1 / 54

U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers and South Florida Water Management District

Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement of Water Conservation Area 3 Feasibility Scoping Meeting. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers and South Florida Water Management District. June 19, 2008. Interagency Team. US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

elgin
Download Presentation

U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers and South Florida Water Management District

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement of Water Conservation Area 3Feasibility Scoping Meeting U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers and South Florida Water Management District June 19, 2008

  2. Interagency Team • US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) • South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) • Everglades National Park (ENP) • US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) • Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) • Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) • Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM)

  3. Feasibility Scoping Meeting Purpose • Seek approval from HQ on the formulation approach • Provide project background • Present Overview of FSM document • Present Issues/Concerns • Discuss application of Incremental Adaptive Restoration principles • Respond to policy review comments • Identify Next Steps

  4. Tab 1Study Background

  5. Project Purpose • Decomp Overall: • To restore natural landscape patterns, natural hydroperiods, flow, water depths, ecological connectivity and native flora and fauna in Water Conservation Area 3, and Everglades National Park, by removing barriers to sheetflow • PIR 1: • As above, focused on Water Conservation Area 3A

  6. Study Authorization • Decomp Study is Component of CERP • Authorized under Section 601(d) – WRDA 2000 • Restudy: 4 Components to be constructed in 2 Parts • Components: AA, QQ (Phases 1 and 2), SS • Part 1: QQ Phase 1 and SS (conditionally authorized) Section 601 (c) of WRDA 2000. • Part 2: QQ Phase 2, AA • Construction Authorization • Phase 1: requires Congressional authorization because Section 902(b) cost limitation exceeded • Phase 2: requires Congressional authorization

  7. Yellow Book Components Pt 1 – Improve NNR, S-150 & S-351 @LO Pt 1 - Backfill Miami Canal Pt 2 – Weirs in L67A Pt 2 – Removal of L-68A X Pt 1 – Add S-345s Pt 2 – backfilling L-67C8A X Pt 1 – Degrade L29 backfill canal Pt 2 – Degrade L-28/L-29 X X Pt 2 – Remove S-12s, 343s, 344 X X X Pt 1 – Raise & bridge east portion TTM Pt 2 – bridge west portion TTM • Part 1 – Conditionally Authorized • Backfill Miami Canal • Conveyance in North New River • S-351, S-150, S-151 • Raise/bridge east Tamiami Trail • Degrade L-29 levee/backfill canal • Additional S-345s • Part 2 • Backfill southern 7.5mi of L-67A • Weirs in the remaining L-67A • Removal of L-68A, L-67C, west L-29, L-28, L-28 tieback levees & borrow canal • Elevating western Tamiami Trail • Removal of S-12s, S-343s & S-344

  8. PIR 1-Improve NNR, S-150 & S-351 @LO PIR 1-Backfill Miami Canal PIR 3– Weirs in L67A PIR 3-Removal of L-68A PIR 2- Alternatives for: - East portion of Tamiami Trail - L-29 level/canal - Additional S-345s X PIR 3 – Alternatives for: - Part 2 of the Yellow Book PIR 3-backfilling L-67C8A PIR 2– Add S-345s X PIR 2–Degrade L29 backfill canal PIR 3-Degrade L-28/L-29 DECOMP Physical Model -Address uncertainties - Concurrent with PIR 1 - Guide planning for PIRs 2 & 3 X X PIR 3– Remove S-12s, 343s, 344 X X X PIR 2 – Raise & bridge east portion TTM PIR 3– bridge west portion TTM Multiple Reports • PIR 1 – Alternatives for: • - Miami Canal • Conveyance in North New River • Improvements to S-351 and S-150 • Removal of S-151 Three-PIR Strategy

  9. EntireDecomp Study Area

  10. PIR 1 Project Footprint Area

  11. Relationship To Other Projects(Full Decomp) • Decomp construction cannot begin until the Modified Water Deliveries Project is completed • Decomp water deliveries to Park depend on: • ENP Seepage Management Project reducing seepage out of ENP along L-30/31 • Broward County WPA eliminating seepage • EAA Storage Reservoir providing more water flow south to WCA 3

  12. Environmental Compliance • NEPA • NOI to prepare PIR / EIS published in Federal Register December 2003 • Initial NEPA Scoping Meeting 2003 • NEPA Scoping Meeting for Multiple PIR Approach August 2007 • ESA • PAL / List of T&E species received from USFWS September 2003 • ESA Consultation September 2007 • FWCA • PAL on PMs and Model Selection received from USFWS January 2004 • PAL from USFWS on Multiple PIR Approach September 2007 • Cultural Resources • Preliminary SHPO Consultation August 2007 • Opportunities for public and agency comment at PDT meetings • All PDT meetings publicly noticed on www.evergladesplan.org

  13. Tab 2 Existing and Future Without Project Conditions,Goals, Objectives, Constraints

  14. Existing Conditions • North end of WCA 3A • Overdrained / natural hydroperiods shortened • Dominated by sawgrass, scattered shrubs • Lacks natural structural diversity of plant communities seen in central & western WCA 3A, which is representative of original, undisturbed Everglades habitat • South end of WCA 3A • Ponds water / hydroperiods longer than natural • Tree islands and other natural historic communities degraded

  15. Existing Conditions • WCA 3B • Prevents water from entering Shark River Slough • Ridge and slough landscape degraded • Historic overland sheetflow eliminated • Invasion of exotic species • 3+ feet of peat soil has been lost due to peat fires and soil oxidation • Water quality – flows coming into the WCAs from EAA contain P, N, pesticides • T&E Species • 22 Federal and State listed species • 5 Federally designated critical habitat areas

  16. Future Without Project Conditions • Continued reduction in sheetflow • Unnaturally low hydroperiods • Increased dry-outs in northern WCA 3A • Continued degradation of habitat, primarily ridge and slough structure, including tree islands • Sawgrass expansion in sloughs • Unnatural recession rates will reduce wading bird foraging efficiency • Continued degradation to listed species, esp. wood stork and snail kite • Land within the WCAs are expected to remain as conservation lands

  17. Problems • Levees/canals provide habitat/dispersal of invasive and exotic species • Miami Canal impairs natural sheetflow and hydroperiods; overdrains northern WCA 3A • Distinctive Everglades’ landscapes degraded due to the disruption of the natural hydrologic regime • Degradation of fish and wildlife habitat and their relative abundance and diversity

  18. Opportunities • Retain in the natural system water lost to tide • Restore hydropatterns in the WCA 3A • Restore landscape mosaic and reduce impacts on fish and wildlife • Reduce expansion of exotics

  19. PIR 1 Goals • Enhance Ecological Values • Enhance Economic Values and Social Well-Being

  20. PIR 1 Objectives • REMOVE BARRIERS TO SHEETFLOW AND CONNECTIVITY • Remove/reduce effects of landscape discontinuities and remove barriers to sheetflow • Improve sheetflow, hydropatterns and hydroperiods within WCA 3A • Promote more natural hydrologic recession rates throughout the ridge and slough, marl prairie and rocky glades landscapes • Increase fish and wildlife connectivity

  21. PIR 1 Objectives • RESTORE ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS • Restore or recover existing populations of migratory birds and their habitat • Restore spatial extent and function of wetland resources in WCA 3A • Increase spatial extent and restore vegetative composition, habitat function and productivity of tree islands • Restore peat soils, depth and micro-topography

  22. PIR 1 Objectives • ENSURE INTEGRATION W/OTHER PROJECTS AND PURPOSES • Promote recreational opportunities consistent with Everglades restoration • Ensure PIR 1 Goals, objectives, constraints, assumptions consistent with and enhance those of PIRs 2 and 3 • Integrate objectives/features w/other projects • Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades Natl. Park • Combined Structural and Operational Plan • Broward County Water Preserve Area • Everglades Natl. Park Seepage Management • C-111 Spreader Canal

  23. Constraints • Water quality must not be degraded as a result of the project • The project must not adversely impact authorized flood damage reduction • The project must not adversely impact permitted, existing water users

  24. Tab 3Formulation and Evaluation of Preliminary Plans

  25. Plan Formulation Strategy

  26. Demolish/Remove S-339 and S-340 Demolish/Remove S-151 Remove all canals, spoil mounds, levees within WCA 3A (other than airboat trails) Rainfall operations Removal of levees and berms but retain canals Construction of backfill in phases: start with shallowing, then plugs, then total Install pipe from S-150 till crossing at I-75 along WCA side of route Additional Water Quality treatment Management Measures

  27. Initial Formulation • Yellow Book plan • Complete backfill of 30 miles of Miami Canal • Improvements to water supply and flood damage reduction requirements • Minimum plan • Backfill only between S-339 S-340 (approx 10 miles) • Assumes no need for North New River improvements • 2 Alternatives • Total backfill of Miami Canal but varying Northern and Eastern routes for water conveyance • Installation of pipes • To carry water volume needed for water supply and flood damage reduction

  28. Evaluation Methodology • Will use PMs, modeling, and expert assessment • Will be quantitative & qualitative • PMs scored as % achievement of target • Quality index score (0 to 1) • Habitat units • Cost-benefit analysis

  29. Performance Measures • 15 PMs currently being considered • Address ecological performance and water quality constraints • RECOVER completed PM consistency review March 2008 • Suite of PMs will be narrowed down based on RECOVER’s recommendations, results of preliminary sensitivity runs, and actual model selection

  30. Screening of Alternatives

  31. Tab 4Policy Issues

  32. Policy Issues

  33. PIR 1 Formulation • Question from last informal HQ Review Conference • For “next increment” of Miami Canal • or • For full solution of Miami Canal problems, recommending implementation in increments

  34. DECOMP Recreation Issue • Miami Canal Existing Recreation: • Local, regional, state-wide and tourist use, • Existing recreation uses are fishing, hunting, nature study, picnicking, trail usage • FWC and Corps completed data collection that show seasonal boating usage of the study area, • Existing facilities within the study area include: four boatramps, levee trails, bait & tackle shop, restrooms, picnic and parking.

  35. DECOMP Recreation Issue • Public Concerns Raised: • Potential loss of boat access to valuable large freshwater fishery, • Potential loss of access to existing cultural / traditional uses within the study area, • Recreation concerns are not being addressed due to the extended planning process.

  36. DECOMP Recreation Issue • Process for addressing public concerns: • Acknowledge existing recreation resources, • Develop a value for existing recreation resource use within Corps guidance (UDV-IWR 86-R-4, ER 1105-2-100, Sec. 7, App. E), • Resolution: • Develop potential recreation impact analysis, • Develop recreation compensation/restoration compatible recreation concepts.

  37. Application of Incremental Adaptive Restoration Principles • Biennial report required by WRDA 2000 • Noted delays in restoration effort due to scientific/programmatic uncertainties • Uncertainties acute dilemma in Decomp • Recommended Incremental Adaptive Restoration (IAR) approach • Take actions that promote learning • Produce early benefits • Address scientific uncertainties • Divide into phases & provide funds • DECOMP specifically identified

  38. Application of IAR to Decomp • Team asked to address • Team made recommendations • Recommendations under consideration by USACE and SFWMD leadership • May present to Quality Review Board in July • Final direction to team expected late July

  39. Tab 5 • External ITR

  40. AFB Draft PIR/EIS complete Final PIR/NEPA complete Civil Works Review Board Chief’s Report Dec 2009 July 2010 Feb 2011 May 2011 Nov 2011 PIR 1 Major Milestones

  41. The DECOMP Physical Model (Prius v3.5 vs DPM Lite )Fred H. Sklar, Scot Hagerthey & Sue NewmanEverglades DivisionSouth Florida Water Management DistrictGraphics used in this presentation are conceptual only and do not represent the final design of the DPM. These graphics are not self-executing or binding.

  42. What is the Decomp Physical Model? • A pilot study to test engineering solutions for ecological restoration. • An on-site, large-scale controlled manipulation of the environment to evaluate ecosystem response to sheetflow. • A landscape manipulation designed to provide critical information of the hydrologic targets for restoration. • Provides “ecological lift” to a drained system: An Adaptive Management approach.

  43. Questions to be answered by a physical model Uncertainty 1: Hydrology: Do canals need to be completely backfilled in order to achieve hydrologic restoration? Uncertainty 2: Sediment: What is the role of floc and sediment movement for restoring and sustaining a stable ridge and slough landscape, and how do canals, levees, and levee modifications affect this movement?. Uncertainty 3: Restoration: What is the ecological function of sheetflow and what are the hydrologic needs (i.e., flow fields, depths, duration) of the ridge and slough landscape?

  44. The objectives and issues that make a DECOMP Physical Model (DPM) important Objective 1: Evaluate the impacts of sheetflow, weirs, and canal backfilling (partial vs. complete) on the processes associated with the restoration and sustainability of the ridge-slough-tree island pattern in the Everglades. Issue: Recreational fishing interests do not want canals to be backfilled. However, there is scientific evidence to suggest that canals that are not backfilled will; short-circuit marsh hydrology, interfere with sediment transport, cause water quality problems, and create habitat for exotic fish.

  45. Impacted ridge & slough landscape Objective 1: Remove the impacts of impoundments, levees and canals. Pre-drainage ridge & slough landscape

  46. The objectives and issues that make a DECOMP Physical Model (DPM) important. Objective 2: Assess the physical and biogeochemical parameters associated with sheetflow as a way to develop, improve and parameterize the tools needed to evaluate Decomp alternatives. Issue: Hydrologic performance measures for the restoration of tree islands, ridges, and sloughs do not yet include velocity vectors. The NSM is not calibrated for flow fields and no one knows if current peak flow rates of 1 cm/sec can support the biophysics of restored microtopography in the Everglades.

  47. Objective 2: How much sheetflow is enough? Present-day Flows Historic Flows

  48. What objectives and issues can be addressed with Adaptive Management? Objective 3: Evaluate the role of floc and sediment movement for restoring and sustaining a stable ridge and slough landscape. Issue: Wading birds need slough habitats during the dry season for intensive foraging to support nesting and fledging of young birds. Wading bird populations can not be restored if the slough habitats of the Everglades continue to be encroached by sediments, cattails and sawgrass. However, there is no scientific understanding of the biology of floc or its distribution & movement across the Everglades.

  49. As you cross from Ridge to Slough the difference is: Healthy = 20-30 cm Impacted = 0-10 cm The Bedrock Surface is not reflected on the peat surface Objective 3: Restore ridge and slough microtopography. Healthy Microtopography Impacted Microtopography

  50. 3000 ft gap* & canal plug with boat channel) DPM Prius Concept- Design linked to “MWD C&SF” features to move water continuously and as pulsed releases along historic flow paths from WCA-3A through large, controlled openings in the L-67A levee, to canal and levee modifications on the L-67C. DPM Prius Design Factors- 1. A focus on hydrodynamics and sediment movement occurs in a BACI flow-path 2. Long-term statistical variation associated with ecological parameters is handled by a Repeated Measure design. 3. Research schedules are linked to the construction of “MWD C&SF” features. Prius Model v3.5 3000 ft gap* & complete backfill BACI Flow-way with one 12,000 ft L-67C levee gap 3000 ft gap* & partial backfill 3000 ft gap* & no canal fill Repeated Measure Flow-way CSOP L-67A weir-culvert cluster location L-67A Levee Canal plug with boat channel L-67C Levee *Gaps = L-67C levee openings

More Related