Lessons in Water Resource and Ecosystem Regulation from Florida's Everglades and California's Bay/Delta Estuary

John R. Wodraska and Peter E. Von Haam

The Value of Negotiated Flexibility

Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt stated recently that the two most perplexing issues in water management in the United States were in Florida and California. He was referring to environmental controversies in the Everglades in southern Florida and California's San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Bay/Delta).

Two main lessons emerge from events surrounding the Everglades and the Bay/Delta. First, regulations aimed at improving water quality and habitat are most effective when they embody an incremental approach with frequent evaluation and updates. Conversely, large-scale, irreversible, and sweeping programs tie the hands of resource managers and prevent new programs that can elicit the broad-based support necessary to sustain any long-term management strategy.

Second, negotiated understandings and agreements involving state and federal resource agencies and local stakeholder groups are effective ways to develop mutually acceptable solutions. Once resolution of such complex environmental matters becomes embroiled in litigation, it becomes extremely difficult to realize an adequate solution.

This paper first compares the geography and history of the Everglades and the Bay/Delta. It then examines the political and legal events surrounding the Everglades controversy and the lessons of those events for the Bay/Delta crisis and other resource management cases.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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 163
--> Lessons in Water Resource and Ecosystem Regulation from Florida's Everglades and California's Bay/Delta Estuary John R. Wodraska and Peter E. Von Haam The Value of Negotiated Flexibility Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt stated recently that the two most perplexing issues in water management in the United States were in Florida and California. He was referring to environmental controversies in the Everglades in southern Florida and California's San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Bay/Delta). Two main lessons emerge from events surrounding the Everglades and the Bay/Delta. First, regulations aimed at improving water quality and habitat are most effective when they embody an incremental approach with frequent evaluation and updates. Conversely, large-scale, irreversible, and sweeping programs tie the hands of resource managers and prevent new programs that can elicit the broad-based support necessary to sustain any long-term management strategy. Second, negotiated understandings and agreements involving state and federal resource agencies and local stakeholder groups are effective ways to develop mutually acceptable solutions. Once resolution of such complex environmental matters becomes embroiled in litigation, it becomes extremely difficult to realize an adequate solution. This paper first compares the geography and history of the Everglades and the Bay/Delta. It then examines the political and legal events surrounding the Everglades controversy and the lessons of those events for the Bay/Delta crisis and other resource management cases.

OCR for page 163
--> Similarities Between The Everglades And The Bay/Delta The Everglades and the Bay/Delta are strikingly similar in physical geography and social importance. Florida's Everglades The Everglades are a wetland ecosystem significantly altered by human development. In this ecosystem's natural state, water flowed southward from the Kissimmee chain of lakes along the meandering Kissimmee River into Lake Okeechobee, an expansive shallow-water lake in the south-central part of the Florida peninsula (Figure 1). When heavy summer rains occurred, Lake Okeechobee flooded, and the water drained southward in a "river of grass," 50 miles wide and 6 inches deep through the region called the Everglades. Weather-related changes in the water level of the lake created a complex ecosystem dependent on varying water flows (Mairson, 1994). These naturally variant conditions, in part, created the need to pursue development projects in the Everglades from the early 1900s to the 1960s. Hurricane-induced flooding caused losses in human life and property, and extended droughts caused overdrafting of groundwater basins that provided water for cities and agriculture. In response, the state and federal government created an extensive flood control and water conveyance system (Light et al., 1989). They confined the Kissimmee River into a straight canal, diked Lake Okeechobee to prevent flooding, and reclaimed some 6 million acres of wetlands south of the lake, mostly for agriculture, by building canals and levees to funnel water toward the coast. After completion of the projects, all flows into Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades were controlled by gates and pumps. By 1953 five major canals totaling 440 miles existed in the area. The canals took water from the marshlands and diverted it for agricultural use or for groundwater recharge for later urban and agricultural pumping. The fertile, dark peat soils of the Everglades are prone to subsidence, and levees are required to protect the reclaimed land from flooding. These projects, however, came at a high environmental cost. The reduced and confined flows into the Everglades and the high phosphorus levels in agricultural drainage degraded the natural ecosystem. Increased nutrient levels and modified water levels caused a monoculture of cattails to overcome native saw-grass in many areas. Water bird abundance has declined dramatically because of diminished habitat and the effect of reduced flow on the fish populations that provide the birds' food source (Light et al., 1989). The importance of the Everglades in Florida's economy underscores the importance of maintaining the ecosystem in a condition that can satisfy the competing uses of its waters. Agricultural areas rely on canals for direct diversions and for recharging groundwater. Cities also draw their water supplies from

OCR for page 163
--> FIGURE 1 The Everglades. SOURCE: South Florida Water Management District.

OCR for page 163
--> aquifers fed by the canals, and the fish and wildlife of the Everglades depend on sufficient flows to sustain their critical habitats. The San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Like Florida's Everglades, the Bay/Delta in California is a stressed ecosystem that plays a vital role in the state's water resource and economic infrastructure (Figure 2). The Bay/Delta also is a complex water system altered significantly by human development. Before development the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, along with numerous mountain tributaries, formed a massive inland marsh of 750,000 acres. Freshwater from upstream mixed with seawater entering with the tides from San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Spanish explorers in the eighteenth century described the delta as a "sea of reeds." The shallow waters, foliage, and brackish quality of the water nurtured a rich fishery. After the gold rush, settlers began reclamation projects to drain the marshlands for farming. They built canals to divert water from the reclaimed lands and levees to prevent flooding. By the tune this massive reclamation effort was completed in 1930, the landscape of the delta had completely changed. More than 500,000 acres had been enveloped by 1,100 miles of levees. The sea of reeds had become an island archipelago of some 70 islands encircled by more than 700 miles of rivers, sloughs, and channels. Most of these islands have supported agriculture, with corn as the most important crop, along with safflower, sugar beets, alfalfa, wheat, and others. The peat soils, similar to those in the Everglades, were susceptible to subsidence and flooding, so agriculture was and still is a risky enterprise (Schwarz, 1991). Conditions in the delta required development of other water projects. Salinity levels in the delta historically varied greatly according to weather patterns, and during the severe drought years of the early 1930s, salt water reached all the way upstream to Sacramento and Stockton. Beginning in the late 1800s and throughout this century, water projects were built to control flooding, divert water from upstream tributaries, and export water for agricultural and urban use. The two largest reservoirs, Oroville and Shasta, retain water throughout the year, providing higher flows during the dry season and enabling water managers to control salinity intrusion into the delta. The State Water Project and federal Central Valley Project (two of the largest public works projects in the nation) include diversion facilities in the southern end of the delta to export water southward through the Delta Mendota Canal and California Aqueduct (Figure 3). Today the Bay/Delta serves as the hub of California's water supply system. The federal and state water projects divert water from the delta into aqueducts that convey water southward into the San Joaquin Valley agricultural areas and then pump it 2,000 vertical feet over the Tehachapi Mountains into the urban communities and farms of southern California. The North Bay and South Bay

OCR for page 163
--> FIGURE 2 Delta waterways. SOURCE: California Department of Water Resources. aqueducts serve urban users in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition, riparian farmers in the delta divert water for irrigation, agricultural water districts in the Sacramento and San Joaquin river basins take water from the system, and the City of San Francisco and East Bay Municipal Utility District (serving Oakland and Berkeley) store and divert water upstream of the delta for urban use. Like the Everglades, the Bay/Delta has experienced environmental problems in recent decades. Exports from the delta and upstream diversion primarily for agricultural use have reduced the amount of freshwater flowing through the delta and altered flow patterns through the channels, with negative effects on fish populations. Introduction of nonnative species, polluted agricultural runoff, poaching, local land-use changes, and droughts also contributed to the widespread decline of fish species in the Bay/Delta. The winter-run chinook salmon and delta smelt have been listed as endangered and threatened, respectively,

OCR for page 163
--> FIGURE 3 Major features of state water project and Central Valley project. under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). These listings significantly constrain operation of the pumping facilities in the southern delta, as the pumps must shut down for significant periods to prevent entrainment of these fish. These periodic shutdowns have significantly decreased the reliability of supplies from the delta, jeopardizing water plans of agencies throughout California.1 California's water supply infrastructure is the backbone of the state's economy. Factors diminishing the reliability of the water supply, such as the environmental problems in the Bay/Delta, threaten California's economic future.2 Therefore, there can be no distinction between protecting the environment

OCR for page 163
--> and promoting California's economy in the case of the Bay/Delta. The two goals are inextricably linked, and developing an acceptable solution to the conflict will sustain both the resources and future economic activity. The Everglades Controversy Concerns over the ecological health of the Everglades led in 1970 to congressional legislation mandating minimum flows into Everglades National Park.3 Although the park was unquestionably affected by the canals, levees, pumps, and water control structures that regulate flows into the area, it was unusual for Congress to micromanage such a complex ecosystem by legislatively mandating specific flow requirements. The results of this program were clearly detrimental to the environment. The timing and magnitude of flows were inappropriate, exaggerating natural extremes (Light et al., 1989). The ecosystem continued to decline, prompting an emotional public reaction that set the tone for future political and legal developments. In retrospect, the inflexibility and sweeping character of the congressional requirements doomed the flow standards from the beginning. There were no built-in mechanisms for monitoring environmental effects of the standards or for modifying them to meet the demands of changing natural hydrologic conditions. This omission tied the hands of resource managers in the Everglades' highly dynamic, variable, and unpredictable ecosystem. In short, the program embodied the characteristics of ineffective environmental regulatory schemes—rigid standards that precluded appropriate ecological decision making. The Role of the South Florida Water Management District In 1983 severe high-water conditions in Everglades National Park eliminated the wading-bird nesting season, and the Everglades Research Center (part of the National Park Service) told the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) that an ''ecological emergency'' threatened the park. Later the Park Service asked for a comprehensive restoration plan including changes in flow distribution and intentional breaching of levees and filling in of canals to return flows to the approximate levels that existed before widespread development. The Florida legislature had expanded SFWMD's duties from traditional flood control and water supply to include issuance of permits for certain types of water use, surface water and stormwater management, land acquisition for riverine habitat restoration, and water quality protection.4 This new mission made SFWMD stewards of environmental uses, as well as water uses, and expanded its role in resolving the Everglades crisis. In response to its new role in the controversy, SFWMD developed a two-pronged program to resolve the issue. The first part involved alternative dispute resolution (ADR), an approach to consensus building that seeks to identify com-

OCR for page 163
--> mon ground among various parties and to build agreements based on mutual interests. The other aspect of the program was SFWMD's iterative testing process (ITP), a progressive approach to resource management emphasizing incremental testing and evaluation of the effects of environmental regulation and active integration of ecological forces into the regulatory decision making process (Light et al., 1989). Alternative Dispute Resolution To break the gridlock that had precluded a mutually acceptable solution, SFWMD developed an approach involving negotiation and consensus building among groups having historically disparate interests, such as environmentalists and sugarcane growers. The District found that even amidst long-standing disputes with deeply entrenched positions, small but meaningful steps toward collaborative problem solving could take place. Good-faith negotiations, in turn, unlocked doors for much bolder and meaningful strategies based on increased understanding and attention to safeguards (Light et al., 1989). The District's commitment to ADR required expenditure of much energy on outreach and required that technical findings be made available for scrutiny by others. In the long run, this fostered greater trust and respect for the District's abilities and intentions. For example, SFWMD avoided litigation with farmers who, contending that the risk of flooding was too great, protested SFWMD's plan to modify flow patterns around Everglades National Park. Using ADR methods, the District negotiated an agreement with the farmers whereby the District operated short-term test-diversions to monitor effects on flood risk. This experience suggests that taking small steps, such as experimental testing, can pave the way for more ambitious future programs by minimizing the perceived risk to interested parties who might feel threatened by new and innovative approaches. Iterative Testing Process The District recognized that water management interventions in the Everglades over the past 80 years (for both development and environmental purposes) had been too sweeping and rigid and failed to integrate ecological processes. As a result, these decisions contributed to the degradation of the Everglades' resources. The District sought an alternative to the traditional water planning approach, which had few built-in mechanisms for remedial action. The Everglades case needed an approach to water management that fostered testing of policies and technical measures on a scale sufficient to be highly informative, while limiting environmental risks. The District developed ITP as a new approach to water management (Light et al., 1989). The key to this new approach was incremental changes followed by systematic testing and analysis to gauge environmental responses to those

OCR for page 163
--> changes. This feedback would guide the next resource management decision, permitting the modifications necessary to achieve the ecological objective. One salient feature of this approach is the integration of ecological processes into decision making. Making incremental changes and modifications enables scientists to see how natural processes affect and react to environmental modifications. By permitting natural response mechanisms to guide and calibrate the water management measures in this way, latent and healthy ecological patterns can emerge.5 Unfortunately, the District's ITP programs were not able to come into full effect because of litigation that drastically affected the water management process in the Everglades. Litigation Developments Beginning in October 1988, a major lawsuit and associated settlement negotiations dominated the Everglades debate. In that month, the U.S. Justice Department sued SFWMD to enforce state water quality standards. The Justice Department filed suit in federal court under state law rather than federal law, because the Federal Clean Water Act did not apply to polluted runoff from farming operations that were discharging phosphorus into the Everglades through a federal water project facility. The water quality standards that SFWMD was responsible for enforcing were narrative, or nonnumeric. The law stated that concentrations of nutrients, such as phosphorus, must cause "no imbalance in the flora or fauna" of the region. There always had been controversy surrounding how to translate this narrative standard into numerical ones and whether the standards were working. After the lawsuit was initiated, Florida's new governor, Lawton Chiles, entered federal court and declared, "We want to surrender. I am here. I have brought my sword. Who do I give it to?" (Palm Beach Post, 1994). In July 1991 the state and federal governments reached a settlement agreement that included conversion of some farmlands into marshes to filter out phosphorus and establishment of phosphorus reduction targets. The estimated cost of the program was $465 million. Certain aspects of the agreement embodied principles of the iterative testing process, as discussed above. The agreement stipulated that a panel of scientists would determine numerical interpretations of the narrative phosphorus criteria. This interpretation would become the temporary "numerical standard." The panel would evaluate the results and suggest adjustments based on the monitoring data. The agreement attempted to represent the incremental, flexible, and systematic approach SFWMD had been advocating. Again, however, litigation delayed implementation of the new approach. Sugarcane growers challenged the legality of the agreement, contending that the federal government was illegally interfering with the state's sovereignty over water issues. In the summer of 1993, Secretary Babbitt announced a framework

OCR for page 163
--> agreement between two of the three major sugar firms regarding the allocation of restoration costs. One of those firms broke off talks with the Interior Department in December 1993. Recent Developments In May 1994 the Florida Supreme Court overturned a ballot initiative that sought to levy a one-cent-per-pound tax on raw sugar and to use the proceeds for an Everglades restoration trust. The court ruled that the initiative violated the "single-subject rule" because the restoration trust would have performed functions of legislative, executive, and judicial branches, in violation of the Florida constitution. In addition, the court ruled that the title and summary of the measure were misleading.6 At the time of this writing, the Florida legislature had just passed the Everglades Forever Act, a comprehensive program for restoring the Everglades ecosystem.7 While the timing of the passage of the act prevents detailed treatment here, it is possible to summarize some of the more important provisions. The act will generate more than $700 million over 20 years (more than $300 million from agriculture) for various activities aimed at improving water quality and water supply throughout the historic Everglades, including Lake Okeechobee, the agricultural areas in the region, Everglades National Park, and urbanized areas of the southeast coast. The Everglades Forever Act seeks to improve water quality through increased inflows to the "protected areas" of the Everglades, an ambitious research and monitoring program, directions to the state Department of Environmental Protection to establish new phosphorus criteria before the year 2003, and establishing time lines for construction of new stormwater treatment areas. The financing for these programs will come primarily from a tax on agricultural lands (ranging from about $25 per acre annually in 1994 to $35 in 2013) and an increase in property taxes in the 15 counties that make up the Everglades region.8 Lessons from the Everglades Controversy The Everglades controversy provides several lessons in the institutional aspects of water resource management. The unique geography of the Everglades and its history of human modifications suggest that regulatory programs should adopt an incremental, flexible, and monitored approach as embodied by SFWMD's iterative testing process. The Everglades controversy also demonstrates that ambitious negotiation programs provide the best hope for finding a workable solution that is acceptable, at least in part, to all interests. After the litigation process began to drive the Everglades dispute, resource managers and others lost the ability to fashion creative solutions.

OCR for page 163
--> The Bay/Delta Crisis In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) is the agency with primary authority over water quality and water allocation. As such, the State Board is responsible for formulating water quality plans and for regulating rights to the use of waters of the Bay/Delta. The State Board also has the duty to protect uses of water for agriculture, cities, and fish and wildlife. Two key regulatory parameters for protection of the Bay/Delta's beneficial uses are flow and salinity. The two are interrelated, because the timing and magnitude of freshwater flows can affect salinity levels at various locations in the Delta. In 1978 the State Board adopted a Water Quality Control Plan as required by the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and also adopted a water rights decision under state law to implement the plan. The State Board's water rights decision (Decision 1485) included flow and salinity requirements and focused regulations solely on the State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project. As generally required by the CWA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reviewed the Water Quality Control Plan for approval and conditioned its approval on commitments from the State Board to improve aspects of Decision 1485 for fish and wildlife if fishery declines indicated a necessity. When the striped bass population declined in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the State Board took no significant actions in response to EPA's request. The Water Quality Control Plan and Decision 1485 also received intense scrutiny under state law in state court. The Racanelli decision in 1986 by a state appellate court declared parts of the State Board's 1978 plan invalid, ruling among other things, that the plan failed to consider the role of all Bay/Delta watershed diverters, focusing instead only on the State Water Project and the Central Valley Project.9 The State Board adopted a revised Water Quality Control Plan in 1991, but EPA disapproved it, claiming that changes made from the 1978 plan were inadequate. In the fall of 1992, President Bush signed into law the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, which requires a significant portion (800,000 acre-feet per year from the project's approximate annual yield of 7 million acre-feet) of the Central Valley Project's water supply yield to go toward fisheries restoration, possibly including increased flows through the delta.10 The act also levies fees on users within the project's service area, with the proceeds used to finance an ambitious fisheries habitat restoration program.11 In response to a request from Governor Pete Wilson, the State Board in December 1992 released draft water rights Decision 1630, which was intended to provide "interim" standards for protection of the beneficial uses of the Bay/Delta, with particular attention to fisheries protection. Draft Decision 1630, if adopted, would have affected most Bay/Delta watershed users and included extensive flow and salinity requirements designed to protect fish and their habitats. In a historic shift of positions, urban water agencies throughout northern and southern Cali-

OCR for page 163
--> fornia supported the environmental objectives of the proposal, while suggesting modifications in the proposed regulations. This change was significant because prior to that time, water agencies in northern and southern California rarely adopted the same positions on issues such as Bay/Delta standards. To the contrary, southern California water agencies along with San Joaquin Valley agricultural water districts had traditionally fought with agencies in northern California. Governor Wilson requested the State Board on April 1, 1993, to stop work on draft Decision 1630, claiming that federal involvement in the Bay/Delta through enforcement of the Endangered Species Act made state action "irrelevant."12 EPA's Proposed Standards In response to the State Board's action on draft Decision 1630, the EPA proposed a set of standards in January 1994, claiming federal authority under the CWA.13 The EPA proposal contained a salinity intrusion standard mandating a fixed number of days for meeting a 2 part-per-thousand salinity level at various locations in the Bay/Delta estuary from February through June. EPA reached this formula from statistical analysis of past hydrologic conditions, intending to recreate conditions as they existed in the late 1960s and early 1970s (before significant levels of State Water Project exports from the southern delta and a period that EPA believes had good habitat conditions for fisheries). Although generally supportive of Bay/Delta standards that are more protective of fisheries, urban water agencies in northern and southern California objected to EPA's specific proposal on several grounds: (1) the standard was unduly rigid and failed to include mechanisms for properly responding to changes in precipitation and runoff within the year; (2) the plan, at times, would have placed the optimum salinity conditions for fisheries too far downstream from the most productive habitat zones; (3) the proposal lacked mechanisms for biological evaluation to accommodate adjustments to the standard based on measured re-suits; and (4) legal questions existed regarding EPA's authority to adopt and implement the type of standards proposed. Urban agencies invested substantial resources in analyzing EPA's proposal, and attempted to produce an alternative that could better meet environmental objectives of the EPA proposal. As a result of extensive studies by technical consultants and others, the urban agencies concluded that environmental objectives of the proposal could be met at a lower water cost. These studies formed the basis of an "Urban Alternative" to EPA's proposal, sponsored by a coalition of northern and southern California urban water agencies. "The Urban Alternative" The alternative proposed by urban water agencies improves on EPA's proposal by providing flexibility, monitoring, and a foundation for realizing long-

OCR for page 163
--> term solutions to the Bay/Delta problem. EPA's proposed salinity standard failed to account adequately for changing runoff patterns within the year. In contrast, the Urban Alternative contains a sliding-scale methodology to permit the standard to update itself periodically within the year to ensure that the regulation responds to natural variations of hydrologic conditions. This approach is similar to the iterative testing process in Florida in that the standard would incorporate natural ecological functions to guide regulatory decision making. The Urban Alternative also includes biological monitoring and evaluation, which EPA's proposal lacked. As discussed earlier, a systematic, incremental plan for resource management requires monitoring to gauge effects of the standard on the environment. The Urban Alternative would require extensive biological evaluation so that the standards could be updated periodically. Long-Term Solutions Immediate standards for the Bay/Delta are only the first step in resolving the larger Bay/Delta issues, and the urban group advocates establishing a process for determining these long-term solutions. The preferred approach would include consideration of the ecosystem as a whole, using multispecies, habitat-wide approaches instead of the single-species approach under the Endangered Species Act, which lacks flexibility and balance. Long-term analysis and solutions also would take into account factors other than delta exports and diversions that have contributed to fisheries declines, including drought, agricultural runoff, introduced nonnative species, and poaching. Finally, an environmental decision making process must take place to evaluate water management alternatives to improve methods by which water is conveyed through and diverted from the delta. Conclusion Experiences in the Everglades have much to teach resource managers about institutional aspects of water regulation in a complex ecosystem. Flexible and incremental approaches are far superior to rigid regulatory schemes that too often have prevailed. Negotiated agreements, which require creativity and scientific determinations that the judicial system often cannot deliver, are far superior to court battles for making resource management decisions. These principles apply equally to the current controversy in California's Bay/Delta. A group of urban water agencies from northern and southern California has proposed an approach that incorporates characteristics of effective regulatory processes. Because of the logical and scientific bases of this alternative and the urban agencies' efforts to consult with political leaders and technical staff of the regulatory agencies, there is hope that mistakes made in the Everglades will not repeat themselves in California.

OCR for page 163
--> Notes 1.   See "Joint Effort Holds Out Hope for California Water," Standard & Poor's Creditweek Municipal, March 21, 1994, p. 112: "Probably the most far reaching action affecting water resources management in California in the past decade was the listing of the winter-run Chinook Salmon and the Delta Smelt, combined with the biological opinions that followed. The restrictions placed on water project operations contained in the biological opinions have immediate and future consequences on delta water export capability." 2.   Idem: "The allocation of water supplies for consumption in California remains in gridlock as both federal and state legislators try to achieve a workable solution to the conflicting interests in the delta.... Problems faced by California water suppliers will have a generally negative impact on credit quality for years to come due to the economic impact and rising costs associated with water supply and reliability." 3.   Public Law 91-28, River Basin Monetary Authorization and Miscellaneous Civil Works Amendments, Section 2: "[D]elivery of water from the central and southern Florida project to the Everglades National Park shall be not less than 315,000 acre-feet annually ... or 16.5 per centum of total deliveries from the project for all purposes including the park, whichever is less." 4.   Water Resources Act of 1972, Chapter 72-299, Florida Statutes, 1972. 5.   The Domenigoni Valley Reservoir Project in Southern California is another example of iterative processes for environmental management. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, in conjunction with several state and federal agencies, manages a 9,000-acre ecological reserve in conjunction with the Project. Biological managers evaluate incremental changes in habitat conditions, and make adjustments to protect the ecosystem supporting sixteen species that are candidates for listing under the Endangered Species Act. 6.   In re. Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General—Save Our Everglades Trust Fund, 19 Florida Law Weekly S276, 1994. 7.   Everglades Forever Act, 1994 Fla. Sess. Law Serv. 115 (West), amending Section 373.4592, Florida Statutes. 8.   Section 373.4592(6), Florida Statutes. 9.   See United States v. State Water Resources Control Board, 182 Cal. App. 3d 82 (1986). The popular name for the case derives from the appeals court jurist who wrote the opinion, Judge John T. Racanelli. 10.   See Public Law 102-575, Title XXXIV, Section 3406(b)(2). 11.   See Public Law 102-575, Title XXXIV, Section 3407(d)(2)(A). 12.   See letter from Governor Pete Wilson to chairman of the State Water Resources Control Board, April 1, 1993 (Sacramento Bee, April 2, 1993). 13.   Environmental Protection Agency, Proposed Rule: Water Quality Standards for Surface Waters of the Sacramento River, San Joaquin River, and San Francisco Bay and Delta of the State of California. Federal Register Vol. 59, No. 4, p. 810, January 6, 1994. References Light, S. S., J. R. Wodraska, and J. Sabina. 1989. The Southern Everglades: The Evolution of Water Management. National Forum, the Phi Kappa Phi Journal (Winter):11-14. Auburn University. Mairson, A. 1994. The Everglades: Dying for help. National Geographic 185(4)(April):2-35. Mayer, J. 1993. Governor backs off new rules for delta. Sacramento Bee, April 2. Palm Beach Post. January 23, 1994. The everglades fight. p. 1F. Schwarz, J. 1991. A Water Odyssey, the Story of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Los Angeles: Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Standard & Poor's Creditweek Municipal. March 21, 1994. Joint effort holds out hope for California water. p. 112.