South Florida ecosystem restoration: scienfitic information needs [DRAFT]

Science Sub-Group. 1994. South Florida ecosystem restoration: scienfitic information needs [DRAFT]

This statement of scientific information needs is a beginning toward developing an organizing framework for collecting the information required for the ecosystem approach mandated by the Interagency Task Force in its September 23, 1993, agreement concerning the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration effort. The document is multiauthored and multidisciplined and has already been reviewed by many experts. Monitoring is to be a major component of the Science Plan. The Science Sub-Group decided that organizing the information needs to support region-wide restoration into a document that could be reviewed and circulated was a necessary preamble to the development of a coordinated, comprehensive monitoring plan. This is yet to come, although this draft contains many elements of monitoring. This statement of scientific information needs is a precursor to a Science Plan to develop the knowledge to support planning and implementation of restoration strategies and the tools for incorporating the knowledge into the decision making process. The modeling, monitoring, and special studies called for in this plan will provide the information basis for ecosystem management. The report that follows is subdivided into sections that detail the research needs of each of the subregions identified in the Science Sub-Group Report, as modified to include a Subregion 10. Subsections also were developed for the following special topics: mercury, endangered species, exotic species, and modeling (hydrologic, hydrodynamic, meteorologic, and ecologic). These are preceded by 1) a description of South Florida that addresses issues of sustainability and 2) a description of the approach to obtaining the scientific basis for restoration, as well as the issues involved in applying this approach. Development of many of the sections involved bringing teams of experts together and gaining consensus regarding information needs. Other sections were developed through interviews with knowledgeable experts on the area or the topic. Since Subregions 3, 9, and 10 involved lands and waters controlled by local governments, local government representatives contributed substantially to the development of these sections. Background or initial organizing issues were those provided by the Science Sub-Group Report. The subregion sections are uneven in format and detail, although all started with the same basic format: a) Major Issues, b) Background, c) Scope, d) Objectives, and e) Approach. Each group worked independently, and the format was more applicable to some topics than others. Therefore, the outline was modified to accommodate the separate needs. Science Plans were already in place for Sub-regions 1 and 8 at the time the Interagency Task Force Science Plan Draft was prepared. These two sections of this plan simply expand upon or integrate the existing plans into the region-wide restoration initiative. Discussion of Sub-regions 6 and 7 are combined because of similar research needs and restoration goals. Discussion of Indian lands (Seminole and Miccosukee tribes) is included in the section on Sub-regions 6 and 7 since all of the Seminole Big Cypress Reservation and one-third of the Miccosukee Reservation are contained in the Big Cypress Basin.

Type
Published Report
Authors
Science Sub-Group
Date of Issue
1994-09-27
Units
BICY , EVER
Keywords
ecologic, ecosystem approach, Endangered Species, Hydrodynamic, Hydrologic, Mercury, meteorologic, Modeling, Monitoring

Full text (PDF)

Collections

Browse the catalog