restoration procedures manual for public lands …restoration procedures manual for public lands in...

RESTORATION PROCEDURES

MANUAL FOR PUBLIC LANDS IN

FLORIDA

Prepared by

The Nature Conservancy6075 Scrub Jay Trail

Kissimmee, FL 34759-3458

For

Florida Department of Environmental Protection3900 Commonwealth Boulevard

Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000

Submitted December 1997Revised August 1998

FDEP Restoration Procedures Manual ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This manual was developed by The Nature Conservancy for the Florida Department ofEnvironmental Protection under contract. The project manager for the Department was AnnErtman. Conservancy contributors included Kathy Freeman, Doria Gordon, Ted Walker, JoraYoung and Joe Wisby. Significant input and review of drafts were graciously provided by stateemployees Ann Redmond, Mark Latch, Judy Haner, Jerry Oshesky, Dana Bryan, Mike Shirleyand Greg Brock. Conservancy reviewers included Jora Young, Doria Gordon, Kathy Freemanand Peter Colverson. Jim Weimer of Paynes Prairie State Preserve contributed significant time,information and expertise in helping test the manual.

Monica L. Folk, Ph.D.Conservation Planning ManagerThe Nature Conservancy8 September, 1998

FDEP Restoration Procedures Manual iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

OVERVIEW 1

BACKGROUND & TERMINOLOGY 4

STEPWISE RAPID ASSESSMENT 13

WALKTHROUGH APPLICATION OF RESTORATION PROCESS 14

QUICK SUITABILITY/FATAL FLAWS ANALYSIS 17

THE PLANNING PROCESS 21

SITE SELECTION 21Regional Planning Approaches 22Regional Information Sources 22

Other staff 23State agencies 23Other regional conservation plans and experts 24Local governments 25Unit management plans 25

Judging Suitability Of Your Site 26Overall Project Goal 28

CONDUCT A DETAILED SITE ASSESSMENT 28Assembling Information 30Current Site Conditions 32

Location and boundary delineation 32Aerial photos 33Topography 33Soils 33Hydrology 33Vegetation communities (land cover) 34Wetlands 35Wildlife 35Special elements 36Cultural and historical sites 37Site issues 37

Historical Conditions 38Surrounding Conditions 38

DEVELOP AND EVALUATE RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES 43Overview 43Articulate Restoration Alternatives 44

FDEP Restoration Procedures Manual iv

Evaluate Proposed Alternatives 45Cost effectiveness and incremental cost analyses 46Criteria method 50Pros and cons method 50

Choose the Final Alternative 51

DEVELOP A RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT ACTION PLAN 52Overview 52Write the Plans 55

Action plan 55Construction plan 55Work plan 57

DEFINE AND TRACK SUCCESS 57Overview 58Establish Success Criteria 58

Define reference system 59Set performance standards 60Select criteria and variables to measure 61

Develop Monitoring Design and Protocol 64Evaluate And Report Progress 64

PLAN FOR THE FUTURE 65

ESTIMATE COSTS 65

THE RESTORATION PROJECT PACKAGE 69

OVERVIEW 69

FORMAT 69

CHECKLIST 69

IMPLEMENT THE RESTORATION PROJECT 71

FUNDING 71

PERMITTING 71

COORDINATION 71

OUTSOURCE THE WORK 72

LITERATURE CITED 73

SOURCES OF INFORMATION 77

FDEP Restoration Procedures Manual v

GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS 83

APPENDICES 91

APPENDIX A: AGENCIES THAT MANAGE PUBLIC LAND IN FLORIDA 92

APPENDIX B: POTENTIAL RESTORATION PROJECTS ON FLORIDA PUBLIC LANDS 95

APPENDIX C: COPIES OF FORMS, WORKSHEETS AND CHECKLISTS 105

APPENDIX D: STATE OF FLORIDA POLICIES AND REGULATIONS RELEVANT TO

RESTORATION 121

APPENDIX E: MANAGING THE NATURAL RESOURCE LANDS AND WATERS OF THE STATE OF

FLORIDA 123

FDEP Restoration Procedures Manual vi

FDEP Restoration Procedures Manual 1

INTRODUCTION

OVERVIEW

Why--This restoration proceduresmanual was born from a recognized need fora synthesis of the best available science onplanning and implementing restorationprojects. The purpose of this manual is toguide and establish standards foridentification, planning and coordination ofrestoration projects on public land sites inFlorida. The instructions provided will showstewards of Florida’s public lands how todevelop and proceed with well-thought-outrestoration strategies and plans. You willunderstand how to evaluate the contributionsthese projects make to the overall ecologicalhealth and integrity of Florida’s naturalecosystems. This will in turn enable you tocreate or take advantage of opportunities toaccomplish restoration.

What--By restoration, we generallymean ecosystem restoration, that is, the re-establishment of ecological functions, naturalprocesses and native communities (plant andanimal) on degraded lands. More specificexplanations of terminology and the state ofthe science are found later in thisintroduction. Terms in italics the first timethey appear are defined in the glossary. Thisprocedures manual will help you identifypotential restoration projects, determine ifthey are ecologically and economicallyfeasible, and develop detailed plans toaccomplish them. In general, each step ofthe planning process is approached from thestandpoint of the common denominators forall projects. In some cases, these commonfactors are followed by elaboration onvariations for specific situations and projecttypes. The manual has five components:

1. The first section is a Stepwise RapidAssessment to allow you to quicklydetermine if you have a suitable projectand if so, what it will take to develop arestoration plan for it.

2. The second section is a detailedexplanation of the planning process, withseven distinct phases: 1) site selectionand suitability analysis, 2) siteassessment, 3) restoration alternativesdevelopment, 4) plan development,5) defining success, 6) planning thefuture and 7) estimating costs. Eachphase is explained in detail and illustratedwith examples.

3. The third component of the manual is anexplanation and checklist for theRestoration Project Package. Thispacket is designed to contain allinformation necessary for typicalgovernment grant, foundation ormitigation solicitations. The RestorationProject Package will also contain detailsrequired by regulatory agencies forimplementation permits. Oncedeveloped, the Restoration ProjectPackage will be the perfect tool toquickly submit project information orproposals for funding opportunities. Itcan also be used to define a specificdeliverable expected from a consultant,contractor or private mitigation banker.

4. The fourth section discusses some basicsof implementation, touching on thesubjects of funding, permitting,coordination and contracting. Thischapter is a guide rather than detailedinstructions, as many of these activitiesare governed by agency policies. Thissection provides helpful suggestions for


carrying out the plans that will resultfrom applying this manual.

5. The final section contains ancillaryinformation and includes a bibliography,list of information sources, glossary andappendices.

Who--Appendix A lists agencies inFlorida, including federal agencies andmunicipalities, that have responsibility formanagement of public lands. Werecommend that state land managers, districttechnical staff and agency planners begin toapply this process to all potential restorationprojects on sites within their jurisdiction.Managers can also use the manual as a set ofguidelines and standards for consultants,private mitigation bankers and contractorswith whom the state collaborates toaccomplish restoration on state lands.

Where--The scope of this manual coverspotential restoration activities on all landsheld in trust by the state for the citizens ofFlorida, regardless of which agency managesthem. Appropriate projects are those inwhich the disturbance is significantlyaffecting the natural functioning of the site.Examples include (but are not limited to):degraded freshwater wetlands (both isolatedand connected), areas affected by regionalhydrologic alterations, pastures, impactedestuarine areas and their adjacent uplands,disturbed forest lands, and sites dominatedby exotic species. Appendix B lists a numberof Florida public lands projects presentlyidentified as having restoration potential orwith activities planned or implemented.

When--State, regional and agencyplanning staff can begin now using the siteselection suggestions to rank restorationopportunities within each region and identifyresources necessary to develop detailed plansfor the highest priority projects. Site and

field technical staff can begin now toassemble information required to evaluatepreviously identified projects and producerestoration plans for them. Time limitationsand work loads may allow you only toassemble the pieces for developing a detailedrestoration plan but not actually apply theplanning process until a need arises. Adrawback of this approach is that there maynot be sufficient time when the opportunitiescome, to do the careful thinking required fora good plan. We recommend that you beginapplying the stepwise planning processpresented here to highest priority projectsprior to becoming aware of potential fundingor implementation opportunities. Adequatetime for planning will result in a betterproduct in the long run and improve yourodds of securing the funding or support thatyou seek. A potential alternative is to hire aconsultant to do the planning, with thismanual as guidance.

How--The step by step approach,accompanying checklists, worksheets, graybox examples and supplemental appendixmaterials are meant to make application ofthis manual and development of theRestoration Project Package as simple, swiftand successful as possible. For a quickevaluation to determine if your project isviable and what is necessary to develop aRestoration Project Package, use thestepwise rapid assessment in the beginning ofthe manual. For detailed instructions andexamples on each step in the planningprocess, walk through the main text of themanual. Extra copies of all the manual’sforms, worksheets and checklists can befound in Appendix C. We recommend usingthese as a copying template to provide formsfor each new project.


THE RESTORATION PROCESS AT A GLANCE

• Take a big picture look, see what has been lost in the region• Identify potential sites, select the most ecologically

sustainable, regionally compatible and physically feasible• Set overall project goal and vision

• Current conditions and resources• Historical conditions and resources• Land use and perturbations

• Identify cause of perturbations• Develop restoration alternatives• Evaluate and choose from alternatives

• Action plan based on chosen alternative• Integrate plan with existing activities• Fatal flaws analysis, review

• Success criteria (from objectives)• Monitoring program• Reporting and evaluating

• Long-term management issues• Ensuring protection and maintenance• Contingency planning

• Standard and often underestimated costs• Restoration budgets• Tracking expenses

• Product of planning process• Uses for package• Checklist

• Funding• Permitting• Coordination and Contracting• Adaptive Management

☺

Select Site

ò

Site Assessment

ò

RestorationAlternatives

ò

Develop the Plan

ò

Define Success

ò

Plan the Future

ò

Estimate Costs

òòò

RestorationProject Package

Implementation

⇓⇓Successful

Restoration


BACKGROUND & TERMINOLOGY

Why restore? Over 100,000,000 acres ofhistorical wetlands have been lost in thecontiguous United States (National ResearchCouncil 1995). These areas providedimportant ecological functions to humans,including groundwater recharge (watersupply), groundwater discharge, floodstorage, shoreline anchoring, sedimenttrapping and nutrient retention (waterquality), food chain support, fisheries habitat,wildlife habitat and recreation (Erwin 1990).Coastal wetlands provide storm protectionand contribute to erosion/accretionprocesses. We witness the effects of the lossof wetlands throughout the country in theform of severe floods, water shortages andpollution and contamination problems. Untold acres of upland naturalcommunities have been converted to urban,disturbed or agricultural uses. Theseconverted areas do notprovide the sameecological services, suchas aquifer recharge andwildlife habitat orrecreational value, thatthe natural systemprovided. In addition,construction of linearobstructions (roads,fences) and conversion ofnatural areas often leaveadjacent patches toosmall or unconnected toprovide adequate habitatfor wildlife, especially tospecies with large homeranges. Restoration of former natural areasthat have been minimally to moderatelydisturbed can re-establish some of thehistorical capacity of these areas tocontribute to overall ecosystem processes.

What do we mean by restoration? Theprimary goal of ecosystem restoration is to“provide self-sustaining ecosystems thatclosely resemble natural systems in bothstructure and function” (Zedler 1997). Thismay be easy to state, but “experience showsthat restoration sites do not function as wellas natural systems” (Zedler 1997).However, with rapidly improving technologyand knowledge, careful planning, a goodapproach and expert implementation, wehave a pretty good chance of sustaining thefunctions most critical to maintenance ofecological integrity.

For something to be restored, it mustfirst have existed in an undisturbed state,either as a wetland, natural community orecological feature. At some point it becamedamaged, usually as a result of some actionby humans. We refer to these disturbancesas perturbations or impacts. Restoration isthe process of returning the site, which is in

an altered state due tothe perturbation, back toits original condition. Inthe case of wetlandrestoration, this meansreturning a formerwetland (that no longerfunctions as a wetland)to a condition thatsupports wetlandprocesses and would bedelineated as a wetland.

Enhancement issimilar to restoration andrefers to improvement ofan area that has notcompletely lost the

characteristics of its natural state, but isunder stress from some disturbance. Theenhancement activity seeks to increasespecific ecological functions or value of thesite by relieving the stress on the system.Examples of enhancement include re-

Ecological restoration is the art andscience of recreating viable natural orecological communities. It meansreturning a specific area to its pre-disturbance condition, including bothfunctional and structuralcharacteristics. Ecological restorationis large and allows a community toevolve and natural selection to occur.In ecological restoration, we seek notto “preserve” a static entity but toprotect and nurture its capacity forchange.

(Harker et al. 1993)


establishing natural water level fluctuationsor depth within a wetland whose water levelshave been manipulated, or reintroducing fireinto a fire-climax natural community that hasbeen fire suppressed. Wetland creation, onthe other hand, is establishing a functioning

wetland in a place where a wetland neverexisted.

In some cases, especially in upland areasthat have been intensively disturbed, it maynot be practical or possible to re-establishnatural processes and communities to restorethe site to its historical condition. The bestthat can be hoped for may be to create a newcommunity that contributes similar or othervaluable natural functions. This is usuallyreferred to as rehabilitation. An example isthe conversion of a citrus grove that washistorically rosemary scrub to a plantedpine/wiregrass community that at leastprovides wildlife habitat to native species andcarries fire.

The differences among these termsbecome especially important inunderstanding the field of mitigation.Mitigation is the process of lessening,compensating for or offsetting impacts towetlands or endangered species habitat thatwill result from development (or some otheraction). Regulatory agencies that overseeprotection of these resources require thatdevelopment projects first avoid andminimize impacting the resources, andsecond provide adequate replacement of thefunctions that will be lost by impacts to areasthat cannot reasonably be avoided.

This replacement of function, ormitigation, can include: 1) creation of anequivalent wetland type or habitat (usuallyon the same site on which it is being lost),2) restoration of a damaged system thathistorically provided those same functions,3) enhancement of a stressed system thatprovides the functions, or 4) a combinationof these types. In some cases, such as inmitigation banks or large offsite mitigationprojects, preservation of natural systems isalso given consideration in as much as itcontributes to the restored or enhanced areasthat it surrounds.

Example of restoration activitiesYou have a large bayhead wetland on an

historic cattle ranch that has been drained by alarge ditch to provide cattle with access to foragefor more of the year. The wetland is surroundedon two sides by improved pasture and on twosides by pine flatwoods. You want to restore thesite, so you first review historical aerial photos todetermine pre-disturbance conditions. Youdecide that filling the ditch will remove theperturbation of altered hydrology and enhancethe part of the wetland that is existing in astressed state. Restoration of the former wetlandedges of the system that have become dominatedby upland vegetation as a result of the alteredhydrology will involve restoring the hydrology byfilling the ditch and reintroducing growing seasonfire to reduce the woody invaders. You hope topreserve the intact pine flatwoods around thewetland by actively managing them usinggrowing-season fire. It will not be possible tocompletely recreate the historical pine flatwoodsas a functioning natural community in theimproved pastures, but you propose torehabilitate the area by creating some ephemeraland seasonal wetlands and planting nativeflatwoods species around the wetlands after youreduce the exotic sod cover. This area willrequire long-term maintenance to controlinvasive exotic and native pest plant species.You hope to be able to generate ecologicalbenefits (improved functions) from the projectand sell them as credits as part of a mitigationbank or large offsite mitigation project. Youplan, permit and implement your restorationproject, monitoring it to demonstrate success andtrack permitted activities.


In general, a good approachto restoration attempts to fosterconditions in which ecologicalprocesses can proceeduninterrupted, eventually (thoughnot always quickly) resulting in aresilient, sustainable, naturallyfunctioning system. This involvesdetermining what historical(pre-disturbance) conditions wereand attempting to re-create them.This usually means reversing orremoving impediments to naturalconditions (in other words, fixingwhat’s broke) or engineering newconditions that allow historicalpathways to be re-established.

It is important to look at yourproject as a dynamic system.Basically, we want to identify andreverse the perturbations that ledto the degradation of the area andattempt to predict the most likelyresponse and potential problems.Some restoration efforts attemptto force the area into apreconceived product deemeddesirable. Heavy-handedmanipulation of the system ismore likely to result inunexpected results and a need forperpetual maintenance. Lettingnature take its own course oftenleads to success beyondexpectations, though sometimesalong an unpredicted pathway.

What actions should be takento accomplish restoration,enhancement, creation orrehabilitation will depend uponthe disturbance being reversed.They may include filling ditches,removing trees, using prescribedburning, excluding cows,excavating spoil or dredge

Success factors for good restoration projects☺ compatibility of adjacent land uses☺ adequate information on site to correctly predict expected

response to restoration activities☺ ability to set and achieve attainable objectives to meet goals

(e.g. specific hydrologic conditions to restore a wetland)☺ proper pre-construction planning (hydrologic analysis,

contour design)☺ appropriate site conditions such as substrate, rooting

volume, soil fertility, hydrology, seed bank, etc.☺ construction techniques☺ water quality issues☺ revegetation techniques☺ adequate supervision of construction and monitoring

activities☺ control of herbivory and plant (exotics and weedy species)

competition for projects involving planting☺ buffers and protection of site☺ long-term management of site☺ adequate monitoring and reporting on restoration progress

Reasons projects failedM poor goal setting and planningM incomplete evaluation of watershed and regional contextM incompatible surrounding land usesM inadequate knowledge of siteM improper design (hydrology, planting elevation,

slope/drainage)M poor supervision of site preparation, construction and

plantingM improper construction techniques, mishandling of plant

materialsM inappropriate substrate or plant materials used in

constructionM improper geohydrologyM low water quality to restored wetlandsM failure to maintain site, control exotics and herbivoryM post-construction impacts (trampling, vehicles, vandalism)M no defined success criteria or monitoring programM poor monitoring, failure to take corrective actions earlyM lack of long-term managementM inadequate funding

(From Lewis 1990, Clewell and Lea 1990, Erwin 1990)


material, regrading soil, planting nativespecies, killing exotic or nuisance species orany number of other activities. In somecases, these same activities are used tomanage a natural system. Restorationactivities differ from management activitiesin that they are used to bring about a changein the system rather than to husband and carefor a natural area. Maintenance generallyrefers to activities required after restorationis complete, such as exotics control.Monitoring is the regular collection of dataor information to determine progress towardgoals.

A number of other issues and terms arerelevant to planning restoration. Scale is therelative size or landscape level at which youare working. Ecological processes may varyat different scales, though many processes(like hydrology) are consistent or follow apattern even across scales. Often however,the larger the scale at which you work, theharder it is to control all the factors thataffect restoration. For example, it may befeasible to propose restoration of a 10-acreisolated wetland that has been degraded by aditch draining it. But if you propose torestore a 10,000-acre watershed that isimpacted by large canals that have loweredregional water tables, you will have muchgreater difficulty developing practicalrestoration alternatives that will accomplishyour goals. Scale is also important indeveloping and monitoring progress towardsuccess criteria.

Which brings us to another importantissue. The land uses on and surrounding apotential restoration site will significantlyaffect all aspects of restoration. We cannotunderemphasize the need to understand asmuch as possible about what is happeningand has happened in the surrounding region.In addition, you need to consider if theresults of your restoration will affect the

resources, property or uses of adjacentlandowners. Any potential negativeconsequences or liabilities must beanticipated and considered carefully.

At various points during planning,especially early in the process, werecommend that you pause to assess yournext course of action or determine if action iseven warranted. A number of assessmentmethods may assist you in this task, so it isworth a moment here to mention somedifferent approaches. A fatal flaws analysisallows you to evaluate any number ofalternatives and eliminate those that do notmeet a set of criteria established at thebeginning of the project (such as a cost capor incompatibility with adjacent land uses).This approach can also be used to decidethat no further action is required if theanalysis reveals that all alternatives have fatalflaws that eliminate them. Or you may needto re-evaluate your criteria.

A suitability analysis looks at a projectfrom an ecological standpoint. This analysisprovides the basis for decisions as to whetherthe project is compatible with existingconditions, will result in a positive ecologicalcontribution and is sustainable. A feasibilityanalysis focuses on the physical and fiscalconstraints of each alternative.

One of the first steps of restorationplanning is to determine if restoration isnecessary or appropriate. Someperturbations are just too severe to bereversible. Some occur in a context where itis impossible to control critical aspects. Oneaspect of assessing appropriateness involvesestimating (at least conceptually) theecological contributions that will result fromthe project. We suggest conducting asuitability and feasibility analysis once youidentify a site and set the overall projectgoal.


STEP BY STEP TOWARD SUCCESSFUL RESTORATION:

A GROUP OF WETLAND PROFESSIONALS OFFERS ADVICE ON THE PRINCIPAL STEPS

COMMON TO MOST PROJECTS*

Steps Explanation How manual addresses

Recommend definitions from NRCSEngineering Field Handbook.

We define terms in theIntroduction and Glossary

sections.

Need a clear vision and set of goals,

be specific!

We discuss defining your overallgoal in Site Selection and

objective setting in Develop aPlan.

Data need to be gathered to describeand quantify pre-restoration conditionsto be able to identify when and what

significant benefits are achieved.

Collecting baseline data is a partof the monitoring program

described in the Define Successstep of the Planning Process.

A wetland [or any restoration project]cannot be separated from its

surroundings. Understand what isgoing on in the watershed or region

around the site.

The regional context of a projectis covered in Site Selection andreferenced in Site Assessment

and Plan the Future.

To achieve your overall goal, you mayhave to look outside the boundaries of

your project.

The Site Selection, Develop aPlan and Implement sections

address work beyond siteborders.

Be open to new ideas, achieve broaderacceptance, improve on good work, let

knowledgeable people contributeinsight and identify potential problems

overlooked.

Coordination and collaborationare stressed throughout the

Planning Process andImplement sections.

1. Agree upondefinitions

2. Know what youwant

3. Establish anhistoric baseline

4. Identify theoverall status of the

landscape

5. Develop system-wide restoration

6. Include peer andpublic review


Restoration is not an exact science.Good planning based on the best

available information is critical, alongwith best professional judgment.Adaptive management will help

minimize risk.

We attempt to limit uncertaintyby providing numerous

information sources in thePlanning Process and tell you

how to deal with the unexpectedin Plan the Future.

Unforeseen circumstances must beadapted to. Use new information, new

problems, and unexpected events tochange/update your plans. View as an

opportunity to improve project.

The Plan the Future andImplementation sections discuss

using adaptive management.

Quick solutions are not necessarilybest for long term. Look for

synergistic opportunities both on thelandscape and with cooperators.

Cooperation toward the overallgoal is addressed in Site

Selection and Implementation.

A restored area does not necessarilyneed complete protection from use. If

appropriate, identify and implementcompatible uses that maintain the

functions of the restoration but provideadditional returns to people.

Develop a Plan discussesintegrating appropriate activities.

Monitor progress towards achievinggoals established early in the process in

order to document success, maintainsupport, increase understanding and

apply adaptive management.

Define Success deals withmonitoring and documenting

restoration results.

*Based on Melanson and Whitaker (1996)

7. Acceptuncertainty

8. Employ adaptivemanagement

9. Avoid quickfixes

10. Explorecompatible uses

11. Monitor anddocument results


Later in the planning process it may benecessary to quantitatively evaluate thefunctions to be improved in order tocompare restoration alternatives or providedocumentation for regulatory review. Thismay be accomplished by applying afunctional assessment methodology. Thisassessment tool was developed toscientifically quantify ecological functions orvalues assigned by humans to wetlands orother natural areas. Comparison of differentfunctional assessment methods, such as theHydrogeomorphic (HGM) approach orWetland Rapid Assessment Procedure arebeyond the scope of this manual, but moreinformation on them isreadily obtainablefrom a number ofagencies (+ Sourcesof Information).

The restorationplanning processinvolves identifyingand articulating whatyou want toaccomplish with therestoration project andwhat you want tohave when completed.We think developing aset of hierarchicalstatements (+ box above) works best, butyou may choose another approach.

Plans may be developed to differentlevels of detail. A conceptual plan may justinclude goals and objectives. A strategicplan adds strategies for achieving the goals.An action plan goes further in definingactions necessary to implement strategies. Awork plan breaks actions out into tasks orsteps and includes timelines and schedules.Choose the appropriate level of planning foryour need.

The first thing you need in the plan isyour overall project goal, which articulateswhy you are undertaking the project in the

first place. It can also be thought of as themission of the project. Are you attemptingto improve water quality in the region? Areyou connecting large areas of habitat for anendangered species by restoring a connectingcorridor? The overall project goal should bestated as a general, big-picture concept. Toaccompany your overall goal, you need anoverall project objective. An objective is aproduct or target to strive for and should bemeasurable. The overall project objective isreally the final vision for your project, whatyou want success to look like. It may evenhelp to document it as a picture or map, aportrait or diagram of what you are trying to

produce.Once you have the

mission and vision ofsuccess for yourproject explicitlystated, you can goabout collecting all theinformation (siteassessment) that youwill need to developrestorationalternatives, whichare approaches toachieving your overallgoal. Determinationof the causes for the

current site conditions and how to go aboutreversing them may be difficult. You willprobably need to conduct some type ofanalysis to select the best restorationalternative.

Based on the selected restorationalternative and information from the siteassessment, you can develop a set ofrestoration goals that will need to beachieved to implement the selectedalternative. For each restoration goal youshould identify at least one objective(product or target, remember). These will bethe measurable outcomes of achieving yourrestoration goals, and will probably be the

Components of an Action Plan

Overall Goal (Mission)Overall Objective (Vision of Success)

Restoration Goal 1Objective 1.1

Strategy 1.1Action 1.1.1Action 1.1.2

Step 1.1.2.1Step 1.1.2.2

Objective 1.2Action 1.2.1Action 1.2.2


basis for success criteria set up in yourmonitoring program. Next, you will attemptto identify the best strategies to produce theobjective. In some cases, the objective maybe so clear-cut that it is not necessary tostate a strategy and you can jump to the nextlevel. Finally, you should list specific actionsthat must be taken to implement eachstrategy. Prior to implementation, it will benecessary to specify concrete steps or taskswithin each action, and develop a schedule tocomplete the work plan.

Once you have compiled a siteassessment and developed a restorationalternative and action plan, you mustcomplete the planning process by:1) designing a monitoring program based onthe objectives to evaluate success,2) delineating long-term protection andmaintenance measures and 3) estimatingcosts. All of this information can becompiled into a single document, which we

call the Restoration Project Package. Nowyou are ready to proceed to implementation,where you must secure funding, acquirenecessary permits, hire contractors,coordinate with all stakeholders, superviseconstruction, deal with contingencies andemergencies, and practice adaptivemanagement.

Basic Steps of a Restoration Project

1. Seek help from experts2. Clearly define goals and objectives3. Conduct a site analysis4. Develop a site plan5. Create a detailed restoration design6. Prepare the site7. Supervise implementation8. Control exotic species9. Establish a plan for monitoring and feedback10. Develop a plan for long-term management

(Harker et al. 1993)


This page intentionally left blank


STEPWISE RAPID ASSESSMENT

SUMMARY OF PRIMARY STEPS IN RESTORATION PROCESS

ò

ò

ò

ò

ò

ò

ò

Monitoring

Assess Site

RestorationAlternatives

Develop the Plan

Define Success

Plan the Future

Estimate Costs

Implementation

RestorationProject Package

Select Site

SuccessfulRestoration

í

¢


WALKTHROUGH APPLICATION OF RESTORATION PROCESS

In this section, the key leads you through the restoration process step by step, with referencesto the relevant sections in the main body of the manual where explanations can be foundexplaining each step.

1. Select a Site1.a. Regional Planning Approach

1.a.i. If your site has been selected through a regional conservation planningprocess, community planning effort, statewide restoration potential analysis,expert consensus or some other “big picture” effort... Go to 1b

1.a.ii. Sites within your region have not been prioritized or selected based on theirrestoration potential. Coordinate with region or state-level agency staff toconfirm that your proposed site is compatible within a regional context (SeeRegional Planning Approaches on Page 22).a) If your site has high priority for the region... Go to 1bb) If restoration of this site is not compatible with the regional

conditions, will not benefit the region as a whole or is a low priorityrelative to other projects in the region, resources could best be usedin other ways. Restoration is not appropriate for your site at thistime… STOP HERE

1.b. Conduct a suitability/feasibility analysis by filling out Worksheet 1 on Page 17(See Judging Suitability Of Your Site on Page 26).

1.b.i. If the project is fatally flawed according to the worksheet, proceed nofurther. Restoration is not appropriate for your site… STOP HERE

1.b.ii. If the project is not fatally flawed according to the worksheet... Go to 1c1.c. Set the overall goal for the project and establish a vision of success (See Overall Project Goal on Page 28). Then... Go to 2

2. You have a suitable, feasible project and an overall goal and vision for it. Now AssessYour Site.2.a. Collect detailed information on existing conditions, resources and site issues.

Complete Checklist 1, Section A (See Current Site Conditions on Page 32).Then… Go to 2b

2.b. Collect detailed information on historical conditions and resources. CompleteChecklist 1, Section B (See Historical Conditions on Page 38). Then… Go to 2c

2.c. Collect detailed information on surrounding conditions, landuses and resources.Complete Checklist 1, Section C (See Surrounding Conditions on Page 38).Then… Go to 2d

2.d. Assemble all of the information, interpret and digest it. Then... Go to 33. You have assessed your site. The next step is to develop and choose Restoration

Alternatives that will accomplish the overall goal and produce your vision.3.a. Identify all potential restoration alternatives (See Articulate Restoration

Alternatives on Page 44). Then… Go to 3b3.b. Evaluate proposed alternatives, using one of several possible methods (See

Evaluate Proposed Alternatives on Page 45). Then… Go to 3c


3.c. Based on the results of the evaluation, select the best alternative (See Choose theFinal Alternative on Page 51). Then… Go to 4

4. Now you must Write the Plans to proceed with the selected alternative.4.a. Write on action plan for the chosen restoration alternative, starting with the

overall project goal and vision, restoration goals and objectives, and strategies andactions to accomplish restoration goals (See Action plan on Page 55). Then… Go to 4b

4.b. Develop or contract out development of construction plans to implementrestoration actions (See Construction plan on Page 55). Then… Go to 4c

4.c. Develop an implementation schedule and work plan (See Work plan on Page 57).Then… Go to 5

5. You have the necessary plans to implement. Now identify how you will Define andTrack Success.5.a. Identify an appropriate reference system or standards (See Define reference

system on Page 59). Then… Go to 5b5.b. Select criteria and environmental variables to monitor progress of restoration (See

Select criteria and variables to measure on Page 61). Then… Go to 5c5.c. Set performance standards, with appropriate precision intervals and timelines for

each variable (See Set performance standards on Page 60). Then… Go to 5d5.d. Develop a sampling design and monitoring protocol for the project (See Develop

Monitoring Design and Protocol on Page 64). Then… Go to 5e5.e. Develop data analysis, evaluation and reporting procedures (See Evaluate And

Report Progress on Page 64). Then… Go to 66. Now Plan the Future of the site (See Plan For The Future on Page 65).

6.a. Revise unit management plan to include maintenance of restoration, especially ifexotics control is necessary. Then… Go to 6b

6.b. Set up staffing and legal arrangements to cover restoration responsibilities.Then… Go to 6c

6.c. Conduct contingency planning, including what to do if restoration fails or anatural catastrophe disrupts progress or unforeseen events make restoration plansunsuitable. Set up mechanisms to adapt restoration process to these changes.Then… Go to 7

7. Everything is in place and you are almost ready to begin restoration. Now accuratelyEstimate Costs so you can budget and control effective implementation (See EstimateCosts on Page 65).7.a. Identify all tasks necessary to implement action plan and list all potential cost

items, supplies and materials. Then… Go to 7b7.b. Quantify result of previous step into measurable units (hours of labor and heavy

equipment use, volume of fill, numbers of plants) and get cost estimates or bidsfor each unit. Then… Go to 7c

7.c. Set up budget with projected expenditures over time (monthly or quarterly).Then… Go to 8

8. Compile the Restoration Project Package (See The Restoration Project Package onPage 69). Then… Go to 9

9. Implement the project9.a. Secure funding (See Funding on Page 71). Then… Go to 9b9.b. Acquire appropriate permits (See Permitting on Page 71). Then… Go to 9c


9.c. Coordinate with other staff, agencies, adjacent landowners and public (SeeCoordination on Page 71). Then… Go to 9d

9.d. Set up and manage contracts to complete construction or other activities (SeeOutsource The Work on Page 72). Then… Go to 9e

9.e. Track costs (See Estimate Costs on Page 65). Then… Go to 9f9.f. Monitor (See Define and Track Success on Page 57). Then… Go to 9g9.g. Troubleshoot!


WORKSHEET 1.

QUICK SUITABILITY/FATAL FLAWS ANALYSIS

This is a worksheet of multiple choice questions regarding suitability and feasibility of theproject. More detailed discussion about each question appears in Judging Suitability Of Your Siteon Page 26. To quickly assess a project’s ecological suitability and physical feasibility, answer the15 questions about the project and then score it based on these instructions: Questions 1-10 areabout primary restoration issues, while Questions 11-15 relate to secondary issues. Primaryissues score as follows: a=6, b=4, c=2, d=0. Secondary issues score as follows: a=4, b=2, c=1,d=0. A total score of less than 20 will result in a fatally flawed project.

Issue Answer Score

Primary Issues Choose mostappropriate

response

a=6b=4c=2d=0

1. Restoration of this site will contribute to: a) at least 6ecological functions, b) 3-5 important ecological functions, c) 1or 2 functions, d) several lesser ecological functions.

2. In terms of ecological functions, this restoration will result in:a) significant increase in regional capacity, b) measurable increasein region, c) moderate increase or d) qualitative but notmeasurable increase in ecological functions of the region.

3. The effect of the restoration will extend to: a) a very large(> 200 square miles) regional area, b) the entire watershed inwhich the project is located, c) local areas surrounding theproject or d) the immediate site only.

4. The site has been identified by or is completely compatiblewith: a) greater than 3 regional conservation plans, b) 1-3 plans,c) 1 plan, d) no regional planning product.

5. The restoration will contribute to increase of ecologicalfunctions that are critically limited or impaired in the region: a) toa great extent for a number of functions, b) to a moderate extentfor a number of functions or to a large extent for one primaryfunction, c) somewhat for a number of functions or moderatelyfor one primary function or d) only moderately for one functionor not at all for any critically impaired functions.


6. The proposed project fits in with previously establishedregional restoration and conservation goals: a) to a great extent,b) to a moderate extent, c) slightly, but has its own goalsapplicable to the site itself, or d) not at all.

7. Surrounding land uses are compatible with restoration: a)completely, b) for the most part, with areas of incompatible useson less than 20% of area surrounding the site, c) on 50% to 80%of the area within 1 mile of the site, d) only on 20% ofsurrounding lands.

8. Project will be ecologically sustainable: a) almost certainly, b)probably, c) perhaps, d) only with continuous, active influence bymanagers.

9. Restoration is financially possible: a) with existing resources,b) with limited fundraising, c) with substantial new allocation orcontribution of funds, d) only with significant allocations fromunknown sources.

10. Restoration construction activities are physically feasible: a)in current conditions and plans, b) with minor modifications toexisting conditions, c) with substantial modifications to on-siteconditions and/or changes in off-site conditions, d) only withdetailed planning, major manipulation of on-site conditions andchanges in off-site conditions.

Secondary Issues Choose mostappropriate

response

a=4b=2c=1d=0

11. Restoration of the site will: a) be completely compatiblewith other site goals and activities, with no conflicts, b) conflictto a minor extent for a limited time, c) conflict to a great extentfor a short time or to a small extent for a long time period, ord) conflict to a large extent in purpose, area and time.

12. Resources (staff, equipment, money) to implement theproject: a) currently exist onsite, b) can be requested and securedwith moderate effort, c) have not been identified but couldpossibly be secured with effort, d) are unknown.

13. Based on the best available information and estimates fromsimilar projects, the costs to plan and implement this restorationwill be: a) minimal, b) moderate, c) significant or d) astronomical.


14. There is political support for this project: a) definitely,b) likely, c) unlikely, d) impossible.

15. The public support for this restoration project is: a) great,b) moderate, c) mediocre or d) nonexistent.

Total Score

If your Total Score from the worksheet is less than or equal to 20, your project as youenvision it is fatally flawed and does not appear to be suitable for restoration. It may be prudentto abandon planning here, or to completely rethink the scope or location of the project. If yourTotal Score is greater than 20, please proceed.


This page intentionally left blank(Write notes on suitability analysis here)


THE PLANNING PROCESS

SITE SELECTION

This section provides some brief guidance forchoosing and prioritizing restoration projects. Theprinciple message is take a big picture look. Ifyour site or project has already been selected, youmay choose to skip this chapter. However, thissection includes helpful information on sources ofdata that may be useful in planning your project.In addition there are instructions for conducting asuitability analysis on the proposed project andguidance on articulating a project goal. Also, ifyou are a site manager, you may want to contactregional or state-level staff to learn how yourproject fits in with others in the region. Priority ofrestoration sites within an area will be important ifyou are competing for funding opportunities.

Over 50% of Florida's historical wetlandshave been lost. Many of the areas we stillrecognize as functioning wetlands havesuffered some alteration in hydrology orwater quality or have been invaded by exoticor weedy plant species. With this legacy ofimpact, there is no dearth of potential areaswhere wetland restoration can occur inFlorida. As more of Florida is developed,we are also finding it necessary to considerrestoring upland natural communities. Theserestored uplands are important for theircontributions to the needs of endangeredspecies, and as linkages and buffers for thelarger blocks of protected conservation landsand wetlands.

All restoration is not equal. Some areaswill likely respond more readily torestoration efforts than others. Some areaswill provide a greater net gain in functionalcontributions than others. Some will beeasier to manage long term. In addition,many of our remaining natural systems areisolated and reduced to the point where theirlong-term viability is in question. It is thetool of restoration that provides the greatesthope for repairing and reconnecting the

tattered and beleaguered remnants of ournative landscape. No restoration efforts arefree. Given these facts, conscious andthoughtful choices of where we willimplement restoration must be made.

All natural areas, even disturbed ones,exist within a larger context. They are notisolated landscape features. They persist andmaintain maximum health because ofmultiple complex relationships between

diverse plant communities and geologicaland climatological conditions. In the case ofwetlands, they also exist as part of a largerdrainage basin. Each natural area unit cancontribute both local functions and broaderregional functions. We recommend using aregional planning approach to set restoration

Principles in selecting restoration

• Identify and prioritize restoration sites basedon their capability to improve the watershedor surrounding region

• Use the best available science to select sitesand to design and implement restorationprojects

• Involve local people in identifying restorationgoals for their watershed or region andimplementing restoration projects

• Integrate watershed or regional planning withother landscape planning processes

• Build partnerships with agencies,organizations, businesses, and individuals toestablish a broad coalition of restorationcooperators and supporters

(From Foote-Smith 1996)


goals for a region and select and prioritizesites.

Regional Planning ApproachesYou may have already identified a site

and developed a valid approach todetermining if it is appropriate and costeffective to undertake restoration. Butselecting sites based on regional planningpromotes first taking a step back andassessing which of all possible sites within aregion would contribute the most to what isneeded within the context of the entireecosystem. In this way, priority will be givento those sites that have the greatest potentialto improve the health of the region as awhole. It does little good to improve naturalfunctions in one wetland or one small park orpreserve if the overall region continues todegrade and decline.

Ultimately, whether restoration occurs ornot is usually based on the twin bottom lines,time and money. It is important to askwhether the region as a whole will benefitfrom this expenditure. If not, should we bespending our limited conservation dollarsand time on this site? A regional planningapproach will help you determine if thepotential benefits of the project justifyproceeding with restoration.

There are a number of approaches toregional planning. One uses the analysis ofspatial data, usually applying a GeographicInformation System (GIS), within ageographically defined area such as awatershed. Another approach is politicallybased, such as work by regional planningcouncils. A third approach is that ofcommunity planning, which incorporatespublic input to a great extent. It is beyondthe scope of this manual to teach you how toconduct a regional planning process.However, it is likely that one of these typesof regional analyses has already beenconducted for your area. Please read on for

sources of existing regional plans and otherinformation useful in selecting a goodrestoration site.

Regional Information SourcesSite selection and suitability analyses

start with information and a goodunderstanding of the regional context ofpotential sites. This includes any existingdata on feasibility or likelihood of success ofyour project type. If you have conducted ortapped into an existing regional analysis foryour area, you should already understand theregional importance of the site. The moreinformation you base your initial assessmentson, the easier your job will be later in makinginformed decisions on the best restoration

Site Identification Framework

(From Foote-Smith 1996)

Conduct functionaldeficit analysis of

watershed or region

Establishrestoration goals forwatershed or region

Identify potentialrestoration sites

Screen sites fortheir contribution to

watershed orregional goals

Apply otherscreening factors

Display results, re-evaluate and

prioritize sites


strategies, the contributions of your projectto regional ecology and appropriate successcriteria. This information should give you afeeling for the context of the project in the“big picture”. We also recommend that youuse this information to conduct a fatal flawsanalysis to eliminate projects that are notlikely to succeed (+ Worksheet 1 on Page17).

Selection of good restoration projectsshould start with a long look at differenttypes of spatial data for the region. This willlet you size up and compare the value thatrestoration of different sites will have withina larger ecosystem unit. Examples of goodinformation types that will help you toexplore the relationship between yourrestoration site and the larger watershedinclude:• topographic maps• soils maps• land cover maps• road and utility maps• aerial photographs• wetlands survey maps• surface drainage feature maps• water quality maps• flood prone area maps• endangered species location maps• ownership maps• development entitlements• landuse zoning (current and future)• county comprehensive plans

The following sections describe somebasic places to go for these informationtypes and more. In addition, Sources ofInformation provides you with a list ofcontacts for much of the readily availablespatial data for the state of Florida.

Other staffIf you are not a site manager, one of the

first and most important steps is to contactthe manager responsible for the site(s) that

contains your potential project and open adialogue. You will probably be partners, atleast in the design and planning of therestoration, if not in the actualimplementation. In addition, the site staffwill provide much of the necessaryinformation and be familiar with crucial on-the-ground aspects. If you are a sitemanager, you should consider contactingregional or field technical staff that may haveskills, time or expertise to contribute to yourproject. You will need to coordinate withthem and rely on them to provide importantinformation on regional processes, agencypolicies and technical information towhich you may not have access.

State agenciesFor many parts of the state, regional

conservation plans or analyses have alreadybeen developed by various state agencies forspecific purposes. The best type of plan toassess the regional contribution of yourrestoration project will be determined byyour overall project goal (+ Overall ProjectGoal on Page 28), but do not rule outvaluable information contained in otherplans. For example, if the overall goal foryour project is to restore wetlands receivingpolluted runoff, you would look forinformation on improving water quality. TheSurface Water Improvement andManagement (SWIM) plans developed bythe Water Management Districts (WMDs)for areas with identified water quality orquantity concerns will be an excellent sourceof information.

The Florida Department ofEnvironmental Protection (FDEP) has aBureau of Information Services. Within that,the Technical Services Map Library is therepository for a large number of base maps inGIS format. The Bureau is responsible for,and actively collects, information onstatewide themes such as roads,


hydrogeography, hypsography (topography),soils, landuse, public land boundaries, censusdata, wetlands, water quality issues, landcover, greenways and trails, and wildlifehabitat. When beginning a restorationproject, consult with FDEP branches thatmay have the information you need beforegoing to an outside provider. Many regionaland field offices already have layers providedto them from this library for their region.

Besides the centralized informationavailable from the Technical Services MapLibrary, specific program areas have theirown datasets. For example, the FloridaMarine Research Institute has a collection ofmarine and coastal data. Check intoprogram areas that are likely to haveoriginated the data you may need beforegoing to the collector of the data.

The WMDs are an excellent source ofregional information. Besides SWIM plans,the WMDs have 5-year plans for the SaveOur Rivers (SOR) conservation program.This program enables protection of landsnecessary for water management, watersupply and water resources. The 5-yearplans identify priority projects within theregion that may include, contribute to or beaffected by your proposed restoration. EachDistrict also has a District WaterManagement Plan. The planning andmapping departments have extensive GISdatasets. Contact the office of publicinformation or the planning department atthe headquarters of the WMD (+ Sources ofInformation) that your site resides within.

The Florida Game and Fresh Water FishCommission (FGFWFC) conducted andpublished an excellent study (Cox et al.1994) identifying critical habitat protectionneeds for 30 wildlife species inadequatelyprotected on existing conservation lands andhigh quality examples of a number of

threatened plant and animal communities inFlorida. Projects with wildlife habitatenhancement or rare species protection goalsshould include an assessment of how theycorrespond to these statewide priorities. Inaddition, the FGFWFC also has a GISdatabase with numerous layers and themesthat can be provided.

The Florida Greenways Commissionmade recommendations on creation of asystem of corridors of protected open spaceto be managed for conservation andrecreation. A GIS-based coverage thatpresents recommended trails and otherfacilities is available from FDEP’s TechnicalServices Map Library (+ Sources ofInformation).

A regional planning approach is needed tomaximize effectiveness of multiplerestoration projects in a large area.

(Zedler 1997)

Other regional conservation plansand experts

The University of Florida is currentlyconducting a “gap” analysis as part of theirFlorida Biological Diversity Project (+Sources of Information) to identify habitatimportant to a large number of species.Information currently available includes aland cover classification map for the stateand a wildlife habitat database with speciesdistributions and literature citations for allterrestrial vertebrates in Florida. A productof this study will be a series of maps of hotspots of species richness, i.e. areas wheredistribution and potential habitat use bymany species overlap. Analysis resultsshould be available within the next severalyears.


There may be a watershed or regionalconservation plan completed specifically foryour area. For instance, The NatureConservancy conducted a 2-year study of theReedy Creek/Lake Marion Creek Watershedin central Florida in order to identifypotential restoration areas suitable for theGreater Orlando Aviation Authority to useas mitigation for wetland impacts fromexpansion of the Orlando InternationalAirport. Rookery Bay National EstuarineResearch Reserve (+ Sources ofInformation) has developed a WatershedManagement Plan for the region surroundingthe estuary. A South Florida EcosystemRestoration initiative is being coordinated bya number of state and federal agencies (%SFWMD for info). Contacts from yourlocal, county and state agencies (+ Sourcesof Information) will be able to tell you whathas been done for your area. There areother sources of regional informationavailable, including the Florida Natural AreasInventory (FNAI) biological conservationdatabase, which contains elementoccurrences (rare species or communitylocations) across the state; Florida datadictionary at Florida State University; anddata archives of the GEOPLAN center atUniversity of Florida (+ Sources ofInformation). Universities, private andgovernment researchers, and sometimesprivate consultants may harbor uniqueexpertise on your particular project. Contactthe nearest university science orenvironmental department to see if they havedone work on or near your site. Word ofmouth may be the best source of informationon experts, so do not neglect asking aroundwithin your department.

Local governmentsLocal (county and municipal)

governments can provide a wealth ofregional information. County zoning and

mapping departments are a terrific place tostart gathering information. Ask for thecounty’s comprehensive and landuse plans,blueline or regional aerial photos, specieslists and any GIS format information theyhave. Also request the comprehensiveregional policy plans, reports, maps,summaries of large development permitactivity and any other available informationfrom your local Regional Planning Council(+ Sources of Information).

Unit management plansDoes a site you have in mind for

restoration have a unit management plan? Inall likelihood, it does. If you are a sitemanager, you are already aware (possibly theauthor) of these site plans. If you are astate-level or regional staff member, one ofyour first requests of the site managers youcontact should be the current sitemanagement plans relevant to proposedprojects. The plans should include detailed

Scientific principles guidingrestoration site selection

• Large systems will have greater potential forsustaining regional biodiversity.

• Good linkages with adjacent ecosystemssupport greater biodiversity, thereforerestoration projects should remove barriersand improve connectivity.

• The restoration site should be located near oradjacent to an existing ecosystem of the sametype, because nearby sources of species(plants and animals) offer higher probabilityfor dispersal.

• Small natural areas will have less resilienceand resistance to perturbations. It may bebetter to add on to existing natural areasrather than create or restore small islands ofnew types.

(From Zedler 1997)


information about the resources andmanagement goals and activities assigned tothe public land site. They may evenreference or address restoration projects onthe site. Any proposed restoration projectsMUST be consistent with these existingplans. The site description information inthese plans will be essential in the siteassessment step of your restoration plan, aswell as the suitability analysis. If a unitmanagement plan does not exist for yoursite, you should consider expanding yourrestoration plan scope to encompass landmanagement issues.

Judging Suitability Of Your Site

Using the data sources described above and inSources of Information, you can use this sectionto select the highest priority sites in your region orevaluate the suitability of a selected site.

To maximize our restoration dollars,before we even decide to invest in therestoration of any given area, we mustanalyze the feasibility and potential forsuccessful restoration at that particular site.If the site was not selected as part of aregional planning effort, it is also importantat this point to evaluate the relationship andcontribution of the site to the largerwatershed or region in which it is found. Ifyou have a number of sites, you can use thisanalysis to choose the best one.

Though the answers to some of thefollowing questions may seem intuitive orobvious to you, it is none the less necessaryto answer each of them before beginning toconceptually plan your restoration project.This will ensure that your project isecologically suitable and physically feasible.It will hopefully eliminate potential projectsthat cannot be ecologically justified or arenot compatible with surrounding land uses.Use Worksheet 1 on Page 17 in StepwiseRapid Assessment to test your project byaddressing these issues:

Functional ContributionQuestions 1 & 2 deal with the number

and degree of contribution to regionalecological functions. Table 1 lists somefunctions for both wetland and uplandnatural areas. Increasing some functionalcontribution is probably the reason you areproposing the restoration. This should beclearly stated in the overall project goal (+next section). However the degree to whichthe restoration improves ecological functionswill vary among projects. A functionalassessment is not necessary at this point, asyou are just subjectively evaluating the levelof regional contributions.

Table 1. Ecological functions of natural areas.

Wetlands UplandsFlood water storage Runoff to wetlandsWater qualityimprovement

Photosynthesis andoxygen production

Wildlife and fisherieshabitat

Wildlife habitat

Water supply Groundwater rechargeShoreline anchoringSediment trapping andnutrient retentionFood chain support Food chain supportNative vegetation Native vegetationBuffers and connectors Buffers and connectors

Regional ContributionsQuestion 3 concerns the size of the area

that will benefit from the restoration. As youwould expect, the greater the spatial extentof the restoration effect, the better (Zedler1997).

Question 4 refers to existing plansdeveloped for the region. Ideally, you haveused one or several of these plans to locateyour project in the first place. They mayinclude SWIM, SOR, Greenways, Closingthe Gaps (Cox et al. 1994) or similarconservation plans.


Question 5 relates to functional deficitsthat have been identified for a region. Forexample, it has been documented that TampaBay has severe water quality issues, so waterquality is a functional deficit for this region.Other areas, such as the Tibet/Butler Chainof Lakes near Orlando, may have extremelylimited flood water storage capacity. Awatershed or regional analysis may havebeen conducted to identify these deficits, oryou may just have to glean them fromexisting documents and information.

Question 6 concerns restoration orconservation goals identified for the regionbased upon any of the previously referencedplans or deficit analyses or studies. Thesemay have been articulated by a state agencyor WMD, regional planning council,municipality or university.

SustainabilityQuestion 7 looks at the compatibility of

surrounding landuses. This issue is actuallycritical to the success of the project, yet isoften overlooked, at least initially, in thedesign of a project. Look at county landuseplans and regional aerial photos and plans todetermine both the current and long-termconditions and uses of surrounding lands.

Question 8 goes to the ecologicalsustainability of the site once it is restored.This includes the minimization of long-termmanagement needs or certainty ofmaintenance provisions, protection from off-site influences and likelihood that the re-introduced processes and conditions willcontinue on their own. Areas with highlong-term care needs, such as intense andfrequent exotic control measures, will notscore well on this issue.

Feasibility

The availability and accessibility offinancial resources to implement the projectare addressed in Question 9. Projects withunknown funding sources should not beconsidered until these issues are at leastexamined. Adding the burden of fundraisingon top of designing and implementing theproject greatly increases the likelihood ofsuccess.

Question 10 addresses the physicalfeasibility of the restoration constructionactivities. This should include some thoughtas to the engineering data or informationrequired, or literature review and discussionof ease of implementing similar projects.Projects that require extensive on-site or off-site manipulations to construct will probablybecome financially ineffective to implement,even if they don’t seem so during planning.

Secondary issuesQuestions 11-15 address the secondary

issues that should be assessed to determinesuitability of the project. The degree towhich the proposed project is compatiblewith other site goals and activities (Question11) will govern how easy it is to implement.Conflicts with other site goals of more thattemporary nature, or over a large area or ofgreatly differing purposes will fatally flaw aproject.

Though details of implementation, suchas availability of site staff, equipment andfinancial resources (Question 12), costestimates (Question 13), information onpolitical (Question 14) or public (Question15) support may not be known at this stage,they will also contribute to the ease ofimplementation. Best guesses on how theproject fits in these issues will help assess itssuitability. If a project is marginal in itsecological suitability (primary issues), thesesecondary issues will probably deliver thefinal blow in identifying it as a fatally flawedproject.


Overall Project GoalOnce you have selected a site that you

think has restoration potential, you mustdelineate the overall project goal. Accuratearticulation of this goal is very important tosuccess of your project! At the same time,or perhaps immediately following, youshould establish a vision or picture of whatyou want success of your restoration projectto look like. This vision is your overallproject objective and should always be inyour mind as you plan the project. Not onlywill it be the basis for restoration designs, itwill allow you to define success criteria anddevelop monitoring plans to measureprogress.

A project may have a number ofrestoration goals, sometimes nested withineach other, but to avoid potential conflicts,one overall project goal should be identified.Though the overall goal may seem obviousto you, it is necessary to establish it up front,to ensure a common understanding of whyyou are proceeding with the project and toallow you to set realistic, attainablerestoration goals and objectives and definemeasurable success criteria.

Typical goals for restoration projectsinclude creation of wildlife habitat,improvement of water quality, storage ofwater, reduction of flooding, maintenance ofplant and animal diversity, recreation,aesthetics, reduction of landscape

maintenance costs, or creation of arepresentative local ecosystem (Harker et al.1993).

CONDUCT A DETAILED SITE ASSESSMENT

This chapter discusses what information isrecommended for a site assessment, steps involvedin conducting one and various ways of obtainingthe information.

A site assessment is the process ofcollecting and organizing information aboutthe physical/biotic characteristics and the

sociopolitical and land management issues ofa site to develop a complete resourcedescription. Information is collected aboutcurrent site conditions, historical siteconditions and status of properties adjacentto the site. These data provide acomprehensive foundation from which to

Common goals for restoration

• offset (mitigate) adverse impacts fromactivities elsewhere

• create or enhance habitat for fish, waterfowlor other wildlife

• store water for livestock or crop irrigation• stabilize erosion (estuarine and marine areas

especially)• improve water quality• increase groundwater recharge• minimize flood damage by increasing flood

storage capacity in restored wetlands• increase functional contribution or habitat

value• minimize or confine effects of hazardous

wastes• reestablish species composition, structure

and function in a damaged naturalcommunity

• integration of a disturbed area back intoprocesses of larger ecosystem

• enhance a particular ecological function,such as sediment trapping in a wetland

• leave something wild for future generations• to recreate “natural beauty”

(From Lewis 1990, Clewell and Lea 1990, Erwin 1990, Zedler and

Weller 1990, Whitaker 1996)


proceed with the planning process. Thisinformation base feeds directly into the initialsteps of developing restoration alternatives -the determination of the causes of observedchanges, the exposition of any issues thatcould constrain the proposed restoration,and the exposition of any benefits that wouldbe realized.

The information collected during a siteassessment supports virtually all aspects ofthe planning process: it is needed to developand choose between restoration alternatives;it contributes to the early identification ofissues that would make the restorationproject not feasible, thus preventing wastedtime and effort; and it is needed for thedesign of efficient monitoring programs andcan be used to develop more detailed costestimates.

There are several secondary benefits ofdoing a written site assessment that can berealized even if the proposed restorationproject is not pursued. These benefitsinclude:• Site managers will have the knowledge

of relevant information and its sources.• Local staff will better understand the site

and will be able to provide morecomplete information to outside inquires.

• The assessment provides a framework inwhich to summarize existing andorganize future information.

• Staff can also use the collectedinformation for annual planning andreporting on land management activities.

Site assessments, while meant to becomprehensive, have a great deal offlexibility in how they are performed. Allcomponents should be considered during thesite assessment to provide assurance that allissues are addressed and documented in asystematic manner. This helps to minimizethe chance that a crucial issue or problem isoverlooked. However, depending on thespecific situation, each site will have a

different level of detail to which it addresseseach component. For example, in an areawhere a few inches difference in topographymeans a tremendous variation in plantcommunities, a detailed topographic mapproduct might be needed for restoration. Inanother case where the entire restorationproject area is at the same topographicelevation, other components of the siteassessment, such as details of surroundingland use, may require more investment.Each site will have its own list of issues,specific to that site. It is important tocomplete a comprehensive list. How toassure a complete list will be addressed laterin this chapter.

The site assessment may be an iterativeprocess. As decisions are made or newinformation is acquired, the importance ofany one component may increase ordecrease. Thus more or higher quality datafor that component may be required, or youmay choose to de-emphasize a component.

Carrying out a site assessment is part ofa continuum of planning for a restorationproject. For the purposes of this documentsite assessment is broken out as a separatestep. In reality, it may be that some of theitems listed as part of the site assessmentwere done in the preliminary suitabilityanalysis, or the initial steps of developingrestoration alternatives may be doneconcurrently or before the site assessmentwork. The planning process is adaptable. Itis crucial that a comprehensive examinationof issues affecting the restoration projecttake place.

The answer to the question “What is acomplete set of information?” depends onthe project. For completeness, this sectiondiscusses all the data types that could beneeded for a restoration project. Dependingon your specific project, some of theinformation discussed below may not beapplicable. However, almost every item willhave to be addressed at some level in every


project. It is important that each informationitem be considered and an explicit decisionbe made as to whether or not its acquisitionis needed

The site assessment checklist (Checklist1 at end of this chapter) is an aid to ensurethat most of the relevant items have beenconsidered. We offer this checklist as astarting point, but you may revise or designyour own form. The following are guidelineson how to fill out the form; we suggest yourecord the status of each topic as one of thefollowing:

Statusü Need - means that this information is

necessary for planning and must beobtained.

ü Have - indicates the information is inhand and adequate for planningrestoration.

ü Update - means that some information isin hand but may be incomplete or out ofdate.

ü ? - indicates that the existence of or theneed for obtaining this information isunknown at this time.

Responsible/SourceThe name of the person responsible for

obtaining the information, or the source fromwhich the information comes.

Format/LocationThis information may specify the media

type (paper map, GIS layer) and its location.

Site information can be placed into threecategories: current site conditions, historicalsite conditions and conditions surroundingthe site. A complete description of currentconditions facilitates planning and assures acommon understanding of the site.

The topics identified in this manual ascomponents of a site assessment are alsousually required for permit applications. Themost likely type of permit that will berequired is an Environmental Resource

Permit (ERP). This information is requiredby regulatory agencies to predict futureconditions, to anticipate all effects theproject will have and to assure the greatestlikelihood of success.

Most of the data needed to conduct acomplete site assessment probably alreadyexists in the unit management plan, TechnicalServices Library or other informationsources. You just need to assemble andcollate it so it is all in one place for easyreference and comparison.

Assembling InformationFor the information items discussed

below, the following sequence of stepsprovides an efficient way to acquire theinformation needed for a complete siteassessment.1. Find out what information you already

have2. Identify the items that are completely

missing3. Are any of the missing items information

that is needed for the restoration project?or long-term management? Make a list.

4. Make a list of items that you have in yourpossession that are of such poor qualityor are incomplete. These should bereplaced or updated.

5. For each item that is missing or needs tobe updated, identify a way to obtain theinformation and assign the responsibilityof obtaining that to a specific person.

6. Establish realistic due dates for obtainingmissing or revised materials.

The result of this effort should be acomplete set of the information needed todevelop a successful restoration plan. Theprocess may be iterative, as you progress indeveloping restoration alternatives, you maywant or need to get better information on aparticular topic. There are also no firm linesbetween steps in the planning process. Youmay be thinking of restoration alternativeswhile you are collecting data or even have


restoration alternatives in mind right fromthe start.

It is best to gather the maps that areneeded for conservation planning inelectronic GIS format. The use of a GIS willfacilitate analysis during planning. It willalso facilitate the production of graphicsneeded for permit applications or any otherdocumentation. The FDEP is refining andexpanding its GIS capability.

It should be kept in mind that whencontracting a consultant to developcompletely new data for a project, even if thedesired deliverable product is a paper map,the result should be obtained in electronicform as well. For maps, electronic datashould be in the most usable format. Forexample, topographic maps are typicallyproduced as Computer Aided Design (CAD)files. The deliverable you want is the papermap. The deliverable specified to thecontractor should be the paper map and theCAD file that produced the map.

If you do not have a CAD program, youwill need the data in a generic format. Thisshould provide the X,Y, Z coordinates ofeach survey point and these can be utilizedby other suitable programs. In the rapidlychanging world of computer and GIStechnology, it is feasible that in the nearfuture the capability to utilize these data willbe available, along with an unforeseen needfor the data.

If the contractor already has the data, itwill take little effort to provide it in multipleformats. If you are unsure in what format toacquire data or are unfamiliar with thecorrect terminology to use to specifydeliverables, contact the Technical ServicesMap Library (+ Sources of Information) forguidance. If possible, the paper mapsacquired should all be at the same scale tofacilitate comparison.

Boundary maps and vegetation maps areperhaps the most useful base layers uponwhich to develop other information. For

example, an access map might show roads,trails, fences and gates and a suitable basemap for this would be the boundary map forthe site. On the other hand, to showendangered species nest locations, avegetation map might be more suitable.With GIS, maps can easily be overlain.Boundaries, vegetation, element occurrencesas well as other information could bedisplayed on the same map.

There are several options for organizingthe data that are collected during a siteassessment. Some options are:• A spiral bound book with 8.5 x 11

figures• A spiral bound book with pockets for

oversized exhibits or separate exhibits• A 3-ring binder with pockets for

oversized exhibits• A collection of separate files

One thing to keep in mind is that if thesedata will have to be submitted as part of anapplication, a convenient method of storageand delivery should be instituted from thestart. However, collecting and organizinginformation does not necessarily mean thatall of it is in one location. The circumstancessurrounding the state of the restorationproject will dictate the format. If the intentis to apply for funding or a permit, thisinformation will necessarily be bound andcollated in some way. If there is no deadlinefor a submission of this information, therelevant information and documents mayonly be gathered. The reality may be thatonly key components are on hand; otherinformation may be in other offices ordepartments.

What is important is that for eachcomponent of the site assessment is that thedocumentation explicitly state whatinformation is available and its location.Speculation about the existence of particulardata (“the survey and mapping departmentmust have survey points along the creek”)does not fulfill the purpose of a site


assessment. On the other hand, verifying anddocumenting that the regional office has asigned and sealed 20” by 30” copy of theboundary survey for a site could beconsidered fulfilling a component of a siteassessment.

Current Site ConditionsWithin the category of current site

conditions, there are 2 broad areas ofconsideration. The first is site features,which refers to mainly physical features,some of which can change (e.g., vegetation)and some which cannot (e.g., geology). Italso includes the nonphysical features,location and boundaries. The second area ofconsideration are site issues, which may ormay not involve physical characteristics ofthe site. An example of a site issue would bea policy requiring public access to the sitethat is being proposed for restoration.

We describe site features first and thensite issues, but information on both types oftopics can be collected simultaneously. Inpractice, the process of doing a siteassessment is flexible and opportunistic.Often the information items are maps thatcan be combined, with multiple themes on asingle map.

Site features that should be considered aspart of a site assessment are:• Location and boundary delineation• Aerial photographs• Topography• Soils/geology• Hydrology• Vegetation communities (land cover)• Wetlands• Wildlife• Special elements• Cultural/historical sitesMore detailed descriptions of each are givenbelow, followed by a general discussion ofsite issues.

Location and boundary delineationA location map showing the restoration

project site in relation to regional featuresshould be developed. This map should be ata sufficient level of detail for a personunfamiliar with the site to find it. Locationspecified as Township, Range and Sectionsmust also be known. Specifying location inthis way is required by the ERP and is astandard notation that can be used to requestinformation. Township, range and sectionare marked on United States GeologicSurvey (USGS) 1:24,000 topographicquadrangles (topo quads), which provide agood base for the location map. A legaldescription of the site’s boundaries may alsobe helpful, as well as exact acreages ofproject parcels.

A good, detailed site map with clearlydefined project boundaries is a requirementfor a site assessment. A parcel boundarysurvey, if available, should be obtained. Ifthe site for the restoration project is a subsetof land lying within some other surveyedboundary (e.g., a park), a formal survey ofthe project site may not be available. Whatis needed in this case is a final delineation ofthe restoration project site, both on paperand on the ground.

On-paper delineation may involvedrawing or digitizing on maps, aerials or GISlayers exactly what the project boundariesare, and also areas that contributehydrologically, as habitat corridors, buffersor seed sources. On-the-ground delineationcan include flagging or collecting GlobalPositioning System (GPS) points atwatershed, wetland or communityboundaries. If the project is strictly wetlandrestoration, a wetland delineation may beperformed. Documentation on how thedelineation was done should be developedand retained. If done by a professional, itwill be part of the survey documents.


Aerial photosThe availability of good current aerial

photographs for a project can make all thedifference to successful planning. There aremany sources of these photos for differentparts of the state (+ Sources ofInformation). Blueline aerials (large scalepaper photos) are an excellent tool fordeveloping field maps; take them out anddraw/write on them as you encountersignificant features. Smaller scale aerials thatcover the entire project are useful forunderstanding the site and restorationoptions. The Technical Services MapLibrary has excellent high resolution digital-ortho-quarter-quads (DOQQ’s) for GIS-based planning.

TopographySite topography can be addressed at

different levels of detail. The level of detailneeded depends on the nature of the site andtype of restoration. For wetland restoration,detailed knowledge of topography is neededto understand ground and surface water flowpatterns in order to clearly understanddrainage, to design construction activitiesand to accurately predict area that will berestored. In areas that are relatively flat, 6”contours may be necessary. Information ontopography of the project area andcontributing hydrologic area is required bythe ERP application. For upland restoration,elevation and soil types will be critical tosuccessful planting designs.

SoilsA Natural Resource Conservation

Service (NRCS) soils map for the site andvicinity is generally required. Beyond beinga requirement for permitting, soils can beused to predict the extent of the restorationarea. A site that has predominantlynonwetland plants and hydric soils is a goodcandidate area for wetland restoration. At asite where extent of historic wetlands isunknown, soils are a good indication of the

potentially restorable areas. Undisturbedsoils are important in sites where completerecovery of native plant species is a goal.

Soil maps are being digitized into GISformat on a county by county basis. FDEP’sTechnical Services Map Library is therepository for this digital information. Soilmaps are also generally available in paperform from local NRCS offices. If onlylimited soils information is available andmore detailed, accurate data are necessary(e.g., determining extent of historic wetlandsoils for use in predicting extent ofrestoration), a soils expert, available fromwithin most state departments or localextension service offices, may be called in.

Geology is most important in Floridabecause it affects hydrologic processes. Seethe following section for discussion ofrelevant issues.

HydrologyAccomplishing restoration, particularly

wetland restoration, often requires that theexisting hydrology of the site be modified.This can be the single most critical aspect ofa restoration project. You should collectdata or gather existing information onimportant hydrologic parameters to enhanceyour understanding and ability to predictresponse of hydrology to restorationactivities. Data on existing normal wet anddry season water levels are critical forwetland restoration projects and required forERP applications. Other hydrologicparameters of great interest are:• sources (inputs) of water, including

ground water, precipitation and inflows• removals (outflows) of water, including

groundwater, drainage,evapotranspiration and natural outlets

• delivery timing and velocity• volumes of inflow and outflow• flow type (sheet or channel) and rate• hydroperiods and inundation depths (or

depth to ground water)


• regional hydrologic influences (wellfields,lakes, major canals, control structures,pump stations)

Hydrologic modeling or an in-depthunderstanding of a site are usually necessaryto predict post-restoration normal wetseason water levels, which will be needed todetermine what effect wetland restorationwill have on vegetational communitycomposition and target wetland area. Thisinformation may also be used to establishtarget water levels, which are often used as asuccess criterion (+Establish Success Criteria). The ERPapplication requires that existing seasonalhigh water elevations be determined.

Boundaries of existing wetlandcommunities are a good indicator of existingwet season water elevations. The boundariesof transitional communities and/or formerwetlands converted to upland vegetation canbe used to predict future wet season waterlevels if historical hydrologic conditions areto be restored. Elevation of communityboundaries can be surveyed to determinetarget water level elevations.

There are a number of hydrologicindicators that can be used to determineaverage water levels. Some are describedand pictured in the “The Florida WetlandsDelineation Manual” (Gilbert et al. 1995).They can be located, flagged and thensurveyed to determine existing or historicalaverage high water level elevations.

Hydrology is, of course, very importantin wetland restoration. But an understandingof water table dynamics and local hydrologywill also be critical to success of uplandrestoration projects. A disturbed upland areawith non-natural hydrologic patterns will bemore prone to persistence of exotics andinvasive weeds. Restoration of appropriatehydrology and substrate may also beessential to the success of non-wetlandrestoration.

If possible, you should obtaininformation on water quality of the site. Thisis especially true for large wetlandrestoration projects with offsite watersources, projects in regions with knownwater quality issues, or projects where highwater quality is one of the success criteria.Contact the FDEP Division of WaterFacilities for statewide information on waterquality (+ Sources of Information).

Vegetation communities (landcover)

Accurately mapping vegetationcommunities and land cover types is animportant part of planning the restorationproject. You will use the current vegetationmap to predict the results of the restorationand demonstrate change through the post-restoration monitoring program.Alternatively, you may develop a preferredvegetation conditions map from historicalaerials or a desired configuration and thenoverlay it on the current vegetation map todetermine restoration actions needed toproduce the change. The current vegetationmap can be used as a base map for othermaps and exhibits.

If a vegetation map exists, it can bechecked by either groundtruthing or lookingat recent aerial photography. If no mapexists, one can be developed by interpretingaerial photography and then groundtruthing.Depending on the site and existing data, onefield visit may be enough to develop avegetation map. Blueline aerial photos,obtainable from county government planningdepartments of property appraiser offices,can be used in the field to identify anddelineate the vegetative communities.

The vegetation map should use astandard vegetation classification systemappropriate for the restoration project. Itshould clearly show uplands, wetlands andopen water areas. The ERP applicationrecommends the Florida Land Use, Cover


and Forms Classification System(FLUCFCS) developed by the FloridaDepartment of Transportation (1985) beused for projects submitted to SFWMD,SJRWMD and SRWMD; SWFWMD prefersthe National Wetlands Inventoryclassification system (Cowardin et al. 1979).The FGFWFC also has a vegetationclassification system, as does FNAI. Thedifferent classification schemes use differingapproaches (existing land use versus currentvegetation versus natural vegetation/originversus wildlife habitat). Which system isappropriate will depend on the overall andindividual restoration goals of the project.

If the land in question had in the pastbeen included in a Development of RegionalImpact (DRI), then a vegetation map (as wellas soil maps, drainage maps and otherinformation) can probably be obtainedthrough a regional planning council.Planning councils keep DRI documentationand it is available to the public.

Accompanying the vegetation maps, asite assessment should also include gooddescriptions of each vegetation communityonsite, including condition, dominant speciespresent, acreages and general ecologicalcontributions provided (habitat value,wetland functions).

WetlandsWetlands may be mapped as part of the

vegetation communities. However, inwetland restoration projects, wetlands willrequire more detailed information on plantcomposition and hydrology. An accurate on-the-ground mapping ofexisting wetlands will be needed if they arenot already mapped. FDEP’s FloridaWetlands Delineation Manual (Gilbert et al.1995) describes the methodology fordelineating wetlands types. Wetlanddelineations can be performed by FDEP orwater management district technical staff ifformal delineations are needed.

Wetland maps for the entire UnitedStates were developed through the USFWSNational Wetlands Inventory (NWI)program. These maps, interpreted fromaerial photos, have limitations that makethem unsuitable for making wetlanddelineations (Tiner 1997). NWI mapsrepresent the minimum wetlands in an area.Ephemeral wetlands or other wetlandsdifficult to see on aerial photos may beunder-represented. NWI maps are suitablefor such things as preliminary assessments,larger scale planning and identifying potentialwetland areas.

WildlifeDocumentation of wildlife use of the

proposed restoration site should be obtainedor developed. The restoration will changevegetative communities and may change theuse patterns of wildlife. Knowledge of theexisting fish and wildlife habitat of theproposed restoration area and a comparisonto expected habitat will be required forpermitting.

A species list is typical of the minimalwildlife data usually obtained. Mapping ofnests, burrows, rookeries, roosts, sightingsor other sign is a second level of informationthat should be obtained, if possible.Abundance estimates and distributionpatterns from organized field surveys areexamples of a higher level of information,not available for most restoration projects.

Recording wildlife sightings or signswhenever encountered is a simple way todevelop knowledge of the wildlife use at thesite. All on-site personnel can contribute tothe development of this kind of informationsimply by recording their observations.Additionally, transects can be laid out tocover diverse vegetation types and walkedmultiple times to confirm presence of certainspecies. Lists of technical publications aboutnongame wildlife and inventory methods areavailable from FGFWFC’s Bureau of


Nongame Wildlife (+ Sources ofInformation).

The FGFWFC maintains a wildlifeobservation database that could provideinsight into wildlife use in or around theproject area. Number and abundance ofdifferent types of wetland or habitatdependent species using an area may be apotential indicator of restoration progress.

Special elementsSpecial elements generally are plant or

animal species that are endangered,threatened, species of special concern orrare. FNAI refers to their documentedlocations as element occurrences. Anelement occurrence may include sign of aspecial element, such as a nest or cache. Forsite assessments, special elements can bevegetative communities that are rare, speciesthat have some special significance to theecosystem, such as keystone species, or evenan onsite population that has special localsignificance.

Using information from variousdatabases and site reconnaissance, maps ofspecial element locations should bedeveloped so that they are considered in therestoration planning. Listed species utilizingthe area in any capacity will be an importantpermitting and management issue.

Sources of information on specialelements include FGFWFC, FNAI and theUSFWS (Table 2). Special elementlocations may have already been mapped atthe site as part of the acquisition ormanagement of the site. If not,reconnaissance should be performed toidentify or update the listed species that areusing the proposed restoration area. TheFGFWFC publishes guidelines for censusingsome listed species.

A memorandum of understanding(MOU) allows FDEP to request elementoccurrence information from FNAI for aspecific area. This information can berequested by specifying township, range andsection or by providing a GIS file with aspecific boundary. There is a charge forprivate consultants requesting thisinformation.

Eagle nest or wildlife observation datacan be requested by faxing or mailing a mapto the FGFWFC Office of EnvironmentalServices. Eagle nest data are updatedannually. The wildlife observation database,which is open to all species, not justprotected species, is a database of incidentalobservations that are reported from a varietyof sources and is not updated regularly. TheOffice of Environmental Services prefers amap or written description of location (e.g.,

Table 2. Agencies and data source for information on listed species.

FGFWFC FNAI USFWS• Official lists of threatenedand endangered flora and fauna.• Eagle nesting data• Guidelines for censusingand habitat improvementrecommendations for somelisted species; other technicalpublications pertaining towildlife• Wildlife observationdatabase• Local/Ad hoc studies

• Special element occurrencesor rare species or communities• Maps of CARL, SOR andother managed areas

• Statewide mapping of FLscrub jay territories and habitat• Endangered speciesregulations and policyinformation (recovery plans,legislation)


southwest corner of Leon County) to alocation specified by township, range andsection. They can also accept a request via aGIS boundary file. Responses can be sentwith locations on a paper map or as anelectronic file.

Cultural and historical sitesThe term cultural and historical sites

commonly brings to mind sites of importantarcheological significance, such as Indianmiddens. Typically these are sites whereartifacts of past cultures are found.However, this item is meant to include othersites, such as trees scarred by turpentinecollection, historical homesteads, campsitesor other physical remains that might beinstructive about some aspect of recenthistory, or have local significance.

Known sites of archeological significanceare listed in the Florida Master Site Filemaintained by Florida’s Division ofHistorical Resources. Checking this sourcefor known historical sites is the minimumlevel of research that could be undertakenfor a restoration project. The Bureau ofArcheological Research receives requests toreview the Florida Master Site File via phoneor fax. Information provided in a request istypically township, range and section or aUSGS map on which the project site isdelineated. Contracting a cultural resourceassessment may be necessary if the proposedrestoration site has a very high potential forhaving significant archeological sites.

As for other more recent, local historicalsites, these should be mapped, judged as totheir importance and included in the siteassessment. Local staff or people who havelived a long time in the area around theproject site may have insights into items ofhistorical significance. The Florida Trust forHistoric Preservation publishes a directory oflocal heritage resources organized by

organization name, county location andprogram area.

Site issuesSites issues include anything that may

affect the restoration planning ormanagement of a site. This includesconditions on the site (e.g., presence ofexotics, trash piles), physical structures (e.g.,buildings, ditches, fences), policies or otherobligations that must be met (e.g., publicuse) and legal questions (e.g., easements).Table 3 shows many of the categories thatshould be considered when developing a listof site issues. All items in the table shouldbe reviewed and, if they apply, includedduring planning for restoration. Any otherrelevant items should be added.

Some issues may have come up in someother contexts. For example, a large area ofexotics may have been mapped as part of thevegetation mapping. This informationshould be included in the site managementunit plan.

Physical characteristics are bestdocumented by marking them on a map. Inthe event that physical site issues arenumerous, it may be best to map them usingmultiple overlay maps, with related siteissues grouped together.

All governing documents for the siteshould be obtained. This will include anyguidelines, manuals, memos or documentsrelated to site acquisition, as well as anylegal documents that pertain to the property,such as title restrictions, pipeline easements,mineral rights, leases, access easements andflowage easements. These documents mustbe read with an eye towards how they willaffect any planned restoration. Make surethat you take note of any apparentrestrictions and be sure to address these inplanning.


Policy and legal issues probably willrequire more effort to obtain thaninformation about physical issues. The keyto obtaining a complete picture of all issuesis to contact all relevant staff that might haveknowledge of the site, even if they have onlya narrow field of contact with the site. Legaldepartment and real estate departmentsshould be contacted as well. Leave no stoneunturned!

Historical ConditionsRestoration implies the return to some

previous condition. It is clear that in manycases these conditions can never berecreated, but only approached. This doesnot reduce the need for information aboutpast conditions on the site. Knowledge ofthe previous landuse history, water levels,soils and vegetation communities cancontribute to choosing restoration actionsthat have the greatest likelihood of success.

Probably the best documentation ofhistorical conditions is historical aerialphotographs. Historical aerials are availablefrom some county governments, FloridaDepartment of Transportation (FDOT), U.S.National Archives, NRCS, privatecollections and some universities (+ Sourcesof Information). The older the aerial photo,the more likely it is to give the best picture

of conditions with the least influence byEuropean settlers. If possible, historicalaerials from various time periods should beobtained. This provides a sequence ofchange, identifying more specifically whenchanges took place and how long specificconditions have taken to develop.

Historical water levels (average wetseason water level) can be determined fromthe elevation at the upper limit of transitionalcommunities around drained wetlands andpresence of organic soils. These elevationsmay be used as hydrologic targets forrestoration success criteria, provided that fullrestoration of historical water levels canrealistically be achieved. If offsite conditionsaffect the site’s hydrology, this may not bepossible. The WMDs and other regulatoryagencies may have historical water level,flow and water quality data for some waterbodies.

Former landowners or local historicalknowledge from long-term governmentagents could also provide insight into pastconditions. Inconclusive observations fromthe field can be corroborated or struck downduring a short conversation.

Surrounding ConditionsBecause ecological processes are

continuous in both time and space, an

Table 3. Categories of site issues that should be considered for restoration planning, with issuescommonly encountered under each category.

Land Use andConditions Physical Structures Policy Issues Legal

• Exotics• Trash piles• Dip vats• Trespassing• Poaching• Pastures• Excavated

water holes• Spoil piles• Site access

• Existingbuildings/facilities

• Plannedbuildings/facilities

• Ditches• Fences• Roads• Permanent water

sources (open water,hydrants)

• Existing or future policies towhich the site must conform

• Public use and access• Management policies or

guidelines• Obligations that must be met• Large-scale programs or

initiatives that affect the site(e.g., a watershed initiative)

• Easements(many types)

• Titlerestrictions

• MOUs• Retained

rights• Assessments


understanding of what is happening adjacentto the proposed restoration site is critical.This applies not only to physical features butalso to land use, political standing andownership status. Future projections aboutsurrounding land uses must also beconsidered to try to assure success inperpetuity.

Offsite conditions could imposeconstraints on what restoration alternativesare developed. For example, a restorationproject that causes water flow onto anadjacent property would require consentfrom the landowner and a recorded flowageeasement. There will be substantialdifference in stresses on a restoration projectthat borders conservation land versus onethat is adjacent to a housing development.Surrounding well fields can interfere with

hydrologic restoration. Application ofprescribed fire may be limited by offsiteconditions and land uses. Land use maychange, so an attempt must be made todiscover future plans for adjacent parcels.

Surrounding conditions take on lessimportance where the restoration project iscompletely within the boundary of someother tract that is owned and managed by thesame organization doing the restorationproject. In a case like this, influences fromthe area surrounding the restoration projectsite can be more easily controlled.

For restoration sites that are adjacent towater bodies, there may be hydrologic andwater quality data available, both current andhistorical. WMDs or other regulatoryagencies may have survey data available aswell.


This page intentionally left blank.


Checklist 1 Site AssessmentProject Name Project Owner

Section A

Existing Site Conditions

Status Responsible/Source Format/Location

Location map & descript/boundary delineation __________ ____________________ __________

Aerial photos __________ ____________________ __________

Topography __________ ____________________ __________

Soils __________ ____________________ __________

Hydrology/water quality __________ ____________________ __________

Vegetative communities __________ ____________________ __________

Wetlands __________ ____________________ __________

Wildlife __________ ____________________ __________

Special elements __________ ____________________ __________

Cultural/historical sites __________ ____________________ __________

Information gaps

Site Issues

Land Use and Conditions/Physical Structures: (exotics, trash piles, dip vats, poaching,access, pastures, man-made water holes, existing or planned buildings, roads, fences, ditches)Make notes and attach additional sheets (maps) as needed.


Site Assessment Checklist - page 2

Policy Issues: (existing or future policies to which the site must conform; managementpolicies or guidelines; obligations that must be met; programs/initiatives affecting the site)

Legal Issues: (easements; title restrictions; MOUs, etc.)

Section B

Historical Conditions

Year Source Area Covered Format/Location

Historical aerial photographs: ________ ____________ _____________

Other information (maps, etc.) ________ ____________ _____________

Section C

Surrounding Conditions(ownership of tracts surrounding the project site; current status of adjacent tracts; future

development, zoning, etc.)


DEVELOP AND EVALUATE RESTORATION ALTERNATIVES

OverviewThere can be different approaches to

developing and evaluating alternatives inplanning environmental projects. However,the following steps are common to mostprojects:

1. Identify restoration alternatives2. Rank alternatives and eliminate fatally

flawed ones3. Choose a final alternativeThe quality of data obtained in the siteassessment may determine the ease andeffectiveness of this process. Site assessmentinformation will be necessary to predictchange (determine environmental benefits),estimate costs, and establish successfulmonitoring. For example, topography andsoils data will likely be used in estimatingenvironmental outputs (e.g., acres ofrestoration). Information about future landuse surrounding the project may greatlyinfluence the final choice of an alternative.

Individual circumstances will dictate howalternatives are developed and the method bywhich they are evaluated. No matter whatmethodology is used in the planning process,it will require a multidisciplinary team effortto develop and evaluate alternatives.

If you have not articulated an overallproject goal and vision, you MUST do sonow! Do not make the mistake of thinking itis a pro forma exercise to write down thegoal. It will direct what restoration actionsshould be taken as well as the selection ofthe final alternative. It also influences whatsuccess criteria and monitoring efforts willbe established. This point is best illustratedby the example described at right. InFlorida, the Kissimmee River restorationproject staff took years to establish a cleargoal for the project. The process, once

completed, facilitated the development andevaluation of alternatives.

Kissimmee River Restoration ProjectOverall Project Goal

The Kissimmee River restoration movementgained strength in the early 1970’s, leading to thepassage of the Kissimmee River Restoration Actin 1976. This Act established broad restorationgoals addressing water management, as did alater executive order issued by then GovernorBob Graham in 1978.

In the years following these legislative acts,the goals for the project expanded to include anarray of other environmental values includingfisheries, waterfowl, wading birds and wetlands.This posed a challenge for planning restorationas attempts to maximize all of theseenvironmental values led to conflictingobjectives.

In 1988, the Kissimmee River RestorationSymposium concluded that an ecosystemperspective was needed to address restoration oflost ecological values, as mandated by variouslegislative acts. Scientists at the symposiumendorsed re-establishment of the ecologicalintegrity of the Kissimmee River ecosystem asthe primary goal. Ecological integrity was givena specific definition.

This clarification of the project goal enabledscientists and engineers to determine a projectvision that would indicate when the goal of re-establishment of ecological integrity had beenmet. From this, specific hydrologic criteria weredeveloped. These criteria provided the means forevaluating proposed restoration alternativesbased on their predicted contribution towardaccomplishing the overall goal.

(From Toth 1995)


Articulate Restoration AlternativesHow alternatives are developed will

depend on the circumstances of the project.Some approaches include developing criteriathat must be fulfilled, asking experts todevelop or discuss alternatives, creatingcombinations of management/constructionactivities that will achieve the overall goal, orgetting alternatives from an outside source(contracting out alternative development).Sometimes all of these approaches are usedtogether.

In a typical restoration project, thefollowing sequence of events is common.First the question is asked, “Given goal X,what are the different actions that can betaken to meet the goal?” A common way toanswer this question is to consult experts onecology, hydrology, or wildlife. Theconstruction and management measuressuggested by these experts can then becombined into alternatives, which areevaluated individually.

An example of establishing criteria todevelop alternatives would be setting a targetwater level elevation based on historicalwater level data. Only alternatives that willmeet that criterion are developed.

You may bring in experts to devisealternatives. This approach involves forminga multidisciplinary planning team so that avariety of technical expertise is brought tothe problem.

Forming combinations of managementand construction actions into alternatives isanother common way for alternatives to bedeveloped. Sometimes specific constructionactivities that will restore an area are readilyapparent (e.g., filling existing ditches).Neglected management of an area may alsobe apparent. Often the causes of change(perturbations) can be determined bystudying historical conditions.Anthropogenic activities such as ditches,roads and logging may explain the currentlandscape patterns.

When causes of change are not obvious,they can often be inferred from biologicaland ecological conditions on site. Examininghistorical and current aerial photos,preferably for multiple time periods, canoften reveal the time at which visibleanthropogenic changes took place and howlong it took for particular plant communitiesto develop. Once causes of change havebeen identified, the construction andmanagement activities that can successfullyreverse or ameliorate them can be identified.

Equally important in this process ofidentifying restoration alternatives is therecognition of constraints to performingactions that could reverse the changes. Forinstance, if a road has altered hydrology andcaused a reduction in wetland area, onepossible action to restore the historicalconditions is to remove the road. However,if the road cannot be removed or relocated(for example because of an easement), thenthat action is not an alternative. The actionof installing culverts or low water crossingsto restore more natural surface flow might bea viable alternative. By identifyingconstraints as early as possible, onlyalternatives that are practical and willfacilitate long-term management aredeveloped.

In addition to physical constraints, theremay be political constraints that will limitrestoration actions and thereby influence the

Because policy choices about resources andenvironmental quality are made in apolitical context and are likely to involvecomparisons and tradeoffs among variablesfor which there is no agreement aboutcommensurate values, monetary benefit-cost analysis is not a simple decision rule.[Economics] is simply a tool for organizingand expressing certain kinds ofinformation on the range of alternativecourses of action.

(Freeman 1993)


development of alternatives. Neighbors orthe general public might object to the use ofherbicides or trapping of feral hogs or someother controversial strategy. While suchalternatives might not be immediatelydiscarded, clear discussion will reduce thenumber of surprises later in the project.Applying a fatal flaws analysis again at thispoint (+ Judging Suitability Of Your Site onPage 26) will allow you to use theseconstraints to eliminate alternatives that willnot be viable.

Sometimes alternatives are introducedfrom outside agencies or other organizationsIn this case, plans need to be evaluated justas alternatives created by the planning teamwould have been evaluated.

Alternatives should be articulated as acontinuation of the hierarchical planningprocess. Look at the overall project goal

and vision and develop a list of restorationgoals that would contribute to producing thevision. Then identify the objectives that arethe measurable result of each goal. Finally,articulate the strategies or approaches toproducing each objective (+ RestorationAlternative Example below).

Evaluate Proposed AlternativesThe general approach to evaluating

restoration alternatives consists ofdetermining the extent to which eachalternative meets your established overallproject goal (mission) and overall objective(vision), and the extent to which each fallswithin the constraints that exist (financial,physical, political, ecological). There are anumber of different methods that can be usedand we present three examples, but eachproject manager should choose or designhis/her own method.

Restoration Alternative Example

Overall Goal (Mission): Create habitat for wetland dependent wildlife.

Overall Objective (Vision of Success): A 10-acre diverse wetland that will provide food chain support foramphibians, birds, aquatic mammals.

Restoration Goal: Create suitable hydrologic regimes.Objective: An area of open water of approximately 1 acre, with maximum seasonal depths ranging

between 12-36 inches, that will provide baseflow of 1 cfs to the adjacent stream during the dry season.Strategy: Excavate an area of 1 acre to a depth of 3.5 feet below existing grade (12 inches below

mean dry season groundwater level), and construct an outlet structure that is 36 inches higher than themaximum depth of open water.Restoration Goal: Create appropriate vegetation structure and composition.

Objective: Vegetated area around the open water of 3 acres each of emergent, scrub-shrub and forestedwetland vegetation classes.

Strategy: Plant appropriate species according to a planting design developed to produce theobjective.Restoration Goal: Ensure suitable habitat for target species.

Objective: Open water and emergent areas that support at least 2 amphibian species and at least onenesting bird species within 5 years; maximum edge habitat and nesting area around open water; uplandbuffers that provide adequate protection.

Strategy: Grade the open water area so that at least ¼ acre will have water depths sufficient tosupport the targeted species during critical months, plant species that can support egg masses, developscalloped edges on open water area, protect a 10-acre upland area around the wetland.

(After Hruby and Brower 1994)


In business, there are straightforwardways to decide between alternatives usingstandard economic analysis techniques.Typically, cost/benefit analyses areperformed and the resulting valuations areused to pick the alternative that maximizesbenefits. This approach is useful when thebenefits and costs can be quantified indollars.

However, in restoration and mitigationprojects, and for environmental resources ingeneral, benefits often cannot be easilyquantified in dollars. Though someeconomic analysis techniques have beendeveloped to perform this conversion and areappropriate for certain kinds of projects,there is no standard, accepted approach. Allapproaches have limitations and bias thatmust be recognized when used to estimatemonetary benefits.

On the other hand, estimating costs forenvironmental planning in monetary terms is,in general, easier than estimating benefits(Tietenberg 1988). The costs for restorationand mitigation projects are costs typical formany other kinds of projects. These includecosts for items such as real estate,engineering, construction, ongoingmaintenance and operation.

Primarily due to the difficulties inquantifying environmental benefits (e.g., thevalue of a single species), restoration andmitigation projects often become a politicalnegotiation between groups. Nonmonetaryecological considerations may appropriatelybe used to make a final decision onrestoration; however, making cost-obliviousdecisions can lead to inefficient, costlysolutions.

Relatively recently, the field ofeconomics has been addressing the problemof evaluating environmental projects. Thisactivity has been motivated by increasingenvironmental regulation and the growingrealization that economics plays a vital rolein the valuation of the environment. There

are economic analysis methods that can be ofbenefit in determining cost-effectivesolutions for environmental projects. Theyinclude cost-effectiveness analysis andincremental cost analysis.

These methods do not necessarily lead toan optimal solution. However, they canprovide information to negotiate, guidedecision making and rule out alternatives thatare not cost-effective. Choosing efficientrestoration alternatives increases the amountof environmental benefits, by any measure.

Little practical literature is available onhow economic concepts and techniques canbe used in the decision making needed forrestoration or mitigation projects. A well-written and practical set of documents (withsoftware program available) that providesguidance specifically for restoration projectsand mitigation planning has been developedby the USACOE’s Institute for WaterResources (+ Sources of Information).These materials were developed to useeconomic analyses in environmental planningand to elevate environmental restoration to apriority mission in the USACOE’s budgetaryprocess (Robinson et al. 1995). The analysisdescribed in these documents can be used todevelop and evaluate restoration projects.Even if the procedural steps of the analysisare not used, the concepts and approach theyprovide could be valuable in restorationplanning.

Cost effectiveness and incrementalcost analyses

Cost effectiveness analysis andincremental cost analysis are procedures thatrelate benefits to costs. A cost effectivenessanalysis can screen out the alternatives thatcost more than others producing the samelevel of output, thus avoiding the selection ofunacceptable alternatives. Incremental costanalysis reveals changes in cost as levels ofoutputs increase. This gives decision makersa basis for deciding if increases in levels of


restoration activities are worth it. These costanalyses are not meant to lead to the singlebest solution. Instead they organizeinformation and provide a rational,supportable, focused and traceable approachfor evaluating and selecting betweenalternatives (Orth 1994).

These analyses require a list of solutions(alternatives), and for each alternative, anestimate of the cost and the output. Outputsamong alternatives must be measured usingthe same units and scale [e.g., outputscannot be expressed as habitat units (outputof Habitat Evaluation Procedure) in onealternative and acres of wetland restorationin another]. If more than one environmentaloutput is needed for project planning anddecision making, then a separate analysis foreach output will be needed.

Table 4 and Table 5 (from Robinson etal. 1995) are designed to illustrate theconcepts and outputs of cost-effectivenessand incremental cost analyses. In Table 4alternatives are highlighted that are not costeffective. Plan A produces the same acreage

of wetlandrestoration at twicethe cost of Plan B.Plan C produces theless acreage ofwetland restorationat the same cost ofPlan D. Plan Eproduces lessacreage than Plan F,at greater cost.

Table 5 shows the various outputs ofincremental cost analysis: incremental cost,incremental output and incremental cost perunit of increasing output for each of the costeffective plans from Table 4. This is thebasic result that is supplied by incrementalcost analysis to decision makers. These datacan then be used, along with circumstancesspecific to the project, to decide on andjustify an action plan.

The key to doing both these analyses isto establish consistent environmental outputsbetween plans. Examples of typical outputsare acres of specific plant communitiesrestored and habitat units. However, anynumber of outputs are possible; the formatwill depend on the type of project that isproposed. For instance, reduction of aspecific pollutant (as measured inmilligrams/liter) in a stream may be theappropriate output for a project. The criticalconcern is to select a unit of measurementthat reflects conditions and changes(Orth 1994).

The level of detail needed to carry out

Table 4. Cost effectiveness analysis matrix.

PLAN TOTAL COST($)

TOTAL OUTPUT(Acres of restoration)

No Action $ 0 0Plan A $ 20,000 40Plan B $ 10,000 40Plan C $ 15,000 45Plan D $ 15,000 55Plan E $ 42,000 105Plan F $ 40,000 110

Table 5. Results of incremental cost analysis.

PLAN COST OUTPUT(Acres)

INCREMENTALCOST

INCREMENTALOUTPUT

(Acres)

INCREMENTALCOST PER UNIT

No Action $ 0 0 Not applicable Not applicable Not applicablePlan B $10,000 40 $10,000 40 $250/acrePlan D $15,000 55 $ 5,000 15 $333/acrePlan F $40,000 110 $25,000 55 $455/acre


cost effectiveness and incremental costanalyses can vary and is project-specific. Forexample, if a decision is to select amongalternative lake water elevations and theelevation differences of a few inches resultsin hundreds of acres of lands being dry orinundated, a great level of detail would beneeded. If in another case it is obvious thatalternatives would cost about the same butthat one would probably produce morehabitat units than the other, a lesser level ofdetail would be needed to choose betweenthem (Orth 1994). By selecting anappropriate level of detail for the analyses,the analytical effort can be balanced againstthe information needed to detect meaningfulchange.

The procedures for these analyses can bedivided into a series of specific steps showabove. Some of these steps are optional.Regardless of whether or not these analysesare performed, the basic work of designingalternatives, evaluating them, describingproject results and estimating costs must becompleted. These analyses generally do notconstitute additional work for the project.Rather, they are an approach to doing whathas to be done.

These steps can be grouped into fourtasks: formulation of combinations, costeffectiveness analysis, developing anincremental cost curve and incremental costanalysis.

Performing Cost Effectiveness and Incremental Cost Analyses

Formulation of combinations (create alternatives)Step 1. Display outputs and costs Steps 1 & 2 may be omitted ifStep 2. Identify combinable management measures alternatives have been developedStep 3. Calculate outputs and costs of combinations. some other way.

Cost effectiveness analysis Alternatives that produce the sameStep 4. Eliminate economically inefficient solutions or lesser output for an equal or greaterStep 5. Eliminate economically ineffective solutions cost are eliminated.

Develop incremental cost curveStep 6. Calculate average costs An optional step if greater detail isStep 7. Recalculate average costs for additional output needed for decision making.

Incremental cost analysis Progressively compares successiveStep 8. Calculate incremental costs levels of output and their incrementalStep 9. Compare successive outputs and costs costs.

(From Orth 1994)


Under the task Formulation ofCombinations there are three steps. Thesesteps refer to the strategy of developingalternatives by combining individualconstruction and management actions. Table6 is a simplistic example of a table that couldbe used to develop alternatives. It showstwo management and construction activitiesand their increments of implementation.Each action is labeled with a letter and eachincrement of that action is labeled with asubscript. Formulating alternatives thenbecomes a matter of listing all possiblecombinations of the actions. From Table 6we can see that the alternatives becomeA1+B1, A1+B2, A1+B3, and so forth. Notethis applies only to activities that are notmutually exclusive. If activities are mutuallyexclusive, they cannot be combined to forman alternative! Because a large number ofcombinations can be generated quickly, usethe level of detail that is meaningful.

Formulation of combinations does notneed to be performed if alternatives havebeen generated in some other way. As longas the alternatives adhere to the requirementsbelow, they can be used in the costeffectiveness and incremental cost analyses.

Cost effectiveness analysis, the secondtask, eliminates alternatives that are eitherinefficient (alternatives that produce thesame output for greater cost) or alternativesthat are ineffective (alternatives that produce

less output than other alternatives at thesame or greater cost). We saw how the datawould be laid out in a table to perform thisanalysis in Table 4.

The third task, developing an incrementalcost curve, may not be necessary. It is alevel of detail that may be useful dependingon the scope of the project and specificcircumstances surrounding it. Details of thisprocess are covered in the USACOEInstitute for Water Resources report CostEffectiveness Analysis for EnvironmentalPlanning: Nine EASY Steps (+ Sources ofInformation). This step eliminatesalternatives that have high averageincremental costs.

The fourth task of incremental costanalysis produces the result shown in Table5. This type of information is theculmination of the effort. It is then up todecision makers to decide what incrementalcosts are “worth it”.

Alternatives must be independent andmutually exclusive. That is, an alternativeshould not be dependent on theimplementation of any other alternative oraction, and the selection of any alternativeshould preclude the selection of any other. Ifindividual activities are dependent on oneanother, then they should be consideredtogether as a single action. A good exampleof this would be the separate actions ofvegetative planting and installing an

Table 6. Example of management and construction increments and combinable activities.

Management/Construction

Action

Action Increment Outputs(Acres of

Restoration)

Cost($)

A - Construct berm to changewater elevations

A1 - raise water level to 54.0’ 20 50,000

A2 - raise water level to 54.5’ 30 70,000A3 - raise water level to 55.0’ 40 95,000

B - Remove encroaching pinetrees on wetland edge

B1 - remove trees on north side 10 10,000

B2 - remove trees on north and west 30 20,000B3 - remove trees all sides 40 45,000


irrigation system. The new action ofplanting and irrigating can be considered asingle action.

Estimates of costs and environmentaloutputs must be measured over the sametime period and with the same units. This iseither the average annual cost and output orthe total cost and total output. Either isacceptable as long as it is consistentthroughout the planning process.

Estimates of cost and estimates ofoutputs should reflect approximately thesame level of detail. For example, anextremely detailed cost estimate should not

be paired with a rough estimates of theenvironmental output. Increasing the levelof definition, that is, the number ofmanagement or construction actions and thevarious levels of those actions can rapidlyincrease the number of alternatives to beanalyzed. The number considered should beadequate to reveal meaningful changes inoutputs and costs, but not so much toproduce overwhelming analytical demands(Orth 1994).

Criteria methodWhen specific criteria have been

established for the restoration, these criteriacan be used to evaluate the variousalternatives. This was the case for theKissimmee River Restoration Project (+ boxat left). Five hydrologic criteria weredeveloped to meet the goal of restoringecological integrity. These criteria were thenused to evaluate 4 alternatives. Physicaltests and numerical modeling showed that 3of 5 hydrologic criteria would not be met by3 of the alternatives. These findings werepart of a fatal flaws analysis that led to theconclusion that 3 of the 4 alternatives wouldnot restore ecological integrity because theycould not meet hydrologic criteria (Toth1995).

A more general example would be analternative to build a levee to reach a certainhistorical target water elevation. Hydrologicmodeling could then be used to determinewhether or not the criteria (target waterelevation) can be met.

Pros and cons methodA third, less objective, evaluation method

is simply to list the pros (benefits) and cons(constraints or negative aspects) of eachalternative, then discuss and compare them.This method will probably be mostappropriate for situations in which outputs ordifferences among alternatives are not clearlyquantifiable. As in the other approaches,

Kissimmee River Restoration ProjectProject Alternatives and Evaluation

Criteria

Proposed Alternatives

♦ Weir alternative♦ Plugging alternative♦ Level I backfilling alternative (discontinuous

backfilling)♦ Level II backfilling alternative (continuous

backfill, slightly modified)

Hydrologic Criteria for Alternative Evaluation

1. Continuous flow with duration and viabilitycharacteristics comparable to pre-channelization records.

2. Average flow velocities between 0.3 to 0.6m/s when flows are contained within channelbanks.

3. Stage-discharge relationship that results inoverbank flow along most of the flood plainwhen discharges exceed 40 to 57 m3/s.

4. Stage hydrographs that result in floodplaininundation characteristics comparable to pre-channelization hydroperiods, includingseasonal and long-term viabilitycharacteristics.

5. Stage recession rates on the floodplain thatdo not exceed 0.3 m/month.

(From Toth 1995)


expert participation or review in the processis essential.

Choose the Final AlternativeAfter alternatives have been developed,

the sometimes more difficult task ofchoosing among them must be carried out.At this point, expert judgment, outsideconsiderations or negotiated requirementscan take on more importance. Theinformation collected during the siteassessment about offsite and futureconditions and legal and political issues willplay an important role here.

Each project will have a unique set ofcircumstances surrounding it that willinfluence the selection of the final alternative.A few general guidelines are:

• Include the right staff in the final reviewof alternatives. Even if a consensuscannot or need not be reached, inclusionof a variety of reviewers can help ensureall relevant issues are raised prior todeveloping construction-level plans.

• Is this alternative in line with long-termmanagement capabilities and objectives?

• Is this alternative in line with both onsiteand offsite legal requirements and anyother obligations that must be met?

Even if cost effectiveness andincremental costs analyses are performed andused to reduce the number of alternatives,this does not mean that any possible solutioncannot be used. There may be an alternativethat has a high incremental cost or even isinefficient but has political or social benefitsthat must be considered.

There are certain questions that canguide decision making. In some instances,the following criteria may be relevant:

• Output target. Is there some minimumoutput that must be considered?Examples are a minimum habitat area orpatch size needed to support a particularspecies or a specific number of acres ofwetland restoration needed formitigation.

• Cost. If there is a specific amount ofmoney available for the project? Thatcan be a cutoff for alternatives. (In thissituation it is especially useful to developcost effectiveness and incremental costcurves).

• Substantive change in incremental costs.Is there an alternative at which theincremental cost jumps substantially asopposed to previous alternatives? Thispotentially flags a breakpoint or cutoffthat can be examined. Is there adifferent construction or managementactivity for the alternative? Has aconstruction threshold that increases costbeen reached?

After the final alternative has beenchosen, it is time once again to ask thequestion, “Is there any reason this projectcould not be implemented?”. This meansreviewing legal, political, offsite and futureconditions. Confirming that the alternative istruly viable is the last step before developingthe actual plan for restoration.


DEVELOP A RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT ACTION PLAN

OverviewA good restoration plan should consist of

all the information necessary to fullyunderstand and implement a restorationproject. It should include a comprehensiveresource description, which results from agood site assessment. Restoration detailsshould be itemized in an action plan. Inaddition, if the plan will be needed for apermit application, it must eventually includeconstruction-level detail. Even if no permitsare required, detailed information shouldhelp ensure proper implementation, commonunderstanding of what is to be accomplishedand guidance to contractors.

At this point, the decision has been madeas to which restoration alternative will beused. Hopefully, you already have astrategic plan (goals, objectives, strategies)from the articulation of the alternative. Forexample, strategies for a wetland restorationproject may include restoring topography tonatural contours, returning hydrology tonatural regimes, restoring substratecharacteristics by depositing wetland soils,re-establish native vegetation by planting, orrestoring chemical integrity by adjustingwater quality (Foote-Smith 1996). Theimplementation of each strategy may involvea number of separate construction andmanagement activities.

The next step will be to add specificactions under each strategy to form an actionplan. Finally, you will develop constructionplans and add schedule/timeline andresponsible parties to form the work plan.The sequence of planning usually includes: 1)developing the conceptual (preliminary)plans, 2) having a pre-application meetingwith agency personnel and getting expertinput, 3) developing construction plans(usually contracted out), and 4) completingthe permitting process.

There should probably be one personresponsible for coordinating the plandevelopment. This task includes hiring andmonitoring contractors, acquiringinformation, setting up meetings withregulatory agencies and making sureschedules are met. If more than one personshares this task, there should be a cleardelineation of responsibility. Thecoordinator may also be actually developingmany components of the plan. On the otherhand, the coordinator may assign the tasks toappropriate personnel and only ensure thatcompleteness, quality standards and timedeadlines are met.

In either case, it is likely the coordinatorwill have to get input from other staff.Specifically, the staff who perform the landmanagement activities and control access tothe project site will have to be included inscheduling the construction and managementactivities. Generally, the person whodevelops the restoration map and predictedvegetation is the person who is best able todesign the monitoring to demonstrate thosechanges. If it can’t be the same person, theremust at least be close coordination.

At this point it is time to find out whatstate policies (+ Appendix D) apply to theproject. There may be rules or restrictionsfor the proposed activity on state land. Thepolicies referred to here are different fromthe issues discussed in the Site Assessmentand Alternatives Development sections.Those chapters referred to issues andpolicies that were site specific, such asrestrictions imposed by easements on thesite. Now is the time to review policies thatmight apply to the proposed construction ormanagement activities. An example of thiswould be timbering on state land, and therestriction that any income from this activitycannot be applied to site management. AnyBest Management Practices (BMP) that are


applicable should also be considered at thistime (+ Appendix D). Mandates to useBMP’s may be part of policies that apply tostate land.

An important step in the plandevelopment is to set up a pre-application(pre-app) meeting with the permittingagencies that regulate the types of activitiesthat you will be conducting. For instance, ifyou are creating or restoring wetlands,especially for mitigation, you will probablydeal with the USACOE and either your localWMD or FDEP, depending upon the type ofproject and which WMD the project fallsunder. See the current operating agreementbetween FDEP and each WMD, whichgoverns coordination of regulatory issues.

Mitigation bank projects will be reviewedby the Mitigation Banking Review Team,and interagency group lead by the USACOE(contact your local office). Projects that willaffect surface water runoff or non-coastalwetlands must be reviewed by the WMD.County and city governments and regionalplanning councils may also require permits orproject review. It is important that theconceptual plan be communicated clearly andwith enough detail to the permitting agencythat they are able to provide feedback on thefeasibility of the plan. The pre-app meetingmay or may not include a site visit.

The pre-application meeting is animportant part of the ongoing fatal flawsanalysis. The permitting agency holds thefinal decision as to whether or not the plancan be implemented. They know the basisfor review, the conventions for construction,the water management in the project areaand the range of restoration activity that theywill permit. It is very important to get theirfeedback on your ideas as soon as possible,so that time, effort and money are not spenton developing ideas that cannot beimplemented as conceived.

The engineer involved in the projectdesign, the person responsible for theestimating the restoration and the projectcoordinator should attend the meeting, ifpossible. There may even be more than onepre-application meeting, depending on thecomplexity of the project and how planningprogresses.

The restoration action plan shouldinclude a summary of how monitoring will beused to demonstrate success of the project.Monitoring is conducted to document theeffects of the restoration project. It tracksthe changes that are expected to occur in therestoration and enhancement areas. The

Wetland Restoration Considerations

Hydrology• Water source• Watershed/wetland size ratio• Periodicity of inundation or saturation• Seasonal water level elevations• Velocity of moving water• Salinity• Nutrient and chemical levels• Sedimentation rates• Permeability of substrates• Structural influences (berms, ditches,

streambeds, control structures, etc.)

Soils• Hydric soils as indicator of historical wetland

conditions• Topsoil or muck removal and reuse• Slope, stability of substrates and erosion• Compaction

Vegetation• Natural regeneration from adjacent sources• Plant material types (seed, bare-root

seedlings, container-grown stock)• Species selection based on hydroperiod and

depth• Use of cover crop for stabilization• Replanting needs if problems arise• Buffer area

(From Harker et al. 1993)


monitoring plan may be a separatedocument, but even if so, the restorationaction plan should include a summary of howmonitoring will be used to evaluate successof the project. The following gives guidanceon what to include in the action plan, thoughit is probably advisable to proceed todeveloping the monitoring plan first (+Define and Track Success) and come backlater to add a summary into the action plan.

Typically, restoration projects monitorvegetation change and hydrologic change.Depending on the project, other parametersmay be monitored. Examples of otherparameters are pollutant load, flow rates,primary productivity, and information onwetland-dependent wildlife populations.

What needs to be included in anapplication to a permitting agency can beconsidered a preliminary monitoring design.However, enough information should havebeen acquired and analyzed by this point thatthe crucial components to the design shouldbe fixed. That is, the parameters to bemeasured should be clearly identified, as theyare essential to accurately detect anddemonstrate change. The fundamentalsampling methodology and the frequency ofmonitoring should be known so that it can bereviewed and approved by the permittingagency.

In some cases, permits specify a timeperiod after the permit has been issued inwhich to develop or finalize a monitoringdesign. However, monitoring is not a topicthat should be thought about at the end, aftereverything else has been finished. Thepermitting agency may have writtenguidelines that they recommend formonitoring. Or they may have certainexpectations for monitoring due toprecedents set in other permits. The pre-application meeting is a good time find thisout. Guidelines from the permitting agencyare just that: guidelines. If a different

sampling methodology or frequency ofsampling than recommended is logical andecologically sound for the project do nothesitate to propose it. Be prepared tojustify its use with facts, scientific literatureor successful examples from other projects.

Pre-restoration baseline data are animportant component of demonstratingchange over time, and are required as part ofa monitoring program. It is critical thatbaseline data be collected, using the samemethodology as post-restoration monitoring,prior to any changes in management,treatments or construction that intentionallyor unintentionally affects the restoration site.If it is not possible to get baseline datawithout any changes having occurred, itshould be a priority to collect data such thatthese effects are minimized. Information onbaseline hydrologic conditions is alsoimportant and necessary for hydrologicmodel calibration.

The ERP permitting rules require a costestimate for the project to be provided to thepermitting agency, and this may also beincluded in the action plan. The requirementis another method of trying to ensure successof the restoration project. By raising theissue of cost, regulators hope to reducerestoration failure due to lack of funds.

At some point, cost estimates will benecessary as part of planning restoration,even if rigorous cost effectiveness andincremental cost analyses are not performed.Cost estimates do not have to be broken outin fine detail for the permitting agency,unless the site is being proposed as amitigation bank and financial assurances arenecessary. Regulators want enoughinformation to know that a) all cost havebeen considered and b) that the expectationsof cost are reasonable for the proposed workand time period. The Estimate Costs sectionlater in this manual details how to deriveaccurate restoration budgets.


Write the PlansAs mentioned earlier, there are varying

levels of detail for plans (+ Page 10). Everyproject must have an overall project goal andvision. Beyond that, the level of detail ofplans will vary based on where the project isin the planning process. During articulationof the alternatives, the plan may bedeveloped down to strategies needed toaccomplish restoration goals and obtainobjectives. Prior to implementation, thisstrategic plan must be expanded into anaction plan, from which construction plansand a work plan (with task schedules,timelines and parties responsible) can bederived.

You may decide to hire consultants todevelop the action plan, construction plansand/or work plan. If so, please use thismanual as a guide in developing the scope ofwork (+ Outsource The Work on Page 72).

Action planThe purpose of the action plan is to

concisely convey all actions necessary toimplement strategies identified to accomplishrestoration goals, which will lead toachieving your overall project goal. Theaction plan should include the items listed inChecklist 2 (at right).

Construction planConstruction details of the action plan

will include all engineering informationnecessary to assure proper implementation ofconstruction activities of the restoration, aswell as accurate maps and acreages of allproposed changes in hydrology andvegetation that will result from therestoration activities.

If part of the restoration plan includesconstruction, engineering design must becontracted with an outside firm or scheduledwith in-house staff. They will need toprovide detailed cross-sections, design viewsand any other engineering drawings or drafts

required for construction permits. The pre-application meeting is a good place todiscuss the format and detail of theengineering information expected by thepermitting agency. This will assist in gettingthe permit as quickly as possible by reducingthe number of questions in Requests forAdditional Information (RAIs).

A construction plan describes whatchanges will result from the restorationactivities. The areas in which these changestake place are vegetation, hydrology, andwildlife habitat. Water quality is anotherarea that restoration could affect. Soils

Checklist 2Items in an Action Plan

1. Executive summary of project, includingecological contributions, site history

2. Overall project goal and vision (post-restoration conditions)

3. Project description (from site assessment) ♦ project name and proposer ♦ location & setting (legal description,

regional location map, site map, aerials) ♦ topography ♦ soils and geology ♦ hydrology and water quality ♦ vegetation and land cover (including

wetlands possibly treated separately) ♦ fauna ♦ special elements ♦ cultural/historical information ♦ site issues ♦ historical conditions ♦ surrounding land uses

4. Restoration plan ♦ restoration goals and objectives ♦ strategies and actions for each goal, with

justification and brief description ofmethodologies

5. Figures, maps, tables, exhibits and appendices6. Literature cited


change over such a long time scale that,while they are affected by restoration, theyare not part of documented change.

Construction plans typically include:• A map of the project area showing areas

to be restored, enhanced or preserved• For restoration areas, the predicted

vegetative community type that will berestored. For enhancement areas, thepredicted community type if it is likely tochange, or a discussion of what changesin the existing vegetation will be broughtabout by the enhancement.

• A discussion of the expected response ofexotics at the restoration andenhancement sites. If there is a potentialproblem, a method of control should beincluded.

• Predicted post-restoration hydrology.• A discussion of predicted changes in

general wildlife use or habitat that willbenefit listed species.

• Any other expected changes (e.g., waterquality).In addition to predicting the vegetative

communities resulting from the restoration,an idea of what plant species will likely bedominant is helpful. This may be a questionthat will be asked by the permitting agency.

Hydrology is another area of criticalconcern for the permitting agency. Theinformation that needs to be supplied to thepermitting agency for existing and predictedhydrology may be different than thehydrologic data that are needed tounderstand the system that is being restored.Historical aerial photos, knowledge ofhistorical vegetative communities, andhistorical water level and flow datacompared with existing conditions allprovide an understanding of how the systemcurrently works. This knowledge must betranslated into measurable targets for thepermitting agency. Most often, this meanstarget water elevations and inundation

periods for restoration and enhancementareas. It could also mean providing a targetrange for water level fluctuations or targetflows.

Typically, hydrologic data are providedas a result of modeling done during theengineering phase. Further information maybe required. When water level controlstructures are being built, flows and waterlevels at design storms (50 or 100 yearevents) must be modeled. Although this maynot be required in some cases, it is probablythe best method of predicting hydrology andthe most satisfactory to a permitting agency.The documentation that was acquired andused to understand the hydrology of thesystem will be used in the discussion that

Considerations in restoration planning

1. Preconstruction ♦ location ♦ site characteristics (hydrology, relief, soils,

erosion, seed bank) ♦ site preparation

2. Construction ♦ timing ♦ contouring ♦ water management ♦ quality control ♦ substrate ♦ plant material (species selection, nurse

crops, site acclimation, quality) ♦ planting techniques (natural regeneration,

seeding, bare-root planting, ♦ containerized seedling planting, root

cutting planting, sapling planting) ♦ planting scheme and design ♦ buffers or protective structures

3. Post-construction ♦ exotics control ♦ herbivory control ♦ long-term management ♦ monitoring

(From Lewis 1990, Clewell and Lea 1990, Erwin 1990)


substantiates the post-restoration hydrology.Expected changes that will benefit listed

species must be discussed and substantiated.Expected changes in wildlife use of the areashould also be discussed. Soils cannot reallychange over the time period in whichrestoration success must be demonstrated,unless fill or top soil material is brought in.If specific soil characteristics are to bechanged by specific treatments, then theseexpected changes will documented.

Work planThe work plan adds the details of who

and when to the action and constructionplans. At the time that restoration activityplans are being finalized, they should also bescheduled. All staff affected by the projectshould either be involved in scheduling, or atleast informed as to what is going to takeplace as soon as it is decided.

The schedule should include ongoingland management activities that will takeplace. These do not need to have specificdates in the plan, but must be included toshow that they are part of the actions neededto ensure success of the restoration. Thisincludes a schedule (both timing andfrequency) for security, exotics control,prescribed burning, maintenance ofstructures and other activities. Worksheet 2(below) is an example of a task timeline for awork plan. Other formats might include ahorizontal bar chart for each task or amonthly or quarterly list of activities tooccur, with who is responsible for each. Thefinal work plan should consist of the entireaction plan plus construction plans plus thesetimeline/schedules for all tasks, withresponsible parties clearly defined.Additionally, the monitoring plan and costestimates may also be included in the finalwork plan.

DEFINE AND TRACK SUCCESS

WORKSHEET 2. RESTORATION TASK TIMELINE

PROJECT NAME: ______________________________

PREPARER/NAME: _____________________________

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Task #1

Task #2

Task #3

Task #4

Task #5

Task #6

Task #7

Task #8

Task #9

Task #10


OverviewYou have selected a site, evaluated its

suitability, conducted the site assessment,selected a restoration alternative anddeveloped an action plan. Now you mustdetermine how you will know if and whenyour project is a success, i.e. you haveachieved the overall goal. This involves:1) establishing success criteria and settingperformance standards, 2) designing amonitoring program to measure variablesidentified in the success criteria and3) evaluating/reporting on your progress.

The new emphasis on ecosystemmanagement and large-scale restorationprojects is forcing everyone in the landmanagement field to reconsider the goals andobjectives of our activities. In all cases, andat several scales, we need to betterunderstand and define what success lookslike, what our objectives and performancestandards are, which variables to measure,and how to measure them. Success criteriaand monitoring protocol will be based on thisunderstanding.

Establish Success Criteria

Success criteria are criteria used toevaluate whether a project achieves success

or not. You may say: “My project will haveachieved success when it meets all of thefollowing criteria...”. Success criteria formonitoring should actually be thedocumentation that the restoration objectiveshave been reached. Success criteria mayaddress different restoration goals or aspectsof the project (see box below). Somesuccess criteria used as permit requirementsmay include maps that specify the actual areaof restoration that needs to occur. Alandscape-based GIS model of the mosaicand spatial configuration of desired andexisting communities could be used toevaluate progress toward the desired orspecified condition (Gordon et al. 1997).

Examples of success criteria

• Establishment of preferred vegetation(species and structure) or threshold densityof mature trees for forested systems

• Presence of desired hydrology andsatisfactory coverage of a specificcommunity or preferred plant [or animal]species assemblage

• Site is able to function indefinitely on its ownas part of a larger ecosystem withoutintervention

• Functional parameters are equal to those of areference system monitored simultaneously

(From Clewell and Lea 1990, Erwin 1990)

Establishing success criteria example.--From The Nature Conservancy’s work atEglin Air Force Base in the panhandle, it wasassumed that an open structure of thesandhill community with a contiguousgroundcover, all sizes of longleaf pines,presence of red-cockaded woodpeckers(RCWs) and a history of fire indicated a highquality sandhill community. However whena comparison was made of the diversity ofthe herbaceous community amongmanagement units that met these criteria onthe Base, it was realized that in some units,only half of the species found in the mostdiverse sites were present. When the sitehistories of the lower diversity units wereresearched, it was found that the area hadbeen logged with heavy machinery around1970. Neither structure, RCWs, nor process(fire) revealed that this system still reflectedthe disturbance that had occurred 25 yearsearlier. Selection of species richness as oneof the success criteria better depictedrecovery of the damaged system.


Define reference systemA reference system is a representative

example, without the disturbance ordegradation, of the area that is beingrestored, against which you can comparemeasured improvements in the restoredsystem as restoration progresses. It is,hopefully, a real-life example of your vision.The reference system may be a nearby highquality site with similar environmentalconditions, or data from the restoration siteprior to its disturbance, or a word or picturemodel based on an aggregation of datacollected during a long-term benchmarkstudy in a comparable site. A computersimulation based on validated mathematicalor spatial models and adequate, appropriateinputs may also provide some referenceconditions, if no physical site is available.

Reference conditions are described fromthe reference system to characterize theexpected range of variation in composition,structure, and function for a particularsystem (Hardesty et al. 1997). Because ofnatural variability within and among sites, itis often recommended that several sites besampled to come up with referenceconditions. It is the range (or boundedrange) (e.g., 30-60% cover) rather than themean value for variables of interest from thereference systems that should be of concern.These reference conditions, coupled withhistorical information, soil maps, elevations,and other available data, should be integratedwith the best understanding of how thesystem functions to develop a written orgraphical description of the target systemand to set quantitative, measurablemonitoring objectives (performancestandards).

Finding a local site that is largely intactfor a reference from which to obtainempirical reference data may not be possible

for many locations. However, sufficientinformation from which hypothesizedreference conditions can be generated ismore likely to exist. For example, naturalfire and hydrological regimes may bededuced from climate and communityinformation. Community structure, but notnecessarily composition, may be similarlyderived. Do you have an aerial photographof the site prior to disturbance? Are thereorganic soils, lichen lines, stranded cypresstrees or other indicators that might show youwhat pre-disturbance conditions such as thehistorical high water elevation, were? Canyou construct a conceptual word or picturemodel of the way you believe all of theecological processes (e.g., hydrology, fire,wildlife, soil development, vegetationalsuccession) interact over time in yoursystem? Do you know where in theecological model the restoration unit is at thecurrent moment and where you want it to bewhen restoration is complete?

While our confidence in the referencestandards and ability to develop quantitativeobjectives may decrease when the referenceis not a real-world example, confidence inthe project’s success criteria without thislevel of analysis would be even lower. Asvariables are monitored, the referencestandards may be refined and objectivesmodified.

Monitoring should involve quantifiableperformance standards base on measurableattributes. A restoration site should bemonitored for the long term, usuallygreater than 5 years, until it achievesfunctional equivalency with a naturalsystem.

(Zedler 1997)


Set performance standardsA performance standard is the value of

an individual variable that, when achieved,means success for that variable. Thesequantitative performance standards shouldalso specify the precision with whichbiologically significant changes are to bedetected, as well as the predicted level.Performance standards should be articulatedin terms of amounts, ranges and timeframes:what performance success would mean for aparticular site.

The performance standards selected asbenchmarks for variables are usually derivedfrom reference system data that provide anestimation of the acceptable variation arounda mean value. Alternatively, performancestandards may be based on a threshold value(e.g., number of individuals necessary for aviable population). There are also variousstatistical procedures (e.g., Morisseta or

Shanon-Weaver similarity indices; Chi squareanalysis) that will allow sophisticatedcomparisons of reference data and collectedrestoration monitoring data, in which case atarget index value may be the performancestandard.

Clear performance standards both guideand constrain your monitoring on theground. The intent is to identify theminimum information necessary that willindicate the condition of those variables thathave been defined as important to evaluatingsuccess. Further, the performance standardsshould identify the amount of change in thevariable of concern that is consideredbiologically significant, so that the samplingimplemented is designed to detect that levelof change. This is an important step, whichinvolves using your best biological intuitionand conducting some pilot sampling in thespecific site to understand how best to

Performance Standards Example (for Restoration Alternatives Example on Page 44)

Restoration Goal: Create suitable hydrologic regimes.Objective: An area of open water of approximately 1 acre, with maximum seasonal depths ranging

between 12-36 inches, that will provide baseflow of 1 cfs to the adjacent stream during the dry season.Strategy: Excavate an area of 1 acre to a depth of 3.5 feet below existing grade (12 inches below

mean dry season groundwater level), and construct an outlet structure that is 36 inches higher than themaximum depth of open water.

Performance Standards: Area of open water after 5 years will be 1 acre during the wetseason, ¼ acre during the dry season, with a minimum depth during the dry season of 12 inches and amaximum depth of 36 inches during the wet season.Restoration Goal: Ensure suitable habitat for target species.

Objective: Open water and emergent areas that support at least 2 amphibian species and at least onenesting bird species within 5 years; maximum edge habitat and nesting area around open water; uplandbuffers that provide adequate protection.

Strategy: Grade the open water area so that at least ¼ acre will have water depths sufficient tosupport the targeted species during critical months, plant species that can support egg masses, developscalloped edges on open water area, protect a 10-acre upland area around the wetland.

Performance Standards: Use of the wetland by two species of amphibians will bedocumented by live-trapping and observation of egg masses during the breeding season; nesting by onespecies of water bird will be documented by providing a photographic record of nest with eggs orsuccessful brood.

(After Hruby and Brower 1994)


sample, given the level of variability thatexists, to be able to detect the amount ofchange you have determined to be theminimum that you want to be able tomeasure.

Select criteria and variables tomeasure

In many ways, selecting variables tomeasure may be the most difficult aspect ofrestoration. Your overall project goal maybe to restore a site to "high quality" or"natural integrity" or "natural function".Even if we define ecological integrity toindicate that the system can resist change,retain intact biota and return to a similarstate following a severe disturbance like ahurricane with minimal support from theoutside (Angermeier and Karr 1994, Karr1991), we are still left with the problem ofwhat to measure to indicate this state. Theproblem is exacerbated when we recognizethat integrity encompasses a wide variety ofprocesses occurring over many spatial andtemporal scales, ranging from cellularprocesses in plants to ecosystem processes

that regulate the flow ofenergy and matter. Yourproject vision, whichshould be a clear “picture”,perhaps even a map ordiagram, of the desiredoutcome of restoration willhelp you pinpoint someindicators to measureprogress toward your goal.

In complex ecologicalsystems with many morecharacteristics that we areunable to control than thosethat may be controlled,determining which variablesand responses will indicate"success" or highperformance is verychallenging. Both by lawand because of concern

about rare and threatened species, we areoften tempted to use these species as if theyare sensitive indicators of dynamics of otherpopulations and the community as a whole.While in some cases this may be true, oftenrare species are not good overall indicatorsbecause many are habitat specific endemicsdependent on fairly unusual conditions in thelandscape. Many are rare now and havealways been rare; they are most threatenedfrom habitat conversion or stochasticenvironmental events beyond our control.

Long-lived perennial plants andcommunities generally show change at ratesfar slower than those of our managementactivities. Because of this long lag period,changes in population status might welldocument a threat whose impacts are alreadytoo far along to be ameliorated. Thus, weneed to select variables that will respondrelatively rapidly to our conservation andmanagement activities. If we are using themas indicators, we need to be sure that theytruly reflect other changes in the system that

Recommendations for measuring success• To set performance standards, ask what functions should be

measured, if simple structural attributes are good indicatorsof functional capacity, and what methods are best to test forfunctional equivalency.

• Functions are processes. Performance standards are only a“snapshots” of what is present at the site at given points intime, but they can indicate if a process is going on.

• Performance standards should include indicators of self-sustainability. Measurements through time will showwhether functions are occurring and being sustained.

• Avoid comparing performance of site with linearperformance curves. Instead try to use reference systems,though beware of short-term variations. Plottingperformance curves of data taken simultaneously from bothrestored and reference system can be a good comparison offunctions.

(From Zedler 1997)


we might be most concerned about. Untilwe understand the relationships betweenthese indicators and the system integrity,they should be considered as weakhypotheses and tested for their predictivevalue.

In restoration and mitigation work, ourgoal is often recover a system with theappropriate structure, processes, and specialelements. If that is the case, then we shouldbe monitoring variables that are above theindividual species level. Where we can, weshould be measuring variables that reflect thefirst-order effects of our restoration actions.Responses of individual species to thatrestoration may in fact be second- or third-order effects. If we measure the actualvariables that we are actively trying tomanage, we should detect responses that areat the same spatial scale of our management,and that are more likely to be close to thesame temporal scale as well.

For example, if the goal is to protectthreatened mussel species, we might createbuffer strips to filter sediments before theyreach the open water. A measure of successfor this action is not the miles of buffer stripsconstructed, but the decline in sedimentloading in the stream. This variable(sediment load) will presumably respond at afaster and more easily manipulated rate thanwill the mussel populations themselves. Themussels would very likely remain relativelystable and then decrease sharply, by whichtime it may be too late for them to recoverwithout additional management efforts (R.Unnasch, pers. commun.). This phenomenonis also found in water quality monitoring andis know as the ‘titration effect’.

In large-scale ecosystem restorationprojects, the overall goal is often to restorethe natural hydrological and fire processes,and re-establish the mosaic and extent ofwetland and upland communities across thearea. Documentation of earth-moving

activity, acres burned or wells installed isinsufficient for understanding the responsesof the plant and animal communities,therefore should not be used as successcriteria, though they may be included asconstruction or permit benchmarks. Instead,variables that indicate the response of thecommunities, their relationship to elevation,historic distribution of wetland area (throughremote sensing or organic soil depthanalysis) and to water table levels over timewould better assess whether progress towardthe overall goal is made.

Scale is very important to how things aremeasured. Changes within specifichydrological units may be assessed usingvegetation and hydrological transects.However, changes across the landscapeshould be assessed in terms of such variablesas reduced fragmentation in the movement ofwater and fire, natural and dynamic locationsof ecotones between uplands and wetlands,water levels that are responsive toprecipitation in surface water driven systems,and expansion in the areas of impactedwetlands following managementimplementation. Other actions will also benecessary to maintain low densities of non-native species and to evaluate trends inspecies of special concern because of state orfederal listing or for site specific reasons.

Scaling up from monitoring a single siteto larger projects and ecosystemmanagement goals remains a challenge. Thedifficulty is in understanding the variablesthat are most indicative of system integrity orfunction and the scales at which thosevariables should be measured. It is likelythat we cannot keep measuring at the samescale and simply increase the area over whichwe monitor, on one level because no one hasthe resources to support all that datacollection and analysis, but moreimportantly, because the function of the


whole is often not reflected by the sum ofsome of its parts.

Further, movement of processes, like fireand water flows, across the landscape maybebe as important as their local effects.Ecosystem-level community dynamics shouldremain relatively constant, but individualcommunity patches may transition todifferent community types depending onchance disturbance and levels of humanintervention. We need to develop methodsfor measuring and evaluating thoseecosystem dynamics. Rookery Bay NationalEstuarine Research Reserve (+ Sources ofInformation) is conducting ecosystem levelmonitoring, using indicators such asinvertebrate (fiddler and mud crabs)population distributions and abundances.

There are some standard variables oftenmeasured in restoration projects. Theyinclude:

Hydrology• water flow rate (flow meter)• surface water depth (staff gauge)• depth to ground water (groundwater well

or piezometer)• area inundated• high water level (crest gauge)

Water quality• dissolved oxygen• nutrient levels• sediment loads (suspended solids)

• bacteria• toxic substances• heavy metals• temperature• pH• alkalinity or hardness

Soils• color (Munsell chart)• pH• alkalinity• particle size• redox potential• organic matter content• microbial activity• time and duration of saturation

Vegetation• plant survivorship (planted areas)• species composition• percent cover by species within each

strata• average height or dbh by tree species• biomass• understory structure• canopy structure• woody debris

Fauna• species composition• species richness and abundance• guild representation• population distributions• use by special elements or all species

(presence or sign)

It is important to acknowledge that inmost cases there will not be a "one size fitsall" type of measurement. We will not havethe same performance standards for everysite. Variability is different in terms of scaleand importance in different locations.Further, the realm of restoration possibilitiesvaries with site history and landscapecontext. It is incumbent on all of us to be

For a metric to be useful it must be(1) relevant to the biological communityunder study and to the specified programobjectives, (2) sensitive to stressors,(3) able to provide a response that can bediscriminated from natural variation,(4) environmentally benign to measure inthe aquatic environment, and (5) cost-effective to sample.

(Barbour, Stribling and Karr 1995:76).


consistent where possible, but recognize andplan flexibly for the inevitable variation.

Develop Monitoring Design andProtocol

Documentation of baseline informationcollected, reference or model conditions,variables selected, and specific performancestandards (monitoring objectives) for eachvariable will ensure clear tracking andcommunication of the project. Everymonitoring program should have articulatedprotocol, the set of rules governing thecollection, communication and transfer ofdata. This should include:1. Species and community information,

including a summary of the status,habitat, and community types, ecology,and major threats to each entityimportant to the restoration project.Sources of information include: USFWSrecovery plans, TNC ElementStewardship Abstracts, inventory data,including records within the FloridaNatural Areas Inventory database, ...

2. Restoration and management concerns,compiled during discussions amongmanagers, regulators, and field biologistsand from the literature.

3. Restoration goals and monitoringobjectives, where the restoration goalsspecify the desired change in status ofspecies, communities, or other variables,and the monitoring objectives specifyhow the goals are measured andaccomplished. Modification ofobjectives resulting from additionalinformation or modification of the modelor success criteria should be clearlydocumented here as well.

4. Site selection for monitoring, in whichthe actual locations (including maps) ofmonitoring are specified and explained.

5. Monitoring schedule, which will dependon permit requirements, speed at whichchange will be detectable, and interactionof management and processes with theecological characteristics of the variablesmonitored. Permitting agencies canprovide input on what they would like tosee.

6. Sampling method protocols formonitoring, which contain a generalreview of the methods to be used,directions to each monitoring location,the specifications for macro-plots,baselines and sampling units, and thesampling methodology used at each sites.Maps and photographs should beincluded.

7. Appendices should include blankdatasheets, computer file names andsample data printouts. Data summariesand tables may be included here or inreports to be filed with the permittingagency if necessary.

Evaluate And Report ProgressEach agency has its own guidelines or

recommended format for submittingmonitoring reports. If this is a permittedproject, you will need to obtain and followthese. Types of information include:• purpose of project (overall goal and

vision)• site location and description• field sampling design• sampling methodologies (monitoring

protocol)• results (summary statistics and analyses

for period of interest)• discussion (progress to date, reasons for

discrepancies in predicted results,projections for future responses)

• appendices with data (can be provideddigitally).


PLAN FOR THE FUTURE

Planning for the future primarilyinvolves: 1) identifying long-termmanagement and maintenance needs,2) revising existing unit management plans toaddress these issues, 3) setting up staffingand legal arrangements, and 4) conductingcontingency planning to deal with unforeseenchallenges. Appendix E will help you withthe first two tasks, especially if the unitmanagement plan does not exist. Agencylegal departments and project plannersshould address the third task by reviewingexisting legal and cooperative arrangements.Arrangements may include establishing

easements or cooperative managementagreements, or providing an endowment forfunding of long-term management andmaintenance.

The project manager, with assistancefrom technical experts that helped inalternative selection, should sit down andthink long and hard about contingency plans.These should include what to do ifrestoration fails (e.g., natural catastrophedisrupts progress) or unforeseen events makerestoration plans unsuitable. Set upmechanisms to adapt the restoration andmanagement processes to these changes.

ESTIMATE COSTS

The final component of the planningprocess is estimating the costs of restoration.This step is a crucial part of your planning.You have probably already derived someballpark estimates for the alternativesselection process, especially if you did a costeffectiveness analysis. It is time to refine thenumbers. Without accurate cost estimatesthe project may never be funded, orworse, not have enough funds tofinish the project. Developing therestoration budget can be divided intofour distinct steps: 1) refine actions inthe restoration plan into a list of veryspecific tasks, 2) quantify performanceof all tasks into measurable units, 3)verify all measurable units, and 4)track expenses and budget.

Step 1.--Identify all the tasks thatare necessary in order to successfullycomplete the project. To accomplishthis, start with the restoration and

enhancement plan you have written. Fromthe actions in the plan, list all the specifictasks necessary for each action, when thetasks should take place, in what order theyneed to occur, and how long will it take foreach task. + Worksheet 2 (in Work plan)for use in determining task schedules.

Sample Costs of Restoration Activities

Filling Ditches Unit Cost/UnitSmall Linear Ft $10Medium Linear Ft $17Large Linear Ft $27

Fill Dirt Cost/UnitHigh Cubic Yd $10Low Cubic Yd $5Transportation Fee Truck $300

Clearing oak trees (<10”dbh) Acre $3,000Clearing oak trees Hour $175


Step 2.--Quantify all tasks intomeasurable units. This is when you get themap and tape measure out. Look at eacharea you will be restoring (with maps and inperson). Measure the length, width, depth,acres and other quantifiable units of the areasto be restored. During the initial planningyou developed a general idea of the size ofthe restoration work to be completed. Nowis the time to refine your estimates intomeasurements. Don’t forget to include stafftime in your planning and cost estimating.+ Worksheet 3 (end of this section) for usein quantifying and costing out specificrestoration tasks. Also + Sample Costs ofRestoration Activities (above).

Step 3.--After you have quantified thetasks and projected costs, you must verifythe estimates. One way is to get bids fromcontractors (+ below). Another way is tocompare your estimates with real cost datafrom a recent project similar to your own.+ Sample Costs of Restoration Activitiesfor some ballpark estimates. After you haveverified that your estimates are accurate orrevised them as necessary, we recommendthat you add 20-50% for contingencies, i.e.to handle unexpected problems.

If you have not previously decidedwhether each task should be contracted out

or done in house, you must do so during this(or possibly the previous) step. Thisdecision should be based on a number offactors (+ Implementation) and may notactually affect the true costs significantly.

After completing the first 3 steps of thebudget process, you should have a verydetailed, accurate budget with a list andtimeline of activities to be completed. Theseproducts will be important components ofthe Restoration Project Package. Theywill be used to secure funding, constructionpermits and project approvals and tonegotiate contracts to complete the work.You are ready to assemble the RestorationProject Package and proceed withimplementation of the project.

Step 4.--Throughout implementation, itis extremely important to monitor the actualcosts of the project compared to the budget.

Restoration Cost Example.--If yourrestoration involves filling ditches, classifyeach ditch as small, medium or large. Smallditches may be about the size of a fire plowline and can probably be filled by onsite staffor volunteers. A large ditch will probablyrequire fill dirt from off site and involve useof heavy equipment, often by a contractor.If you are filling large ditches, it is importantto find out where the fill sources are and ifthey are easily accessible, as transportationfees for fill can be considerable. Often spoilpiles from the initial ditch dredging are nextto the ditch. If the onsite fill is covered withsubstantial vegetation, this will have to beremoved before ditch filling can begin, whichmay be a significant task if large trees havecolonized the spoil piles. Anotherconsideration is the quality of fill required,which may increase the cost. Engineeringwork completed during the constructionplanning phase of developing the restorationplan will have determined fill requirements.

Getting Bids.--Take each contractor intothe field and explain what is to be done. Thecontractor should give you an itemizedestimate of what he/she would charge to dothe work (remember that this includes theirmarkup). They can also point out potentialproblem areas that may require additionalwork (though be cautious, they mayencourage you to include more work thannecessary so that their contract is bigger).You are not obligated to award the contractto them, even if you use their estimates toverify your own costs. + Outsource theWork in Implementation


This involves carefully tracking expenses asthey are incurred and comparing them to thetotal budget, usually based on proportion ofthe work completed versus percentage of thebudget used up.

Tracking budgets is a crucial componentof good project management (+Implementation). Set up a separate costtracking system just for the restorationproject. Keep income and expensessegregated. Hopefully, your cost estimateswere accurate and no unexpected expenseswill occur, though few restoration projects inhistory have come in under budget. Ifunexpected problems arise, fall back on yourcontingency funds for the project. If a

catastrophe occurs and contingency fundsare not sufficient to compensate, a decisionwill have to be made about if and how tocomplete the project.

By following these four simple steps andcollecting budget examples from otherrestoration projects, you should be able todetermine accurate cost estimates for yourproject and develop a good restorationbudget. Of course, there are manyunexpected issues that are likely to occurduring the project. If you have created adetailed plan with contingency arrangements,you will be prepared for most problems evenif they are unexpected.


WORKSHEET 3. RESTORATION TASK COSTS

PROJECT NAME: ______________________________

PREPARER/NAME: _____________________________

Activity #1

Tasks Units Cost/Unit Total $000 $00000 $000 $00000 $000 $00000 $000 $00000

Total Activity #1 $000000

Activity #2



Activity #3



Activity #4




THE RESTORATION PROJECT PACKAGE

OVERVIEW

The Restoration Project Package issimply the assemblage of all of theinformation developed during application ofthe manual thus far (the restoration planningprocess). It is designed to contain allinformation necessary for typical governmentgrant or foundation requests, constructionpermit applications or mitigationsolicitations. Its purpose is to serve as a toolto allow quick yet detailed submission ofproject information or proposals for fundingopportunities, permit applications,contractor/mitigation banker scopes of work,or public information.

FORMAT

The physical format of the RestorationProject Package will depend on the project-specific circumstances and the intended useof the package. If it is to be used as a permitapplication, its format will be based on therequirements of the appropriate agency. Forexample, a wetland restoration project willrequire an ERP, therefore the RestorationProject Package should include and followthe format specified by that application.

It may be a bound document with theresults (text and small maps) of the siteassessment in the front half and the text forthe restoration action plan following, withreferences to oversize exhibits that are eitherin bound-in pockets or separate from thebook. Or a binder could be used to keeptext and exhibits together. Some exhibitssimply cannot be bound into a document;these should be clearly and permanentlylabeled as to what they are and to whichpackage they belong.

CHECKLIST

The Restoration Project Package shouldcontain:

A description of how the site wasselected, included detailed referencesto regional plans used

Results of suitability analysis (+Worksheet 1) or other explanation ofproject justification and feasibility

The complete results of the siteassessment (+ Checklist 1),including aerial photos and othermaps or exhibits

The final restoration alternative andrationale on why it was selected overothers

The complete action plan, withstrategies and actions forimplementation of restoration

Full construction plans necessary forpermits or contractor implementation

The completed workplan, includingwho is responsible for all tasks andthe timeline/schedule

A detailed monitoring plan

An updated long-term management,maintenance and contingency planfor the site (or reference to itslocation)

Detailed cost estimates and budgetsfor each stage of restoration


IMPLEMENT THE RESTORATION PROJECT

FUNDING

Hopefully you have already identified thesource of funds to complete the restoration;if not, your project may be fatally flawed (+Judging Suitability Of Your Site). However,very few restoration projects come in under-budget, and there are always additionalactivities that should occur but may not havebeen budgeted.

Potential sources of restoration moneymay include mitigation funds, federal/stategrants, research or conservation foundationsand possibly other agencies. The use ofmitigation funds on public land has yet to beapproved, but if policies are developed toallow it, this is a very suitable source ofrestoration money, provided there is a trueincrease in functional contribution at leastequivalent to the permitted loss. There are anumber of federal and private grant sourceslisted on the Internet. Contact your agencyproject development or funding officer formore information.

PERMITTING

Almost all wetland restoration projectsand some upland projects will requireconstruction permits from appropriateagencies or municipalities. Contact theregulatory agency offices in your region forinformation on whether or not your projectqualifies. The Restoration Project Packagewill be your key to quickly and easilyobtaining the necessary permits.

COORDINATION

Much of the actual work of managing arestoration project lies in the coordinationnecessary to plan and successfully implementit. You must determine who will do whatand when, then follow up with each party toensure that it is happening. This mustinclude the site staff who will doubtless beinvolved with not only implementation, butlong-term management. Other agencies maybe concerned, especially if permits arerequired. The project manager mustcoordinate with adjacent landowners andconduct public notice and input prior toimplementation.

Send out regular communications andupdates during planning/implementation toall parties connected to the project. Makesure each has a copy of the RPP. See yourown agency information offices for policiesand procedures about public involvement.Hold coordination meetings for thoseoverseeing the execution of the plans,especially contracts. Notify supervisors orpolicy makers if the project has regionalimplications. You may need to be the liaisonbetween several agencies or departmentswithin agencies, but this is crucial to efficientcompletion of the project. Try to be on thesite during implementation at least twice aweek (much more if you are the contractorsupervisor).

There are a number of federal programs toencourage restoration ... through financialincentives, including the Wetlands ReserveProgram and Partners for Wildlife.

(Foote-Smith 1996)

Project management components• General administration• Permit acquisition and tracking• Coordination• Budget tracking (+ Estimate Costs)• Contract supervision• Adaptive management


OUTSOURCE THE WORK

To implement the restoration project,you will probably rely on at least one, if notseveral, outside contractors. This mayinclude biological or engineering consultantsto assist in the planning (especiallyhydrologic modeling, if required) orconstruction companies to actually do theearthwork or planting. The keys tosuccessfully outsourcing restoration workinclude: 1) selection of reliable andresponsible contractors, 2) a good, tightscope of work, 3) regular communicationand a solid relationship with the contractor,and 4) regular and thorough oversight ofcontract execution, compliance and costs.

The first step is to decide what tocontract out versus what to do with existingstaff. These decisions will be based onconsiderations that include whether theexpertise or equipment exist in-house,whether staff with expertise or equipmenthave the time or resources available, andwhether it would be more efficient or costeffective to contract. Consider carefully.Though it may seem as if hiring a contractoris the most efficient way to get the workdone properly, remember the costs ofcontractor coordination and supervision,which can be substantial.

In general, the contract process startswith the development of a Request forProposals (RFP), with a detailed descriptionof the work you want performed as well asall the crucial information contractors mustsubmit (cost estimates, professionalstandards and references, etc.). You mustset all standards for important aspects of theproject (e.g., plants must be of high qualityor size, originating from seed producedwithin the state, etc.) in the RFP. Proposalsshould be judged partly on how state thatthey will deal with standards. Contact youragency contracting office for standard RFP

formats and forms. Once proposals arereceived, they are generally ranked accordingto pre-established criteria. You may wantyour team of technical experts that helpedwith the alternative selection to assist incontractor selection. Once a “short-list” ofproposals is selected, you should contacttheir references and request a presentationfrom each contract to get additionalinformation on qualifications and costestimates. Then select the best contractorand have your contract office draw up thelegal documents.

Use the detailed information from theRFP to craft a scope of work that is veryspecific and detailed. Put all standards andspecifics agreed to in their proposal in thescope. If appropriate, divide the work intotasks, with itemized deliverables for each. Agood scope of work seeks to delineate everyexpectation (on both sides) so there are nosurprises or misunderstandings once theagreement is in place.

Work can begin as soon as the contract isin place. So should contract coordinationand oversight. Develop a good relationshipwith the contract manager and on-sitesupervisor of the work. You will need towork closely with them to assure the bestproducts. Regular contact and professionalcommunications will ensure that they willrespond well to suggestions or mid-coursecorrections if they become necessary.

Finally, oversee execution of the scopeand keep a close eye on cost accounting andinvoicing. Make sure that the contractor iscompliant with the contract. If small detailsslip, do not hound them, but keep a goodrecord. You may choose not to work withthem in the future, or provide a less-than-glowing reference if requested. Practiceadaptive management and revise restorationplans and cost estimates as you learn moreduring implementation, and to compensatefor mistakes made along the way.


LITERATURE CITED

Angermeier, P.L. and J.R. Karr. 1994. Biological integrity versus biological diversity as policydirectives. Bioscience 44:690-697.

Barbour, M.T., J.B. Stribling and J.R. Karr. 1995. The multimetric approach for establishingbiocriteria and measuring biological condition. Pages 63-80 in W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon,eds. Biological assessment and criteria: tools for water resources planning and decisionmaking. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida.

Blanchard, J., S. Jue and A. Crook. 1998. Florida conservation lands, 1998. Florida NaturalAreas Inventory, Tallahassee, Florida. 252pp.

Cairns, J., Jr. 1988. Increasing diversity by restoring damaged ecosystems. Pages 333-343 inE.O. Wilson and F.M. Perter, eds. Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.

Cairns, J., Jr. 1995. Restoration ecology: protecting our national and global life support systems.Pages 1-12 in J. Cairns, Jr. ed. Rehabilitating damaged ecosystems, second edition. LewisPublishers, Boca Raton, Florida.

Carlson, B.D. 1993. Bussey Lake: demonstration study of incremental analysis in environmentalplanning. US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C. 76pp.

Clewell, A.F. and R. Lea. 1990. Creation and restoration of forested wetland vegetation in thesoutheastern U.S. Pages 195-231 in J.A. Kusler and M.E. Kentula, eds. Wetland creationand restoration: the status of the science. Island Press, Washington, D.C.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands anddeepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, D.C.131pp.

Cox, J., R. Kautz, M. MacLaughlin and T. Gilbert. 1994. Closing the gaps in Florida’s wildlifehabitat conservation system. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee,Florida. 239pp.

Ehrenfeld, J.G. and L.A. Toth. 1997. Restoration ecology and the ecosystem perspective.Restoration Ecology 5(4):307-317.

Environmental Law Institute. 1993. Wetland mitigation banking. Environmental Law Institute,Washington, D.C. 159pp+appendices.

Erwin, K.L. 1990. Freshwater marsh creation and restoration in the southeast. Pages 233-265in J.A. Kusler and M.E. Kentula, eds. Wetland creation and restoration: the status of thescience. Island Press, Washington, D.C.


Florida Department of Transportation. 1985. Florida land use, cover and forms classificationsystem. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, Florida. 78pp.

Foote-Smith, C. 1996. Restoration in a watershed context. National Wetlands Newsletter.18(2):10-13.

Freeman, A. M., III. 1993. The measurement of environmental and resource values - theory andmethods. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.

Gilbert, K.M., J.D. Tobe, R.W. Cantrell, M.E. Sweeley and J.R. Cooper. 1995. The Floridawetlands delineation manual. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee,Florida. 198pp.

Gordon, D.R., L. Provencher and J.L. Hardesty. 1997. Measurement scales and ecosystemmanagement. Pages 262-273 in S.T.A. Pickett, R.S. Ostfeld, M. Shachak and G.E. Likens,eds. The ecological basis of conservation. Chapman & Hall, New York., New York.

Hardesty, J.L., D.R. Gordon, K. Poiani and L. Provencher. 1997. A proposed concept formonitoring ecological condition in northwest Florida sandhills. The Nature Conservancy,Gainesville, Florida.

Harker, D., S. Evans, M. Evans and K. Harker. 1993. Landscape restoration handbook. LewisPublishers, Boca Raton, Florida. 98pp+appendices.

Hruby, T. and C. Brower. 1994. Guidelines for developing freshwater wetlands mitigation plansand proposals. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington. 39pp.

Karr, J.R. 1991. Biotic integrity: a long neglected aspect of water resource management.Ecological Applications 1:66-84.

Kusler, J.A. undated. Federal, state, and local government roles and partnerships for fair,flexible, and effective wetland regulation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency WetlandsDivision. 65pp.

Lewis, R.R., III. 1990. Creation and restoration of coastal plain wetlands in Florida. Pages 73-101 in J.A. Kusler and M.E. Kentula, eds. Wetland creation and restoration: the status of thescience. Island Press, Washington, D.C.

Lewis, R.R., III. 1990. Wetlands restoration/creation/enhancement terminology: suggestions forstandardization. Pages 417-422 in J.A. Kusler and M.E. Kentula, eds. Wetland creation andrestoration: the status of the science. Island Press, Washington, D.C.

Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink. 1993. Wetlands. Second edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold,New York, New York. 722pp.

Melanson, J. and G. Whitaker. 1996. Step by step toward successful restoration. NationalWetlands Newsletter. 18(6):12-13.


National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: characteristics and boundaries. National AcademyPress, Washington, D.C. 308pp.

Neufeldt, V. and D.B. Guralnik, eds. 1988. Webster’s New World dictionary, third collegeedition. Simon & Schuster, Inc., New York, New York. 1574pp.

Orth, K.D. 1994. Cost effectiveness analysis for environmental planning: nine EASY steps. USArmy Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C.. 62pp.

Robinson, R., W. Hansen and K.D. Orth. 1995. Evaluation of environmental investmentsprocedures manual - interim: cost effectiveness and incremental cost analysis. US ArmyCorps of Engineers, Washington, D.C.. 80pp.+appendices.

Salvesen, D.A. 1994. Wetlands: mitigating and regulating development impacts, second edition.Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C. 150pp.

Schneller-McDonald, K., L.S. Ischinger and G.T. Auble. 1990. Wetland creation andrestoration: description and summary of the literature. U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceBiological Report 90(3). 198pp.

South Florida Water Management District. 1995. Basis of review for environmental resourcepermit applications with the South Florida Water Management District. 86pp+appendices.

The Nature Conservancy. 1997. Vegetation monitoring in a management context. ConservationScience Department, The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

Tietenberg, T. H. 1988. Environmental and natural resource economics, second edition. Scott,Foresman and Company, Glenview, Illinois. 559pp.

Tiner, R.W. 1997. NWI maps: what they tell us. National Wetlands Newsletter 19(2).

Toth, L.A. 1995. Revitalizing the headwaters: a critical link in the restoration of the ecologicalintegrity of the Kissimmee Rive Ecosystem. South Florida Water Management District, WestPalm Beach, Florida.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. Wetlands fact sheets. USEPA Office ofWetlands, Oceans and Watersheds (4502F), Washington, D.C.

Whitaker, G. 1996. Why do landowners restore wetlands?. National Wetlands Newsletter.18(5):5-6.

Young, J.M. 1997. Managing the natural resource lands and waters of the state of Florida. TheNature Conservancy, Winter Park, Florida. 9pp.

Zedler, J.B. 1997. Restoring tidal wetlands: a scientific view. National Wetlands Newsletter.19(1):8-12.


Zedler, J.B. and M.W. Weller. 1990. Overview and future directions. Pages 405-413 in J.A.Kusler and M.E. Kentula, eds. Wetland creation and restoration: the status of the science.Island Press, Washington, D.C.


SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Names of organizations that have relevant information on specific topics appear below.Because some organizations have information related to more than one topic, addresses andphone numbers are at the end of the section, in alphabetical order. The addresses of county andlocal organizations are not given.

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY

• FDEP Technical Services Map Library: Digital Ortho Quarter Quads (DOQQ’s) - GIStrue-color aerial photographs at high resolution for entire state

• Aerial Cartographics of America, Inc.: All types of current aerial photographs, varyingwith area of coverage needed

• FDOT: 9”x9” black and white 1970-1990 aerial photographs (statewide coverage) at1”� 2,000’ scale

• County planning or property appraiser offices: 3’x3’ blueline aerial paper photos, usuallyat 1”=200’ or 1”=400’ scale

• U.S. National Archives: 9”x9” historical (1940s) black and white aerial photos• U.S. Department of Agriculture-ASCS: 9”x9” historical (1950s) black and white aerial

photos• U.S. Geological Survey-EROS Data Center: Historical aerials, varies with area

COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSES

• USACOE Institute for Water Resources

CULTURAL RESOURCES

• Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources: Florida Master Site File• Local historical societies

HYDROLOGY/WATER QUALITY

• WMDs• FDEP Division of Water Facilities: Statewide water quality report• FDEP Technical Services Map Library: Digital coverages of drainage basin boundaries,

surface water, ground water contaminations sources, water supply wells, Oracle welllocations, petroleum and storage tank contaminant sites, dry cleaning sites, solid wastefacilities, toxic release sites, hydrography, wetlands, NWI maps, lakes, outstanding waters,etc.

INFRASTRUCTURE/LAND OWNERSHIP

• FDEP Technical Services Map Library: Digital coverages of political boundaries, countyboundaries, agency district boundaries, ecosystem management areas, regional planningcouncil boundaries, conservation easements, mitigation banks, conservation lands (publicand private), trailways, flood insurance maps, cities, schools, parks, census data,transportation (roads, highways, railroads), etc.


• County property appraisers office• County governments: Plat map books• Local book or map stores: Plat map books

LISTED SPECIES/WILDLIFE INFORMATION

• FNAI: Element occurrence data available by special request• FGFWFC: Official list of endangered species, eagle nest data, wildlife observation data• USFWS: Florida scrub-jay maps, listed species information and regulations• County planning departments• Florida Biological Diversity Project (Gap analysis)• FDEP Technical Services Map Library: Digital coverage of habitat data

MARINE/COASTAL ISSUES

• FDEP Marine Research Institute: Datasets of marine resources

REGIONAL PLANNING

• Regional planning councils: Comprehensive regional policy plans, applications and plansfor developments of regional impact

• Ehrenfeld and Toth 1997

SOILS

• FDEP Technical Services Map Library: Digital coverages of generalized soils and NRCSdetailed soil surveys

• NRCS county offices: County soil surveys (hard copy)

TOPOGRAPHY

• WMD-Survey/mapping departments• USGS topo quads• Local book or map stores: Quad maps• FDEP Technical Services Map Library: Digital coverages of drainage basin boundaries,

hydrography

VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS/LAND COVER MAPS

• FDOT: FLUCFCS system• FGFWFC: Land cover classification system for wildlife habitat• FNAI: Guide to Natural Communities of Florida• FDEP Technical Services Map Library: Digital coverages of ecoregions, landcover

(generated by WMDs), wetlands, NWI maps, lakes, surface water classification, etc.

WETLAND ISSUES

• FDEP regional permitting offices• WMD local and regional permitting offices• USACOE (Jacksonville District)• Environmental Protection Agency Wetlands Hotline


• Washington State Department of Ecology (wetland planning publications) Wetlands Literature

• National Wetlands Newsletter• Schneller-McDonald et al. 1990 (bibliography and literature review)• National Research Council 1995• Mitsch and Gosselink 1993• Salvesen 1994

ADDRESSES

Aerial Cartographics of America, Inc.1722 W. Oak Ridge RoadOrlando, FL 32809or P.O. Box 593846Orlando, FL 32859-3846(407) 851-7880(407) 855-8250 (fax)

Environmental Protection Agency Wetlands Hotline(800) 832-7828

Florida Biological Diversity ProjectFlorida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit117 Newins-Ziegler HallUniversity of FloridaGainesville, Florida 32611(352) 846-0637website: http://www.coop.wec.ufl.edu/gap

Florida Department of Environmental Protectionwebsite: http://www.dep.state.fl.usDivision of Water Facilities (Statewide water quality)Florida Marine Research Institute100 8th Avenue SESt. Petersburg, FL 33701(813) 896-8626Technical Services Map Library2600 Blair Stone Road MS#6520Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400(850) 488-0892

Florida Department of State, Division of Historical ResourcesBureau of Archeological Research (Review of Master Site File)R.A. Gray Building500 South Brohough


Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250(850) 487-2299(850) 921-0372 (fax)Florida Trust For Historic Preservation (Names of local historical societies)P.O. Box 11206Tallahassee, FL 32302(850) 487-2333

Florida Department of TransportationSurvey and Mapping (Aerial Photography)605 Suwannee StreetTallahassee, FL 32399(850) 488-2332(850) 488-2587 (fax)Maps and Publications (FLUCFCS Manual)605 Suwannee StreetMail Station 12Tallahassee, FL 32399(850) 414-4050(850) 487-4099 (fax)

Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commissionwebsite: http://www.fcn.state.fl.us/gfc/gfchome.htmlOffice of Environmental Services620 S. Meridian StreetTallahassee, FL 32399(850) 488-6661(850) 922-5679 (fax)Division of Wildlife620 S. Meridian StreetTallahassee, FL 32399(850) 921-5990 (Official list of endangered species)(850) 488-3831 (List of technical publications)

Florida Natural Areas Inventory1018 Thomasville RoadSuite 200CTallahassee, FL 32303(850) 224-8207(850) 681-9364 (fax)

National Wetlands NewsletterEnvironmental Law Institute1616 P Street NW, Suite 200Washington, DC 20036


Northwest Florida Water Management DistrictRt. 1, Box 3100Havana, FL 32333-9700(850) 539-5999

Regional Planning CouncilsTampa Baywebsite: http://www.access.tampabayrpc.org

Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve300 Tower RoadNaples, FL 34113

South Florida Water Management DistrictP. O. Box 24680West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680(561) 686-8800(800) 432-2045

Southwest Florida Water Management Districtwebsite: http://www.dep.state.fl.us:80/swfwmd2379 Broad StreetBrooksville, FL 34609-6899(352) 796-7211(800) 423-1476

St. Johns River Water Management Districtwebsite: http://www.sjr.state.fl.usP. O. Box 1429Palatka, FL 32178-1429(904) 329-4500

Suwannee River Water Management DistrictRt. 3, Box 64Live Oak, FL 32060-9573(904) 362-1001

United States Army Corps of EngineersInstitute for Water Resources (Project cost-effectiveness analysis info and software)Water Resources Support Center7701 Telegraph RoadAlexandria, VA 22315-3868

Jacksonville District


Federal Building400 West Bay StreetP.O. Box 4970Jacksonville, FL 32232

United States Department of Agriculture - ASCSAerial Photo Field OfficeP.O. Box 30010Salt Lake City, UT 84130-0010

United States Fish and Wildlife Service6620 Southpoint Drive South, Suite 310Jacksonville, FL 32216-2404904-232-2580904-232-2404 (fax)

U.S. Geological SurveyEROS Data CenterSioux Falls, SD(605) 594-6151

United States National ArchivesCartographic Branch8601 Adelphi RoadCollege Park, MD 20740-6001301-713-7030

Washington State Department of Ecologywebsite: http://www.wa.gov/ecology/pubs.html


GLOSSARY AND ACRONYMS

Word/ACRONYM: Dictionary definition (Neufeldt and Guralnik 1988); Literature use, ourrecommended use, connotation

Action plan: Plan that details, down to level of actions, how to accomplish a project orachieve goals

Action: Something performed; deed; consciously willed activity; an act or thingdone; Specific steps taken to accomplish objective, implementation ofstrategy

Adaptivemanagement: Management that is made fit or suitable by changing or adjusting; Using

new scientific knowledge and feedback from monitoring to improvemanagement strategies; the process of implementing policy decisions asscientifically driven management experiments and using the results toimprove management plans; mechanism for integrating experience andknowledge into management of natural systems

BMP: Best Management Practices

CAD: Computer Aided Design

Compliance: In accordance with; Consistent with stipulations of a permit or otherregulatory instrument

Conceptual plan: Plan that includes the overall project goal, vision, restoration goals andobjectives

Cultural resources: Prehistoric or historic sites or artifacts identified as being used by arecognized culture for specific purposes

Degraded: Corrupted, lowered in grade or quality; Altered by man throughimpairment of or changes to some physical or chemical property, whichresults in a reduction of habitat value or other functions; (+ Perturbation)

Disturbed: Altered from a natural condition, yet retaining some natural characteristics

DRI: Development of Regional Impact


Ecological functions: Characteristic actions or special duties of a system that affect relationsbetween organisms and their environment; Specific contributions orservices performed by a natural system, such as the capacity of wetlands tostore and filter water

Ecological integrity: The state of being complete, unbroken, whole, perfect, unimpaired andsound, for the complex of relations between organisms and theirenvironment; Protection and preservation of native diversity, ecologicalpatterns and natural processes, such that the system can resist change,retain intact biota and return to a similar state following a severedisturbance; the ability to support and maintain a balanced, adaptivecommunity of organisms comparable to that of the natural habitat

Ecological processes: Continuing developments involving many changes that affect relationsbetween organisms and their environment; Ecological activities, patternsand interactions, including fire, hydrology, soil development and chemicalinteractions, as they occur in a natural system

Ecosystem health: The soundness, vitality or well-being of a system of plant, animal andbacterial communities and their interrelated physical and chemicalenvironment; [+ Ecological integrity]

Enhancement: Intensification, heightening, augmentation, improvement in quality;Improving the ecological contribution of wetlands, surface waters oruplands that have been degraded from their historic condition;improvement of existing natural areas for a particular function or value

ERP: Environmental Resource Permit

Exotic species: Foreign, imported or not native organism; an invasive or troublesomeintroduced plant or animal species that displaces native species

Fatal flaws analysis: A method to evaluate any number of alternatives that eliminates those thatdo not meet a set of criteria established at the beginning of the process

FDEP: Florida Department of Environmental Protection

FDOT: Florida Department of Transportation

Feasibility analysis: Evaluation of the practicality of a project based on physical, economic orpolitical aspects

FGFWFC: Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission

FLUCFCS: Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System

FNAI: Florida Natural Areas Inventory


Functionalassessmentmethodology: Methods developed to quantify ecological functions or values assigned by

humans to wetlands, wildlife habitat or other natural areas; examplesinclude HGM, Habitat Evaluation Procedures and Wetland RapidAssessment Procedure

Functionalcontribution: Augmentation of ecological functions

GIS: Geographical Information System

Goal: The result or achievement toward which effort is directed; an object or endthat one strives to attain; aim; Broad, overlying idea or result you aretrying to accomplish; a general concept that defines the intent or purpose ofa project

GPS: Global Positioning System

Grant: Conveyance of funds, as by the Federal government or a foundation, tosupport a specific program or project;

Habitat unit: Output of Habitat Evaluation Procedure evaluation methods

HGM: Hydrogeomorphic

Impacts: Events that produce change or strain; (+ Perturbation)

Keystone species: A species whose presence is important or critical to the presence of otherspecies or the continuance of ecological processes; examples includegopher tortoises (maintains commensals) and wiregrass (carries fire)

Maintenance: Upkeep, support, defense, keeping in a state of good repair; Any activitiesrequired to assure successful restoration after a project has beenconstructed, such as exotic plant control

Management: The art of handling or using carefully, husbanding; to have charge of;Activities required to protect and sustain a naturally functioning system

Mission: Operational task; special task or purpose; Usually used in the broadestsense, to indicate the overarching goal or purpose of a project or program(+ Overall project goal)

Mitigation bank: A project undertaken to provide for the withdrawal of mitigation credits tooffset adverse impacts; wetland or endangered species habitat restoration,creation or enhancement undertaken expressly for the purpose of providingcompensation for losses from future development activities, as part of acredit program


Mitigation: The act of lessening, making less severe, or moderating; An action or seriesof actions to offset the adverse impacts that cause a regulated activity tofail to meet environmental review criteria; restoration, creation,enhancement or sometimes preservation of wetlands or endangered specieshabitat to compensate for permitted losses

Monitoring: Checking or regulating performance; warning; Periodic evaluation todetermine success in attaining goals

MOU: Memorandum of Understanding

Natural area: A relatively undisturbed area, with native species dominating

Natural or nativecommunities: Associations of organisms living together that are wild, unaffected by

mankind; Assemblages of plants (usually) and/or animals that naturallyoccur together, such as the pine flatwoods community; communitydominated by native biota and occurring in a physical system that hasdeveloped through natural processes and in which natural processescontinue to take place

Natural processes: + Ecological processes

NRCS: Natural Resource Conservation Service

NRCS: Natural Resources Conservation Service; previously known as SoilConservation Service

Nuisance species: An organism causing danger, trouble or annoyance; similar to exoticspecies, but not necessarily introduced (may be native)

NWFWMD: Northwest Florida Water Management District

NWI: National Wetlands Inventory

Objective: Purpose; target; the object or goal of one's endeavors or actions; somethingstriven for; Result of strategy or actions toward goal; must be specific,measurable, doable; often tangible; think of as TARGET or PRODUCT


Overall projectgoal: The articulation of why a project is being undertaken; the mission; a

general, big-picture concept of the purpose

Overall projectobjective: The overall product or target of a project; the final vision, what success

looks like

Performancestandard: Something set up and established by authority as a rule for the measure of

quantity, weight, extent, value or quality; The value for a given variablethat has been determined to be the threshold or criteria of success for thatparameter

Perturbation: Something that causes disturbance, disorder, or great trouble; Physicaldisturbances to the functioning of ecological processes or services

Plan: A scheme or program for making, doing or arranging something; project,design, schedule; method of proceeding; outline

Preservation: Protection from development or impact, including maintenance of existingor improved condition

Principle: A fundamental, accepted or professed rule of action or conduct; anessential element; Overriding idea

Protocol: A set of rules governing communication and transfer of data; A specific,detailed set of instructions for collecting data from a site

RAI: Request for Additional Information; a permitting step following submissionof an application to a regulatory agency, in which they ask for greaterdetails regarding restoration project in order to issue permit

Rationale: Justification or explanation of goal, strategy, alternative, action, etc.

Rehabilitation: The act of putting back in good condition or bringing to a normal state ofhealth; Conversion of an area that was previously one type into anothertype deemed to be better

Restoration: A restitution of loss or damage; putting into a former, normal orunimpaired state or condition; reconstruction of original form or health;The act, process or result of returning a natural area to a closeapproximation of its condition prior to disturbance

Restorationalternative: An outline for a planned or proposed series of events to put something

back to original form; scenario or approach to achieving the overall goal


RFP: Request For Proposals

Scale: The ratio between dimensions of a representation and those of the object; asystem of grouping or classifying according to a standard of relative size

SFWMD: South Florida Water Management District

Site: Location, a piece of land with a specified purpose

Site assessment: To estimate or determine the significance, importance or value of a site,evaluate; A detailed inventory and description of all aspects of a site’sresources

Site issues: Site characteristics, conditions or policies to be considered in restorationplanning, (e.g., listed species, facilities, impacts)

SJRWMD: St. Johns River Water Management District

SOR: Save Our Rivers

Special element: Plant or animal species that are endangered, threatened, species of specialconcern or rare

SRWMD: Suwannee River Water Management District

Step: Any of a series of acts or distinct successive stages in a process; begin toact; Equivalent to or subset of actions

Strategic plan: Plan that includes the overall project goal, vision, restoration goals,objectives and strategies

Strategy: A plan, method, or series of maneuvers for obtaining a specific goal orobjective; an artful means to some end; Methodology to be used, HOW toattain goal or objective; usually phrased as action

Success criteria: Criteria, measurable as quantitative values, used to evaluate whether aproject achieves success or not; usually a set of performance standardsestablished for a series of variables that indicate progress toward achievinggoals

Success: Favorable or satisfactory outcome or result; Documentation ofachievement of established goals; requires that measurable success criteriabe established prior to commencement of activities and that monitoringdata show that performance standards have been met

Suitability analysis: Evaluation of the compatibility of a project with its surroundingenvironment and potential of the restoration to achieve ecological goals


SWFWMD: Southwest Florida Water Management District

SWIM: Surface Water Improvement and Management; a program implemented byFlorida’s water management districts, designed to protect and restorepriority surface waters of the state

Uplands: Areas that are not wetlands or open water

USACOE: United States Army Corps of Engineers

USFWS: Unites States Fish and Wildlife Service

USGS: United States Geological Survey

Variable: A quality or quantity that varies or may vary, anything changeable;parameter selected to be periodically measured to document progress

Vision: (also Vision of success) A mental image, an imaginative contemplation;What you want success to look like; final outcome or product (+ Overallproject objective)

Watershed: The area in which all water, sediments and dissolved materials flow ordrain from the land into a common body of water

Wetland creation: Conversion of a nonwetland area into a wetland where a wetland neverexisted

Wetlands: Those areas inundated or saturated by surface water or ground water at afrequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of vegetationtypically adapted for life in saturated soils. Florida wetlands generallyinclude swamps, marshes, bayheads, cypress domes and strands, sloughs,wet prairies, hydric seepage slopes, tidal marshes, mangrove swamps andother similar areas

WMD: Water Management District; any one of Florida’s five water managementdistricts, quasi-governmental agencies (agents of the state) charged withcontrolling and supplying Florida’s water

Work plan: Plan that includes the overall project goal, vision, restoration goals,objectives, strategies, actions, tasks, a timeline/schedule and responsibleparties


APPENDICES

A: AGENCIES THAT MANAGE PUBLIC LAND IN FLORIDA

B: POTENTIAL RESTORATION PROJECTS ON FLORIDA PUBLIC LANDS

C: COPIES OF FORMS, WORKSHEETS AND CHECKLISTS

D: STATE OF FLORIDA POLICIES AND REGULATIONS RELEVANT TO

RESTORATION

E: MANAGING THE NATURAL RESOURCE LANDS AND WATERS OF THE

STATE OF FLORIDA


APPENDIX A: AGENCIES THAT MANAGE PUBLIC LAND IN FLORIDA

(From Blanchard et al. 1998)

United StatesUS Department of Agriculture

Forest ServiceUS Department of Interior

Fish and Wildlife ServiceNational Park Service

US Department of DefenseAir ForceArmy Corps of EngineersNavy

US Department of CommerceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

US Department of TransportationCoast Guard

US Geological SurveyUS Bureau of Land Management

State of FloridaFlorida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services

Division of ForestryFlorida Department of Environmental Protection

Division of Recreation & ParksDivision of Marine ResourcesOffice of Greenways and Trails

Florida Department of Military AffairsFlorida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission

Division of WildlifeDivision of FisheriesOffice of Environmental Services Mitigation Program

Florida State UniversitiesFlorida Atlantic UniversityUniversity of FloridaUniversity of South Florida

Florida Water Management DistrictsNorthwest Florida Water Management DistrictSuwannee River Water Management DistrictSt. Johns River Water Management DistrictSouthwest Florida Water Management DistrictSouth Florida Water Management District


Local GovernmentsCounties

BrowardBrevardCollierDadeGulfHernandoHillsboroughLeeManateeMartinOrangeOsceolaPascoPinellasPalm BeachSt. LucieSarasotaSeminole

Various Municipalities

Private (Conservation Organizations)Archbold Expeditions, Inc.Florida Audubon SocietyFlorida Trust for Historic PreservationFlorida Power and LightNational Audubon SocietyThe Nature ConservancySierra ClubTall TimbersUniversity of Florida FoundationYMCA


Summary of Public Land Acreages Managed by Agencies in Florida

Department Agency/Division Area Managed(Acres)

FederalAgriculture Forest Service 1,147,078Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 498,945

National Park Service 1,714,001Defense All 680,287Other National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration,Geological Survey, Bureau ofLand Management, Coast Guard

4,629

Total Federal 4,044,940StateAgriculture & ConsumerServices

Division of Forestry 714,170

Environmental Protection Division of Recreation and Parks 430,420Division of Marine Resources 212,140Office of Greenways and Trails 69,067

Game and Fresh Water FishCommission

Division of Wildlife, Division ofFisheries, Office ofEnvironmental Services

1,201,289

Military Affairs 62,340State Universities 11,524Water Management Districts 1,127,851

Total State 3,828,801LocalCounties and Municipalities 196,248

Total Local 196,248Total All Public 8,069,989

Private 98,219Size of Florida 34,721,280


APPENDIX B: POTENTIAL RESTORATION PROJECTS ON FLORIDA PUBLIC

LANDS

(list compiled from sources provided by FDEP staff, information from 1995-1997)

State Parks

Paynes Prairie State Preserve* major topographical and wetlands restoration includes backfilling, canal blocks,

dredging and dike removals

Tosohatchee State Reserve* 35 miles of main canal filling, topographical restorations of power lines, canals,

reservoirs and lakes, and upland restoration

Tomoka State Park* extensive high marsh restoration; drainage ditches to be filled

Port Bouganville* part of the Key Largo Hammocks State Botanical Site, major development halted

after significant manipulation of hammocks, dredging of a huge marina and construction ofsome buildings; restoration of tropical hammock and filling of the marina and canal

Falling Waters State Recreation Area* revegetate eroded area along fence* construct diverters along fence to prevent off-site erosion and stormwater from

entering sink area (must be coordinated with adjacent property owner.)

Florida Caverns State Park* cave restoration* upgrade or re-contour golf course to allow stormwater treatment and prevent entry of untreated stormwater into sink holes on the golf course and the park

Henderson Beach State Recreation Area* remove the remainder of old Highway 98 and restore* restore dune areas that have been destroyed by foot paths

Lake Jackson Mounds State Archaeological Site* repair erosion on nature trail* restoration of improved pasture area

Natural Bridge State Historic Site* vegetative restoration of the monument area

Ochlockonee River State Park


* revegetation for shoreline erosion control

Perdido Key State Recreation Area* restore dune vegetation destroyed by foot paths

St. Andrews State Recreation Area (Shell Island)* remove pilings from submerged land and from salt marsh* restore two dune blow-outs west of pavilion with sand fencing, native vegetation

and interpretive signs

St. George Island State Park* remove asphalt from dunes (old roadway)* restoration of beach dune system

St. Joseph Peninsula State Park* site restoration with native vegetation (two burned areas, fire plow scars, dune

blowout)

Three Rivers State Recreation Area* removal and restoration of the dump area* invading hardwood removals

Topsail Hill* restoration of dune damage by unauthorized vehicle use; includes sand fencing and

planting of appropriate vegetation

Torreya State Park* restoration of pine plantations

Wakulla Springs State Park* redesign and repave parking areas adjacent to lodge; treat and direct stormwater

away from sink holes and sensitive areas* fill 2 borrow pit / dumps with appropriate soils* wiregrass transplanting and seeding* beach restoration

Fort Clinch State Park* fill in some of the mosquito ditches as determined by the Park Manager and District

Biologists and revegetate to the appropriate wetland community

Gold Head Branch State Park* branch outfall restoration* restoration of Sheelar Lake shoreline and adjacent uplands* scrub-jay habitat restoration


O’Leno State Park / River Rise State Preserve* restoration of natural communities in pastures / old fields* restoration of natural hydrology of Buzzards Roost Prairie drainage at Bible Camp

Road

Peacock Springs State Recreation Area* restoration of natural communities in pastures

San Felasco Hammock State Preserve* restoration of natural communities in pastures / old fields, and clear-cut areas

Stephen Foster State Folk Culture Center* restoration of remaining clear-cut areas

Talbot Islands State Geopark* fill in some of the mosquito ditches as approved by the Park Manager and District

Biologist and revegetate to the appropriate wetland communities* restore central swale on Big Talbot, regulate drainage, remove invasive vegetation

and monitor* restore cattail pond on Big Talbot Island, purchase outparcel, remove and dispose of

vegetation and substrate, and monitor* addition of culverts under the highway impounding the marsh between Simpson and

Myrtle Creeks

Anastasia State Recreation Area* rip rap should be removed, reshaped, added to, etc.; the beach should be

renourished, and a dune system established and planted with dune vegetation* fill in some of the mosquito ditches to remove present breeding sites; ditches to be

filled will be determined by the Park Manager and District Biologists* revegetate dunes* habitat restoration of conch island - reduction in density of wax myrtle

Bulow Creek State Park* pine plantation removal and community restoration

DeLeon Springs State Recreation Area* restoration of acquired improved pasture to original ecosystem of pine flatwoods* spring bulkhead repairs and restoration

Gamble Rogers Memorial State Recreation Area at Flagler Beach* removal of exotic plants and revegetation with appropriate wetland / ecotonal plants* dune restoration* stabilize and restore shoreline on ICW* restoration of spoil area

Guana River State Park


* shoreline stabilization at Shell Bluff* erosion control on dunes through revegetation* restore swale area

Hontoon Island State Park* investigation and restoration of old “dump” pond* removal and restoration of Snake Creek Dam* investigation and restoration of man-made canal system surrounding the property

Lake Kissimmee State Park* hydrologic restoration of park

Lake Louisa State Park* revegetate 700 acres of former mesic flatwoods and sandhill communities

Lower Wekiva River State Preserve* longleaf pine restoration, LWRSR west* pasture restoration storage area, LW-15, LW7P* wiregrass replanting

North Peninsula State Recreation Area* removal of exotic plants and revegetation to appropriate wetland/ecotonal

community

Ravine State Gardens* removal of bamboo and air potato and revegetation with native ravine plant species* restoration of base reflection pond and removal of exotic plants* erosion control of ravine sides by revegetation

Rainbow Springs State Park* restoration of natural community in springhead* restoration of natural communities in pastures / old fields

Rock Springs Run State Reserve* pasture restoration (not ST5)* tram removals & restoration

Sebastian Inlet State Recreation Area* exotic tree removal and plant native vegetation* remove / restore mosquito ditching

Spruce Creek State Recreation Area* exotic plant removal and revegetation with appropriate native species* erosion control and river shoreline stabilization with native plant revegetation

Washington Oaks State Gardens


* continue shoreline restoration* evaluate the potential for filling in some of the mosquito ditches

Wekiwa Springs State Park* restore retention pond installation at Thomson and Welch Road* youth camp soil stabilization* restore retention pond at dip in road on Wekiva Springs Road* pasture restoration zone WS-03* wiregrass replanting in ruderal areas* cypress plantings in flats area - wetlands enhancement / exotic control

Beker Property* fill canal draining wetland on parcel B and restore filled area with native herbaceous

vegetation

Collier-Seminole State Park* provide native hardwoods for natural community restoration

Egmont Key State Park* remove exotics, restore native vegetation

Fakahatchee Strand State Preserve* remove spoil from west boundary* install culverts on selected trams and provide heavy equipment for tram maintenance

Gasparilla Island State Recreation Area* provide native vegetation for coastal strand restoration

Hillsborough River State Park* remove / repair seawall along riverbank and restore shoreline* stabilize erosion along riverbank caused by foot traffic

Honeymoon Island State Recreation Area* revegetate select areas with native vegetation

Koreshan State Historic Site* exotic plant removal, post-treatment and reforestation* recontour the two one-acre borrow pits to more gradual slopes, with exotic removal

and planting of native vegetation* shoreline stabilization on the Estero River* clear and stabilize the man-made ditches created by the Koreshans

Little Manatee River State Recreation Area* clean up several dump sites and restore


* roller-chop old-growth saw palmettos* reforest 250 acres of improved pasture

Lovers Key State Recreation Area* reconstruct some berm sites at bay side of park and replant with red mangroves

Myakka River State Park* flatwoods and dry prairie restoration* Vanderipe Slough restoration via removal of dikes and filling of ditches

Oscar Scherer State Recreation Area* fill ditches that were dug to drain wetlands

Port Charlotte Beach State Recreation Area* remove exotic vegetation; revegetate with native species

Avalon State recreation Area* restoration of impoundment #2 (breached impoundment)* filling of non-maintained mosquito control ditches* exotics removal; planting of native vegetation* coastal strand restoration

Bahia Honda State Park* stabilize eroding bay-side beach area* hydrologic restoration & tidal reconnection to 2 impounded mangrove areas (large

campground & split lagoon)

Curry Hammock* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation

Fort Pierce Inlet State Recreation Area* continuation of shoreline restoration (fringing mangroves)* exotic tree removal and plant native vegetation* hammock restoration

Fort Zachary Taylor State Historic Site* stabilize shoreline and complete breakwater structure* exotic removal and plant native vegetation* vegetate area near moat with appropriate native plants


Hugh Taylor Birch State Recreation Area* mangrove restoration (removal of dredge fill and Australian pines)* soften seawall (placement of rip-rap)* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation

John D. MacArthur Beach State Recreation Area* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation, north boundary* hammock restoration (Munyon Island)

John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park* revegetate prop-scarred seagrass areas* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation* clean up Shaw tract and remove exotics* complete revegetation of scarified sections of day-use areas

John U. Lloyd Beach State Recreation Area* beach stabilization* continuation of shoreline restoration

Jonathan Dickinson State Park* acquisition and restoration of the pasture lands just west of the park* Loxahatchee river tributaries; restoration of water quantity and quality of Kitching

Creek / Jenkins Canal, Hobe Grove Canal, and Cypress Creek* restoration of powerline impacts* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation* restoration of endangered sand pine scrub community in the area damaged by

development of the Murphy Army Base and Hyland terrace* campground vegetation restoration

Key Largo Hammock State Botanical Site* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation* stabilize shoreline of plugged canal at Ocean Reef Shores and backfill to depth of 4-

6’ MLW* replace boulder plug in the canal entrance at Sunland Estates* restore topography and vegetation at scarified areas, i.e., Port “B,” Bell Hammock,

Largo Beach & Tennis Club, Missile Tract site* restore missile tracking site to hammock; remove all structures* remove all old paved sections of SR 905

Long Key State Recreation Area* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation* shoreline stabilization through coastal plant restoration

Oleta River State Recreation Area


* connect tidal creeks, replace fill roads with pedestrian bridges to create continuouscanoe trail and improve water quality

* remove exotics in wetlands and plant mangrove* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation

Savannas State Reserve* restoration from stormwater inputs (water quantity and quality)* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation

St. Lucie Inlet State Park* removal of 16 spoil piles, which includes “Mt. St. Lucie”* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation* dune restoration

Seabranch* Manatee Creek restoration; removal of guava

Windley Key State Geological Site* remove all debris and dump sites* exotics removal and planting of native vegetation.

Marine Resources (primarily mangrove restoration / exotics removal)

East Coast* Indian River Lagoon Spoil Islands - North and South Indian River Lagoon* North Fork St. Lucie Aquatic Preserve - South Indian River Lagoon* Indian River Lagoon Mosquito Impoundments - North and South Indian River

Lagoon* Pumpkin Hill - Nassau River* Indian River Aquatic Preserves -North Indian River Lagoon* Sebastian Creek - North Indian River Lagoon

Apalachicola National Estuarine Research Reserve - Franklin County* East Bay Lands - Apalachicola Watershed* Unit 4 - Apalachicola Watershed* Cape St. George Island - Apalachicola Watershed* Rodrique Tract - Apalachicola Watershed* St. Vincent Sound and Schoellas Tract - Apalachicola Watershed

Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve* Belle Meade Regional Watershed - Henderson Creek Basin* Rookery Bay Regional Watershed - Henderson Creek Basin* Water Management District 6 - Lely Canal Basin* South Golden Gate Estates - Faka-Union Canal Basin


Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary* Coupon Bight - Marine* Coupon Bight / Key Deer - Freshwater Lens* Card Sound - Southern Glades* Lignumvitae Key - Marine

Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve* Oleta River State Recreation Area - Biscayne Bay* Florida International North Campus - Biscayne Bay

Crystal River and St. Martins Aquatic Preserves* Crystal Cove Tract - Crystal River and St. Martins Estuary

Charlotte Harbor* Hendry Creek* Estero Bay Buffer* North and South (Stardial) Caloosahatchee River Mouth* North and South Cape Coral Spreader* Pine Island / Maria Drive and South A. P. Island* Matlacha Pass A. P. Islands* Winkler Road Easement* Charlotte Harbor - Crow Key, Garrod, PGI & Freeland, Angin / Graybeal,

Concannon / Watson / Gay & Piel / Asbury* PGI / Alligator Creek* Charlotte Harbor State Buffer Preserve - El Jobean, Myakka River Bridge* GDC Cape Haze* Lemon Bay / Cedar Point


APPENDIX C: COPIES OF FORMS, WORKSHEETS AND CHECKLISTS


WORKSHEET 1. QUICK SUITABILITY/FATAL FLAWS ANALYSISThis is a worksheet of multiple choice questions regarding suitability and feasibility of the

project. More detailed discussion about each question appears in Judging Suitability Of Your Siteon Page 26. To quickly assess a project’s ecological suitability and physical feasibility, answer the15 questions about the project and then score it based on these instructions: Questions 1-10 areabout primary restoration issues, while Questions 11-15 relate to secondary issues. Primaryissues score as follows: a=6, b=4, c=2, d=0. Secondary issues score as follows: a=4, b=2, c=1,d=0. A total score of less than 20 will result in a fatally flawed project.

Issue Answer Score

Primary Issues Choose mostappropriate

response

a=6b=4c=2d=0

1. Restoration of this site will contribute to: a) at least 6ecological functions, b) 3-5 important ecological functions, c) 1or 2 functions, d) several lesser ecological functions.

2. In terms of ecological functions, this restoration will result in:a) significant increase in regional capacity, b) measurable increasein region, c) moderate increase or d) qualitative but notmeasurable increase in ecological functions of the region.

3. The effect of the restoration will extend to: a) a very large(> 200 square miles) regional area, b) the entire watershed inwhich the project is located, c) local areas surrounding theproject or d) the immediate site only.

4. The site has been identified by or is completely compatiblewith: a) greater than 3 regional conservation plans, b) 1-3 plans,c) 1 plan, d) no regional planning product.

5. The restoration will contribute to increase of ecologicalfunctions that are critically limited or impaired in the region: a) toa great extent for a number of functions, b) to a moderate extentfor a number of functions or to a large extent for one primaryfunction, c) somewhat for a number of functions or moderatelyfor one primary function or d) only moderately for one functionor not at all for any critically impaired functions.


6. The proposed project fits in with previously establishedregional restoration and conservation goals: a) to a great extent,b) to a moderate extent, c) slightly, but has its own goalsapplicable to the site itself, or d) not at all.

7. Surrounding land uses are compatible with restoration: a)completely, b) for the most part, with areas of incompatible useson less than 20% of area surrounding the site, c) on 50% to 80%of the area within 1 mile of the site, d) only on 20% ofsurrounding lands.

8. Project will be ecologically sustainable: a) almost certainly, b)probably, c) perhaps, d) only with continuous, active influence bymanagers.

9. Restoration is financially possible: a) with existing resources,b) with limited fundraising, c) with substantial new allocation orcontribution of funds, d) only with significant allocations fromunknown sources.

10. Restoration construction activities are physically feasible: a)in current conditions and plans, b) with minor modifications toexisting conditions, c) with substantial modifications to on-siteconditions and/or changes in off-site conditions, d) only withdetailed planning, major manipulation of on-site conditions andchanges in off-site conditions.

Secondary Issues Choose mostappropriate

response

a=4b=2c=1d=0

11. Restoration of the site will: a) be completely compatiblewith other site goals and activities, with no conflicts, b) conflictto a minor extent for a limited time, c) conflict to a great extentfor a short time or to a small extent for a long time period, ord) conflict to a large extent in purpose, area and time.

12. Resources (staff, equipment, money) to implement theproject: a) currently exist onsite, b) can be requested and securedwith moderate effort, c) have not been identified but couldpossibly be secured with effort, d) are unknown.

13. Based on the best available information and estimates fromsimilar projects, the costs to plan and implement this restorationwill be: a) minimal, b) moderate, c) significant or d) astronomical.


14. There is political support for this project: a) definitely,b) likely, c) unlikely, d) impossible.

15. The public support for this restoration project is: a) great,b) moderate, c) mediocre or d) nonexistent.

Total Score

If your Total Score from the worksheet is less than or equal to 20, your project as youenvision it is fatally flawed and does not appear to be suitable for restoration. It may be prudentto abandon planning here, or to completely rethink the scope or location of the project. If yourTotal Score is greater than 20, please proceed.


Checklist 1 Site AssessmentProject Name Project Owner

Section A

Existing Site Conditions

Status Responsible/Source Format/Location

Location map & descript/boundary delineation __________ ____________________ __________

Aerial photos __________ ____________________ __________

Topography __________ ____________________ __________

Soils __________ ____________________ __________

Hydrology/water quality __________ ____________________ __________

Vegetative communities __________ ____________________ __________

Wetlands __________ ____________________ __________

Wildlife __________ ____________________ __________

Special elements __________ ____________________ __________

Cultural/historical sites __________ ____________________ __________

Information gaps

Site Issues

Land Use and Conditions/Physical Structures: (exotics, trash piles, dip vats, poaching,access, pastures, man-made water holes, existing or planned buildings, roads, fences, ditches)Make notes and attach additional sheets (maps) as needed.


Site Assessment Checklist - page 2

Policy Issues: (existing or future policies to which the site must conform; managementpolicies or guidelines; obligations that must be met; programs/initiatives affecting the site)

Legal Issues: (easements; title restrictions; MOUs, etc.)

Section B

Historical Conditions

Year Source Area Covered Format/Location

Historical aerial photographs: ________ ____________ _____________

Other information (maps, etc.) ________ ____________ _____________

Section C

Surrounding Conditions(ownership of tracts surrounding the project site; current status of adjacent tracts; future

development, zoning, etc.)


Checklist 2Items in an Action Plan

1. Executive summary of project, including ecological contributions, site history2. Overall project goal and vision (post-restoration conditions)3. Project description (from site assessment) ♦ project name and proposer ♦ location & setting (legal description, regional location map, site map, aerials) ♦ topography ♦ soils and geology ♦ hydrology and water quality ♦ vegetation and land cover (including wetlands possibly treated separately) ♦ fauna ♦ special elements ♦ cultural/historical information ♦ site issues ♦ historical conditions ♦ surrounding land uses

4. Restoration plan ♦ restoration goals and objectives ♦ strategies and actions for each goal, with justification and brief description of methodologies5. Figures, maps, tables, exhibits and appendices6. Literature cited


WORKSHEET 2. RESTORATION

TASK TIMELINE

PROJECT NAME:

PREPARER/NAME:

Year

1

Year

2

Year

3

Year

4

Year

5

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Task #1

Task #2

Task #3

Task #4

Task #5

Task #6

Task #7

Task #8

Task #9

Task #10


WORKSHEET 3. RESTORATION TASK COSTS

PROJECT NAME: ______________________________

PREPARER/NAME: _____________________________

Activity #1



Activity #2



Activity #3



Activity #4




Checklist 3Items in a Restoration Project Package

A description of how the site wasselected, included detailed referencesto regional plans used

Results of suitability analysis (+Worksheet 1) or other explanation ofproject justification and feasibility

The complete results of the siteassessment (+ Checklist 1),including aerial photos and othermaps or exhibits

The final restoration alternative andrationale on why it was selected overothers

The complete action plan, withstrategies and actions forimplementation of restoration

Full construction plans necessary forpermits or contractor implementation

The completed workplan, includingwho is responsible for all tasks andthe timeline/schedule

A detailed monitoring plan

An updated long-term management,maintenance and contingency planfor the site (or reference to itslocation)

Detailed cost estimates and budgetsfor each stage of restoration


APPENDIX D: STATE OF FLORIDA POLICIES AND REGULATIONS RELEVANT TO

RESTORATION

(To be provided and updated by FDEP staff)


APPENDIX E: MANAGING THE NATURAL RESOURCE LANDS AND WATERS OF THE

STATE OF FLORIDA

(From Young 1997)

restoration procedures manual for public lands …restoration procedures manual for public lands in...

Documents