Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
Summary
The Florida Everglades, a large and diverse aquatic ecosystem, has been
greatly altered over the past century by an extensive water control infrastructure,
designed to increase regional economic productivity through improved flood
control, urban water supply, and agricultural production. The remnants of the
original Everglades now compete for vital water with urban and agricultural
interests and are impaired by contaminated runoff from these two activities.
The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), a joint effort led by the
state and the federal government launched in 2000, seeks to reverse the decline
of the ecosystem. This $13.5 billion project was originally envisioned as a 30-
to 40-year effort to achieve ecological restoration by restoring the hydrologic
characteristics of the Everglades, where feasible, and to create a water system
that serves the needs of both the natural and the human systems of South Florida
(Figure S-1).
The National Research Council (NRC) established the Committee on Inde-
pendent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress (CISRERP) in 2004
in response to a request from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), with
support from the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the
U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), based on Congress’s mandate in the Water
Resources Development Act of 2000 (WRDA 2000). The committee is charged
to submit biennial reports that review the CERP’s progress in restoring the natural
system (see Box S-1). This is the committee’s fourth report in a series of biennial
evaluations.
The committee concludes that, 12 years into the CERP, little progress has
been made on restoring the hydrology of the historical Everglades ecosystem;
instead most of the recent progress has focused on the periphery. To reverse
ongoing declines in the central Everglades, it will be necessary to expedite res-
toration planning and implementation in this area while integrating water quality
and hydrologic improvements. The newly launched Central Everglades Planning
Project offers an innovative approach to expedite restoration progress, although
1
OCR for page 2
2 Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades
FIGURE S-1 The South Florida ecosystem, which shares the same boundaries as the South
Florida Water Management District.
SOURCE: © International Mapping Associates
OCR for page 3
Summary 3
BOX S-1
Statement of Task
This congressionally mandated activity will review the progress toward achieving
the restoration goals of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). The
committee meets approximately four times annually to receive briefings on the current
status of the CERP and on scientific issues involved in implementing the restoration
plan, and it publishes biennial reports providing:
1. assessment of progress in restoring the natural system, which is defined by sec-
tion 601(a) of WRDA 2000 as all the land and water managed by the federal government
and state within the South Florida ecosystem;
2. discussion of significant accomplishments of the restoration;
3. discussion and evaluation of specific scientific and engineering issues that may
impact progress in achieving the natural system restoration goals of the plan; and
4. independent review of monitoring and assessment protocols to be used for
evaluation of CERP progress (e.g., CERP performance measures, annual assessment
reports, assessment strategies, etc.).
additional rigorous analyses at the interface of water quality and quantity will
be essential to maximize restoration benefits.
RESTORATION PROGRESS
The CERP, led by the USACE and the SFWMD, consists primarily of rojects
p
to increase storage capacity (e.g., conventional surface-water reservoirs, quifer
a
storage and recovery, in-ground reservoirs), improve water quality (e.g., storm-
water treatment areas [STAs]), reduce loss of water from the system (e.g., seep-
age management, water reuse), and reestablish pre-drainage hydrologic patterns
wherever possible (e.g., removing barriers to sheet flow, rainfall-driven water
management). The CERP builds upon other activities of the state and the federal
government aimed at restoration (hereafter, non-CERP activities), many of which
are essential to the success of the CERP in achieving its restoration goals.
During the past two years, notable progress has been made in the construc-
tion of Everglades restoration projects, with eight CERP projects now under
construction. These projects include all of the first-generation projects autho-
rized by Congress (Picayune Strand, Site 1 Impoundment, Indian River Lagoon-
South, and Melaleuca Eradication) as well as two second-generation projects
(C-111 Spreader Canal, Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands) and two third-generation
projects (Loxahatchee River Watershed Restoration, Lakeside Ranch STA) being
OCR for page 4
4 Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades
constructed solely with state funding. This level of construction, and the associ-
ated program funding for 2010-2011, reflect significant implementation progress
since the committee’s previous review. Several major project phases are nearing
completion in 2012, including the C-111 Spreader Canal Western Project and
the Picayune Strand Merritt Canal components, which are expected to deliver
significant increments of restoration benefits upon completion. Progress is also
being made on important non-CERP projects, including the Kissimmee River,
Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park, and the state’s Long Term
Plan for Achieving Water Quality Goals.
Nevertheless, as noted in previous committee reports, production of nat-
ural system restoration benefits within the Water Conservation Areas and
Everglades National Park continues to lag behind restoration progress in other
portions of the South Florida ecosystem. Early CERP implementation has largely
focused on the periphery of the remnant Everglades, and in the most recent
CERP project schedule, the projects with the greatest potential benefits to the
remnant Everglades (e.g., decompartmentalization, seepage management, cen-
tral verglades storage) have been significantly delayed or remain uncertain.
E
For project components that have been implemented, the committee was
generally unable to obtain rigorous analysis of incremental restoration benefits.
In some cases, the only descriptions of progress are anecdotal accounts of veg-
etation changes or field observations of new water flows. Effective assessment
of restoration progress will depend on monitoring data that cover periods
long enough to establish pre-project trends, followed by similar data after
the roject (or project component) is complete to determine the ecological
p
changes that can be ascribed to the project. Such a scientifically derived assess-
ment of ecosystem response to project implementation is important to enhance
the understanding of ecosystem recovery processes and may be useful to build
public support for ongoing restoration efforts.
The Central Everglades Planning Project provides a means to expedite the
realization of restoration benefits to the remnant Everglades while addressing
major impediments inherent in the USACE project planning and approval pro-
cess. The Central Everglades Planning Project is one of five USACE pilot projects
nationwide that will test a new accelerated project planning process, with the
goal of delivering an approved project implementation report to Congress within
two years. The focus on the central Everglades (Water Conservation Area 3 and
Everglades National Park) is appropriate for this pilot, given the urgent need
to address ongoing ecosystem decline, as noted in NRC (2008). The Central
Everglades Planning Project process allows for the combination of increments
of multiple CERP projects (e.g., storage, seepage management, decompartmen-
talization) within a new planning framework to more easily identify their inter-
dependence and system benefits. The pilot also intends to test new approaches
OCR for page 5
Summary 5
for project planning, including clear, early scoping of analyses and decision-
making criteria, early coordination with decision makers at all levels of USACE
leadership, and reduced reliance on detailed analyses within a framework of
risk-based decision making. The Central Everglades Planning Project appears to
be an important step forward, responsive to earlier concerns of this committee
(NRC, 2007, 2008, 2010), and consistent with the concept of incremental adap-
tive restoration (NRC, 2007). However, at completion of this report, the process
remained at an early stage, and no specific project plans were available for the
committee to review.
State-proposed projects to improve water quality represent an important
step forward, with critical implications for restoration of attributes in the
central Everglades impacted by high levels of phosphorus. Additional progress
toward meeting water quality criteria appears likely, because the state and the
federal partners have recently agreed upon additional water quality improve-
ments for the Everglades Protection Area. These proposed features, however,
address only current inflows to the Everglades, and do not provide water quality
treatment for increased water volumes anticipated under the CERP.
If the pace of restoration progress is to be maintained, then an increased
level of federal funding will be necessary for two reasons. First, large cuts to
the SFWMD budget have already led to deferral of several large projects, and
relatively modest outlays are projected over the next five years, mostly for water
quality improvements to attain compliance with water quality criteria. Projected
funding relies heavily on a drawdown of reserve funds to levels that, without
other changes, will leave the SFWMD with little flexibility and limited capability
to fund new CERP projects. Second, overall state CERP spending (including land
purchases and expedited construction efforts) has vastly exceeded federal spend-
ing. Thus, even if the state could sustain prior levels of spending, the SFWMD
might be reluctant to do so until the overall spending gap is reduced between the
two partners. Nevertheless, the capacity for increased federal spending could be
impacted by CERP cost-sharing requirements, because calculations of the cost-
share balance do not include extensive state expenditures from land purchases
and construction for projects that are not yet authorized.
Without congressional action, project authorization could soon become a
major impediment to restoration progress. To receive federal funding, individual
CERP projects must be authorized by Congress. To date, only three projects have
been congressionally authorized under WRDA 2007, and one additional roject
p
is under construction with programmatic authorization from WRDA 2000. Four
additional projects await authorization. Without a new WRDA, the federal
government will be unable to maintain progress on several second-generation,
state-expedited projects now under way (e.g., C-111 Spreader Canal, Biscayne
Bay Coastal Wetlands). Also, authorizations affect the projects that are eligible
OCR for page 6
6 Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades
for cost-share crediting. With no additional authorized projects and at current
rates of federal spending, the federal creditable expenditures could exceed the
state’s in approximately three years, bringing the CERP to a standstill because
federal cost-share creditable obligations may not exceed those of the state. If
Congress does not authorize additional projects and the state does not increase
spending, federal funding and project implementation would need to be sharply
curtailed. Additional project authorizations (with accompanying project partner-
ship agreements) could allow for more than $500 million of state CERP-related
expenditures being credited as cost-shared funds.
Innovative, multi-species approaches have been applied to resolve local
conflicts between species management and restoration management, but such
conflicts are likely to continue, requiring flexible and innovative multi-species
approaches applied at even larger spatial scales to avoid restoration delays and
optimize restoration benefits. Examples of innovative multi-species approaches
include the Everglades Restoration Transition Plan (ERTP) to address a conflict
between the water management needs of endangered snail kites and Cape
Sable seaside sparrows in Water Conservation Area (WCA)-3A and an approach
to address a conflict between stormwater treatment area (STA) operations and
protection of the nests of black-necked stilts and other migratory birds. Addi-
tional conflicts between the needs of endangered species and what is required
to restore the ecosystem restoration are inevitable in the transition to a fully
implemented CERP. A recent conflict between efforts to protect snail kite nests
and STA operations illustrates how single species management could potentially
compromise water management required for system restoration.
Trajectories
An assessment of the status and trajectories of 10 ecosystem attributes
reveals that conditions for tree islands, ridge-and-slough landscape, snail kites,
and peat continue to degrade and that cattail coverage continues to expand 12
years after the initiation of the CERP. These declines can be attributed to altered
hydrology and/or the elevated supply of phosphorus in the remnant Everglades.
Despite its ability to search throughout the Everglades ecosystem for suitable
conditions, the Everglade snail kite has experienced a precipitous decline in
numbers over the past 15 years and is in danger of extirpation.
The state’s extensive phosphorus control efforts over the past two decades
appear to be stabilizing or improving the current trends for several ecosystem
components driven by phosphorus (e.g., periphyton, soil P). Cattail expansion,
however, is continuing but at a decreasing rate in some areas (e.g., WCA-2).
Implementation of STAs and best management practices has markedly decreased
phosphorus loads to the WCAs, and interior phosphorus concentrations have
OCR for page 7
Summary 7
decreased in WCA-2 and -3 in response to decreases in the concentrations of
inflowing waters. Despite this progress, impacted areas of the WCAs consistently
fail the four-part test for compliance with Florida’s water quality standards. Thus,
it is widely recognized that additional water quality improvements are needed
to prevent further degradation and reverse ongoing adverse impacts to the eco-
system caused by elevated phosphorus.
In contrast, the restoration of flows in the central Everglades has been
limited, and the ecosystem attributes most directly influenced by hydrologic
factors continue to decline. In many cases, these ongoing losses can only be
recovered over long time scales. The velocity, depth, and duration of water in
the Everglades are important controlling factors for the distinctive terrain of the
Everglades: tree islands, ridge-and-slough topography, and peat accumulations.
These landscape components have been severely degraded by flow alterations
during past decades. Recovering additional losses will require decades if not
centuries. Of the many projects under construction, only Mod Waters (a non-
CERP project) and the C-111 Spreader Canal (a CERP project) offer promise of
direct, significant effects in the central Everglades.
Substantial near-term progress to address both water quality and hydrology
in the central Everglades is needed to prevent further declines. Near-term prog-
ress that addresses only water quality or water quantity leads to continued system
declines of many components. Additionally, many improvements in water quality
are linked with improvements in water quantity. Thus, decisions on restoration
project design and scheduling should not be viewed as simple tradeoffs between
water quantity and water quality. Instead, this qualitative analysis points to the
need for a more critical and comprehensive quantitative analysis using models
and field data to evaluate management alternatives in an integrated manner (see
Chapter 5). Also, it highlights the importance of stabilizing and ultimately revers-
ing declines of attributes that would take a long time to recover, particularly if
other aspects of the restoration depend on them. Because of its focus on the
remnant Everglades and accelerated planning, the Central Everglades Planning
Project conceptually provides promise for rehabilitating the remnant Everglades.
Science and Decision Making
Recent science synthesis efforts represent an impressive accomplishment,
although clearer acknowledgment of conflicts and tradeoffs will be essential
to maximize restoration success. Science synthesis is important to advance
understanding among the scientific community, inform policy decisions for
managers, and translate important findings for the interested public. Collectively,
the recent science synthesis efforts, including the 2009 System Status Report,
the Scientific and Technical Knowledge Gained report, and the Synthesis of
OCR for page 8
8 Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades
Everglades Research and Ecosystem Services (SERES) project, among others, suc-
cessfully address all three of these audiences. Together, they present a relatively
consistent view of the scientific principles relevant to the Everglades restoration.
If the best aspects of these synthesis efforts can be combined and continued in
an efficient, ongoing manner, then the effort can help policy makers coalesce
around a common vision of scientific principles, key uncertainties, and chal-
lenges. In the future, the effectiveness of the synthesis effort could be improved
by explicitly addressing tradeoffs, conflicts, and commonalities among water
quality, water quantity, and ecosystem responses.
A comprehensive assessment of monitoring efforts is necessary to ensure
that fundamental short- and long-term needs of the CERP are met and critical
gaps are addressed in the most cost-effective manner. The recent large and
sudden cuts to the RECOVER Monitoring and Assessment Program pose a risk
to system-wide assessment, which is important to the success of Everglades res-
toration. However, previous NRC committees have raised questions about the
ambitious list of indicators for monitoring relative to the likelihood of sustained
funding. Recurring evaluations of all monitoring (not just RECOVER-funded
monitoring) in support of the CERP should assess the usefulness of existing
datasets and performance measures, consider emerging priorities, and explore
opportunities for improved efficiency.
Progress has been made in the development of linked hydrologic and eco-
logical models, but they remain largely unavailable to project planning, limiting
the ability to evaluate differential benefits and impacts of restoration alterna-
tives. No ecological models have been approved for use in benefits analysis
for CERP, even though integrated ecological models provide an important tool
to assist with project planning, particularly to assess the responses of critical
performance measures to project design alternatives and to understand the res-
toration tradeoffs implicit in alternative plan approaches. If ecological models
are to be available to support restoration planning and assessment, the CERP
model development, testing, and review process should be accelerated so that
models can move more quickly from development and testing in the research
domain to application in support of restoration.
Integrated, or linked, water quality and ecological models are essential
tools for exploring the benefits and impacts of project alternatives that affect
water quality, water quantity, and habitat. To identify project designs and imple-
mentation sequences that maximize restoration benefits and assess potential
impacts, project-planning teams need to analyze a range of inflow water quality
conditions, including those that exceed targeted levels. The legal requirement
that water quality constraints be met should not limit the modeling analyses
of restoration alternatives under a range of conditions. Being overly cautious
with respect to water quality modeling could prevent a thorough exploration of
OCR for page 9
Summary 9
restoration options and limit the understanding of water quality constraints in
hydrologic restoration projects.
Transparent and systematic mechanisms to build trust and incorporate a
range of stakeholder preferences relevant to CERP implementation into deci-
sion support frameworks would help to clarify and reduce conflict and enhance
transparency. The committee acknowledges recent steps toward establishing
formal structured decision support tools for components of the CERP with an
emphasis on weighing multiple objectives. Decision support frameworks that
build trust and provide opportunities for deliberation and negotiation can also
assist in identifying and reducing sources of conflict, although they cannot, on
their own, eliminate persistent conflict. Hence, additional mechanisms may be
needed to resolve conflict, or at the very least, a strategy should be set in place
for moving forward in the face of conflict while considering conflicting values,
preferences, and objectives.
OVERALL EVALUATION OF PROGRESS AND CHALLENGES
Over the past two years, the pace of restoration implementation has
improved, although restoration remains focused along the periphery of the rem-
nant Everglades. Degradation of the Water Conservation Areas and Everglades
National Park continues because of the altered hydrology and poor water quality
in the system. Substantial progress has been made over the past two decades
to reduce phosphorus in the inflows. Moreover, state and federal governments
have reached agreement on the additional steps necessary to meet the phos-
phorus criterion for existing flows. However, minimal progress has been made
on restoring the water flows essential to restoring the remnant Everglades eco-
system. The altered flow regimes have plagued the Everglade snail kite, whose
trajectory to near extirpation is tied to that of the overall system. Degradation of
key hydrology-dependent ecosystem components, such as the ridge and slough
and tree islands, continues relatively unabated, and further losses can only be
recovered over long timeframes, if at all.
Saving the historical Everglades at this critical juncture requires a new
approach. Key components of a new strategy include: 1) focusing on restoring
the central core of the historical Everglades to reverse the ongoing degradation
before it is too late; 2) ending the segregation of water quantity and quality and
integrating water quantity and quality analyses that explore opportunities to
accelerate restoration in the remnant Everglades; and 3) finding a new way to
do business that avoids costly and unproductive delays in the project planning
and authorization processes. The Central Everglades Planning Project is a prom-
ising new initiative focused on the remnant Everglades with the goal of greatly
expediting the project planning process.
OCR for page 10
10 Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades
Impressive science synthesis efforts over the past few years have advanced
scientific understanding and provided a solid scientific foundation for deci-
sion making. Investments in continued cutting-edge research, consolidated and
timely synthesis, and effective monitoring are critical to supporting sound deci-
sions for a restored Everglades. However, key challenges remain—in particular,
conflicts at the interface of water quality and quantity that have been exacerbated
by the continuing challenges in meeting the 10 ppb water quality criterion and
the resulting delays in implementing hydrologic restoration. Additional use of
integrated ecosystem modeling and decision support tools could facilitate res-
toration progress by clarifying these conflicts, identifying interim strategies for
limiting further degradation of critical ecosystem components, and enhancing
the capacity to address these conflicts in a more timely and integrated way.
