Notes from the Hydrological Targets Scientific Symposium

With the South Florida Water Management District preparing for the River of Grass Project Planning Phase 1, I submitted my notes from the recent Hydrological Targets Scientific Symposium held from January 14-16 at the District:

The substantive issue was getting to consensus on flows and levels targets in terms of volume of water in acre feet are needed going south to match the hydraulics of the natural system as close as possible, given the modern constraints of an altered system.

A significant part of the discussion called for targets for the estuaries as well, so as not to trash them.

Bob Johnson did a good job of summarizing and amplifying the DOI (Dept of Interior) Vision and Plan, with supporting comments from Rock Salt and a few others.

The general consensus was that the historic everglades, paleo to 40's was a lot wetter, and the more water going south, the better, i.e., there is a need to capture and clean much of the water going to tide, and get it past Tamiami Trail, and into FL Bay.

REQUEST: There was a website given as a location for copy of the several presentations, but I must have written it down wrong. Maybe Rick Smith can provide same.

The Moderator was Dick Pettigrew, giving this a dejavu-all-over-again breath of the Governor's Commission for a Sustainable South Florida, which he chaired; this was a brilliant suggestion, as I understand it, by one of our favorite Governing Board members. Greg Knect was at the head of the table also, representing DEP (The Governor?), for more Gov Commission feel. Ken Ammon was the technical moderator, pushing the group to stay on the objective of getting to consensus on MFL targets for the Everglades from Lake O to FL Bay.

Kudo's to those who pushed for more natural system flow, than static storage, especially Ronnie Best, Nick Auman, Cris McVoy, Bob Johnson, Rock Salt, and a few others, not to exclude anybody. Much of this may reflect involvement in the DOI Vision and Plan "peer review".

A few references to the McVoy, et al, book on the 1880's satellite view of the historic everglades, which is due to hit the street just in time, as in better late than never.

The balance between reservoirs and restoration of dynamic storage and sheet flow remains a puzzle yet to be solved, with the catch 22 conundrum that reservoir acreage takes away treatment acreage, and reservoir water requires more treatment acreage. Made comments to this effect, and left a copy of the EvCo Conference Panel power point presentation on same on the lobby table. Was happy to see that the 2 million + acre-feet back-of-the-envelope calculations were close to "average" calculations presented in the NSM et al models.

What came out of the several models presented was a middle of the road graphic called a synthetic model, which was useful in getting to a consensus hydro-target, with flow south variability ranging from about 500,000 acre-ft in dry years to 3,500,000 acre feet in wet years, best I can recall from looking at graphs for at least 10 hours over three days.

The main purpose of the reservoir storage need cited was to provide more water to the Everglades during dry years of, especially when the drought extents more than a year. Surge needs was not raised as a major problem, as it has in past discussions, citing the need for swift water to sustain the ridge and slough landscape.

There were about 30 scientists, most of whom were around in '98 when CERP was formulated, around the discussion table, all of them knowledgeable govt scientists, or former govt employees (e.g. Tom Van Lent, Tom McVicar, John Ogdon), also a technical consultant, Frank Marshall (no relationship). Some modeling work by Frank, and also Fennama was touted as noteworthy contributions.

The audience dwindled from about 10 the first day to 3 at closing. YT (Yours Truly) was the only one to take in all three days, and make public comment daily, three times on the last day, and handouts on the lobby table. Exception was a "cameo" appearance by Drew Martin, who made public comment calling for flow on behalf of Sierra.

Pushed the essence of the Marshall Plan, also called for Ecosystems Services Values in Economic Terms, same as Art Marshall called for qualitatively, and what's in the DOI Vision & Plan = the Art Marshall Plan - revisited. I will be prepared to summarize at the Clewiston event, including a few copies of the DOI Vision and Plan, and copies of what was left on the lobby table as public comment, same as what went to the Everglades Coalition Conference+.

In response to John Ogden's ongoing question about what should the repaired system look like, I pushed for 10,000 acres of restored pond apple forest as the first element of the flow path, TBD in future planning.

[Trees 'R Us! At 500 trees per acre planted, this is 5,000,000 million trees, about a 50 million dollar job for Ag/nursery folks in the Glades, and a lot of nutrient uptake.]

The Symposium was webcast; The District announced that they had about 500 folks watching during the course of the symposium, or something like that.

Unfortunately there was no press on any of the days to report on the proceedings, substantiating my observation that the body politic (general public) does not much care for data and number crunching, also that Data is apolitical, Politics is data antithetical, such that there is more interest in politics than data.

All agreed it was a well worth-while science symposium, AKA Hydrologic Restoration Targets Workshop, including me, which was my last public comment statement and the last word, at the closing bell. Maybe the best we have seen since the 1981-1994 time frame.

OK, carried away a bit, and this is from the perspective of the only public commentor for all three days, and is certainly not all inclusive. However, this is the report most of which ought to be a lead-in to the Jan 22 event, also the report that is unlikely to hit the newspapers.

YT, JAM