This year the Florida Environmental Regulation Commission must finalize a rule limiting phosphorus reaching the Everglades, and those who care about the Everglades should be offended by the campaign of misinformation by some activists.

The campaign by the Florida Audubon lobbyist group called "Getting to 10 " should be called "Getting to Court." The "no compromise" standard of 10 parts per billion (ppb) of phosphorus -- the equivalent of two drops of water in an Olympic-size pool -- is based on politics, not science. Audubon lobbyists know very well that 90 percent of the Everglades Protection Area already receives water of 10 ppb or less.

This rule is really about water flowing into border areas at the ends of canals that drain water from Lake Okeechobee, agricultural areas and from communities such as Wellington and Weston.

The 1994 law governing this issue mandated that the state build stormwater treatment areas to remove phosphorus. To date, less than half are finished, but where they are operating, water flows into them from sugar farms at 84 ppb and from the lake and urban sources at 150 ppb or higher and leaves averaging 20 ppb to 30 ppb.

So what does it really mean when environmentalists demand no compromise on 10 ppb? Their campaign is intentionally vague, omitting important details. Where should water quality be measured? How can a single standard assure the natural variability of this complex system? How will flood and drought impact measurements? They don't even acknowledge variances in testing labs, whose results can differ as much as 20 percent.

No. The "10" campaigners chant "10" as though it were a mystical mantra. There is no mystery, there's only science, and science has raised very serious doubts about the "no compromise" standard.

The scientific Peer Review Panel says, "A uniform phosphorus criterion across the entire Everglades may not promote patterns of variability that are naturally characteristic of this system" and a rigid standard might pose "environmental risks" to some kinds of wildlife habitats.

Obviously, a one-size-fits-all rule for 10 ppb everywhere, every day of every year, is not a science-based goal. It's a political slogan designed to have litigation drive the restoration process.

Audubon lobbyists pick their usual scapegoat and ignore seven consecutive years of cooperation and progress during which sugar farmers have reduced the phosphorus leaving their farms. In 2001, there was a 73 percent reduction, and the most recent three-year average shows a 59 percent reduction in nutrients.

In spite of this progress, the campaign for "10" would automatically create massive legal and technical "violations." These lobbyists then would be free to bring lawsuits against the people who are spending millions of dollars to restore the Everglades, including farmers, Indian tribes and the South Florida Water Management District.

That is not fair. It is not scientific. It is bad public policy. Only harm and delay can result from the guaranteed epidemic of litigation that this cynical campaign is trying to create.