Santa Fe River Springs Restoration Action Plan Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG #

Introduction Contents The Santa Fe River, located The Howard T. Odum Florida in the Springs Heartland of Springs Institute organized a Introduction…………………………………………………... 2 north central Florida, is the group of stakeholders Need for a Blue Revolution..………………. 4 discharge point for at least (including participants from Character of a Basin—A Karst Environment………… 5 36 named springs (Figure 1). Geography………………………………………. 5 the Santa Fe River Springs Springshed and Hydrogeology..………….. 6 As a natural resource and Basin Working Group) in Land Use/Land Cover…….…... 6 popular recreational destina- June 2011 to develop the Hydrology of the Basin………….…………. 8 tion, these springs are pivot- Santa Fe Springs Restoration Precipitation………..…………… 8 al for the economic and en- Action Plan. The Restoration Groundwater Recharge……... 8 vironmental health of a sev- Action Plan is a compilation Stream Flows……….…………………………. 9 en-county area populated by of the best available science Floridan Aquifer Levels……………………... 10 over 700,000 residents. documenting the condition Spring Flows……………………………………. 10 of the Santa Fe River and Water Withdrawals ………………………… 11 The Santa Fe River Springs outlines a recovery plan for Water Balance Summary………………….. 12 Basin Working Group, orga- this collection of springs. Impaired Waters or Swimming Holes?...... 13 nized in 1998, has raised Water Quality………………………………….. 13 awareness of the threats to Santa Fe River………………………………….. 13 the Santa Fe River and its Springs…………………………………………... 13 springs. This awareness is Groundwater Nitrate Concen- helping the public under- trations...... 14 Recreational and Economic Resources—A North stand the continuing decline Central Florida Playground……………..……………….. 14 of these springs and the Recreational Facilities………………………. 15 Floridan Aquifer system up- Economics………….…………………………… 15 on which the springs depend Ecosystem Services…………………………... 16 for clean and abundant wa- Regulatory Protections– A Restoration Roadmap... 16 ter. It is through public Summary……………………………………………..……….. 18 awareness that the health of Key Findings…………………………..……….. 19 the springs, the Santa Fe Riv- Recommended Actions……………………… 19 er, and the Floridan Aquifer Water Quantity………..………………………. 19 can begin to recover. Water Quality………….………………………. 19 Other Recommendations..…... 19

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 2

This Action Plan describes the following principal findings:  The Santa Fe River and its springs  It is essential to reduce the over- are important to the economy of all rate of groundwater use until at least seven counties in north a safe yield can be quantified central Florida with an estimated that protects the natural re- average annual direct economic sources of the Santa Fe River value of over $20 million. Springs. This reduction will re- quire water conservation and re-  Average flows have declined sig- use as well as a regional cost vs. nificantly in the Lower Santa Fe benefit analysis for any new River and in its springs. Flow de- Consumptive Use Permits. clines are partially due to a multi- year drought. Increased pumping  Elevated nitrate concentrations of groundwater throughout north cause nutrient impairment and Florida and south Georgia also increased populations of fila- contribute to declines in spring mentous algae and loss of natu- flows. Future increases in ground- ral plant communities. These water use are likely to further re- changes provide visible evidence duce spring and river flows. of impairment. Impaired springs have reduced value for fish and  Reductions in spring and river wildlife, human health, and hu- flows result in aesthetic and recre- man recreation. ational impacts through changes in water color, loss of visible  Groundwater feeding the Santa spring boils, less flushing of pollu- Fe Springs is contaminated by tants, lower water levels, greater nitrate nitrogen. The largest growth of noxious algae, and loss source of nitrogen in the Santa of base flow in downstream rivers. Fe springshed appears to be ag- Reductions in spring flow also re- ricultural fertilizer use, followed duce aquatic productivity that by urban fertilizer use, septic supports fish and other wildlife. tanks, and municipal wastewater disposal. Nitrogen loads result-  It is critical that we better under- ing from human activities in the stand the impacts of groundwater Santa Fe springshed will need to pumping on springs and river be significantly reduced to meet flows. Steps can be taken to avoid the proposed nitrate water quali- future impacts and to reverse the ty criterion of 0.35 mg/L. current impacts due to man-made causes.  The most immediate solution for reducing nitrate is to reduce the

use of nitrogen fertilizer in the vulnerable portions of the springshed and to upgrade hu- man and animal waste disposal methods. Incentives and regula- tory controls should be consid- ered to achieve this goal.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 3

Need for a Blue Revolution From the Florida Keys to the Pen- Springs are one of the most im- sacola beaches, tourism is the portant economic engines in north largest economic driver in the Florida, and pure and abundant state. Many Florida residents groundwater is the fuel that makes know about a well-kept secret – those engines run. An increased awareness and com- the states’ 900+ springs. When Yet, in spite of their recognized im- almost 1,200 Gainesville Sun mitment by the public and by local, portance to the residents and econ- readers were polled to determine state, and federal leaders is neces- omy of north Florida, springs are “Florida’s greatest natural won- sary to provide restoration and fu- being diminished by a wide range der”, the largest number (34%) of human activities. In an effort to ture protection of the Santa Fe River answered “springs and rivers”, build public awareness of these is- Springs. There are many actions that higher than “beaches” (26%), “the sues, this Action Plan summarizes Everglades” (23%), “the can be implemented immediately to evidence of springs decline and de- Keys” (7%), “coral reefs” (6%), and help reduce the problems and begin tails the types of activities that are “caves” and “National Forests” at reversing the deteriorating condi- causing these negative changes. (2%) (Gainesville Sun November tions in these springs. 14, 2011). Careless and wasteful practices in Specific recommendations to re- north Florida are at the root of Local residents flock to the store the Santa Fe River Springs are these changes in springs’ health. A springs along the Santa Fe River “Blue Revolution” is needed to cre- summarized in this Restoration Ac- on weekends throughout the ate a public water ethic throughout tion Plan. They require a shift from long, hot summer months. Tubers north Florida to treat water as the focusing on the short-term and tak- ride the current from the springs’ valuable resource it is and to pre- perpetual flows. Fishermen spy ing a longer-view for conservation of vent its waste and pollution (Cynthia their wary prey in the transparent clean and abundant groundwater- Barnett 2011, Beacon Press). As Cyn- spring runs and rivers. Cave di- one of the most important natural thia Barnett points out, a water ethic vers from around the world ex- is needed so all residents preserve resources in north Florida. Currently, plore the black ether of the Flori- our groundwater, and treat the Flor- our groundwater is neither clean nor dan Aquifer. idan Aquifer like the important nat- abundant, as evidenced so clearly by Kayaking and canoeing have be- ural resource that it is. A Blue Revo- the condition of our springs and come the preferred pastime for lution and associated water ethic spring-fed rivers. Fortunately thousands of Floridians and will be the solution to protecting groundwater is a renewable resource “ecotourists” attracted to Florida’s the springs along the Santa Fe River. in north central Florida. wild rivers and springs.

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 4

Character of the Basin -A Karst Environment Figure 1  A map of springs and other karst Geography features along a segment of the The Santa Fe River is a second- The Santa Fe River is underlain Santa Fe River. A total of 44 order tributary that flows into by porous limestone formations springs, estavelles, siphons, and the Suwannee River (Figure 2). that comprise the Floridan Aqui- swallets are shown along this seg- The river is naturally divided into fer system. The entire flow of the ment of the Santa Fe River. two sections: the Upper Santa Fe Santa Fe River goes underground River extending from Lake Santa at a sinkhole at River Sink in Source: ACEPD 2007 Fe downstream to O’Leno State O’Leno State Park. The water Park; and the Lower Santa Fe flows underground for approxi- River extending from O’Leno mately three miles through sub- State Park down to its conflu- terranean caves and returns to ence with the Suwannee River. the surface at River Rise in O’Leno State Park. Groundwater Soil permeability and confine- from at least 36 springs from the ment of the aquifer distinguish Floridan Aquifer (e.g. Poe, the Upper Santa Fe River from Gilchrist Blue, Ginnie, Rum Island, the Lower Santa Fe River. The etc.) discharges into the Santa Fe watershed of the Upper Santa Fe River after the river emerges is underlain by up to 100 feet of from underground. Further low permeability soils which downstream, the Ichetucknee confine the Floridan Aquifer sys- River - a spring-fed river— tem below. The Lower Santa Fe discharges into the Lower Santa River is dominated by surficial Fe River. Karst features, com- limestone karst geology, very prised of sinkholes, springs, little confinement of the under- estavelles, suckholes, and swal- lying Floridan Aquifer, highly lets, illustrate the interdepend- permeable soils, and generally ence of surface and groundwater drier plant communities. along the Lower Santa Fe River.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 5

Figure 2 Map of the Suwannee River Water Management District illustrating the location of the Santa Fe and Suwannee Rivers in Florida. The Santa Fe River is the largest tributary of the Suwannee River in terms of mean discharge and water- shed area. The colored dots and river segments represent principal water bodies slated for de- velopment of minimum flows and levels by the Suwannee River Water Management District. Source SRWMD

Springshed and Hydrogeology

The Lower Santa Fe River, starting at the River Rise in O’Leno State Park, is predominantly a spring-fed stream with most of its water originating as discharge of springs from the Floridan Aq- uifer. Figure 3 defines the Santa Fe River springshed—the area of land under which water in the Floridan Aquifer discharges at springs along the Santa Fe River. The springshed is of great im- portance to springs protection because the springshed defines the land area where water infiltrates into the ground, recharges the Floridan Aquifer, and discharges at specific springs. It is the activities in the springshed—groundwater pumping, fertilizer use, human and animal waste disposal, stormwater runoff—that affect the quantity and quality of water discharging at the Land Use/Land Cover springs. The springshed surrounding the Santa Fe About 70+ years ago, the Santa Fe River springshed is estimated to have been about 1,775 square miles in size. By 2008, the San- River can be divided into five principal ta Fe River springshed had declined considerably to a current types of landscapes: size of about 1,114 square miles. These estimates indicate that  Upland forest (40% of total area; there has been a 37% reduction in the size of the springshed both natural forests and planted pine that supplies water to the Santa Fe River Springs (the methods forests) and data used to estimate the springsheds vary so there is un- certainty associated with this calculation). The reduced spring-  Agriculture & rangeland (25%) shed is attributed to groundwater pumping from municipal  Urban, built-up, transportation, & wells, agricultural wells, and private wells. It is these and other utilities (17%) groundwater withdrawals that remove water from the Floridan  Wetlands (15%) Aquifer, lower the level of the aquifer, and diminish the flow of water that discharges at the Santa Fe River Springs.  Water (2%)

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 6

Figure 3 The estimated 2008 Santa Fe River springshed that encompasses parts of Alachua, Bradford, Clay, Columbia, Gilchrist, Levy, and Union Counties. The springshed includes all or parts of the following municipal areas: Gaines- ville, Alachua, Keystone Heights, High Springs, Newberry, Archer, Bronson, and Lake Butler. The current Santa Fe River springshed has been reduced by about 661 square miles in the past 70+ years as a result of intensive INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS groundwater withdrawal activities. THAT WORK FOR YOUR BUSINESS. Relative topography is depicted in this figure and ranges in ground elevation from about 50 to 100 feet above mean sea level. Water quality in the Floridan Aquifer and at the Santa Fe River Springs is directly affected by the land use activities that oc- cur in the springshed surrounding the springs. When land use activities are intensive and consist of large or consistent applications of nutrients and pollutants to the soil, then these intensive activities threaten the quality of water in the Flori- dan Aquifer and in the flow of water discharging at the springs. Agriculture in the Santa Fe springshed includes row crops, pastures, planted pine stands, pine straw production, and confined animal facilities. These agricultural land areas are subjected to a combination of tilling, mowing, fertilizing, irri- gating, and disposal of animal waste. In areas of the Santa Fe springshed where soil permeability is high and the aquifer is unconfined, aquifer water quality is vulnerable to leaching of nutrients from fertilizers and animal waste. Likewise, residential, commercial, and industrial sites can af- fect the Floridan Aquifer through discharge of untreated stormwater, leaching of nutrients from treated wastewater discharge sites (i.e., sprayfields and discharge basins), and leaching of fertilizers and pesticides from yards and golf courses. Cumulatively, all of these sources have the potential to diminish the quality of water in the Floridan Aquifer and ultimately, the quality of water that discharges at the springs.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 7

Figure 4 Hydrology of the Springshed Total annual rainfall measured at nine weather stations in the watershed of the Precipitation Groundwater Recharge Santa Fe River between 1903 and 2010. The median annual rainfall during this period Rainfall and resulting ground- Although rainfall is the prima- water recharge is the primary ry source of groundwater re- was 51 inches and varied between 33 and source of water for springs. charge, not all the rain that 68 inches. Linear regression indicates a The long-term median rainfall reaches the ground infiltrates positive but non-significant trend in rainfall in the Santa Fe River spring- into the soil. Some of the rain- amounts during the entire period-of- shed is about 51 inches per fall runs off into surface wa- record. The five-year and 10-year moving year. While there is considera- ters. A large portion of rainfall ble year-to-year variation in is lost to the atmosphere averages are overlaid on the annual trend rainfall totals (33 to 68 inches through evapotranspiration chart. The LOESS line provides a locally- per year) there has been no (ET). ET depends on climatic weighted trend line that illustrates the ob- significant upward or down- factors and land use, and can served range of rainfall changes during a ward change in the long-term account for over half of the shorter time frame. Source: iAIMS Climatic rainfall in north central Florida volume of rainfall. Runoff is over the last 107-year period dependent upon local geolo- Data, Texas A&M University (Figure 4). Detailed analysis of gy and is greater in the east- (www.beaumont.tamu.edu/ these data indicate a relatively ern portion of the springshed. CLIMATICDATA ). steady increase in rainfall to- After ET and runoff there is an tals during the first half of the average of only about 15 to period-of-record (about 12 18 inches of rain per year that percent) and a steady decline can potentially recharge the during the last 50 years (about Floridan Aquifer. The only wa- 13 percent). ter available for both the springs and human ground- water uses is the net rainfall that recharges the aquifer.

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 8

Character of the Basin - A Karst Environment

Figure 5 Stream Flows Daily flow values at the US 47 Flow in the Lower Santa Fe River segments, rainfall into the river, gauge near Fort White and the is measured at two locations- up- and runoff from the surrounding locally-weighted smoothed trend stream at US 441 north of High land areas. line (LOESS) for these flow data. Springs and downstream near the Figure 5 illustrates the flow of This trend line shows the relatively US 47 bridge south of Fort White. water measured at the down- consistent average flow of about From 1931 to 1976, the upstream stream gauge (at the Fort White flow gauge recorded an average 1,600 cfs at this station until the station) in the Santa Fe River. flow of about 900 cubic feet per 1960s when the average flow in- These data illustrate a significant second (cfs) while the down- creased to about 1,800 cfs. Since downward trend in average stream gauge recorded an aver- flows at this station since about about 1968 this trend has been age flow of 1,643 cfs. The increase 1968. Average river flow at this declining at a relatively fast rate in flows between the upstream station has declined from about and downstream segments of the to an average of about 1,040 cfs 1,600 cfs to about 900 cfs — a river are a result of spring flow from 2001-2010: a flow decline of decline of more than 40 percent. into the river between the two more than 40 percent.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 9

Figure 6 Groundwater levels in a long- term monitoring well located in High Springs about one mile east of Poe Springs. The average level of the Floridan Aquifer has de- clined about three feet over the 30-year period of record. This change appears to be relatively small compared to the overall variation in the aquifer level (about 10 feet) but may explain the observed decline in the aver- age flow at Poe Springs of about 22 cfs over this 30-year period. Also, note that extreme low lev- els appear to be lower in the sec- Floridan Aquifer Levels Spring Flows ond half of this interval (about The water level in the Floridan Poe Spring is the only spring along the Santa Fe River where flow was 30.4 ft MSL) compared to the first Aquifer is measured in moni- toring wells throughout the measured prior to 1972. The aver- half of the time period (about 32 spring recharge area. The wa- age flow at Poe Spring between ft MSL). ter level in the aquifer varies 1917 and 1972 was 72 cfs. From over time in response to re- 1972 to present, the average flow at charge from rainfall and Poe Spring has declined to 50 cfs— groundwater withdrawals. Fig- representing a 31 percent decline. ure 6 illustrates the water level During drier periods when rainfall, in the Floridan Aquifer over a and runoff are minimal, spring flow 30-year period from one well in the Santa Fe can be estimated by located near High Springs, measuring the base flow in the river, near the Santa Fe River i.e., the average groundwater- Springs. This well depicts high dominated flow in the river. The year-to-year variability in water base flow (during an annual 7-day levels and has ranged from low flow period) at the US 47 gauge about 30 to 40 ft above mean on the Lower Santa Fe River has sea level. This well also indi- shown a downward trend over the cates a statistically significant last 40 years. From 1927 to 1970 decline over the 30-year peri- the average spring flow at this sta- od of record. The lower tion was about 1,000 cfs. Since 1970 groundwater levels can directly the flow has declined to an average result in lower flow at nearby of about 650 cfs— this 35% decline springs. is yet another indicator of declining water levels in the Floridan Aquifer, Santa Fe River and springs.

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 10

Figure 7 The “Bucket” provides a useful analogy for understanding the relationship be- tween spring flows and the level of wa- ter in the Floridan Aquifer System. Rain- fall (the hose) is the primary source of water that fills the aquifer and ultimate- ly feeds the springs. While the Floridan Approx. 300 to 800 feet thick Springs Aquifer holds a vast quantity of fresh water, only the top few feet of water is available to feed springs. When this Water Withdrawals groundwater level is lowered by a com- bination of drought (less recharge), ur- Most wells in the Santa Fe Groundwater withdrawals in ban development (increased impervious springshed are drilled into the 2005 in the 7-county Santa Fe top few hundred feet of the springshed were estimated to surfaces), and human withdrawals Floridan Aquifer. In this area be 181 million gallons per (pumping from wells), the surface of the of Florida, the freshwater por- day (280 cfs). Agriculture is aquifer is lowered and spring flow de- tion of the Floridan Aquifer is the largest user (40%) fol- clines. Additional aquifer drawdown approximately 300 to 800 feet lowed closely by public sup- below this level dries up springs. thick. However, surface water ply (35%). Private domestic bodies such as lakes, rivers, wells represent the next high- Source: SRWMD. wetlands, and springs are typi- est user (17%) and other uses cally hydrologically connected account for the remaining to the upper portion of the amount (8%). Both crop and Floridan Aquifer. A bucket full landscape irrigation waste of water provides a useful about 70% to ET. Based on analogy between the relation- the measured declines in the ship between water level in Floridan Aquifer, declining the Floridan Aquifer and flow spring flow at Poe Springs, in the springs (Figure 7). and declining base flow in Since spring flow is connected the Santa Fe River, the exist- to the upper level of the Flori- ing groundwater uses already dan Aquifer, a small decline in exceed the rates of ground- Necessary Actions: the Floridan Aquifer level can water withdrawal that can  Encourage the adoption of a have a dramatic effect on flow sustain a healthy spring and public water ethic and spark the in the springs. river system. beginnings of a “Blue Revolu- tion” in Florida.  Record and track existing groundwater pumping rates.  Implement water conservation programs with strict enforce- ment of watering restrictions.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 11

1800 6

Figure 8 LOESS Curves US 47 1600 Observed trends (LOESS curves) for US 441 5 y = ‐0.0001x + 9.6788 Rainfall (monthly) 1400 rainfall in the Santa Fe springshed and R2 = 0.447

flows at the US 441 (near High 1200 4 y = ‐0.0849x + 4322 2 s) ) Springs) and US 47 (near Ft. White) f R = 0.4082 in (c

1000 (

ll ge a r 3 a

stations in the Santa Fe River. Over the in f h a sc 800 R past 20 years, rainfall monthly totals Di 600 2 have declined about 20 percent while flows at US 441 have declined about 400 y = ‐0.0754x + 3338.6 1 2 62 percent and flows downstream at 200 R = 0.4154

US 47 have declined about 40 percent. 0 0 10/1/1992 6/28/1995 3/24/1998 12/18/2000 9/14/2003 6/10/2006 3/6/2009 Springshed and Hydrogeology Water Balance Summary Rainfall is the only significant input of water for the Santa Fe River. Based on a review of the available data, the estimated pre-development average flow in the Santa Fe River at the US 47 station was about 1,640 cfs. The current (2001-2010) esti- mated annual average flow at the US 47 station is about 1,040 cfs. While rainfall totals have declined about 20 percent over this period, average flows at US 441 and at US 47 in the Santa Fe River have declined between 40 and 60 percent (Figure 8). This discrepancy indicates that rainfall changes are not the only cause of flow reductions in the Santa Fe River Springs.

Figure 9 Photograph of floating mats of filamen- tous algae in the Lower Santa Fe River Springs in 2012. Evidence like this con- vinced Florida environmental officials to list the springs as impaired under the U.S. Clean Water Act. A total maximum daily load (TMDL) for nitrate in the low- er Santa Fe River and its springs was established in 2008 and requires that nitrate concentrations be reduced to less than 0.35 mg/L. Source: FDEP 2008.

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 12

Impaired Waters or Swimming Holes?

Water Quality

The water chemistry of the Santa Fe The total mass of nitrate nitro- River naturally changes from up- gen transported by the Santa Fe stream to downstream because of River can be estimated on an the surrounding landscape. The up- annual basis by multiplying av- per Santa Fe River is a black-water, erage flows by average nitrate acidic, soft water river because of di- concentrations. The average rect runoff through poorly drained nitrate mass during the past 20 swamp lands. The lower Santa Fe years at US 47 was about 817 River is dominated by spring waters tons per year, nearly 10 times with naturally high dissolved solids, the estimated predevelopment hardness, alkalinity, and pH from its nitrate load of about 80 tons per passage through the limestone aqui- year. Key Findings: fer. Springs  The average nitrate load during Nitrate nitrogen concentrations in the past 20 years in the Santa the lower Santa Fe River have been Average nitrate concentrations Fe at US 47 was about 817 tons in the Santa Fe River Springs steadily rising since at least the per year, nearly 10 times the 1960s, from their estimated pre- over the past decade have estimated predevelopment development concentrations of ranged from a low of about 0.2 about 0.05 mg/l, to an average of mg/L in the Hornsby Spring load. about 0.7 mg/L today. The lower Group, to a high of about 1.8  Average nitrate concentrations Santa Fe River was added to the mg/L in downstream springs. at some Santa Fe River Springs Nitrate concentrations continue State’s “Impaired Waters List” in have increased by more than 2008 for nutrients (nitrate nitrogen) to rise in the two downstream 3,000% over the last 20 years. and for low dissolved oxygen. Elevat- springs (Ginnie and Gilchrist ed nitrate concentrations in the San- Blue) but may be declining in  The total estimated nitrogen ta Fe River result in an increased fre- the more upstream springs. Av- load to the entire Lower Santa quency of algal blooms (Figure 9), erage nitrate concentrations at Fe River watershed was esti- some Santa Fe River Springs especially during low-flow periods mated by the Florida Depart- when the water is clear (dominated have increased by more than by artesian groundwater) and has 3,000% over the past 20 years. ment of Environmental Protec- the highest nitrate concentrations. tion as 21,000 tons per year.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 13

Figure 10 Groundwater nitrate concentrations meas- ured between 2000 and 2004 for the state of Florida. The colored legend on the right refers to concentrations of nitrate nitrogen in units of mg/L (parts per million). The inset provides a blowup of the area of the Santa Fe springshed. The majority of the data are from Floridan Aquifer wells. Source: Wetland Solutions, Inc. (unpublished data). Groundwater Nitrate Concentrations Alachua County The data above indicate significant increas- es in nitrate concentrations throughout much of the Floridan Aquifer over the past five decades. Figure 10 is a Florida ground- water nitrate map based on data collected between 2000 and 2004. Areas colored blue Recreation and Economics - are closest to pre-development levels of nitrate (0.05 mg/L) and are characterized by A North-Central Florida Playground minimal aquifer vulnerability (presence of The springs along the Santa groundwater to supply water adequate confining layers above the Flori- Fe River and their sister to the rivers. dan Aquifer) or the presence of relatively springs on the Ichetucknee and the Suwannee Rivers - a Today’s intensive agricultural unaltered forest lands and wetlands. Green total of over 200 major practices can only be contin- areas correspond to areas where the springs - form the Springs ued by unsustainable “mining” of the remaining groundwater nitrate concentration is close Heartland. People flock to the Floridan Aquifer system. to or above the levels known to be harmful springs year round to fish, Much of the agricultural to springs (0.35 mg/L). The color shades kayak, canoe, camp, snorkel, swim, cave dive, tube, and re- economy is directly depend- from yellow through red represent areas lax. Visitors from more than ent on groundwater that where aquifer nitrate concentrations are 40 countries around the world would otherwise feed the well above levels that cause impairment in return time after time to ex- springs and river. springs and other surface water bodies. The plore the springs. Thus, the economy of north- inset map depicts recent groundwater ni- Economies throughout the central Florida is supported trate concentrations in the Santa Fe spring- Springs Heartland in north by the Santa Fe River, its springs, and clean and abun- shed. Groundwater nitrate levels are lowest Florida are reliant upon flow- ing, pure, healthy springs and dant groundwater. The only in the confined portions of the springshed way to ensure this resource in the east and highest in the unconfined the river that they feed. With- out springs there would be no for future generations is to portion of the aquifer under the western limit use of groundwater in portion of the springshed. the Springs Heartland.

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 14

Recreational Facilities Economics

More than 700,000 people live in Many private businesses are direct- the seven counties (Alachua, Brad- ford, Gilchrist, Union, Columbia, ly or indirectly dependent upon Levy, and Clay) surrounding the the health of the springs and the Santa Fe River and its springshed. Santa Fe River. A sampling of the These residents are sustained by local businesses and their estimat- the same water sources as the ed annual gross income totals springs and river – the Floridan Aq- more than $20 million per year uifer System. With the exception of the Santa Fe River and its springs, as follows: there are no reliable alternative Directly dependent upon Springs/ surface water supplies available in this area. At current use rates the River: residents of the seven counties that Agricultural users pump an esti-  Private Springs – 260,000 peo- comprise the majority of the mated 40 percent of the total estimated groundwater with- ple per year (estimated as springshed pump about 181 mil- $5,200,000) lion gallons of water per day. Pub- drawals in the Santa Fe spring-  Dive Shops/Outfitters – 10,000 lic utilities utilize large wells to shed. Much of this farmland is not suited to growing high-cash people per year (estimated as supply water to the majority of the $500,000) people, while the rest rely on crops without irrigation. Never-  Canoe/Kayak Outfitters – smaller private wells. theless, if the springs are to be fully restored, some agricultural 15,000 people per year (estimated as $300,000) Just as these public utilities are de- producers will need to shift to pendent on groundwater, so are more sustainable crops that do Indirectly dependent upon the the natural lands, agricultural not require irrigation - such as Springs/River: lands, and natural resources. Pub- managed forests. Monetary in- lic facilities such as Poe Springs centives in the form of conser-  Local Businesses – 100,000 Park, boat launching facilities along vation subsidies will be needed patrons per year (estimated as $3,000,000) the Santa Fe River, O’Leno State to compensate these producers Park, and other public lands would for the reduced economic return  Local Lodging – 20,000 guests lose much or all of their value to of these less water-intensive and per year (estimated as $1,000,000) the public if the springs and river more sustainable practices. did not flow or became highly pol-  Water Bottling Facilities – em- luted. ploy up to 200, use local ser- vices, and invest in springshed protection/monitoring (estimated as $10,000,000)

These estimates do not include the

portion of the indirect economic benefits realized by the rest of the urban centers (Gainesville, Lake City, Alachua, Newberry, etc.) who can attribute at least part of their population and local expenditures to their proximity to the Santa Fe River and its springs.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 15

Regulatory Protections – A Restoration Roadmap The state’s data analysis indicated Because the Santa Fe River Springs that existing flow reductions were are stressed by high nitrogen con- already about 11% and led to centrations and low flows, their adoption of a recovery strategy. protection has not been ignored by Regional draw-downs in the Flori- policy-makers. An array of Federal, dan Aquifer will become signifi- State, and local laws and policies cantly worse if new water sources Ecosystem Services are aimed at protecting groundwa- or modes of conservation are not ter, springs, and springsheds. developed to address future de- Natural environments such as mands. For example, the U.S. Geo- springs and rivers provide a variety The strength and timing of these environmental protections vary sig- logical Survey and the SRWMD of services to neighboring human nificantly across jurisdictions. For have estimated that more than 45 populations. These services may in- example, MFLs (Minimum Flows billion gallons per year of ground- water no longer flow in the direc- clude production of fish and wildlife, and Levels) are being developed tion of the Santa Fe and Suwannee water quality purification, enhance- regionally by both the Suwannee River Water Management District Rivers because of high groundwa- ment of air quality, temperature sta- (SRWMD, home of the Santa Fe ter withdrawals in northeast Flori- bilization, recharge and maintenance Springs) and the St. John’s River da and southeast Georgia. of aquifers, and essential genetic Water Management District Protections at the county and mu- diversity. For example, the Santa Fe (SJRWMD). MFLs are the minimum nicipal levels vary widely because water levels or flows necessary to River and its springs have one of the of variations in their areas’ activ- prevent significant harm to the wa- ism, economies, demographics, most diverse and abundant turtle ter resources or ecology of an area and geology. Alachua County has populations anywhere in the world. resulting from water withdrawals. long been a leader in springs pro- Rare cave crayfish and shrimp spe- MFLs apply to decisions affecting tection, and a designated Ground- water withdrawal permits, declara- cies live inside the largest spring water and Springs Element was in- tion of water shortages, environ- cluded in the Comprehensive Plan vents. Manatees are commonly seen mental resource permitting, and in 2011. Land development regula- in the Santa Fe River, and the endan- assessment of water supply tions and ordinances protective of gered Gulf Sturgeon utilizes the low- sources. Water Management Dis- groundwater resources have been tricts are required to develop re- er Santa Fe River. in place since 1988. Alachua Coun- covery or prevention strategies ty has conducted tracer studies, The value of these living plants and when an MFL is violated. springshed mapping, and an aqui- animals is not easily measured in An MFL study for the Upper Santa fer vulnerability assessment that terms of dollars but is priceless to Fe River – a basin shared by have all contributed to the under- many of the people who regularly SJRWMD and SRWMD – was com- standing of the Santa Fe River visit the Santa Fe River and its pleted in 2009 and demonstrated Springs. In contrast, the more ru- ral and agriculturally-based Co- springs. that future water withdrawals will result in significant harm. lumbia and Gilchrist Counties have been slower to implement more The SRWMD initiated rule-making stringent springs protection for the Lower Santa Fe River MFLs measures. in 2012. Final MFL rule adoption occurred on June 10, 2015 and al- Whether these existing and new lowed an 8% reduction in median protections will be adequate to flows in the river. reverse the decline in the Santa Fe Springs remains to be seen.

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 16

Key Findings:  The Santa Fe River is an “Outstanding Florida Water” and should be “protected under all circumstances.”

 Minimum Flows and Levels (MFLs) have been established to prevent significant harm to the Santa Fe River and Springs.

 The springs create a local economic engine, resulting in more than $20 mil- lion a year of springs-related business.

 Today’s intensive water use practices in the Santa Fe springshed can only be In 1984 the State designated The means of achieving the the Santa Fe River an Out- TMDL is a Basin Management continued by unsustainable “mining” of standing Florida Water. The Action Plan (BMAP) – a resto- the remaining Floridan Aquifer System quality of Outstanding Florida ration plan developed by the with inevitable reductions of spring and Waters is meant to be Florida Department of Envi- river flows. “protected under all circum- ronmental Protection and stances.” In 2008 the Florida basin stakeholders that de- Department of Environmental scribes how stakeholders will Protection determined that reduce the pollutant loads the Santa Fe River Basin was and achieve the TMDL. impaired for nutrients and Stakeholders in the Santa Fe dissolved oxygen concentra- River BMAP include the tions. SRWMD, local governments, agriculture, other businesses, The Florida Department of environmental groups, visi- Environmental Protection tors, and local citizens. adopted a nitrate Total Maxi- mum Daily Load (TMDL) of The Santa Fe River BMAP was 0.35 mg/L for the basin. A adopted in March of 2012. It TMDL represents the maxi- differs from many other Flor- mum amount of a given pol- ida BMAPs because the Santa lutant that a water body can Fe basin is rural, agricultural, assimilate and still meet water and lacking in major point quality standards, including sources of pollution. As a its applicable water quality result, restoration activities criteria and its designated us- will need to be conducted by es. To meet the annual aver- many small diffuse sources in age nitrate target, it will re- order to reduce the nitrogen quire that nitrate loads from loads and increase water stormwater sources to the flows to the Santa Fe Santa Fe River be reduced by Springs. 35%.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 17

Summary A prosperous economy and future for the entire Springs Heartland is The Santa Fe River Springs are dependent upon clean and abun- suffering from the same stressors dant water in our springs, rivers, faced by the majority of springs in and aquifer. Florida. They have lost up to 40% of their historic flows due to All residents in the seven counties groundwater pumping and de- included in the study area share creasing rainfall and they have ex- some responsibility for the prob- perienced up to a 3,000 percent lems facing the Santa Fe River increase in nitrate nitrogen con- Springs, and consequently can be centrations. Since clean and abun- part of the solution. Greatest dant water is the lifeblood of groundwater pumping occurs in these springs, they are experienc- areas with the highest population ing an overall decline in their en- density and the most intensive vironmental health. farming practices. Highest nitrogen loads result where fertilization and/ In addition to defining these im- or wastewater disposal are high pairments, this Santa Fe Springs and the aquifer is most vulnerable Restoration Action Plan recom- to surface land use practices. mends specific steps that need to be taken to reverse these trends. Many actions that are essential for These actions will need a buy-in springs’ restoration are free. They by stakeholders in order to be entail the elimination of excessive successful. In addition, voluntary and wasteful water consumption or actions to conserve water and nitrate pollution. Thus, there can be minimize nutrients are needed as cost savings in addition to the eco- well as strong enforcement of ex- nomic benefits that result from re- isting laws that were intended to stored springs. However some of prevent these impacts. the actions in this restoration plan will cost money to implement. Cost This guide for specific restoration savings and expenditures for the actions needs to be reviewed, re- Santa Fe Restoration Action Plan vised if necessary, and adopted by will be made based on the recom- key decision-makers, both within mended actions. This recovery is and outside the Santa Fe spring- long overdue. The benefits of pre- shed, to provide ultimate restora- serving our precious springs to tion of these critical public re- maintain a vibrant economy are sources. clear. The time for action is now.

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute # 18

Key Findings General Recommendations  The Santa Fe River and its associ-  Increase awareness and commit- ated springs are important to the ment by the public and their lo- economy of at least seven coun- cal, state, and federal leaders of ties in north central Florida. the need to provide restoration of the Santa Fe River Springs.  The Santa Fe River and its associ- ated springs are a significant natu-  Reduce groundwater pumping to ral resource of importance for restore spring and river flows. their ecosystem services and  Reduce fertilization and improve maintenance of habitat for fish conventional wastewater disposal and wildlife. practices in the springshed to  Average flows in the Lower Santa reduce the load of nitrate nitro- Fe River and its springs have de- gen leaching into the underlying clined by an estimated 40 percent. Floridan Aquifer. Other  These flow declines appear to be Water Quantity the combined result of high rates Recommendations of groundwater pumping and re-  Develop a map of priority pro- cent rainfall declines.  Refine and enforce MFLs that pro- tect the springs from harm. tection zones around the Santa  Groundwater feeding the Santa Fe Fe River and springs. Springs is contaminated by nitrate  Implement a strict water conserva-  Implement a comprehensive nitrogen derived principally from tion program that includes signifi- fertilizers, human and animal cant fees for water uses, and en- monitoring program in the forcement of watering restrictions. waste disposal practices, and Santa Fe River and in principal stormwater runoff.  Instrument agricultural and private springs to track trends in flows, wells to record and track existing  Nitrate concentrations in some of water quality, and biology. the Santa Fe Springs and Santa Fe groundwater pumping rates.  Fund and publish annual Santa River are high enough to cause nutrient impairment. Increased Water Quality Fe Springs Health Report populations of filamentous algae Cards. and loss of natural plant commu-  Implement the Santa Fe River nities provide visible evidence of BMAP with an accelerated sched- this impairment. ule of compliance.  Restrict fertilizer use in the most vulnerable portions of the Santa Fe springshed.

 Encourage agricultural producers to voluntarily convert to crops that require less or no fertilizer use.

 Initiate a phased upgrade to pro- vide advanced nitrogen removal at municipal, agricultural, and on- site (septic tank) wastewater treatment systems.

WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG # 19

Prepared by: Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute in cooperation with the Santa Fe River Springs Basin Working Group and with financial support from the Jelks Family Foundation The mission of the Florida Springs Institute is to pro- vide a focal point for im- proving the understanding of springs ecology and to foster the development of

science-based education and management actions needed to restore and pro- tect springs throughout Florida.

www.floridaspringsinstitute.org Updated June 2016

Howard T. Odum Florida Springs Institute WWW.FLORIDASPRINGSINSTITUTE.ORG #