RS20702: South Florida Ecosystem Restoration and the
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan

Nicole T. Carter

Analyst in Environmental Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division

Updated March 27, 2001

Summary

The Everglades, a unique network of subtropical wetlands, is now half its original size. Many factors have contributed to its decline, including flood control projects and agricultural and urban development. As part of a larger restoration program for South Florida, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other federal, state, tribal, and local agencies collaborated to develop the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP or the Plan). CERP focuses on increasing storage of wet season waters to provide more water during the dry season for the natural system, and urban and agricultural users. The Plan consists of 68 projects estimated to take 36 years and $7.8 billion to complete. The Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (P.L.160-541) authorizes appropriations for initial construction projects and their operation and maintenance. The federal government will pay half the Plan's costs and an array of state, tribal, and local agencies the other half. Major issues associated with the Plan include the following: its effectiveness as a restoration effort, uncertainties in technologies used and their costs, coordination of restoration efforts, specifics of programmatic authorization, sufficiency of reporting requirements, and its effect on the Corps budget. This report outlines the history and current conditions of the Everglades, CERP legislation and funding, and associated issues. It will be updated as events warrant.

Introduction

The 106^th Congress enacted legislation--Title VI of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (P.L.160-541)--authorizing Corps involvement in a plan to restore the Everglades, a nationally and internationally recognized natural resource. ⁽¹⁾ The Everglades is the defining component of the South Florida ecosystem (see Figure 1), which incorporates 16 federal wildlife refuges and four national park units. South Florida is also home to more than six million people and a large agricultural economy. There is wide agreement that major changes in water quantity, quality, timing, and distribution since the 1950s have significantly degraded the region's ecological health. During the dry season, the current water regime in South Florida is unable to provide sufficient freshwater supplies for both the natural system and urban and agricultural consumers. Water shortages are expected to become more frequent as demand by urban and agricultural consumers increases.

Everglades History

The Everglades is a network of subtropical wetland landscapes that once stretched 220 miles from Orlando to Florida Bay. Several hundred lakes fed slow-moving creeks, called sloughs, that joined the Kissimmee River. Depending on rainfall, water flowed south down the river or topped the river's banks and flowed through 40,000 acres of marsh to Lake Okeechobee. During the summer rainy season, the lake would overflow its southern shore, spilling water into the Everglades. Due to flat topography, this water moved slowly south to Florida Bay through a shallow 40-mile wide, 100-mile long sawgrass marsh. These wetlands acted as natural filters and retention areas that recharged underlying aquifers. The unique habitat resulting from the Everglades' combination of abundant moisture, rich soils, and subtropical temperatures supported a vast array of species. However, by the mid-1800s, many in South Florida viewed the Everglades as an unproductive swamp. Flood control and reclamation efforts that manipulated the Everglades hydrology promoted development of the East Coast of Florida and permitted agriculture on reclaimed marshland. Principal among the human interventions affecting the Everglades is the Corps' Central and Southern Florida (C&SF) project, which was first authorized by Congress in 1948 to provide flood control and to satisfy other water management needs of South Florida. Water flows in South Florida are now directed by 1,000 miles of canals, 720 miles of levees, and almost 200 water control structures.

Current Conditions and Recent Restoration Efforts

Management efforts and development activities have markedly changed the Everglades' water regime. The C&SF project redirects water, that once flowed from Lake Okeechobee across the Everglades in a slow-moving sheet, into canals and rivers discharging directly to the ocean. Experts now believe that the Everglades receive too little water during the dry season and too much during the rainy season. The changed water regime combined with urban and agricultural development have reduced the Everglades to half its original size. Habitat loss has threatened or endangered numerous plant and animal species. According to some estimates, the wading bird population alone has fallen 90-95% since construction of the C&SF project.

The Everglades are also affected by degraded water quality. Pollutants from urban areas and agricultural runoff, including excess nutrients (such as phosphorous and nitrogen), metals, and pesticides, have negatively affected plant and animal populations. Nutrients entering the Everglades have caused a decline in native vegetation and an overabundance of invasive exotic species. Changes in the quantity, quality, and timing of freshwater flows have also disrupted the equilibrium of coastal estuaries and reef systems. Pressure on the South Florida ecosystem is anticipated to worsen if South Florida's current population doubles as forecasted to 12 million inhabitants in 2050.

The federal government and the State of Florida have already undertaken many restoration activities, such as land acquisitions and preparation of a multi-species recovery plan. Between FY1993 and FY2000, $1.6 billion in federal funds and $3.1 billion in state funds were used for South Florida restoration. ⁽²⁾ The South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, which was formalized by the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, coordinates the numerous restoration activities. The Task Force facilitates restoration using the following goals: (1) "get the water right," (2) restore, preserve, and protect natural habitats and species, and (3) foster compatibility of built and natural systems. The Department of the Interior, which chairs the Task Force, estimated that achieving these goals for South Florida would cost $14.8 billion. This sum includes $7.8 billion for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP or the Plan). CERP is the principal mechanism under the restoration program for "getting the water right," i.e., restoring natural hydrologic functions and water quality, and providing water supplies.

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan

CERP focuses on water quantity, quality, timing, and distribution. The overarching concept behind the Plan is to capture and store freshwater currently discharged to the ocean to be used during the dry season; 80% of the captured water would be used for the natural system, and 20% for agricultural and urban uses. CERP calls for removal of 240 miles of levees and canals and building a network of reservoirs, underground storage wells, and pumping stations that would capture water and redistribute it to replicate natural flow. The Plan is anticipated to affect 12 to 15 of the 68 threatened or endangered species of South Florida. ⁽³⁾ It is not clear what effect the implementation of Plan projects will have on these species.

Legislation in the 106^th Congress. Title VI of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (also referred to as the Everglades Restoration Act) approved CERP as contained in the "Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement" dated April 1, 1999, as modified by the Act. ⁽⁴⁾ Passage of Title VI follows years of delicate negotiations between the Clinton administration, the State of Florida, Congress, and disparate groups of stakeholders including local and national environmental organizations, sugar growers, utility companies, home builders, the Seminole Tribe of Florida, and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians. Broad support for the Plan was achieved through a participatory development process. Some groups still express reservations about aspects of CERP; these concerns are discussed below.

Funding. Under Title VI, CERP costs are equally shared by Florida and the federal government; Title VI authorizes four pilot projects at a total cost of $69 million ($34.5 million federal share), 10 construction projects and a monitoring program at a total cost of $1.1 billion ($550.5 million federal share), and modifications to the C&SF Project not to exceed $206 million ($103 million federal share). In total, the Plan requires an estimated $7.8 billion--$5.5 billion for construction and $2.3 billion for necessary lands, easements, water rights, relocation expenses, and disposal areas. The Corps expects to request congressional authorization for additional projects every two years through 2014. In May 2000, Florida passed legislation approving CERP and committing $2 billion in state resources.

Under Title VI, Florida and the federal government equally share future operation and maintenance costs, which are estimated at $172 million annually (1999 price levels) for the completed Plan. Title VI departs from the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, Section 528, which prohibits federal funding of operation and maintenance. Proponents of the exception argued that a federal project damaged the Everglades and much of the restoration will benefit federally-owned land.

Issues Associated with CERP

While support for CERP is now rather broad, some reservations remain over the specifics of implementation. Principal among these are the coordination of restoration activities, CERP's effectiveness as a restoration effort, and some uncertainties in technologies used and their costs. Other issues include the specifics of programmatic authorization, the sufficiency of reporting requirements, the Plan's effect on the Corps budget, and the development of the former Homestead Air Force Base.

Coordination. A significant challenge for CERP implementation will be coordination among the numerous involved agencies and interest groups. The Corps leads CERP implementation with cooperation from local sponsors and the following federal agencies: Department of the Interior (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and U.S. Geological Survey), Department of Agriculture (Natural Resources Conservation Service), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Cooperating state entities are the South Florida Water Management District, the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. The South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force coordinates CERP's implementation with ongoing restoration efforts. ⁽⁵⁾ As CERP project details and operational policies (especially those related to the timing and delivery of water) are developed, support may shift and conflicts arise, testing the effectiveness of the coordination framework of CERP and the Task Force.

Restoration Effectiveness. Some environmental groups question the extent to which CERP contributes to Everglades restoration and whether so complicated and costly a plan is necessary. There is also concern that the Plan does not include enough measures to improve water quality in the Everglades. Some groups and federal agencies have expressed concern that CERP does not explicitly give natural systems precedence in water allocation, and that it is focused first on water supply rather than ecological restoration. To address this point, the Corps revised the project implementation sequencing to include restoration activities in earlier phases. These changes have not satisfied some groups and scientists who continue to oppose CERP. Some environmental groups, which support CERP and Florida's financial participation in the effort, have recently expressed concern about the source of Florida's contribution. They argue against using funds designated for the purchase of priority lands to finance CERP projects; these groups contend that the land acquisitions are essential for successful Everglades restoration.

Technological and Cost Uncertainties. Because not all the scientific data and technologies to restore the South Florida ecosystem are available, CERP utilizes a strategy to manage uncertainties called adaptive assessment, which combines the implementation of initial project features with data collection for use in later project designs. The current state of knowledge and this adaptive refinement strategy means that CERP is not as detailed as typical Corps feasibility proposals. CERP's conceptual nature contributes to uncertainty regarding project specifics and project costs. Title VI authorizes funding of four pilot projects; these include projects to test aquifer storage and recovery (ASR), which has never been used on such a large scale in these geologic conditions. ASR uses underground aquifers as reservoirs to store freshwater which is withdrawn later for use during dry periods. Title VI requires a report to Congress within 180 days of enactment on the benefits of the ongoing Biscayne ASR Program.

A February 2001 report by the National Research Council concluded that regional modeling efforts should precede implementation of ASR as proposed by CERP. ⁽⁶⁾ The report also noted the need to assess water quality standards for discharge of ASR water. A September 2000 General Accounting Office (GAO) report identifies a number of uncertainties that could lead to changes in project designs and their costs. ⁽⁷⁾ These uncertainties include: (1) what treatment would be required for water stored in aquifer storage and recovery wells, (2) whether more water would be needed for Everglades National Park, and (3) whether stormwater treatment areas would achieve sufficient phosphorous removal. Results from pilot projects and studies are likely to alter designs, which may yield either cost savings or cost increases.

Programmatic Authority. Title VI provides the Corps with authority to implement modifications to the C&SF project that are both in CERP and intended to produce substantial benefits. An estimated 27 Plan components can be implemented under this programmatic authority. Title VI requires the development of programmatic regulations with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Interior and the Governor of Florida. Title VI contains some limitations on the concurrence needed for individual features of CERP.

Reporting and Corps Budget. In its September 2000 report, the GAO recommended that the Secretary of the Army accompany subsequent authorization requests with updates describing cumulative changes in projects and costs for CERP as a whole and indicating the progress made on implementation. Title VI requires a report to Congress on CERP, at least every 5 years, including information on both the benefits achieved in the natural systems and human environments and the progress toward interim goals. Another concern is that the substantial commitment of federal funds to CERP might limit the federal construction funds and the operation and maintenance funds available for other Corps projects. The Corps budget is of particular concern because of its current backlog of construction projects and maintenance activities. Title VI requires that the annual federal budget include under the heading "Everglades Restoration" all proposed funding for the Plan. Title VI also requires that the Corps budget show the total proposed funding for the Plan and an assessment of the Plan's impact on the budget year and long-term funding levels.

Homestead Air Force Base. Some environmental groups have raised concerns about proposals to use the former base, located 2 miles from Biscayne National Park and 10 miles from Everglades National Park, as a commercial airport. These groups contend that this use would contribute to noise and water pollution, hampering restoration efforts. A Record of Decision by the Air Force in early 2001 allows the property's use for mixed-use development, but restricts its development as a commercial airport.

Footnotes

1. ^(back)Everglades National Park has been designated a World Heritage Site, International Biosphere Reserve, and Wetland of International Significance.

2. ^(back)For more information on federal and state spending, see Fiscal Year 2001 Cross-Cut Budget at http://www.sfrestore.org/documents/cc2001/index.htm.

3. ^(back) Steve Forsythe, State Supervisor of Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Vero Beach, Florida, interview by telephone, October 2, 2000.

4. ^(back) The Interior Department FY2001 Appropriations b

ill (P.L. 106-291) includes funds for other Everglades restoration activities.

5. ^(back)Other participants in restoration efforts and the Task Force are other federal, state, tribal, and local agencies as well as private and non-profit groups. For an analysis of the coordination of restoration activities, see General Accounting Office. An Overall Strategic Plan and a Decision-Making Process Are Needed to Keep the Effort on Track. April 1999. (RCED-99-121).

6. ^(back)National Research Council. Aquifer Storage and Recovery in the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. February 2001.

7. ^(back) General Accounting Office. Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan: Additional Water Quality Projects May Be Needed and Could Increase Costs. September 2000. (RCED-00-235).