1 CHAPTER 8: BACK TO THE FUTURE – REBUILDING THE 1 EVERGLADES 2 3 Fred Sklar 4 with 5 James Beerens, Laura Brandt, Carlos Coronado, Steve Davis, Tom Frankovich, Christopher 6 Madden, Agnes McLean, Joel Trexler, and Walter Wilcox 7 8 9 In a Nutshell: 10 • Bringing back the past is constrained by legacy effects, irrevocable damages, and 11 anthropogenic trends not seen in the past. Restoration in the purest sense of the word is not 12 possible. A more accurate term is rehabilitation. 13 • Rehabilitation requires an understanding of what is ecologically, economically, and legally 14 possible. It requires models to extrapolate and synthesize long-term datasets, adaptive 15 management to test alternative hypotheses of ecosystem processes, and a system of governance 16 that allows for debate on the socio-economic, legal, and ecological constraints of future 17 alternatives. 18 • For simulations of the future to be credible, they require long-term datasets that capture cyclical 19 patterns, an understanding of feedbacks, drivers and forcing functions, calibration, validation, 20 and clear peer-reviewed documentation. 21 • The ecological uncertainties of restoration or rehabilitation are reduced by focusing on the 22 impacts of Anthropocene trends in ecotones, where change is most dynamic. 23 24 Introduction: Welcome to the Anthropocene: 25 Few places, if any, exist on the planet that have not been directly or indirectly altered, 26 influenced, degraded, or destroyed by humans (Klein 2014; Kolbert, 2014). Since societies value 27 the landscapes, seascapes, plants, and animals that were prevalent 100-200 years ago, there has 28 been a concerted effort by scientists, decision-makers, and non-government organizations to look 29 at the [seemingly] pristine past and develop plans to move the past into the future (Dengler 2007; 30 Miller and Hobbs 2007; Doyle and Drew 2008). The Society of Ecosystem Restoration defines 31 restoration on their webpage as “the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has 32 been degraded, damaged, or destroyed. An ecosystem has recovered - and is restored - when it 33 contains sufficient biotic and abiotic resources to continue its development without further 34 assistance or subsidy”. Because of its sheer size and its importance for water supply and flood 35 protection, the Everglades landscape will never fit this rigorous definition at all times and in all 36 places. Regardless, justification for pursuing “restoration” of the Everglades can be found in the 37 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Central Everglades Planning Project (CEPP) 38 that was released by the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) in August 2014. We will reference 39 this 3,000 page document often (USACE 2014) because, as in the movie series “Back to the 40 Future,” CEPP is the “flux-capacitor” that generates the ability to analyze the past and travel to a 41 potential future. 42 Native Americans in South Florida have always had a deep appreciation and respect for 43 the Everglades (Carr 2002; see Chapter 1). However, from a utilitarian perspective (Greer 2011), 44 the past was no bed of roses in South Florida. Everything was wet, alligators were dangerous, 45 mosquitos were everywhere, cultivation during the rainy season was impossible, and industry saw 46