Environmental Management

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 497–521 | Cite as

Ecosystem management to achieve ecological sustainability: The case of South Florida

  • Mark A. Harwell
  • John F. Long
  • Ann M. Bartuska
  • John H. Gentile
  • Christine C. Harwell
  • Victoria Myers
  • John C. Ogden
Profile

Abstract

The ecosystems of South Florida are unique in the world. The defining features of the natural Everglades (large spatial scale, temporal patterns of water storage and sheetflow, and low nutrient levels) historically allowed a mosaic of habitats with characteristic animals. Massive hydrological alterations have halved the Everglades, and ecological sustainability requires fundamental changes in management.

The US Man and the Biosphere Human-Dominated Systems Directorate is conducting a case study of South Florida using ecosystem management as a framework for exploring options for mutually dependent sustainability of society and the environment. A new methodology was developed to specify sustainability goals, characterize human factors affecting the ecosystem, and conduct scenario/consequence analyses to examine ecological and societal implications. South Florida has sufficient water for urban, agricultural, and ecological needs, but most water drains to the sea through the system of canals; thus, the issue is not competition for resources but storage and management of water. The goal is to reestablish the natural system for water quantity, timing, and distribution over a sufficient area to restore the essence of the Everglades.

The societal sustainability in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) is at risk because of soil degradation, vulnerability of sugar price supports, policies affecting Cuban sugar imports, and political/economic forces aligned against sugar production. One scenario suggested using the EAA for water storage while under private sugar production, thereby linking sustainability of the ecological system with societal sustainability. Further analyses are needed, but the US MAB project suggests achieving ecological sustainability consistent with societal sustainability may be feasible.

Key words

Ecosystem management Sustainability Ecological risk assessment Everglades South Florida 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Agee, J. K. and D. R. Johnson. 1988. Ecosystem management for parks and wilderness. University of Washington Press, Seattle.Google Scholar
  2. Bottcher, A. B., and F. T. Izuno (eds.). 1994. Everglades Agricultural Area: Water, soil, crop and environmental management. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
  3. Cardoch, L. 1995. Land use management in South Florida: A tool for ecosystem management. Master's degree internship report. University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, Miami, Florida.Google Scholar
  4. Craighead, F. 1979. Track of the grizzly. Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, California.Google Scholar
  5. Davis, J-H., Jr. 1943. The natural features of southern Florida, especially the vegetation and the Everglades, Bull. No. 25, Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee, Florida.Google Scholar
  6. Davis, S. M. and J. C. Ogden (eds.). 1994. Everglades: The ecosystem and its restoration. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Florida.Google Scholar
  7. Deren, C. W., R. H. Cherry, and G. H. Snyder. 1993. Effect of flooding on selected sugar cane clones and soil insect pests.Journal of the American Society of Sugar Cane Technology 13:22–27.Google Scholar
  8. Derr, M. 1993. Redeeming the Everglades.Audubon September–October: 48–56, 128–131.Google Scholar
  9. Douglas, M. S. 1947. The Everglades: River of grass. Mockingbird Books, St. Simon's Island, Georgia.Google Scholar
  10. Fennema, R. J., C. J. Neidrauer, R. A. Johnson, T. K. MacVicar, and W. A. Perkins. 1994. A computer model to simulate the natural Everglades hydrology. Pages 249–290in S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden (eds.), Everglades: The ecosystem and its restoration. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Florida.Google Scholar
  11. Florida Legislature. 1994. Everglades Forever Act. Florida State Statute 373.4592, Tallahassee, Florida.Google Scholar
  12. Gore, A. 1992. Earth in the balance: Ecology and the human spirit. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.Google Scholar
  13. Governor's Commission for a Sustainable South Florida. 1995. Final report to Florida Governor Lawton Chiles. October 1995. Coral Gables, Florida.Google Scholar
  14. Grumbine, R. E. 1994. What is ecosystem management?Conservation Biology 8(1):27–38.Google Scholar
  15. Harwell, M. A. and C. C. Harwell. 1989. Environmental decision-making in the presence of uncertainty. Pages 517–540in S. A. Levin, M. A. Harwell, J. R. Kelly, and K. Kimball (eds.), Ecotoxicology: Problems and approaches. Advanced texts in the ecological sciences series, Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Harwell, M. A. and J. F. Long. 1992. US MAB Human-Dominated Systems Directorate workshop on ecological endpoints and sustainability goals. University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, Miami, Florida.Google Scholar
  17. Harwell, M. A. and J. F. Long. 1995. US MAB Human Dominated Systems Directorate report on ecological and societal sustainability. US Man and the Biosphere Program, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  18. Harwell, M. A. and T. C. Hutchinson, with W. P. Cropper, Jr., C. C. Harwell, and H. D. Grover. 1985. Environmental consequences of nuclear war: Vol II, Ecological and agricultural effects. SCOPE 28, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, U.K., 600 pp.Google Scholar
  19. Harwell, M. A., C. C. Harwell, D. A. Weinstein, and J. R. Kelly. 1990. Characterizing ecosystem responses to stress. Pages 91–115in W. Grodzinski, E. B. Cowling, A. I. Breymeyer, A. S. Phillips, S. I. Auerbach, A. M. Bartuska, and M. A. Harwell (eds.), Ecological risks: Perspectives from Poland and the United States. National Academy of Science Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  20. Hoffmeister, J. E. 1974. Land from the sea: The geologic story of South Florida. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables, Florida.Google Scholar
  21. Hogan, D. J. 1992. The impact of population growth on the physical environment.European Journal of Population 8: 109–123.Google Scholar
  22. Leopold, A. 1949. A Sand County almanac and sketches here and there. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Levin, S. A. 1992. Orchestrating environmental research and assessment.Ecological Applications 2:103–106.Google Scholar
  24. Levin, S. A. 1993. Forum on science and sustainability.Ecological Applications 3(4):545–546.Google Scholar
  25. Light, S. S. and J. W. Dineen. 1994. Water control in the Everglades: A historical perspective. Pages 47–84in S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden (eds.), Everglades: The ecosystem and its restoration. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Florida.Google Scholar
  26. Long, J. F. and M. A. Harwell. 1992. US MAB Human Dominated Systems Directorate workshop on societal issues. US Man and the Biosphere Program, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  27. Loucks, O. L. 1992. Forest response research in NAPAP: Potentially successful linkages of policy and science.Ecological Applications 2:117–123.Google Scholar
  28. Lubchenco, J. and others 1991. The sustainable biosphere initiative: An ecological research agenda.Ecology 72(2):371–412.Google Scholar
  29. Ludwig, D., R. Hilborn, and C. Walters. 1993. Uncertainty, resource exploitation and conservation: Lessons from history.Science 260:17, 36.Google Scholar
  30. Myer, J. L. and G. S. Helfman. 1993. The ecological basis of sustainability.Ecological Applications 3(4):569–571.Google Scholar
  31. Myers, R. L. and J. J. Ewel (eds.). 1990. Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
  32. Ogden, J. C. 1994. A comparison of wading bird nesting colony dynamics (1931–1946 and 1974–1989) as an indication of the ecosystem conditions in the southern Everglades. Pages 571–584in S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden, (eds.). Everglades: The ecosystem and its restoration. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Florida.Google Scholar
  33. Sciences Sub-Group Report (Science Sub-Group of the South Florida Management and Coordination Working Group). 1993. Federal objectives for South Florida restoration. The South Florida Management and Coordination Working Group, Miami, Florida.Google Scholar
  34. Shelford, V. E. 1937. Animal communities in temperate America: As illustrated in the Chicago region. No. 5 of the Geographic Society of Chicago Bulletin. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 368 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Snyder, G. H. 1994. Soils of the EAA. Pages 27–41in A. B. Bottcher and F. T. Izuno (eds.), Everglades Agricultural Area: Water, soil, crop and enviornmental management. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
  36. Solecki, W. D., R. Walker, S. Hodge, and A. Landers. 1995. Use of geographic information systems: A data dictionary for South Florida. US Man and the Biosphere Program Human Dominated Systems Directorate, Publication HDS 006.Google Scholar
  37. Solow, R. M. 1991. Sustainability: An economist's perspective. Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  38. South Florida Water Management District Planning Department Staff. 1994. Draft preview document: Lower East Coast water supply plan. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, Florida.Google Scholar
  39. South Florida Water Management District Information Resources Division. 1986–1988. Digital files.Google Scholar
  40. Tebeau, C. W. 1990. Man in the Everglades: 2000 years of human history in the Everglades National Park. University of Miami Press, Coral Gables, Florida.Google Scholar
  41. US Army Corps of Engineers. 1994. Central and South Florida project reconnaissance report comprehensive review study. November 1994, Jacksonville, Florida.Google Scholar
  42. US Bureau of the Census. 1993. 1990 census of population and housing. Population and housing unit counts: Florida 1990. CPH-2-11. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  43. US Environmental Protection Agency. 1992. Framework for environmental risk assessment. EPA/630/R-92/001. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  44. Walker, R. T., W. D. Solecki, and C. C. Harwell. 1996. Land use dynamics and ecological transition: The case of South Florida.Urban Ecology (in press).Google Scholar
  45. Walters, C., L. Gunderson, and C. S. Holling. 1992. Experimental policies for water management in the Everglades.Ecological Applications 2(2):189–202.Google Scholar
  46. Wright, G. M. and B. Thompson. 1935. Fauna of the national parks of the US. USDA Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  47. Zubrow, E., J. R. Schumm, S. Finn, G. A. Panetski, and J. Van Ness. 1995. The biological reserve: The future's last stand.Futures 27(4):437–446.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark A. Harwell
    • 1
  • John F. Long
    • 2
  • Ann M. Bartuska
    • 3
  • John H. Gentile
    • 4
  • Christine C. Harwell
    • 4
  • Victoria Myers
    • 4
  • John C. Ogden
    • 5
  1. 1.Center for Marine and Environmental Analyses Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric ScienceUniversity of MiamiMiamiUSA
  2. 2.Population DivisionBureau of the CensusWashington, DCUSA
  3. 3.Forest Environmental ResearchUS Department of Agriculture Forest ServiceWashington, DCUSA
  4. 4.Center for Marine and Environmental Analyses Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric ScienceUniversity of MiamiMiamiUSA
  5. 5.South Florida Water Management DistrictOffice of the Executive DirectorWest Palm BeachUSA

Personalised recommendations