Caloosahatchee & Lake Okeechobee Issues


ATS - Algal Turf Scrubber

Check under Water Quality

Backpumping into Lake Okeechobee

April 23, 2008 - HB 7143 comes up on the Florida House floor today and Amendment No. 024305 has been added.  This amendment would undermine the decision made last year by the SFWMD Governing Board to disallow backpumping into the Lake.

Letter to House leaders sent April 23, 2008

The following Guest Opinion by Rae Ann Wessel, which was published in several South Florida papers, summarizes SCCF’s opposition to backpumping.

The practice of backpumping from the EAA into Lake Okeechobee is not a sustainable solution for the health of south Florida. It undermines the significant financial investments and commitment the State has made in cleaning up the Lake and estuary discharges. It is a failed water policy.

The flood control system that we have today made up of the Kissimmee River – Lake Okeechobee – Caloosahatchee, St. Lucie Rivers and Everglades was created over 60 years ago at a time when using a natural lake as a reservoir was unremarkable; an acceptable practice for supplying water and abating flood control. The problem is it did not really do either very well. Today we are living with problems created by those practices. The current operation of managing Lake Okeechobee as a reservoir, instead of a living system, perpetuates the uninformed practices of 60 years ago. Water runs downhill bringing everything with it.

What we have learned is that we cannot continue to operate lake O as a reservoir where nutrient laden and polluted water is “stored” for future use. Why not?

  • There is not enough storage capacity. The lake we have today has a smaller footprint and less capacity than its natural predecessor, notwithstanding the further restrictions on storage now imposed by the crumbling dike surrounding it.
  • There is more water to store in a smaller vessel. More water is delivered more quickly directly into the lake through the channelized Kissimmee River and from pump stations around the lake. These “direct connections” eliminate historic sheet flow patterns that slowed the water down and provided water quality treatment.
  • The reservoir has become a toxic sink of polluted water. Channelization to the north eliminated historic, natural sheet flow that cleaned water and provided it slowly into the lake. To the south the conversion of 700,000 acres of the historic Everglades River of Grass to agricultural lands eliminated the critical southern flowway outlet from the lake. Pumps were added to address the volume of water that competes with the crops. Excess water can be quickly pumped back into the lake to keep the crops and the historic wetlands dry. However, no corresponding water treatment was added to address water quality. This combination created the perfect storm for the disastrous water quality the entire system is suffering with today.

The statement has been made that “rainfall returned to the lake by pumps, as has been done by every governor and every secretary of DEP during past droughts.” This practice has resulted in our current situation of a dying lake and estuaries. So has that been the right decision, one that we want to perpetuate? I’ve heard it said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again - expecting a different result. This would seem to be the case…

Many claims are being made that the water back pumped from the farms and storm water areas south of the lake is cleaner than the water currently in the lake any and all other sources of water to Lake Okeechobee. Of course the past practices have resulted in the poor condition of the water in the lake in the first place.
Water from the EAA may be cleaner than water flowing into the system from the north side of the lake but it is not clean, it is only less bad. Longtime Lake Okeechobee researcher Dr. Paul Gray has provided the following facts about the content of the water being backpumped.
Backpumping during the last drought in 2001 dumped 1,493 tons of Nitrogen into the lake. The permitted level is 393 tons. So, backpumping contributed nearly 4 times the permitted levels of Nitrogen into the lake. Is that less bad enough?

In that same drought, Phosphorus from the EAA contributed from 87 to 154 ppb of Total Phosphorus. The phosphorus target goal for the lake is 40 ppb. So backpumping contributed a range of 2 – 4 times the phosphorus loading into the lake. Is less bad ok?

Water pollution is cumulative; all sources of pollution contribute to the toxic water condition. Less polluted water is still polluted, it still adds to the whole. Preventing the EAA’s incremental degradation to the lake, will improve conditions.

The reason nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus are a problem is that they contribute the critical growing medium to the water that spurs algal blooms. Algal blooms block sunlight from reaching the bottom of the lake where plants use the sun to produce oxygen necessary for fish and other organisms in the water. So increasing nutrient loading in a polluted lake makes the algal blooms worse and decreases oxygen faster and longer. Blocking the sunlight also inhibits the growth of native plants critical to the health and balance of the aquatic system. When the algae die, (even they have a life span), they can release toxins that threaten the health of humans as well as fish, bivalves and invertebrates. The dead mats of algae float to the bottom creating the muck sediments that continue to decrease oxygen and feed additional algal blooms.

Every system - natural and manmade -has operating limits. If we are to make a commitment to and investment in restoration we must begin with the limits of the natural system not artificially based, political compromise. We are clever enough to find solutions to the current problems but we must look for them instead of focusing on all the obstacles. We must change our practices/water policy.

Water policy is a social responsibility for the public health, safety and welfare of communities and economies. Fresh, clean water is not optional. It is the right of every individual and our responsibility to ourselves and the other living systems upon which our lives are intertwined. We must prioritize the health of these systems to protect the economic viability and quality of life of Southwest Florida.


October 2007 Member Update:
Since the South Florida Water Management District (WMD) Governing Board vote in August to end backpumping from the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA), a debate has begun on the editorial pages of newspapers across south Florida. SCCF joined in the debate to respond to misleading statements that have been made regarding the quality of water backpumped from south of the lake. You can read our letter on the policy page of our website: www.sccf.org.

In essence, the EAA corporate offices posit that water pumped from the sugar fields is cleaner than the water in the lake and from other sources. The numbers tell the story. The WMD backpumping report from the last drought in 2001 reveals that the water backpumped from the EAA contains two-to-four times the phosphorus levels needed to achieve a healthy lake and dumps four times the permitted nitrogen loads into the already polluted lake. In addition, water backflowing into the lake from canals including the upper Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie rivers is contributing an additional 637 tons of Nitrogen and 63.5 tons of Phosphorus. It is interesting that their rebuttals carefully avoid discussion of nitrogen loading, choosing to focus only on phosphorus levels. Their statements that backpumped water is cleaner than the lake fail to account for the fact that their nutrient loads contributed to the lake condition in the first place!

The EAA is not the only source of nutrient loading to the lake. It is, however, the only unnatural flow to the lake, one that we have created with water policy. Nutrient loading to the lake comes from the Kissimmee basin, the communities surrounding the lake as well as from backpumped and backflowed water from the EAA. Storage for water coming from the Kissimmee basin is being addressed to abate the volume and quality of water flowing into the Lake. Water flowing from the north is directed by gravity while the backpumped water is directed upstream against gravity by operational water policies. We cannot stop the Kissimmee from flowing south but we can end failed water policy, which is the first step in getting flows out of Lake Okeechobee redirected to the south where gravity directs it. The bottom line is that backpumping and backflowing water into Lake Okeechobee is adding nutrient loads to the lake and is an unnatural pollution source that we can change.

September 2007 Member Update:
Backpumping – Stay Tuned!
On August 9, 2007 the Governing board of the South Florida Water Management District took historic action when they voted against allowing backpumping of polluted water from the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) south of the lake, back into Lake Okeechobee.

Backpumping has been practiced for decades as a way to rid the EAA agricultural lands of excess water. This has resulted in the lake being treated like a stormwater reservoir for Ag instead of managed as a unique and critical State water resource. The lake is managed for several competitive interests including drinking and agricultural water supply, flood protection, and the lake ecosystem. The practice of backpumping has contributed nutrients to the lake that have decreased water quality and contributed to the accumulation of organic muck sediments in the lake -- all of which is eventually discharged down the Caloosahatchee, affecting the quality of the river and estuary.

Our new representative on the South Florida Water Management District Governing Board, Charles Dauray, expressed the issue forcefully when he declared that contaminating the lake with polluted water “was wrong in the past, is wrong today and will be wrong in the future ... it’s about time we realize we have to assume leadership.” Voting for backpumping would be “indefensible.” With that he joined three other Governing Board members, Chairman Buermann, Shannon Estenoz and Melissa Meeker to defeat the practice in a 4-3 vote.
As an alternative to backpumping, the district agreed to explore storing water on more than 700 acres in Clewiston, in old rock pits west of West Palm Beach and the 30,000-acre Holey Land and Rotenberger properties in southwestern Palm Beach County.

In a final statement, the Board also unanimously agreed to challenge a federal judge’s ruling that the District needs a federal permit before backpumping. The District contends that requiring a permit violates the State’s control over its own waterways. The district also plans to apply for a permit to preserve its right to pump. One concern is that this position could result in polluted water being moved between basins without treatment and this sets the district apart from other municipalities that are required to obtain NPDES permits in compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act.

Letter re Backpumping sent to SFWMD Governing Board member Charles Dauray on Aug. 10, 2007

Letter re Backpumping sent to SFWMD Governing Board member Charles Dauray on Aug. 6, 2007

Caloosahatchee Estuary TMDL's

Expedited as a result of a lawsuit by Earthjustice the State has fast-tracked TMDL development for the tidal portion only of the Caloosahatchee to establish maximum limits for nutrients.

Caloosahatchee West Basin Storage Reservoir (C43)

(C-43 is what the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District call the Caloosahatchee River: Canal 43)
A response to the excess flows from high water conditions in Lake O, this 11,000-acre Hendry County reservoir is proposed to capture and hold excess water to provide a more natural timing and volume of freshwater releases to the estuary. Unfortunately, it will not come close to providing the needed storage during heavy rain years. Test cells that were constructed for testing the operation have proven to be algae incubators, with no way to clean water before it is released. Since construction was first proposed, Caloosahatchee stakeholders have been asking for a water treatment area that would clean the water before releasing it back into the river. See aerial map below under Nitrogen Treatment Area.

C-43 Test Cells
One of the solutions proposed to abate excess flow from the Caloosahatchee into the estuary is the proposed 11,000 c43 test cellsacre C-43 reservoir, located at the Berry Grove site west of LaBelle. Currently the reservoir design and function is being tested with two, 20 acre test cells pictured at right. The test cells are constructed above ground surrounded by a seepage canal. Surface water quality testing is conducted monthly and groundwater is tested quarterly. Early results indicate that algae is blooming in the test cells and seepage canal.

The current design of the proposed reservoir does not include any form of water quality treatment such as a filter marsh. The concern is that water held in the reservoir will degrade and become lower quality than that in the river, thus limiting its ability to be discharged back into the river when needed.

We believe that a filter marsh should also be tested alongside the test cells on the site to determine how to effectively filter and clean the water.

Letter about C-43 sent to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on Oct. 22, 2007

Caloosahatchee River Watershed Protection Plan (CRWPP)

Modeled after the LOPP for restoring and protecting the watershed, this legislated plan expands the restoration effort north, west and east of Lake O to cover the Kissimmee watershed and Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries.

Preliminary Draft: Nutrient Loading Rates, Reduction Fac tors and Implementation Costs Associated with BMPs and Technologies, dated May 8, 2008
 
P and N loads from report		  watershed map from report
    Table of nutrient loading (page 21) and Caloosahatchee watershed map (page 8) from the report.

Caloosahatchee Nitrogen Treatment Area

The first project under the Northern Everglades plan, this 1,770-acre area was purchased in partnership with Lee County to provide a water quality treatment area specifically for removal of nitrogen from river water. The property was selected because it is bordered on both sides by agricultural ditches. The site is located 13 miles upstream of the proposed C-43 reservoir so it is not clear how the water treatment area will interact with the reservoir. Construction of the treatment system is estimated to cost $150 million.

January 2008 Member Update:
The very first project under the Northern Everglades Act, passed in the 2007 legislative session, has been initiated with a $37 million purchase of a 1,770-acre citrus grove in Glades County for a water quality treatment project. The site is located on the south side of the Caloosahatchee, approximately 13 miles upstream of the C-43 reservoir site. The parcel extends from the river to SR 80 and east from the Ortona Lock & Dam (see aerial photo).

Approximately 1,335 acres of the site is proposed for a water quality treatment area to remove nitrogen from the river. The remaining 435 acres will be set aside for recreational and commercial use. The site was selected because it is bordered on both the west and east sides by agricultural ditches that connect to the river. Lee County contributed $10 million toward the land purchase. An additional $150 million will be required to build the treatment system, although the water quality treatment method has not yet been determined. In a year of extremely tight budgets and rising costs, the Governing Board will be taking a hard look at the cost benefit and prioritization of projects as well as comparing the benefits of land acquisition vs. construction projects.

Lake Hicpochee & Lake Flirt storage flowway


These historic lakes were integral parts of the storage and conveyance of water between Lake Okeechobee and the Caloosahatchee before the 1881 dredging drained them. Vestiges of these basins are still present, undeveloped and visible on aerial photos today. For the past 10 years we have been advocating the reflooding of these historic water bodies for storage and treatment of lake and river water in the Caloosahatchee basin.

Lake O & Estuary Recovery (LOER)


LOER is a plan developed to help restore the ecological health of Lake Okeechobee and the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee Estuaries.

Lake O Protection Plan (LOPP)


The plan was developed to identify strategies to reduce phosphorus loading to the lake and to meet the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) targets.

Letter re Draft Lake O Protection Act to Lee County Commissioner Tammy Hall on Jan. 17, 2007

Lake O Regulation Schedule (LORS2008)


The lake regulation schedule is used by the Corps of Engineers to manage lake levels and determine when water is released from the lake to the Caloosahatchee, St. Lucie and south. The damage to the estuaries caused by the water releases prompted review of the current schedule. An interim schedule is expected to be in effect until 2010 when a new schedule will be evaluated and implemented.

July-August 2008 Member Update:
On April 28, Brig. Gen. Joseph Schroedel, commander of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division, approved a new Lake Okeechobee Regulation Schedule designed to keep Lake O water levels between 12.5 and 15.5 feet throughout the year. The lower water levels should help reduce large damaging flows to the coastal estuaries in the rainy season and include base flows for the dry season; however, periods of very high rainfall would still cause excessive flows. The lower levels will benefit the lake’s ecological health by maintaining water levels that will enhance the lake's littoral zone, critical to water quality and wildlife in the lake. This schedule will be in effect while managers conduct a study of additional options for water storage and management. The purchase of EAA lands may add a new option to the rehabilitation of the Herbert Hoover Dike and future regulation schedules.

September 2007 Member Update:
On Wednesday, August 8, SCCF staff attended a meeting with the Corps of Engineers to provide public comment on the latest lake regulation schedule. This meeting was a follow-up to the meeting last fall, which resulted in the Corps receiving over 2,000 written comments against the 2006 Tentatively Selected Plan (TSP). In response to overwhelming public concern over the proposed schedule, Col. Grosskrueger of the Corps of Engineers took a bold stand to retract the plan and asked staff to revisit their alternatives. This August 8 meeting took public comment on the latest alternative known as “T3.”

While we acknowledge and appreciate the improvements this alternative LORSS TSP schedule offers, it will still result in damaging releases to the estuaries. Improvements to the plan include:
  • Managing the lake at lower levels
  • Reduced frequency of high-volume releases to the estuaries
  • Reduction in the number of times flows exceed 2,800 cfs and
  • Setting a lake level 17.25 as a performance measure, not a constraint.
  • Issues that remaining to be worked out before the Final EIS include;
  • Operational policy on Caloosahatchee backflowing into the Lake and back pumping from the EAA. We do not support these operational conditions as they cause degraded conditions in the lake and additional minimum flow and level (MFL) exceedences for the Caloosahatchee estuary .
  • Under this alternative, MFL exceedences will increase. We would like to see how alternative storage areas, which are not addressed, could reduce these exceedences.
  • There remains concern about operational guidance and the seasonality of releases. How will the seasonality of releases and their potential impacts to the estuary be considered in the operational guidance?
  • Additional detail is needed regarding the assumptions made about additional storage location, capacity and triggers that would advise when diversions are made.
  • Independent analysis has shown that only complete DECOMP will provide the storage and diversion of flows that will protect the lake and estuaries. We would ask that the COE proceed with Full DECOMP to achieve historic flows. Protected Species are not fully considered in the SEIS. Impacts to Federally listed species must be addressed, including the Manatee and Small tooth sawfish.
Letter re the Draft Lake O Regulation Schedule to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dated Aug. 17, 2007

January 2007 Member Update:
The Corps, the Lake and the Tentatively Selected Plan
In 1802 Congress created the Army Corps of Engineers we know today, charged with construction and maintenance of both military and civil construction works. Following the hurricanes of 1926 and 1928 that killed thousands and devastated settlements around Lake Okeechobee, the State of Florida asked the Federal Government for help. President Hoover tasked the Corps with designing a solution for Lake Okeechobee flooding. In the 1930s construction began on a dike to contain the lake while additional flowway capacity was provided by dredging the Caloosahatchee channel deeper to allow more water to flow out of the lake to the west. 

Every three years the COE assigns a new Colonel to Florida. The Colonel is tasked with decision making authority and oversight of Federal construction, maintenance and operation projects.  This past summer, Colonel Paul Grosskruger took over, inheriting a priority assignment to implement a new water release schedule for the Lake and fix the leaking dike around Lake O. 

The water release schedule attempts to balance the water levels in the lake with discharges to the estuaries, the Everglades Agricultural Area, known as the EAA,  and the Everglades. Each has its own balancing act, attempting to provide enough freshwater for natural system and human functions, but not so much that the areas are unnaturally flooded in wet seasons or over-drained in dry seasons. It is a difficult juggling act.  The current water release schedule causes harm to the estuaries by releasing too much high-nutrient lake water at unnatural times and durations, resulting in flooding of the sensitive estuary with polluted freshwater which has contributed to algal blooms and caused a die-off of seagrass and oysters.  

Upon his arrival this past summer, the Colonel was presented with a revised water release schedule selected after staff reviewed a series of alternatives.  The preferred alternative,  called the Tentatively Selected Plan or TSP, was the subject of two public hearings around the region to take input on the plan. Over 2,000 letters of objection were received by the Corps after the public hearings and the Colonel decided to step back from the plan and asked staff to try again, addressing the public concerns. SCCF staff has had the opportunity to meet with Col. Grosskruger on several occasions since his arrival in Florida.  We are pleased that he has heard our concerns and taken action to not implement a plan that would have caused more harm to the estuary than the current schedule.  A new plan is currently under development which will be presented in public meetings early next year. 

Letter re the Draft Lake O Regulation Schedule to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dated Oct. 16, 2006

Lake O Tributary TMDL's

The Federal Clean Water Act requires states to establish a load calculation for a variety of water quality pollutants. These levels identify the maximum amount of degradation a water body can receive and still meet water quality standards.

Letter re proposed TMDL's sent to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on May 15, 2007

Lake O water levels

Photo at right shows the exposed bed of the lake, photographed on April 13, 2007.

lake o droughtMay-June Member Update:
Trickle Down Affects Of Low Lake Okeechobee Water Levels 
The drought Southwest Florida is currently experiencing has resulted in record low water levels in Lake Okeechobee, with almost two months of dry season remaining.  As with any natural system, there is a “normal” range of conditions and there are extreme conditions. The rainy seasons of 2004 and 2005 represented extreme conditions in terms of high water volume and flow in Lake Okeechobee and the Caloosahatchee; in contrast, the current drought represents the opposite extreme.  Extremes are part of the natural cycles. In fact natural systems are dependant on these extremes.
The extremely low water in Lake Okeechobee is providing both positive and negative affects.  One positive affect of the low water levels is the exposure of the muck encrusted lake bottom to air and sunlight allowing for oxidation of these nutrient-laden sediments.  Oxidation is the process that nature provides to remove the organic sediment from exposed portions of lake bottom.  Since these sediments are one source of nutrient loading to the Caloosahatchee, this is a great benefit of low lake levels.  A negative affect of  low lake levels is the affect on water supply.  Communities around the lake and Lee County/Fort Myers use water from the lake and river respectively to provide drinking water.  Low water conditions in the lake limit the amount of water available to those municipalities.  In Lee County, the Olga Water Treatment plant draws water from the Caloosahatchee just 3,960 feet upstream of the W.P. Franklin Locks.  During low water conditions in the Lake there is not enough freshwater being released to protect the freshwater supply at Olga and the WP Franklin Locks have to limit their operation schedule to prevent salt water from extending up to the water plant intake. As a result this normally “on demand” lock is currently on a resticted lock schedule,  so if you have plans to boat through the locks in the next few months be sure to check the following web site for navigation bulletins, channel conditions and lock schedules:  http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/nav/index.html

For a graph covering the period 1931 – 2006 showing Minimum Water Levels in Lake Okeechobee with an overlay of 2007 lake levels (through October 3) for comparison with other years of low water levels (1956, 1981, 1982 and 2001).

Graph showing Lake Okeechobee Minimum Water Levels for 1931 - 2006

Southern flowway / conveyance

A critical element to reducing excess water flows out of Lake O into the Caloosahatchee and St Lucie is restoration of historic flows south out of the lake. A portion of the 700,000 acres south of the lake that were part of the original Everglades is today in agricultural production and known as the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA). Before a conveyance south out of the lake can be established, changes must be made to restore water quality and delivery to Everglades National Park. A part of that includes elevating a section of Tamiami Trail, which currently acts as a dam to water flowing south and implementation of the C-111 spreader project to restore flows to Florida Bay.

October 2007 Member Update:
How we spell relief: Flowway South
flowway south mapPrior to 1881, before all the man alterations to water flow in south Florida, water from Lake Okeechobee sheet-flowed south through the sawgrass habitat of the Everglades, slowly making its way to the estuary of Florida Bay at the southern end of the peninsula. Today we recognize the challenge in trying to restore the greater Everglades ecosystems with all the alterations to flows and the structure of the built system. There is renewed interest in restoring a marshy flowway south of Lake Okeechobee, a project that could both manage the greater volume of water -- the majority of which is released out the Caloosahatchee and is responsible for the loss of seagrass and oyster populations -- and provide water quality treatment.

Restoring flow to the south may prove to be more economical than currently proposed engineering alternatives, such as Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR). It could also improve the health of the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries. Estimates calculate that savings could approach $5 billion by eliminating the need for more than 200 planned deep-injection wells around Lake Okeechobee. In addition, water could be moved out of the lake faster reducing the need for massive damaging releases to the estuaries. ASR wells would take more than 150 days to lower Lake Okeechobee by one foot, while the proposed flow way could take a foot off the lake in 34 days. Land acquisition and restoration of a flowway south is estimated to cost $1.5 billion while ASR is estimated to cost $6.5 billion.

July 2007 SCCF Member Update:
While the water level in Lake Okeechobee continues at record breaking low levels a debate is raging over what to do with excess water from the lake. For many years there has been discussion about restoring flows south out of the lake in an effort to restore the historic flow pattern to the Everglades and reduce flows out the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries. In June the Ten County Coalition met to discuss the concept of a flow way south out of Lake Okeechobee, also referred to as Plan 6, to provide an additional outlet for excess water from Lake Okeechobee during high water conditions. The Ten County Coalition is a planning committee of commissioners from Okeechobee, St. Lucie, Martin, Lee, Palm Beach, Hendry, Glades, Highlands, Osceola and Polk counties that meets quarterly to discuss issues of mutual concern.

The meeting focused on a resolution proposing a flow way south out of Lake Okeechobee to restore the historic southern flow of water out of the Lake and reduce excess flows to the estuaries. At the meeting the Water Management District presentation suggested that the proposed design would neither provide substantial storage nor would it work effectively as a flow way. Instead, it focused the discussion on the need for storage north of the lake. In the end the resolution adopted by the Coalition removed the emphasis on the southern flow way and instead supported all means of routing excess water from Lake Okeechobee that benefits Lake Okeechobee, the estuaries and Everglades National Park.

It is unfortunate that the discussion sidelined the flow way south. There is no debate about the need for storage north of the lake, but storage is only a passive piece of the water quality treatment needed in all the basins of the system. A flow way south could incorporate an active water quality treatment process, known as an algal turf scrubber, like the one currently being used in Taylor Creek on the north side of the lake. See ATS for more information.

Unfortunately, the discussion of a southern flowway at the Ten County Coalition did not include a discussion of the water quality treatment opportunities that could be realized with ATS technology. We urge consideration of this technology as part of a water conveyance south of the lake and encourage you to write in support of the southern flow way concept incorporating algal turf scrubber technology. Contact information for Governor Crist, our Legislators, Carol Wehle, Executive Director of the SFWMD, Lee County Commissioners and the members of the Ten County Coalition can be found on our website.

Southwest Florida Feasibility Study (SWFFS)

When CERP was proposed it did not include any projects west of Lake O. This study was created to identify southwest Florida water resources in Glades, Hendry, Collier and Lee Counties to evaluate their conditions and develop potential solutions.