Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Ninth Biennial Review - 2022 (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

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 Prepublication Copy 

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-XXXXX-X International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-XXXXX-X 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 2022 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. 2022. Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Ninth Biennial Review—2022. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https//doi.org/10.17226/26706. PREPUBLICATION COPY 

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. PREPUBLICATION COPY 

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. PREPUBLICATION COPY 

COMMITTEE ON INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OF EVERGLADES RESTORATION PROGRESS DENICE H. WARDROP, Chair, 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 (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 PREPUBLICATION COPY v 

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. LeCHEVALLIER, 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 PADRAIGH HARDIN, Program Assistant MILES LANSING, Program Assistant OSHANE ORR, Program Assistant EMILY BERMUDEZ, Program Assistant PREPUBLICATION COPY vi 

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, FAMU-FSU 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. PREPUBLICATION COPY vii 

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 Carlos Coronado, SFWMD Drew Coman, USACE 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 PREPUBLICATION COPY ix 

x Acknowledgments Danette Goss, USACE Jamie Graulau-Santiago, USACE Timothy E. Gysan, USACE Troy Hill, NPS Nafeeza Hooseinny-Nabibaksh, SFWMD Marie Huber, USACE Robert Johnson, DOI Robert Kadlec, Wetland Management Services Phyllis Klarmann, SFWMD Fahmida Khatun, NPS/IMC Jill King, SFWMD Robert Kirby, USACE Glenn Lawrence, 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 Parrot, 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 Romanach, 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 PREPUBLICATION COPY 

Acknowledgments xi Lauren Talbert, NOAA Kim Taplin, USACE Tiffany Troxler, FIU Will Veatch, USACE CPR COP Zulamet Vega-Liriano, USACE Eva Velez, USACE Bob Verrastro, SFMWD 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 PREPUBLICATION COPY 

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 are we 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, 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. PREPUBLICATION COPY xiii 

xiv Preface 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 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 NRC staff: Stephanie Johnson, Sarah Haedrich, Jonathan Tucker, and Padraigh Hardin. Stephanie Johnson has served as senior project officer 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 PREPUBLICATION COPY 

Acronyms A.R.M. Arthur R. Marshall AF acre-feet Alt-1BWR Alternative 1BWR AMO Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation ASR Aquifer Storage and Recovery BBCW Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands BBSEER Biscayne Bay-Southern Everglades Ecosystem Restoration BBSM Biscayne Bay Simulation Model BISECT Biscayne and Southern Everglades Coastal Transport BMP best management practice C&SF Central and South Florida Project CBP Chesapeake Bay Program CEPP Central Everglades Planning Project CERP Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan CFR Code of Federal Regulations CISRERP Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration CMIP5 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 COP Combined Operational Plan CRIDA Climate Risk Informed Decision Analysis CROGEE Committee on the Restoration of the Greater Everglades Ecosystem CSSS Cape Sable Seaside Sparrows CWA Clean Water Act DIP dissolved inorganic phosphorous DMSTA Dynamic Model for Stormwater Treatment Areas DOI Department of the Interior DOP dissolved organic phosphorus DRP dissolved reactive phosphorus 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 EPC_0 equilibrium phosphorus concentration ERTP Everglades Restoration Transition Plan PREPUBLICATION COPY xv 

xvi Acronyms ET evapotranspiration FAV floating aquatic vegetation FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection FEB Flow Equalization Basin FW Flow-way FWMC Flow-weighted mean concentration FWO future without FY fiscal year GCM General Circulation Model GISTEMP Goddard Institute for Space Studies Surface Temperature Analysis HLR hydraulic loading rate IDS Integrated Delivery Schedule IMC Interagency Modeling Center IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IRL-S Indian River Lagoon-South IWR Institute for Water Resources LNWR Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge LORS Lake Okeechobee Regulation Schedule LOSOM Lake Okeechobee System Operating Manual LOWRP Lake Okeechobee Watershed Restoration Project LTER Long-term Ecological Research MAP monitoring and assessment plan NA not applicable NASEM National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine NGVD National Geodetic Vertical Datum NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NRC National Research Council NSM Natural System Model PDO Pacific Decadal Oscillation PDT Project Delivery Team PIP particulate inorganic phosphorus PIR Project Implementation Report PLR phosphorus loading rate POP particulate organic phosphorus PP particulate phosphorus 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 SFER South Florida Ecosystem Restoration SFER South Florida Environmental Report PREPUBLICATION COPY 

Acronyms xvii SFNRC South Florida Natural Resources Center SFRCCC Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact SFWMD South Florida Water Management District SOM System Operating Manual 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 STERTF South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force TBD To be determined TE_P phosphorus treatment efficiency TIME Tides and Inflows to the Mangrove Everglades TMDL Total maximum daily load TN total nitrogen TP total phosphorus UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey WCA Water Conservation Area WERP Western Everglades Restoration Project WIIN Act Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act WPA Water Preserve Areas WQBEL water quality−based effluent limit WRDA Water Resources Development Act WY water year PREPUBLICATION COPY 

Contents SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 11 The National Academies and Everglades Restoration, 11 Report Organization, 14 2 THE RESTORATION PLAN IN CONTEXT ............................................................................... 17 Background, 17 Restoration Goals for the Everglades, 19 Restoration Activities, 22 Summary, 28 3 RESTORATION PROGRESS ........................................................................................................ 29 Programmatic Progress, 29 Natural System Restoration Progress, 37 Recommendations and Conclusions, 86 4 STA WATER QUALITY AND CERP PROGRESS .................................................................... 89 Everglades Water Quality Objectives and Criteria, 90 Implications of STA Discharge Quality on CERP Progress, 95 Overview of Stormwater Treatment Areas, 97 Evaluation of Current Conditions and Strategies of Individual STAs Toward the WQBEL, 103 External and Internal Drivers Regulating STA Performance, 109 Adaptive Management Opportunities, 126 Recommendations and Conclusions, 134 5 RESTORATION IN THE CONTEXT OF CLIMATE CHANGE ............................................ 137 Climate Change in South Florida, 137 USACE Approach to Climate Change, 144 Restoration Planning in Coastal Systems: The Biscayne Bay and Southeastern Everglades Restoration Project, 149 Managing Operations, 158 Program Management, 165 Recommendations and Conclusions, 166 6 SCIENCE PLAN TO SUPPORT RESTORATION OF THE SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM ............................................................................................................. 169 The Need for a Science Plan, 170 Engaging the South Florida Restoration Science Enterprise, 172 Conclusions and Recommendations, 188 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 191 PREPUBLICATION COPY xix 

xx Contents APPENDIXES ......................................................................................................................................... 217 A THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES OF SCIENCES, ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE EVERGLADES REPORTS ..................................................................................... 219 B STA PERFORMANCE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 227 C BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND STAFF...................... 241 PREPUBLICATION COPY