Everglades 2010

Page 1

landscape planning + ecological design

Exploring Strategic Conservation for Southern Florida’s

Greater Everglades Landscape


INSTRUCTOR Dr. Juan Carlos Vargas-Moreno

STUDENTS Gates Gooding Chris Horne Bjorn Jensen Anna Josephson Sarah Madden Evan Paul Sari Rothrock

GUEST CRITICS + REVIEWERS Alan Berger, Eran Ben-Joseph, Joe Ferreira, Michael Flaxman, Amy Glasmeier, Herman Karl, Daniel Sheehan, Jim Wescoat Book design by Sarah Madden

u

ed

m

p.

s du

Copyright Š 2009 MIT Department of Urban Studies and Planning School of Architecture + Planning Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA

2

. it


landscape planning + ecological design

Exploring Strategic Conservation for Southern Florida’s

Greater Everglades Landscape


4


Table of Contents

7 8 12 16 18

40 42 44 46

FOREWORD Introduction Methodology History of the Region Trends & Projections Identifying Critical Landscapes 22

Agriculture

28

Ecology

34

Hydrology

Initial Synthesis Defining the Problem Synergies Interventions: Towards a Synergistic Landscape 46

Regional

56

Mid-scale

60

Local

64

Non-spatial

66 Future Scenarios 76 Participants & Acknowledgements


6


INTRODUCTION g

p

ca s d n

2T 5 9 . 11

h

es i r o e

h

et M d n

a

f La o s od

nin n a l eP

Theories and Methods of Landscape Planning was designed to teach students about landscape ecology in the context of planning at the regional scale with complex natural systems. The primary goal of the course was to develop an ecologically-informed knowledge of landscape dynamics. We critically examined the methods used by planning professionals to understand and to represent natural systems, and synthesized this knowledge to inspire or evaluate designs and plans. A hands-on introduction to spatial environmental assessment and planning methods at landscape to regional scales, the course focused on the ecological components of the planning of large regional landscapes. Lectures and discussions introduced key concepts in landscape ecology, as well as the data and methods needed to incorporate these concepts in environmental spatial planning and design. The class functioned in a lecture-workshop format, where the critical concepts of ecologicallybased landscape planning were presented and discussed in class through lectures, student presentation and discussion; and practical knowledge and applications were explored in the workshop through analysis, design and planning exercises. Students exercised an array of methods, ranging from sketching and diagramming through to application of Geographic Information Systems (GIS). In Spring 2009, the course focused on the greater Everglades Ecosystem in Southern Florida as a case study system. By choosing such a large, complex and controversial landscape as our primary laboratory, the course aimed to develop critical understanding of the interrelationships between human settlement patterns, hydrology, ecology and climate change. Different groups of students developed a series of projects, working in collaboration with faculty and guest lectures, before finally combining efforts to develop a collaborative analysis and proposal. The results are presented in this publication.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


methodology

8


METHODOLOGY le

sca l a n

em l b o pr

o

la

g nnin

hp c a ro

How

egi r a r

fo

p p a to

Contrary to most academic cases, the approach and methodology in this study did not begin with a pre-defined problem or program. Instead, we started from the premise that the landscape of Southern Florida was rapidly changing, and in this process, its ecological and socio-economic functions were changing significantly. Then, the first problem for the students was to identify the regional and ecologically based landscape planning problems in the case study region, and to explore, assess, and develop possible solutions at various scales employing the concepts, fundamentals and analytical tools and methods discussed in class. The goal of the case study was for the students to develop critical skills by assessing and testing the landscape and ecological design theory and methodological approaches. The only requirement was that the proposals should include a variety of regional landscape strategies and planning propositions that enhanced the ecological functioning of the landscape of Southern Florida while as well as socio-economic considerations. Given the nature of the methodology, the course was based on team collaboration, individual and group research, and self-management. The topics related to landscape planning theories and methods were introduced through lectures covering ecological planning theories, fundamentals, and case studies. The class read topical selections from the literature on various theoretical positions and methods in preparation for each lecture, and wrote brief reactionary essays. Class time was divided in half, between lectures and discussion between class participants, facilitated by the instructor. This allowed rich, critical discussion of the concepts. Students’ previous experience and views enhanced the discussions and provided important learning opportunities for all participants. Three guest lecturers presented cases and lessons from other landscape-based ecological planning processes. Carl Steinitz, Professor of Landscape Architecture and Planning at Harvard University, presented methods of landscape planning in the design of visual management plan for Valencia, Spain. James Dobbin, consultant in spatial development planning from Dobbin International Inc and IBI, Washington D.C., discussed using landscape planning to create development initiatives in Madagascar, East Africa Coast. Finally, Stephanie Hurley, Doctor of Design Candidate at Harvard University and a researcher in design and planning of urban storm water systems, presented on the concepts of storm water management as well as a case in Boston implementing those design and planning principles. These guests exposed the students to professional and academic work where the landscape served as medium for the design, planning and proposition of ecologically-based strategies.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Getting started In the absence of a pre-defined problem, the case study began with the preliminary evaluation of the regional landscape assets. Students grappled with a basic data set and documentation in both geographic and document format. The premise of this exercise, defined as The Identification of Indispensable Landscapes, was that in order to understand what is the problem was, the students first needed to understand the state of landscape, and identify and evaluate the patterns and processes that make certain characteristics indispensable for ecological and socio-economic integrity. The eight students formed three teams to explore the indispensable landscapes related to (1) Ecology, (2) Hydrology, and (3) Agriculture (a prominent land use in Southern Florida, and one that is important in economic and social dimensions). The students took on small individual research assignments to analyze ecological, hydrological and socioeconomic agriculture processes and concepts, such as landscape fragmentation and aquifer recharge. Each student presented findings on those concepts as they related to the region of study. Parallel to these exercises, students explored the analytical tools in Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The students used GIS to analyze emerging geospatial problems that allowed them to reflect upon the use of the tool. Throughout the semester, this process helped students to internalize the critical processes to manipulate, represent and analyze spatial data. Next, students identified the composite nature of those indispensable landscapes, and reflected upon the synergies emerging from those landscape patterns and processes. This pushed the students to embrace rich cross-sectoral discussions and to learn from each thematic approach. It also allowed the students to assess the malfunctioning of the landscape in ecological terms at the light of each other findings. Students considered three basic landscape stressors to characterize the possible change in the study region: demographic and urban change, demographic growth, and sea-level rise derived from IPCC climate change scenarios. Student research on each of these topics relied on quantitative analysis and research to derive the input numbers for each category. Given access to GIS data on urban growth, we set the time horizon at 2040. Future urban growth was represented by University of Florida GeoPlan Center urban growth model. The combination of these variables allowed the students to identify not only sectoral conflicts but also the areas where indispensable landscapes composite conflict with each of these drivers of change. The students drafted their first strategic propositions and presented them at the midterm. Defining the problem for the study region: After the midterm, the group re-evaluated their position and readings of the landscape and re-defined it in spatial and narrative formats. Only here, after a careful review and confrontation with the regional dynamics, were the students asked to define the problem of the study. The problem definition was derived through a group discussion, and articulated in a brief narrative and through diagrams explaining the components of the problems in the landscape.

Identifying strategies of intervention

10

Articulating the problem definition was a milestone in the course. Then, the students could interpret the landscape of South Florida in a critical way, and propose a set of landscape-based planning interventions at a diversity of scales and sectors – those ones that affect the most those critical landscapes and the study region as a whole. The students discussed the presentation of design and planning ideas, aiming to exchange and critically assess each others’ propositions and evaluate their relative impact in the overall scheme.


Students identified a set of three scales of focal interventions: (1) regional scale interventions, (2) mid-scale interventions and (3) local interventions. Interventions at the regional landscape scale include those related to water storage quality and management, as well as the need to re-shape and create new climate-related and strategic habitat conservation areas. Interventions at this scale also deal with some of the policy mechanisms to achieve these strategies. Mid-scale interventions present opportunities to plan, manage and re-shape the intermediate scale of the landscape privately focusing on the synergistic role of agriculture and recreational urban land uses land uses as important tools and spaces to sustain species and hydrological dynamics. Local interventions deal with the neighborhood scale. These interventions are aimed at the identification of opportunities to enhance the notion and functioning of urban and suburban ecologies. Proposals included traditional solutions such as green roofs and their role in the regional hydro dynamic, as well as the re-conceptualization of the urban and sub-urban parcels to promote connectivity. In this way, studies of “retrofitting” aimed to recruit private spaces to work for the greater public good. In addition to the three scales of landscape intervention, three options of so-called non-spatial interventions where proposed. They include biomining, endangered species farming and assisted migration.

Interventions Lastly, students packaged the proposed interventions into three scenarios to combine and stage the suggested strategies into different phases. The Business as Usual scenario assumes a minimum of intervention, while the Progressive Scenario is the most aggressive. The first one was called Reform Scenario and assumed no significant interventions. The progressive scenario assumed the implementation of substantial landscape-scale based interventions. In order to reach some robustness in the formulation, the class once again divided into two groups to integrate the different scale-based interventions into the scenario. Each group defined a series of ruling assumptions to capture the potential likelihood of funding each intervention as well as the nature of the proposition – that is defensive or offensive. Those were compared with the trendbaseline “business as usual” scenario, which did not integrate any landscape interventions. Finally, the students studied the implementation of each scenario, in light of mechanisms such as policy interventions, subsidies, and the market. The resulting implementation chart compared the different scenarios according to several variables, incuding project name (intervention), relevant organizations (public and private), implementation mechanisms, and potential barriers. Lastly, we compared the implementation mechanism and the interventions to reveal their relative synergistic nature focused on ecology, hydrology and agriculture. The course’s methodological approach was a pedagogical experiment designed to encourage the students to confront real case studies in complex regions where the nature of the problem, scope and interventions are rapidly evolving. The resulting planning, design, and policy proposals are possible solutions on a short-term future, given the forces and factors in motion today in Southern Florida. Their value is to allow one to visualize possible solutions driven by contemporary and historical considerations. Students synthesized parallel learning experiences from other areas of planning, design and ecology, applying that knowledge to identify and define the methodological problem. This collaborative approach pushed students to learn from and critique each other’s work in a positive and constructive way, preparing them indeed to became more complete professionals of the planning discipline.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


HISTORY OF THE REGION

The study focused on the complete South Florida watershed, defining the borders of analysis at of the South Florida Water Management District boundary. The study area encompasses a large, complex landscape, including the Everglades National Park, many large urban regions clustered on the coast, and a highly managed hydrological system. The study area is: • 17,930 square miles • Highly engineered hydrological system • 6 million residents • Growing coastal urban areas • Extensive Protected Areas, but fragmented habitat • Agricultural land dominates the inland landscape • A complex mix of overlapping political jurisdictions: includes four regional planning councils and 16 county governments.

The leading sectors of South Florida’s economy are:

International Trade

40% of all U.S. exports to Latin and South America pass through Florida

Tourism

76.8 million visitors in 2004 (a record number)

Agriculture

Florida produces about 75% of the U.S. oranges and accounts for about 40% of the world’s orange juice supply.

Construction

This industry’s strength results from the steady stream of new residents and visitors who come to Florida each year.

The Study Region:

12

South Florida Water Management District


< The NASA satellite image to the left, shot in 2000, illustrates the fragmentation of the landscape south of Lake Okeechobee, in.a region that is primarily used for agriculture. As NASA explains, “A green and brown checkerboard of agricultural fields rings the southern shores of Lake Okeechobee in southeastern Florida. ...Smudges of dark blue near the lake and along the outer edges of the farmland are wetlands. In the lower right corner of the image, the wetlands are intersected by straight lines—a sign that at least part of the land has been drained. ... The link between wetland change and climate change in South Florida was described in a recent NASA and U.S. Geological Survey study, using a careful comparison of historical and present-day land cover along with climate simulations of the effects of these changes.“ Source: NASA, The Visibile Earth, ttp://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view_rec. php?id=17012

Jacksonville

Tampa Naples

Orlando West Palm Beach Fort Lauderdale Miami

South Florida and the boundaries of the South Florida Water Management District. Aerial photo courtesy of Google Maps.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


The Everglades: Ice Age to 1950 By Chris Horne

During the last ice age, Florida was an arid savanna three times its current size, inhabited by a range of mega-fauna including mastadons, giant armadillos, saber tooth cats, and giant sloths. Humans arrived approximately 15,000 years ago. When the ice age ended, sea level increased, the climate became much wetter, and several species went extinct. Several subsequent climate shifts caused southern Florida to become increasingly wet, resulting in the formation, 5,000 years ago, of a perennial flood plane south of Lake Okeechobee that we call the Everglades. The first Europeans to land in Florida came with Ponce de Leon from Spain in 1513. For the next 300 years, southern Florida was sparsely settled and changed hands from Spain to England (during which Florida was divided into two states), back to Spain, and finally to the US (as a territory) in 1819. The native tribes that lived in the region when the Europeans arrived—the Calusa and the Tequestas—were wiped out by European aggression and disease. In the mid-1700s part of the Creek nation, called Seminoles by Europeans, migrated into the region. Three wars were fought between the US and the Seminoles. Florida was annexed by the US as a territory after the conclusion of the first Seminole War. After the wars were over, most of the Seminoles had been killed or forcibly sent west, though some stayed and remain to the present day. Until the mid-1800s, the Everglades were viewed as inhospitable, dangerous, and unprofitable. Few Americans lived there, and the region was not even charted until the wars with the Seminole Indians. However, as early 1837, investors and politicians began pushing to drain the Everglades, with intentions of converting it into farmland.

14

In 1881, Hamilton Disston, a real-estate developer from Philadelphia, purchased 4,000,000 acres of land for $1M and began constructing canals to drain the Everglades. From an engineering perspective, it was only partially successful, but it spurred rapid population growth. Railroads and other infrastructure were built at the same time. The new settlers put ecological stresses on the region, hunting several species of birds to the brink of extinction. Drainage efforts accelerated, first with the Miami Canal, connecting Lake Okeechobee to the Miami area, completed in 1909 and later with additional, smaller channels being built by the Army Corps of Engineers. A dam on the south rim of the lake itself was completed in 1930. Later, the Tamiami Trail road (now US Route 41), which runs east and west through the Everglades, was completed, interrupting the flow of water to the south. After two devastating floods in 1926 and 1928, focus shifted from drainage to flood control. Between 1930 and 1937, the 66-mile Hoover Dike was built along the southern edge of Okeechobee and water levels began to be strictly maintained between 14 and 17 feet. An 80ft wide canal was built through the Caloosahatchee River to carry the excess water released from Okeechobee. These projects eliminated the Everglades’ natural sources of water and caused widespread drought, peat subsidence, and saltwater intrusion into Miami’s water supply. The Everglades was officially dedicated as a protected land in 1947, and in 1948 Congress approved the Central and Southern Florida Project for Flood Control and Other Purposes, which divided the Everglades into Water Conservation Areas and The Everglades Agricultural Area.


Lake Okeechobee Cape Coral Fort Myers

• •

Naples •

• West Palm Beach The Everglades

• Fort Lauderdale • Miami

South Florida and the boundaries of the South Florida Water Management District (outlined in white). Aerial photo courtesy of Google Maps.a

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


TRENDS & PROJECTIONS Modeling Urban Growth We considered two time-based phenomena exerting spatial constraints on the landscape: sea level rise and urbanization. With regard to the latter, our region of study is expected to face continuous outward growth in housing, commercial areas, and infrastructure.

URBANIZATION (miles2) 20000

15200 mi2

15000

11700 mi2 8000 mi2

10000

5000

4800 mi2

0

2000

2020

2040

URBANIZATION (miles2)

2060

20000

POPULATION GROWTH

Population Growth

15200 mi2

15000 40000000

35000000 URBANIZATION (miles2)

Based on projections from the University of Florida’s GeoPlan Center (numbers are Florida-wide)

10000 30000000 20000 25000000 5000 20000000 15000 15000000 100000000 10000 5000000 0

5000

2005 2020

17,872,295 people 22,765,644 people

8000 mi2 27

4800 mi220

29,290,104 people

15200 mi2 11700 mi2 2020 8000 mi2

2000 2000mi2 2010 4800

2020

2030

2040 2040

2050

2060 2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

POPULATION GROWTH 0 40000000

2000 2020 SEA 35000000LEVEL RISE (inches) 30000000

25

20

24

27

36 million in2060 2060

2040

29

32

22 inches

POPULATION GROWTH 20000000 20 15

17 inches

15000000 40000000

15 10000000

35000000

*assuming constant urban densities into the future

29

24

15

25000000

2040

2 11700 mi 36 million in 2060 32

5000000 30000000

10

25000000 0

20000000 5

2000

2010 20

24

2020

27 2030

29

36 million in 2060

32

2040 9 inches 2050 2060

2070

2080

11 inches

2090

2100

15

15000000 10000000 0

2000

2050

5000000 LEVEL RISE (inches) SEA 0

25

2000

2010

2020

2030

20

Sea Level Rise • •

0.33 meters by 2050 (Stephan Rahmstorf et al.) Supported at IPCC Copenhagen

2040

2050

2100 2060

2070

2080

2090

17 inches

SEA 15LEVEL RISE (inches) 2510

9 inches 17 inches

20 5 15 0

2000

2050

10

9 inches

2211inches inches

2100 11 inches

5 0

16

2100

22 inches

2000

2050

2100


Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Identifying critical landscapes

18


Diagramming the problem As part of beginning to analyze and define the approach to the problem, the class developed some representation models to explore how various factors might impact South Florida.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


DESCRIBING THE problem Describing the Problem What are the spatial patterns that will integrate a plan for sustainable conservation in Southern Florida?

Valuable agricultural landscapes

What are the most valuable landscapes?

Valuable ecological landscapes

Valuable hydrological landscapes

20

Criteria 1

Map Criteria 1

Criteria 2

Map Criteria 2

Criteria 3

Map Criteria 3

Criteria 1

Map Criteria 1

Criteria 2

Map Criteria 2

Criteria 3

Map Criteria 3

Criteria 1

Map Criteria 1

Criteria 2

Map Criteria 2

Criteria 3

Map Criteria 3

Composite Valuable AgriculturE

Patterns: Problem & Opportunities

Composite Valuable ecology

Patterns: Problem & Opportunities

Composite Valuable hydrology

Patterns: Problem & Opportunities


Constraints + Assumptions

Climate change constraints

urban growth constraints

Valuable Landscapes Most Valuable Landscapes

∑

Sea level rise

=

Most Valuable Landscapes

∑

Urban growth

=

Constrained by Sea-Level and Urban Growth

Composite Values 1 -6

What are the major problems? Problem 1 Problem 2 Problem 3

What are the possible strategies? Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


AgriculturE

22

Chris Horne, Anna Josephson, & Evan Paul


Agricultural Land Projections Agricultural land in South Florida provides valuable services, including food security and the preservation of rural livelihoods. However, trends predict that 65% of agricultural land will disappear by 2050. Agriculture, climate, and energy are intimately connected. Agricultural processes require light, fuel, precipitation, heat, soil, and living organisms—all factors that depend on climate and energy. These processes in turn affect climate and energy through the proliferation of phosphorous, methane, carbon emissions, and crops that can be turned into biofuels. The problem is one of both knowledge and governance. The knowledge problem is how to understand the interrelations between these factors and how to forecast plausible future scenarios based on changes within the system being considered. The governance problem is how to transform the knowledge into a set of policies that bind the stakeholders of the region to a strategy that will strike an ideal balance between competing land uses and economic, environmental, and social goods.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Identifying critical landscapes: Analysis methodology for agricultural land

Process

criteria

Ag map

Commerce

Agricultural land is critical to Florida’s economy.

Agriculture land use maximizes water efficiency.

Ag map

Soil can replenish itself under proper management.

Ag map

Hydrology

soil stability

climate change

employment

24

Agricultural land use emits minimal GHGs.

Agricultural land is important for regional employment.

Data on agricultural employment were not available for this analysis.

data needed

Revenues and yields

Water usage research

evaluation range

Least–Most 1–6

Worst–Best 1–10

No peat: 1 Peat: 0 Soil map GIF

Ag map

Ag GHG research

Worst–Best 1–5

Ag map

Employment data

Least–Most 1–3


spatial operations

Evaluations Map

1. Features to raster 2. Reclassify

Economically Important Agricultural Lands

1. Features to raster 2. Reclassify

Water Efficiency Map

1. Features to raster 2. Reclassify

Soil Stability Map

Index performance map

1. Raster Calculator (Econ x2, Hydrology x1, Soil stability x3, Climate Change x1

Critical Agricultural Lands Map

2. Reclassify 1. Features to raster 2. Reclassify

Climate Change Impact Map

1. Features to raster 2. Reclassify

Employment Map

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


26


Critical Land for Agricultural function Overall Ranking: Highest Value (3):

Citrus, Row Crops (vegetables), Nurseries, Greenhouses, Specialty Farms

Mid Value (2):

Beef, Dairy, Goats, Sheep

Lowest Value (1):

Chicken Farming, Sugar Cane, Corn

PROBLEMS • Urban growth threatening high value land—sea level rise has no direct effect • The highest valued agriculture land lies near current urban areas and is the first to be affected by expansion inland

Circles ( ) indicate five prime areas of conflict in the composite analysis shown above. Map analysis by Chris Horne, Anna Josephson, and Evan Paul.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Ecology

28

Gates Gooding & Sarah Madden


Ecological Lands Projections The Florida Everglades is globally recognized as one of the most biodiverse and unique regions on the planet. Threats due to land use changes, a warming climate, and sea-level rise are forcing the science, policy, and planning communities to reassess how to protect and restore biodiversity in the region. These stressors are fragmenting and eliminating habitat for many species, despite efforts through the Endangered Species Act and other policies. Temperatures and sea-levels will continue to rise even if greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically reduced. If we are to protect the biodiversity of the Everglades, particularly its threatened and endangered species, then a variety of land use and policy changes will need to be instigated over the coming years. Proper interventions will only be able to be identified through assessing the historic, present, and projected future trends for land use, climate, and sea-level in the region. Particular aspects to be studied and mapped include:

COMPONENTS Responders (mappable)

Stressors

Biodiversity / Endangered Species

Fragmentation / Connectivity

Land use

Agriculture, silviculture, fishing, urban sprawl and transportation infrastructure all impact the region’s biodiversity. Land dedicated to these purposes in the future will further alter species’ habitats.

Land use decisions have fragmented previously contiguous habitats, resulting in a fragmented landscape. Future changes in land use could connect and/or further fragment habitats, potentially hurting or helping the expansion of native and invasive species.

Climate Change

Increasing temperatures, precipitation changes, and changes seasonal timing will change breeding, flowering, fruiting, and other cycles for plants and animals. The relationships between species reliant upon these cycles will also change (e.g. flowering plants dependent upon pollinating insects). Temperature sensitive species (e.g. amphibians, invertebrates) will be seriously affected.

Increasing temperatures, changing precipitation levels, and shifts in seasonal timing will alter current habitat connectivity: more frequent wildfires, changes in microclimates, and drought. Seasonal changes will shift the timing of life cycle cues for plants, invertebrates, and avians.

Sea-level rise

Rising sea-levels will change salinity and aquatic microclimates, changing habitat viability in the process. Habitat will be submerged. Some species will be more resilient than others.

Changing inland water depths due to sea-level rise will fragment terrestrial and fresh-water habitats, creating new fragmentation based on the availability of fresh water. It could connect brackish and salt water habitats.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Identifying critical landscapes: Analysis methodology for ecological hotspots

criteria

evaluation range

Biodiversity

Biodiversity Hotspots Priority Uplands Habitat Priority Wetland Habitat Strategic Habitat Conservation

Biodiversity Hotspots: 3–4 focal species: 1; 5–6 focal species: 2; 7+ focal species: 3 Priority Upland Habitat: 1–3 species: 1; 4–6 species: 2 Priority Wetland Habitat: 1–3 species: 1; 4–6 species: 2; 7–9 species: 3; 10–12 species: 4 Strategic Habitat Conservation: Existing: 1; New/ Strategic: 4

Endangered species

Protected Species Observations Integrated Wildlife Habitat Rank Strategic Habitat Conservation Watersheds Containing Rare and Imperiled Fish

PROTECTED SPECIES: Endangered: high buffer; Threatened: Med buffer; Partial pop/delisted: low buffer INTEG. WILDLIFE HAB RANK: High: 3; Medium: 2; Low: 1 STRATEGIC HAB CONSERVATION: Currently Protected Areas: 1; Unprotected Stat. Habitat: 2 WATERSHED WITH RARE FISH: 1

Florida Land Use Roads and Canals Surface Water Pollution Invasive Species

LAND USE (Habitat Disruption): Dense urban: 0; Peripheral Urban: 1; Agricultural Urban: 2; Unimproved: 3 ROADS AND CANALS: Adjacent areas: 1 SURFACE WATER POLLUTION: Low priority zone: 1; Medium: 2; High priority zone: 3 INVASIVE SPECIES: Dense populations: high buffer; Sparse: Med buffer; Individuals: Low buffer

FL Managed Areas Nat’l Park Service Land Nat’l Wildlife Refuges Nat’l Park Service Land Water Conservation Areas

Managed or Protected Area: 1

Habitat Integrity

Protected Areas

30

data


spatial operations

Evaluations Map

1. Reclassify

Land Value for Biodiversity

1. Reclassify 2. Euclidean Distance: End Spp: 3k; Threatened:2k; Partial/DL spp 1k

Suitability for Protected Species

1. Reclassify 2. Euclidean Distance: Roads: 1k; Canals: 500m; Dense Inv. Spp: 1k; Sparse Inv. Spp: 500m; Indiv. Inv.Spp: 100m

Land Value by Habitat Integrity

1. Reclassify 2. Merge

Land Value by Protected Areas

Index performance map

Critical Lands for Ecological Protection

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


32


Critical Land for ecological Function Notes: • Many priority areas are already protected, so the key will be to connect patches and corridors to link the preserves. •

On the west side, urban growth directly abuts priority habitat

Strategies • • •

Connect patches of protected habitat Specify buffers around urban areas adjacent to ecological habitat. Prioritze land to maximize connectivity among areas.

Lime green marks currently protected lands. Map analysis by Gates Gooding and Sarah Madden

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Hydrology

34

Bjorn Jensen & Sari Rothrock


Hydrological Projections The hydrological system in southern Florida is a mixture of wetland, upland, estuarine, and marine ecosystems, characterized by a surficial drainage system across the landscape and underground aquifers. The regional hydrology is characterized by the surficial and subsurface freshwater transport, notably the so-called “river of grass�, water quantity, water quality, storage, sheetflow, and timing, all of which are essential for the sustainability of the Everglades. Our analysis identifies key criteria and interactions in a spatial form.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Identifying critical landscapes: Analysis methodology for hydrology

criteria

quantity

quality

36

data

Prioritze reservation of surface water storage capacity

• Lakes and Rivers • Wetlands • Water Conservation Areas

Promote and sustain surface water quality for clean drinking water and healthy habitats

Surface Water Quality data

Preserve sites of groundwater recharge to enhance water quality and promote aquifer health.

• • • • •

Protect areas that flood after storms.

Floodplain

Impervious Biscayne Lakes and Rivers Wetlands Floridan recharge


evaluation range

spatial operations

Evaluations Map

Lakes and Rivers = 3 Wetlands = 2 WCAs = 1–3

1. Reclassify 2. Raster Calculator 3. Reclassify

Surface Water Capacity Map

Low to High Priority = 1–3

1. Reclassify

Surface Water Quality Map

Urbanized = –3 Biscayne = 3 Lakes = 3 Rivers = 2 Floridan recharge = 0–1

1. Reclassify 2. Raster Calculator

Groundwater Recharge Map

Low to High Priority = 2–3

1. Reclassify

Temporary Surface Storage Map

Index performance map

Composite Hydrology Map

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


38


Critical Land for Hydrological Function Notes: • Western Perimeter of Lake Okeechobee highly valuable •

Area northwest of Ft. Lauderdale also important

Medium priorities are lakes and wetlands

Strategies • • •

Buy land/buffer Okeechobee and other high-quality lakes Save high priority wetlands southeast of Ft. Myers and west of Fort Pierce Legislate stringent environmental controls (no wetland development, specify riparian buffers improve environmental design criteria)

Circles ( ) indicate five prime areas of conflict in the composite analysis shown above. Map analysis by Bjorn Jensen and Sari Rothrock

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


40


initial Synthesis composite conflict maps The composite conflict maps reveal: • The best agriculture land is the first affected by projected urban expansion. • That urbanization will likely expand into valuable protected and unprotected habitat. • High-quality headwaters and wetlands, while protected, still face degradation from externalities associated with urbanization.

Draft Strategy for Intervention •

Encourage greater density and in-fill in the coastal urban areas through urban growth boundaries or other mechanisms Protect high-value agricultural and water resources just inland from these areas Create a “wishbone” corridor for wildlife from the Everglades through protected areas to the north

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Defining the problem

42


Initial understanding of the problem WHY EVALUATE VALUABLE LANDS BEFORE DEFINING THE PROBLEM Only at the mid-point of our project did we articulate the problem. Why? The existence of a problem, or problems, presupposes that a landscape is not working well, but in order to make such a judgment, we must understand the landscape itself. We gained this understanding from our assessment of valuable lands. Only then were we able to critique the functioning of the landscape, first within each sector, and then holistically.

what is the problem? We need to create an arrangement of non-conflicting, if not synergistic, uses in the landscape that allows for optimization of the ecological, hydrological, and agricultural systems while taking into account the identified conflicts with the GeoPlan’s urban growth model projections and 33 cm sea level rise in the SFWMD region by 2040. A narrow approach undermines success. • Subordinating other regional interests with old-fashioned “trade-off” mentality polarizes or underestimates potential allies. • “Restoration”, “preservation” and “protection” of CERP’s stated objective are inherently nonadaptive. Irreversible change should be a starting assumption. • Disappointing returns (no progress in landscape) indicates ineffective process.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


SYnergies A sectoral approach is useful to understand the landscape, but it also imposes fundamental limitations on the possibilities for intervention. Conventional restoration efforts use this approach and seek compromise among competing interest groups in zero-sum negotiations. In this way of thinking, a given area is used either for agriculture, urbanization, or conservation. Our goal was to seek synergies between different land uses, and look at different sectors as potential allies. After our initial analysis of the landscape and articulation of the problem, we sought solutions that made the most out of the different opportunities presented by the various landuses considered. We particularly sought out areas of contention, where multiple uses were in conflict, and studied them as opportunities for new synergistic processes in the landscape. For example, farmers could sustain or even increase their income by offering ecosystem services, such as water storage, in addition to growing crops or raising livestock. Portions of agriculture land could be used as wildlife corridors. Another key principle was to seek adaptation and flexibility as opposed to restoration, per se. Climate change necessitates a forward-looking view–irreversible change should be a starting assumption. Restoring the Everglades to its historic conditions does not make sense, since the landscape is undergoing constant, fundamental change, even without climate change. Instead of striving to return the landscape to how it was, our goal was to consider how it could be. One final consideration was the importance of operating on multiple scales. Synergies are possible from the smallest to the largest scales, and supporting the fundamental requirements of the basic land uses has implications for all of them. We specifically defined our scales as follows:

Regional Mid-Scale Local

44

Wide-ranging spatial concepts Localized issues at a broader scale Retrofits and design guidelines

These were also accompanied by non-spatial policies and implementation guidelines, all of which are described in the next section.


Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


46


Regional scale Interventions

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Water The South Florida Water Management District is composed of four regional planning areas, defined by natural hydrologic divides. 90% of the region’s drinking water is supplied by aquifers. In 2005, 62%of all fresh water withdrawals in the state were groundwater. SFWMD issues permits that determine how much water cities can withdraw from shared underground water reserves. Each person uses about 175 gallons/day, which is approximately twice the national average. About half of that total is used outside the home to maintain landscapes.

Water Sources:

Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Dept (MDWASD), the largest wastewater system in Florida, includes: • 2,900 miles of gravity sewers • 880 miles of force mains • 987 pump stations • 2 million customers • 340 million gallons/day (MGD) • Currently, MDWASD reuses 16.2 MGD of wastewater.

4.8% mgd reused

16.2 MGD reused 340 MGD total

Kissimmee Basin

Demand: 66% urban, 44% ag

Sources: Aquifer (1),

some surface water.

Upper East Coast

Demand: 27% urban, 7 3% ag

Sources: potable: agriculture:

Aquifers (2) Surface water, groundwater

Demand: 35% urban, 65% ag

Sources: Aquifers:

2 freshwater, 1 brackish, some surface water. Reverse osmosis systems are common.

Lower West Coast

Lower East Coast

• Miami Demand: 72% urban, 28% ag

Sources: Aquifers (3),

Okeechobee

48 20 mi 50 km


Pressures:

Weak points:

• • • •

Increasing population Cycles of drought Climate change and uncertainty Saltwater intrusion from rising sea level Balancing human and ecological needs

recommendations

Reclaimed water is under- and inefficiently used Ocean outfalls in South Florida send 300 MGD of treated domestic wastewater into the sea ~ 50 percent of potable water supplies to irrigate landscapes that often are not well suited to Florida’s climate and soils. Agricultural water use is measured less accurately than other water use sectors

1.

Re-use reclaimed water and recycled stormwater. 2. Diversify sources: Focus on reuse of reclaimed water 3. Improve efficiency of irrigation systems, use appropriate landscaping, enforce of irrigation restrictions 4. Reduce demand: incentives for water conservation

Ocean outfalls in South Florida send 300 million gallons/day of treated domestic wastewater into the sea – water that could be put to beneficial use on land.

Lake Okeechobee Cape Coral Fort Myers

Naples

• •

• West Palm Beach The Everglades

• Fort Lauderdale • Miami

20 mi 50 km

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Water Storage on Agricultral Land This strategy proposes a means of improving southern Florida’s fresh water supply while simultaneously providing additional revenue to the local agricultural sector. Farmers with land adjacent to existing canals could seasonally flood fallow fields, storing water for subsequent periods of higher demand, and releasing it as needed. Another synergistic benefit would come from the creation of seasonal freshwater aquatic habitat in an area otherwise completely given to crops.

50 Agricultural land Flooded fields

Recommendations •

Seasonally flood agricultural land adjacent to canal network

Create new water storage capacity to mitigate floods

Create a new source of income for farmers during off-season


New Protected Lands The Everglades and other protected lands make up a large portion of the southern Florida. Protected lands include the Florida Managed Areas, National Park Service Land, National Wildlife Refuges and Water Conservation Areas. While many areas high in biodiversity are protected, some are not. Unprotected biodiversity hotspots are a top priority for the creation of protected lands.

The strategy of protecting new areas has to main objectives: create large patches and new protected corridors to establish a viable ecological network that provides for species migration and facilitates adaptive species relocation in response to climate change. Large patches of protected land can provide many functions including protecting aquifers and stream networks, providing sufficient buffer areas to sustain populations of interior species and providing habitat and escape cover for large vertebrates. The class identified several hotspots west, southwest, and south of Lake Okeechobee. Additional areas were identified to connected those hotspots with existing protected areas and to connect protected areas with one another, with the overall proposal being an ecological conservation network in the shape of a wishbone encircling Lake Okeechobee and enabling species to move from the everglades all the way to the headwaters of the Southwest Florida Water Management District on either side of the lake.

Unprotected biodiversity hotspots are a top priority for the creation of protected patches. Suggested new areas for protections are marked in green ( ). Large patches: • Protect aquifers and stream networks •

Sustain populations of interior species

•

Provide core habitat and escape cover for large vertebrates

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Hybrid Wetland Canals The traditional approach to controlling water in South Florida has been reliance on gray infrastructure, including an extensive network of engineered canals and channels to redirect flow and drain the naturally waterlogged lands. However, this approach creates many problems for the ecological and hydrological health of the region. A hybrid approach to canal design would provide a solution to establish riparian corridors alongside the canals, while still providing sufficient drainage and flood control. We propose changing the shape of the engineered channels to a terraced wetland channel design, modifying key ecological sites along the existing canal network to restore riparian zones.

52


Existing: Channel design Existing: Typical trapezoidal channel High water level Normal water level

Proposed: Terraced wetlands channel

High water level Normal water level

Land acquired, excavated and restored as wetlands. Gravel substrate filters pollutants from runoff.

The terraced wetlands channel design creates biological habitat, promotes water quality and slows water flows

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Greenbelts One of our preliminary strategies was to limit urban sprawl into sensitive ecological areas and encourage density through the use of urban growth boundaries around Fort Meyers, Fort Lauderdale, Palm Beach and St Lucie. An Urban Development Boundary (UDB) already exists in Miami-Dade County, so we recommend strictly adhering to that UDB. The class noted several weaknesses of the UDB strategy. One weakness was political, which is the tendency to expand the UDB when it begins to affect the economics of development and well before urban infill is complete. Another weakness is apparent in the common case of development leapfrogging a UDB leading to rapid sprawl in a separate jurisdiction.

In response to these and other weaknesses the class posited greenbelts as an alternative mechanism for controlling growth while incorporating urban areas into the conservation network. We recommended establishing greenbelts as soft growth boundaries around urban areas allowing for some “leapfrog” development so that over time the conservation network would become an integrated part of the urban mosaic.

Protects natural lands surrounding cities and serves to preserve agricultural productivity

Act as a buffer to filter air pollution and stormwater run-off

Balance and direct urban and suburban growth.

Areas of 2000 contiguous hectares (7.7 mi2) can support many species and ecological processes

54 West Duwamish Greenbelt , Seattle WA. Source: http://www.cityofseattle.net/Parks/_images/pro%20parks/wDuwamishGreenbelt.jpg


Transferable Development Rights Transferrable Development Rights (TDRs) have been a policy mechanism utilized in many counties throughout the country, including in South Florida. TDR systems: • Allow landowners to transfer the right to develop from one parcel of land to another; •

Shift development from agricultural areas to designated growth areas with access to services;

Enable communities to conserve farmland using market forces; &

Enable agricultural landowners to retain their land for agriculture and realize its development value.

Extending a TDR system to the entire region can increase the parcels available for development in the system, thereby giving developers greater flexibility in determining which priority development areas to pursue. They would no longer be restricted to developing solely in the same county as the area that has been prioritized for conservation.

North St. Lucie County Towns, Villages, and Countryside Plan (TVC Plan), Florida. Source: http://www.cuesfau.org/toolbox/subchapter.asp?SubchapterID=35&ChapterID=1

Source: http://www.hrwc.org/

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


mid-scale interventions

56


Cover Crops & Crop Sequencing Cover crops are plants that are planted during the off-season to benefit soil strucutre, soil biota, nutrient levels, weed suppression, and water conservation. In addition to providing increased soil fertility, cover crops reduce run-off and erosion, improve water filtration, and provide seasonal habitat, especially for bird and beneficial insect species. Similarly, crop sequencing considers the placement of crops relative to sensivtive ecological areas, and how spatial arrangements of land uses might mitigate potential ecological degradation. A crop sequencing proposal would place cereal crops between livestock and water, thereby reducing reducing phosphorous and nitrogen loss/run-off. The nutrient savings (realized via decreased reliance on fertilizers), plus other policy intiatives, would provide a profitable incentive for farmers to provide a buffer.

no cover crops

With cover crops

SOIL EROSION & RUN-OFF

INCREASED RETENTION & DECREASED RUN-OFF

- GROUNDWATER RECHARGE

Minimal groundwater recharge

+ GROUNDWATER RECHARGE

more groundwater recharge & infiltration enriches the soil

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Farm Wildlife Corridor One of the main issues for wildlife ecology is the fragmentation of the landscape, where what was once open, unobstructed habitat is now divided into many agricultural parcels that isolate the remaining habitat patches. The resulting patterns of fragmentation disrupt the movement of many species, effecting migration patterns, species dispersion, and gene flow, especially for terrestrial mammals that require large ranges. Wildlife corridors, strips of land that preserve habitat in a linear path, can connect patches of habitat and promote the health of wildlife populations. We propose a system to compensate farmers to establish a robust corridor system. This scheme would:

58

•

Pay farmers to set aside portion of land for wildlife. For example, the UK pays farmers to take portion of field out of commission to create habitat and reduce overproduction of certain crops

•

Establish a debt-for-conservation programs buy farmer to debt in exchange for provision of ecosystem services (such as corridors)

•

Encourage NGOs such as TNC purchase conservation easements and develop ecosystem management plans with farmers


Golf Courses as Habitat creating an integrated ecological network

The coasts of southern Florida are extensively developed, while the interior south of Lake Okeechobee is largely made up of the Everglades National Park and other protected areas. To greatly restrict further growth along the coasts is unrealistic because any effort to do so would go head to head with the population projections of the Florida 2050 Plan. Rather than recommending direct conflict between urban growth and ecological conservation we focused on innovative methods of creating habitat by building on existing green spaces in the urban and suburban landscape. Southern Florida has numerous golf courses totaling a significant land area. By applying the principles of landscape ecology to identify the ideal configuration of edges, boundaries, patches and corridors to serve priority species, naturalistic golf course design golf courses can turn golf courses into a vital component of urban and suburban conservation efforts and ecological networks. The use of organic horticultural

techniques in golf course management will increase the benefits to the ecosystem from these rapidly increasing recreational sites. These techniques are being applied throughout the country. The Rum Point Seaside Golf Links in Maryland is a particularly pertinent example of the potential these techniques to restore southern Florida’s ecosystem. At Rum Point old farmland was turned into a matrix of wetlands restoring natural habitat (OSU Extension, http:// ohioline.osu.edu/w-fact/0015.html) On average, 70% of a golf course is “rough,” which has the potential to function as habitat. Steps to increase wildlife habitat function of golf courses: • Plant native species offering berries, seeds, and nuts •

Create vegetation corridors to link isolated habitat patches throughout the golf course

Use buffers to reduce run-off of sediments and chemicals (source: OSU Extension)

Habitat Golf Course, Grant Valkaria, Florida

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


local interventions

While our interventions at larger scales seek to mold Florida’s landscape largely using urban areas as boundaries, our local interventions seek to integrate ecological sensitivity within existing and future areas of human development. We recognize that while South Florida contains systems (ecological, hydrological, and agricultural) in need of immediate attention, it would be remiss not to briefly identify changes that could be made within the more localized human-built environment to facilitate changes in the greater landscape.

60


Green Roofs Green roofs, like rain gardens, allow for the retention of some rainfall during storm events. What is not retained, though, is slowed, which reduces the amount of water inundating the ground at any one time. Additionally, green roofs capture pollutants in the atmosphere, and can even be used as patch habitat for birds. The benefits of green roofs are widely documented, and the roofs themselves can be found all over the world. We would advocate for green roofs in Southern Florida by creating strong incentives and design guidelines. Perhaps one day Miami can look like the birthplace of the green roof: Stuttgart, Germany. An elevated rain garden • Intercepts 15-90% of rooftop runoff, absorbing 50-60%, thereby reducing runoff and combined sewer overflows •

Captures atmospheric particles and pollutants

Acts as patch habitat for birds

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Ecology of Parcels One of our proposed strategies for “retrofitting” urban areas is to nonintrusively recruit private spaces to work for the greater public good. We observed two types of plots: a plot in a typical suburban neighborhood and a plot in a commercial or industrial urban environment. We considered their corresponding underutilized spaces: backyards and rooftops. Backyards are ideal spaces to create rain gardens in low-lying, flood-prone Florida suburbs. Rain gardens are used to capture excess stormwater and filter runoff as it percolates downward. In America, rain gardens have been used extensively in many eco-conscious developments as early as 1990. Studies conducted in one Maryland subdivision found a 75-80% reduction in runoff during typical rainfall due to rain gardens that had been planted in each lot (Kassulke 2003). Such an intervention would be critical in Florida developments. We would advocate design guidelines similar to those in Prince George’s County, Maryland, in hopes of producing similar results.

Reinterpreting Edges and Private Spaces as Public Goods • As stormwater mitigation •

As a wildlife corridor

62 Kassulke, Natasha. "Rain Gardens Made one Maryland Community Famous." Wisconsin Natural Resources Magazine, February 2003.


Ecology of Neighborhoods This strategy necessitates groups of houses working together as a single, committed neighborhood cooperating with other communities to create networks of environmental improvements. Examples of interconnected neighborhood strategies include the Street Edge Alternative program and a backlot vegetation management plan. A Street Edge Alternative (SEA) program strives to create a natural drainage system through maximizing pervious surface along roadways. It simultaneously filters stormwater runoff and remains sustainable through its use of native plant species. Seattle pioneered the SEA initiative, which created natural drainage through landscaping and reduced impervious surface. In Florida, this idea could be utilized and taken one step further. Design guidelines should ensure that all new developments must conform to Street Edge Alternatives standards. A second initiative which requires the cooperation of an entire neighborhood is backyard interconnectedness. Backyard interconnectedness is created through a collective agreement to abstain from maintaining each backyard’s back lot line. This allows native plants and trees to thrive, which creates a corridor through which birds, insects, and small mammals can travel. This has been observed several studies, including a segment in Richard Forman’s book Land Mosaics. While we know of no instance in which ‘backyard interconnectedness’ has been implemented as a policy, it could be institutionalized through LEED ND Standards, municipality development design standards, and can be reinforced through educational campaigns. A network of ‘green parcels’: • Filters stormwater •

Acts as wildlife corridors

Minimizes impervious surfaces

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


non-spatial interventions

64


Biomining Hunting Burmese Pythons in southern Florida is already an accepted activity– this strategy proposes to open the season on other invasive species as well. Underemployed workers, such as seasonally jobless agricultural workers, could be granted the right to enter southern Florida’s protected lands and “mine” the invasive species that currently grow there, both plant and animal. The miners would benefit from the alternative employment, while the local ecosystem would benefit from the reduction of invasive competition. • Preserve livelihoods of displaced farm workers •

Control invasive species

Harvest animals for food, clothing, and pets, tree species for lumber, etc.

Endangered Species Farming This strategy would grant farmers the right to raise endangered species in captivity, and then release a portion of their stock into the wild to bolster populations, while funding their activities by selling an exotic food item to the public. This strategy would add more individuals to wild populations of endangered species, while simultaneously increasing public awareness of their plight through the sale of high-profile food items. The idea of eating something to save it has been proven effective, outlined in such books as: “Renewing America’s Food Traditions: Saving and Savoring the Continent’s Most Endangered Foods” by Gary Nabhan. • Raise endangered species domestically for profit •

A percentage is re-introduced to the wild

A portion of profits go to conservation programs

Assisted Migration Assisted migration would physically relocate endangered plants or animals. In a related example, Torreya Pines were moved from Florida to South Carolina The approach does present some risk, namely invasive species (for example, the spread of the Nile Perch), and many scientists are skeptical of the feasibility of assisted migration

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Future scenarios

66


scenarios

n

Cha

g ngin

th u o eS

La a d i lor

e

ap c s d

F

th

about the scenarios We formulated a series of scenarios to combine and stage our suggested strategies into different phase. The Business as Usual scenario assumes a minimum of intervention, while the Progressive Scenario is the most aggressive.

Assumptions for each scenario: Business as Usual: No interventions. Reform Scenario: Moderate changes to the landscape • Existing political dynamics •

Limited conservation funding

Primarily “defensive” in nature

Progressive Scenario: Radical changes to the landscape • Maximum political support •

Full-funding

Primarily “offensive” in nature

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


Scenario 1: Business As Usual No landscape interventions.

Scenario 2: Reform Existing protected lands Existing urban areas Hybrid wetland canals New greenbelts and corridors New conservation areas Seasonal flood reservoirs New zones for cover crops Golf courses for habitat Wastewater recyling (potable)

Scenario 3: Progressive Existing protected lands Existing urban areas Demonstration hybrid canal Limited greenbelts and corridors Some new conservation areas Retention ponds New zones for cover crops Golf courses for habitat Wastewater recyling (landscape)

68


scenario 1: Business as Usual

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


scenario 2: reform

Existing protected lands Existing urban areas Demonstration hybrid wetland canal Limited greenbelts and corridors Some new conservation areas Detention ponds 70

New zones for cover crops Golf courses for habitat Wastewater recyling (landscape)


Implementation Examples for Scenario 2 – Reform Project

Organizations Involved

Mechanism

Barriers to Overcome

Limited greenbelt corridors

Regional Planning Councils & Developers

Establish a County Transferrable Development Rights system

Anxieties about the current economy may inhibit desires to restrict growth in any way

Limited ecoagriculture

Florida Department of Agriculture, the Cooperative Extension Service, & local farm bureaus

Strengthen existing programs through Extension Service & elsewhere

The state is short on funding currently because of declining tax revenue

Water storage through new detention basins

South Florida Water Management District & farm bureaus

Establish an easement system for owners of proposed basin sites

Resistance to land appropriation

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


scenario 3: progressive

Existing protected lands Existing urban areas Hybrid wetland canals New greenbelts and corridors New conservation areas 72

Seasonal flood reservoirs New zones for cover crops Golf courses for habitat Wastewater recyling (potable)


Implementation Examples for Scenario 2 – Progressive Project

Organizations Involved

Mechanism

Barriers to Overcome

Extensive greenbelt corridors

Regional Planning Councils & Developers

Establish a Regional Transferrable Development Rights system

Anxieties about the current economy may inhibit desires to restrict growth in any way

Region-wide ecoagriculture

Florida Department of Agriculture, the Cooperative Extension Service, & local farm bureaus

Provide funding through a Nutrient Trading System

The state is short on funding currently because of declining tax revenue

Water storage through controlled flooding & terraced canals

South Florida Water Management District & farm bureaus

Purchase land adjacent to canals to widen to terrace levels; establish annual flood agreements with farmers of proposed sites

Resistance to land appropriation and changing crop types & practices

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


synergies The synergies diagrams below show how the strategies and phases combine to address the key concepts in the original analysis: Hydrology, Ecology, and Agriculture. The compilations do show a high degree of overlap, indicating that the strategies do succeed in addressing these important categories.

Hydrology

74

Ecology


Agriculture Conclusions Exploring strategic conservation for southern Florida’s greater Everglades landscape is a big, messy problem: a tangle of competing jurisdictions, development pressures, phosphorus run-off from agriculture affecting delicate wetland ecosystems, rising demand on aquifers, sea level rise, impending problems with saltwater instruction into freshwater aquifers, and potential climatic changes that could trigger a cascade of changes in ecosystem interactions. Over the course of one semester, our team analyzed and proposed a range of landscape and economic tools that could be strategically applied to the Southern Florida landscape. The range of possibilities for the landscape is broad, and the choice of how to intervene is subjective. The spectrum of choice of whether to do nothing, or whether to implement many landscape strategies will test the political, economic, ecological, and jurisdictional momentum. As one of our reviewers noted, the tools themselves are not revolutionary, and the key is to use the extensive analysis to apply them successfully. We hope to have provided a solid basis to craft new solutions.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


project participants

76


contributors , o en, aul ren ens van P s-Mo J a rn ,E Bjo dden s Varg , e a n o l r ar hM Ho ris , Sara uan C h participants g, C on k, J din sephs throc o Go Jo Ro Project tes nna Sari a A G

Acknowledgements We wish to thank all of the guest reviewers who gave valuable critical feedback throughout the course, including Alan Berger, Eran Ben-Joseph, Joe Ferreira, Michael Flaxman, Amy Glasmeier, Herman Karl, Daniel Sheehan, Jim Wescoat. Thanks to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning for offering this course for the first time in Spring 2009.

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


The class

Diagramming the approach to the problem

Stephanie Hurley, from Harvard’s Graduate School of Design, spoke about landscape design for stormwater and wetland mitigation projects.

James Dobbin, Vice President and Director of the Dobbin Planning Group- IBI Consulting, spoke to the class about advances in regional and spatial development planning in Madagascar and Mozambique, Africa on April 1st, 2009.

78


The midterm presentation, April 15, 2009

The midterm presentation, April 15, 2009

Reassessing the approach to the problem: how to best synthesize the analysis, synthesis, and interventions.

The final presentation, May 13, 2009

Landscape Planning + Ecological Design


80


Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.