Progress Toward
Restoring the Everglades
The Ninth Biennial Review—2022
_____
Committee on Independent Scientific Review of
Everglades Restoration Progress
Water Science and Technology Board
Division on Earth and Life Studies
Consensus Study Report
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of the Army under Cooperative Agreement No. W912EP-15-2-0002 and by the U.S. Department of the Interior and the South Florida Water Management District. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-69343-1
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-69343-8
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26706
This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2023 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Cover Photo: Stormwater Treatment Area 2. The 15,500-acre STA-2 in southwestern Palm Beach County treats water before it is released to Everglades Water Conservation Area 2. SOURCE: South Florida Water Management District. Licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-ND 2.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0.
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Ninth Biennial Review—2022. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https//doi.org/10.17226/26706.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OF EVERGLADES RESTORATION PROGRESS
DENICE H. WARDROP, Chair, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park
WILLIAM G. BOGGESS, Oregon State University, Corvallis
CASEY BROWN, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
CHRISTOPHER B. BURKE (NAE), Christopher B. Burke Engineering, Ltd., Chicago, IL
PHILIP M. DIXON, Iowa State University, Ames
CHARLES T. DRISCOLL, JR. (NAE), Syracuse University, NY
K. RAMESH REDDY, University of Florida, Gainesville
DENISE J. REED, University of New Orleans, LA
JAMES E. SAIERS, Yale University, New Haven, CT
ALAN D. STEINMAN, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI
MARTHA A. SUTULA, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Costa Mesa
JEFFREY R. WALTERS, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg
Staff
STEPHANIE E. JOHNSON, Study Director
JONATHAN M. TUCKER, Associate Program Officer
SARAH HAEDRICH (until May 2022), Senior Program Assistant
PADRAIGH HARDIN (starting May 2022), Program Assistant
WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD
CATHERINE L. KLING (NAS), Chair, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
NEWSHA AJAMI, Stanford University, CA
PEDRO J. ALVAREZ (NAE), Rice University, Houston, TX
JONATHAN D. ARTHUR, American Geosciences Institute, Washington, DC
RUTH L. BERKELMAN (NAM), Emory University, Atlanta, GA
JORDAN R. FISCHBACH, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA
ELLEN GILINSKY, Ellen Gilinsky, LLC, Richmond, VA
ROBERT M. HIRSCH, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA
VENKATARAMAN LAKSHMI, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
MARK W. Le CHEVALLIER, Dr. Water Consulting, LLC, Morrison, CO
CAMILLE PANNU, Columbia University, New York, NY
DAVID L. SEDLAK (NAE), University of California, Berkeley
JENNIFER TANK, University of Notre Dame, IN
DAVID L. WEGNER, Jacobs Engineering, Tucson, AZ
Staff
DEBORAH GLICKSON, Director
LAURA J. EHLERS, Senior Program Officer
STEPHANIE E. JOHNSON, Senior Program Officer
M. JEANNE AQUILINO, Financial Business Partner
CHARLES BURGIS, Associate Program Officer
MARGO REGIER, Associate Program Officer
JONATHAN M. TUCKER, Associate Program Officer
EMILY BERMUDEZ, Program Assistant
PADRAIGH HARDIN, Program Assistant
MILES LANSING, Program Assistant
OSHANE ORR, Program Assistant
Reviewer Acknowledgment
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Ebrahim Ahmadisharaf, Florida A&M University–Florida State University College of Engineering
Brenda Bass, University of Utah
Michael Beck, University of California, Santa Cruz
Linda Blum, University of Virginia
John Callaway, University of San Francisco
Ron Corstanje, Cranfield University
Christopher Elphick, University of Connecticut
Lawrence Gerry, Collective Water Resources, LLC
James Giattina, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (retired)
James Jawitz, University of Florida
Paul Julian, Sanibel-Captiva Conservation Foundation
Upmanu Lall, Columbia University
James Morris, University of South Carolina
Although these reviewers provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions and recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this
report was overseen by George Hornberger (NAE), Vanderbilt University, and Holly Greening, CoastWise Partners. Appointed by the National Academies, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments received full consideration. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
Acknowledgments
Many individuals assisted the committee and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine staff in their task to create this report. We would like to express our appreciation to Robert Johnson, DOI; Gina Ralph, USACE; and Nafeeza Hooseinny, SFWMD, who served as agency liaisons to the committee. We would also like to thank the following people who gave presentations, participated in panel discussions, provided public comment to the committee, or served as field trip guides.
Lisa Aley, USACE
Cassondra Armstrong, SFWMD
Andrea Atkinson, NPS
Nick Aumen, USGS
Christian Avila, SFWMD
Ernie Barnett, Florida Land Council
Ken Bradshaw, USACE
Laura Brandt, FWS
Lehar Brion, SFWMD
Joan Browder, NOAA
Kathleen A. Burchett, FWS
Elizabeth Caneja, SFWMD
Marisa Carrozzo, Everglades Coalition
Bahram Charkhian, SFWMD
Phoebe Clark, USACE
Michael Collis, USACE
Drew Coman, USACE
Carlos Coronado, SFWMD
Dan Crawford, USACE
Stephen Davis, Everglades Foundation
Jay Diedzic, University of South Carolina
Michael Duever, SFWMD
Gene Duncan, Miccosukee Tribe
Angie Dunn, USACE
Morgan Elmer, NPS
James Erskine, FWC
Julie Espy, FDEP
Adam Gelber, DOI
Lawrence Glenn, SFWMD
Danette Goss, USACE
Jamie Graulau-Santiago, USACE
Timothy E. Gysan, USACE
Troy Hill, NPS
Nafeeza Hooseinny, SFWMD
Marie Huber, USACE
Robert Johnson, DOI
Robert Kadlec, Wetland Management Services
Fahmida Khatun, NPS/IMC
Jill King, SFWMD
Robert Kirby, USACE
Phyllis Klarmann, SFWMD
Chris Madden, SFWMD
Jessica Mallett, USACE
Carolina Maran, SFWMD
Ramon Martin, FWS
Jenna May, USACE
Brenda Mills, SFWMD
Melodie Naja, NPS
Melissa Nasuti, USACE
Nicole Niemeyer, SFWMD
Raul Novoa, SFWMD
Jayantha Obeysekera, FIU
Patrick O’Brien, USACE CPR CoP
Jose Otero, SFWMD
Mindy Parrott, SFWMD
April Patterson, USACE
Mark Perry, Everglades Coalition
Tracey Piccone, SFWMD
Bob Progulske, FWS/Ecological Services
Mark Rains, Florida’s Chief Science Officer
Gina Ralph, USACE
Jed Redwine, NPS
Jennifer Reynolds, SFWMD
James Riley, USACE
Stephanie Romañach, USGS
Mike Ross, FIU
Savanna Royals, USACE
Dan Scheidt, EPA
Joe Serafy, U Miami
Robert Shuford, SFWMD
Joe Sicbaldi, Florida Power and Light
Fred H. Sklar, SFWMD
Edward Smith, FDEP
Erik Stabenau, NPS
Donatto Surratt, NPS
Lauren Talbert, NOAA
Kim Taplin, USACE
Tiffany Troxler, FIU
Will Veatch, USACE CPR COP
Zulamet Vega-Liriano, USACE
Eva Velez, USACE
Bob Verrastro, SFWMD
Anna Wachnicka, SFWMD
Bill Walker, independent consultant
Leslye Waugh, SFWMD
Joanna Weaver, SFWMD
Walter Wilcox, SFWMD
Lynn G. Wingard, USGS
Capt. Chris Wittman, Captains for Clean Water
This page intentionally left blank.
Preface
There are four remarkable things about the effort that this report describes. First, there are the innumerable and varied visions of the Everglades as an extraordinary ecosystem, from the vastness of a “River of Grass” to the incredible diversity of life that can be found in the smallest pocket of a hummock or beneath the seagrass blades in Florida Bay. There are the practical visions, too—its role in the very health and well-being of those who live near and those who visit from afar, to its powering of an economy and a way of life. Whatever vision we individually and/or collectively hold, we sense when it is at risk of being changed or lost. When many of us sense that loss, we do the second remarkable thing—we come together and willingly wrestle with the difficult question that asks what we are trying to restore and to what end. That leads us to the third remarkable thing, the sheer magnitude of the human endeavor to move large amounts of water, the very basis of life, across this vast and varied landscape that occupies most of the state of Florida, to restore it.
The use of the word “restore” dates back to the 14th century, defined as “a means of healing or restoring health, a cure; renewing of something lost.” The word originated as a term applied to efforts directed to an individual or a single object. Now we find ourselves applying it to renewing a diverse and distinctive ecosystem that stretches from the meandering Kissimmee River and associated floodplain and chain of small lakes to the much larger Lake Okeechobee, and on to sawgrass plains, ridge-and-slough wetlands, tree islands, marl prairies, bays, and estuaries. To restore something lost means something far different in the 21st century than it might have in the 14th century because the context in which we restore—a changing climate, and changing human needs—requires a diverse and unique set of skills, approaches, and philosophies to deal with both the pace of change and its consequences. The enormous passion, commitment, and collective intelligence of the people engaged in this effort to renew and restore
the Everglades is the fourth remarkable thing, and it is an honor and privilege to be given the vantage point to review their efforts.
This document reports on the progress toward restoration of the Everglades natural system. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (National Academies) Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress, or CISRERP, was formed for this purpose in 2004. This report, which is the ninth in a series of biennial evaluations that are expected to continue for the duration of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), reflects the concerted efforts of 12 committee members and 4 National Academies staff representing a wide range of scientific and engineering expertise. A fifth remarkable thing might be the circumstances under which the entire community of scientists, engineers, and stakeholders of the restoration effort helped the committee navigate the new landscape of remote meetings to provide a comprehensive picture of a work in progress unlike any other.
It has been my privilege to serve on this committee with some of the nation’s leading experts in biological, hydrologic, and geographic sciences; hydrologic and systems engineering; project administration; law; and policy. I greatly appreciate the time, attention, and thought each committee member invested in understanding the complexity of the Everglades ecosystem and the corresponding scope of the CERP. I also appreciate the members’ careful, rigorous analyses; expert judgment; constructive comments and reviews; and the professionalism, collegiality, and good humor with which they conducted their business, most notably over many hours on Zoom.
The committee is indebted to many individuals for their contributions of information and resources. Specifically, we appreciate the efforts of the committee’s technical liaisons—Nafeeza Hooseinny (South Florida Water Management District), Robert Johnson (Department of the Interior), and Gina Ralph (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)—who responded to numerous information requests and helped the committee utilize the vast resources of agency expertise when needed. Many others educated the committee on the complexities of Everglades restoration through their presentations, field trips, and public comments (see Acknowledgments).
The committee had the good fortune to be assisted by dedicated and talented National Academies staff: Stephanie Johnson, Sarah Haedrich, Jonathan Tucker, and Padraigh Hardin. Stephanie Johnson has served as study director for all nine CISRERP panels and is a true Everglades expert. Her encyclopedic knowledge and understanding of the science, engineering, and administrative aspects of the CERP; ability to identify and synthesize the complex interrelationships among these aspects; deft management skills; and contacts were critical to the committee’s success. She is intellectual shepherd, spiritual director, and choral
master, blending voices and modulating rhythms as only she can. We literally can’t thank her enough.
The CERP is a bold, challenging, and complex plan with great potential to provide benefits to the ecosystem and the public, and the progressively larger increments of restoration that have been achieved suggest that that potential can be realized. We offer this report in support of that endeavor.
Denice H. Wardrop, Chair
Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress
This page intentionally left blank.
Acronyms
A.R.M. | Arthur R. Marshall |
AF | acre-feet |
AFWM | Annual flow-weighted mean |
Alt-ASR | Alternative-ASR |
Alt-H | Alternative-H |
Alt-Hr | Hybrid Revised Alternative |
Alt-1BWR | Alternative 1BWR |
AMO | Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation |
ASR | aquifer storage and recovery |
BBCW | Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands |
BBSEER | Biscayne Bay and Southeastern Everglades Ecosystem Restoration |
BBSM | Biscayne Bay Simulation Model |
BISECT | Biscayne and Southern Everglades Coastal Transport |
C&SF | Central and South Florida Project |
CaCO3 | calcium carbonate |
CBP | Chesapeake Bay Program |
CEPP | Central Everglades Planning Project |
CERP | Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan |
CESI | Critical Ecosystem Studies Initiative |
CFR | Code of Federal Regulations |
CISRERP | Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress |
CMIP5 | Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 |
COP | Combined Operational Plan |
CPR CoP | Climate Preparedness and Resiliency Community of Practice |
CRIDA | Climate Risk Informed Decision Analysis |
CROGEE | Committee on the Restoration of the Greater Everglades Ecosystem |
CSSS | Cape Sable Seaside Sparrows |
DIP | dissolved inorganic phosphorous |
DMSTA | Dynamic Model for Stormwater Treatment Areas |
DOI | Department of the Interior |
DOP | dissolved organic phosphorus |
DSC | Delta Stewardship Council |
EAA | Everglades Agricultural Area |
EAV | emergent aquatic vegetation |
ECB | existing conditions baseline |
EIS | environmental impact statement |
ENP | Everglades National Park |
ENSO | El Niño Southern Oscillation |
EPA | Environmental Protection Agency |
ERTP | Everglades Restoration Transition Plan |
FAV | floating aquatic vegetation |
FDEP | Florida Department of Environmental Protection |
FEB | flow equalization basin |
FIU | Florida International University |
FPL | Florida Power and Light |
FW | Flow-way |
FWC | Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission |
FWM | Flow-weighted mean |
FWO | future without |
FWS | Fish and Wildlife Service |
FY | fiscal year |
GAO | U.S. Government Accountability Office |
GCM | general circulation model |
GEER | Greater Everglades Ecosystem Restoration |
GISTEMP | Goddard Institute for Space Studies Surface Temperature Analysis |
IDS | Integrated Delivery Schedule |
IIJA | Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act |
IMC | Interagency Modeling Center |
IPCC | Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |
IRL-S | Indian River Lagoon-South |
LNWR | Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge |
LOEM-CW | Lake Okeechobee Environmental Model for Constructed Wetlands |
LORS | Lake Okeechobee Regulation Schedule |
LOSOM | Lake Okeechobee System Operating Manual |
LOWRP | Lake Okeechobee Watershed Restoration Project |
LPWEM | Low-P Wetland Event Model |
LTER | Long-term Ecological Research |
MAP | monitoring and assessment plan |
MGD | million gallons per day |
N/P | nitrogen-to-phosphorus |
NA | not applicable |
NASEM | National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine |
NGO | Nongovernmental Organization |
NGVD | National Geodetic Vertical Datum |
NOAA | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration |
NPS | National Park Service |
NRC | National Research Council |
OSPAR | Oslo/Paris Convention |
PDO | Pacific Decadal Oscillation |
PDT | Project Delivery Team |
PIP | particulate inorganic phosphorus |
PIR | Project Implementation Report |
PLR | phosphorus loading rate |
POM | Project Operating Manual |
POP | particulate organic phosphorus |
PP | particulate phosphorus |
ppb | parts per billion |
PSTA | periphyton-based STA |
RCP | Representative Concentration Pathway |
RECOVER | Restoration, Coordination, and Verification |
RSM | Regional Simulation Model |
RSM-GL | Regional Simulation Model for the Glades and Lower East Coast Service Areas |
SAV | submerged aquatic vegetation |
SCG | Science Coordination Group |
SCT | Science Coordination Team |
SCW | Spreader Canal Western |
SFERTF | South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force |
SFNRC | South Florida Natural Resources Center |
SFRCCC | Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact |
SFWMD | South Florida Water Management District |
SRP | soluble reactive phosphorus |
SSG | Science Sub-Group |
SSR | System Status Report |
SSRF | Strategic Science and Research Framework |
STA | stormwater treatment area |
STAC | Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee |
STAR | Scientific, Technical Assessment and Reporting |
TIME | Tides and Inflows to the Mangrove Everglades |
TMDL | total maximum daily load |
TN | total nitrogen |
TP | total phosphorus |
TSP | Tentatively Selected Plan |
TTTFF | Tamiami Trail Flow Formula |
USACE | U.S. Army Corps of Engineers |
USDA | U.S. Department of Agriculture |
USGS | U.S. Geological Survey |
WAI | Wetland Affinity Index |
WCA | Water Conservation Area |
WERP | Western Everglades Restoration Project |
WIIN Act | Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act |
WPA | Water Preserve Area |
WQBEL | water quality−based effluent limit |
WRDA | Water Resources Development Act |
WSE | Water Supply/Environmental |
WY | water year |
Contents
The National Academies and Everglades Restoration
2 THE RESTORATION PLAN IN CONTEXT
Restoration Goals for the Everglades
Natural System Restoration Progress
Recommendations and Conclusions
4 STA WATER QUALITY AND CERP PROGRESS
Everglades Water Quality Objectives and Criteria
Implications of STA Discharge Quality on CERP Progress
Evaluation of Current Conditions and Strategies of Individual STAs Toward the WQBEL
External and Internal Drivers Regulating STA Performance
5 RESTORATION IN THE CONTEXT OF CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate Change in South Florida
USACE Approach to Climate Change
Restoration Planning in Coastal Systems: The BBSEER Project
Recommendations and Conclusions
6 SCIENCE PLAN TO SUPPORT RESTORATION OF THE SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM
Engaging the South Florida Restoration Science Enterprise
Recommendations and Conclusions
A The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Everglades Reports