Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades The Seventh Biennial Review - 2018 (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Monitoring and Assessment
4 Monitoring and Assessment
Pages 101-132
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 101... ...
Evaluations are also frequently hampered by inadequate monitoring designs, a disconnect between the collection of monitoring data and their synthesis to inform a subsequent decision-making process, funding challenges, and data management issues. Given the importance of monitoring to understand Everglades restoration progress, which is a key element of the committee's charge, this chapter examines Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)
|
From page 102... ...
, but it did not include an associated monitoring plan or implementation framework. Developing an effective restoration monitoring plan is challenging.
|
From page 103... ...
, then numerous project considerations must be understood and factored into the restoration monitoring plan (Figure 4-1) : • Specific indicators and metrics should be identified that provide ecologically reliable information to address the fundamental questions and are often derived from the conceptual ecological models (e.g., Ogden et al., 2005)
|
From page 104... ...
. For example, a monitoring plan can be developed with a sampling regime that can detect an increase in roseate spoonbill nesting success of 20 percent with 80 percent certainty of detecting this change if it occurs and a 10 percent chance of false detection of an increase when it does not occur.
|
From page 105... ...
Put simply, and all else being equal, few indicators are better than more indicators, and simple indicators are better than complicated indicators. These principles can also be used to manage the number of indicators within a monitoring plan.
|
From page 106... ...
Success occurs if the mean increases to 1.5 chicks (or greater) per nest Time frame: Ten years Spatial extent: Two largest colonies sampled in each of five regions of Florida Bay Specific null hypothesis H0: Mean nesting success is less than or equal to 1.5 chicks/ nest Specific alternative hypothesis H1: Mean nesting success is greater than 1.5 chicks/nest Model: A stratified or random sampling design with goal of estimating the mean chicks per nest over the region.
|
From page 107... ...
CERP PROJECT-LEVEL MONITORING Three CERP projects -- C-111 Spreader Canal Western, Picayune Strand, and Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands -- have made sufficient implementation progress, with some expectations for system response. In this section, the committee examines the ability of their monitoring programs to sufficiently document performance and identifies lessons learned for project-level monitoring across all projects.
|
From page 108... ...
TABLE 4-1 Comparison of Key Features of Three CERP Project-Level Monitoring Plans Criteria Biscayne Bay C-111SC Picayune Strand Performance Establishment of conceptual Yes Yes Yes Monitoring ecosystem model Development of numerical project Yes (hydrologic No Yes objectives: drivers (e.g., hydrology, objectives) (hydroperiod)
|
From page 109... ...
The Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands (Phase 1) Project uses a mix of objectives.
|
From page 110... ...
A major objective of the Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands (Phase 1) Project is to improve productive nursery habitat along the bay's shoreline.
|
From page 111... ...
For many of the Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands indicators, baseline (i.e., pre-construction) data are used to assess project-level performance (post- construction)
|
From page 112... ...
Of the three projects reviewed in this section, the Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands most closely follows the guidance in RECOVER (2006) , Conyngham (2010)
|
From page 113... ...
. They note that long-term achievement of objectives will require additional freshwater input, which is partially controlled TABLE 4-3 C-111 Spreader Canal Project Objectives, Related Indicators, and the Time Necessary to Achieve Each Objective Time Period to Achieve Restoration Objectives Indicators to Monitor Objectives Objectives Increased hydroperiod and freshwater Stage and canal stage Short conditions across the southern mangrove Surface flow transition zone Groundwater level Salinity levels Increased coverage of brackish and Cover, biomass, and identification of Short freshwater submerged and emergent vegetation vegetation Lower salinities in the southern lakes Salinity levels Short region Increased abundance of the freshwater Freshwater prey abundance and biomass Medium prey-based fish communities in the southern mangrove zone Increased productivity of the southern Salinity Medium mangrove transition zone and Submerged aquatic vegetation northeastern Florida Bay Prey fish abundance Increased nesting success of roseate Nesting success Long spoonbills in northeast Florida Bay Increased crocodiles Growth and survival Long Relative abundance, and nesting success NOTE: Short is 5-10 years, Medium is 10-20 years, and Long is >20 years.
|
From page 114... ...
Hydrologic, meteorological, and water quality indicators are monitored in and around the C-111 Spreader Canal Project area, and ecologi cal and salinity monitoring is conducted in the southern coastal wetlands and Florida Bay (see Table 4-3)
|
From page 115... ...
A quantitative analysis plan is needed to evaluate project performance, and long-term monitoring may be required to observe effects on ecological indicators in Florida Bay. It may be difficult to separate the effects of the C-111 Spreader Canal Project from those of non-CERP projects to the north that will also increase the deliveries of freshwater (e.g., ModWaters, C-111 South Dade, Florida Bay Project [see Chapter 3]
|
From page 116... ...
Even when numerical criteria are established, as with hydroperiod and water levels by vegetation category (Table 4-5; USACE and SFWMD, 2009) , they do not seem to be utilized to assess monitoring data (Barry et al., 2017; Chuirazzi et al., 2018; Worley et al., 2017)
|
From page 117... ...
may also be useful for evaluation of restoration. For the biotic components of vegetation and aquatic macroinvertebrates, the Picayune Strand monitoring plan uses comparison to reference sites to demonstrate restoration success, with an ultimate target of matching the distribution, composition, and extent of 1940s vegetation.
|
From page 118... ...
First, the approach to infer simi larity with reference sites is based on an individual sampling event and does not account for the natural variability in reference conditions over time and space. This variability in reference sites could be evaluated and used to determine when the restoration at restored sites can be considered successful.
|
From page 119... ...
that could improve future project-level monitoring programs, including • Use of quantitative objectives and envelopes of expectations, • Careful selection of indicators and appropriate scales of project monitoring, • Rigorous statistical and computational analysis, and • Missed opportunities for learning through adaptive management plans. Quantitative Objectives and Envelopes of Expectations Clear, quantitative objectives or expectations of system response are essential components of project-level performance monitoring.
|
From page 120... ...
The Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands Project's approach considers variability and therefore defines an acceptable envelope of monitoring results. In this case, salinity monitoring is used to determine whether the appropriate salinity enve lope is being achieved for eastern oysters at or near the mouths of major tidal creeks.
|
From page 121... ...
For the C-111 Spreader Canal Project, existing indicators in Florida Bay and the southern mangrove transition zone may be unable to detect projectrelated changes in the face of natural variability and may be better indicators of long-term regional restoration improvements. Indicators of flow and seepage near the project features are needed to assess project performance and inform adaptive management.
|
From page 122... ...
For example, the Picayune Strand and the C-111 Spreader Canal monitor ing plans do not address how collected data will be analyzed. As a result, it is unclear whether the monitoring data can lead to meaningful conclusions about project performance.
|
From page 123... ...
Defining the approach to statistical analysis in the monitoring plan reduces uncertainties and allows for an a priori estimate of the strength of the inference that is made about project success. Evaluation of individual project performance with multiple, neighboring projects may require the use of more complex statistical models or hydrologic and ecological simulation models as part of the data analysis.
|
From page 124... ...
Missed Opportunities for Learning Without adaptive management plans, the opportunities for learning about the restoration process are limited. Of the three CERP projects reviewed here, only Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands has an established adaptive management plan; Picayune Strand was initiated before adaptive management plans were required, and the C-111 Spreader Canal Project team has not developed one.
|
From page 125... ...
. Although the monitoring plan is designed for these systemwide objectives, some projects use the data to supplement project-level performance monitoring.
|
From page 126... ...
called for a comprehensive review process to update the systemwide monitor ing program based on new information and lessons learned from the monitoring program to date; changing ecosystem conditions, including climate change; and changing budget conditions for RECOVER and other agencies that supply systemwide monitoring in support of the CERP. RECOVER's 5-Year Plan includes an update of the Systemwide Monitoring Plan.
|
From page 127... ...
and analysis strategies to improve efficiencies, but more importantly, to maintain the relevancy of the monitoring program to management. Periodically revisiting a monitoring program provides the ability to incorporate emerging stressors that may severely impact the probability of restoration success, such as changing precipitation patterns, regional invasive species, or sea-level rise, which may not have been apparent when the monitoring pro
|
From page 128... ...
Fortunately, several programs have tried different approaches to adapting their monitoring programs to evolving needs and can offer lessons learned as the CERP looks to the near future (2019) when a review of its systemwide monitoring programs is scheduled to begin.
|
From page 129... ...
Commitment to such a process avoids the unintended drift in large monitoring programs that results in a growing deficiency of information for relevant decision making. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Monitoring is essential to assess the effectiveness of ecosystem restoration efforts (i.e., what was the response?
|
From page 130... ...
As programs evolve, more is learned about project functioning, and as knowledge and modeling tools improve, the quantitative objectives can be refined. Monitoring plans should include an evaluation of the ability to detect restoration success given natural variability and sampling constraints.
|
From page 131... ...
might affect restoration outcomes. Only one of the three CERP projects analyzed (Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands)
|
From page 132... ...
The upcoming RECOVER review of its systemwide monitoring plan should be embraced as an opportunity to improve its effectiveness and efficiency. Many of the same issues addressed in project-level monitoring, such as the ability of the sampling plan to address the key questions and the availability of data to allow adaptation of management actions if the desired outcomes are not being achieved, are evident in current approaches to systemwide monitoring.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.