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 United States Department of the Army under Cooperative Agreement No. W912EP-15-2-0002 and by the South Florida Water Management District and the U.S. Department of the Interior. 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: 978-0-309-72305-3
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-72305-1
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/27875
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 2024 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.
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Tenth Biennial Review—2024. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/27875.
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
JAMES SAIERS (Chair), Yale University, New Haven, CT
CASEY BROWN, University of Massachusetts Amherst
JOHN CALLAWAY, University of San Francisco, CA
PHILIP M. DIXON, Iowa State University, Ames
CHARLES T. DRISCOLL, JR. (NAE), Syracuse University, NY
MARLA R. EMERY, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research
MARGARET W. GITAU, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
WENDY D. GRAHAM, University of Florida, Gainesville (resigned November 2023)
MATTHEW C. HARWELL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Newport, OR
WILLIAM A. HOPKINS III, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg
TRACY QUIRK, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge
K. RAMESH REDDY, University of Florida, Gainesville
HELEN M. REGAN, University of California, Riverside
ALAN D. STEINMAN, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI
JEFFREY R. WALTERS, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg
DAVID L. WEGNER, Woolpert Engineering, Tucson, AZ
Staff of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
STEPHANIE E. JOHNSON, Study Director
NOEL WALTERS, Associate Program Officer
EMILY BERMUDEZ, Senior Program Assistant (until September 2024)
SAMUEL KRAFT, Senior Program Assistant (as of April 2024)
WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD
DAVID L. SEDLAK (NAE) (Chair), University of California, Berkeley
NEWSHA AJAMI, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, CA
PEDRO J. ALVAREZ (NAE), Rice University, Houston, TX
MARTIN DOYLE, Duke University, Durham, NC
JORDAN R. FISCHBACH, The Water Institute, Baton Rouge, LA
SHEMIN GE, University of Colorado Boulder
ELLEN GILINSKY, Ellen Gilinsky, LLC, Richmond, VA
ROBERT M. HIRSCH, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA
BRANKO KERKEZ, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
YUSUKE KUWAYAMA, University of Maryland, Baltimore County
VENKATARAMAN LAKSHMI, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
CAMILLE PANNU, Columbia University, New York, NY
AMY PRUDEN, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg
JENNIFER TANK, University of Notre Dame, IN
CRYSTAL L. TULLEY-CORDOVA, Navajo Nation Department of Water Resources, Window Rock, AZ
Staff of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
DEBORAH GLICKSON, Director
LAURA J. EHLERS, Senior Program Officer
STEPHANIE E. JOHNSON, Senior Program Officer
M. JEANNE AQUILINO, Financial Business Partner
CHARLES BURGIS, Program Officer
MARGO REGIER, Program Officer
JONATHAN M. TUCKER, Program Officer
NOEL WALTERS, Associate Program Officer
MAYA FREY, Senior Program Assistant
SAMUEL KRAFT, Senior Program Assistant
MILES LANSING, Senior Program Assistant
BRYAN RUFF, Senior Program Assistant
Reviewers
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:
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release.
The review of this report was overseen by CHRIS T. HENDRICKSON (NAE), Carnegie Mellon University, and CATHERINE L. KLING (NAS), Cornell University. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
Acknowledgments
The study committee and staff would like to respectfully acknowledge the Miccosukee and the Seminole Peoples, past and present, and the Calusa, Tequesta, Jeaga, Ais, and Mayaimi Peoples before them—the original and current caretakers of Everglades’ land, water, and air. The study committee and staff would also like to gratefully acknowledge the Native peoples on whose ancestral homelands they live and work. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are physically housed on the traditional land of the Nacotchtank (Anacostan) and Piscataway Peoples, past and present. The committee and staff honor and respect the enduring relationship that exists between Native peoples and nations and this land. The committee and staff thank these peoples for their resilience in protecting this land and aspire to uphold our responsibilities to their example.
Many individuals assisted the committee and staff in their task to create this report. We would like to express our appreciation to Robert Johnson, U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI); Gina Ralph, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE); and Amanda Kahn, South Florida Water Management District (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.
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
The National Academies and Everglades Restoration
Natural System Restoration Progress
Issues That May Impact Progress: Water Quality
Conclusions and Recommendations
3 APPLYING INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN
Collaboration with Everglades Tribes
Assessment of CERP Tribal Consultation and Collaboration Over Time
Indigenous Knowledge and the Scientific Process
Best Practices for Integration of Indigenous Knowledge in Florida Everglades Restoration
CERP-Specific Examples of Ways to Improve Application of Indigenous Knowledge
4 APPLICATION OF TOOLS TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate Scenarios for Restoration Planning and Management
Sediment Accretion Modeling for Restoration Decision Making in Light of Sea-Level Rise
Models for Assessing Ecological Responses to Climate Change
Application of Climate Tools for Adaptation of Operations
Conclusions and Recommendations
5 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT AND USE OF NEW INFORMATION IN DECISION MAKING
Adaptive Management Process Guidance from RECOVER
Evaluation of CERP Adaptive Management and Incorporating New Information into CERP Decision Making
Revisiting the Building Blocks of Adaptive Management
Conclusions and Recommendations
A The Restoration Plan in Context
Preface
The Everglades is a treasure. It supports a remarkable diversity of birds, fish, reptiles, and mammals and encompasses landscapes unlike those anywhere else on the planet. As the homeland of the Seminole and Miccosukee, the Everglades has provided sustenance and shelter essential to their lives and serves as a center of cultural activities and sacred traditions that have been passed down through the generations. The Everglades also benefits the burgeoning population along South Florida’s coastline by providing storm-surge protection, recharging drinking-water aquifers, attracting tourism that contributes to local economies, and offering recreational opportunities that enrich the lives of the region’s residents.
That this natural wonder was once regarded as a nuisance and impediment to progress now seems unfathomable, but this was the undeserved reputation that the Everglades endured through much of the 20th century as it was replumbed to accommodate agriculture and development. Nearly every part of the Everglades was affected. At the top of the watershed, the once-meandering Kissimmee River was straightened and channelized, cutting off its connection with the floodplain. Lake Okeechobee, the so-called liquid heart of the Everglades, was isolated from the surrounding marsh by an earthen levee, and the lion’s share of sheet flow that once sustained the ridge-and-slough landscape and fed the southern estuaries was short-circuited through a maze of canals to the Atlantic Ocean. With drainage enabling the expansion of agriculture, excess phosphorus runoff from poorly managed fertilizer applications caused water quality impairments that propagated throughout much of the system, from Lake Okeechobee and the coastal estuaries to the freshwater marshes of the central and western Everglades. The loss of water storage and hydrologic connectivity, coupled with water quality degradation, led to widespread habitat loss and left ecosystems throughout the Everglades struggling to support their wildlife and sustain ecosystem services upon which South Florida residents rely.
Marjory Stoneman Douglas and other visionaries recognized that the Everglades was in trouble even before large-scale drainage began in 1948 with the launch of the Central and Southern Florida Project for Flood Control. Unfortunately, more than half the original Everglades was gone and much of the remaining fraction impacted by the time a plan to halt Everglades degradation was conceived. In 2000, Congress authorized the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), the world’s largest ecosystem restoration effort intended to restore, preserve, and protect the South Florida ecosystem by addressing the quantity, quality, timing, and distribution of water while providing for water supply and flood protection.
The CERP is daring and ambitious, originally consisting of 68 projects outlined in the Yellow Book that were projected to take 30 years to complete. Recognizing the scale of the challenge, Congress recommended that an independent scientific review be conducted on progress toward restoration on a regular basis. In response, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine formed the Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress (CISRERP) in 2004. This report represents the tenth biennial review of the CERP by this committee.
CISRERP is comprised of natural scientists, social scientists, and engineers specializing in ecosystem restoration; wetland ecology; water resources; climate change; environmental policy; adaptive management; program administration; and ecological, water quality, and hydrological modeling. These experts were selected for their eminence in their fields and for their record of accomplishment in addressing issues relevant to Everglades restoration. Over a 12-month period, the committee met in-person on four occasions and in many additional virtual meetings, when it heard oral presentations on the various dimensions of Everglades restoration and had discussions with federal and state personnel, Tribal representatives, academic scientists, interest groups, members of nongovernmental organizations, and the public. Outside of these meetings, the committee read thousands of pages of reports and peer-reviewed literature, synthesized and drafted its findings, and made revisions based on committee-wide feedback. I am extremely grateful for the energy and thoughtful efforts that this distinguished group dedicated to these important tasks and have been inspired by the respectful way the members engaged with one another and worked collegially to produce this document. The 2024 CISRERP report represents the consensus assessment of the committee on restoration accomplishments and challenges that have emerged primarily over the past 2 years but also over the 24 years since the CERP was authorized.
CISRERP could not have completed its work without Stephanie Johnson, Emily Bermudez, and Noel Walters, talented staff of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. This is the tenth iteration of CISRERP,
and Stephanie Johnson has served as study director for every one of them. It is a great fortune to this committee and, more generally, to the quality of the review process that Stephanie is able to reprise this important role. Stephanie has an extraordinary command of the science, engineering, and policy that underpin the CERP, and she has built a well-respected reputation that enables her to convene members across the Everglades community to familiarize CISRERP of the latest developments and unaddressed challenges. The information that Stephanie is uniquely able to provide was essential to mapping the course of this report, and her leadership, analytical thinking, and determination were critical in assisting the committee to develop its ideas and insights into a coherent narrative. Emily Bermudez provided key technical and logistical support before, during, and after each meeting, and Noel Walters provided support for production of the report. On behalf of the entire committee, I wish to express our gratitude and admiration for the exceptional abilities and valuable contributions of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine staff. The task would have been impossible without them.
The committee is indebted to many people for information and resources they provided. The committee’s technical liaisons—Gina Ralph, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Robert Johnson, U.S. Department of the Interior; and Amanda Kahn, South Florida Water Management District—responded to numerous information requests and facilitated the committee’s access to agency resources and expertise. The committee also wishes to thank the numerous individuals who shared their views on Everglades restoration through presentations, field trips, and public comments (see Acknowledgments).
James Saiers, Chair
Committee on Independent Scientific
Review of Everglades Restoration Progress
This page intentionally left blank.
Acronyms and Abbreviations
| AF | acre-foot |
| AFR | Adaptive Foundational Resilience |
| AMI | Active Marsh Improvement |
| ASR | aquifer storage and recovery |
| BBCW | Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands |
| BBSEER | Biscayne Bay and Southeastern Everglades Ecosystem Restoration |
| BISECT | Biscayne and Southern Everglades Coastal Transport |
| BMP | best management practice |
| CEM | conceptual ecological model |
| CEPP | Central Everglades Planning Project |
| CEQ | Council on Environmental Quality |
| CERP | Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan |
| CFR | Code of Federal Regulations |
| CISRERP | Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress |
| CMIP | Coupled Model Intercomparison Project |
| COP | Combined Operational Plan |
| CROGEE | Committee on the Restoration of the Greater Everglades Ecosystem |
| DOI | U.S. Department of the Interior |
| DPM | Decomp Physical Model |
| EAA | Everglades Agricultural Area |
| EAV | emergent aquatic vegetation |
| ECB | existing conditions baseline |
| EDEN | Everglades Depth Estimation Network |
| ENSO | El Niño–Southern Oscillation |
| EDR | Engineering Documentation Report |
| EIS | environmental impact statement |
| EPA | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency |
| ERTP | Everglades Restoration Transition Plan |
| ESA | Endangered Species Act |
| EVA | Everglades Vulnerability Analysis |
| FCE | Florida Coastal Everglades |
| FDEP | Florida Department of Environmental Protection |
| FEB | flow equalization basin |
| FWC | Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission |
| FWM | flow-weighted mean |
| FWO | future without |
| FWS | U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service |
| FY | fiscal year |
| GCM | General Circulation Model |
| GRR | General Reevaluation Report |
| IDS | Integrated Delivery Schedule |
| IPRL | Invasive Plant Research Laboratory |
| IQA | Information Quality Act |
| IRL-South | Indian River Lagoon-South |
| JEM | Joint Ecosystem Modeling |
| LILA | Loxahatchee Impoundment Landscape Assessment |
| LNWR | Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge |
| LOCAR | Lake Okeechobee Component A Reservoir |
| LORS | Lake Okeechobee Regulation Schedule |
| LOSOM | Lake Okeechobee System Operating Manual |
| LOWRP | Lake Okeechobee Watershed Restoration Project |
| LRR | Limited Reevaluation Report |
| LTER | Long-Term Ecological Research |
| MGD | million gallons per day |
| NEPA | National Environmental Policy Act |
| NGVD | National Geodetic Vertical Datum |
| OSTP | Office of Science and Technology Policy |
| PACR | Post-Authorization Change Report |
| PED | Preconstruction Engineering and Design |
| PIR | Project Implementation Report |
| POM | Project Operating Manual |
| ppb | parts per billion |
| RCW | red-cockaded woodpecker |
| 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 |
| SFWMD | South Florida Water Management District |
| SOM | System Operating Manual |
| SOP | Standard Operating Procedure |
| STA | stormwater treatment area |
| TBD | to be determined |
| TMDL | total maximum daily load |
| TP | total phosphorus |
| USACE | U.S. Army Corps of Engineers |
| USDA | U.S. Department of Agriculture |
| 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 Area |
| WQBEL | water quality–based effluent limit |
| WRDA | Water Resources Development Act |
| WRRDA | Water Resources Reform and Development Act |
| WY | water year |
This page intentionally left blank.
