Editing Everglades (section)

==Restoration==
{{Main|Restoration of the Everglades}}The [[International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List|International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)]] [[World Heritage Site|World Heritage]] Outlook cited the [[Everglades National Park]] 2020 Conservation Outlook as "Critical". Assessment of current trends were concluded to be "deteriorating" with "very high threat" to the overall health of the ecosystem. Unfortunately, some ecological features now lost cannot be restored as they were initially developed over decades to centuries.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Everglades National Park Conservation Assessment |url=https://worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/explore-sites/wdpaid/2012 |access-date=March 24, 2023 |website=World Heritage Outlook}}</ref> The surviving ecological features are of vital importance to protect due to their essential support of the state of Florida and their unique properties, unknown elsewhere in the world and are of invaluable consequence to multiple fields of study.

Major contributors to this decline include water quality (nutrient pollution), quantity (reduced water flow), distribution, and timing; invasive species; climate change (sea-level rise, etc.); ocean acidification; and hurricanes. Other significant threats to the restoration and conservation of the Everglades are lagging logistic and legislative action. Restoration projects in other areas of Florida (i.e. Tamami Trail Next Steps, water storage and treatment south of Lake Okeechobee, etc.), as well as decompartmentalization of the varying jurisdictions and regional water quality/quantity measures which are upstream of the ecosystem, have not received adequate attention, but are essential to prevent further loss.<ref name=":0" />

While some Everglades Restoration projects have been completed, critical plans remain incomplete. Further, pre-CERP components of current plans overestimated the hydrologic and ecologic benefits of these plans, and restoration projects to be complete by 2027 that address these "benefit setbacks" lack timely funding.<ref name=":0" />

Recent changes in internal site policies have been lauded as showing promising improvement, including improved consistency in the management of park visitor activities, efforts to deal with invasive species, improving prescribed fire activities, and increasing financing opportunities for internal park projects. However, although the site itself is increasing work to deal with salient issues, support at the local, state, and federal level have not been in proportion to the critical nature of conservation efforts.<ref name=":0" />

===Kissimmee River===
The Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project's final construction project was straightening the [[Kissimmee River]], a meandering {{convert|90|mi|km|adj=on}}-long river that was drained to make way for grazing land and agriculture. The C&SF started building the C-38 canal in 1962 and the effects were seen almost immediately. Waterfowl, wading birds, and fish disappeared, prompting conservationists and sport fishers to demand the region be restored before the canal was finished in 1971.<ref name="usgs1134">{{cite web| title = Environmental Setting: The Altered System| work = Circular 1134| publisher = U.S. Geological Survey| date = November 2, 2004| url = http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/circular/1134/esas/index.html| access-date = 2008-05-19| archive-date = May 13, 2008| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080513152849/http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/circular/1134/esas/index.html| url-status = dead}}</ref> In general, C&SF projects had been criticized for being temporary fixes that ignored future consequences, costing billions of dollars with no end in sight.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Davis | first1 = Jack | year = 2003 | title = 'Conservation is now a dead word': Marjory Stoneman Douglas and the transformation of American environmentalism | journal = Environmental History | volume = 8 | issue = 1| pages = 53–76 | doi=10.2307/3985972| jstor = 3985972 | s2cid = 145203614 }}</ref> After Governor [[Bob Graham]] initiated the Save Our Everglades campaign in 1983, the first section of the canal was backfilled in 1986. Graham announced that by 2000 the Everglades would be restored as closely as possible to its pre-drainage state.<ref name="angier">{{cite magazine| last = Angier| first = Natalie| title = Now You See It, Now You Don't| magazine = Time| date = August 6, 1984| url = http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,921744,00.html| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20090512091505/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,921744,00.html| url-status = dead| archive-date = May 12, 2009| access-date = 2008-05-20}}</ref> The Kissimmee River Restoration project was approved by Congress in 1992. It is estimated that it will cost $578&nbsp;million to convert only {{convert|22|mi|km}} of the canal. The entire project was to be complete by 2011,<ref name="krrstate">{{cite web| title = Kissimmee River History| publisher = Florida Department of Environmental Protection| year = 2006| url = http://www.dep.state.fl.us/evergladesforever/about/history.htm| access-date = 2008-05-19}}</ref> yet {{as of|2017|lc=y}}, the project is "more than halfway complete" and the new completion date is 2020.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Missions/Environmental/Ecosystem-Restoration/Kissimmee-River-Restoration/|title=Kissimmee River Restoration|website=www.saj.usace.army.mil|access-date=2017-04-07}}</ref>

===Water quality===
[[File:Mercury warning sign in Everglades National Park.JPG|thumb|upright|Warnings are placed in Everglades National Park to dissuade people from eating fish due to high mercury content. This warning explicitly mentions [[Bass (fish)|bass]].]]

Further problems with the environment arose when a vast [[algal bloom]] appeared in one-fifth of Lake Okeechobee in 1986, the same year [[Typha|cattails]] were discovered overtaking sawgrass marshes in [[Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge]]. Scientists discovered that [[phosphorus]], used as a fertilizer in the EAA, was flushed into canals and pumped back into the lake.<ref>Lodge, p.&nbsp;230.</ref> When the lake drained, the phosphorus entered the water in the marshes, changing the nutrient levels. It kept periphyton from forming marl, one of two soils in the Everglades. The arrival of phosphorus allowed cattails to spread quickly. The cattails grew in dense mats—too thick for birds or alligators to nest in. It also dissolved oxygen in the peat, promoted algae, and prohibited the growth of native invertebrates on the bottom of the food chain.<ref>Davis, Steven. "Phosphorus Inputs and Vegetation Sensitivity in the Everglades" in ''Everglades: The Ecosystem and its Restoration'', Steven Davis and John Ogden, eds. (1994), St. Lucie Press. {{ISBN|0-9634030-2-8}}</ref>

At the same time [[Mercury (element)|mercury]] was found in local fish at such high levels that consumption warnings were posted for fishermen. A [[Florida panther]] was found dead with levels of mercury high enough to kill a human.<ref name="lodgemercury">Lodge, pp.&nbsp;231–233.</ref> Scientists found that power plants and incinerators using fossil fuels were expelling mercury into the atmosphere, and it fell as rain or dust during droughts. The naturally occurring bacteria that reduce sulfur in the Everglades ecosystem were transforming the mercury into [[methylmercury]], and it was [[Bioaccumulation|bioaccumulating]] through the food chain.<ref name="lodgemercury" /> Stricter emissions standards helped lower mercury coming from power plants and incinerators, which in turn lowered mercury levels found in animals, though they continue to be a concern.<ref name="lodgemercury" />

The [[Everglades Forever Act]], introduced by Governor [[Lawton Chiles]] in 1994, was an attempt to legislate the lowering of phosphorus in Everglades waterways. The act put the [[South Florida Water Management District]] (SFWMD) and the [[Florida Department of Environmental Protection]] (DEP) in charge of testing and enforcing low phosphorus levels: 10&nbsp;parts per billion (ppb) (down from 500&nbsp;ppb in the 1980s).<ref name="efa">{{cite web|title = Florida Statutes (Supplement 1994) [Everglades Forever Act]|work = Chapter 373: Water Resources, Part IV. Management and Storage of Surface Waters, 373.4592 Everglades improvement and management|publisher = [[University of Miami]] School of Law|year = 1997|url = http://exchange.law.miami.edu/everglades/statutes/state/florida/E_forever.htm|access-date = 2008-05-21|url-status = dead|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20081028150828/http://exchange.law.miami.edu/everglades/statutes/state/florida/E_forever.htm|archive-date = 2008-10-28
}}</ref> The SFWMD built Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs) near sugarcane fields where water leaving the EAA flows into ponds lined with lime rock and layers of peat and [[calcareous]] periphyton. Testing has shown this method to be more effective than previously anticipated, bringing levels from 80&nbsp;ppb to 10&nbsp;ppb.<ref>{{cite web|title = Periphyton-based Stormwater Treatment Area (PSTA) Technology|publisher = The Journey to Restore America's Everglades|date = December 2003|url = http://www.evergladesplan.org/docs/fs_psta_hires.pdf|access-date = 2008-05-22|url-status = dead|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080529070046/http://www.evergladesplan.org/docs/fs_psta_hires.pdf|archive-date = 2008-05-29
}}</ref>

===Invasive species===
{{Main|List of invasive species in the Everglades}}

[[File:ARS Lygodium microphyllum.jpg|thumb|upright|Climbing ferns overtake cypress trees in the Everglades. The ferns act as "fire ladders" that can destroy trees that would otherwise survive fires.]]

As a center for trade and travel between the U.S., the Caribbean, and South America, South Florida is especially vulnerable to [[invasive species]], or species of plants and animals that adapt aggressively to conditions in the Everglades, allowing them to reproduce faster and grow larger than they would naturally in their native environments. Approximately 26% of all species of fish, reptiles, birds, and mammals in South Florida are exotic—more than in any other part of the U.S.—and the region hosts one of the highest numbers of exotic plant species in the world.<ref>Ferriter, et al. (2004), p. 1.</ref> Controlling invasive species in {{convert|1,700,000|acre|km2|abbr=on}} of infested land in South Florida costs authorities about $500&nbsp;million a year.<ref name=invaders>[http://www.nps.gov/ever/naturescience/upload/2008%20Florida%20Invaders%20For%20Web.pdf Florida Invaders], National Park Service and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Retrieved on February 3, 2010.</ref>

The Everglades hosts 1,392 exotic plant species actively reproducing in the region, outnumbering the 1,301 species considered native to South Florida.<ref>Rodgers, ''et al.'', p. 9-2.</ref> The melaleuca tree (''[[Melaleuca quinquenervia]]'') takes water in greater amounts than other trees. Melaleucas grow taller and more densely in the Everglades than in their native Australia, making them unsuitable as nesting areas for birds with wide wingspans.<ref>Lodge, pp.&nbsp;237–240.</ref> They also choke out native vegetation. More than $2&nbsp;million has been spent on keeping them out of Everglades National Park.<ref>Tasker, Georgia (August 22, 1998). "Federal Experts Warn of Alien Plant Invasion", ''The Miami Herald''.</ref>

Brazilian pepper, or Florida holly (''[[Schinus terebinthifolius]]''), has also wreaked havoc on the Everglades, exhibiting a tendency to spread rapidly and to crowd out native species of plants as well as to create inhospitable environments for native animals. It is especially difficult to eradicate and is readily propagated by birds, which eat its small red berries.<ref>Lodge, p.&nbsp;241.</ref> The Brazilian pepper problem is not exclusive to the Everglades; neither is the [[water hyacinth]] ''(Eichhornia crassipes)'', which is a widespread problem in Florida's waterways, a major threat to endemic species, and is difficult and costly to eradicate. The Old World climbing fern (''[[Lygodium microphyllum]]'') may be causing the most harm to restoration as it blankets areas thickly, making it impossible for animals to pass through. It also climbs up trees and creates "fire ladders", allowing parts of the trees to burn that would otherwise remain unharmed.<ref>Lodge, p.&nbsp;242.</ref>

Many pets have escaped or been released into the Everglades from the surrounding urban areas. Some find the conditions quite favorable and have established self-sustaining populations, competing for food and space with native animals. Many tropical fish have been released, but blue tilapias (''[[Oreochromis aureus]]'') cause damage to shallow waterways by creating large nests and consuming aquatic plants that protect native young fish.<ref>Lodge, pp.&nbsp;243–244.</ref>

Native to southern Asia, the Burmese python (''[[Python molurus bivittatus]]'') is a relatively new invasive species in the Everglades. This species can grow up to {{convert|20|ft|m}} long, and they compete with alligators for the top of the food chain. Florida wildlife officials speculate that [[Burmese Pythons in Florida|escaped pythons]] have begun reproducing in an environment for which they are well-suited.<ref>Lodge, p.&nbsp;244.</ref><ref>{{cite news| title = Snake bursts after gobbling gator| work = BBC News| date = October 5, 2005| url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4313978.stm| access-date = 2008-03-14}}</ref> In 2017 The South Florida Water Management District implemented the Python Elimination program, hoping to encourage the public to participate in the removal of the snakes by placing a cash reward per foot of python captured and euthanized with an additional wage pay and $200 per active nest found.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.sfwmd.gov/our-work/python-program | title=Python Elimination Program }}</ref> In Everglades National Park alone, agents removed more than 2,000 Burmese pythons from the park {{as of|2017|lc=y}}.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nps.gov/ever/learn/nature/burmesepythonsintro.htm|title=Burmese Pythons – Everglades National Park (U.S. National Park Service)|website=www.nps.gov|access-date=2017-04-07}}</ref> Federal authorities banned four species of exotic snakes, including the Burmese python, in 2012.<ref>Segal, Kim (January 17, 2012). [http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/us/florida-python-ban/index.html U.S. bans imports of 4 exotic snake species], CNN. Retrieved on January 17, 2012.</ref> The pythons are believed to be responsible for drastic decreases in the populations of some mammals within the park.<ref name=dorcas>{{cite journal|last1=Dorcas|first1=M. E.|last2=Willson|first2=J. D.|last3=Reed|first3=R. N.|last4=Snow|first4=R. W.|last5=Rochford|first5=M. R.|last6=Miller|first6=M. A.|last7=Meshaka|first7=W. E.|last8=Andreadis|first8=P. T.|last9=Mazzotti|first9=F. J.|last10=Romagosa|first10=C. M.|last11=Hart|first11=K. M.|title=Severe mammal declines coincide with proliferation of invasive Burmese pythons in Everglades National Park|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume= 109|issue=7|date= 2011-12-21|pages= 2418–2422|issn= 0027-8424|doi= 10.1073/pnas.1115226109|pmid=22308381|pmc=3289325|doi-access=free}}</ref> In a 2015 study by the United States Geological Survey, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, and the University of Florida, 95 adult marsh rabbits were released and tracked in areas known to have invasive python populations. 11 months later, it was found that 77% of the rabbits that fell victim to predation, was due to pythons.<ref>{{cite journal | doi=10.1098/rspb.2015.0120 | title=Marsh rabbit mortalities tie pythons to the precipitous decline of mammals in the Everglades | year=2015 | last1=McCleery | first1=Robert A. | last2=Sovie | first2=Adia | last3=Reed | first3=Robert N. | last4=Cunningham | first4=Mark W. | last5=Hunter | first5=Margaret E. | last6=Hart | first6=Kristen M. | journal=Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences | volume=282 | issue=1805 | pmid=25788598 | pmc=4389622 }}</ref> Relationships like these are believed to be a reason for declining native predator populations such as the Florida Panther that has less than 500 remaining individuals in the wild.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.fws.gov/story/2022-04/florida-panther | title=The Florida Panther &#124; U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service | date=13 April 2022 }}</ref>

===Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan===
{{Main|Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan}}

Although scientists made headway in decreasing mercury and phosphorus levels in water, the natural environment of South Florida continued to decline in the 1990s, and life in nearby cities reflected this downturn. To address the deterioration of the Miami metropolitan area, Governor Lawton Chiles commissioned a report on the [[sustainability]] of the area. In 1995, Chiles published the commission's findings in a report that related the degradation of the Everglades ecosystems to the lower quality of life in urban areas. The report noted past environmental abuses that brought the state to a position to make a decision. Not acting to improve the South Florida ecosystem, the report predicted, would inevitably cause further and intolerable deterioration that would harm local tourism by 12,000&nbsp;jobs and $200&nbsp;million annually, and commercial fishing by 3,300&nbsp;jobs and $52&nbsp;million annually.<ref name="sustainable">{{cite web|title = Chapter 1: Background and understanding|work = The Governor's Commission for a Sustainable South Florida|publisher = State of Florida|date = October 1, 1995|url = http://dlis.dos.state.fl.us/fgils/agencies/sust/tocs.html|access-date = 2008-05-23|url-status = dead|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20090516153453/http://dlis.dos.state.fl.us/fgils/agencies/sust/tocs.html|archive-date = May 16, 2009
}}</ref> Urban areas had grown beyond their capacities to sustain themselves. Crowded cities were facing problems such as high crime rates, traffic jams, severely overcrowded schools, and overtaxed public services; the report noted that water shortages were ironic, given the {{convert|53|in|cm}} of rain the region received annually.<ref name="sustainable"/>

In 1999, an evaluation of the C&SF was submitted to Congress as part of the Water Development Act of 1992. The seven-year report, called the "Restudy", cited indicators of harm to the ecosystem: a 50&nbsp;percent reduction in the original Everglades, diminished water storage, harmful timing of water releases from canals and pumping stations, an 85 to 90&nbsp;percent decrease in wading bird populations over the past 50&nbsp;years, and the decline of output from commercial fisheries. Bodies of water including [[Lake Okeechobee]], the [[Caloosahatchee River]], [[St. Lucie River|St. Lucie]] estuary, [[Lake Worth Lagoon]], [[Biscayne Bay]], [[Florida Bay]] and the Everglades reflected drastic water level changes, [[salinity|hypersalinity]], and dramatic changes in marine and freshwater ecosystems. The Restudy noted the overall decline in water quality over the past 50&nbsp;years was due to loss of wetlands that act as filters for polluted water.<ref>US Army COE and SFWMD, p.&nbsp;iii.</ref> It predicted that without intervention the entire South Florida ecosystem would deteriorate. Water shortages would become common and some cities would have annual [[water restriction]]s.<ref>US Army COE and SFWMD, pp.&nbsp;iv–v.</ref>

[[File:Future Drainage in South Florida.jpg|thumb|upright=1.4|Planned water recovery and storage implementation using CERP strategies]]

The Restudy came with a plan to stop the declining environmental quality, and this proposal was to be the most expensive and comprehensive ecological repair project in history.<ref>Schmitt, Eric (October 20, 2000). "Everglades Restoration Plan Passes House, With Final Approval Seen", ''The New York Times'', p. 1.</ref> The [[Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan]] (CERP) proposed more than 60&nbsp;construction projects over 30&nbsp;years to store water that was being flushed into the ocean, in reservoirs, underground aquifers, and abandoned quarries; add more Stormwater Treatment Areas to filter water that flowed into the lower Everglades; regulate water released from pumping stations into local waterways and improve water released to Everglades National Park and Water Conservation Areas; remove barriers to sheetflow by raising the [[Tamiami Trail]] and destroying the Miami Canal, and reuse wastewater for urban areas.<ref>US Army COE and SFWMD, pp.&nbsp;vii–ix.</ref> The cost estimate for the entire plan was $7.8&nbsp;billion, and in a bipartisan show of cooperation, CERP was voted through Congress with an overwhelming margin. It was signed by President [[Bill Clinton]] on December 11, 2000.<ref>{{cite web|title = Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2000|publisher = The Journey to Restore America's Everglades|date = November 4, 2002|url = http://www.evergladesplan.org/wrda2000/wrda.aspx|access-date = 2008-05-23|url-status = dead|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080720075749/http://www.evergladesplan.org/wrda2000/wrda.aspx|archive-date = July 20, 2008
}}</ref>

Since its signing, the State of Florida reports that it has spent more than $2&nbsp;billion on the various projects. More than {{convert|36000|acre|km2}} of Stormwater Treatment Areas have been constructed to filter {{convert|2500|ST|MT}} of phosphorus from Everglades waters. An STA spanning {{convert|17000|acre|km2}} was constructed in 2004, making it the largest manmade wetland in the world. Fifty-five percent of the land necessary to acquire for restoration has been purchased by the State of Florida, totaling {{convert|210167|acre|km2}}. A plan to hasten the construction and funding of projects was put into place, named "Acceler8", spurring the start of six of eight large construction projects, including that of three large reservoirs.<ref>{{cite web| title = Restoring the River of Grass| publisher = Florida Department of Environmental Protection| year = 2006| url = http://www.dep.state.fl.us/evergladesforever/| access-date = 2008-05-24}}</ref> However, federal funds have not been forthcoming; CERP was signed when the U.S. government had a budget surplus, but since then deficits have renewed, and two of CERP's major supporters in Congress retired. According to a story in ''[[The New York Times]]'', state officials say the restoration is lost in a maze of "federal bureaucracy, a victim of 'analysis paralysis'".<ref>Goodnough, Abby (November 2, 2007). "Vast Effort to Save Everglades Falters as U.S. Funds Dwindle",  ''The New York Times'', Section A, p.&nbsp;1.</ref> CERP still remains controversial as the projects slated for Acceler8, environmental activists note, are those that benefit urban areas, and regions in the Everglades in desperate need of water are still being neglected, suggesting that water is being diverted to make room for more people in an already overtaxed environment.<ref>Grunwald, Michael (October 14, 2004). "Fla. Steps In to Speed Up State-Federal Everglades Cleanup", ''The Washington Post'', p.&nbsp;A03.</ref>

[[File:Airboating 1, Everglades, FL, jjron 31.03.2012.jpg|thumb|[[Airboat]]ing has become a popular [[ecotourism]] attraction in the Everglades.]]

A series of biennial reports from the U.S. National Research Council have reviewed the progress of CERP. The fourth report in the series, released in 2012, found that little progress has been made in restoring the core of the remaining Everglades ecosystem; instead, most project construction so far has occurred along its periphery.<ref>National Research Council report Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Fourth Biennial Review 2012, http://dels.nas.edu/Report/Progress-Toward-Restoring-Everglades/13422 {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120928101857/http://dels.nas.edu/Report/Progress-Toward-Restoring-Everglades/13422 |date=September 28, 2012 }}</ref> The report noted that to reverse ongoing ecosystem declines, it will be necessary to expedite restoration projects that target the central Everglades, and to improve both the quality and quantity of the water in the ecosystem.<ref name="dels">National Research Council Report-in-Brief, Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Fourth Biennial Review 2012, http://dels.nas.edu/Materials/Report-In-Brief/4296-Everglades {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120925044706/http://dels.nas.edu/Materials/Report-In-Brief/4296-Everglades |date=September 25, 2012 }}</ref> To better understand the potential implications of the current slow pace of progress, the report assessed the current status of ten Everglades ecosystem attributes, including phosphorus loads, peat depth, and populations of snail kites, birds of prey that are endangered in South Florida. Most attributes received grades ranging from C (degraded) to D (significantly degraded), but the snail kite received a grade of F (near irreversible damage). The report also assessed the future trajectory of each ecosystem attribute under three restoration scenarios: improved water quality, improved hydrology, and improvements to both water quality and hydrology, which helped highlight the urgency of restoration actions to benefit a wide range of ecosystem attributes and demonstrate the cost of inaction.<ref name="dels" /> Overall, the report concluded that substantial near-term progress to address both water quality and hydrology in the central Everglades is needed to reverse ongoing degradation before it is too late.

===Future of the Everglades===
In 2008, the State of Florida agreed to buy [[US Sugar Corporation|U.S. Sugar]] and all of its manufacturing and production facilities for an estimated $1.7&nbsp;billion.<ref name=sugar>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/us/24cnd-sugar.html|title=Florida to Buy Sugar Maker in Bid to Restore Everglades|author=Damien Cave|author2=John Holusha|newspaper=The New York Times|date=2008-06-24|access-date=2008-06-24}}</ref> Florida officials indicated they intended to allow U.S. Sugar to process for six more years before dismissing its employees and dismantling the plant. The area, which includes {{convert|187000|acre|km2}} of land, would then be rehabilitated and water flow from Lake Okeechobee would be restored.<ref name=sugar/> In November 2008, the agreement was revised to offer $1.34&nbsp;billion, allowing sugar mills in Clewiston to remain in production.<ref>Cave, Damien (November 12, 2008). "Everglades Deal Shrinks to Sale of Land, Not Assets", ''The New York Times'', p. 16.</ref> Critics of the revised plan say that it ensures sugarcane will be grown in the Everglades for at least another decade.<ref>Bussey, Jane, Morgan, Curtis (November 16, 2008). "Land deal could lift U.S. Sugar's sagging fortunes: Is it a buyout or a bailout? Either way, a pending deal to sell land to the state for Everglades restoration could reverse Big Sugar's flagging finances", ''The Miami Herald'' (Florida).</ref> Further research is being done to address the continuing production of sugarcane in the Everglades to minimize phosphorus runoff.<ref>Yao, Stephanie (March 24, 2010). [http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr/2010/100324.htm Sugarcane Okay in Standing Water, Helps Protect Everglades], Agricultural Research Service U.S. Department of Agriculture. Retrieved on August 9, 2010.</ref>

Everglades restoration received $96&nbsp;million of the [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]].<ref>Morgan, Curtis, Clark, Lesley (April 29, 2009). "River of Cash: Stimulus Aid for Glades", ''The Miami Herald'', p1A.</ref> As a result of the stimulus package, a mile-long (1.6&nbsp;km) bridge to replace the [[Tamiami Trail]], a road that borders Everglades National Park to the north and has blocked water from reaching the southern Everglades, was begun by the Army Corps of Engineers in December 2009. The next month work began to reconstruct the C-111 canal, east of the park that historically diverted water into Florida Bay.<ref>Morgan, Curtis (January 27, 2010). "Canal work begins in Everglades project", ''The Miami Herald'', South Florida news.</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |last=Jackson |first=Susan |date=December 2009 |url=http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Divisions/Executive/Branches/CCO/DOCS/JaxStrong/v1-4_JaxStrong_Dec2009.pdf |title=Everglades supporters celebrate Tamiami Trail groundbreaking |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725192029/http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Divisions/Executive/Branches/CCO/DOCS/JaxStrong/v1-4_JaxStrong_Dec2009.pdf |archive-date=2011-07-25 |publisher=Army Corps of Engineers |magazine=Jaxstrong |volume=1 |issue=4 |page=3 |access-date=February 11, 2010}}</ref> Governor [[Charlie Crist]] announced the same month that $50&nbsp;million of state funds would be earmarked for Everglades restoration.<ref>Skoloff, Brian (January 22, 2010). "Gov. Crist proposes $2.1 billion for environment", ''The Miami Herald'', Florida news.</ref> In May 2010, {{convert|5.5|mi|km}} of bridges were proposed to be added to the Tamiami Trail.<ref>Gibson, William (May 19, 2010). [http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-05-19/business/fl-everglades-washington-forum-20100519_1_everglades-projects-everglades-water-flow-everglades-foundation Federal officials plan to add more bridges to let Everglades water flow under U.S. 41] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120330053813/http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-05-19/business/fl-everglades-washington-forum-20100519_1_everglades-projects-everglades-water-flow-everglades-foundation |date=March 30, 2012 }}, ''Florida Sun-Sentinel''. Retrieved on August 9, 2010.</ref>