Restoring the Heart of the Everglades: the Challenges and Benefts Stephen E
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DigitalCommons@Florida International University Florida International University FIU Digital Commons FCE LTER Journal Articles FCE LTER 2014 Restoring the Heart of the Everglades: The Challenges and Benefts Stephen E. Davis Everglades Fundation G. Melodie Naja Aida Arik Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/fce_lter_journal_articles Recommended Citation Davis, S.E., G.M. Naja, A. Arik. 2014. Restoring the Heart of the Everglades: The hC allenges and Benefits. National Wetlands Newsletter 36: 5-9. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation through the Florida Coastal Everglades Long-Term Ecological Research program under Cooperative Agreements #DBI-0620409 and #DEB-9910514. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in the material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. This work is brought to you for free and open access by the FCE LTER at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in FCE LTER Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. National Wetlands Newsletter, Vol. 36, No. 6, Copyright © 2014 Environmental Law Institute ® Washington, DC, USA Restoring the Heart of the Everglades: The Challenges and Benefts Te slow pace of Everglades restoration has drawn concern from all sides of political afliations, non- profts, and industries alike. With such a large-scale restoration process underway, the overwhelming task of determining how and when to implement the numerous aspects of the restoration plan have become a challenge for all those working towards restoring the historic fow of water south. By Stephen E. Davis, G. Melodie Naja, and Aida Arik verglades restoration is not occurring fast enough. designed, or proven to be a viable solution on a large According to whom? The National Academy of scale. Furthermore, there were insufficient water quality Sciences in its most recent biennial report to Con- improvement measures in place when CERP was passed Egress.1 Stakeholders and environmentalists concur, cit- ing the latest science and agency reports2 that point to a continued decline in the ecosystem’s vital signs including wading birds, fish, and landscape pattern. Even politi- cians on both sides of the aisle have agreed that Ever- glades restoration is a national priority. To make it an even more pressing issue, there is also a growing body of evidence to suggest that restoring the Everglades is our best defense against an uncertain future climate and would allow for a more natural transition of habitats as sea levels continue to rise.3 We all agree that something needs to be done and soon. Surprisingly, there is an equally broad consensus on what needs to be done. In order to restore the Everglades, we must reconnect the fow of freshwater from Lake Okeechobee to this vast oligotrophic wetland dominated by sawgrass ridges, sloughs, and tree islands. Tis hydro- logic reconnection will have the dual beneft of reduc- ing the massive discharges of polluted freshwater to the Caloosahatchee River and St. Lucie River Estuaries, while providing the freshwater fow needs of habitats across the River of Grass and important estuaries to the south such as Florida Bay and Biscayne Bay (Figure 1). We also know that restoring this fow to the Everglades will enhance recharge of the Biscayne Aquifer, thus improving south Florida’s water supply for the future. The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), which was signed into law by President Wil- Figure 1: Map of south Florida showing the South Florida Water 4 Management District (SFWMD) that spans the historic Everglades liam Clinton in 2000, provided the consensus road map from the Kissimmee River-Chain of Lakes all the way to Florida Bay. for replumbing the ecosystem to move more water south. Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) are represented by dark parcels However, there were essential water storage components along the southern rim of the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA). associated with CERP that were not sufficiently tested, Map provided courtesy of the SFWMD. NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014 5 National Wetlands Newsletter, Vol. 36, No. 6, Copyright © 2014 Environmental Law Institute ® Washington, DC, USA and no consensus opinion on a phosphorus threshold that taxpayers. This is the largest treatment wetland system in would protect remaining Everglades habitat. the world, yet it is still not enough to meet the 10 ppb TP criterion for the ecosystem. RESOLVING THE WATER QUALITY ISSUE In 2012, the state of Florida unveiled a water quality plan In 2003, the state of Florida adopted a water quality crite- called Restoration Strategies.9 Tis was an $880-million rion for total phosphorus (TP) of 10 parts per billion (ppb) efort to boost the capacity and efciency of the current wet- for most Everglades marshes.5 Tis standard was based land treatment system through an additional 6,500 acres of on years of research and feld observations noting dra- STAs and shallow Flow Equalization Basins (FEBs) to maxi- matic long-term changes mize efciency of STAs. in habitat when TP con- Moreover, a discharge limit centrations were above for the STAs was set to the 10 ppb threshold (see ensure that waters reach- infographic in Figure 2). ing the Everglades would Subsequent legal action meet the water quality cri- and federal court rul- terion of 10 ppb TP. Te ings6 would establish that existing network of STAs water reaching the Ever- and the fxes from Restora- glades must be sufciently tion Strategies apply to cur- cleansed of agricultural rent infows only. In order pollutants (mainly phos- to deliver additional fow phorus) to protect sen- to the ecosystem—which sitive Everglades marsh is what Everglades resto- habitats. To resolve the ration is largely about— lawsuit between the fed- additional water treatment eral government and the infrastructure, beyond Res- state of Florida, a settle- toration Strategies, must be ment agreement was included in the plan. reached obligating the OW TO ESTORE THE state to implement Best Figure 2: Infographic showing Everglades marsh habitat change resulting H R Management Practices from chronic phosphorus pollution (above the 10 ppb TP threshold), EVERGLADES THEN? (BMPs) for source control including a loss of periphyton, invasion and expansion of cattail, loss of While stakeholders across habitat and species diversity, and soil degradation. in the Everglades Agri- the region agree on the cultural Area (EAA) and concept of “flowing water build treatment wetlands called Stormwater Treatment south,” some believe that it can be achieved in a single Areas (STAs) for phosphorus removal. increment of restoration. Since the summer of 2013, when STAs are a costly, yet reliable technology for reducing discharges from Lake Okeechobee to the Caloosahatchee TP loads to the Everglades. A recent estimate shows that it and St. Lucie Rivers wreaked havoc on water quality in costs an average of about $921 for every kilogram of phos- those estuaries, there has been much public outcry and phorus removed by STAs in the EAA.7 In terms of sur- discussion of everything from near-term solutions to a face water storage solutions, conventional above-ground panacea. This is understandable given that livelihoods storage is the most reliable and relatively cost-effective and economies are tied to the environmental impacts of solution. Both of these treatment and storage technolo- these discharge events. The reality is that we are unable gies require the acquisition and conversion of lands for to relieve the issues of the Caloosahatchee, the St. Lucie, these purposes and subsequent connection to existing and the Everglades in a single increment of restoration, flow paths into the Everglades. Given the location of the and it will take time. EAA between Lake Okeechobee and the remaining River Why? First, it would be too costly. For every incre- of Grass, the EAA is the best location for these features. ment of water volume diverted back to the Everglades, a To date, the state of Florida has invested nearly $2 billion corresponding increment of storage and treatment is also in the construction and operation of almost 57,000 acres needed because the source water has about 20 times the of STAs8 in the southern EAA—largely at the expense of amount of phosphorus than the ecosystem can withstand. 6 national wetlands newsletter National Wetlands Newsletter, Vol. 36, No. 6, Copyright © 2014 Environmental Law Institute ® Washington, DC, USA Storage and treatment components require additional land In August 2014, the Corps released the Final Project acquisition and signifcant earthworks that reach into the Implementation Report and Environmental Impact State- hundreds of millions of dollars. Restoration also involves ment for CEPP.11 In reality, CEPP is part of CERP. It is a removing key barriers to fow such as canals and levees reconsideration and repackaging of several CERP projects. and bridging old roads such as Tamiami Trail (US-41), Tese CERP projects were repackaged to maximize ben- known as decompartmentalization, in order for water to efts in the central Everglades using state-of-the-art hydro- fow freely as a sheet across the land rather than pond- logic models and modern processing power that allowed ing against man-made structures. And, as more fow is for screening of options for storage and treatment in a frac- restored back to the ecosystem, food control for adjacent tion of the time it took in the 1990s. Further, with an developed and agricultural lands must be reevaluated and additional 15 years of monitoring and research, we have maintained at existing levels—requiring changes to opera- generated a richer scientifc understanding of the ecosys- tions or additional infrastructure.