For the Future of Florida, Repair the Everglades -
1981 – The Marshall Plan Revisited!
Arthur R. Marshall Foundation Science & Technology Team Must Have Agency Action Report
January 8, 2008
Subject: Dept. of Interior Vision and Plan for Successful Everglades Restoration as an outline for an Everglades Agricultural Area Plan
ABSTRACT: This report addresses two urgencies: (1) Major disconnects between the Dept. of Interior Vision & Plan/National Research Council (NRC) recommendations, and terms of the US Sugar Corporation (USSC) land buy; (2) actions needed to overcome the major disconnects, given DOI/NRC stated urgency.
BACKGROUND. DOI has issued Version 2, of the DOI Vision and Plan, i.e. The Plan (Scarlett, Duke, et al, 2008). The Plan is being used as briefing document for the Obama transition team. The Plan is based on National Academy of Sciences (NAS) National Research Council (NRC) Recommendations. (National Research Council, 2008) Briefings at the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) have indicated it will take at least two years to develop a plan for restoration efforts in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA), after the USSC land purchase is complete, and land swaps can begin. Land swaps may be delayed owing to US Sugar having a seven year lease on the land, and other circumstances not yet foreseen.
THE MARSHALL PLAN, 1981, postulated that: (1) Sheet flow be restored to the greatest possible extent [feasible under current conditions] from the Kissimmee Lakes to Florida Bay; (2) the purpose was to recover an array of vital natural resources now disappearing from the region, of extreme importance to present and future Floridians and to the nation at large. (3) The status quo…continues to diminish or degrade: - water supplies – soils - freshwater fisheries - marine fisheries & estuaries – wetlands – Everglades National Park. This remains our call to restore the Everglades and its historic river of grass, per the Governor’s mandate.
IMPACT OF NOT TAKING ACTIONS SUGGESTED: Less than full action will preclude timely restor-ation with potentially unrecoverable ecosystem services and severe economic impacts (Marshall, 1981, 2008)
THREE MAJOR DISCONNECTS
· The seven year lease terms of the USSC land undermine the urgency of taking near term action to prevent further, possibly non-restorable degradation of the Everglades ecosystem, as reported by NRC (2008) and outlined in the DOI Plan.
· The seven year lease terms of the USSC insufficiently address the urgency of taking near term action on Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan - CERP implementation as a carbon sequestration mecha-nism to mitigate sea level rise and climate change as reported by NRC (2008)/outlined in the DOI Plan.
· Both the DOI Plan and the USSC land purchase are not financially executable under the current federal – state financial structure; there is an immediate urgent need of financial restructuring, to provide the means for urgent actions aforementioned.
THE MARSHALL PLAN BENEFICIAL SUGGESTIONS FOR MUST HAVE AGENCY ACTION – 2009:
FEDERAL BENEFICIAL SUGGESTIONS:
· Presidential allocation of funds to CERP to make up for CERP 50/50 nine year federal deficit
· Presidential allocation of funds as a jobs/conservation corps/carbon reduction mechanism to support CERP implementation
· Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) or expanded federal legislation for back payment, and continue federal share of CERP 50/50 cost share.
· Federal establishment of cap and trade system with potential for ecosystem services economic value to partially fund CERP.
· DOI/Task Force facilitation of DOI Vision & Plan per WRDA 96, section 528, under an all-stakeholder Commission/Council Co-Chaired by Secretary, FDEP (Per DOI Vision and Plan recommendation)
o Continue science coordination team work to support stakeholder Commission
· Re-designation of the Everglades as an endangered ecosystem
STATE BENEFICIAL SUGGESTIONS:
· Provide funding to supplement the US Sugar Corporation (USSC) land purchase by SFWMD
· Appoint a Glades representative to the vacant SFWMD Governing Board position ASAP.
· Press USSC and other land owners for minimal land acreage immediately to implement full DECOMP and restoration of sheet flow per DOI Vision and Plan.
· Ensure the minimal amount of acreage (150,000 acres?) to make the USSC plant at Clewiston productive (cost-effective) for seven years.
· Take actions that provide non-ag economic transition under State Regional Economic Development Initiatives (REDI) before the Clewiston sugar mill becomes less than cost effective (next generation?).
· Note that failure to provide a modicum of land to restore the missing link results in equivalent adverse economic consequences to those who depend on the estuaries or near-shore fisheries for livelihood.
o Recognize that the ~43,000 acres needed to restore the missing link flow path will provide ecosystem service benefits of great economic value to all (Marshall, 1981; Marshall, 2008)
· Press for a lower total price, a higher lease price, and support, for financial sustainability of SFWMD mission, or out, per SFWMD counter-offer; the status quo amounts to an unfunded mandate.
· Use DOI Vision and Plan as integrated strategic guidance for an EAA plan
· Use Florida Dept of Community Affairs (DCA)/Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)/SFWMD oversight to ensure county plans do not interfere with CERP implementation.
· Provide a Co-Chair for facilitation of the DOI Plan per WRDA 96, section 528, under a standing stakeholder Commission; Include county govt and Florida stakeholder representation.
LOCAL BENEFICIAL SUGGESTIONS (Counties):
· Ensure land use provisions that do not inhibit CERP implementation
· Participate in implementing DOI Vision and Plan.
· Take Action in the 10 County Coalition
US SUGAR CORP: Cure the Mine Problem; Keep the corporate word that the sale is for the greater good.
AG COMMUNITY: Negotiate Land Trades; Help the local economy: Donate a Nature Center!
EVERGLADES COALITION: (DISCLAIMER: This Report does not constitute endorsement by EvCo)
· Exercise leadership in advocating for beneficial suggestions herein; Base advocacy on science
· Note that the DOI Vision and Plan is the closest thing to the 1981 Marshall Plan
· Note that the DOI Plan is the closest thing to the Everglades Coalition May, 2006, resolution taken to the Task Force asking for a strategic plan for the EAA; Same for the 10 County Coalition resolution in 2006.
· Note that all this is an extension of the homework given to EvCo by Senator Bob Graham (2008)
GENERAL BENEFICIAL SUGGESTIONS:
· Base all the above on full cost consideration of ecosystem services economic benefits as well as costs;
· Make CERP implementation a case study on getting to a proper Benefit:Cost ratio for decision support; (NRC 2000; Marshall, 2008); See NRC Summary at: http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/valuing_services_final.pdf
· Be optimistic; Optimism is a force multiplier; Colin Powell.
REFERENCES / BIBLIOGRAPHY (Some familiarity of the references are a prerequisite for full understanding of this report, and the basis for action per beneficial suggestions noted:
1. Almeida, Danielle, et al; Top 10 Science Needs and Gaps; A poster paper; Greater Everglades Ecosystem Restoration (GEER) Conference; July 21 – August 1, 2008; Naples, FL.
2. Marshall, Arthur R. Jr: For the Future of Florida, Repair the Everglades; Friends of the Everglades newsletter and Petition; Spring 1981; Also known as the Marshall Plan
3. Marshall, John Arthur; Value of Ecosystem Services Provided by Restoring Gravity-Driven Flow to the Everglades; A Conference on Ecosystem Services (ACES); Dec 8 – 11; Naples, FL
4. National Research Council; Valuing Ecosystem Services; National Academy Press; 2000
5. National Research Council; Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Second Biennial Review, 2008; National Academies Press Advance Copy; September 29, 2008
6. Scarlett, Lynn; Duke, Dennis, et al; Department of Interior Vision and Plan for Successful Everglades Restoration; Dec 4, 2008 Version (ARMF S&T Supporting comments to SFWMD Governing Board, WRAC et al, Jan 6, 2008)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment