CHESAPEAKE BAY:

The Chesapeake Bay Program provides an interesting model for large-scale ecosystem restoration. Many of the ecosystem's challenges are similar to those of other ecosystems across the United States, such as how to involve multiple states, combine federal and state interests, and address the problems of a large water body with multiple tributaries, multiple problems, population growth and development issues, and important economic interests.

To meet these challenges, the Chesapeake Bay Program depends on stakeholder involvement and cooperation. The federal and state governments all are members of the Chesapeake Executive Council and signatories to the 1987 and 2000 Chesapeake Bay Agreements, which contain sections on government participation and responsibility, as well as community involvement and engagement. In addition, the program's restoration goals are designed to address not just the ecosystem needs, but also the sustainability of the Bay economies that depend on local resources (e.g., recreational and commercial fisheries). The Chesapeake Bay Program also is an example of the success that can be achieved when the states have a key role in initiating, developing, and leading the process, rather than simply being directed by the federal government. Finally, cost-sharing between the federal government and the states has been crucial for the success of Bay restoration efforts.

Recent criticisms of the slow rate of water quality improvement in the Chesapeake Bay have focused attention on the voluntary nature of the program's agreements. Some have called for a more regulatory approach to ensure that agreements and commitments are met.

COASTAL LOUISIANA:

Although restoration efforts in coastal Louisiana involve only one state and are directed at many challenges and problems endemic to the Mississippi gulf region, the Coast 2050 Plan for large-scale restoration provides a fascinating model for other regions of the country. First, coastal Louisiana's restoration and conservation efforts have involved local, state, and federal entities under various guises for many decades. The Coast 2050 Plan is an ambitious attempt to coordinate these efforts into one initiative, with the goal of sustaining a coastal ecosystem that supports and protects the environment, economy, and culture of southern Louisiana, and also contributes greatly to the economy and well-being of the nation.

In addition, Coast 2050 is locally driven and extremely well organized. At a very early stage in the process, it was endorsed by scientists, business and industry groups, environmental groups, civic organizations, and the general public - as well as federal, state, and local government - even though it will cost billions of dollars and take decades to be carried out.

Finally, the Coast 2050 Plan details the problems facing coastal Louisiana, including both ecosystem and economic consequences. Using the latest scientific information, the plan forecasts what will happen if it is not implemented. This information - both the statistics provided and the detail of potential devastation in realistic, understandable terms-has a tremendous impact. For example, it shows that every year, a chunk of Louisiana's coast the size of Manhattan crumbles and sinks into the sea; if the current land loss rates continue unabated, by the year 2050, the Gulf of Mexico will move inland more than 30 miles. Information like this makes the restoration effort a necessity, not a luxury, and unites all of the region's constituencies in the common goal of restoring coastal Louisiana.

COLUMBIA RIVER:

Although the Columbia River system is similar to other ecosystems across the United States in that it encompasses numerous states, two countries, various tribal and local entities, and industry authorities, restoration efforts in the basin should not be considered as a model. The lack of a single, comprehensive restoration plan is a definite obstacle for restoring the Columbia River system. To the detriment of restoration efforts in the region, the four primary restoration programs currently operating in the basin function independently of each other, and in some cases have historically been at loggerheads.

Together, the four primary restoration programs have resulted in multiple restoration goals and objectives, numerous court actions and appeals, significant delays in restoration actions, uncertain timelines, and continuous implementation problems and issues. Perhaps the two most important factors impeding restoration efforts in the Columbia River are the apparent lack of a lead federal agency charged with overseeing and implementing all federal restoration efforts, and the lack of a holistic, system wide approach to restoration. Other unresolved issues in the Columbia River basin include lack of strong public will, the absence of a stable source of funding; no specific, uniform set of restoration goals and objectives; fragmentation of responsibility; and unclear direction for interagency obligations.

SOUTH FLORIDA EVERGLADES:

The South Florida ecosystem restoration initiative, as implemented by the Comprehensive Ecosystem Restoration Plan (CERP), is the largest restoration effort led by the U.S. Army Crops of Engineers to date, and potentially the largest ecosystem restoration effort in the United States. As the South Florida effort continues to evolve and be implemented, close attention should be paid for lessons relevant to other initiatives across the country.

The South Florida initiative differs from many other efforts in that it involves only one state and one country. Its types of ecosystems, impacts, stakeholders, and potential issues and user concerns arising from restoration and development also differ markedly.

However, as its name suggests, CERP is a comprehensive plan involving all stakeholders of the region, including local, state, and federal agencies and entities. Most, if not all of the government agencies and entities involved in the Florida effort are expected to play some role in other efforts.

The scale of the project also is considered to be analogous to other initiatives, as well as its levels of funding and degree of commitment from both state and federal governments. The timeline needed to undertake the vast number of projects for large-scale ecosystem recovery elsewhere also will be similar to the Everglades. Further, other efforts will be conceptualized through a dire need for whole ecosystem recovery.

In addition, comparable endeavors are expected to be based on overarching principles similar to those in South Florida, including restoration, preservation, and protection requirements while providing for the needs of all stakeholders in the region; use of best-available science, technology, and independent scientific review; unanimous cooperation and facilitation of the restoration agenda from stakeholders and all involved entities (including full partnership with federal, tribal, state, and local agencies); and development and implementation of a flexible plan that engages adaptive assessment and provides for ongoing maintenance and monitoring.

Possible issues of contention arising during CERP implementation include stakeholder assurances for water allocation; agency and entity coordination; technological uncertainties; plan success; and funding.

GREAT LAKES:

The Great Lakes ecosystem presents many of the challenges involved in other large-scale restoration initiatives nationally, including how to involve multiple federal, state, and tribal interests; how to tie together existing strategies and program activities; and how to holistically address multiple ecosystem problems while accommodating important economic interests. Because the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration is a recent initiative charged with developing a coordinated, comprehensive plan for the long-term conservation and restoration of the Great Lakes, it is uncertain how these challenges will be overcome. However, the Great Lakes have more than 30 years of effective joint cooperation through the Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and other forums to build on.

One important detail of the Collaboration that is yet to be determined is the type of role that the Canadian federal agencies and the provinces of Ontario and Quebec will have. Nor has the role of the tribes and first nations - large landowners with special legal status in the Great Lakes basin - been determined. As in the rest of the country, it is important that any holistic approach to restoration in the Great Lakes basin fully include its neighbors - Canadian federal agencies, the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and tribes and first nations - at a high level. The problems of the Great Lakes basin do not end at the U.S. border and need to be addressed through a shared vision and complementary restoration actions.

One positive outcome of the Collaboration is the involvement of the mayors and cities of the Great Lakes in restoration planning through the Great Lakes Cities Initiative. Long-term restoration in the Great Lakes must have the commitment of all levels of government and all stakeholders, and this seems to be recognized in the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration. It is hoped this commitment will not only be in the form of support for the restoration effort, but also for providing resources and helping with plan implementation. Specifically, it is essential that any restoration initiative incorporate specific ways that all constituencies of a healthy ecosystem (industrial, municipal, and public) can participate in achieving the desired outcome - for example, by transforming the region's human systems that impact the natural system.

SAN FRANCISCO BAY DELTA:

Unlike many other initiatives across the country, restoration of the Bay-Delta involves only one state and one ecosystem. However, numerous lessons can be drawn from the CALFED Bay-Delta Program when considering the most successful pathway for developing and implementing a long-term comprehensive restoration plan.

First, a federal commitment to both authorization and funding is crucial during comprehensive plan development and comprehensive plan implementation. Although the CALFED Bay-Delta Program received adequate state and federal resources and funding during its development phases, plan implementation was severely delayed for many years while the program awaited federal reauthorization. This delay not only affected restoration actions on the ground, but also saw the decline of federal funding dollars and overall agency support for the program.

Between 2001 and 2004, a handful of bills were introduced in both the House and Senate to reauthorize the CALFED Bay-Delta Program. To gain support from lawmakers outside California, many of the bills included provisions addressing water development issues in other Western states. All the bills advanced a dialogue over reauthorization of the CALFED Bay-Delta Program, but to its detriment some bills also caused debate among the program's stakeholders. Finally, after four years of negotiation and several ill-fated attempts, bipartisan consensus resulted in successful passage of legislation reauthorizing the CALFED Bay-Delta Program in September of 2004. However, it is yet to be determined if Congress will appropriate the authorized program funding levels.

It is also imperative that restoration program funding be scheduled into all participating state budgets, and be authorized in state statute. Initially the CALFED Bay-Delta Program was not displayed as a program element in the governor's budget or scheduled in the budget bill, and the state legislature was slow in statutorily authorizing the program's governance framework. Both of these factors produced hiccups in the program's structure in the state and affected its overall functioning.

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER:

Along with other parts of the United States, the UMR basin is geographically diverse and complex, with many competing economic and political interests. The challenges and accomplishments of restoration efforts in the UMR basin should be a source of significant insight to other initiatives across the country.

Although the UMR basin has no single restoration plan or funding strategy, there are a number of significant and complementary ecosystem restoration and environmental protection initiatives underway within the river system and the broader watershed. Together, the Environmental Management Program (EMP), UMR-Illinois Waterway navigation study, Hypoxia Action Plan, and USDA conservation programs represent long-term, interagency, and multi-stakeholder efforts to direct billions of federal, state, and private dollars toward the restoration of critical ecosystems in the UMR basin.

Within the river and floodplain system, the EMP has provided a scientific and practical basis for future restoration efforts. An important set of long-term monitoring data, design and construction methods, information on habitat response, models of interstate and interagency coordination, and public input mechanisms have evolved through nearly twenty years of program implementation. The 50-year, $5.72-billion ecosystem restoration plan proposed recently by the Corps of Engineers in the UMR-Illinois Waterway Navigation Study builds on these findings and lessons.

Within the broader watershed-most of which consisting of private lands in agricultural production-the Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating, and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico (called the Hypoxia Action Plan) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture conservation programs constitute the primary landscape-level efforts to improve environmental management of private agricultural lands. The Hypoxia Action Plan has initiated a planning process, but the degree of federal and state support needed to move it forward has yet to materialize. At the same time, spending has increased significantly through the U.S. Department of Agriculture conservation programs reauthorized in the 2002 Farm Bill. Over the life of the current Farm Bill, several billion dollars will be invested in voluntary conservation efforts on private agricultural lands in the UMR basin. Because these investments are not coordinated or evaluated on a large-scale basis, it is unclear what level of basin-wide impacts they will have.

In ecological terms, the division of the UMR into two basic components--the river system (river and floodplain) and the broader watershed--is an arbitrary distinction, since the two components are internally and dynamically connected. Moreover, with respect to particular environmental problems such as nutrient and sediment runoff, policy and management responses need to be formulated in a cross-cutting fashion. Owing to the size and complexity of the UMR - as well as to the jurisdictional reach and institutional proficiencies of different federal agencies-it remains a great challenge to move beyond piecemeal efforts to restoration. Very significant steps toward an integrated approach toward restoration of the river and floodplain system have taken through the Environmental Management Program and the Navigation Study. Hopefully these initial successes will form a basis for a more comprehensive basin-wide approach to land stewardship and ecosystem restoration.

COMPARING CASE HISTORIES:

Effects of Competing Demands
First and foremost, all of the ecosystems have historically suffered from the effects of competing demands on ecosystem resources. This competition has led to the development of socio-economic systems and infrastructure that depends on particular uses, including dams and levees for flood control and power production; channels and canals for navigation, irrigation, and wastewater discharge; and fish stocking and farming for recreational and commercial activities. As a result, any attempt to restore the ecosystem must also transform these historically significant socio-economic systems, and modify their dependent infrastructure. Therefore, large-scale ecosystem restoration is a sensitive process. It takes money, time, and resources away from other priorities, and requires shifts in historical thinking.

Ecosystem Impacts
Another commonality is the similar ecosystem impacts of reduced water quality; water quantity issues; declining fish and wildlife populations; destruction and loss of habitat - particularly wetlands; and invasive species problems. Because of these common problems and concerns, the restoration initiatives should look to one another for guidance, lessons, and technologies that work best to address these issues.

For example, conversion of land for agriculture has resulted in the loss of up to 95 percent of wetlands in the Iowa and Illinois portions of the Upper Mississippi River basin. More than 1.2 million acres of coastal land has been lost in Louisiana - accounting for 80 percent of the nation's coastal land loss. And in the San Francisco Bay-Delta, over 88 percent of the estuary's wetlands have been eliminated or altered.

In the Chesapeake Bay, nutrient enrichment and algal blooms combined with sediment runoff have resulted in decreased dissolved oxygen and water clarity. Declining water quality through soil erosion and increased levels of polluted runoff, nutrients, and contaminants is also prolific in the South Florida Everglades. The discharge of pollutants - such as pesticides, fertilizers, oil and grease, metals, nutrients, and sediments from farms, ranches, and cities - have similarly produced inadequate water quality in the San Francisco Bay-Delta. Industrial and municipal discharges, combined sewer overflows, and urban and agricultural nonpoint source runoff also have seriously reduced water quality in the Great Lakes basin and resulted in the accumulation of contaminants in lake sediments.

Endangered, Rare, and Invasive Species
All seven ecosystems also provide habitat for listed endangered and rare species. The South Florida Everglades has 68 plant and animals species listed as threatened or endangered - more than any other state. Two species of freshwater mussel listed as endangered and another five species listed as rare are found in the Upper Mississippi River basin. In the Columbia River, 12 major salmon and steelhead runs are listed as endangered, and several species are extinct.

The ecosystems also share the problem of invasive species. In the Upper Mississippi River basin, Asian carp, round gobies, and zebra mussels are particularly destructive. Over 1.5 million acres of the South Florida Everglades are infested with invasive species and exotic plants. More that 140 non-native aquatic species have colonized the Great Lakes since the 1800s resulting in costly damage to ecology and water infrastructure.

Federal and State Leadership
All seven initiatives have a designated federal and state agency leading the restoration efforts. In most cases, priority issues and restoration actions have determined these lead agencies. For example, the Florida Everglades and Coastal Louisiana restoration efforts both are co-led by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers because they involve extensive engineering and replumbing. Because the Chesapeake Bay initiative centers on water quality issues, it is managed by the U.S Environmental Protection Agency.

Government and Stakeholder Coordination
These restoration efforts require unprecedented levels of federal, state, local, and stakeholder coordination and commitment throughout both development and implementation phases. For that reason, the restorations have established numerous task forces, citizen advisory panels, and coalitions to oversee, coordinate, and facilitate the restoration process. For example, in the San Francisco Bay-Delta a group of more than 30 citizen-advisor stakeholders are charted under the Federal Advisory Committee Act as the Bay-Delta Advisory Council. In recognition of the threats to the Mississippi River Delta and the Chenier Plain, a unique mix of local and national environmental groups, civic organizations, businesses, industry groups, local governments, and concerned individuals have created the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana.

In the Great Lakes, principal conveners - including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Administrator, Great Lakes governors, mayors, tribal officials, and congressional delegation members - recently established the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration to prepare short- and long-term restoration goals and strategies. In the Chesapeake, the Chesapeake Bay Commission - comprising delegations from Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania - assists the state legislatures by promoting intergovernmental cooperation and coordination for resource planning and uniformity of legislation, among other functions.

Costs
Large-scale restoration in all the regions is also expected to cost an average of $10 billion and take decades to achieve. The federal government is expected to pay the more than half the costs, with states providing funding through some form of cost-share arrangement. For example, the total cost of restoring the South Florida Everglades is estimated at $7.8 billion, half of which will be provided by the federal government and the other half by the state of Florida. The effort is also expected to take four decades.

CONTRASTING CASE HISTORIES:

Geographic Size
In terms of geographical coverage and population size, the Great Lakes is the largest ecosystem restoration initiative in the United States. At 200,000 square miles, the Great Lakes watershed is more than three times the size of the Chesapeake Bay, and more than ten times the size of the Florida Everglades. The Great Lakes also has the distinction of being only one of two restoration efforts to transcend international borders, and encompasses more states than any of the other initiatives. Taken as a whole, any large-scale restoration effort in the Great Lakes must assimilate 10 different legislative bodies, two federal governments, and many tribes and first nations-an immense and complex undertaking. With territory in seven states and the Canadian province of British Columbia, more holistic approaches to restoring the Columbia River will similarly need to assimilate eight legislative bodies, two federal governments and many tribes and first nations.

Population
At 667 people per square mile, the South Florida Everglades is the most densely populated restoration area, followed by the Chesapeake Bay (250 people per square mile), San Francisco Bay-Delta (179 people per square mile), the Great Lakes (170 people per square mile), the Upper Mississippi River (157 people per square mile); Coastal Louisiana (111 people per square mile), and finally, the Columbia River (42 people per square mile). However, the total population of the Great Lakes basin, home to 34 million people, is nearly three times larger than that of the Florida Everglades, and five times larger than the San Francisco Bay-Delta population.

Ratio of Land Area to Water
The Chesapeake Bay is unique among coastal and inland bodies of water in that it has the largest land area to water volume ratio of any system in the world - equal to 1,059 square miles of land for every square mile of water. This is five times the ratio of the next closest waterbody; the Gulf of Finland. The principal reason for this is the Chesapeake's extreme shallowness; its average depth is less than 21 feet. The shallowness of the Bay however exacerbates its vulnerability to degradation from actions that take place on land hundreds of miles from its shores. This vulnerability is further compounded by the dense population within the Bay's watershed.

Source of Drinking Water
Several of the ecosystem restoration areas are a source of drinking water for large populations. The Great Lakes--which hold 95 percent of the nation's surface fresh water supply-provides drinking water to more than 25 million people, the San Francisco Bay-Delta provides drinking water to 22 million people and the South Florida Everglades provides drinking water to 6 million people. This demand for clean freshwater not only catalyzes the need for restoration and protection efforts, but also determines the level of environmental quality these efforts must achieve.

* * * * *

Each of the seven ecosystems is nationally and globally unique in its biological and habitat diversity, socio-economic dependencies, and a whole range of other distinguishing characteristics. This fact alone warrants a national commitment to conserving and restoring these systems. Many of the systems already have local and regional consensus for protection and restoration, but all of them need national support to successfully garner state and federal attention, program authorization, and funding.