January 30, 1999, BIG ECOLOGICAL GUNS FAULT PLAN FOR EVERGLADES

January 30, 1999

BIG ECOLOGICAL GUNS FAULT PLAN FOR EVERGLADES

By CYRIL T. ZANESKI
Herald Staff Writer

An all-star team of ecologists says the Army Corps of Engineers ' broad plan
for restoring the Everglades is riddled with ``deep, systematic problems and
needs to be reviewed by an independent panel of scientists.

In a letter to Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt, the six ecologists
predicted the $7.8 billion proposal will fail to meet goals for restoring
the River of Grass and fall short of resolving long-standing conflicts over
water in South Florida.

``There are serious failings in the plans being considered,'' the scientists
say. ``These are deep, systemic problems, ones unlikely to be overcome by
tinkering with the existing alternative.''

Signing the letter were Edward O. Wilson of Harvard University; Paul Ehrlich
of Stanford; Peter Raven, director of the Missouri Botanical Garden; Gary
Meffe of the University of Florida and editor of the journal Conservation
Biology; Gordon Orians of the University of Washington, and Stuart Pimm of
the University of Tennessee.

The scientists' criticism of the restoration plan and the call for outside
review echo requests made last week by the Sierra Club and Friends of the
Everglades. And they follow closely a sharply worded critique of the
proposal written last month by researchers at Everglades National Park.

Park Superintendent Dick Ring subsequently praised the corps' efforts to
satisfy his scientists' concerns and said that the recent work on the
restoration is moving closer to meeting the park's needs. Ring's comments
were part of a larger effort by state and federal agencies last week to
rally around the beleaguered Corps of Engineers in the face of criticism of
its proposed restoration plan.

The corps is leading the effort to draw up a broad plan for restoring the
remaining Everglades and assuring flood protection and water supplies for
South Florida. They are joined by scientists and engineers from other state
and federal agencies, including Babbitt's Department of the Interior.

Leaders of the restoration planning effort are opposed to putting their plan
up for outside review. They insist that such a review is unnecessary given
that a large number of ecologists and engineers from several federal, state
and local agencies are reviewing their work and continually refining the
plan. Furthermore, they say additional review would delay efforts to seek
approval from Congress for the proposal later this year.

Interior's position Bill Leary, senior counsel at the Interior Department,
said the proposal will get ample review as engineers and scientists draw up
detailed blueprints if Congress agrees to go forward with plans that will
take two decades or more to finish.

``It's going to get so much scientific scrutiny from all sides as it unfolds
over the next 20 years that I'm not sure I see the need for an independent
review at this point, Leary said.

There's no consensus among conservation groups. Most do not back the
independent review, and some are strongly opposed to those who do. Charles
Lee, executive vice president of the Florida Audubon Society, for example,
said the corps' current restoration plan is on the right track and needs
only refinement. He denounced calls for independent review as ``cries from
the fringe.

Respected in field

The ecologists who signed the letter, however, are not on the fringes of
international conservation efforts. Harvard's Wilson is perhaps the world's
most famous ecologist. He has won biology's two top prizes, the Craaford
Prize and the International Prize for Biology, as well as the National Medal
of Science. He has also won two Pulitzer Prizes for his books.

Ehrlich has also won the Craaford, given by the king of Sweden, and Raven is
a winner of the International Prize for Biology, given by the emperor of
Japan. All but Pimm and Meffe are members of the National Academy of
Sciences, a kind of scientific honor society that dates to the 19th Century.

Pimm said he recruited the scientists to join him in calling for a review
fearing that the concerns of ecologists in the park service and the U.S.
Geological Survey were not being adequately addressed -- to the detriment of
the Everglades.

An expert on species teetering on the brink of extinction, Pimm has been
working in the Everglades since 1992, studying the endangered Cape Sable
seaside sparrow.

Purpose questioned Pimm explained his problems with the plan bluntly in an
electronic message to conservationists last week: ``It's not that there are
gaping holes in this plan. It's that we scientists are having trouble
finding even a thread of restoration upon it, he wrote. ``Sensible people
are going to see that.

``While we may agonize over the pain this will cause well-intentioned people
within the [Clinton] administration, they'd better hear it now from those
who appreciate those intentions, than later from those who do not.

The scientists' letter explains worries that the corps' plan is based on a
badly flawed computer model and would continue to unnaturally dry out
sections of the Everglades. They argue that there's too much reliance on
expensive high-tech solutions like storing water in deep wells and cleaning
up wastewater for use in the environment.

The ecologists suggest that the plan be reviewed by the National Research
Council, which Pimm said reviews scientific work subject to political,
social or economic tensions. He could not say how long such a review would
take.

``These things are not done overnight, he said. ``But on the other hand, the
plan that they're trying to implement is not going to be done overnight,
either.

WHO ARE THESE PROMINENT SCIENTISTS?

Edward O. Wilson: Harvard University professor known worldwide for his
advocacy of biodiversity. Winner of the Craaford Prize, the equivalent of
the Nobel Prize for biology, plus the International Prize for Biology, the
National Medal of Science and two Pulitzer Prizes for his books. He has
more than a casual interest in Florida ecology. In the late 1960s, he used
mangrove islands off Key Largo to study how new colonists replace species
that become extinct. He also played a role in preservation of Lignumvitae
Key as a state park.

Paul Ehrlich: Stanford University professor whose 1968 bestselling book The
Population Bomb launched a nationwide debate on the impact of growing human
populations on natural resources. Also a winner of the Craaford Prize.

Peter Raven: Director of the Missouri Botanical Garden in St. Louis. Has
been a tireless spokesman for conservation of tropical ecosystems for more
than 25 years. Along with his friend Ehrlich, has emphasized the dangers of
worldwide population growth. Also a winner of the International Prize for
Biology.

Gordon Orians: University of Washington biologist with expertise in studying
marsh-nesting blackbirds. Worked with federal agencies in South Florida in
resolving dispute over habitats for endangered wood storks and snail kites.
Past president of the Ecological Society of America.

Gary Meffe: University of Florida and editor of Conservation Biology
magazine. His specialties are ecosystem management and aquatic ecology.

Stuart Pimm: University of Tennessee professor who specializes