Part III - Case Studies

Case Study 1: Comparative Analysis of the Florida Everglades and the South American Pantanal
Case Study 2: Infrastructure for Water Supply and Sanitation in the Hemisphere

Case Study 1: Comparative Analysis of the Florida Everglades and the South American Pantanal

Presented by

Jeffry S. Wade, John C. Tucker, Richard G. Hamann
Center for Governmental Responsibility
University of Florida College of Law
Gainesville, Florida

at the

Interamerican Dialogue on Water Management

Miami, Florida, USA
October 27-30, 1993

I. OVERVIEW

A. Ecosystem Structure and Impacts

Though the Pantanal and Everglades share important physical and biological characteristics, there are significant differences in the structure and ecological functioning of the two systems. Both are large, internationally significant freshwater wetland systems, though the Pantanal watershed is several times larger than that of the Everglades. Both systems are dependent on larger watersheds. The Pantanal receives direct rainfall and water from many riverine systems and is drained by a major river. The Everglades, in addition to rainfall, is dependent on a single river and lake system which historically supplied sheetflow to the system. It drained, in turn, to a dependent estuary. The differences in elevation and degree of natural sedimentation rates from surrounding uplands are much greater in the case of the Pantanal. The Everglades developed as an oligotrophic ecosystem, more vulnerable to slight increases in nutrients. Variability in the sub-basins of the Pantanal make generalizations difficult concerning that system. It appears that the Pantanal evolved with higher nutrient levels associated with sedimentation processes.

Soils in the upper basin of the Pantanal appear to be more susceptible to erosion than those in the upper basin of the Everglades. Generally, soils in the lower basin of the Pantanal are less organic than those in the Everglades lower drainage areas. Yearly and wet season rainfall totals appear to be approximately equivalent in each system. Both ecosystems depend on water regimes with yearly wet and dry cycles, however the Pantanal experiences greater differences in water levels between dry and wet seasons. Historically, the relative abundance of wildlife in the two systems appears to have been roughly equivalent, though diversity may have been greater in the Pantanal. Currently, the Pantanal supports much more diversity and abundance of wildlife.

Some of the more significant impacts to the water regime in both Pantanal and Everglades ecosystems involve planned or existing large scale water development projects. Since the 1880s, a government-subsidized process of dredging, draining and channelization within the Everglades watershed has profoundly altered the quantity, quality, timing, rate and distribution of water flows to that ecosystem. Impacts on ecosystem functioning have included the significant loss or degradation of native plant communities, the loss or destruction of wildlife habitat, including that of threatened and endangered species and estuarine-dependent fish, and the loss of hydrostatic pressure in fresh water aquifers.

For many years, the natural resources of the Upper Paraguay Basin have played an important role in local economies. Large scale water development projects have not been attempted in the Basin, due in large part to its remoteness and lack of national economic importance. However, the planned Paraguay-Paraná Waterway (Hidrovia), being promoted by international development interests, has the potential to cause significant disruption of ecosystems in the Pantanal. As currently promoted, the first phase of the project would involve the dredging of a large percentage of the Paraguay River below Corumbá, with possible negative impacts on wetlands ecosystems in the Pantanal. The second phase of the project appears to include major water control structures, dredging and channelization above Corumbá, with potentially significant negative effects on ecosystem function and extensive secondary impacts.

There are very large soybean, sugar, rice and corn plantations in the highlands (planaltos) of the Pantanal watershed. Deforestation of the region, including loss of gallery forests and other vegetation along rivers, as well as poor water management practices on farms, appear to be contributing to extensive sedimentation of rivers in the Pantanal plain. The intensive agricultural techniques used in the relatively poor upland soils include the application of large amounts of agrochemical pesticides, fungicides and fertilizers, a significant percentage of which may be entering the Pantanal lowlands, primarily during periods of higher rainfall and flooding. Cattle ranching on the plains (planície) is dispersed, however impacts to vegetation from burning and grazing have been noted and the introduction of non-native grasses with low survivability leads to sedimentation.

Agricultural development in the Everglades is concentrated in areas just south of Lake Okeechobee, but is also present in several areas near Everglades National Park. Extensive diking and drainage were necessary to expose the muck soils which support many thousands of hectares of sugar cane just south of Lake Okeechobee. Rock plowing, intensive use of agrochemicals, and massive groundwater withdrawals are necessary to support winter vegetable and citrus production in areas farther south near Everglades National Park. In addition, a long history of dairy farming in regions around the Kissimmee River contributed to the eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee. The cumulative negative impacts on the hydrologic regime and on water quality in the Kissimmee/Lake Okeechobee/Everglades (KLOE) ecosystem have profoundly altered the functioning of the Everglades.

Mining and industrial operations represent important manipulations of the water regime of both Everglades and Pantanal ecosystems. The extent of various extractive industries and specific impacts of gold mining in the Pantanal watershed appear to have greater total negative consequences than those of extractive industries in the Everglades.

At present the consequences of urban development are more significant in the Everglades than in the Pantanal, with population pressures still very high. However, urban development pressure is increasing within the Pantanal watershed. A very low percentage of households in the region receive advanced sewage treatment, and control over other associated urban effluents is inconsistent. Continuing population influx will require infrastructure development, and careful planning and regulatory response.

Current conditions in the Pantanal and historic conditions in the Everglades represent what might seem to be virtually unlimited opportunities for exploitation of wildlife. In the case of the Everglades, fish, alligators and deer were taken by subsistence and commercial hunters beginning early in the history of human occupation of the area, at generally sustainable levels. However, the killing of tremendous numbers of wading birds from the 1870s to 1930s to satisfy the fashion industry's need for plumes was unprecedented. Millions of birds were taken before public opinion, changing styles and new legislation ended the slaughter. Several rookeries were completely extirpated and many have never recovered. Though by the 1960s, the alligator had been placed on the endangered species list for protective purposes, by the 1980s, populations had increased significantly. The controlled hunting program for alligators now in effect is a measure of the current success of the species. Other species have experienced serious declines in population for reasons only partially related to hunting, and authorities have been generally unsuccessful in helping those species recover.

Biological, social and economic conditions in the Pantanal roughly approximate those of the Everglades much earlier in its history. The sheer numbers of fish and other wildlife offer seemingly limitless opportunities for commercial and recreational harvest. Historically, the Pantanal ecosystem was used for subsistence level hunting and fishing by relatively small populations of indigenous peoples, whose activities had little impact on ecosystem functions. Currently, commercial overfishing has become a serious problem, essentially mining fish from the system at unsustainable rates. Though illegal, the taking of caiman for hides and many species of birds for the pet trade also continues to reduce populations.

B. Legal and Policy Response

The regulatory and enforcement tools available to agencies with jurisdiction over the Pantanal and Everglades share some similarities and differences. Though the Brazilian Constitution includes clearly articulated environmental rights, and specifies additional protection for the Pantanal as part of the “national patrimony,” the federal and state laws intended to implement those protections do not adequately address all potential threats and are inconsistently applied. The establishment of Everglades National Park placed protective boundaries around the lowest sections of the Everglades, but other related parts of the watershed have received very little specific protection. Regulatory exemptions, lack of coordination between agencies, and gaps in legislation have allowed continued degradation of the KLOE ecosystem. Only recently have issues concerning water resources for the Park and other sections of the Everglades been given the priority that is necessary in order to restore and maintain ecological functions.

There are very large differences in the physical, technical and monetary resources available to regulatory, research and planning institutions in the two ecosystems. Federal, state and regional agencies in Florida have access to sophisticated technical equipment, with relatively good research, monitoring and enforcement capabilities. The Brazilian economic crisis, combined with a general ambivalence toward environmental regulation, has resulted in a lack of institutional capability for most institutions in the Pantanal. In the past, a centralized approach to governmental regulation gave more authority and resources to federal institutions, while state agencies suffered. Recent changes in institutional emphasis, combined with a growing cultural appreciation of the need for environmentally sustainable development, have translated into increased resources for state level institutional development and greater regulatory authority. However, there is still a crucial need for funding to support adequate research, planning, permitting, monitoring and enforcement for environmental purposes in Brazil.

The problem of political will affects agencies in both ecosystems. For many years scientific information on the Everglades has documented a system in environmental decline, yet despite debate, increased regulatory authority and institutional capabilities, the degradation continued. It has taken near crisis conditions, and a federal lawsuit, to force responsible parties toward an effective response. A low level of perceived environmental threat to the Pantanal, combined with politically powerful development interests and a national drive for economic growth have allowed for ill-advised agricultural, industrial and mining operations to be permitted in the Pantanal watershed, particularly in the highlands.

II. ECOSYSTEM DESCRIPTIONS

A. Pantanal

The Pantanal, or “swampland” in Portuguese, is an immense alluvial plain within the Upper Paraguay River Basin in western Brazil, eastern Bolivia, and northeastern Paraguay. (Fig. 1) The Upper Paraguay Basin, including all associated upland areas, contains 496,000 square kilometers (191,500 square miles), of which approximately 80%, or 396,800 square kilometers (153,200 square miles) lie within Brazil, primarily in the states of Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul (SEMA, 1993). The Pantanal itself includes only the 140,000 square kilometers (54,000 square miles) of alluvial plain or planície, but a complete understanding of the ecology and management of the Pantanal requires consideration of the associated highlands, or planaltos. Altitudes range from 80-150 m (260-490 ft.) on the plains, to over 250 m (820 ft.) on the planaltos (Ferreira, 1992), with some isolated peaks over 1000 m (3250 ft.) southeast of Corumbá (Scott and Carbonell, 1986).

Fig. 1. Location of Pantanal Watershed Within Brazil

Though the Pantanal is one of the largest wetlands in the world, it is more properly characterized as a related series of river floodplains. Principal rivers in the basin include the Paraguay, Miranda, Cuiabá, São Lourenço, Negro, Taquarí, and Aquidauana, all originating in the planaltos. (Fig. 2) The Paraguay River is the major north-south watercourse in the Pantanal, extending 2800 kilometers (1735 mi.) from its source in the northern highlands of Mato Grosso, Brazil to Corrientes, Argentina, where it joins the Paraná River. Situated at the interface of three major South American ecosystems, the Pantanal includes characteristics of Amazon rainforest, cerrado scrub forests of central Brazil, and the chaco vegetation of nearby Bolivia and Argentina. Within the watershed, ten different ecological subregions have been identified (Adámoli, 1992). The area is dominated by a matrix of seasonally-flooded savanna, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and marshes. Principal vegetation consists of scrub forest and savanna characterized by native grasslands interspersed with gallery forest, humid semi-deciduous forest and wetland vegetation.

Fig. 2. Map of the Pantanal Region

Source: Bucher et al., 1993.

The Pantanal supports a great diversity and abundance of wildlife. Over 650 species of birds have been identified. The region is one of the world's largest breeding grounds for wading birds, an important migratory bird stopover point, and probably the most important area in South America for wetland birds (Mittermeier et al., 1990). Over 260 species of fish have been identified, with about 10-12 species caught for commercial purposes. Large numbers of other species of wildlife exist in the region, encompassing approximately 80 mammal species, 50 species of reptiles and over 1.000 species of butterflies. Some of the most unique animals in the world inhabit the Pantanal, including the giant anteater (Myrmecophaga tridactyla), giant river otter (Pteronura brasiliensis), maned wolf (Chrysocyon brachyurus), capybara (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris), tapir (Tapirus terrestris), jaguar (Panthera onca palustris), puma (Felis concolor), caiman or jacaré (Caiman crocodylus yacare), swamp deer (Blastocerus dichotomus), howler monkey (Alouatta caraya), blue hyacinth macaw (Anodorhynchus hyacinthinus) and the jabirú stork (Jabiru mycteria) (Mittermeier et al., 1990).

B. Everglades

The Everglades is a system of shallow sawgrass marshes, tree islands, wet prairies and aquatic sloughs that historically covered most of southeastern Florida (Davis, 1943). (Fig. 3) Formation of the Everglades began over 5000 years ago as organic matter and sedimentary deposits accumulated in a limestone depression which underlies much of the southern tip of Florida (SWIM, 1992a; Parker and Hoy, 1943). By the end of the 19th century wetlands covered about 10,000 square kilometers (3,900 square miles). The original Everglades extended from the south shore of Lake Okeechobee to the mangrove estuaries of Florida Bay, and were over 64 km (40 mi.) wide and 160 km (100 mi.) long (SWIM, 1992a). The Everglades is an integral part of the larger Kissimmee/Lake Okeechobee/Everglades system, which covers much of south and central Florida below the City of Orlando. They are bordered on the east by the Atlantic coastal ridge and on the west by the Immokalee rise (SWIM, 1992a; Parker and Hoy, 1943).

Fig. 3. Map of Everglades Watershed (Historic)

Source: Light and Dineen, in press.

Climate and weather patterns are closely tied to the hydrology of the region. Average yearly rainfall is 1350 mm (53 in.), about 75% of which occurs during the wet season (May to October) (SWIM, 1992a; Shih, 1983). Rainfall during the wet season is typically in the form of convective showers which occur almost daily, while winter rainfall is typically associated with winter frontal storms. Rainfall over the region is characterized by considerable variability between seasonal and annual amount, and in areal distribution (SWIM, 1992a).

Elevations in the Everglades region are generally less than 6 m (20 ft.) above sea level. The ground surface slopes gently from north to south with an average gradient of 2.8 cm/km (.15 ft./mi.) (SWIM. 1992a; Parker et al., 1955). The predominant soils of the Everglades region are organic histasols (muck or peat), overlying limestone formations. The muck soils have accumulated in a layer of up to 5.5 m (18 ft.) thick in the northern Everglades (SWIM, 1992a; Stephens and Johnson, 1951) where limestone elevations are lowest, to about one meter (3 ft.) or less in the southern Everglades. Another dominant soil type, calcitic mud, occurs in shallow peripheral marshes of the southern Everglades which undergo shorter periods of inundation than where muck soils occur.

The interaction of climate, geology, and topography with surface water, which makes up the hydrologic cycle of the region, shaped the biological system which developed in the Everglades. Everglades ecosystems evolved under conditions in which water availability varied from season to season and from year to year. The systems depend on the annual pattern of wet summer and dry winter seasons, as well as on a certain degree of variation in rainfall and the amount of surface water, for their continued existence (SWIM, 1992a). Accordingly, the variability and diversity of the biological systems are related to the natural variability of the hydrologic system (SWIM, 1992a).

The original Everglades comprised about one million hectares (2.5 million acres) of freshwater marsh (SWIM, 1992a). Major Everglades plant communities include the periphyton (algae) community, the sawgrass community, the wet prairie, aquatic sloughs, bayheads or tree islands, willow heads, tropical hardwood hammocks, cypress forest, and coastal mangrove forest communities (SWIM, 1992a). The Everglades were historically bordered by seasonal or short hydroperiod wetlands and upland pine habitat (Davis, 1943).

The major habitat types found in the Everglades region include upland forests, wetland forests, marshes, wet prairies, open water ponds and creeks, and mangrove forest (SWIM, 1992a). Most of the animals utilize a variety of habitat types, in response to the drying out and flooding of various areas during the annual water cycle.

Historically, wildlife species diversity in the Everglades was relatively poor, particularly compared to the species rich Pantanal, though the ecosystem did support tremendous numbers of birds and alligators. The majority of animal species, including the land mammals, and most of the breeding birds, reptiles and amphibians, appear to have colonized from the temperate southeastern coastal plain (SWIM, 1992a; Layne, 1984; Gunderson and Loftus, in press). The wetland and wading birds are dispersed throughout the West Indies (SWIM, 1992a; Robertson and Kushlan, 1984). Animals endemic to the region include the Everglades mink, the rice rat, the hispid cotton rat, the round-tailed muskrat, and the Cape Sable seaside sparrow (SWIM, 1992a).

The relatively low species diversity found in the Everglades is probably due to a variety of factors, including the young geologic age of the region, the lack of diversity in aquatic and terrestrial habitats, and its peninsular location (SWIM, 1992a). At least 44 species of amphibians and reptiles (SWIM, 1992a; Duellman and Schwartz, 1958), almost 400 species of birds (SWIM, 1992a; Robertson and Kushlan), and about 30 species of mammals (SWIM, 1992a; Schwartz, 1952; Layne, 1984) occur within the Everglades. About 60% of the bird species are wintering and migrant birds.

III. HUMAN USE AND DEVELOPMENT

The quality and quantity of water are key variables in the functioning of both the Pantanal and Everglades ecosystems. Both systems are highly dependent on the duration, distribution and timing of water flows. These characteristics, in turn, are subject to human interference through large scale water development, flood control and navigation improvement projects. The Everglades has been most significantly altered by such projects, but plans under consideration for development in the Pantanal may significantly alter that system as well.

Water quality has also been affected by human activities in both the Pantanal and Everglades. In both cases, there are significant threats from agricultural development in the watershed. Both systems are also contaminated by mercury. In the Pantanal the source is gold mining in the watershed. The source of mercury contamination of the Everglades is not yet known, but it has probably been transported by atmospheric processes. In addition, the Pantanal also receives point source discharges from industrial and urban sources.

Other key variables are the degree to which land cover has been altered through clearing, grazing or other activities and direct utilization of fish and wildlife. Much of the Everglades has been drained and convened to urban and intensive agricultural uses. The remaining Everglades is largely protected from such alteration. It is highly susceptible, however, to an ongoing invasion of non-native plant species, principally melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) and Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia). Land cover in the Pantanal plains remains largely intact, though it is subject to extensive grazing, limited logging and some clearing for pasture improvement. Many parts of the Pantanal highlands have been extensively cleared for agriculture and pasture.

The protected status of most of the remaining Everglades, and its relative lack of human habitation, means that direct utilization of fish and wildlife have relatively insignificant impacts on their populations. The commercial harvest of fish and the illegal harvest of several species of wildlife may have significant impacts in the Pantanal.

A. Large-scale water development projects

1. Pantanal

The Pantanal ecosystem is based on an annual cycle of flooding and drought, including a multi-year pattern involving occasional greater fluctuations, or pulses, in the cycle. The Pantanal plains absorb and moderate the flow of water through the Paraguay River (Bucher et al., 1993). Though wildlife in the region is adapted to the natural cycle of flooding and drought, extremely high water conditions can cause loss of caiman nests, and restriction of habitat for capybara and many other non-aquatic wild and domestic species (Ferreira et al., 1992). Conversely, extreme drought conditions can severely stress both domestic animals and wildlife, and greatly restrict aquatic and wetland habitats.

A potentially significant interference with natural hydroperiods and flow patterns is the proposed Paraguay-Paraná Waterway (Hidrovia), a massive navigation project which would increase transportation efficiencies for several products of the Pantanal and surrounding areas. The primary impetus for the Hidrovia is an agreement among Brazil, Bolivia, Uruguay, Paraguay and Argentina to create a regional common market, known as MERCOSUL or MERCOSUR (Andersen, 1992).

Though the proposal is at an early stage, there are concerns that the project could have serious negative environmental impacts (Bucher et al., 1993; Ferreira et al., 1992). As presently configured, the Hidrovia would include two modules or phases. The first is a short-term, fairly restricted project consisting primarily of channel dredging from Santa Fé, Argentina to Corumbá, Brazil, as well as signposting from Corumbá to Nueva Palmira, Uruguay. Currently, the Inter-American Development Bank is funding a US$2 million study of potential environmental impacts of this phase, and close to US$8 million for engineering and economic pre-feasibility studies. The second phase would include dredging, course changes, channel straightening and stabilization, and construction of water control structures for navigational purposes between Cáceres, Brazil and Nueva Palmira, Uruguay, including additional work within the Pantanal (Bucher et al., 1993).

There are many direct and indirect impacts associated with the proposed works. Direct impacts from the first phase of the project would include dredging and channel maintenance, deposit of dredged material and the physical effects of increased barge and ship traffic on the river banks. Dredging destroys habitat and organisms in the affected area, changes the composition of bottom material and increases water velocity in the dredged channel (Bucher et al., 1993; Allen and Hardey, 1980; Rasmussen and Harber, 1981). Changes in stream velocity are associated with water quality impacts caused by increased turbidity and suspended sediments. Depending on where dredged material is deposited, there may be direct destruction of habitat for nesting fish or birds, spawning fish or other vertebrates (Bucher et al., 1993; Allen and Hardey, 1980; Rasmussen and Harber, 1981). The single most potentially damaging impact of the Hidrovia project would be the loss of the Pantanal's function in moderating and absorbing flood waters on the Paraguay River (Bucher et al., 1993).

The hydrological regime of upper reaches of rivers can be significantly altered by construction and maintenance of downstream navigation channels, if channel capacity is increased at points of natural geomorphological constriction, increasing rates of drainage. In addition, channelization can exacerbate downstream flooding by increasing peak flows in a river (Bucher et al., 1993). Channel dredging and straightening can also affect the hydrological regime controlling wetland ecology. Though there is relatively little technical understanding of the hydrologic functioning of the Paraguay Basin, researchers have estimated that if the river channel were deepened by approximately 0.5-1.0 meter in that area, the extent of important floodplain wetlands might be significantly reduced in upriver regions which normally flood to less than one meter (Ferreira et al., 1992).

Of particular concern are the long-term impacts that alteration to the hydrology could have on the flora and fauna of the Pantanal. As evidenced in the Everglades, changes in water regimes can have many substantial and unanticipated adverse effects, including disruption of nesting and feeding behavior of wildlife, and changes in species composition and diversity. Ultimately, depending on the scale of the alterations, water management projects can substantially change the character and integrity of freshwater ecosystems.

In addition to impacts from dredging and channel straightening, channel maintenance structures, water control structures and the harbors and terminals that would be included in construction of the Hidrovia, there is also concern that a related increase in agricultural, industrial and urban activity (Bucher et al., 1993; Internave, 1992) would cause corresponding increases in pollution from agrochemicals, and industrial and urban wastes (Bucher et al., 1993).

2. Everglades

There has been extensive manipulation of water flows in the Kissimmee River-Lake Okeechobee-Everglades system by federal and state government, beginning in the late 1880s. Efforts to drain the region for agricultural purposes began as early as 1907, with the creation of the Everglades Drainage District. Early efforts included construction of a canal between Lake Okeechobee and the Caloosahatchee River, channelization of the Caloosahatchee and Miami Rivers, and digging of other canals through the Atlantic Coastal Ridge to facilitate drainage from Lake Okeechobee to the Atlantic Ocean. By 1927, six major drainage canals and many smaller canals had been built, including 440 miles of levees and 16 locks and dams.

Between 1926 and 1947, hurricanes and long periods of drought caused extreme fluctuations of water levels in the region. While flood control had been the primary concern in the past, the region was now faced with the additional problem of maintaining an adequate water supply for the rapidly increasing populations on the lower east coast of Florida. In response, Congress initiated the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project in 1947 to provide urban and agricultural flood control and to ensure adequate water supply. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers constructed a series of canals, levees, water retention areas, pump stations, and water control structures that extended throughout the entire length of the Everglades system. Today, this system includes over 2250 km (1,400 mi.) of canals, levees, water retention areas, pump stations, and water control structures in and around Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades. (Fig. 4)

Fig. 4. South Florida Water Management District (Drainage Canals and Surface Water Control System)

Source: Light and Dineen, in press.

During the 1960s, much of the Kissimmee River, the northernmost component of the KLOE system, was channelized. Channelization efforts considerably altered the hydrology of the Lower Kissimmee Basin and led to the loss of about 16,200 to 20,235 hectares (40,000 to 50,000 acres) of wetlands (SWIM, 1993). Drainage of the historic floodplain led to increased agricultural development (improved pasture and intensive dairy operations) along the river. Channelization and destruction of floodplain marshes reduced the natural phosphorus removal capabilities of the river. The reduced phosphorus removal capability of the river coupled with runoff from agricultural operations led to increased phosphorus loadings in Lake Okeechobee (SWIM, 1993; Lamonds, 1975; Federico, 1982). Channelization also altered the rate and amount of water which enters Lake Okeechobee.

Efforts to drain the Everglades and to control flooding substantially altered the quantity, timing, distribution, and rate of water flows in the natural system. These changes in the historic hydrologic regime of the Everglades, in combination with other factors, have resulted in substantial impacts to the biological components of the system, including significant loss or degradation of native plant communities and loss or destruction of habitats of threatened and endangered plants and animals. Almost one half of the original 1,619,000 hectares (4,000,000 acres) of wetlands in the Everglades have been lost to agriculture and urban development. Various species of wildlife have been adversely impacted by changes in natural flooding regimes. These changes have also contributed to problems associated with the quantity, timing and discharge of freshwater into the estuaries of Florida Bay, Manatee Bay, and Barnes Sound. Such changes have significantly reduced the ability of these estuaries to support fisheries at formerly highly productive levels.

B. Agricultural development

In the past twenty years, primarily in response to national economic goals, use of the planaltos surrounding the Pantanal plain has shifted dramatically toward intensive agriculture and cattle production. Though the low quality and erosive tendencies of soils in the region was known at the time, the drive to develop superseded concerns over the ecological functioning of downstream lowlands. The placement of intensive agricultural operations in the highlands continues to threaten the Pantanal planície. Use of massive amounts of agrochemicals and poorly planned water management systems have chronic long-term negative effects on the biology and hydrology of the area. Though public attention has recently begun to focus on the impacts of large scale agricultural operations, given the continuing economic crisis in Brazil and traditionally low concern for environmental values (Guimarães, 1991), it may be difficult to achieve meaningful change in agricultural practices in the near future.

The program is not dissimilar to that pursued by federal and state authorities in Florida at the turn of the century, when they officially supported and subsidized a program of drainage and agricultural development in the Everglades region south of Lake Okeechobee. The resulting impacts on water quality, quantity, timing and distribution to the rest of the Everglades have severely affected the functioning of the ecosystem.

1. Pantanal

Most of the rivers and tributaries draining into the Pantanal have their sources in the surrounding highland plateaus, or planaltos. In several regions, the planaltos are patchworked with extensive agricultural operations, most dedicated to soybean production, but including sugar cane, rice and corn. In the planaltos surrounding the Pantanal to the north and west, approximately 75% of the original cerrado forests and savannas have been converted to agriculture or pasture. Soils are relatively poor, yet intensive farming in these areas has been growing since the 1970s. To maintain soil fertility and combat crop pests, farmers have increasingly relied on extensive use of a wide variety of agrochemicals, including fungicides, pesticides, and fertilizers. Deforestation, including the clearcutting of vegetation bordering rivers, and poor water management practices have resulted in extensive agrochemical runoff, soil erosion and river sedimentation.

During the rainy season, extensive flooding, and some sedimentation and movement of river channels is considered normal in several rivers entering the Pantanal. However, there is growing concern that increased sediment load as a result of deforestation and farming on the surrounding uplands may be worsening flood conditions in the lowlands during the rainy season. In Mato Grosso, approximately 14 metric tons of soil per hectare per year is being eroded from farms on the planaltos (Teixeira, 1993). Higher sediment deposition in a river bed causes a decrease in flood storage capacity and a corresponding increase in flooding and channel movement (Bucher et al., 1993; Alho et al., 1988; Ferreira et al., 1992). The problem appears to be particularly severe on the Taquarí River, one of the major tributaries of the Paraguay River. Approximately 1,800,000 hectares (4,446,000 acres) of the upper Taquarí River basin have been deforested since the early 1970s, primarily for livestock pasture and intensive agriculture (Bucher et al., 1993).

There is a question concerning the rate and effects of sedimentation on the Taquarí River, which runs for more than 250 km (155 mi.), with a declivity of 10-15 cm/km (.65-.75 ft./mi.). Recent sediment loads have been estimated at several million tons per year, however the Taquarí formed an alluvial fan of over 50,000 square kilometers (19,300 square miles) long before humans arrived in the area, and has shifted its riverbed many times over its history (Adámoli, 1992). Thus, a problem lies in determining just how much this process has been accelerated by human activity and what corrective measures should be taken to conserve the basin. Some researchers believe the Taquarí River alluvial fan was not active in historical times due to dense vegetation which covered the entire basin, but has been reactivated by human-induced sedimentation (Bucher et al., 1993, citing Tricart, 1982).

Sediment loading changes the process of river movement across a floodplain, causing the river to break through surrounding natural berms more easily, thus creating large distributary channels and flooding areas not normally flooded. In attempts to eliminate such channels and increase total grazing area, several ranchers in the Pantanal have closed off breaks in the berms containing the Taquarí River. These actions have interfered with the migration and reproductive behavior of many water dependent species as the waters recede, occasionally stranding large numbers of fish in areas which eventually dry. Widespread action of this son would also raise questions concerning impacts to temporary lakes and wetlands, and effects on ecosystem functioning on a regional basis.

Another major problem related to the intensive agriculture in the planaltos is the widespread use of agrochemicals and their migration into the lowlands. There is growing evidence indicating that agrochemical pollution may be an important factor in the Pantanal, though actual magnitudes and impacts have yet to be evaluated systematically (Bucher et al., 1993; Alho et al., 1988; Ferreira et al., 1992). Herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers, as with sediments, enter the Pantanal primarily by way of stormwater runoff and seasonal floods. However, agrochemicals, particularly those with higher persistency, will tend to travel much farther on flood waters. Dilution and degradation by natural processes are additional factors in estimating the degree of harm ultimately posed by agricultural chemicals (Adámoli, 1992).

In addition to intensive farming in the highlands, another activity with potential impacts on ecosystem function in the Pantanal is cattle ranching. Roughly 95% of the Pantanal plains has been divided into privately owned cattle ranches, known as fazendas, owned by approximately 3500 fazendeiros. The tradition of cattle ranching in the Pantanal goes back approximately 200 years. The fazendas averaged 100,000 hectares during earlier periods, though now many have been subdivided into smaller ranches of 5000 hectares or less. The fencing required for these partitions tends to restrict the movement and migration of animals, and may have negative effects on some wildlife populations, particularly during flood periods when access to isolated higher areas is important to survival.

Though cattle densities are relatively low, there are questions concerning the effect that grazing has had on natural vegetative communities and sedimentation rates, and the systemic effects of manure from the large number of cattle raised in the Pantanal. An estimated three to eight million head of cattle in the watershed produce many millions of pounds of manure per day. Relatively low animal densities are thought to have prevented significant adverse effects on water quality, but no studies have been attempted which would evaluate the total effects on ecosystem functioning. Similarly, low densities are thought to have prevented significant deterioration of vegetative communities from grazing, but research is lacking. It is worth noting that on a government owned research fazenda in the Nhecholândia region of the Pantanal, the exuberant regrowth of vegetation in a small fenced area included species that have not been detected for many years in areas of open range accessible to cattle (Gomes, 1992).

In many cerrado regions, excessive pasture burning also reduces native vegetation, resulting in increased populations of undesirable vegetation, increased soil erosion and river sedimentation. The attempted cultivation of non-native grasses is also problematic, since these do not survive dry season conditions as well as native lowland grasses, and contribute to sedimentation problems when they die off.

The educational level of the fazendeiros is relatively high, and there appears to be general support for protecting and maintaining this existing use of the lowlands system. In recent years, ranch associations have been formed in an effort to support and inform the fazendeiros. One of the more visible of these associations is the NGO, known as Society for the Defense of the Pantanal (SODEPAN) in Mato Grosso do Sul, which offers workshops and educational materials to improve cattle and forest management, teach sustainable agricultural technologies and fish farming, and conduct research into the possibility of commercial farming of capybara and caiman. There are also attempts to advise and educate ranch owners on the possibility of supplementing cattle ranching with appropriate types of ecotourism (Azevedo, 1993).

2. Everglades

Agricultural land use practices within and adjacent to the Everglades have had significant adverse impacts on the historic natural system. Adverse impacts have resulted from both the physical disruption of natural habitat and hydrology caused by converting lands within the Everglades to agricultural and urban uses, and by the pollutants (pesticides and nutrients) associated with both activities. There are approximately 810,000 hectares (2,000,000 acres) of agricultural lands in these areas. The construction and operation of the water management system necessary to support these land uses have played a role in the large scale destruction of wetlands, water shortages, disruptions of the timing and distribution of water supply, nutrient pollution, and disruption of habitat. Such manipulation of the natural hydrologic regime has also contributed to fragmentation of the Everglades, resulting in the loss of connections between the central Everglades and adjacent transitional wetlands. Generally, there are several predominant forms of agricultural activities which impact the Everglades system. Crop production in the east Everglades area, including portions of Dade County, is typically preceded by rock plowing, a process of breaking up and crushing the native limestone rock formation until it reaches a consistency which can be plowed and planted. The subsequent agricultural use requires intensive use of water, pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer (SWIM, 1992a; Baker, 1988). Agricultural activities in this area are shifting from seasonal crops such as tomatoes and vegetables to year-round crops and plants such as citrus, tropical fruit, and ornamental nurseries that require more intensive water management (SWIM, 1992a; Metro-Dade, 1989).

Agriculture in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA), comprising about 283,000 hectares (700,000 acres) along the southern edge of Lake Okeechobee, relies on drained areas consisting of muck soils formed from the decay of sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense). Drainage of these soils causes soil oxidation and release of nutrients, and has been shown to contribute significant nitrogen and phosphorus loads to receiving waters. The principal crop is sugar cane, although vegetables, sod, corn, and rice are also grown in the area. Although sugar cane typically requires little or no fertilization, vegetable crops, which cover about 10% of the EAA, are responsible for about one third of the phosphorus fertilizer applied in the area (SWIM, 1992a; IFAS, 1989).

Fertilizer use on vegetable crops has been shown to significantly increase the phosphorus content of soils and to result in high concentrations in soil waters, groundwater, and drainage waters (SWIM, 1992a; IFAS, 1989). An extensive system of irrigation ditches, canals, levees, and pump stations exists to irrigate and drain fields. Nutrient contributions from surface waters from the EAA may have had significant adverse impacts on water quality and composition of flora and fauna. In addition, receiving waters are contaminated with high concentrations of chlorides, dissolved minerals, iron, and trace levels of pesticides (SWIM, 1992a).

Nutrient pollution from large dairy and cattle fanning operations located north of Lake Okeechobee has had adverse impacts on the water quality of the lake and downstream waters (SWIM, 1989). The primary concern is the large amounts of phosphorus and nitrogen that are discharged into the lake through surface water runoff from these operations. Excessive nutrients in the lake have led to massive lake-wide blue-green algae blooms and subsequent fish kills due to low oxygen levels in the water. In addition, nutrient rich waters flowing south from Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades Agricultural Area are altering native flora and fauna. Phosphorus is assumed to be the growth-limiting nutrient in Lake Okeechobee. Accordingly, current management strategies are focusing on controlling phosphorus inputs to the lake.

Only approximately half of the 1,619,000 hectares (4,000,000 acres) of original Everglades now remain, and are contained within various impoundments, cut off from essential sources of sheet flowing water. Everglades wildlife communities and the sustainability of the ecosystem are impaired by this separation and isolation. Runoff from dairy operations and backpumping from the Everglades Agricultural Area have resulted in increased nutrient loads to Lake Okeechobee, the water conservation areas, and Everglades National Park. These discharges are causing significant changes in the composition of plant and animal communities and other natural characteristics, and threaten the ecological integrity of the Everglades ecosystem (SWIM, 1992a; LOTAC-II, 1988; Swift and Nicholas, 1987; Davis, 1989, 1991).

C. Extractive and industrial activity

1. Pantanal

Extractive industries for iron, manganese, diamonds and gold have the potential for significant impacts on the Pantanal ecosystem. Iron and manganese mining, primarily in areas near Corumbá, produces mostly localized effects in the Pantanal, but does have negative impacts on nearby agricultural areas that are important to local markets (Ferreira et al., 1992). Mining also appears to be related to changes in the direction of groundwater flow and in streams draining the area, and creates problems with iron and manganese contamination and sedimentation, particularly when dams containing mineral wastes break during heavy rains (Ferreira et al., 1992).

Sedimentation from operations occurring directly in or near rivers has significant long-term impacts on hydrological and ecological functioning. Two diamond mining areas in Mato Grosso contribute very high sediment loads to the Paraguay River and São Lourenço River. Operations in these areas include activities which occur directly in the river channels.

In the upper Paraguay Basin, of the various mineral mining operations, gold mining represents the greatest environmental and human health risk. Since the early 1980s, gold mining has been concentrated in the state of Mato Grosso, in the upper reaches of the basin. There are approximately 300,000 miners (garimpeiros) in Mato Grosso (PRODEAGRO, 1992), and more than 500 mining operations in the Poconé area alone (Santos, 1993), with production estimated at 400 kilograms per month (Teixeira, 1993). Environmental impacts include destruction of riverine vegetation, soil erosion and sedimentation, changes in river bed topography and water pollution.

Estimates are that 40 metric tons per year of mercury are used by miners in Mato Grosso in order to amalgamate gold particles contained in the mined soil and mud slurry (PRODEAGRO, 1992). There are serious questions concerning how carefully mercury is being handled, and how much is being released to the environment. Environmental officials state that recent advances in technology allow the containment of 80% of mercury used during this phase of the process, but it is unclear to what extent the new technology is being employed. Pits for discarded slurry are often poorly designed and constructed, sometimes allowing pit walls to break or overflow during high water periods.

Typically, the mercury/gold amalgamate is heated in open containers with blowtorches to vaporize the mercury. Public health officials estimate that three grams of mercury are used for every gram of placer gold mined, and that 70% of the volatilized mercury eventually finds its way into the food chain, bioaccumulating at higher trophic levels. Environmental officials in Mato Grosso state that new volatilization processes recapture 80-90% of the volatilized mercury, though small miners do not tend to use such processes, and the state's low enforcement capability makes it difficult to control small operations.

There are several documented cases of elevated mercury levels in native fish and birds, particularly in the northern Pantanal (Hylander et al., 1993; De Lacerda et al., 1991). Though some questions have been raised concerning the sources of mercury in migratory fish (Santos, 1993), there appears to be general consensus among most regulators and academics that a significant part of the problem is related to gold mining activity (Adámoli, 1992; Espíndola, 1993). The political pressure behind the mining is significant. In Poconé alone, approximately 70% of the population is dependent on the income from gold mining (Santos, 1993). When IBAMA, the federal environmental agency, closed all mines in the area earlier this year, in an attempt to properly survey and permit mining operations in the area, and determine the extent of the mercury pollution problem, the mayors of several municípios pressured federal and state authorities to force IBAMA to reopen many of the mines.

Agroindustrial activities represent another significant potential source of contamination, since wastewater treatment systems are very rare. Primary agroindustries in the Pantanal watershed include alcohol fuel distilleries, slaughterhouses, meat processing plants, and dairy processing facilities. Generally, industrial, urban and mining waste effluents are deposited directly into rivers on an ongoing basis. There are approximately ten operating alcohol fuel distilleries in Mato Grosso and one in Mato Grosso do Sul. In the northern part of the basin, the cumulative productive capacity of alcohol distilleries has been estimated at 1,500,000 l/day (396,000 gal./day), with a waste discharge of about 27,800 m³/hr. (7,345,000 gal./hr.) (Ferreira et al., 1992).

At present, there are internationally supported plans to construct a natural gas pipeline from Bolivia to São Paulo, through Corumbá and the Pantanal. In conjunction with this project, the Brazilian federal government is planning for Corumbá to be the first of a series of fourteen export processing zones to encourage economic and industrial growth within the country. The ultimate size and number of industrial operations in the Zona de Processamento e Exportação (ZPE) could result in severe environmental disruption, however environmental officials in Mato Grosso do Sul have expressed the opinion that existing authority and enforcement capability are adequate to regulate the expected impacts (Espíndola, 1993). Recently, the environmental impact assessment required for larger development projects was presented at a public hearing for another proposed ZPE at Cáceres along the upper Paraguay River in the northern Pantanal.

2. Everglades

Mining activities in the Everglades region have primarily involved mining of water and limestone. Though limestone mining operations have destroyed considerable habitat in the eastern Everglades, generally they are not considered to have significant negative effects on water quality or quantity. Currently, a very large scale limestone quarrying operation is close to starting up in Dade County. There is some concern that the operation could lead to adverse impacts to ecosystem functions. Another extensive industrial project involves the mining of water east of the perimeter levee near Conservation Area 3 (to the east and south of Lake Okeechobee). Potential impacts from this operation are unclear.

Oil drilling has occurred in the Everglades region, but to date commercially viable operations have occurred only at the Raccoon Point Wellfield in the Big Cypress Preserve and in Immokalee region to the west. There are several pipelines which carry oil from the Raccoon Point and Immokalee wellfields east across the Everglades to the Fort Lauderdale area. Generally, the pipelines parallel the path of Alligator Alley, the major east-west highway which cuts through the Everglades system. These pipelines have ruptured in the past, most significantly about six years ago when a casing of one of the pipes deteriorated and had to be replaced. Cleanup of the spill was accomplished within about one year of the spill. The pipelines are located underground, and their construction and placement pipelines causes some disturbances to the Everglades. Generally, the pipelines are not considered to cause adverse impacts to the hydrology.

Currently, there is also a proposal to drill an exploratory well on the Miccosukee Reservation in the Everglades. The directional well would be constructed on Reservation property at a slant, in order to access areas under adjacent Water Conservation Area 3.

D. Urban development

Urban development within a watershed has associated with it many direct and indirect impacts on the natural functioning of the system. These include but are not limited to the direct loss of habitat to clearing of vegetation, siltation and contamination of water resources as a result of vegetation loss and urban effluents, loss of many wetland values as a result of drainage, consumptive uses of surface and ground water.

1. Pantanal

Approximately three million people live in the Brazilian portion of the Pantanal basin, and surrounding highlands. Direct habitat losses to conversion of land for urban development are, for the most part, restricted to a few population centers in the upland areas of the Pantanal. Indirect effects of urbanization include urban requirements for natural resource inputs and waste assimilation. Relative to the amounts of freshwater available from surface water sources, consumptive uses of water related to urban development in and around the Pantanal are probably negligible. However, advanced treatment of urban sewage and solid waste is rare in the area. Millions of gallons of untreated domestic waste enter waterways each day, resulting in significant contamination of surface and subsurface waters.

Urban wastes originating from Cuiabá, in the state of Mato Grosso, have been estimated to be responsible for a 20% reduction in concentrations of dissolved oxygen and for a mean abundance of 1,533 fecal coliforms/100 ml of water in the Cuiabá River, within a short distance downstream (Ferreira et al., 1992; Gomes and Shimada, 1985). In the state of Mato Grosso do Sul, it has been estimated that the organic waste load for the Paraguay River basin results in a total biological oxygen demand of 12,083 kg/day, of which 75% originates from the city of Corumbá and from the upper basin of the Miranda River (Ferreira et al., 1992). Fish kills regularly occur during low water periods, but such dieoffs apparently also occur from natural processes, and the cumulative effects of chemical, viral and bacterial contamination from urban wastes on fish and wildlife are not known. During high water periods, flooding patterns and other dispersive and assimilative processes tend to prevent large numbers of massive fish kills related to water quality impacts (Adámoli, 1992).

2. Everglades

The intense urbanization of lands within the Everglades has had significant adverse impacts on the natural system. Currently, there are 4.5 to 5 million people living within the Everglades and on the low coastal ridge separating the Everglades from the Atlantic Ocean. In 1986, residential uses were the most prevalent use in the southern counties, comprising a total assessed value of over $94 billion (SWIM, 1992a). Agricultural lands east of the Everglades are continuing to be converted for urban development, which forces farming activities further west into areas closer to the perimeter canals and levees which border the Everglades. Other predominate urban land uses include service industries, retail trade, financial industries, manufacturing, tourism, and recreation.

The urbanization of this region has had considerable impacts on water supply, wildlife habitat, groundwater recharge, and water quality of the Everglades system. Significant portions of the system have been adversely affected or destroyed. Development has directly impacted the hydrology of the region by increasing the amount of surface runoff and by decreasing the amount of storage available (SWIM, 1992a). The drainage necessary for urbanization causes two to three million acre feet per year of fresh water to be shunted to the sea. Under historic conditions, this water would serve to extend Everglades hydroperiods and increase fish production and other components of the food chain necessary for wading birds. Current regulatory initiatives are focusing on the need for increased water conservation and investigation of water supply alternatives, protection and preservation of wetlands for groundwater recharge and wildlife habitat, and the need to address impacts of stormwater discharge from existing and future development on water quality (SWIM, 1992a).

E. Wildlife exploitation

Wildlife exploitation in both ecosystems has followed a similar track, with prehistoric and early historic use by indigenous peoples at subsistence levels, followed by semi-indigenous uses with slightly more impact. Early colonial uses tend to be very extractive, and are eventually moderated to allow more sustainable use of wildlife resources.

Modern approaches to wildlife exploitation include the significant potential for non-extractive “exploitation” in the form of ecotourism. There is a growing worldwide market for opportunities to experience wildlife species in their natural and undisturbed habitats, with potentially significant financial returns for local economies. The Everglades National Park is only one manifestation of that market in south Florida, and current visitation rates are approximately one million visitors per year.

With large numbers of wildlife, including some of most unique and beautiful species in the world, the Pantanal represents a tremendous, relatively untapped, market for ecotourism. Visitation rates in recent years are on the order of 10,000 people per year (Bucher et al., 1993), though accurate figures are difficult to obtain. Dry season conditions are particularly favorable to wildlife viewing, with relatively pleasant weather, and wildlife tending to congregate near areas of surface water. It is extremely important that environmental planning and regulatory authorities survey existing ecotourism facilities and practices, in order to assure that habitat is not destroyed or contaminated and wildlife populations are not compromised as a result of what appears to be a burgeoning and lucrative industry.

1. Pantanal

Historically, the Pantanal ecosystem was used for subsistence level hunting and fishing by relatively small populations of indigenous peoples, whose activities had little impact on ecosystem functions. Native tribes in the area include the Kadiwéu, Terena, Kinkinao, Guaraní, Guató, Boror, Caduveo Uutina, Pareci, Komba and Ufaiê-Xavante, though most have now moved to FUNAI reserves, been assimilated or become extinct (Bucher et al., 1993).

Beginning in the colonial period, and continuing to the present, semi-indigenous uses of the Pantanal have included low levels of subsistence farming, in addition to hunting and fishing. Closely associated with the history of cattle ranching in the Pantanal are the pantaneiros or Pantanal cowboys, many of whom support families. This relatively small, semi-indigenous group, with its own rich cultural tradition, has been an important part of the growth of cattle ranching since its inception over 200 years ago. The economic viability of the fazendas is closely related to the work done by pantaneiros, while the viability of the pantaneiro culture itself is tied to the economic fortunes of the ranches. Wildlife diversity is also related to the health of pantaneiros and fazendeiros. Though hunting is illegal in the Pantanal, pantaneiros often have an implicit understanding with ranch owners that hunting their lands for caiman, jaguars and other wildlife is acceptable. The practice gives the low wage pantaneiros the opportunity to sell hides for money and takes care of what is often seen as a wildlife nuisance.

Current trends in wildlife harvesting are probably not sustainable. With about 30,000 fishermen and very little enforcement presence, a serious problem in the Pantanal involves uncontrolled fishing throughout the year. The situation is particularly problematic during the piracema (spawning season), which occurs at different times, depending on the fish and the region. Estimates in 1990 were that about 3000 kgs (6600 lbs) of fish were taken illegally each month.

Until fairly recently, the poaching of caiman or jacaré for skins was essentially unregulated. In 1988, an estimated 1,000,000 hides were illegally taken, with almost no effective intervention by authorities (Mittermeier et al., 1990). Increased enforcement activity in Mato Grosso do Sul, combined with international pressure on Bolivia and Paraguay to close down the markets for skins in those countries, have significantly reduced the illegal poaching, but the problem has not been completely abated (Rabelo, 1993).

The taking of animals for the illegal trade in pets has also damaged populations of such animals as the hyacinth macaw, parrots, parakeets, monkeys and anacondas. Hyacinth macaws have a market value of up to US$8000 a pair in the United States and US$15,000 in Europe. Recent surveys have indicated that a maximum of 3000 individuals remain in the wild and that 50 per cent of all smuggling in Brazil is for the national market (Mittermeier et al., 1990).

2. Everglades

Historically, portions of the KLOE system were used for subsistence hunting, gathering, and fishing by small essentially nomadic populations of indigenous peoples. At the beginning of the period of Spanish settlement in Florida, aboriginal groups inhabiting the KLOE system included the Jeaga (coastal area east of Lake Okeechobee), the Mayaimi (all sides of Lake Okeechobee), Tequesta (coastal areas southeast of Lake Okeechobee) and Calusa (coastal region southwest of Lake Okeechobee) (Larson, 1980). These early groups followed a seasonal cycle of utilizing particular plant and animal species that were in sufficient abundance to support the population. The primary food sources were fish, whales, shellfish, cocoa plums, saw palmetto berries, zamia (starch source), sea turtles, and various land mammals, including deer and bear (Larson, 1980). The subsistence activities of early aboriginal peoples probably had little impact on ecosystem functions.

Early aboriginal groups in the region were extinct by the mid-1700s, primarily due to massacre and disease (Derr, 1989). Later occupation of the area by Native Americans (primarily Seminole and Miccosukee tribes) also probably had relatively little impact on the natural system. By the turn of the century, official U.S. policy had almost completely removed Native Americans from the region (Derr, 1989). Current uses of the Everglades system by the Seminole and Miccosukee Tribes include traditional activities such as hunting, fishing, and harvesting timber for personal dwellings, as well as modern economic activities (Quetone and Koening, 1992).

Certain animal species have suffered tremendous declines in the Everglades region. Excessive hunting at the turn of the nineteenth century severely stressed populations of a number of species, many of which have never fully recovered. Several species have been extirpated from the area, including the Florida red wolf and the Carolina parakeet (SWIM, 1992a). Wading bird populations, estimated at about 2.5 million birds in 1870, were reduced to 500,000 in 1910 as a result of plume hunting (SWIM, 1992a; Robertson and Kushlan, 1984).

While wildlife hunting laws helped ease the pressure on certain species, other factors have resulted in continued declines of many species. The causes of these declines include the loss of habitat to urban and agricultural use, intensive harvest and over harvesting, altered hydroperiods, changes in the composition of native vegetation, introduction of exotic vegetation, water management practices, and alteration of fire patterns (SWIM, 1992a). Wading bird populations have declined by about 90% during the past 60 years.

Presently, at least 44 species which use the Everglades area are considered threatened, endangered, or of special concern. Threatened and endangered species include the Florida panther, mangrove fox squirrel, Florida black bear, everglades mink, manatee, wood stork, snail kite, cape sable seaside sparrow, peregrine falcon, southern bald eagle, brown pelican, American alligator, eastern indigo snake, and American crocodile (SWIM, 1992a).

F. Cross-scale Threats

In addition to localized anthropogenic impacts on watershed functioning, management of the Pantanal and Everglades may be influenced by cross-scale threats with wide ranging sources and effects. Both systems have the potential to be affected by many types of activities and events occurring outside the boundaries of the watershed. A potential example includes shifting weather patterns and sea level rise as a result of global warming. Even slight differences in the amounts, location and timing of rainfall can have unanticipated and greatly magnified effects in terms of ecosystem functioning. Though the effects of sea level rise would probably be felt more in the Everglades than on the Pantanal, shifts in rainfall patterns could have significant, essentially unforeseeable negative impacts on the habitats of resident and migratory birds in the Pantanal, as well as wetland and aquatic habitats for a large number of other species.

Additionally, contaminants in several forms can be transported by different processes over long distances and deposited within a watershed. Examples include long distance movement of metallic and organic forms of mercury, which in the Pantanal, are closely associated with gold mining and periods of high water. Volatilized forms of mercury may also be transported long distances by wind and rain patterns. The true scope of the resulting damage to human health and environment from mercury is only beginning to be realized. In the Everglades, mercury deposition appears to be associated with atmospheric processes. Though at present, they appear not to be a significant problem in south Florida or western Brazil, increases in the rates and concentrations of acid deposition from sources hundreds of miles away, particularly in combination with other regional or cross-scale threats, have the potential to affect ecosystem functions.

Larger trends in economic conditions and trade policy should also be appreciated as potential cross-scale threats, since intensity of development in an area may be closely associated with national and state efforts to respond to such trends and conditions. In the Everglades, the most obvious example is sugarcane production, which has been heavily subsidized by price supports and import quotas. In the Pantanal, agricultural development on the planaltos was rapidly accelerated and subsidized beginning in the early 1970s, in response to national economic goals to increase foreign exchange and service the debt to international lending sources. The lack of concern for, and apparent inability to regulate the environmental impacts of such large, intensive operations were at least partially related to forces acting on a very large scale. In these circumstances, the negative impacts on a watershed are just as much a result of cross-scale threats as is atmospheric mercury deposition, and equally as difficult for regulatory authorities to control.

IV. REGULATORY AND POLICY RESPONSE

A. Legal Authority and Institutional Capacity

Agencies responsible for research, planning and regulation of impacts to the Pantanal and Everglades have varying degrees of effectiveness, which appear to be related to factors such as: agency missions, allegiances and funding; the degree of regulatory and planning authority granted to an agency; principal constituencies served by an agency; power relationships between agencies; potential for political manipulation of an agency; and whether equipment and training levels of personnel are sufficient to meet program responsibilities imposed on the agency.

There is generally adequate legal and regulatory authority to control activities with negative environmental impacts in the Everglades and in much of the Pantanal, although the authority in both regions is weakened somewhat by exemptions and gaps in the regulatory structures. Several other factors affect the ability of agencies to act effectively. Beyond certain projects financed by international lending institutions which support much needed research, regulation and institutional development in the Pantanal, lack of funding and resources is a chronic problem for state environmental agencies. The Brazilian economic crisis has severely restricted available funds for equipment and staff. As a result, it is difficult to retain qualified personnel. Environmental agencies in the Pantanal express a general need for expertise in several areas, including basic scientific understanding of ecosystem functioning, increased enforcement capability, and the processes and forms for creating effective, enforceable legislation. Laboratory testing facilities and technical capabilities are not sufficient to allow complete chemical and bacteriological testing.

1. Pantanal

a. Federal

The Brazilian Constitution of 1988 is considered by the U.N. to be one of the most advanced constitutional texts on environmental issues in the world (Guimarães, 1991). Chapter VI (Article 225) of the 1988 Constitution is devoted to public environmental rights, and specifies the Pantanal as one of several ecosystems which are recognized as part of the “national patrimony.” Also included are the Amazon, the Atlantic Forest, the Serra do Mar or Sea Mountains and the Coastal Zone. All states with jurisdiction over such areas must provide for their specific protection based on financial capability and applicable resources. At present, realizing the full potential of available constitutional and legal controls is difficult. Federal bureaucratic controls suffer from excessive jurisdictional overlap and political pressure from development interests (Guimarães, 1991). State environmental agencies have only recently gained sufficient authority to address many problems and suffer from a general lack of institutional capacity (Brazil 92, 1992).

There are approximately 120 federal laws related to the environment in Brazil, not including articles and resolutions. Generally, federal laws set minimum standards of review and regulation on a certain topic, while state laws may address particular issues and problems with more specificity. State laws must be consistent with federal law on a particular subject and must meet federal minimum standards, as set by the National Environmental Council (CONAMA). Most federal laws are implemented and enforced by the Brazilian Institute for Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA), the primary federal environmental agency.

The Brazilian National Environmental Policy Act (Federal Law No. 6938), enacted in 1981, serves as the foundation for federal environmental regulation in Brazil, essentially requiring a permit from federal or state environmental agencies for many types of projects with the potential for environmental impacts. Before permits can be issued, environmental impact assessments must be completed and must be subject to public review and comment (audiência pública) (Findley, 1988). The Brazilian Forest Code (Federal Law No. 4771/1965) as amended, is a complex law which includes substantive and procedural rules concerning property rights, the exploitation of protected areas, methods for managing forests in most regions of the country, and permit conditions and penalties. The law requires a 30 to 200 m (100-650 ft.) protection zone on either side of rivers and other watercourses, depending in part on the size of the stream, the rate of flow and the flooding regime (Santos, 1992; Espíndola 1993).

In addition, the CONAMA has established six classifications of water use, based on existing water quality in surface waters of the country (Resolution No. 20, 1986). Most states apply the federal minimum standards for water quality, depending on the classification of use. Industrial effluent is not allowed to violate these standards. A cumulative impact analysis, or assimilative capacity analysis is also required for developments with impacts on a river based on the classification of the particular section of the river potentially impacted. No additional industrial effluent may be allowed in an area if assimilative capacity standards would be exceeded. Accurate evaluation, monitoring and enforcement of these requirements is problematic.

A new federal law has been proposed by which federal agencies would regulate impacts to water quality and quantity in interstate waters within Brazil. One feature of the proposed legislation is the creation of river basin commissions and where necessary, sub-basin commissions, overseen by a national collegiate, which would work together to plan and evaluate permits for the proper use of water resources. It appears that the legislation is still being revised and debated.

On paper, Brazilian environmental law has a powerful enforcement tool. Federal Law No. 7347 was enacted in 1985, creating and regulating a type of citizen suit (ação civil pública) (Findley, 1988). Such suits may now be brought against the government or private parties by the Attorney General or by legally recognized entities other than individual persons, in order to enforce environmental statutes. Standing is broadly defined, allowing groups to sue for enforcement of laws in remote parts of the country regardless of their presence in the applicable area (Muller and Ninio, 1992). Though the law has the potential to increase control over environmental violators, it has not been widely used as yet in the Pantanal.

Before adoption of the 1988 Brazilian Constitution, all impacts to flora and fauna were regulated solely by IBAMA. States could legislate and act on these topics only through agreements with, and authorization by, the federal agency. The agreements allowed for federal intervention whenever necessary. States now have concurring authority to regulate flora and fauna, though not all states have acted on this authority (Oliveira, 1993). In some states, IBAMA has no presence at all, such as in the state of São Paulo, which has a powerful state environmental agency.

In the past two years, Brazil has initiated a “National Program for the Environment,” financed by the World Bank. The program has three fundamental components: institutional development, focused primarily on IBAMA; ecological protection of the Pantanal, the Atlantic forest and the Atlantic coastal area; and the establishment and protection of approximately fifty Federal Conservation Units, identified as ecologically important areas, with responsibility for the plans delegated to IBAMA. Environmental agencies in states with jurisdiction over the Pantanal and other representatives of the “national patrimony” are responsible for administering those components of the program in their respective states.

b. Mato Grosso do Sul

The Brazilian portion of the Pantanal is divided between the states of Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul. In addition to regulatory agencies in these states, IBAMA and local environmental authorities exert influence over efforts to develop the basin. In Mato Grosso do Sul, which has jurisdiction over approximately 52% of the Brazilian Pantanal watershed (SEMA, 1993), environmental and land use activities are regulated primarily by the State Secretariat for the Environment (SEMA). The federal research agency known by the acronym EMBRAPA maintains a research complex (CPAP) in Corumbá, Mato Grosso do Sul dedicated to agricultural, ranching and environmental issues in the Pantanal. In Mato Grosso, the responsible environmental agency is the State Foundation for the Environment (FEMA), and there is a small EMBRAPA research unit in Poconé.

In recent years, federal and state governmental officials have provided support for institutional strengthening which has increased SEMA's capacity to monitor and regulate activities with environmental impacts. FEMA, created in 1987, is a relatively young organization which appears to have received somewhat less support from policymakers. A new agro-environmental development program being funded by a World Bank loan includes a component for the institutional strengthening of FEMA (PRODEAGRO, 1992).

In Mato Grosso do Sul, SEMA and IBAMA are responsible for the regulation of activities with effects on the environment. The Secretary of SEMA oversees three technical departments with about 120 technicians (permitting of polluting activities, conservation of natural resources, environmental education); a center for environmental control, including physical/chemical and bacteriological laboratories; a financial and administrative department; and two advisory departments for technical and legal matters. The agency maintains regional offices in Bonito, Aquidauana, Corumbá and Coxim (Espíndola, 1993).

The Forest Police, a unit of the State Military Police, provide environmental protection and preventive policing through formal agreements (convênios) with IBAMA and SEMA. There are approximately 250 members of the Forest Police covering Mato Grosso do Sul's portion of the Paraguay Basin, only about 50 of whom have specialized training in environmental enforcement (Rabelo, 1993). The agreement with IBAMA calls for the Forest Police to enforce laws controlling hunting, fishing in interstate waters, and the exploitation of forest resources. Through the agreement with SEMA, the Forest Police enforce laws concerning fishing in state waters and activities that have the potential to cause soil degradation. The agency also participates in the research efforts of SEMA and EMBRAPA, including monitoring and reporting environmental conditions and the status of wildlife (Oliveira, 1993).

There are two primary state environmental laws in Mato Grosso do Sul. The first of these laws, the State Environmental Policy Act (Law 90) was the first law of this type in Brazil, adopted in 1980, one year before a similar federal law. The law requires that all activities with the potential to harm the environment must obtain a permit from SEMA. It deals with the licensing and control of polluting activities, addressing all potential environmental impacts. The requirements are detailed, and apply to all of Mato Grosso do Sul. Under this legislation, SEMA has permitting authority over the approval of the project itself; location and siting; control of air pollution; and control of effluents, with standards and controls depending on the sensitivity or classification of the area (Oliveira, 1993).

The second such law, the Pantanal Protection Law (Law 328), was adopted by the legislature of Mato Grosso do Sul in 1982. This legislation divides the state into two areas, the Paraná and Paraguay river basins, and requires that all proposed economic activities in the Paraguay basin provide an environmental impact assessment, allowing for public review and comment (audiência pública) on any activity with potential environmental impacts. Most evaluative criteria for permits relate to land use and water management. After staff review and public discussion at the audiência pública, SEMA either rejects the proposed activity, or imposes technical conditions to meet applicable standards. The law also prohibits industrial fuel alcohol distilleries within the Pantanal region of the Paraguay Basin.

c. Mato Grosso

The situation in Mato Grosso is somewhat different. The state's history and current orientation toward development suggest a political climate not favorable to environmentally sustainable management of natural resources. However, the state constitution of Mato Grosso does require that the Pantanal be protected, and requires that local governments take measures to ensure this protection. It also mandates that environmental measures in the Pantanal be implemented in conjunction with the state of Mato Grosso do Sul. It is worth noting that recently, the top official at FEMA (also serving as Special Secretary for the Environment) was replaced, at least partially for an inability to make progress on several environmental programs. Currently, the agency is undergoing an organizational review and restructuring. Though new management has the potential to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the agency, it remains to be seen whether it will become a significant force in promoting environmentally sustainable development.

At present, FEMA enforces a State Environmental Policy Act (Law 4894/1985) which generally tracks the federal legislation on which it is based. The law requires permits for construction and operation of several activities with the potential to pollute the environment, based on environmental impact assessments which are subject to public review and comment. Although comprehensive, the state law did not adopt provisions specific to local conditions, and did not include higher levels of protection for the Pantanal. For example, in its original formulation, the law did not prohibit fuel alcohol distilleries in the Pantanal. In 1985, CONAMA required FEMA to suspend any licensing of new alcohol distilleries in the Pantanal, though existing distilleries were allowed to remain in operation. Farm projects over 1000 hectares (2500 acres) are also subject to the law, but agricultural developers have been able to avoid these requirements by subdividing projects into units less than 1000 hectares, then operating cooperatively to achieve efficiencies of scale. In Mato Grosso do Sul, the applicable size threshold for farm projects requiring environmental impact assessments is 500 hectares (1250 acres). Several attempts have been made to develop and adopt more stringent environmental legislation, in Mato Grosso, but development interests within the state have hindered those efforts (Oliveira, 1993).

A relatively new program of planning and regulation in Mato Grosso is the Project of Agro-Environmental Development, known as PRODEAGRO, which includes environmental components related to several types of threats. The specific policies and regulations for most of these components have yet to be developed. One of the primary elements of the program is agro-ecological zoning, which attempts to locate particular types of farming and ranching activities in appropriate areas of the state (PRODEAGRO, 1992). The program also contains a component for the management, protection and monitoring of natural resources, with subcomponents which include: establishing conservation units; sustainable management of primary and secondary forests; registration, rationalization and control of mining activity; environmental licensing, monitoring and regulation; informal environmental education; institutional reform and development of FEMA; support of indigenous communities; monitoring of cover vegetation, mining activities and remote sensing (PRODEAGRO, 1992).

The Mato Grosso Forest Police, were created in 1986 to enforce several state and federal laws, including those concerning illegal burning, illegal skin hunting and out of season commercial fish netting. The Police maintain a primary office in Cuiabá, with branch offices in Cáceres, Caracara, Poconé, Porto Cercado, Isla Diamon, Barão de Melgaço, and Porto Joffre. The force includes about 150 soldiers divided into detachments. Recruits receive special instruction in the applicable environmental laws and in dealing with tourists along the Transpantaneira Highway (Teixeira, 1993). However, as a result of low salaries and few operating funds, the agency may not be as effective as its counterpart in Mato Grosso do Sul, and is currently undergoing reorganization (Rabelo, 1993).

With relatively low enforcement capability, FEMA has pursued several efforts at achieving environmental goals through public education. In agricultural areas, the agency promotes the use of small contour plowed berms in order to decrease soil erosion. In cattle ranching areas, there are public service announcements to decrease the amount of pasture burning which normally occurs during the dry season. In gold mining areas, pamphlets are distributed which warn of the dangers of uncontained volatilization of mercury, and which promote a relatively simple technology for containing the mercury vapors. The agency has also produced educational pamphlets which explain the need to avoid fishing during the spawning season.

2. Everglades

There is no institution in South Florida, other than the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), with the combined capacity to conduct the research, planning, construction, operation, acquisition, regulation, and public education necessary to protect and restore the Kissimmee-Lake Okeechobee-Everglades (KLOE) ecosystem. The Everglades National Park has responsibility for research, planning and management in a significant portion of the lower part of the KLOE system, though it does not hold regulatory or permitting authority for activities outside the Park boundaries. The SFWMD encompasses the entire watershed. District staff have been closely involved, with the Corps of Engineers, in designing, constructing and operating the Central and South Florida Flood Control Project. The District also has an extensive regulatory program for urban and agricultural activities. Several intensive planning efforts focused on the Everglades are now coming to fruition. These include the Everglades SWIM Plan and the District's Water Supply Plan.

The District has a staff of 1517, many of whom are highly trained and experienced professionals, with an additional 50 positions being considered for the coming fiscal year. Its 1993 budget was approximately $259 million. When compared to the likely challenges and costs of restoring the Everglades, however, the District must have the active cooperation and assistance of the federal government and local governments. Current planned projects are expected to cost $1.24 billion. These include: Kissimmee River Restoration ($372 million); Everglades Agricultural Area Restoration ($465 million); Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park ($187 million); and the C-111/Florida Bay Restoration ($220 million). It is generally understood that these efforts will not be enough to restore the system. The Corps is currently conducting a reconnaissance study for a major restudy of the entire system. It is not yet known what the study might cost, let alone the implementation of it. In addition, it seems likely that the urban areas along the East coast will have to invest hundreds of million of dollars in water supply facilities so that additional water can be retained in the Everglades system.

a. Consumptive Use

The South Florida Water Management District regulates consumptive use of water in the Everglades region under the authority of the Florida Water Resources Act of 1972 (Chapter 373, Part II, F.S.). Under the Act, applicants proposing new uses must establish that the proposed use is: 1) a reasonable beneficial use, 2) will not interfere with a presently existing legal use of water, and 3) is consistent with the public interest.

The Act contains several provisions relating to the effects of consumptive uses on the environment, including a statement of policy to preserve natural resources, fish, and wildlife. The Act mandates that minimum flows be established for surface waters, as well as minimum lake and groundwater levels. In addition, under the public interest standard, adverse environmental impacts can be considered when evaluating a proposed consumptive use. The Act also provides for adoption of water shortage plans and water emergencies.

b. Manipulation of water flows

In 1972, the Florida Legislature created the South Florida Water Management District (District) with the enactment of the Water Resources Act. The Act provides the District with management authority for water quality protection and environmental protection and enhancement, as well as for the traditional objectives of flood protection and water supply.

Today, several federal and state laws apply to management of water supply and flood control in the Everglades region. The legal requirements for water supply are governed primarily by federal law which resulted in the authorizations for the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project. The law establishes Lake Okeechobee and the Water Conservation Areas as the water supply source for Everglades National Park, Florida's lower east coast, and for the Everglades Agricultural Area. Flood control is also regulated under the authority of Project, which provides that Lake Okeechobee provide flood control for the Everglades Agricultural Area, and that the Water Conservation Areas provide flood protection for the Everglades Agricultural Area and the Lower East Coast.

The state of Florida is responsible for allocating water supply releases from storage areas, except where specified by federal law. The Florida Water Resources Act (Chapter 373, F.S.), is the primary state law which regulates water supply on the state and regional level. Chapter 373 provides for planning for water use and water supply as part of a state-wide planning effort, authorizes development of a consumptive water use permit program, and authorizes water shortage orders when water supplies are reduced due to drought or overuse. Flood control and surface water management is regulated under Part IV of Chapter 373, F.S., which requires that adequate flood protection be provided by dams, impoundments, reservoirs, and other works which can affect the water resources of the state.

Water supply and flood control on lands owned by Indian tribes are governed by water rights compacts between the respective tribe and the South Florida Water Management District. The compacts are superior to any other federal or state laws on the subject of water supply or flood control.

c. Water quality impacts

Water quality in the Everglades is regulated by several federal and state laws. The original Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project did not address water quality, other than to provide relief from the effects of flooding upon septic and sewer systems. Water quality was first recognized as a prime objective of the Project in a 1969 Congressional authorization for additional works, which stated that operation methods should evaluate and minimize concentrations of pesticides, herbicides, and nutrients.

The federal Clean Water Act has as its objective to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. (U.S.C. § 1257a). Prior to 1987, the Act focused primarily on controlling point-source pollution. The 1987 amendments authorized a program to provide federal support for state efforts to control diffuse sources of pollution, known as non-point source pollutants.

The National Environmental Policy Act requires that an environmental impact assessment be conducted for certain projects in which there is federal participation. Major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment may be required to conduct an environmental impact assessment, including impacts to water quality.

Several state laws and other documents regulate water quality in the Everglades region. The Water Resources Act of 1972 (Chapter 373, F.S.) authorizes the South Florida Water Management District to consider water quality as part of its management of water and related resources. Chapter 373 also establishes the Legislature's intent that water quality be promoted through environmental enhancement. The Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Act, adopted in 1987, requires that the District create and implement plans for the protection and restoration of designated priority water bodies. The Marjory Stoneman Douglas Everglades Protection Act of 1991 requires the District to adopt a SWIM plan for the Everglades Protection Area which includes additional protections to those required under the SWIM Act of 1987. Additional requirements include strategies for meeting water quality standards and to restore the Everglades hydroperiod. In 1989, the District was also given authority to regulate stormwater.

Chapter 403, Florida Statutes, establishes a statewide pollution control program, and provides the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) with authority to regulate point source discharges to surface waters and ground waters, dredge and fill activities, classification of water bodies, and adoption of state water quality standards. Under authority of Chapter 403, DEP has designated the Everglades National Park and Biscayne National Park as “Outstanding National Resource Waters,” which imposes an anti-degradation standard for those water bodies.

d. Land use regulation

The use of private lands within and adjacent to the historic Everglades is regulated primarily by local government jurisdictions. The Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act (Chapter 163, Part II, F.S.) requires that local government comprehensive plans, zoning codes, and development approvals be consistent with conservation oriented provisions in the state comprehensive plan (Chapter 187, F.S.). The state comprehensive plan establishes goals and policies relating to water resources, coastal and marine resources, natural systems and recreational lands, hazardous and nonhazardous materials and waste, mining, land use, and agriculture. The conservation and protection of natural systems, wildlife, and water resources are clearly identified as priorities in the State Comprehensive Plan.

State and federal entities may impose conditions or prohibit certain projects on private lands through regulatory permitting programs. The primary permitting programs in the Everglades pertain to stormwater, management and storage of surface waters, point sources of pollution, and dredge and fill.

Publicly owned lands may be used for government facilities, managed for the benefit and or use of the public, or leased for private uses, such as silviculture or mining, depending upon the mission of the particular governmental entity.

B. Jurisdictional Divisions

In both ecosystems, there are significant jurisdictional divisions based on geography and subject matter. In Florida, the Everglades watershed is partitioned between local governments, federal and state authorities, and water management districts. Responsibility for the review and permitting of the many types of potential environmental impacts can also be divided among several agencies. The Pantanal is also divided according to geography and subject matter. Partitioning the watersheds among agencies with different constituencies and mandates makes the development or implementation of basinwide water management programs extremely difficult.

1. Pantanal

Regulatory authority for the Pantanal is geographically split between the states of Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul, and jurisdictionally split between environmental agencies in those states, IBAMA, and the local governments. Until fairly recently, there was little coordination between these agencies on the management of the Pantanal. Environmental officials in Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul now report excellent cooperative efforts between those states. Under the Brazilian Constitution, areas of “national patrimony” are eligible for special laws applicable over and beyond general environmental laws. However the economic crisis, a lack of information and expertise and in some cases, a lack of political will have created difficulties in developing and adopting such legislation for the Pantanal. Mato Grosso do Sul has adopted several restrictions and controls on development in and around the Pantanal, and its environmental agency is working with its counterpart in Mato Grosso, in its efforts to devise effective legislation in that state.

A relatively new initiative being jointly administered by environmental agencies in the two states is known as the Pantanal Project, financed by the World Bank, which is channeling US$10,000,000 each in funding to Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul. The project, part of the National Program for the Environment, is divided into two components. The first includes emergency actions, which are short term measures designed to ameliorate the effects of environmental degradation. The second component is known as the Plan for Conservation of the Upper Paraguay Basin (PCBAP). Essentially, this is a network of actions emphasizing the regulation of natural resources and institutional development for the management of the Pantanal ecosystem. The project encompasses an area of approximately 396,000 square kilometers (152,900 square miles), including portions of the Pantanal planaltos and planície in the states of Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul.

Officials recognize that in order to carry out the plan, it will be necessary to broaden scientific understanding of natural systems and socio-economic conditions which characterize the basin. Studies are planned in several research disciplines, including the fields of soil science, geology, geomorphology, meteorology, botany, wildlife sciences and hydrology. The project will also undertake studies of the socio-economic environment, demographic dynamics, land use, and economic indicators. A data bank of research products is planned.

Federal authorities also have a role in management of the Pantanal, although the federal presence, including enforcement presence, appears to be relatively small. Two areas of the Pantanal lowlands are officially protected: a remote national park and a small ecological reserve in the state of Mato Grosso. The former Caracara Biological Reserve was expanded and converted into the Pantanal National Park in September 1981, covering about 138,000 hectares (341,000 acres). However, the boundaries of the park were not related to wildlife needs, and there are international efforts underway to purchase additional contiguous lands to allow for wildlife movement during periods of high water. This park and the much smaller, state-owned Taiamá Ecological Station (12,000 hectares; 29,650 acres) to the north are the only protected areas in the entire Brazilian sector of the Pantanal planície. Northeast of Cuiabá, the Chapada dos Guimarães National Park comprises about 33,000 hectares (81,500 acres) in the northern planaltos, including the headwaters of several rivers which form the left arm of the Cuiabá River. At present however, the national park designation appears to have little practical significance. Both areas are considered “paper parks,” with no infrastructure or protection plans, few if any government rangers on site, and very low operating funds.

2. Everglades

The watershed for the Everglades lies entirely within the state of Florida and at least one of the many agencies with some responsibility for managing it has responsibility for that entire watershed. The South Florida Water Management District is the one institution with a mandate to plan for the protection and restoration of the Everglades. The Marjory Stoneman Douglas Everglades Protection Act requires the District to develop strategies for restoring and protecting water quality and the hydroperiod of the Everglades. In this respect, the Everglades is very different than the Pantanal, whose watershed includes parts of two states in Brazil and parts of Bolivia and Paraguay.

There is a strong federal presence in South Florida, as both a regulator and land manager. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers designed and built most of the system of levees, canals, pumps and spillways that controls the vital flow of water through the system. It is currently beginning a major replanning of the system. In addition, the Corps regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material, and thus plays a major role in controlling the further conversion of wetlands to other uses. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also plays a role in wetland permitting, with authority to veto Corps permits and establish the criteria for permit issuance. The discharge of all other pollutants is subject to regulation by EPA, except that Congress has exempted from regulation the most problematic pollutant: agricultural discharges.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service assists the regulatory agencies through commenting and technical support. It has a more direct responsibility for endangered and threatened species, which benefit from research and recovery programs, and the regulatory oversight of the agency. In addition, the Service manages a significant part of the Everglades through a lease of Conservation Area 1, the Art Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge. The National Park Service owns and manages the Everglades National Park, at the bottom of the watershed, as well as the Big Cypress National Preserve, which protects an important part of the Everglades watershed.

The state agencies or entities with primary responsibility for managing the Everglades include the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the Florida Department of Community Affairs, the South Florida Water Management District, and the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission.

The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) was created this summer by merging the Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The DEP regulates facilities that discharge pollutants to the atmosphere or water; solid and hazardous waste facilities; stormwater discharges; and dredge and fill activities. The agency also has supervisory authority over the South Florida Water Management District, implements the districts' rules for certain types of facilities (e.g. landfills), and administers the state's environmental land acquisition programs.

The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) has responsibility for implementing the state's role in land use planning and control. It does this primarily by reviewing local comprehensive plans for consistency with state policy, reviewing large scale “Developments of Regional Impact” (which do not include agriculture), and implementing a closer level of state control in Areas of Critical State Concern, which include the Big Cypress and Florida Keys. The DCA works closely in the region with three Regional Planning Councils, which represent all of the local governments.

The counties and cities of the watershed have major responsibility for land use planning and regulation. In addition, there are a number of special districts which operate drainage systems to benefit landowners within their boundaries. Such districts operate most of the secondary drainage systems within the Everglades Agricultural Area and for many of the drained areas of the former Everglades along the eastern edge of the remaining Everglades system.

The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) was created by the Water Resources Act of 1972, which was largely a response to the problems of water supply and environmental degradation triggered by the droughts of 1970-71. In the Water Resources Act, the Legislature established a system of regional districts along surface water hydrologic boundaries. The South Florida Water Management District thus includes all of the Everglades watershed, from the headwaters of the Kissimmee River, through Lake Okeechobee, the Everglades Agricultural Area, to the Everglades National Park and Florida Bay.

The decision to create an institution encompassing the entire watershed actually had its genesis in the floods of 1947 and Congressional authorization of a massive, multipurpose public works project, the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project, which was implemented by a predecessor agency, the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District. That district in turn, was the successor to the Everglades Drainage District, which had been created primarily to drain and develop the Everglades Agricultural Area.

The South Florida Water Management District operates today under a broad mandate to manage water and related land resources. It maintains and operates the levees, pumps, canals and structures of the flood control project. It also acquires land for restoration and management in a more natural state. The District also has comprehensive regulatory authority over the consumptive use of water, stormwater and drainage works and wetlands alteration. These efforts are supported by various planning responsibilities, the authority to levy ad valorem taxes, and some degree of autonomy from undue political influence through a governing board appointed by the Governor.

V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Importance of basic scientific information, and environmental education

Analysis and comparison of the Everglades and Pantanal ecosystems and of the systems by which they are managed, leads to several conclusions. Effective management for sustainable use and development must be grounded in a fundamental scientific understanding of the area. Research that is targeted to developing information to support management is therefore essential. Many of the mistakes that have been made in managing the Everglades might have been avoided with better scientific understanding. Even today, management of the Everglades, one of the most heavily researched systems in the world, continues to be constrained by the limitations of available information. The need for research in the Pantanal is especially acute. Major projects such as the Hidrovia cannot be properly evaluated without, for example, sufficient understanding of the hydrology of the area and the response of plant and animal communities to hydrologic alteration.

Crucial to the effort is the continued financial support of collaborative research between universities, research institutes, regulatory and planning agencies and non-governmental organizations. To encourage optimum use of scientific research, it is also important to support wide dissemination of research findings, including establishment of clearinghouses for scientific information, regular conferences at which researchers and policymakers can share and discuss findings, and electronic information networks for data transfer and on-line discussion of issues by water managers and researchers.

Another extremely important factor in the management of both systems is the value of environmental education based on scientific findings. Funding, resources and enforcement ultimately depend on political will, which in turn is related to cultural recognition of and support for certain values. Thus, environmental education plays a crucial role in developing and implementing sustainable management schemes. In the case of the Pantanal, the relationship is particularly important, in the face of strong development pressure, low enforcement capability and a nascent environmental consciousness. There are many potential audiences, messages and media for the distribution of such information.

B. Economic and environmental significance of planning for and maintaining all water-related natural functions

The undisturbed hydrologic regimes of the Everglades and Pantanal ecosystems have served many environmental and human-related functions. A failure to recognize, evaluate and manage for a broad range of functions has placed the Everglades on the list of endangered ecosystems. Policymakers in Brazil have an opportunity to observe the failures and successes of management schemes for the Everglades, and develop or adjust policies for the Pantanal which will allow for the sustainable development of that watershed. The primary goals of planning efforts should be to develop plans which account for and properly manage all water-related functions of the ecosystem, helping avoid the crisis management approach which has characterized the situation in the Everglades for many years. This approach allows for the consideration and development of economic uses of water while maintaining ecosystem functions.

Management policies in the Everglades watershed which sacrificed certain functions of the system in favor of flood control and drainage for agriculture and urban development have led to a water control system that is now among the most complex and expensive in the world, and which is struggling to sustain the ecosystem. Economic gains derived from agriculture and urban development have come at tremendous cost. Efforts to understand the functioning of the ecosystem, create technical and managerial approaches for maintaining its viability and replace lost functions have cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and will require many hundreds of millions more. Many environmental and economic values of the ecosystem will probably never be fully regained.

The current hydrological regime of the Pantanal also serves a large number of ecosystem and human-based functions, most of which appear to be relatively intact. However, policymakers in Brazil have already begun to favor high return economic uses and manipulations of the system which threaten to significantly alter the hydrologic regime in ways which may reduce its long-term sustainability.

C. Importance of watershed management approach

Another insight derived from a comparison of the two ecosystems is the crucial importance of a basinwide watershed management approach. Many problems in the Everglades have developed as a result of single purpose, localized water development and management decisions which failed to consider the functioning of the watershed as a whole. Decisions made to channelize the Kissimmee River affected Lake Okeechobee. Efforts to protect the water quality of Lake Okeechobee resulted in shifting the discharge of nutrients into the Everglades. Drainage of the East Everglades has deprived Florida Bay of freshwater inflow. The necessity of considering the entire watershed has been conclusively demonstrated in the Everglades system.

The Pantanal is a much larger watershed, but a watershed approach seems equally important there. Like the Everglades, the Pantanal is vulnerable to poorly planned and managed development in the watershed. The effects of gold mining activities and agricultural development in the watershed must be considered as part of a comprehensive watershed management plan. The challenge for Brazil is how to accomplish that in a basin that is almost the size of Florida, which is under several jurisdictions with different political constituencies, and in a continuing economic crisis.

D. Necessity of coordination among all planning/regulatory authorities

Related to basinwide water management is the necessity for developing a coordinated approach by all planning and regulatory authorities with water management responsibilities. Though the Everglades watershed has, since 1972, been under the jurisdiction of the South Florida Water Management District, the permitting and regulatory authority granted to the District has not allowed it to address all potential impacts to the system. One example is water quality impacts, which were not originally part of the specific regulatory mandate of the District under Chapter 373, F.S. As a result, potential project impacts have been addressed by several regulatory and planning bureaucracies. Until recently, there was relatively little coordination or planning among those bureaucracies, resulting in management goals and priorities which sometimes worked at cross purposes. The lack of a coordinated and cooperative approach by all relevant agencies worked to slowly but inevitably degrade ecosystem function in the Everglades watershed.

With a watershed divided between two states in Brazil, and parts of Bolivia and Paraguay, regulatory and planning authorities with jurisdiction over the Pantanal face a more difficult task in developing a structure and process for coordinating management goals and permitting criteria to achieve a basinwide approach.

At present, though the Brazilian Constitution requires that states with jurisdiction over the Pantanal enact and enforce laws to protect that watershed, there is no overarching plan to guide permitting and development decisions in the Pantanal. As a result of the Pantanal Project, funded by the World Bank, there has been recent cooperation between environmental agencies in the two Brazilian states, but there is no evidence that permitting decisions have been coordinated.

Until a watershed management plan can be developed and implemented, the result will continue to be degradation of the Pantanal ecosystem. There is a crucial need for the development of approaches and structures to allow for creation and coordinated implementation of such a plan, incorporating plans for all sub-basins within the Pantanal. The research, training, institutional development and regulatory initiatives funded under the Pantanal Program have the potential to advance the effort to develop such plans.

The need to coordinate a wide range of programs must also be pursued. In the case of the Everglades, many of the problems of agricultural water pollution may be related to U.S. trade and agricultural policies, which have supported a domestic sugar industry. The expansion of urban areas in South Florida, and the resulting demand for drainage and water supply, may be related to immigration policy. There are similar relationships in Brazil. Environmental policy must be coordinated with economic, agricultural, trade, immigration and other social policies.

REFERENCES

Adámoli, J. 1992. Diagnostico do Pantanal: Características Ecolôgicas e Problemas Ambientais. Instituto Brasileiro do Meio Ambiente e Recursos Naturais Renováveis (IBAMA). Brasília.

Alho, C.J., T.E. Lacher, Jr., and H.C. Gonçalves. 1988. Environmental degradation in the Pantanal ecosystem, 38 Bioscience 164.

Allen, K.O. and J.W. Hardy. 1980. Impacts of navigational dredging on fish and wildlife: a literature review, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program, Vicksburg, MS.

Andersen, S. January 1992. The development of a South American common market (MERCOSUL): environmental effects on the Plata River Basin. Publication No. 7, The Gaia Institute of Brazil.

Azevedo, J.R. (interview). July 16, 1993. Executive Director, Sociedade de Defesa do Pantanal (SODEPAN), Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul.

Baker, J. 1988. Survey of chlorinated pesticide residues in groundwater in rural areas of Dade County. Technical Report 88-5. Dade County, Department of Environmental resources Management, Miami, FL.

Brazil 92: Environmental Profile and Strategies (abridged edition). 1992. Brazilian Association of Environmental Agencies, Secretariat for the Environment, São Paulo.

Bucher, E.H., A. Bonetto, T.P. Boyle, P. Canevari, G. Castro, P. Huszar and T. Stone. 1993. Hidrovia: An Initial Environmental Examination of the Paraguay-Paraná Waterway. Wetlands for the Americas, Manomet, MA.

Davis, J.H., Jr. 1943. The natural features of southern Florida, especially the vegetation, and the Everglades. Bulletin No. 25, Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee, FL.

Davis, J.H., Jr. 1946. The peat deposits of Florida - their occurrence, development and uses. Bulletin 30:1-247, Florida Geological Survey, Tallahassee, FL.

Davis, S., L. Gunderson, R. Hofstetter, D. Swift, and B. Waller. 1987. An assessment of the potential benefits to the vegetation and water resources of Everglades National Park and the southern Everglades ecosystem associated with the General Design Memorandum to improve water deliveries to Everglades National Park. Statement Paper. South Florida Research Center, Everglades National Park, Homestead, FL.

De Lacerda, L., W. Pfeiffer, R. Marins, S. Rodrigues, C. Souza and W. Bastos. 1991. Mercury dispersal in water, sediments and aquatic biota of a gold mining tailing deposit in Poconé, Brazil, 55 Water Air Soil Poll. 283.

Duellman, W.E. and A. Schwartz. 1958. Amphibians and reptiles of southern Florida. Bulletin of the Florida State Museum, Biological Sciences, 3:181-324. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Espíndola, E. (interview). July 16, 1993. Assistant Secretary, State Secretariat for the Environment (SEMA), Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul.

Federico, A.C. 1982. Water quality characteristics of the Lower Kissimmee River Basin. Technical Publication 82-3. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL. 107 pp.

Ferreira, C.J., B.M. Soriano, S. Galdino, and S.K. Hamilton. 1992. Factors of anthropogenic origin affecting waters of the Pantanal wetland and associated rivers in the Upper Paraguay River Basin of Brazil. In: Proceedings of the Brazilian Program on Conservation and Management of Inland Waters. Fundação Biodiversitas. Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

Findley, R.W. 1988. Pollution control in Brazil. 15 Ecol. L. Q. 1.

Florida Sugar Cane League. 1988. Florida's Sugar Industry, 1987-88 Facts, Florida Sugar Cane League Inc., Clewiston, FL.

Gleason, P.J. and P.A. Stone. 1975. Prehistoric trophic levels status and possible cultural influences on the enrichment of Lake Okeechobee, (unpublished report). Central and Souther Florida Flood Control District, West Palm Beach, FL, p. 133.

Gomes, U. (interview). August 6, 1992. Chief of the Pantanal Agro-Ranching Research Center (CPAP), EMBRAPA. Corumbá, Mato Grosso do Sul.

Guimarães, R. 1991. The Ecopolitics of Development in the Third World: Politics and Environment in Brazil. Lynne Rienner Publ., Boulder and London.

Gunderson, L.H. and W.F. Loftus. 1989 (in press). The Everglades, competing land uses imperil the biotic communities of a vast wetland. In: W.H. Martin, S.C. Boyce, and A.C. Echternacht (Eds.). Biotic communities of the southeastern United States. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Harlem, P.W. 1979. Aerial photographic interpretation of the historical changes in Northern Biscayne Bay, Florida: 1925-1976. Sea Grant Technical Bulletin Number 40. University of Miami, Miami, FL.

Hylander, L., E. Silva, L. Oliveira, S. Silva, E. Kuntze and D. Silva. 1993. Mercury levels in alto Pantanal: mercury in fish and feathers. Sociedade Brasileiro Pesquisa Científico. Brasília.

Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. 1989. IFAS, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Lamonds, A.G. 1975. Chemical characteristics of the Lower Kissimmee River, Florida, with emphasis on nitrogen and phosphorus. Water Resources Investigation 45. U.S. Geological Survey, Tallahassee, FL. 75 pp.

Larson, Lewis H. 1980. Aboriginal Subsistence Technology on the Southeastern Coastal Plain during the Late Prehistoric Period. University of Presses of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Layne, J.N. 1984. The land mammals of south Florida. In: Gleason, P.J. (Ed.) Environments of South Florida: Present and Past II. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables, FL, pp. 269-296.

Light, S. and J.W. Dineen. In press. Water Control in the Everglades: An Historical Perspective. In: S. Davis and J. Ogden, (Eds.). Everglades: The Ecosystem and Its Restoration. St. Lucie Press.

Mittermeier, R.A., I. Gusmão Câmara, M.T. Jorge Pádua and J. Blanck. 1990. Conservation in the Pantanal of Brazil, 24 Oryx 103. April, 1990.

Muller, A. and A. Ninio. 1992. The Pantanal: paradise in danger. 14 National Wetlands Newsletter. November/December, 1992.

Oliveira, M. (interview). July 15, 1993. General Counsel, State Secretariat for the Environment (SEMA). Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul.

Parker, G.G., G.E. Ferguson and S.K. Love. 1955. Water resources of southeastern Florida with special reference to the geology and groundwater of the Miami area. Water Supply Paper 1255, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 965 pp.

Parker, G.G. and N.D. Hoy. 1943. Further studies of geological relationships affecting soil and water conservation and use in the Everglades: I. Additional notes on the geology and ground water of southern Florida. Soil Science Society of Florida Proc., 5-A:33-55.

Projeto de Desenvolvimento Agroambiental do Estado de Mato Grosso (PRODEAGRO). 1992. Secretária de Estado de Planejamento e Coordenação Geral, Cuiabá, Mato Grosso.

Quetone, J., and J. Koening. 1992. “Nations within a Nation: Native Americans in Florida Today,” Forum: The Magazine of the Florida Humanities Council, Fall.

Rabelo, A.P. (interview). July 16, 1993. Commander of the Independent Company of Forest Police, State of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande.

Rassmussen, J. and J.G. Harber. 1981. Effects of navigation and operation/maintenance of the Upper Mississippi River system nine-foot channel on commercial fish and fishing. Prepared for the Upper Mississippi River Basin Commission, Minneapolis, MN.

Robertson, W.B., Jr. and J.A. Kushlan. 1984. The southern Florida avifauna. In: Gleason, P.J. (Ed.) Environments of South Florida: Present and Past. Miami Geological Society, Coral Gables, FL, pp. 219-257.

Santos, Euclides (interview). July 12, 1993. Mayor of Poconé, Mato Grosso.

Santos, Saint Clair (interview). July 30, 1992. State Attorney, Paraná State Department of Justice. Curitiba, Paraná.

Schwartz, A. 1952. The land mammals of southern Florida and the upper Florida keys. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Michigan. Ann Arbor, MI.

Scott, D.A. and M. Carbonell (compilers). 1986. A Directory of Neotropical Wetlands, IUCN Cambridge and IWRB Slimbridge.

Secretária de Estado de Meio Ambiente (SEMA). 1993. Description of the State of Mato Grosso do Sul. Unpublished report.

Shih, G. 1983. Data analysis to detect rainfall changes in south Florida. Technical Memorandum. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL.

South Florida Water Management District. 1992a. Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan for the Everglades, Supporting Information Document. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL.

South Florida Water Management District. 1992b. Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan for the Everglades, Planning Document. South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL.

Stephens, J.C. and L. Johnson. 1951. Subsidence of organic soils in the upper Everglades region of Florida. Soil Sci. Soc. Fl., Proc., 11:191-237.

Teixeira, M.J. (interview). July 13, 1993. Public Information Di