Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
resources and natural history to coastal morphology, soils, and wildlife. Dade Envi-
ronmental Resource Management, a county agency that ultimately funded and per-
formed the wetland restorations at the park, was involved in the earliest of dialogues,
and the University of Miami provided expertise on an array of subjects. The American
Littoral Society, a national coastal conservation group, was approached to provide
community outreach, coordinate volunteers, and help with private fund-raising for
the restoration project.
A 1926 aerial photograph that showed the dune and swale system of the barrier is-
land and a 1938 thesis about the flora of Key Biscayne were among the first docu-
mentation used to set restoration parameters (McAllister 1938). Researchers deter-
mined that prior to the dredge and fill operations that so altered the site, the
subtropical island park had supported six distinct natural communities: beach dune,
coastal strand, mesic pine flatwoods, maritime hammock, mangrove forest, and iso-
lated freshwater wetlands, also known as coastal dune lakes. These were identified as
restoration targets. The initial group of FPS, county, and American Littoral Society
staff working on the project agreed with the findings, and a shared vision for a restored
Cape Florida emerged.
The park was closed for nearly a year while debris was removed, the Australian
pines were mulched, and plans were drafted. During this time, the FPS lobbied Con-
gress and the state legislature for emergency relief through direct appropriations and
applied for substantial government grants. While their Natural and Cultural Re-
sources and Park Planning bureaus continued to work with the local contingency of
park staff, community advocates, and county personnel, the Bureau of Design and
Construction was charged with oversight of the restoration project due to their experi-
ence administering large contracts.
Between 1993 and 1996, roughly $18 million were directed toward Cape Florida's
recovery. While a good portion of the funds that poured in frommultiple government
contracts were used for debris removal, construction and repair, and an on-site native
plant nursery, millions of dollars were earmarked for the purchase of large trees. This
proved to be problematic due to the limited commercial availability of native species.
Complicating matters further, time constraints inherent in government grants made it
difficult to arrange growing contracts with native plant providers. Of the hundreds of
species listed for Cape Florida's restoration, only sixteen were identified in the con-
tracts and ultimately purchased. As a result, those sixteen species were overplanted,
and in some cases, planted outside of their targeted natural communities (Florida De-
partment of Environmental Protection 1994).
The American Littoral Society grew concerned with the lack of restoration specifi-
cations and the limitations contracts placed on the project. The society signed on as
the nonprofit arm of the restoration effort, but it needed work plans based on restora-
tion objectives to develop programs, generate funding proposals, and deploy volunteer
resources. Based on this concern, the American Littoral Society formed a local advo-
cacy group to generate support for ecological restoration, and it partnered with the
nonprofit Institute for Regional Conservation to develop restoration guidelines and
provide training to staff and volunteers.
