HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix C - Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program Comprehensive Conseration and Management PlanAppendix 1
Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan
Looking Ahead to 2030..
A 10-Year Comprehensive Conservation and
a nagern a n t Plan fo r t he I nd ian Ri ver Lagoon, Flo r id a
ONELAGOON
f pAMw.-%a
IMG��H a[YSq 4+[�7M
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
This Final Draft version of the Indian River Lagoon Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
(CCMP) — Looking Ahead to 2030 replaces the Preliminary Final Draft version and the original Draft
version that were provided to the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program (IRLNEP) Management
Conference and public on the IRL Council website, www.irlcouncil.com, to facilitate open access to the
CCMP and encourage public comments. This Final Draft version will remain open on the IRLNEP website
and available for comments until certification of the Final Draft is completed by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA), recommended changes are made (if necessary), and a Final USEPA certified
CCMP is reviewed by the IRLNEP Management Conference and adopted by the IRL Council in 2019. All
public comments have been and will be recorded and posted on the website.
i I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronymsand Abbreviations...................................................................................................................................
iv
IRL Council Resolution and Adoption.......................................................................................................................v
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Concurrence.............................................................................................
vii
Message from IRLNEP Executive Director........................................................................................................... viii
TheNational Estuary Program...................................................................................................................................2
IndianRiver Lagoon...................................................................................................................................................3
2016 Expansion of the IRLNEP Planning Boundary............................................................................................4
IRLNEP Management Conference........................................................................................................................5
CCMP Revision: IRLNEP Responds to a Changing Lagoon.....................................................................................9
Pathwayto IRL Restoration................................................................................................................................11
TakingAction......................................................................................................................................................11
IRLNEP: Core Values..............................................................................................................................................12
IRLNEP: Measuring Performance and Progress......................................................................................................13
Roleof the IRLNEP.................................................................................................................................................13
IRLVital Signs.........................................................................................................................................................14
How to Use the Vital Signs Wheel......................................................................................................................15
Measuring Changes in IRL Vital Signs...............................................................................................................16
IRLHealth Concern Levels.................................................................................................................................18
Howto Use this Plan................................................................................................................................................18
ONELAGOON........................................................................................................................................................20
WaterQuality......................................................................................................................................................20
Impaired Waters (Including TMDLs, BMAPs, and RAPs)..............................................................................20
Wastewater.......................................................................................................................................................24
Stormwater.......................................................................................................................................................30
Hydrologyand Hydrodynamics.......................................................................................................................35
Legacy Loads and Healthy Sediments.............................................................................................................39
AtmosphericDeposition...................................................................................................................................44
Contaminantsof Concern .................................................................................................................................48
Habitats...............................................................................................................................................................53
Seagrasses.........................................................................................................................................................53
FilterFeeders....................................................................................................................................................57
LivingShorelines.............................................................................................................................................61
Wetlands and Impounded and Altered Marshes...............................................................................................66
SpoilIslands.....................................................................................................................................................71
LandConservation...........................................................................................................................................75
ii I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Connected Waters and Watersheds..................................................................................................................80
LivingResources.................................................................................................................................................86
Biodiversity......................................................................................................................................................86
Speciesof Concern ...........................................................................................................................................90
InvasiveSpecies...............................................................................................................................................94
ForageFishes....................................................................................................................................................97
Commercial and Recreational Fisheries.........................................................................................................101
Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs).....................................................................................................................105
ONE LAGOON and One Community....................................................................................................................109
Living Resources & Healthy Communities.......................................................................................................109
ClimateReady Estuary...................................................................................................................................109
ONECOMMUNITY..............................................................................................................................................113
HealthyCommunities........................................................................................................................................113
Vibrant21s1 Century Communities.................................................................................................................113
Trash -Free Waters..........................................................................................................................................118
Marinasand Boating......................................................................................................................................121
Distinctive Lagoon Communities...................................................................................................................125
Emergency Preparation & Response..............................................................................................................129
ONEVOICE...........................................................................................................................................................132
Communicate — Collaborate — Coordinate........................................................................................................132
Monitoringand Data Sharing.........................................................................................................................132
Stateof the Lagoon.........................................................................................................................................137
TechnologyInnovation...................................................................................................................................140
CCMP Implementation and Financing...........................................................................................................143
CitizenEngagement and Education................................................................................................................146
Federal, State, and Local Policy Opportunities..............................................................................................151
Appendix A. CCMP Changes 2008-2018..............................................................................................................154
AppendixB. Wastewater Maps..............................................................................................................................169
Appendix C. Agricultural BMP Enrollment...........................................................................................................183
iii I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AWT
Advanced Wastewater Treatment
BMAP
Basin Management Action Plan
BMP
Best Management Practice
CCMP
Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CERP
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan
DEO
Department of Economic Opportunity
DEP
Department of Environmental Protection
ECERT
East-Central Estuarine Restoration Team
FDACS
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
FDOH
Florida Department of Health
FDOT
Florida Department of Transportation
FWC
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
FIT
Florida Institute of Technology
GIS
Geographic Information System
HAB
Harmful Algal Bloom
IRL
Indian River Lagoon
IRLIZ
Indian River Lagoon Innovator and Investor (Network)
IRLNEP
Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program
MFC
Marine Fisheries Council
mg/L
Milligrams per Liter
MRC
Marine Resources Council
MSD
Marine Sanitation Device
NASA
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NEP
National Estuary Program
NERT
Northeast Florida Estuarine Restoration Team
NMFS
National Marine Fisheries Society
NOAA
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPS
National Park Service
NRCS
Natural Resources Conservation Service
OAWP
Office of Agricultural Water Policy
ORCA
Ocean Research & Conservation Association
OSTDS
Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal System
PFAS
Perfluorinated Alkyl Substances
RAP
Reasonable Assurance Plan
SFWMD
South Florida Water Management District
ShORE
Sharing Our Research with Everyone
SJRWMD
St. Johns River Water Management District
SRF
State Revolving Fund
STEMAC
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Modeling Advisory Committee
SWIM
Surface Water Improvement and Management (Program)
TBD
To Be Determined
TMDL
Total Maximum Daily Load
OF-IFAS
University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
USACE
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USCG
U.S. Coast Guard
USEPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
WMDs
Water Management Districts
WWTP
Wastewater Treatment Plant
iv I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
IRL COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND ADOPTION
WHEREAS, the creation of the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) Council (an independent special district of the state
of Florida) to serve as the host agency for the IRL National Estuary Program (IRLNEP) was driven by a common
goal to improve communication, coordination, leadership, and investment among the federal, state, and local
government agencies and private -sector organizations throughout the IRL watershed.
WHEREAS, this vision for change began at the local level on September 13, 2013 when representatives from the
six counties along the IRL (Volusia, Brevard, Indian River, St. Lucie, Martin, and Palm Beach) met for the first
time as the IRL Counties Collaborative to begin an organized local effort to respond more effectively to declining
IRL water quality, recurring harmful algal blooms, and negative impacts to local economies. These discussions
led to the creation of the IRL Council in February 2015. The Interlocal Agreement was last amended in 2017.
WHEREAS, the IRL Council began its first fiscal and operational year on October 1, 2015 and worked quickly
and strategically to hire staff, relocate the IRLNEP headquarters to Sebastian, Florida, and establish a new IRL
Management Conference of citizens, scientists, and community leaders to advise the IRL Council Board of
Directors.
WHEREAS, IRL Council creation and IRLNEP reorganization provided an immediate benefit of increased and
diversified financial support for IRL restoration from $600,000 of annual federal funding to $2,100,000 annually
of mixed federal, state, and local funding. These new revenues allowed for continued and expanded funding for
IRL restoration projects consistent with the 2008 IRL Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
(CCMP).
WHEREAS, in fiscal year 2016-2017, the IRL Council and IRLNEP successfully completed and passed a
mandatory five-year program evaluation with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that is an obligation for
continued federal funding and which re -aligned the IRLNEP brand to "One Lagoon — One Community — One
Voice" to reflect the commitment to a program that is community -based and consensus -driven.
WHEREAS, the IRL Council and IRLNEP recognize that the IRL CCMP is a science -based pathway to restore
ecosystem and economic health to the IRL that is long-term, non -regulatory, consensus -driven, and community -
based.
WHEREAS, the IRL Council and IRLNEP Management Conference have adopted the following:
VISION: Healthy Ecosystem — Healthy Communities — Healthy Economy
MISSION: One Lagoon — One Community — One Voice
PROMISE: Clean Water for People and Nature
GOALS:
1. To attain and maintain water and sediment of sufficient quality to support a healthy estuarine lagoon
ecosystem;
2. To attain and maintain a functioning, healthy ecosystem which supports endangered and threatened
species, fisheries, commerce, and recreation;
3. To achieve heightened public awareness and coordinated interagency management of the IRL
ecosystem; and
4. To identify and develop long-term funding sources for prioritized projects and programs to preserve,
protect, restore, and enhance the IRL.
v I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the IRL Council Board of Directors adopt this revised IRL
CCMP (Looking Ahead to 2030) with support from our Management Conference advisory committees:
Management Board; Science, Technology, Engineering, and Modeling Advisory Committee; and Citizens
Advisory Committee. This final CCMP has been revised with input from citizens throughout the IRL watershed.
The IRL Council and IRLNEP will work with our citizens, cities, government agencies, academic institutions, and
business community to seek expanded funding for implementation of the CCMP action recommendations.
DONE, ORDERED, AND ADOPTED by the IRL Council Board of Directors on this 14th day of December
2018.
Chris Dzadovsky, Chair
St. Lucie County Commission
Susan Adams, Secretary
Indian River County Commission
Bryan Lober
Brevard County Commission
Doug Bournique
St. Johns River Water Management District
Deb Denys, Vice Chair
Volusia County Council
Stacey Hetherington
Martin County Commission
Drew Bartlett
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Brandon Tucker
South Florida Water Management District
A I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY CONCURRENCE
Placeholder — USEPA concurrence email or letter
vii I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
MESSAGE FROM IRLNEP EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
The Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program (IRLNEP) Management
Conference and staff are pleased to present this revised Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plan (COMP) (Looking Ahead to 2030). This
CCMP is supported by a Community and Citizen's Guide to the CCMP. The
CCMP was developed with significant input from the IRLNEP Management
Conference, stakeholders, local communities, and citizens. Thank you all for your
thoughts, advice, and comments. This CCMP is a significant revision from the
2008 CCMP update. It responds to the dramatic water quality changes, seagrass
losses, and declining fisheries that the Indian River Lagoon (IRL) has faced since
the 2011 superbloom.
This IRL CCMP revision also looks beyond the defined IRL watershed to
consider connected waters and watersheds more explicitly. This approach includes
a formal boundary amendment adopted in 2016 that extends planning to include
the southern portion of the Halifax River in Volusia County. This CCMP revision
also looks westward at connections with the St. Johns River and connections between the St. Lucie Estuary,
Lake Okeechobee, and Everglades restoration, as well as eastward to include inlets connecting the IRL to
nearshore waters.
This CCMP revision has been developed in alignment with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
program performance criteria for National Estuary Programs (NEPs) and Section 320 of the 1987 Clean Water
Act, as reauthorized by the U.S. Congress in 2016. NEPs promote comprehensive planning for long-term
protection of nationally significant estuaries in the United States that are deemed to be threatened by pollution,
development, or overuse. Restoration is implemented through collaborative and voluntary efforts by local, city,
state, federal, private, and interest group stakeholders convened as a Management Conference. The purpose of
the IRLNEP Management Conference is to:
• Assess trends in water quality, natural resources, and uses of the estuary.
• Collect, characterize, and assess data on harmful contaminants, nutrients, and natural resources within the
estuarine zone to identify the form and causes of environmental problems.
• Clarify how pollutant loads from legacy (in -place), point, and nonpoint sources affect the estuary's
potential uses, water quality, and natural resources viability.
• Develop a CCMP that recommends priority corrective actions and compliance schedules for addressing
all sources of pollution and for restoring and maintaining the physical, chemical, and biological integrity
of the estuary, including restoration and maintenance of water quality; balanced populations of indigenous
shellfish, fish, and wildlife; recreational and commercial activities; and other designated uses of the
estuary.
• Develop plans for the coordinated implementation of the CCMP by the federal, state, regional, and local
partners participating in the Management Conference.
• Monitor the effectiveness of CCMP actions and track trends in conditions.
• Review all federal financial assistance programs and federal development projects in accordance with
Clean Water Act requirements.
The IRL Council and IRLNEP Management Conference and our local community partners will work
cooperatively to implement this CCMP revision. This plan recommends the following broad actions that will
be necessary to restore and sustain IRL health:
• Take individual and community RESPONSIBILITY for your impacts on the IRL. If you own or
contribute to a problem, fix the problem. Each action decreases IRL, vulnerability and builds IRL
RESILIENCE.
• REDUCE nutrients and other pollutants entering the IRL from all sources.
viii I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• REMOVE muck, nutrients, pollutants (including known surface water and groundwater pollutant or
toxicant sources that threaten human or lagoon health), litter, invasive species, and human -built
impediments to natural water circulation.
• REBUILD aging and/or inadequate wastewater and stormwater infrastructure to reduce loads of nutrients,
other pollutants, and sediments to the IRL.
• RESTORE impaired natural IRL habitats with priority action for seagrasses, filter feeders, living
shorelines, and wetlands with a spatial mosaic that supports biological diversity.
• Invest in scientific RESEARCH strategically targeted to improve restoration and stewardship of
resources, with full support from comprehensive and integrated monitoring of conditions and progress
throughout the lagoon.
• RESPOND to changes and new information quickly, responsibly, and with the best available science.
• Expand public participation, leadership, investment, and RESOLVE among diverse stakeholder groups
throughout the IRL watershed to achieve our mission, "One Lagoon — One Community — One Voice."
• REPORT activities, projects, challenges, opportunities, and financial expenditures to document trends in
the system, evaluate the progress of restoration, and provide transparency and accountability.
In support of this CCMP revision, the IRLNEP assembled a preliminary list of proposed projects that will
improve wastewater infrastructure, reduce reliance on conventional septic systems, retain and treat stormwater,
rehabilitate habitats, and enhance planning for resilient communities. This list was assembled from data
provided by the partners in our Management Conference. This working list of projects will be evaluated and
revised annually by the IRLNEP Management Conference to ensure that we have a pipeline of "shovel -ready"
projects that can move forward to completion with available funding. The preliminary list of projects clearly
demonstrates that IRL improvements will require multiple projects to move forward to completion at varying
spatial and temporal scales. This will require proper alignment of project types to available and future funding
streams, as well as expanded annual funding at local, state and federal levels.
None of the above actions will occur without public support for expanded and accelerated funding for IRL
infrastructure, water quality improvement, and habitat restoration projects. The foundation for that support
depends on well-informed and engaged citizens, partners, and policy -makers making sound financial
investments in IRL restoration and stewardship. This is a long-term commitment to clean water. The future
ecological health of the IRL, economic vitality of our communities, and quality of life depend on it.
Sincerely,
1
x , 4A.,
Duane De Freese, Ph.D., Executive Director
IRL Council and IRLNEP
ix I Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
A Call to Action:
"...passionately continue the task of facing seemingly insurmountable
challenges to do the right thing for our environment. "
Nathaniel "Nat" Pryor Reed (1933-2018)
Jupiter Island, Florida
October 2016
Travels on the Green Highway
11 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
THE NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM
The National Estuary Program (NEP) is a non -regulatory program established by the U.S. Congress and
administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The NEP was authorized by Section 320 of
the Clean Water Act in 1987. Each estuary in the NEP was designated by the U.S. Congress as an "Estuary of
National Significance." Today, 28 estuaries located along the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coasts and in Puerto Rico
have been designated as estuaries of national significance.
Pug*r swr4
Loeser
cam
_ FQUUW R*
L � _ nul.aaatipyzro alys
guyh E _�� BU
an Sk
TL T
j `pwmie Buy
Sm Fri - .� i ��+
E ref �tl..�
Mom
x
sao-te r., ��d r l Barr,
Inda� �1rr�r
�fi
RAYS OftWkft Holm
NEPs reside in a variety of institutional settings, including state and local agencies, universities, and individual
nonprofits. In overseeing and managing the national program, USEPA provides annual funding, national
guidance, and technical assistance to the local NEPs.
The 28 NEPs develop and implement Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans (CCMPs), which are
long-term plans that contain actions to address challenges and priorities related to water quality and living
resources. Work is focused within a study area that includes the estuary and its watershed. NEP challenges and
priorities are defined by local, city, state, and federal public agencies, and private -sector and independent -sector
interest groups. The NEP is a collaborative, effective, efficient, and adaptable coastal ecosystem -based network.
With more than 20 years of experience implementing key provisions of the Clean Water Act, the NEP is the
nation's principal watershed program —one that offers a viable, effective method for protecting and managing all
types of watershed environments.
NEPs assist the nation in restoration and stewardship of 28 estuaries of national significance that represent a
portfolio of natural and human -built assets that drive the coastal economy of the U.S. For example, in 2016, the
National Ocean Economics Program estimated the U.S. coastal economy at $13.9 trillion or 83.7% of the U.S.
gross domestic product for all coastal states based on 2013 data.'
'National Ocean Economics Program. 2016 Update. State of the U.S. Ocean and Coastal Economies. Available online at
htta://midatlanticocean.orL,/wa-content/uDloads/2016/03/NOEP National Report 2016.ndf
2 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
INDIAN RIVER LAGOON
An estuary is a coastal waterbody where freshwater tributaries (rivers and streams) meet the waters of the sea. It is
this subtle but important mixing of fresh and salt waters that make estuaries the most productive and fragile
coastal ecosystems in the world. A lagoon is a special type of estuary that is oriented parallel to the coast and
characterized by shallow coastal waters with restricted, but free, exchange with the adjacent open ocean. The
Indian River Lagoon (IRL) is a microtidal system that has limited exchange with the ocean through five inlets
(Ponce de Leon, Sebastian, Fort Pierce, St. Lucie, and Jupiter). Port Canaveral connects the ocean to the lagoon
through an engineered lock system that is used for access by maritime vessels.
The distance between inlets and the small tidal
range on the east coast of Florida limits
exchange between the ocean and the IRL system.
In fact, circulation of water in large portions of
the IRL is driven primarily by wind. Because of
the long residence times and flow restrictions
from land -based development (i.e., causeways,
wetland alterations, and past construction
practices) in some locations, the IRL is highly
sensitive to nutrient and pollutant loadings from
the watershed. Inputs from the watershed have
continued to increase during recent decades,
causing declines in water quality and changes to
the ecological and biological integrity of the
ecosystem.'
The IRL system is composed of three distinct
and connected estuaries: the Indian River
Lagoon, Banana River Lagoon, and Mosquito
Lagoon. The IRL system extends 156 miles from
the Ponce de Leon Inlet to Jupiter Inlet. It spans
three climate zones, from temperate to
subtropical to tropical. It encompasses almost
40% of the east coast of Florida and connects
five counties (plus an additional two counties,
Palm Beach and Okeechobee, within the
watershed), 38 incorporated cities, and
approximately 1.6 million residents. The lagoon
watershed covers 2,284-square miles, and the
lagoon's waters span 353-square miles.
Healthy estuaries provide many ecosystem services and
support coastal assets of national significance:
• Serve as centers of biological diversity.
• Provide essential natural habitats that support birds,
mammals, fishes, and other wildlife.
• Support a complex food web upon which much marine life
depends.
• Act as "bread baskets" for coastal oceans, providing
productive nursery areas and habitats that support both
commercial and recreational fisheries.
• Provide natural wetland buffers that reduce stormwater
runoff, reduce flooding, and treat nutrients and runoff
protecting coastal ocean water quality.
• Protect coastal areas from natural hazards, including storm
surges, flooding, erosion, and impacts from sea level rise.
• Connect bodies of water for transportation and marine
operations.
• Represent waters and complex watersheds that support
many of the largest and oldest coastal cities with diverse
historical, cultural, and environmental assets.
• Serve as centers of commerce with significant public and
private infrastructure, including harbors and ports vital for
shipping and transportation; tourism destinations; scientific
research, restoration, and education centers; and military
installations.
• Improve real estate values for properties on and near the
estuary.
• Attract residents and visitors for recreational fishing,
boating, swimming, and wildlife viewing.
• Provide many ecosystem services that support America's
valuable coastal economy. Nurture an enviable, water -
dependent quality of life.
The IRL is home to a rich array of plants and animals whose existence depends on the quality of water within the
lagoon. More than 2,000 species of plants, 600 species of fish, 300 species of birds, and 50 threatened or
endangered species inhabit the IRL for at least some portion of their lives. Scientists have shown the IRL to be a
biologically diverse estuary with approximately 4,000 species documented. Visitors come from across the globe
to see the large and diverse number of birds, manatees, and dolphins, or to fish the waters of the lagoon, which
also make the IRL an economic driver for the five counties it borders.
' Sigua, G., Steward, J., & Tweedale, W. 2000. Environmental Management 25: 199. https://doi.org/l0.1007/s002679910016.
3 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
A 2016 economic valuation study by the East Central Florida and Treasure Coast Regional Planning Councils
estimated the total annual economic output (value received) from the IRL in 2014 was about $7.6 billion. This
figure did not include the estimated $934 million in annualized real estate value for properties located on or near
the IRL, nor does it include the economic contributions from estuarine -related resources in Volusia County north
of the Ponce de Leon Inlet. When both of these economic contributions are considered, total economic output is
valued at about $9.9 billion annually.
However, decades of land use activities throughout the IRL watershed have upset the natural balance of this
delicate ecosystem. Stormwater runoff from urban and agricultural areas, wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP) discharges, inadequate and failing septic systems, and excess fertilizer applications have led to
harmful levels of nutrients and sediments entering the lagoon. In addition, these pollutants lead to muck
accumulation on the lagoon bottom, which damages healthy sediments and increases internal nutrient
exchange. These changes create a lagoon bottom that is not conducive to seagrass, shellfish, or benthic
invertebrate growth. Land use changes and urban development have changed the size and drainage patterns of the
IRL watershed with the addition of drainage canals, mosquito control ditches, impervious surfaces, and
causeways. Development impacts are most pronounced along IRL shorelines where dredge and fill activities,
hardened shorelines, and coastal development have altered natural upland -wetland -lagoon connections.
2016 EXPANSION OF THE IRLNEP PLANNING BOUNDARY
At the request of the Volusia County Council (Resolution
2015-133) and with support from the Indian River Lagoon
National Estuary Program (IRLNEP) Management
Conference, the IRL Council adopted a boundary
amendment in 2016 to expand the planning boundary of
the IRLNEP northward into the Halifax River (Resolution
2015-04). The addition extends the IRLNEP northern
planning boundary by approximately 25 miles and
incorporates an additional 198,678 acres of watershed,
including six of Volusia County's 16 drainage basins.
The amended boundary acknowledged the benefits of
considering connected waters and watersheds in a broad,
holistic, and regional approach to ecosystem -based
management. Ecosystem -based management is a
comprehensive and integrated approach that considers
entire ecosystems, including people and infrastructure. By
considering the connections within and among coastal
watersheds, this approach addressed the cumulative
impacts of multiple activities across space and time. This
comprehensive, ecological approach ensures the continued
provision of services people want and need by
maintaining healthy and productive connected
ecosystems. The boundary amendment also provided
opportunities to better understand and plan for how
climate change (including sea level rise) might influence
the connectivity of water and wildlife along a north -south
gradient that spans the temperate, subtropical, and tropical
climate zones. For example, the additional area is part of
the Atlantic Flyway for birds and provides pathways for
migration of fishes, manatees, and other estuarine species.
ledl*n MWW L"FMn
' f
R Q"
R+VEF
,
W. UW E
sm"M
4 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
IRLNEP MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
Designation of the IRL as an `Estuary of National Significance," with authorization under Section 320 of the
Clean Water Act, was first announced by President George H. W. Bush on Earth Day in 1990 and provided the
catalyst for creating the IRLNEP and convening a Management Conference in 1991. The first CCMP was adopted
by the Management Conference in 1996. The 1996 CCMP was then updated in 2008. From 1991-2015, the St.
Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) served as the host agency for the IRLNEP. Dramatic
changes to IRL health as the result of an unprecedented pico-cyanobacterial bloom in 2011 ("superbloonf ),
coupled with damaging seasonal freshwater releases from Lake Okeechobee to the southern IRL, heightened
scientific and public concerns for the future of the IRL. These continuing and expanding threats resulted in a call
to action from citizens; scientists; and local, state, and federal partners.
In 2013, the Indian River Lagoon Counties Collaborative met for the first time in response to the harmful algal
blooms in 2011, 2012, and 2013. The Collaborative was initiated by Martin County Commissioner Ed Fielding,
who was joined by Brevard County Commissioner Chuck Nelson, Indian River County Commissioner Peter
O'Bryan, Palm Beach County Commissioner Hal Valeche, St. Lucie County Commissioner Chris Dzadovsky, and
Volusia County Commissioner Joshua Wagner. The goals of the group were to better understand the causal agents
of the algal blooms, create uniform water quality rules and regulations across county lines, and unify in the
request for projects and funding from the state and federal legislatures for water quality issues. Over the months
that followed, the collaborative engaged USEPA, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP),
SJRWMD, and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) in discussions to create a new, independent
organization responsible for the IRLNEP. This initiative received both programmatic and technical best practices
advice from the three other NEPs in Florida (Charlotte Harbor, Tampa Bay, and Sarasota Bay).
The new host agency for the IRLNEP, the IRL Council, was created by interlocal agreement on February 19,
2015, as an independent special district of the state of Florida. The partners to the interlocal agreement (DEP,
SJRWMD, SFWMD, Volusia County, Brevard County, St. Lucie County, and Martin County) made
commitments to provide annual funding contributions to the IRL Council. Pursuant to the interlocal agreement,
IRL Council investors serve as the Board of Directors of the IRL Council and as the policy board of the IRLNEP.
On September 8, 2015, an amended interlocal agreement was executed to extend IRL Council membership to
include the Indian River County Lagoon Coalition, representing three cities in Indian River County (Vero Beach,
Sebastian, and Fellsmere). The first operational fiscal year of the IRL Council began on October 1, 2015. On June
9, 2017, a second restated and amended interlocal agreement transferred representation from the Indian River
County Lagoon Coalition to Indian River County Board of County Commissioners. The annual funding
commitments from each of the IRL Council partners include $250,000 from DEP, $500,000 from SJRWMD,
$500,000 from SFWMD, and $50,000 from each of the five counties (Volusia, Brevard, St. Lucie, Martin, and
Indian River). In addition, USEPA contributes $600,000 per year, and the IRL license plate generates about
$125,000 per year.
The driving force for the IRLNEP reorganization was a visionary and unified agreement among the participating
IRL counties and cities that a new structure and business model for the IRLNEP was needed to achieve the
following outcomes:
• Solve the urgent problems facing the IRL as a unified, focused, and science -based IRLNEP Management
Conference.
• Ensure that the IRLNEP is a fully performing NEP based on USEPA performance measures.
• Enhance local community knowledge and engagement.
• Expand IRLNEP activities to be more inclusive of the entire IRL ecosystem, as well as adjoining systems
that influence the lagoon watershed.
• Encourage greater participation from the private -sector.
5 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• Expand and expedite funding for ecosystem restoration at all levels of the public -private -independent
sector partnership.
The IRLNEP Management Conference is science -based, non -regulatory, collaborative, community -based, and
consensus -driven. It is led by diverse interests from local, state, and federal agencies; academia; community and
industry leaders; and citizens dedicated to developing and implementing the vision, mission, goals, and actions of
the COMP. The Management Conference recognizes that no individual organization, agency, or community can
protect, restore, and manage the HRL watershed alone. Successful restoration and stewardship of the lagoon will
require a common vision and unified effort among citizens and stakeholders throughout the IRL watershed.
The IRL Council created three advisory and oversight committees to provide advice and recommendations: (1) a
Management Board comprising administrators and resource managers from local, regional, state, and federal
government agencies and organizations, as well as a financial oversight sub -committee; (2) the Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Modeling Advisory Committee (STEMAC) that provides scientific and technical
expertise, guidance, and oversight from local academic and research institutions; and (3) the Citizens Advisory
Committee comprised of local representatives (IRL Ambassadors) representing each of the five counties
participating in the IRL Council who are responsible for ensuring that the IRLNEP is connecting to and
communicating with local communities and citizens throughout the IRL region. In addition, the IRLNEP staff
work directly with industry partners through the IRL Innovator and Investor (IRLI2) Network.
USEPA serves in an advisory capacity to the IRL Council and is a voting member of the advisory Management
Board. USEPA represents a major partner/investor to the IRLNEP consistent with Section 320 of the Clean Water
Act and contingent upon Congressional reauthorization of Section 320 and annual Congressional appropriations
for the NEP. USEPA also provides technical assistance and support to the IRLNEP Management Conference.
A Coffabo"re Approach To a * Gowmame
IRL Counc 1"IRLNF f} mnff
%v]7rKwC all krs-& of the
NUTPWTWM(:UaVMrLC-C.
7 AJTMILkAA"t 7909rPHIMM
i IN1rE5tY7Q� �IAII � I
Florida coam4iV Id"
ali�L�Wilh3rl all et,q' wL
tKMFLI9 .MJ LV 3 rO M I'C[O&x
6 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Together, the IRL Council and its Management Board and advisory and oversight committees represent the
IRLNEP Management Conference. The Management Conference employs the network governance organizational
model defined in Section 320 of the Clean Water Act. The IRLNEP Management Conference represents a more
than 100-member citizen and scientist oversight committee that advises the IRL Council Board of Directors as
they adopt policies and make annual budget and appropriation decisions to implement the CCMP actions. The
IRL Council and IRLNEP staff acknowledge and thank all present and past members of the IRLNEP
Management Conference for their support of the IRLNEP reorganization and CCMP revision. The current and
former members of the Management Conference at the time of CCMP adoption are shown in the tables below.
IRL Council Board of Directors
IRL Council Board of Directors (alternates)
Chris Dzadovsky (Chair), St. Lucie County Commission
Frannie Hutchinson, St. Lucie County Commission
Deborah Denys (Vice -Chair), Volusia County Council
Billie Wheeler, Volusia County Council
Susan Adams (Secretary), Indian River County Commission
Tim Zorc, Indian River County Commission
Bryan Lober, Brevard County Commission
Rita Pritchett, Brevard County Commission
Stacey Hetherington, Martin County Commission
Doug Smith, Martin County Commission
Drew Bartlett, DEP Deputy Secretary
Thomas Frick, DEP
Doug Bournique, SJRWMD
William Tredik, SJRWMD
Brandon Tucker, SFWMD
Kathy LaMartina, SFWMD
Cesar Zapata, USEPA Region 4 (Advisory)
Jennifer DiMaio, USEPA Region 4 (Advisory)
Former IRL Council Board of Directors and Alternates
Doug Daniels, Volusia County (2015-2016)
Dick Winger (2016)
Kevin Powers, SFWMD (2015-2017)
Joel Tyson (2015-2017)
Richard Gillmore, Indian River County Lagoon Coalition (2015-2016)
Curt Smith, Brevard County (2015-2018)
Ed Fielding, Martin County (2015-2018)
Jeff Beal, Florida
Fish and Wildlife
Conservation
Commission (FWC)
Vanessa Bessey,
Florida Department
of Agriculture and
Consumer Services
(FDACS)
Brad Blais, Mead and
Hunt, Inc.
Mel Bromberg,
WaterSHED
International LLC
(replacing Jim David,
2016-2018)
Thomas Campenni,
Treasure Coast
League of Cities
(Financial
Subcommittee)
Tom Carey, Volusia
County
Paul Carlisle, City of
Sebastian
IRL Council Management Board
Anthony Catanese, Doug Gibson, Chuck Jacoby,
Florida Institute of Volusia League of SJRWMD
Technology (FIT) Cities
Frank Catino,
Brevard County
Stu Glass, Space
Coast League of
Cities (Financial
Subcommittee)
Mark Crosley, Florida Layne Hamilton, U.S
Inland Navigation Fish and Wildlife
District Service (USFWS)
Jennifer DiMaio,
USEPA Region 4
Monte Falls, City of
Vero Beach
Joseph Falzone,
Raymond James
Financial (Financial
Subcommittee)
Sara Davis, DEP
(replacing Chris
Ferraro, 2016-2018)
Clay Henderson,
Stetson University
Chris Hendricks,
Sotheby's
International Realty
Dianne Hughes,
Martin County
Mitch Hutchcraft,
King Ranch
Greg Wilson,
Riverside
Conservancy
(Financial
Subcommittee)
George Jones,
Ocean, Research and
Conservation
Association (ORCA)
Bill Kerr, BKI, Inc.
Kathy LaMartina
(Vice Chair),
SFWMD
Vince Lamb, Citizen
Barbara Lenczewski,
Florida Department
of Economic
Opportunity (DEO)
Mike Littell, Citizen
(Financial
Subcommittee)
Mike McCabe,
Melbourne -Tillman
Water Control District
Kelli McGee, Natua
Strategies (Financial
Subcommittee)
Robert Musser,
Canaveral Port
Authority
Judy Orcutt, Citizen
Lynne Phillips,
National Aeronautics
and Space
Administration
(NASA)/Kennedy
Space Center
Kevin Shropshire, City
of Rockledge
Marty Smithson,
Sebastian Inlet Tax
District
Thomas Stratton,
Citizen (Financial
Subcommittee)
Laurilee Thompson,
Brevard County
Tourism
Development Council
William Tredik,
SJRWMD
Robert Ulevich
(Chair), Polymath
Consulting Services,
Inc.
Charles Vogt III,
Florida Department
of Health (FDOH)
7 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Anne Birch, The
Nature Conservancy
Mitch Roffer, Citizen
Kevin Johnson, FIT
David Cox, Indian
River Soil and Water
Conservation District
Patti Gorman,
SFWMD
Adeljean Ho
(replacing Hyun Jung
Cho), Bethune-
Cookman University
Megan Stolon, Hubbs
SeaWorld Research
Institute
Dale McGinnis,
Eastern Florida State
College
Edie Widder, ORCA Bob Day, Citizen
STEMAC
Mark Perry, Florida
Oceanographic
Society
Chuck Jacoby (Chair),
SJRWMD
Kevin Cooper, Indian
River State College
Linda Walters,
University of Central
Florida
Valerie Paul,
Smithsonian Marine
Station at Ft. Pierce
Chris Bodisco, Stetson
University
Leesa Souto, Marine
Resources Council
(MRC)
Andrei Ludu, Embry -
Riddle Aeronautical
University
Debra Woodall, Daytona
State College
Dennis Hanisak,
FAU/Harbor Branch
Oceanographic Institute
Citizens' Advisory Committee
Chris Farrell, Florida
Audubon
Chad Truxall (Vice
Chair), Marine
Discovery Center
Richard Paperno,
FWC
Lisa Krimsky,
University of Florida
Institute of Food and
Agricultural Sciences
(UF-IFAS)
Frank Brownell, Volusia County
Sam Lopez, Brevard County
Leesa Souto, Brevard County
Becky Bruner, Martin County
Jim Moir (Vice -Chair), Martin County
Heather Stapleton, Indian River County
Dave Carlson, St. Lucie County
Gary Ritter, Indian River County
Katie Tripp, Volusia County
Frank Catino (Chair), Brevard
Billy Rome, Volusia County
Cynthia Van de Voorde Hall, Indian River
County
County
Mike Conneen, Brevard County
Gayle Ryan, Martin County
Jessy Whales, Volusia County
Ken Grudens, Indian River County
Adam Locke, St. Lucie County
Keith Winsten, Brevard County
Zack Jud, Martin County
Doug Patterson, Brevard County
Graham Cox, Indian River County
Former Citizens' Advisory Committee Members
David Brigida, St. Lucie County
Dennis Dickerson, Volusia County
Billy Gibson, St. Lucie County (2016-
(2016-2018)
(2016-2018)
2018)
Crystal Lucas, Martin County (2016-
2018)
CCMP implementation requires coordination among a diverse network of individuals, communities, and
organizations to integrate local -scale conservation activities with broad -scale goals. Sustained performance and
success hinges on effective communication among scientists, resource managers, and policy makers. An effective
IRLNEP will provide leadership that advances the shared interests of the Management Conference. There is no
one -size -fits -all model for addressing IRL problems nor is there an easy "quick fix." IRL restoration will require a
long-term commitment among all stakeholders and partners to fund and implement restoration and stewardship
projects. IRL restoration will require action based on science, evaluation, knowledge, and common sense.
8 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CCMP REVISION: IRLNEP RESPONDS TO A CHANGING LAGOON
This CCMP revision builds on the strengths of the 1996 CCMP and 2008 CCMP update. However, this CCMP
revision makes significant changes from previous CCMP action plans to be more responsive to the needs of the
IRL and more closely aligned with the NEP Program Evaluation Logic Model and Standardized Performance
Measures. Specific CCMP changes since the 2008 CCMP update are documented in Appendix A. New CCMP
action plan recommendations are identified as "NEW." Most importantly, this revised CCMP shifts its emphasis
to an active water quality and habitat restoration focus.
NEPs strive to demonstrate
progress on implementing
CCMP action plans to meet
the objectives of the Clean
Water Act and achieve the
long-term outcomes of
restoring and maintaining the
ecological integrity of
estuaries of national
significance. However, the
strength and value of a NEP
cow =WJ are tested most when a
Management Conference must
respond to a combination of
factors that shift the trajectory
of an estuary from what
appeared to be improving
health to declining health.
C Such a shift created the
challenges and opportunities
facing the IRLNEP today.
Since the 2008 CCMP update,
the IRLNEP and its
Management Conference have been challenged by a combination of events that dramatically reinforced the
scientific concerns about the health of the IRL. These events have increased the demands and opportunities for
enhanced service and support that the IRLNEP is designed to provide to stakeholders, communities, and citizens.
This CCMP revision incorporates new scientific knowledge, addresses inadequacies of past strategies for
restoration and intervention, and responds to new vulnerabilities and emerging threats. Key issues include:
RESPONDING TO A TIPPING POINT: The IRL experienced a dramatic shift from a system where benthic
aquatic vegetation was expanding to one dominated by planktonic microalgae following an unprecedented algal
bloom in 2011 (now referred to as the "2011 superbloom"). The post-2011 IRL is characterized by intense,
recurring, and long-lasting algal blooms; widespread loss of seagrasses; and episodic wildlife mortality events.
Ongoing blooms of picocyanobacteria, nanoplanktonic chlorophyte, and the brown tide species that plagued
Texas, Aureoumbra lagunensis, now appear to be the "new normal" for the central and northern IRL. This shift
emphasizes the need for improved scientific understanding of nutrient loads, nutrient cycling, and tipping points
for the IRL.
RESPONDING TO LAKE OKEECHOBEE RELEASE EVENTS: Concurrent with these stress -response
issues, the southern IRL is impacted seasonally by freshwater releases from Lake Okeechobee during times of
high water. During the summers of 2013, 2016, and 2018, billions of gallons of freshwater were released through
9 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
the St. Lucie Estuary to the southern IRL. As a result, the St. Lucie Estuary and southern IRL experienced
dramatic salinity shifts including sustained freshwater conditions. The combination of freshwater, high nutrients,
sediments, and an inoculant of the cyanobacteria Microcystis from Lake Okeechobee, in addition to nutrients from
the IRL watershed, fueled harmful algal blooms (HABs) in portions of the southern IRL. hi 2013, 2016, and again
in 2018, these releases initiated an intense Microcystis HAB, with reported concentrations of the toxin
microcystin exceeding World Health Organization standards. These freshwater releases and HAB events highlight
the importance of connections between the watersheds of the IRL and the Everglades and the need to address
expansion of the natural boundaries of the IRL watershed as the IRLNEP adopts a revised CCMP. This CCMP
revision considers the resource management implications of connected waters and watersheds more explicitly
than in past plans.
RESPONDING TO A NEED FOR INTEGRATED, SYSTEMATIC, AND SUSTAINED MONITORING,
MAPPING, AND MODELING: More than three decades of peer -reviewed scientific research and other
scientific reports have documented the detrimental impacts on water quality generated by nutrients from
wastewater treatment systems, septic systems, stormwater conveyances, fertilizers, and muck. This research
communicated concerns that continued loading would shift the IRL from a mesotrophic, seagrass-dominated
system to a eutrophic, microalgal dominated system. That tipping point may have been reached in 2011, but
scientific evidence of a declining lagoon preceded the shift of 2011 by decades, and improvements observed in
seagrass growth in the early 2000s may have been caused mostly by drought conditions. Given this ecological
shift and the concerted efforts to reduce nutrient loads, there is a growing need to define, coordinate, integrate,
and sustain the science that should inform management of the lagoon's water, habitat, living resources, and
communities. For example, there is an urgent need to develop and improve lagoon -wide health assessments.
There is also a need for ongoing scientific research to better understand the dynamics of the IRL to give policy
makers betters options to respond to HABs, fish kills, and other emerging issues including human health threats.
LEVERAGING THE KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE OF THE NEP NETWORK: Evidence of
successful restoration of water quality from other NEPs (Sarasota Bay, Tampa Bay, Puget Sound, Long Island
Sound, and Narragansett Bay) as well as Chesapeake Bay provided important guidance for this IRL CCMP
revision. The message is clear: focused and expanded efforts to reduce nutrient and other pollutant loads by
refurbishing aging and inadequate wastewater systems; removing septic systems with connections to a sewer
system or upgrading septic systems to enhanced treatment systems; improving treatment of water carried by large
stormwater conveyances; implementing alternative solutions to the current practice of land applying biosolids in
the watershed; diverting, consolidating, and treating water carried by small, dispersed urban stormwater
conveyances; removing muck; and decreasing residential, commercial, and agricultural use of fertilizer and
chemicals and managing yard waste will be required as part of a rigorous diet for the IRL. Across the spectrum
of external and internal sources of pollutant loads, a higher standard is required to rectify past loads, limit
current loads, and prepare for the loads associated with growth of the human population that is yet to
come. Another critical next step is to restore filter feeders (clams and oysters), because these populations will
have direct impacts on improving water quality. Although natural recovery of seagrasses and fisheries is expected
with improved water quality and clarity, additional restoration efforts (seagrass replanting and fish -stock
enhancement) may be required.
EVALUATING RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH SEA LEVEL RISE AND CLIMATE CHANGE: Over the
next several decades, coastal communities will be challenged to understand and respond to vulnerabilities of
natural resource assets, human -built infrastructure, and transportation/supply chains associated with climate
change and sea level rise. Understanding potential risks is the critical first step for coastal communities seeking to
implement adaptation strategies that decrease risks, build resilience, and in some cases, take advantage of new
opportunities.
10 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
PATHWAY TO IRL RESTORATION
Successful restoration of the IRL, is not an easy target to identify, nor does it equate to reestablishing a single set
of desired conditions. Broadly defined, ecosystem restoration attempts to remove or reduce human -induced
stressors and return some measure of structural and functional integrity to the system. Due to shifting baseline
stressors associated with factors such as human populations growth, coastal urbanization, climate change
(including sea level rise), and loss of taxa, restoration of the IRL to an idealized past reference status after
removal of human -induced pressure may be difficult to achieve'. For this CCMP revision, a healthy IRL provides
essential ecosystem functions that deliver sustainable ecosystem services to society. The overarching goal for IRL
restoration is to improve water quality and biodiversity as evidenced by a stable range of indicators, discussed
below in the Measuring Changes in IRL Vital Signs section.
If you are a citizen, industry leader, regulated stakeholder, community decision -maker, scientist, or government
agency, you and all the IRLNEP's many partners have an opportunity to restore the IRL. This CCMP revision
represents a non -regulatory restoration plan that is dependent on each individual stakeholder and partner taking
the actions necessary to reduce human -impacts to the IRL and its watershed. It is a plan that will require annual
evaluation, with USEPA required updates and revisions in the future.
TAKING ACTION
This CCMP revision identifies 10 broad categories of actions that can be considered and implemented by citizens
and all IRL stakeholders and partners. They were first envisioned by the Brevard County Save Our Indian River
Lagoon Project Plan in 2016 as REMOVE, REDUCE, RESTORE, and RESPOND. This CCMP revision expands
the list of actions to reflect the comprehensive nature of the "One Lagoon — One Community — One Voice"
mission of the IRLNEP. This focus of this mission is to approach lagoon restoration with a more unified voice.
' Duarte, C. A et al. 2009. Return to Neverland: Shifting baselines affect eutrophication restoration targets. Estuaries and
Coasts 32, 29-36.
111 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
IRLNEP: CORE VALUES
In April 2017, the IRL Council and IRLNEP Management Conference adopted the following vision, mission,
promise, and goals. Success for a healthy IRL system will only be achieved if the "One Lagoon — One
Community — One Voice" mission is successful.
Vision!
Healthy Ecosystem - Healthy Coiywm n i tier - Healthy Economy
Mission:
Otte Lagoor2 - One Community - One Voice
Promise:
Clean Water- for People and Nit ture
Goals:
To attain and maintain waterand sediment of sufficient quality to
support a healthy estuarine lagoon ecosystem;
To attain and maintain afinctioning, healthy ecosystem which
supports endangered and fhreatened species, fisheries, commerce
a nd recreation;
To achieve heightened public awareness and coordinated interagency
management of the IRL ecosystem; and
To identify and develop long-term funding sources for prioritized projects
and programs to preserve, protect, restore and enhance the IRS,.
12 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
IRLNEP: MEASURING PERFORMANCE AND PROGRESS
To assess NEP progress in achieving long-term CCMP and program goals, USEPA conducts quarterly and annual
progress reporting. Every five years, a comprehensive program evaluation is conducted by USEPA for each NEP.
USEPA developed NEP Program Evaluation Guidance to assess the effectiveness of NEP actions. The guidance
includes performance measures, describes a process for conducting site visits, and provides a feedback loop to
help ensure that recommendations for improvement are implemented. This revised CCMP is structured to align
with the USEPA Evaluation Model for NEPs and specific Standardized Performance Measures for NEP Core
Elements and Sub -Elements:
NEP Performance Measures - Core Elements:
Program Implementation and Reporting
Financial Management — Program Planning and Administration — Outreach and Public Involvement
Ecosystem Status and Trends
Research —Assessment and Monitoring - Reporting
Each activity of a NEP is evaluated based on outputs and outcomes. Outputs represent the deliverables from
the workplan and CCMP activities (i.e., products, services, methods, and approaches). Outcomes are the
results, impacts, and accomplishments. When possible, outcomes are quantified as measurable changes.
USEPA considers three timelines for outcomes:
Short-term (1 — 2 years) outcomes revolve around improved knowledge.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years) outcomes revolve around behavioral change.
Long-term (5 — 10+ years) outcomes revolve around restoration and maintenance of the ecological
integrity of estuaries of national significance so that they meet their defined uses.
ROLE OF THE IRLNEP
Throughout this revised COMP, specific IRLNEP responsibilities will be identified that align with three broad
categories of program commitment or action (coordinate, collaborate, and conduct).
Actions Engagement
Coordinate Convene partnering entities, ensure open communication to minimize conflicts and/or redundancies,
and maximize efficiencies through cooperative ventures.
Collaborate Join forces with partner agencies and invest staff time and funding into projects.
Conduct Invest staff time and funding as the lead agency conducting an IRL initiative defined in the IRLNEP
Annual Business Plan, budget, and USEPA workplan identifying federally -funded projects.
Over the next decade, the IRLNEP will join with partners in its Management Conference to advance initiatives
and actions that restore the IRL, enhance long-term stewardship of the system, and align with authority, vision,
mission, promise, and goals of the Clean Water Act. Realization of the complete benefits of the IRL Council
Interlocal Agreement and development of the lRLNEP as a fully performing estuary program that represents the
entire IRL watershed will require significant and sustained program support (both human and financial resources).
IRLNEP leadership actions identified in this CCMP revision represent specific and strategic IRLNEP outputs
(deliverables). These actions will be represented as project deliveries in annual USEPA workplans, as well as
IRLNEP business plans and budgets. Each IRLNEP leadership action addresses a program need and is an
essential prerequisite for effective, science -based ecosystem restoration. When viewed collectively, these
leadership actions combine with others that have been completed or are already in progress to form a solid
foundation for successful restoration and stewardship of the IRL. Most importantly, the IRLNEP will strive to
implement an IRL ecosystem -wide restoration initiative that is effective, efficient, transparent, and inclusive.
13 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
IRLNEP
Mission
IRLNEP Deliverables from the Action Plans
Tentative Target Date
Annual CCMP project funding and implementation (projects identified and
Annual; recurring
prioritized for IRL Council/IRLNEP funding annually)
Lagoon -wide geographic information system (GIS) asset mapping
Annual; recurring
Looking Ahead — Science 2030 Report that identifies gaps in knowledge,
2019; update as needed
emerging issues and innovation opportunities
IRL Habitat Restoration Plan anchored by a network of four Regional
Restoration Centers identified for IRL restoration, research, citizen
engagement, and education (Marine Discovery Center in Volusia County,
2019-2020
ONE
Brevard Zoo in Brevard County, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution
LAGOON
in Indian River and St. Lucie Counties, Florida Oceanographic Society in
Martin County)
Climate Ready Estuary Report (risk -based vulnerability assessment and
2018-2019
adaptation plan funded by USEPA, in development)
CCMP Update (USEPA mandate every five years, as needed)
2025
CCMP Revision (USEPA mandate every 10 years)
2030
Expanded funding for cost -share projects from local, state, regional,
Annual; recurring
federal, and private funding sources
IRL Projects Plan
2019; update annually
Update of 2016 IRL Economic Analysis
2019-2020; update as
needed
Update Boaters Guide to the Indian River Lagoon
To be determined
(TBD)
Emergency Incident Preparation and Response Plan
TBD
Expansion of IRLI2 network (IRLNEP leadership to promote and cultivate
water and clean technology innovation, technology development, and
Annual; recurring
private -sector industry solutions to IRL and Florida water quality
ONE
challenges)
COMMUNITY
Direct support (IRLNEP staff and funding resources) for three established
annual lagoon -wide symposia:
EDUCATION: SNORE (Sharing Our Research with Everyone)
education/research conference hosted by Daytona State College
RESEARCH: IRL Science Symposia hosted by Florida Atlantic
Annual; recurring
University/Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute
TECHNOLOGY: IRL Research Institute TechCon hosted by FIT
coupled with industry -led incubator/accelerator partnerships for
innovation development
IRL Monitoring Plan
2019-2020
IRL Communications Plan
2019; update annually
ONE VOICE
IRLNEP "One Community — One Voice" Initiative
2019-2020
"State of the Lagoon" Technical Report (synthesizing the science,
Begin initiative in
2019-2020; tentative
identifying stressors, and responding to emerging threats)
target for report in 2025
IRL VITAL SIGNS
The Puget Sound Partnership is one of the nation's 28 NEPs, and they developed a Vital Signs wheel that
communicated the health of the Puget Sound in a way that was scientifically valid and resonated with the public.4
The IRLNEP recognized the value and success of the Puget Sound Partnership Vital Signs wheel and applied a
similar approach for the IRL. The IRL Vital Signs represent different CCMP action plans or the overarching
4 Puget Sound Partnership. Vital Signs Website: httD://www.nsn.wa.2ov/vitalsi2ns/.
14 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
measures for determining the health of the IRL. New CCMP action plans or Vital Signs that have been added as
part of this CCMP revision are identified as "NEW" in the tables of actions for each Vital Sign.
HOW TO USE THE VITAL SIGNS WHEEL
The IRL Vital Signs wheel presents 32 Vital Signs for IRL health that align with the "One Lagoon — One
Community — One Voice" mission of the IRLNEP. Each Vital Sign is important:
One Lagoon — Water quality, habitat restoration, and living resources issues and actions reside within the
One Lagoon segments of the wheel.
One Community — Community planning, economic development, and coastal resilience issues reside
within the Healthy Communities segments of the wheel.
One Voice — Strategic IRLNEP activities authorized by Section 320 of the Clean Water Act reside within
the Communicate, Collaborate, and Coordinate segments of the wheel. Specific outputs (deliverables) and
outcomes from this segment represent essential CCMP implementation and financial activities that will
drive restoration and stewardship of the IRL.
Every citizen, scientist, local community, public agency, and stakeholder can view Vital Signs individually and
collectively as an IRL "Call to Action." All point inwardly towards the center of the wheel and a healthy lagoon.
Identify which Vital Sign(s) correspond to your responsibility, authority, or opportunity. If you are responsible or
interested in solving a problem within a Vital Sign, take action and fix the problem. This individual ownership
approach respects local home -rule decisions of our communities and allows adaptive and strategic management
decisions to be made at all levels of the Management Conference partnership.
15 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
MEASURING CHANGES IN IRL VITAL SIGNS
An adage by Peter Drucker is, "You cannot manage what you do not measure." Measuring all possible indicators
at all times and in all locations would be cost prohibitive and impossible. Nevertheless, measuring key indicators
at multiple locations on a frequency that captures important changes and evaluating the data relative to
appropriate targets represent a cost-effective approach to documenting status and trends and demonstrating the
effectiveness of management actions.
For each of the 32 Vital Signs, specific indicators were identified and will be measured to assess the condition of
the Vital Sign (its status) and document how that condition changes through time (any trend). The selection and
monitoring of indicators represents a complex process and challenging process. Appropriate and consistent
indicators should convey complex information as simple and useful measures of status and trends. Some
indicators presented in this CCMP revision have been well studied with ample information available to describe
status and trends, whereas other indicators are not well understood. Therefore, some indicators may be
reconsidered, modified, or replaced as new information becomes available. The IRLNEP will work with the
Management Conference and our partner scientists, managers, and practitioners to advance appropriate indicators
and to better understand stressor-response relationships. Overall, indicators can provide:
• Fundamental information on the health of a system.
• Essential measures of the success of management actions and valuable guidance for course corrections
including identification of degrading trends that can be or should be reduced or reversed and improving
trends that can be or should be facilitated or accelerated.
• Qualitative and quantitative metrics that can provide useful comparisons through time on local, regional,
or national scales.
• Easy to understand information that communicates clear messages to diverse target audiences including
managers, scientists, and the public.
The following tables show how the IRLNEP mission, Vital Signs, indicators, and targets are related. The most
important aspect of CCMP implementation will be to evaluate trends for each Vital Sign, as appropriate, to
document improvement or decline in lagoon conditions over time. Identification and quantification of appropriate
indicators and targets will be an ongoing challenge and opportunity for the IRLNEP over the next decade.
IRLNEP Vital Sign
Mission Category,
ONE Water
LAGOON Quality
Vital Signs
Impaired Waters
Wastewater
Stormwater
Hydrology and
Hydrodynamics
Legacy Loads and
Healthy Sediments
Atmospheric
Deposition
Indicators: The Measures
Total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), basin
management action plans (BMAPs), reasonable
assurance plans (RAPs), applicable water quality
criteria including numeric nutrient criteria,
biological response
WWTP discharge quality; number of septic
conversions to advanced septic or sewer;
biosolids and reclaimed water nutrient
management
Stormwater discharge to IRL; urban, recreational,
and agricultural fertilizer use reductions (pounds
or tons); urban and agricultural best management
practices (BMPs) implementation; light
attenuation coefficient in the lagoon
Surface water volume restored to natural flow,
groundwater and internal water flows and loads
Healthy sediments; location, acreage, volume,
and nutrient loads/flux from muck
Wet -dry atmospheric deposition of nitrogen and
pollutants
Contaminants of Types, concentrations, and loads of contaminants
Concern of concern
Targets
Total phosphorus, total nitrogen, chlorophyll -a,
fecal coliform, metals; BMAP or RAP compliance;
meeting water quality criteria and removal from
impaired waters list
Advanced wastewater treatment (AWT);
connection of septic systems near surface waters;
total phosphorus, total nitrogen, fecal coliform,
metals, and pollutant load reductions
Freshwater, total phosphorus, total nitrogen,
salinity, sediment, fecal coliform, and metal load
reduction; annual reductions in fertilizer use; acres
treated by BMPs; pre -development runoff equal to
post -development runoff, percent light reaching
lagoon substrate
Hydrologic targets identified and achieved
Total phosphorus, total nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide,
pH, sediment toxicity
Total nitrogen and contaminants
Thresholds levels identified by water quality
criteria for human and wildlife health, contaminant
concentration, and contaminant load
16 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
IRLNEP
Mission
Vital Sign
Category
Vital Signs
Indicators: The Measures
Targets
Coverage (acres), density, and species diversity;
coverage (acres), density, and species diversity of other
Recovery to scientifically defensible
Seagrasses
benthic habitats
reference target; TMDL targets for seagrass
Coverage (acres), density, and condition of live target
Recovery to scientifically defensible
Filter Feeders
species in conservation and/or commercial production
reference target
Expansion of functional living shoreline habitats based
on quantitative shoreline restoration coupled with
Miles of eroded or hardened shoreline
evaluation of natural habitat quality and functionality;
planted, miles of buffer zones around
ONE Habitat
Living Shorelines
miles of living shoreline, miles of buffer zone
waterbodies
LAGOON Quality
Wetlands and
Impounded and
Acres acquired and conserved, natural
Altered Marshes
Acres in conservation and management
wetland functions restored and managed
Spoil Islands
Islands in conservation, management, and public use
Islands restored, enhanced, and managed
Acres restored and managed for ecosystem
Land Conservation
Acres in conservation, management, and public use
integrity
Volume or area of unimpeded circulation in
Connected Waters
the IRL, restored flows to St. Johns River,
and Watersheds
Regional watershed planning and project integration
volume retained to groundwater
IRLNEP Vital Sign Vital Signs Indicators: The Measures Targets
Mission Cateeory
Pelagic and benthic community diversity,
population status, and trends; grazers; aquatic
Biodiversity
trophic cascade
Species of
Rare, threatened, endangered, and endemic species
Concern
identification, population trends, and recovery
Invasive Species
Invasive species population reduction and removal
ONE Living I Forage Fishes
LAGOON Resources
Commercial and
Recreational
Fisheries
HABs
Climate Ready
Estuary
Population status and trends
Population status and trends
Annual incidence of toxic and non -toxic HAB
events
Risk -based vulnerabilities identified
Target complex, not yet established;
maintain biodiversity of region
Targets for species recovery are population,
location, and removal from listing
100% removal
Targets for sustainable populations looking
at presence of breeding grounds, species
population, and species location
Targets for sustained and robust commercial
and recreational fishing, sustainable yields
and catch, presence of breeding grounds,
and species population and location
Target reductions for number, intensity, and
duration of blooms
Adaptation strategies identified and
adopted, projects implemented
IRLNEP
Vital Sign
Vital Signs
Indicators: The Measures
Targets
Mission
Category
Vibrant 21st
Century
Communities with vision and sustainability
Communities
plans
Inventory of plans developed and shared
Weight/volume of trash recovered annually
Trash -Free Waters
and hotspots for trash identified
Trash -Free Lagoon by 2030
Expanded clean marinas and compliance,
ONE Healthy
Marinas and
Number of clean marinas, number of derelict
100% reduction in derelict boats, no
COMMUNITY Communities
Boating
boats, number of moored vessels
discharge zone throughout IRL
Distinctive
Lagoon
Urban waterfronts, working waterfronts, and
Full engagement between communities and
Communities
Environmental Justice communities identified
IRLNEP Management Conference
Emergency
Preparation and
Emergency preparation and response plans
Response
Emergency preparation and response
in place
17 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
IRLNEP
Mission
ONE
VOICE
Vital Sign Vital Signs Indicators: The Measures
Category
Monitoring and Data
Sharing
State of the Lagoon
Communicate —
Collaborate —
Coordinate Technology Innovation
CCMP Implementation
and Financing
Monitoring Plan developed and implemented
Comprehensive, integrated, multi -disciplinary
State of the Lagoon Technical Report
Science Plan developed and implemented
CCMP revised, funded, and projects tracked
and implemented
Citizen Engagement and Communication Plan developed and
Education implemented
Federal, State, and
Local Policy Local, state, and federal policies align with
Opportunities IRLNEP vision, mission, and goals
IRL HEALTH CONCERN LEVELS
Targets
Comprehensive and integrated lagoon -
wide sampling, monitoring and data
sharing network and plan in place,
economic value of IRL quantified and
updated regularly
Delivery of State of the Lagoon Technical
Report every 10 years
Science and technology advancements
support and improve resource protection
management and environmental resource -
based economic stability
CCMP restoration project implementation
and return on investment
Citizen knowledge, engagement, and
behavior change to improve lagoon health
increases over time
Number of policy opportunities and
roadblocks identified and altered
Each IRL Vital Sign was ranked by the IRLNEP Management Conference based on one of four levels of
ecosystem health concern.
Levels are shown with this icon 1 and are color -coded as red, dark orange, light orange, and blue and
include the level number:
LEVEL 1: CRITICAL — Condition threatens immediate and long-term prognosis for lagoon health.
Indicators are unfavorable. Trend is negative. Immediate and aggressive intervention is urgently needed to stop
and reverse trend.
LEVEL 2: SERIOUS — Condition threatens long-term prognosis for lagoon health. Trend is unfavorable or
uncertain. Favorable outcome is not expected without strategic intervention and long-term stewardship.
LEVEL 3: UNDETERMINED — Insufficient knowledge is available to inform decision -making and resource
management for the Vital Sign. Research needs to be identified, funded, and applied to resource management.
LEVEL 4: STABLE OR IMPROVING TREND — Vital Sign is stable or trending towards improvement.
Continued intervention is needed. Long-term stewardship efforts are expected to deliver favorable outcomes.
HOW TO USE THIS PLAN
For each Vital Sign, the following information is provided:
• Goals: The specific goals that will be achieved by implementing the actions for the Vital Sign.
• Issue Summary: Description of the issues facing the IRL system for the Vital Sign, using the best
available information.
• Strategies: Approaches that should be implemented to achieve the goals for the Vital Sign.
• Action Plan Outputs (Deliverables): Specific deliverables including the responsible and partner entities,
estimated costs, potential funding sources, and the IRLNEP role in delivering the output.
• Outcomes: Short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes expected from implementation of the outputs.
• Challenges to Success: Potential challenges to achieving the goals of the Vital Sign.
• Citations: Literature referenced in the above items for each Vital Sign.
The information in the following sections guides the IRL Council and Management Conference in achieving the
vision, mission, promise, and goals established for the IRL system.
18 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
IMPAIRED WATERS
Goals:
c h ivve water qij al i ty sta nda rds to rem ave waterbod -pes
from the Impaired Waters list.
19 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
WATER QUALITY
Impaired Waters (Including TMDLs, BMAPs, and RAPs)
GOALS: REMOVE or REDUCE anthropogenic pollutant and nutrient loading to the IRL watershed to
meet the regulatory targets established by TMDLs, BMAPs, and/or RAPS; achieve the intended biological
response criteria; and achieve applicable water quality criteria to REMOVE the waterbody from the
Impaired Waters designation list.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Waters that do not meet state and federal water quality standards for one or more
parameters are determined to be "impaired." Under the federal Clean Water Act, this determination requires the
development of TMDLs for pollutants causing impairment to the waterbody. For identified pollutants, TMDLs
must specify reductions to achieve water quality standards.
As of 2018, the IRL system has verified impairments of
water quality standards for nutrients, fecal coliform
bacteria, and metals. In March 2009, DEP adopted
TMDLs for the IRL watershed, which was determined
to be impaired due to excessive amounts of total
nitrogen and total phosphorus.' The TMDLs focused on
the water quality conditions necessary for seagrass
regrowth at the depth limits where seagrass historically
grew in the watershed, based on a multi -year composite
of seagrass coverage. The median depth limits of
seagrass coverage in the IRL system have decreased
over the years because of deteriorating water quality
conditions. In 2013, additional TMDLs were adopted
for dissolved oxygen and nutrients for eight tributary
segments to the IRL.2 TMDLs were established in 2008
for dissolved oxygen, total nitrogen, and total
phosphorus for the St. Lucie River and Estuary Basin,
located at the southern end of the IRL.3 In addition,
DEP adopted nutrient numeric criteria for the entire M
for total nitrogen, total phosphorus, and chlorophyll -a.
Following TMDL adoption, DEP worked with IRL partners to develop BMAPs to implement the actions needed
to achieve the IRL TMDLs. A BMAP is a "blueprint" for restoring impaired waters, and it represents a
comprehensive set of strategies —permit limits on wastewater facilities, urban and agricultural BMPs,
conservation programs, and financial assistance —designed to implement pollutant reductions established by the
TMDLs. BMAPs are adopted by DEP Secretarial order and are enforceable. BMAPs were adopted for the North
IRL,' Central IRL,' and Banana River Lagoon' portions of the IRL system in February 2013 and the St. Lucie
River and Estuary in June 2013.' Revisions to the IRL TMDL and associated model are currently underway."
DEP identified the Mosquito Lagoon and Loxahatchee River as impaired, but a TMDL is not required for these
waterbodies because partners in these areas are working with DEP to develop RAPs.10°" RAPs are similar to
BMAPs in that they identify strategies and projects that affected stakeholders will implement to achieve water
quality standards within a specified timeframe; however, the RAP is intended to provide reasonable assurance to
DEP and USEPA that these pollution control mechanisms will result in reasonable progress toward attainment of
20 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
water quality standards and bring these waters into compliance with state and federal criteria in the future so that a
TMDL is not needed.
STRATEGIES:
Participate in TMDL, BMAP, and RAP processes and work to expand partnerships, identify and
implement pollutant reduction projects, and obtain funding to meet and work to surpass minimum water
quality standards to achieve restoration goals.
Continue to identify and implement scientific RESEARCH projects to better understand nutrient cycles
and flux in the IRL to advise revisions of TMDLs, BMAPs, and RAPS.
Evaluate and achieve stakeholder support for future IRLNEP activities that can help TMDL, BMAP, and
RAP implementation and success.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Plan Outputs
Output Intent
Lead Agenci
gencie
Cost
Role
or Organizat'
aniz
Impaired Waters-1: Support
Use best
DEP
BMAP
TBD
DEP, local
Coordinate
implementation, review, and
available
partners,
governments
update of IRL TMDLs as
science to revise
IRLNEP
needed and as best available
TMDL targets,
Management
science evolves.
as needed.
Conference
Impaired Waters-2: Work
Implement
DEP
BMAP
$4.6 billion*
DEP, local
Collaborate
with BMAP partners and DEP
water quality
partners,
governments,
to support implementation of
improvement
IRLNEP
water
BMAPs and track progress,
projects with a
management
compliance, and
goal to
districts
implementation challenges.
REMOVE
(WMDs),
waterbody from
Florida
impaired list.
Legislature
Impaired Waters-3: Support
Adopt RAPS for
RAP partners
DEP, IRLNEP
Mosquito
DEP, local
Collaborate
the partners and DEP in the
Mosquito
Lagoon: $39
governments,
development, adoption, and
Lagoon and
million;
Florida
implementation of the
Loxahatchee
Loxahatchee
Legislature
Mosquito Lagoon and
River to guide
River: $90
Loxahatchee River RAPs.
water quality
million
(NEW)
restoration.
Impaired Waters-4: Evaluate
Expedite water
IRLNEP
DEP
$4.6 billion*
Private
Coordinate
opportunities to incentivize,
quality
Management
investments,
monetize, and expedite
improvements.
Conference, local
local
nutrient reduction policies and
governments
governments,
actions, including water
DEP, WMDs,
quality credit trading. (NEW)
Florida
Legislature
*Estimate for Banana River Lagoon,
North IRL,
Central IRL, and St. Lucie River and Estuary BMAPs."
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Increase local partner participation in these watershed restoration processes.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Implement projects and programs to work towards five-year nutrient
reduction targets specified in the BMAPs.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Meet five-year and ten-year nutrient reduction targets specified in the
BMAPs. Meet the five-year targets identified in the Mosquito Lagoon and Loxahatchee River RAPS.
Evaluate seagrass response and make recommendations as necessary to revise BMAP activities and
TMDL targets. REMOVE the waterbody from the Impaired Waters designation list.
211 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Inadequate funding and project ideas to meet required reductions.
• Lack of incentive for regulated stakeholders to surpass required nutrient reductions.
• Legacy loading in the watershed may mask progress towards achieving water quality standards.
• Limited understanding by some of the public on how individual actions impact the lagoon water quality.
• Inadequate data on appropriate spatial and temporal scales, need for multiple lines of evidence, and
complexity of modeling and model construction, testing, and validation.
• Lack of planning that results in reactive or hastily implemented projects that may not benefit lagoon water
quality.
• Inadequate long-term support for real-time monitoring to assess if water quality targets and standards are
being achieved.
CITATIONS:
1. Gao, X. 2009. TMDL Report: Nutrient and Dissolved Oxygen TMDLs for the Indian River Lagoon and
Banana River Lagoon. Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
2. Gao, X. and Rhew, K. 2013. TMDL Report: Dissolved Oxygen and Nutrient TMDLs for Eight Tributary
Segments of the Indian River Lagoon. Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
3. Partner, K., Laskis, K., McTear, R., and Peets, R. 2008. TMDL Report: Nutrient and Dissolved Oxygen
TMDL for the St. Lucie Basin. Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
4. DEP. 2013. Basin Management Action Plan for the Implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads for
Nutrients Adopted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in the Indian River Lagoon
Basin North Indian River Lagoon.
5. DEP. 2013. Basin Management Action Plan for the Implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads for
Nutrients Adopted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in the Indian River Lagoon
Basin Central Indian River Lagoon.
6. DEP. 2013. Basin Management Action Plan for the Implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads for
Nutrients Adopted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in the Indian River Lagoon
Basin Banana River Lagoon.
7. DEP. 2013. Basin Management Action Plan for the Implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads for
Nutrients and Dissolved Oxygen by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in the St. Lucie
River and Estuary Basin.
8. Harper, H.H. and Baker, D.M. 2016. Refining the Indian River Lagoon TMDL-Technical Memorandum
Report: Assessment and Evaluation of Model Input Parameters.
9. Janicki Envirommental and Applied Technology and Management. 2012. Nutrient Loading Estimates for
the Indian River Lagoon TMDL Load Revision. Brevard County.
htti)://www.brevardfl.2ov/NaturalResources/WatershedPro2ram.
10. Mosquito Lagoon Reasonable Assurance Plan website:
httn: //i)ublicfiles. deb. state. fl.us/DEAR/Mosquito%2OLa2oon%20RA/.
11. Loxahatchee River Reasonable Assurance Plan website:
htti)://Dublicfiles.deD.state.fl.us/DEAR/Loxahatchee RA Plan/.
22 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
WASTEWATER
wM —
l.�lyrr��r lid [r,urY*
Goals:
f mprove wa stewat e r i nfrast ructu re to in c reese ca pac i ter a nd
treatment. Ac h lure adva aced wa stew-s#e r t reatme nt.
23 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
WATER QUALITY
Wastewater
GOALS: Improve municipal and industrial wastewater infrastructure throughout the IRL watershed to
achieve AWT standards to REDUCE or REMOVE loads of human and industrial pollutants to the IRL.
REDUCE vulnerability to WWTP overflows to the IRL. Expand WWTP capacity to accommodate septic to
sewer conversions and the region's growing human population.
ISSUE SUMMARY: The 2017 Bureau of Economic and Business Research estimates the population of the
five IRL region counties will increase up to 27% between 2017 and 2030.' This projected population increase
presents various challenges including how to treat and transport increased wastewater with an aging and limited
infrastructure. Sea level rise will place additional stress on centralized sewer systems, pipes, and septic systems in
low elevation and high-water table areas. Nutrient and other pollutant loads come from various wastewater
sources in the IRL, including WWTPs, septic systems, reclaimed water, and biosolids. Each of these sources has
its own challenges with respect to waste treatment and management .2
WWTPs. Direct WWTP discharges to the lagoon were largely removed because of the federal Clean Water Act
(1972) and the Indian River Lagoon System and Basin Act of 1990 (Chapter 90-262, Laws of Florida). The Indian
River Lagoon System and Basin Act had three stated goals: (1) elimination of surface water discharges, (2)
investigation of feasibility of reuse, and (3) centralization of wastewater collection and treatment facilities. This
Act also required local governments to identify areas where package treatment plants and septic systems posed
threats to the IRL and implement plans to provide centralized sewage treatment to these areas. Many of the small
package WWTPs were removed throughout the basin in response to the Act. In recent years, public concerns have
focused on accidental wastewater discharge events associated with hurricanes, tropical storms, heavy rain events,
and line breaks. These discharges are associated with aging pipe infrastructure and leaks and/or cracks in
underground wastewater lines. These increasing common failures highlight the vulnerability of the aging and
inadequate wastewater infrastructure to water inflow/infiltration, wastewater pipe failures, and lift station failures.
Conversion of septic systems to centralized sanitary sewer systems will further burden existing aging wastewater
infrastructure. Infrastructure improvements to municipal and private WWTPs present multiple community
benefits in addition to IRL protection. It is recommended that domestic WWTPs meet AWT standards of 3
milligrams per liter (mg/L) for total nitrogen and 1 mg/L for total phosphorus in the treated effluent. In addition to
the domestic WWTPs, there are industrial WWTPs throughout the IRL watershed. Industrial wastewater sources
include manufacturing, commercial businesses, mining, agricultural production and processing, and cleanup of
petroleum- and chemical -contaminated sites. Industrial wastewater discharges in Florida must provide reasonable
assurance for meeting water quality standards for surface water or groundwater to receive a discharge permit from
DER Maps of the domestic and industrial WWTPs in the IRL watershed are provided in Appendix B.
Septic Systems or Onsite Sewage Treatment and Disposal Systems (OSTDS). A 2015 study found that the
approximately 300,000 septic systems in the IRL watershed contribute a large nitrogen load to the lagoon.' Maps
of the OSTDS in the IRL watershed based on FDOH data are provided in Appendix B. Storm events also affect
septic systems, especially systems that are old, poorly maintained, and/or sited near the IRL and its major
tributaries where high water tables may compromise septic system drainfield functions. Sea level rise, changing
rain patterns, and elevated water tables will further reduce efficiencies and place additional burdens on OSTDS."'
In combination, more than 50% of the households in Volusia, Indian River, and Martin Counties are served by
OSTDS, as shown in the table below.' Traditional septic systems, as well as old or failed systems, provide little or
no treatment for nutrients. In addition, failing systems may provide little or no treatment for pathogens. It is
recommended that traditional septic systems not be used near the IRL and its tributaries and major canals. In
24 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
October 2018, the Brevard County Commission passed an ordinance that requires alternative septic systems on
the barrier island and within an identified overlay zone along the IRL.
Advanced OSTDS can be used to reduce the nutrient contribution to groundwater. On July 31, 2018, FDOH
adopted revised OSTDS rules to authorize in -ground nitrogen reducing biofilters and other "alternative systems."
The rule authorizes alternative systems in circumstances where standard systems are not suitable or where
alternative systems are more feasible.
ty
OSTDS
Municipal
Proportion OSTDS
Volusia
102,831
102,413
50%
Brevard
91,630
117,797
43%
Indian River
30,574
25,968
54%
St. Lucie
34,364
70,649
33%
Martin
29,864
26,201
53%
Source: Barile 2018
fftft IMF*
nor,
lirr.arr awnwam
OWN-L—L94�
—Wp 18�
■.*,rrr PWq
ro-b�•
Source: httn://www3.eDa.eov/nodes/nubs/homeowner_euide_lone_customize.ndf Source: Hazen and Sawyers
Conventional OSTDS Passive Nitrogen Reduction System
Reclaimed Water. Today, many
WWTPs use their treated effluent
for irrigation although other options
for reclaimed water disposal exist
as shown in the graphic. While the
use of reclaimed water for
irrigation is an excellent approach
to conserving potable water, if the
reclaimed water is high in nutrients,
irrigation with reclaimed water can
result in nutrients leaching into the
groundwater. Currently, no
regulations exist for the
concentration of total nitrogen and
total phosphorus in reclaimed water
for irrigation. In the IRL watershed,
reuse discharges from WWTPs
range from average annual total
nitrogen concentrations of 0.22 to
29.40 mg/L and average annual
total phosphorus concentrations of
0.17 to 9.47 mg/L. As part of the
Roe yd e-d Water Cycle
Source: httn://ramirezholmes.bloesnot.com/2013/07/celebratin2-central-dublin-recvcled.html
25 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
public education and outreach efforts, customers who use reclaimed water for irrigation should be informed of the
nutrient content in the reuse water because they can and should eliminate or reduce the amount of fertilizer added
to their lawn and landscaping.
Biosolids. Biosolids are the solid, semisolid, or liquid residue generated during the biological wastewater
treatment process. Land application of biosolids is allowed on permitted sites at controlled rates in accordance
with DEP-established site restrictions and site management requirements. All biosolids applied to land application
sites must meet the pathogen reduction requirements for Class AA, Class A, or Class B biosolids. No treatment
requirements exist for nutrients when producing biosolids, which may lead to biosolids with high nutrient
concentrations being applied in the IRL watershed. As a result, it will be important to track where biosolids are
being applied, determine the nutrient content, if possible, and track levels of nutrients in the soil. Chapter 62-640,
Florida Administrative Code, does not authorize the land application of biosolids in the St. Lucie River, Lake
Okeechobee, and Caloosahatchee River watersheds unless the applicant for a site permit can demonstrate that the
nitrogen and phosphorus in the biosolids will not add to nitrogen and phosphorus loadings in the watershed. There
is growing public concern that more protective measures are required within the IRL watershed, as well as
statewide, to ensure that biosolid nutrient loading to both surface waters and groundwater is strictly managed and
controlled. Additional concerns are associated with emerging pollutants that may be present in the biosolids waste
stream. DEP recently created a Biosolids Technical Advisory Committee to evaluate current management
practices and potential opportunities for enhancements to better protect Florida's water resources. The Technical
Advisory Committee includes seven members, who represent academia (two representatives), small utilities, large
utilities, environmental interests, agriculture, and haulers.
STRATEGIES:
• Improve existing wastewater infrastructure to
accommodate transfer of septic systems.
• Explore new technologies for AWT, such as
those that generate power, REMOVE
contaminants of emerging concern, and reclaim
nitrogen and phosphorus separately. Conduct a
cost -benefit analysis for these technologies.
• Review permit data to establish current baseline
for permitted wastewater discharges into the
IRL.
• Refine scientific knowledge about �
anthropogenic sources, e.g., use of
biogeochemical tracers to identify human wastewater sources.
• Implement an OSTDS inspection program to identify and prioritize areas where OSTDS are having the
greatest impact and to determine if the OSTDS can be connected to the sewer system or upgraded to an
advanced OSTDS.
• Continue to REDUCE density of septic systems in the IRL watershed, particularly in high vulnerability
and high impact areas. Where connection to centralized sewer is not practical or possible, policies should
require use of nitrogen reduction treatment systems in areas that impact IRL surface or groundwater.
• Provide funding for innovative technologies to improve nutrient treatment efficiencies and decrease costs
for nitrogen reduction systems where connection to sewer is not possible.
• Work with local governments to create rules and ordinances requiring connection of septic systems to the
sewer system within a certain time after sewer is made available, and to allow access by utilities for
maintenance of advanced OSTDS.
• Develop strategies and policies to identify areas not suitable for conventional septic systems where
alternative systems would be more feasible, and to incentivize or require alternative systems in areas
where wastewater treatment is not available.
26 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• REDUCE excess use of reclaimed water that supersaturates soils and pollutes groundwater within the IRL
watershed.
• Identify new uses for reclaimed water to REDUCE discharges.
• Conduct RESEARCH to track where all classes of biosolids are being applied and to determine the
nutrient and other pollutant content.
• Identify and evaluate alternative technologies for the handling, processing, and disposal of biosolids.
• Conduct RESEARCH to quantify nutrient loading associated with application of reclaimed water for
irrigation purposes and implement associated fertilizer reductions.
• REDUCE and strictly control nutrient and other pollutant loads to surface and ground waters within the
IRL watershed from applications of biosolids and use and management of reclaimed water.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
partner
Action
Output Intent
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Estimated
Funding Source
IRLNEP
or
Organizations
Cost
Role
Organizations
Wastewater-1: Ensure
compliance with the
IRL Act (Chapter 90-
262, Laws of Florida,
1990).
Wastewater-2:
REDUCE or REMOVE
all wastewater
discharges to the IRL
(including direct,
indirect through reuse,
and emergency loadings
of nutrients and other
pollutants).
Wastewater-3:
RESEARCH, identify,
and recommend
funding sources and
alternatives for
upgrading WWTP
infrastructure and to
REDUCE or REMOVE
domestic and industrial
effluents.
Wastewater-4: Promote
the connection of areas
served by OSTDS to
central sewer or, where
connection is not
feasible, use of nutrient
removing systems in
areas identified as
"problem" or "potential
problem."
Ensure that no
nutrients or
pollutants from the
human waste stream
are discharged
directly into the IRL
or indirectly through
groundwater or
tributary surface
waters.
Discharge directly
from a WWTP or
through reuse
should not exceed
AWT standards.
Reclaimed water
education, outreach,
and enforcement.
Expand funding for
wastewater
infrastructure
improvements and
REDUCE
pollutants.
DEP, local WMDs, interest
governments groups
Staff time
from DEP
and local
governments
Local
governments,
public and private
utility fees,
infrastructure
improvement
funds, State
Revolving Fund
(SRF) loans
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Local WMDs, DEP, TBD Local Coordinate
governments interest groups governments, and
public and private collaborate
utility fees,
infrastructure
improvement
funds, SRF loans
DEP and USEPA, $40 million
utilities WMDs, local for CCMP
governments projects
Local
governments,
public and private
utility fees,
infrastructure
improvement
funds, SRF loans
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Improve the FDOH, local
DEP, WMDs, $392 million
Local Coordinate
regional wastewater governments
Natural for CCMP
governments, and
treatment network
Resources projects
public and private collaborate
through innovation,
Conservation
utility fees,
regional
Service (NRCS),
infrastructure
consolidation, and
academia,
improvement
strategic transition
interest groups
funds, SRF loans
away from OSTDS.
27 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Responsible
Partner
Action
Output Intent
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Estimated
Funding Source
IRLNEP
or
Organizations
Cost
Role
Organizations
Wastewater-5: Develop Mandatory FDOH, local
and implement an inspection for all governments
OSTDS inspection OSTDS.
program and education
program within the five
IRLNEP counties.
Wastewater-6:
Evaluate nutrient Local
Undertake further
loads, governments,
studies to quantify the
vulnerabilities, and DEP
impacts of OSTDS on
risks to establish
the IRL with a focus on
priorities for septic
identifying high priority
to sewer conversion.
"problem" and
"potential problem"
areas.
OUTCOMES:
NRCS, DEP, TBD
WMDs, local
governments
Academia, TBD
WMDs
Local
governments,
public and private
utility fees,
infrastructure
improvement
funds, SRF loans
Local
governments,
public and private
utility fees,
infrastructure
improvement
funds, SRF loans
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Short-term (1— 2 years): Map problem areas and secure funding to upgrade WWTPs to AWT to
REDUCE nutrients in direct discharges and reuse and/or increase capacity. Begin WWTP retrofits, septic
to sewer connections, and septic system upgrades.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Continue WWTP upgrades, septic to sewer connections, and septic system
upgrades.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): 100% of WWTPs have been upgraded to AWT standards. Septic to sewer
connections and septic system upgrades completed in problem areas.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Lack of adequate recurring cost -share funding for human waste stream infrastructure improvements, such
as septic to sewer conversions and WWTP upgrades.
• Inadequate regulatory, non -regulatory, and financial incentives to compel infrastructure improvements.
• Developers and permit agencies may not be familiar with advanced, nutrient reduction OSTDS that would
better treat nutrients.
• Inadequate regulatory standards for nutrients in reclaimed water for irrigation, disposal of reclaimed
water, and biosolids management and application.
CITATIONS:
1. Bureau of Economic and Business Research. 2018. Projections of Florida Population by County, 2020-
2045, with Estimates for 2017.
2. LaPointe, B.E., Herren, L.W., Debortoli, D.D., and Vogel, M.A. 2015. Evidence of sewage -driven
eutrophication and harmful algal blooms in Florida's Indian River Lagoon. Harmful Algae 43: 82-102.
3. LaPointe, B.E., Herren, L.W. and Paul, A.L. 2017. Septic systems contribute to nutrient pollution and
harmful algal blooms in the St. Lucie Estuary, Southeast Florida, USA. Harmful Algae 70:1-22.
4. Barile, P.J. 2018. Widespread Sewage Pollution of the Indian River Lagoon System, Florida (USA)
Resolved by Spatial Analyses of Macroalgal Biogeochemistry. Marine Pollution Bulletin 128: 557-574.
5. Hazen and Sawyer. 2015. Evaluation of Full Scale Prototype Passive Nitrogen Reduction Systems and
Recommendations for Future Implementation. Report to the Florida Department of Health.
28 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
STORMWATER
Goals:
Reduce sto rmwa ter rya no f f e nted ng t he I R L a nd,
improvo the quality of furtoff that -eaters tho lagoon.
29 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
WATER QUALITY
Stormwater
GOALS: REDUCE unnatural fresh and surface water discharges to the IRL from both large stormwater
conveyances and dispersed urban and residential sources. RESTORE water quality in the IRL system.
Conduct RESEARCH to better understand natural hydroperiods of the IRL watershed.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Stormwater contributes significantly to pollutant loads entering the IRL. Multiple factors
affect stormwater loading to the IRL including:
Land Use Change. The population in the five -county lagoon region has grown from 743,000 people in
1980 to almost 1.76 million in 2017, which led to an increase in coastal development and urbanization,
particularly in the last 100 years. 1, 2,3,' Between 1920 and 1990, the estimated average annual runoff
increased 113% in the IRL watershed, and this increase is mostly the result of urbanization.2
Hydrologic Changes. Coastal impoundments of marshes, ditching to manage mosquitoes, and ditching to
manage water for agricultural, road drainage, flood prevention, and other uses have changed the
landscape. Other practices, such as expansion of impermeable surfaces, stormwater diversion and
channelization, direct stormwater discharges to the IRL, and riparian and wetland habitat alteration and
loss have led to changes in the natural hydrology of the watershed.
Nutrient Loads. As the human population increased, so have the nutrient loads associated with fertilizer
use by residential and agricultural stakeholders, as well as other lawncare chemicals, pond maintenance
herbicides, and pesticides for homes and businesses.'
Each of these factors has reduced the water holding capacity of the IRL watershed resulting in increased flood
risks; lowered surface water quality due to runoff of sediments, nutrients, and other pollutants; and resulting
negative impacts to IRL living resources from declines in water quality. In addition, considerable economic costs
are associated with attempts to manage and reduce the negative impacts of these factors over a range of spatial
scales.
Urban Stormwater. A 2017 report produced by
SJRWMD and DEP in support of the IRLNEP
recommended nine large, regional stormwater project
priorities (from over 40 potential projects that were
evaluated lagoon -wide). These projects represent high -
value priorities to improve stormwater management
and water quality in the IRL.' The recommended
projects are listed in the separate Projects Plan.
A more challenging aspect of stormwater mitigation
arises from smaller, dispersed stormwater impacts
associated with urban and suburban landscapes. These
are best addressed by local BMPs. Stormwater BMPs
are designed to treat rain where it falls to address four
criteria that are critical to managing urban and
dispersed stormwater runoff:
30 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
1. Volume: Reduce or delay the volume of stormwater that enters the drainage system.
2. Peak Discharge: Reduce the maximum flow rate into the system by decreasing the stormwater volume
and lengthening the duration of discharge.
3. Water Quality: Improve water quality through volume reduction, filtering, and biological and chemical
processes.
4. Maintenance: Sustainable practices to ensure proper functioning of BMPs. Grass clippings and cut
vegetation should not be allowed to enter BMPs or natural waterbodies and applications of fertilizers,
pesticides, and herbicides should occur with a buffer around the BMP or natural waterbody. Where
possible, use mechanical harvesting instead of herbicide control for invasive vegetation in waterways.
By constructing small-scale, distributed stormwater management systems at individual sites, stormwater BMPs
have the capability to meet multiple stormwater management objectives. Stormwater BMPs use unit processes of
the hydrologic cycle, such as infiltration, detention, and evapotranspiration, to meet these objectives. One
approach that has shown excellent results is the application of low impact development/green infrastructure
stormwater BMPs. The goal of these BMPs is to meet stormwater management objectives by replicating natural
elements of the hydrologic cycle that have been lost in urban areas.
Agricultural Stormwater. The Florida Watershed Restoration Act of 1999 directed DEP, FDACS, and WMDs to
work together to reduce pollution in Florida's waters, citing BMPs as the best way to accomplish this task for
agricultural stormwater. In areas with adopted BMAPs, agricultural producers must either implement FDACS-
approved BMPs or conduct water quality monitoring to demonstrate compliance with water quality standards.
Agricultural BMPs are guidelines to assist producers in managing water, nutrients, and pesticides to minimize the
impact on the state's natural resources. Maps of properties that are enrolled in the FDACS BMP Program within
the IRL watershed are provided in Appendix C. When properly designed and implemented, agricultural BMPs
are practical, cost-effective actions that agricultural producers can take to conserve water and reduce the amount
of pesticides, fertilizers, and animal waste that enter surface and ground water resources. BMPs can benefit water
quality and water conservation while maintaining or even enhancing agricultural production. Typical agricultural
BMPs include:
• Nutrient management to determine nutrient needs and sources and manage nutrient applications
(including manure) to minimize impacts to water resources.
• Irrigation management to address the method and scheduling of irrigation to reduce water and nutrient
losses to the environment.
• Water resource protection using buffers, setbacks, and swales to reduce or prevent the transport of
sediments and nutrients from production areas to waterbodies.
STRATEGIES:
• Support IRL partners to fund, design, engineer, construct, and manage stormwater capture and treatment
projects identified in the SJRWMD feasibility study to enhance water quality discharged to the IRL.
• Implement, track, and measure performance outcomes and REPORT on BMP activities and projects listed
in the BMAPs, RAPS, and IRLNEP Projects Plan throughout the IRL, watershed.
• Educate and engage agricultural producers in issues surrounding BMAPs, proper agricultural BMP
implementation, and cost -share opportunities.
• Design, deliver, and refine BMPs for both agricultural and urban landscapes to improve stormwater
management. Encourage augmentation of BMPs using practices such as littoral zones and aeration.
• Evaluate opportunities for reduction and reuse of stormwater such as through aquifer storage and recovery
and deep -water storage.
• Educate urban, recreational, and agricultural landowners on proper use and application rates for fertilizer
and chemical applications to reduce excess use.
311 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Cost
Source
Role
or Organizations
I Or anizations
Stormwater-1: Design,
engineer, construct, and
manage stormwater capture
and treatment projects
identified in the SJRWMD
feasibility study to enhance
water quality discharged to
the IRL. (NEW)
Stormwater-2: Develop,
improve, and implement
BMPs and education
programs for stormwater
management and freshwater
discharges for urban,
agriculture, and dispersed
residential landscapes.
Stormwater-3: Update and
maintain comprehensive
drainage maps of the IRL
watershed.
Stormwater-4: Continue
reviews of reclamation plans
for water control districts
and the standard operating
procedures and project
works of each large drainage
system.
Stormwater-5: Upgrade
existing urban and
agricultural stormwater
infrastructure networks to
REDUCE freshwater
discharges, nutrient loads,
and other pollutant loads to
the IRL.
OUTCOMES:
Reduced large -volume
pulsed stormwater
discharges to the IRL
and their associated
nutrient, sediment, and
pollutant loads.
Encourage effective
and responsible design
and delivery of BMPs,
and education
programs for fertilizer
use, landscaping,
proper use and
disposal of chemicals,
etc.
Update drainage maps
to reflect changing
land use patterns and
development patterns.
Develop and
implement strategies
to REDUCE
discharges and
pollutant loadings to
the IRL from these
sources.
Improve stormwater
network to REDUCE
loads and be able to
RESPOND to expected
population growth and
climate change
impacts.
SJRWMD,
SFWMD, water
control districts,
local
governments
FDACS, WMDs,
NRCS, DEP, UF-
IFAS, local
governments
WMDs, water
control districts,
local
governments
Local
governments
DEP, FDACS,
local
governments
DEP $48.8 DEP, Coordinate
million — WMDs, and
$1.68 local collaborate
billion governments
Academia, TBD
consultants/
private
industry
NRCS, TBD
IRLNEP
DEP,
WMDs,
FDACS,
IRLNEP,
local
governments
Coordinate
and
collaborate
WMDs, Coordinate
local and
governments collaborate
N/A TBD WMDs, Coordinate
local and
governments collaborate
USEPA, U.S.
Department of
Agriculture,
OF-IFAS,
WMDs,
interest groups
$508
million for
CCMP
projects
WMDs, Coordinate
local and
governments collaborate
Short-term (1— 2 years): Begin implementation of CCMP projects listed in the BMAPs, RAPS, and
IRLNEP Projects Plan.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Continue implementation of CCMP, BMAP, and RAP projects.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Meet BMAP five- and ten-year targets and RAP targets. Make significant
progress in decreasing stormwater pollution to the IRL system.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Need for training and implementation of safe and effective BMPs.
• Drainage and estuary characteristics vary significantly from south to north along the IRL; therefore, a
one -size -fits -all management approach cannot be taken in the IRL.
• Inadequate funding to implement all necessary projects, including both urban and agricultural BMPs.
• Urban and agricultural BMPs do not always meet the assumed reduction rates for pollutants.
32 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• Lack of planning that results in reactive and costly large-scale projects that provide intermittent benefit to
lagoon water quality.
• Desire for a sod only lawn may prevent people from implementing practices that would help to improve
the IRL, such as using landscaping that would require minimal fertilizer and irrigation.
CITATIONS:
1. Kim, Y., Engel, B.A., Lim, K.J., Larson, V., and Duncan, B. 2002. Runoff Impacts of Land -Use Change
in the IRL Watershed. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering.
2. Graves, G.A., Wan, Y., and Fike, D.L. 2004. Water Quality Characteristics of Storm Water from Major
Land Uses in South Florida. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 1405-1419.
3. Sayemuzzaman, M., Ye, M., Zhang, F., and Zhu, M. 2018. Multivariate Statistical and Trend Analyses of
Surface Water Quality in the Central Indian River Lagoon Area, Florida. Environmental Earth Sciences
77: 127.
4. LaPointe, B.E., Herren, L.W., Debortoli, D.D., and Vogel, M.A. 2015. Evidence of sewage -driven
eutrophication and harmful algal blooms in Florida's Indian River Lagoon. Harmful Algae 43: 82-102.
5. SJRWMD. 2017. Indian River Lagoon Stormwater Capture and Treatment Feasibility Analysis.
33 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
HYDROLOGY AND
HYDRODYNAMICS
' a,l
•r .
+1�;�'�,fjw; *tF��'�r�+����, ��-�• r I'i �',�;,' �Jlj ��''�F�•�'w ?, � • � , e!�'
Goals..
Improve understanding of lagoon hydrology and hydrodynamics
to trnproVe deci5ion-makin-9 and m-anagoment.
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
WATER QUALITY
Hydrology and Hydrodynamics
GOALS: Conduct RESEARCH to improve understanding of the IRL watershed, groundwater, and
hydrology and hydrodynamics to improve decision -making for management of land use impacts to water
and reduction of loads of nutrients and other contaminants.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Hydrology is the study of the movement, distribution, and quality of surface and ground
waters, and hydrodynamics is the study of the internal circulation of the waters and effects on water quality.
By its very nature as a coastal lagoon, the IRL, is a narrow, shallow estuarine system with minimal connection and
exchange with the open ocean. The IRL is a complex system that is divided into sub -basins because of inlets and
causeways located along its extent. These sub -basins are characterized by different residence/ocean exchange
rates based on the ocean tides, weather patterns, and seasons." These sub -basins are also affected by 12
causeways, which create compartments within the IRL.' Studies have shown that the removal of extended
causeways can improve water quality and acreage available for seagrass.',' Groundwater levels also vary
seasonally within the lagoon.' Its hydrology has been significantly altered as the area's population continues to
grow.' Surface water flows and groundwater discharges have been altered by land use changes. It is estimated that
groundwater and sub -surface discharge may contribute 45-60% of the total nitrogen and total phosphorus loading
to the IRL.' Thus, it is important that the IRLNEP and partners continue to work towards a better understanding
of the hydrological features of the IRL, including hydrodynamics within the waterbody.
The watershed has been highly altered due to ditching, draining,
and impounding for urban, industrial, and agricultural purposes as
well as for management of mosquitoes and flood control. In
addition, man-made inlets, stabilized inlets, navigational canals,
and causeways have also altered the hydrology. It is unlikely that
these alterations will be removed completely from the landscape.
More importantly, climate change and sea level rise impacts will
further alter hydrologic functions throughout the IRL and its
watershed in complex ways. Therefore, it is important to
understand how the IRL hydrologic system currently operates and
develop predictive models to better inform decision making.
Existing reasearch and management documentation from studies in the area could help inform restoration efforts
throughout the IRL. For instance, the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) IRL-South Feasibility
Study, Loxahatchee River Watershed Restoration Plan, and minimum flows and levels for the St. Lucie River and
Loxahatchee River provide good examples of using hydrologic modeling to set specific performance measures.
Other major waterbodies in the IRL watershed could benefit from this type of planning effort.
STRATEGIES:
• Refine scientific knowledge about IRL hydrology and hydrodynamics to better identify restoration
strategies and inform decisions about development.
• Review and revise, as needed, hydrologic and hydrodynamic models used to guide IRL restoration and
stewardship decisions and to set performance measures for landscape -level projects.
35 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• Integrate models to better understand interactions of surface water, groundwater, and internal flow
characteristics and incorporate findings into management decisions.
• Continue to investigate potential connections and interactions among transportation infrastructure,
groundwater flow, surface water flow, and internal flow on IRL water quality and health.
• Convene a project team to develop scope of work for a science -based pilot study to better understand the
physical, chemical, and biological implications, benefits, risks, and expected outcomes of using oceanic
exchange as an intervention to enhance IRL internal water flow and REDUCE residence time.
• Develop and refine quantitative performance measures for physical and chemical components of regional -
scale projects.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible Lead
Partner
Action Output Intent Agencies or
Agencies or
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
h fiN Organizations
Organizations
Cost
Source
Hydrology-1:Support
advancements in
hydrological model
development, verification,
and application. (NEW)
Hydrology-2: Apply the best
available models to better
evaluate connectivity
between IRL sub -basins.
REDUCE negative impacts
of road corridors and
causeways. (NEW)
Hydrology-3: Continue
evaluation of options to
enhance water flow through
engineering solutions that
have well defined water
quality and ecological
outcomes. (NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Improve
understanding of
IRL hydrology and
water circulation.
Mitigate for
human -built
interruptions of
natural water
circulation in the
IRL.
Identify
engineering and
technology options
to REDUCE IRL
residence time and
enhance water flow
IRLNEP
Management
Conference,
Academia
IRLNEP
Management
Conference,
academia, Florida
Department of
Transportation
(FDOT), water
control districts,
local governments
IRLNEP
Management
Conference,
academia, FDOT,
water control
districts, local
governments
IRLNEP, DEP, TBD
WMDs
IRLNEP, TBD
WMDs
IRLNEP, TBD
WMDs
IRLNEP,
Florida
Legislature,
academia,
DEP
IRLNEP,
Florida
Legislature,
academia,
DEP,
FDOT
IRLNEP,
Florida
Legislature,
Academia,
DEP,
FDOT
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Short-term (1— 2 years): Identify funding sources for RESEARCH on IRL hydrology and
hydrodynamics and the complex influence on the IRL water quality and health. Conduct one public
education workshop to improve public understanding.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Implement CCMP projects from the Projects Plan to ensure that human -
caused hydrological impacts are reduced and natural hydrological functions of the IRL watershed are
optimized.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Incorporate enhanced understanding of IRL hydrology and hydrodynamics
and expected changes to hydrological functions into IRL management decisions and actions.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Difficult to model the highly -altered landscape of the IRL watershed.
• Inadequate funding for RESEARCH and projects.
• Difficulty in retrofitting infrastructure that effects hydrology and hydrodynamics within established
communities.
36 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CITATIONS:
1. Smith, N.P. 1993. Tidal and Non -tidal Flushing of Florida's Indian River Lagoon. Estuaries 16 (4): 739-
746.
2. Smith, N.P. 2016. Transport Pathways through Southern Indian River Lagoon. Fla. Sci. 79 (1): 39-50.
3. Bilskie, M.V., Bacopoulos, P., and Hagen, S. 2017. Astronomic Tides and Nonlinear Tidal Dispersion for
a Tropical Coastal Estuary with Engineered Features (Causeways): Indian River Lagoon System.
Estuarine, Coastal, and Shelf Science. 1-17.
4. FDOT District 7. 2015. Old Tampa Bay Water Quality Improvements, Phase I: Feasibility Study.
5. FDOT District 6. 2009. Responses of Water Quality and Seagrass Coverage to the Removal of the Lake
Surprise Causeway.
6. Swarzenski, P.W., Martin, J.B., and Cable, J.C. 2001. Submarine Groundwater Discharge in Upper Indian
River Lagoon, Florida. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Water -Resources
Investigations Report 01-4011: 194-197.
7. Janicki Environmental and Applied Technology and Management. 2012. Nutrient Loading Estimates for
the Indian River Lagoon TMDL Load Revision. Brevard County.
htti)://www.brevardfl.izov/NaturalResources/WatershedPro2ram.
37 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
LEGACY LOADS AND
HEALTHY SEDIMENTS
WT.e.iI Cr010#1
Goals..
Remove m uc k i n th 0 1 RL do reduce nutrient loads
and improve water c#airit}.
38 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
WATER QUALITY
Legacy Loads and Healthy Sediments
GOALS: REMOVE and/or REDUCE muck in the IRL to REDUCE the legacy load of nutrients and
contaminants and improve water clarity. RESTORE healthy natural sediments to support seagrasses and
associated communities, shellfish, and healthy benthic communities.
ISSUE SUMMARY: The IRL was once a sandy bottom estuary with a modest accumulation of organic detritus
from losses of shoreline and aquatic vegetation. As much as 10-20% of the lagoon bottom is now covered with a
layer of fine silt and sediment called "muck" that has accumulated over years of excess sedimentation. Muck is
defined as black, organic -rich (greater than 10% organic matter), mud -rich (greater than 60% silt + clay), high
water content (greater than 75% water by weight, greater than 90% water by volume) sediments. Earlier studies in
the IRL reported muck, as defined above, to be most prevalent in the mouths of creeks (e.g., Crane Creek and
Turkey Creek), Intracoastal Waterway, and deeper pockets of water near tributaries.' A 1989 muck survey of the
IRL from the Ponce de Leon Inlet to St. Lucie Inlet concluded that the spatial occurrence of muck was limited to
less than 10% of the lagoon'. Today, muck flux in the IRL contributes 582 metric tons of total nitrogen
(essentially all as dissolved ammonium) and 87 metric tons of total phosphorus (essentially all as dissolved
phosphate) that accounts for approximately 37% and 44% of the annual total nitrogen and total phosphorus loads,
respectively, in the Banana River Lagoon, North IRL, and Central IRL.2 Large quantities of muck are also present
in the St. Lucie River and Estuary and its major tributaries.
The source of muck is fine sediments and fine biological particles carried in by tributaries, canals, and stormwater
systems. The biological material accumulates on the bottom and decomposes. The muck in the lagoon increases
turbidity, promotes oxygen depletion in sediments and the water above, stores and releases nutrients, covers the
natural bottom, and destroys healthy communities of benthic organisms.2° s Muck builds up in channels and deep
pockets where it can reach depths of up to 15 feet. The muck sediment contains nutrients and serves as an internal
"legacy load" of nutrients that releases (fluxes) nutrients back into the water column. The Brevard County Save
Our Indian River Lagoon Project Plan (2016) estimated that the annual release of nutrients from decaying muck is
almost as much as the annual external loading delivered by stormwater and groundwater baseflow combined. The
muck deposits in Brevard County alone cover an estimated 15,900 acres of the lagoon system.'
Understanding nutrient flux dynamics and the role of legacy nutrients in algal blooms is complex. Organic as well
as inorganic nutrients must be considered.' Other eutrophication stressors, such as loss of benthic habitat, loss of
filter feeders, development of hypoxia/anoxia, and alterations in food webs are additional considerations for
resource managers as well as the environmental impacts of these blooms. An emerging concern with the
expansion of IRL anoxic muck sediments is the production of hydrogen sulfide as a potential stressor for
seagrasses,6 macrobenthos,' and calcium -carbonate shell forming organisms, such as clams and oysters.' The
relationships among eutrophication, increased temperatures, microbial respiration, dissolved oxygen, and pH
(aragonite saturation) are poorly understood for the IRL. There is growing evidence that coastal acidification
represents a significant but previously underappreciated environmental threat that requires monitoring and
management. Nutrient management plans in acidified estuaries should consider the level of nutrient load
reduction required to alleviate low pH conditions and the associated impacts on marine life.'
Because of the inorganic/organic composition and desire to remove legacy nutrients from fluxing internally in the
IRL, muck dredging is currently the most cost-effective way to address this internal legacy load. The focus for
muck removal projects for this CCMP revision is to align with the Brevard County Save Our Indian River Lagoon
Project Plan' and the muck removal component of the CERP IRL-South project. Emphasis is on large deposits of
39 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
muck in open water sites, main canals, navigational canals, and the Intracoastal Waterway and tributaries that may
be transporting upstream legacy loads of muck to seagrass and shellfish areas in the main body of the IRL. In
Turkey Creek, a tributary to the IRL, about 300 metric tons of nitrogen and 70 metric tons of phosphorus were
removed with 160,000 cubic meters of wet muck and sand via environmental dredging during 2016 and 2017.
Dredging removed nutrients, fine sediments, and increased water depth and basin volume with positive increases
in both salinity and the total inventory of dissolved oxygen.10
Muck flux can be a complex biogeochemical process to understand. Ongoing research associated with muck
dredging projects suggest that careful consideration of muck location, volumes, area of coverage, and nutrient
variability should guide site selection and expected outcomes from muck dredging. Prioritization of project
funding, timing, and implementation of source reduction projects versus legacy load reduction projects will prove
challenging. The four goals of muck management include: (1) decrease turbidity, (2) restore bottom habitats, (3)
improve oxygen content of lagoon water, and (4) decrease nutrients released from muck. Brevard County is using
a goal of reducing nutrients from muck flux by 25%,' and this is also the goal for this CCMP revision.
STRATEGIES:
• REDUCE organic and inorganic sources on land that contribute to muck in the IRL. Harvest floating
aquatic vegetation to REMOVE this material as a source of muck.
• REMOVE high -nutrient legacy loads and muck in high -priority locations both within the lagoon and
major canals and tributaries to the lagoon.
• Evaluate opportunities for muck capping and sediment traps instead of dredging.
• Conduct RESEARCH to better understand muck nutrient flux and cycling in the lagoon and other
eutrophication stressors that may be associated with muck (i.e., micronutrients).
• Conduct RESEARCH, including modeling, to understand efficacy, benefit, and risk of muck removal.
• Develop muck maps that include priority areas and RESEARCH findings.
• Prioritize, simplify, and expedite restoration project permits, including expanding eligible project types
that qualify for general permit consideration.
• Identify beneficial uses for dredged materials to limit the area needed for storage.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DF.T,IVERABLES):
esponsible
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
A
Output Intent Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Cost
Source
Role
or Organization
Or anizations
Legacy Loads-1: Complete muck
Improve knowledge
Local
WMDs, local
$35 per
Florida Coordinate
mapping of the entire IRL,
about muck
governments,
partners
cubic yard
Legislature and
prioritize muck dredging projects,
distribution,
academia
of muck'
collaborate
and REDUCE source contributions
abundance, and
of sediment and biomass that result
sources and
in muck formation. (NEW)
REDUCE loading.
Legacy Loads-2: Continue to
Gain knowledge from
Local
WMDs, local
TBD
Florida Coordinate
couple scientific evaluation and
muck dredging
governments,
partners
Legislature and
assessment of muck dredging
projects to advise
academia
collaborate
projects to evaluate and optimize
decision making and
the dredging process. (NEW)
muck management
and disposal process.
40 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Responsible Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Output Intent ead Agencie gencies or
Cost
Source
Role
r anizati anizations
Legacy Loads-3: Track emerging
Identify new and
technologies, innovative
emerging
approaches or alternatives to
technologies to
dredging, muck capping, upstream
enhance
controls of muck transport, more
performance,
efficient approaches to dewatering,
improve efficiency,
enhanced pollutant removal in
decrease cost, and
post -dredge water, and enhanced
decrease risks with
muck management to improve
muck dredging and
process efficiency, REDUCE costs,
management.
and identify beneficial uses of muck
residuals. (NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Academia, local DEP, IRLNEP, TBD
governments WMDs, local
governments,
academia,
FWC, Florida
Inland
Navigation
District
TBD Coordinate
and
collaborate
Short-term (1— 2 years): Muck removal plan is developed, and priority locations are identified.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Muck removal is underway in priority locations.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Muck is removed from all priority locations to REDUCE internal nutrient
loads.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Difficulty in addressing sources of muck (i.e., source
control, street sweeping, aquatic weed control practices by
some local entities and Chapter 298 Districts, lawn care
management, and large network of urban stormwater
conveyances).
• Cost of muck removal and management.
• Logistics and challenges associated with muck handling,
storage, dewatering, and transport.
• Limited land area available for muck storage and
management and local community concerns about
locations and potential community impacts.
• Difficulties in permitting muck removal projects.
• Inefficiencies in removal of dissolved organic fraction and
nutrients in water returned to the lagoon during dredging.
• Continued inputs of muck from incomplete dredging and upland sources.
CITATIONS:
1. Trefry, J.H., Metz, S., Trocine, R.P., Iricanin, N., Burnside, D., Chen, N-C, and Webb, B. 1990. Design
and Operation of a Muck Sediment Survey. Special Publication SJ 90-SP3, St. Johns River Water
Management District, 62 pp.
2. Trefry, J.H. and Fox, A.L., 2017. Internal Loading of Nutrients to the Indian River Lagoon (Muck Flux).
Presentation.
3. Trefry, J.H. 2013. Presentation on Sediment Accumulation and Removal in the Indian River Lagoon.
Presentation to the Environmental Preservation and Conservation Senate Committee. Marine and
Environmental Systems, Florida Institute of Technology.
4. Tetra Tech, Inc. and Closewaters, LLC. 2016. Save Our Indian River Lagoon Project Plan for Brevard
County, Florida. Report to Brevard County Natural Resources Management Department.
http://www.brevardfl.gov/SaveOurLagoon/Home.
411 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
5. Heisler, J., Gilbert P., Burkholder, J., Anderson, D., Cochlan, W., Dennison, W., Gobler, C., Dortch, Q.,
Heil, C., Humphries, E., Lewitus, A., Magnien, R., Marshall, H., Sellner, K., Stockwell, D., Stoecker, D.,
and Suddleson, M. 2008. Eutrophication and Harmful Algal Blooms: A Scientific Consensus. Harmful
Algae 8(1): 3-13.
6. Kilminster, K., Forbes, V., and Holmer, M. 2014. Development of a `sediment -stress' functional -level
indicator for the seagrass Halophila ovalis. Ecological Indicators 36: 280-289.
7. Kanaya, G., Uehara, T., and Kikuchi, E. 2016. Effects of sedimentary sulfide on community structure,
population dynamics, and colonization depth of macrozoobenthos in organic -rich estuarine sediments.
Marine Pollution Bulletin 109: 393-401.
8. Gazeau, F., Parker, L.M., Comeau, S. Gattuso, J-P., O'Conner, W.A., Martin, S., Portner, H-O., and Ross,
P.M. 2013. Impacts of ocean acidification on marine shelled molluscs. Marine Biology 160:2207-2245.
9. Wallace, R.B., Baumann, H., Grear, J.S., Aller, R.C., and Gobler, C.J. 2014. Coastal ocean acidification:
The other eutrophication problem. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 148:1-13.
10. Fox, A.L. and Trefry, J.H. 2018. Environmental Dredging to Remove Fine -Grained, Organic -Rich
Sediments and Reduce Inputs of Nitrogen and Phosphorus to a Subtropical Estuary. Marine Technology
Society Journal, Volume 52, Number 4.
42 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ATMOSPHERIC
DEPOSITION
Goals:
Research and monitor atrrrvspherie deposition of nutrients in the
IRL to improve managememt and advise TMDLs and BMAP&
43 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
WATER QUALITY
Atmospheric Deposition
GOALS: Monitor and conduct RESEARCH on atmospheric deposition of nutrients and pollutants.
Develop and implement strategies to REDUCE, REMOVE, and RESPOND to these impacts.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Atmospheric deposition is a source of nutrients, pollutants, and fine sediments from
power plants, cars, and land use activities that fall on the IRL watershed, as shown in the figure below. These
atmospheric nutrients and pollutants fall onto the watershed at differing rates during wet and dry seasons. Because
of atmospheric conditions and weather patterns, not all nutrients from atmospheric deposition are generated
within the watershed, and this factor adds complexity to management of atmospheric deposition sources.
• • Air ma%um
rr - LOW Or WN-CKx tue ViWOM
SOracas of pW6"q s - changn +a che+akOt/PhOv11 fcr m
Source: USEPA (2001)'
Over recent decades, scientific interest has focused on wet and dry deposition of nitrate stemming from
combustion of fossil fuels. Successful decreases in nitrogen oxides emissions in the United States have
substantially decreased nitrate deposition. By contrast, emissions of ammonia, an unregulated air pollutant, and
resulting deposition of ammonium have grown.' Expanded observations demonstrate that deposition of reactive
nitrogen in the United States has shifted from a nitrate -dominated to an ammonium -dominated condition.' Trends
in atmospheric ammonium deposition for the IRL are not well known. A better understanding of status and trends
will be an important consideration for refinement of IRL nutrient budgets, TMDLs, and water quality
management strategies.
44 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
R% 1. tom pa mom 0 U* 11 amr;xW HH.' pep im%a W o1 weei Lmmgank n tagen depoeltFau xrou U* IhYled a Ubn hn 1990�-49W (ArM Ard 2MU-20I2
Q IFO 16 1" 5rhUACe-4;LAUA 061WV . i't"f*If+wveff ff-d'rwl kI Ir*FROM;*4 NIV mo+r P U'hIa9h r[ "d+vWwO ftdhl9arµ 4%h vww t r+hk kr
wu40 Mwee ~ d W M *wLmdtilh 900 Ivy ad rx+i etbu•i%.puan %UborL FF* hiKk dahL on the mop nnmrhLw kxdU ,6a! yLe4*tM kIdad zaUbb hue
erih itrntpermod the Mi.' pexmWe wi r-ml,ei Unn JjW6'%P • CW.')Rhk},- - MI.) X 10^1 r rnkd ■leashsidE
In 2018, only a single continuous monitoring station for meteorological conditions and wet/dry deposition of total
nitrogen and total phosphorus exists along the IRL. This station is at a former Clean Air Status and Trends
Network station (IRL141) located at Coconut Point near Sebastian Inlet (latitude 27.849; longitude-80.4554).
SJRWMD funded the station for many years, but funding responsibility transferred to the IRLNEP in 2018 with
strong science support from IRLNEP partners at SJRWMD, Wood Group, and Indian River County Health
Department.
These data are essential to estimate nutrient loads from atmospheric deposition. As documented in a stakeholder -
driven study of IRL TMDL allocations and the Mosquito Lagoon RAP development, atmospheric loads of total
nitrogen can represent a sizable portion of the total loads to the IRL.4° s The relative contributions of direct
atmospheric deposition of nutrients onto the lagoon varies in different portions of the system depending on the
size of the waterbody in that area. Recent research highlights the need to better understand atmospheric nitrogen
deposition, impacts and trends on the IRL nutrient budget and potential new implications associated with external
nutrient loads that drive HABs.
STRATEGIES:
Continue to monitor wet/dry atmospheric nutrient deposition along the IRL to advise restoration and
management strategies. Expand scope to include additional data for ammonium and estimates of
biological fixation and removal of nitrogen versus industrial/anthropogenic nitrogen fixation.
Determine appropriate monitoring station locations in the southern IRL.
Evaluate the need for expansion of atmospheric deposition monitoring along the IRL to better understand
nutrient deposition (including ammonium) spatial and temporal variability.
45 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Atmospheric
Deposition-1:
Determine the impacts
of atmospheric
deposition of nutrients
and other pollutants on
the nutrient budget,
water quality, and
resources of the IRL.
Atmospheric
Deposition-2: Evaluate
need for additional wet
and dry atmospheric
monitoring stations.
(NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Continue data
acquisition and
analysis for
atmospheric nutrient
deposition to the
IRL to inform
nutrient budget
refinement and
nutrient reduction
strategies.
Conduct a gap
analysis for
atmospheric
deposition data and
make
recommendations in
the IRL Monitoring
Plan.
Lead Agencies
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
Partner
Estimated
Funding
Agencies or
Cost
Source
Organizations
USEPA, DEP, TBD
DEP, Florida
WMDs,
Legislature
academia, local
governments,
interest groups
Academia, TBD DEP, Florida
WMDs, DEP Legislature
IRLNEP
Role
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Short-term (1— 2 years): Develop a plan with recommendations on the scale and scope of an IRL
atmospheric nutrient deposition monitoring network required for effective IRL management. Seek
funding to expand the network as needed.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Implement the recommendations for the atmospheric nutrient deposition
monitoring network and collect data to evaluate trends.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Synthesize available data to evaluate trends. Use improved understanding of
atmospheric wet/dry nitrogen deposition trends to the IRL watershed to revise actions, as needed.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Long-term stable funding for IRL monitoring network equipment and operations and maintenance.
• Identification of a primary scientific investigator to lead the data acquisition, synthesis, and analysis effort
over the next decade.
CITATIONS:
1. USEPA.2001. Frequently Asked Questions about Atmospheric Deposition. EPA-453/R-0 1 -009.
2. Gruber, N. and Galloway, J.N. 2008. An Earth -System Perspective of the Global Nitrogen Cycle. Science
451: 293-296.
3. Li, Y., Schichtel, B.A., Walker, J.T., Schwede, D.B., Chen, X., Lehmann, C.M. B., Puchalski, M.A., Gay,
D.A., and Collett, J.L. Jr. 2016. Increasing importance of deposition of reduced nitrogen in the United
States. Proceedings National Academy of Sciences. May 24, 2016. 113 (21): 5874-5879.
4. Janicki Environmental, Inc. 2018. Determination of Mosquito Lagoon Nutrient Loading Targets. Prepared
for Volusia County and Mosquito Lagoon RAP Stakeholder Group.
5. Janicki Environmental and Applied Technology and Management. 2012. Nutrient Loading Estimates for
the Indian River Lagoon TMDL Load Revision. Brevard County.
http://www.brevardfl.aov/NaturalResources/WatershedPro2ram.
46 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CONTAMINANTS OF
CONCERN
Goals..
I d anti fy contam i nant sources to bette r U nd ars#a:nd h u man
health and whEdiife risks. R emery late contaminated sites.
47 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
9 ONE LAGOON
WATER QUALITY
Contaminants of Concern
GOALS: Conduct RESEARCH to identify sources and loads of known contaminants and contaminants of
emerging concern to better understand potential ecological, wildlife, and human health risks. Identify
mechanisms to REDUCE or REMOVE these contaminants from the system. REPORT findings and
RESPOND to protect human health and wildlife. Identify and remediate contaminated sites.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Estuaries with large human influences, like the IRL, are vulnerable to chemical
contaminants that are delivered through surface and ground water from multiple sources.
In 1969, the Cuyahoga River was so contaminated from discharges from
adjacent industry that the river caught on fire. As a result of this incident,
degradation of waterbodies throughout the U.S., and a new understanding
of the effects human interaction has on the environment, the Clean Water
Act was promulgated in 1972. Prior to this legislation, many industrial
contaminants of concern were discharged to the ground or directly into our
waterways. In 1987, the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
was established to regulate all point source discharges. Under this program,
pollutants such as heavy metals, pH, nitrogen, and industry -specific
pollutants are monitored for compliance. Even with the Clean Water Act
and the regulations that followed, historical and modern-day discharges
from gas stations, dry cleaners, industrial facilities, agricultural, and Department of Defense sites continue to seep
into the IRL through contaminated groundwater. Some known contaminants of concern, while regulated under the
Clean Water Act, do not have defined cleanup criteria or specific regulations for cleanup; therefore, the
investigation and remediation of these chemicals are unenforced.
Cleanup types=
A Br wn&l&
A Petroleum
'A
LL
6p %A1
A Superfund
A Other Waste Cleanup
WFAVGsl Palm
48 1 Page
One such class of chemicals is perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are
synthetic chemicals that have been used in fire -fighting foam and other
industrial and household products for more than 50 years. They have been
identified in the plasma of dolphins and alligators in the IRL as well as fish
tissue in waters across the U.S.' These chemicals have been shown to cause
liver, immune, and developmental toxicity in animals. They bioaccumulate
and biomagnify, are persistent in the environment, and have shown negative
health effects at very low doses. PFAS are still not well understood and are
considered contaminants of emerging concern.
The term "contaminant of emerging concern" is used by USEPA and other
agencies to identify chemicals and other substances that have no regulatory
standard, have been recently "discovered" in natural waterways (often
because of improved analytical chemistry detection levels), and potentially
cause harmful effects in aquatic life at environmentally relevant
concentrations. They are pollutants not currently included in routine
monitoring programs and may be candidates for future regulation
depending on their (eco)toxicity, potential health effects, public perception,
and frequency of occurrence in environmental media. Contaminants of
emerging concern are not necessarily new chemicals. They include
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
pollutants that have often been present in the environment but whose presence and significance are only now
being evaluated.2
Microplastics are another contaminant of
emerging concern in the IRL. Generally,
of Emerging in Co
AgrContaminants
u1
between 0.04-0.2 inches in size, microplastics
is
Che
are small plastic particles usually derived
Polybrominated diphenyl ethers
from the breakdown of larger plastic marine
(flame retardants, furniture foam, Organone
pesticides
debris. Another source is from the direct
and plastics)
manufacture of microfibers used in synthetic
Perfluorooctane sulfonate Alkylphenols
clothing and microbeads, such as those found
Perfluorooctanoic acid Glyphosate
in cleansers and cosmetics. The Microbead-
Other HAS chemicals Antibiotics
Free Waters Act of 2015 banned the
Nano -scale chemicals
manufacturing and delivery of rinse -off
cosmetics with microbeads, so this source of microplastics will be reduced over time.'
Blood pressure
medicines
Antidepressants
Ibuprofen
Antibiotics
Endocrine disrupters
A study published in 2018, quantified the amount and diversity of microplastics in water and soft tissues of
eastern oysters (Crassostrea virginica) and Atlantic mud crabs (Panopeus herbstii) in Mosquito Lagoon. One -liter
water samples had an average of 23.1 microplastic pieces, and microplastics were also found in crabs and adult
oysters.' Recognition that microplastics represent a threat to ocean and estuarine environments, both from
particulate pollution and potential toxicity, suggests that further research is needed in the IRL. The properties of
plastics also allow for adsorption of persistent organic pollutants,' and concentration of toxins and heavy metals.','
These plastics also include biofilms, which can carry HAB species and pathogenic microbes."
In addition, two other categories of environmental contaminants receiving considerable public attention and
concern are pesticides and herbicides, especially the active biocide glyphosate found in common weed killers.
With these two categories of compounds, concerns about environmental and human health remain controversial
and are in continuous scientific and public debate. The application of any potential toxicant near the surface
waters of the IRL must follow label instructions for safe application, and chemicals should only be applied when
necessary. For products containing the biocide glyphosate, two recent peer -reviewed scientific papers suggest that
residential and commercial applicators should take special precautions when applying these products near surface
waterbodies. Wang, et al.10 concluded from lab experiments with phytoplankton that glyphosate could be used as
a phosphorus source by some species, is toxic to some other species, and may have no effects on others. These
differential effects suggest that the continued use of glyphosate and increasing concentration of this herbicide in
coastal waters will likely have a significant impact on coastal marine phytoplankton community structure.
Mercurio et al.11 demonstrated that glyphosate was moderately persistent in marine waters under low light
conditions and is highly persistent in the dark. The authors concluded that little degradation would be expected
during flood plumes, which could potentially deliver dissolved and sediment bound glyphosate far from shore.
Glyphosate is not generally considered in most marine monitoring programs despite being one of the most widely
used herbicides in the IRL watershed. Recent work has also reported that surfactants and wetting agents in
commercial glyphosate formulations are themselves more toxic or increase the bioavailability and toxicity of
glyphosate to non -target species.12,1' Changes in agricultural production, such as reductions in citrus, throughout
the IRL watershed may result in changes in the amount of these chemicals used.
An additional, and often overlooked, pollutant of emerging concern is thermal pollution from urban/suburban
runoff from roadways and parking lots and industrial sources (primarily power plant cooling water discharges).
Temperature governs the rates of biological organization at all levels (e.g., from biochemical reactions to
metabolism of whole organisms). Therefore, changes in temperature associated with thermal pollution can
influence the IRL at the species level, such as manatee migrations, all the way to rates of ecosystem processes and
49 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
functions (i.e., nutrient cycling and decomposition). Recent studies have shown that increasing temperature can
influence harmful cyanobacteria blooms."
STRATEGIES:
• Educate the public about IRL contaminants and best practices to REDUCE contaminant loads by funding
projects, programs, and/or campaigns to increase public awareness.
• Identify, RESEARCH, and REDUCE sources and impacts of contaminants of emerging concern.
• Seek innovative and cost-effective wastewater treatment technologies to REDUCE the pollutant waste
load to surface and ground waters.
• Ensure all IRL counties have an active Small Quantity Generator Assessment, Notification, and
Verification Program.
• Seek innovative and cost-effective wastewater treatment technologies to REDUCE the pollutant waste
load to surface and ground waters.
• Evaluate opportunities to implement a program to promote xeriscaping to REDUCE the use of pesticides
and herbicides, with a possible monetary incentive for changing lawn to xeriscape.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible Lead Partnr
ction Output Intent Agencie Agencieseor -mated Fundin IRL
Or aniz Or anizatio Role
Contaminants of
Concern-1: Monitor
and RESEARCHto
better understand
contaminants of
concern within the
IRL system. (NEW)
Contaminants of
Concern-2: Implement
actions to REMOVE
or REDUCE
contaminant loads to
the IRL system.
(NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Increase
DEP, FWC, FDOH
IRLNEP, local
TBD based on
USEPA,
Coordinate
knowledge
governments,
extent and type
WMDs, DEP,
and
about
WMDs
of monitoring
FWC, grants
collaborate
contaminant
implemented
types, sources,
transport,
pathways, loads,
and wildlife
burdens.
Decrease known
DEP, federal land
Local
TBD based on
Federal, state,
Coordinate
contaminant
managers,
governments,
the types of
and local
and
loads from all
wastewater
homeowners
actions needed
governments;
collaborate
sources.
utilities,
to reduce the
industries;
commercial
source of
grants; loans
industry,
contaminants
agriculture
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Sources of pollutants are known and action plans to REDUCE the sources and
alleviate the impacts are in place and prioritized.
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Action plans are implemented to REDUCE pollutants in the IRL system.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): Pollutants affecting the IRL are significantly reduced from current
conditions.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Funding to adequately assess the concentrations of contaminants of concern within the IRL system, and
appropriate monitoring tests to measure the low concentrations of contaminants.
• Sufficient RESEARCH on the impacts of these contaminants and how to properly remediate them.
• Lack of understanding on the effects of complex mixtures of organic chemicals on plants, animals, and
the IRL system.
• Communication opportunities to reach a majority of the public.
50 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CITATIONS:
1. Bangma, J.T., Reiner, J.L., Jones, M., Lowers, R.H., Nilsen, F., Rainwater, T.R., Somerville, S., Guillette,
L.J., and Bowden, J.A. 2017. Variation in perfluoroalkyl acids in the American alligator (Alligator
mississippiensis) at Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge. Chemosphere Volume 166, 72-79.
2. USEPA. 2008. White Paper: Aquatic Life Criteria for Contaminants of Emerging Concern, PART 1,
General Challenges and Recommendations. Prepared by the OW/ORD Emerging Contaminants
Workgroup.
3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The Microbead-Free Waters Act: FAQs.
httns://www.fda. 2ov/Cosmetics/GuidanceRe2ulation/LawsRe2ulations/ucm531849.htm.
4. Waite, H.R., M.J. Donnelly, and L.J. Walters. 2018. Quantity and types of microplastics in the organic
tissues of the eastern oyster Crassostrea virginica and Atlantic mud crab Panopeus herbstii from a
Florida estuary. Marine Pollution Bulletin 129: 179-185.
5. Wang, J., Tan, Z., Peng, J., Qui, Q., and Li, M. 2016. The behaviors of microplastics in the marine
environment. Mar. Environ. Res. 113, 7-17.
6. Kowalski, N., Reichardt, A.M., and Waniek, J.J. 2016. Sinking rates of microplastics and potential
implications of their alteration by physical, biological, and chemical factors. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 109, 310-
319.
7. Avio, C.G., Gorbi, S., and Regoli, F. 2016. Plastics and microplastics in the oceans: from emerging
pollutants to emerged threat. Mar. Environ. Res. 1, 1-2 1.
8. Keswani, A., Oliver, D.M., Gutierrez, T., and Quilliam, R.S. 2016. Microbial hitchhikers on marine
plastic debris: human exposure risks at bathing waters and beach environments. Mar. Environ. Res. 118,
10-19.
9. Vermeiren, P., Munoz, C., and Ikejima, K. 2016. Sources and sinks of plastic debris in estuaries: a
conceptual model integrating biological, physical and chemical distribution mechanisms. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 113, 7-16.
10. Wang, C., Lin, X., Li, L., and Lin, S. 2016. Differential Growth Responses of Marine Phytoplankton to
Herbicide Glyphosate. PLoS ONE 11(3): e0151633. doi:10.1371/joumal.pone.0151633. 20p.
11. Mercurio, P., Flores, F., Mueller, J.F. Carter, S., and Negri, A.P. 2014. Glyphosate persistence in
seawater. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 85:385-390.
12. Perez, G.L., Vera, M.S., and Miranda, L.A. 2012. Effects of herbicide glyphosate and glyphosate-based
formulations on aquatic ecosystems. Herbicides -Properties, Synth. Control Weeds, 334-368.
13. Stachowski-Haberkorn, S., Becker, B., Marie, D., Haberkorn, H., Coroller, L., and de La Broise, D. 2008.
Impact of Roundup on the marine microbial community, as shown by an in -situ microcosm experiment.
Aquat. Toxicol. 89, 232-241.
O'Neill, J.M., Davis, T.W., Burford, M.A., and Gobler, C.J. 2012. The rise of harmful cyanobacteria
blooms: The potential roles of eutrophication and climate change. Harmful Algae (14):313-334.
511 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
SEAGRASSES
*J Velk"
Goals:
Implement a -comprehensive strategy to remove seagrass stressors,
restore seagrassus, and sustain !Seagrass-dependent ie _
52 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
HABITATS
Seagrasses
GOALS: Implement a comprehensive, coordinated, and integrated IRL strategy to REMOVE stressors to
seagrasses in the IRL and RESTORE seagrass habitats to support and sustain healthy water quality and
seagrass dependent species.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Seven species of seagrasses are found in the IRL: turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum),
shoal grass (Halodule wrightd), manatee grass (Syringodium filiforme), Johnson's seagrass (Halophila johnsond),
star grass (Halophila engelmannii), paddle grass (Halophila decipiens), and widgeon grass (Ruppia maritima).1
Each has subtle but different optimum salinity requirements. These seven species of seagrasses each have unique
survival strategies for growth.
For more than 25 years, seagrass distribution, area coverage, and health have been considered a barometer of IRL
health. Within seagrass communities, a single acre of seagrass can produce over 10 tons of leaves per year. This
vast biomass provides food, habitat, and nursery areas for a myriad of adult and juvenile vertebrates and
invertebrates. Further, a single acre of seagrass may support as many as 40,000 fish and 50 million small
invertebrates. Because seagrasses support such high biodiversity, and because of their sensitivity to changes in
water quality, they have become recognized as important indicator species that reflect the overall health of coastal
ecosystems.' In addition, seagrass adds dissolved oxygen during daytime photosynthesis, is important in nutrient
cycling, and recent studies seem to indicate that they can buffer the system from ocean acidification.1,2s
Therefore, seagrasses are a key component not only in the IRL system but in waterbodies throughout the state.
DEP has estimated that each acre of seagrass in Florida has an economic value of approximately $20,500 per year,
which translates into a statewide economic benefit of $55.4 billion annually. However, since the 2011
superbloom, the IRL has experienced extensive seagrass loss with the figure below documenting 52% less
acreage than was present in 2009.4,5 In addition, seagrass beds do not extend as far offshore, with seagrass
transects in 2017 being 70% shorter than they were in 2009.5
The IRL system has seagrass targets
for Banana River Lagoon, North IRL,
and Central IRL,' as well for the
southern IRL,' which are based upon
light penetration in the lagoon and
associated water quality parameters.
These targets are not being achieved
with the current conditions in the
lagoon system.
Although seagrass recovery will
begin when water quality, sediment
quality, and the microbial biome
improve in the IRL, many seagrasses
are slow to recolonize. Proactive
planting is a restoration technique
that can complement and enhance
natural recovery. Whether it is the
relocation of an entire bed or removal -
iNDIA31 PIVEP UWAX E 5EAVrASS
.-11 er1-f �e ir J* op 00 OF e 4F ew e r'If, if
•a
53 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
of random plugs from an existing bed, the use of donor beds may help with seagrass restoration. Nutritional
improvements, wave protection, and herbivore exclosures can also be used to help with restoration. To date,
seagrass restoration within the IRL has been limited, small in scale, and costly. The size of restoration may
change in the future based on seagrass response to improving conditions. The IRLNEP Management Conference
recognizes the potential need for seagrass restoration intervention. IRLNEP will work with science and restoration
partners (including industry) to identify and evaluate new techniques to enhance and expedite seagrass restoration
success.
STRATEGIES:
• Ensure that monitoring, mapping, and modeling are coordinated lagoon -wide to provide a clear picture of
seagrass and epiphytes abundance, distribution, and trends.
• Improve water clarity and quality in the IRL to sustain IRL seagrass recovery.
• Develop and assess seagrass nursery techniques and planting strategies in strategic areas to determine the
feasibility of accelerating recovery.
• Implement a program of protection from human activity, restoration, and management activities needed to
maintain, protect, and RESTORE the IRL seagrass community.
• Evaluate new seagrass restoration techniques by funding innovative pilot projects and partnerships.
• Prioritize, simplify, and expedite restoration project permits including expanding eligible project types
that qualify for general permit consideration.
• Evaluate the current state of IRL feedback mechanisms and nutrient cycling to assess the ability of the
system to function as a coastal filter.'
• Refine the existing IRL seagrass restoration targets using new technology for measuring light attenuation.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible Partner
Funding
IRLNEP
ction Output Intent
Lead cies or
Estimated Cost
or Or4 gations
Allimurce
Role
Seagrass-1:
Implement a
program of
protection,
restoration, and
management
activities.
Seagrass-2: Ensure
that monitoring,
mapping, and
modeling are
coordinated
lagoon -wide.
(NEW)
Seagrass-3: Fund
innovative pilot
projects and
partnerships.
(NEW)
Maintain, protect,
and RESTORE the
IRL seagrass
community.
Provide a clear
picture of seagrass
abundance,
distribution, and
trends.
Evaluate new
seagrass
restoration
techniques.
DEP, FWC,
WMDs, IRLNEP
Management
Conference
DEP, FWC,
WMDs, IRLNEP
Management
Conference
IRLNEP,
academic
research partners,
private
companies
Local
governments,
interest groups
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
partners, FIT,
Florida
Oceanographic
Society, Harbor
Branch
Oceanographic
Institute
WMDs
Planting costs range
from $10,000 to
$200,000 per acre
depending on
conditions9;
additional costs for
stock, staff time, and
monitoring
$250,0004300,000
annually
Planting costs range
from $10,000 to
$200,000 per acre
depending on
conditions 9;
additional costs for
stock, staff time, and
monitoring
DEP, FWC,
USFWS,
National
Park Service
(NPS),
academia,
interest
groups
DEP,
WMDs,
FWC,
USFWS,
NPS,
academia,
interest
groups
DEP, FWC,
USFWS,
NPS,
academia,
interest
groups
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Conduct,
coordinate,
and
collaborate
54 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Responsible Partner
'
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Output Int Lead Agen s or
Estimated Cost
r Or ani ns
urce
Role
Seagrass-4:
Develop a Habitat
Restoration Plan
for the IRL
system. (NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Prepare a Habitat IRLNEP
Restoration Plan to Management
meet USEPA Conference
performance
measures for
NEPs.
Local $50,000
governments,
WMDs, FWC,
academia,
Northeast Florida
Estuarine
Restoration Team
(NERT), East-
Central Estuarine
Restoration Team
(ECERT)
IRLNEP Conduct,
coordinate,
and
collaborate
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Evaluate ongoing monitoring and ensure efforts are coordinated. Begin
seagrass restoration in key areas of the IRL, where possible.
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Observe seagrass recovery and expansion of its distribution in sub -basins of
the IRL with improving water quality. Evaluate the need for a seagrass nursery to assist with restoration.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): RESTORE IRL seagrasses to targets in the relevant BMAPs.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
Water clarity and quality will determine seagrass recovery timeline.
Muck removal is required in many areas to provide adequate
substrate for seagrass recovery and expansion.
Impact of climate change on IRL water quality and depth will
increase restoration challenges.
CITATIONS:
1. Yates, K.K., Moyer, R.P., Moore, C., Tomasko, D., Smiley, N., Torres -Garcia, L., Powell, C.E., Chappel,
A.R., and Bociu, I. 2016. Ocean acidification buffering effects of seagrass in Tampa Bay. pp.273-284 in
Burke, M. (ed.). Proceedings, Tampa Bay Area Scientific Information Symposium, BASIS 6: 28-30
September 2015. St. Petersburg, FL.
2. Sherwood, E.T., Greening, H.S., Johansson, R, Kaufinan, K., and Raulerson, G.E. 2017. Tampa Bay
(Florida, USA): Documenting Seagrass Recovery since the 1980's and Reviewing the Benefits.
Southeastern Geographer 57(3):294-319. DOI: 10.1353/sgo.2017.0026.
3. Sherwood, E.T., Greening, H.S., Janicki, A.J., and Karlen, D.J. 2015. Tampa Bay estuary: Monitoring
long-term recovery through regional partnerships. Regional Studies in Marine Science 4:1-11. DOI:
10.1016/j .rsma.2015.05.005.
4. Rey, J.R. and Rutledge, C.R. 2013. Seagrass Beds of the Indian River Lagoon. OF-IFAS Extension.
5. Morris, L., Hall, L., Chamberlain, R., and Jacoby, C. 2018. Summary report for the Northern Indian River
Lagoon. Seagrass Integrated Mapping and Monitoring Report No. 3. Fish and Wildlife Research Institute
Technical Report TR-17 version 3, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg,
Florida. http://mvfwc.com/media/4489960/simm3-northern-indian-river-la2oon.])df.
6. Steward, J.S., Virnstein, R.W., Morris, L.J., and Lowe, E.F. 2005. Setting Seagrass Depth, Coverage, and
Light Targets for the Indian River Lagoon System, Florida. Estuaries 28(6): 923-935.
7. Crean, D.J., Robbins, R.M., and Iricanin, N. 2007. Water quality target development in the southern IRL.
Florida Scientist 70:522-531.
8. McGlathery, K.J., Sundback, K., and Anderson, I.C. 2007. Eutrophication in shallow coastal bays and
lagoons: the role of plants in the coastal filter. MEPS 348:1-18.
9. FWC. 2003. Florida Seagrass Manager's Toolkit. Florida Marine Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL.
55 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
FILTER FEEDERS
Goals:
Better understand shellfish stresso rs, restore filter feeders, a n d
maintain healthy wat-pr quality to sustaim fIsherigs,
56 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
HABITATS
Filter Feeders
GOALS: Conduct RESEARCH to better understand stressors and root causes for the decline of filter
feeders in the IRL. RESTORE selected bivalve populations, with a focus on restoring oyster and clam
populations to support and sustain goals for both habitat conservation and sustainable commercial
harvests.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Reef -forming oysters have declined globally by approximately 85%,' and the abundance
and extent of oyster reef habitat (Crassostrea virginica) in the IRL is likely even further depleted. Similarly, the
abundance of the hard clam, Mercenaria mercenaria, has declined precipitously following two significant peaks
in fishery landings in the 1980s and 1990s.'
The loss of large bivalves from
estuarine and lagoon systems results in
a diminished level of overall
ecosystem benefits, including water
column filtration, denitrification in
surrounding sediments, and production
of reef -associated species that support
recreational and commercial fisheries.'
Filtration pressure is considered an
important driver of benthic and water
coupling,' and as such, it plays a critical role in maintaining water quality in estuarine systems at various scales. It
is likely that filtration pressure at local scales (feet to tens of feet) can improve water clarity and support growth of
seagrass and benthic microalgae, while filtration at estuarine scales (miles to tens of miles) has historically been
an important mechanism for removing particulate organic material and moving nutrients into the benthos for
processing at scales that match watershed inputs.'
Several recent studies in Mosquito Lagoon have been conducted to evaluate the benefits of oysters on lagoon
water quality. One study investigated key biogeochemical properties (e.g., nutrient pools and microbial
community size and activity) in the sediments of dead reefs; 1-, 4-, and 7-year old restored reefs; and natural
reference reefs of the eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica. The study found that measured biogeochemical
properties increased significantly by one-year post restoration, relative to dead reefs, and then remained constant
as the reefs continued to age. The study demonstrated the role of live intertidal oyster reefs as biogeochemical
hotspots for nutrient cycling and burial.' Another study measured denitrification rates and nutrient sequestration
and bioavailability of oyster beds. The study found that denitrification rates are higher underneath restored oyster
reefs and that oyster reefs provide nitrogen retention. Oysters provide a continuous mechanism for nitrogen
removal and have the potential to increase IRL resiliency to nutrient loads and mitigate internal nutrient loads.'
IRL shellfish populations can be impacted by several stressors. These stressors include poor water quality, poor
sediment quality, harmful algal blooms, changes in food types and availability, changes in predator populations,
salinity changes, overexploitation, and ocean acidification. These stressors and their synergistic actions are
complex, and they are likely to influence species differently at each stage of their life cycles. A better
understanding of these stressors and conditions is essential to optimize the siting, timing, and scale of projects to
restore filter feeders.
57 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
STRATEGIES:
• Conduct mapping and condition analysis of existing habitats, delineate the areas suitable for restoration,
and establish targets for key ecosystem services using a lagoon -wide filter feeder suitability analysis.'
• Quantify ecological and socioeconomic benefits associated with restoring oyster reef habitat, hard clams,
and other bivalve populations."
• Develop a comprehensive filter feeder management plan, using data from the above ecological and
socioeconomic benefits such as filtration capacity, denitrification, and fisheries enhancement to inform
restoration and management goals and that address multiple objectives of ecosystem value (habitat),
commercial fisheries yield, genotypic variation, and aquaculture.
• Prioritize, simplify, and expedite restoration project permits, including expanding eligible project types
that qualify for general permit consideration. Evaluate need for a restoration -only permit to streamline the
permitting process.
• Understand the historic and current oyster and clam distribution and abundance throughout the lagoon
through communications and data sharing among scientists, wild shellfish harvesters, and aquaculture
lease holders. Integrate science -based and experienced -based IRL conditions and trends for successful
filter feeder restoration.
• Consider a strategic and diversified approach to filter feeder restoration that integrates site selection
(including watershed and shoreline influences), water quality, water flow, water depth, natural and
artificial substrates, and traditional wild harvest techniques like relaying.
• Assess and expand existing bivalve nursery operations for the benefit of commercial and restoration
purposes and conduct research regarding culture and out planting techniques.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
esponsi a
Partner Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Action utput Intent
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Cost
Source
Role
r Organizations
Or anizations
Filter Feeders-1: RESEARCH
Identify the
DEP, USFWS,
IRL Management TBD
DEP, local
Coordinate
spatially explicit data on the
extent and
FWC
Conference
governments,
and
extent and condition of
condition of
partners,
IRLNEP
collaborate
existing filter feeder habitat.
existing filter
academia, WMDs
(NEW)
feeder habitat.
Filter Feeders-2: REPORT
Identify spatially-
DEP, USFWS,
IRL Management TBD
DEP, local
Coordinate
spatially -explicit data on
explicit data on
FWC
Conference
governments,
and
denitrification potential
denitrification
partners, WMDs
IRLNEP
collaborate
associated with existing
potential
natural and restored filter
associated with
feeder habitat, incorporated
existing natural
into maps and online
and restored filter
platforms. (NEW)
feeder habitat.
Filter Feeders-3: Develop a
Identify goals for
DEP, FDACS
NERT, ECERT, TBD
DEP, local
Coordinate
filter feeder management plan
management and
USFWS, FWC
WMDs, IRL
governments,
and
working with public, private
restoration of
Management
IRLNEP,
collaborate
and independent sector
filter feeder
Conference
Florida Inland
partners. (NEW)
habitat to assist
partners
Navigation
with restoration
District
of recreational
(funding for
and commercial
reef balls)
fisheries.
OUTCOMES:
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Determine the quantitative basis for measuring denitrification and filtration
benefits from filter feeders.
58 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Develop a nitrogen budget and spatially -explicit nitrogen accounting
framework to support the use of denitrification in overall nutrient management at the watershed scale.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): Filter feeders restored across a broad spatial distribution that supports a
sustainable oyster fishery and aquaculture endeavors.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Continued water quality/quantity issues not suitable to sustain oyster/shellfish populations in some parts
of the IRL.
• Availability of adequate, stable recurring funding for effective, efficient, and timely program and project
implementation.
• Complexity of management of the shellfish resource.
• Availability of dry goods and supply chain of shell and spat needed for projected scale of restoration.
CITATIONS:
1. Beck, M.W., Brumbaugh, R.D., Airoldi, L., Carranza, A., Coen, L.D., Crawford, C., Defeo, O., Edgar,
G., Hancock, B., Kay, M., Lenihan, H., Luckenbach, M., Toropova, C., Zhang, G., and Guo, X. 2011.
Oyster reefs at risk and recommendations for conservation, restoration and management. Bioscience
61(2): 107-116.
2. Arnold, W.S., Marelli, D.C., Parker, M., Hoffinan, P., Frischer, M., and Scanlon, J. 2002. Enhancing hard
clam (Mercenaria Spp.) population density in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida: A comparison of
strategies to maintain the commercial fishery. J. Shellfish Res. 21(2): 259-672.
3. Zu Ermgassen, P., Hancock, B., DeAngelis, B., Greene, J., Schuster, E., Spalding, M., and Brumbaugh,
R. 2016. Setting objectives for oyster habitat restoration using_ ecosystem services: A manazer's 2_ uide.
The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA. 76 pp.
4. Dame, R.F. 2011. Ecology of Marine Bivalves: An Ecosystem Approach. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
269 pp.
5. Dame, R.F., Zingmark, R.G., Stevenson, L.H., and Nelson, D. 1980. Filter feeder coupling between the
estuarine water column and benthic subsystems, p. 521-526. In V. C. Kennedy (ed.), Estuarine
Perspectives. Academic Press, New York.
6. Chambers L.G., Gaspar, S.A., Pilato, C.J., Steinmuller, H.E., McCarthy, K.J., Sacks, P.E., and Walters,
L.J. 2017. How Well Do Restored Intertidal Oyster Reefs Support Key Biogeochemical Properties in a
Coastal Lagoon? Estuaries and Coasts. DOI 10.1007/sl2237-017-0311-5.
7. Schmidt, C. and Gallagher, S. 2017. Final Report: The denitrification potential and ecosystem services
from ten years of oyster bed restoration in the Indian River Lagoon. Prepared for the Brevard County
Board of County Commissioners, Natural Resources Department, 2013 Urban and Community Forestry
Program.
8. Baggett, L.P., Powers, S.P., Brumbaugh, R.D., Coen, L.D., DeAngelis, B.M., Greene, J.K., Hancock,
B.T., Morlock, S.M., Alen, B.L., Breitburg, D.L., Bushek, D., Grabowski, J.H., Grizzle, R.E., Grosholz,
E.D., LaPeyre, M.K., Luckenbach, M.W., McGraw, K.A., Piehler, M.F., Westby, S.R., and zu
Ermgassen, P.S.E. 2015. Guidelines for evaluating performance of oyster habitat restoration. Restoration
Ecology. 23 (6): 73 7-745.
9. Zu Ermgassen, P.S, Spalding, M.D., and Brumbaugh, R.D. 2015. Estimates of historical ecosystem
service provision can guide restoration efforts. Chapter 9 in: Marine Historical ecology in Conservation:
Applying the Past to Manage for the Future. Kittenger, J.N., L. McClenahan, K.B. Gedan, and L. K
Blight, eds. University of California Press. Pp. 187-206.
59 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
LIVING SHORELINES
Goals:
Identify priority locations for living shoreline restorations and
re b uIld g reen infrastructu ro to corari bate to cna sta I res i I ience.
IV
1k
ou I rage
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
HABITATS
Living Shorelines
ACTION: Conduct RESEARCH to identify key locations along the IRL and tributaries that would benefit
from living shorelines. RESTORE natural shorelines. REBUILD both natural and hardened shorelines that
have been impacted by erosion or storm surge. Incorporate living components into armored shorelines
where a hybrid solution is feasible and amenable to the owner. REPORT the performance, value, and cost -
benefit of living shorelines as natural infrastructure that decreases storm surge vulnerability and
contributes to coastal RESILIENCE.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Historically, efforts to protect shorelines have involved hardened structures, such as
seawalls, rock revetments, or bulkheads, to dampen or reflect wave energy. However, shoreline hardening
interrupts natural shoreline processes, reduces nursery habitat for marine species and foraging habitat for wading
birds, degrades water quality, and can increase erosion processes. Hardened shorelines are often the default
method of shoreline protection selected by property owners to "hold -the -line" along the edge of their properties.'
UW+q Mxwvbnn w pL"%o►ovtw nowl ncorrbuWtan v Ah
hardy 1lwrtGra wWhW t—w aA4r t9UW0W COWL b V^ and MbArft
r _IqlP1111�. r t dO.►
r
uavoi"Mw h+ni=%ft Wnriwa d lacy Mar 9" 6I�dN�wdYr
M�+17AlOMlrw %-. .aver C~-of as ~0*4n Wr 0a/I" 01ho orman"No
"W "0 wow% 0wa"r N 1%"0 man MMAMM U 1 04 be bwwk /a
IF aim" arw tl %#W. I .6-W bo"wn wu &Pow Mrww MMrMM bT VW"" "Aw I
oowswft40 Mwrb rKr.wl wa.e% 15ll01 thin 2100 Anwwry ~W Wtv^-"
ft mewa1 1W -its nw blMMr My SUM&W blw�v kAwrnha"O 6WrM8nw
/a1 r+AarN b.r+ mft old pron~ do" W% d and 6eVed6v%ft ." ra
noMllsw WW- o l rww =mom
A more environmentally friendly option that provides similar benefits is a living shoreline. A living shoreline is a
protected, stabilized coastal edge made of natural materials such as plants, sand, or rock. Unlike a hardened
structure, which impedes the growth of plants and animals, living shorelines grow over time. Living shorelines are
a natural shoreline management approach that provides erosion control benefits; protects, restores, or enhances
natural shoreline habitat; and maintains coastal processes through the strategic placement of plants, stone, sand
fill, and other structural organic materials. Living shorelines are an innovative and cost-effective technique for
coastal management.2
611 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
A 2015 report by Restore America's Estuaries' found that living shorelines:
• Prevent erosion caused by everyday weather, boat wakes, and long-term sea level rise more effectively
than hardened structures in many cases.
• Prevent catastrophic storm damage more effectively than hardened structures in many cases.
• Avoid many of the adverse effects that hardened structures usually have on the adjacent aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems and associated ecosystems services.
• Grow stronger over time through natural processes, while hardened structures often deteriorate and may,
if not maintained, ultimately fail.
The use of living shorelines is being encouraged across the state. The Coastal Wildlife Conservation Initiative is
led by FWC in partnership with multiple agencies to address coastal issues that affect wildlife and their habitats
while considering human needs. One priority issue for the initiative is
replacing traditional hardened methods of shoreline stabilization with
more natural living shorelines that not only provide shoreline
stabilization but also habitat for wildlife while maintaining natural
coastal processes.' The Florida Master Naturalist Program through UF-
IFAS has been holding special topic classes throughout the state
including one on coastal shoreline restoration, which was recently
completed in the IRL. This class provides training in the restoration of
living shorelines, oyster reefs, mangroves, and marsh, with focus on
ecology, benefits, methods, and monitoring techniques.5
Studies are also underway locally to determine the most effective living shoreline designs given conditions in the
lagoon. One study evaluated the wave energy attenuation from four types of living shorelines: (1) a control with
sediment only, (2) oysters, (3) cordgrass, and (4) a combination of oysters plus cordgrass. This study found that
the combination of live oysters plus one-year old cordgrass was the most effective. This design reduced 67% of
the wave energy created by a single recreational boat wake, compared to bare sediment.6 Information from these
types of studies will help to plan appropriate types of living shorelines throughout the lagoon system.
STRATEGIES:
• Work with IRL restoration partners to implement a strategic, science -based and comprehensive living
shoreline restoration program
• Support the planning, funding, implementation, and coordination of living shoreline projects throughout
the IRL.
• Develop recommendations for site location, design, construction, and standardized metrics for projects to
ensure consistent performance and monitoring.
• Coordinate the sharing and transfer of living shoreline information and tools to IRL partners, including
resource managers, federal, state, and local agencies, contractors, and homeowners.
• Work with regulatory agencies at federal, state, and local levels to streamline permitting for living
shoreline projects and incorporate living shorelines into local comprehensive plans as the preferred
technique to stabilize shorelines.
• Prioritize, simplify, and expedite restoration permits including expanding eligibility for general permits.
• Implement a hybrid approach to combine living components with engineered structures where wave
energy and shoreline configuration necessitate armor. These hybrid combinations provide ecosystem
services for species that need habitat and improve coastal RESILIENCE to erosion.
• Develop comprehensive strategies throughout the IRL system, following a similar approach used by
Brevard County' and Volusia County to assess shoreline hardening and plan for living shoreline projects.
62 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner Agencies or
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Output Intent
Lead Agencies
Organizations
Cost
Source
Role
zations
Living Shorelines-1:
Improve siting,
IRLNEP,
Florida Master Naturalist
TBD
DEP,
Conduct,
RESEARCH and
design, and
USFWS, FWC
Program, resource
WMDs,
coordinate,
REPORT science -based
construction of
managers; federal, state,
IRLNEP,
and
siting, planning, design,
living shorelines
and local agencies;
local
collaborate
and construction criteria.
throughout the
contractors;
governments
(NEW)
IRL.
homeowners; Riverside
Conservancy; academia;
NERT;ECERT
Living Shorelines-2:
Ensure consistent
NERT, ECERT
DEP, FWC, U.S. Army
TBD
DEP,
Coordinate
Develop standardized
performance and
Corps of Engineers
WMDs,
and
metrics and protocols for
monitoring.
(USACE), WMDs,
local
collaborate
living shoreline projects.
NERT, ECERT
governments
(NEV)
Living Shorelines-3:
Provide resources
IRLNEP
Florida Master Naturalist
TBD
IRLNEP,
Conduct,
RESEARCH and
to IRL partners.
Program, resource
local
coordinate,
REPORT on living
managers; federal, state,
governments
and
shoreline information.
and local agencies;
collaborate
(NEW)
contractors;
homeowners; academia;
NERT;ECERT
Living Shorelines-4:
Reduce barriers to
USAGE,
Federal, state, and local
TBD
USAGE,
Coordinate
Streamline permitting for
project
USFWS, DEP,
agencies; contractors;
USFWS,
and
living shoreline projects.
construction.
FWC, WMDs,
homeowners
DEP, FWC,
collaborate
(NEVV)
local
WMDs,
governments
local
governments
Living Shorelines-5:
Make living
Local
Landowners and
TBD
Local
Coordinate
Incorporate living
shorelines the
governments
developers, NERT,
governments
and
shoreline guidance into
preferred shoreline
ECERT
collaborate
local comprehensive
restoration
plans. (NEW)
approach.
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Promote living shoreline restoration in areas with high erosion and/or sediment
loads to the IRL and as an alternative or hybrid solution for seawall replacement for waterfront homes.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Continue living shoreline restoration projects throughout the IRL as
identified in the CCMP and in other local and regional restoration plans.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Continue to implement living shorelines projects as needed.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Homeowner and community acceptance of living shorelines as a sufficiently protective and cost-effective
alternative for bulkheads, sea walls, and rip rap.
• Limited knowledge of living shoreline techniques in coastal construction companies.
• Funding sources and manpower to complete projects.
• Sufficient dry goods and supply chain to meet needs.
• Local comprehensive plans and permitting.
CITATIONS:
1. Florida Living Shorelines. Hardened vs. Soft Shorelines. Website:
httn://floridalivinashorelines.com/hardened-vs-soft-shorelines/.
63 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Office of Habitat Conservation. 2017. Living
Shorelines. Website: httns://www.fisheries.noaa.2ov/insiaht/livinL-shorelines.
3. Restore America's Estuaries. 2015. Living Shorelines: From Barriers to Opportunities. Arlington, VA.
4. FWC Coastal Wildlife Conservation Initiative. Website: httiD://mvfwc.com/conservation/sDecial-
initiatives/cwci/facis/.
5. OF-IFAS The Florida Master Naturalist Program. Special Topics Classes.
httns://mastematuralist.ifas.ufl.edu/about/special tonics.asnx.
6. Manis, J.E., Garvis, S.K., Jachec, S.M., and Walters, L.J. 2015. Wave attenuation experiments over living
shorelines over time: a wave tank study to assess recreational boating pressures J Coast Consery (2015)
19: 1. httns://doi.or2/10.1007/s11852-014-0349-5.
7. Donnelly, M., Kibler, K., Walters, L. 2017. Developing a Shoreline Habitat Restoration and Management
Plan for Brevard County. Final Report Phase 1, 63pp.
64 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
WETLANDS AND
ALTERED MARSHES
Goals..
Res to re a nd protect wet la rids a nil refs n e wetl a nd ma nagement
65 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
HABITATS
Wetlands and Impounded and Altered Marshes
GOALS: RESTORE and protect wetlands, wetland -upland transitions, and impounded or altered marshes
throughout the IRL watershed. RESPOND to opportunities to refine wetland management strategies to
support IRL biodiversity and coastal RESILIENCE. Conduct RESEARCH and RESPOND to future
wetland management challenges associated with sea level rise.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Wetlands within the IRL region play a key role in maintaining a healthy ecosystem. They
provide a wide variety of ecological functions, including serving as habitat for various species, providing water
quality protection and improvement, supporting the food chain, providing flood storage, and buffering the lagoon
from activities that occur on adjacent uplands.
Urban, industrial, and agricultural development have contributed
to the loss of wetlands in the IRL region. By 1980, it was
estimated that 8% of Florida's estuarine habitat had been lost to
development.' Within the IRL region, 27% of the mangrove
acreage in the Fort Pierce area alone was lost between 1940 and
1987.2 It is likely that similar losses of wetlands occurred near
other urban centers in the IRL region. Upland wetlands provide
critical water storage that is important to hydrologic and salinity
regimes, and they filter nutrients and suspended solids. These
wetlands are under increasing pressure from upland
development. In addition, tidal wetlands associated with
tributaries are vulnerable to hydrologic changes, and these
wetlands are important habitats for critical life stages of fishery
species such as juvenile redfish, snook, and blue crabs. Some of
these areas, such as along the North Fork of the St. Lucie River,
have been examined for restoration efforts.3
In addition to direct wetlands loss, more than 40,000 acres of wetlands were impounded or ditched for mosquito
control purposes and isolated from the IRL.4 A mosquito control impoundment is a salt marsh or mangrove forest
with an earthen dike around the perimeter that allows the area to be artificially flooded during mosquito breeding
seasons, and machines called draglines were used to dig ditches and create piles of spoil in other marshes,
especially further north in the system. Both approaches were designed to reduce breeding by salt marsh
mosquitoes because females will not lay their eggs in standing water or on dry soil in piles of spoil. They lay their
eggs on moist soil, and the eggs hatch when flooded by tides or rainfall; therefore, holding water on marshes
permanently or during their breeding seasons prevents mosquito production.' Both methods effectively controlled
mosquitoes, but they also isolated the wetlands from the IRL or eliminated wetland plants. Thus, the water quality
and habitat benefits of these wetlands to the IRL were largely lost.
The creation of the Subcommittee on Managed Marshes of the Florida Coordinating Council for Mosquito
Control in 1986, and the allocation of funds for research on wetlands management by various entities including
the Florida Coastal Management Program proved to be critical in advancing ecologically sound mosquito control
in Florida without reverting to heavy reliance on pesticides. In fact, new approaches yield more functional
wetland, without an increase in breeding by salt marsh mosquitoes. In recent decades, amphibious excavators
have restored wetlands by replacing spoil in ditches dug by draglines and grading them to the elevation of nearby
66 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
marsh, and most impoundments have been managed by rotational impoundment management, breaching of dikes,
or other means to fully or seasonally reconnect the marsh with IRL waters. In most of the lagoon, impoundments
represent the majority of the restored wetlands.
Installing culverts through the dikes that isolate areas of wetlands in impoundments is the most cost-effective
means for reintegrating wetlands into the IRL system. By using pumps, operable weirs, and one-way valves, these
reconnected wetlands continue to provide seasonal control of mosquitos and support management actions
designed to benefit wildlife of interest. For the impounded marshes within the SJRWMD jurisdiction, 98% of
affected wetlands are targeted for rehabilitation, with reconnection completed for 79% of those wetlands. The
remaining 2% of wetlands are unlikely to be rehabilitated, in large part because they are managed for specific
purposes that are incompatible with reconnection, e.g., open water for waterfowl, or they are surrounded by
developed areas. In addition, the St. Lucie County Mosquito Control District manages 4,000 acres of coastal
mangrove swamps and salt marshes for mosquito control using an ecosystem management approach for salt
marsh mosquito control that does not require pesticides.
Su - ithin SJRWMD Mosquito Banana River Lagoon/ North IRL Central Total
Lagoon Newfound Harbor IRL
Reconnected (Acres)
Targeted for Rehabilitation (Acres)
Not Targeted for Rehabilitation (Acres)
Total (Acres)
� -�
�
AMO
�tyl>ilce
Estuary
5,360
3,722
14,801
3,150
27,033
1,396
1,257
4,227
124
7,004
0
100
740
0
840
6,756
5,079
19,768
3,274
34,877
Management of wetland impoundments has varied over
time. For many years, most management activities in
impoundments were limited to water level manipulations
using pumps or artesian wells. In recent years, culverts
have been installed in the dikes of most impoundments to
re-establish the vital connection between the impounded
marshes and the IRL. In certain situations, dikes have been
entirely removed. Restoration of the connection between
formerly impounded wetlands and the open waters of the
lagoon not only benefits water quality but also improves
the habitat quality of the formerly impounded wetlands,
providing additional habitat to many IRL species dependent
on coastal wetlands for all or a portion of their life cycles.
These revised management practices have not been implemented in all impounded marshes because many of the
remaining impounded wetlands in the IRL are privately owned, and many of these landowners are reluctant to
allow changes in current management practices. However, local, state, and federal regulation of development or
construction within wetlands has reduced the rate of wetland loss.
The five lagoon counties have ordinances to reduce the impacts and/or loss of wetland acreage and function.
• Volusia County:
httl)s://www.volusia.org/core/fileDarse.DhD/4742/urlt/Division l l WetlandAlterationPermits 1-30-2014.Ddf
• Brevard County: httD://www.brevardfl.aov/docs/default-source/natural-resources-documents/article-x-
division-4-wetland-Drotection-2014-09.Ddf
• Indian River County: httD:Hindianrivercountv.elaws.us/code/coor aDxid487171 titleix ch928
• St. Lucie County:
httDS://Iibrarv.municode.com/fl/st. lucie county/codes/land develo_ment code?nodeld=CHVIREPRST
6.02.00ENSELA 6.02.03WEPR
67 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• Martin County:
httDS://Iibrarv.municode.com/fl/martin countv/codes/land development code?nodeld=LADERE ART4S
IDEST DIV 1 WESHPR S4.2WEPRST
STRATEGIES:
• Eliminate further destruction of wetlands through land acquisition of privately owned wetlands,
ordinances, and other mechanisms.
• Identify opportunities for wetlands restoration for all types of hydrologic impact such as impounding,
drag lining, ditching, berms, and tributary oxbow isolation. Work with private property owners to
reconnect waters.
• Identify opportunities for mitigation banking and wetlands creation.
• Work with IRLNEP partners, the Sub -Committee on Managed Marshes, and mosquito control districts to
continue responsible wetland and impoundment management to benefit the IRL, support IRL biodiversity
and protect human health from insects.
• Re-evaluate wetland management strategies regarding key parameters such as dissolved oxygen, acidity,
and primary and secondary production of fishery species.
• Work with county mosquito control districts to expand funding opportunities for living shoreline
restoration when impoundment dikes require maintenance or repairs after post -storm erosion and storm
surge events.
• Implement restoration of tidal wetlands in tributaries, focusing on rehydration and reconnection of
historical flow and headwaters.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
I
partner Agencies
Estimated Funding
IRLNEP
c
Out Intent
Lead Agencies
or Organizations
Cost ource
Role
ions
Wetlands-1: RESEARCH and
develop new and improved
wetland BMPs with a focus on
understanding wetland
responses to sea level rise and
climate change.
Wetlands-2: Establish or
enhance wetland or shoreline
setback buffers.
Wetlands-3: Implement
innovative programs and
incentives supporting wetlands
protection and management on
privately -owned lands and
marshes managed by private,
non-profit organizations. When
necessary, acquire ownership or
control of crucial wetlands.
Wetlands-4: Continue projects
and programs to RESTORE
shorelines with a focus on
enhancing and managing
mosquito impoundment dikes
with living shoreline
restoration.
Understand
wetland
responses to sea
level rise and
climate change.
Protect wetlands
from
development and
invasive species.
Create wetland
opportunities on
public and private
land and create
public/private
partnerships.
Create a more
natural
environment and
enhance
biodiversity.
NRCS, DEP
Local
governments
Brevard
Environmentally
Endangered
Lands Program,
DEP's Division
of State Land,
Florida Forever
FWC, DEP
WMDs, academia, TBD
interest groups,
FWC,
Subcommittee on
Managed Marshes
WMDs, academia, TBD
interest groups
Local
governments,
forest and
agricultural land
owners, mosquito
control districts,
interest groups,
NERT,ECERT
WMDs, local
governments,
interest groups,
NOAA, mosquito
control districts,
Subcommittee on
Managed Marshes,
NERT,ECERT
NRCS,
WMDs,
DEP,
academia,
NOAA,
National Fish
and Wildlife
Foundation
Local
governments
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
TBD Florida Land Coordinate
Acquisition and
Trust Fund, collaborate
local
governments
FWC,
WMDs,
DEP, local
governments
Coordinate
and
collaborate
68 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
OUTCOMES:
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Evaluate the status and needs of wetlands and impounded and altered marshes
throughout the IRL.
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Implement CCMP projects to ensure IRL wetlands and marshes are restored
and protected. Support the use of wetland sites as living laboratories for RESEARCH related to evaluating
wetland changes and management needs (including BMPs) in response to climate change and sea level
rise.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): Implement IRL wetland and marsh management as a coordinated network of
BMPs to sustain diverse habitats and biodiversity in the IRL.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Re-establishing functional wetlands is difficult and costly. Therefore, focus should be on protection of
existing wetlands and natural wetland functions.
• Management approaches for mosquito impoundments and managed marshes must balance mosquito
control with habitat restoration goals. A whole ecosystem perspective is needed to incorporate biological
diversity and water quality into lagoon -wide marsh management.
• Inadequate long-term funding.
• Challenges of sea level rise to current and future management strategies.
CITATIONS:
1. Brantly, R.M. 1980. The Changing Resource Scene in Florida. Transactions 45' North American Wildlife
Conference: 5-10.
2. Hoffman, B.A. and Haddad, K.D. 1988. General Land Use and Vegetation Changes in the Indian River
Lagoon System. In Indian River Lagoon Estuarine Monograph (Draft). D.D. Barile (ed.) Marine
Resources Council of East Florida, Florida Institute of Technology. Melbourne, Florida.
3. Herren, L., Sharpe, B., Beal, J., Tucker, J., and Conrad, C. 2011. Hydrological Restoration of the North
Fork St. Lucie River and Ten Mile Creek: 2011 Needs Update. DEP Report, 306 pp.
4. Rey, J.R. and Kain, T.1989. A Guide to Salt Marsh Impoundments of Florida. Florida Medical
Entomological Laboratory, Publication. Vero Beach.
5. Rey, J.R., Carlson, D.B., Brockmeyer, R.E. 2011. Coastal wetland management in Florida: environmental
concerns and human health. Wetlands Ecology and Management.
69 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
SPOIL ISLANDS
Goals:
U pdate the Spoi l Isla nds Ma nags rent Plan fa r t he I R L wit h a
foc u s on im pied pub I is access, manage -ont, a nd wa ter q kA al ity.
iu I rage
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
HABITATS
Spoil Islands
GOALS: Update and revise the IRL Spoil Islands Management Plan with a focus on maintenance, habitat
RESTORATION and island enhancement, IRL water quality improvements, and provision of public access
based on the best available science and sound habitat management principles.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Spoil islands are human -made islands, often created as a byproduct of channel
dredging. To promote boating and commerce throughout Florida, countless channels were dredged through the
state's shallow inshore and coastal waters to provide enough depth for vessels. The material dredged to create
these channels is called "spoil." In the past, the practice was to deposit the spoil in piles along the edge of the
channels as the dredging operation progressed, which created spoil islands throughout the IRL.1,2
Although not natural, spoil islands have become
an integral habitat type throughout the IRL
ecosystem since their creation in the 1940s and
1950s. Spoil islands are often surrounded by
seagrass beds and mangrove fringe, which
provide habitat for a variety of organisms
important to the ecology and economy of the
region. Spoil island uplands can support a variety
of flora and fauna, both native and invasive, as
well as provide an opportunity for recreation by
the public. Erosion, invasive species, human -use
impacts, and sea level rise pose the most
important threats to spoil islands in the IRL. In
1990, The Spoil Island Management Plan was
drafted by DEP (then Florida Department of
Natural Resources) with support from the Florida
Inland Navigation District. The plan was an
assessment of the resources on each of the
islands, with recommendations for management
strategies based on designations that were
suggested at the time and still in place today.
Spoil islands currently fall under three basic designations: recreation, education, and conservation. Recreation
islands are further broken down into "active" and "passive." Detailed information on island designations and
locations can be found online on the IRL Aquatic Preserves Spoil Island Project website.3 The designations
assigned to the islands managed by IRL Aquatic Preserves are not legally binding and are used as management
decision tools. As the management plan is updated, many islands will undergo changes in their designations based
on more current resource assessments and public use patterns.
Two spoil islands in the region have been designated by FWC as Critical Wildlife Areas, BC-49 in Brevard
County and MC-2 in Martin County.4 Lands designated as Critical Wildlife Areas are protected under the Florida
Administrative Code and are closed to public access. Both islands are important bird rookeries that were impacted
by human activities. The Critical Wildlife Areas designation provides an important layer of protection to these
areas. As natural areas along the region are developed, the spoil islands will become more important to wildlife.
711 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
To date, successful spoil island restoration/enhancement projects include those conducted on SL-3 and SL-15 in
St. Lucie County. The 5.7-acre SL-3 enhancement project involved the replacement of the Australian pine and
Brazilian pepper community with native wetland and hammock plant species. The 10.5-acre SL-15 project
entailed removal of exotic vegetation and 90,000 cubic yards of sediment to create coastal hammock, mangrove,
and seagrass habitats. Large-scale projects such as island scraping can be coupled with muck capping projects as
the islands represent a suitable sediment source.
Spoil island restoration immediately post -project (left) and ten years later (right)
Spoil Island Working Group. In 1997, the IRL Aquatic Preserves office created the Spoil Islands Working
Group to coordinate IRL spoil island activities and research. The Working Group is composed of numerous
stakeholders including federal, state, county, local interest groups, and university partners.' The Spoil Islands
Working Group functions as an issue -specific working group of Florida's NERT and ECERT. All stakeholders
work closely with the IRLNEP on habitat restoration issues for the 1RL. A priority for the Working Group is to
draft an updated IRL Spoil Islands Management Plan. The updated management plan, along with stakeholder
input, will align management decisions with goals outlined in the IRL Aquatic Preserves approved management
plan. The plan will also be aligned with this CCMP revision. Once completed, the updated Spoil Island
Management Plan will provide an example for other spoil island managers throughout the state and country.
Leave No Trace Program. In 2017, the IRL Aquatic Preserves office partnered with the Leave No Trace Center
for Outdoor Ethics to address impacts associated with recreational use of the spoil islands. The IRL and its spoil
islands were designated as a 2017 hotspot. The Hot Spots Program identifies areas suffering from severe impacts
of outdoor activities that can thrive again with Leave No Trace solutions. In 2017, week-long outreach activities
were held in the region to educate recreational users and land managers about Leave No Trace principals and
BMPs to help reduce impacts to the spoil islands and areas around the IRL. The main issue that the program aims
to address is human waste left on spoil islands, which is both a social and water quality issue.
Friends of the Spoil Islands. Friends of the Spoil Islands is the approved Citizen Support Organization for the
IRL Aquatic Preserves office. The Friends of the Spoil Islands is responsible for providing funds for the hosting
and management of the Spoil Island Project website, financing a web -based public user survey account that
gathers data on recreational use of spoil islands, financing the Leave No Trace Program, and holding public
interest funds that are used throughout the aquatic preserves. The group has also created the only limited mobility
access spoil island in the IRL region through a grant from the IRLNEP.
72 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
STRATEGIES:
• Work closely with DEP, IRL Aquatic Preserves office, Florida Inland Navigation District, and Spoil
Island Working Group to update the IRL Spoil Island Management and the DEP Aquatic Preserve's
Island Designation System, as needed.
• Work closely with IRL Aquatic Preserves staff to implement and expand the Leave No Trace Program as
part of the IRLNEP Trash -Free Waters Initiative.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
esponsible Lead
Partner
"utput inten Agencies or
Agencies or
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Organizations
Organizations
Cost
Source
Role
Spoil Islands-1:
Develop a repository
IRL Aquatic
IRLNEP
$21,000
DEP, FWC
Coordinate
Create a central
and centralized
Preserves, Friends
Management
allocated by
and
electronic
electronic file location
of the Spoil Islands
Conference
IRL Aquatic
collaborate
repository for spoil
for spoil island
Working Group,
Preserves for
island maps,
information.
NERT, ECERT
a position
documents,
sources. (NEW)
Spoil Islands-2:
Update the IRL Spoil
IRL Aquatic
IRLNEP
$50,000 to
DEP,
Coordinate
Update the IRL
Island Management
Preserves, Friends
Management
update the
FWC,
and
Spoil Management
Plan and implement
of the Spoil Islands
Conference
plan; cost for
Florida
collaborate
Plan and
spoil island habitat
Working Group,
projects to be
Inland
implement
restoration and
NERT, ECERT
determined
Navigation
identified projects.
enhancement and public
based on plan
District,
(NEW)
access projects.
update
IRLNEP
OUTCOMES:
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Revised IRL Spoil Island Management Plan is completed and adopted.
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): High priority habitat restoration projects on IRL spoil islands are identified,
funded, and underway.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): IRL spoil islands represent an integrated network of conservation, habitat
restoration, and public recreation.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Funding for habitat restoration and spoil island maintenance.
• Sea level rise will threaten the natural resources and public access values of spoil islands.
• Boat wakes erode the shorelines.
• Human use of island with bird rookeries conflicts with listed species protection.
CITATIONS:
1. DEP. 2016. IRL Aquatic Preserves System Management Plan, Banana River; Indian River — Malabar to
Vero Beach, Indian River — Vero Beach to Fort Pierce, and Jensen Beach to Jupiter Inlet Aquatic
Preserves. www.aauaticpreserves.or2.
2. Florida Department of Natural Resources. 1990. Indian River Lagoon spoil island management plan.
Division of State Lands, Bureau of Submerged Lands and Preserves. Tallahassee, Florida.
3. IRL Aquatic Preserves. 2018. Spoil Island Project. www.spoilislandproiect.or2.
4. FWC. 2018. Critical Wildlife Areas. httt)://mvfwc.com/CWA.
73 1 Page
A 10 1 0 z 0( 0 1 ILI' ki =1 11""I'vilya 0 Is
dt
is 1".
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
HABITATS
Land Conservation
GOALS: Promote conservation of land. Pursue strategic initiatives that will REDUCE freshwater,
sediment, nutrient, and pollutant loads to the IRL and REBUILD natural land -water connections to
provide water quality improvement, provide flood prevention, and RESTORE natural hydroperiods.
ISSUE SUMMARY: IRL water quality is directly affected by activities on the land surrounding the lagoon.
Coastal development, stormwater runoff, and alteration or destruction of coastal and nearby habitats affect the
natural and human -built assets of the IRL. Upland and wetland areas adjacent to the IRL serve as important travel
corridors or habitat for many species. Protection of these upland -wetland -lagoon linkages is important to many of
the region's biological resources, and it provides essential protective services to human -built communities along
the IRL. In addition, in 2005, Naturally Central Florida recognized IRL as one of seven regional "jewels of our
natural world" and "must save" places for Central Florida.'
r, ert Alust Save Places
of Central Florida
75 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Willing seller — willing buyer land acquisition is an important non -regulatory tool that respects private property
rights. It is the most effective management tool to protect biological integrity and diversity in coastal estuary
watersheds. Strategic acquisition of land for public use provides many benefits to the IRL and its coastal
communities (i.e., protection of natural habitats and species, wetland areas for stormwater conveyance and
treatment, groundwater recharge areas, public access and use areas, and coastal resilience to flooding and storm
surge events). Land acquisition has supported the creation of more than 50 destinations for nature, heritage, and
cultural tourism along the IRL.
Local land conservation programs can work in concert with state and federal initiatives.' The IRL watershed has a
long and successful history of acquiring lands for conservation at private, local, state, and federal levels.
Statewide programs, such as Preservation 2000 and Florida Forever, acquired 2.4 million acres statewide. Locally,
Volusia, Brevard, Indian River, St. Lucie, and Martin counties adopted tax -supported land conservation programs
in the 1990s. In 2014, Florida voters ratified the Florida's Water and Land Legacy amendment which dedicates
more than $20 billion to land and water conservation over the next 20 years. Consistent with this, the Florida
Legislature re -initiated Florida Forever and Florida Communities Trust funding in 2018. Among the Florida
Forever projects is the Indian River Lagoon Blueway, which was placed on the list in 1998. The project area
contains 27,451 acres in five counties. Over the last 20 years, 8,018 acres have been acquired at a cost of $45
million leaving 19,433 remaining to be acquired. Private, non-profit organizations have been significant and
active land acquisition partners. The Nature Conservancy, The Trust for Public Land, The Richard King Mellon
Foundation, and the Indian River Land Trust have provided considerable land acquisition support over the past
decades. The Indian River Land Trust is one of the only private, non-profit organizations that acquires and
manages lands along the lagoon. Since 2009, the Indian River Land Trust has acquired more than 925 acres and
over 8.5 miles of IRL frontage.3
As a result of land conservation activities over multiple decades, there are now tens of thousands of acres of
publicly owned lands and waters managed for conservation purposes, including five national wildlife refuges, one
national seashore, seven state parks, and numerous county and municipal parks and preserves. Management of
these lands should incorporate restoration goals for the lagoon as well as provision for public access.
Acquisition of fee -simple title is not the only pathway to manage lands for conservation and restoration purposes.
Less than fee options, such as conservation easements, are powerful tools for conservation that allow private
landowners to provide lands for conservation. The easement is either voluntarily donated or sold by the landowner
and constitutes a legally binding agreement that limits certain types of uses or prevents development from taking
place on the land in perpetuity while the land remains in private hands. Conservation easements protect land for
future generation, while allowing owners to retain many private property rights and to live on and use their land,
at the same time potentially providing them with tax benefits.
An innovative, cooperative land -use agreement being used in Florida is the Dispersed Water Management
Program. This program encourages private property owners to retain water on their land rather than drain it,
accept and detain regional runoff for storage and use, or provide both. Landowners typically become involved in
the program through cost -share cooperative projects, easements, or payment for environmental services.
Managing water on these lands is one tool that can accelerate water storage projects, reduce flood risks, and divert
high -volume stormwater discharges away from coastal estuaries.
In addition, FDACS has the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program, which is an agricultural land
preservation program designed to protect important agricultural lands through the acquisition of permanent
agricultural land conservation easements. The program is designed to protect valuable agricultural lands, create
easement documents that work together with agricultural production to ensure sustainable agricultural practices
and reasonable protection of the environment without interfering with agricultural operations, and protect natural
resources in conjunction with the economically viable agricultural operations. This program recognizes that a
thriving rural economy with a strong agricultural base and viable rural communities is essential to Florida's future.
76 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
It also protects agricultural lands in the path of development so that Florida will continue to maintain a viable
agricultural sector in our state's economic base, and the citizens of Florida can continue to enjoy rural landscapes
and open space, and in so doing, provide simultaneous protection of environmentally significant areas.'
STRATEGIES:
• Acquire sufficient lands through fee simple or less than fee simple acquisition strategies to achieve the
intended outcomes for IRL restoration and ecosystem health.
• Develop and update lagoon -wide maps of publicly -owned conservation lands integrating existing and
planned restoration projects to communicate a lagoon -wide picture of the network of conservation lands,
ongoing site activities, and needs.
• Evaluate needs, opportunities, and funding sources to acquire environmentally -sensitive lands along the
IRL with special focus on inholdings and additions on existing management units, opportunities and
funding sources for less than fee conservation easements, opportunities and funding sources for dispersed
water management on existing public and privately conservation lands, and development of a protocol for
rapid buy-out response for high -risk, frequently flooded properties.
• Review and update Florida Forever Plans within the IRL watershed, including the Indian River Blueway
Florida Forever Project.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible Lead
Agencies or
Partner
Agencies or
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Acti Output Intent
Or tions
Or anizations
Cost
Source
Role
Land-1: Continue
Manage sensitive
Local
IRLNEP, Indian
TBD
Florida Land
Coordinate
coordination of efforts to
lands with strategic
governments,
River Land
Acquisition
and
identify, classify, acquire,
conservation
DEP, WMDs,
Trust, interest
Trust Fund,
collaborate
and manage
outcomes throughout
private landowners
groups,
local
environmentally sensitive
the IRL region.
Riverside
governments,
lands.
Conservancy
private
Land-2: Support recurring
Acquire and manage
Florida Legislature
DEP, FWC,
TBD
Florida Land
Coordinate
funding of the Land
conservation lands
local
Acquisition
and
Acquisition Trust Fund and
for long -tern land
governments,
Trust Fund,
collaborate
other funding sources.
management and
interest groups
local
stewardship.
governments
Land-3: Support public
Help protected
Local
IRL NEP
TBD
Florida Land
Coordinate
acquisition of
species and REDUCE
governments,
Management
Acquisition
and
environmentally sensitive
risk vulnerability for
DEP, WMDs,
Conference
Trust Fund,
collaborate
lands that are deemed
natural and human-
private landowners
local
essential for long-term
built infrastructure
governments
protection and management
from storm events,
of IRL resources, CCMP
erosion, or sea level
implementation, and
rise.
stormwater projects. (NEVI
Land-4: Develop and
Promote conservation
Local
IRL NEP
TBD based
Florida Land
Coordinate
implement incentives to
of privately -owned
governments,
Management
on
Acquisition
and
promote conservation of
sensitive lands and
DEP, WMDs,
Conference
conservation
Trust Fund,
collaborate
privately -owned
provision of cost-
private
method
local
environmentally sensitive
effective dispersed
landowners, water
governments
lands and provision of cost-
water management
control districts,
effective dispersed water
projects.
FDACS
management projects.
Land-5: Promote acquisition
Create public access
Local
IRL NEP
TBD
Florida Land
Coordinate
of lands for public access to
to the IRL.
governments,
Management
Acquisition
and
the IRL.
DEP, WMDs,
Conference
Trust Fund,
collaborate
private landowners
local
governments,
private
77 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Identify and target highest priority lands required for CCMP restoration project
implementation. Integrate land acquisition considerations into coastal RESILIENCE and adaptation
planning.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Begin land acquisition activities as needed for CCMP implementation.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Continue land acquisition along the IRL. Implement an acquisition strategy
to prepare for sea level rise impacts to coastal areas.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Lack of funding, including emergency response reserves, and/or willing sellers.
• Rapid population growth and coastal development may increase land prices beyond a cost -benefit
threshold.
• Emergency "REBUILD quick" decisions are typically made without consideration for land acquisition as
a strategy to address long-term risk exposure.
CITATIONS:
1. Naturally Central Florida, Fitting the Pieces Together. 2005. Myregion.org and the University of Central
Florida.
2. De Freese, D.E. 1995. Land Acquisition: A Tool for Biological Diversity Protection in the Indian River
Lagoon, Florida. Bulletin of Marine Science 57 (1): 14-27.
3. Indian River Land Trust. Website: httn://www.irlt.or2/.
4. FDACS. Rural and Family Lands Protection Program. Website:
httr)s://www. freshfromflorida. com/Divisions-Offices/Florida-Forest-Service/Our-Forests/Land-Plannin,2-
and-Administration-Section/Rural-and-Familv-Lands-Protection-Pro2ram2.
78 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CONNECTED WATERS
AND WATERSHEDS
Goals:
Improve understanding and management of graters influencing
the IRL,
79 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
HABITATS
Connected Waters and Watersheds
GOALS: Conduct and share RESEARCH to improve understanding and management of waters that
influence the IRL. RESTORE natural connections and water flow to REDUCE freshwater discharges to the
IRL. REPORT regularly to IRLNEP partners working in connected and adjacent waters and watersheds.
RESPOND to opportunities for shared projects and potential threats.
ISSUE SUMMARY: All of Florida's surface and groundwaters are connected either directly by natural or
man-made connections or indirectly through the water cycle. Restoring the health of the IRL will require resource
managers to look beyond watershed boundaries. Communication, cooperation, coordination, and collaboration
among many resource managers and stakeholders will be essential. For the IRL, key surface water and watershed
connections include Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades, St. Johns River, and Atlantic Ocean. To be effective at
IRL ecosystem -wide restoration, the IRLNEP must communicate, cooperate, and coordinate with regional
restoration initiatives on connected and adjacent waters and watersheds.
IRL-Halifax Planning Boundary (2016). In 2015, in response to a request by Resolution 2015-133 (November
5, 2015) of the Volusia County Council, the IRLNEP Management Conference evaluated and accepted an
IRLNEP planning boundary amendment to include the southern section of the Halifax River north of Ponce Inlet
in Volusia County. The boundary amendment extended the northern
boundary of the CCMP planning boundary 25 miles north and
included 198,678 watershed acres and 6,555 surface water acres.
The IRL-Halifax Planning Boundary was reviewed and supported
by IRLNEP Management Conference (i.e., Citizens Advisory
Committee, STEMAC, and Management Board). Final IRL Council
Board approval occurred on November 18, 2016. A number of
considerations influenced the decision. IRLNEP targets a broad
range of issues and engages local communities in the process to
maintain the integrity of the whole system, which includes its
, chemical, physical, and biological properties, as well as its
economic, recreational, and aesthetic values; six of Volusia County's
16 drainage basins contribute to the Halifax River, including the
Outstanding Florida Waters of the Tomoka River and Spruce Creek;
_ the Halifax River merges with Spruce Creek and the Mosquito
Lagoon as an integrated estuarine system which requires a holistic
approach to ensure the health and success of regional restoration and
stewardship; and climate change and sea level rise compel coastal
managers to look at large-scale features and changes to evaluate
^ risk -based vulnerabilities and develop adaptation strategies.
Everglades Restoration. The Everglades is a World Heritage Site, an International Biosphere Reserve, and one
of the world's largest ecosystem restoration projects. Today, the south Florida landscape is a highly altered
system of canals and ditches that began to drain the land a century ago and pave the way for agriculture and urban
development. To protect the region from flooding, Lake Okeechobee was connected to the IRL by the
Okeechobee Waterway and the St. Lucie River, which is a major tributary to the southern IRL. During wet
seasons, large freshwater discharges from the St. Lucie River watershed and from Lake Okeechobee are made to
control water levels and offer flood protection across the SFWMD area.' A number of these high -volume
80 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
freshwater releases have occurred since the 2008 CCMP (2013, 2016, 2017, and 2018). These seasonally
recurring releases drastically alter the normal IRL salinity regime. The release volume and duration determine the
severity of the salinity impacts to the estuary and lagoon. These release events also convey large loads of
sediment and nutrients to the system, and they can transport algae from Lake Okeechobee and watershed canals
capable of triggering HABs. This happened in 2016 when 30.4% of the total inflow, 36.0% of the total nitrogen
load, and 25.1 % of the total phosphorus load to the St. Lucie Estuary came from Lake Okeechobee! The releases
triggered a severe bloom of Microcystis with associated production of the microcystin toxin that posed threats to
the health of the ecology, livestock, and humans. A similar event occurred in 2018.
To reduce nutrient pollution to the St. Lucie Estuary and the IRL, SFWMD and USACE plan to implement the
IRL-South project, part of CERP. The IRL-South project includes: (1) construction and operation of four new
large-scale above -ground reservoirs to capture water from the C-23, C-24, C-25, and C-44 canals for increased
storage; (2) construction and operation of four new stormwater treatment areas for the C-23/C-24 North, C-23/C-
24 South, C-25, and C-44 basins; (3) restoration of about 92,100 acres of upland/wetland areas and habitat; (4)
redirection of water from the C-23/C-24 basin to the North Fork of the St. Lucie River to attenuate freshwater
flows to the estuary; (5) about 7.9 million cubic yards of muck removal from the St. Lucie River Estuary; and (6)
about 900 acres of oyster shell, reef balls, and artificial submerged aquatic vegetation near muck removal sites for
habitat improvement. The CCMP efforts should coordinate with CERP, such as with the C-44 Reservoir and
Stormwater Treatment Area component of the IRL-South project that is under construction.2
St. Johns River. The St. Johns River begins its northerly journey to
the Atlantic Ocean from a drainage basin west of the City of Vero
Beach in Indian River County. The 2,000-square-mile basin that
makes up the headwaters of the river is known as the Upper St. Johns
River Basin. In the early 1900s, the upper basin was diked and drained
for agricultural purposes. By the early 1970s, 62% of the marsh was
gone, and canals were constructed for urban and agricultural purposes
to divert water from the basin east to the IRL. The alterations
diminished water quality in the lagoon and degraded the upper basin's
remaining marshes. In 1977, SJRWMD and USACE began a long-
term flood control project to revitalize the upper basin. The Upper St.
Johns River Basin Project reclaimed drained marshlands by creating
reservoirs and replumbing existing canals. The project goals included improving water quality, reducing
freshwater discharges to the IRL, providing for water supply, and restoring and enhancing wetland habitat. The
Upper Basin project was completed in May 2016, and the project is now subject to a long-term maintenance plan.'
Projects have also been completed to re -divert C-54, C-10, C-1, and Crane Creek to restore freshwater flows to
the St. Johns River and reduce freshwater discharges and associated pollutant loads from reaching the IRL.'
Restoration efforts are also underway in both the Middle and Lower St. Johns River basins as part of existing
TMDLs and BMAPs, as well as SJRWMD projects. Continued coordination is needed to ensure that the
restoration goals for both the St. Johns River and IRL can be achieved.
Ocean Inlets. The IRL has five inlets that provide direct connections to the Atlantic Ocean, allowing for animal
migration between the productive estuary and nearshore coastal waters, and provide tidal exchange of the lagoon
system. Inlets have opened and closed over the long geological history of the lagoon. These inlets are important in
controlling the residence time of water within lagoon segments and influence the transport of materials through
the lagoon. These transport and exchange processes have presumably varied considerably over time as the number
and arrangement of inlets changed. With coastal construction and inlet stabilization, the degree of variation in the
IRL system has been lowered, although even today dredging and other modifications of the inlets influence water
quality of the lagoon. The five inlets include:
811 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• Ponce de Leon (Ponce) Inlet is the most natural inlet, which has been
open since colonial times and has since been artificially stabilized.
• Sebastian Inlet is a man-made inlet that was constructed in 1924, closed
by natural forces in 1941, and reopened in 1947.4 It is now stabilized.
• Fort Pierce Inlet is a man-made inlet near the site of the Indian River
Inlet and was dredged and stabilized in 1921.
• St. Lucie Inlet was built as a small connection between the IRL and
ocean in 1844 and was later dredged in 1892.
• Jupiter Inlet is a natural inlet at the south end of the IRL that has been
stabilized to eliminate migration.
The natural opening and closing of these inlets was part of the coastal
geological dynamics of eastern Florida. In this microtidal, high wave energy
environment, natural sand transport favors long (20-60 mile) barrier islands
with abundant wash over terraces and wash over fans and infrequent tidal inlets.
Typically, temporary inlets caused by over wash during storm events are rapidly
sealed by tidal and longshore current driven sand transport.5
Segment
Average Residence
Time (Days)
Mosquito Lagoons
ML1
4
ML2
8
ML3-4
76
Banana River Lagoon'
BRl-2
148
BR3-5
96
BR-6
11
BR-7
3
North IRL'
IRl-3
47
IR4
3
IR5
47
IR6-7
30
IR8
9
IR9-11
35
Central IRL'
IR12 12
IR13 1
In addition to these inlets, there are other connections. One connection to the i IR14-15 6
ocean is at Port Canaveral, which was constructed between 1951 and 1955 in an IR16-20 9
IR21 1
area where no known inlet had previously existed. The connection consists of an South IRL 'I
engineered lock system that is used specifically for access by maritime vessels. South IRL 16
This lock system limits the exchange of water between the Banana River
Lagoon and ocean to times when the locks are open. Another connection is for the Mosquito Lagoon to the IRL
through the man-made Haulover Canal, which was constructed during the 19th Century.
The Banana River Lagoon, North IRL, and southern
Mosquito Lagoon do not have inlets and, therefore, they have
long residence times, which create their valued ecology and
means that water in these areas is not exchanged with the
ocean rapidly, so nutrients can build up leading to algal
blooms. One option to help this condition is to increase
exchange by adding culverts, pumps, weirs, or inlets to
provide new connections to the Atlantic Ocean. However,
artificial exchange projects are expensive and complex. They
can move nutrients, muck, and pollutants from one location to
another without delivering intended water quality benefits.
Local municipalities are concerned about shoreline erosion
and stormwater infrastructure efficiency with enhanced
circulation and elevated water levels. Because of the complex
nature of biological response to changing water quality conditions, there are also concerns among the scientific
community regarding unintended and undesirable consequences. The amount of exchange needed to have a
beneficial impact on the system without causing harm is also unknown. One issue of concern is artificial shifting
of salinity and nutrient regimes that might favor certain HAB species. SJRWMD has been conducting studies to
evaluate potential options to provide additional exchange for the lagoon system .6'The IRLNEP is pursuing
discussions with IRL scientists and engineers to evaluate options and develop a scope of work for a pilot project
designed to better evaluate costs, benefits, and associated risks. In addition, the IRLNEP is working with Port
Canaveral and FIT to model IRL water flow and internal compartmentalization of water segments by causeways,
bridges, and other human -built structures to advise future FDOT and local roadway, causeway, and bridge
infrastructure improvement decisions.
82 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
STRATEGIES:
• Seek opportunities to communicate, cooperate, and coordinate with agencies and partners in the
connected watersheds of the IRL system to identify measures to achieve goals for both the IRL and its
connected waters.
• Integrate the IRL-Halifax Planning Boundary into all IRLNEP and CCMP considerations and activities.
• Expand efforts with SFWMD and other partners in the IRL-South CERP project to support expanded and
accelerated funding for water storage as part of Everglades restoration to REDUCE nutrient laden
freshwater discharges to the IRL.
• Expand efforts with SJRWMD and other partners in the restoration of the St. Johns River to support
funding for expanded efforts, with a focus on restoring a more natural drainage divide and flow of
freshwater that includes using public and private lands to retain, treat and manage releases, with a goal to
eliminate discharges to the IRL.
• Work with IRLNEP Management Conference and interested science and engineering partners to develop
a detailed scope of work for a science -based pilot project to evaluate the effects of enhanced oceanic
exchange for the M, where appropriate.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Respong1ble
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Actin
Output Intent
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
or Or anizations
aniz
Cost
ource
Role
Connected Waters-1:
Incorporate the IRL-Halifax
Planning Boundary area
into all IRLNEP discussions,
CCMP action plans, and
CCMP implementation
activities. (NEW)
Connected Waters-2:
Support expanded and
accelerated funding for
Everglades restoration.
(NEW)
Connected Waters-3:
Support expanded and
accelerated funding to
RESTORE the St. Johns
River. (NEW)
Connected Waters-4:
Evaluate water quality
habitats and species
composition around inlets
and develop management
recommendations. (NEW)
Incorporate IRL-
IRLNEP
Volusia County
TBD
Local
Conduct,
Halifax Planning
and local
governments,
coordinate,
Boundary into all
governments,
IRLNEP
and
IRLNEP discussions.
SJRWMD, DEP
collaborate
Significantly
USACE,
Local
$16.4
Federal and
Coordinate
REDUCE or stop large
SFWMD
governments
billion for
state
and
volume freshwater
CERP
legislative
collaborate
releases from Lake
appropriations
Okeechobee and St.
Lucie River
watershed.
RESTORE freshwater
SJRWMD,
Local
Initially
SJRWMD,
Coordinate
flow direction,
USACE
governments
$105.2
state
and
retention, treatment,
million*
legislative
collaborate
and managed release.
appropriations
Implement projects
that protect lagoon-
nearshore ocean
connections for
species of concern,
improve water quality,
and support
biodiversity.
IRLNEP, USACE Canaveral Port
Authority
Connected Waters-5: Better
Develop a pilot project DEP
IRLNEP
understand the physical,
to enhance oceanic
Management
chemical, and biological
exchange, as
Conference, local
implications, benefits, risks,
appropriate.
governments,
and expected outcomes of
inlet districts
enhancing oceanic exchange
and develop a pilot project,
as appropriate. (NEW)
* For the Sottile Canal, C-54/Fellsmere Main Canal, C-1, C-10, and Crane Creek projects.
TBD
TBD based
on
connection
type and
location
State and
federal grants,
IRLNEP
IRLNEP
Management
Conference,
state and
federal grants
Conduct,
coordinate,
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
83 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Enhanced communication, coordination, and cooperation among partners in
connected watersheds. Complete enhanced water flow pilot project planning and, if scientifically feasible
and supported by the IRL Management Conference and partners, seek funding to move forward with
design and engineering work.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Coordinated and cooperative efforts are successful in expanding and
accelerating local, state, and federal cost -share funding for projects.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Citizens, communities, and partners within the IRL watershed and connected
waters and watersheds understand and appreciate the complex nature of the system and the opportunities
and challenges.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Cost of individual efforts and diversity of partners engaged in watershed restoration and management.
• Tendency for people and programs to think and prioritize with only a local perspective.
• The need to balance re -diversion and storage with maintaining flood protection.
• Climate change and increasing storm intensity add to the challenge of managing watershed connectivity.
CITATIONS:
1. Zheng, F., Doering, P., Chen, Z., Baldwin, L., Orlando, B., Robbins, R., and Welch, B. 2017. Chapter 8C:
St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee River Watershed Research and Water Quality Monitoring Results and
Activities. 2017 South Florida Environmental Report -Volume 1. West Palm Beach, Florida.
2. USACE and SFWMD. 2018. Everglades Restoration Website: httr)s://www.ever2ladesrestoration.2_ov/.
3. SJRWMD. 2018. Upper St. Johns River Website: httns://www.sirwmd.com/waterways/st-iohns-
river/upper/.
4. Stauble, D.K. 1988. The Geomorphology, Geologic History, Sediments and Inlet Formation of the Indian
River Lagoon System. Volume I (Unpublished). The Marine Resources Council of East Central Florida.
Edited by D. Barile. Melbourne, Florida.
5. Hayes, M. 1979. Barrier Island Morphology as a Function of Tidal and Wave Regime. Barrier islands:
from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to the Gulf of Mexico. 1- 27.
6. CDM Smith and Taylor Engineering. 2014. Preliminary Concept Design for Artificial Flushing Projects
in the Indian River Lagoon. Phase I — Literature Review/Preliminary Site Selection. Prepared for the St.
Johns River Water Management District.
7. CDM Smith and Taylor Engineering. 2015. Preliminary Concept Design for Artificial Flushing Projects
in the Indian River Lagoon. Phase II — Conceptual Design/Project Refinement. Prepared for the St. Johns
River Water Management District.
8. Steward, J.S., Christian, D.J., Green, W.C., Lasi, M.A., and Miller, J.D. 2010. Using multiple lines of
evidence for developing numeric nutrient criteria for Mosquito Lagoon, Florida. Department of Water
Resources, St. Johns River Water Management District.
9. Applied Technology and Management and Janicki Environmental. 2011. Receiving Water
Characterization Report Task LC: Indian River Lagoon Total Maximum Daily Load Revision. Prepared
for Brevard County.
10. Kim, Y.T. 2003. Water balance and flushing time in the restricted Indian River Lagoon (IRL), Florida
USA. Ocean and Polar Research March 2003. DOI: 10.4217//OPR.2003.25.1.075.
84 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
SIODIVERSITY
+ + • �qk k
L
.M - 1, '
r e
- I F
r
Goals:
DeveCop a tong -term rnanapernent strategy to restore and protect
biological dlvi�rsit} in tho IPL-
85 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
LIVING RESOURCES
Biodiversity
GOALS: Conduct comprehensive biodiversity RESEARCH to develop a long-term management strategy
to RESTORE, REBUILD, and protect the biological diversity of the IRL.
ISSUE SUMMARY: More than 4,000 species of plants and animals live in the IRL watershed, including more
than 2,200 animal species and more than 2,100 plant species! The IRL is one of the most biologically diverse
estuaries in North America?
The IRL and its surrounding region is a complex coastal landscape
consisting of a broad variety of habitats that support many plant and
animal species. Much of the biological diversity found in the region
results from both physical features of the lagoon and the overlapping
of the temperate and sub -tropical climate zones .2°' Additional
influences from ocean inlets and the proximity to the Gulf Stream in
the southern IRL also contribute to the rich biological diversity of the
system.
The goal of biodiversity conservation has been described as the conservation of diversity at three levels: (1)
ecosystem, (2) species, and (3) genetic.' Developing a representative system of protected areas is often considered
an effective way to achieve this goal in the marine environment. For the IRL, habitat alteration and loss drive this
management strategy towards the restoration of damaged habitats or creation/rehabilitation of damaged habitats.
Some species, communities, and habitats have been the subject of
several studies, while little information is available on others.
Numerous studies and several management activities have
attempted to address the status and maintenance of biological
diversity in the IRL region. In 1995, the IRLNEP hosted a lagoon -
wide biodiversity science conference to better understand the
biodiversity status of the IRL.'
A comprehensive biodiversity management strategy for the ML
region must focus on four broad objectives: (1) restoration of IRL
water quality, (2) restoration of natural habitats that support water
quality and species richness/abundance, (3) species -specific
restoration actions for species of concern, and (4) implementation
of management strategies to enhance resilience of the IRL system.
Protecting and managing biodiversity will require improved knowledge of the elements of this regional ecosystem
and how these elements interact. Acquiring the necessary knowledge and developing and implementing a strategy
to protect and manage regional biodiversity in the IRL will require the coordination, cooperation, and
collaboration of a wide variety of entities ranging from academia to regulatory and management agencies to local
governments to individuals residing in the region.
86 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
The IRLNEP has taken a first step towards building that lagoon -wide coalition
by working with NERT.4 NERT was created in 2010 as a voluntary, grassroots
effort to bring partners together to develop regional landscape -level habitat
initiatives focused on the restoration and enhancement of estuarine habitats. In
2015, NERT expanded its regional network of habitat restoration scientists to
form ECERT. Together, these habitat restoration partners cover the full planning
boundary of the IRLNEP.
STRATEGIES:
Improve scientific understanding through RESEARCH of IRL
biodiversity and trends.
Advise IRL restoration and management actions required to protect,
maintain, and if needed, RESTORE IRL biodiversity.
Work with the Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce to update and
expand the online IRL Species Inventory that provides comprehensive information on all aspects of IRL
biodiversity. It was first completed in 1995.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
esponsib
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Output Intent
Agencies or
Agencies or
Or anizations
Organizations
Cost
Source
Role
Biodiversity-1: Acquire
Improve habitats to
Federal, state, and
IRLNEP TBD
Federal,
Coordinate
and effectively manage the
maximize species
local agencies;
Management
state, and
and
IRL network of
biodiversity.
private
Conference
local
collaborate
conservation lands and
conservation
agencies;
wetlands as a tool to
groups
private
preserve, protect, and
conservation
RESTORE the biological
groups
diversity, functional
integrity, and productivity.
Biodiversity-2: Work to
Update knowledge
Smithsonian
IRLNEP TBD
Smithsonian,
Coordinate
continue, expand, update,
of species within
Management
IRLNEP
and
and improve the IRL
IRL watershed.
Conference
conservation
collaborate
species inventory.
USFWS,
groups
Merritt Island
Wildlife
Association,
Florida
Audubon
Society
Biodiversity-3: Integrate
Increase
NERT, ECERT,
IRLNEP TBD
IRNEP
Coordinate
biodiversity considerations
biodiversity within
IRLNEP
Management
Management
and
in habitat restoration and
IRL watershed.
Conference
Conference
collaborate
planning activities.
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Create an updated IRL species inventory. Support efforts within the IRL
science community to evaluate status and trends of IRL biodiversity.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Evaluate status and trends of IRL biodiversity using data from the updated
species inventory.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Update actions based on latest data, status, and trends with consideration for
long-term impacts of climate change, including sea level rise.
87 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Cost and time intensive to update inventory.
• Lagoon -wide studies of biological diversity are scientifically complex and often require a multi-
disciplinary perspective at multiple spatial and temporal scales.
• Climate change (including sea level rise) and invasive species are causing shifts that may permanently
change IRL biodiversity.
CITATIONS:
1. IRL Species Inventory. 2018. httD://www.sms.si.edu/IRLSDec/index.htm.
2. Swain, H.M., Breininger, D.R., Busby, D.S., Clark, K.B.., Cook, S.B., Day, R.A., De Freese, D.E.,
Gilmore, R. G., Hart, A.W., Hinkle, R.C., McArdle, D.A., Mikkelsen, P.M., Nelson, W.G., Zahorcak,
A.J. (1995): IRL Biodiversity Conference. Bulletin of Marine Science 57(1): 1-7.
3. Ducrotoy, J.P. 2008. Conservation and restoration of coastal and estuarine habitats.
httD://www.coastalwiki.or2/wiki/Conservation and restoration of coastal and estuarine habitat.
4. NERT. 2018. httDS://sites.2oo2le.com/site/nertinfo/.
88 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
SPECIES OF CONCERN
NV
r�
Goals:
Evaluate population trends, Manage to reduce stresso rs on sped es
of tan cern_ Tale aetiorlS that 5ust-adn 5per- i9s to aIlow d-OEisting.
89 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
LIVING RESOURCES
Species of Concern
GOALS: Conduct and/or continue RESEARCH to evaluate status and population trends of IRL species of
concern. REMOVE and/or REDUCE stressors and threats to species of concern. RESPOND to
opportunities for species -specific management action that will RESTORE sustainable levels for populations
of species of concern.
ISSUE SUMMARY: The IRL region has more than 50 species
that are listed as endangered, threatened, or species of special
concern, and more than 70 others that are considered rare.
Included are a variety of plants and animals ranging from small,
seldom -seen species, such as the mangrove rivulus fish (Rivulus
marmoratus), to large and well -publicized ones, such as the
Florida manatee (Trichecus manatus latirostris). Wildlife
protection is covered by a number of laws at local, state, and
federal levels.',',' Also included as federally protected species are
marine mammals, including cetaceans (whales and dolphins),
sirenians (manatees), and otters. The Endangered Species Act of
1973 is the primary legislation that provides a framework to
conserve and protect species listed as endangered and threatened
and their habitats.' The U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act
protects all marine mammals.' The Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act also provides specific protection to the significant
eagle population along the lagoon. In addition, FWC is authorized to list and protect imperiled species separate
from the Endangered Species Act.
Several factors are responsible for the endangerment and diminishing numbers of species with special status.
Habitat loss is a primary cause of declining population size for many species. As the IRL region developed, much
of the habitat important to these species was destroyed or altered reducing habitat quality. While Endangered
Species Act listings and federal regulation provide a level of regulatory protection for specific plants or animals
that are deemed threatened or endangered, many rare or imperiled species are never listed. State, regional, and
local conservation efforts are best positioned to implement proactive conservation and restoration strategies to
protect rare, threatened, and endangered species. The IRL region has many significant conservation success
stories that were driven by state and regional leadership (including recovery of the manatee, sea turtles, and
several bird species). Unfortunately, dramatic water quality declines in the IRL, recurring algal blooms, loss of
seagrasses, habitat alteration, habitat fragmentation, habitat degradation, invasive species, and complex stressors
from sea level rise and other effects of climate change will challenge recovery efforts for some species. A list of
species of concern can be found on the Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce4 and USFWS websites.'
While individual species recovery plans continue to be developed as required by federal law, a trend has been to
integrate these species recovery plans into a single ecosystem -based multi -species plan. Indian River, St. Lucie,
and Martin Counties are within the South Florida Multi -Species Recovery Plan, which covers 68 federally listed
species through efforts to protect 23 identified ecosystems.
90 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
STRATEGIES:
• Implement action plans that align with and support recovery efforts for species of concern.
• Develop a comprehensive list of species of concern and track status and population trends.
• Identify habitat needs of species of concern and develop strategies to protect, RESTORE, and maintain
those habitats.
• Develop a multi -species recovery plan for species of concern within the IRL.
• Develop a watch list of non -listed species with significant population declines.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible Lead
Partner Agencies
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Output Intent Agencies or
or Organizations
Cost
Source
Role
Organizations
Species of Concern-1:
Track status and
IRLNEP
USFWS, National TBD
IRLNEP, The
Coordinate
Identify IRL species of
population trends
Management
Marine Fisheries
Nature
and
concern and track
for species of
Conference, The
Society (NMFS),
Conservancy,
collaborate
status and population
concern in IRL
Nature
FWC, WMDs,
USFWS, FWC
trends.
watershed.
Conservancy,
local governments,
USFWS, FWC
Audubon Society
Species of Concern-2:
Refine
IRLNEP, USFWS,
DEP, academia, TBD
IRLNEP,
Conduct,
Align the CCMP with
understanding of
NMFS, FWC
interest groups
USFWS,
coordinate,
adaptive management
species of
NMFS, FWC
and
or recovery plans for
concern in IRL
collaborate
species of concern.
watershed.
Species of Concern-3:
Improve
USFWS, NMFS,
DEP, local TBD
USFWS,
Coordinate
Improve enforcement
enforcement for
FWC
governments
NMFS, FWC
and
of regulations for
species of
collaborate
species of concern
concern.
found in the IRL
region.
Species of Concern-4:
Manage habitats
IRLNEP
USFWS, NMFS, TBD
TBD
Coordinate
Protect and manage
for species of
Management
FWC, WMDs,
and
natural habitats that
concern.
Conference
local governments,
collaborate
support species of
partners, agencies,
interest groups
concern found within
private landowners,
the IRL region.
private land trusts
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Improve public understanding of the importance and status of species of
concern to the health and biodiversity of the IRL ecosystem and economy. Refer to CCMP action
recommendations to species -specific recovery plans and plans available on the IRLNEP website.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Implement CCMP water quality and habitat restoration projects that support
and align with species recovery plans. Support scientific RESEARCH to better understand emerging risks,
challenges to species recovery, and potential resource management conflicts.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Work with IRL agencies and organizations involved in recovery of species
of concern to evaluate and track progress and REPORT on trends to the public.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Inadequate funding available to monitoring all the species of concern.
• The size and spatial/temporal complexity of the IRL can be a challenge for scientists conducting
population assessments.
• Invasive species and climate change impacts.
911 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CITATIONS:
l . USFWS. 2017. httDs://www.fws.2ov/endan2ered/laws-policies/.
2. NOAA. 2017. httDs://www.fisheries.noaa.2ov/marine-mammal-protection-act.
3. Schaefer, J., Tucker, J., and McGuire, M. 2012. Laws that Protect Florida's Wildlife. Document WEC-48.
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food
and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. 5p. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.
4. Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. Website: httDs://www.sms.si.edu/IRLSDec/ListedSDec.htm.
5. USFWS. Website: https://ecos.fws.2ov/ecp0/reports/species-listed-bv-state-
report?state=FL&status=listed.
92 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
INVASIVE SPECIES
FIn cwlii I+rY:l Srwei
Goals:
Demoveinvasive sp"i and improve wa#ehed
management to support native habitats and communities.
93 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
LIVING RESOURCES
Invasive Species
GOALS: REMOVE invasive species from the IRL, its contributing waters, and its watershed. Conduct
RESEARCH to improve management and understanding of invasive species in the IRL watershed to help
RESTORE native habitats and communities. Be prepared to RESPOND quickly to eradicate newly
introduced invasive species.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Non-native and non -
indigenous are terms that have been used to describe
plants and animals that are not native to an area.
While many non-native species are relatively benign
due to difficulties in reproduction or propagation,
other species are characterized as invasive when they
thrive in their new environment, reproducing,
growing, and spreading rapidly or uncontrollably.
This rapid growth and reproduction can have
consequences for the health and biodiversity of the
IRL, often resulting in invaders overwhelming native
species, the loss or degradation of valuable habitats or
the displacement or loss of native animal or plant
species.
hi 2006-2007, the authors of the IRL Species Inventory focused on assessing the status of nonindigenous species
in the IRL region. They identified approximately 240 species in the region as exotic or cryptogenic, and of those,
170 species were new to the inventory.' When the species database was updated in 2014, approximately 215 non-
native species were identified in the region.', 2
STRATEGIES:
• Establish a stand-alone Invasive Species Commission to coordinate invasive species inventory and
eradication effort.
• Continue monitoring invasive species in IRL watershed. Assist partners in development and
implementation of species eradication or control strategies. Work with partners to educate public about
invasive species threats.
• Update IRL invasive species inventory and track eradication and control activities.
• Assist IRL Management Conference partners with communication and coordination about invasive
species eradication and management, including opportunities for volunteering.
• Develop a citizen science and engagement campaign ("see something — say something") to assist partners
with early detection and rapid response that quickly address invasive species.
• Provide support to not -for -profit organizations that work to control invasive populations.
• Encourage the commercial harvest of invasive species as a management tool.
94 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
esponsible
Partner
on
ctiutput In Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Estimated
IRLNEP
Cost
SourceFunding
Role
or Organizations
Organizations
Invasive Species-1 Support
Improve
DEP, FDACS,
USFWS, NMFS, TBD
DEP,
Coordinate
the inventory and
understanding
FWC, WMDs
academia, interest
FDACS,
and
assessment of invasive
and management
groups, local
FWC,
collaborate
fauna and flora within the
of invasive
governments
WMDs,
IRL watershed.
species.
USFWS
Invasive Species-2: Provide
Provide
DEP, FDACS,
USFWS, NMFS, TBD
DEP,
Coordinate
standardized information
consistent
FWC, WMDs
academia, interest
FDACS,
and
to IRL partners about
information and
groups, local
FWC,
collaborate
invasive species and their
plan for partners.
governments
WMDs
eradication and
management. Prepare an
early detection and rapid
response plan.
OUTCOMES:
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Identify IRL partners and programs involved in IRL invasive species
eradication and control activities. Share opportunities to volunteer with the public.
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Document progress with eradication and control of invasive species in the
IRL watershed.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): Quantify 10-year progress of invasive species eradication and control in IRL
watershed.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
Management of invasive species can prove difficult as they are often prolific and can outcompete native
species.
Management of invasive plant species through chemical methods can add nutrients and chemicals to the
lagoon system.
Long-term, recurring funding will be required to sustain aggressive eradication and control activities.
CITATIONS:
1. IRL Species Inventory. 2018. Website: httD://www.sms.si.edu/IRLSDec/index.htm.
2. Smithsonian Institution. 2018. Website: httDs://www.sms.si.edu/IRLSDec/Nonnatives.htm.
95 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
FORAGE FISHES
Goals:
Restore water quality and habitats to sustain abundant and
d wares pop u lat ions of forage fishes i n th e I RL
96 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
LIVING RESOURCES
Forage Fishes
GOALS: RESEARCH forage fish abundance, trends, and threats. RESTORE water quality and natural
habitats to sustain abundant and diverse forage fish populations and other species that depend on forage
fish. REPORT the importance of forage fish and trends in their abundances to partners and stakeholders.
Elevate public awareness and understanding of the importance of forage fish to a healthy IRL.
ISSUE SUMMARY: It is estimated that between 75% and 90% of the original mangrove and salt marshes that
bordered the IRL have either been lost or impacted, resulting in negative impacts to water quality and loss of
habitat for fisheries.' The diverse fish fauna of the IRL and its coastal region has been a crucial factor leading to
general recognition of the lagoon as a high diversity estuarine system.
Gilmore (1995) documented 782 species of
fishes in 140 families in the IRL region with
397 species from the IRL system. Long-term
quantitative studies of IRL fish communities
reveal high species richness in specific
habitats, such as estuarine -ocean inlet seagrass
meadows and nearby ocean reef fish
communities (214 species from seagrasses and
282 from ocean inlets).Z Of these species,
many forage fish species serve as an essential
food resource for commercially and
recreationally important predatory fish and
other species of IRL wildlife, including
many species of resident and migratory
birds. As such, the proper management of
forage fish species is critical sustaining the
lagoon as a recreational and commercial
centerpiece of the region.
What are fc;n, ge fisl t 'v�
rp- F,,ar*w7k-*4.-F-Aph-d-&1100*M ri,4,ffw
Florida has been a leader in forage fish management. Forage fish fisheries in Florida's waters are relatively
small, no fisheries that turn their catches into fish meal or oil are operational in the state, and gear limitations set
in the mid- 1990s have kept harvest levels low. Only small nets, less than 500 square feet, are allowed in nearshore
and inshore waters, and entangling or gill nets are prohibited throughout state waters. Locally, commercial
harvest of forage fishes represents an important commercial bait fishery for the recreational fishing industry
with an estimated statewide economic value of $8 billion annually.
The most immediate threats to IRL forage species include declining water quality, HABs (especially the
brown tide organism, Aureoumbra lagunensis, that impacts seagrasses and fishes), loss of essential natural
habitats, and climate change.' On a global level, commercial demand is surging for forage fish, which are
used for pet food, cosmetics, nutritional supplements, fertilizer, and feed for animals and aquaculture
operations. The importance of effective forage fish management and conservation was recognized in 2015
by FWC in a formal resolution that proclaimed FWC will manage forage fishes to ensure sufficient
abundance and diversity of their populations to sustain abundant fisheries stocks and other species that
depend on forage fish and to maintain Florida's reputation as the "Fishing Capital of the World.i' Restoring
97 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
healthy forage fish populations will also ensure that the IRL region remains a world -class destination for
viewing birds and wildlife.
STRATEGIES:
• Work closely with FWC and partners involved in commercial and recreational fisheries to ensure that
populations of IRL forage fish remain diverse, abundant, and able to sustain IRL living resources,
ecosystem health, and vibrant commercial and recreational fishing activities.
• Assess zooplankton populations and ecology in IRL watershed as food sources for forage fish.
• Identify and map essential habitats for forage fishes in the IRL to advise and assist water quality and
habitat restoration strategies and prioritization of projects.
• Provide an updated inventory and a scientific assessment of the sizes and health of populations of forage
fish in the IRL.
• Develop a science -based strategy for estimating the abundance and diversity of forage fishes required to
support sustainable populations of other species (especially recreationally and commercially valuable fish
species) in the IRL.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Output Intent Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Cost
Source
Role
or Organizations
Organizations
Forage Fishes-1: Support
Identify suitable FWC
IRLNEP,
TBD FWC, IRLNEP,
Coordinate
RESEARCHand
habitats for forage
academia
grants, private-
and
assessments to identify and
fishes and track the
sector support
collaborate
map suitable habitats and
health of populations.
spawning habitats for
forage fishes and track
population size and health.
(NEW)
Forage Fishes-2: Continue
Improve FWC
IRLNEP,
TBD FWC, IRLNEP,
Coordinate
to support scientific
understanding and
academia
grants, private-
and
assessments of forage fish
management of IRL
sector support
collaborate
population size and health.
fisheries and consider
(NEW)
restocking species
where needed.
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Improve public understanding of the importance of forage fishes and essential
fish habitats to the health of the IRL system health and the regional economy. Implement water quality
and habitat restoration projects in the CCMP to ensure IRL forage fish populations remain diverse,
abundant, and sufficient to support IRL living resources.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Continue water quality and habitat restoration projects in the CCMP to
ensure IRL forage fish populations remain diverse, abundant, and sufficient to support IRL living
resources. Improved water quality in the IRL system is supporting seagrass recovery, and important
forage fish habitat.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Water quality improvements can be documented throughout IRL watershed.
Forage fish population recovery is underway.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Declining water quality and HABs since 2011 appear to have shifted the IRL trophic structure with
unknown consequences to larval and forage fishes.
98 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• Poor water quality and recurring algal blooms have resulted in a historic loss of seagrasses, an essential
fish habitat.
• Inadequate funding for expanded, long-term, lagoon -wide RESEARCH on the status and trends in
populations of forage fish.
CITATIONS:
1. Taylor, S.D. 2012. Removing the Sands (Sins?) of Our Past: Dredge Spoil Removal and Saltmarsh
Restoration along the Indian River Lagoon, Florida (USA). Wetlands Ecological Management 20: 213-
218.
2. Gilmore, R.G. 1995. Environmental and Biogeographic Factors Influencing Ichthyofaunal Diversity:
Indian River Lagoon. July 1995. Bulletin of Marine Science, Miami, FL. 57(1):153-170.
3. Shenker, J.M. 2009. Sustainability 2009: The Next Horizon. G. L. Nelson and I. Hronszky, Editors.
American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings. Volume 1157. pp 39-47.
4. FWC. 2015. Resolution June 25, 2015. Sarasota, Florida.
99 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
COMMERCIAL AND
RECREATIONAL FISHERIES
V64 4 15ft pow k%rkwT
Goals..
Restore water qua Iity ire the I R L to support sustainable
co m me r,.,!ia I and recreational fish a ri a!;_
100 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
LIVING RESOURCES
Commercial and Recreational Fisheries
GOALS: Conduct fisheries RESEARCH to help REBUILD IRL commercial and recreational fisheries.
RESTORE IRL fish populations to support world -class recreational fishing and sustainable commercial
harvest.
ISSUE SUMMARY: In the IRL region, fishing
has been a commercially valuable activity, a
recreational pastime, and a means of subsistence for
centuries. Fish populations in the IRL are some of
the richest and most diverse in the United States
with more than 700 species identified.
Data from a 2016 economic analysis conducted by
Treasure Coast and East Central Florida Regional
Planning Councils and funded by DEO reported
that the IRL-dependent fishing industry was in
decline. Commercially harvested clams, oysters,
crabs, and shrimp were worth $12.6 million at the
docks in 1994. Adjusted for inflation, this 1994
amount was $20.1 million in 2015 dollars. The
overall value of the commercial clam, oyster, crab,
and shrimp harvest for 2015 was $4.3 million,
representing a nearly 80% decline since 1994.'
SHELLFISH
R F9 H
From approximately 1994 to 2015, shellfish harvest declined from 7.1 million pounds to 2 million pounds, or
almost 72%. IRL counties showing the sharpest decline in value and pounds harvested were Volusia, Brevard, and
Martin. The commercial fin fishery fared slightly better, but still showed significant declines in value and pounds
landed. In 1990, the estimated value of commercial finfish landed was worth $13 million. Adjusted for inflation,
this 1990 amount was $23.5 million in 2015 dollars. The overall value of the commercial finfish harvest for 2015
was estimated at $14.8 million —a decline of 37%. Pounds of finfish landed also declined during that same period,
from 17.3 million pounds to 8 million pounds or almost 54%. IRL counties showing the sharpest declines in value
and pounds harvested were Brevard, Indian River, and Martin.' However, it is important to note that in July 1995,
an amendment to the Florida Constitution made it unlawful to use entangling nets, such as gill nets, and limited
the use of other nets, such as seines, cast nets, and trawls in Florida waters. Therefore, the fishing industry was
impacted by this change in allowable gear, which made staying in the industry cost prohibitive for some
fisherman and impacted the amount of shellfish and finfish harvested.
FWC conducts Marine Fisheries -Dependent Monitoring and Marine Fisheries -Independent Monitoring. The
Fisheries -Dependent Monitoring collects and analyzes catch -and -effort data to monitor trends in commercial and
recreational fisheries throughout Florida. These data provide assessments of how management regulations affect
harvest and fishers. The Fisheries -Independent Monitoring monitors the status and abundance of recreational and
commercial fishes from six estuaries around the state.2 Recent data from the Fisheries -Independent Monitoring
Program generally show fisheries stocks in the IRL, to be stable, although smaller than historical numbers have
been observed. The data from this program allow the development of annual abundance models of juvenile fishes.
1011 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
These models may be used to predict the availability of a species and provide the information needed to determine
fisheries management measures and to assess the effectiveness of those measures after they are enacted.
Recreational fishing guides and commercial fishers throughout the lagoon have reported that poor water quality
and declining fishery quality have impacted their ability to make a living. Seasonal large volume freshwater
releases from Lake Okeechobee to the St. Lucie Estuary and southern IRL have catastrophic impacts to both the
recreational fishing industry and regional tourism. Chronic, recurring algal blooms and poor water quality in the
Banana River Lagoon and central -northern IRL have impacted recreational fishing and tourism since the algal
superbloom in 2011. Over 30 fish mortality events were reported in the Mosquito Lagoon during the Aureoumbra
bloom of 2012. Since that time, small recurring fish mortality events have been associated with algal blooms and
low dissolved oxygen levels. In March 2016, an intensive and large fish mortality event co -occurred with an
Aureoumbra bloom in the Banana River Lagoon that impacted hundreds of thousands of fish, multiple species and
age classes, and many prized recreational fish species. The long-term impacts of these recurring algal blooms, loss
of seagrasses, and fish mortality events are not well understood.
Saltwater recreational fishing in Florida is estimated at $8.0 billion annually and supports 114,898 jobs.3 For the
recreational fishing guide and commercial fisher making a living on the IRL, water quality and high -quality
fishing are the foundation of their businesses. Ten years ago, the IRL was known as the "Redfish Capital of the
World." Many redfish tournaments were held every year, and the IRL was featured on numerous televised fishing
shows. It has been years since a redfish tournament was held in the IRL. Television's celebrity fishing guides
have moved on to more productive areas, as have many of the local fishing guides.
Without water quality improvements, the IRL may never support a viable and sustainable recreational and
commercial finfish and shellfish fishery. Most of the commercial fishers have been forced out of work or changed
occupations, no longer able to make a living plying the once productive waters. Accelerated water quality and
habitat restoration is required and, once achieved, a second -phase restoration effort may require fish stock
enhancement. This will require proactive planning and capacity development for aquaculture facilities and fish
stock breeding programs associated with the IRL regional restoration center network. Ultimately, a sustainable
commercial fishing industry is the high -bar for clean water and estuary restoration. If fish and shellfish stocks can
support sustainable healthy harvest, then those same stocks will support a robust recreational fishery.
STRATEGIES:
• Improve IRL water quality to RESTORE oyster reefs, clam beds, seagrasses, and living shorelines.
• Determine if fish -stock enhancement may be necessary and take proactive steps to provide aquaculture
facility support.
• Implement a strategic, coordinated, and science -based recovery plan for both recreational and commercial
fisheries.
• Encourage catch and release management to aid with issues from fish population declines to potential
safety issues from fish consumption.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner Agencies
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Output Intent
Lead Agencies
or Organizations
Cost
Source
Role
or Organizations
Fisheries-1: Conserve,
RESTORE, protect,
protect, RESTORE, and
and manage
manage the commercial and
commercial and
recreational finfish and
recreational
shellfish resources in the
fisheries.
IRL region to support a
sustainable harvest.
FWC, Marine NMFS, USFWS, TBD
Fisheries Council DEP, WMDs, Sea
(MFC) Grant, academia,
interest groups,
local governments
FWC, MFC, Coordinate
local and
governments collaborate
102 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Responsible
Partner Agencies
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Output Intent
Lead Agencies
or Organizations
Cost
Source
Role
or Or anizations
Fisheries-2: Continue to
Expand RESEARCH FWC, MFC
NMFS, USFWS, TBD
FWC, MFC,
Coordinate
support and expand
to identify
DEP, WMDs, Sea
local
and
RESEARCHinitiatives and
appropriate
Grant, academia,
governments
collaborate
coordinated finfish and
management
interest groups,
shellfish management
strategies.
local governments
strategies specific to the
IRL.
Fisheries-3: Improve
Use existing and FWC, MFC
NMFS, USFWS, TBD
FWC, MFC,
Coordinate
effectiveness of fish habitat
new tools to
DEP, WMDs, Sea
local
and
conservation and restoration
integrate
Grant, academia,
governments
collaborate
efforts by identifying and
information and
interest groups,
characterizing critical
conduct assessments
local governments
spawning, nursery, and
to inform
forage areas within the IRL
restoration and
and its tributaries. (NEW)
conservation efforts.
Fisheries-4: Identify,
Implement FWC, MFC
NMFS, USFWS, TBD
FWC, MFC,
Coordinate
inventory, and assess finfish
appropriate
DEP, WMDs, Sea
local
and
breeding and important
management and
Grant, academia,
governments
collaborate
habitats within the IRL.
restoration
interest groups,
strategies for
local governments
finfish.
OUTCOMES:
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Improve public understanding of the importance
of commercial and recreational fishes and essential fish habitats to the
health of the IRL ecosystem and economy. Improve communication and
cooperation among the commercial and recreational fishing industry
sectors.
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Implement CCMP water quality and habitat
restoration projects to ensure that IRL commercial and recreational fish
populations remain diverse, abundant, and sufficient to support IRL living
resources.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): Water quality, habitat quality and fisheries
quality have recovered to support a re-emergence of the IRL as a world -
class fishery and the IRL commercial and recreational fishing industry as a
sustainable, high -quality, community -supported multi -species fishery.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Poor water quality and recurring algal blooms have resulted in a historic loss of seagrasses, an essential
fish habitat. The timeline to recovery may be too long to save traditional commercial fishing and high -
quality recreational fishing industry interests along some parts of the IRL.
• Inadequate funding for aggressive and strategic implementation of projects to improve water quality.
• Inadequate lagoon -wide monitoring.
CITATIONS:
1. Treasure Coast and East Central Florida Regional Planning Councils. 2016. Indian River Lagoon
Economic Valuation Update. Report available at www.onela2oon.or2.
2. FWC Marine Fisheries Research. Website: httD://mvfwc.com/research/about/Drosrams/mfr.
3. FWC. 2017. The Economic Impact of Saltwater Fishing in Florida.
htti)://mvfwc.com/conservation/value/saltwater-fishing/.
103 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
j ••y
HARMFUL ALGAL
K
BLOOMS
� 1
rye
f
I
'
F
?
{
44
•f�l z_ is R
� •
Goals:
Advance understanding of the triggers for harmful algal bloom
occur I I ce and toxicity to re d ocp their frequency and -I nta nsl ter_
104 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON
LIVING RESOURCES
Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs)
GOALS: Advance RESEARCH, coordination, and understanding of the causes of HABs to REDUCE their
frequency, intensity, and duration. Effectively and efficiently RESPOND to HAB emergence and secondary
impacts including toxicity in some species, low dissolved oxygen concentrations as blooms decline, and
associated fish and wildlife morbidity and mortality events. Improve scientific understanding of toxic algal
blooms and human health risks. REPORT IRL algal bloom status and trends.
ISSUE SUMMARY: This IRL CCMP revision applies a broad definition to IRL HABs. HABs occur when
colonies of algae —microscopic plants that live in the sea and freshwater —grow out of control and sometimes
produce toxic or other harmful effects on people, fish, shellfish, marine mammals, birds, seagrass, and other
ecological components. Human illnesses caused by HABs are rare, but they can be debilitating or even fatal.'
HABs are often associated with large-scale marine mortality events and have been associated with several types
of shellfish poisonings.'
Since 1996, several additional events and discoveries have occurred that raised concerns about aquatic animal
health and biotoxins associated with algal blooms in the IRL. In 2002, 19 cases of puffer fish poisoning were
reported to state and federal health officials following consumption of puffers caught in the Titusville area.
Subsequent investigation found that a common algal species in the lagoon was producing a toxin that entered the
food chain, ultimately resulting in puffers becoming toxic. Microalgae and associated toxins were also thought to
be implicated in a 2001 event where several dolphins died in the north -central IRL and Banana River Lagoon in
what was termed an "unusual mortality event" as well as several fish kills, horseshoe crab mortalities, and similar
events. Lesions on fishes in the southern IRL region have also caused public concern. These issues and incidents
are reviewed in more detail in the 2006 publication Indian River Lagoon Biotoxin & Aquatic Animal Heath:
History and Background
Report.' To address
these emerging issues,"
`'
the IRLNEP and FWC +Q..:ar�R•e IMW L
established the �" �'~ "'aO"` "'' At'� r.� t-t+ �` WhA4 kL e,
ointlL .a LL
IRL Biotoxin and
Aquatic Animal Health t
Working Group, which
evaluated projects and - WtN f.aw Low rLC"
actions to improve
communications and
coordination among the
various individuals and
organizations, enhance
knowledge of HAB
events, and determine
the cause or causes of
HAB events and
management actions
that may be taken to
address them.
105 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
A dramatic ecological state -shift from a benthic aquatic vegetation system to one dominated by planktonic
microalgae began in the IRL in 2011 with an unprecedented bloom of a nanoplanktonic green alga and
picocyanobacteria (now referred to as the "2011 superbloom"). In response to the superbloom, SJRWMD
convened a group of experts to evaluate the potential causes and to prepare a plan of investigation. The post-201 I
IRL is now characterized by intense, recurring, and long-lasting algal bloom conditions of multiple species,
widespread loss of seagrass habitat, and episodic wildlife mortality events. Ongoing blooms of pico-
cyanobacteria, dinoflagellates, and the Texas brown tide species, Aureoumbra lagunensis, appear to be the "new
normal" for the central and northern IRL. These ecosystem shifts challenge scientific understanding of nutrient
enrichment thresholds, nutrient and carbon cycling, and tipping points for the IRL.','
Blooms in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015-2016, and 2018 of small -celled phytoplankton
in Mosquito Lagoon, North IRL, and Banana River Lagoon share conditions
associated with prominent blooms of small -celled phytoplankton in other
ecosystems, such as the brown tide events involving Aureoumbra in Texas6 and
picocyanobacteria blooms in Florida Bay.' Common characteristics include
shallow restricted estuaries with long water residence times, varying salinity
regimes, high -light attenuation caused by persistently high phytoplankton biomass,
and declines in benthic primary producer biomass, such as seagrasses. The
continuing and shifting character of phytoplankton blooms in Mosquito Lagoon,
North IRL, and Banana River Lagoon provides some insights into future
management challenges. Correlations between rainfall levels, external nutrient
loads, and bloom activity support the hypothesis that reductions in anthropogenic
nutrient sources have potential to reduce the frequency and intensity of blooms.'
Concurrent with these ecosystem -wide stress -response issues, the southern IRL was severely impacted by massive
seasonal freshwater release events from Lake Okeechobee during times of high water. In summer 2013 (the "Lost
Summer"), billions of gallons of freshwater were released east through the St. Lucie Estuary and southern IRL.
As a result, the St. Lucie Estuary and southern IRL experienced catastrophic salinity shifts to sustained freshwater
conditions. The combination of freshwater, high nutrients, and an inoculant of the cyanobacteria Microcystis from
Lake Okeechobee fueled cyano-HABs of Microcystis in portions of the southern IRL. In 2016, large -volume,
high -velocity freshwater releases from Lake Okeechobee from February through November ("the Lost Year")
fueled an intense Microcystis cyanobacteria HAB, with reported microcystin toxin concentrations that greatly
exceeded World Health Organization standards. A similar event occurred in 2018. The 2013, 2016, and 2018
events highlight the close watershed connections between the IRL and Everglades ecosystem and the need to look
beyond the historic watershed boundaries of the IRL.
It is important to note that cyanobacteria interact with many bacterial members within their natural environment.
For instance, the University of Central Florida recently found that the exact species that is causing the HABs in
the IRL serves as "food" for the growth of other harmful microorganisms, such as the agent of cholera (Vibrio
cholerae) and, based on preliminary data, Vibrio vulnificus (the flesh -eating bacterium that has caused problems
in Florida before). In addition, it is possible that the changes in the IRL are not only directly fostering growth of
cyanobacteria but also negatively affecting the survival or prevalence of bacterial species that might establish an
antagonistic relationship with the cyanobacteria, which allows the HABs to grow unchecked. Monitoring the IRL
bacterial communities could help to predict and prevent this from occurring.
STRATEGIES:
• REDUCE nutrients from external and internal sources to decrease concentrations that fuel blooms.
• RESEARCH causation factors for IRL HABs and document progress towards decreasing occurrence.
• Continue to provide a forum for scientific discussions and management regarding IRL HABs and trends.
106 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible Lead
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
AActio
Output Intent
Agencies or
Agencies or
Cost
Source
Role
Or anizations
Organizations
HAB-1: Support continuation of the
Prepare a
IRLNEP
NMFS. TBD
IRLNEP,
Conduct,
IRL 2011 Consortium, which would
RESEARCH
USFWS, DEP,
local
coordinate,
function as a formal task force
and response
WMDs, Sea
governments
and
supported by the IRLNEP and
plan.
Grant,
collaborate
which would develop a HAB
academia,
RESEARCHand Restoration
interest groups
Response Plan. (NEW)
HAB-2: Seek partnerships and
Improve
FWC, IRLNEP,
DEP, WMDs, TBD
DEP,
Conduct,
funding to pursue RESEARCH
knowledge and
academia
FDOH, interest
WMDs,
coordinate,
priorities identified by the IRL 2011
management
groups, local
IRLNEP,
and
Consortium that align with IRLNEP
of HABs in
governments
local
collaborate
Management Conference
IRL
governments
management priorities. (NEW)
watershed.
HAB-3: Continue funding and
Improve
IRLNEP
Academia, TBD
NOAA,
Coordinate
scientific partnerships to understand
knowledge of
Management
interest groups
DEP, FDOH
and
HABs toxicity and risks to human
toxicity and
Conference, NOAA,
collaborate
and wildlife health. (NEW)
health impacts
DEP, FDOH
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Monitor and conduct RESEARCH on the causes and effects of IRL HABs.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Incorporate new findings into management plans.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Implement projects to REDUCE causative pollutants and factors for HABs.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• HABs and cyanobacterial blooms are carried with ocean currents, so they may occur in areas outside of
the IRL watershed and then be transported into the area.
• Understanding of HABs, impacts, and toxicity.
• Interactions of trophic levels and the effects on naturally managing blooms is not well understood.
• Regime shifts to ecosystem domination by a lower trophic level are difficult and slow to overcome.
CITATIONS:
1. NOAA. What is a HAB? Website: httD://www.noaa.aov/what-is-harmful-algal-bloom.
2. Ehrhart, L.M. and Redfoot, W.E. 1995. Composition and Status of Marine Turtle Assemblage of the
Indian River Lagoon System. Bulletin of Marine Science. 57:279 — 280.
3. Provancha and Van den Ende. 2006. Indian River Lagoon Biotoxin and Aquatic Animal Heath: History
and Background Report.
4. De Freese, D.E. 2017. IRLNEP 5-Year Program Evaluation Report to the USEPA. Full report and support
documents on-line at www.irlcouncil.com.
5. Phlips, E.J. and Badylak, S. 2013. Phytoplankton Abundance and Composition in the Indian River
Lagoon 2011-2012. Annual Report 2012 for St. Johns River Water Management District. 29 pp.
6. Buskey, E.J., Liu, H., Collumb, C., and Guilherme, J. 2001. The Decline and Recovery of a Persistent
Texas Brown Tide Algal Bloom in the Laguna Madre. Estuaries Vol. 24, No. 3, p. 337-346.
7. 2015 Indian River Lagoon Consortium. 2015. 2011 Superbloom Report: Evaluating Effects and Possible
Causes with Available Data. St Johns River Water Management District Technical Document. 57 pp.
8. Phlips, E.J., Badylak, S., Christman, M., Wolny, J., Brame, J., Garland, J., Hall, L., Hart, J., Landsberg,
J., Lasi, M., Lockwood, J., Paperno, R., Scheidt, D., Staples, A., and Steidinger, K. 2011. Scales of
temporal and spatial variability in the distribution of harmful algae species in the Indian River Lagoon,
Florida, USA. Harmful Algae 10: 277-290.
107 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CLIMATE -READY
ESTUARY
--T-I 14
Goals..
Understand coastal vulnerabilities to climate change. Manage
adaptively, and improve community resi I en cg,
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE LAGOON AND ONE COMMUNITY
LIVING RESOURCES & HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
Climate Ready Estuary
GOALS: RESEARCH IRL risk -based vulnerabilities to climate change and sea level rise to make
informed adaptation planning decisions. RESPOND to threats and opportunities. Make management
decisions that improve IRL RESILIENCE to storm events and long-term risks. REPORT findings and
scientific advancements to partners in the IRLNEP Management Conference and communities.
ISSUE SUMMARY: The IRL is vulnerable to the
impacts of climate change, including sea level rise.
Climate stressors include changes in annual air and
water temperatures, precipitation patterns, intensity of
storms, ocean acidification, and sea level rise. These
will cause changes to the IRL that will challenge
resource management and stewardship. Most scientists
agree that these impacts already are being felt.
There are potential solutions that can improve resiliency and time is of the essence for these solutions to be
realized. Identifying risks associated with climate change, including sea level rise, is the first step. The second
phase is to adopt a plan to reduce potential impacts of these risks. The USEPA Climate Ready Estuaries Program
has identified ten steps to help NEPs identify, analyze, prioritize, and reduce their climate change risks. These
steps fall into two activity categories: (1) risk -based vulnerability assessment, and (2) action plan — determining a
course of action.'
onOl � t
W*
A�
0
Anticipated risk -based vulnerabilities extend
beyond the water quality and ecosystem health
of the IRL to human -built infrastructure,
transportation corridors, integrity of traditional
supply chains for goods and services, human
health, communication networks, and
homeland security. The economy and quality
of life of the IRL region is closely linked to its
natural and human built assets. When
discussing future climate change scenarios,
�} human -built and natural assets need to be
y considered as one interdependent and
integrated coastal ecosystem.',',' Anticipated
risk -based vulnerabilities include the water
quality and ecosystem health of the IRL, as
well as all aspects of infrastructure,
transportation corridors, supply chains for
goods and services, human health,
communication networks, and homeland
security.
Adapting to these climate change stressors
will require much wider consideration than
109 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
traditional hazard risk management. Adaptation involves integration of strategies for both the natural environment
and human -built environment to be resilient to a range of future conditions. For this reason, adaptive management
will require significant community engagement and a process for long-term strategic planning and decision -
making. The figure provides a ten -step process structured around five broad questions.'
Some infrastructure assets for vulnerability consideration include:
• Transportation corridors (roadways, bridges, and rail).
• Kennedy Space Center and regional aviation and aerospace assets (such as Harris Corporation, Northrup
Grumman, Space X, and Blue Origin).
• Military facilities and operations that support national defense and homeland security (U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG) Stations at Ponce Inlet, Port Canaveral, and Fort Pierce; Naval Ordnance Test Unit at Cape
Canaveral; Patrick Air Force Base; Cape Canaveral Air Force Station; 45t1i Space Wing; and 9201}i Rescue
Wing).
• Ports (Port Canaveral, which is one of the busiest cruise ports in the world; Port of Fort Pierce, which has
a vision for growth as a mega -yacht destination).
• Wastewater and stormwater infrastructure vulnerable to flooding and overflow to the IRL.
In addition to infrastructure, there will be changes to the natural environment (e.g., seagrass beds and mangroves),
which should also be monitored over time.
The IRLNEP has initiated a risk -based vulnerability assessment (fiscal year 2017-2018) and adaptation planning
process (fiscal year 2018-2019) as a result of grant awards from the USEPA Climate Ready Estuaries Program.
Results of the risk -based vulnerability assessment identified 154 management objectives related to climate
change. Five climate change stressors were evaluated based on impacts to IRL sediment and water quality, natural
resources, and stakeholder engagement: (1) warmer temperature, (2) changing precipitation, (3) increased
storminess, (4) acidification, and (5) sea level rise.' The vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning
technical documents will be shared with the IRLNEP Management Conference and community partners to advise
CCMP implementation.
STRATEGIES:
Develop a Risk -Based Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Plan for the IRL in alignment with the
USEPA Climate Ready Estuary guidance.
Rethink infrastructure design standards and locations to build RESILIENCE into coastal infrastructure
(including bridges, causeways, WWTPs, road elevations, stormwater configurations, septic systems along
low elevation shorelines, energy network and grids, and living shorelines instead of bulkheads).
Encourage local government to adopt adaptation action areas within their comprehensive plans.
110 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner Agencies or
Estimated Funding
IRLNEP
Action
Output lnTufrr
Lead Agencies
Organizations
Cos Source
Role
or Organizations
Climate Ready
Estuary-1: Prepare a
Risk -Based
Vulnerability
Assessment and
Adaptation Plan for the
IRL. (NEW)
Climate Ready
Estuary-2: Identify
opportunities to
integrate infrastructure
RESILIENCE into
community planning.
(NEVI
OUTCOMES:
Prepare a plan and IRLNEP with IRLNEP Management $100,000
share findings with contractor Conference
IRLNEP partners. support
Work with IRL
communities and
partners to consider
and integrate
infrastructure
RESILIENCE into
community planning.
IRLNEP DEP Coastal Resilience N/A
Management Program, DEO,
Conference transportation planning
organizations, economic
development agencies,
tourism industry, public
and private -sector partners
USEPA
Conduct,
supplemental
collaborate,
funding,
and
IRLNEP
coordinate
Management
Conference
USEPA,
Conduct,
grants,
collaborate,
private -sector
and
support
Coordinate
Short-term (1— 2 years): IRLNEP Management Conference partners have improved awareness and
understanding of climate change, including sea level rise, vulnerabilities and adaptation strategies.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): IRLNEP Management Conference partners begin implementation of
adaptation plans to improve IRL RESILIENCE.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Significant progress is made by IRLNEP Management Conference partners
to position the IRL as a climate ready estuary.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Insufficient data and/or lack of trust for science.
• Focus on challenges rather than opportunities.
• Lack of technical and financial resources.
• Perception that local community actions will have no impact.
• Existing legal and regulatory environment.
• Obtaining buy in from more local governments within the IRL watershed that climate adaptation and
RESILIENCE planning is of vital importance and policies and projects should be coordinated.
CITATIONS:
1. USEPA. 2014. Being Prepared for Climate Change: A Workbook for Developing Risk -Based Adaptation
Plans. Office of Water EPA 842-K-14-002. 120p.
2. Nicholls, R.J. 2011. Planning for the impacts of sea level rise. Oceanography 24(2):144-157,
doi:10.5670/oceanog.2011.34.
3. Ng, A.K.Y, Becker, A., Cahoon, S., Chen, S-L. Earl, P., and Yang, Z. 2016. Climate Change and
Adaptation Planning for Ports. Edited book in the series, Routledge Studies in Transport Analysis.
Routledge, NY. 286 p.
4. Lawrence, J., Bell, R., Blackett, P., Stephens, S., and Allan, S. 2018. National guidance for adapting to
coastal hazards and sea -level rise: Anticipating change, when and how to change pathway. Environmental
Science and Policy 82:100-107.
5. Bell, R., Lawrence, J., Allan, S., Blackett, P., and Stephens, S. 2017. Coastal Hazards and Climate
Change. Ministry for the Environment. Government of New Zealand. 279 p.
6. RW Parkinson Consulting, Inc. and The Balmoral Group. 2018. Risk -Based Vulnerability Assessment of
the Indian River Lagoon to Climate Change. Prepared for: Indian River Lagoon Council.
1111 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
VIBRANT 21sT
CENTURY COMMUNITIES
Goals..
Rebuild infrastructure to be Lagoon -Friendly, susta i nabl er
and resdiont. 'Research ecomonrlic value and trends.
112 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE COMMUNITY
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
Vibrant 21" Century Communities
ACTION: Update RESEARCH on IRL economic value and trends, at least every five years or as needed,
in response to abrupt economic changes, threats, and opportunities. REBUILD human -built infrastructure
along the IRL to be more Lagoon -Friendly TM, more sustainable, and more resilient. RESPOND to 21st
Century changing environmental, economic, and societal needs, challenges, and opportunities. REPORT
regularly to the IRL regional business and economic development community to ensure that CCMP
implementation advances the "One Lagoon — One Community — One Voice" Mission.
ISSUE SUMMARY: IRL health and regional
economic health are inter -dependent. News of poor
water quality, HABs, and fish mortality events harm the
regional tourism economy, threaten lagoon -related small
businesses, impact commercial and residential property
values, influence employee and employer recruitment
success, and diminish the global brand of the region as a
high value destination to live, work, and play. The
IRLNEP recognized the essential need to have balanced
participation and leadership from the public,
independent, and private sectors to implement an
effective and long-lasting restoration and stewardship
plan for the IRL. For many years, active and engaged
private -sector involvement in CCMP implementation was missing. This involvement was a strategic consideration
of the IRL Council and reorganization of the IRLNEP in 2015-2016. The new IRLNEP Management Conference
structure and network governance model was designed to encourage and cultivate increased participation from
private -sector business and industry throughout the five -county IRL region! This goal was achieved through
strategic private -sector appointments by the IRL Council Board of Directors to the IRLNEP Management
Conference and creation of the IRLI2 Network.
74tt I 1.6
mlaroN of M IWO N
APJKUAL RtEMEIEWTS F
ILI ■ 1 11 F
We�LLy yy �w� ui d,rz-i-�_ IRL [?EWW 74$S
�p �PJC11D��7 id�+f�•'� , C
w ft "4W * Ior
38-`-5
W
in OF THE IRL
The economic importance of estuaries to local
communities, the state of Florida, and the nation
cannot be overstated. In 2016, the economic
value of the IRL was estimated at $7.6 billion
annually with a return of $33 to every $1
invested.2 An independent economic study by
Brevard County through the Save Our Indian
River Lagoon Project Plan in 2016 calculated
return on investment by applying a net present
value analysis.3 It was estimated that at least a
total present value of $6 billion was tied to
restoration of the IRL of which approximately $2
billion in benefits were realized from restoration
efforts and an estimated $4 billion in damages
were anticipated if the IRL was not brought back
to health during the next decade. If the restoration
plan was viewed purely as a financial investment
113 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
that paid the $2 billion in benefits alone (i.e., not counting the avoidance of the $4 billion loss), the projected
pretax internal rate of return was 10%, if the plan took 20 years to implement. However, if plan implementation
could be accelerated to occur over 5 years instead of 20 years, the return on investment rose significantly to 26%
because the benefits of restoration would begin to accrue much faster. This analysis demonstrated that an
accelerated restoration timeline was a smart financial decision.
In addition to providing economic, cultural, and ecological benefits to communities, estuaries also deliver
invaluable ecosystem services.4 Ecosystem services include, but are not limited to, raw materials and food, coastal
infrastructure protection and resilience, erosion control, water purification, maintenance of fisheries, carbon
sequestration, aesthetic values, quality of life values, and support of estuary -dependent industry -sectors (i.e.,
tourism, recreation, education and research).
However, the IRL is a human -dominated ecosystem with many stressors
directly linked to human -built infrastructure (i.e., inadequate and aging
WWTPs and pipe networks, septic systems, stormwater conveyances,
nutrient and pollutant impacts from reclaimed water and biosolid
management, and impacts from transportation corridors, bridges,
causeways and public access). IRL coastal communities are also
vulnerable to tropical storm events and associated flooding, storm surge,
and high winds. These risks and vulnerabilities are compounded by aging
infrastructure and/or poorly planned, designed, and built infrastructure.
4 {
Twenty-first century planning for sustainable cities and communities is a complex process that must integrate
economic, environmental, and societal considerations. Eight critical factors have been identified for smart city
initiatives: (1) management and organization, (2) technology, (3) governance, (4) policy context, (5) people and
communities, (6) economy, (7) built infrastructure, and (8) natural environment.5 These factors, and others such as
responding to climate change, form the basis of an integrative framework that can be used to examine how local
governments envision and implement smart city initiatives, sustainability initiatives, green infrastructure, and
Lagoon -Friendly' and resilient coastal infrastructure development.
STRATEGIES:
• Coordinate, integrate, and communicate the connected environmental, economic, and quality of life
values of the IRL to the regional businesses and industries. Seek opportunities to partner with the tourism
industry, ports and maritime industries, commercial fishing industry, recreational fishing industry,
aviation and aerospace industry, economic development organizations, and others to achieve Lagoon -
Friendly' goals.
• Quantify and track the economic value of the IRL with special attention to estimating return on
investment from restoration, IRL-dependent jobs, and the influence of clean water on corporate
relocations, employee recruitment and retention, and residential/commercial development.
• Ensure that the IRL business community, including tourism industry, maritime industry and ports,
commercial fishing industry, recreational fishing industry, aviation and aerospace, economic development
organizations, real estate, and other interested private -sector partners are included and actively engaged in
the IRLNEP Management Conference.
• Work with partners on the Management Conference and local elected officials to update the IRL
Economic Analysis produced in 2016 by the Treasure Coast and East Central Florida Regional Planning
Councils at a minimum of every five years, with special attention to include estimates for estuary -
dependent industries, jobs, and return on investment.
114 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsinle Partner Agencies or
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Ac
Output Intent Lead Agencies
Organizations
Cost
Source
Role
ization
Vibrant Communities-1:
Work closely with the
business community and
industry clusters along
the IRL to ensure
effective cooperation and
communication
associated with CCMP
implementation. (NEW)
Vibrant Communities-2:
Update the IRL
economic analysis
produced in 2016 by the
Treasure Coast and East
Central Florida Regional
Planning Councils every
five years. (NEW)
Vibrant Communities-3:
Promote lagoon -related
nature and heritage
tourism development for
residents and
visitors. (NEW)
Vibrant Communities-4:
Conduct community
planning workshops to
plan for Vibrant 21'
Century communities.
(NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Engage the IRLNEP
business
community and
industry clusters
in CCMP
implementation.
Provide the latest IRLNEP
economic
information for
the IRL
watershed.
Promote efforts to
advance
appreciation and
knowledge about
the IRL through
tourism activities,
events, and
volunteer
activities.
Conduct
community vision
planning
workshop(s).
Tourist
development
organizations,
Brevard Zoo, not -
for -profit
organizations,
IRL destinations
IRLNEP
DEO, Space Florida,
Visit Florida, Enterprise
Florida, CareerSource
Florida, Port Canaveral,
Port Fort Pierce,
Treasure Coast and East
Central Florida Regional
Planning Councils,
chambers of commerce,
economic development
commissions, tourist
development councils
DEO, Treasure Coast and
East Central Florida
Regional Planning
Councils
IRLNEP
IRLNEP Management
Conference Partners,
local governments
IRLNEP staff IRLNEP
activity
$300,000 for IRLNEP
IRL economic
update every
5 years
N/A IRLNEP
$25,000— USEPA
$50,000 Section 320
Conduct,
Coordinate,
and
collaborate
Conduct,
coordinate,
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Conduct,
collaborate,
and
coordinate
Short-term (1— 2 years): IRLNEP is viewed by the regional business community as the leading lagoon -
wide organization to promote and cultivate productive, effective, efficient, and cooperative partnerships
with the private -sector. Quantify and track the economic value of the IRL with special attention to return
on investment from restoration; IRL-dependent jobs; and the influence of clean water on corporate
relocations, employee recruitment and retention, and residential/commercial development.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Private -sector partnerships develop new revenue streams for CCMP
implementation and support new technological innovations to advance IRL restoration and management.
The IRLNEP is recognized as a successful bridge between industry and academic partners in the
STEMAC to promote innovative industry -academic partnerships in applied research and development of
new coastal restoration methodologies, technologies, and commercial products. Update the IRL Economic
Analysis every five years to coincide with CCMP updates (five years) and CCMP revisions (10 years).
Long-term (5 —10+ years): The IRLNEP helps to advance the ML region and the state of Florida as a
national center of excellence for innovation in clean -water technologies and innovative coastal
management strategies. For 2030, in advance of the next CCMP revision, evaluate long-term (10-year)
economic trend for the IRL with special attention to restoration of the IRL watershed.
115 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Traditional communication challenges and presumed conflicts between industry and environmental
interests.
• Water quality declines in the IRL can impact coordinated state and federal activities and assets (i.e., ports,
expansion of commercial aviation and space ventures, Kennedy Space Center, and military bases and
operations). To protect these commercial activities and assets, continue federal support for the IRLNEP
funding appropriations as a non -regulatory core water program pursuant to Section 320 of the Clean
Water Act.
• Funding for comprehensive, lagoon -wide economic analysis.
• Challenges to accurately quantify ecosystem services.
• Difficulty securing accurate economic metrics from the private sector.
• The North American Industry Classification System does not generally include government -owned
establishments, even when their primary activity would be classified in industries covered by the
economic census. Because of these exclusions, economic census data for industries in many sectors might
appear to be incomplete. In addition, the job classifications often do not reflect 21st Century workforce
changes and emerging workforce job categories.
CITATIONS:
1. De Freese, D. 2016. Rethinking the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program: Challenges and
Opportunities for Enhanced Ecosystem Restoration and Management. American Water Resources
Association Annual Conference. Orlando, FL. Presentation online at:
httn://www.awra.ora/meetings/Orlando2O l 6/doc/noweri)oint/Session%2044%20830%2Ode%2OFreese. f)df.
2. Treasure Coast and East Central Florida Regional Planning Councils. 2016. Indian River Lagoon
Economic Valuation Update. Report available at www.onela2oon.or2.
3. Tetra Tech and Closewaters. Brevard County Save Our Indian River Lagoon Plan. 2016. Report available
at www.onelaaoon.org.
4. Barbier, E. B., Hacker, S.D., Kennedy, C., Koch, E.W., Stier, A.C., and Silliman, B.R. 2011. The value of
estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. Ecological Monographs, 81(2), pp. 169-193.
5. Chourabi, H., Nan, T., Walker, S., Gil -Garcia, J.R., Mellouli, S. Nahon, K. Pardo, T.A., and Scholl, H.J.
2012. Understanding Smart Cities: An Integrative Framework. 45th Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences. System Sciences. pp 2289 — 2297.
116 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
TRASH -FREE WATERS
IL
C+6ETJ � [4rl RAC tbFl!
Goals:
Implement a Trash -Free Lagoon campaign in all lagoon coon ias.
Erih a nce co Drd i nation. report loot s pots. a n d : u ccusses.
»
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE COMMUNITY
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
Trash -Free Waters
GOALS: REDUCE trash by implementing a lagoon -wide trash -free waters campaign, "Trash -Free
Lagoon 2030." Enhance efforts to REMOVE trash by coordinating with local organizations and partners in
the IRLNEP Management Conference. REPORT trash hotspots and trash removal success stories.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Trash is a common and recurring problem
in the waters of the IRL and along its shorelines. It is especially
notable along causeways and certain "trash hotspots" where vehicle
access and high -volume recreation occur. Plastic debris is much
more than an aesthetic problem. Of all trash, plastic has the greatest
potential to harm the environment, wildlife, and humans because of
its persistence. It can be found floating at the surface, suspended in
the water column, or deposited on or in bottom sediments.
Discarded fishing line and rope can cause animal entanglements.
Trash is transported by wind and currents throughout the IRL and
out to the ocean though inlets. Once ingested, plastics and other
debris can result in intestinal tract blockages causing animals to
starve. Reports from animal necropsies (autopsies on dead animal)
have found marine debris in the stomachs of sea turtles, birds,
bottlenose dolphins, manatees, and oysters.
There is a growing awareness and concern about microplastics and
microfibers in the lagoon and adjacent ocean waters. Microplastics
come from a variety of sources, including from larger plastic debris
that degrades into smaller pieces. One type of microplastic is
microfibers, which are used to make mats, knits, and weaves for
apparel, upholstery, industrial filters, and cleaning products.
Microfibers are not biodegradable and when washed, can release
microfibers that are then processed at WWTPs and discharged to
waterbodies. Another type of microplastic is microbeads, which are
very tiny pieces of exfoliants in health and beauty products, such as
some cleansers and toothpastes. These tiny plastic particles are
found in almost all species, including filter feeders like oysters.
The particles are so small they pass easily through wastewater
treatment systems. Recent research by the University of Central
Florida has shown that Mosquito Lagoon oysters are already impacted by microplastic pollution! Over a longer
term, chemical breakdown products of plastics can concentrate toxic chemicals in animal tissues.'
STRATEGIES:
Photo of stomach contents of dead bottlenose dolphin in the
Indian River Lagoon. Plastic bags, beach towels, food
wrappers (Photo: Hubbs-SeaWorld Research Institute).
• Work with local partners, municipalities, tourism development councils, restaurants and businesses, and
organizations (such as Keep America Beautiful affiliates and other non -profits) to implement a strategic
and coordinated Trash -Free Lagoon campaign.
• Identify and map trash hotspots throughout the IRL and identify opportunities to address through BMPs
such as stormwater litter traps.
118 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
• Take actions, where necessary, to increase availability and management of trash containers,
microfilament recycling bins, and pick-up spots in high -use areas.
• Implement a high -visibility, high -impact "Trash -Free Lagoon" public awareness campaign through
videos, social media, and graphic imagery.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible partner Agencies or Estimated Cost Funding IRLNEP
Intent Lead Agencies Organizations ce Role
or Or anizations
Trash -Free Waters 1:
Educate the IRLNEP
USEPA, local
$25,000 for GIS
USEPA
Conduct,
Identify and map IRL
community
organizations, Keep
mapping,
Trash -Free
coordinate,
hotspots for trash,
through the
America Beautiful
$50,000 for
Waters
and
develop education
Trash -Free
local affiliates
Trash -Free
Program,
collaborate
projects that REDUCE
Lagoon
Lagoon
IRLNEP
and/or REMOVE trash,
campaign and
campaign
and seek funding for
provide funds
projects from the USEPA
for trash
Trash -Free Waters
removal and
Program. (NEW)
abatement.
Trash -Free Waters-2:
REMOVE IRLNEP
DEP, FWC, Florida
Derelict vessel
DEP,
Conduct,
Identify and REMOVE
derelict
Department of Law
removal cost
IRLNEP
coordinate,
derelict boats and fishing
vessels and
Enforcement, USCG,
averages $350 to
and
gear throughout the IRL.
fishing gear.
Marine Cleanup
$450 per vessel
collaborate
(NEW)
Initiative Inc, 40cean
length
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Communicate the impacts of trash on the IRL. Implement the Trash -Free
Lagoon campaign with partners.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Make progress towards achieving the goal of Trash -Free Lagoon by 2030.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Trash is an unusual and rare occurrence along the IRL shorelines and in its
waters. Trash Free Lagoon by 2030.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
Funding long-term programs and having the financial and human resources and reserves to be able to
RESPOND to emergency situations.
Keeping partners engaged and interested in trash removal.
Changing culture to Lagoon -Friendly TM
CITATIONS:
1. Robbins, M. and Walters, L. 2018. Plastics Under a Microscope. Accumulation of Microplastics in Oyster
Spat in the Mosquito Lagoon. Undergraduate research poster. Florida Undergraduate Research
Conference. Eastern Florida State College. Melbourne, Florida.
2. USEPA. 2018. Trash -Free Waters Website: htips://www.el)a.2ov/trash-free-waters.
119 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
MARINAS AND
BOATING
Goals:
Reduce negative impacts through boater education, Update the
$oa ker's Guide to focu !� an good practices and safe rec reatio n-
120 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE COMMUNITY
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
Marinas and Boating
GOALS: REDUCE impacts from marina and boating activities. Educate boating population to take
RESPONSIBILITY and be Lagoon-FriendlyTM. Update and re -publish the highly acclaimed IRLNEP
Boaters Guide to the Indian River Lagoon to focus on boater waste management, safe boating practices,
lagoon community boat ramps and recreational destinations, and emergency call contacts.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Boating has been a traditional use of the IRL since Native Americans and early
settlers used the lagoon as a primary route for travel and commerce. While the lagoon continues to be heavily
used by boaters, today's boating is primarily a recreational activity with commercial activity mostly located on the
Intracoastal Waterway.
The number of boats and boaters decreased following the 2008 recession; however, the boating industry has been
growing rapidly in recent years. In 2016, 102,803 boats were registered in Volusia, Brevard, Indian River, Martin,
and St. Lucie counties. While recreational use of the lagoon is important for the economy of the region, as well as
for the enjoyment of its residents and visitors, heavy use can strain the sensitive natural resources of the lagoon.
While most boaters use great care in the operation and maintenance of their boats, some uses and behaviors may
affect the health of the lagoon. Approximately 10% of the vessels registered in the IRL region are greater than 26
feet in length and are required to have some form of marine sanitation device (MSD) on board. In 1992, the Clean
Vessel Act was signed into law to reduce water pollution by prohibiting vessels from discharging raw sewage into
fresh water or coastal saltwater.' Discharges from MSDs, pollutants generated by fueling and operating boat
motors, detergents from boat cleaning, and metals (especially copper) or other materials leaching from bottom
paints can affect water quality. The impacts of these pollutants can range from slight perturbations to acute
toxicity in the water column and sediments to threats to the public health.
Boat traffic itself can damage the lagoon. Boat wakes may erode shorelines and break up oyster reefs, and if care
is not taken to avoid shallow areas, boat propellers may dig into the bottom, destroying seagrass and/or benthic
habitat. In addition to possible damage to the boat, prop scars can be enlarged by scouring currents, leading to
expanding seagrass loss and turbidity.
Other recreational impacts can include littering or improper disposal of trash. Manatees, sea turtles, dolphins, fish
and birds can be injured or killed by ingesting or becoming entangled in discarded fishing line, nets, plastic bags
or other debris.
Numerous marinas and similar facilities have been constructed along the IRL to provide services for boaters and
access by the public. Because of their proximity to the lagoon, these facilities have a high potential to impact
lagoon resources if they are not operated and managed carefully. Boaters, especially those on live -aboard boats,
have a responsibility to comply with Florida law and be Lagoon-FriendlyTM. While the extent of the problem is
not known, in May 2017 in response to multiple citizen complaints about irresponsible boat owners and captains,
FWC enforcement officers issued 15 citations over a two -night detail for MSD violations, made an arrest on an
outstanding warrant, and issued multiple warnings for other violations. Under Florida Statutes, violations relating
to marine sanitation carry a civil penalty of $250 for a first offense, $750 for a second offense, and $1,000 for a
third offense.
1211 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Boater education and engagement programs, such as the 7 - Pumpou1t R"m"
Florida Clean Boater, Clean Marina, and Clean and Resilient
Marina programs, promote boater awareness and improved r
operation and maintenance of boats and marina facilities, 7 Q 4 Q 0
bring boaters and marina operators the tolls needed to 0-
minimize their potential impacts on the M's resources.
STRATEGIES:
• Provide education to boaters on Clean Boater Program and to marinas on the Clean Marina Program.
Communicate about boating BMPs for marinas and boaters.
• Ensure that MSDs are working and pumped out properly. Discuss regulatory policy options with
enforcement agencies.
• Develop an inventory and map of certified Clean Marinas along the M.
• Collect information on IRL boater education courses and help distribute materials that contain
environmental awareness elements, updates on existing guides, and similar materials.
• Work with county partners to identify who has approved boat facility siting plans. Work with Brevard
County to identify opportunities to review, update, or support their comprehensive maritime management
master plan.
• Establish and maintain beneficial marine infrastructure to promote safe boating and habitat protection.
• Promote increasing the number of law enforcement staff assigned to patrol the IRL, and staff time
committed to patrolling the IRL.
• Collect data as available on agency enforcement activities (i.e., resource evaluations, number of resource
protection zones established, manatee strikes and prop scar data, impacts to seagrass beds and oyster
reefs).
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
c on Output Intent Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Cost
Sourc
Role
or Ora ns
Organizations
Boating-1: Eliminate waste
Eliminate or
DEP, FWC,
Florida Sea
TBD
DEP, FWC,
Coordinate
discharges and MSD
REDUCE the
USCG, local
Grant, marine
USCG, local
and
impacts on the public
nutrient and
governments
industry,
governments
collaborate
health and IRL resources.
pathogen
USCG
discharges to the
Auxiliary
IRL.
Boating-2: Expand and
Provide for a safer
DEP, FWC,
FWC, DEP,
TBD
DEP, FWC,
Coordinate
coordinate enforcement of
IRL waterway and
USCG, local
USCG
USCG, local
and
boating safety and resource
REDUCE impacts
governments
Auxiliary, local
governments
collaborate
protection regulations
to IRL natural
governments,
throughout the IRL and
resources.
interest groups
develop and distribute
targeted public education
and outreach products to
REDUCE impacts.
Boating-3: Update and
Update and
IRLNEP
IRLNEP
$50,000 -
USEPA
Conduct,
distribute the Boaters
distribute the
Management
$100,000
Section 320
coordinate,
Guide to the Indian River
guide.
Conference,
funding
and
Lagoon. (NEWT)
private
collaborate
industry
partners
122 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Build stronger ties between the IRLNEP and the boating and marine industry
sector. Assist DEP, FWC, USCG Auxiliary, and other maritime interests to assist expansion with boater
education programs and outreach.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Work with state and private partners to quantify improvements in boater
and marina compliance. Elevate clean marinas with effective and efficient pump -out and waste
management standards as a Florida brand for clean water excellence. Marine industry associations are a
strong partner with IRLNEP.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): REDUCE impacts on IRL water quality and habitats from boating and
marina activities.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Inadequate funding for FWC enforcement coverage along the IRL.
• Diverse and independent nature of the boating and marina community.
• Inadequate local policies and regulatory oversight to prevent marinas from becoming live -aboard boat
communities with insufficient wastewater pump -out facilities.
CITATIONS:
DEP Clean Vessel Act Grant Program. Website: https:HfloridadeD.2ov/OSI/CVA.
123 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
DISTINCTIVE LAGOON
COMMUNITIES
.,
Goals:
R e spo nd to t he t he u n ique needs of corn munities having urba n
graters, work ing waterfronts, and environmental Justice populations_
124 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE COMMUNITY
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
Distinctive Lagoon Communities
GOALS: RESPOND to the unique needs of three categories of IRL coastal communities that contribute to
the rich history, culture, human diversity, infrastructure, and economic value of the IRL watershed.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Each of the 38 incorporated cities, numerous unincorporated communities and villages,
and the counties have unique identities, histories, and connections to the IRL. However, there are three distinctive
community categories within the IRL watershed that contribute in significant ways to the rich history, culture,
human diversity, infrastructure, economic value, and coastal identity of the IRL watershed. Together, these
communities form a foundation for the IRL's unique identity and brand.
Urban Waters: Cities share one key
characteristic: they are full of people,
buildings, and businesses. Because
everyone shares the same relative space,
air, and water, environmental impacts are
concentrated in smaller areas, including
waterways. In the decades to come, most of
the mainland coast of the IRL will be
characterized by high density development.
Throughout the U.S. and Florida, urban
waters receive large amounts of pollution
from a variety of sources, including
industrial discharges, mobile sources (e.g.,
cars/trucks), residential/commercial
wastewater, trash, and polluted stormwater
runoff from urban landscapes. This
pollution creates public and environmental
health hazards, such as waterbodies that are not safe for swimming. In addition, urban patterns of development
often make waterways inaccessible to adjacent neighborhoods. Lack of access limits a community's ability to reap
the benefits of living close to the water, whether through recreation, fishing, or access to real estate. IRL
communities can make planning and development decisions to preserve community values for water access and
use.
Working Waterfronts: The Waterfronts Florida Program offers help to coastal governments to revitalize their
working waterfronts by providing resources for land acquisition and technical assistance for planning.' The
Waterfronts Florida Partnership Program was created by the Florida Coastal Management Program in 1997 to
address the physical and economic decline of traditional working waterfront areas. Since 1997, a total of 24
communities have received designation as Waterfronts Florida Partnership Communities. During the designation
process, a community receives intensive technical assistance from DEO, resulting in a new or refined,
community -designed vision plan (special area management plan) to guide the revitalization of the community's
designated waterfront area. During the first phase of designation, a community establishes its Waterfronts Florida
Partnership, prepares a community -designed vision plan to guide the revitalization of the traditional working
waterfront area, and begins implementation of the vision plan, as appropriate. The visioning process and resulting
document identify the community's issues and their plans for addressing the following priority areas: public
access to the waterfront, hazard mitigation, environmental and cultural resource protection, and enhancement of
125 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
the viable traditional economy or economic restructuring. During the second phase, the community continues to
implement its vision plan, focusing on incorporating its vision into the comprehensive plan and undertaking
priority projects that will further its efforts to revitalize and preserve the working waterfront. The public dialogue
and the partnerships developed with state agencies, private organizations, and other Waterfronts Florida
communities across the state enable a designated community to identify proactive solutions to address community
concerns and to implement them. Designated communities along the IRL and within the IRLNEP IRL-Halifax
planning boundary include Daytona Beach (Volusia County), Oak Hill (Volusia County), Old Eau Gallie
(Brevard County), and Port Salerno (Martin County). In addition, the Stan Mayfield Working Waterfronts Florida
Forever grant program was created by the 2008 Legislature and is administered by Florida Communities Trust. To
fund the program, the Legislature provided 2.5% of the total Florida Forever program appropriation. In the IRL
watershed, the City of Sebastian, Blue Crab Cove (also known as Griffis Landing) on Merritt Island, and Port
Salerno in Martin County have received grants towards creating Working Waterfronts.2
USEPA Environmental Justice Communities: Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful
involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. The 251}i anniversary of the
creation of USEPA's Office of Environmental Justice occurred in 2017, and it is a testament to the USEPA's
commitment to furthering environmental justice by addressing the environmental and public health concerns of
minority, low-income, tribal, and indigenous communities. USEPA has developed an environmental justice
mapping and screening tool called EJSCREEN, which is based on nationally consistent data and an approach that
combines environmental and demographic indicators in maps and reports.' Data from this tool can be used to
implement the CCMP actions. This CCMP revision incorporates aspects of environmental justice throughout each
of the action plans, as water quality, habitat, and living resources seek to be preserved for all communities to
enjoy. Furthermore, there are CCMP actions that call for access to the lagoon, so that all can enjoy the IRL as One
Community, as well as actions to monitor and report the status of all areas of the IRL, which will allow all
communities to speak and be heard with One Voice.
STRATEGIES:
• Provide technical assistance and support to distinctive IRL communities to assist with vision plan
implementation, incorporating vision objectives into local comprehensive plans, and supporting local
priority projects that revitalize and sustain community health and welfare.
• Look for opportunities to redevelop viable waterfront areas to create livable waterfront communities.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
e
Estimated Funding
IRLNEP
EIRPartner
encies Agencies or
Cost rc I
Role
ations _ Organizations
Distinctive Communities-1:
Maintain sustainable,
IRLNEP DEO, DEP
TBD USEPA,
Conduct,
For, Urban Waters, ensure
Lagoon -Friendly TM,
DEP,
coordinate,
the high density human
and economically
economic
and
population is Lagoon-
viable urban waters
development
collaborate
Friendly TM. (NEW)
areas.
councils
Distinctive Communities-2:
For Working Waterfronts,
coordinate with local
communities to maintain
the commercial use. (NEW)
Promote working IRLNEP
waterfronts and help
enhance communities
by providing
economic,
educational,
recreational, social,
and employment
opportunities.
DEO, DEP TBD
USEPA,
Conduct,
DEP,
coordinate,
economic
and
development
collaborate
councils
126 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Responsible
Partn
Estimated
Funding
Action
Output Intent encies
Agencies or
Cost
Role
' ations
Or anizations
Distinctive Communities-3:
For Environmental Justice
Communities, identify the
unique challenges and
opportunities along the
lagoon for
underrepresented and
underserved communities.
(NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Provide support and IRLNEP
information to
underrepresented and
underserved
communities to
promote being
Lagoon -Friendly TM
DEO, DEP TBD
USEPA,
Conduct,
DEP,
coordinate
economic
and
development
collaborate
councils
Short-term (1— 2 years): Identify and map the locations of each distinctive community and working
waterfront.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Support the development of community action plans.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Promote and enhance the quality of life in the distinctive communities in a
Lagoon -Friendly' manner.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Funding for community cost -share
projects to preserve and revitalize
working waterfronts.
• Challenges to rethink and redefine a
sustainable working waterfront.
• Resources to provide project funding and
education for underrepresented and
underserved communities.
• Limited access to the shoreline and other
IRL resources for distinctive communities creates a lack of ownership.
i T
CITATIONS:
1. DEO. 2018. Website: httD://www.floridaiobs.orv-/communitv-Dlannina-and-
develoDment/Dro2rams/communitv-Dlannin2-table-of-contents/waterfronts-florida-Dro2ram.
2. Lampl Herbert Consultants. 2010. Linking Commercial Fishing to Land Use Planning: The Stan Mayfield
Working Waterfronts Florida Forever Grant Program. Research conducted under a grant from Gulf &
South Atlantic Fisheries Foundation, Inc.
3. USEPA. EJSCREEN: Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool. Website:
httDs://www.eDa. 2ov/ei screen.
127 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
EMERGENCY PREPARATION
AND RESPONSE
Goals:
Identify the role of the IRLNEP du ring amergenc1es and develop
word i n-al-ed plans with Partners to respond to eEn a rge nc ius_
128 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE COMMUNITY
HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
Emergency Preparation & Response
GOALS: Identify the role of the IRLNEP during emergencies that impact the IRL and its communities.
Develop coordinated plans with IRLNEP Management Conference partners and responsible local, state,
and federal entities to prepare, RESPOND, and RECOVER after an emergency in the IRL watershed.
ISSUE SUMMARY: In recent years, several environmental incidents have occurred with the potential to
significantly affect the IRL's environmental resources. These incidents include HABs, unusual mortality events,
seasonal releases from Lake Okeechobee, frosts and freezes, discovery of aquatic invasive species in various areas
of the IRL (Australian spotted jellyfish, green mussel, lion fish, and Charru mussel [Mytella charruana]), land- or
water -based pollutant spills, vessel stranding and abandonment, fish kills, and hurricanes and major storm events.
These events have the potential to alter the character and biodiversity of the IRL's ecosystem and potentially
impact the health and safety of people and their communities.
Most pollutant spills —oil, hazardous materials,
wastewater —have an established notification
and regulatory response that involves
contacting the DEP Office of Emergency
Response.' Other teams are established to
respond to marine mammal and sea turtle
strandings.2 A hotline has been implemented
for response to fish kills and algal blooms;
however, emergency assessment for many other
categories of environmental incidents is largely
organized on an ad hoc basis.
To address the issue, an IRLNEP incident risk assessment and response workshop is proposed to discuss potential
incident risks, identify key agency roles and responsibilities, develop a communication strategy, and define the
IRLNEP role in providing emergency preparation, response, and recovery support to its Management Conference
and community partners.
STRATEGIES:
Identify ways for the IRLNEP to aid and support in preparation for, response to, and recovery from
emergency situations in the IRL to help understand the potential problems, identify key partners, gather
resources and funding mechanism(s), and be a conduit for communication and consistency throughout the
lagoon.
Share an inventory of classes of incidents and events that could impact water and habitat quality or human
health, safety, and welfare in the IRL to develop responses, as necessary, to REDUCE risks or RESPOND
to events effectively and efficiently.
Identify a pre -disaster emergency response and coordination plan, hazard mitigations, and a succession
plan for continuity of operations.
129 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Action
Output Intent
bible
Lead Agencies
Partner
Agencies or
Estimated
Cost
Funding
Source
IRLNEP
Role _
Emergency-1: Evaluate the role
REPORT on the
IRLNEP
Federal, state
IRLNEP
IRLNEP Conduct,
and ability of the IRLNEP to
role of the
Management
and local
staff time
collaborate,
assist local communities and
IRLNEP in
Conference
emergency
and
emergency management
emergency
planning and
communicate
agencies in times of emergencies
planning and
response
that impact the IRL. (NEW)
response.
agencies.
OUTCOMES:
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Coordinate with partners and other NEPs about the role of IRLNEP in
emergency management and develop a report with the IRLNEP's role.
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Coordinate with partners to quickly and efficiently RESPOND to
emergencies in accordance with defined emergency response roles.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): Continue to assess and modify the plan to best address emergencies that
arise.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Coordination and communication among multiple agencies and organizations during an emergency.
• Limited staff and financial capacity of the 1RLNEP.
CITATIONS:
1. DEP State Office of Emergency Response. 2018. Website: https://floridadep.e_ ov/OER.
2. FWC. 2018 Website: httn://www.mvfwc.com/seaturtle/.
130 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
MONITORING AND
DATA SHARING
Goals:
Coordinate and integrate monitoring, data sharing. and rnapging
efforts throughout thc- IRL Identify gap!5 and evallatP tron-c!5_
131 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE VOICE
COMMUNICATE - COLLABORATE - COORDINATE
Monitoring and Data Sharing
GOALS: Coordinate IRL monitoring, data sharing, and mapping throughout the IRL and its watershed.
RESPOND to gaps in monitoring and data collection and the need to evaluate trends and changes.
REPORT the shared findings from the IRL monitoring network to inform IRL partners and stakeholders
about status and trends related to the health of the IRL.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Monitoring the sediment, water quality, and biological resources of the IRL is important
not only to determine the current condition of the estuary but also to ascertain the effectiveness of restoration.
Having adequate and reliable data allows standards to be established and provides a framework for future
comparisons. Monitoring networks must be in place and maintained before critical changes occur to the lagoon if
we are to understand why and how the changes occurred. Mapping and GIS tools are a powerful way to convey
these data quickly, and modeling can be used to evaluate future monitoring locations and parameters. Information
gleaned from mapping and GIS evaluations should then be used to identify innovative technologies to address
existing and newly identified problems, such as climate change impacts on the IRL. For these reasons, it is
important to regularly monitor the conditions and resources of the IRL and evaluate these data.
Concerned citizens and agencies alike monitor the lagoon's water quality. A long-term comprehensive,
coordinated network was established by the IRL Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Program
in 1989,' including participants from Volusia, Brevard, and Indian River Counties; DEP; NASA; SFWMD; and
SJRWMD. MRC, in partnership with DEP, established the IRL Watch Water Quality Monitoring Program in
1989.2 The network consists of more than 90 stations located throughout the IRL that are monitored on a weekly
basis. MRC and FIT are also under contract with Brevard County to probe the lagoon to identify the presence and
depths of muck on the IRL floor. Many of the same entities involved in the IRL SWIM monitoring network also
monitor or study the biological resources of the lagoon. Fixed seagrass transects located throughout the lagoon are
monitored by SJRWMD, SFWMD, and partners to assess the health and extent of the seagrass community.
Seagrasses in the IRL are mapped every two to three years through aerial photography to determine current
seagrass extent and document any changes that occurred in the period between map developments. Several
organizations, such as the University of Central Florida and the Brevard Zoo,' are contracted by Brevard County
to monitor oyster survival and
recruitment from restoration 4
efforts. In the Southern IRL „ kwin _ mm u,. wm
and St. Lucie River, the CERP
Restoration Coordination and +••.+ .
Verification Program has been
monitoring oysters and M
benthic infauna on a regular
basis since 2005.
Throughout the IRL watershed
are numerous educational and
research institutions that 0��_
contribute to the body of ;, _ .;W P
scientific knowledge 0 •q
concerning the lagoon.
Universities, such as FIT,
132 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
University of Central Florida, Florida Atlantic University, Stetson University, Bethune-Cookman University,
University of Florida, and others conduct faculty and student research and monitoring. Research entities, such as
Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, Smithsonian Marine Station, and ORCA, conduct ongoing research and
monitoring.
This CCMP revision promotes scientific integrity, honesty, objectivity, and accountability, and it integrates
science with the social, economic, and education needs and values of the community. Achieving these goals will
be dependent upon the development of a coordinated, integrated, and well -managed IRL field research site
network with access and support for facilities. It will be important to create central data repositories to ensure all
data are coordinated and provided in a specific format. Existing databases, such as the Watershed Information
Network maintained by DEP, water quality and environmental data maintained by SJRWMD, and DBHYDRO
maintained by SFWMD can be used.
STRATEGIES:
• Provide monitoring of the IRL and evaluate the data through maps and models to validate ongoing
projects and identify potential problems and sources of problems in the IRL.
• Provide a consistent, long-term funding source to maintain the necessary monitoring network.
• Effect change in plans and practices through collection, analysis, and interpretation of data.
• Increase muck monitoring and mapping to better understand the amount and locations of muck and the
potential for nutrient release to the water column, as well as turbidity caused by muck resuspension.
• Continue monitoring of biological resources, such as seagrasses and oysters, to evaluate the impacts of
restoration.
• Provide funding and support for science symposia, outreach, technology transfer, workshops, and events.
• Consolidate data on a regular basis and in a standardized format into more user-friendly platforms using
GIS, Environmental Visualization Software, Tableau, and other modeling and data management tools.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
a
prtner Agencies
Funding
IRLNEP
Action Output Intent Lead Agencies
or Organizations
Estimated Cost
Source
Role
or Or anizations
Monitoring 1: Develop a
comprehensive IRL
monitoring plan. (NEW)
Monitoring-2: Monitor
IRL indicators at
appropriate spatial and
temporal scales to
understand the status and
trends associated with key
indicators of the system's
health. (NEW)
Evaluate roles
and
responsibilities
and identify gaps,
opportunities, and
challenges to
delivering a
comprehensive
monitoring
network.
Obtain
appropriate data
to better
understand the
status and trends
for key indicators.
IRLNEP
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
partners
90+ partners
including
SJRWMD,
SFWMD, DEP,
MRC, Smithsonian
Institute, ORCA,
Harbor Branch
Oceanographic
Institute, interest
groups, local
governments
$50,000
A minimum of
$100,000 annually
to coordinate and
have a reserve for
emergency
monitoring need;
additional
$75,0004100,000
if expanding the
atmospheric
monitoring station
network.
USEPA
Section 320
funds
IRLNEP
Section 320
annual
funding,
partner
support and
grants
Conduct,
coordinate,
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
133 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Output Intent
Responsible
Lead Agencies
Partner Agencies
Estimated Cost
Funding
IRLNEP
or Or anizations
or Organizations
Sourepdik
Role
Montioring-3: Support
expansion of and
adequate funding for the
IRL Citizens Water
Quality Monitoring
Program.
Monitoring-4: Identify,
develop, and apply next -
generation smart sensors,
remote sensing
technologies, big data
analytics, and surveillance
components to monitor
and deliver an IRL water
quality dashboard in real
time. (NEW)
Monitoring-5: Advance
the 10 scientific
RESEARCHpriorities
identified by the
STEMAC in the 2018
Looking Ahead — Science
2030 Report. Work with
IRL partners to seek
funding to implement
priority RESEARCH
projects within the 10
priorities. (NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Data quality
control,
standardized
methodology, and
integration of
data into IRL
health status
evaluations.
Create an IRL
water quality
dashboard.
Provide an annual
update on how
the 10
RESEARCH
priorities were
advanced and
revise priorities
as needed.
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
90+ water quality
monitoring and
data user partners,
MRC, Florida
Oceanographic
Society, Marine
Discovery Center,
Brevard Zoo,
Counties, Water
Control Districts
ORCA, Harris
Corporation,
Embry -Riddle
Aeronautical
University,
NOAA, academia,
Cardinal Systems,
HydroPlus
Engineering,
robotics groups
Agencies,
academia, interest
groups
Included in
Monitoring-2
TBD based on
research needed
for 10 priorities
IRLNEP
Section 320
annual
funding,
partner
support and
grants
TBD
Agencies,
local
governments
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Coordinate
and
collaborate
Short-term (1— 2 years): Evaluate existing monitoring projects and programs to ensure long-term
viability of existing monitoring networks and prepare a monitoring plan that identifies responsible
entities, gaps, and potential funding sources. Assemble issue -specific task forces to identify RESEARCH
projects, responsible entities, and funding sources for each of the ten priorities identified by the STEMAC
in the Looking Ahead — Science 2030 Report.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Implement identified changes to the monitoring network. Add a monitoring
requirement for projects funded through the IRLNEP, as appropriate. Begin implementation of
RESEARCH projects for the ten priorities identified by the STEMAC in the Looking Ahead — Science
2030 Report.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Create a real-time database and conduct real-time modeling to distribute
available data to a larger group and understand what is happening and predict what will happen in the
near- and long-term in the IRL. Complete the RESEARCHprojects and incorporate findings into the next
CCMP revision and into management of the IRL's resources.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Money tends to be available for "shovel -ready projects" that can provide a more tangible benefit than
data. Sediment, water quality, and biological data collected through monitoring provide the information
required to evaluate what is happening, what needs to change, and what has changed because of actions.
134 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
A value needs to be placed on the data that provides efficiency and validity to projects and the dollars that
fund them.
Various entities collect data in the IRL system, and these efforts need to remain coordinated and
collaborative so that they are efficient and effective. In addition, the increased concern about the health of
the IRL system offers an opportunity to convey useful and actionable information in more effective ways
to raise the level of coordination and integration of data to better RESTORE and sustain the health of the
IRL.
CITATIONS:
1. SJRWMD and SFWMD. 1989. Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan for Indian
River Lagoon.
2. MRC. 2018. htti)://www.mrcirl.ora/our-programs/indian-river-laaoonwatch.
3. Brevard Zoo. 2018. Restore Our Shores Program. https://restoreourshores.orR/.
135 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
STATE OF THE
LAGOON
On
Goals:
Dew lop a "State of t he La goon" Tec kin i ca I Repo rt th a t add resses
ecosystem statu !�, st ressors. trends. and emerging r-o rwcems.
136 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE VOICE
Communicate — Collaborate — Coordinate
State of the Lagoon
GOALS: Collect, synthesize, and analyze IRL data and RESEARCH findings to develop a "State of the
Lagoon Technical Report" that addresses the health of the IRL, ecosystem stressors, indicators, and trends.
REPORT the findings. Apply the findings to advise CCMP updates and revisions.
ISSUE SUMMARY: One requirement of the Clean Water Act is to assess trends in water quality, natural
resources, and uses of the estuary! To meet this objective and to comply with USEPA core performance measures
for NEPs regarding the reporting of ecosystem status and trends,' the IRLNEP will bring together Management
Conference partners, including the IRL Science and Management Working Group, as well as other practitioners
from universities, organizations, and agencies to develop a "State of the Lagoon Technical Report" in advance of
ten-year CCMP revisions. The report will present and track appropriate IRL indicators and Vital Signs to evaluate
key stressors to the IRL and its watershed; assess chemical, physical, and biological conditions; describe past and
current trends; look ahead to potential fixture changes; and identify data and research essential to advancing
understanding of changes and emerging issues.
STRATEGIES:
• Create an IRL technical task force and fund the activities of the technical task force to develop a "State of
the Lagoon Technical Report" with a target delivery date of 2025. That technical report will serve as the
scientific foundation for advising the next revision of the CCMP due in 2030.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Partner
Estimated
Funding IRLNEP
Action Output Intent
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Cost
Role
or Or anizations
Organizations
State of the IRL-1:
Provide support for a
"State of the Lagoon
Technical Report" to
be released every ten
years. (NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Produce a "State of IRLNEP
the Lagoon Management
Technical Report" Conference
in advance of 5-year
CCMP updates and
10-year revisions.
Universities, $450,000
organizations, (funded over
and agencies 4 years)
IRLNEP and Conduct,
Management coordinate,
Conference and
collaborate
Short-term (1— 2 years): Identify and RESOLVE data gaps and monitoring needs required to conduct
effective ecosystem health analyses. Build a multi -disciplinary scientific and technical task force willing
and able to implement and coordinate report development. Begin report development.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Present a draft report for Management Conference review.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Finalize report and publicly rollout report in conjunction with an IRLNEP
Scientific Summit or Florida Atlantic University/Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute IRL Science
Symposium. Prepare an update to the "State of the Lagoon Technical Report" every ten years in advance
of CCMP revisions.
137 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Gaps in monitoring and data make indicator identification and analysis challenging and sometimes
impossible.
• Long-term studies with large data sets that have not been published in peer -reviewed journals may be
difficult to access for use and analysis.
• Large trans -disciplinary teams and multi -agency partnerships face challenges in coordination,
cooperation, and communication.
• Multi -year funding to support the comprehensive work needed to develop a strong science -based report
based on leading -edge scientific knowledge.
CITATIONS:
1. Federal Water Pollution and Control Act, as Amended through P.L. 107-303, November 27, 2002. 234 P.
httDs: //www. eDa. eov/sites/production/files/2017-08/documents/federal-water-pollution-control-act-
508full.pdf
2. USEPA. 2016. National Estuary Program — Program Evaluation Guidance.
httDs://www.eDa.2ov/sites/Droduction/files/2015-09/documents/2011-final-nep-pe-2uidance.pdf.
138 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
TECHNOLOGY
INNOVATION
Goals:
Research innovative technologies and emerging commeircital
Opportunities that Cmu ICJ aSSISt in 1 P L restn ratl art and stew rd sh i p-
139 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
9 ONE VOICE
Communicate — Collaborate — Coordinate
Technology Innovation
GOALS: RESEARCH innovative technologies and emergence of commercial opportunities that will assist
with restoration and stewardship of the IRL. REPORT findings. RESPOND to industry needs and desires
to communicate more effectively with IRL partners. Work with industry and economic development
partners to position Florida and the IRL region as a leader in clean water innovation, research, and
technology development.
ISSUE SUMMARY: Clean water is essential for the environment, industry, _
society, and individuals to survive and thrive. As coastal populations grow and _
existing water infrastructure ages and becomes inadequate, four areas of water
innovation are needed: (1) talent, (2) technology, (3) infrastructure, and (4)
investment.' The development and deployment of innovative technologies and
processes; new applications of existing technology; production changes; and
organizational, management, and cultural changes can improve the condition
and sustainability of the IRL water resources.2
The fragmented framework governing the water sector in Florida and
throughout the United States constrains innovation and commercialization by
creating barriers to entry and reducing the viability and economic value of
private -sector market development. During the highly publicized 2016 algal
blooms and fish mortality events in the IRL, dozens of small business and technology companies approached the
IRLNEP with innovative technology solution proposals. All discussed multiple challenges to market entry and
commercial success, which included no central point for market entry, risk aversion by public agencies, distrust of
for -profit companies, regulation and permit challenges, lack of financial support for pilot projects, lack of private -
sector investment capital, and complex/slow governmental processes that eroded return on investment. For many
of these corporate interests, quantitative data on performance and proof of efficacy were also lacking for one or
several critical criteria, including effectiveness; efficiency; ability to scale; environmental safety; sustainability;
capital, operational, and maintenance costs; and life -cycle costs compared to traditional and proven approaches.
+— - r-
STRATEGIES:
• Provide an objective and easy to access industry and technology directory on the IRLNEP website for
existing and emerging water quality restoration, habitat restoration, and water quality monitoring
technologies.
• Create a technology review panel to evaluate proposals received for new technologies.
• Develop a white paper on technological opportunities related to water and industry cluster (geographic
concentration of interconnected institutions in a particular field) development for the IRL region.' Work
with the FIT IRL Research Institute to expand its annual technical conference. Work with the Economic
Development Commission of the Space Coast, DEO, and clean technology sector partners to promote
RESEARCH, development, and commercialization of technologies related to water.
• Launch the IRLNEP water technology directory on the www.onela2oon.or2 website and update the
directory on a regular basis.
• Advance an incubator program in partnership with Groundswell Startups and other interested partners to
help commercialize the most promising technological opportunities that need pilot funding and third -party
monitoring to move from the lab and bench -scale experiments to field applications.
140 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner Agencies
Estimated
Funding
Actio
O t Intent
Lead Agencies
or Organizations
Cost
Source
IRLNEP Role
or nizations
Technology Innovation-1:
Support
Work with IRLNEP
development of
IRLIZ, industry leaders,
an IRL region
economic development
and Florida
organizations, and startup
water
incubators/accelerators to
technology
help drive IRL regional
industry
economic, technology, and
cluster.
talent development.
(NEW)
Technology Innovation-2:
Share
Continue to support and
technology
develop a water
knowledge and
technology directory for
industry
the www.onela2oon.org
contacts with
website. (NEW)
IRL resource
managers and
Association of
NEPs.
Technology Innovation-3:
Evaluate and
Evaluate options for a
communicate
regular, sustainable, and
about emerging
cost-effective water
monitoring
quality monitoring
technologies.
network using
autonomous sampling.
(NEW)
OUTCOME:
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
FIT IRL Tech -
Con, industry
incubators,
economic
development
organizations,
DEO,USEPA
Private -sector
industry willing to
submit directory
information
IRLNEP
event
sponsorship
($5,000—
$10,000
annually)
IRLNEP staff
time, possible
student
internships,
estimated at <
$5,000
annually
IRLNEP,
public- and
private -
sector
sponsors
IRLNEP
Conduct,
coordinate, and
collaborate
Conduct,
coordinate, and
collaborate
IRLNEP Embry -Riddle
IRLNEP staff
Grants, Coordinate and
Management Aeronautical
time (<
National collaborate
Conference University,
$10,000
Science
NOAA, academia,
annually =
Foundation,
Cardinal Systems,
10% of
NOAA,
HydroPlus
Executive
NASA,
Engineering,
Director time)
Office of
robotics interest
Naval
groups
Research
• Short-term (1— 2 years): Launch the IRLNEP technology directory on www.onelawon.m.
• Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Deliver a Florida water technology conference in the IRL region with
partners from industry, academia, and state/regional economic development agencies.
• Long-term (5 —10+ years): Build the IRL regional reputation as an industry cluster for technology,
innovation and excellence related to water.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
Funding to evaluate and implement new technologies to improve water quality and to better understand
the IRL system.
Building industry and market trust in the IRLNEP directory.
Providing third -party verified quantifiable value to IRL partners and industry partners.
CITATIONS:
1. U.S. Council on Competitiveness. 2016. Leverage. Phase I Sector Study: Water and Manufacturing. 36p.
2. USEPA. 2018. Promoting Technology Innovations for Clean and Safe Water - Water Technology
Innovation. httl)s://www.ei)a.2ov/sites/production/files/2014-
04/documents/clean water blueprint final.Ddf.
3. De Freese, D. and Coffee, R. 2018. Viewpoint: Opportunities for Clean Water Technology and
Innovation. IRLNEP White Paper in development.
1411 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
COMP IMPLEMENTATION
AND FINANCING
i
1k,
Goals:
Work with I R L partners to -1mplement the CCMP. Fund projects
an d p rog ra rns t hat re*to r€ thg I I? L to h ea It h_
142 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE VOICE
Communicate — Collaborate — Coordinate
CCMP Implementation and Financing
GOALS: IRL communities, partners, and citizens work in cooperation to align their individual and
collective interests and actions to take RESPONSIBILITY to achieve the "One Lagoon — One Community —
One Voice" Mission. Identify, fund, and implement CCMP projects and actions to RESTORE the IRL.
Align CCMP activities to provide enhanced RESILIENCE for the IRL and its human communities.
ISSUE SUMMARY: The IRLNEP is the only IRL organization with the responsibility to develop a long-term,
watershed -based, non -regulatory, and community -driven CCMP for the IRL and to work with partners to
implement the plan.','
For IRL ecosystem restoration and management to
deliver on multiple environmental, infrastructure, and
societal targets (i.e., water quality, habitat
improvement, economic vitality, community resilience,
and quality of life), the process of restoration and
management must create a lagoon -wide, unified, and
scale -dependent approach that applies and integrates the
best available natural and social sciences to resource
management with full participation, engagement, and
support of IRL citizens, community leaders, scientists,
resource managers, and policy makers.
For this CCMP to be successful, there is a need for stable, recurring funding to implement the actions, projects,
research, monitoring, and reporting included in this plan. Without additional funding, the existing annual funding
from the IRLNEP Management Conference plus the funding available to local entities is insufficient to achieve
restoration at the scale and timeline needed for the IRL system to recover. Identifying additional source(s) of
funding will be key to implementing the actions in this plan.
STRATEGIES:
• Implement and communicate the "One Lagoon — One Community — One Voice" mission as a foundation
for building local, state, and federal support for IRL restoration and management with participation from
the public, private, and independent sectors throughout the IRL region.
• Complete the CCMP revision in fiscal year 2018-2019. IRL Council formally adopts the CCMP revision
after USEPA review and certification in early 2019.
• Fine tune CCMP targets and indicators as necessary, track performance, and communicate progress.
• Continue to identify and secure expanded and expedited cost -share funding for CCMP project
implementation throughout the IRL watershed.
• Work with funding partners and investors to secure dedicated matching funds at a level commensurate
with the needs of the IRL.
• Seek opportunities for funding IRL restoration through sources such as the Water and Land Legacy
Amendment (often referred to as Amendment 1).
• Increase federal funding for each of the 28 NEPs authorized by Section 320 of the Clean Water Act with a
goal of $1 million annual base funding per NEP to implement CCMP restoration actions.
143 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner
'RFEEMttion
Output
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Estimated Cost
Funding Source
IRLNEP
Intent
ar nizations
' ations
I
Role
Implementation-1:
Deliver all IRLNEP
Local IRL
$2.1 million
Annual Funding: USEPA
Conduct,
Develop a finance
USEPA Management
partners,
minimum base
($600,000), SJRWMD
coordinate,
plan for CCMP
performance Conference
federal
funding for
($500,000), SFWMD
and
development and
measures
partners,
IRLNEP pursuant
($500,000), DEP
collaborate
implementation,
representative
private -sector
to the 2015 IRL
($250,000), Volusia
project and
of an
investors, and
Council Interlocal
County ($50,000),
program funding,
"excellent"
industry
Agreement, as
Brevard County
and program
performing
partners from
amended from
($50,000), Indian River
delivery with a
NEP.
tourism, real
time to time; full
County ($50,000), St.
focus on restoration,
estate
CCMP project
Lucie County ($50,000),
scientific
development,
implementation is
Martin County ($50,000),
RESEARCH,
and other clean
estimated at $1.5
IRL license plate
monitoring, and
water-
billion
($125,000)
citizen engagement.
dependent
Proiect Funding: Priority
(NEW)
industries
need is a stable, recurring
funding source for local -
state cost -share projects
OUTCOMES:
Short-term (1— 2 years): Secure and expand funding that accelerates implementation of CCMP priority
activities and partners' projects to include, but not be limited to, expanded IRL Council base annual
funding and expanded local, state, and federal cost -share funding. All IRL partners and stakeholders are
investing time, talent, and/or funds to fulfill CCMP actions to RESTORE and manage the IRL.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Expansion of strategic partnerships and expansion/diversification of
funding opportunities to implement priority projects and programs. IRL region is unified in its support of
the CCMP for IRL restoration and stewardship.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Document improvements in water quality and natural habitat improvements
in the IRL based on Vital Signs and science -based indicators. Evaluate the return on investment for
management practices implemented.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Overcoming stakeholder's narrow spatial and short-term temporal perspectives to embrace "One Lagoon
— One Community — One Voice" as a shared regional, statewide and national identity.
• Availability of adequate, stable recurring funding for effective, efficient, and timely program and project
implementation.
CITATIONS:
1. IRLNEP Management Conference governance model (www.onelaRoon.ora).
2. Clean Water Act. 40 Code of Federal Regulations 320 — of the Clean Water Act, as amended.
httDs://www.2Do.2ov/fdsys/granule/CFR-2002-title40-volt/CFR-2002-title40-vol l-nart35-subDart320.
144 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT
AND EDUCATION
I
Plafida OcinimQrapkiv_ Sac"
Goals:
Engage and educate the public about lagoon restoration.
Provide hand& -ors Stewardship opportunjti€S_
145 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE VOICE
COMMUNICATE - COLLABORATE - COORDINATE
Citizen Engagement and Education
GOALS: REPORT on needs and progress and educate and engage the public on the need to RESTORE
and manage the IRL's natural resources. RESPOND to opportunities to fund and implement "hands on"
opportunities for citizen engagement that promote and produce well-informed citizens and communities
that become IRL ambassadors for Lagoon -Friendly TM behaviors. REBUILD community -lagoon
connections that promote the identity, well-being, and unique qualities of IRL communities.
ISSUE SUMMARY: The recent fish mortality events and algal blooms have brought national attention to the
IRL and highlighted a need to increase restoration activities. Federal, state, and local agencies charged with
management of the lagoon's resources, as well as environmental groups, are working towards restoration, which
includes actively seeking to educate and involve the public in the protection and enhancement of the estuary and
its resources.
A key event in public involvement and education in the IRL
region was the passage of the SWIM Act by the Florida
Legislature in 1987. This legislation not only included the IRL
in the SWIM program as a priority waterbody of state concern
but also mandated a program to involve and educate the public
about efforts to protect and restore SWIM waterbodies. The
IRL SWIM public involvement and education efforts were
coordinated by SJRWMD and SFWMD. In 1991, the IRLNEP
was established. As the IRLNEP goals of citizen involvement
and education are closely related to those of the SWIM
program, IRLNEP joined the IRL SWIM program in their
public involvement and education. Following the adoption of
the IRL CCMP in 1996, the IRLNEP and IRL SWIM programs
were merged to continue the implementation of public
involvement and education efforts.
Maintaining and nurturing public interest and involvement in the protection and preservation of the IRL and its
resources requires a substantial investment of money, time, and effort. These efforts must continue beyond the
initial CCMP development and adoption phase to continue to promote implementation of CCMP actions. Several
studies have been completed to evaluate the effectiveness of public education and outreach campaigns in the IRL
watershed. One study conducted in the IRL found that physical and virtual field trips both promoted learning
about the area.' In 2012, Good Education Solutions, under contract with Brevard County and nine of its
municipalities, and in partnership with Keep Brevard Beautiful followed by partnership with the Brevard Zoo,
created a public education campaign called "Blue Life."' The purpose of this campaign is to provide information
to the public about sources of pollution and what lifestyle choices people can make to protect and improve water
quality. To determine the effectiveness of this educational campaign on behavior changes, Brevard County
contracted with Praecipio Economics Finance Statistics to conduct a survey before the campaign implementation
in 2012 and after the campaign was in place for two years in 2015. When comparing the results from the 2012 and
2015 surveys, the study unambiguously showed that people in 2015 were better informed about stormwater issues
than in 2012, and that behavior that affects water quality in the area has, in general, improved.'
146 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
In addition to the Blue Life education program, the Be Floridian Now
program educates the public along the IRL and is the east coast version of the 0
Be Floridian Program from the Tampa Bay Estuary Program.' This program
was started in 2015 and focused on matching the right plants to the right
places, using water wisely, and reducing or eliminating fertilizers and
pesticides. Indian River County, Martin County, St. Lucie County, and
Volusia County, as well as the City of Port St. Lucie, City of Stuart, City of
Fort Pierce, and Town of Sewell's Point, participate in this program, which is
coordinated by MRC.
The IRLNEP also recently launched the Lagoon -Friendly' education Lagoon- Friendly'
campaign to promote the "One Lagoon — One Community — One Voice"
mission. This campaign promotes actions associated with landscaping, such as determining whether additional
fertilizers or pesticides are needed, following package directions and using the proper amounts for the area being
treated, spot -treating problem areas with pesticides rather than spreading them over the entire yard, using slow -
release fertilizers and less toxic pest controls, using native plants in landscaping, and leaving a five-foot buffer
zone around ponds free from fertilizers and pesticides. This campaign also includes actions for good
housekeeping, including keeping trash, pet waste, and yard waste out of storm drains; taking waste motor oil,
antifreeze, paint, or other hazardous household chemicals to proper collection sites; washing cars in a carwash
rather than in a driveway; and repairing cars with oil leaks. In addition, this campaign includes clean boating
practices, such as maintaining boat engines to prevent leaking of oils and fuels into the lagoon, keeping trash
secured onboard and disposing of it properly on land, operating boats at speeds that protect wildlife and
seagrasses and preventing shoreline erosion, and using MSDs properly and designated pump -out facilities instead
of dumping untreated wastes overboard.
Engaging citizens in data collection and restoration enhances their understanding of lagoon threats and
opportunities for improvement. MRC engages citizens in water quality monitoring. The Florida Institute of
Oceanography engages the public in oyster restoration. Brevard County has invested in local not -for -profit
organizations to build their capacity for engaging the public in citizen science. This investment includes initiating
and funding a diverse array of programs, such as oyster gardening and oyster restoration on projects through
Brevard Zoo, rain barrel workshops coordinated by MRC, muck finders training and field data collection guided
by FIT and coordinated by MRC, and muck toxicity measurement coordinated by MRC and guided by ORCA.
Brevard County continues to look for ways to engage the public in meaningful citizen science coordinated by
grass roots, non-profit organizations.
Martin County and OF-IFAS Sea Grant Extension have partnered to implement the Water Ambassador training
program. The purpose of this program is to increase awareness and foster behavioral changes related to the
reduced use of fertilizer and pesticides. The program provides interested citizens with information on lagoon -
friendly practices. Participants learn about Florida's drainage history, the nine principals of Florida Friendly
landscaping, estuary friendly living, how/why to reduce stormwater in runoff from the homeowner's property, and
the Martin County fertilizer ordinance. The goal of the program is to create Water Ambassadors, who take on the
role of educator and activist within the community to help spread information on reducing pollutants in runoff and
protecting local waterways.
Local conservation organizations and environmental education facilities are an important part of engaging the
public to learn more about the lagoon and to participate in local restoration projects and citizen science. Examples
include the Lagoon Academy, "shuck and share" oyster restoration projects, Audubon Advocates for the IRL, and
"lagoon watch" citizen science program. Local facilities, such as the Marine Discovery Center in New Smyrna
Beach, Brevard Zoo, MRC, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, and Environmental Learning Center,
promote environmental education, engage citizens, and promote citizen science.
147 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
New and important partners are emerging throughout the IRL region with strong interest in enhancing citizen
knowledge, engagement, and behavior change. Recent changes in Florida Statutes in 2018 provided expanded
flexibility in how tourist development taxes can be spent. In response, the Brevard County Tourist Development
Council announced the availability of up to $900,000 in annual grant funds for projects that demonstrate a benefit
to the health of the IRL and a positive impact to Brevard County tourism.
STRATEGIES:
Educate and engage the public about the challenges that the natural resources in the IRL face and what
they can do to RESTORE and protect these resources.
Implement additional surveys to determine which portions of the education campaigns are working and
where changes need to be made in the messaging.
Communicate a clear and unified message for IRL restoration that is compelling, factually accurate, and
easy for the public to understand and embrace.
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
or Organizations
Organizations
Cost
Source
Role
Communicate-1:
Facilitate
implementation of the
IRL CCMP consistent
with "One Lagoon — One
Community — One
Voice" mission. (NEVI)
Communicate-2:
Develop and implement
an IRLNEP multi -year
Communication Plan.
Communicate-3:
Implement public
education programs
including the "One
Community — One
Voice" initiative to
promote community
place -based identities
and Lagoon -Friendly TM
behaviors. (NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Fund and
implement
CCMP citizen
science
engagement
projects.
Develop a
Communication
Plan pursuant to
USEPA NEP
performance
measures.
Develop and
apply
performance
metrics to
measure
behavior
change.
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
IRLNEP
Management
Conference
DEP, FWC,
IRLNEP
Sea Grant,
staff time
local
governments,
interest groups
IRLNEP
$150,000
Management
per year
Conference
partners
Local $50,000 per
governments, year
interest groups
IRLNEP
USEPA
Section 320
funding; local,
state, and
federal funds;
grants; private -
sector support
USEPA
Section 320
funding; local,
state, and
federal funds;
grants; private -
sector support
Conduct,
coordinate,
and
collaborate
Conduct,
coordinate,
and
collaborate
Conduct,
coordinate,
and
collaborate
Short-term (1— 2 years): Provide support for existing education campaigns and ensure a clear and
consistent message is provided throughout the IRL system. Incorporate the "One Lagoon — One
Community — One Voice" mission into the education messaging.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Increase public, private, and independent sector participation and
involvement in Lagoon -Friendly' activities.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Lagoon -Friendly' practices are consistently applied throughout the IRL
watershed.
148 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
• Availability of funds to increase education, outreach, and engagement, and to evaluate existing programs
to determine where modifications are needed.
• Delivering information effectively and in a way that will result in behavior changes and measuring those
changes.
• Individuals desire for a sod only lawn may prevent them from implementing practices that would help to
improve the IRL.
CITATIONS:
1. Garner, L.C. and Gallo, M.A. 2005. Field Trips and their Effect on Student Achievement and Attitudes: A
Comparison of Physical Versus Virtual Field Trips to the IRL. Journal of College Science Teaching.
2. Blue Life Florida. 2018. httas://brevardzoo.ora/conservation-Dro2rams/blue-life-florida/.
3. Praecipio Economics Finance Statistics. 2016. The Blue Life Campaign and its Impact on Stormwater-
Related Knowledge, Familiarity, Information and Behavior: Evidence from a Survey -Based Analysis of
Brevard County Residents (2012 & 2015). Prepared for Brevard County.
4. Be Floridian Now. 2018. httn://befloridiannow.or2/.
149 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
POLICY
OPPORTUNITIES
0
I
Goals:
Al ign t he CCM P to I eca I co m pre hen-s ire pi an-s and evalu ate state and
federaI policies to dotefmine opport nitios to ir'1 PIemont the ccmR
150 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ONE VOICE
COMMUNICATE — COLLABORATE — COORDINATE
Federal, State, and Local Policy Opportunities
GOALS: Identify opportunities to align the CCMP with local comprehensive plans and land development
regulations to more effectively RESTORE the IRL. Evaluate state and federal policies that may impact the
ability to implement the CCMP actions and coordinate with agencies to determine policy opportunities
moving forward. RESPOND to policy changes and new policy opportunities. REPORT policy best practices
and success stories.
ISSUE SUMMARY: While local comprehensive plans1,2,3,as are critical big -picture blueprints that set the
direction for a community's growth, a diverse suite of tools, including land development regulations, guidance
manuals, and codes of ordinances, are vital to implementing the broader vision. Enhanced restoration and
protection could be achieved by incorporating CCMP actions directly into these existing planning tools. This
CCMP revision provides multiple areas in which concrete, actionable guidance could be incorporated into both
comprehensive plans and land development regulations. The IRLNEP can work with local governments to (1)
prioritize CCMP actions that are suitable for inclusion in local government comprehensive plans, land
development regulations, or other guidance documents; (2) identify relevant elements, goals, objectives, and
policies in local government regulatory frameworks to serve as the most appropriate vehicle for incorporating
CCMP priority actions; and (3) provide model language based on CCMP goals and actions for local government
consideration.
At the state and federal level, policy decisions can have profound effects on resource management and restoration
decisions, funding appropriations, and inter -agency coordination and cooperation. At the state level, continued
implementation, regulatory oversight, and refinement of TMDLs, BMAPs, and water quality/land use regulations
is essential for continued statewide water quality restoration. At the federal level, continued reauthorization of the
Clean Water Act and the NEP are central to the IRLNEP restoration mission. Reauthorization of the Water
Resources Development Act is essential to Everglades and southern IRL restoration. Authorization laws establish,
continue, or modify federal programs, and they are often a prerequisite under House and Senate rules (and
sometimes under statute) for Congress to appropriate budget authority for programs.
A broad range of state and federal agencies and programs have an impact on the lagoon and will be important to
efforts to restore it. USACE and the Florida Inland Navigation District are responsible for maintaining the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway which stretches the entire length of the IRL. NASA (Kennedy Space Center) is the
largest property owner within the watershed, and 140,000 acres of Kennedy Space Center is managed as the
Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge. In addition, there are four other National Wildlife Refuges, Canaveral
National Seashore, and seven state parks. USFWS, National Marine Fisheries, and FWC protect listed species.
FDOT is responsible for multiple bridges and causeways, which divide the lagoon into segments. State
organizations including DEP, FDOH, FDACS, and WMDs are also responsible for programs that affect the
lagoon.
STRATEGIES:
Work with local governments to identify and prioritize actions from the CCMP and incorporate actions
into the appropriate elements of local comprehensive plans, land development regulations, codes of
ordinances, or other guidance documents.
Provide model language based on CCMP actions that can be adopted or adapted by local governments in
their planning and guidance documents.
1511 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Coordinate with state and federal agencies to retain existing policies that support ML restoration, revise
existing policies to enhance restoration performance, or develop new policies to assist with IRL
restoration and stewardship efforts.
Coordinate federal land and water management plans to seek cooperation between federal, state, and local
agencies to promote policies and projects within the CCMP
ACTION PLAN OUTPUTS (DELIVERABLES):
Responsible
Partner
Estimated
Funding
IRLNEP
Lead Agencies
Agencies or
Cost
Source
Role
or Or anizations
Or amzations
Policy Considerations-1:
Work with local
governments to identify and
prioritize CCMP actions
and incorporate into local
planning regulations and
documents. (NEW)
Policy Considerations-2:
Evaluate state policies that
affect the IRL system and
work with state agencies to
revise or develop new
policies to promote
restoration. (NEW)
Policy Considerations-3:
Evaluate federal policies
that affect the IRL system
and work with federal
agencies to revise or develop
new policies to promote
restoration. (NEW)
OUTCOMES:
Identify opportunities
to align Lagoon -
Friendly TM practices
with revised or new
local comprehensive
plan directives.
Identify opportunities
to revise or develop
new statewide policies
to RESTORE water
quality, RESTORE
natural habitats,
expand ecosystem
monitoring, and fund
IRL projects.
Identify opportunities
to revise or develop
new federal policies to
RESTORE water
quality, RESTORE
natural habitats,
expand ecosystem
monitoring, and fund
IRL projects.
5 counties and 38 IRLNEP
municipalities Management
Conference
DEP, FWC, IRLNEP
FDACS, FDOT, Management
FDOH Conference
USEPA, NOAA, IRLNEP
Department of Management
Defense, NASA Conference
TBD based
on extent of
revisions
TBD based
on extent of
revisions
TBD based
on extent of
revisions
Local
governments
State
agencies
Federal
agencies
Coordinate,
collaborate,
and conduct
Coordinate,
collaborate,
and conduct
Coordinate,
collaborate,
and conduct
Short-term (1— 2 years): Identify CCMP actions that are most appropriate for each local government to
include in their local planning regulations. Evaluate existing state and federal policies that affect
restoration and determine where revisions or new policies are needed.
Medium -term (3 — 4 years): Begin to incorporate CCMP actions into local government planning
regulations. Coordinate with state and federal agencies to incorporate revisions to existing policies and to
develop new policies, where needed.
Long-term (5 —10+ years): Incorporation of CCMP actions into local, state, and federal planning efforts
to improve restoration success.
CHALLENGES TO SUCCESS:
Local regulations from five counties and 38 municipalities may need to be modified to include CCMP
actions, which requires coordination with numerous boards and councils.
Support will be needed from local representatives to modify local, state, and federal policies, and
changing these policies can be time consuming and difficult.
152 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CITATIONS:
1. Brevard County Comprehensive Plan. httD://www.brevardfl.2ov/Plannin2Dev/ComDPlan.
2. Indian River County Comprehensive Plan. httD://www.irccdd.com/Dlannin2 division/Comp Plan.htm.
3. Martin County Comprehensive Plan. httDS://www.martin.fl.us/government/departments/2rowth-
mana2ement-department/comprehensive-planning,
4. St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. httD://www.stlucieco.2ov/departments-services/a-z/Dlannin2-and-
develoDment-services/Dlannina/comprehensive-Dlannin2.
5. Volusia County Comprehensive Plan. httDs://www.volusia.oreservices/growth-and-resource-
mana2ement/Dlannin2-and-development/lone-ranee-Dlannin2/comprehensive-plan. stml.
153 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
APPENDIX A. CCMP CHANGES 2008-2018
154 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update 2111
sue Goal Action H Goal Action
PS-1: Ensure Compliance with the Indian Wastewater-1: Ensure compliance with the
River Lagoon Act (Chapter 90-262, Laws IRL Act (Chapter 90-262, Laws of Florida,
of Florida, 1990) 1990).
PS-2: Ensure that any proposed changes
or exceptions from the Indian River
Lagoon Act are consistent with the
original intent and purpose of the Act and
To ensure compliance with will not reduce they effectiveness of the
the Indian River Lagoon Act.
Point Source Act and to reduce,
Discharges (PS) eliminate or mitigate
industrial wastewater
discharges to the Indian
River Lagoon.
Determine the impacts of
On -Site Sewage
OSDS on the resources of
Disposal
the Indian River Lagoon
Systems
and to develop and
(OSDS)
implement strategies to
address these impacts.
155 1 Page
PS-3: Reduce or eliminate industrial
discharges to the IRE.
PS-4: Investigate and recommend
funding alternatives for the upgrading of
WWTPs.
PS-5: Investigate and promote
alternatives to deep well disposal of
domestic and industrial effluents.
OSDS-2: Develop and Implement an Wastewater
OSDS inspection program within the six
lagoon counties.
OSDS-3: Undertake further studies of the
OSDSs in the region to quantify the
impacts of OSDSs on the IRL and to
further quantify the extent of the
"problem" and "potential problem" areas.
OSDS-4: Promote the connection of
areas served by OSTDS to central sewer
service or, where connection to central
sewer is not feasible, promote the
development and use of alternative or
advanced OSTDS technologies offering
improved treatment in areas identified in
the IRL SWIM studies as "problem" or
"potential problem" for OSTDS. Identify
and publicize potential funding sources
that could be used to connect areas served
by OSTDS to central sewer or support the
development and use of alternative or
advanced OSTDS technologies.
Improve municipal and industrial
wastewater infrastructure throughout the
IRL watershed to achieve AWT
standards to REDUCE or REMOVE
loads of human and industrial pollutants
to the IRL. REDUCE vulnerability to
WWTP overflows to the IRL. Expand
WWTP capacity to accommodate septic
to sewer conversions and the region's
growing human population.
Wastewater-2: REDUCE or REMOVE all
wastewater discharges to the IRL (including
direct, indirect, and emergency loadings of
nutrients and other pollutants).
Wastewater-3: RESEARCH, identify, and
recommend funding sources and alternatives
for upgrading WWTP infrastructure and to
REDUCE or REMOVE domestic and
industrial effluents.
Wastewater-5: Develop and implement an
OSTDS inspection program and education
program within the five IRLNEP counties.
Wastewater-6: Undertake further studies to
quantify the impacts of OSTDS on the IRL
with a focus on identifying high priority
"problem" and "potential problem" areas.
Wastewater-4: Promote the connection of
areas served by OSTDS to central sewer or,
where connection is not feasible, use of
nutrient removing systems in areas identified
as "problem" or "potential problem."
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Goal Action
Goal
FSD-1: Complete or continue the
diagnostic, management or pilot projects
Stormwater-1: Design, engineer, construct,
related to stormwater or freshwater
and manage stormwater capture and
discharges being planned undertaken
treatment projects identified in the SJRWMD
by federal, state, regional and local
feasibility study to enhance water quality
governments.
discharged to the IRL. (NEW)
FSD-2: Continue implementation of the
NPDES nonpoint source (stormwater)
permitting program throughout the Indian
River Lagoon region.
FSD-3: Develop, implement and update
pollutant load reduction goals (PLRGs)
for all areas of the Indian River Lagoon.
To develop and implement
Freshwater and
strategies to address the
Stormwater
impacts of freshwater and
Discharges
stormwater discharges on
(FSD)
the resources of the Indian
River Lagoon.
156 1 Page
FSD-4: Develop and implement best
management practices (BMPs) for the
management of stormwater, agricultural
and fresh water discharges.
FSD-5: Update and enhance
comprehensive drainage maps of the Stormwater
Indian River Lagoon basin.
FSD-6: Reduce the impacts of muck on
the Indian River Lagoon.
FSD-7: Amend local government
comprehensive growth management plans
and land development regulations to
incorporate the goals, objectives and
actions found in the IRL COMP.
FSD-9: Strengthen existing stormwater or
freshwater discharge management
programs.
FSD-10: Encourage the proper use of
fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides and
reuse water.
FSD-11: Educate residents and property
owners about the impacts of freshwater
and stormwater discharges on the Indian
River Lagoon and what they can do to
reduce these impacts.
REDUCE unnatural fresh and surface
water discharges to the IRL from both
large stormwater conveyances and
dispersed urban and residential sources.
RESTORE water quality in the IRL
system. Conduct RESEARCH to better
understand natural hydroperiods of the
IRL watershed.
Stormwater-2: Develop, improve, and
implement BMPs and education programs
for stormwater management and freshwater
discharges for urban, agriculture, and
dispersed residential landscapes.
Stormwater-3: Update and maintain
comprehensive drainage maps of the IRL
watershed.
Stormwater-4: Continue reviews of
reclamation plans for water control districts
and the standard operating procedures and
project works of each large drainage system.
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Issue Goal A
Goal
FSD-12: Continue reviews of plans of
reclamation for water control districts and
the standard operating procedures and
Stormwater-5: Upgrade existing urban and
project works of each large drainage
agricultural stormwater infrastructure
system and agricultural drainage system.
networks to REDUCE freshwater discharges,
Develop and implement strategies to
nutrient loads, and other pollutant loads to
reduce discharges and pollutant loadings
the IRL.
to the Indian River Lagoon from these
To reduce impacts to the
Indian River Lagoon from
boating activities and to
Marina and Boat engage the boating public
Impacts (MB) and marine industries as
active participants in the
protection and restoration
of Indian River Lagoon
resources.
157 1 Page
sources.
FSD-13: Upgrade existing urban and
agricultural stormwater systems to reduce
pollutant loadings to the Indian River
Lagoon.
FSD-14: Develop and implement
appropriate mechanisms to fund and
undertake the operation, maintenance and
improvement of urban and agricultural
stormwater management systems to
reduce pollutant loadings.
MB-1: Implement the Clean Marina
Program throughout the Indian River
Lagoon.
MB-2: Implement boat facility siting
plans and update these plans as new data
and information are available.
MB-3: Prevent pollutant spills and
discharges and protect the resources of
the Indian River Lagoon from the impacts
of any spills or discharges.
MB-5: Provide educational materials and
programs, such as the Clean Boater
Program and boater's guides, to owners
and operators of boats and personal
watercraft.
MB-6: Expand and coordinate
enforcement of boating safety and
resource protection regulations
throughout the Indian River Lagoon.
MB-7: Eliminate the impacts of waste
discharges and marine sanitation devices
on the public health and Indian River
Lagoon resources.
Reduce impacts from marina and
boating activities. Educate boating
population to take responsibility and be
Lagoon -Friendly'. Update and re -
Marinas and publish the highly acclaimed IRLNEP
Boating Boaters Guide to the Indian River
Lagoon to focus on boater waste
management, safe boating practices,
lagoon community boat ramps and
recreational destinations, safe boating
practices, and emergency call contacts.
MB-5 combined with MB-6 in current
Boating-2
Boating-2: Expand and coordinate
enforcement of boating safety and resource
protection regulations throughout the IRL
and develop and distribute targeted public
education and outreach products to reduce
impacts.
Boating-1: Eliminate waste discharges and
MSD impacts on the public health and IRL
resources.
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Goal Action Goal
M13-8: Monitor boating impacts to Indian
River Lagoon natural resources. Where Boating-3: Update and distribute the Boaters
appropriate, establish resource protection Guide to the Indian River Lagoon. (NEW)
zones and monitor their effectiveness.
To determine the impacts of
AD-1: Determine the impacts of
atmospheric deposition of
atmospheric deposition of pollutants on
Monitor and conduct RESEARCH on
Atmospheric
pollutants on the resources
the water quality and resources of the
Atmospheric
atmospheric deposition of nutrients and
Deposition of
of the Indian River Lagoon
Indian River Lagoon.
Deposition
pollutants. Develop and implement
Pollution (AD)
and to develop and
strategies to REDUCE, REMOVE, and
implement strategies to
RESPOND to these impacts.
address these impacts.
TMDL-I: Develop, implement, and
update TMDLs for all areas of the Indian
River Lagoon.
TMDL-2: Coordinate development and
REMOVE or REDUCE anthropogenic
Full implementation of
implementation of BMAPs with Florida
pollutant and nutrient loading to the IRL
Total Maximum
basin management action
Department of Environmental Protection.
Impaired Waters
Watershed toby meeting the regulatory
targets established by TMDLs, BMAPs,
Daily Loads
plans (BMAPs) to meet
total maximum daily loads
TMDL-3: Support implementation of
(Including
TMDLs, BMAPs,
and/or RAPS; achieving the intended
(TMDLs)
(TMDLs) developed for the
Basin Management Action Plans
and RAPS)
biological response criteria; and
Indian River Lagoon.
(BMAPs) for all basins requiring
achieving applicable water quality
TMDLs.
criteria to removing the waterbody from
the Impaired Waters designation list.
BD-1: Coordinate biodiversity activities
within the Indian River Lagoon region.
Develop and implement a
coordinated scientific
BD-2: Acquire and effectively manage
Conduct comprehensive biodiversity
conservation and
environmentally sensitive lands as a tool
RESEARCH to develop a long-term
Biodiversity
(BD)
management strategy to
to preserve, protect and restore the
Biodiversity
biological diversity, functional integrity
management strategy to RESTORE,
preserve, protect and
and productivity of the Indian River
REBUILD, and protect the biological
restore biodiversity in the
Lagoon region.
diversity of the IRL.
Indian River Lagoon.
BD-4: Create and maintain a species
inventory for the Indian River Lagoon.
Seagrass
To protect and restore
SG -I: Implement a program of
Implement a comprehensive,
Protection,
seagrass integrity and
protection, restoration and management
coordinated, and integrated IRL strategy
Restoration And
functionality in the Indian
activities needed to maintain, protect and Seagrasses
to REMOVE stressors to seagrasses in
Management
River Lagoon by reducing
restore the seagrass/SAV community of
the IRL and RESTORE seagrass
(SG)
anthropogenic impacts and
the Indian River Lagoon.
habitats to support and sustain healthy
158 1 Page
Atmospheric Deposition-1: Determine the
impacts of atmospheric deposition of
nutrients and other pollutants on the nutrient
budget, water quality, and resources of the
IRL.
Atmospheric Deposition-2: Evaluate need for
additional wet and dry atmospheric
monitoring stations. (NEW)
Impaired Waters-1: Support implementation,
review, and update of IRL TMDLs as needed
and as best available science evolves.
Impaired Waters-2: Work with BMAP
partners and DEP to support implementation
of BMAPs and track progress, compliance,
and implementation challenges.
Impaired Waters-3: Support the partners and
DEP in the development, adoption, and
implementation of the Mosquito Lagoon and
Loxahatchee River RAPs. (NEW)
Impaired Waters-4: Evaluate opportunities to
incentivize, monetize, and expedite nutrient
reduction policies and actions including
water quality credit trading. (NEW)
Biodiversity-3: Integrate biodiversity
considerations in habitat restoration and
planning activities.
Biodiversity-1: Acquire and effectively
manage the IRL network of conservation
lands and wetlands as a tool to preserve,
protect, and restore the biological diversity,
functional integrity, and productivity.
Biodiversity-2: Work to continue, expand,
update, and improve the IRL species
inventory.
Seagrass-1: Implement a program of
protection, restoration, and management
activities.
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Issue � Goal Action
Goal Action
attaining and maintaining
water quality and seag rays dependent Seagrass-2: Ensure that monitoring,
water quality capable of
species. mapping, and modeling are coordinated
supporting a healthy,
lagoon -wide. (NEW)
productive and sustainable
Seagrass-3: Fund innovative pilot projects
submerged aquatic
and partnerships. (NEW)
vegetation community
meeting the seagrass
coverage and depth targets
Seagrass-4: Develop a Habitat Restoration
developed by the water
Plan for the IRL system. (NEW)
management districts for
the Indian River Lagoon.
W-1: Implement programs that protect the
ecological services of wetlands.
W-2: Regular review and updating of
wetlands protection rules and regulations.
W-3: Establish or enhance wetland or
shoreline setback buffers.
W-4: Implement innovative programs and
incentives supporting wetlands protection
and management on privately owned
lands. When necessary, acquire
ownership or control of crucial wetlands.
Preserve, protect, restore
Wetlands and
Wetlands (W) and enhance the wetland
W-5: Continue the restoration and Impounded and
resources of the Indian
rehabilitation of impacted or impounded Altered Marshes
River Lagoon region.
coastal wetlands.
W-6: Continue projects and programs to
restore shorelines.
W-7: Promote the removal of trash and
litter from wetlands, shorelines and
islands.
W-8: Undertake research to develop new
and improved wetland management best
management practices (BMPs).
Develop and implement a LA-1: Continue coordination of efforts to
Land identify, classify, acquire and manage
Acquisition And coordinated strategy ll Conservation
endangered habitats within environmentally sensitive lands Land
Protection (LA) protect environmentally throughout the Indian River Lagoon
region.
159 1 Page
RESTORE and protect wetlands,
wetland -upland transitions, and
impounded or altered marshes
throughout the IRL watershed.
RESPOND to opportunities to refine
wetland management strategies to
support IRL biodiversity and coastal
RESILIENCE. Conduct RESEARCH
and RESPOND to future wetland
management challenges associated with
sea level rise.
Promote conservation of land through
acquisition and other forms of
stewardship. Pursue strategic land
acquisition initiatives that will
REDUCE freshwater, sediment,
Wetlands-2: Establish or enhance wetland or
shoreline setback buffers.
Wetlands-3: Implement innovative programs
and incentives supporting wetlands
protection and management on privately -
owned lands and marshes managed by
private, non-profit organizations. When
necessary, acquire ownership or control of
crucial wetlands.
Wetlands-4: Continue projects and programs
to restore shorelines with a focus on
enhancing and managing mosquito
impoundment dikes with living shoreline
restoration.
Wetlands-1: RESEARCH and develop new
and improved wetland BMPs with a focus on
understanding wetland responses to sea level
rise and climate change.
Land-1: Continue coordination of efforts to
identify, classify, acquire, and manage
environmentally sensitive lands.
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Issue Goal FF Goal Action
the Indian River Lagoon nutrient, and pollutant loads to the IRL Land-3: Support public acquisition of
basin through acquisition. and REBUILD natural land -water environmentally sensitive lands that are
connections to provide both water deemed essential for long-term protection
quality improvement, provide flood and management of IRL resources, CCMP
prevention, and RESTORE natural implementation, and stormwater projects.
hydroperiods. (NEW)
Endangered and Protect endangered and
Threatened threatened species found in
Species (ETS) the Indian River Lagoon
region.
160 1 Page
LA-3: Support continuation and
expansion of state funding initiatives for
long-term acquisition programs for
conservation lands.
LA-4: Develop and implement incentives
to promote conservation of privately
owned environmentally sensitive lands.
LA-5: Promote the acquisition of lands
for public access to the Indian River
Lagoon.
ETS-1: Develop, implement, update or
refine adaptive management or recovery
plans for the endangered, threatened and
species of special concern found in the
Indian River Lagoon region.
EYS-2: Improve enforcement of
regulations protecting endangered,
threatened or species of special concern
in the Indian River Lagoon region.
ETS-3: Protect and manage the critical
habitats of endangered, threatened or
species of special concern found within
the Indian River Lagoon region through
land acquisition and other land protection
measures.
ETS-5: Encourage private land owners to
manage lands for endangered species,
threatened species, and species of special
concern found within the Indian River
Lagoon region.
ETS-6: Identify endangered, threatened
and species of special concern
distribution and critical habitats
throughout the Indian River Lagoon.
Conduct and/or continue RESEARCH
to evaluate status and population trends
of IRL species of concern. REMOVE
Species of and/or REDUCE stressors and threats to
Concern species of concern. RESPOND to
opportunities for species -specific
management action that will RESTORE
sustainable levels for populations of
species of concern.
Land-2: Support recurring funding of the
Land Acquisition Trust Fund and other
funding sources.
Land-4: Develop and implement incentives
to promote conservation of privately -owned
environmentally sensitive lands and
provision of cost-effective dispersed water
management projects.
Land-5: Promote acquisition of lands for
public access to the IRL.
Species of Concern-2: Align the CCMP with
adaptive management or recovery plans for
species of concern.
Species of Concern-3: Improve enforcement
of regulations for species of concern found in
the IRL region.
Species of Concern-4: Protect and manage
natural habitats that support species of
concern found within the IRL region.
Species of Concern-1: Identify IRL species
of concern and track recovery progress status
and population trends.
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
sue Goal
Goal
Action
F-1: Conserve, protect, restore and
Fisheries-1: Conserve, protect, RESTORE,
manage the finfish and shellfish resources
and manage the commercial and recreational
in the Indian River Lagoon region.
finfish and shellfish resources in the IRE
region to support a sustainable harvest.
F-3: Support and expand research
Fisheries-2: Continue to support and expand
initiatives and coordinated finfish and
Conduct fisheries RESEARCH to help
research initiatives and coordinated finfish
Conserve, protect, and
shellfish management strategies specific
REBUILD IRL commercial and
and shellfish management strategies specific
restore the fin and shellfish
to the Indian River Lagoon.
Commercial and
recreational fisheries. RESTORE IRL
to the IRL.
Fisheries (F) resources of the Indian
F-4: Identify, inventory and assess finfish
and shellfish habitats within the Indian
Recreational
Fisheries
fish populations to support world -class
Fisheries-4: Identify, inventory, and assess
River Lagoon.
River Lagoon and implement appropriate
recreational fishing and sustainable
finfish breeding and important habitats
management and restoration strategies.
commercial harvest.
within the IRL.
Fisheries-3: Improve effectiveness of fish
habitat conservation and restoration efforts
by identifying and characterizing critical
spawning, nursery, and forage areas within
the IRL and its tributaries. (NEW)
BAH-1: Implement a lagoon -wide, multi-
HAB-1: Support continuation of the IRL
species, multi -disciplinary approach to
Advance RESEARCH, coordination,
2011 Consortium, which would function as a
determine the status of emerging
and understanding of the causes of
formal task force supported by the IRLNEP
infectious diseases in the Indian River
HABs to REDUCE their frequency,
and which would develop a HAB Research
Lagoon, assess trends and identify
intensity, and duration. Effectively and
and Restoration Response Plan. (NEW)
Improve knowledge of
underlying causes.
efficiently RESPOND to HAB
biotoxin and aquatic animal
Biotoxins and
BAH-2: Continue support of the Biotoxin
emergence and secondary impacts
HAB-2: Seek partnerships and funding to
Aquatic Animal health issues to protect
and Aquatic Animal Health Working
Harmful Algal
including toxicity in some species, low
pursue research priorities identified by the
Health (BAH) public health and the
Group and the goals of this working
Blooms (HABs)
dissolved oxygen concentrations as
IRL 2011 Consortium that align with
resources of the Indian
blooms decline, and associated fish and
IRLNEP Management Conference
River Lagoon.
group.
wildlife morbidity and mortality events.
management priorities. (NEW)
BAH-3: Complete or continue the
Improve scientific understanding of
HAB-3: Continue funding and scientific
projects identified in the Preliminary
toxic algal blooms and human health
partnerships to understand HABs toxicity
Strategic Plan for Algal Toxins and
risks. REPORT IRL algal bloom status
and risks to human and wildlife health.
Aquatic Animal Health in the Indian
and trends.
(NEW)
River Lagoon.
CC-1: Track state, national and
RESEARCH IRL risk -based
Climate Ready Estuary-1: Prepare a Risk -
Support and implement
international actions and research
vulnerabilities to climate change and sea
Based Vulnerability Assessment and
policies and strategies
concerning climate change issues that
level rise to make informed adaptation
Adaptation Plan for the IRL. (NEW)
Climate Change developed to address
affect Indian
diaort RIndive
Climate Ready
planning
an i RESPOND
SPO D to
(CC) impacts resulting from
CC-2:the
RiveoLagoon-
Estuary
and opportunities. ke
threatmanagement
climate change in the
based research that considers and
decisions that improve IRL
Climate Ready Estuary-2: Identify
Indian River Lagoon.
integrates global climate change issues
RESILIENCE to storm events and long-
opportunities to integrate infrastructure
and seeks practical scientific,
term risks. REPORT findings and
resilience into community planning. (NEW)
technological and public policy solutions.
scientific advancements to partners in
1611 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
rkevinaun
sue Goal
Action
Goal
j
CC-3: Provide information to local
the IRLNEP Management Conference
governments and residents of the Indian
and communities.
River Lagoon region about impacts of
climate change and actions they can take
to reduce these impacts.
IFF-1: Support the inventory and
Invasive Species-1 Support the inventory and
assessment of non-native invasive fauna
assessment of invasive fauna and flora within
and flora within the Indian River Lagoon
the IRL watershed.
basin.
IFF-2: Support development and
implementation of management plans for
eradication or control of non-native
REMOVE invasive species from the
invasive plants and animals found in the
IRL, its contributing waters, and its
Identify, control or
Indian River Lagoon region.
watershed. Conduct RESEARCH to
Invasive Fauna eradicate invasive, non-
IFF-3: Coordinate the formation of
improve management and understanding
and Flora (IFF) native fauna and flora in the
"Rapid Assessment" teams to assess the
Invasive Species
of invasive species in the IRL watershed
IFF-3 and IFF-4 combined into Invasive
Indian River Lagoon.
extent of recently discovered invasions
to help RESTORE native habitats and
Species-2
and provide recommendations for
communities. Be prepared to RESPOND
management or eradication.
quickly to eradicate newly introduced
IFF-4: Engage residents in management
invasive species.
and eradication of exotic invasive species
Invasive Species-2: Provide standardized
by providing standardized information to
information to IRL partners about invasive
residents of the Indian River Lagoon
species and their eradication and
region about non-native invasive plants
management. Prepare an early detection and
and animals and their management and
response plan.
eradication.
PIE-1: Facilitate implementation of the
Communicate-1: Facilitate implementation
Indian River Lagoon (IRL)
Report on needs and progress, and
of the IRL CCMP consistent with "One
Comprehensive Conservation and
educate, and engage the public on the
Lagoon — One Community — One Voice"
Management Plan (CCMP) through
need to Restore and manage the IRL's
mission. (NEW)
Facilitate implementation
public involvement and education.
natural resources. RESPOND to
of the Indian River Lagoon
PIE-2: Develop, implement and refine a
opportunities to fund and implement
Public (IRL) Comprehensive
communications plan to inform
Citizen
"hands on" opportunities for citizen
Involvement and Conservation and
stakeholders and government officials
Engagement and
engagement that promote and produce
Communicate-2: Develop and implement an
Education (PIE) Management Plan (CCMP)
about the resources of the Indian River
Education
well-informed citizens and communities
IRLNEP multi -year Communication Plan.
through public involvement
Lagoon, the economic and ecological
that become IRL ambassadors for
and education.
value of these resources and threats to the
Lagoon -Friendly TM behaviors.
continued viability of these resources
REBUILD community -lagoon
PIE-4: Increase public and governmental
connections that promote the identity,
involvement in activities designed to
well-being, and unique qualities of IRL
protect and restore the resources of the
communities.
Indian River Lagoon.
162 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Goal
Action
E Goal
j Action
PIE-5: Strategically prioritize and
Communicate-3: Implement public education
implement public education programs
programs including the "One Community -
based on pollution potential, perceived
One Voice" initiative to promote community
likelihood for behavior change, resource
place -based identities and Lagoon -
availability, and opportunities that arise.
Friendly' behaviors. (NEW)
Establish a modified
IRL communities, partners, and citizens
Implementation-1: Develop a finance plan
management structure that
FI-1: Continue the Indian River Lagoon
work in cooperation to align their
for CCMP development and implementation,
will oversee the
Advisory Board's role of oversight,
individual and collective interests and
project and program funding, and program
implementation of the
monitoring, and guidance of
actions to take RESPONSIBILITY to
delivery with a focus on restoration,
IRL CCMP Indian River Lagoon
implementation of the IRL CCMP. CCMP
achieve the "One Lagoon — One
scientific research, monitoring, and citizen
Implementation Comprehensive
Implementation
Community — One Voice" Mission.
engagement. (NEW)
(FI) Conservation and
and Financing
Identify, fund, and implement CCMP
Management Plan (IRL
Continue measurement
projects and actions to RESTORE the
CCMP) and provide for an
of v itiesprogress
of CCMP implementation activities.
IRL. Align CCMP activities to provide
organization to support its
enhanced Resilience for the IRL and its
activities
human communities.
Develop and implement a
Data And
strategy to coordinate the
Information
management and
Management
dissemination of data and
Strategy (DIM)
information concerning the
Indian River Lagoon
To develop and maintain a
monitoring network which
Monitoring will provide adequate and
(MON) reliable data and
information on water
quality, sediment quality
and the biological resources
163 1 Page
DIM-1: Continue projects and strategies
related to data and information
management.
DIM-3: Improve public access to
published research and reports specific to
the Indian River Lagoon.
Monitoring and
DIM-4: Ensure appropriate water quality Data Sharing
and benthic data and information
concerning the Indian River Lagoon is
entered into and available through the
storage and retrieval (STORET) system
or its successor.
MON-1: Continue projects related to
monitoring the resources of the Indian
River Lagoon and address gaps in data as
needed.
MON-2: Continue the Citizens Water
Quality Monitoring Program.
Coordinate IRL monitoring, data
sharing, and mapping throughout the
IRL and its watershed. RESPOND to
gaps in monitoring and data collection
and the need to evaluate trends and
changes. REPORT the shared findings
from the IRL monitoring network to
inform IRL partners and stakeholders
about status and trends related to the
health of the IRL.
Monitoring 1: Develop a comprehensive IRL
monitoring plan. (' )
Monitoring-2: Monitor IRL indicators at
appropriate spatial and temporal scales to
understand the status and trends associated
with key indicators of the system's health.
(NEW)
Monitoring-4: Identify, develop, and apply
next -generation smart sensors, remote
sensing technologies, big data analytics, and
surveillance components to monitor and
deliver an IRL water quality dashboard in
real time. (NEW)
Monitoring-5: Advance the 10 scientific
research priorities identified by the
STEMAC in the 2018 Looking Ahead —
Science 2030 Report. Work with IRL
partners to seek funding to implement
priority research projects within the 10
priorities. (NEW)
Montioring-3: Support expansion of and
adequate funding for the IRL Citizens Water
Quality Monitoring Program.
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update201
Issue Goal Goal
of the Indian River Lagoon Collect, synthesize, and analyze IRL
to support mapping, data and RESEARCH findings to
modeling and management develop a "State of the Lagoon
MON-3: Provide support for the State of the IRL-1: Provide support for a
decisions. State of the Technical Report" that addresses the
development of a triennial report on the Lagoon health of the IRL, ecosystem stressors "State of the Lagoon Technical Report" to be
state of the Indian River Lagoon. released every ten years. (NEW)
indicators, and trends. REPORT the
findings. Apply the findings to advise
CCMP updates and revisions.
Indian River
Lagoon
Scientific
Research (SR)
Environmental
Incident
Assessment And
Response
(EIAR)
Economic
Analysis (EA)
Development of a scientific
research vision and
implementation strategy for
the Indian River Lagoon
Rapid assessment of and
response to significant
environmental incidents
that may affect the
resources of the Indian
River Lagoon.
164 1 Page
SR-1: Create an Indian River Lagoon
Science and Management Working Group
charged with the development and
implementation of a scientific research
vision and implementation strategy for
the Indian River Lagoon. This strategy
should be consistent with and
complimentary to statewide research
strategies identified by the Florida
Coastal and Ocean Resources Council
and national coastal priorities.
SR-2: Include the value of scientific
research in any studies of the Indian River
Lagoon regional economy.
SR-3: Expand and diversify funding for
scientific research in the Indian River
Lagoon.
EIAR-1: Inventory existing rapid
assessment and response programs within
the Indian River Lagoon region and
identify classes of incidents not addressed
by these programs.
EIAR-2: Create and maintain an
inventory of support services and
equipment available within the Indian
River Lagoon region.
EIAR-3: Develop assessment and
response strategies and protocols for
significant environmental incidents not
addressed by existing programs.
EA-1: Undertake an analysis of the
economic benefits of the Indian River
Lagoon to the economy of the region on a
recurring basis.
RESEARCH innovative technologies
and emergence of commercial
opportunities that will assist with
restoration and stewardship of the IRL.
REPORT findings. RESPOND to
Technology industry needs and desires to
Innovation communicate more effectively with IRL
partners. Work with industry and
economic development partners to
position Florida and the IRL region as a
leader in clean water innovation,
research, and technology development.
Identify the role of the IRLNEP during
emergencies that impact the IRL and its
Emergency communities. Develop coordinated
Preparation and plans with IRLNEP Management
Response Conference partners and responsible
local, state, and federal entities to
prepare, Respond, and Recover after an
emergency in the IRL watershed.
Update RESEARCH on IRL economic
Vibrant 21st value and trends, at least every five
Century years or as needed, in response to abrupt
Communities economic changes, threats, and
opportunities. REBUILD human -built
Technology Innovation-1: Work with
IRLNEP IRLI2, industry leaders, economic
development organizations, and startup
incubators/accelerators to help drive IRL
regional economic, technology, and talent
development. (NEW)
Technology Innovation-2: Continue to
support and develop a water technology
directory for the www.onelagoon.org
website. (NEW)
Technology Innovation-3: Evaluate options
for a regular, sustainable, and cost-effective
water quality monitoring network using
autonomous sampling. (NEW)
Emergency-1: Evaluate the role and ability of
the IRLNEP to assist local communities and
emergency management agencies in times of
emergencies that impact the IRL. (NEW)
Vibrant Communities-1: Work closely with
the business community and industry clusters
along the IRL to ensure effective cooperation
and communication associated with CCMP
implementation. (NEW)
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Goal Action Goal Action
infrastructure along the IRL to be more Vibrant Communities-2: Update the IRL
Lagoon -Friendly ", more sustainable, economic analysis produced by the Treasure
and more resilient. RESPOND to 21 It Coast and East Central Florida Regional
Century changing environmental,
economic, and societal needs,
challenges, and opportunities. REPORT
regularly to the IRL regional business
and economic development community
to ensure that CCMP implementation
advances the "One Lagoon — One
Community — One Voice" Mission.
Conduct RESEARCH to improve
understanding of the IRL watershed,
Hydrology and groundwater, and hydrology and
Hydrodynamics hydrodynamics to improve decision -
making for management of land use
impacts to water and reduction of loads
of nutrients and other contaminants.
REMOVE and/or REDUCE muck in the
IRL to REDUCE the legacy load of
Legacy Loads and nutrients and contaminants and improve
Healthy Sediments Water clarity. RESTORE healthy natural
sediments to support seagrasses and
associated communities, shellfish, and
healthy benthic communities.
165 1 Page
Planning Councils every five years. (NEW)
Vibrant Communities-3: Promote lagoon -
related nature and heritage tourism
development for residents and
visitors. (NEW)
Vibrant Communities-4: Conduct community
planning workshops to plan for Vibrant 21 st
Century communities. (NEW)
Hydrology-1: Support advancements in
hydrological model development,
verification, and application. (NEW)
Hydrology-2: Apply the best available
models to better evaluate connectivity
between IRL sub -basins. Reduce negative
impacts of road corridors and causeways.
(NEW)
Hydrology-3: Continue evaluation of options
to enhance water flow through engineering
solutions that have well defined water quality
and ecological outcomes. (NEW)
Legacy Loads-1: Complete muck mapping of
the entire IRL, prioritize muck dredging
projects and site selection for seagrass and
filter feeder restoration projects, and
REDUCE source contributions of sediment
and biomass that result in muck formation.
(NEW)
Legacy Loads-2: Continue to couple
scientific evaluation and assessment of muck
dredging projects to evaluate and optimize
the dredging process. (NEW)
Legacy Loads-3: Track emerging
technologies, innovative approaches or
alternatives to dredging, muck capping,
upstream controls of muck transport, more
efficient approaches to dewatering, enhanced
pollutant removal in post -dredge water, and
enhanced muck management to improve
process efficiency, reduce costs, and identify
beneficial uses of muck residuals. (NEW)
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Goal Action Goal
Actffl—
Conduct RESEARCH to identify
Contaminants of Concern-1: Monitor and
sources and loads of known
research to better understand contaminants of
contaminants and contaminants of
emerging concern within the IRL system.
emerging concern to better understand
(NEW)
potential ecological, wildlife, and
Contaminants of human health risks. Identify
Concern mechanisms to REDUCE or REMOVE
Contaminants of Concern-2: Implement
these contaminants from the system.
actions to REMOVE or REDUCE
REPORT findings and RESPOND to
contaminant loads to the IRL system. (NEW)
protect human health and wildlife.
Identify and remediate contaminated
sites.
Filter Feeders
Living Shorelines
Spoil Islands
166 1 Page
Conduct RESEARCH to better
understand stressors and root causes for
the decline of filter feeders in the IRL.
RESTORE selected bivalve populations,
with a focus on restoring oyster and
clam populations to support and sustain
both habitat conservation and
sustainable commercial harvests.
Conduct RESEARCH to identify key
locations along the IRL and tributaries
that would benefit from living
shorelines. RESTORE natural
shorelines. REBUILD both natural and
hardened shorelines that have been
impacted by erosion or storm surge.
Incorporate living components into
armored shorelines where a hybrid
solution is feasible and amenable to the
owner. REPORT the performance,
value, and cost -benefit of living
shorelines as natural infrastructure that
decreases storm surge vulnerability and
contributes to coastal RESILIENCE.
Update and revise the IRE Spoil Islands
Management Plan for the IRL with a
focus on maintenance, habitat
Filter Feeders-1: RESEARCH spatially
explicit data on the extent and condition of
existing filter feeder habitat. (NEW)
Filter Feeders-2: REPORT spatially -explicit
data on denitrification potential associated
with existing natural and restored filter
feeder habitat, incorporated into maps and
online platforms. (NEW)
Filter Feeders-3: Develop a filter feeder
management plan working with public,
private and independent sector partners.
(NEW)
Living Shorelines-1: RESEARCH and
REPORT science -based siting, planning,
design, and construction criteria. (NEW)
Living Shorelines-2: Develop standardized
metrics and protocols for living shoreline
projects. (NEW)
Living Shorelines-3: RESEARCH and
REPORT on living shoreline information.
(NEW)
Living Shorelines-4: Streamline permitting
for living shoreline projects. (NEW)
Living Shorelines-5: Incorporate living
shoreline guidance into local comprehensive
plans. (NEW)
Spoil Islands-1: Create a central electronic
repository for spoil island maps, documents,
sources. (NEW)
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Goal Action Goal
restoration and enhancement of islands,
IRL water quality improvements, and Spoil Islands-2: Update the IRL Spoil
provision of public access based on the Management Plan and implement identified
best available science and sound habitat projects. (NEW)
management principles.
Connected Waters
and Watersheds
Forage Fishes
Trash -Free Waters
167 1 Page
Conduct and share RESEARCH to
improve understanding and management
of waters that influence the IRL region.
RESTORE natural connections and
water flow to reduce freshwater
discharges to the IRL. REPORT
regularly to IRLNEP partners working
in connected and adjacent waters and
watersheds. RESPOND to opportunities
for shared projects and potential threats.
RESEARCH forage fish abundance,
trends, and threats. RESTORE water
quality and natural habitats to sustain
abundant and diverse forage fish
populations and other species that
depend on forage fish. REPORT the
importance of forage fish and trends in
their abundances to partners and
stakeholders. Elevate public awareness
and understanding of the importance of
forage fish to a healthy IRL.
REDUCE trash by implementing a
lagoon -wide trash -free waters campaign
— "Trash -Free Lagoon 2030." Enhance
efforts to REMOVE trash by
coordinating with local organizations
Connected Waters-1: Incorporate the IRL-
Halifax Planning Boundary area into all
IRLNEP discussions, CCMP action plans,
and CCMP implementation activities.
(NEW)
Connected Waters-2: Support expanded and
accelerated funding for Everglades
restoration. (NEW)
Connected Waters-3: Support expanded and
accelerated funding to restore the St. Johns
River. (NEW)
Connected Waters-4: Evaluate water quality
habitats and species composition around
inlets and develop management
recommendations. (NEW)
Connected Waters-5: Better understand the
physical, chemical, and biological
implications, benefits, risks, and expected
outcomes of enhancing oceanic exchange and
develop a pilot project, as appropriate.
(NEW)
Forage Fishes-1: Support research and
assessments to identify and map suitable
habitats and spawning habitats for forage
fishes and track population size and health.
(NEW)
Forage Fishes-2: Continue to support
scientific assessments of forage fish
population size and health. (NEW)
Trash -Free Waters 1: Identify and map IRL
hotspots for trash, develop education projects
that REDUCE and/or REMOVE trash, and
seek funding for projects from the USEPA
Trash -Free Waters Program. (NEW)
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
2008 CCMP Update
Goal Action Goal Action
and partners in the IRLNEP
Distinctive
Lagoon
Communities
Federal, State, and
Local Policy
Opportunities
168 1 Page
Management Conference. REPORT
trash hotspots and trash removal success
stories.
RESPOND to the unique community
needs of three categories of IRL coastal
communities that contribute to the rich
history, culture, human diversity,
infrastructure, and economic value of
the IRL watershed.
Identify opportunities to align the
CCMP with local comprehensive plans
and land development regulations to
more effectively RESTORE the IRL.
Evaluate state and federal policies that
may impact the ability to implement the
CCMP actions and coordinate with
agencies to determine policy
opportunities moving forward.
RESPOND to policy changes and new
policy opportunities. REPORT policy
best practices and success stories.
Trash -Free Waters-2: Identify and remove
derelict boats and fishing gear throughout the
IRL. (NEW)
Distinctive Communities -1: For, Urban
Waters, ensure the high -density human
population is Lagoon -Friendly TM. (NEW)
Distinctive Communities-2: For Working
Waterfronts, coordinate with local
communities to maintain the commercial use.
(NEW)
Distinctive Communities-3: For
Environmental Justice Communities, identify
the unique challenges and opportunities
along the lagoon for underrepresented and
underserved communities. (NEW)
Policy Considerations-1: Work with local
governments to identify and prioritize CCMP
actions and incorporate into local planning
regulations and documents. (NEW)
Policy Considerations-2: Evaluate state
policies that affect the IRL system and work
with state agencies to revise or develop new
policies to promote restoration. (NEW)
Policy Considerations-3: Evaluate federal
policies that affect the IRL system and work
with federal agencies to revise or develop
new policies to promote restoration. (NEW)
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
APPENDIX B. WASTEWATER MAPS
i
�. LU
arndia n Rrver Lagoon I
IRL Wateraed
� I
� v
a s m
J
i
- 5 1
\-Omk
W EL
40.
Awn
OKEECH08EE
a'`T, LUCRE
*.
lb
MMM
4
N
Figure B-1: Overview of domestic and industrial WWTPs in the IRLNEP area
169 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Ind Ian Rawer Lawn
f W&a#WaW TrraMrry F qc I li rX
0 VrLa I � " P i wvAjk- WWTF4
E,Kw*Goa KG-Ih VfXF
SdPH a "w I "K
lAana L[� krn
-rom InhrA d Rt+a!
oesr8d 94mh1mkwTP
korpra Of fhnrAr�
l
VOLUSIA
L
ExrrXb�r & h1 ILrgian� WIF
To -*I Fw" WG LandIIII
v&Smwe Cara k0 WKYF5
Msmam Shwm 41WW
wCepalran Pura* WF•ti
:W&ldp WrfTF
�kwanaiie Cwxn-ymumrfffU
+ &nd 0„ncr WtNtF
Y A4dawa Yd3a -CWKM4 W" Mr
va Nn -O
} W10 Wwr.; Yr NTF
{f W,ndM+Hi SbQm 1WrTF
f SunIiraCandbftArnn
#rmwd 0a4nir* Wff P
Cr rr H9wi1P CQw4 wk14wm WVTF
�nwrr�d �Jlma 41Y1'1�'
Oanrghen kltiva
Orm&Wf3 Y Tha Se
-Cam'rra pwl AWmenft WF
�Qcir� �tK,re 1ff17't�
5ho-n Play"m," r
r++-� Gund—r"'rr
rnarydSr,rMIdaGluh South WWF
'4ZC 44- t
Ormand Z..h t Vl r
O4•rru 1;flYQ+
0wXbOFr 9taeh Cr.M 9T
rW*++k Irr Th* K'iW
PwOranp WWTR
New S"gry Mmr h WhLipi Rixi"Uon FrcAt f {
Swpr MI Rrda tdwml !Pvk 5r4Y4TF `
Urn ov4 Oxw mY WWTF
' x'x
Izmir
Ow"d k04■ WNTI-r
EOp Cit] qGN
yr—, uutltitlrtYl'w" 7
Figure B-2: Domestic and industrial WWTPs in Volusia County in the IRLNEP area
170 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Fap.ti,r, r-
Q�
�L
Lf; S4•+IhN77 n�� �-7
WLI A ?
E WR PfJLail Ime fM PWALdrd
1i�-- Hdurinp ✓dulNrtp DI :Brrrrtd -Caumt7 5YW1 r
%MwLSPRSPr prickWA79
Indian Riw e1r Lags -on
411asNwaser Triktmem FadOV
Y� IRL Waiarahtd
Ti4nrd4 Ci1T of • k,;ryh • ONwwy WOTF
f
F P A m RprC=rilia Hop Pir; W%7F
wr Fwarrl Vabbw *rrir Parr WwTF
O*k Rts ht N6bq lr Harm* f it k WYM
Irrdran kNw 1}Wrn Pi
W n 41 rW +prh+� WOM
C q* C 1+1 Air
FP L • G a pa C i nar" Raww F1 rf! SLPW WWTIF
CrrwtririkV -CrJr
Figure B-3: Domestic and industrial WWTPs in Volusia and northen Brevard Counties in the
IRLNEP area
1711 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Dorm MFKbwM04 KpnwP41A YffTF
iilrrr Faeai WMNItMon%PrkYWTF
0.3► Pn A W W lr Mama Park WW TR
IN14ARh*er$IRMn Rllrtl
W • Gaps Canwitmi Paww Pint
Cr+rrr&m4v Crud
MrrjH Hard UWby
.''� tr�Woi' WrYiK
CA on IC I my" A r fams
Si aarxr .1;opmiF Yr1YFF
Trap,ci Trail M?Lmp 51WTF
KUa'SyLtm C r n k RtVmak Wa ww4tr r -L iflmwl Fe
�44ROd$l�
-- � Canrrrea144�F
Gaci i Ca{oi _
w�rlrrRre!Ia�mAbOA tuhOrr FMeIkFp� �
A-4
BRMRD
Riwin M KC&6 Hay6m 4L Ru Pi
t
Wbwrrw Gemir+ Caa�mh�r
Offfid 9 UN WWOr,.atrr TrErtrrwntPl'rt %
k4lbO rft grim 51 wp4h
Cwr*WlV P:+Iry;
W&W Unbormrr, City ert &A mrd W*9rF
r'L
F&B Bak Q"r WffrF
PjIR ewQ
sNahra n i t.w ra! mob&
Hem park Ydl4r M
E-,h4rd 64.LL6r* e:btzW
Rim bo WirOr
Marna Jla4a
vwu Bach Cm1ar-WRF
ImMv n R Iver Lagoon
* 1aalewater TrealmeAl FaOity
L R4a7el'SM
W
4 1 j iI
hMrWt_ Cbmh
BCU16 gr3dn 9t4dhn NWrF
$GF;Ah -Crd Rw77Vr4j
WOOMalrr TraemrritNrit
G"f Al 5OLap $i!r'thIN
-' 4rkn n rM rrr Usix 40A
MOTF 1rinprLi-Adinn■
Dem i r1 eda I man
$2wth'Shwo Wety
Lsphthga� Garr
Figure B-4: Domestic and industrial WWTPs in central Brevard County in the IRLNEP area
172 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
PW— Oft C" 130 -
KUD.SouttF Ruc4m' TF
Crr rt R y+9rr� Wr111nr�IM Tt*&ftTt P1irrl
Cara M U4 th r4* -C&hft- Wkrh AL* bWJ66h WATF
VengP" Firwrrr pyrnlnadr 40Eft C4rtarrr7drr
PJIm My 43 39Ah.INww Lw4r
L LIGht GN" Carl wwl!r
fix hirrted i.r4n Erma
Trwlop 401n
ylriiIrig KaLm f!wA NNdsn WWTF
c.r„erotrnrp.,iL>n ,
A*WIno 00kjr C' mn nna+4t4Mh4r1F
�
krdwn RI.v*rSwasTm4wPsAW TF
gdW wn - conk 111s��lr IF4rnr Isrrfi'wwrf
Amer Crnv-e IFarh w x�r VdUge 1� YTf
Surnm,l Ctwa 0anddnMluth
toer4 400LPCA' F*Igr
PWKarr drr W4t 11Y1'f�F
"ter.
Lmg Paint k*Crfrt W&i PY►
Ns,r� DUI■hyr F:eiI.
Fame {ar Win
Ew4pl6r Ord —nG
IrKWnAmr
BREVARD
ADFU 130a k6wb:wmr PLTk WWF
4� d& Noidr 14rpro-na ww!F
ern RNU Gfwntr • CrrrFLW • t+i OA w TF
IRtUD-Nerlh Uun'yC4 bCWmentrrlr
Indian River Lagoon
Misliwrter Trea1rno-nL1rmc111 jr
I A L Wato d
N.
SPruh IW+ri r,i84rFbi� 0 u h YU&Is WWtF
trxan "taurrty
Jul-� Chsra
;, r - 41 Vkhan R.7rGmunty Y4ri11'nM I
I- J J Indan &-ori behmpa Pa&tm
INDIANI
DIVER
prwhLMetCaan1rKC1ahV1" F
-.a
2 ip—h L•6w-F-Ruw*lR • p0 WK7r1 MM
I" Colo WWT C
il> OX Via'.
lib: Citrus aackin
RCUD • UuLh
County Umn
4ar.q,prtr� w p
Od-F4"WV
vm $mlk
6kbW
HG+nf
r a r'•
ere: r
:5LC1) LrahwC d Pert YMF
$1. lode Canty 00*" Halidr+ P1r%mE VIM F
Hubor'brirsehCk,eangrrphleleahtr,hee%Pest Oat
H'rW1 6ranrh FwNrtY W"; Wrd vt+!
F+.0 artrpr IRrmn{ h 4=tarKDapNG "t hft arm
4Wdfn 94nq iR P rO-Oft
ST, LUCIP KCki FrY�inda aee Ceuru WWfM
Pftzwj Cart YHP
Figure B-5: Domestic and industrial WWTPs in southern Brevard, Indian Rver, and northern St.
Lucie Counties in the IRLNEP area
173 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
EECHOBEE
Indian Raver Lagoon
* lYtatrt �r�ItIM
_"j IRLWNW&hwd
N
W
WE
`J
r rC%kn41 VW F
$1 LVG4F CPUrrh' F§*NI%WbdF WWTPr
II UKIn Caunty Fa:-!greu ds YhlOM
- ST_ LIJ10E
F W W Fhwa ddvwebd U"f. syl'"
PWrWU Twk IndY96m • J. PMr;i QpvTy Mho
�5
F P L - 41aeta5
� •_ ilrrlm � oarui INN�E
F l4rd
[%AIL 0*M Ga9rrwibon LIP
Figure B-6: Domestic and industrial WWTPs in western St. Lucie, western Martin, and
Okeechobee Counties in the IRLNEP area
174 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Gamhy Gu,+1 w M P F.,rLH1r+'w14
SUU F Hrmr%ft rA A Cown.t 7WWTf -�:4* Tom" Canlwi
I LP P*:RM LLG -t R4" W TF
Rvrw4 $n :r4r rMw wn • 9M++wr Ma
S4 kwpr CVjf"
+510rfrYLarrdl+l` MUD SaulhMatrhrn F
T� 41lrfd R1q 4Y.YTf
Rmhws Cd 4ndii- Rlgr
CIF Ih` Lid Poc4ap Haug
LnGi� C x Fhe fiart Ceenluluy�
F#ry Aft WWI Amft,iten WNTP
F'or! 3I Lam* Uhu4n
91 Lue,i Gaunq Pv:JU GIr%r4 WY0%
Fa.rprft&W%i4WTP
�R1,1++vaLn,�ry Ceeprry�oh
Karl k*M4 IIGIYk Aulhmtk . WOV i F I
]ncHan R ivc%r Laaibon
♦ fuse a te r TrMmenI Faal Iity
II�L wN�r#Tlt�
Aftft Oftol
-
TrpW.014Y4W4"wd *
'rrwFbdit
9an4nn�ood Yrb,fi +lamr Prt
�4 Lw-
o I rl
R�.�r Pli•a
wd4*JM 90ui* ShBPP" Q`ifirrr
&FQnnF Ckb 11 WF
41 ixlf 44'45tsafm arj aain[I
ST. LUC IE
Reet S1 Lame
%WwMa pock Induotrlrl OtII�bll • 9aulhpw
PI 1r hurry Yrra
r
tkffbnr Am" illiliwoor
TcHbMFA Kaclldp
bm fba t:wh Y mltw,Ir.
Tr6Arr,pnl Fxilq
Worlin
L-alilul#
MARTIN
ublinC6uhtyOka dartI•P5
I0 WWDunn
O&um Ti • RD `1Yrh1r Pbm
wwm Rrwr LAnrd
Lri■ 1ArrKr
BIB Hrrdl Tf&W TrzAH Fjf%
�r
bWlh Gau0y °JEY4rc'MoMh WHT
0aean 8rrial Plara
RP3 WWWWGinlr VMTF
� CMY Of �kw1 YI'a1;r�►vltr
T raai nlrrl F
N Mn KiY1,4rrMgm"wn
Fu"Vi Fiim.W $-Q
irllhnh Nni
hE &" Cox p
LHAE" a4p
I CU CohralydmW
FkAfto Mkt PA rm Lh RIrift MHP
Uvr4moo Viol a T* eiLIkb Irm SoL h 10wF4rI
`J" wd m Ylbhalla Wtw ell, 19 fq*3ja ytft
Palm Inca WA &rY1a (VftF
Water rdunA VxNis HN" P"
Low1m�r V�I(--,* 0P,
se�,lir IGx: a }rr�Fi i a 41ryY1e+pip.1�.
OEM tt+to kLC
Sr Lk-6b I M I& M "
Figure B-7: Domestic and industrial WWTPs in eastern St. Lucie and eastern Martin Counties in
the IRLNEP area
175 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
lover L;PgQon
Pk Eymm
L WAmshad
Figure B-8: Overview of septic systems in the IRLNEP area
176 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Indian River Lagoon
s4vit SYIIIW
IRL WwiRmhrd t
VODU L
Figure B-9: Septic systems in Volusia County in the IRLNEP area
177 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
i
•
f
Wan RW@rLon
G wokm
N
F
0 t -
Jid u,& Oaeln
Figure B-10: Septic systems in southern Volusia and northern Brevard Counties in the IRLNEP
area
178 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
RIver Lagoon I
3Wit swmw
R4 WLIdr$h"
HREVARD
Figure B-11: Septic systems in central Brevard County in the IRLNEP area
179 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Figure B-12: Septic systems in southern Brevard, Indian River, and northern St. Lucie Counties in
the IRLNEP area
180 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Figure B-13: Septic systems in western St. Lucie, western Martin, and Okeechobee Counties in the
IRLNEP area
1811 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
Ind Ian Riw4� r Lagoon '
sepliG SYSL€'m
IRLWabmhed ,
I 2 +
Figure B-14: Septic systems in eastern St. Lucie and eastern Martin Counties in the IRLNEP area
182 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
APPENDIX C. AGRICULTURAL BMP ENROLLMENT
Implementation of Agricultural Best Management Practices
The Florida Watershed Restoration Act of 1999 directed DEP, FDACS, and WMDs to work together to
reduce pollution in Florida's waters, citing BMPs as the best way to accomplish this task. BMPs are the
future of agriculture in Florida, and are guidelines advising producers how to manage the water, nutrients,
pesticides, herbicides, and other potential pollutants that agriculture uses to minimize impacts on the
state's natural resources. Through the Office of Agricultural Water Policy (OAWP), Florida Forest
Service, and Division of Aquaculture, FDACS develops, adopts, and assists producers in implementing
agricultural BMPs to improve water quality and conservation. Adopted BMPs are initially verified by
DEP as reducing nutrient loss to the environment. OAWP BMPs are published in commodity -specific
manuals that cover key aspects of water quality and water conservation. The BMP categories include:
• Nutrient management practices that help determine appropriate source, rate, timing, and
placement of nutrients (both organic and inorganic) to minimize impacts to water resources.
• Irrigation and water table management practices that address methods for irrigating to reduce
water and nutrient losses to the environment and maximize the efficient use and distribution of
water.
• Water resource protection practices, such as buffers, setbacks, and swales to reduce or prevent the
transport of nutrients and sediments from production areas to water resources.
The Notice of Intent to implement BMPs and BMP checklist are incorporated into each manual.
Information on the BMP manuals and field staff contact information can be obtained at:
httn://www.freshfromflorida.com/Divisions-Offices/Agricultural-Water-Policv. Printed BMP manuals
can be obtained by contacting OAWP field staff.
OAWP outreach to solicit enrollment extends to all types of agricultural operations but is more intensive
in BMAP areas because of the relationship of BMPs to the presumption of compliance with water quality
standards in a BMAP area. FDACS field staff work with producers to enroll them in the BMP program by
signing a Notice of Intent. Enrollment is based on the expectation that producers recognize and address
the water quality and conservation issues associated with their operations. Upon completion of all
information in the BMP checklist, a Notice of Intent must be signed by the landowner or the landowner's
authorized agent (who may be the producer if the producer is not the landowner). Table C-1 summarizes
FDACS BMP Program enrollment within the IRLENP area. Figure C-1 shows the agricultural acres
enrolled in the FDACS BMP Program in the IRLNEP area as of July 31, 2018.
Table C-1. FDACS BMP enrollment in the IRLNEP area
BMP Manual
Acres Enrolled
Citrus
81,505
Conservation Plan Rule
1,316
Cow/Calf
133,448
Dairy
5,757
Equine
704
Fruit/Nut
11
Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan
13,154
Multiple Commodities
25,156
Nursery
1,758
Row/Field Crops
38,813
Sod
1,275
Total
302,897
183 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
ae-
•a•.k.&
wl r �■ r•.I -,
{S.ti
LJ SfI. �IJ
I i iFIY s
r.i.w if Ys• i.f.
Q Iolriq{r FJ��
FJ��K1W�••
IRL NaWW E Owy PMmrm
OAWP BMP EinrcOnwnt Juty 2G I8
r'!gpir. CarnWJdm:!5;-.ImnijAI
- �Fi�:CnahorFd+l�n
art
- gUine
;per aty rn.rarf,l w
0
- J akr. OkeechliKwme RI l ediun Plan r:
r 1 W ' I
litiS/ AWmc i rW i!arOrF9mPc CrGPi
sod
w 0fe
MdHN
25 !0
i -K f ft".4 a^fq flMn'kn*c■, rwra+ P" :irlbrr- �'X+rti r7+a�tra Yrl.. OC4C n-W"-b-h -krgW r"I jRwo-%_lo-- &WVAV
■ M YMrlh A �� PA *%- .LFM Y]k�i E4 Rc..y+K.�+nwr+4 W rv..+ri r-M`r r i.r+* .&M 11■-W J- Ttra�Wkr rr rA.rkr•+er �A marl
R i�� dotal��iAOF ■ ��fW IVtW .� rr fir.*'a" sm. f lFhi Mr. Ri wPr w4m wz
Figure C-1. BMP enrollment in the IRLNEP area as of July 31, 2018
184 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
FDACS OAWP Role in BMP Implementation and Follow -Up
OAWP works with producers to submit Notices of Intent to implement the BMPs applicable to their
operations, provides technical assistance to growers, and distributes cost -share funding, as available, to
eligible producers for selected practices. OAWP follows up with growers through site visits to evaluate
the level of BMP implementation and record keeping, identify areas for improvement, if needed, and
discuss cost -share opportunities.
When DEP adopts a BMAP that includes agriculture, it is the agricultural producer's responsibility to
implement BMPs adopted by FDACS to help achieve load reductions. If land use acreage corrections and
BMP implementations do not meet the current agricultural load reduction allocation, it may be necessary
to develop and implement additional projects and practices that reduce nutrients from agricultural
nonpoint sources and will require additional funding sources and producer participation. In that case,
FDACS will work with DEP and water management districts to identify appropriate options for achieving
further agricultural load reductions.
Section 403.067, Florida Statutes, requires that, where water quality problems are demonstrated despite
the proper implementation of adopted agricultural BMPs, FDACS must reevaluate the practices, in
consultation with DEP and stakeholders, and modify them if necessary. Continuing water quality
problems will be detected through the BMAP monitoring component and other DEP and water
management district activities. If a reevaluation of the BMPs is needed, FDACS will also include water
management districts and other partners in the process.
OAWP Implementation Verification Program
OAWP established an Implementation Assurance Program in 2005 in the Suwannee River Basin as part
of the multi-agency/local stakeholder Suwannee River Partnership. In early 2014, OAWP began to
streamline the Implementation Assurance Program to ensure consistency statewide and across
commodities and BMP manuals. The Implementation Assurance Program was based on interactions with
producers during site visits by OAWP staff and technicians as workload allowed. For the visits, field staff
and technicians used a standard form (not BMP specific) developed in 2014, that focused on nutrient
management, irrigation management, and water resource protection BMPs common to all BMPs that were
adopted by rule. Once completed, these paper forms were submitted to OAWP staff and compiled into a
spreadsheet, and the data were reported annually.
On November 1, 2017, the OAWP's Implementation Verification rule (Chapter 5M-1, Florida
Administrative Code) became effective. The Implementation Verification Program provides the basis for
assessing the level of BMP implementation and for identifying enrolled producers who require assistance
with BMP implementation. The components of the Implementation Verification Program are (1) site
visits, (2) implementation status reporting on common practices that apply across all BMP manuals, (3)
technical assistance, and (4) external reporting. Implementation verification is confirmed by field staff
through site visits and by producers through annual self -verification of the common practices.
Site visits to agricultural operations by OAWP field staff and contract technicians are the most effective
means to determine the level of BMP implementation. These visits also provide an opportunity to identify
needs for assistance with implementation and explore potential improvements. Resource limitations
prevent site visits from occurring on all enrolled operations every year, and for that reason, site visits are
prioritized. The program objective is for field staff to conduct site visits for 5-10% of active Notices of
Intent each year, with approximately 10% of the site visit locations selected randomly.
Per the Implementation Verification rule, each year producers participating in the BMP program will be
requested to report on the implementation of common practices for their operations. Lack of response
from enrollees with parcels in a BMAP area raises the priority of the operation for a site visit from field
185 1 Page
IRLNEP 2030 Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
staff. Where a need is identified, OAWP may facilitate technical assistance for the producer from UF-
IFAS or other resources, including third -party vendors. In some cases, cost -share support may be
available. Data from producers and site visits will be used to complete the OAWP's annual report on the
status of BMP implementation as required by Section 403.0675(2), Florida Statutes.
BMP Enrollment Data and Manuals
OAWP maintains a database on the implementation of BMPs for producers enrolled in BMP programs
and creates spatial data that show agricultural BMP enrollment by manual statewide.
FDACS OAWP has adopted BMPs for commodities shown in Table C-2. The BMPs are designed to
improve water quality while maintaining agricultural production. Each BMP manual covers key aspects
of water quality and water conservation. These manuals are located at
httos://www.freshfromflorida. com/Business-Services/Water/Auicultural-Best-Management-Practices.
Table C-2. FDACS BMP manuals
Manual
Adoption Date
Rule Reference
Next Review
Cow/Calf
2009
5M-11
Under Review
Sod
2008
5M-9
Under Review
Specialty Fruit and Nut
2011
5M-13
Under Review
Equine
2012
5M-14
Under Review
Citrus
2013
5M-16
Under Review
Nursery
2014
5M-6
2019
Vegetable and Agronomic Crops
2015
5M-8
2018
Dairy
2016
5M-17
2021
Poultry
2016
5M-19
2021
Small Farms
Pending
Pending
Pending
186 1 Page