Monday, December 6, 2010

International Volunteer Day

December 5th is International Volunteer Day. The Marshall Foundation would like to take this time to thank the many people who offer us their time and their talents. Please congratulate our Top 101 Volunteers!

Friday, November 12, 2010

The Last Egret

here is a promotional video for The Adventures of Charlie Pierce: The Last Egret. The book, by local author Harvey Oyer III, is being read by every 4th grader in Palm Beach County. It ties together with an exhibit at the Palm Beach County Historical Society and with Marshall Foundation field trips to the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge. The Palm Beach County School District's T.E.N. (The Education Network) has created a 1/2 hour documentary to go along with the book.

Watch the video!

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Public Comments to the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (10/28/10)

Public Comment to the Task Force; Coral Gables, Florida, October 28, 2010

By John Arthur Marshall,
Representing the Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc.


As briefed by Mark Musaus, we applaud expansion of the Greater Everglades Ecosystem by the proposed establishment of the Everglades Headwaters and Fisheating Creek National Wildlife Refuges, as well as the proposed additions to the Florida Panther NWR, and other activities to increase spatial extent of natural area, noting that this meets the first goal/objective of CERP Table 5-1 in a most significant way.

We applaud the inclusion of Ecosystem Services as an emerging theme in the Task Force 2010 Plan for Coordinating Science, as noted in the Everglades Coalition resolution.

Connecting the dots: Recent Everglades Coalition members’ ecosystem services value studies and analyses indicate the high value of restoring and preserving spatial extent of the Everglades, with benefit to costs ratios exceeding 4:1, and in some cases much higher.

While methods used in two Everglades analyses differed significantly, the result ends up in the same ball park. Case studies also indicate that Benefit:Cost in the case of CERP will be somewhere in the vicinity of 6:1. This includes our 2010 Summer Intern work on Valuing Ecosystem Services of a Restored River of Grass, with handouts available.

The 6:1 B/C ratio exceeds the US Army Corps of Engineer’s go-no-go criteria of B/C greater than 1.5, and appears to make more sense than the somewhat arbitrary and esoteric assignment of habitat units, in B/C analysis.

With respect to pinning the tail on the donkey regarding the absolute value of restoring ecosystems, we recognize that the work done is a best estimate of projected outcomes.

We feel that analytic value is in consistently applying the methodology to different configurations to provide analysis of alternatives in a situation like the River of Grass workshop deliberations. That said, this does provide a general sense of value.

Should the ESV-B/C approach be applied to CERP without a overt mandate for doing so? Given the robust B/C ratios, maybe it is time to give more consideration to the ESV-B/C approach for CERP decision-support, with the synthesis of benefits in economic dollar value, that fully meets the WRDA Section 601 requirements to report to Congress the benefits to the natural system and the human environment achieved, in understandable terms.

We note that The DRAFT Report to Congress does give some credit to Defenders of Wildlife for Valuing Ecosystem Services. We concur with NRC that failure to put a value on Ecosystems leaves them at zero value, and at high risk of not meeting no net loss of wetlands policy.

Finally, as a matter of ethics, if we can’t put value added by our work, what does that say for us, and for hope of restoring the Everglades? Thanks for considering the EvCo resolution.

John Arthur Marshall

SIP 2010 Poster Paper


Sure we talked about the SIP Poster Paper...but did we ever share it with you? Here it is for your viewing pleasure...

follow the link for a PDF version:

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Show your support for National Wildlife Refuges

This from our friends at the National Wildlife Refuge Association...
America’s Great Outdoors initiative in an effort to start a national dialogue about the great places across our nation to get outside and how the federal government and private citizens can help protect these places for future generations. After months of collecting input from Americans, the President will announce how he plans to conserve our great outdoors this Fall.
Refuges need YOUR help to make sure they are key part of any Presidential announcement -- don’t let the National Wildlife Refuge System remain America’s best kept SECRET!

Please go to America’s Great Outdoors website and cast your vote for the National Wildlife Refuge System – we need AT LEAST 4000 votes!

The National Wildlife Refuge System ought to be a cornerstone of this Initiative. As committed refuge supporters you’ve experienced the wonders of refuges and you know how important creating and conserving refuges are to preserving our natural legacy. So please cast your vote now and tell the President how valuable refuges are to the American public.

If you haven’t already registered with the website, click here to register. After you’ve completed the process, follow the instructions below.

If you have already registered with the America’s Great Outdoors website, please click on this link to go to Conserving America’s Wildlife Heritage: Strengthening our National Wildlife Refuge System There’s a box on the left with an orange border that shows the vote total so far. Click on the GREEN “Promote” text to cast your vote and leave a comment about your refuge if you wish.

We need to make sure the Refuge System is no longer America’s best-kept secret. Thank you for speaking up for wildlife and the refuges they call home!

Regards,

Joan Patterson

Director of Grassroots Outreach

National Wildlife Refuge Association


And here is a shot of our favorite Refuge:

Monday, August 16, 2010

Green M&M's Party!

US Sugar Purchase: responding to the critics

Several newspapers and columnists have responded negatively to the land purchase that the Governing Board agreed on last week. So let's take the time to debunk some of their favorite myths:

I’m afraid you don’t understand the hydrology of the Everglades, the soil subsidence in the EEA that will prevent any natural connection between Lake O and the water conservation areas, and the need for more water storage

We understand the hydrology perfectly well. We have looked at contour maps, and the north-south profiles from Lake O to WCA-3. It is clear that even with the current subsidence, the possibility of gravity driven flow begins when the lake reaches ~13+ feet, the higher the Lake, the more gravity driven flow, and energy reduction. Florida Crystals has reached the same conclusion.

Even the SFWMD admits that this is so, in the course of the River of Grass workshop considerations.

That also is why the Corps of Engineers is considering a spill-way, down roughly this north-south path around the Miami and North New River Canal. Given current conditions of the dike, and an extreme wet condition that would take the Lake up to 18+ feet, and a possible breach of the dike, it is fairly obvious which direction the water would flow.

An ill-conceived conclusion that the water would not flow came from a look at an east-west transect, which does show a bowl of sorts. However the major objective remains south flow, not east-west flow. The hype that water won't flow from south to north under the aforementioned conditions is beyond science (BS)

Of course the reservoir isn’t the final solution and nobody says it is.

The National Research Council councils against engineered solutions, as usually they carry a lot of unforeseen consequences. As the EAA reservoir would have been a four-sided dam requiring a lot of pumping, and more unforeseen consequences, same as the dike around Lake O, it needed to be taken off the table as providing too few benefits, relative to cost.

Where do you get your water storage?

Dynamic Storage and Sheet Flow, as described in CERP section 2.3.1

Everglades Scientists, Florida Crystals, and the ArtMarshall.org have all calculated that if there is enough treatment by restoration of vegetation in shallow flow-ways and STA's, there would be enough thru-put via flow to provide "dynamic storage", just as it worked in the historic Everglades.

The ArtMarshall.org is also pushing restoration of the pond apple forest as part of the solution. It appears that the pond apple forest played a major role in reducing nutrients as water flowed south.

I.e., this approach would have moved nearly 2 million acre feet south, the current estimated requirement to restore ENP and FL Bay, which would also provide relief of the estuaries.

Both the placement and acreage of the EAA Resvoir would likely have foreclosed this option.

John

B.S. Geology, UF '63, M.S. System Science, 72

John Arthur Marshall, Chairman of the Board,

Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc.

www.ArtMarshall.org Declaring 2010 the Year of the Everglades!

EVERGLADES RESTORATION: Our Passion! Our Mission! Our Legacy!

Letter to the Editor: Orlando Sentinel

The following was sent to the Orlando Sentinel in response to Nancy Smith's article, U.S. Sugar Deal Diverts Money From Concrete Solutions. The quote below is from that article...
I asked Sen. Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland, what she thought of Thursday’s unanimous vote. “I’m disappointed but not surprised,” she said. “I’m a great supporter of Everglades restoration, somebody who sponsored Everglades Forever. But this is the wrong land, wrong time, wrong price.
We should never have switched from building projects, from a reservoir that was nearly built that we had already put $300 million into, to buying land that brings us to a halt.

Most of the nay-sayers of the purchase parrot the EAA reservoir as if it would be the savior of the Everglades. In fact it was the second-worst component of a deficient plan, second on to the proposal for 330 Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) wells in what was the historic Everglades.

ASR has faded into the background; the EAA reservoir is in need of the same course of action, with the realization that low-cost, low-risk, low tech approaches, such as a flow-way provide significantly greater benefit to cost, than high-tech, high-risk, high-cost applications that require pumping and concrete.

Operations and maintenance costs, for either of these components would have broken the bank, and both have significant water-quality problems with more expense to address, rather than the needed water treatment provided by restoring flow, re-vegetating, and restoring peat, fundamental processes's needed to restore the Everglades.

In the case of the EAA reservoir, the construction cost was ballooning from the $400 Million estimate to something approaching a billion dollars. The Title of Smith's article - U.S. Sugar deal diverts money from concrete solutions - does hold some truth. There would have been a lot of concrete plowed into this project, and of course there was no concrete or deep water storage in the historic Everglades.

Not only would the EAA Reservoir provide negative water quality attributes, but would provide little relief to the estuaries, because when bone-dry the EAA reservoir would lower Lake Okeechobee less than a foot. Few reservoir advocates have taken a look at the future scenario, with the reservoir being a source for back-pumping polluted farm water.

In a really wet storm event the reservoir would fill up same as Lake O; this would lead to no other option but to dump dirty water south, same as dumping dirty water east at west to the estuaries.

In fact the EAA reservoir would have displaced spatial extent of natural area needed for treatment and conveyance of clean water, as in a lose-lose-lose BIG-time loser situation.

The reservoir was an alternative solution owing to the lack of a willing seller of the lands needed to convey and treat water when the plan was formulated back in 1999 (The ArtMarshall.org was there protesting for more natural flow then, same as now)

All should be grateful that Governing Board Member Estenoz addressed the reservoir issue in the discussion of what to do, April 12.

Granted we all would like to have seen more land bought in the August 12 deal. However the Art Marshall view is that the SFWMD has reached the right reasons for suspending the reservoir and considering win-win options, with the option to purchase more land in the future, for the natural solution.

Whatever configuration is chosen to restore the missing link to revitalize the river of grass, the ArtMarshall.org has calculated economic benefits of 90 Billion dollars over the 40 year life-cycle of the plan.

The best of six solutions - with the most economic benefit - turned out to be the one with no deep water storage reservoirs. Wonder of all wonders, it was the Florida Crystals Corporation solution.

We would be happy to provide the basis for that calculation as well, for people willing to listen to serious analysis, rather than shoot from the hip.

Art Marshall, Marjory Stoneman Douglas, and Johnny Jones, Everglades restoration luminaries past, had it right all along. For the Art Marshall approach, Semper Fi,

Respectfully submitted,

John
John Arthur Marshall, Chairman of the Board,
Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc.

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Letter to the Editor: What About the Benefits?

Below is a draft letter to the editor, sent to the Palm Beach Post from the 2010 Marshall Foundation Summer Interns. As of 8/12/10 this had not been published.

U.S. Sugar Land Purchase

What About the Benefits?

Restoration of the historic Everglades is at a critical point. In a pending Florida Supreme Court appeal, litigants have argued against the purchase of the U.S. Sugar Corporation land on economic grounds. The newest version of the proposed land deal calls for buying 26,800 acres from U.S. Sugar that could be used to build reservoirs and treatment areas to restore water flows from Lake Okeechobee to the southern Everglades. The litigants’ main argument states that the high cost of the South Florida Water Management District issuing $200 million in bonds does not serve the “public good.” Litigants imply that restoring the land bought with bonds will cost still more and take away from other critical Everglades restoration projects. They suffer from what some call, “sticker shock.” Those critics have failed to consider the economic benefits that restoration will bring or claim that they are either intangible, or incalculable. However, there are objective, scientific methods of valuing the services provided to nature and society by restored ecosystems.

While the cost of buying the land is evident, the greater benefits provided by the land are less apparent. In order to assess these benefits, we have quantified the economic value of the services provided by ecosystems: flood protection, water supply, recreation, etc. We have used and modified the methodology for “valuing ecosystem services”, first quantified by a group of international economists and biologists in 1997 and recommended for application by the National Academy of Sciences. Without natural systems like the Everglades the cost to provide these services will burden the SFWMD and the public. Our point is that natural systems and restoration provide economic value.

Furthermore, in the decision-making process, we must recognize that the natural ecosystem has tangible economic value. We argue that it can be evaluated as an investment, and we calculated the return on the purchase of the U.S. Sugar land. Our assessment compared the co

sts to the ecological and economic benefits of the proposed plans for Everglades restoration. Costs include the purchase of land, building necessary reservoirs and storm water treatment areas, and ongoing operations and maintenance. Benefits include flood control, water regulation and the revitalization of the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries, which have been severely damaged by harmful discharges from Lake Okeechobee.

Investment in any of the proposed restoration plans will result in a substantial return within 10 years and contribute up to $90 billion dollars to the economy over 40 years. What the investors and taxpayers need to remember is that restoration is not only a “feel good” environmental project, but also an economic investment with a huge return. With a benefit to cost ratio of at least 6 to 1 there is an astounding “sticker benefit” associated with the purchase and restoration of this land.

2010 Summer Interns: Angelique Giraud, Ed Pritchard, Dylan Scott, Adrienne Smith, Jim Wally

Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc.


What about the Benefits?: The U.S. Sugar Corporation Land Purchase

Here is a paraphrased version of my public comment to the SFWMD Governing Board, delivered on August 11, 2010:

Chairmain Buermann: The written summary submitted for the record is the work of our Arthur R. Marshall Foundation Summer Interns, same that briefed you at the Greater Everglades Ecosystem Restoration (GEER) Conference in July.

Economic conclusions remain: In the long run, whatever River of Grass configuration is chosen, the economic benefits approach 90 billion dollars over the 40 year life cycle of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). This results in a calculated benefit to cost ration of 6 to 1, maybe more, with an optimal approach.

What were the benefits as Art Marshall saw them, reading from the 1981 Marshall Plan:
There will be benefits to fresh and saltwater fisheries, to wildlife, and to water quality. These translate into increased public health and improved recreational experience, protein foods for Floridians and their visitors, and profit for the tourist industry and fisheries, both recreational and commercial. There will also be benefits - little recognized - arising from increased energy efficiency.
On the same page of the Marshall Plan, Marjory Stoneman Douglas addresses the cost question:
What about the costs? The cost of doing nothing in monumental.
As Art Marshall advocated, the only way to get this done is to buy some land...and increase the total spatial extent of natural area...the first stated goal of CERP!

Stupidity is forgivable, but ignorance is no excuse.

Buy the land, whatever's affordable. Then buy more land when it becomes affordable.

The cost of not doing it is monumental

(Following this public comment, Chairman Beurmann acknowledged the work of the 2010 Arthur R. Marshall Foundation Summer Interns with a thank you.)

Post Script: (1) All the nay-sayers and anit-establishmentarians are putting up roadblocks, so who is going to exercise leadership and tell us how it--CERP+, is going to be done?
(2) Art Marshall, Marjory Stoneman Douglas and Johnny Jones, had it right all along.

Respectfully Submitted,
John Arthur Marshall

Friday, August 6, 2010

Another group of Champions to help restore the Everglades

A heartfelt 'thank you' to Jim, Angelique, Ed, Dylan and Adrienne. Best of luck in all that you do.

Friday, July 23, 2010

Interns make a splash at the GEER Conference

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The SIP 2010 on Valuing Ecosystem Services of a Restore River of Grass Poster Paper and write-up has the 2010 SIP Class over the top and up even another notch. Lots of good comments on what the interns have accomplished. Sponsoring Dr. Richard Weisskoff, Environmental Economist, who actually wrote the book on the Economics of Everglades Restoration, gave us even more presence at the GEER Conference. To answer a lingering question, GEER 2010 was more than worth the investment (as in priceless). The photos better tell the story, and will be some of the highlights in the Graduation Luncheon presentation.

SIP ESV POSTER PAPER
Perhaps the biggest coup at the Conference was the impromptu working lunch Break out session (remarked by a few as one of the best presentations), “sponsored” by Ronnie Best, Conference Co-Chair. Handout: Costanza, et al, paper (green) with written public comment
• Introduction Ronnie Best (JAM)
• Keynote speaker: Dr. Richard Weisskoff
• Summer Intern Presentation of Poster Paper (Angelique, Jim; JAM intro)
• Discussion and Questions (There were some)

The Summer intern Poster paper was posted early (day 1) on an extra display board, along with the 2008 poster paper (Top Ten Science Needs and Gaps); These posters stayed up all five days. Also the SIP 2010 display, as noted below.

Several VIP’s were briefed by the Summer Interns and the SIP Team (including Dr. Weisskoff, Dr. Tom, JAM, Shannon); each of five got a VIP folder package, including a CD.
• CD was another great SI idea, we passed out about 18 CD’s, which contained most of the hand outs and more); VIP’s briefed include…
• Eric Buermann (pictured below), Chair, Gov Board, SFWMD (“I will use these numbers)
• Rock Salt, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works (an hour of hard questions)
• Colonel Al Pantano (1.5 hours of discussion, including how the USACE works)
o His deputy, LtCol Kinard was at the Rock Salt Brief
• Cheryl Ulrich (at the Noon Breakout, when she asked for more details; invitation to NCER)
• Stephanie Johnson, National Research Council (Biennial report?),
• Greg May, Executive Director, Dept of Interior Task Force, at the poster and in Pubic Comment

RESULT: Virtually every major principle VIP now knows of the SIP, the 2010 interns, and the direction of the ArtMarshall.org. Of course exposure was not limited to the VIP’s.

PR: The SIP Team yellow shirts worked out great; lots of recognition of the SIP Team
• We also “acquired” a vacant vendor table and posted the SIP 2010 display; also included 2010 year of the Everglades report, brochures, and flyer advertising SIP 2011.

Recognition from the Podium
• Paul Sousa (Marshall interns are our replacements, our future) Other Recognition:
• Larry Fink, SFWMD retired – “Great WRAC presentation by Summer Interns; You must be proud” (Many more like this, acknowledging yellow shirt team)


PUBLIC COMMENT ON ECOSYSTEMS SERVICES VALUATION (ESV), SYNTHESIS, etc.
o JAM To SCG/WG meeting Noon, July 14 (Costanza handout, blue copy); invitation to attend poster paper #14; some blue copies made it to noon breakout session; Only NGO to comment.
o To Paul Wetzel on Synthesis of Everglades Restoration and Ecosystem Services (SERES)
o Potential for ARMF/FEI S&T committee to be involved in SERES/CESI.
o Potential for Dr. Weisskoff to be involved as TBD Environmental Economist on list of Core Team members
o RECOVER Report (Double Sized notebook DRAFT), regarding speaker comments interim goals and objectives, and shared vision of “what is restoration” – Question:
o Is CERP Table 5-1 goals and objectives in the document?
 Increase total spatial extent of natural area, etc
 Everybody should be made to memorize these objectives. o Answer, we will make sure it is there.



Summer Interns with Rock Salt

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Guest Blogger--Ed Pritchard


To keep you all updated on the Summer Intern Program, we have asked the interns to serve as guest bloggers from time to time. Here is a rundown of recent events from Ed Pritchard:

Over the past couple of weeks, my fellow interns and I have traversed the state, discovering, examining, and studying two of the most important parts of the Everglades; The Kissimmee River and the chain of lakes that feed into Lake Okeechobee at the northern end of the system and Everglades National Park and the extensive mangrove and seagrass communities along Florida Bay that comprise the southern end.
In Key Largo, we met with a variety of mentors including author and ecologist Stuart Pimm, who shared with us his extensive knowledge and research on the endangered Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow. We also got the opportunity to do a study on Florida seagrasses off of Key Largo with Dr. Tom Frankovich, a research biologist at Florida International University. Dr. Frankovitch emphasized the effects of long-term nutrient loading on the seagrass communities and the importance of water quality entering Florida Bay through the Taylor and Shark Sloughs. We wrapped up the trip with a visit to Everglades National Park where we examined some of the most recent restoration projects taking place within the park. We also had a chance run-in with newly appointed U.S. Army Corps Chief Engineer General Van Antwerp at the Anhinga Trail, which has been immortalized by the photo depicting the general wearing Dr. Tom’s signature beanie.

Our second trip started with a visit to the south shore of Lake Okeechobee, where we met with Mayor J.P. Sasser of Pahokee. In our discussion with him we covered the issue of U.S. Sugar and the role it plays in the town of Pahokee and other southern shore communities. The mayor was in favor of creating a flow-way from the lake to the rest of the Everglades ecosystem, somewhat because of its ecological benefits, but mostly because of the local jobs that would be created as a result.

Water levels and water management on the lake were also reccurring themes with Paul Gray of the Audubon Society of Florida and Don Fox from Florida Fish & Wildlife, who took us on an airboat tour of the littoral marshes on the northwest side of the lake. They seem to agree that lake levels should be kept at a range between 12-14 ft and that adaptive management practices need to be used in order to protect the ecosystems that exist on the lake. Loisa Kerwin of the SFWMD, discussed the challenges and successes associated with the restoration of the Kissimmee River. There was ample evidence of rapid re-colonization of native plants and animals associated with the recovered wetland function. The Kissimmee River Restoration is a true Florida environmental success story and is a great testament to the benefits and values that can be attained with a restored system.

The majority of our second trip was spent at the Archbold Biological Station. The Station fosters long-term ecological research on native plants and animals of central Florida and also provides environmental education for children of all ages. We toured the MacArthur Agro-ecology Research Center at Buck Island Ranch. This operation is dedicated to long-term ecological research, education, and environmental stewardship on a large-scale working cattle ranch. Another topic of discussion was the Florida Ranchlands Environmental Services Project (FRESP), which uses public funds to buy land to build large regional treatment and storage areas, capture rainwater and build deep storage wells.
All of the information we’ve gathered and the lessons we’ve learned over the past couple of weeks have been especially helpful to us as we continue to work on our project for the upcoming Greater Everglades Ecosystem Restoration (GEER) conference. Our challenge is to come up with values for the ecosystem services provided by the restoration of the River of Grass, which we believe is necessary to aid in the best environmental decision-making. The opinions we’ve gathered from our various mentors are important to consider when we look at the River of Grass configurations and assess economic values and ecosystem services. Wish us luck as we take our conclusions on the road and present it to the participators of GEER and the general public.

Friday, July 2, 2010

"Synthesis" at the GEER Conference/WRAC

ALL:

FYI, A new Development at the GEER Conference: The Science Coordination Group and Working Group will hold joint sessions at the GEER Conference, Wednesday July 14. The SCG/WG agenda can be found here: http://www.sfrestore.org/wg/wgminutes/2010meetings/14july2010/agenda.pdf

A major part of the SCG/WG agenda is dedicated to identification and discussion of key science management questions related to Synthesis of Everglades Restoration and Ecosystem Services. (see synthesis defined below; should the discussion start with what SCG/WG means by synthesis?)

Connecting the dots on Synthesis and Ecosytem Services: Given the definition of synthesis, The Constanza, et al, calculations provide a synthesis about as good as science gets in terms of Ecosystem Services Valuation (ESV). As the NRC 2005 notes in general, there are too few visible applications of ESV. The result is frequently reported as the tragedy of the commons.

On Synthesis of Everglades Restoration and Ecosystem Services (SERES). There is nothing like a new acronym to stimulate the discussion. Five Arthur R. Marshall Summer interns are presenting a GEER poster paper on the Ecosystem Services Value of Restoring the River of Grass. The paper uses the Costanza, et al, synthesis to calulate the benefits of six configurations evolving from the River of Grass Workshop. The result provides an analysis of alternatives in the form benefit:cost (B/C) ratios for the six configurations. We note that the B/C ratios are also an optimization tool, in terms identifying maximum benefits at least cost, long term. This provides scientific and economic synthesis for decision-support. A read of the Costanza report provides considerable comfort for taking the ESV approach. See http://www.uvm.edu/giee/publications/Nature_Paper.pdf

We invite attendees at the GEER Conference to visit this Poster Paper for additional discussion with our five Arthur R. Marshall Summer Interns.

Can't make the GEER conference: The Poster Paper will be presented at the Thursday, July 8 WRAC meeting about 12:30 PM at a working lunch session, also webcast at www.SFWMD.gov.

Please consider this preliminary public comment for the July 14, 2010, SCG/WG meeting.

Thanks for your consideration. Have a great 4th of July weekend.

John Arthur Marshall
http://www.artmarshall.org/

----------------------------------
Synthesis Defined:
Main Entry (Wikpedia): syn•the•sis [Button]
Pronunciation: \ˈsin(t)-thÉ™-sÉ™s\Function: noun; Inflected Form(s): plural syn•the•ses [Button]\-ËŒsÄ“z\
Etymology: Greek, from syntithenai to put together, from syn- + tithenai to put, place — more at do
Date: 1589
1 a : the composition or combination of parts or elements so as to form a whole b : the production of a substance by the union of chemical elements, groups, or simpler compounds or by the degradation of a complex compound c : the combining of often diverse conceptions into a coherent whole; also : the complex so formed 2 a : deductive reasoning b : the dialectic combination of thesis and antithesis into a higher stage of truth
3. Webster's Thesaurus/Dictionary: Combination of separate Ideas, parts, or chemical elements of compounds, into a new unit, e.g. photosynthesis.
Since all these definitions are somewhat esoteric, how about something that reflects SCG/WG intent? (From brainstorming by the summer interns and their mentors):
4. Synthesis: a. The reduction of a huge amount of information to a format usable for decision-support, i.e. b. taking a huge amount of information to a usable application in Everglades Restoration; c. combination of separate thoughts into a whole
Next question for debate: Do these definitions fit the Costanza, et al, synthesis? --- The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. See http://www.uvm.edu/giee/publications/Nature_Paper.pdf

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Save The Date--August 5th: Summer Intern Graduation


Upcoming Refuge Event

On July 18th @ 2pm--Author/Photographer Joel M Curzon will be presenting a slide show and discussion based on his award winning book, Light Fading – Reflections on the Imperiled Everglades

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Guest Blogger--Adrienne Smith

To keep you all updated on the Summer Intern Program, we have asked the interns to serve as guest bloggers from time to time. Here is a re-cap week two,of the SIP courtesy of Adrienne Smith:
We spent the first week of June at the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge. We went on an airboat trip around the Refuge with Nick Aumen and Rolf Olson. It was interesting to notice the change in the types of plants from the canal to the inner region of the marsh. We also saw a snail kite! The snail kite was certainly a highlight of the day.
We also met with Lisa Jameson and Grant Gifford from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Lisa discussed the various invasive species that are problems in the Refuge and Grant talked about the use of fire as a land management tool. Dylan, in particular, was fascinated with the “fire-blowing” technique that can be used in fire application.
We toured the Loxahatchee Impoundment Landscape Assessment (LILA) with Dr. Tom Dreschel and Eric Cline of the South Florida Water Management. I loved the idea of having an “artificial wetland” that resembles the original Florida Everglades landscape for research experiments. What a great idea!

In addition to talking with different people within the Refuge, we went on the canoe trail and explored the Visitor Center. Luckily, none of us tipped the canoe! That was quite a relief. The exhibits were wonderful! Ed and I particularly enjoyed the exhibit with the boy and his father discussing the different sounds one would hear at the Refuge. It sounded as if we were actually in the middle of the Refuge!
We ended the week with a mentoring session from Dr. Brian LaPointe of FAU’s Harbor Branch located in Fort Pierce. Brian talked about the influence that nutrients from the Everglades have on algal blooms on coral reefs. The restoration of the Everglades will certainly help the reduction in algal blooms.

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

Guest Blogger--Jim Wally

To keep you all updated on the Summer Intern Program, we have asked the interns to serve as guest bloggers from time to time. Here is a re-cap of the first week courtesy of Jim Wally:
The summer interns just finished our first full week of work!
We’ve been getting “fire hosed” as John calls it, trying to wrap our minds around all of the scientific background we need to understand the Everglades. It’s been a little challenging absorbing it all, but it helps that it is what we all love to study anyway. Dr. Tom has been a great teacher, and he certainly has some interesting methods. John, Eric and all of the rest of the mentors have clearly a great deal of thought and energy into setting up this program.
We’ve already got a heavy dose of government meetings that will be a part of our summer. We’ve been studying up on acronyms like WCA, ASR, and CERP just so we can follow some of the dialog. I know I already feel way more informed about how local government works. On Tuesday, we got to meet Christopher McVoy, one of the leading experts on what the Everglades looked like before we started to change it. We were all impressed how much knowledge he’s managed to accumulate about this controversial topic.
Thursday, Dr. Tom and Eric took us to the Wakodahatchee wetlands. It was easily the most wildlife-packed place I’ve ever seen. A few species like Anhinga and Blue Heron were still nesting, and the pond apple tree islands were chock full of nests. This wetland was all built to further process treated wastewater from the nearby treatment plant. It’s probably the best example I’ve seen of turning something society needs into something that can benefit wildlife.
Friday we got to visit the meeting of the Science and Technology committee for the Foundation. It was great to meet them and get some wisdom they’ve accumulated from all of their collective years of working on everglades restoration.
This week has been really informative and a lot of fun. We’re looking forward to spending most of next week out at the Refuge.

Keep checking back for more updates as the interns get deeper and deeper into the Everglades ecosystem.

Monday, May 24, 2010

Summer Interns have arrived!

We welcome our newest group of Everglades champions...

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Dr. Stuart Pimm, Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement Laureate

Congratulations to our friend and Science and Technology committee member Stuart Pimm, for winning the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievent.



To learn more about the Tyler Prize click http://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/tylerprize/

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

restoring a wetland at Morikami Park Elementary School


On Saturday, May 1 the Marshall Foundation joined students, families and employees of Morikami Park Elementary School to plant nearly 800 native trees, shrubs and wildflowers in a School District owned natural area adjacent to their playground.

Special thanks to the Habitat Restoration Team organized and chaired by Cindy Papadoyianis, PTA Green Chairperson. The team included many friends to the Everglades including Pine Jog Environmental Education Center, the state Division of Forestry, PBC School District, South Florida Water Management District, Florida Native Plant Society, and Palm Beach County Parks and Recreation. Tree-planters got their hands dirty planting some of our favorites, like Cypress and Pond Apple trees.

Friday, April 9, 2010

US Fish & Wildlife Award Winner

Congratulations are due to Nancy Marshall--winner of the US Fish & Wildlife Service Volunteer Service Award! Thank you, Nancy for leading by example.

Follow the link for the full coverage: http://www.americantowns.com/fl/delraybeach/news/marshall-foundation-president-wins-volunteer-service-award-from-u-s-fish-wildlife-service-284136

The Award for Volunteer Service is “presented annually
to partners who have made extraordinary contributions to the conservation of natural resources in the Southeast Region. With friends like (Nancy Marshall), our conservation efforts multiply far beyond what we can do alone,” said Cynthia K. Dohner, Regional Director of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Letter to the Editor--Palm Beach Post

This is the letter I submitted to the Palm Beach Post editorial board on April 6, responding to the court's decision concerning the EAA Reservoir:

Letter to Editor/Point Paper; Laws of man on reservoirs and laws of nature are in conflict!
[Authors’ note: These 2 pages are in response to a Judge’s reservoir remedy decision 20 pages long]

A major problem in Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) implementation is getting to the water quality standard, set at 10 ppb (parts per billion) phosphorous (P), resulting from a federal law suit, scientific findings, and legislation.

In March 31, 2010 legal adjudication regarding failure to achieve the P standard, the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) reservoir has been proposed as a remedy.

The decision to impose the reservoir as a remedy for the water quality problem goes mostly in the opposite direction of meeting the P standard; further it does not meet the science of restoration, nor Webster’s definition of to restore, nor the plainly stated objectives of CERP 1999.

Reservoirs are not known for water quality treatment solutions, and in most cases, have negative water quality consequences. In this case, the proposed reservoir would take up thousands of acres needed for treatment, while adding requirements for more P treatment area, a real catch-22, making fully successful CERP implementation mission impossible.

In terms of to restore, the reservoir remedy abandons Webster’s definition; there were no deep water reservoirs in the Everglades watershed, per se. The exception was Lake Okeechobee, which are the headwaters of the Everglades. What the reservoir remedy generates is a miniature Lake O, with a billion dollars worth of dikes built to dam standards, a cost overrun of almost three times the originally projected cost of $420 million, and more polluted water left to clean, without the means to clean it.

A deep-water reservoir imposed on what use to be the historic Everglades, AKA the River of Grass, does not fit the overarching goals & objectives of CERP 1999, simply stated in CERP Table 5-1 under Enhance ecological values:
• Increase the total spatial extent of natural areas
• Improve habitat and functional quality
• Improve native plant and animal species abundance and diversity.
A reservoir furnishes none of these attributes; there was no deep-water habitat in the historic Everglades south of Lake O. A flow-path south, from Lake O to FL Bay provides all these attributes, and more.

One objective of the reservoir was excess water storage during extremely wet events. The reservoir will store only about a foot of Lake O water when it is dry. When Lake O fills during heavy rains, so will the reservoir, so expect less than a foot of storage, and minimal relief for the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries. The CERP(+) solution is the River of Grass consensus solution: A restored flow-path south!

What the judiciary and litigants for the reservoir have not recognized, is that a fatal flaw in CERP 1999 was the failure to connect the missing link between Lake O and the rest of the Everglades, by restoring natural flow, AKA sheet flow, as described in CERP Section 2.3.1, Dynamic Storage and Sheet Flow. An axiomatic premise of greater Everglades ecosystem restoration is that sheet flow was/is the primary characteristic of the Everglades; thus, to restore sheet flow is the primary goal that meets all the CERP Table 5-1 Goals & objectives, and the bold promise to restore natural flows on CERP(-) 1999 page 1.

A restored flow path was proposed by the late Art Marshall in 1981, taken up by a govt Science Group in 1993, and included in the 1994 USACE Recon study, predecessor study to CERP(-), (read CERP minus)

The recommended flow-path was specifically not included in CERP (-) because the govt did not own the land needed to restore the previous recommended flow path, and getting the land from a willing seller did not appear in the political play of the day. There is more politics than meets the eye, here.

Thus it became politically incorrect to push for the flow-path, and scientists put their careers at risk for pushing same. As an eye-witness to the formulation of CERP 1999 (-), several scientists came to the undersigned, and asked him to keep pushing the flow path issue, because they couldn’t. Enter more politics. The rest of the 1999 (-) story regarding the stifling of scientific speech is reduced for brevity.

Whether to endorse CERP(-) was a debate in the non-govt conservation community. Those who endorsed it noted (1) the bold statement on CERP page 1: The plan will restore natural flows, (2) the inclusion of a concept called adaptive management, (3) asked for greater consideration of flow, and (4) envisioned that the concept of adaptive management and science would eventually prevail. Enter more politics.

On June 24, 2008, a willing seller was announced by the Governor of Florida, generating the possibility of acquiring at least some of the land need for the flow path. Enter more politics.

To restore the flow path also requires meeting the P standard. However the placement of the EAA reservoir not only inhibits achieving the P standard; it also blocks a re-vegetated flow path that would achieve virtually all goals & objectives of CERP, including a much better chance of meeting the water quality standard. Decision support begs for a benefit to cost analysis here, not more politics.

Planning for the use of projected land acquisition is on-going in the SFWMD River of Grass (ROG) workshops, with maximum public participation, and all matter of science-based information available at the SFWMD.gov/River of Grass website. Progress here has not been considered in the reservoir remedy decision; the decision insults the process of democracy by ignoring public involvement.

Summary
• The litigant claim that the ROG flow path was not included in CERP(-) 1999 is correct and at the same time, absurd, as it ignores the definition of to restore, i.e., ignores the fatal flaw of CERP(-) not to include a flow path thru the EAA, and disregards the CERP tenets of adaptive management.
• Adaptive management now holds the possibility of correcting the fatal flaw with a flow path.
• There has been no govt analysis of alternatives regarding the benefits(+) of restoring the flow path relative to costs, to compare the benefits(-) of the reservoir, relative to costs.
• Estimates indicate the benefits/cost of the flow path far out-weigh the benefits/cost of the reservoir. Footnote: Restoration of the Catskills watershed to provide water to the environment and NYC is an example to follow; so is the restoration of the Kissimmee River Watershed.
• The laws of man and the laws of nature are in severe conflict, given the EAA reservoir remedy.
• CERP(+) implementation must include the River of Grass workshop findings, including a restored, re-vegetated flow-path, long term, for any chance of successful CERP(-) implementation.

Those saying Everglades restoration can now proceed with the building of the EAA reservoir need to check their premises, de novo.

Respectfully submitted,
John Arthur Marshall, Chair Science & Technology Committee; Chairman of the Board
Arthur R. Marshall Foundation and Florida Environmental Institute, Inc.
2806 South Dixie Highway, West Palm Beach, FL 33405; 561-805-8733

Monday, March 22, 2010

LAST CALL for Internship Applications!


The Arthur R. Marshall Foundation is looking for a few good college juniors, seniors, and graduates with majors in the environmental sciences, a GPA > 3.0, and ready for a challenging opportunity, by taking a crash course on the Everglades, and associated restoration plan implementation.

If you haven't had much field work, this program is for you.

Deadline for application receipt is close of business March 31, 2010.

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Year of the Everglades--artwork from Bak Middle School

Students at Bak Middle School were inspired by the River of Grass Canoe Expedition and created several pieces of artwork for our Paddlers... Here is one: Gabrielle Martine- from Ms. Amedee's sixth grade science class!





Monday, March 8, 2010

From the Palm Beach Daily News:


from the Marshall Foundation President:


Marshall, Everglades foundations are supportive, but distinct
By NANCY MARSHALL
Special to the Daily News

Saturday, March 06, 2010

On behalf of the Arthur R. Marshall Foundation, which champions the restoration and preservation of the greater Everglades ecosystem, I want to congratulate the Everglades Foundation for hosting another successful fundraiser at The Breakers. At the same time, it is important to clarify the relationship between Palm Beach County's own Arthur R. Marshall Foundation and the Miami-based Everglades Foundation.

While we are mutually supportive and share the same goal of restoring and protecting the Everglades — in fact, the Marshall Foundation named the Everglades Foundation's former chairwoman Mary Barley as one of our first Champion of the Everglades award winners in 2008 — our two nonprofit organizations remain separate and distinct.

The Everglades Foundation has a more statewide and national focus in its effort to "help the environmental community develop the staff and tools necessary to tackle restoration challenges," while the Marshall Foundation's activities are more localized, grassroots and hands-on in nature.

Founded in 1998, the Marshall Foundation is widely recognized as a community leader in the delivery of award-winning environmental and restoration programs, working directly with the school district of Palm Beach County to reach and motivate more than 7,500 students a year. In recent years, we've also planted approximately 100,000 native Florida trees in wetland areas, awarded over $350,000 in scholarships and internships, and involved more than 5,000 volunteers in valuable restoration projects.

The Marshall Foundation is almost entirely funded by our generous supporters in Palm Beach County. We receive no financial aid from the Everglades Foundation or from any Everglades restoration projects funded by the state or federal government.

Over the next few years, we look forward to working more closely with the Everglades Foundation other environment-based nonprofit organizations in the Marshall Foundation's ongoing campaign to educate every citizen about the critical importance of Everglades restoration.
http://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/opinion/content/news/2010/03/06/Edit0307Marshall.html

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Summer Intern Program--application deadline approaches...

2009 Summer Interns enjoying some hands-on learning in the Big Cypress Preserve.

The application deadline for Summer Intern Program 2010 is March 31st. Act now if you or someone you know would benefit from this life-changing course. Criteria and information, along with the application can be found on our website. http://www.artmarshall.org