaded rocks, and a few
herbs of the nettle family, such as Urtica chamaedryoides and
Parietaria, are quite characteristic.

The soil of the calcareous high hammocks is very good for
farming, but some of it is too rocky, and the expense of clearing
is quite an item, too. In fields and orange groves cleared from
this type (and also from low hammocks) scattered cabbage pal-
metto trees are a common and picturesque sight (fig. 14). They
probably come up from seeds dropped by birds, and are allowed
to remain for the sake of appearances and because they cast little
shade and do not take much from the soil.

The tropical hammocks described-on an earlier page might also
be treated as calcareous hammocks, but they have been put in a
different category on account of the small size of the trees.

Sweet gum woods. This is not a very distinct type, but ‘s note-
worthy on account of its strong resemblance to some forests several

Fig. 41. Red oak woods with some sweet gum, on reddish strongly phos-
ephatic soil about a mile and a half east-southeast of Ocala, Marion County.
Feb. 13, IQIS.

a

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 217

hundred miles farther north. The sweet gum, short-leaf pine and
hickory are characteristic species. This is best seen in flat-bot-
tomed valleys with dark loamy soil around Brooksville, and on up-
lands northwest of Ocala, for example around Fairfield.

Such forests indicate pretty good soil for general farming,
through the scarcity of running water might be a slight drawback.

Red oak woods (fig. 41). On dry uplands with somewhat
clayey soil rich in potassium, phosphorus and iron, in central Marion
County, the red oak is the prevailing tree, as it is im some places
much farther north. Here it is commonly associated with sweet
gum, hickory, and long-leaf pine. At one extreme this grades into
high pine land, and at the other into high hammocks, which have
neither red oak nor pine. Fire goes into the red oak woods just
about as far as the pine does. Further details can be found in the
7th Annual Report, pp. 168-169.

This type of vegetation indicates a strong soil, on which staple
crops can be raised for several years without fertilizer.

218 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I1I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

\

CENSUS OF TIMBER TREES.

In contrast: with the great diversity of vegetation, the species
of trees in central Florida are rather few. About two dozen that
are widely distributed in the eastern United States reach their
southern limits a little north of our area, while a much larger num-
ber of tropical species do not extend quite so far north.

In the following table the large trees already mentioned in the
regional descriptions are brought together in a single list, with a
column for each region filled with symbols showing the relative
abundance of each species there. The writer's observations are

hardly complete enough yet to warrant assigning percentages to »

every species, but those over 20 are indicated by numbers, and those
under 20 by easily remembered letters corresponding to groups of
percentages, as follows :—

10-20%, A (abundant )
3-10%, C (common )
1-3%, F (frequent )

0.1-1%, O (occasional) ,

GOlr=0)1 7 a ehace) ian

It will be noticed that these letters are in alphabetical order,
so that in the table the letters nearest the beginning of the alpha-
bet indicate the highest percentages. Where the occurrence of a
given species is probable but not proved an interrogation point
is used, and where it is believed to be entirely absent the space 1s
left blank.* .

The smaller and rarer trees are omitted, as are all the shrubs
and herbs, because they are hardly important enough to justify
taking up much space with them, and also because their relative
abundance cannot be determined so accurately. .

At the top of each column is given the estimated percentage of
evergreens in the forests, which is believed to be pretty closely
correlated with soil fertility.

*A similar scheme was used for the trees of southern Alabama in Geol.

Surv. Ala. Special Report No. 11, pp. 102-104. Aug., 1920.

Tg

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

TABLE 20

Census of Timber Trees of Central Florida.

219

REGIONS

West coast
Gulf hammock

region

Middle Fla.
flatwoods
Lime-sink
region
Middle Fla.

Percentage of eve

hammock belt

hammock belt

Hernando

S. W. flatwoods

POTCEN Se ee ee

Ne)
ice

Pinus palustris (Long-leaf pine)
Pinus Caribaea (Slash pine)
Pinus Elliottii (Slash pine)
Pinus Taeda (Short-leaf pine)

Pinus serotina (Bl

Pinus clausa (Spruce pine) ~-_------___ F

Taxodium distichu

Taxodium imbricarium (Pond cypress)
Juniperus Virginiana (Cedar) _________ F
Sabal Palmetto (Cabbage palmetto) ~-_|55
Enconanalbaw? (Hickory) pease
Hicoria glabra ? (Hickory) --.-------- O

Quercus Michauxii

Quercus Virginiana (Live Oak) ~__-____ O

Quercus laurifolia
Quercus hybrida ?

Quercus nigra (Water oak)
Quercus faleata (Red oak) _____________

Quereus Schneckii
Ulmus Floridana
Ulmus alata (Elm

Celtis occidentalis? (Hackberry) ~--~-_
Magnolia grandiflora (Magnolia) ______ i
Magnolia glauca (Bay) ____----________ ?
Liquidambar Styraciflua (Sweet gum) _

Acer rubrum (Red
Acer Floridanum (

Acer Negundo (Box elder) -~---------__

Tilia pubescens?

Gordonia Lasianthus __________________

Persea Borbonia (

Fraxinus Americana (Ash) ~----------.
Nyssa biflora (Black gum) -----------

wo
ies)

ackipine) ji a2 =e

mr WiCypress) = 22. 3

>D Ovrrvraia

(White oak?) ____-

(Elim) Eee ea ee as
) a ee ate ee ECR

Ow~Or-

maple): lta 2 2o feo
Sugar maple) _---__-

(clei) hy SERS ate Bk ee

Red*hay).22-2." e

WAH OnONNOMORMO~OCOOCOMAPONNORANOs

DHA AD DIDO DHOXAHOHDOOOAWAON AAAS

UTILIZATION OF NATIVE PLANTS

a o8|

OR ADADORODNNOVONHOAMAAMAA Fw

|

for)
nr

_ Ot 2|x)

Ov MHA mvOwW

DuDDoovOQNO0O day

WOOOWO AVOTHANAOHAZ|S) Lake region

APOWWAA WOWOWWO

yvOnNANW

ie.)
1.2)

ETet|
Divya WD A FOO O>gls S. E. flatwoods

DOOO WA WAND

OOW0On WwW

OAOAD W

anOW

OnWWH WD WH O TH BO Ady Ka] Hast coast

aw

In central Florida, as in most other parts of the State, the most |
important industries based on native plants are the production of
lumber and naval stores from the long-leaf pine and its near rela-
tives. The government census reports give no statistics of these

220 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY——-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

industries for counties, but according to the report of the State
Commissioner of Agriculture for 1913-14 there were in the 15
counties of central Florida at that time 102 sawmills and 51 tur-
pentine stills. The State census of 1915 found in 13 counties (no
returns on this point having been received from Osceola and Polk)
109 sawmills, with an average capital of $25,000 and 34.2 em-
ployees each, and 77 turpentine stills, with $31,500 capital and 33.9
employees each.

From a mimeographed directory of Florida sawmills made by
the United Sawmills Co. of New Orleans and Atlanta early in
1915 the following statistics of the number and average capacity
(in board feet per day) of the mills of central Florida, by regions,
have been derived.

TABLE 21
Number and Average, Daily Capacity of Sawmills in Central Florida, 1915, by
Regions.
REGIONS | No.| Capacity
IS Westacoast islands aes Saeee ee ee ee 1) eee
2 <1 Gulé hammock omeoin eee so esol a eS a oe ee eee 7| 65,700
3.. Middle Plorida flatwoods: --22. 22 222522262 ea See Ol 22 ese
AL (bfnin@=3M ROM ee oe SE 44) 31,136
5: | Moddlesloridayhammoclasbelt =o ees =— ann nee oe 5| 20,000
6 Hernandomhammocks belt tesa == === a= ae eee 7| 10,000
fo IDS ae eG Sooo See Se Se ee Se es 36) = 30,555
8. Southwesterm tlatwoods))222--2—2=—2a— =e en ee 20} 42,500
9. (Southeastern ‘flatwoods, =—-=-—-=2_=22 lo 22o2 22a ee 10} 18.500
US DEIR GORA Rigel) — A ee eS 1} 10,000
Wiholevares (222 see ee Oe eee Se en ee ee | 130] 31,962

Of course these figures should not be taken literally, for no
doubt some very small mills, which would bring down the average
capacity, were overlooked; and a mill near the edge of a region
might get some or most of its timber from an adjoining region.
But it is interesting to note that the lake region, the largest of all,
has not as many sawmills as the lime-sink region, and they are a
little below the average in daily capacity. The capacity seems to
be roughly proportional to the density of the pine forests. Prob-
ably at least nine-tenths of the lumber is pine, but there are a few
mills that specialize in cypress or hardwoods.

Besides being sawn into lumber a good deal of the pine is
worked up into veneers, used in making crates and hampers to ship

to
bo
=

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

oranges and vegetables in, and into crude barrels for fish or
rosin, or hewed into cross-ties without ever going through a
mill. Long-leaf pine is still the principal fuel in the rural dis-
tnicts and smaller towns, and especially at ice factories and
electric light plants. A generation ago it was used on nearly
all locomotives in Florida, but that custom is now almost ob-
solete except on a few branch lines* and logging railroads.

Cypress of both species is used largely for fincies poles, piles,
and cross-ties. Within the last few weeks a company owning a
body of cypress (presumably pond cypress) near Cow Creek in
Volusia County has advertised for 100 laborers to cut ties, the
supply of timber being estimated to last five years. Cedar is or
has been cut for pencil wood, mostly in the Gulf hammock region.
There were cedar mills at Cedar Keys and Webster forty or more
years ago, and more recently there has been a large mill at Crystai
River and a small one at Rosewood.

Rail fences, chiefly of pine, can still be seen in some of the
older settled regions, particularly the two hammock belts, but wire
fences (with posts usually of pine) are much more common at pres-
ent. Another important by-product of the long-leaf pine is pine
straw, used for road-surfacing material in high pine land where the
sand is deep and clay and rock not easily accessible, mostly in the
lake region. A few years ago a pine-straw road could be con-
structed for about $40 a mile, but the straw has to be renewed
every few years. ;

The terminal buds of the cabbage palmetto have been used more
or less for food, and they yield a coarse fiber which is made into
brushes, brooms, etc., at Cedar Keys and perhaps elsewhere. Two
carloads of them are said to have been shipped north from Titus-
ville recently to be used for ceremonial purposes on Palm Sunday.
But to destroy a whole tree just for a few ounces of food or fiber
is a rather wasteful practice. Its leaves are often used to make
thatch roofs on fishermen’s shacks and other more or less tem-
porary structures. The hardwoods are little used as yet, except for
fuel.

*In April, 1920, the writer traveled from Tampa to Tarpon Springs behind
a wood-burning engine. In the last few years the Florida East Coast Raiiway
has run its engines with crude oil, which is almost as accessible to Florida as
coal-is, and incidentally less annoying to passengers.

222 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Turning to smaller plants than trees, some of the vines and
shrubs yield berries (muscadines, blackberries, huckleberries, etc.),
and some may be used for decorative purposes (mistletoe, holly,
wild smilax, etc.). Honey comes mostly from native shrubs and
small trees, such as saw palmetto, gallberry, and black mangrove.
In 1909, according to the U. S. census, the central Florida counties
produced 217,757 pounds of honey and 2913 pounds of beeswax,
together valued at $17,185. The corresponding figures for 1913-
14, according to the State agricultural department, were 183, 305
pounds of honey and 726 pounds of wax, with a value of $19,822.
The greatest honey-producing section in our area is the east coast
strip, as stated in the description of that region. The industry
is one that calls for very little common labor, and it would seem to
be capable of great extension. —

The Spanish moss is used in a small way for mattress making,
mostly around Ocala and Leesburg, and it could be used a great
deal more if there was enough cheap labor to be had. (The in-
dustry is much more extensively developed in Louisiana, which has
no more moss than Florida, but many. more illiterate unskilled
laborers.) Nothing is known as to how much moss per acre can
be produced annually under the most favorable conditions, but the
total quantity in our hammocks and swamps is enormous, and seem-
ingly inexhaustible.

The proposed use of saw-grass for paper-making has been men-
tioned on a preceding page, and a paper mill is said to be about to
begin operations at Leesburg. The deer-tongue (Trilisa odo-
ratissima was formerly used largely for flavoring tobacco. An
old agricultural report states that 39 bales of it were shipped
from Silver Springs in the fall of 1871; and some has been
shipped from Volusia County within the last twenty years.

The grasses and other herbs of the pine lands and prairies afford
pasturage practically all the year round for large herds of cattle
and a few horses, sheep and goats, and grazing is still one of the
big industries, particularly in the southeastern flatwoods, as in-
dicated in the description of that region, and as will be further dis-
cussed under the head of agriculture. Many hogs of the “‘razor-
back” variety get most of their living from roots and acorns and
other seeds in the woods.

ee ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 223

WILD ANIMALS, OR FAUNA

No description of central Florida would be complete without
some account of the native fauna, but the subject is difficult to
treat satisfactorily in a few pages, especially for one who makes
no pretension to being a zoologist. Although an expert ornithol-
ogist, herpetologist, ichthyologist, entomologist or conchologist
might be able after careful examination of literature and speci-
mens, or after spending a few months in the area, to prepare a
fairly complete list of the animals of his particular group occur-
ring in central Florida, there is hardly any one person in these
days of specialization who is a good authority on all groups of
animals. Furthermore, even if we knew exactly what species oc-
curred in the area as a whole, existing literature and collections
would be quite inadequate to show just which ones belonged in any
one of the ten regions, for most animals do not stay in one place
to be counted and mapped like trees, and some of the rarer or less
conspicuous ones may be seen in any one region by competent ob-
servers only at long intervals. And finally, even if it was pos-
sible to get absolutely complete lists for each region, they would
mean little to the layman, and those for neighboring regions might
be very much alike in the absence of data on relative abundance,
such as have been given in the foregoing pages for the commoner
plants.

Very few botanists or zoologists as yet seem to appreciate the
importance of studying wild plants and animals quantitatively
after the manner of a census, and it is of course more difficult with
animals than with plants, on account of the impossibility of count-
ing those which travel rapidly or whose safety depends on con-
cealment. And civilization increases the difficulty, for even in
such a thinly settled area as ours the more conspicuous animals,
such as bears, deer, alligators, wild turkeys, egrets and paroquets,
have been hunted almost to the point of extermination, for their
meat, hides, or plumage, or merely for “sport.’* Birds are

*Among the very few quantitative studies of our animals that have been
made the second and last annual report of E. Z. Jones, Game and Fish Com-
missioner of Florida, published in the spring of 1915, deserves special men-
tion. It contains a table giving the estimated number of bears, deer, wild-
cats, coons, opossums, otters, skunks, squirrels, quail, wild turkeys, ducks,
and cranes in each county; and although some of the figures may be very
inaccurate, it is certainly a step in the right direction.

224 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT
among the hardest of animals to apply census methods to, on ac-
count of the extensive migrations of many species, some spending
their summers in Canada and their winters in South America, so
that the bird population of any small area varies greatly at dif-
ferent seasons.+ One might, however, make a distinction between
those which nest in a given area and those which are merely tran-
sients.

Under the circumstances therefore the best that can be done 1s
to guess at the number of species of mammals and birds occurring
in our area and present a few random notes on them and other an-
imals that are abundant or especially characteristic, or useful or
troublesome, They will be taken up approximately in systematic
order, beginning with the highest types, and with occasional refer-
ences to extinct species known to have existed here in past geo-

.

logical epochs.?

There are of course quite a number of scientific and popular
books and articles on the animals of our area, ranging from the
narratives of 18th century explorers who tried to describe every-
thing they saw in what was to them a wonder-land, and more
modern popular works on hunting and fishing, to monographs of
particular families or other groups for the whole country, and
short lists of mammals, birds, insects, shells, etc., for some partic-
ular neighborhood. The writer has had access to comparatively
few of these zoological works, and it would be out of the ques-
tion to list even those few. One of the earliest really scientific
works on our fauna is that of Dr. J. A. Allen on the mammals and
winter birds of East Florida.* One that covers a greater variety
of animals but only a small area geographically is Prof. W. S.

*Two preliminary bird censuses of the United States, by W. W. Cooke,
have been published by the U. S. Department of Agriculture, as Bulletins
187 (11 pp., Feb. 1915), and 396 (20 pp., October, 1916) but the author died
before the publication of the second one, and little seems to have been done
in that line since.

tA good example of a detailed study of the fauna of a small area, but
with the quantitative viewpoint almost lacking, as usual, is “An ecological
survey of Isle Royale, Lake Superior,’ by Chas. C. Adams and others, a vol-
ume of 484 pages and numerous plates, which accompanies the Report of the
Michigan Geological Survey for 1908.

*Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard Coll. 2:161-450, pl. 4-8. 1871. Reviewed
by E. Coues in Amer. Naturalist 5:364-373. 1871.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 225
Blatchley’s “A Nature Wooing at Ormond by the Sea.”+ Some
others will be referred to farther on in connection with particular
groups of animals.

Notes on the vertebrate fossils can be found in Dr. Sellards’
papers on phosphate mentioned under economic geology (p. 158),
and in earlier works cited therein ; and numerous references to fossil
shells are given in the bibliographies in the First and Twelfth An-
nual Reports.

Mammals. As in most other thinly settled parts of the eastern
~ United States, bears and deer can be found in almost any county
in central Florida if one goes far enough from civilization and has
good luck, and stories of the latter being killed appear in the local
papers almost every day in the hunting season. Rabbits, squir-
rels, ’coons and ’possums are probably as common here as in other
parts of the South. Noteworthy papers on our mammals have
been published by S. N. Rhoads in the Proceedings of the Acad-
emy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia for 1894, 1895 and. 1902,
and by Outram Bangs in the Proceedings of the Boston Society of
Natural History, vol. 28, pp. 157-235, 1808.

From an annotated list of North American land mammals by
Gerrit S. Miller, Jr.,£ it appears that at least forty species (not
counting sub-species) can be found in our area, including the opos-
sum, mole, 2 shrews, 6 bats, bear, wolf, gray fox, raccoon, weasel,
mink, 2 skunks or polecats, otter, panther, wildcat, 8 native
mice and rats, salamander, 3 squirrels, 2 rabbits, and deer. Sev-
eral of them are classed as geographical varieties or sub-species
peculiar to Florida and differing slightly from the more widely
distributed forms in neighboring states. These forty are only about
2% of the total number known in North America, but about 30%
of the species occurring in the eastern United States.

One of our most abundant mammals, very rarely seen but
easily followed up, is the “salamander” (a rodent, Geomys Flor-
idanus). It travels underground in high pine land and old fields,
throwing up mounds of sand every few feet, but never leaving its
burrows open, at least in the:daytime. This particular species is

7245 pages, 12 plates. Indianapolis, 1902.
<U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 79. xiv + 455 pp. “Dec. 31, 1912.”

226 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

supposed to range only from the Suwannee and St. Mary’s Rivers
to DeSoto County, but other forms differing very little from it
range northeastward to the Savannah River in Georgia and the
Warrior and Tombigbee in Alabama; and there are many other
species of Geomys and related genera west of the Mississippi
River. Like some of its western relatives, it performs an impor-
tant service in stirring up the soil, as indicated in the chapter on
soils; but unlike some others, it does very little damage to crops.*

The manatee or sea-cow (Trichechus Manatus or Manatus
Americanus), was doubtless formerly common on our coasts, but
being practically defenseless it has been hunted for sport or for
curiosity until it is nearly extinct. Whales are occasionally
stranded on our shores.

Among extinct mammals may be mentioned the elephant, mas-
todon, bison, camel, rhinoceros, tapir, sloth, armadillo, and some
relatives of the horse, all of which.roamed over what is now the
phosphate country in Pliocene or Pleistocene time, which was only
yesterday geologically speaking.

Birds. Vhe study of birds is more popular with amateurs than
is that of mammals, and it is possible to give some rather detailed
information about them, culled mostly from Frank M. Chapman’s
Handbook of Birds of Eastern North America.+ It appears from
that that the number of species (not counting subspecies) that can
be seen in central Florida at one season or another is between 200
and 250, or a little more than half of all that are known in eastern

*The distribution of the southeastern salamanders, as indicated by their
“hills,” was discussed in Science for January I9, 1912; but up to the present
time, nine years later, the writer has never seen one of the animals. The
soil-making activities of one of the Great Plains species were described by
Ernest Thompson Seton in the Century Magazine for June, 1904.

*+There is more than one edition, but the latest seen by the writer was copy-
righted in 1912, and is a duodecimo with xxix+ 530 pages, a double-page
colored “life-zone” map of North America, a double-page color chart, 24
plates (some of them colored), and 136 text-figures. Toward the end there
is a bibliography arranged by states, containing several references to the area
under consideration.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 227

North America. (If only nesting birds are counted we have about
one-fourth.) The exact number is and always will be indeter-
minate, on account of differences of opinion as to what constitutes
a species, if nothing else.+ Another reason is that there are quite
a number of birds that feed in the ocean near by but rarely if ever
nest on our coasts, or which pass over in their annual migrations
between North and South America and seldom stop, and some
whose usual migration routes lie considerably to the eastward or
westward but are occasionally blown out of their course by storms
and forced to land. Then too there must be many which barely
reach our limits from the north or south, and whose ranges are
not yet known with sufficient exactness to indicate whether they
occur within the arbitrary limits of this work or not. But all these
uncertainties should not materially affect the statistical observa-
tions which follow.

The birds of North America are divided into two great groups:
water birds, comprising (according to Chapman) g orders and 29
families, and land birds, with 8 orders and 37 families. The for-
mer are the more ancient and primitive types, and seem to be most
characteristic of regions that are geologically young, while the lat-
ter have evolved so recently that there are comparatively few fos-
sil records of them, and they are most abundant in regions that
have been dry land for ages. About 46% of the birds (species,
not individuals) in central Florida are water birds, as compared
with 42% in eastern North America, 38% in the whole United
States and Canada, and only ro or 12% in the whole world.* But
the water birds as a rule have wider ranges or migrate more than
the land birds, so that even if other things were equal they should

As there are more bird students than species of birds in civilized countries,
the temptation is strong to keep drawing finer distinctions, making slight dif-
ferences the-basis of subspecies, and elevating subspecies to the rank of species
from time to time. Birds of widely distributed species that do not migrate much
are apt to be a little smaller and darker in Florida than farther north, and
already quite a number have been separated for that reason, and doubtless
more will be hereafter. Some of the mammals show the same sort of vari-
ation, as was pointed out by Dr. Allen in the paper previously cited.

‘*This high percentage of water birds in new lands seems analogous to
the high percentage of monocotyledons among flowering plants in the same
areas. See a statistical method for comparing the age of different floras,
in Torreya for December, 1905. Also 3d Ann. Rep. Fla. Geol. Surv., p. 357.

228 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

be relatively more numerous in species in a state or similar area
than in a whole continent.

If only nesting birds were counted the results would be some-
what different. For only about 33% of our water birds, as com-
pared with 56% of our land birds, are known to breed in the area
treated; the remainder, except for a few transient or doubtful
species, being found here only in winter. So that among the nest-
ing species the land birds outnumber the water birds about two
to one.

A few birds of special interest deserve a passing mention. The
largest one, the wild turkey, is still found in solitudes far from
the homes of mankind, like the bear and deer.

The Florida burrowing owl (Speotyto Floridana, first de-
scribed in 1874) differs from most other birds in living in holes
in the ground. It is said to be rather frequent in the Kissimmee
River prairies of Osceola, Polk, Okeechobee and DeSoto Counties,
and has been found also along the Caloosahatchee River and in
Manatee County. The same or a very closely related form has
been found in the Bahamas, and it has a near relative in Haiti and
another in the western burrowing owl which is a well-known in-
habitant of “prairie dog towns” in the Great Plains. Its habits
have been described in a few papers referred to in Chapman’s
Handbook of Birds (p. 317).*

The Carolina paroquet or ‘‘parrakeet” (Conuropsis Carolin-
ensis), a very showy bird that formerly ranged over a large part
of the coastal plain from Virginia to Florida, is now making its
last stand a little south of our limits, if it is not already extinct.
Its handsome plumage caused many specimens to be caught and
caged, and at the same time made it an easy mark for gunners,
and there has also been some prejudice against it on account of its
supposed fruit-eating propensities.

The Florida jay (Aphelocoma cyanea, a different genus from
the common jaybird of the eastern United States and its Florida
subspecies), apparently first observed by William Bartram about
1775, and first described scientifically in 1817, is said to be chiefly
confined, now as formerly, to the coasts of Florida between lat-

*See also J. K. Small, Natural History 20:491, 496. “Sept.-Oct.” (Dec)
1920.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 229

itudes 27° and 30°. (The other species of Aphelocoma, eight or
nine in number, are all western, ranging from Texas and Idaho to
Central America. )

The dusky seaside sparrow (Passerherbulus nigrescens), al-
though described as long ago as 1873, is still known only from
marshes within a few miles of Titusville on the east coast. Chap-
man says of it (Handbook, p. 394): “In view of the fact that
this species is abundant and that the region is in no sense isolated,
but that both to the north and south there are marshes apparently
similar to those it occupies, the restriction of its range to an area
only a few square miles in extent makes its distribution unique
among North American birds.”

Besides these well-marked local species of non-migratory birds
there are several other cases in which the Florida birds differ just
a little from those of the same species farther north, as stated a
few pages back, but it is hardly worth while to mention them in
a work of this kind.

Among extinct birds there is one noteworthy record, the find-
ing of bones identified as belonging to the great auk (Plautus im-
pennis) in a shell mound near Ormond by Prof. Blatchley in 1902.
This penguin-like bird was chiefly confined to the colder parts of
the Atlantic ocean, and there is no record of its having been seen
alive since 1842.

One avian product that deserves special mention is bird guano.
The principal source of this has been a few small islands off the
coast of Peru, where myriads of sea birds have roosted and nested
for ages, safe from most of their enemies, and where rain is prac-
tically unknown, so that there is no leaching of the valuable fer-
tilizing constituents of the guano. The deposits have been ex-
ploited more or less for centuries, but the industry reached its
height in the third quarter of the last century.*

In recent years some artificial guano islands have been con-
structed near Cedar Keys, by building wooden platforms a few
feet above the shallow waters of the Gulf a few miles off shore.

*Probably the most accessible descriptions of the guano islands of Peru
are those by Dr. Robert E. Coker in the Proceedings of the U. S. National
Museum 56:449-511, pl. 53-69 (Sept. 1919), and in the National Geographic
Magazine 37 :537-506, with 28 unnumbered half-tones (June, 1920).

230 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The writer saw one of them from a distance in 1910, but did not
learn at that time whether the project was succeeding or not; but
has lately been informed that other such platforms have been built
near by, and that two carloads of the guano were shipped from
Cedar Keys not long ago. In our climate the rain must soon leach
out most of the nitrogenous compounds that give the Peruvian
guano its greatest value, unless the platforms are roofed over.

Reptiles. Our largest reptile is the alligator, formerly abund-
ant throughout Florida, and ranging over the coastal plain from
North Carolina to Oklahoma. It has been so mercilessly hunted
for its hide or merely for sport that it has become rather scarce
and shy, and the writer has never seen one outside of captivity
in the area under consideration.*

There are of course snakes of several species, but they are ap-
parently not as abundant as in many ‘equal areas farther north,
probably because the prevailing open pine forests do not afford
much food or concealment for them, and the annual fires must be
an important factor in limiting their numbers.

A characteristic reptile in the high pine lands, and even occa-
sionally on dunes, is the “gopher” (Gopherus Polyphemus), a tur-
tle of strictly terrestrial habits, which digs a sloping burrow sev-
eral feet deep in the sand, the entrance being marked by a mound
of about the same size as the salamander hills already mentioned.
Its general range is a little wider than that of the salamander, but
as it is edible it has decreased in numbers with the increase of

_population.; According to Blatchley its burrows have quite a pe-
culiar fauna, including a frog and several species of insects not
found elsewhere.

Remains of several species of turtles and a crocodile have been
found in the phosphate mines.

Fishes of many species abound in both fresh and salt water,
,and they afford a livelihood to many people on both coasts, par-
ticularly at Cedar Keys and Titusville. One of the largest is the

*For a scientific study of the alligator in its native haunts, somewhere
south of Orlando, see A. M. Reese, Pop. Sci. Monthly 77:365-372 (with 10
half-tones.) Oct., 1910.

7The Legislature of 1909 passed a law protecting gophers in the three
westernmost counties of Florida in May, June and July, and prohibiting the
use of hooks and the taking of specimens less than nine inches long.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 231

tarpon (Tarpon Atlanticus), which has little food value but 1s
caught merely for sport by tourists. Important marine food
fishes in central’ Florida waters are the mullet, red snapper, pom-
pano and Spanish mackerel.*

There seem ta be no statistics available by which the fishing
business of our area can be separated from that of the rest of the
State. .

Sharks’ teeth are common in the pebble phosphate and in some
other formations.

Insects. In most parts of the world, especially in warm cli-
mates, there are more species of insects than plants, so that there
must be at least a few thousand in central Florida.+ A reasonably
complete list of them would take years to prepare and would have
little value for the general reader, but a few of the troublesome
ones must be mentioned. Those of greatest popular interest are
probably the mosquitoes, but to write about mosquitoes without
being backed by statistics is to ris offending some local interests,
so that the subject must be handled cautiously.

There are several species of mosquitoes present in: some parts
of our area throughout the frostless season, but probably no more
individuals than in an equal area in New Jersey or Alaska. Nat-
ural conditions are not especially favorable for them in central
Florida except in salt marshes, for the lime-sink region has very
little water, and the lakes and streams in other regions are usually
well stocked with fish that eat all the mosquito larvae within reach.
Most of our mosquitoes come from artificial or accidental breed-
ing places that could be eliminated, such as water barrels and tin
cans, and the malaria-carrying species are decidedly in the minor-
ity, probably on account of the absence of muddy water which
they seem to prefer. Consequently there is much less malaria in

*See Everman & Bean, Indian River and its fishes. U. S. Senate Doc.
46. 54th Cong., 2d Session. Jan. 1897.. Also in Rep. U. S. Fish Comm.
1896 :227-262 (with 36 plates). 1808.

+There are said to be important papers on Florida beetles by E. A.
Schwarz in Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 17:353-469, 1878, and in Entomologia Amer-
icana 4:165-175, 1888. In recent years J. A. G. Rehn and Morgan Hebard
have published taxonomic papers on some of our other insects in the Pro-
ceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

16

232 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

our area than in some places farther north. The yellow fever
mosquito (Stegomyia or Aedes calopus) is believed not to be in-
digenous, but to breed only in artificial habitats.

The consensus of opinion seems to be that mosquitoes are most
abundant on the east coast;* but even if they-are that does not
prevent Daytona from being a summer resort for people from the
interior as well as a winter resort for northern people. A good
brief summary of the mosquito situation in Florida by Clifton F.
Hodge, a nature student of national reputation, appeared in the
Florida Entomologist (Gainesville), for July, 1920.

Sandflies (a very small species of gnat) are said to be very
annoying on the east coast at times, but the writer has never hap-
pened to encounter them there (or anywhere else).

Roaches—or cockroaches as they are called in the books—of
several species are common, as in other warm climates (and in
steam-heated buildings farther north), but they seem to be mostly
native species, that live in decaying wood, etc., and do not ordi-
narily invade houses.+ And the more domesticated species have
at least one thing to be said in their favor, namely, they are said
not to tolerate the presence of bedbugs in the same house; conse-
quently the latter are very scarce in Florida.

Mites. A very common but inconspicuous animal, resembling
an insect but belonging with the spiders, is the redbug (Trombia-
ium sp., known, farther north as chigger, or harvest mite). It is
not peculiar to Florida, but ranges northward to Maryland and
Wisconsin or thereabouts, and allied species are said to be trou-
blesome in parts of England, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico,

*From 1824 to 1845 approximately the eastern third of central Florida
was known as Mosquito County, probably taking its name from Mosquito
Lagoon on the coast of what is now Volusia and Brevard Counties. In Igor
the Florida Legislature—whose jurisdiction in such matters may be ques-
tioned—decreed that the lagoon should thereafter be known as Indian River
North; but Mosquito Inlet, near New Smyrna, the mouth of the lagoon, is
still on the maps.

tAn easily accessible pamphlet on roaches and how to deal with’ them
is Farmers’ Bulletin 658 of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, published
in IQIS.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 233

etc. Being only about the size of a pin-point, it is not easy to de-
termine its natural habitats, but it evidently frequents places that
are rarely burned, like hammocks, swamps, and roadside® shrub-
bery, and is scarce in pine lands. It is annoying but not danger-
ous, and its pernicious activities are chiefly confined to the warmer
half of the year. The instinct that leads it to burrow into human
skin is a suicidal. one, for there is very little chance of such an in-
dividual having any descendants to inherit the same tastes.*

There are several species of ticks, with habits similar to those
of the red bug, but being larger they are less abundant and more
easily dealt with. The cattle-tick which infests the ranges and
pastures has been viewed with alarm by stock-raisers in recent
years, and a campaign for its extermination is now under way,
with good prospects of success.+ .

Miscellaneous invertebrates. Vhe scorpion, which looks just
like one of the pictures among the signs of the zodiac in old-fash-
ioned almanacs, is more or less common in South Florida, but the
writer has never seen but one in central Florida, that in Lake
County in 1909.

Earthworms, which abound in clayey and loamy soils in most
parts of the civilized world, and are an important factor in main-
taining the fertility of such soils, are scarce in the sand of penin-
sular Florida, but there are said to be a few native species in the
humus of our hammocks, and very likely some of the European
species occur in gardens.

Of the many mollusks, terrestrial and aquatic, univalves and
bivalves, living and fossil, only the oyster need be mentioned here.
It is common in salt water (see fig. 3), and is shipped from Cedar
Keys and elsewhere. Its shells have been used extensively on
roads near the coast, as stated in the chapter on roads, farther on,
but they are now being gradually superseded by brick and asphalt.

Sponges grow on the rocky bottom of the shallow waters along
the Gulf hammock coast, and Tarpon Springs is a great center for
the sponge industry, which is carried on by Greeks. A few are
also brought in to Cedar Keys.

*See Farmers’ Bulletin 671 of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, I915.
Also N. Banks, Proc..U. S. Nat. Mus. 28:30-33. 1904.
tFor notes on ticks see Banks, 1. c., pp. 42-49.

bo

34 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT
PORBULATION

DENSITY

When the first census of Florida was taken, in 1830, the pen-
insular portion of the State was practically uninhabited, except for
a few small settlements along the east coast. Not until about the
middle of the century were there enough people or enough coun-
ties in the area under consideration to make it possible to estimate
the density of population. In 1850 there was about one inhab-
itant to three square miles; and as at present, there were about
twice as many whites as negroes. The changes in density of pop-
ulation since then, for the whole area and as many of the regions
as we can get satisfactory data for from the census returns, are
shown graphically in figure 42, which is based on both Federal
and State censuses, the latter taken midway between the former,
beginning in 1885.

The number of inhabitants more than doubled Beier 1880
and 1890, the decade when phosphate was discovered and com-

‘INHABITANTS 7" SQUARE MILE
TOTAL

See et ioe ae

ee a

'
’
'
'
‘
’
'
)
’
5
'
--+
‘
'
'
'
'
'
'
4
‘
+
'
'

'
‘
‘
'
'
'
'
i)
+
'
‘
'
'
‘
'
'
t
‘
+
'
'
'
‘

aoaime Aeulas $2 w=.6\0 win

(850 1860 1870 1880 1g890 * $900 (910 1920

Fig. 42. Historical graph showing density of total and rural population in
central Florida, some of its subdivisions, and the whole State, from 1850 to
1920, or as far as can be ascertained from the census returns.

ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 23

on

mercial fertilizers of other_kinds became available in large quan-
tities, but almost stood still between 1895 and 1900, when two se-
vere freezes dealt the orange industry a staggering blow.* (The
lake region actually lost population during that period.) From
I900 to I9I5 approximately the former rate prevailed, but the
world war retarded the increase between 1915 and 1920, as it did
in most other parts of the United States outside of manufactur-
ing centers. ;
COMPOSITION

The percentage of negroes was lowest in 1885, only 28; but in-
creased soon after that, when the development of farms and phos-
phate mines created a new demand for unskilled labor, and also
at the time of the great freezes, when many white people of north-
ern origin left the State. At this writing the racial composition
for 1920 by counties has not been made public, but it is quite prob-
able that the negro percentage is now even less than it was in
1885, on account of the great northward migration of negroes
during the recent war. As in other parts of the South, negroes
have always been most numerous in the most fertile regions.

The red and yellow races constituted less than 1-20 of 1%
of the total population in 1910. Over half of them were Chinese,
and most of the Chinese were in Tampa (and presumably in the
laundry business. )

There are (or were in Ig10 at least) more men than women in
every region, as is the case in practically all countries that are
being settled up rapidly, for men naturally precede women in seek-
ing homes in new territory.

NATIVITY

The percentage of foreign whites in the total population
ranged from 4.3 in 1850 to 1.96 in 1880, 9.1 in Ig10, and 7.3 in
1915, and is highest in and around Tampa, on account of its being
a seaport and a large city. The leading foreign nationalities rep-
resented in the whole area in 1880 were English, German,
Swedish, Canadian, Irish, French and Scotch, all from much far-

*See Yearbook U. S. Dept. Agriculture 1895:143-174 (1896); Geograph-
ical Review 2:361-367. Nov. 1916.

236 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

ther north, it will be observed; and in 1910 Cuban, Italian, Span-
ish, English, German, Turkish (probably meaning mostly
Syrian), Canadian, Greek, Swedish, Irish, Scotch, Russian and
Roumanian. This great increase of West Indian and southern
European immigration in thirty years indicates quite a deteriora-
tion in quality; but if we leave out Hillsborough County, which
had over four-fifths of all the foreigners in central Florida, the
percentage of foreign whites in 1910 was only 2.24, and the lead-
ing nationalities English, German, Canadian, Swedish, Irish,
Scotch, Italian, Greek, Danish, Russian and French; which is not
very different from the percentage or the sequence in 1880, when
Tampa was a very small place. In the city of Tampa in 1910 the
order was Cuban, Italian, Spanish, German, English, Canadian,
Roumanian, Irish, Russian, Greek, Swedish, French, Austrian,
Scotch, Mexican, Swiss, Danish. (Some religious statistics for
Tampa are given farther on.) ,

Recent Federal censuses have not distinguished between native
and foreign-born negroes, but in 1915 a little less than 1% of the
negroes in central Florida were of foreign origin, doubtless mostly
from the Bahamas and West Indies.

In 1880 only 59.9% of the inhabitants of central Florida were
born in Florida, 14.2% in Georgia, 10.2% in South Carolina,
3% in Alabama, 1.8% in North Carolina, 0.9% in Virginia, and
smaller numbers in the other states. Marion County had more
South Carolinians than Georgians, strange to say.* Unfortu-
nately there are no similar data in later censuses, either Federal
or State, except for whole states and for cities with more than
50,000 inhabitants. The State census of 1915 made inquiry as
to the birthplace of each individual and his or her parents, but did
not publish the results, except as to the number of persons born in
and out of the United States. If the data could be tabulated sep-
arately for whites and negroes, for adults and children, and for

farmers and city people, some very interesting results would be
obtained.

*See Seventh Annual Report, p. 124. At present Ohioans seem to be
very largely represented, especially west of the lake region, and Kentuckians
in the lake region.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 237

RURAL AND URBAN POPULATION

The percentage of the total population living in incorporated
places with over 2,500 inhabitants (the arbitrary limit for urban
population used by the U. S. Census Bureau) was 11.2 in 1890,
howein s1e0G 8-7 ai, LOO; 23.0) 1M 21905,»33.6 in 1910, 37.1. im
1915, and 40.5 in 1920. These figures are rather high, being above
the average for the whole State (and in recent years for the whole
South). In 1915, by the State census, 51% of the inhabitants of
central Florida, and 44.2% of those in the whole State, were living
in incorporated places (some of which had much fewer than 2,500
people). The percentage of urban population is a rough measure
of civilization, for where there is a low state of civilization there
are few or no cities; but of course it does not necessarily follow
that a city is a better place to live than the country.

Some interesting comparisons between our urban and rural
population in 1910 are given in Table 22. In this there are sep-
arate columns for Tampa (including West Tampa, which is 1n-
corporated separately, but for geographical purposes is as much a
part of Tampa as is Ybor City on the east side), for the eight
cities next in rank (listed farther on), and for the remainder of
the population, which is classed as rural by the census; also for the
rural and urban population of the whole State.

One who studies this table carefully can gather from it many
significant facts, especially about the amount and kind of immi-
gration to this part of the State, but it would take several pages
to discuss it in detail. It will be observed however that in many
respects the smaller cities resemble the rural districts more than
they do Tampa, that central Florida has a larger proportion of
men than the rest of the State, and that the foreigners in the
smaller cities and rural districts are of a superior type to those in
Tampa, where they partly take the place of negroes.

Although the foreigners constitute less than a third of the total
population of Tampa proper (which includes Ybor City), they
outnumber native whites and negroes combined in West Tampa
(which would hardly be possible in an isolated city, but West
Tampa is a mere suburb). Worse still, among the adult males the
foreigners outnumber the native whites in Tampa proper, and in
West Tampa they are over three times as numerous as all native

238 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

TABLE 22.

Comparisons of Rural and Urban Population of Central Florida, 1910.

es Whole State
| Sees See
lat slae 2| 's
Bh a | ose Urban | Rural
ASHI as] &
Percentages of total population:
Wii tesa erre eee meer we ee aka 78.0 60.3 62:5 59.5} 58.8
Native white, native parents -_--__-- 27:5). R20|h) 55:7 nareelen aaa
Native white, foreign or mixed parents_ 19-6 5:3 3-4 IT-1{ eon
Donegan waMlie: = ee 30-9 3-0 3-4 TI-2 ine
INGproestnse eee tee Ei te ead 21.8] 39.6| 37.5|| 40.5] 41.2
Welles ee eee 52.3| 49.1 54.8 50.8] 53.1
Percentages of adult male population: ]
\Vihiltes ya ee 76.8] 61.2) 59.9 58.7| 57.5
Native white, native parents __-____- 26-5 51-4 50-0] gos 51-2
Native white, foreign or mixed parents_ 6.0 4.6 2.9 6.5) 2.2
Horeign, jwhite).2 22-22-2223. 44:3 5-2 7-0|| 16.9 4-1
Neproes)> 23-22) 28 =) eae eee 23.1| 38.6] 40.1|/ 40.2) 42.5
literate q = === ee 6.5 6.4] 13.7 (eT Peelers
Per cent of adult males in the following
groups:
otal: population g="5-5---22-- 2-2 | 30.6 30.2; 31.2|| 30.8] 27.6
Wihite population 225-222-2222. = 30.1| 30.5) 29.8 30.7| 26.9
Native white, native parents ~-_-__--- 29.5 29.8 28.0 29.6 25.7
Native white, foreign or mixed parents_ 913), { 26.0)" 26:2 18.1 27.0
Foreign, whites~ 225-22 = 25 See eS 43.6] . 52.7| 63.4 46.8] 64.0
Weenies tga aera 08 aa eh | 32.4] 29.3] 33.4!| 30.9] 28:8
Per cent of illiterates in population over 10: |
Native whitey 332 Se. bate es 1.6 0.5) 2.0 el 6.4
Horeign. white 2.55522 =") oe see 14.4 4.4 12.9 Me? 8.9

Negro: 22-5 Blea ei aes eee 12.1 12.2| 25.9 15.41 30.0

men, white and black.* (The census gives no figures for national-
ities in places as small as West Tampa, but the people there are
probably mostly of Latin races, as in Ybor City.) And in Tampa
proper among the white children between the ages of 6 and 15
there are more with one or both parents foreign than with both
parents native.

This large proportion of recent immigrants from countries
with lower standards of civilization than ours is not peculiar to
Tampa and vicinity by any means, but is common to practically all
the larger cities of the United States. It is probably due at least

*In 1910 only 20.8 per cent of the foreign white men in Tampa and 15.4 per
cent of those in West Tampa were naturalized, making the potential voters
only 70.3 per cent and 35.8 per cent respectively of the adult males.

{SS ee aes 4 A OS

—_—

ee a

ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 239

in part to the superior school facilities in cities, which by contm-
ually uplifting the native children tend to create a vacuum at the
bottom of the social scale, which calls for the importation of ig-
norant foreigners to do the necessary menial tasks, or the monot-
onous routine work of semi-skilled laborers in factories. This
state of affairs is accentuated by compulsory education, and is
therefore more pronounced in the northern states that have had
such a system much longer than Florida has.*

*The following table will indicate something of the condition of the foreign
population in a few large northern cities in 1910. All except Boston and New
York are noted chiefly for their textile industries.

©
~ S a EY) >
CITIES deta} lie Me paste |iO 9
Sapien lien meh ait hel ae |e es
S2loaa|s.21/6 @|F ele | gs
SY SP ed S99 ee Sie (Sel OS | Oe. A ag.
Ae lea lhe [Hea |4e|44/am
= “ | :
SOP es |p ies H Sp .:
bhi Ey lh eh” a) Mil toes woe Beet i, ie
ore tune (ae sa \oe setae laee| os
eading foreign nationalities : ; 2 > 3 et | o 8
, oa Pees ei allie Gat a cae Peg Renae
CE lec i be oe ce
x 3S ads as ty fe | es = Sa
Sa ee ee | eel eel a | Se a
Per cent of total population:| | | | |
Moreigm: wihithe,/—-==5. >. 2s | 35.9} 42.6) 48.1) 40.9] 44.1] 404) 36.1
Native white, foreign or| | | |
mixed parents —--------- | 38.3] 43.7| 37.9] 39.5] 33.5] 38.2} 40.0
Per cent of adult males: | | | 1 { |
Foreign white —-..-----~--- | 49.5] 63.8] 67.0] 68.1|' 60.7| 57.8] 54.7
Native white, foreign or| — | | | |
maxed parents: —=---="_- | 245| 24.3] 20.3] . 22.9] 15.4, 23.7| 24.5
Per cent of foreigners illit.:| | | | | |
el ONere lO aoe = | 10.0]. 28.5| 222| 11.7| 20.8) 13.2) 14.5
Adult males only -----_-- | 8.6, 23.2); 14.8; 12.0) 145) 10.7] 11.8

Most of the abbreviations for nationalities will be readily understood. Fr.
Can. means French Canadians, and Can. all other Canadians.

240 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

CITIES AND TOWNS

The largest cities and towns, with their total population at dif-
ferent census periods since 1890, are shown in Table 23. They
are arranged in order of size in 1915, because the 1920 figures are
still subject to revision. ;

TABLE 23.
Total Population of Largest Cities and Towns in Central Florida, 1890 to 1920.

1890| 1895) 1900! 1905) 1910) 1915/ 1920

CITIES (June)| (July)!/ April) ¢July)| (Jan.)
Rampage seat eee __.---| 5,532] 15,634] 15,839] 22,823] 37,782] 48,160] 51,252
Wiesterliam palpes fo! ens. hee 2,815} 2,355| 3,661) 8,258] 7,837! 8463
Siweetersbilno. == 2 sos 273 308| 1,575) 2,316) 4,127) 7,186) 14,237
Wakelandtse =) =—2= = “eee 552 ? 1,180] 3,299] 3,719] 7,287] 7,062
Onlamdonseas— 2 = seek alee ee 2,856] 2,993] 2,481) 3,511] 3,894] 6,448] 9,282
Ocal ai ae Se a i ee 2,904] 4,597) 3,380] 4,493] 4,370) 5,370) 4.914
SAO NG ees eee eye ee eee 2,016| 1,517] 1,450] 2,822) 3,570] 4,998] 5,588
Daytona! 22282 3S eee 771! 1.425] 1,690) 2,199] 3,082| 4,526] 5,445
AGT STANT Cs eee ee ee 1,086] 1,172) 1,182! 1,580] 2,157) 4,221) 2,722
Deland =- ee ee ee 1,113] 1,609} 1,449] 1,496] 2,812] 3,490| 3.324
IB Art OW are oe ea ee | 1,386] 1,931] 1,983] 1,950} 2,662] 3,412] 4,203
Blante City: cs 2o*e ee SES ee 349 2 720| 1.544) 2,481] 3,229) 3,729
iHorts Meade: == ees 267 350 261 322) L165) 321150) 2/029
SiGe C10 dy eee ee we i af Seah | ee ee x 2 2,080| 2,011
INGE adage) Vee ee se 287 500 543 750| 1,121) 2,012) 2,007
Dad es City a= eee ee 321 ? 509 794| 1,066) 1,950) 1,296
Harpony Springs 327 562 541 740| 2,212| 1,938] 2,105
Clear watery 27 ees Sees ee Peete | ee ee 300 343 610) LUA, 19321 2427
Zephyrhills: a 2523525 Se ee ee |e ee ee | ee 2 423) 1,450 577
BOOKS villi eres eee 512 608 641 709 979| 1,385] 1,011
beesburg,- Se te ees ae 722 805 765 844 991| 1,360] 1.835
Mat swalllas, | Ve ste Pe ees 746 831 756) 948 868} 1,310] 1,361
Wma ers DEV at vie rales eae Ea ee eee | ees 375 ? 1,226| 1,597
US tis see ee aes ay So a ee ee 563 411 529} 910) 1,148] 1,193
Mullberny. ees. 22 kee | ee | ee ee 850] 1,418] 1,121] 1,499
IPois, Aaron, Cinmy ee Soe I oe 1,111) 1,367] 1,049] 1,343] 1,071] 1,030

These actual figures should not be taken literally, for much
depends on the area included in the city or town. And an exten-
sion of the city limits, which is a rather frequent occurrence, may
make an abnormal apparent increase between two successive cen-
suses. The apparent decreases in the population of Lakeland, Kis-
simmee and Dade City between 1915 and 1920 are hard to under-
stand, unless the areas covered by the enumerators were smaller
at the latter period, or there was some error in tabulating the
returns. (The increases in some. popular winter resorts at the
same time are doubtless due partly to the fact that the census of
1915 was taken in summer and that of 1920 in winter. For al-
though the census is supposed to count only bona-fide residents,

~— ee Se ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 241

many people spend about half the year in Florida and half in some
other state, and are therefore entitled to be counted in either place.

But when we take several cities together such errors (except
the seasonal one last named) ought to offset each other to a con-
siderable extent. And it is safe to say that the population of the
ten largest cities (which were not the same places each time,
though) nearly doubled between 1890 and 1895, decreased a little
in the next five years, and then more than doubled in the decades
1900-1910 and 1905-1915. The increase from 1915 to 1920 was
less than 15%, but the rural population at the same time was
practically stationary, as seems to have been the case in most other
states. The ten cities or towns next in rank did not seem to be af-
fected so much by the freezes of 1895 and 1899, strange to say,
and they just about doubled every ten years between 1895 and
1915, but gained very little in the last five years.

WINTER RESORTS

The mild dry winters of peninsular Florida naturally attract
many visitors from the colder states, and they are an important
source of revenue, ranking in that respect close to the products
of the phosphate mines, forests and farms. It would be very dif-
ficult to estimate the total number of “‘tourists’” that visit central
Florida in an average year, but the average maximum number
that are expected at any one time in the height of the season may
be guessed at by means of the hotel capacity.. Of course all the
hotels are not likely to be filled at the same time, and many if not
most of them are open all the year for the accommodation of com-
mercial travelers, etc. But at the same time no hotel directory is
absolutely complete and up to date, and there are many winter vis-
itors who rent cottages or even live in tents, so that the indicated

hotel capacity is probably as good a measure of the tourist busi-
ness as can be found.*

*The tourists are presumably all white (and mostly adults), though the
negro population must be augmented a little also in the winter season by a
certain number of waiters, porters, etc.

242 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

A “Guide to Florida” by Harrison Rhodes and Mary W. Du-
mont, published in 1912, devotes 27 pages to a hotel directory of
the State. There is no explanation of how complete it is supposed
to be, or whether the rates quoted are American or European plan,
and in some cases either the rate or the capacity is left blank. But
the towns and hotels omitted are mostly very small ones, and the
rates in nearly every case are evidently American plan, and the
list is useful for indicating the distribution of the tourist business
and calculating the average cost of board in each region, if nothing
else.

According to that there were within the area under consid-
eration accommodations for 15,680 visitors, at an average mini-
mum rate of $2.47 per day, American plan.* About 11% of the
rooms were in the lime-sink region, mostly on the coast thereof
in Pinellas County, 23.2% in the lake region, the same in the west-
ern division of the flatwoods (mostly at St. Petersburg), 35.6%
on the east coast, and the rest scattering. The average rates per
day were about $3.00 1n the lime-sink region (one hotel on the
coast contributing a large part of this), $2.21 in the lake region,
$2.00 in the western division of the flatwoods, and $2.88 on the
east coast. (Of course to convert these figures to present-day
prices they would have to be multiplied by about two, on account
of the depreciation of money during the recent war.)

A winter resort directory of the South issued by the Atlantic
Coast Line for the season of 1914-15 seems to have about the
same degree of completeness as that just mentioned, and the num-
ber of hotel accommodations in central Florida listed in it is about
20,000. <A similar publication for 1920-21 increases the number
to about 24,000, 9.7% of which are in the lime-sink region, or on
the coast thereof, 34.7% in the lake region, 21.4% in the west-
ern division of the flatwoods, and 26.5% on the east coast. (In
all these calculations Tampa has been divided equally between the
lime-sink region and the flatwoods.) Hotels are most numerous
in the. lake region, but they average smaller there than on the east
coast.

*This average is not simply the sum of the rates divided by the number
ot hotels, but a weighted average obtained by multiplying each rate by the

number of rooms before adding. Where the rates given are obviously Euro-
pean they have been multiplied by three or four.

th eee

eT

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 243

A list of the leading winter resorts is given below. In this all
places less than two miles apart (an easy walking distance) are
lumped together, and the resorts are then arranged in order of
the number of hotel accommodations in the 1920 list, down to
those which have only 200. The figures are not given here, be-
cause they are subject to correction and change, but they form
approximately a descending geometrical progression, from 3,724
down to 200. The regions are indicated in parenthesis.

Daytona, Daytona Beach, Seabreeze (East coast).
St. Petersburg (Coast of western flatwoods).
Orlando (Lake region).*

Tampa (Coast of lime-sink region and flatwoods).
Belleair and Clearwater (Coast of lime-sink region).
DeLand (Lake region).

Ormond and Ormond Beach (East coast).
Winter Park (Lake region).

Cocoa and Rockledge (East coast).

Lakeland (Lake region).

New Smyrna (East coast).

Ocala (Middle Florida hammock belt).

Sanford (Lake region).

Winter Haven (Lake region).

Eustis (Lake region).

Plant City (Western flatwoods).
Tarpon Springs (Coast of lime-sink region).
Bartow (Western flatwoods).

Pass-a-Grille (West coast islands).

Kissimmee (Eastern flatwoods).

Tavares (Lake region).

Melbourne and Melbourne Beach (East coast).
Leesburg (Lake region),

Florence Villa (Lake region).

Mt. Dora (Lake region).

St. Cloud (Eastern flatwoods).

Lake Helen (Lake region).

Titusville (East coast).

Enterprise (Lake region).

*There are signs advertising Orlando attached to many roadside trees on
Cape Cod, which is a great summer resort region.

244 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

In the last year or two there have been large numbers of so-
called “tin can tourists,’ who come into Florida in automobiles
and camp in tent colonies on the outskirts of the cities, often in
special places provided for them and furnished with free water
and electric lights by the accommodating municipalities. This has
been going on in California in summer for several years, but it 1s
so new in Florida that no estimate of the number of such tour-
ists can be made.*

If the average winter visitor spends $5 a day for lodging, meals,
clothes, souvenirs, railroad fare, gasoline, etc., which seems a
conservative estimate at present prices, and there are 24,000 in the
area throughout the three or four months of the winter season,
that would make a gross income for central Florida from this
source of about $12,000,000 a year. This money of course ulti-
mately goes out in exchange for groceries, manufactured prod-
ucts, etc., and this explains why Florida has what some thought-
less people regard as a large “unfavorable” balance of trade. But
even if all the food supply was raised within the area, the money
would still have to flow out in exchange for something or other,
for otherwise it would accumulate until it had very little value.
The account is partly balanced, however, by the northward m1-
gation of Florida people in summer.

Just how long the average “‘tourist’’ remains in one place
can hardly be guessed, but the “turnover” must be quite large. At
St. Petersburg, with an estimated hotel capacity in 1914 of only
2,706, it was claimed about that time that 40,000 different tourists
came there in one winter. The local Board of Trade keeps a vis-
itor’s register, and in the season of 1914-15 there were 10,830
names recorded there. The principal states from which they came,
with percentages, were as follows:

Ohio 14.8, New York 12.4, Indiana 10.4, Pennsylvania 10.3.
Illinois 9.5, Michigan 8.8, Massachusetts 4.7, New Jersey 3.6,
Kentucky 2.5, Connecticut 2.5, Maine 2.0, Iowa 2.0, Wisconsin
1.7, West Virginia 1.6, Minnesota 1.3, Tennessee 1.3, New Hamp-
shire 1.2, Missouri 1.0. There were also 1.1% from foreign
countries (probably mostly Canada). Virginia, Alabama and

*The first such camp east of the Mississippi River is said to have been
established at New Port Richey in Pasco County in the winter of 1916-17.

“a Si

I i i em

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 245

Mississippi were the only states east of the Mississippi River not
represented. On the east coast the proportions are doubtless some-
what different, there being very likely more New Yorkers and New
Englanders there.

Central Florida is not lacking in summer resorts also, such as
Daytona, Pass-a-Grille, Cedar Keys, Silver Springs, Clay Springs,
and Orange Springs, but'no statistics of their patronage are avail-
able at this writing.

TELITERACY

A crude measure of the educational equipment of the people is
afforded by the statistics of illiteracy, which have been given by
every United States census since 1840, but are not considered very
trustworthy until recent decades. If the whole population, or any
race or national or age group, could be graded according to edu-
cation, or the number of years of schooling each individual has
had, a curve could be constructed from the results, and this curve
would always be steepest in its higher parts (like those for school
population and size of farms given farther on), for in every city,
county, state or country there are always more persons below than
above the average in education (as in age, wealth, etc.), just as
there are more towns than cities, more gnats than camels, more
herbs than trees in the forests, more creeks than rivers, and more
hills than mountains. The illiteracy count gives only one point on
such a curve, and that usually near the bottom, among white people
in civilized communities at least, but it is much better than no in-
formation at all on the subject.

The illiteracy percentage has been determined in different coun-
tries for adults, voters, army recruits, bridal couples, etc., but in
this country the usual method is to ask of each person who has
reached the age of ten years whether or not he can read and write.
Formerly this was asked only of adults, but the 1910 census gives
the data both for adult males and for all persons over ro, subdi-
viding each group according to race and nativity.

Some comparisons between the urban and rural population
with respect to illiteracy have already been given in Table 22.
Table 24 gives for each region, the whole area and the whole State
the illiteracy percentages for adult males in 1910 and for all per-
sons over 10 at three different census periods, subdividing them by

246 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY——-13TH ANNUAL REPORT

race and nativity. The figures for 1900 are not quite as accu-
rate as those for 1910, for the former census did not give the total
number of persons over 10 in each county, and that has been es-
timated, on the assumption that the proportions of different ‘age
groups were the same as in 1910. The counties used in comput-
ing the regional averages are the same as already stated in the re-
gional descriptions. Three regions are represented by two or
three counties each, five by only one, and two not at all.

As in all other tables from here on in which different regions
are contrasted, the highest number in each line is printed in heavy
type and the lowest in italics, to show which regions lead or lag
behind in any one particular.

TABLE 24.

Percentages of illiteracy in the adult male population of central Florida in
1910, and in the total population over 10 in 1900, 1910 and 1915, by regions, race
and nativity.

~
:.| 2
av =| oe o|
ellie a*|% Slate 5 S| 8s E812»
68/53/43 s[aS[S P/E =|Sc|e s|oR| ea
ADULT MALES, 1910 | Pare ta ura Neale ce Sigoee|
AN Glaases 2.22 oa) | 12.4] x95] 162| 18.9) 11.4) 7.8) 94 8.5|| 11.3] 13.9
AML. @whitess 5322 saee a ess | 3.5] 6.3] 2.0] 4.1) °2.2) 5.5] 3.7| 1.7|| 40) 53
Natives whites: —=—--===-—--= | 3.6] 5.97| 17 3.7| 2.2| 7.2| .3.8]. 1.4|| 2.2| 49
Foreign whites _----------- | o | 189) 62) 9.8} 1.8] 11.3] 1.9} 3.7|| 10.3] 82
Negroes re 222 See hes az See | 27.4| 30.2) 26.0] 34.9) 25.6) 16.0] 32.1| 21.0 24.0| 25.9
PERSONS OVER 10. | | | ~~ | | |
1900 oa ala ean |
Alli clipces.; (2 somite | 15.8] 21.0} 21.4] 21.0] 12.4] 11.1] 12.2} 6.6]| 15.0) 21.9
Ali whites ute - eae | 4.0] rox] 26) 6.1] 4.3] 6.9] 82) z.7|| 5.4) 8.9
Native whites, with native| | | | | | |
Parente 2 Se Be oes | 4.2} 9.7] 2.6] 6.3] 4.9] 2.0] 8.5] 7.8|| 4.3] 9.0
Native whites, foreign or| | | | | |
mixed ‘parents! ==-==--=2= | 1.2] 6.9] 0.6] 3.0| o.7| 2.6] 2.4) 1.5]| 21 3.6
Foreign: whites, -2=-2~—-=—= | o | 26.0] 4.3] 6.7| 2.4) 19.1) 5.7| 0.9 14.7| 11.6
Negrods ac eae am | 34.9] 35.2| 32.3) 46.0] 26.6] 24.6) 39.7| 17-9|| 31.1] 38.4
1910 :
AML. classes, ©8502 ye aS 110 ras} 144) 182 09 8.1| 7.9] 6.3|| 10.3] 13.8
Miliswhites( os ee | 29) 62} 1.7] 3.3] 1.9} 62) 3.6] rgl| 4:1] 55
Native! whites ._--2--2"22=" | 3.0] 5.9] 1.6] 3.1| 1.9) 1.7] 3.6| 7.7 2.2| 5.0
Koreign whites (225-22 —= 24 | o | 14.8] 4.8} 8.9] 1.7| 15.3] 3.2] 4.5|| 13.5) 10.5
Neprocnire eee See ee | 26.9] 30.0] 22.9] 31.2| 23.0| 14.7] 29.1] 717.z|| 21.8] 25.5
1915 | | | |
ANI classes soe Se Ses te Se ee | 14.6] 14.0] 17.1] 13.2] ? 6.8] 2.2| 4.2|| 9.8] 14.7
Witte ©o7 eee eS | 3.3] 4.8) 24; 21] 1.1] 40) o4) 0.6] 25) 44
Colored?) sesh es eee ee | 36.6] 24.2] 27.8] 33.4] ? | 18.3] 13.2] 13.3 25.2! 30.6

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 247

Between 1900 and roto the percentages of illiteracy declined
in every region, as they did nearly everywhere else in the United
States, but there were apparently some increases between 1910
and 1915, perhaps due to different methods of federal and State
censuses, or even to typographical errors (for the 1915 figures for
negro illiteracy in Lake County are so incredibly high that they
have been rejected).

The distribution of illiteracy is not altogether fortuitous, but
is governed by several different factors. First. it is usually more ~
prevalent in sparsely settled regions, where school-houses are ne-
essarily few and far apart, than in populous communities and es-
pecially in cities. Second, it depends on the racial composition of
the. population, for in a given community there is always less edu-
cation among the negroes than among the whites, and where they
are the most numerous there is likely to be the greatest contrast be-
tween them and the whites in education, wealth, etc. (This is
more evident ‘in Georgia and Alabama than in Florida, though.)
Foreigners are usually inferior to native whites in this respect in
cities and in mining districts (such as the phosphate regions), but
often a little superior in the purely agricultural districts of the
South. (This is doubtless because the farmer type of foreigner
comes mostly from northern Europe and the laborer type from
Latin countries. )

Another important factor is the distance of birthplace from
residence. An illiterate cannot read the advertisements of op-
portunities in distant states, or the time-tables used on railroad
journeys, so that he is not likely to travel far unless he goes with
a crowd (as many immigrants from foreign countries do). Prob-
ably nearly half the adults in central Florida were born in other
states (though the census gives us no adequate information on this
point), and must have learned to read before coming here. Flor-
ida has a considerably lower illiteracy percentage among native
whites than other southeastern states, and central Florida is su-
perior to the rest of the State in that respect, doubtless largely for

17

248 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

this reason.* The lowest white illiteracy percentage in the table
is that for the east coast, which has probably the most cosmopol-
itan population (and also the most intensive farming, as will be
shown in a later chapter), but that in the Middle Florida hammock
belt is next lowest, for a different reason, namely, the large per-
centage of negroes available for kinds of work that require no ed-
ucation.

Compulsory school attendance laws, which are now in force to
some degree in every state, tend to reduce illiteracy among the na-
tive population, but if unskilled laborers are still needed they are
simply imported or invited from countries with low standards of
living to take the place of the forcibly ‘uplifted’? natives, as has
happened on a large scale with disquieting»results in many north-
ern and western states.+

SCHOOLS:

The biennial reports of the State Superintendent of Public In-
struction contain a vast amount of information about the public
schools of Florida and its counties, that has never been utilized
as fully as it might be. The statistical data are probably even
more accurate than the average census returns, for schools and
pupils are not easily overlooked, and educators have long been ac-
customed to keeping exact records of enrollment, attendance, ex-
penditures, etc. Furthermore, the present State Superintendent
is an experienced statistician and a stickler for accuracy, and he
has probably kept the typographical errors (which mar so many
other State publications) in his reports down to a minimum.

The school statistics used here are those for year 1915-16.
Soon after that the world war made conditions somewhat abnor-

*Ellsworth Huntington, in his book “Civilization and Climate” (1915),
noticed that Florida had a very low native white illiteracy percentage for such a
supposedly “enervating” climate, and tried to explain it on the ground that “so
many northern people have moved there to raise oranges.” That is only a par-
tial explanation, though, for northerners constitute only about one-eighth of the
population of the whole State, and an equal number of people coming from
Georgia to run sawmills or turpentine stills would have about the same effect.

+This was discussed in the comparison of rural and urban population, a few
pages back. See also Geog. Review 8:274-275. “Oct.-Nov., 1919.” (January,
1920. )

GO ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 249

mal, and the passage of a compulsory attendance law in 1919 dis-
turbed the equilibrium again, at least as regards enrollment. It
would be very interesting to present comparative statistics for
periods several years apart, but that would necessitate making al-
lowance for the great changes in the value of money in recent
years, and would take more time and space than can be spared at
present. Another advantage of using the figures for 1915-16 in-
stead of 1917-18 is that they can be compared closely with the
population figures of the State census of 1915. The figures for
1919-20 would be equally interesting, but neither they nor the
government figures for race, sex, age, etc., in 1920 have been pub-
lished yet.

The State reports unfortunately do not give separate statistics
for city and country schools. And although they tell how many
teachers in each county have homes in other counties or states,
there is no indication of how many were born in Florida or any
other state, which would be equally interesting. Information
about the marital condition of the teachers is likewise lacking
But very likely there are few if any other states that give a greater
variety of information about schools than Florida does.

Of the many kinds of school statistics available only a few can
be safely used for computing regional statistics, for when only one
or two counties are considered some of the numbers (e.g., of male
teachers) are so small that a slight change in them would make a
considerable difference in some of the ratios or averages. But
some statistics of the value and size of school buildings, school ex-
penditures, enrollment and attendance, for the two races sepa-
rately, are given in Table 25 for each region treated statistically* .
and for the whole area and State; and Table 26 gives some addi-
tional details about schools, teachers and pupils for central Flor-
ida, the whole State, and the whole United States at the same
period.

In preparing these tables a few errors in figures have been de-
tected, but checked up pretty satisfactorily by comparison with
other data in the same biennial report or corresponding figures

*There are so few negro schools in Osceola and Brevard Counties that
averages based on them might be misleading; which explains the four blank
spaces in Table 25.

250 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—_I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

for other years. In Table 26, as a slight aid to the reader, abso-
lute figures are printed in heavy type, percentages in italics, and
other ratios and averages in ordinary type, while in Table 25 the
heavy and light figures have the same significance as in other ta-
bles in which different regions are contrasted,

TAREE eat

Selected Public School Statistics of Central Florida and the Whole State, by
Races, 1915-16.

Cent’] Florida | Whole State | Whole
White | Negro White | Negro U.S.
SCHOOLS | | | | |

Number of schools taught ---.---_--___- | 581 207| 2099 817) 281,524

le sie GIN ON US pa ae ly 736 | 26-34 72.0" |e 26200)
Average value of school property ($)---| 5073) 1060) 3350 754 5910
Per cent of buildings brick or concrete--| 74.5 | 1.6 O-1.| Od5) =e
Annual expenditure per school taught---| 2330 550} 1681 468 2280
Do. per capita of total population ~~~ | 6.97; 1.22} 6.13] 0.78 6.28
Do. per pupil in average attendance_---| 40.40) 9.44) 35.75) 6.33 41.72

TEACHERS | f

Number, of positions filled)=====2=5"2=== 1492 B78\) 2 4480) = 51385) a=
Average number per school ------------ | 2:57] U83)6° 2.141 © 270 2.21
Number of teachers employed ~--------- 1505 339| 4598) 1136| 622,371

Tete Gai ph) Seo oe Se 18.5 | 18-6.| 24:0 | 21-9 19-8
Average age of male teachers (years) --- 30 35 28 34 | asa SSe
Average age of female teachers (years) --| 29 28 26 29} 22s
Av. experience of male teachers (mos.) -- 53| (fil 45 95): sees
Av. experience of female teachers (mos.) _| 41| 54) 37 55 |
Av. monthly salary of male teachers----| 92.40} 38.20] 77.32! 37.32 85.36
Av. monthly salary of female teachers_-| 60.10} 34.00) 56.65) 31.23 66.88
Per cent of teachers subscribing to edu-| |

cational journal sia s eee | 60.3 520 | AZO \\ AO eee

PUPILS ] | |

Rota enrollment p= ss sea ee eee | '43,038| 16,786|135,888| 62,482|20,351,687
Number per school-taught 22-__--.--___- | 74.3 | 81.0 | 64.7 | 76.4 | 72.4
Average daily attendance ~_------------ | 33:471| 12,063] 98,847) 45,572/15,358,927
Number “per ; teacher’; =.= <p e e2 See | 22.4 | 31.9 | 22.1 | 33.0 | 24.7

ee

Sa Ae, et pe als WATE Lo

CENTRAL FLORIDA

4

APHY OF

GEOC

ez | O'sL || 062 002 | T'08
bl FS £9 06 16
101 ae OL Zo IZI

ors | oes || o18 | Ose | Beg

SPL | Ost 22. | LOL ees

cite | 08s || r9o | OFT | ger

ro (leer roe es ee
Ge 1S ole alee 69'T
Oz is (ies seco eee

got | Sul || r8Z | 4°69 |
POT 91 6LI 10L Sz
EFI SFI ZCI OFT vS1

o9L | OFL | vos | ozg | 279

LPS > See Ces. (AO! eet

gs9 | 0. || peZ | Sg | p98

19 |269 ~©llon2 bees ies
6g 8S 691 |9ra lers
ozce lorse {1442 = |egzt one

na Q ° ha} th =
e5| 29 |sP | ee | es
+5 S cole Sell ta
o= ie! ct 4 0 aoc
eee ea = Soe wkece
aF as

n n

9°02 ee
\g6 89
|SEx 16
| s€Z | 9:67
TLS OPT
loge | Tae
ie PST ee
|06 1e'I
yo leze

|
cit —‘[POT
lppL «(SPT
| sez | ges
| o'ez. | 0°92
| #49 | OLL
pee pee
lstz = «baz
ee pee
mr | 84
oo i=}
5 Be
5
ion
oO
=

| 669 | 9Ig
| 243 «| POT
| SLS | ope
feu ee
6GT jerz
919. |O5z

kena eee eee aouepuazye
A[lep osvi0ae UL YUEUT[[OLUa [B04 JO Jue. Jog
ee eae ee tidnd 10d souvpueqye skup odsvi0ay
Mrs Seg (sAep) utle} JO YYSUsT oSvIoAY
Baars ee IZ puv g fo sasB UvaMjoq ‘o(
ae pejorus uorxindod oasau jo yu 10g
TSS o1seu spidnd paljorue Jo yued 9g
ASS TASS noma Pan sale ($) Uoreindod ossou
jo vyidvo aod sfooyos sof aanztpuedxe penuuy

ween eee on 5- jooups

Jed smoot jo Joquinyy

ee ($) sSurppmq [ooyos JO aN[VA osvIOAW

S'TOOHOS

OWOUN

Teg 5 ee d0UBPUI47}B

Ajvep osvioae UL YUoUI[[OLUa [¥404 JO Judd. Jeg
pane Tia tidnd 10d souvpuoqyye step osvi0ay
Sn eS ae ee (skep) Ute} Jo YySus] VsBIBAW
ate as IZ puv g jo sosv uoaMjoq ‘og

lea test payors uorzerndod o4rya Jo gue Jag

------------ aqrya stidnd palforue jo 4ue0 10g

($) uorgetndod ogrqa

jo vyidvo sod sfooyos 10F aangrpuedxe [enuuy

BE ihe a Paks, jooyos

Jed smoor Jo aaquinyy

2 ae ($) SSurplinq [ooyos jo onjea aseviaay

STOOHOS

‘suorsoy Aq. ‘OT-GI6L “Vplto, [ecyueD JO 8014819749

Cz WIAvL

lopt §=s lop SsésZ
| sos | og | 298
| Fog | gz | &6e
| Ser | greg | O02
poe ee nae
ter |€or larg
pe aoe fee
n =7
Sa | RE | BE
amr ® 5
a5
ales am
(<)
5

OLLTH MA

g JooypY, oqng peze]eg

>

ee .

252 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The differences between different regions agree pretty well
with those brought out elsewhere in this report about the compo-
sition and density of population, illiteracy, agriculture, etc. The
western division of the flatwoods leads in several things on ac-
count of containing our largest city, for city schools of course are
usually larger and more regularly attended than country schools.

The differences between central Florida and the whole State
are not very pronounced (if comparison had been made with the
rest of the State instead of the whole State the contrasts would
have been magnified), but they are nearly all in the direction of
larger and better schools, older, more experienced and better paid
teachers, better attendance records, etc. Comparisons with other
states would involve considerable labor, but central Florida is evi-
dently well up to the United States average in most respects.*
The government school statistics available do not separate the
races, but in the whole country about 90% of the population (and
probably a still larger proportion of the school population) is
white, so that figures for white schools would not differ much
from those for all schools. When the sparse population of our
area is considered its excellent showing in school matters is rather
remarkable. .

In Figure 43 the school population of central Florida and the
whole State, not counting the chart or kindergarten grade, is di-
vided by races and grades. The curves are cumulative, i.e., the
distance from any point on any curve to the right hand margin
indicates the percentage of pupils in the group designated that
have entered or passed through the grade selected. Consequently
the percentage enrolled in a given grade corresponds to the hori-
zontal distance between the points where the curve cuts the upper
and lower boundaries of the grade. The curves are all steepest in
the upper grades, on account of the inevitable dropping out of pu-
pils all along, though in some counties there are a few more in the

*In comparing Florida with the rest of the United States it should be borne
in mind that most other parts of the country are colder and therefore require
more substantial schoolhouses and greater expense for heating them.

Se ee ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 253

fourth grade than in the third, or in the third than in the second,
probably mostly on account of families moving in with children
who have already been to school a few years+

SCHOOL POPULATION CURVES
1915 -19i6

CENTRAL FLORIDA

WHOLE STATE

PERCENTAGES

Fig. 43. Graph showing percentage distribution by grades of white and
negro pupils enrolled in public schools of central Florida and the whole State,
- above the chart or kindergarten grade, 1915-16.

In this diagram the same superiority of whites over negroes
and of central Florida over the rest of the State already brought
out in several other ways is apparent. A similar curve for the
whole United States would be so close to that for whites in the
whole State of Florida that it could hardly be separated on the
small scale used here. ;

Private Schools. There are quite a number of private schools,
but only those of collegiate grade-can be mentioned here. Very
little statistical information is given about some of them in places
where one would ordinarily look for it (such as recent issues of
the New York World Almanac), but in order of size or reputa-
tion, or both, they seem to be as follows: John B. Stetson Uni-
versity (Baptist), at DeLand, with about 37 instructors and 500
students ;.Southern College (Methodist), at Sutherland in Pinel-
las County, with about 24 instructors and 210 students; Rollins
College (with Congregational and southern Presbyterian affilia-

tIf the entire population could be graded in this way by the census the
results would be extremely interesting, but to the best of the writer’s knowl-
edge that has never been done except in Iowa.

254 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

tions), at Winter Park, with about 20 instructors and 200 stu-
dents; and St. Leo College (Catholic) at St. Leo in Pasco County.
All of these are located in regions of much scenic beauty, and they
draw a good deal of their patronage from colder climates.

NOTED PERSONS

If ‘“Who’s Who in America” is a reliable criterion, central
Florida leads the rest of the State in number of noted persons, as
it does in schools and many other things. The 1920 edition of
that work lists 41 persons who have homes in central Florida,
which is about one to each 7,000 of the population, as com-
pared with about one to 10,000 in the whole State, and one to
4,500 for the whole United States. If whites alone were consid-
ered the ratio would be about one to 5,000 in central Florida, one
to 7,000 in the whole State, and one to 4,000 in the whole coun-
try. Just how many natives of our area are listed it would be
impossible to tell without examining over 20,000 _ biographical
sketches, as they are not indexed by birthplaces.

—_—

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 255

. PERCHES

Statistics of churches have been gathered by every United States
census from 1850 to 1890, and later by special inquiry between the
regular census periods, in 1906 and 1916. The information is ob-
tained not by asking each person what church he belongs to, if any
(which is done in some European countries, but would be repug-
nant to American ideas), but by correspondence with church of-
ficials, It is therefore hardly as accurate as most census data, but
it will suffice to show the prospective settler what to expect here
in that particular.

A source of considerable uncertainty is that different churches
have different criteria of membership, some counting all baptized
persons, including infants, and some only those who have joined
the church voluntarily. (If the statistics were restricted to adults
we would have a fairer basis of comparison.) Another minor dif-
ficulty is that one comparatively new denomination (which has
quite a large following among persons of leisure, mostly in north-
ern cities) refused to give any information about its membership
for the enumeration of 1916, according to the census volume. For
these reasons it is hardly worth while to estimate the ratio of
church members to total population, but in most parts of the
United States it amounts to less than half.

The data for 1916 (published early in 1920) only are used
here. It would have been more or less interesting to give some
1906 figures for comparison, but the differences probably would
not be pronounced enough to warrant the extra labor, and in 1906
the white and colored Baptists were not separated in the county
tables. The leading denominations in each region have already
been indicated in the regional descriptions, but without giving per-
centages, on account of the uncertainties mentioned above and be-
low. For this reason-the regions are not contrasted in the follow-
ing table, which gives statistics for the whole State, central Flor-
ida with and without Hillsborough County, and the city of Tampa
by itself, the last to illustrate conditions in a city with a large for-
eign-born. population.

256 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY— {13TH ANNUAL REPORT

White and negro churches are tabulated separately, but there
is some uncertainty about apportioning the Northern Methodists,
both branches of Presbyterians, and some smaller denominations
between the two races, for the census did not divide these accord-
ing to race for areas smaller than states; but it has been assumed
that the ratio between white and colored members is the same in
central Florida as in the whole State. Denominations making up
less than 1% of the total church membership are here grouped to-
gether under the head of ‘‘all others.” The figures in the table are
percentages, and should add up to about 100 in each half of each
column.

TABLE 27.

Relative Strength of Leading Religious Denominations in Central Florida, 1916.

Central Florida
"eh
ae

Or. loi eRe Ss meuet

2s| £ |/#28| 28

BH | 8 |ERO| Se

WHITE CHURCHES |
Adventist (2) branches), —=——=——-=— fee ae ee ee 1.6 ee il 1.9
Souther! (Bap Uist == a a re eee 30:9) 29:0)" 3128) 20:2
BraMitiviexebal puis Usee= =e = eee ee eee 1.0 1.1] 1.0 0
Ghurchwot 7Christyee= 2-285 22s eee ee eee 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.0
Disciplessoty Christ) ===2=s== Sot oe ope eS i eS 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.3
Coneresaitionallist: s2222-- S222 See ee 1.5 2.1 2) 0.7
Greek: (Orthodox) = 2)4 253 se ee eee 0.9 2.4 3.5 0
Methodistay¢Northenn)\ =22==22)22 = 2.3 3.3 2.4 1.6
Miethodiste cts Outi ery) ee see ene ee 27.6 28.2 30.2 28.6
Eres ytertany a((Nonthierm)) jee sa eee eee eet 1.2 1.6 2.5 0
Presbyterian ((Southern)je== 22. === eg ee 5.4 5.7 5.7 7.4
Brotestante Episcopal 222222 = = eee 4.9 4.9 5.0 6.6
Romany. Catholic: = -222 28 322 S32 ee Se ee 13.0 13.3 6.8 13.7
Al others j. 22u nia ee ee ee eee 6.2 33) 3.2|. 15.8
Necro CHURCHES

Nationals Baptist, 2222 ee s= Bas ae ee |e 050 | e004 S10 aeerone
Brimitive (Baptist: 222-225 Ss SS ee eee ee 2.5 6.9 3.2 0
Northern Methodist) {222232222222 5.8 6.9] 8.8] 15.4
Atrican ¢ Methodist 22" S"- 225 2 5225 See ee eo one 28.6] 26.3) 25.8] 29.1
A Mi Ws Zion 2 Se ee SS ee ee Se 8.4{ 11.3) 12.1 7.5
Colored “Methodist 2-8 = 22-2 52 Se eee ee ee 2.0 1.4 | ela
Presbyterian «(North ern) gs ee ee | 0.2 0.2 ? | ?
Brotestants Episcopal, 2= es ae 0.9 ? re 3.1
AN others? 22 2>'-s.5322 -2 3 = se See | 2 al ?

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 257

The figures for Roman Catholics seem surprisingly small for
Tampa, with its large Latin population, but if West Tampa was
included the results would doubtless be different.* The only Greek
church reported in central Florida in 1916 is in Tarpon Springs,
and claimed 1,500 members; but it could hardly seat a third of
that number at one time. Outside of Tampa and its suburbs and
other cities the Catholics seem to be most numerous along the
western edge of .the Hernando hammock belt in Pasco County,
as indicated in the description of that region, The Baptists and
southern Methodists have their greatest strength in the rural dis-
tricts, as elsewhere in the South.

POLITICAL PARTIES

Without going into historical details, or making allowance for
inevitable periodical fluctuations, we may take the results of the
presidential election of 1916 as a fair indication of the average
political complexion of the white population of central Florida
(for comparatively few negroes vote in Florida now) in recent
years. In that election 67.3% of the votes cast in the area under
consideration were Democratic, 19.7% Republican, 6.6% Social-
ist, and 6.2% Prohibitionist. The proportions for most of the re-
gions vary so little from this that it is hardly worth while to tab-
ulate them,; and those for the whole State are almost exactly
the same.

In 1920, when conditions were somewhat abnormal, about
60% of the vote in central Florida was Democratic and 30% Re-
publican, and conditions in the whole State were very similar.

*The city of Tampa contains over half the population of Hillsborough
County, but only 28.3 per cent of the Catholics, if the census figures are cor-
rect. Most of the remainder may be in West Tampa.

The principal exception is Osceola County, where the Democrats had a safe
majority in 1912, only a plurality in 1916, and a minority in 1920. (Only two
other counties in the State had Republican majorities at the last election, and
they were both farther south.)

268 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT
AGRICULTURE

CONDITIONS PREVIOUS TO 1887

Although farming has long been one of the most important in-
dustries in central Florida, as in most other parts of the United
States, it has had its greatest development only in the last few dec-
ades. In 1850, when the number and acreage of farms was first re-
turned by the census, there were only about 600 farms in our whole
area, and over half of them were in Marion County, presumably in
the hammock belt, which has the richest soil. Only a little over one
per cent of the whole area was in farms, and one-fifth of that im-
proved, making 2.66 improved acres per inhabitant, which would
hardly be enough to feed the population if they depended entirely
on field and garden crops for their sustenance. As there were
no railroads in peninsular Florida then it is not likely that any ap-
preciable quantity of food was imported, but fish and oysters con-
tributed something to the larder of people living near the coast, and
in the interior grazing cattle and hogs in the pine woods seems to
have yielded more revenue than tilling the soil. Large plantations
worked with slave labor, such as were common in other southern
states, were almost unknown here, except for a few in the ham-
mock belt north of Ocala. |

In the next ten years the number and average size of farms
nearly doubled. Marion County still had the lion’s share of the
farm land and buildings, but considerably less than half the total
number of farms and live-stock, showing that the farmers in other
counties depended more on meat than on vegetables. The develop-
ment of agriculture in central Florida as a whole from 1850 to
1880 is shown in Table 28, but the regions cannot very well be
separated on account of the large size of the counties in those days,
as already explained.

The number of farms more than doubled between 1860 and
1870, but their average size decreased, doubtless because the Civil
War made many former slaves farm proprietors, and their hold-
ings were naturally smaller than those of the whites. The amount
of improved land fell off between 1870 and 1880, but outside of
Marion County there was an increase, which would seem to in-
dicate that the rich hammock lands were becoming impoverished

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 259

TABLE 28.
Agricultural Statistics of Central Florida, 1850-1880.
1850 | 1860 | 1870 | 1880
Deni eent) of lang. ane tania = Soe en Pree, Fes) |S 76.
Rec cent, ofmandanimnpnoavicd a= —2—=— ees = ane 0.2 1.0 20) bl eelee
Improved acres per inhabitant ---_____----------- 2.7 4.6 6.7 3.1
ible orheaiys) jee tena) 2 ee 12.6, |) 17.3 \- 10:0 8.7
Motalmachess pempianm@ = ooo. eee SEE e eee 172.3 | 291.6 | 187.6 | 136.0
IMproveduackes perwtarm, =o s.o ee ene 33.5 | 79.5 | 66.6 | 27.6
Value of land and buildings per farm ($) ~-------- 1195) 2550 578| 1354
Value of implements and machinery per farm ___-~ 172 119 42 29
Value of livestock, poultry, etc., per farm ~---~-~- 696} 1149 583 278
Number of slaves per farm —----- JES pei ia SR ES a 208 ey a aloes
Number of horses per farm -~---~----------_---- 1.8 2.2 1.1 1.2
Number, of--mules per farm: 2222) 22-2 a2 ae Se 0.5 1.5 0.7 0.2
NUMIDers OLeWORGlOxXeny sae soe soem aon ee ee 0.9 0.7 0.3 0.7
Number of milch cows per farm ---~------+------ 22.4 | 27.4 6.1 1.7
Number of other cattle per farm ~-------------~-- 74.1 | 102.0 | 50.0 | 26.4
Number of sheep per farm ----__---------------- 0.8 3.2 0.4 1.4
Number of hogs per farm ----------------------- | 374 | 43.0] 13.5] 13.2
Number or penckenssper farm 202-22 ooo el |S oe |e 2} == 16.0
Number of other poultry per farm --------------- yetaeee: Pe ese jeeet 5.7
Expenditure for fertilizers, per farm ~------------| ,-----| ------| ------ | $
Value of animals slaughtered, per farm ---------- 295.60] 154.00] 42.40
Value of orchard products, per farm ------------ 0.26] 4.09) 6.17
$285
Value of market garden produce, per farm ------- | 0.47| 0.61 0.044
Value of, staple) crops, per farm i..-------------- apne ae) ceo eet ees Mie

from long cultivation, and the farmers were seeking fresher fields
elsewhere. At the same time the number of farms nearly doubled,
perhaps indicating a large immigration of small farmers from
northern Florida or other states and countries. In 1880 commer-
cial fertilizers were just beginning to be used, the expenditure for
them the previous season having been at the rate of 11 cents for
each acre of improved land in the whole area (only about 2 cents
in Marion County, and none at all in Hernando).

CONDITIONS IN 1889-90 AND 1894-5.

The establishment of Citrus, Lake, Osceola and Pasco Coun-
ties in 1887 made it possible to use the 18g0 statistics for separate
regions, as shown in Table 29. But the percentage of farm land
and improved land cannot be estimated accurately for those re-
gions that cover less than half of any one county, which accounts
for some blanks in the first two lines of figures.

I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

260

ce) levee ese = ogee alyro? = tees | |GOrMer pace @ lcci Sea. Weel eee wavy tod syonpoad yo anpea
G0) enic sos 116° Z0'T zyg GE'T Is” Or: ee aaa RE ae peaoidut aioe sed ‘og
QOS lOTrr |l09're l08'%e lost loots |cor, ogre Ire: loo, — |--7-7777 tary tod loztiqdey 10J soungipuodxoy
88'S Oneal eeer ve 60 G0) 10 rac OG | HOW Lisa gaae as wary aod Arynod z0yjo Jo zoquiny
892, | L8T EGR wi eGOE eee leet Gide alecCaom) Ocal) One el momen aor Waiey tad Suayoryo Jo soquinn
6 OL 91 ST OST COT ie CTT POO. jae ao MOM: sd see oo ee wary tod ssoy jo toquny
1see eo T 0 0) Le U0 80 6% ST Cac aims = aed posaeee wavy tod daays Jo sequny
gol | Ost Gsh | fof | Toe | 08 Sth 2 oes CPL: «| OD... bSoe5eo see wiuiey Jed 0[34%0 JoyjO Jo roquNnN
Te’ aS RN as wd hk CP Cpt OF 2 iesssaeoer ses wey tad Soo yo[tut JO Jaquinn
eo’) a0 0 SI L0 I‘0 U0 z'0 z0 LiOt anl sao eSe aa ee wary tod wexo YOM Jo 1aquNnN
820 G0 oO Cie ane l0 a0 £0 l0 LO.) =e Se ae udey aed seynu jo sequiny
OO OORT) Oe ler Serie Ih ies & Tink bee wey tod sosroy fo Jequiny
806961 geo (129 lf6e (90 6st. |ezz eee ror ~~~ wang dad “ozo ‘Aagjnod ‘yo04s eat, Jo onpeA
ize 6& € 8& GP IP 8% &P Ov 0g ~uiey ted Atounporut pue szuemeldur jo ante,
Z6Is_|000h__||008*or |ozea__lorse locs¢ locaz lezee |$06r |ocre | ------- wary tod ssurpiing pue purl jo one,
OSEc 1-9'0z Srl | ree | Fzt | Ser | ost | woe | est |-@1g | -------------------- wavy ted soioe poaoaduy
GLOL |! O'L8 GFIL | O88 o'00T | 4°99 £16 Z16 x@hen | Zegiy |) same mce sno eos sss se sess wiey Jed samy
£9L | 976 RCA AI SESYOY WAG <I] Grey SS HSp Iai Mp Stoo so Seo aee San SLOGVULUL PUB SIOUMO JO Yue. Jog
ZPIL |fo°8 Bale | SOP SCG Te aILGIG me IEOION 100; mul sOnOIh m0: 90mm eae rees eet eee wiry tod squnqiqeyuy
COG IFZ@ 89°0 85:0 160 COG Go's TLE ese SER a IS SS SS quvzyiqeyut tod saioe paaordury
966 Si Give a 20 9'T Gilg oto tak ty ates GO ests ees poaoidwuit pur, jo quedo Jag
SVOL | LU Neha as 90 U6 7TH ip ol leon es Se i re a SUG adthe Samne ees eek eee SULIR] UL pu, JO Jue Jog
5/8 82|/oe/ sa] 7 | 22) 82 | Re | BE
Oe teas 3 eye Be | 6 wy ' S} SNODDWY
5 = a = Sh]/ as 8
| n n AO nA an

‘06-688T ‘Suorsoy AQ “epllo,y, [eazUED Jo soystIanyg [RaNg[WOLIsy
‘602 WIAVL

Per reer et oe ae eee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 201

The expenditure for fertilizers per acre was nearly twenty
times as much as in 1879-80, and the results are shown in the in-
creased population, improved land, and value of products. By
this time the Middle Florida hammock belt had lost its leadership
in every particular that the table shows (but doubtless still led in
improved land percentage) and the most progressive farming was
in the lake region and east coast strip.

The report of the State census of 1895, although a little pam-
phlet of only 27 pages, and less than a third of that devoted to
agriculture, gives some valuable information about conditions just
@urer tne tréeze of February, 1605.) (See ‘chapter on climate.)
This seems to be the first census to give the expenditures for farm
labor (to which the value of board furnished laborers is added).
As the expenditures and receipts are those for the year 1894, while
the number and size of farms are as of the sunfmer of 1895, when
considerable acreage had been abandoned on account of the freeze,
the expenditures and receipts per acre are somewhat exaggerated,
as was clearly recognized at the time. But probably where a whole
farm had been abandoned and there was no one to answer for it,
its operations in 1894 were not counted at all, so that it did not
affect the ratios per farm or per acre. The amount of improved
land showed an.increase over that of I8g0, in spite of the ca-
lamity.

There are some omissions and inconsistencies in the returns
(perhaps mostly the fault of the printers), so that it is hardly
worth while to give statistics for separate regions. The next table
therefore gives only the results for central Florida, the rest of the
State, and the whole State. As far as statistics per farm are con-
cerned the rest of the State is practically the northern third; but
the vast uninhabited areas of South Florida of course affect the
percentage of farm? land and improved land.

If labor and fertilizers were the only expenses, and every farm
occupied by only one family, it would appear that the difference
between expenses and receipts, or the value of the labor of the av-
erage farm family in a year, was about $546 in central Florida and
$553 in the rest of the State; but if we had all the facts central
Florida should rank higher in this respect than the rest of the

262 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

State, on account of having a larger proportion of white farmers,
if for no other reason. But as the northern Florida farms were
considerably larger, many of them must have required the services
of more than one family. In value of products per acre, however,
central Florida was far ahead of northerm Florida then, as now.

TABLE 30.
Agricultural Statistics of Central Florida and the Rest of the State, 1894-5.

Central | Rest of | Whole
Florida | State | State
Percent sot gland in arms) 22.2 we) eo eee raat | 10.24| 10.60] ‘10.50
Percentrots landoaimprovedst-_ 22525223 a eee 3.04 3.43 3.33
Imiprovedwacress per ainhabitant) 2s ee 2.24 2.62 2.51
Inkabitants spenttarm' 2255 hos ee a=. See 9.73] 14.05] © 12.21
Average mumber Oleackes per farm 22 ssa s eae eee to N33] VST 99.3
Average improved acres per farm —~-~----------_----_- 21.8 36.8 31.4
Value of land, fences and buildings per farm ~_---_-__-_ 1820 788 1155
Value of implements and machinery per farm __---~-~- 55.55| 22.10) 34.10
Expenditures in 1894, per farm, for | |
Labor, including board furnished --------------_- —_ 52.20 28.00 36.80
ET TLIZIOT ety Se Drm ES Se ed ne eee 37.20 9.10] 19.20
Value of products in 1894, per farm ~----------------- 635 590 607
Expenditure in 1894, per acre improved in 1895, for'|
aber, eho)’. ase tele 2 ot a he A ee 2.40 0.76 Ey
Wertiizers® yates see aS Se se ee a ee eee UseAl 0.25 0.61
Value of products in 1894, per acre improved in 1895__| 29.20] 16.00] 19.30

In comparing values for 1895 with those for other periods it
is well to bear in mind that a year or two after that average com-
modity prices reached the lowest ebb ever known in the whole his-—
tory of the United States, or in other words, the purchasing power
of the dollar was greatest.

CONDITIONS IN 1899-1900 AND 1904-5.

For 1899-1900 we have more complete agricultural data than
ever before. For the first time the farmers are divided according
to race, and the value of buildings separated from that of land and
fences; but there are no separate statistics for white and colored
farmers for areas smaller than states, except in regard to land
tenure. Goats and beés are also returned for the first time.*

*Cattle are subdivided rather minutely as to age and sex, but for our
purposes that has been a drawback rather than an advantage, for it necessitates
adding together several figures in the same line to get the number of cows,
steers, etc., and even then the results may not be strictly comparable with those
of other censuses.

* CENTRAL FLORIDA

GEOGRAPHY Of

Ocoe Jior= lisse ltoo “lose <lPEE- lepton (eed. (POO SSR at sae > ee eee JOZY ploy 10M
Igo. jorZ. lero “lee. -lze'ss" Le ol Te't Prat GAO Mera) fo ee oe en eee IOqeR] oq
i | | | | | | ‘0061 peadoidumt o10v s0d GEgT UL seangrpuedxa|
gees ple eee |4¥o [top |e? S)e IDE = re, S686 eae one wey tod syonpoad yo onpe,
CP8t log'es ||O&%9 |cg, ae 0296 |09°6 cot [Shr los" & at aia mae Iter A tis ee IOZUIJAIT LOT
a Nae ee er eee ee ee ee ee
1460 (|980 |Ov°e 190 apt ; Ill a0) 1 SOS BIS ON) hears eee ae ay I :
ig 931 || 9°0 OT Tl OT UT Ole. lata soulesebe de geese eee ee rnd IayjO Jo 1oquiny
rue | 8's || st “é ear y0te| G20 ride ne oan iO Paine on mer svoumMs pur sueyorya Jo coquinyy
CU | Cat. Ee Soe ease) el Oro Se eae SC iBI ae Creal eats een ena sSoy jo raquny
101 |00'T O-—-\8¢'Os"|6G°O:= “E00: 109 Tall 00 ieee 00 fees DE ce eer Da eee ite ter syvo8 jo soquiny
Oak areata Sc eta Aa a Pe ge rete
fo |¢r'0 10 dod oro (sto isto |zto0 (zo (lero ene ro tog
SOT 96'T Ww OL*% FO'T 98°0 OFT GOT 99°T GSHL.- gi Sas Sehr sera en eres a 80S Loquan NY
id et Hci HSL SIE eee OUT Seer al OE oe Ra se GeiaeN ERTS Te SUES a9} Ro eee & nN
6sé 96h lope [0% ee 00% . leLP og Thay ceeangrian se sss Son Bape aro
cel love leot ises irre ist lee loos lpoe tee [--n---z----- wey iad smoo Aarep jo rquny
giz. ioe. “lose. joree “Igaz; lnog - |0ge = 1902 eck IBER We tse a aaoee a ‘aga ‘Aazynod ‘yo0q8 eatt Jo onpeA
€ SF \ler E 6S LG oF bP Ise gs Mars gio Adourypovut puke Szuoupdwur jo onpe,
apa. ove.» Sel. > 4er loot ss lele) “l0ee = Ole eciaton s\0G) Ass aetna eee wavy tod sSurppmq jo onpe,
91 Se1t |lo89z lo6tt lo6zt lozet |o6¢ CGY .. 1RRRS IRDO SAA eace ae aie ener ar wavy tod purl jo onpe,
90°2. looer jloeeh jyoy- loorez jogat leas |eo'9 [O75 owg: [ee (¢) oa aod Purl fo ante,
VLE | Es || SIT Hi | g'¢T | L0Z | 8ZZ | 8°82 | L3é | OG aks oo oa o wae} sod sate ee
O'LOT | S98 ore9 Sel O' LL a0 pete Gare 6.620 910-400 dG BON: algae meaten gta eae nia wavy tod sa.to
eal hee 0708 | 006 | Teg | as4 MeS | 6:e) UF 18. NOS ilae sae oes S10uUMO JIvd puv S19OUMO JO YUOd Jog
699 | LI8 Tree |e'00 epee |. azo lene | FOR Cee SOIR ol Sosa ee eee oe apIYM SlowIVZ JO yUed Jog
“CW alia of] ea) ck ea os oe eae ORE Otte OG 1G olee ees wal anes eee pers a wing tad szueziqeyuy
18% | LST fee 2106 Szin pois IBC ee KOC Seed eee e se kes queqiqeyut ted sare poaoidwy
gare bk pt arg | are ee G0 9% GEG Son then ced) |e ahs | Og ro mee ach on ee peaordut pur, jo yued 13g
ih a LS Sia Girs Noe Gee leas cae ete ene | 8'1Z Wh peep ery oL6 SUI] UL pu, JO Fuad Jog
eo | oe | Se sep es oR ie ape | mee =

-o | Bs | ~ 3 3° CoN oS BS oe P 16 SNOLDGY

2 ey 3
| a i re | RP *

QUGT-668T ‘SUOFoy Aq ‘eplIOTy [wAyWED Jo SONSRIG [eINg[NOLIsy

‘I€ AIdvL

17

t)
264 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The Middle Florida hammock belt has negroes in the majority
among the farmers, as in total population. The eastern division
of the flatwoods leads in live-stock, as before, and the east coast
strip in value of farm land and intensity of farming, despite its
rather poor soils.

The State census of 1905, under the direction of H.S., Bitters
gave much the same sort of information about agriculture as did
the federal census five years before, and under the head of live-
stock made a distinction between “‘native’ and “thoroughbred”’
cattle, though the oxen and dairy cows counted may be of both
kinds. But the total value of livestock in each county is obtainable
only by adding up the figures for several different kinds, which
has not been done, as it would involve some duplication for the
reason just mentioned, and besides, the live-stock values are more
or less interspersed with other things in the county tables, making
it rather irksome to pick them out. It would be a still greater task
to get the quantity and value of various crops and animals for
the whole State, for that would necessitate adding the figures for
each kind for the whole 46 counties, which was not done in the
census volume, In getting the total value of farm products there
is still another difficulty, namely, the county totals as published
seem to include not only crops and animal products, but also the
value of all animals on hand, which makes a considerable exagger-
ation.

The number of white and colored farmers was given, but no
| separate statistics for the two races. As in the other State cen-

*Mr. Elliot, who died June 24, 1920, had charge of practically all the sta-
tistical work of the State agricultural department during the last thirty years
of his life, and was the author of a 59I1-page handbook of Florida published in
1904 (see our Third Annual Report, p. 363), and of numerous short articles.
He was well informed, careful and conscientious, but too modest to attach his
name to his handbook and census reports, and too good-natured to ins‘st on
the printers and others who worked under his direction doing their work
properly. And some of the typographical and other errors in the census re-
ports are doubtless due to his being inadequately supplied with clerical assist-
ance. There is a brief sketch of his life in the Quarterly Bulletin of the Ag-
ricultural Department for July 1, 1920, but it was gotten up on too short notice
to do him justice.

ae ee

ait at ae Be es Ed

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 265

suses, typographical errors make the figures for single counties

.or regions unreliable, but of course they do not affect the totals for

the whole area so much. In the next table, as in that for 1895,
only three columns of figures are given, one for central Florida,
one for the rest of the State, and one for the whole State. St.
Lucie County was cut off from Brevard shortly before this cen-
sus, making the area to be included in central Florida smaller, but
not materially affecting the ratios.

TABLE 32.
Agricultural Statistics for Central Florida and the Rest of State, 1904-5.

Central | Rest of | Whole
Florida | State | State

Rericentsot land: intfarms eo SNe ee eee Dawe 2 FT is Ey a a Tf
Pence Gt alancd improved ss — Se 2 lo eee Be 4.25 4.75 4.62
Penrcentaots tarmense whitey e.- ==! 525 vos se eS 83.0 64.2 68.7
Per cent of farmers owners and managers —_~-_---______ 91.0 69.1 74.2
Improved: ‘acres per inbabitant ~~~ 22-2. 24-- 2.38} 2.73] 2.64
imibabiianess per pieeMm, 2 ese ee San era 12.3 13.4
Average number of acres per farm 222.20 25.2222 0 6 5_ 129.5 97.0 | 104.6
Averupenimiproved.actes per farm, s2-2-= 2 2 eee | 418 33.6 37.3
Value of farm land -per acre ($) --4-----1-----_-,---- 9.48 7.41 7.96
Wulnevor land: per sfarm 2 2.i 2 2 1226 721 872
Male on pilldinos persaiimrm), 92) 22s 2 ee 8 | 360 193 247
Value of implements and machinery ~---------------_~ 49.00] 36.80] 41.50
bile Se ibe labor 1904-5) per: farm 22250 ---v se oe | 58.30) 40.50) 46.65
Expenditures‘for fertilizer per farm ----------_----~_- | 62.20) 35.40| 43.30
Expenditures for labor per acre improved ~---------__- 1.39| 1.20 1.25
Expenditures for fertilizer per acre improved ~-------- 1.49 1.05 1.16
Number of horses, per, farm -22) 222 28s ee IR ZA pe cNeier [pis Me = Te
INSIH ERT Of eBttles fe a hot ee te hs oe ee a | 56) | ee ee eee
Nim beDy Or work oxen) 2 5o20 2 52 ee ee | JY) ae eohae al gee a
Number vol; dairy: cows 225-24 83 2 ae ee OMG A ee eee ys ae
Number or snative’ Cattle <2 43222 2 ete ee. PL s1\ ee eee tees tee
Number of “thoroughbred” cattle ......-.....--..--.- | 2s eee en iad es
NMEMOEY SOLR SHOR ply hui see os ee pie Ce as a fe DOO teen 2 (Wye eate
Number of goats -_------- pee ots Se Be ee de Ve Oe WO 2 | ees eee ie eee oe
eQeE Tas U1e) meh) Gh C0) = WE MepMae 6, Soe Desa Ses Ras ae Seo et DON at EO:OD I eee |e ee
INUTEBErOGh TCHIGK ens) 225222 be soo ot Ss es 40:30|f)-22e elena
Wimbersof other poultry —2-5..21.2-2 2-225. 5 =-8L- SOS note potas fel
Nimibersor colonies: of bees 22-22 sen O22 See

As before, central Florida leads the rest of the State in per-
centage of white farmers, size and average value of farms, and in-
tensity of farming.

266 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

CONDITIONS IN 1909-10

The federal census of 1910, supplemented by a special report
on- negro population published late in 1918, affords enough mate-
rial for several tables, one for all farmers as before and two for
whites and negroes separately, besides somte for crop values, crop
yields, and animal products. Statistics of a few kinds_for owners,
managers and tenants separately could also have been compiled
from the same returns 1f it had seemed worth while.

The blanks near the top of the first table are due to lack of
correspondence between natural boundaries and county bounda-
ries, as before. In the negro population volume the returns
from counties with less than 100 negro farmers are less complete
that the others, so that some blanks had to be left in one of the
tables for that reason.

As these are the most complete agricultural statistics available
at this writing, they will be used to illustrate some general princi-
ples which have been passed over rather hurriedly in discussing the
earlier censuses.

The percentages of farm land and improved land are doubt-
less highest in the most fertile region, the Middle Florida ham-
mock belt, though there are no statistics to show it, because it cov-
ers only a fraction of one county. The number of improved acres
per inhabitant is highest and the number of inhabitants per farm
lowest in the Gulf hammock region (if Sumter County is a fair
representative of it), indicating that agriculture is most important
(relative to other industries) there, though the hammock belt
would doubtless lead in this respect too if it did not contain the
city of Ocala. The other extreme is in Hillsborough County,
which contains the largest city.

The largest farms are in the eastern flatwoods, where there is
a superabundance of “elbow room,” but five-sixths of their area
there is unimproved, mostly cattle range. The lime-sink region,
where land is cheapest (and easy to cultivate), has the most im-
proved acres per farm.* The east coast strip represents the other

*Conditions there resemble those in the Mississippi Valley in that low ex-
penditures and returns per acre are compensated for by the cultivation of a
large number of acres per farm; this being extensive as opposed to intensive
farming.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 267

extreme as far as central Florida is concerned, for reasons appar-
ent after reading the description of that region.

The east coast has the most valuable land per acre, but is sur-
passed a little in value per farm by the eastern flatwoods, where
the farms are over five times as large, on the average. The east
coast strip also has the mfost valuable farm buildings, and there-
fore presumably the highest standards of living, and the lime-sink
region is the other extreme, as far as the statistics show. But in
value of implements and machinery the east coast is lowest, on ac-
count of the small farms worked mainly by hand labor; and the
lake region ranks highest.

The eastern division of the flatwoods, being still mainly in
the pastoral stage as far as agriculture is concerned, is far in the
lead in the value of live-stock per farm, as well as in number of
cattle, horses, and sheep. The Gulf hammock region seems to lead
in dairy cows (though this may be due to some error in the census,
as suggested elsewhere), the Middle Florida hammock belt (with
the largest proportion of negroes) in mules and goats, the lime-
sink region in hogs (as in corn and peanuts), and the east coast
in bees.

The east coast has the highest expenditures for labor and fer-
tilizers and the lime-sink region the lowest, but no region in cen-
tral Florida spends as much for feed as the State average, perhaps
because there is more winter pasturage here than in northern Flor-
ida. The east coast also leads in value of crops per farm and per
acre, while the Hernando hammock belt is lowest in crops per
farm and the lime-sink region the lowest per acre. The east-
ern flatwoods and the east coast strip, although adjacent, are
opposite extremes as far as the value of animal products is con-
cerned. The value of crops is roughly proportional to the value
of land and buildings, and inversely to the illiteracy percentage,
though if different states were compared some exceptions to this
might be noticed.*

*For some statistics of farm expenses and receipts in different regions in
Florida and in several other states, with a regional map of the State and a
discussion of general principles, see the Quarterly Bulletin of the State Ag.
ricultural Department, vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 14-26. (Nov.) 1920.

I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

268

8L0 =: [090 LUE IRD OF FOL GLO Ore POLE |OE 00m 4|0G0) a Ook ren occa SoS aa sa0q JO SelUO[OD FO JequINNy
0g pBaie || seh Seger Se | etealr Oe lea UG aalseic | oy cullen. = ee a eee a ene Aaymod jo saquiny
S9E | SOT || 9 S91 | 66 BG O'S oe nL Pelee | lee ce eae sSoy JO Joaquin
G0r et lene el ta etlavel OSs VP ar SitOige |G) ete ee een ote toa ees syvos JO JoquinN
ice lone: oa) | eee leRiOe eer) ZO oT Gg Te Oi... |= ee ae eee deeys JO Joquiny
s*o 0 ra) ee OeelecOm ul Oe eae 0 | Boo lwo) oS a - sofnu jo Jaquiny
60 Gil wh ae ree Geen On G0 nce GT 91 oy ee ae ae re . “OY Jo Jequinyny
OPE a Rese 22P. ORO OT] .8:OD let eee ley ele eo'Oa es TOP | saesceeee eee teams aqyyeo . Yo Jo saquiny
&% CG 40 |o¢ GT Tale le Ocleee eCommerce PiQinl agrees Tee er wavy tod SMod A. (ep Jo roquInN
Ip s6p =| |OFe lo60z = OPP 80P elP FSP 8G Siena leaaeaes oes ‘oqo ‘Aaq]nod ‘yoo}s aA] JO onlTBVA
68 git ||Z8 166 IG2t Ler = |g FOL 86 Ci Bl eaacmes « Atouryowur pue syuouojdut jo on[e,
68P g99 = ||S4¥r_— lege 6F9 ~—«- |600T_—«|F6F ZOF Ore Or al=s—- SS Se wavy tod ssutpying jo on[e,A
e181 |oroge |loes¢ |oSSo lopee losse sist |ippr [0472 |etg, |--------7------ wavy iad puvy wary Jo one
PS LT -l0L'e \|9446. icete leceo lost: lege. |ierr |9&4 — geet |= s--- 2 = (g$) oro sod pux, wey so onper
T9e | SF CE | Oise Ged PBT epode INGiOr= | Ciera eb OG! one ceteemeeertae alates wavy Jed sesoe poaoiduy
SOiCOTaeG6 eel| SiG: rnGQZOE [Ni -2ee ai eize RON 1-4 TONS Oleei | cnlONlc on aeien ae cease wavy Jod se10v aSeieAV
10m nO Olea||e4e > | OL. AeGigi Gey Fl [eh 4 18a us| Sac anes eae Squvue} SLoMIv} JO JUeD Og
OGeo a) Lage || MOOk ss e OP. el Ook | Gilone | (ase LEO sel GEO | agen cee SloSvuvU SIoULIB Joye. Jog
SOL =| Seer Os | POR || Sao | gigg: |-SteBe «| GR s|<c 18) ol cpicRaltaa> caeeee sae SIOUMO SIeMIVT JO JUD Jeg
962 | Z9I ViCT. {Oe 2 O'g. aloe Been 7 OOM aun OIG Tes SGsRie || tees = eee oe oe pe1ojoo S1eutIey JO Jue ag
VG aC Oe ol ele here se) | meme leon lezic 60 6:0) Nea aa sas IPIYM UWFe1OT SLomMIVJ JO yU0d Jog
@ SOnu SSiSU eee) = |EL:86. S| "e:'gee |2e'pge serege |, 2-2o. 1 eigee Gl @elins smae — aeee d7IYM PATPLU S1OULIVZ JO YUE IOg
OST | SLT Oi = es es PBS Gara tas ae WA od fk I kell SPs aoa eee wmiey sod sqyueziqeyuy
OFS ILET ert iit Ss Goo) -SiblT ek poiee s|\OGm. ral Stas amc eee ea ee queyiqeyut ted sa1oe paaoiduy
(ae A Pee eens Cipro ae wll giee a saan epee eee cre: [SiO Skee eS eee paaordut puvyl jo 4yuao sg
Oia Ts eae eae lngeper [pei [Sse tee ase cae ner: eae tates Cig Sse ee SMIvJ Ul purl, Jo JUV. Jeg
|

D WO); GS) Ba) azn) & ges Peis pel SA saa lee)

ee ee ee | gel Sa) F | ES] EE | RE EE

Po | Bs 3 3° Ber ee P| 8 SNOIDEY

pe ° 3} Oy °o 4 }
fe e Pee cas *

‘OL-6061 ‘Suorsoy Aq “Bprio],T [eAzUED JO SorqsIZeZG [ANg[NOTIsW [eVseue;)

CC alav1

269

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

‘ge |jofrorr \go'Te: ‘easy loner lois “loots: [Or?z ‘0962 \-ssen- as ee ee O16I
| | | | | | ut peaoidut aioe sad ‘E96, UL sdoro Jo ante,
GMO ke (LLY SRS leo eT 990. oe 0 Sl0b Tt ale aee eet a meneree er eames peey JOT
|Sten eee 060". ee ihe WOW 1890 loge |s- e TozI[I}4oy Log
pros \oroe “lds 0 sao l0e 0G Gre ee ee lk MiGaige |e aa mean a serene ae oqel 107
| | | leone | | | ‘OI6T Ul poaordmr osov aod “gO6, UL yuedy
99 jove logt tat leer lest lees sg |---- of6T warez dod ‘syonposd jemmue zo onped
|sséx lees loe9 lose (€4" \ecg loza ees |-------- OGL wavy tod “GOGT Ut sdoso Jo onteA
ts ios ([4tr log log (9¢ [ye gp |-------#7 BU SRonsare ser a Ree poey 10g
lebr SF lsot leot ize \19 |o& 6Gtel Oa oe 2 oe ee SLOZI[I4lof 107
ilv6z__istt__ise___—iloet__izg__—silost_ oS —eggt__|-($) soqet 203 ‘ore1 uf mares sod ‘e061 ui queds
2) se | an pace?) l= Sin | oe aa | eo :
e est a\p ep 2 © = se | Be | p
88 |ge [gs] o | 2a |e | ee lee 7
o $ 8 3 5 5 ihe SNOIDAY
a bo: |: pea wr

‘OT-6061 ‘SuoIsoy Aq “eprtopy [eazueD jo sorystzezg [eINyNoIsy [e10UH
‘GHONILNOO—EE Alavi

_ pine —_— ee a Se eee ee

TAL REPORT

13TH ANN

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

270

OGL

ZL
960
OOF
Ig'0
F6'0
8G
60T
919
068%
E881

6%
e'9
Z'0
£0
| €'0
i
LG
821
OFL

06

I

OVSé
09'€€

PGS

--+--- AO eRCE ae bps ecae ek PON Blan ae Se ee Oe ad Seni
Seuccs re LZ | ae | ao BG. [eae ee EE ded W100) TON So10N7
Se ee Bee oe (ee ee ee | 20 CAG ae io ea lene ee a im pe ee es POLIO CU IYI]
aro (ele Aes | e09 Ts (Wed ele ecine eo ge ae uliey Jed U0zJod JO say
------ z'0 Tye SN e'0 Z@Q |c7777 7777777 «Wary Jed soynur yom fo Jequiny
--=--- | OT Gos oe ee al QT |cc7777 77777 «wares sed sesioy YOM Jo JoqunNy
=----- oT er oes ees ge | 2OL (0777777777777 Waey Jed smoo Aarrep Jo requnNn
101 8z1 GS1 18 ZG ell Spo aie eS Ayoutypovut puvx szuowmoldut jo onp~eA
86¢ 019 OLOL le%¢ 189 OLE Aiea Seas faa eee wavy ded ssurpling Jo enjeA
ozlg lopie lotip jlotrt jeeee (98! |Izl2 | wavy dod pul wavy Jo on[vA
Sire ise Ge! ieee eh Gare Opes (¢) e108 sod Puvy wavy fo anjeA
Tice Gio eeea lc os | etre leetenlesstcnacne= wivy tod sotow poaoadut ssvioay
a8 z'9 z) ce, | 8 PeOTs srcU elec oe ae wivy Jed satov jo loquinu asviay
Zs Z9 a) CET Gs pol | (eo) el SMI: OES RE Sa spuUBUOZ JUVD I9q
LZ ZF 921 | 0% ge 90 C:0a oo Cans Se SlocvuvUt yUueD dq
Was leGOe, wlarhes eGips. \ecel Smelly Gc ee cic: oo: | menmae iene SIOUMO Jxvd PUB S1OUMO JUAd Jog
vs ore ae al te i er 20. NaCI SEs a aa ae UL0g-USIa10} JUD Jog
ROG. TS FO OR e eOL EO: Wwe ee sac d US| ail Wek cee anes cae a LELOTeO Bueo eed
pe lpm) f | eel be | BE Eg

ie) see heed ese. | eee es

ao ae B > S} = le SNOIDEY

Bis he 88 | 25 EE

D 7) ‘ae) a | ‘ar

‘OT-G06T ‘suoIsoyy kq eprxop jeaquay ut sro ULIe aq AA JO SOrzSIzRIS
‘po WiavL

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

S'Or JF) Wee | Re iat Monee MCS See 9 OL 9'OT BOs, Dos ae oe aiov Jed speysng
COPE] co | heRE) ie | Sc Rese Qe eal Ore le wee | 68 COR tua ean oS So eee wey tad U10d JO Sa1oV
SoU Oso ee eee ner leo eae |sS245= DIO. AIR L000 aseae lea sae a See ee ee ate aod sayeg
0€'8 C0 js olsen) Nise leet Ole ese 90 61 One eert eere os wey tad 03400 jo samy
reg LQ. ------ [------ r0 “ile Wess Bi voabelle Seo ellie bssaee es Wary tod seynm yIoM Jo LoquinNn
O90 kL Ole ol eee eee 6'0 ie donee Ott (See lei ees ee wivy ied sesioy YOM JO coquinN
80'T Cisieeael | cas eee 9°0 Sit), onlaaeaes (ict FT Rite ene wavy Jod smoo Ariep jo sequiny
coor lo26F leo LG er) vl I¢ l6r g Fel) aac ee Ayourgovut Pue szuoutatdur jo onpep
LLI = |09 G59: |60¢ =a |0TE 2 |GGPa. IO La OU ce SO eset ocu eae ane merece wavy tod sBurppmq jo onper
1g9 =‘ |ST6 OORE= GIT -\0ZBL \0GSE Oper 992. InOGs “lol \noneaen enon atn.e wiv} Jod purl wary Jo onpea
orat loo'1z |lootex loses Icoroe lose levst leeot [98 leat | CTS gE ETN
8'2e | 861 8'8 PLS Ager SOL] bieeolceicae LS Ree C ule 3 seat a aes. wavy Jed sadov poaoidwt osviaay
Geo. | Ger | Pee eGes Tce <| CGE. Weg ee euerpa 0) Deel hlines eames wiv Jod saiov JO Joqunu esvi0Ay
L6P TS || set O° | FOI Lor | 2% OF Sz On Giclees has ee ee ee SJUvUd} Jue. 19g
L0 Graal SCine|- Ore al-o Geer cg ZT Ge ik G0 clog Rok eee eee ee os SlasvuvuUl yued Idg
CGR) Sze Ul-giees 1001. Peseta. pon, Ibe) ulOrre = Ol) cleam an aem S19UMO Javd pUv SLOUMO U0 Jog
eee Ob ale eke Oss agg. lee Oran re ROR lwo Sri iGwilsceo a wor ee eee [%}0} JO Yue. sag

Z |

Sa Je 4 Se | ae oe hace po c= Ste a

5/98 | 28 | ge] ¢ Rol eo | ee] eee

Poe eal on ® gaa | 48 = ates NOY

eee Se Ws ee hem ole ;
| i = Se Re * :

‘OT-606T ‘SuoISay Aq “eplo[T [e1ZUaDH UT SLoMIeT PoeLO[OD JO SoTqsTzPRIg
-C& atlavL

272 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

The tables for .white and negro farmers separately present
many interesting features which it would take too long to discuss,
but most of them can be picked out readily enough with the aid of
the bold-face and italic figures. Generally speaking, the negroes
are most efficient where they are least numerous, and those on the
east coast seem to have nearly as high standards as the whites in
some other regions (as already indicated by the illiteracy figures).

The census tells little about the foreign white farmers except
their numbers, but by doing a little adding, subtracting and di-
viding we can ascertain that of those in central Florida in
I9Q10, 90.2% owned their farms, 7.3% were managers, and
2.5% tenants: while the corresponding figures for native white
farmers were 84.1, 6.5, and 9.4. This agrees very well with the
showing with respect to illiteracy of the rural white and foreign
population brought out in an earlier chapter. The nationality of
foreign farmers is not given by counties, but a little more than
half of the.foreign white farmers in Florida in 1gto were in cen-
tral Florida, and the leading nationalities among them in the whole
State were English, German, Canadian, Swedish, Irish, Scotch,
and Danish.

The State census of 1915 dealt with population and manufac-
turing only, but for some years past the State agricultural de-
partment has been taking a census of crops, etc., every two years,
going into much more detail than the federal censuses; and two
of these State censuses have been used in the foregoing pages in
determining the relative importance of different crops in each re-
gion, The nuntber of acres in cultivation in each county has been
given in the last few biennial crop censuses, and the report for
1917-18 gave the number and acreage of farms, but nothing about
the color and tenure of farmers, the value of farm property, or
the expenses of farming. On account of the limited funds avail-
able for these crop censuses the work has to be done rather hastily,
and the results are further vitiated by typographical errors, so that
it is not safe to use them for statistical work involving ratios and
percentages.

>

~

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 273

CONDITIONS IN I9QI9Q-20

At this writing only a few preliminary returns from the fed-
eral census of Jan. I, 1920, are available, not enough to warrant
the construction of a table for the different regions; but the fol-
lowing results will indicate in a general way the developments of
a decade in central Florida as a whole. The percentage of farm
land has increased to 17.9 and of improved land to 5.4, or 1.61
acres per inhabitant. The percentage of white farmers has in-
creased a little, to 85.4, while owners and managers together con-
stitute 89.3% of all farmers, a trifle less than in 1910. The farms
are a little larger now, averaging 106.8 acres with 32.2 improved,
but this may be due entirely to the larger proportion of white
farmers.

The apparent value of land and buildings per farm has more
than doubled, being $8,400, but as the dollar of 1920 was probably
worth less than half that of 1910, this does not necessarily indi-
cate any increase in rural standards of living, The number of cer-
tain animals per farm is as follows: Horses 0.94, mules 0.46,
cattle.13.9, sheep 0.78, hogs 12.6. This is a decrease in everything
except mules, and probably indicates a further approach to the
conditions prevailing in the east coast strip, where very intensive
farming is done with a minimum of live-stock. Some of the
horses may have been replaced by mechanical tractors, but that
change is likely to be much more marked in the next ten years than
in the last ten, if the supply of oil holds out. Statistics of farm
expenditures and the value of crops and animal products have not
yet been received, but it is altogether likely that they will show
a notable increase in intensity of farming.

The amount of improved land at present is only about half
enough to feed the population, and however much this may be de-
plored by our patriotic citizens, this part of the country will doubt-
less continue indefinitely to be a large importer of food; for in or-
der to become self-supporting the farm population would have to
increase faster than the city population, something that has never
happened to any notable extent in the whole history of the United
States, the tendency being constantly in the other direction.

274 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

VARIATIONS IN SIZE OF FARMS

All the foregoing agricultural statistics are based on average
farms, and tell nothing about how many are below and above the
average or how far some may depart from the average. News
items about wonderful yields of one crop or another abound in
local papers, and the census averages seems so small in comparison
with some of these reports as to tend to give the impression that
they may be inaccurate or unfair; but it must be borne in mind that
it is only exceptional happenings that have much news value, and
the doings of the multitudes of farmers (or any other class of peo-
ple) who rank near or below the average are not likely to be men-
tioned often.

The U. S. census gives for every state and county, and in many
cases for white and colored farmers separately, the number of
farms in several different size groups, from which curves can be
constructed showing the range of variation in that particular in
any county or group of counties. For 1860 and 1870 the group-
ing was based on improved acreage, but since then on total acre-
age, which in most parts of Florida and other “piney woods’ sec-
tions is much less significant than improved acreage, for the
greater part of the farm area in this State consists of wild land
which does not differ perceptibly from neighboring land that has
never been appropriated by farniers.

For this reason, and also because the census does not give sta-
tistics of this kind for the two races separately for counties that
have less than 100 negro farmers, no size-of-farm curves are pre-
sented here,* but some have been drawn for office use, and some
of their interesting features may be mentioned briefly.

At all times and in all countries, as far as known, there are
more farms below than above the average size, just as most people
are below the average in age, education, wealth etc., as explained
at the beginning of the chapter on illiteracy. In Ig1o both in
central Florida and the whole State just about 23.5% of the white
farmers had farms above the average in size, while among the

*For a series Of such curves for southern Alabama, perhaps the only ones
of the kind ever published, see Geol. Surv. Ala., Special Report No. I1, p. 131,
August, 1920.

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 275

negroes there was greater uniformity, about one-third being above
the average and two-thirds below.* In central Florida about 8%
of the negro farmers had larger farms than the average white
man, while the corresponding figure for the whole State was about
7%, and for Marion County only about 2%. The greatest in-
equality in our area is in Osceola County, where only 9% of all
farms (for both races, but there are so few negroes that the re-
sults would be much the same for whites alone) are above the
average in size. But the largest farms are cattle ranches, with
very little improved land, and if improved land alone was consid-
ered Osceola might not show up very different from some of the
other counties.
If we only had similar graded figures for acreage of improved
land, value of land and buildings per farm, yield of different crops,
c., the results would be very significant. But in the absence of
such data we can safely assume that the resulting curves would all
be steepest in their higher portions, as we already know to be the
case with those for ages of the population, grades of school chil-
dren (fig. 43), cities arranged in order of size, mountains in or-
der of height, rivers in order of length, etc.

CROPS
Relative Importance

In the regional descriptions the relative importance of the prin-
cipal crops for 1909, 1913-14 and 1917-18 has been indicated,
without specifying how much’ of the total crop value is contributed
by each, except sometimes in the case of one or two near the head
of the list. Table 36 shows for each of the more important crops
what percent it made in 1909 of the total crop value in each region
for which we have statistics, as nearly as can be ascertained from
the 13th U. S. census. The value of each crop in each county is
not given by the federal census as it is;by the State census, but it
has been estimated by assuming that the value per bushel, pound,

*Fyom these curves it can be determined that the median sizes of farms
in the seven central Florida counties that had over 100 negro farmers in 1910
were about 43 acres for whites and 30 for negroes; that is to say, there were
just as many farms above as below these sizes. But the average sizes for the
two races, as shown in Tables 34 and 35, were 102.5 and 43.5 respectively.

276 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

or other unit is the same in each county as it is in the whole State.
The federal census is also unsatisfactory in that it lumps together
the two varieties of cotton and many kinds of vegetables, which
are important in Florida, but that at least simplifies the table. The
reasons for not using the State census figures for crop value per-
centages have been given elsewhere.

The percentages in this table are given to the nearest tenth, so
that those below .05% are represented by zero, which does not nec-
essarily mean that the crop in question is not raised in that region
at all. Crops that do not constitute as much as 1% in any of the
regions treated are omitted. The highest figure in each line is
printed in heavy type, as usual, but the lowest is in many cases in-
determinate. Some of the columns add up more than 100% and
some considerably less, doubtless because of great variations in the
value per acre of different vegetables, which are not separated by
the census.

TABLE 30.
Relative Importance of Different Crops in Central Florida, by Regions, 1909.

\ uf | |
g i 2| § 9| Lely 3.31

wlo,| 8/880 be Fle zleslisels2

Se ees a Sele eM el ealgsias

CROPS CE Ag AS/BS) A ws|ds|e soR|sa
SVerctables:) S2--—=-2—-- = | 72.0] 29.5| 66.8] 19.3] 37.6] 20.7| 8.1] 4.7|| 30.4) 17.5
Cotton (both kinds) ------ 0.1] 5.4] 0.77 0 0| 0 Q |, 20 0.5| 13.4
Cotton seed .—-=-=-=-_____= ee | eed es el 0 | 0 0 Oo Nae
Coney seems eee wks | 13.2) 18.4] 13.4] 16.9] 3.4] 5.5] 7.8) 0.2]| 7.4| 15.8
Ontar eee ste ue ee Se 1.3] 4.1| 3.3] 0.6) 0 0 0 0 1.0| 1.2
Reanutse 2. ==-—- = ee 2:3) sx9.2) 5 6:2|72.2)) 401) | O.L) Oss 0 2.7| 5.9
Trish potatoes ------------ o-2| 0.8] 0.4] 0.7| 1.8] 3.1] 1.7| 0-4]| 1.3) 2.3
Sweet potatoes —~---------- | 13] 3.8] 2.5] 5.8| 1.9] 26) 6.6] 0.7|| 27| 34
Oa CCOmp ee ee 0 Oy) SOME g-4le 0 0 0 0 0.2| 2.8
Hay and forage —---=--—-= 1.5] (1.8/5.1) 0.5] 3.7| 3.4] 5.6) O.1|| 34) 723
Sugar cane (syrup) ------- 1:0). 5.2), *22b/ 74.6] 03) 2-7) 1.5) 0:2 || aia
Straw Pernes pea=— == sae OP eh0 ls 0 a4) Ol 2,7) 5, Ons \eg0 1.1| 0.8
Oranges: 2220 Sse See ees 8.2| 3.7| 8.6| 16.7| 51.8] 43.2| 54.3| 51.9)! 32.5] 11.9
Grapeiruit tose ee 3.3] 0.3| 2.8] 3.0] 9.9] 18.7] 10.6] 12.5|| 9.8] 5:3

Average Yields

The average yield per acre of the leading crops in 1909, which
is readily ascertained from the census reports, except for vegeta-
bles and orchard fruits, is given by regions in the next table, ex-
cept that in a region where a given crop is relatively insignificant

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 277

its yield has not been computed because the chances of error are
too great. For example, if only one or two farmers in a region
raise a certain crop their yield in the census year might easily be
below or far above the normal, in accordance with the principle .
set forth a few pages back, so that averages based on them might
be very misleading.

“Vegetables” are left out of this table, because so many dif-
ferent kinds, measured in different units, are lumped together in
the government census reports. Both federal and State censuses
give the number instead of acreage of fruit trees, apparently be-
cause some farms have only a few scattered trees whose acreage
cannot be measured; but the average number of orange and grape-
fruit trees per acre is commonly reckoned at 70, and the acreage
has been computed on that basis.

TABLE 37.
Average Yield per Acre of Certain Crops in Central Florida, 1909.

=——
SSS

eet REGIONS | a4|g4 Sie |
) & Ola oS | es

a sha oleae eer Ol | eae
Sal exisalbe 2 [Pe es ggleelse
tt ek ee ecm Sa) 4 Aa wa ms O & SH
Coen (bushels) 7252-22. 16.0| 70.6] 12.0| 13.3] 14.6] 13.7) 12.4] 15.7|| 11.5] 11.6
Oats (bushels), 2222—-2-=-—- 12.2] 13.9] 12.8] 12.1] 13.9] 17.7] ----| 10.0|| 13.1} 14.0
Rice. (bushels)> =2-22222 22-222 [eel lien|! io ee 2aeb) | eee || 227 | 198
Peanuts (bushels --------- 14.2| 22,.1| 16.3] 19.2] 15.7) 11.9] ----| ---_|| 18.5] 18.4
Hays (tons) == ====——=—=-—== TO) EG eros ea) ete 2) TL) Lotte V2p LO

Irish potatoes (bushels) --_| 51.0] 72.3) 52.4) 57.4| 92.3| 87.0| 90.8| 95.4|| 84.6|100.8

Sweet potatoes (bushels) -_| 85.7| 82.3] 70.8|101.5|100.1| 85.8/105.0/120.0|| 90.4) 94.7
Sugar cane (tons) -----~- | go| 7.7| 4.4| 13.5] 7.4) 13.9] 21.2] 13.4|) 9.4) 11.1
Sugar cane (gals. syrup) --| 164] 221) 199} r45| 171| 155] 179| 294] 178) 196
Oranees a (boxes), -4-2=—) -- | 8z| 138] 115] 103] 119] 176) 153) 115); 122| 123
Grapefruit (boxes) ----~-~-- 152] ---_| 129] 146] 103] 144) 121] 8|| 129| 112
Strawberries (quarts) .-.=-] ~-=-| +-—-| ~=_-| 2130] 680|,1737| ~---| ---=|| 1611] 1777

The yield of any crop of course fluctuates from year to year
with the weather, etc., but should not change much from one
decade to another, except for a slight increase as the population
becomes denser, land more valuable, and farming more intensive.
Natural fertility of soil seems to have little to do with crop yields,
probably because differences in that respect are so easily elim-
inated by the use of a few dollars’ worth of labor or fertilizer, or
both. The Middle Florida hammock belt is unquestionably the

278 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

most fertile in the area under consideration, but it does not have
the highest yield of any crop shown in the table; and the averages
for central Florida are close to the State averages, although the
soil is doubtless below the State average in fertility.* Density
of population has more effect, for the western flatwoods and the
east coast strip each lead in three crops.

ANIMAL PRODUCTS

In several of the foregoing tables the number of animals per
farm in different regions at different times has been given, but
little has been said about the amount of meat, milk, wool, eggs,
honey, etc., produced by them. Such information was gathered
more completely by the census of 1910 than by any preceding one,
and the results as far as they apply to central Florida are shown
in Table 38, which as usual has a column for each region, one for
the whole area, and one for the whole State.

The census does not give the total production and value of
every animal product, but sometimes only the total or only: the
surplus sold; and the different kinds are lunrped together more or
tess in the returns of values. The results are computed on a per
tarm rather than a per acre basis, for animals bear no close rela-
tion to either total farm land or improved land.

The amount of milk, butter, poultry and eggs sold is roughly
proportional to the urban population, and is therefore highest in
the western division of the flatwoods, represented by Hillsborough
County. Hogs (and therefore animals slaughtered, which are
mostly hogs), are most important in the lime-sink region, which
raises the most corn and peanuts. Animals sold on the hoof,
which are mostly beef cattle, of course lead in the eastern flat-
woods. Although that region has the most sheep per farm, they
must be raised mostly for mutton, for the Middle Florida ham-
mock belt exceeds it in wool per farm. The east coast leads in
honey, but is lowest in most other animal products, on account of
the intensive farming which prevails there.

*The value of crops per acre is a different matter, though. In this re-
spect central Florida is over 60 per cent above the State average, as shown
in Table 33, not by producing larger yields, but by raising a larger proportion
of more valuable crops and less cotton, corn, oats, peanuts, etc.

279

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

PPI

OG ES
OO'LE

Lal

la

CL st
OO'TF
cC1l
Cr él

|
|

lo |

nie
ot ie oe

=

OTL
9 FT
SP

o9

T¥é
S'1%
PEST

Tot=. ||90 Jove [beta iter. bet Selb lT = spec GS Alcs ce crceg nes oer (090 ‘s1oyywoy
| | sopty ‘yrut ovutoy ydooxe) syonpoad [vutue [TV
ose |loo’2t |gest [o7Or |cezt jog'ep jog'sg jooror [OTST [> patoyysneys spwurUy
loose ||@2-4 oorvEr loge los0e [OSTS [09 1F [00:09 [00°06 | yooy oy} Uo POS s[vUIUy
OO'T O 00'T STO 80°0 09°0 zg'l 690 CSOs 2s > eres peonpoid areyour Puv [ooA,
6eT ||24°P Teal 66'0 ST 620 oG'0 ANN | Sein Oa lean oe ae oe poonpoid xvasooq pue Aouoy{
losz2 llozst lozzt lo&eS loge lest lores loses \9822 |-- > - pjos ssse pus Aaypnog
ossp |l09-2E |loo'sg |oo'64 lorer loeze |st1¢ jog'0g 00°68 |---—-———————--—— poonpoad ssso0 pue Arq[nog
OLT2 <S2— [ZrO \OOSe Sieg pte lGleee |UD Cen ROsr sce Oe) a ecemmntes te eee nde eseeee Plos Syonpoad Aare
06°62 -[|29° {OB'LE. [OS'08) 0uGe IoL 8 [000% 1286" ONG E| So aiscmsss (6) speune te (euroy 78 posn
| | | | | | weld pues YW Surpnjoxe) syonpoad Aareq
Pict cine aloe san A
NEE <a Yen | ate, oo [et 2 G0 0 0 90 10 ed oR OTS exes oe peso} snvIS 10. Pjos szvos pux daosyg
Sig..> et > airy GT 6% zo Osa cleGtOw 2) Gieeulpac ree eee eee ae potaqzySne[s 10 plos ssoy
9% [o'r “lmeks SI 13 SZ Tizeteove OO: Git Ekim pe me Lago PolozysNVIS 10 P[OS 9[99BD
ep Ios ote ive oe aoe eis Acre S| 6 0n serie tere meee cence nomen ULOYS Sod00]} “[OOA\
| OLT wee | 6 | 98 pol |0'e PP FP QTE See eee acme (spunod) peanpoad Aouoyy
BOL || “her vi Opp. POCO) cy IeieG, = POG: | RGD =| E1CC Sian ate ete oes enerene nes (uazop) P[OS soso
OFET.|| Selo eT OOee. GB sOra0e| secre Ore la MO mldn |oeme cet iene oman (uezop) poonpoad seso
ret || 14 HEL. Sees sar MOP. CLC MG RTE MIGhli'icast <n a nena emo (aoquinu) pros A14;~nog
Oapalienne epld BE Lp ole Cer sp peu ce Oc | cOpiee Shep rsnon ene nee eal (toquinu) pester Ar4[Nog
Tbe BE lope ee | WB. oleae ay) cs) iG) = de eae cis ar a (spunod) Pjos 41099n¢
9°0& Ch 4 wes | zzz | For 6ST EOF | 8'GZ PCG a = pa See DRS (spunod) eprut 1044ngq
PO0ne | Te ere. le ere | oie closet <lnbiy | CON mnlcCl yt eraaeune ms seamen tan (suoyfes) P[os ATT
Oot || 7. | O:c0g | or60f | OFeT-| 1:29 | OORT 986 OTs ee (suo][zd) Poonposd API
| | | | | | | | SHILILNVAC)
ix) lac} eh bk wm

selee|e2|ee| sl ze|re|ey/re

= alc eae Soe fee gee m= 2 =a Sl olan

Ss 3 So: Bp Bw ee = SNODDEY

_ 3° 3 os o 3 lo)
ome re | RP a

‘suotsayy Aq ‘“606T “eplqoy [eajueD ul wey tad syonporg [euluy

"Qe ATaVL

19g

280 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

By comparing the number of animals of various kinds sold or
slaughtered in a year with the number living on the average farm
at the time of the census we can get a rough approximation of the
annual birth and death rate of each species, which in central Flor-
ida in 1909-10 was about 10% for cattle, sheep and goats, 33%
for hogs, and 143% for poultry.

The difference between the amount of milk, butter, chickens
and eggs produced and that sold is approximately that consumed
by the average farm family in a year, if none of these products
are bought by the farmers, and therefore gives some indication of
the standard of living. The-farmers of the east coast, however, .
although they have the most expensive land and buildings and
therefore presumably a pretty high standard of living, must buy
considerable groceries with the money received for their vegeta-
bles and oranges, for otherwise the average family would have
only about 37 gallons of milk, 3 pounds of butter, 18 chickens, —
and 57 dozen eggs to eat in a year, as compared with 92.6 gallons
of milk, 19.8 pounds of butter, 27 chickens, and 69 dozen eggs in
the lime-sink region, which probably really has the lowest stand-
ards. (Very likely the east coast farmers eat more fish and oys-
ters than those in the interior, though.) If such data could only
be obtained for whites and negroes separately we would doubtless
find considerable differences

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 281

MANUFACTURING

The United States census has not published returns of manu-
facturing for single counties for several decades; and although
the State agricultural department has taken censuses of manufac-
turing at several different periods, and published the returns by
counties, omissions and typographical errors make the reports of
doubtful value for statistical purposes.* Consequently it is not
feasible to treat the subject statistically at this time, but some ran-
dom observations can be given.

Central Florida is too remote fron? coal mines and waterfalls
for manufacturing to rank high among its industries, though at
some future time its vast stores of peat may be utilized as a source
of power. (Some notes on water-power were given in the chapter
on topography.) The most common kinds of manufacturing es-
tablishments are sawmills and turpentine stills, which put the raw
products of the pine forests through one or two of the first stages
in their preparation for use; and these get their power from pine
wood, which is a by-product of the same industries and therefore
costs them very little. A few statistics of sawmills have been
given in the chapter on vegetation.

Every city has various necessary establishments supplying local
needs, such as laundries, bakeries, ice factories, printing offices,
and plants supplying water, gas and electricity, and these are
classed as factories by the census, but unlike real factories they
bring in little or no wealth to the region because their products are
not shipped out to any appreciable extent, and it is hardly possi-
ble to expand such industries any faster than the population im-
mediately around them grows, (There are of course a few ex-
ceptions, such as the plant in DeLand where this report is
printed. )

There are quite a number of crate factories, jwhich have a
somewhat wider circle of patronage, and a few brick-yards. Cigar
boxes are made in Tampa to supply the factories there, and there

*For example in the 1915 census no returns of manufacturing were re-
ceived from Osceola County, and none of sawmills and turpentine stills from
Polk County; and the published figures made it appear that the cigars made
in Hillsborough County were worth about six cents apiece and those in Orange
County only about half a cent apiece.

282 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

is more or less building of ships and boats along the coast. Pre-
serves and other fruit products are made on a small scale in a few
places, and the list of small manufacturing industries might be ex-
tended considerably if there was any convenient way of getting
information about them.

Among factories in the accepted sense of the word, those that
employ skilled or semi-skilled labor in large buildings and make
finished products to be consumed in other states, the best known
are the cigar factories, which are chiefly concentrated in the out-
skirts of Tampa and operated by Cubans. They use little or no
machinery, and fuel and power constitute only about 1/6000 of
their total expenses (as compared with more than % in the case of
ice factories ).*

There is a large fertilizer factory: at Inglis, near the mouth of
the Withlacoochee River in Levy County, where much of the hard-
rock phosphate is exported; and a tractor factory at Oldsmar.
Plants for the manufacture of automobile cushions from Spanish
moss and of paper from saw-grass are said to be nearing comple-
tion at Leesburg.

The U. S. census of 1910 gives a few meager details for all
manufacturing industries in Tampa combined, from which the fol-
lowing figures have been extracted. In 1909 there were 215 “‘fac-
tories’ (nearly twice as many as in Jacksonville), with a com-
bined capital of $11,610,421, employing about 10,000 persons
(over four times as many as Jacksonville). The total expenses
were $16,281,003, and the value of products $17,653,021.

TRANSPORTATION
WATERWAYS

The St. John’s and Ocklawaha Rivers are navigable for most
of their length. Passenger steamers are operated throughout the
year on the St. John’s as far up as Sanford, and during the tourist
season small steamers and launches have for many years carried
sight-seers up the Ocklawaha and its tributary, Silver Spring Run,

*A number of original statistics on the efficiency of Tampa cigar-makers
under different weather conditions can be found in Ellsworth Huntington’s
“Civilization and Climate” (1915).

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 283

to Silver Springs. There is occasional freight traffic, perhaps less
now than formerly, still farther up the Ocklawaha to the large
lakes of central Lake County, The Kissimmee River together
with lakes and canals affords navigation all the way from Kissim-
mee to Lake Okeechobee, but as the river is very crooked and the
population near it very sparse, there has never been much traffic
on it. Much of the phosphate exported from the hard rock dis-
trict travels a few miles on the Withlacoochee River, from Inglis,
the terminus of a short railroad, to its mouth. The lagoons along -
the east coast have been connected up by short canals, and the shal-
lower stretches deepened, so that boats’ drawing not more than
three or four feet have an “inside passage’’ the whole length of the
coast.
RAILROADS

Central Florida is well supplied with railroads, considering its
sparse population, and it is one of the few parts of the United
States that has had any railroad building in the last five or six
years. In 1880 apparently the only railroads in this area were
lines connecting Cedar Keys and Ocala with Jacksonville, and an
isolated line from Astor on the St. John’s River to Fort Mason or
Lake Eustis: ‘about 83 miles in all. By 1891 the mileage had in-
creased more than ten-fold, to 1,026, or about one mile to every
too inhabitants.

At the beginning of 1920 there were about 1,875 miles of
track on which passenger service was operated, making about one
mile to every 7.7 square miles or every 160 inhabitants. None ot
the lines are double-tracked, and the average number of passenger
trains is about two each way a day (four or five on some lines in
winter, though). Nearly half the present mileage belongs to the
Atlantic Coast Line and its subsidiaries, and next in order are the
Seaboard Air Line (including Tampa Northern, Tampa & Gulf
Coast, etc.), with 28.6%, Florida East Coast, 15.2%, Tavares &
Gulf 2%, Ocklawaha Valley, Charlotte Harbor & Northern, and
Tampa & Jacksonville.

The mileage of railroads for 1920 is shown by regions in Table
39, which gives also for each region the percentage of the total
area, population, and railroad mileage which it has, as nearly as
can be estimated.

284 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

TABLE 39.
Railroad Mileage in Central Florida, 1920, by Regions, Compared With Area and °
Population.
; é Per cent of total
Regions Mileage : :
Area |Population | Mileage
Lu \West*coastyislandsy 22955 4 = 2 0.1 0.3 0.1
2. Gulf hammock region —--=—--__ 127 10.3 4.8 6.8
3. Middle Florida flatwoods _-_~- 25 2.2 ? 1.3
45) Dume=sinks resion p= == 365 15.5 24.6 19.6
5. Middle Fla. hammock belt ___- 43 1.4 4.0 2.3
6. Hernando hammock belt ~----- 28 1.3 2.6 1.5
Da eslalemre clon ene = aoe ee oe rat | 547 27.5 24.6 29.5
8: JWiesterm stlatwoods),="<— 222.274 | 390 13:5 27.5 21.0
oF astern) alatwoods)=22 22222). 225 | 25.8 4.8 12.0
10. East coast strip -------------- 121 2.8 6.7 6.5
ROADS

In the early days-in central Florida, as in other long-leaf pine
regions, roads cost practically nothing, for wagons could be driven
almost anywhere through the open pine forests. Where small
streams had to be crossed it was necessary merely to cut a right of
way through the swamp, and if the bottom was soft a layer of
poles could easily be put down, In the flatwoods and other low
places ditches are often dug on both sides of the road to carry
off the water from heavy rains faster than it would flow natu-
rally, and the earth from them used at the same time to elevate the
roadbed a little. Little-used roads through the flatwoods are often
carpeted with a fine turf of a small sedge, Eleocharis Baldwinii,
which is more agreeable for both pedestrians and vehicles than the
bare sand.

On the uplands where the sand is deep and dry it soon becomes
loosened up by the wheels and rather difficult to pull through.
The simplest way of getting around this is to start a new trail a
little to one side, where the sand has not been stirred up. From
this practice there often results a maze of approximately paral-
lel roads, rather confusing to a stranger, who may have no way
of knowing whether a fork in the road indicates a junction or a
mere siding. (This of course is not peculiar to Florida, but can
be seen also in Michigan and elsewhere.)

Where it is not practicable to make new tracks, as for example
where there are fences on both sides of the road (for wherever

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 285

forests or prairies are much more extensive than cultivated fields
it is cheaper to fence the crops and give the cattle and hogs free
range than it would be to confine the cattle, and the law gives the
animals this freedom in most parts of Florida), some method of
improving the road must be adopted if there is much traffic on it.
The cheapest road-surfacing material is pine straw (said to have
cost about $35 a mile by 1915 prices), which has been used to a
considerable extent where there is neither clay nor rock within
easy reach. This is ordinarily renewed every year or two. Near
sawmills and planing mills sawdust and shavings are often used
in the same way.

In many places, particularly in the lake region, sandy clay oc-
curs within a few feet of the surface, and when spread out to the
proper thickness and rolled it makes a very good roadbed. In sev-
eral other regions lintestone rock is available, and gives still better
results. In the pebble phosphate country a sandy rock that forms
part of the overburden in the mines is sometimes used in the same
way. Even in the eastern flatwoods and the lake region there are
a few deposits of marl near the surface, and that makes as good a
road as clay. Near the coasts oyster shells, either from living
reefs or from shell mounds, have long been utilized by road-mak-
ers, as have other species of shells occurring in the mounds. Be-
fore the days of automobiles the shells were usually simply spread
out over the surface of the road from time to time and left to be
ground up and compacted by wagon wheels.

Since automobiles became common there has been a great de-
velopment of permanent roadways, and where local supplies of
rock, clay, etc., are inadequate, brick and asphalt (fig. 27) have
been imported from other states or countries in large quantities.
At the present time there is perhaps no equal area in the world that
has better roads in proportion to population than central Florida.
But in the building of highly improved roads in recent years there
has been a regrettable tendency to locate them as much as possible
along section lines or parallel thereto. This practice doubtless
simplifies negotiations with land-owners and requires less mental
exertion than adapting the roads to the topography, but it makes
them more expensive to build and maintain and wastes the time of
people using them (for two sides of a square are over 40%

/

286 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

longer than the diagonal), to say nothing of the extra wear and
tear on tires and steering gear at the numerous square turns, and
the danger of accident.

On Sept. 30, 1918, according to the Second Biennial Report
of the State Road Department, there were over 1,500 miles of
roads classed as improved in the 15 central Florida counties, mak-
ing 31.9% of the State total, or about one mile to every 200 in-
habitants. By kinds of material used they were divided as fol-
lows: Marl and sand-clay 25%, asphalt 22.9%, brick 19.3%,
shells 16.8%, plain macadam 10.7%, surface-treated macadam
5.24%, concrete 0.14%. About two-thirds of the brick roads in
the State are in central Florida, and about two-thirds of the as-
phalt roads in Polk County alone. Shell roads are confined to the
coast counties, or nearly so, There has of course been some road-
building since 1918, but later figures are not yet available.

AUTOMOBILES

Central Florida is naturally as well supplied with automobiles
as it is with good roads. On March 2, 1920, according to the
State comptroller, there were 24,604 cars registered in our 15
counties, which was about 40% of the State total and about one
to every 12 inhabitants. The license records as published do not
indicate how many of the cars belong to winter visitors who get
Florida licenses at the beginning of the year and use them in some
northern state all summer, and do not even separate the races; but
probably neither tourists nor negroes constitute more than 10%
of the total. In the lake region there was about one automobile
to every nine inhabitants (and probably about 1 to 6 or 7 among
the white population, which means that the majority of white
families own at least one, and compares favorably with the fig-
ures for lowa and Kansas, which are often cited as extremes.)

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 287

NEWSPAPERS AND OTHER PERIODICALS

From a 1920 newspaper directory of the United States it ap-
pears that there are in central Florida about 14 daily, 3 semi-
weekly and 46 weekly newspapers (some of the weeklies being
weekly editions of dailies, however, and not independent enter-
prises), besides 10 special publications (mostly weekly) for agri-
culturists, college students, ministers, motorists, labor unionists,
Cubans or negroes. ‘Their average circulation cannot be esti-
mated closely, because the individual figures are not given in some
cases, some papers are printed only part of the year, some have a
larger circulation in winter than in summer, etc. But there must
be about 450,000 papers printed each week, enough to give every
family, white and black, a paper every day. This is doubtless
above the State average, for in 1909, according to the census, the
ageregate circulation of all periodicals printed in Florida was
about 700,000 per week, or four a week per family.* Of course
many copies, especially of Tampa papers, go outside of central
Florida, but this must be much more than counterbalanced by pub-
lications coming in from other sections and states, and the total
number of papers read may be as much as two a day per family,
or three a day per white family.

It is hardly worth while to give statistics by regions, for prob-
ably no paper has its circulation confined to one region; but out-
side of Tampa those of largest circulation are in the western di-
vision of the flatwoods, averaging about 5,700 per week normally.
Those in St. Petersburg claim a doubled circulation in the tourist
season, and one of them distributes its whole edition gratuitously
on days when the sun does not shine previous to the hour of print-

ing.

*In the whole United States at the same time the number of papers printed
was about eleven a week per family, but the number read may be much less,
for the number coming in from foreign countries must be less than the number
exported to Canada, etc.

288 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS.

Pages 75-70. The statistical tables (Nos. 1-8, 20-22, 24-39) contain over
2,000 percentages, averages and other ratios, about nine-tenths of them new
and the remainder copied from census reports, etc.

Page 82. In footnotes and elsewhere there are references to about fifty
papers relating to the area treated and thirty others,

Pages 111, 161. A news item from Brooksville a few weeks ago mentioned
incidentally a Snow Hill, five miles from there (direction aot specified), 368
feet above sea-level. This is probably an exaggeration, but it deserves inves-
tigation,

Page 121. Last line of text. For connect read connected.

Page 129. The raising of asparagus “ferns” under partial shade (like
tobacco and pineapples) is said to be an industry of some importance around
Pierson and Leesburg.

Page 136. There are a few typographical errors in the first paragraph,
most of them easily detected.

Page 141. The sanguinary conflicts mentioned in the footnote are prob-
ably not so much between stockmen and small farmers as between cattlemen
and others who own and fence large areas and those who own little or no
land and cut the fences that interfere with the ranging ot their animals.

Page 159. Diatomaceous “earth” should have been mentioned after peat.
See page 119, also 3d Ann. Rep., pp. 290-291. .

Page 160. In second paragraph of first footnote, for April read May.
(The article cited was published in April, though.) ;

Page 165, An important paper on the shell mounds along the St. John’s
River is that by Dr. Jeffries Wyman in the American Naturalist 2:393-403.
449-463, 1868. Clarence B. Moore has published several articles on the In-
dian mounds of Florida and other southern States in the Journal of the Acad-
emy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

Page 171, first footnote. Fairly typical of most 19th century classifications
of Florida soils on a basis of vegetation is a paper (presumably by H. S.
Elliot) in the Quarterly Bulletin of the State Agricultural Department for
July 1, 1909, pp. 25-36, reprinted in the 11th Biennial Report of the same de-
partment, pp. 36-49. I9II.

Page 200, line 3: or“ In? reads: On:?

Page 219; in first line of figures, for 38 read 83.

Page 224, second footnote. Two other noteworthy treatments of animals in
geological reports, both published about three years ago, are a 30-page chap-
ter by Howard Cross in Bulletin 27 of the Oklahoma Geological Survey (Ge-
ography of Oklahoma by L. C. Snider and others), and S. S. Visher’s Ge-
ography of South Dakota (S. D. Geol. Sury. Bull. 8). In the latter both
plants and animals are classified by habitat.

Page 244. About 30,000 visitors are said to have registered at St. Pe-
tersburg in the season of 1920-21, with Ohioans in the lead, as before.

Page 245. The size-of-farm curves mentioned here were not published, for
reasons explained on page 274. The 1915 State census of Iowa grades the
whole population according to education, as stated on page 253.

’

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 289

INDEX

This index is intended to include references to all important topics in the
whole volume (though at least nine-tenths of it pertains to pages 71-288, on
the Geography of Central Florida) that are not sufficiently indicated by the
tables of contents or common to all the regional descriptions or several or
many of the statistical tables, except the species of foraminifera, which are in-
dexed separately on page 70. Numbers in parentheses indicate pages on which
the topics in question are referred to indirectly or under different names,

Technical names of plants (about 230 species) and animals are italicized.
Where only a generic name is given it means either that there is only one
species of that genus in central Florida, or that the identity of the one men-
tioned is uncertain, or else that the statement referred to applies to several or
all of the species of the genus. In order to find all the references to some
of the commoner species it may be necessary to look up both technical and
common names in the index. The number of references to different species
will give some idea of their relative importance in the area treated, which
might not always be apparent otherwise.

Alaska, mosquitoes in, 231

A Aletris lutea, 139, 141
Abandoned farms, 261 Allen, J. A., work of, 224, 227
Abbott (Pasco Co.), I17 Alligators, 223, 230
Aborigines, 144 Alluvial soils, 170

Acer Floridanum, 219; Negundo (215),| Ampelopsis arborea, 90, 125, 133, 140
219; rubrum, 90, 94, 99, 124, 126,] Anamomis, 148

133, 138, 148, 219 Anastrophus paspaloides, 202
Acid soils, 126 Anchistea, 94, 125, 126, 134, 130 ‘
Acnida, 126 (201, f. 36) Anclote Keys, 84
Acorns, 222 Andropogon glomeratus, 86; scoparius,
Acrostichum, 148 . 04, 133; sp. 126, 130, 148; Virgin-
Actinospermum, 100, 126, 134, 140 icus, 100, 126 :
Adams, Chas. C, work of, 224 Animals (wild), 204, 223-233, 288; in
Advent Christians, I51 ; soil, 162, 172, 173, 176, 193
Adventists, 127, 256 Annuttalagga Hammock, III
Aedes calopus, 232 Anthony (Marion Co.), 101, 157
Africans, 91 (see Negroes) Anticlines, 18
African Methodists, 92, 102, 108, 117,| Ants, 173, 179

$27, TAT, 151,250 Aphelocoma, 228, 229
Ages of teachers, 250 Apopka (Orange Co.), 34, 40, 42, 127
Agriculture, information about, 80, 258-} Aquatic vegetation, 199

280 Aralia spinosa, 90
Air-plants, 91, 116, 133, 134, 139, 211 Aristida spiciformis, 126, 139, 141, 148;
Alabama, 108, 117, 156, 175, 207, 214, 218, stricta, 91, 94, 100 (101), 106, 116,

226, 286, 244, 247, 274° 125, 133, 148, (187)
Alachua formation, 95, (156) Armadillo (fossil), 157, 226

Alafia River, 163, 169, 170 Aronia, 94

ory

290

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Artesian wells, 95, 122, 130, (136), 144,| Bay (tree), 90, 94, 100, 115, 125, 133, 138,

159, 166

Ash (tree), 90, 106, 138

Asimina angustifolia, 100; pygmaea, 90,
133, 138, 140; reticulata, 100; spec-
tosa, 100, 126

Asphalt roads, 137, 285, 286

A. O. A. C. methods of soil analysis,
188, 189, I91

Astor (Lake Co.), 283

Atlantic Coast Line R. R., 111, 161, 242,
283

Auburndale (Polk Co.), 127

Auk, great, 229

Australia, scrub in, 209

Austrians, 236, 239

Automobiles, 77, 144, 282, 285, 286

Avicenma, 85, 86, 148, 205

Azalea, 116

B

Baccharis halimifolia, 100, 133

Bacteria, 193

Bahamas, 228; negroes from 236

Bakeries, 281

Balance of trade, 244

Balearic Islands, 150

Ball clay, 25 (see Kaolin)

Bamboo vine, 90, 94, 125, 133, 139, 212

Bananas, 153

Bangs, O, work of, 225

Banks, N, work of, 233

Baptists, O2)02)108,) 17; 127,147, 51,
253, 256, 257

Barnes, John K., 160, (288)

Barrels, 221

Barrier beaches, 84, 88, 143, I50, 164

Bartonia verna, 94

Bartow (city), 134, 195, 240, 243

Bartram, William, 229

Basin prairies, 79, 113, 202

Bathing pools, 168

Batis, 86, 148

Batodendron, 86, 99, 106, 115

Bats, 225

148, 202, 212, 219; red, 86, 90, 99,
ROOM iS. 25. som eno 7a)

Bayheads, 213

Bays (vegetation), 81, 93, 124, 132, 140,
212

Beaches, 84, 88, 143, 150, 163-164, 179

Beach ridges, 165

Bean, B. A., work of, 231

Beans, 93, 103, I10, 118, 129, 136, 143

Bears, 223-225

Bedbugs, 232

Bedouins, 198

Beef cattle, 110, 278, (see Cattle)

Bees, 262, 263, 265, 268 (see Honey)

Beeswax, 222, 279

Beets, 129 Z

Bejaria, 94, 125, 126, 130, 141, 148

Belleair (Pinellas Co.), 243

Belleview (Marion Co.), 108

Berchemia, 90, 125, (132)

Berlandiera, 126

Berries (wild), 222

Bibliography, 82, 288

Bidens leucantha, 148

Bignonia, 106, 115

Bird guano, 91, 229-230

Birds, 107, 206, 216, 223-224, 226-229

Birth and death rate of domestic ani-
mals, 280

Bison (fossil), 226

Bivalves, 179, 233

Blackberries, 222

Black gum, 124, 133, 138, 21I, 212, 219

Black-jack oak, 90, 94, 99, 100, II5, 125,
133, 138, 148, 174, 208

Black mangrove, 84-86, 148, 205, 222

Black pine, 94, 124, (126), 138, (141),

148, 207, 219
Black-root, 91, 94, 100, I16, 125, 133,
139, 148

Black sticky or waxy soil, 175, 190, 216
Blanding, A. H., (208) .
Blanton (Pasco Co.), III

Blatchley, W. S., work of, 225, 220, 230 |

Blechnum, 148
Blue flag, 91, (130)

SS ee ee ee ee

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 291

Blue Springs (two), 168

Bluffs, 165

Boats, 282

Bog iron ore, 158

Bone Valley formation, 130, 157

Bonnets, 91, 94, 122, 126, 139

Borrichia, 148

Boston, Mass., 239

Box elder, 215, 219

Bradley (Polk Co.), 134

Branches, 168

- Brevard County, 140,, 143, 145, 146, 149-
153, 159, 170, 191. (See also Cape
Canaveral, Cocoa, Eau Gallie, Mel-
bourne, Merritt’s Island, Rockledge,
Titusville)

Brick roads, 285, 286

Bricks, brick-yards, 26, 81, 111, 119, 158,
281

Briers, 210

Bronson (Levy Co.), 165

Brooksville, III; 114, 117, 158, 169, 195,
240, 288

Broom-sedge, 94, 100, 126, 133, 1390, 148

Brooms, brushes, 221

Bugg Spring, 168

Bullace (see Muscadine)

Burbank (Marion Co.), 177

Burrowing animals, 162,
176, (179, 180, 225)

Burrowing owl, 228

Bursera, 206

Bushnell (Sumter Co.), 92; deep well
near, 16, 17, 34, (160)

Butter, 110, 153, 278-280

Buttonwood, 86, 205

yx2)ia 173%

G

Cabbage, 93, 103, II0, 129, 136, 143. 152

Cabbage palmetto, 85-221 (see Sabal
Palmetto)

Calcareous hammocks, 105, 175, 215-216;
soils, 89, 140, 175, (177), 216 (see
also Marl); swamps, 213; water,
168

California, 209, 244

Callicarpa, 100, 106, 116

Camels, 226, 245 ’

Canadians, 101, 108, 127, 150,. 235, 236,
230, 244

Canals, 144, 283

Cantaloupes, I10

Cape Canaveral, 179

Cape Cod (Mass.), 243

Careless, 126, (201)

Carphephorus, 91, 100, 116, 126, 133, 139,

140

Carpinus, 90, 106, 115, 125, 133, 140,
(190)

Cassena, 125, 138

Cassia Tora, 106

Cassytha, 86, 148

Castalia, 126, (119)

Castor beans, 103, 118

Catholics, )108;,‘117;. 127, 141, 151,253;
256, 257

Cat-tails, 201

Cattlen 875107, 137, 143, 202.) 200, 222)
258-273, 278-280, 285

Cattlemen, 141, 288 ;

Cattle ranches or ranges, 81, 138, 141,

152, 275

Cattle-tick, 233

Caves, 81, 104, 156, 163, 179-180, 199,
215

Ceanothus microphyllus, 100, 125

Cedar, 86, 87, 90, 133, 148, 219

Cedar Keys, 84-88, 91, 164, 195, 221, 230,
231, 233, 245, 283

Celery, 129, 136, 143

Celtis, S 106, 115 (175), 219

Census data, errors in or inadequacy
of, 80, 93, 108, 149, 150, 236, 238,
245-249, 253, 255-257, 261, 264-267,
272-278, 280, 281; use of, 76, 80,
109, 155, 219, 220

Centella, 94, 126, 139

Center Hill (Sumter Co), 92

Central Florida defined, 75

Cephalanthus, 90, 100, 106, 125, 126, 133

Ceratiola, 100, 125, 133, 139, 148

Cercis, 106, 126

Chamaecrista, 86, 100, 116

292

Changes in value of money, 9, 20, 81,
249, 262, 273

Chaparral, 209

Chapman, F. M., work of, 226, 228, 229

Chaptalia, 139

GC.) Hie Net RR. AR 283

Chattahoochee (limestone)
18, III

Chessahowitzka River, 168

Chickens, 153, 259, 260, 263, 265, 280
(See also Poultry)

Chiggers, 232

Chimneys, rock, 81, 158

Chinese in central Florida, 128, 129, 235

Chione cancellata, 147, 165

Choctawhatchee (mail) formation, 36,
38, 48-51, 54-56, 58

Choke-berry, 94

Cholisma ferruginea, 90, 100, 116, 125,

formation,

133, 130, 148; fruticosa, 94, 125,
126). 1335, 130: / 141, 148
Chondrophora nudata, 139
Choocochattee Hammock, III, 114;
Rrainiews in

Chrysobalanus, 100, 125, 133, 139, 148

Churches, 255-257

Church of Christ, 92, 102, 108, 256

Chutch of God, 92

Cisterns, 159

Citra (Marion Co.), 108

Citrous fruits, 129, 172 (See also Grape-
fruit, Orange, etc.)

Citrus County, 84, 89, 9I, 97, IOI, 102,
114, 157, 163, 175, 203, 206,!215, 250
(See also Crystal River, Homosassa,
Inverness, Lake Tsala Apopka)

City water supplies, 34, 167, (244)

Civilization, 198, 237, 238, 248, 282

Civil War, 109, 158, 258

Cladium, 91, 100, (124), 125, 126, 133,
139, 148, 200 (See also Saw-grass)

Clam shells, 147, (165)

Clapp, F. G., work of, 119

Classification of soils, 170, 288; of veg-
etation, 197, 198

Clay, 11,°25, 8£, 110, 158 soils; 175; 277

Clay Springs, 168, 245

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Clay testing, II

Clearwater, IOI, 240, 243

Clermont, 161, 195

Cliffs, 165, 168, 179

Coccolobis laurifolia 206; uvifera, 86

Cockroaches, 232

Cocoa (Brevard Co.), 150, 243

Coffee weed, 106

Coker, R. E., writings of, 229

Coleman (Sumter Co), 92, 178

Colored Methodists, 92, 108, 256

Columbia formation, 156

Comanchean formations, 42

Compulsory education, 239, 248, 249

Conchologists, 223

Confederate iron works, 158

Conglomerate, I19

Congregationalists, 127, I5I, 253, 256

Connecticut, tourists from, 244

Conocarpus, 86, 205

Conuropsis, 228

Cooke, W. W., work of, 224

Co-operation with U. S. Geological Sur-
vey, 12

Co-operative orange groves, 129

Coquina, 143, 145, 158, 185, 186

Corn, 93-153, 180, 270, 271, 276-278

Cornus florida, 100, 106, I15, 125, 126,
133, 140, (190) ; stricta, 106, 133, 140

Corporation farming, 129

Cottages for winter visitors, 241

Cotton, 102, 103, II0, 180, 270, 271, 276,
278

Coues, E., writings of, 225

Cowpeas, 103, 110, 118, 129, 136, 143

Cows, 93, 153 (See Cattle)

Cranes (birds), 224

Crataegus, 100, 106, 126

Crates, crate factories, 220, 281

Cream-colored sand, 172-173

Creeks, 93, 168

Cretaceous strata, 17, 40, 42, 46

Criminals, 198

Crocodiles (fossil), 157, 230

Croom (Hernando Co.), 95

Cross, H., work of, 288

Cross-ties, 212, 221

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

Cross-vine, 106, II5

Croton argyranthemus, 100, 126

Crustaceans, 179

Crystal River, 168; (town), 92, 221

Cubans, 236, 282, 287

Cucumbers, 93, 103, I10, 129, 136, 153

Cushions, moss, 282

Cushman, J. A., work of, 9, 22, 33-70

Cut-over land, Io1

Cut-throat grass, and vegetation, 208

Cyclones, 197

Cypress, 90-99, 124-140, 178, 211-213,
219-221 (See Taxodium)

Cypress ponds, 93, (130), 131, 132, 136,
138, 178, 211, 212

D

Dade City, 117, 173, 174, 240

Dairy cows, dairying, 87, 93

Dall, W. H., 119

Dams, 88, 169

Danes, 150, 236

Dasheens, 153

Davies, J. P., work of, 188

Daytona, 150, 232, 240, 243, 245

Daytona Beach, 81, (144), 150, 243

Decumaria, 90, 100

Deer, 223, 225

Deer-tongue, 222

DeLand, 127, 165, 240, 243, 253, 281

DeLeon Springs, 168

Democrats, 257

Denmark, immigrants from (See Danes)

Depth of lakes, 166

Devil’s Punch-bowl, 111

Dewberry, II5

Diatoms, diatomaceous earth, 81, I19.
288

Dichromena latifolia, 139, 141

Diospyros, (79), 100, 115

Disciples of Christ, 108,°127, 141, ISI.
256

Doellingeria reticulata, 126, 139, 141

Dog-fennel, 79, 91, 100, 106, 116, 126,
133, 202, 203

Dogwood, 100, 106, II5, 125, 133, 190

293

Domes, 18, 19

Drilling for oil, 14-19, 160 (See also
Oil)

Dryopteris patens, 106

Ducks, 224

Dumont, Mary W, 242

Dunedin (Pinellas Co.), r101

Dunes, 81, 84, 95, 121, 143-147, 163-165,
179, I9I, 200, 209, 210

Dunnellon, 95, 101, 169

Dupatya (See Syngonanthus)

Durrett, J. B., work of, 87

Dwarf palmetto (90, 125), 132

E

Earthworms, 233

Eau Gallie, 150, 163

Egg-plants, 103, II0, 120, 136, 143, 153

Eggs, I10, 153, 278-280

Egrets, 223

Elbow-bush, 90, 100, 106, 133

Electric lights or power, 169, 221, 244,
281

Eleocharis Baldwinti, 284

Elephants (fossil), 157, 226

Elliot, H. S., work of, (261), 264, (272),
288

Elm, 90, 115, 133, 219

Endemic species, (126), 127

England, Englishmen, 101, 108 127, 150,
232, 235, 236, 230

Enterprise (Volusia Co.),. 243

Entomologists, 223, 231

Eocene strata, 33, 39, 41, 49, 54, 95, 104,
136, 156

Episcopalians, 102, 108, 151, 256

Ericaceae, 94, 100, 107, 126, (134), 139,
140 (See also Azalea, Batodendron,
Bejaria, Cholisma, Pieris, Vaccin-
mum)

Erigeron vernus, 94

Eriocaulon compressum, 94, 126

Eriogonum Floridanum, 126; tomento-
sum, 100, 106, 116, 125

Ernodea, 86

Erosion, 160, 162, 168

204

Eryngium, 116

Erythrina, 148

Eskimos, 198

Espiritu Santo Springs, 32, 130, 168

Establishment of Survey, 5

Etonia scrub, 184, 188 (See Scrub)

Eupatorium aromaticum, 100, 126; cap-
ulhifolium, 79, 91, 100, 116, 202,
(203); compositifolium, 79, 100,
106, 126, 133, 140

Europe, Europeans, 158, 236, 247, 255
(See also Danes, English, etc.)

Eustachys, 86

Eustis, 127, 195, -240, 243

Euthanua, 139

Evergreens, percentage or significance
of, 78, 86, 91, 94, 100, 107, 116, 126,
134, 130, 149, 175, 218, 219

Evermann, B. W., work of, 231

Expenditures of Survey, 20-24

Explorers, early, 224

Exporting phosphate, 158

Extensive farming, 109, 266

Extinct animals, 224, 226

F
Factories, 239, 282
Fairfield (Marion Co.), 175,
Fall River, Mass., 239
Farmers, farms (See Agriculture)
Fauna of central Florida, 223-233
Feathers, 279
“Fellowship” soils, 97, 105, 114, 131, 174-
177, 183, 288
Fences, fence laws, 221, 285, 288
Ferns, 9I, 94, 100, 106, 116, 125, 126, 134,
130, 148, 180, 216, 288 (See also
Anchistea, Blechnum, Drvyopteris,
Osmunda, Polypodium, Pteris)
Fern grottoes of Citrus Co. (163), 215
Ferruginous sandstone, 119; soils, 126,
(217) é
Fertilizer factory, 282
Fertilizers, use of, 117,
217, 229, 235, 259-269
Fiber from palmetto, 87, 221
Ficus (wild fig), 206

217

156-158, 180,

“Gainesville”

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Field peas, 136

Fire (in vegetation), 98, 145, 154, 173,
177, 180, 199, 204, 206, 207, 209, 21I-
214) $217, 230; (233)

Fish, fishing, 86, 87, 91, I01, 102, 149,
221, 230-231, 258, 280

Flag, blue, 91 (See Iris)

Flagler County, 136, 211

Flat-bottomed lakes, 202

Flat prairies, 203

Flatwoods, 81, 80, 93, 124, 130-143, 163,
206, 207

Flaveria, 148

Florence Villa (Polk Co.), 243

Florida East Coast Ry. (149-151), 283

Florida Experiment Station, 188

Florida jay, 229

Flowing wells, 130, 136, 144, (159), 166

Fluctuation of water, 98, 166, 170, 199,
Pai is Pe

Foraminifera, 9, 33-70, 289

Force-pumps, 159

Foreign-born farmers, 128, 268; 270, 272;
negroes, 236

Foreigners, 101, 108, 127, 134, 150, 235-
239, 244, 247, 255, 270, 272

Fort Mason (Lake Co.), 283

Fort Meade, 134, 173, 185, 195, 240

ROSSI, OS; UR}, UGA 225

Fox, gray, 225

Fraxinus Americana, 106, 219;
liniana, 90, 138; profunda, 9o

Free range, I41, 142, (285, 288)

Freezes, 196, 235, 241, 261

French Canadians, 235, 239

French immigrants, 108, 235, 236

French mulberry, 100, 106, 116

Fresh marshes, 138, 200

Frogs, 230

Frost, 84, 149, 104, 106

Fuel, 101, 127, 221

Fuirena scirpoidea, 126

Fullers’ earth, 26-27

Fungi, 78 ,

Caro-

G
Soils) O74 OS mais

f 146,
172) Tyas 170) TO 1e2ss oo ane

. GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

Galactia Elliottii, 126, 139

Gallberry, 90, 94, 100, 116, 123, 125, 133,
139, 222

Garberia, 125, 126

Gas plants, 281

Gelsemium, 90,,100, 106, II5, 133, 140

Geniuses, 198

Geomys, 226, (See Salamander)

Georgia, 16, 17, 59, 108, 114, 117, 140,
171, 178, 207, 200, 212 226, 236,
247, 248 :

Germans, Germany, I01, 108, 127, 150,

232, 235, 236, 239
Glass sand, 159
Gnaphalium purpureum, 106, 116
Gnats, 232, 245
Goats, 222, 262, 279, 280
Gophers (Gopherus), 173, 179, 180, 230

Gondonia, 124, 126, 133, 138, 141, 212,
219

G. A. R. men (141) -

Grapefruit, 93, 102, 110, 118, 129, 135,
136,, 143,153). 276, 277

Grapes (cultivated), 136; (wild), 100,

139, 215

Grasses, 86, 91, 106, 134, 139, 178,
200, 202, 200, 222

Grassy dunes, 200

Gravel, 30-31

Grazing, 94, 113, (117), 137, (138),
202, 206, 222, 258, (288)

Great auk, 229

Greeks, IOI, 134, 149, 233, 236

Greek Church, 256, 257

Green Springs (130), 168

Greene, E. P., photograph by, 96

Groceries bought by farmers, 244,

Growing season (84, 150), 194, 195

Guano, bird, 91, 229, 230

Guavas, 136, 153

Guinea-fowl, 263

Gulf Hammock, 87, 89, 177

Gum (See Black, Red, Sour, Sweet)

Gumbo-limbo, 206

Gypsum, 89, 124, 1590

280,

295
H

Hackberry, 90, 106, I15, 175, 190, 215,
219

Haines City, 127

Haiti, 228

Hammocks, 81-138, 154, 159, 175, 205-
216

Hampers, 220

Hardpan, 176

Hard-rock phosphate, 28, 29, 95, 157,
158, 282, 283

Hard water (95), 150, 167

Hardwoods, I14, 220, 221

Harris, Gi: rio

Haw, red, 100, 106

Hawks Park (Volusia Co.), 150

Elayix03;) 102,103; 2810, I18, 120,135,
136, 143, 153, 276, 277

Heath family, 94, 100, (107, 126), 134,
(139, 140)

Heath vegetation, 209

Heating devices for orchafds, 196

Hebard, M., 231

| Heimburger, L., work of, 77, 189, I9QI

Helena Run, 169

Helianthus Radula, 100, 116, 126, 134,
139

Hernando County, 88, 89, 91, 112-118,
168, 175, 206 (See also Brooksville,
Croom)

“Hernando” soils, 89, 97, 114, 176

Herpetologists, 223

Hickory, 81, 86, 99, 105, 106, I15, 124,
138, 148, 175, 180, 187, 217, 219

Hicoria alba, 99, 06, 126, (175, 180, 187),
219; glabra, 86, 99, 106, 115, 124, 138,
148, 219

Hides, 279

Highest hill in Florida, 81, 120, 161,
(288)

High hammocks, 105, (111), 183, 215

High pine land, 97-99, 105, 121, 124, 132,
173, 174, 208-209

Hilgard, E. W., 187, 188, 193, 194

296

Hillsborough County, 81, 95, 97, 130,
132, 134, 135, 156, 236, 255-257, 266,
278, 281 (See also Plant City, Port
Tampa, Tampa, West Tampa, Ybor
City)

Hillsborough River, 169

Hodge, C, F., work of, 232

Hogs, 102, 103,110, 117, 153, 222, 258-
273, 285

Holly, 100, 106, 115, 222

Holly Hill (Volusia Co.), 150

Homosassa, 89, 91, 163, 206; River, 89,
168

Honey, 94, II0, 127, 149, 153, 207, 212,
222, 278-280

Honeysuckle, 116

Hoosier Spring, 168

Hopkins, O. B., work of, 16-17

Horses, 222, 226, 273; fossil, 157

Horse-wicky (See Hurrah bush)

Hotels, 81, 150, 241-244

Houstonia rotundifolia, 106, 116

Huckleberry, 90, 94, 100, 116, 125, 133,
139, 148, 222

Human society analogous to vegetation,
198

Humus, 147, 165, 172-175, 177, 179, 214

Hurrah bush, 90, 94, 125, 133, 139, 148

Hurricanes, 197

Hyacinth, water, 91, 100, 125, 199

Hydraulic mining, 157

Hydro-electric power, 88, 169

Hypericum fasciculatum, 90, 94,
125, 126, 133, 139, 141

100,

I

Ice factories, 221, 281

Ichthyologists, 223, (231)

Ilex Cassine, 125, 138, 141; glabra, 90,
94) 100, 116, (123), 125,h 085.) 130:
opaca, 100, 106, 115, (214); vomi-
toria, 86, 106

Illinois, tourists from, 244

Illiteracy (91), 108, 116, 127, 134, I50-
151, 230, 245-248, 252, 267, 272, 274

Ilmenite, 27

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I13TH ANNUAL REPORT

Immigrants, immigration (108, I17, 127,
149-150), 236-239, 248, 259

Impoverishment of soil, 258

Income from tourists, 244

Indiana, tourists from, 244

Indian River, 137, 143, 144, 149, 165,
203, 205, 206, 231

Indians, 165, (235), 288

Indigo, 151

Infusorial
toms)

Inglis (Levy Co.), 282, 283

Insects, 224, 230-232, 288

Intensive farming, 150, 151, 266, (267),
273

Inverness, 195

Iowa, 244, 253, 286, 288

Ipomoea Pes-Caprae, 86

Tris versicolor, 91, 139

Irishmen, 108, 127, 150, 235, 236, 239

Irish potatoes, 102, 103, 110, 118, 120,
135, 136, 143, 153) 270; 277

Iron, iron ore, 158, 176, 180, 217

Iron Mountain (Polk Co.), (81), 119, .
120, 161

Ironwood, 90, 106, I15, 125, 133, 190

Irrigation, 176

Islands, 84, 90, 143

Italians, I0I, 108, I50, 236, 239

Itea, 90

Iva, 148

Ivy, poison, 90, 100, 106, I15, 125, 133,
139, 148

earth, 119 (See also Dia-

J

Jack pine, 209, 211

Jackson County, 30, (161)

Japan, Japanese, 129, 232

Japanese persimmons, 153

Jaybird, 228

Jessamine, yellow, 90, 100, 106, I15, 133

Jews, 108

Jones, E. Z., 223

Juncus Roemerianus, 86, 91, 133, 140,
148, 179

Juniperus, 86, 90, 133, 140, 148, 219

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 297

K

Kansas, automobiles in, 286

Kaolin, 25, 119, 158

Kemp, J. F., 147

Kentuckians, 236, 244

Kindergartens, 252

Kissimmee, 141, 170, 195, 240, 243, 283

Kissimmee prairies, 138, 203-204, 228;
River, 136, 138, 141, 166, 203, 228,
283

Kissingen Spring, 130

Kitchen middens, © 165
mounds)

Kuhnistera, 100, 125, 133, 140

Kumquats, 129

(See Shell

L

Labor on farms, cost of, 261-269

Laborers, semi-skilled, 239, 282; skilled,
282: unskilled, 116, 222, 235, 248 _

Lacoochee (Pasco Co.), 163

Lagoons, 144, 164, 179, 283

Laguncularia, 86, 205,

Lake Alfred, 122

Lake Apopka, 166, 199

Lake basins, 7¢, 95, 98, 113, 124, 162

Lake County, 25, 81, 119, 121, 123, 125,
127, 128, 161, 169, 201, 210, 233, 259,

283. (See also Astor, Clermont,
Eustis, Fort Mason, Leesburg,
Montverde, Mt. Dora, Okahump-

ka, Sorrento, Tavares, Umatilla)
Lake Eustis, 283
Lake George, 121, 163, 166
Lake Harney, 166, 170, 203
Lake Harris, 169
Lake Helen (town), 127, 150, 165, 243
Lake Jessup, 178
Lake Kissimmee, 166
Lakeland, 127, 240, 243
Lake margin prairies, 202
Lake Monroe, 123, 170 -
Lake Panasoffkee, 178
Lake shore vegetation, 81, 200
Lake Tohopekaliga, 137, 203

Lake Tsala Apopka, 203, 204

Lake Wales (town), 119

Lake Weir, 165, 167

Lakes: 81, 95, 97, 105, 113, 121.
162, 165-167

Largo (Pinellas Co.), 134

Latin races, 238, 247, 257

Laundries, 235, 281

Lawrence, Mass., 239

Leaching of soil, 200, 229, 230

Leesburg, 127, 222, 240, 243, 282

122, 138.

Leguminosae, leguminous plants, 94, IOI,
» 107, 126, 140 (See also Cassia, Cer-
cis, Chamaecrista, Erythrina, Galac-

tia, Kuhnistera, Lupinus, Psoralea,

Sophora)

Lemons, 129

“Leon” soils, 89, 93, 97, 99, 105, 114, 130,
I3i Ll dy 3.% 170

Lettuce, 93, 103, I10, 129, 136, 153, 175

Levy County, 84, 87, 89, 91, 93, 101, 102,
177 (See also Bronson Cedar Keys,
Gulf Hammock, Inglis, Levyville,
Rosewood, Williston)

Levyville, 158

Library of Survey, II

Lichens, 78

Lima beans, 153

Lime, limestone, 27, 87-89, 93, 95, 104,
119, 120, 156, 158, 162, 163, 160, 173,
174, 177, 179, 203, 215 (See also Cal-
careous soils)

Lime-sinks, 95, III-113, 121, 162, 163

Lin, 90, 106, 115, 190, 219

Liquidambar, 90, 99, 106, (112, 114), II5,
124, 126, (132), 133, 138, 140, (175,
180, 187, 190), 219 ~

Live oak 86-138, 148, 187, 215, 219 (See
Quercus geminata and Virginiana)

Loafers, 198

Locomotive fuel, 221

Loess, 174

Logging, 208 (See Lumber)

Long Island (N, Y.), 201, 212

Long Key (Pinellas Co.) , 84-86, 189, 190,
205, 206 ¢

298

Long-leaf pine, 90-148, (173), 187, 190,
209, 217, 219, 221, 284 (See Pinus
palustris)

Louisiana, 211, 212, 222

Lowell, Mass, 239

Lower Cretaceous strata,

Lowering of lakes, 166

Low hammocks, 81, 89, 106, 143, 177, 213,
214

Lue Gim Gong (128-129)

Lumber, lumbering, 94, IOI, 102, 107,
(127), 134, 149, 207, 209, 219

Lupine (Lupinus diffusus), 100,
126, 133, 140

17

125,

M

McIntosh (Marion Co.), 108, 175

Macadam roads, 286

Mackerel, 231

Maine, tourists from, 244

Magnolia, 187, 215 (See also M_ grand-
iflora)

Magnolia glauca, 90, 94, 100, II5, 125,
126, 133, 138, 140, 148, 202, 212, 219;
grandiflora, 90, 99, 106, 115, 124, 133,
138, 140, 148, (187, 215), 219

Maiden cane, 122, 125, 133, 200

Malaria, 149, 231

Mammals, 224-226

Manatee (Manatus), 226

Manganese in soil, 188

Mangrove (black, red or white), 84:86,
148, 205, 222

Mangrove swamps, 84, 147, 200, 205

Manufacturing, 235

Maple, (219); red, 90, 94, 90, 124, 133.
130) eIAGu(2r2) pe 2TO

Maps. topographic, 12-14, 161

Marginai vegetation, 200, 201

Marion County, 81, 104, 107-110, i24.
1572 OSs 071774 OO 207,825 5-2 07,
236, 258, 275 (See also Anthony,
Belleview, Burbank, Citra, Dun-
nellon, Fairfield, McIntosh, Octia,
Reddick, Rockwell, Silver Spring)

Mariscus, 200 (See Cladium)

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Marl, marly soils, 119, 124, 136, 159, 175,

177, 285, 286

Marshes, 84, 88, 90, 167, 178, 179, 200-202

Massachusetts, 239, (243), 244

Mastic (tree), 206

Mastodon (fossil), 157, 226

Matson, G. C., 119, 158, 165

Mattresses, moss, 107, 222

Median size of farms, 275

Medicinal springs, 168

Melbourne, 150, 163, 243

Melbourne Beach, 146, (147), 243

Mental exertion, 285

Merritt’s Island, 143, 144, 146, 147, 149,
177, 195, 196, 206

Mesosphaerum rugosum, 91

Methodists, 92, 102, 108, 117, 127, I4I,
151, 253, 2560, 257

Mexicans, Mexico, 232, 236

Mice (wild), 225

Michigan, 209, 224, 244, 284

Middle Florida defined, 75

Migration of birds, 224, 227; of negroes,
108, 235, 241

Milk, 110, 153, 278-280

Miller, G. S., Jr., 225

Mineral production in 1918, 25-32

Mineral springs or water, 31-32, 130

Mining, 102 (See Phosphate)

Mining districts, illiteracy in, 247

Minks, 225

Minnesota, tourists from, 244

Minorcans, 149-151

Miocene strata, 33, 36-38, 43-45, 47-52,

54-58, 63, 119, 156

Mirror Lake, 111, 113

Mississippi, 156, 174, 207, 245

Missouri, tourists from, 244

Mistletoe, 100, 106, 116, 133, 222

Mitchella, 91, 106, 116

Mites, 232-233

Moles, 225

Mollusks, 165, 179, 233 (See Clam, Mus-
sel, Oyster, Shell)

Money, changes in value of, 9, 20, 81,
249, 262, 273

Monocotyledons, 199, 200, 202, 228

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

Montverde (Lake Co.), 173

Moore, C. B., work of, 288

Mosquitoes, 149, 210, 231-232

Mosquito County, Inlet, 232; Lagoon,
145, 232

Moss, Spanish (See Spanish moss, Til-
landsia usneoides)

Mosses, 78, 180

Mount Dora (town), 127, 173, 243

Muck, 178, 179

Muddy water, 231

Muhlenbergia filipes, 86

Mulberry (Polk Co.), 134, 240

Mules, 273

Mullet, 231

Muscadine, 100, 106, II5, 125, 133, 148,
222

Museum of Survey, 10

Mussels, 167

Mutton, 278 (See Sheep)

Myrica cerifera and pumila (Myrtle),
86, 90, 100, 106, 116, 125, 133, 139,
148

N

Nashua marl, 156

Natal grass, 129, 136

National Forest (Marion Co.), 82, 124

Natural bridges, 163

Natural race-course, 144

Naturalized foreigners, 238

Naval stores, IOI, 134, 209, 219 (See also
Rosin, Turpentine)

Navigable waters, navigation, (88), 122,
144, 167-168, 179, 282-283

Negroes, foreign-born, 236; illiteracy
among, 246, 247, 272; in fertile re-
gions, 108, 234, 264; migrations of,
108, 235, 241; percentage of, 234,
235, 241; religious denominations,
256

Negundo (See Acer Negundo)

Nesting birds, 224, 227, 228

Nettle family, 216

New Bedford, Mass., 239

New England, 124, 245

New Hampshire, tourists from, 244

299
New Jersey, 119, 209, 231, 239, 244
New Port Richey, 244
New Smyrna, 149, 150, 195, 240, 243
New York, 230, 244, 245

Newspapers, information from, 83, (127,

134, I4I, 201), 225, (244), 274, 288

Non-alluvial swamps, 93, 124, 212

“Norfolk” soils, 89, 97, 99, 105, 114, 146,
171-173, 176, 182

North Carolina, 108, 117, 211, 214, 236

North Indian River, 145, 232

Northward migration of negroes, 108,

235

Norton, C. L., writings of, 161

Norwegians, 150

Noted persons in central Florida, 254

Nymphaea macrophylla, 91, 94, (122),
126, 139, I41

Nyssa biflora, 124, 126, 133, 138, 219

O
Oaks, 140, 208, 219 (See Black-jack,
Live, Post, Red, Scrub, Swamp

chestnut, Turkey, Water, White)

Oak runner, 90, 94, 133, 139

Oats, 93, 102, 103, 110, 276-27

Ocala, 82, (107), 108, 111, 156, 158, 174,
175, 182, 190, 195, 196, 222, 240, 243,
266, 283

Ocala (limestone) formation, 7-19, 39,
53, 58-60, 104, 136, 156, 175

Occupations, classification of, 198

Ocklawaha River, 119, 122, 167, 170, 178,,
282, 283

Ocklawaha Valley R. R., 283

Oenothera humifusa, 86

Ohioans, 236, 244, 288

Oil (and gas) wells, 13, 14, 160, 195
(See also Drilling)

Oil fuel on railroads, 221

Okefinokee Swamp, 19

Oklahoma, animals of, 288

Old fields, 79, 225

Oldsmar (Pinellas Co.), 134, 282

Oligocene strata, 38, 39, 51, 52, 60, 63,
95, III, I19, 130, 156.

300

Onions, 136, 153
Open flatwoods,
Oplismenus, 106
Opossum, 223, 225

Opuntia, 86, 203

Oranges, orange groves, 81, 93, 102, 103,
107, 110, 118, 128, 129, 135, 141, 143,
149, 153, 173, 174, 213, 216, 221, 235,
248, 276, 277, 280

Orange City, 127, 195

Orange County, I19-I2I, 127, 128, 156.
167, 168, 281 (See also Apopka, Or-
lando, Taft, Winter Garden, Win-
ter Park)

Orange Lake, 104, 175

Orange Springs, 245

Orchard fruits, 259, 276, 277

Orchard heaters, 196

Orlando, 127, 240, 243

Ormond, 150, 225, 220, 243

Ormond Beach, 243

Ornithologists, 223, (227)

Osceola County, 137, 141-143, 203, 228,
249, 257, 259, 275, 281 (See also Kis-
simmee, St. Cloud)

Osmanthus, 90, 99, 106, 115, 125

Osmunda cinnamomea, 126, 134,
regalis, 126, 139

Ostrya, 90, 106, 115,

Otters, 224, 225

Owls, 228

Oysters, 84, 85, 87, 165, 179, 233, 258,
285

131, 207

130;

E

Pablo Beach, 27

“Palm Beach” soils, 146

Palmetto (See Cabbage, Dwarf, Saw)

Palms, 140 (See Sabal, Serenoa)

Palm savannas, 85, 146, 147, 177, 206

Palm Springs, 168

Palmetto fiber, 87, 221; flatwoods, 93,
132, 138, 207; prairies, 176; thick-
ets, 204

Panicum Combsti, 208; (digittarioides)
hemitomon, 125, 126, 133, 140, 200

Panthers, 225

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Paper from saw-grass, 127, 201, 222, 282

Parasites, 198

Parietaria, 216

“Parkwood” soils, 89, 131, 146, 177, 178,
181

Paroquet, parrakeet, 223, 228

Parthenocissus, 90, 106, 125, 133, 140

Partridge pea, 86, 100, 116

Pasco County, 87, 91, III, 114, 116, 117,
‘130-132, 134, 204, 207, 244, 253, 257,
259 (See also Blanton, Dade City,
Lacoochee, New Port Richey, St.
Leo, San Antonio, Zephyrhills) ;

Pass-a-Grille, 85, 86, 243, 245

Passerherbulus, 22

Pastoral stage of agriculture, 267

Pastures, pasturage, 79, 207, 222, 267

Paterson, N. J., 2390

Pawpaw, 90, 100, 133, 139

Peace River, 157, 163, 174,
207, 215

Peaches, 102, 103, 118, 129, 136

Peanuts, 93, 102, 103, I10; 118, 129, 136, *
276-278

Pears, 102, 103, 129

Peat, 27-28 81, Ilo} 124; 136, (156; }150)
167, 170, 178, 200-202, 281

Peat prairies, 81, 124, 202; soils, 170

Pebble phosphate, 29, 130, 157, 158, 190,
211

132, 170,

Pecans, 103, 136

Pencil wood, 87

Peninsulas, 99, 124

Pennsylvania, tourists from, 244

Peppers, 129, 136, 153.

Perennial herbs, 209

Periodicals, 287

Persea Borbonia, 99, 106, 115, 187; hu-
milis, 125, 126; littoralis, 86; pubes-
cens, 90, 133, 138, 212

Persimmon, 79, 100, II5

Persons, A, A., work of, 188

Peru, Peruvian guano, 229, 230

Petroleum (See Oil)

Phoradendron, 100, 106, 116, 133, 140

GEOGRAPHY
Phosphate deposits, mining, rock, etc.,
28-30, 81, 95, 101, 102, 116, 130, 156-

158, 169, 174, 209, 225, 230, 231, 234,
282, 283, 285

Phosphatic soils, phosphorus in soils,
126, 132, 138, 140, 170, 174, 217

Phragmites, 201

Piaropus, 91, 100, 126, (199)

Pieris nitida, 90, 94, 125, 126, 133, 139,
141, 148

Pierson (Volusia Co.), 288

Pigeon plum, 206

Piles, piling, 221

Pin-down, 126, 139

Pineapples, 143, 153, 172

Pine-barrens of New Jersey, 209

Pinellas County, 84, 85, 87, 95, 102, 130,
132, 134, 164, 168, 178, 189, 205, 242,
253 (See also Clearwater, Dunedin,
Espiritu Santo, Largo, Long Key,
Oldsmar, Pass-a-Grille, St. Peters-
burg, Sutherland, Tarpon Springs)

Pines, 107, 122, 127, 140, 172-174, 176,
219, 281 (See also Black, Long-
leaf, Short-leaf, Slash, Spruce pine)

Pine-straw roads, 81, 221, 285

Pinus Caribaea, 86, 90, 124, 126, 131,
132, 138, 140, (147), 148, 207, (208),
211, 219; clausa, 86, 90, (98), 99,
124, 126, 132, 138, 141, (145), 148,
(186), 210, 219, Elliott, 90, 4,
124, 126, 132, (136), 138, 140, 211,
219; palustris, 90, 94, (97, 98), 99,
(101), 106, 115, (121, 123), 124,
132, (137, 138), 143, (147), 148,
(173, 187, 190, I91), 219; serotina,
94, 124, 126, 138, 141, 148, 207, 219;
Taeda, (81), 90, 99, 106, 112, 114,
115, 124, (175, 177, 184), 219

Piper, C. V., work of, 208

Pistia, 91, (199)

Pitcher-plant, 94, 203, 207

Pithlachascootee River, 204

Plantations, 109, 141, 258

Plant City, 134, 135, 195, 240, 243

Plant names, treatment of, 80

OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

301

Plate rock phosphate, 157
Plautus impennis, 229

Pleistocene strata, 36, 136, 143, 156, 165,
225

Pliocene strata, 36, 95, 119, 130, 156,
157, 226

“Plummer” soils, 131

Plums, 103, 136

Poison ivy, 90, 100, 106, 115, 125, 133,
139, 148

Poison oak, I00

Polecats, 225

Poles (cypress), 212, 221

Polk County, 81, 119, 120-122, 125, 130,

132, 134, I41, 161, 203, 208, 228, 281

(See also Auburndale, Bartow,
Florence Villa, Fort Meade, Haines
City, Iron Mountain, Lakeland,

Lake Wales, Mulberry, Peace Riv-
er, Winter Haven)

Polygala cymosa, 94, 139, 141; Rugelit,
134, 139, 141

Polypodium polypodioides, 91, 116

Pompano (fish), 231

Pond cypress, 90, 94, 90, 124, (130, 131),
132. (130). 1138,. (140), 178)" 211,
212: 210-221

Ponds, 93, 95, 130, 167, 178

Pontederia, 91, 94, 116, 125, 126, 133,
139, 140, 199, 200

Poor grub, 94, 125, 133, 139, 148

Population, information about, 80, 234-
257

Porcelain clay, 158 (See Kaolin)

Port Orange, 150

Port Tampa, 134, 240

“Portsmouth” soils,
146, 174, 176, 183

Possum (See Opossum)

Possum haw, 133

Post oak, 100

Posts, 221

Potamogeton, 199

Potash, potassium, in soils or ferti-
lizers, 126, 172, 178-180, 193, 217

Potatoes (See Irish, Sweet)

Poultry, 110, (153), 278-280

89, 114, 130-131,

302

Power-houses, 88, 169

Prairies, 81, 132, 137, 138, 140, 171, 178,
190, 202-204, 207, 228

Presbyterians, 92, 102, 108,
141, I51, 253, 256

Preserves, 282

Prickly ash,’ 90

Prickly pear, 86, 203

Primitive Baptists, 92, 127, 141, 256

Printing offices, 281

Private schools, 253

Prohibitionists, 257

II7, 127,

Protestant Episcopalians, 256 (See
Episcopalians) :
Prunus geniculata, 125, 126; umbellata,

125

Psoralea canescens, 100, 126

Pteris aquilina, 100, 106, 116, 126, 148

Pterocaulon, 91, 94, 100, I15, 125, 133,
139, 148

Publications of the Survey, 5-8

Pumps, 159

Putnam County, 25

Q

‘

Quail, 224

Quantitative studies of plants and ani-
mals, 223

Quarries, 104, 158

Queen’s delight, 100

Quercus aquatica (See Q. nigra) ; brev-
ifolia (See cinerea) ; Catesbaei, 90,
04, 99, 00, II5, 125, 133, 138, 140,
148, (174); Chapmani, 100, 125;
cinera, 90, 99, 125, 133, 138, 140,

148, (174); digitata (See next);
falcata, 99, (105), 106, (III, 115),.
126,, (G80; 187; 4100;, .1OL)), 219
geminata, 86, 90, 97, 99, II5,
125, 133, 138, 148; hybrida, 90,
133, 219; laurifolia, 99, 106, 115,

124, 126, 133, 140, 187, 219; Mar-
garefta, 100, 126; Michauxit, 90,
106, II5, 187, 219; minima, 90, 94,
133, 139; myrtifolia, 86, 90, 100,
125, 130, 141, 148, 204; nigra, 90, 106,
II5, 124, 133, 140, 219; pumila, 133,

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

140; Schneckii, 219; Virginiana, 86,
QO, 99, 106, (114), 115, 124, 126, 133,
138, 140, 148 (187), 219

R

Rabbits (wild), 225

Race-course, natural, 144

Raccoons, 165, 224, 225

Rail fences, 221

Railroad ballast, 30

Railroads, 76, 258, 283-284

Ranches, 81, I41, 152, 275

Ranids in streams, 169

Rattan vine, 90, 125, 132

Rats, 225

Red bay, 86 90, 99, 106, I15, 125, 133,
138, (187), 219

Redbud, 106, (126)

Redbugs, 232-233

Red clay soils, 170

Reddick (Marion Co.), 108

Red gum (See Sweet gum)

Red haw, 100, 106

Red mangrove, 84, 86, 205 ;

Red maple, 90, 94, 99, .124, 133, 138.
148, 219

Red oak, 99, 105, 106, 111, 115, 180, 187,
190. I9I, 216, 219

Red oak-woods, 105, 180, 187

Red snapper, 231

Reed-grass, 201

Reese, A. M., work of, 230

Rehn, J. A. G., work of, 231

Religious statistics, 255-257

Reptiles, 230

Republicans, 257

Residual soil, 173

Revenue from tourists, 244

Reversible streams, 169

Rhinoceros (fossil), 226

Rhizophora (84), 86, 205

Rhoads, S. N., work of, 225

Rhodes, Harrison, 242

Rhus copallina, 100, 125, 148; radicans,
90, 100, 106, LIS, 125, 133, 130, 140,
148; Toxicodendron, 100

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

Rhynchospora miltacea, 91

Rice, 136, 277

Rivers, 81, 138, 168-170, 282-283"

Roaches, 232

Roads, road materials, 27, 30, 81, 84,
119, 137, 147, 156, 158, 165, 199, 221,
284-286

Robertson, Mrs, L. B., 9, 21-24

Rock outcrops, 87-890, 177

Rock roads, 81, 285

Rock Spring, 119, 120, 156, 168

Rockledge (Brevard Co.), 186, 243

Rockwell (Marion Co.), 105

Rocky shoals, 88, 169

Rodents (225), 226

Rollins College, 253

Roman Catholics, 108, 117, 127, 141, 151,
250, 257

Roofs, thatched, 221

Rosa palustris (wild rose), 90

Rosemary, 100, 125, 133, 139, 148

Rosewood (Levy Co.), 221

Rosin, 221

Roumanians, 236

Rubber tree, 206

Rubus trivialis, 115

Runs, 168, 169, 282

Rushes, 86, 91, 133, 148, 179,

Russians, 108, 150, 236, 239

S)

Sabal glabra, 90, 125, (132);
(85), 86, 90, 99, 106, (107,
(132), 133, 140-141, (144,
(177, 184), 219

Sabbatia grandiflora, 139, 141

Sage, 116

Sagittaria, 199; lancifolia, 91, 126, 134,

; 140, 148, 199, 200 \

St. Cloud, 141, 240, 243

St. John’s River, 119, 122, 123, 136, 156,
166, 170, 203, 282, 283

St Heo ‘(Pasco Co.))\(1F7), 195, 253

“St. Lucie” soils, 97, 99, 114, 131, 146,

aEA7; 172
St. Martin’s Keys, 84

Palmetto,
123), 124,
146), 148,

393

St. Petersburg, 134, 163, 240, 242-244,
287, 288

Salamanders, 81, 164, 173, 175, 176, 179,
180, 225, 226, 230

Salicorma, 148

Salix longipes, 90, 100, 125, 133, 138,
140, 148

Salt marshes, 84, 88, 132, 147, 179, 200,
231

“Salt sickness,’ 208

Salt springs, water, wells, 136, 159, 168,

179, 203
Salvia lyrata, 116
Samphire, 148
San Antonio (117), 130
Sand and gravel, 30-31
Sand-bars, 165
Sand-clay roads, 285, 286
Sand-flies, 232
Sand-hills, 209
Sand-lime brick, 31, 159

Sand myrtle, 90, 94, 100, 125, 133, 139

Sand-soaks, 178, 203

Sandstone, 104, 119

Sandy hammocks, 105, 124, 173, 214-215

Sanford (city), 123, 127, 240, 282

Sanford, S., work of, 165

Sarracenia munor, 94, «139, 141, 203

Saururus, 91, 126, 133, 140

Savannas, 85, 146, 147, 177, 206

Sawdust roads, 285

Saw-grass, OI, 100, 124, 125, 127, 133,
139, 148, 200-202, 222, 282

Saw-grass marshes, 124,. 127, 200-202,
213

Saw-palmetto, 86-147, 172, 176, 177, 190,
203, 204, 207, 222

Saw-palmetto thickets, (146), 204

Scaevola, 86

Scenery, I2I, 127

Schools, 239, 248-253

Schwarz, E. A., work of, 231

Scirpus, 199

Scorpions, 233

Scotchmen, 108, 127, 150, 235, 236

“Scranton” soils, 131

304

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—-I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Scrub, 98, 99, 105, I14, I15, 121, 122,|Short-leaf pine (Pinus Taeda), 81, 90,

124, 132, 138, 140, 147, 154, 164, 171,
172, 184, 186, 189, 204, 209-211

99, 105, 106, LI2, 114,
177, 184, 214, 217, 219

115, 124, 175,

Scrub oak, 86, 90, 100, 125, 139, 148, 171] Shrews, 225

Scrub thickets, 204

Scuppernongs, 136

Seaboard Air Line Ry: 87, 283

Seabreeze (Volusia Co.), 150, 243

Sea-cow, 226

Sea-grape, 86

Sea Horse Key, 84

Sea-island cotton, 102, 110, 118, 129

Sea-oats, 86, 146, 200

Seaside sparrow, 229

Sedges, 91, 100, 124, 126, 139, 200, 284
(See also Cladium, Dichromena.
Eleocharis, Fuirena, Rhynchospora,
Scirpus, Stenophyllus)

Sellards, E. H., 9, 20, 83, 113, 144, 158,
166, I71, (188), 225

Semi-calcareous hammocks, 105, 174,
(215)
Seminole County, 119, 127, 167, 168,

213 (See also Lake Jessup. Palm
Springs, Sanford)

Seminole Spring, 168

Semi-skilled laborers,

Senecio lobatus, ‘91

Serenoa, 86, 90, 94, 100, 106, I15, 116,
(123) 125, 120, (132), 133,. (137),
1390, 141, (146, 147), 148, (203)

Sericocarpus bifoliatus, 100, 116, 148

Seton, E. T., writings of, 226

Shaler, N. S., work of, 161, 162

Shallow prairies, 203

Sharks (fossil), 157, 231

Sheep, 113, 152, 202, 222, 273, 278-280

Shells, 143, 147, 179, 224, 225

Shell marl, 156

Shell mounds, 95, 144, 147, 165, 179, 205,
285, 288

Shell roads, 81, 233, 285

Shingles (cypress), 212, 221

Ship-building, 282

Shoals, 88, 169

Shore vegetation,

239, 282

200

Shrinkage of dollar (See

Sideroxylon, 2060

Silk, 109

Silver Spring, 96, 97, 167,
282, 283

Size of farms, variations in, 274-275,
288

Skilled laborers, 282

Skunks, 224, 225

Slash pine (two species), 86, 90, 94,
T2413Ts) 132) 130s) 138. TAOmmIcys
TAS 2072 2004 Zila 202 a 2n9

Slaves, 109, 258, 259

Sloth (fossil), 226

Small, J. K., work of, 163, 228

Smilax auriculata, 86, 100, 125, 126, 148;
lanceolata, 106, laurifolia, 90, 94,
125, 126, 133, 139; pumila, 106, 116;
Walteri, 94

Smith, Eugene A., work of, 115, I19,
161, 187, 209

Snakes, 210, 230

Socialists, 257

Soft phosphate, 29, 157, 158

Soil surveys, 76, 77, 171-183, 288

Solidago fistulosa, 148

Solution topography, 95, 162

Sophora tomentosa, 86

Sorghum, 153

Sorrento (Lake Co.), 168

Sour gum (Nyssa?), 187

South Carolina, 108, 117, 144, 236

South Dakota, 288

Southern College, 253

Spaniards (149), 236

Spanish bayonet, 86

Spanish mackerel, 231

Spanish moss, QI, 94, 100, 106, 107, 116,
125, 133, 139, 148, 174, 222, 282

Sparkleberry 86, 99, 106, 115

Sparrow, dusky seaside, 229

Spartina Bakeri, 91, 100, 125, 126, 133,
130, 141, 146, 148, 206; glabra, 86,
179,

Money)

168, 222, 245,

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

Speotyto, 228

Spongers, sponges, 87, 9I, IOI, 102, 233

Sporobolus gracilis, 134, 140

Sportsmen, 87, (223, 228)

Springs, 11, 31-32, 89, 96, 97, 119, 167-
168

Spruce, 211

Spruce pine (Pinus clausa), 86, 90, (98),

: 99, 124, 132, 138, 145, 147, 148, 186,
210, 219

Squashes, 103, I10, 129

Squirrels, 224, 225

Stalactites, stalagmites, 163

Standards of civilization or living, 238,
248, 267, 272, 273, 280

Statistics of topography,

Stegomyia, 232

Stenophyllus Warei, 100, 126 -

Stetson University, 253

Stillingia aquatica, 133, 140; sylvatica,

_ 100

Stone, R. W., 159

Stone walls, 81

Storms (197), 227

Strawberries, 118,
276, 277

Streams, classification of, 168; meas-
urement of, II

String beans, 93, 103, 110, 118, 129,
153

Subterranean animals, 162, (172),
(176, 179), 180, (225)

Subterranean channels or streams,
163, 167

Succession of vegetation, 154

Suction pumps, 159

160

135,. 36; .143,,, 153,

136,

173,

104,

Sugar, sugar-cane, syrup; 81, 93,
103, 109, (119, 118), 129, (135,
143, 153), 276, 277

Sugar Loaf Mountain (Lake Co.), 121

Spring (Hillsborough Co.),

102,
136,

Sulphur
168

Sulphurous water, 144, 159, 167, 168

Sumac, 100, 125, 148

Summer farewell, 100, 125, 133

Summer resorts, 245

395

Sumter County, 16, 81, 87, 88, 91-93,
159, 160, 169, 207, 213, 266 (See also
Bushnell, Center Hill, Coleman
Sumterville, Webster, Wildwood)

Sumterville, 156, 163, 169

Suwannee River, 88

Swamp chestnut oak, go, (106, 115, 219)

Swamps, 132, 167, 178, 212, 213

Swedes, 101, 108, 127, 150, 235, 236

Sweet gum, 190, 199, 106, 112, 114, II5,
124, 132). 133; 138, 175,) 180, 187,
190, 216, 217, 219

Sweet potatoes, 93, 102, 103, 110, 118, 120,
135, 136, 143, 153, 276, 277

Swiss in Florida, 150, 236

Switch-grass, 9I, 100, 125, 133, 139, 146,
148, 206

Syngonanthus, 94, 126, 133, 139

Syrians in Florida, 236

Syrup, 93, 110, 118, 129, 135, 136, 143,
153, 276, 277

ar:

Taft (Orange Co.), 141

Tampa, 95, 134, 135, 160, 195, 235-238,
240, 242, (252), 255-257, (266), 281,
282, 287

Tampa (limestone), formation, 38, 63,
95, 156

Tampa & Gulf Coast, Tampa & Jack-
sonville, and Tampa Northern R.
R.s, 283

Tanbark, 205

Tapir (fossil), 226

Tarpon fishing, 231

Tarpon Springs, 84, 91 101, 102, 134, 156,
163, 195, 233, 240, 243, 257

Taxodium ascendens, 211; distichum,
90, 99, 124, 126, 133, 138, 140, (212),
213, 219; imbricarium, 90, 94, 99,
124, (130, 131), 132, 138, 140, 211,
219

Tavares, 127, 243

Tavares & Gulf R. R., 283

Tea, 109

Teachers, 249, 250

Temperature of springs, 168

~

306

Tennessee, tourists from, 244

Tent colonies, 241, 244

Tenure of farms, 260-273

Terraces, 165 :

Testudo Polyphemus (230)

Texas, 9, 119

Thatched roofs, 221

Thickets, 204-205

Mieke, BH

Tide, 144, 179

Tilia, 90, 106, 115, (190), 219

Tillandsia fasciculata, 134, 139, 1413; re-
curvata, 133, 139, 141; tenutfolia,
QI, 116, 133, 139, 140; wusneoides,
QI, 94, 100, 106, (107), 116, 125, 133,
139, 140, 148

Timber, 213 (See Lumber)

“Tin-can tourists,” 244

Titanium, 27

Titusville, 149, 150, 195, 221, 220, 231,
240, 243

Tomatoes, 93, 103, IIO, 129, 135-136,
153

Topographic mapping, 12-14

Topography, statistics of, 160

Tornadoes, 197

Tourists, 87, 150, 241-244, 286, 287

Tractors, 273, 282

Trichechus Manatus, 226

Trilisa odoratissima, 222

Tropical hammocks, 147, 179, 205-206

Truck-farming, 81, 120, I41, 143, 177,
213 :

Tubiflora, 91, 106, 116

Turbid streams, 169

Turkey-berry, 91, 106, 116

Turkey-oak, 90, 99, 125, 133, 138, 148,
174, 208

Turkeys, wild, 223, 224

Turks in Florida, 236

Turnbull, Andrew, 149-151

Turnbull Hammock, 144, (151)

Turpentine, turpentine stills, 81, 94, 107,
127, 149, 207, 209, 220, 248, 281

Turtles, 230

Ul
Ulmus alata, 115, 219; Floridana, 90,

115, 133, 140, 219

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—I3TH ANNUAL REPORT

Umatilla (Lake 'iCo.),: 127

Underground water, 95

Unio Cunninghami, 167

Uniola paniculata, 86, (146), 200

Union veterans, I41

U. S. Bureau of Soils, 171, 180; De-
partment of Agriculture, 224, 232,
233; Geological Survey, 12-14,
10,7174 10; °20,) TIO; es lO TOS" LOOR
Weather Bureau, 77, 194

Unskilled laborers, 116, 222, 235, 248

Upland cotton, 103, 110, 118, 129

Urtica chamaedryoides, 216

Vv

Vaccinium nitidum, 90, 94, 100, 116, 125,
126, 133, 139, 148

Vallisneria, 199

Veatch, J. O., 171

Vegetables, 80, 93, 102, I10, 118, 129,
135, 143, 153, 172, 175, 180, 225.270:
277, 280

Vegetation, classification of, 78, 197;
importance of, 77

Velvet beans, 93, 103, 110, 118, 136, 143,
153

Veneers, 220

Vertebrate fossils, 157

Viburnum nudum, 133, 140; obovatum,
90, I16, 133, 140; semitomentosum,
116

Vicksburg limestone, 156

Vines, 116, 140, 208, 211, 215, 222

Virginia, 108, I17, 236, 244

Virginia creeper, 90, 106, 125, 133

Visher, S. S., 288

Vitis aestivalis, 100, 126, 139, (215);
rotundifolia, 100, 106, 115, 125, 133,
148

Volusia County, 119, 128, 136, 143-145,
140, 150, 268, 203,~ 221, \2227""(Sec
also Daytona, DeLand, DeLeon
Springs, Enterprise, Hawks Park,
Holly Hill, Lake Helen, New Smyr-
na, Ormond, Pierson, Port Orange:
Seabreeze)

GEOGRAPHY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

Voters, 238, 257

W

Waccasassa River, 168

Wampee, 91, 94, 116, 125, 133, 139, 199,
200

Water hyacinth, 91, 100, 126, 1990

Water lettuce, 91, 199

Water lily, 126, 199

Watermelons, 93, 103, I10, 118, 129, 136,
143, 153

Water oak, 90, 106, I15, 124, 133, 187,
2190 a

Water power, 88-169

Water-softeners, 95, 159

Waves, 179

Way Key (Levy Co.), 85

Wax, 222 (See Beeswax)

Weasels, 225

Weathering, 157, (173)

Webber, H. J., work of (235)

Webster (Sumter Co.), 92, 221

Weeds, 79, 107, 198, 202

Weekiwachee Spring, 168

Wekiva River and Spring, 167, 168, 213

Well drilling (See Drilling)

West Indians, 236

West Tampa, 134, 237, 238, 240, 257

West Virginia, tourists from, 244

Wet prairies, 178

Whales, 157, 226

White mangrove, 86, 205

White oak, 187, 219

White sand, 171, 176, 209, 210

Whitney (Lake Co.), 119, 158

Whitney, Milton, 180, 188

Who’s Who in America, 254

Wild animals, 223-233

Wildcats, 224, 225

Wildcatting, 19

Wild fig, 206

397

Wild grape, 100, 139, (215)

Wild rose, 90

Wild smilax, 106

Wild turkeys, 223, 224

Wildwood, Io!

Williams, J. L., work of, 209

Williston, 101

Willow, 90, 100, 125, 133, 138, 148

Wind, 121, 162, 164, 179

Winter Garden, 127

Winter Haven, 127, 240, 243

Winter Park, 127, 243, 253

Winter resorts, 150, 240-245

Wire-grass, 9I, 94, 100, IOI, 106,
125, 133, 148, 187

Wisconsin, tourists from, 244

Withlacoochee River, 87, 88, 91, 93, III,
169, 170, 282, 283

Wolves, 225

Women, percentage of, 235, (250)

Wool, 110, 278, 279 ;

World Almanac (New York), 161

World War (103), 157, 248

Wyman, Jeffries, work of, 288

116,

x

Xanthoxylum Clava-Herculis, 148
Ximenia, 148
Xolisma (See Cholisma)

Y,
Yaupon, 86, 106
Ybor City, 237, 238
Yellow fever, 232
Yellow jessamine, 90, 100, 106, II5, 133
Yucca aloifolia, 86

Zz
Zephyrhills (Pasco Co.), 117, 240
Zircon, 27
Zoologists, 223, (288)

perecterecmrrntaeeny parerostettt st ettaer tare ssios inssaeesetentuenssseasereesas=eapransesnsyersanansnensensnnens

———— =
=
+4 =
4 =
———:
——s =
ee =
| ===. ae
——
—
—
os
= =
assuage
—— =
— =
— = = >:
a —_-_ —
onerss => =
: = ==
es = —
eee =o
=— ===
= =
sas =
————: = SS
ae =.
cecal = © SSs2
= oS
=o =
eieeteeel 3 — I
a Sees | Syseseene=
= os ~gasensoanen
: — =
: =
=
=
=
ses = SSS
_ieenes — =
== a
: =
: —
— ==
—— ~ = osmmere
~ —
——— a a Oe ee
= ==
———-
=
a
———

ayeeomenonns REP ego rhrresrnrresenoverenrennsprinenenaeeanesnnin nanuansaenfuaee are nent SaeSsrnenareniegeneiee Tare sere eraser ayer,

AE REE

ii

Hye

TUTE

it viii nH

eititige

bvrGunRC HUE 4HERG ENS HGBEGSHASDUOUAUS GSAS HE ELEHEELUTA

en renal anata mete aoe eee ree
Sipehreramewnointastsnperennsee ster eremeenstnstner yeeros sores Seren tree eee aeat!

=
==
= papers
= =
io =
eecceeeme ==
4 : = i
: LS
~ ih wend =—
5 Fs ———
ececeeee: 8s ome H came nennennmenateomreareaarseseeean sobauremeceer sare aprnepererss eer enenesnnnnyeertantesanawan Veengegryeernenenrnnre :
wroarerms |$} sean} Bp Speen
a, tan
~—omeces Sit) ome -——
Sas at St +
SS OS i
SS = : =
Monsees ford ues p sussuusveasrsupsnusseensgrssseiscens suspevesseareusemsearrerdonsaressasteuaredwasueguentwven Seuuenseas Suseaseerresssegarsangereree ——— = —
momeewe St) ome 3
ae —
mgqoemee Testes a T=
= ppeprabylerversersunents a
= ‘
SSS SS
= = en news worn yoo ient own wo owas woe oan es wee woonensseveneecetsaceemnereee coe
po aaemee= Nae | a) ;
sed 8 penennennenseseetetneensnney san reethr any seyns ese a Y=
meee a! = oe = es : = - = SSS =
aon t rercewnrenreteenoers ee once <= = 3
— “oe! = eset; = paren’ = = : : =
woveome ve Ses 2 * Presets : ~ SS eaves ae eT = = Seager =
sasseem jm) samy Bes leron hbo 48h Fares s tee carts St: . 2 7 ‘ 3 es - : ies aI Sepa SS a on ae
— Saaaenini eee SE se = . : cee See
a : “> = - Seo Sse Sots sevens peor ewer aye wr—s = = a
Sool : “3° = Pr edepibeditii roihdicasecaahabeetted Gonissit#2 act ot inde ended oaks aaa aesinke ea oh oe ae =
= p bi einen i pd ma tg mea an oti si . =
kG RT SS =
: ee ee eee eee a eee aetna

enietnetnensmetnenaes pecneteema peri shete~serteneeivert sien te feiereeteteett teers
aowp-ccnup. asap ansensatannec=eestemeaneginiastabeqraenaseassSeunsseeaeernnete Geass reereneee