Waterfowlers Summit--August 25/26

Below you can find the presentation I will deliver at the 2011 Waterfowlers Conference in Ocala on August 25.

CERPBenefitsandCosts

For more information on the conference click HERE!

Cypress Harvest

The 2011 Annual Cypress Seed Harvest will take place on October 29

email plantcypress@aol.com for more information or visit our website!

Public Comment for CISRERP

Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc (ArtMarshall.org)
Public Comment on synthesis, ecosystem services, etc., to the 24th meeting of the
Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress

It is great to see “Synthesis,” “Ecosystem Services,” “Restoration Benefits,” and “Costs” (Budget Implications) on the Agenda for the 24th Meeting of CISRERP as applied to Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plans (CERP) and Non-CERP projects, which I’m calling CERP-plus = CERP(+) here.

Unfortunately I am unable to attend the meeting to see the synthesis results presented. In lieu of not attending the following public comment is submitted for the record.

First, I am pleased to introduce a new member of the Art Marshall.org Science & Technology Team as our representative at the 24th CISRERP meeting: Dr. Teresa Thornton, PhD in Forestry Resources, University of Maine, and another ArtMarshall.org spokesperson for the trees, environmental education, and more.

Second, on Synthesis: As always, the late Art Marshall was ahead of his time on this subject:
“If you don’t synthesize knowledge, scientific journals become spare-parts catalogues for machines that are never built. Until isolated and separated pieces of information are assimilated by the human mind, we will continue to rattle around aimlessly.” --- from “Anatomy of Man-made Drought,” Sports Illustrated, March 15, 1982 [Google for an interesting read]

Finally, the main point of this comment: The Art Marshall Foundation position, consistent with my late Uncle’s view re synthesis, is that better environmental decision making results from incorporating comprehensive ecosystem services valuation (ESV) based on total dollar accounting (total economic valuation) of benefits and costs (NRC, 2005) and that includes decisions on how to apply or implement CERP(+) for the following reasons:

• No matter what comprehensive ESV approach is taken, the benefits demonstrated are greater than the B:C go-no-go decision ratios of 1.5 traditionally used by the Corps of Engineers. Using an ESV B:C for CERP(+) looks to have a B:C range of 6 to 9 times dollars invested as a return on investment. (ROI);
• The White House (PCAST 2011) has called for ROI to be calculated for programs such as CERP(+) to support decision-making. Fully accounting for benefits and costs is more likely to result in support by Congress, Office of Mgt & Budget, and the public, while avoiding the influence of high cost nay-sayers;
• In the Case of CERP(+), which has a 40-50 year life-cycle, the ESV approach forces long-term, strategic thinking, by requiring life-cycle benefits and costs to be projected, whereas the present focus on near-term project costs yields “sticker shock” for lack of accounting for long-term benefits.
• Provides those implementing CERP(+) the opportunity to exercise leadership by example, as a better way of doing business, and is an opportunity to shift the zero-value paradigm.

The ESV approach is a fast emerging paradigm owing to the need to achieve optimum return on investment in these difficult economic times. We are very pleased to see the White House Report to The President: Sustaining National Capital: Protecting Society and the Economy hit the street (PCAST 2011), with strong recommendations that the Federal government adopt the ESV approach in projects like CERP(+). The Florida Ranchlands Payment for Ecosystem Services (FRPES) Project is a start.

Having presented a demonstration project (Marshall, et al, 2010) using the Costanza Synthesis (Google Nature 387), which got good peer review, e.g., The Honorable Rock Salt’s comments at a previous CISRERP meeting, we are happy to tout using the Costanza Synthesis (1997) and the benefits-transfer approach to move the implementation of CERP(+) forward, based on preliminary estimates of ESV.

Consistent with the latest literature we acknowledge that the benefits transfer method may have disadvantages over other methods. (Daily, Polasky, et al: 2011), However as a starting point when no other information is available, the benefits transfer approach using the Costanza Synthesis (Costanza, et al, 1997) appears to meet the mission impossible 3 out of 3: Quicker, better, and cheaper (QBC) goals. This appears more effective than resorting to narrative assessments necessitating subjective judgments by decision-makers, absent numeric decision-support.

The benefits transfer method also provides an order-of- magnitude reality check when alternative ESV approaches are taken up. Such an approach is equally great for QBC analysis of alternatives when several configurations are under consideration, and a determination of relative merit ROI is a primary consideration. This was the main purpose of the Valuing Ecosystem Services of a Restored River of Grass demonstration by our 2010 Summer Interns (Marshall, et al; 2010). As the late Admiral Grace Hopper noted: One good experiment [demonstration] is worth a 1,000 expert opinions.

P.S. Back to the future regarding the current man-made drought debate on the 2011 managed water shortage: The 2011 Arthur R. Marshall Summer Interns calculated the cost of the 2011 drought/water shortage to south Florida’s society and economy. They projected the drought/water supply shortage cost over the 40 year life-cycle of CERP(+), assuming three droughts a decade. The total cost to society and the economy exceeded $11 Billion. They concluded that at least $7.6 Billion Dollars in drought costs could be avoided. That’s enough to pay for implementing most of the proposed River of Grass configurations. (Marshall, et al, 2010). Greater focus is needed on such cost avoidance as CERP(+) is fully implemented.

All this begs an ethical question: Who are we as scientists and CERP(+) implementers if we can’t demonstrate the added value of our work to society? Art Marshall had an answer to this question as well:

I have to believe, as all scientists should, that the more exactly we define realities, the closer society will adhere to them. If this is not true, then many of our careers are personal opiates rather than contributions to hope in the world. American Association for Advancement of Science Conference, December, 1972.

Respectfully submitted,

John Arthur Marshall, Chairman of the Board, Chair Science & Technology Committee
Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc.; www.ArtMarshall.org
1028 North Federal Highway; Lake Worth, FL 33460; 561-233-9004

Primary References:
Costanza, et al; 15 May 1997: The Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital.
NRC, 2005: Valuing Ecosystem Services – Toward Better Environmental Decision Making
Marshall, et al; 2010 GEER Conference; Valuing Ecosystem Services of a Restored River of Grass;
Daily, Polasky, et al; 201l; Natural Capital – Theory & Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services
PCAST, 2011: President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (S&T); Report to the President: Sustaining Natural Capital – Protecting Society & The Economy;

Happy Trails, to our Summer Interns

Find a nice online article about the Summer Intern Graduation HERE

Guest Blogger--Vanessa Aparicio

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 Vanessa Aparicio:

On July 27th, the Summer Interns and crew left bright and early to see a true treasure of Florida, Barley Barber Swamp. This old growth cypress swamp is owned and maintained by FPL and is located in Indiantown. We were all really excited because most of the cypress trees we had seen this summer were not very old and the trees in this Barley Barber Swamp were several hundred years old, with the oldest being around 900 to 1000 years!

It was a real treat that we were even able to go on this tour because tours normally only run from September through April, but Charles Barrowclough of Treasured Lands Foundation, made a special exception for us. It was also a special treat because the Swamp had been closed to the public since September 9, 2001 for security reasons. The Swamp had only recently reopened to the public after an Eagle Scout had restored the boardwalk to its original glory.

The Swamp had just experienced a rain storm the night before and had quite a bit of water, even though our guides said the day before had been very dry. We got to see a lot of insects, apple snail eggs, a variety of birds, pond apple trees, and of course plenty of cypress trees. We also saw a lot of flowers and Dr. Tom saw his first ever Ball Bromeliad in bloom, which has a beautiful purple flower! When we came to the clearing where the oldest cypress trees were, the oldest known as big grandpa or the Champion, took center stage, it was huge!

We also learned an interesting history as to where Barley Barber Swamp got its name. It was named after a man who came down here and laid claim to land. He was a bit of a loner and needed to make some money, but had no family or friends he could call upon to work with. As a result he decided to hire a Seminole Indian to help him open a logging business. One day people around town noticed Barley Barber and the Seminole Indian did not show up for work and they went looking for them. At Barley Barber’s house they found the Seminole Indian dead and his bride, along with Barley Barber, were missing never be seen again.

We also learned a great deal of the cultural history of Barley Barber Swamp. It is classified as an Indian trading or aquaculture mound by the State. There are many Indian artifacts located on the grounds and this mound likely took many generations to build. The mound faces due west towards the lake and was built with materials brought back from the coast. The highest elevation of the mound sits at 16 feet and is thought to be where the high chiefs resided.

Towards the end of the day, while we were at lunch, we received a fascinating history of Florida Ranching and Indiantown from the owner of the Seminole Inn. She told us of her family roots and how her mother’s best friend, Betsy, helped the Seminole Tribe gain recognition by the government. It was fascinating to hear about her heritage and a little bit about old Florida. I would really recommend to anyone who has a chance to get out there and see Barley Barber Swamp for themselves! It will not disappoint!

River of Grass Everglades Restoration Benefits and Costs: A Citizen Scientist’s view.

The July 30 letter to the editor, TC Palm, of questionable title puts politics ahead of restoration science by demeaning a total system approach initiated by a previous Governor. Citizens deserve a more science-based account than what was provided by a former South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) governing board member.

Regarding the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) there is virtually unanimous consensus in the conservation community and many gov’t scientists that the June 24, 2008 initiative to restore the missing link and revitalize the River of Grass, was finally a way to make the C in CERP comprehensive.

The CERP issued in 1999 (CERP 1999) was fatally flawed by failure to provide natural flow from Lake Okeechobee to the Everglades and restore its historic River of Grass in the metaphor of Marjory Stoneman Douglas. Moreover, restoring natural flow was a major premise on page 1 of CERP 1999, and throughout the 4033 page tome.

A group of scientists, gov't and non-gov't, took the fatal-flaw issue to the same governing board member circa 2000-2001, who was then chair of the governing board. The chair promised that the flow-way debate would be put back on the table in a workshop. Then he reversed his position, as apparently the discussion of the primary characteristic that was needed to fully restore the Everglades was too hot a potato to put on the table at that time.

Getting the CERP 1999 needs fully discussed based on restoration science at this stage would have saved a lot of time and money, including avoiding $300 million going into a project with more negative externalities than benefits.

The A-1 Reservoir was an implementation in reaction to the fatal flaw in absence of the needed cure. The reservoir result would be a smaller Lake - like structure, requiring expensive dikes and subsequent huge maintenance and replacement costs down stream. It would have increased the need for water quality treatment while taking up space for needed water quality treatment, a double whammy, given the intent to restore dynamic storage and sheet flow as described in CERP 1999 Section 2.3.1, while blocking the flow path to do so.

Long story short: Most what has been claimed in the July 30 letter defies scientists’ calls to restore sheet flow dating back to the 1970’s, also called the Marshall Plan, through the latest CERP 1999 peer review by the National Research Council (2010 Biennial Report).

In January 2008, CERP scientists revealed a second deficiency: That they had found through modeling and analysis, that the Everglades was a much wetter ecosystem than previously modeled in CERP 1999, requiring a return to the drawing board to get the water right and restore natural flow postulated on page 1 of CERP 1999 and elsewhere in the 4033 page tome. Per CERP protocol, this requires an execution of “adaptive management” when new data dictates a significant need for a modification of CERP 1999.

All this was summarized in Governing Board meetings as debriefs of what was going on in River of Grass workshops being conducted at the SFWMD, so it does beg a question as to why this was not heard as a matter of fiduciary responsibility.

In terms of CERP science, per the verb “to restore” and adaptive management, the initiative to restore “the missing link to revitalize the River of Grass” was/is right on target. This provides the means to flow water south to meet the true water needs of the historic Everglades, as well as all the other users, and avoids trashing the estuaries by moving water south more than east and west.

Call the total ecosystem revitalization CERP(+). Consider CERP(+) progress in three regions:

1. There is progress north of Lake O per the Northern Everglades Ecosystem legislation/plan and the proposed Everglades Headwaters National Wildlife Refuge.
3. There is progress in the southern Everglades with the bridging of Tamiami Trail and related projects.
2. Until the River of Grass initiative, there was inadequate action for connecting the northern part of the ecosystem with the southern part of the ecosystem, due to CERP 1999 deficiencies. Absent this link, the Everglades would have to remain on expensive engineered life-support, and not much life with that.

In May, 2010 the River of grass (ROG) workshops were postponed until further notice, owing to the need to address land purchase needed. Admittedly the economy makes the current paltry land purchase look like a bad deal, but it does provide options to restore the integrity of the Everglades ecosystem in a more robust way.

Meanwhile the astute Chairman of the Governing Board posed salient questions: Wouldn’t we have to go through this ROG exercise anyway, even if we didn’t buy the land? And what about the benefits relative to the costs?

Preliminary analysis based on data coming out of the ROG workshops indicate that sheet flow configurations with the most benefit would cost about half of the $14 Billion cost claimed in the July 30 letter, produce benefits greater that ten times the cost, and cost much less than the $500 million per year in operations. It would be interesting to know the basis of the bigger costs claimed, and the fact that benefits were not part of the discussion.

Analysis presented to the Governing Board on Sept 12, 2007 also indicated potential benefits in the form of cost avoidance of over $5 billion dollars by restoring natural gravity flow to the extent feasible in lieu of pumping costs.

Additional calculations based on the 2011 drought/water shortage management indicate it likely will be less costly in the long run to restore the River of Grass, than inaction and the need for water management that results in the adverse economic impacts of droughts that are more frequent, longer in duration, and of extreme/exceptional category.

The approach referenced in the July 30 letter lacks a CERP(+) vision and de facto praises the reduction of State resources for adaptive action to get the water right and lessen the economic impacts of drought/water shortage. This leaves the Everglades and CERP 1999 on a fast track to undermine the Florida economy.

Further, the CERP 1999 approach proposed in the July 30 letter would leave Everglades Restoration a fragmented farce, and undermine revitalization of south Florida’s natural water supply at billions of expense to Florida Citizens.

Not to mention that scientists are proposing that the CERP(+) approach is the best antidote to sea level rise, salt water intrusion, and diminishing the need for expensive water supply alternatives.

Why a former governing board member does not see this is left to the judgment of the reader.
John Arthur Marshall, Chairman of the Board
Arthur R. Marshall Foundation & Florida Environmental Institute, Inc.
1028 North Federal Highway, Lake Worth, FL 33460; 233-9004
561-233-9004