DOCSLIB.ORG

Hillsborough River Basin Bmap: Technical Stakeholders and Basin Working Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hillsborough River Basin Bmap: Technical Stakeholders and Basin Working Group FINAL 2009 HILLSBOROUGH RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN for the Implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads Adopted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in the Hillsborough River Basin for Fecal Coliform Bacteria developed by the Hillsborough River Basin Working Group in cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Division of Water Resource Management Bureau of Watershed Management Tallahassee, Florida 32399 June 30, 2009 Hillsborough River Basin Management Action Plan – FINAL, June 30, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................ VI HILLSBOROUGH RIVER BASIN BMAP: TECHNICAL STAKEHOLDERS AND BASIN WORKING GROUP.................................................................................. VII HILLSBOROUGH RIVER BASIN BMAP: OTHER PARTICIPANTS........................... IX LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................... XII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1 E S .1. Management Actions /P rojects ..................................................................... 4 Blackwater Creek ........................................................................................... 5 New River ........................................................................................................ 6 Spartman Branch, Baker Creek, and Flint Creek ......................................... 6 Lower Hillsborough River .............................................................................. 7 E S .2. Managing P ollutant L oads from Future G rowth ......................................... 8 E S .3. B MAP Implementation and Tracking ........................................................... 8 2008 HILLSBOROUGH RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN ADDRESSING THE FECAL COLIFORM TMDLS FOR BLACKWATER CREEK, NEW RIVER, SPARTMAN BRANCH, BAKER CREEK, FLINT CREEK, AND LOWER HILLSBOROUGH RIVER ........................................................ 10 1.0. Introduction .................................................................................................... 10 1.1. Overview of Management Actions/Projects ....................................... 11 1.2. Document Organization ....................................................................... 13 2.0. B ackground .................................................................................................... 14 2.1. Regional Setting ................................................................................... 14 3.0. TMDLs in the Hillsborough River Basin ....................................................... 16 4.0. BMAP Development Process ........................................................................ 18 5.0. Pollutant R eduction Allocations ................................................................... 20 6.0. P ollutant S ources and Management Actions /P rojects ............................... 21 6.1. BMAP Assumptions and Considerations ........................................... 21 6.2. Management Action/Project Overview ............................................... 22 6.3. Management Actions/Projects ............................................................ 23 6.4. Local Initiatives and Programs ........................................................... 23 6.5. Managing Pollutant Loads from Future Growth ................................ 26 6.6. Waterbody Assessments ..................................................................... 26 ii Hillsborough River Basin Management Action Plan – FINAL, June 30, 2009 6.6.1. Blackwater Creek (WBID 1482) ................................................... 26 Pollutant Sources and Management Actions/Projects ....................................... 28 Assessing Progress and Making Changes ......................................................... 31 6.6.2. New River (WBID 1442) ............................................................... 31 Pollutant Sources and Management Actions/Projects ....................................... 32 Assessing Progress and Making Changes ......................................................... 35 6.6.3. Spartman Branch (WBID 1561), Baker Creek (WBID 1522C), and Flint Creek (WBID 1522A) ....................................... 35 Pollutant Sources and Management Actions/Projects ....................................... 38 Assessing Progress and Making Changes ......................................................... 40 6.6.4. Lower Hillsborough River (WBID 1443E) ..................................... 41 Pollutant Sources and Management Actions/Projects ....................................... 43 Assessing Progress and Making Changes ......................................................... 44 7.0. Monitoring Program ....................................................................................... 46 7.1. Issues Involving Quantification of Reductions in Fecal Coliform Concentrations .................................................................. 46 7.2. Water Quality Monitoring Objectives .................................................. 48 8.0. Tracking and Follow-up Actions ................................................................... 49 9.0. C ommitment to P lan Implementation ........................................................... 51 10.0. Detailed Project Information ....................................................................... 53 10.1. Introduction ........................................................................................ 53 10.2. FDACS’ Process of BMP Implementation ........................................ 53 10.3. Quantifiable Fecal Coliform Bacteria Load Reductions .................. 53 10.4. BMAP Implementation Costs ............................................................ 53 11.0. References .................................................................................................... 55 TABLES ........................................................................................................................ 59 APPENDIX A. GLOSSARY OF TERMS .................................................................... 133 APPENDIX B: MONITORING PLAN ......................................................................... 137 B.1.1. Background ..................................................................................... 137 B.1.2. Monitoring Objectives .................................................................... 143 B.1.3. Water Quality Monitoring ............................................................... 144 B.1.3.1. Water Quality Indicators ......................................................... 144 B.1.3.2. Monitoring Stations ................................................................. 144 B.1.3.3. Sampling Frequency ............................................................... 144 B.1.3.4. Rainfall and Streamflow Data ................................................. 144 B.1.3.5. Quality Assurance/Quality Control .......................................... 144 B.1.3.6. Data Management .................................................................. 146 iii Hillsborough River Basin Management Action Plan – FINAL, June 30, 2009 B.1.3.7. Assessment of Water Quality Status and Trends ................... 146 B.1.4. Contaminant Source Survey Information ..................................... 147 B.1.5. Targeted Monitoring To Evaluate the Effectiveness of BMPs and Other Management Actions ......................................... 147 B.1.6. Reporting Monitoring Results and Tracking Changes in Water Quality and CSS Rankings .................................................. 147 B.1.7. Funding ........................................................................................... 149 B.1.8. References Cited ............................................................................ 149 LIST OF TABLES Table ES.1. Anticipated trends in core and supplemental water quality indicators _____________________________________________________ 9 Table 1.1. Project management categories in the Hillsborough River Basin for fecal coliform ______________________________________________ 12 Table 3.1. TMDLs addressed in the Hillsborough River Basin __________________ 17 Table 4.1. BWG organizational structure ___________________________________ 19 Table 6.1. Office of Agricultural Water Policy BMPs __________________________ 24 Table 6.2.1. Blackwater Creek projects by management category ________________ 29 Table 6.2.2. Blackwater Creek projects by stakeholder _________________________ 30 Table 6.2.3. New River projects by management category ______________________ 33 Table 6.2.4. New River projects by stakeholder _______________________________ 34 Table 6.2.5. Spartman Branch, Baker Creek, and Flint Creek projects by management category _________________________________________ 39 Table 6.2.6. Spartman Branch, Flint Creek, and Baker Creek projects by stakeholder __________________________________________________ 40 Table 6.2.7. Lower Hillsborough River projects by management category _________ 44 Table 6.2.8. Lower Hillsborough River projects by stakeholder __________________ 45 Table 7.1. Anticipated trends in core and supplemental water quality indicators ____________________________________________________ 46 Table 9.1. Signatories ___________________________________________________ 52 Table 6.2. Projects by management
Load more

Recommended publications
  • St. Lucie and Indian River Counties Water Resources Study
    St. Lucie and Indian River Counties Water Resources Study Final Summary Report November 2009 Prepared for: South Florida Water Management District St. Johns River Water Management District St Lucie and Indian River Counties Water Resource Study St Lucie and Indian River Counties Water Resources Study Executive Summary Study Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential for capturing excess water that is currently being discharged to the Indian River Lagoon in northern St. Lucie County and southern Indian River County and making it available for beneficial uses. The study also evaluated the reconnection of the C-25 Basin in the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and C-52 in the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) so that available water supplies could be conveyed to meet demands across jurisdictional boundaries. The study objectives were to: Identify the quantity and timing of water available for diversion and storage; Identify water quality information needed to size water quality improvement facilities; Identify and provide cost estimates for the improvements and modifications to the existing conveyance systems necessary for excess runoff diversion and storage; Identify, develop cost estimates, and evaluate conceptual alternatives for storing excess runoff, and Provide conceptual designs and cost estimates for the highest ranked alternative in support of feasibility analysis and a future Basis of Design Report. Study Process The study process consisted of the following activities: Data compilation and analysis, Identification of alternative plans, Evaluation of alternative plans, Identification of the preferred plan, and Development of an implementation strategy. St Lucie and Indian River Counties Water Resource Study Formal stakeholder meetings were conducted throughout the study.
    [Show full text]
  • Stormwater Management Master Plan Updates There Are 16 Defined
    Stormwater Management Master Plan Updates There are 16 defined watersheds in Volusia County. Stormwater Management Master Plans (SWMP) have been prepared for the 11 of the watersheds, with the concentration on the urbanized basins. Many of these SWMPs were prepared in the 90’s and are currently over 20 years old. These plans need to be updated to address current corporate boundaries and responsibilities and to address current priorities. The SWMP updates proposed are for the Indian River Lagoon, the Halifax River, the Tomoka River and Spruce Creek. The studies will update the stormwater system improvements in these watersheds and analyze for water quantity and water quality impacts to the receiving water bodies, each of which is an impaired water body. Current Situation The Indian River Lagoon, Halifax River, Tomoka River and Spruce Creek SWMPs were completed in the 90s prior to the cities in these areas completing SWMPs. Each of these basins is an impaired water body with Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) established. A Basin Management Action Plan (BMAP) has been completed for the Indian River Lagoon and the BMAP process has begun for the Halifax River (Northern Coastal Basin). Future BMAPs are scheduled for the Tomoka River and Spruce Creek basins. The goal of the SWMP Updates is to review and update Volusia County’s previous SWMPs with a focus on water quality and projects that serve areas within unincorporated Volusia County. Project The preparation of a Stormwater Management Master Plan Update for these watersheds will include: A review of previous SWMPs to determine if capital projects recommended at that time may still be recommended for grant applications An evaluation of potential water quality benefits resulting from altering or increasing stormwater maintenance practices An evaluation of water quality conditions to propose additional improvement alternatives and quantify resultant pollutant load reductions The majority of the land uses in these basins is urban and fall within city limits.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 17: Archeological and Historic Resources
    Chapter 17: Archeological and Historic Resources Everglades National Park was created primarily because of its unique flora and fauna. In the 1920s and 1930s there was some limited understanding that the park might contain significant prehistoric archeological resources, but the area had not been comprehensively surveyed. After establishment, the park’s first superintendent and the NPS regional archeologist were surprised at the number and potential importance of archeological sites. NPS investigations of the park’s archeological resources began in 1949. They continued off and on until a more comprehensive three-year survey was conducted by the NPS Southeast Archeological Center (SEAC) in the early 1980s. The park had few structures from the historic period in 1947, and none was considered of any historical significance. Although the NPS recognized the importance of the work of the Florida Federation of Women’s Clubs in establishing and maintaining Royal Palm State Park, it saw no reason to preserve any physical reminders of that work. Archeological Investigations in Everglades National Park The archeological riches of the Ten Thousand Islands area were hinted at by Ber- nard Romans, a British engineer who surveyed the Florida coast in the 1770s. Romans noted: [W]e meet with innumerable small islands and several fresh streams: the land in general is drowned mangrove swamp. On the banks of these streams we meet with some hills of rich soil, and on every one of those the evident marks of their having formerly been cultivated by the savages.812 Little additional information on sites of aboriginal occupation was available until the late nineteenth century when South Florida became more accessible and better known to outsiders.
    [Show full text]
  • North Fork of the St. Lucie River Floodplain Vegetation Technical Report
    NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER FLOODPLAIN VEGETATION TECHNICAL REPORT WR-2015-005 Coastal Ecosystem Section Applied Sciences Bureau Water Resources Division South Florida Water Management District Final Report July 2015 i Resources Division North Fork of the St. Lucie River Floodplain Vegetation Technical Report ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document is the result of a cooperative effort between the Coastal Ecosystems Section of South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Florida Park Service (FPS) at the Savannas Preserve State Park in Jensen Beach, Florida and the Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserve Office in Fort Pierce, Florida. The principle author of this document was as follows: Marion Hedgepeth SFWMD The following staff contributed to the completion of this report: Cecilia Conrad SFWMD (retired) Jason Godin SFWMD Detong Sun SFWMD Yongshan Wan SFWMD We would like to acknowledge the contributions of Christine Lockhart of Habitat Specialist Inc. with regards to the pre-vegetation plant survey, reference collection established for this project, and for her assistance with plant identifications. We are especially grateful to Christopher Vandello of the Savannas Preserve State Park and Laura Herren and Brian Sharpe of the FDEP Indian River Lagoon Aquatic Preserves Office for their assistance in establishing the vegetation transects and conducting the field studies. And, we would like to recognize other field assistance from Mayra Ashton, Barbara Welch, and Caroline Hanes of SFWMD. Also, we would like to thank Kin Chuirazzi for performing a technical review of the document. ii North Fork of the St. Lucie River Floodplain Vegetation Technical Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ..........................................................................................................................ii List of Tables ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park Jennifer H
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons GIS Center GIS Center 5-4-2015 Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park Jennifer H. Richards Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, [email protected] Daniel Gann GIS-RS Center, Florida International University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/gis Recommended Citation Richards, Jennifer H. and Gann, Daniel, "Vegetation Trends in Indicator Regions of Everglades National Park" (2015). GIS Center. 29. https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/gis/29 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the GIS Center at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GIS Center by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 Final Report for VEGETATION TRENDS IN INDICATOR REGIONS OF EVERGLADES NATIONAL PARK Task Agreement No. P12AC50201 Cooperative Agreement No. H5000-06-0104 Host University No. H5000-10-5040 Date of Report: Feb. 12, 2015 Principle Investigator: Jennifer H. Richards Dept. of Biological Sciences Florida International University Miami, FL 33199 305-348-3102 (phone), 305-348-1986 (FAX) [email protected] (e-mail) Co-Principle Investigator: Daniel Gann FIU GIS/RS Center Florida International University Miami, FL 33199 305-348-1971 (phone), 305-348-6445 (FAX) [email protected] (e-mail) Park Representative: Jimi Sadle, Botanist Everglades National Park 40001 SR 9336 Homestead, FL 33030 305-242-7806 (phone), 305-242-7836 (Fax) FIU Administrative Contact: Susie Escorcia Division of Sponsored Research 11200 SW 8th St. – MARC 430 Miami, FL 33199 305-348-2494 (phone), 305-348-6087 (FAX) 2 Table of Contents Overview ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Just the Facts: North Fork of the St. Lucie River Water Reservation
    North Fork of St. Lucie River, page 1 April 2015 North Fork of the St. Lucie River Water Reservation The joint state-federal Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) identifies restoration of the Indian River Lagoon – South as an integral step in achieving systemwide benefits in the south Florida ecosystem. Subject to extreme salinity variations, the St. Lucie Estuary and Indian River Lagoon together are home to more just the than 50 endangered or threatened species. Restoring a more natural volume, timing and FA CTs distribution of flows to the river, floodplain and estuary will give native plant and animal life a better opportunity for recovery. This fact sheet is provided as a The Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2000 required the South Florida reference to encourage a greater Water Management District to legally protect water intended for the natural system understanding of the various before any federal funding could be authorized to construct the CERP Indian River issues related to managing Lagoon – South project. The District adopted a water reservation rule for the North water in South Florida. Fork of the St. Lucie River, and construction is underway on the C-44 Reservoir and Stormwater Treatment Area components. Defining water reservations • A water reservation is a legal mechanism to set aside water for the protection of fish and wildlife or public health and safety. When a water reservation is in place, quantities and timing of water flows at specific locations are protected for the natural system. The necessary quantities and timing are determined using data which link local hydrology to the needs of fish and wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Plan for Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades Tributaries (EPKOET)
    Environmental Plan for Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades Tributaries (EPKOET) Stephanie Bazan, Larissa Gaul, Vanessa Huber, Nicole Paladino, Emily Tulsky April 29, 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY…………………...………………………………………..4 2. MISSION STATEMENT…………………………………....…………………………………7 3. GOVERNANCE……………………………………………………………………...………...8 4. FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL POLICIES…………………………………………..…..10 5. PROBLEMS AND GOALS…..……………………………………………………………....12 6. SCHEDULE…………………………………....……………………………………………...17 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS…………………………………………....17 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………..……………………....18 2 LIST OF FIGURES Figure A. Map of the Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades Watershed…………………………...4 Figure B. Phosphorus levels surrounding the Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades Watershed…..5 Figure C. Before and after backfilling of the Kissimmee river C-38 canal……………………….6 Figure D. Algae bloom along the St. Lucie River………………………………………………...7 Figure E. Florida’s Five Water Management Districts………………………………………........8 Figure F. Three main aquifer systems in southern Florida……………………………………....14 Figure G. Effect of levees on the watershed………………………………………...…………...15 Figure H. Algal bloom in the KOE watershed…………………………………………...………15 Figure I: Canal systems south of Lake Okeechobee……………………………………………..16 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Primary Problems in the Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades watershed……………...13 Table 2: Schedule for EPKOET……………………………………………………………….…18 3 1. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The Kissimmee Okeechobee Everglades watershed is an area of about
    [Show full text]
  • Everglades to Okeefenokee – a Thousand Miles Through the Heart of Florida
    FLORIDA WILDLIFE CORRIDOR EXPEDITION: EVERGLADES TO OKEEFENOKEE – A THOUSAND MILES THROUGH THE HEART OF FLORIDA The vision of the Florida Wildlife Corridor is to connect natural lands and waters throughout peninsular Florida, from the Everglades to Okeefenokee in southeast Georgia. Despite extensive fragmentation of the landscape in recent decades, a statewide network of connected natural areas is still possible. The first step is raising awareness about the fleeting opportunity we have to connect natural and rural landscapes in order to protect the waters that sustain us, the working farms and ranches that feed us, the forests that clean our air, and the combined habitat these lands provide for Florida’s diverse wildlife, including panthers and black bears. Our goal is to increase public awareness for the Corridor idea through a broad-reaching media campaign, with the Florida Wildlife Corridor Expedition as the center of the outreach strategy. January 17, 2012 marks the kick off the 1000 mile expedition over a 100 day period to increase public awareness and generate support for the Florida Wildlife Corridor. Photographer Carlton Ward Jr, bear biologist Joe Guthrie, conservationist Mallory Lykes Dimmitt and filmmaker Elam Stoltzfus will trek from the Everglades National Park toward Okefenokee National Forest in southern Georgia. They will traverse the wildlife FLORIDA WILDLIFE habitats, watersheds and participating working farms and ranches, which comprise CORRIDOR the Florida Wildlife Corridor opportunity area. KEY ISSUES: The team will document the corridor through photography, video, radio reports, • Protecting and restoring dispersal and daily updates on social media networks, and a host of activities for reporters, migration corridors essential for the landowners, celebrities, conservationists, politicians and other guests.
    [Show full text]
  • Outfall and Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Analysis 2015
    INDIAN RIVER LAGOON OUTFALL AND SEA LEVEL RISE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS 2015 Outfall and Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Analysis Prepared by: The East Central Florida Regional Planning Council April 2016 1 INDIAN RIVER LAGOON OUTFALL AND SEA LEVEL RISE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS 2015 Page intentionally left blank 2 INDIAN RIVER LAGOON OUTFALL AND SEA LEVEL RISE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS 2015 Table of Contents I. Introduction 4 II. Planning Process and Outreach 5 III. GIS Methodology 7 ECFRPC 7 UF GeoPlan 10 IV: County Inundation Analyses 12 Volusia County Vulnerability Analysis 13 Brevard County Vulnerability Analysis 15 Indian River Vulnerability Analysis 17 St. Lucie County Vulnerability Analysis 19 Martin County Vulnerability Analysis 21 Canal System Vulnerability Analysis 23 V: Study Area Inundation Maps 24 High Projection Rate Curve Maps 25 Intermediate Projection Rate Curve Maps 37 Low Projection Rate Curve Maps 49 VI: Maintenance Information 62 VII: Planning Team Contacts 66 VIII: Source Documentation 67 3 INDIAN RIVER LAGOON OUTFALL AND SEA LEVEL RISE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS 2015 SECTION I: Introduction This vulnerability analysis is part of a grant awarded by the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity to the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council to continue the work done for an associated grant awarded in 2014. As part of the 2014-15 planning project, the ECFRPC collected data and mapped all outfalls within the Indian River Lagoon, its connected water bodies and primary canals that flow into the lagoon system. As part of the 2014 project, the planning team also collected data for water quality, outfall ownership, and other important information.
    [Show full text]
  • Everglades Ecosystem Assessment: Water Management and Quality, Eutrophication, Mercury Contamination, Soils and Habitat
    United States Region 4 Science & Ecosystem EPA 904-R-07-001 Environmental Protection Support Division and Water August 2007 Agency Management Division EPA Everglades Ecosystem Assessment: Water Management and Quality, Eutrophication, Mercury Contamination, Soils and Habitat Monitoring for Adaptive Management: A R-EMAP Status Report The Everglades Ecosystem Assessment Program is being conducted by the United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 Science and Ecosystem Support Division, with the Region 4 Water Management Division cooperating. Many entities have contributed to this Program, including the National Park Service, United States Army Corps of Engineers, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida International University, University of Georgia, Battelle Marine Sciences Laboratory, FTN Associates Incorporated, United States Geological Survey, South Florida Water Management District, and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. The Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida and the Seminole Tribe of Indians allowed sampling to take place on their federal reservations within the Everglades. EPA 904-R-07-001 August 2007 EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT Water Management and Quality, Eutrophication, Mercury Contamination, Soils and Habitat Monitoring for Adaptive Management A R-EMAP Status Report U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 Science and Ecosystem Support Division Athens, Georgia This document is available on the Internet for browsing or download at: <http://www.epa.gov/region4/sesd/sesdpub_completed.html> Everglades R-EMAP is a program of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Region 4 Laboratory [the Science and Ecosystem Support Division (SESD) in Athens, Georgia], with the Region 4 Water Management Division (WMD) cooperating. Everglades R-EMAP is managed by Peter Kalla of SESD.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades
    Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades The Third Biennial Review, 2010 Although the progress of environmental restoration projects in the Florida Everglades remains slow overall, there have been improvements in the pace of restoration and in the relationship between the federal and state partners over the last two years. However, the importance of several challenges related to water quantity and quality have become clear, highlighting the diffi culty in achieving restoration goals for all ecosystem components in all portions of the Everglades. Rigorous scientifi c analyses of the tradeoffs between water quality and quantity and between the hydrologic requirements of Everglades features and species are needed to inform future prioritization and funding decisions. haped by the slow As part of fl ow of water Congress’s mandate Sfrom Lake in the Water Resources Okeechobee to Florida Development Act of Bay, the Everglades was 2000, and with support once a large and diverse from the U.S. Army aquatic ecosystem with Corps of Engineers, millions of acres of the Department of the wetlands, sawgrass Interior, and the state plains, ridges, sloughs, of Florida, the National and tree islands that Research Council provided sanctuary to convened a committee a rich array of plant and Figure 1. Canals and levees have radically altered the fl ow of water in the Everglades, and to conduct a series animal life. However, development has reduced the area of the of biennial evaluations over the past century, ecosystem by half. Source: David Policansky, NRC of progress toward the construction of an achieving the natural extensive network of system restoration canals and levees for fl ood control, water supply, goals of the Restoration Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Plan 6 Project Kissimmee River
    Upper Chain of Lakes Lake Kissimmee Indian River Lagoon Plan 6 Project Kissimmee River St. Lucie Estuary Lake Stop the destructive Okeechobee discharges to the Caloosahatchee Estuary Northern Estuaries and Everglades Restore the River of Grass Biscayne Ba Florida Bay Coral Reefs Plan 6 Project Flow Historic, Current & Plan 6 Project Flows Plan 6 Project – Stop destructive discharges to the Northern Estuaries and Restore the River of Grass www.FloridaOcean.org Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) Sugarcane Farmlands (Needed for Project) Pubic Lands (Existing) Plan 6 Project – Stop destructive discharges to the Northern Estuaries and Restore the River of Grass www.FloridaOcean.org C-10 A 1. Becomes THE primary outflow for water from Lake Okeechobee S-352 2. Stops destructive discharge releases from S-351 S-354 Lake Okeechobee to the Northern Estuaries 3. Replaces the Lake Okeechobee ASR Project of CERP with a project of greater flow & capacity 4. Restores water flows south from the Lake to the Everglades 5. Provides for healthy water levels in Lake Okeechobee 6. Maintains Water Quantity, Quality, Timing and Distribution for Everglades Restoration WCA 3A Plan 6 Project – Stop destructive discharges to the Northern Estuaries and Restore the River of Grass www.FloridaOcean.org Lake Okeechobee ASR Project- 200 wells – Proposed CERP Current Average Annual 1548 cfs DischargeWhere Volumes the Water Current MaximumGoes Flood Based on 1996-2005 Data Discharge Rates S-308 7300 cfs St Lucie Estuary 20 % C-10 A 442 K AF per Year 900 cfs S-77 2.21 M AF
    [Show full text]