150630-a
Protecting wetlands and water bodies from shooting range activities generates $1 Million for the community and range owners
PRnewswire.com
June 30, 2015
Firing ranges with wet lands and open water may be missing out on a huge lead reclamation revenue opportunity which will provide a win-win for the range and local community.
ARVADA, Colo., June 30, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- A typical firing range generates 25,000-500,000 pounds of lead which could be worth a substantial amount of money to the range, but many times the range assumes the lead in wet lands and open water areas would not be accessible. Fortunately MT2, the nation's #1 firing range maintenance & lead reclamation company, has developed and implemented a patented approach to recovering the maximum amount of used lead while protecting the sensitive natural environment of wetlands, water bodies and active waterways.
●  On a firing range project in Maryland, MT2 was contracted to clean and recover PAH and lead contamination from years of trap and skeet use that caused the accumulation of lead pellets down- range of the club. The environmental impact of lead contamination was of particular concern because the site is located in a floodplain within a State Park. The project focused on the environmentally sensitive Chesapeake Bay watershed with headwater and drainage basins.
●  On a project in Broward County Florida, 40,000 cubic yards of lead impacted soil and sediment were successfully processed from an 8-acre pond and swamp bordering the Everglades using a new cutting edge lead separation method. The result produced over 1,000,000 pounds of lead shot ready to be converted into revenue.
●  Most recently, a project was successfully completed with US EPA consent-order oversight including 15 acre and 8 acre ponds with up to three feet of lead impacted sediment.  Over 100,000 cubic yards were handled including dredging at an astounding rate of 1,000 cubic yards per day. The success of this project required special handling and drying technologies. The key was to treat the lead contamination via in-situ methods. This simply means that all of the treatment work was done on-site, which ensures that it is done thoroughly and with the highest level of treatment results.
MT2 utilizes their proprietary lead treatment technology called ECOBOND® to protect the sensitive natural environment, while at the same time protecting all active waterways. The EPA and various state regulators have approved the ECOBOND® technology on over 1,300 projects. The treatment process provides for the chemical conversion of lead to a more eco-friendly mineral form that is non-hazardous and easily disposed of.
When a firing range makes a proactive effort to remove the lead from their range, they see very powerful additional benefits. Their focus on Environmental Stewardship is recognized in protecting the law enforcement officers who use their range. These officers protect and serve their local community who also benefit from a clean firing range. There is potential for lead proximity contamination  from lead dust in the air and soil migrating offsite and in waterways.   Keeping gun ranges clean with the lowest levels of lead is top priority for MT2.
Over the past decade, MT2 has credited over $4,000,000.00 to range owners from lead recycling on their firing range, while working closely with them to implement EPA Best Management Practices (BMPs) to protect shooters and the environment. MT2's extensive list of clients includes over 200 law enforcement agencies such as NYPD, State Departments of Corrections, and the US Military.

150630-b
Sinkholes are drying out Orange Lake
Alligator.org – by Lawrence Chan, Staff Writer
Jun 30, 2015.
North Central Florida’s biggest lake is vanishing down a sinkhole.
Stretched like a brown patch between Marion and Alachua county, Orange Lake, near Ocala, is famous for its bass fishing and wetlands environment. But now, nature and human influence have created a disquieting trend in Orange Lake, whose shores have spent decades draining down a sinkhole into a depleted Floridan aquifer during droughts.
“My bait and tackle shop has been closed,” said Robert Shidner, owner of South Shore Fish Camp on the lake.
Shidner, who’s owned his camp for the past 15 years, believes Orange Lake’s decreasing water levels are due to sinkholes located along the lake bottom. The sinkholes are directly connected to the Floridan aquifer, which is being continuously drained for human use.
While Orange Lake’s shores have historically shrunk during droughts and refilled when rain is plentiful, the past quarter century have demonstrated extreme water-level drops well below historical trends.
Orange Lake is 12,550 acres in size and an average 5.5 feet deep, but the water level fluctuates an average of two feet annually.
Data from the St. John’s Water Management District, the agency which oversees lake, river and stream management throughout northeast and east central Florida, demonstrates lake levels following rainfall patterns. 
However, in the past quarter century, the lake’s water levels have dipped into extreme lows despite rainfall congruent with historic patterns.
According to the U.S. Geological Survey, when the aquifer’s supply is plentiful and rainfall steady, Orange Lake expands into its normal size, but when the aquifer drops below normal, water from Orange Lake drains into the aquifer to compensate, which lowers lake levels below their natural depth.
The U.S.Geological Survey reported Floridians used about 134 gallons of water per day in 2010. Much of this is drawn from Florida’s aquifers, exasperating water-level problems on the lake.
Dan Canfield, a professor of limnology in UF’s Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, said he believes Orange Lake will eventually become another Paynes Prairie unless more is done to maintain its water levels.
Officials have tried to isolate and plug Orange Lake’s sinkholes with debris since 1964, but the problem has worsened due to the overall depletion of the aquifer.
In 2003, Marion County officials proposed a way to plug the sinkhole in the lake, but authorities rejected the plan, saying it would interfere with the lake’s natural rhythms.
“Wide fluctuations in water levels are important for long-term maintenance of healthy lake and wetland habitats for fish and wildlife,” said Teresa Monson, a public communications coordinator for the St. Johns River Water Management District.
The lake recently recovered from a six-year drought, during which water levels dropped to the second lowest on record.
Depressed water levels have allowed plant life to grow in dried-up areas of the lake usually covered by water. The foliage floats to the top of the lake and becomes floating islands of mud and vegetation, called tussocks, covering hundreds of acres on the lake’s surface.
These drifting rafts of vegetation, known as tussocks, are obstacles for local fish camps and boating companies. 
Tussocks prevent boats from traversing Orange Lake due to a fear of clogging engine motors.
“Some of them can be up to anywhere from three to 10 feet thick of muck,” Shidner said. “There is roughly 9,500 acres of floating tussocks and islands on Orange Lake due to the years of drought we’ve had.”
The tussocks have compelled local legislators to begin making preliminary plans to clean the surface of the lake by creating a lake management group known as the Orange Creek Basin Interagency Working Group.
While their focus has been primarily on discussing ways to clean the lake’s surface, the plan may only be a short-term solution to the lake’s long-term problems.

150630-c
State adds land near springs to its ‘Florida Forever’ list
Ocala.com –by Kristine Crane, Staff writer
June 30, 2015
Local efforts to protect Silver Springs got a boost last week, when the Florida Department of Environmental Protection approved Marion County’s application to add the Silver Springs Sandhill Site to the 2016 Florida Forever project list.
The Sandhill Site, which consists of 470 acres just outside the northeast quadrant of Ocala, is bordered by Coehadjoe Park to the west and Indian Lake State Forest to the northeast. The state’s acquisition of the site would create one connected piece of conservation land, said Jim Couillard, director-landscape architect for Marion County Parks and Recreation Department.
With the site potentially under state ownership and county management, the aquifer that feeds Silver Springs would also be protected from pollutants that might otherwise contaminate it if the site fell to developers and was potentially used for as many as 1,600 residential and commercial units, Couillard added.
“We’ve got a chance to take it off the development block,” said Guy Marwick, the executive director of the Felburn Foundation, an Ocala-based nonprofit philanthropy group specializing in water protection.
“Silver Springs has enough problems,” Marwick added.
In the late 1990s, Marwick spearheaded springs’ protection efforts that led to the state’s purchase of Indian Lake State Forest from a development company that was planning to build 10,000 houses and 1 million square feet of commercial space.
“That would have been the end of Silver Springs right there,” Marwick said.
Similarly, the state could save the Springs from potential contamination with the Sandhill Site acquisition, he added.
In the application, Couillard wrote, “From a general aquifer recharge and springs protection standpoint, and based on the goals of the Silver Springs Basing Management Action Plan, any new residential development, at any density, would be viewed as a threat to the restoration goals of Silver Springs.”
The site, which is part pasture and part woods, is also located one mile from Silver Springs head springs in a Primary Springs Protection Zone. The area is “most vulnerable,” according to the Marion County Aquifer Vulnerability Assessment, because of its thin sandy soil, which allows water to quickly reach the Aquifer.
The DEP’s Acquisition and Restoration Council — which approved the Sandhill Site for the Florida Forever project — also added the Site to Florida’s First Magnitude Springs Project. The Florida Forever project is the state’s premier conservation and recreational lands aqcuisition program, according to the DEP web site.
County Commission Chairman Stan McClain said those two approvals “were the two big hurdles.”
McClain said when they found out the property was up for sale, they jumped on the Florida Forever application. The land is currently owned by both a hedge fund and a limited liability group, and is jointly represented by attorney Steven Gray of Gray, Ackerman and Haines, P.A. in Ocala.
“We thought it would make a great addition to the property that’s already there,” McClain said. “It could be another entryway into the Indian Lake State Forest and our Coehadjoe Park is next to it.”
Couillard said acquisition will result in creation of more trails and building of the whole area’s recreational potential.
“If the state was able to acquire it, it’s going to enhance the [Coehadjoe] Park. Definitely the park would become a busier park. It’s a pretty busy park already,” Couillard said.
Even on a muggy Tuesday morning, a handful of people were out walking in the park, which the county purchased as part of the Pennies for Parks program in the 1990s.
“The park is really starting to pick up. Six tennis courts have been resurfaced and there are new lights,” Couillard said. There are plans to build pickleball and volleyball courts as well, he added.
A big part of the park’s charm is its natural state, replete with cavernous gopher turtle habitats, deer hoofprints and the odd invasive plant.
If the county extends its reach into managing the Sandhill site, the wildlife potential would increase, Couillard said. The first priority would be restoring the land to its natural state, through controlled burnings, so that native plants and wildlife could grow into their natural habitats.
Appraisers are currently assessing the value of the Sandhill property. The estimated taxable value has been assessed at $4.5 million. Meanwhile, McClain said the project is high on his agenda in anticipation of the state’s decision about the properties on the Florida Forever list during the next legislative session, if not sooner.
“We’ll probably try to prioritize our priorities in August, and certainly this will be one we’ll have a discussion about as a board.”

150630-d
States sue over waters of the U.S. rule
GrowingFL.com - by Allison Floyd
June 30th, 2015
As the new Waters of the U.S. rule became official on Monday, North Dakota and 12 other states sued the federal government in U.S. District Court in Bismark, challenging expanded federal jurisdiction over some state waters. The rule is set to take effect on Aug. 28, barring court intervention.
Meanwhile, Texas’ attorney general filed a similar lawsuit in district court there, saying that the rule “vastly expands (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) jurisdiction, threatening the ability of states and private property owners to use their own land.” Louisiana and Mississippi have joined that lawsuit.
Waters of the U.S. or WOTUS defines what land must comply with the Clean Water Act and therefore is subject to oversight by the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers. While federal officials claim the rule only clarifies which property has always fallen under Clean Water Act requirements, farming groups have said that WOTUS added hundreds of thousands of acres to the land under federal control.
North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem called WOTUS “unnecessary” and “unlawful,” saying the rule does nothing to improve water quality in North Dakota and other states. The state sued in U.S. District Court on Monday, the same day that the rule was officially published in the Federal Register.
“We’re taking the lead,” Stenehjem said. “We’re the most agricultural state in the country, so it just seemed like a logical place.”
A dozen other states joined the lawsuit, including Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, Nevada, South Dakota and Wyoming. Other states may join the lawsuit, while groups with interests in agriculture, manufacturing or energy might sue on their own.
“The EPA’s new water rule is not about clean water – it’s about power,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said. “This sweeping new rule is a blatant overstep of federal authority and could have a devastating effect on virtually any property owner, from farmers to ranchers to small businesses. If it moves forward, essentially anybody with a ditch on their property would be at risk of costly and unprecedented new regulations and a complicated web of bureaucracy. Texans shouldn’t need permission from the federal government to use their own land, and the EPA’s attempt to erode private property rights must be put to a stop.”
 While many critics of WOTUS point to the Obama administration and worry the federal government is expanding its reach, the issue isn’t strictly partisan. Three of the states that sued on Monday are led by Democrat governors.
Agriculture advocates worry that the rule, as it is written, would make intermittent streams and ditches subject to environmental protection laws, creating bureaucratic red tape for farmers.
 “I fear that, potentially, we would just get bogged down in paperwork and regulatory issues to do everything that we do. And, so much of what we do on farms and ranches is time sensitive. Things need to be done on time and weather is a factor in that. I can see this being very problematic in that respect,” said Steve Nelson, president of Nebraska Farm Bureau.
The U.S. Senate and House both passed bills that would force EPA rewrite WOTUS and chambers have blocked funding to implement the rule in the 2016 fiscal year.
Any legislative solution, however, faces a threat of presidential veto.

150630-e
There could be many uses for Lake Okeechobee water drained out to sea
Sun Sentinel - by Andy Reid and Kaitlyn Kelly
June 30, 2015
Draining Lake Okeechobee water out to sea protects South Florida from flooding, but also sacrifices help for long-term water woes.
From mid January to early June, nearly 200 billion gallons of lake water was flushed away to leave more room for rain expected during the summer storm season.
Dumping water to the east and west coasts eases the strain on the lake’s erosion-prone dike. But it also wastes water that could boost South Florida drinking water supplies, irrigate crops and nourish the parched Everglades.
In addition, that dumping of lake water east through the St. Lucie River and west through the Caloosahatchee can kill normally salty coastal fishing grounds and cause other water quality problems that scare away tourists.
This year’s lake draining comes as state leaders and environmental advocates are bickering over whether to spend billions in taxpayer money to buy land and build a reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee.  That reservoir could hold lake water for future needs and help send more of it south, where lake water once flowed naturally before farming and development got in the way.
Here are a few examples of how this year’s volume of wasted lake water compares to South Florida water supply needs:
SEVEN MONTHS OF DRINKING WATER: The amount of Lake Okeechobee water drained east and west and out to sea was enough to supply about seven months of drinking water for the nearly seven million people in Palm Beach County, Broward County, Miami-Dade County and the Florida Keys. Water plants in southeast Florida churn out about 840 million gallons of drinking water a day.
NINE MONTHS OF CROP IRRIGATION: Tapping into lake water drained to the east and west coasts could have provided nine months of water to irrigate South Florida crops. Sugar cane, sod, vegetables and other agriculture in southeast Florida uses about 655 million gallons of water a day.
THREE YEARS OF WATERING GOLF COURSES, PARKS AND OTHER RECREATION AREAS:  Golf courses, parks, neighborhood associations common areas and large commercial developments could have quenched their landscaping irrigation thirst for three years with the amount of Lake Okeechobee water drained toward the east and west coasts this year. The watering of these and other “recreation” areas uses about 149 million gallons of water a day.
NEARLY 40 PERCENT OF EVERGLADES’ WATER NEEDS:  Everglades advocates have called for moving almost 500 billion gallons of Lake Okeechobee water south each year to help replenish Florida’s struggling River of Grass. The volume of lake water drained east and west for flood control so far this year equates to almost 40 percent of that Everglades restoration goal.
282,000 SWIMMING POOLS:  Even if boosting drinking water supplies, watering crops and lawns and helping the Everglades aren’t a pressing concern, then what about filling swimming pools ? The lake water drained to the east and west coasts was enough to fill about 282,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools.
2.3 MILLION BAGS OF ICE:  This year’s lost Lake Okeechobee could have helped keep 2.3 million beach coolers cold if it had been corralled, frozen and sorted into 10-pound bags of ice.
SOURCES:  The Army Corps of Engineers, which controls lake discharges, provided the volume of Lake Okeechobee drained east into the St. Lucie River and west into the Caloosahatchee River. The water use volumes in these comparisons comes from the Florida Lower East Coast Water Supply Update of 2013.

150629-a
FL district, agricultural partners explore innovative rainwater harvesting techniques
WaterWorld.com
June 29, 2015
PALATKA, FL, June 29, 2015 -- The St. Johns River Water Management District of Florida has teamed up with Trader Hill Farms in Nassau County, Fla., to implement an innovative technique of rainwater harvesting that will be used to irrigate crops, ultimately conserving fresh groundwater and reducing nutrient loading to area waterways.
The project will allow the farm to use rainwater as an alternative to groundwater to make up for evaporation losses within its irrigation system. The roof harvesting area covers 9,780 square feet, and every 1-inch rain event will yield 5,800 gallons of water. On an annual average basis, it could produce tens of thousands of gallons per year. The water will be used for the production of salad greens and tilapia.
Last week, Ann Shortelle, executive director of the St. Johns River Water Management District, and Charles Shinn, director of government and community affairs with the Florida Farm Bureau Federation, toured the premises.
"We are excited to see such proactive measures being taken by the agricultural community to conserve groundwater," Shortelle said. "Finding these types of opportunities and sharing the success stories and techniques with others will help us multiply the water-saving benefits throughout our District."
Shinn added, "This type of farming practice conserves energy [and] water and is sustainable for years into the future due to the low environmental impact and high crop yield. The Florida Farm Bureau supports and encourages these types of best management practices."
In addition to conserving water, this aquaponics operation keeps its irrigation water contained within its distribution system, so no nutrient-laden runoff leaves the farm.

150629-b
Florida Bay still at risk as restoration moves forward
Miami Herald – Letter to the Editor by Tabitha Cale, Everglades policy associate, Audubon Florida, Miami
June 29, 2015
Florida Bay is known for its incredible natural beauty. Beautiful teal waters filled with fish, dotted with mangrove islands filled with birds.
For years canals and other structures have drained water away from the Everglades wetlands that flow into Florida Bay. As a result, not enough freshwater reaches the bay, leaving water too salty. Much of the sea grass that serves as a nursery area for fish has died off, and the populations ofwading birds and other wildlife that eat those fish have been dramatically reduced.
The good news is that taxpayers have invested in infrastructure that is helping reroute this water back to the natural areas where it belongs. Three restoration projects south of Tamiami Trail are nearly complete and will soon change the way water flows towards the Everglades.
The goal of these projects is to move more water towards Shark River Slough and Taylor Slough, rehydrating the parched wetlands of Everglades National Park, and improving conditions in Florida Bay.
The bad news is that as a result of outside pressure to use restoration projects for flood control rather than ecological benefits, the first two year-long test run of these projects could actually make conditions even worse for Florida Bay.
The government agencies in charge of restoration will meet on Tuesday to discuss this operational test that will begin this summer. More water will move into Shark River Slough — which will benefit the wetlands of the western half of Everglades National Park.
Unfortunately, less water may end up in Taylor Slough to the east, cutting off some of the water going to Florida Bay.
This test is the first in a series of three. Audubon believes remaining tests must prioritize bringing freshwater to the Southern Everglades.
If we get it wrong, fish and wading bird populations will continue to decline.
Taxpayers have invested a lot of money in Everglades restoration infrastructure.
This is because there are so many benefits — for people and for wildlife.
Restoration efforts will ensure protection of unique habitats, help recharge the Biscayne Aquifer, delay the impacts of sea level rise, and protect the commercial and recreational fishing industries in Florida Bay.
These benefits will not be realized if government agencies continue to bow to pressure to drain the water away from the Everglades. Restoration is about putting water in the right place for the right reasons.

150629-c
Sugar from Cuba not a concern to U.S. sugar producers
NaplesNews.com - Bartholomew Sullivan
June 29, 2015
WASHINGTON D.C. - WASHINGTON — Powerful forces with a lot of clout and money are making sure the U.S. Sugar Program stays intact, recently killing long-held plans to flood sugar land in the Everglades while holding on to lucrative subsidies and price supports in Washington.
The expansion of the industry in South Florida after the 1959 Cuban Revolution has resulted in an $8.4 million annual lobbying effort and campaign donations that buy the support of loyal members of Congress. The combined effect is to keep sugar cane and sugar beet prices higher than world prices, with resulting higher food prices, critics complain. Lobbyists for the American Sugar Alliance, other sugar trade associations and individual sugar producers such as Palm Beach-based Fanjul Corp. and Clewiston-based U.S. Sugar spend millions annually.
Even an eventual opening to sugar-producing Cuba is likely to have only a marginal impact on the U.S. market, most likely limited to high-quality organic sugar for niche markets like boutique confectionaries, said U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council president John S. Kavulich. The council, founded in 1994, is a nonprofit, membership-based company that provides information on Cuban business prospects.
“I don’t think that U.S. sugar beet producers or corn syrup producers should be terribly worried about the short, medium or long term impact of sugar from Cuba,” Kavulich said. The laws, regulations and policies relating to the importation of sugar to the U.S. to protect the domestic market are likely to stay even after a “post-Raul Castro, post Fidel Castro” Cuba, he said. Other sugar exporters wouldn’t willingly allow Cuba to cut into their market share.
U.S. Sugar Corp. made political campaign contributions of $100,000, and Florida Crystals spent $25,000, in early 2014 supporting the Liberty and Leadership Fund, the single-candidate super-political action committee supporting state Sen. Lisbeth Benacquisto of Fort Myers. She lost to Curt Clawson of Bonita Springs in last year’s three-way Republican primary ahead of the special election to replace congressman Trey Radel after his arrest for cocaine possession.
Florida members of Congress Alcee Hastings, D-Fort Lauderdale; Lois Frankel, D-Boca Raton; and former member Steve Sutherland, R-Panama City, were among the top 20 recipients of contributions from sugar interests last year, each receiving more than $30,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
The U.S. Sugar Program, which restricts imports from 40 sugar-exporting nations and supports a domestic sugar price well-above the cost of repaying crop-production loans, has plenty of critics. During last year’s debate over the Farm Bill, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the program costs American consumers $3 billion a year through crop forfeitures, tariffs and marketing controls.
“It is one of the most obscene farm subsidies ever conceived,” he said, “and this Farm Bill does nothing to reform it.” While the bill did pare back subsidies for many crops, it left sugar alone.
McCain is one of 16 co- sponsors of the Sugar Reform Act of 2015. An identical measure in the House has 41 co-sponsors, none from Florida.
Lobbyists from Washington-based North Bridge Communications, were paid $70,000 by the American Sugar Alliance in the first quarter of this year to lobby against those measures, lobbying disclosure records show. The alliance has paid a Lubbock, Texas, firm $25,000 per quarter since January 2014 for lobbying. The Arlington, Virginia-based alliance spent $780,000 on lobbying in the first three months of this year on regional and bilateral trade agreements that involve access by foreign sugar to the U.S. market, including the Trans- Pacific Partnership, the trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the African Growth and Opportunity Act.
Separately, U.S. Sugar has paid the D.C. lobbying law firm Davis and Harman $50,000 per quarter since January 2014, when the most recent five-year Farm Bill was being negotiated. Florida Crystals paid the Washington-based firm Smith and Boyette $120,000 in the same period for work on legislation involving free-trade agreements, among other things, records show.
Five sugar industry groups — the American Sugar Alliance, American Crystal Sugar, U.S. Beet Sugar Association, Fanjul Corp. and the Sugar Cane League — paid $8.4 million for lobbyist last year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a good-government watchdog group.
Big Sugar’s recent efforts resulted in the South Florida Water Management District board’s unanimous vote in May to terminate its option to buy 48,600 acres of U.S. Sugar Corp. land south of Lake Okeechobee for use as a water storage area.
The water management district had been in favor of the plan until recently, but Big Sugar’s plans changed, said Richard Grosso, director of the Land Use Law Clinic at Nova Southeastern University in Fort Lauderdale.
Grosso believes it’s no coincidence that U.S. Sugar is proposing an 18,000-unit residential development called Sugar Hill on some of the option land south of Clewiston, accommodating 58,000 people by the time it is built out, according to Southwest Florida Regional Planning District documents. Part of the development would be on Caloosahatchee restoration land.
U.S. Sugar maintained that the largest 26,000-acre parcel of the option land, if dug out four feet deep, would only have held 104,000 acre-feet of water, a small fraction of the 4.5 million acre-feet discharged to the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee rivers in 2013.
“More than 117,000 acres in this area has already been purchased for Everglades restoration, and that land is in the southern end where the state and federal projects have been designed as the best places for storing and treating and sheet-flowing water into the Everglades,” said U.S. Sugar spokeswoman Judy Sanchez.
Local officials in Clewiston and Hendry County were dead-set against the sale, which they believed would harm the local economy long dependent on sugar production.
Asked if a future opening to Cuba might result in more imported sugar, Sanchez said any answer “would be pure speculation at this point.”
“We have trade regulations; we have the Farm Bill; we have forty-something other countries that have rights to import sugar into our country, and I doubt they’re going to just step aside and say ‘give our sugar imports to Cuba,’” Sanchez said, referring to their import quota rights.
Sugar baron and Cuban exile Alfonso Fanjul told The Washington Post late last year that he “would like to see our family back in Cuba, where we started,” drawing the ire of several South Florida Republicans, including Sen. Marco Rubio, and U.S. Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario Diaz-Balart, the latter of whom called Fanjul’s position a “betrayal.”
Fanjul, who reportedly lost 150,000 acres and 10 sugar mills when the Castro government nationalized his family’s holdings, has traveled to his native country in recent years but acknowledged conditions have to change before he’d be willing to invest in Cuba.
His brother, Pepe Sr., told the newspaper he would return to Cuba only when “Cubans are reunited.” Neither returned calls seeking comment.

150629-d
Sugar lands south of lake needed for restoration, water flow
NaplesNews.com - Guest commentary by Ray Judah
June 29, 2015
Michael Collins' politically charged rhetoric in his recent guest commentary criticizing Erik Eikenberg, the CEO of the Everglades Foundation, for supporting the state option with U.S. Sugar to purchase land south of Lake Okeechobee for treatment, storage and conveyance of water to the Everglades was fraught with the same dismissive attitude he exhibited while on the South Florida Water Management District board.
Well known for his long-standing support of the sugar industry, Collins erroneously states that "spending hundreds of millions of our tax dollars to grab private land and build a reservoir where he (referring to Eikenberg ) wants to build it will do virtually nothing for our water supply, will not solve critical water quality problems in the estuaries, and will delay critical restoration projects needed for Everglades restoration we all support."
In fact, restoration of a central flow way south of Lake Okeechobee is critical to recharging the Biscayne Aquifer to ensure adequate water supply for millions of people on the east coast; provide for proper flow rate and volume of water to renourish the Everglades; alleviate the massive releases of polluted water currently being redirected to the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie resulting in the destruction of the estuaries on the west and east coast of South Florida; and is the final piece of the puzzle for meaningful comprehensive Everglades restoration.
Collins further suggests that an incredibly expensive water management system put in place since the 1950s has increased the flow of water into the Everglades. In fact, the Everglades Agricultural Area, including approximately 440,000 acres of sugar cane fields, south of Lake Okeechobee has severed the hydrological connection between the lake and the Everglades. The inability of the water district and the sugar industry to comply with the 1989 federal consent decree, limiting the discharge of phosphorus to 10 ppb, has substantially reduced the volume of clean water needed to nourish and support a healthy Everglades ecosystem.
Continuing his attack on Mr. Eikenberg, Collins states that "billions of dollars have been invested and pledged, and cooperative efforts are making historic improvements in both water quality and quantity in the Everglades and related critical estuaries."
In reality, Mr. Collins needs to look the public taxpayers in the eye and attempt to defend such a specious argument. The Everglades and coastal estuaries are dying due to the disruption of the flow and volume of surface water runoff and decades of agricultural runoff of chemicals including insecticides, fungicides and pesticides along with nutrient loading of phosphorous and nitrogen resulting in harmful algae blooms and devastating impacts to fish and wildlife.
Collins dismisses the need for additional land to responsibly manage the Lake Okeechobee watershed by asserting that "after 15 years of science, study, discussion and cost-analysis, water storage, water treatment areas and shallow flow basins are part of the consensus scientific restoration plans among water managers, elected officials, stakeholders and experts."
But here's the problem: the Central South Florida Flood Control project model used as the basis for Everglades restoration under the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program is seriously flawed because the model incorporated data collected from a historic 30-year dry cycle from 1965 to 1995. The water district underestimated the need for water storage to restore the Everglades and there is a need for an additional one million acre feet of water storage to properly manage maximum flow from Lake Okeechobee.
Collins' suggestion that scientists do not support restoration funds on an expensive new reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee is contradicted by the recent University of Florida Water Institute study that recommended the state proceed with the limited time option with U.S. Sugar to purchase land south of Lake Okeechobee for critical water storage.
Facts are, indeed, inconvenient sometimes.

150628-a
Amendment 1 betrayed
Miami Herald - Editorial
June 28, 2015
Our state political leaders should be ashamed. In twisting the intent of Amendment 1, they have brazenly ignored the will of Florida voters.
But the ballot initiative, born of a wish to keep lawmakers from raiding money set aside to purchase and preserve Florida lands, was subverted and misappropriated by state legislators.
Now state environmentalists are fighting back with a lawsuit to stop this from happening next year. They deserve our support.
In a bold move, they are suing the Florida Legislature, Senate President Andy Gardiner, R-Orlando and House Speaker Steve Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island. Both leaders defend their actions. True, vague Amendment 1 wording may give them leeway, but the intent of voters was always clear: Acquire land and preserve it. Period.
The lawsuit says lawmakers violated the state Constitution by misusing money set aside from fees on real-estate transactions for land acquisition and conservation through Amendment 1.
Supporters of the ballot initiative want a judge to declare exactly what lawmakers can and can’t do with the money. In years to come, Floridians, including legislators and governors, definitely need such clarification.
The environmental groups suing say almost half of the $740 million generated by the environmental initiative this year will go to salaries and operations, not land purchases. The Legislature, the suit says, “defied the constitutional mandate” in spending less than half of the money for the purposes intended by millions of Florida voters. What a betrayal.
It all began with a wonderful idea back in November, when environmental activists sold Amendment 1 to Florida voters. The amendment — endorsed by the Miami Herald Editorial Board and other newspapers — would set aside one-third of the tax on real-estate documents for conservation efforts ranging from land purchases to restoration programs.
Environmentalists said it was a way to force lawmakers to boost environmental funding and prevent them from raiding such allocations, as they had done with the Florida Forever fund during the 2008 economic downturn.
A whopping 75 percent of voters thought it was a good idea. The Legislature then chose to snub them.
Florida Wildlife Federation President Manley Fuller said, “The Legislature took the money and used it for things it should not be spent on. This is a slap in the face to Florida voters, and it should not stand.”
Indeed.
The 2015-16 budget siphons existing money from the environment to other areas and uses the new money to replace it. Amendment 1 should not follow the path of the Florida Lottery.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Earthjustice, the Florida Wildlife Federation, St. Johns Riverkeeper and the Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida, can’t do anything about the budget approved by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Rick Scott last week. But the groups want to rein in the Legislature for future budgets. They want the Amendment 1 funds to be used only for buying, improving and maintaining land and water resources. Period.
Ironically, the Legislature found room in the budget for tax cuts, a major priority for Gov. Scott, but didn’t increase spending on the environment, the groups say.
If state political leaders don’t respect the will of voters, those voters should respond when those legislators next ask the electorate to let them keep their jobs.

150628-b
Bold leadership on water lacking in Fla.
Ocala.com - for the Star-Banner by Jim Gross, geologist
June 28, 2015
Florida’s population is rapidly approaching 20 million. We have surpassed New York to become the third most populous state in the nation, and our growth rate is increasing as the economy improves. Florida’s water supplies are being stretched to and past sustainable limits.
Studies have shown that saltwater intrusion is impacting more wells. Wetlands are stressed. Springs are suffering the double whammy of reduced flows and degraded water quality. If there was ever a time for bold leadership in water management, it is now.
But bold leadership in Florida water management is not in evidence today. The water management districts have become more focused on issuing new water-use permits than taking the steps needed to sustain water supplies for generations to come. And yet, sustainability is one of the principal reasons these agencies were created.
Water-management indecision has too often been justified by lack of scientific data and tools to assess the data. I am a licensed professional geologist with 38 years of water-resources experience. Eighteen of these years have been involved with water-management issues in Florida. As a scientist, I am often the first to agree that additional data and better tools are desirable. However, there is already a wealth of data in Florida, and our tools are better than they have ever been.
Regional groundwater-flow models are powerful tools for effective water management when properly applied. However, no single groundwater-flow model is best for every application.
There will never be enough geologic and hydrologic information to eliminate all model uncertainty. However, it is not necessary to eliminate all model uncertainty for effective water management. Professional experience and judgment are essential. Continued monitoring and refinement of models reduces uncertainty, prudent course corrections can be made as needed.
This approach requires water management districts to hire and retain competent geologists and hydrologists. It also requires the districts to cultivate an environment in which geologists and hydrologists are confident in expressing their professional opinions without fear of retribution.
Despite uncertainty, model results provide critical information for water managers. For example, during my tenure at the St. Johns River Water Management District, I worked closely with hydrologists simulating many different withdrawal scenarios using groundwater-flow models. The work focused on protecting minimum flows and levels. Scenarios included restricting withdrawals by location, by water-use category and by aquifer.
The results were clear. The cumulative effect of all groundwater withdrawals is the central challenge we face in achieving water-supply sustainability. We must limit withdrawals from the Floridan aquifer system.
Some may be surprised that this finding is not a recent discovery. Work at the St. Johns River Water Management District in the 1990s showed the effects of cumulative groundwater withdrawals. Even before the district completed its first regional water supply plan in 2000, it was aware that the high permeability of the Floridan aquifer system caused drawdowns from withdrawals to spread widely across the Florida peninsula.
It has been common over the years for hydrologists to delineate sections of the Floridan aquifer system based on varying hydrologic characteristics, often using groundwater-model results. However, the purpose of identifying sections of the aquifer system is not to imply that there are separate and isolated groundwater basins in the Floridan Aquifer system.
The Floridan Aquifer system is essentially a single groundwater basin across the entirety of the Florida peninsula. The delineated sections only illustrate differing flow responses to withdrawals caused by differing geologic conditions.
Sustainability need not be a partisan issue. Ten years ago, the three largest water management districts in Florida came together under the leadership of state government. They all concluded that groundwater withdrawals in Central Florida must be capped to protect water resources. This conclusion was reached with significantly less data than we have today, and with significantly less powerful groundwater-modeling tools.
The constraints to groundwater supplies recognized in Central Florida years ago are now evident over broader areas of Florida. Both humans and natural systems rely on the Floridan aquifer system. Sustainable management of this precious resource requires cooperation from all of us.
It will take political leadership at the highest levels of state government to achieve such cooperation. Currently, this leadership is lacking.

150628-c







IGNORED !

150628-c
Conservation Amendment goes to court
News-Press.com – by Chad Gillis
June 28, 2015
Can voters force lawmakers to buy conservation lands ?
That question is at the heart of a lawsuit filed this week by Amendment 1 backers, who say the Florida Legislature misappropriated hundreds of millions of dollars in the 2015-16 budget.
Groups such as the Florida Wildlife Federation and the Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida filed the lawsuit against Senate President Andy Gardiner and Speaker of the House Steve Crisafulli in hopes that the state will be required to spend more money on land acquisition next year.
“The thrust of our case is to get the court to provide definition to future legislatures on what is appropriate and what is not appropriate to fund with Amendment 1 dollars,” said Manley Fuller, with the Florida Wildlife Federation, one plaintiff in the suit. “We want to try and point them in the right direction.”
The lawsuit could be settled later this year but may extend into 2016, Fuller said, and the suit should not impact the upcoming fiscal budget.
About $750 million is expected to be generated in the coming fiscal year. Nearly half of that money has been misused, the suit says.
“Instead of complying with the mandate of Amendment 1 and in defiance of its constitutional obligations created by that Amendment, the Legislature misappropriated over $300 million of Amendment 1 funds, devoting those funds to uses not allowable for the Land Acquisition Trust Fund,” the suit reads.
A large chunk of Amendment 1 money (about $200 million) this coming year will be spent on existing agency operating expenses, which violates the spirit of the voter mandate, critics say.
The total budget, signed earlier this week by Gov. Rick Scott, is about $78 billion and includes $500 million in tax cuts. Some critics say the Amendment 1 money is simply being shifted to make those tax cuts a reality.
Representatives, though, say they did their job in the latest budget, and that the allocations from Amendment 1 — funded by one-third of real estate transaction taxes — were distributed properly.
“I opposed the amendment because I don’t think we should budget through the Constitution,” said Rep Matt Caldwell, R- North Fort Myers. “That’s how California ended up on the brink of bankruptcy.”
Caldwell said the budget allocates money to help local water quality by improving some of the tributaries and stormwater flows into the Caloosahatchee River and its estuary.
Crisafulli could not be reached for comment, but said in a release that he’s confident the court will side with lawmakers.
“The Legislature complied with both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution, and we look forward to defending against this politically motivated lawsuit,” Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island, said in a statement.
Land acquisition has been funded nearly every year since 1963, through 11 administrations with various political affiliations.
Florida Forever, the latest rendition of taxpayer-funded land-buying programs, had an annual budget of $300 million for nearly 20 years, securing more than 683,000 acres at a value of $2.87 billion since 2001.
But from 2009 through 2012, a period that would have generated $1.2 billion under past regimes, administrations under Charlie Crist and Rick Scott set aside about $20 million combined for Florida Forever.
Nearly 75 percent of voters said “yes” on Amendment 1, or the Florida Water and Land Conservation Initiative.
The money is generated by a real estate transaction document tax and will be used for land purchases and management for the next 20 years.
“We would like the court to define the strike zone — where they can make appropriate expenditures — and we think it’s gotten overly broad,” Fuller said.
Amendment 1 fight
•What: The Florida Land and Water Legacy Act
•How: Sets aside one-third of the state’s excise tax on real estate transactions for land purchases and maintenance.
•When: Begins coming fiscal year and lasts for 20 years.
•At issue: The Legislature is misusing the money, according to critics and a recent lawsuit. Amendment 1 proponents say the money should be spent largely on land acquisition.
Related:           Legislators miss point on funding Amendment 1       The News-Press

150628-d
Florida’s evolution: Once underwater, state could sink
Tallahassee Democrat – by Peter Ray, Guest columnist
June 28, 2015
Florida’s evolution: Once underwater, state could sink Tallahassee Democrat – by Peter Ray, Guest columnist June 28, 2015 We often think that Florida is a long peninsula attached to the southern extension of South Georgia. There is some real truth to that. But getting there involved a long trip over a long time. We can start with the Mesozoic Era and the super continent Pangea about 200 million years ago. This is when Pangea started to split apart. Part of the African plate eventually stuck onto the North American plate and became Florida. Until geologically recently much of Florida was below a warm shallow ocean, in conditions similar to the Bahamas today, and accumulated a lot of limestone. About 23 million years ago sea level dropped enough that portions of Florida became dry land and land animals occupied the area for the first time. This was well after the Age of Dinosaurs, which explains why there are no dinosaurs in Florida, even in the deep subsurface. About 2.5 million years ago, the water level was about 100 feet higher than it is today. The Panhandle of Florida was just the Northern half of what it is today and a small land mass about two-thirds of the peninsula width extended down to Lake City. And a few islands extended as far south as Orlando. You can see evidence of this in the northern part of Tallahassee, where the soil is much like southern Georgia — red clay. But, more-or-less south of the State Fair Grounds, the soil becomes sandy and it is sandy all the way to the coast and beyond. This is because coastal waves eroded the red clay during the period when sea levels were their highest, and left a layer of marine sand as the sea retreated. During the last glacial maximum, about 20,000 years ago, sea levels were 300 feet lower which caused Florida to have 3 times its present land mass, mainly by the peninsula extending way west. Basically the land mass extended to the east and west almost to the edge of the continental shelf. Then the ice melted and Florida became what it is today. In the future, Florida may sink some due to the retreat of glaciers long ago, and if appreciable ice melts, then that would raise the mean seal level also. But we are a long way from being underwater and freshwater will become increasingly precious long before the “Waterworld” scenario depicted in the 1995 science fiction film. Already many parts of the country are suffering economically because of the lack of fresh water, even Florida. Hurricane contest David Garnett tenaciously hold on to the lead in the hurricane forecast contest. It has been one month and the gap is closing. I give him at most one more month. I, and a whole bunch of folks are poised to make our move and are waiting for Mother Nature to come through for us, as long as she doesn’t hurt anyone. No development expected in the tropics this next week

150628-e
Lawmakers ignored will of voters when spending Amendment 1 funds
TCPalm.com - Maggy Hurchalla
June 28, 2015
In 2009, the Florida legislature responded to the recession by raiding the Florida Forever Trust Fund. Lawmakers said they had to do it because they had based their financial planning on the assumption the housing bubble would go on forever. They were caught with their financial pants down when the bubble burst.

150628-f
Sargassum is ruining beaches from Texas to Tobago
Newsweek.com – by Melissa Gaskill
June 28, 2015
The road along the east side of Tobago, running from the airport to the village of Speyside, passes dozens of small beaches where, in normal times, people lounge on the sand beneath palm trees and swim in the clear blue waters that lap at the shore. But on this mid-May weekend, sand and sea lay hidden beneath several feet of thick, brown seaweed.
Sargassum, a vine-like, floating algae, regularly circulates throughout the Gulf of Mexico and North Atlantic, where it forms the nearly 2 million-square-mile Sargasso Sea. Mariners recorded its presence as far back as Christopher Columbus’s time. The seaweed often washes up on beaches in the Gulf, southern U.S. Atlantic coast and northern Caribbean in spring and summer. But in 2011, it began showing up in unprecedented amounts, sometimes in places it hadn’t been seen before. On a single day in May 2014, for example, more than 8,400 tons of the stuff—the most ever recorded for a 24-hour period—buried a three-mile stretch of beach on Galveston Island, Texas.
As with many recent dramatic changes to the environment, the blame for the sargassum explosion appears to be to a combination of factors resulting from climate change. That means that scenes such as those in Tobago and Texas could be the new normal: an inconvenience for beachgoers but a potential economic disaster for those who earn their living from tourism and other coastal industries.
Mats of sargassum provide habitat and food for a wide variety of marine species, including sea turtles, fish, invertebrates, marine mammals and even birds, which depend on it to fuel over-water migrations. It rains down particulates to nourish creatures in the ocean’s depths. If the open sea is a desert, sargassum mats are its oases. They can help the beaches too: Driven onto shores by wind and waves, the algae mats add nutrients to the beach ecosystem and help build and strengthen dunes, which protect land and the structures behind them from storms.
But in such large quantities, sargassum has a dark side. For one, it tends to drive away tourists, who come to the shore for sand and not seaweed. Not all affected communities have the resources to remove the stuff, and even those that do find dealing with the increasing amounts a struggle. In addition, in Tobago and elsewhere, fishermen have been unable to fish in the thick seaweed. Heavy accumulations on the water may harm coral reefs and, on the beach, prevent sea turtle nesting.
Spikes of sargassum were first recorded in the Greater and Lesser Antilles (including Trinidad and Tobago) in 2011 and 2012. The problem appears to have begun many miles away. In recent years, the Amazon basin has experienced some of the world’s highest rates of deforestation. And without vegetation to hold soil in place, rain washes that soil and whatever it contains into streams and rivers. So when the Amazon basin saw greater than normal amounts of rain in 2011 and 2012, unusually high levels of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus washed into Atlantic waters around the mouth of the Amazon River off the north coast of Brazil. Sargassum passed through this nutrient-rich water and responded by growing like, well, a weed. Ocean currents carried it from there to the Lesser Antilles and western Caribbean.
Jim Franks, a senior research scientist at the University of Southern Mississippi’s Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, recently created a website to collect eyewitness reports of large quantities of sargassum. Those reports confirm the seaweed is showing up in areas where before it had been seen only rarely or not all. Circulation patterns in the equatorial Atlantic even carried mats to Africa for the first time. Satellite data suggest the amount of sargassum in the Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean and Atlantic may hit an all-time high in 2015.
“For [Caribbean] communities, such an overwhelming influx is difficult to deal with,” says Franks, who has worked in the region for years. “It radically impacted tourism on some islands, creating economic and environmental hardship. I can’t overemphasize how important this is to the region,” he adds. “We need a well-thought-out strategy of response.”
Last summer, city officials in Galveston posted signs and handed out fliers touting the seaweed’s many virtues. The Galveston Park Board sent out 50 trained volunteers, dubbed the Bucket Brigade, to show beachgoers all the interesting little critters living in it. While these efforts didn’t change the fact that the beaches were covered, the city hoped they would change how Galveston visitors felt about that.
It didn’t. Most visitors think of a coast covered in sargassum as “a dirty beach,” says David Parsons, city manager in Port Aransas, Texas. This community on Mustang Island, just north of Corpus Christi, is developing machinery that uses a rake-like mechanism to pick up seaweed but leaves the surrounding wet sand. They hope to take the seaweed to remote parts of the beach and allow it to break down naturally—far from sunbathers and swimmers.
Tobago’s Division of Agriculture, Marine Affairs, Marketing and the Environment began removing sargassum from 16 beaches in early May, but officials noted that it continued to wash ashore in such quantities that efforts to clear it were futile. Some Caribbean islands use mechanical rakes and tractors to remove sargassum, but others have only hand rakes and animal-drawn wagons. Even when removing sargassum from the beach is possible, it raises the question of where to dump tons of decomposing vegetation.
One solution may be to dry and compact the seaweed into bales, and then use those bales as the base of new dunes. The theory is that these seaweed-based dunes will withstand waves and storm surges even better than natural ones. That won’t help beaches that don’t have dune systems, of course, which includes many of those in the Caribbean. Sargassum is sometimes used as fertilizer, but there’s not a high enough demand for that to make a dent in the amounts piling up. Dumping seaweed offshore may be an option, but it would also require heavy equipment and could potentially harm the marine environment.
Technology is at least helping us track the stuff. The University of Florida’s College of Marine Science posts links to real-time satellite observations of areas in the Gulf, Caribbean Sea and central Atlantic that can show the location of significant amounts of sargassum. In April, at a symposium held to discuss research and the economic and environmental effects of the “sargassum situation,” NASA and Texas A&M University at Galveston scientists unveiled the Sargassum Early Advisory System, or SEAS. This smartphone app combines satellite images with water current and wind data to predict where and when mats are likely to come ashore.  
Such early warnings will be more helpful for communities with the resources to respond. Knowing an invasion is coming won’t always help vacationers, who tend to book trips several months in advance, and, of course, warning away tourists is exactly what affected communities don’t want to do. But until scientists and policymakers come up with better solutions, that may be their only choice.

150628-g
What's the science behind our daily downpours ?
TampaBay.com - by Emily McConville, Staff Writer
June 28, 2015
It can be like clockwork during the summer. The dark sky. The low pressure. The lightning, often too close for comfort. The rain, sheets of it, pouring from the thunderheads faster than windshield wipers can slash it away.
Storms are a ubiquitous part of life in the Tampa Bay area, one of the stormiest regions in the country. Tampa, in particular, regularly racks up more than 80 days of storms in a year, most of which hit on summer afternoons.
So why do we see so many squalls — and why during rush hour?
Blame the heat and humidity, said WTSP 10Weather meteorologist Bobby Deskins. That, and our proximity to so many bodies of water.
Especially in the summer, the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico produce breezes. So do Tampa Bay, smaller lakes and the remnants of previous thunderstorms. All of those winds can form stormy weather on their own, but they can also hurtle across the state on a storm-producing collision course, fed by moisture in the hot air.
"You really just have a real soupy, prime atmosphere for storm development," Deskins said.
Every storm has three essential "ingredients," said National Weather Service meteorologist Dan Noah: moisture, lift and air instability. Moisture becomes rain, lift starts the air moving, and instability — pockets of hot air rising and giving off energy — allows thunderclouds to grow.
"Think of moisture as the gasoline," Noah said. "The lift is the match, and unstable air is like blowing oxygen on a fire to get it really hot."
When it gets hot, air near the surface of the Earth starts to rise, carrying water vapor with it, Noah said. But when that warm air meets the cold air several thousand feet up, it starts to cool down again — and the water condenses, forming clouds. The tops of those clouds are positively charged, and the bottom of the cloud and the ground are negatively charged.
When the condensed water gets too heavy, it falls. Rain.
If the electrical charge on the ground changes, a kind of path forms between earth and sky, and electrons stream from clouds to meet another stream from the ground. Lightning.
When lightning strikes, the air around it expands, which creates a loud shock wave. Thunder.
And during Tampa Bay summers, all of this is supercharged. It's hotter, so air rises easily, and it's more humid, so there's more moisture. Sometimes, those factors can produce storms on their own if the air is unstable enough, Deskins said.
But the driving force of most storms is sea breezes — that extra lift. That's what makes Florida unique.
"We get sea breezes on both our coasts," Noah said. "Texas also gets a sea breeze, but they just have one. We get two."
How those breezes interact varies — and so do the time and place of storms. But here's how it usually works: as it gets hotter throughout the day, the air heats up and rises. Cooler air from over the Gulf of Mexico rushes in as a sea breeze, straight toward another wind.
It's like swiping your arm through the water in a swimming pool, Noah said. The sea breeze lifts the air and the moisture in it, the same way your arm creates a wave of swirling, fast-moving water. If there are two breezes moving toward each other — if you swing your arms together — "that water goes straight up," Noah said.
Then, it comes straight back down, right over your evening commute.

150626-a
California hopes to drink Pacific Ocean
RYOT.org – by Alex Bauer
June 26, 2015
Four years into a devastating drought, the people of California are desperate for water. What may be good news for the state is the fact their entire western border is the Pacific Ocean.
With ocean water readily available, California plans to begin changing the salt water into fresh water, as the need for water increases, according to Fortune.
To make ocean water useable, the salt needs to be taken out. To do so, the process of desalination, where dissolved salts in water are removed, needs to occur. Desalination does not happen naturally, so humans need to intervene to get the fresh water.
Just north of San Diego sits the Carlsbad Desalination Project. It is the largest desalination project in the Western Hemisphere. With a cost of $1 billion to build, the plant has been twenty years in the making — due to lawsuits and permit problems. By the fall, the plant will be functional and plans to produce a “drought-proof” supply of high-quality water. It would meet all state and federal drinking water standards.
The progress is going to be closely monitored. It is expected to provide upwards of 50 million gallons of fresh water daily — 10 percent of San Diego County’s water demand — by 2020. With the drought costing the state’s economy $2.7 billion this year, any way to improve the water situation will be welcomed.
Desalination is used throughout the world. There are plants in Saudi Arabia, India and Australia, while Texas and Florida are considering to up their desalination investments.
If successful, the desalination process allows California to utilize 800 miles of coastline. Conservations worry about the “concentrated brine” — which is the by product of desalination — that is pumped back into the ocean. But, the need of fresh water is too big. Desalination could be a helpful tool in solving California’s need for water.

150626-b
Finding an efficient way to store water surpluses could pay off well
LubbockOnline.com – Editorial View
June 26, 2015
During the severe drought years of 2011-2013 in Texas, water pumped from under the ground helped make up for the water not falling from the sky.
Here’s an interesting contrast today: Now that water is plentiful in many parts of the state, experts are considering storing excess water underground to have it available for drought years.
It’s a logical approach that could have significant long-range value. The idea behind it is pumping excess water into the ground to be stored in aquifers, which are geologic areas — layers of rock — that naturally hold water.
When water is plentiful in a given year — even when people think there is too much rain falling, which many Texans have experienced this year — the wet times are not going to last forever.Drought years are going to return, and if water from the years of plenty has been pumped into aquifers and stored there, it can be pumped back out for use when it’s needed.
Water stored in underground aquifers doesn’t evaporate as water stored in reservoirs about the ground does.
It’s not a new idea, but it’s not a widespread one, either. Currently, 133 aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) facilities are in the United States. Unfortunately, only three of them are in Texas, according to the Associated Press.
If Texas can develop more underground areas to store water, it could make a big impact in a state whose population is expected to double to 54 million people by the year 2050.
Consider the wet month of May in Texas this year. An estimated three trillion gallons of water was carried by Texas rivers in May into the Gulf of Mexico.
Granted, even if a system of pumps was in place to store excess water in aquifers, only part of that water could have been saved.
Nonetheless, it would be nice to have whatever part could be saved stored under ground and ready for use when it is needed.
The Ogallala Aquifer is huge and covers parts of eight states, including the South Plains of Texas. Pumping water into parts of the Ogallala is being considered.
There also are smaller aquifers that would be suitable, such as an aquifer storage system currently used by San Antonio.
The city pumps water from the Edwards Aquifer to the Carrizo Aquifer, which has received about 1 billion gallons since the start of May, according to the AP. That’s a nice asset to have in reserve.
Considering Texas’ rapid population growth and the heavy evaporation rate from above-ground reservoirs, aquifers are an appealing possibility for storing water in Texas.
They have been used effectively in states such as Florida and Nevada to store water. Why not expand it in Texas?
Suitable aquifers won’t be found under all parts of Texas, but trillions of gallons of water could be stored where aquifers are available.
If planners give their approval for underground storage, it would be wise to start with a few areas. Build pumps to test how successful storing water underground would be, and expand further if it’s warranted by success.

150626-c
Government agencies partner to combat climate change
Water Technology
June 26, 2015
WASHINGTON — With partners, five government agencies will conserve and restore lands and waters to make them more resilient to climate change, according to a press release.
The Department of the Interior (DOI), Department of Agriculture (USDA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have enacted three collaborative, nationwide partnerships, noted the release. The projects include the California Headwaters, California’s North-Central cost and Russian River Watershed, and Crown of the Continent.
The projects have been added as parts of the Resilient Lands and Waters Initiative, stated the release. Federal agencies will work closely with state, tribal and local partners to build these natural resources to support the people that depend on them.
President Obama announced the first Resilient Landscape partnerships at the 2015 Earth Day event in the Everglades, reported the release. Partners will work over the next 18 months to develop strategies for the new sites.
"From the Redwoods to the Rockies to the Great Lakes and the Everglades, climate change threatens many of our treasured landscapes, which impacts our natural and cultural heritage, public health and economic activity," said Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell in the release. “The key to making these areas more resilient is collaboration through sound science and partnerships that take a landscape-level approach to preparing for and adapting to climate change.
The initiative is part of the administration’s Climate and Natural Resources Priority Agenda, stated the release, which is committed to support resilience of the country’s natural resources.

150626-d
Heat-tolerant genes could help corals adapt to climate change
NewScientist.com - by Joshua Sokol
June 26, 2015
Coral reefs still have some fight left in them. In the face of climate change, recent discoveries are giving us hope that some corals can hang on longer than researchers imagined by resisting both rising temperatures and ocean acidification.
This growing evidence on the surprising resilience of reefs has gained more support today, with news of lab experiments that demonstrate some corals able to withstand rising temperatures can pass the trait on to their offspring through their genes.
Reefs, home to a quarter of all marine life, are facing a one-two punch in the next few decades. Warmer waters bleach corals, stripping away the photosynthetic microbes that live in their tissues. At the same time, the rising level of atmospheric carbon dioxide is affecting ocean chemistry: CO2 dissolves in the ocean, turning into carbonic acid that lowers pH, and thus making it harder for corals to grow their skeletons. The combination has led some scientists to expect most reefs to die out long before the end of the 21st century.
Recent history seems to support this gloomy prognosis. The El Niño event of 1997-98 wiped out 16 per cent of the world's shallow reefs in one shot. Then the 2009-10 event saw a lesser round of bleaching. Now, just five years later, an ongoing El Niño has swept across the equatorial Pacific. "We're on the brink of the third global bleaching event in history," says Mark Eakin of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in College Park, Maryland.
Resilience toolkit
But the good news is that evidence is mounting that corals may have a whole toolkit of resistance strategies at their disposal – and, crucially, that they can pass on their genes for climate-change resistance to the next generation.
Working on the Great Barrier Reef, Australian and US researchers cross-bred corals from warmer and colder waters, and subjected the offspring to a heat test. "The corals from warmer locations have babies with higher heat tolerance," says Line Bay from the Australian Institute of Marine Science in Townsville, Queensland.
The researchers also found that mother corals passed on heat resistance more effectively than fathers, and that genes related to mitochondria were particularly helpful for resisting warmer temperatures – an unexpected result that they hope to further examine in future studies.
"It's great stuff," says Andrew Baker at the University of Miami in Florida. "We're starting to see corals resisting heat stress in a variety of different ways."
Baker's own work – on the algae that corals partner with – has identified another strategy. By changing their algae for a more heat-resistant strain, corals can tolerate temperatures about 1.5 °C higher in the weeks or months after a bleaching event, he says.
It's not just larvae, but also adult corals, that can build heat tolerance. Researchers from Stanford University working in American Samoa have found that corals exposed to naturally hot water are primed to use the genes that grant them heat resistance – and that they have a diverse, interacting set of them. We don't know yet whether the coral genes at work on the Great Barrier Reef are the same as those in American Samoa, but the Stanford team is keen to find this out.
Acid resistance
There are hints that corals can resist ocean acidification too. Between limestone islands in Palau, a team from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts has found coral communities living in naturally acidified waters that display few of the detrimental effects expected from the process – the reasons for which the researchers are now exploring.
These are hopeful stories, but biologists will be eager to see if these promising genetic results can be replicated on reefs elsewhere in the world. In addition, it still isn't clear whether corals resistant to high temperatures will also be able to tolerate acidification, and vice versa.
Even so, learning more about how corals can combat climate change is opening up new opportunities, according to Baker. Further work that confirms the importance of heat-resistance genes and identifies reefs that are naturally more resilient amid changing conditions may help conservationists to draw up a list of reefs most likely to survive the next hundred years of carbon emissions. These could then be made a priority for protection from more manageable hazards, such as pollution and fishing.
Alternatively, biologists might be able to transplant particularly heat-resistant adult corals onto reefs that are struggling to adapt to warmer waters – a strategy that might prove useful if the natural spread of resistance is too slow to keep pace with warming.
But there is still one big question hanging over all reefs: how will they cope if we don't slow and eventually reverse the amount of carbon we emit into the atmosphere? The UN Climate Change Conference in Paris at the end of the year could give resilient corals a "fighting chance" if it can set a plan that will keep the world to only 2°C of warming, Eakin says.
"The corals are doing their part," he says. "Can we do ours ?"

150626-e
UF/IFAS invasives research facility likely to close
AgProfessional.com - by Brad Buck
June 26, 2015
A valuable University of Florida program that helps save the state millions of dollars annually in controlling invasive plants and insects will likely close after a veto by Gov. Rick Scott on Monday.
An approved increase by the Legislature of $180,000 was denied, and the facility also lost all funding. The state-of-the-art lab opened in 2004 at the UF/IFAS Indian River Research and Education Center in Fort Pierce with $3.9 million in state funding.
The center will probably close, and 12 positions will be eliminated, said Jack Payne, UF senior vice president for agricultural and natural resources.
The quarantine facility is a highly secure lab where scientists conduct research on biological controls for invasive species. Scientists introduce, evaluate and release biological control agents to try to manage exotic weeds and insect pests in Florida.
Florida has the largest invasive infestations in the nation. Invasive species cost Florida approximately $100 million a year, Payne said. Scientists at the lab helped control the tropical soda apple, an invasive weed, through the release of 250,000 South American beetles. The move saved cattle ranchers about $5.75 million a year, Payne said.
The center was poised to release the first biological control agent against the Brazilian peppertree, which is native to Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay. The tree has moved around the world as an ornamental plant, and in Florida, it has infested nearly 700,000 acres in the central and southern regions. It has been particularly abundant in the Everglades.
In general, the trees take over space where native plants should be. Animals such as white-tailed deer, the Florida panther and migratory birds that depend on native vegetation, such as mangrove, for food and shelter are deprived of that habitat.
Biological control is the use of natural enemies, typically insects or diseases, to reduce the numbers of an invasive insect or plant.
UF/IFAS scientists at the quarantine facility work on many other projects, including:
● Trying to establish laboratory colonies of one or more promising insect herbivores that feed on cogongrass, one of the most invasive grasses in the Southeast.
● In collaboration with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, they have released more than 350,000 beetles for biological control of the air potato at more than 1,000 locations in Florida since 2012.   
Landowners, managers and industry use the UF/IFAS assessments when deciding whether to use non-native species in Florida. FDACS consults the UF/IFAS plant assessment to help shape their regulation of invasive species.
UF/IFAS officials cite the control of alligator weed by three insects from South America, melaleuca by insects from Australia and tropical soda apple by a Brazilian leaf-feeding beetle as other successful biological control programs.
Researchers have imported more than 160 exotic natural enemies to target more than 60 pest insects in classical biological control programs in Florida. About 30 percent of the exotic species have become established following release.
Many insects have been controlled biologically in Florida, including the citrus blackfly by a parasitic wasp from Asia, the Florida red scale by a parasitic wasp from Asia, the sugarcane borer by a parasitic wasp from Asia, the Mexican bean beetle by a parasitic wasp from South America and invasive mole crickets by a parasitic wasp and a parasitic nematode from South America.

150626-f
Want to experience the estuaries up close?
BocaBeacon.com - by Jack Short
June 26, 2015
Sometimes, to understand something, you have to be willing to dive right in.
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection is hoping that bringing people into close contact with the nature around them will help convince people of the need for preservation.
They have begun shuttling people to see the preserves firsthand, for free.
“The main goal is for people to have a good time and enjoy the resources,” said Stephanie Erickson, CHAP environmental specialist. She added that she hopes people will take from the experience a better understanding of seagrass beds and why it’s important to protect them.
That need for protection is crucial because of how many different kinds of wildlife spend part of their life in the fragile ecosystems like marine grass beds. Florida’s 2,000,000 acres of seagrass beds filter water, stabilize sandy bottoms, and provide shelter for marine life – over 80 percent of all recreationally and commercially important fish species depend on seagrass in some way, according to material provided by CHAP.
But they are also susceptible to human activity, particularly damage from boat. Efforts to rehabilitate and replant seagrasses have been supplemented by F.L. 253.04 (3)(a), which makes destruction of seagrass in Aquatic Preserves a violation of law that carries a penalty of up to $1,000.
CHAP monitors not only seagrass, but water quality and colonial nesting birds, and keeps invasive species like Australian Pines and Asian Green Mussels at bay.
They also provide education and outreach through programs like the snorkeling trips. Most recently, participants were taken to the trestles near the north end of Gasparilla Island to explore and look for creatures large and small, from dolphin and great egrets, to pinfish and stone crabs.
The trips last approximately two hours and gear, obtained through a grant, is provided, but participants should wear a bathing suit and bring any needed towels, water, or sun protection like hats and sunscreen.
There is no cost, but participants must pay $5 for parking at the Gasparilla Marina, from which the trip departs.
Erickson said the response has been great and that many upcoming trips are full. They will add some dates, but those interested shouldn’t hesitate to contact CHAP at (941) 575-5861 for more information about how to reserve a spot.

150626-g
Water farming sometimes drenched in controversy
WSFU.org - by Jim Ash
June 26, 2015
It doesn’t need fertilizer, pesticides, or require a back-breaking harvest. That’s why one of the most tempting new crops for Florida farmers is water. Environmentalists and the agricultural industry are pumped about a cheaper way to fight pollution and devastating droughts.
For citrus growers, it’s usually what’s above ground that counts. Months of sunshine and balmy weather, mild winters and a long growing season that come together to turn air and sunshine into a cash crop.
But it’s what’s beneath the surface of the flat woods terrain, a layer of natural sand filter and water-trapping clay,that can be a grower’s salvation when disease and natural disaster creep in. Peter McClure, owner of Double K Groves, Inc., says rather than liquidate, why not go liquid?
“As the disease greening, citrus greening, is killing our groves, we really don’t have an alternate crop. The beauty of water farming is we can plug these groves in sometimes just a matter of weeks or months.”
McClure is a native Floridian who grows citrus on about 50 acres in Lake County, just outside of the tiny town of Astatula. McClure earned a master naturalist designation from the University of Florida and works on water farming projects with other landowners he declines to name.
He says it’s a win-win for taxpayers and the environment. Instead of paying monster sums of taxpayer dollars on water projects, water farming is way to make the best use of land that’s already available.
“The state already has hundreds of thousands of acres of land and a lot of that land is designated to have reservoirs built on it. But what happens is they buy the land, the land goes off the tax rolls, and then they never have the money to build the reservoirs.”
When the state gets involved, land designated for water conservation can sit for more than 10 years without benefitting the environment, McClure says.
Stan Bronson, executive director of the Florida Earth Foundation, says water farming had a promising beginning.
“Back in the mid 2000’s, it was a program sponsored by the World Wild Life Fund and the South Florida Water Management District and I think about six or seven ranchers participated in it and it was proven feasible.”
Last week, the key word for Governor Rick Scott was South Florida Water Management District. Scott vetoed more than $30 million lawmakers wanted to spend on water farming, also known as “dispersed water management.”
Scott’s veto message essentially said that funding should not be coming from Tallahassee, but the water management district, which is funded by local property taxes. Bronson says that’s always been the debate.
“I think the issue is, how you pay for it. I think that it’s really worth looking in to. The issue is, show me the money.”
Everglades activists see water farming as a valuable component for cleaning polluted runoff bound for an already polluted Lake Okeechobee.
When the lake overflows, the phosphorous and nitrogen laden water causes toxic algae blooms in estuaries downstream of the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie rivers.
Some of the water farming projects involve tens of thousands of acres of private property. South Florida agricultural giant Alico has the biggest, an agreement worth 120 million dollars over 11 years.
Audubon of Florida executive director Eric Draper agrees with Scott’s veto. He says Tallahassee lobbyists can push for water farming projects that don’t always bring the biggest bang for the buck.
“We weren’t big fans of the Alico project. I think I’m on the record as saying that. Because we couldn’t see where the benefit of spending that money was to the Everglades.”
Double K Groves owner Peter McClure says just because a water farming project is big doesn’t mean it’s not worthwhile. Meanwhile, the Florida Farm Bureau, a big supporter of the water farming, has vowed to do a better job convincing Scott to change his mind next year.

150626-h
Will the Everglades, and its surprises, ever get full protection ?
LiveScience.com - Op-Ed by Michael Sainato
June 26, 2015
There is no place on Earth like Everglades National Park. Fresh water and Earth converge into one of the richest and most diverse ecosystems on the planet. It is the largest tropical wilderness in the United States and only one of three places in the world that can claim listing as an International Biosphere Reserve, a World Heritage Site and a Wetlands of International Importance. 
The Everglades has also been a battleground of controversy, as environmentalists and developers continuously struggle over its uses and resources. Early Florida politicians used to campaign on the idea of dredging and clearing the Everglades to stimulate economic growth and prosperity. Even today, the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration plan passed by the U.S. Congress years ago — the biggest environmental restoration undertaking the world has ever seen — still sputters through bureaucracy toward full implementation.
[Why 'Protected Lands' Too Often Lose Protection (Op-Ed)]
A complex history
This past Earth Day, U.S. president Barack Obama used the Everglades as his stage to address the stark realities of climate change in the face of Florida politicians, such as Governor Rick Scott, who still uphold policies that fail to fully account for the environmental impacts of unchecked development and growth throughout the state. 
"Climate change is threatening this treasure and the communities that depend on it, which includes almost all of south Florida. And if we don't act, there may not be an Everglades as we know it," president Obama said.
The livelihood of Florida depends on the Everglades. One out of every four Floridians depends on it for their drinking water. It generates more than a quarter billion dollars in tourism revenue annually: For every $1 invested in the park, it yields $10 in return, attracting more than a million visitors just last year. 
And, the Everglades provides one of the best support systems Florida has against climate change and rising sea levels by mitigating saltwater intrusion to south Florida’s freshwater supplies and creating a natural protective barrier for Florida from tropical storms and hurricanes.
Early this year, a new caretaker of the park, superintendent Pedro Ramos, took office.
"I'm going to show you what the Everglades had to do with the Cuban Missile Crisis," Ramos said when we met. He grabbed the keys to his government issued white Ford Taurus just yards away from where president Obama held a photo op, and we left to meander through some Everglades back roads to a gated fence inundated with faded U.S. Army warning placards. 
The Nike missile site in Everglades National Park maintained several nuclear missiles during the 1960 crisis. After the tensions with Cuba dissipated, the site was abandoned, nuclear warheads removed, and the hangars and bunkers were slowly reclaimed by nature — until a few years ago when a grant and restoration work by the Baker Aviation School put forth the efforts to tell this long forgotten Everglades story. 
"If they were ever utilized, the nukes from this site would have altered the course of history forever," Ramos added as he unveiled a restored 40-foot missile behind the original rusted hangar doors.
A personal path to preservation
Ramos caught the National Park bug at a young age. His mother, widowed when he was seven years old, could not afford vacations or excursions to the fancy resorts on Puerto Rico's coastlines. Their bouts of leisure were spent at San Juan National Historic Site, what he calls "the most special place on the island." 
After high school, he left the small island to attend college at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. "To this day, it is one of the most frigid places I have ever been. I thought then it was inhuman to expect a Puerto Rican kid to live in that cold environment."
In Florida, things are a bit different. "People complain about the lack of seasons here in South Florida, but they are as marked here as anywhere else. Every one of them is special, but my favorite is the wet season, from October to December, when this place really comes alive. When it's flooded, going into a Cypress Dome is the only way to get intimate with this place. Every single time you go in one you see something different. The perpetual mystery of what's around every corner in such a foreign environment really helps you get to know this place well," said Ramos. 
His degree in agricultural resource economics landed him a position at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and he worked there for more than a decade while applying — every year — for an opportunity in the U.S. National Park Service. In 2001, he was finally hired as Administrative Officer of Big Cypress National Park, just north of the Everglades.
Big Cypress was first conceived with a dual mission of conservation and private use, two priorities typically seen as incompatible. When Ramos took office, off-road vehicles were tearing the park apart, rupturing through the delicate soil that would take decades to recover from the abuse. 
With the support of environmental, traditional hunting, and the off-road vehicle communities, Ramos downsized the 26,000 miles of off-road vehicle trails to fewer than 500. 
"It was a compromise of conservation and traditional uses that people thought could never be accomplished," he said. His tenure and pragmatic successes at Big Cypress made him a shoe-in when the position of superintendent at Everglades National Park opened up.
Preserving the Everglades
The Everglades also shares many of the same issues faced in Big Cypress, on even greater magnitudes. South Florida has more exotic species of fish, reptiles, birds, mammals and plants than in any other part of the United States. 
More recently, invasive pythons have been one of the most prevalent and damaging species in the park, decimating prey and out-competing other predators. The park enlists the help of Iraqi-war veteran volunteers to catch the snakes in targeted park areas, protecting the endangered species the pythons threaten. Ramos cites going out with the volunteers as one of the highlights in his first few months as superintendent of the park.
Funding issues and budget concerns have forced Ramos and Everglades National Park to consider significant fee increases for park admission. If enacted, the changes would mark the first fee increase evaluation the park has seen in 20 years. State and federal agencies are also entangled in bureaucracy over funding the for Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan which calls for the state of Florida to purchase land with matched federal funds, while the Army Corps of Engineers would build the necessary projects. 
Flamingo Bay, the southernmost tip of the park, a 45-minute drive from the entrance gate, may also soon solicit bids for private entities to improve the current campground and visitor center infrastructure, with the possible addition of a restaurant to add more amenities for visitors.
"This site is a lens to climate change and the projections for the next 50 years. We want to revitalize the area to attract more visitors and build infrastructure designed to sustain strong storms, occasional flooding and higher sea levels," Ramos said.
Late in our tour, Ramos pulled up to another locked gate with the sign Hidden Lake. "People have the misconception that all the water here is murky and swampy," he said while pointing to the crystal clear water, as fish dart away to safety from our shadows. 
"We do a lot of environmental location programs for youth here. Whether kids that come here for the first time fall in love with nature or not, the sense of values instilled by the exposure to the Everglades forges a sense of commitment to support conservation efforts for the rest of their lives. The park means different things to different people and we try to speak all of those languages." 
We drove back toward the park headquarters as the sun began to set over the river of grass. I asked Ramos what his hope was for the future of the park and he responded, “In my coming years as superintendent, I hope to see a much more meaningful connection between the park and the communities around us. I want people to feel proud of what they have in their backyard and develop a personal sense of ownership and responsibility over it. The Everglades is part of the story of who we are as a people and as a country. It is a place of international significance and the world is watching to see how well we respond to our responsibility to care for this special natural wonder."
Follow all of the Expert Voices issues and debates — and become part of the discussion — on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher. This version of the article was originally published on Live Science.
Editor's Recommendations:
Florida Everglades: Follow the 'River of Grass' (Photos)
Wildlife Across the Globe Rely on Pristine Antarctic Waters: Protect Them (Op-Ed)
Without Economic Incentives, Protecting Global Forests May Prove Impossible (Op-Ed)

150625-a
Jackson Blue Spring: Plans continue on Basin
JCFloridan.com – by Deborah Buckhalter
June 25, 201
A few compliments were tossed at the presenter as a lengthy update session wound down this week regarding the plan being crafted by the state for long-term management of the Jackson Blue Spring recharge basin.
Several local people said DEP Environmental Consultant Terry Hansen may have done the best job yet in helping sort out some of the particulars related to the plan in progress, including why it’s needed and what it can do to reduce the negative on-land influences that contribute to its state of health.
One of key points he made that evening was that this plan is not a punitive instrument. Instead, it’s a blueprint for building cleaner on-land conditions going forward so that today’s and tomorrow’s generations don’t make critical mistakes in ignorance. His talk was more of a give-and-take affair, with the audience participation level high and causing the meeting to run almost three hours.
It is important to identify and then educate both the major and minor groups who contribute the polluting nutrients, since those degrade the spring and the large pool from which it originates. That’s the Floridan aquifer, from which most residents of this areas get their drinking water. The health of the aquifer is important for several reasons, not only because it is the parent of the popular spring which serves thousands of people each year as a primary swimming-diving-fishing hole.
That recharge basin is large, covering many miles of land where people live, farm and recreate. It is identified as a recharge basin for the spring because what happens on the land and in septic systems create substance that can eventually wind up in the spring. As rainwater falls and the water moves over land, for instance, it combines with and carries materials back into the aquifer from which the spring boils.
Currently, the state continues to collect and analyze data in an attempt to figure out why so many outside nutrients like bacteria. algae and mercury are evident in the water there. Using what they find, DEP is working on a Basin Management Plan in hopes that it will lead to a reduction in the amount of quality-negative materials being gathered by water on its way back into the spring.
At times, this process has causes a sense of alarm and resentment as homeowners with septic tanks, farmers with fertilizer and others in the basin have felt unfairly targeted. At the forefront of concerns are issues about how the plan and its requirements might alter their ways of life and their expenses, and in some cases their very livelihood.
Hansen, though, quelled some of that fear by characterizing the development of the plan as something adaptable that’s best worked out in partnership with all who live and work in and around the spring, as well as those who live outside it but still care about the spring and the wide-ranging aquifer beneath it.
DEP stands ready to assist as potential solutions to hard problems are developed, agency leaders have emphasized. Some programs are already in place and expertise on access and implementation is available within the DEP.
The plant continues to develop, Hansen said, and is in its early stages. Public input is welcome and can be shared on the DEP website and in person at various meetings to come. The next one in Jackson County, Hansen said, will likely be in late July and outreach will focus on producers, their concerns, and information on the impact their operations can have on the basin and things they can do to mitigate the negative effects.

150625-b
Land and water are assets to economy
TampaBay.com - Letter by Chip Thomas, Tampa, FL
June 25, 2015
Gov. Rick Scott, the Legislature and the Department of Environmental Protection treat environmental protection as an expense to be minimized. But a clean, healthy environment is not an option. It is an asset to protect and invest in.
Pristine beaches, parks and green spaces add great value not only to our quality of life, but to the state's economy as well. Allow them to decay and watch tourism disappear.
Clean air and water are essential to life itself. Compromise them and watch our health deteriorate while health care costs escalate.
Relegating environmental issues as secondary concerns, to be dealt with only when there are funds available, is a shortsighted, misguided, financially foolish strategy. The huge expense of trying to clean up the Everglades — long abused and neglected — is proof of that.
The governor, Legislature and DEP need to recognize the environment is an asset to be invested in and protected, not an expense that takes away from some bottom line.

150626-c
Settlement reached for Apalachicola River coal ash
WFSU.org - by Nick Evans
June 25, 2015
Gulf Power is preparing to move coal ash from a retired power plant along the Apalachicola River.  The transfer is part of a recent settlement between the company and a coalition of environmentalists.
In April of this year Gulf Power shuttered the Scholz power plant in Sneads, Florida.  The company says with the inevitability of new and stronger EPA regulations, keeping the coal-fired plant running just no longer made sense.
“Well we had to look at the plant, and the age of the plant, and whether it would be cost effective to—you know, retrofit the controls needed to comply with future regulations that were coming down the pike, or to retire it,” Gulf Power spokesman Jeff Rogers says. 
But closing a power plant isn’t as simple as turning off the lights.  Coal plants produce energy but they also produce waste—waste that can be very dangerous if it’s not properly handled, such as coal ash.  For example a major 2008 ash spill in Tennessee leveled nearby houses and contaminated water supplies. 
The Scholz plant has nowhere near as much coal ash, but environmentalists are worried about where and how Gulf Power is storing it.
“These coal ash ponds have been there since the fifties,” Bradley Marshall says.  He’s an attorney with Earthjustice. 
“These are old coal ash ponds—unlined—so they just, the water in it the coal ash in it can just go right into the ground water and it can go right out into the Apalachicola River,” Marshall says.   
He represented a group of clean water advocates in a 2014 court case against Gulf Power and its coal ash containment at the Scholz plant.
“So, what we had was 40 acres of unlined coal ash ponds next to the Apalachicola River,” Marshall says, “and our clients went out there and found that these ponds were leaking.”
Gulf Power disputes these findings.  Rogers says the company has funded studies above and below the site with no noticeable differences in water quality.  As part of the newly reached settlement, Gulf Power will be moving the coal ash to a new location, but Rogers argues they would have done that anyway.
“We really think it was an unnecessary lawsuit,” Rogers says. “The plant was retired back in April of 2015—this year.  The closure of the ponds is just a natural part of the retirement of the plant, that’s something that’s going to come and it’s and we’ll be working with FDEP to do that.”
Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection, or FDEP, has final approval over Gulf Power’s mitigation plan.  Under the agreement the company will move the coal ash to a new landfill beyond the river’s floodplain.  That area will be covered and walled off below to prevent ground water contamination.
Related:           Gulf Power settles Florida coal ash court case           Argus Media

150625-d
UF says Fort Pierce lab may close because of Gov. Scott's veto
Miami Herald
June 25, 2015
The University of Florida said Thursday that its state-of-the-art laboratory in Fort Pierce is "likely" to close, and its 12 positions eliminated, because of Gov. Rick Scott's line-item veto.
The joint projecst by UF and IFAS, the Institute for Food and Agricultural Sciences, controls invasive plants and insects. The university said that the lab's future is in question because Scott vetoed its funding, including a $180,000 increase that the Legislature appropriated in the new state budget. Jack Payne, a UF senior vice president for agricultural and natural resources, said the lab has been open since 2004 at the Indian River Research and Education Center.
UF said Florida has the largest invasive infestations of any state, and that the center was poised to release the first control agent to control the Brazilian peppertree, which has infested nearly 700,000 acres in central and south Florida and has been particularly abundant in the Everglades.

150624-a
Cabinet defers confirming Steverson for FDEP Secretary
Florida Water Daily
June 24, 2015
Of the 59 applications that were received for the position of Secretary of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Interim Secretary Jon Steverson was the only one that Governor Scott recommended for a formal interview. However, Attorney General Pam Bondi requested that the cabinet defer the interview because she may want to add a candidate for consideration.
From the Lakeland Ledger (link):
As for the DEP appointment, Bondi said she wasn’t ready to say who she is still considering for the position.
“I just didn’t want to exclude anyone at this point,” Bondi said.
She also declined to discuss her thoughts on Steverson, who served in the governor’s office under former governors Charlie Crist and Jeb Bush and later was executive director of the Northwest Florida Water Management District.

150624-b
Florida discusses reduced protection for endangered panther
Reuters (AgWeek.com) – by Barbara Liston
June 24, 2015
ORLANDO, Fla. - Florida’s wildlife agency may cut back on its efforts to save the endangered Florida panther two decades after helping return the big cats from the brink of extinction, according to an agency memo.
Dozens of people spoke out for and against the move Tuesday at a meeting in Sarasota of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. The hearing came one day before the commission is expected to approve an equally contentious black bear hunt this fall.
Carole Baskin, founder of Big Cat Rescue, told the commission the memo implies that the state is moving toward removing federal protections from the panthers and eventually allowing hunts. A draft agency position paper argues that it is not feasible to re-establish three separate breeding populations of 240 panthers, a level at which the federal government considers the cats capable of surviving on their own.
In the memo, the agency proposes limiting Florida’s involvement primarily to managing the 100-180 panthers that now live in Southwest Florida. It calls on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees the federal endangered species list, to take responsibility for increasing panther numbers.
Part of the problem, according to the memo, is that the panthers so far have refused to establish populations north of the Caloosahatchee River, which runs generally east-west from Fort Myers to the Everglades.
A Florida panther who bore kittens just one mile south of the Caloosahatchee River near Fort Myers almost three years ago gives hope to panther advocates that female cats, who typically don’t range as far as males, eventually will cross the river on their own and help the species survive. Kipp Frohlich, the agency's deputy director of habitat and species conservation, said that since 2004 panthers have killed 140 pets, backyard livestock and calves from commercial ranches, and that yearly totals are rising along with the cat population.
Frohlich said a program to reimburse animal owners for their losses has paid out $6,000, a figure which likely would be higher if not for the fact that panthers typically conceal their prey, thus hiding the evidence. The federal wildlife service considers the Florida panther the most endangered mammal in the eastern United States.
Related:           Florida wildlife managers agree to rework panther policy     Miami Herald

150624-c
Past water patterns drive present wading bird numbers
USGS News
June 24, 2015
Wading bird numbers in the Florida Everglades are driven by water patterns that play out over multiple years according to a new study by the U.S. Geological Survey and Florida Atlantic University. Previously, existing water conditions were seen as the primary driving factor affecting numbers of birds, but this research shows that the preceding years’ water conditions and availability are equally important.
“We’ve known for some time that changes in water levels trigger a significant response by wading birds in the Everglades,” said James Beerens, the study’s lead author and an ecologist at USGS.  “But what we discovered in this study is the importance of history. What happened last year can tell you what to expect this year.”
From 2000 to 2009, scientists examined foraging distribution and abundance data for wading bird populations, including Great Egrets, White Ibises, and threatened Wood Storks.  To do the research, they conducted reconnaissance flights across the Greater Everglades system, an area that includes Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park. They found climate and water management conditions going as far back as three years influenced current bird population numbers and distribution.
“We know wading birds depend on small fish and invertebrates for food,” said Dale Gawlik, director of FAU’s Environmental Science Program and study coauthor. “What is interesting is the ‘lag effect’; wet conditions that build up invertebrate and fish numbers may not immediately result in increased bird numbers until after several more wet years.”
This new information has allowed scientists to improve existing wading bird distribution models providing a more accurate tool to estimate wading bird numbers under climate change scenarios and hydrological restoration scenarios proposed for the Everglades.
In the Everglades, food items such as small fish and crayfish are concentrated from across the landscape into pools as water levels recede throughout the dry season.  It does not always work that way anymore due to a lack of water and loss of habitat in Everglades marshes. This new research shows that under the right dry season conditions following a water pulse in previous years, wading bird food is even further concentrated in near-perfect water depths, setting off a boom in the numbers of young wading birds that add to the population.
Beerens and computer scientists from the USGS have also developed publically available software as an extension to this work that predicts wading bird numbers in the Everglades based on real-time, current conditions, in addition to historical settings. This new model allows managers to simulate the effect of various management strategies that can have an impact on future bird numbers. The number and distribution of wading birds serve as an important indicator of ecosystem health in the Everglades. Beerens further explained that “increased seasonal water availability in drier areas of the Everglades stimulates the entire ecosystem, as reflected in the wading birds.”
Altered water patterns resulting from land-use and water management changes have reduced wading bird numbers throughout the Everglades by about 90 percent since the turn of the 20th Century. This research shows that current management and use of water is equally important.
“Our findings also suggest that we can continue to improve the Everglades and its wading bird community by restoring water availability to areas that are over drained,” said Beerens. “There is increasing understanding that water availability and proper management make this entire ecological and economic engine work.”
Florida generates more than $3 billion in annual revenue from resident and nonresident wildlife watchers according to estimates from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Of the 1.9 million people who view wildlife in Florida while ‘away-from-home’ each year, more than 1.3 million watch wading birds and other water-dependent birds.
The study, “Linking Dynamic Habitat Selection with Wading Bird Foraging Distributions across Resource Gradients,” was published in the journal PLOS ONE and can be found online.

150623-a
$40 billion of national parks at risk from sea rise
Florida Today – by Jim Waymer
June 23, 2015
Sea-level rise puts at high risk more than $40 billion in park infrastructure and historic and cultural resources, including almost $90 million in assets at the Canaveral National Seashore, according to a federal report released today.
The report by scientists from the National Park Service and Western Carolina University is based on a study of 40 parks, including Canaveral National Seashore.
Sea-level rise threatens structures and other resources at Canaveral that have a replacement value of $88.4 million, according to the report. The park's 167 listed assets in the report all are considered at high risk of damage from sea-level rise because of the overall low elevation of the park and extreme vulnerability to tropical storms.
Assets at risk at Canaveral include the $1 million headquarters, parking lots, and maintenance and administrative buildings.
"Climate change is visible at national parks across the country, but this report underscores the economic importance of cutting carbon pollution and making public lands more resilient to its dangerous impacts," U.S. Secretary of the Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, said in a release. "Through sound science and collaboration, we will use this research to help protect some of America's most iconic places — from the Statue of Liberty to Golden Gate and from the Redwoods to Cape Hatteras — that are at risk from climate change."
The report examined LiDAR data flown in 2007. LiDAR is akin to radar, measuring elevations with a laser and analyzing the reflected light.
Secretary Jewell released the report in advance of the two-year anniversary of President Barack Obama's Climate Action plan.
Sea-level rise projects vary by place and time, but scientists expect a one-meter rise in the next 100-150 years. In some areas of Alaska, however, relative sea-level is decreasing because as land-based glaciers and ice sheets melt, land is rising faster than sea-levels, according to the report.
"Many coastal parks already deal with threats from sea-level rise and from storms that damage roads, bridges, docks, water systems and parking lots," said National Park Service Director Jonathan B. Jarvis. "This infrastructure is essential to day-to-day park operations, but the historical and cultural resources such as lighthouses, fortifications and archaeological sites that visitors come to see are also at risk of damage or loss."
Authors of Adapting to Climate Change in Coastal Parks: Estimating the Exposure of Park Assets to 1 m of Sea-Level Rise, examined 40 of the 118 national parks considered at risk from sea-level rise. They used data from U.S. Geological Survey Coastal Vulnerability Index.
Recent assessments by NASA found that sea level at the Kennedy Space Center — just south of Canaveral National Seashore — could rise from 6 to 25 inches by the 2050s and 10 to 49 inches by the 2080s.
The parks service study also included urban areas such as Gateway National Recreation Area in New York City and Golden Gate National Recreation Area in San Francisco, two of the most visited parks in the country.
Results from analysis of an additional 30 coastal parks will be released later this summer.
Called "assets," the infrastructure and historic sites, museum collections and other cultural resources of the 40 parks were categorized as at high- or limited- exposure based on exposure to risk of damage from one meter of sea level rise.
About 40 percent of assets in the 40 parks, valued at more than $40 billion, are in the high-exposure category. Low-lying barrier island parks in the parks service's Southeast Region, such as Canaveral National Seashore, account for the majority of the high-exposure assets.
At Cape Hatteras National Seashore in North Carolina, for example, the cost to rebuild lighthouses, visitor center exhibits, historic structures and other areas would be almost $1.2 billion, the report says. That does not include the potential billions for loss of lands and tourism.
More than one-third of assets in the parks service's Northeast Region are in the high-exposure category, including the Statue of Liberty in New York and the landmark structures at Boston National Historic Park and Fort McHenry in Baltimore.
Many national park areas in the Northeast already were damaged by Hurricane Sandy in 2012. The storm shuttered the Statue of Liberty for eight months and forced National Park Service to remove much of the Ellis Island museum collection after the heating, ventilation and air conditioning system flooded with sea water.
Although one meter of sea level rise may not seem like a lot, Jarvis explained that amount would create a cascade of ill effects.
"Coupled with sea level rise, big storms have that extra volume of water that can damage or destroy roads, bridges and buildings, and we saw what that looks like – again – with Hurricane Sandy in 2012," the NPS director said.
Rebecca Beavers, NPS's lead scientist on coastal geology, said that considering Hurricane Sandy, the new report probably was too conservative with the assets it deemed "high exposure."
"Although reality may deal even more harsh circumstances as Sandy illustrated, information from this report provides a useful way to help determine priorities for planning within coastal parks," Beavers said.
The authors hope to bring attention to the need for "broader guidance related to climate change adaptation, not only at the park level, but also by the NPS regional and national levels," they wrote in the report.

150623-b
Florida Governor signs $78 billion state budget, minus some pork
BayouBuzz.com – by media source
June 23, 2015
Florida Governor Rick Scott signed a $78.2 billion state budget Tuesday, vetoing a record $461 million in pork-barrel projects that legislators requested in their special session last week.
The Republican governor praised legislators for including tax reductions of $427 million in the budget. He had sought nearly $700 million in cuts, but a standoff over healthcare funding caused the state to shift some general revenues to make up for reduced federal funding in hospital programs.
Scott's $461 million vetoes were mostly hometown building projects, dubbed "turkeys," injected by influential Republican legislators at the last minute to smooth ruffled feathers.
They included $15 million sought by Senate President Andy Gardiner, an Orlando Republican, for a downtown campus for his hometown university. Scott also axed $27 million for a water storage project.
His veto messages said the governor eliminated programs that he thought did not go through the normal committee process or
Related:           Editorial: Were Scott vetoes purely political? Senate says yes ...       St. Augustine Record
Reaction to Gov. Rick Scott's vetoes runs from anger to ...   Tampabay.com (blog)
Scott vetoes $461 million in spending; signs a $78.2 billion budget  Sarasota Herald-Tribune
Scott Slashes $461M From Budget, Draws Senate IRE        CBS Local
Editorial: Scott's budget vetoes send a message        Tampabay.com

150623-c
Lawsuit filed over Florida's Amendment One
Examiner.com – by Karl Dickey
June 23, 2015
Today, June 23, 2015, the Liberty First Network and its members announced they are disappointed with the filing of a lawsuit by Earthjustice over the Florida legislature's allocation of funds as directed by Amendment One. Today, Florida Governor Rick Scott signed the FY2015-2016 budget which includes $740 million in funding for Amendment One. Amendment One involves the State of Florida supporting land and water programs through the Florida Land Acquisition Trust Fund.
The Florida legislature followed the letter of the law in crafting the 2015-16 budget completed in the special session and used the discretion they were allowed by Amendment One to use funds to acquire, restore, improve, and manage conservation lands. Almost one-third of Florida’s land mass is owned by federal, state and local governments for conservation purposes, which equals a landmass the size of New Jersey. Unfortunately, much of Florida’s conservation land is in disrepair, have become fire hazards and vulnerable to invasive species.
The Florida legislature did the right thing in making sure we properly take care of what the government already owns and the Amendment One budget by the Florida Legislature reflects smart stewardship of our state’s precious natural resources and the taxpayer’s money.
"If Earthjustice and other environmental groups were sincerely concerned about Florida’s natural environment they would applaud this budget," said John Hallman a lobbyist with the Liberty First Network. Hallman continued, “But by this lawsuit they have shown they have a political agenda and intend to bully the legislature to usurp our representative form of government.”
The new Florida budget includes $45 million to protect Florida Springs, over $500 million to “protect” Florida's Everglades, $880 million to ensure water quality. $71.5 million is going to land management and land acquisition, including $17.4 million in new cash for the Division of State Lands within the Deparment of Environmental Protection. It also includes $15 million for the Rural and Family Lands Programs within the Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services, $5.5 million for the Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program and $33.6 million for additional land management.

150623-d
Phase one of Lee County water project almost complete
NBC-2.com - by Brian Colleran, Anchor/Reporter
June 23, 2015
LEE COUNTY - In 2010 and 2011, Lee County spent $37 million in Conservation 2020 money to buy old farmland to store water. Now that project is starting to take shape.
We got a first look at the North Six Mile Cypress Preserve Headwaters Storage Project, which sits on 1,200 acres north of State Road 82 near Buckingham.
Lee County, the South Florida Water Management District, FDOT and Florida Power have all teamed up on this effort to return natural water flow going south toward the Six Mile Cypress Slough.
"Each one of these projects when you start assembling and putting them together, it really makes a big difference," said South Florida Water Management District representative Phil Flood.
Phase I includes transforming old farm and grazing areas to a 100 acre water storage area that will be able to hold millions of gallons of water.
"Through our ditching and draining for development, it started to go to the north, what we are trying to accomplish with this project is to make it go south where it's supposed to go," said Cathy Olson, Lee County conservation land manager
"We are going to be able to restore the watershed, be able to restore water, going to be a positive influence on the Caloosahatchee river," said Flood.
The project, which when complete will cost between $3 to $4 million, will provide retention near I-75 and reduce the risk of flooding on neighborhoods that lie north of the project.
The plans also call for biking, hiking and horse trails for the public to enjoy.
"Three years out, we hope to have hiking trails, equestrian trails and bicycle trails so the public will be able to come in and enjoy the preserve," said Olson.
"They are going to view this as just another spectacular public park that they can come out an utilize," added Flood.
Phase I is on schedule to be completed by the end of July. The rest of the project, which is still in the planning phase, is expected to be done by late May of 2016.

150622-
Amendment 1 doesn't require Legislature to fund land acquisition
Herald-Tribune – by Robert Martineau
June 22, 2015
Florida newspapers have been nearly unanimous in condemning the Legislature for failing to carry out the will of the voters as expressed in Amendment 1, adopted last November, by not spending substantial funds to purchase or restore land for conservation purposes. The Herald-Tribune has published three editorials, a guest column, articles and letters to the editor, all claiming that the Legislature is violating at least the spirit of Amendment 1 to the state Constitution, adopted last fall by 75 percent of Florida voters, by not funding land purchases and restoration.
The amendment’s ballot title read: “Water and Land Conservation-Dedicates funds to acquire and restore Florida conservation and recreation lands.” The summary that appeared on the ballot began by stating: “Funds the Land Acquisition Trust Fund to acquire, restore, improve, and manage conservation lands. ...” Both the summary and the amendment, however, list 14 different types of properties covered in addition to conservation lands, including beaches and shores, farms and ranches, and historic and geologic sites. Thus the amendment includes not only acquiring conservation lands but other types of properties. It also included, in addition to acquisition, the restoring, improving, and managing of these properties and “enhancement of public access or recreational enjoyment of conservation lands.”
To fund all of these activities, the amendment dedicated at least 33 percent of revenue from the excise tax on legal documents to be paid into the existing Land Acquisition Trust Fund. To prevent the Legislature from diverting the fund to other purposes, it prohibited transferring any of the fund into the state’s general fund.
There are two main problems with the amendment. First, while it requires the documentary tax money to be put into the Land Acquisition Trust Fund, it does not require that any of the money be spent. It is simply there to be spent as provided in the budget adopted by the Legislature. There is no constitutional mandate to spend the money.
Second, given the broad description of the items that can be funded, the criticisms that the Legislature is violating the amendment by spending the fund on purposes other than the acquisition and restoration of conservation land are neither fair nor accurate. Unfortunately, Amendment 1 is so broadly written that it does not require the Legislature to use any of the fund for purchasing substantial amounts of -- or even any -- land for conservation purposes.
It allows the funds to be used not only to acquire and restore but to "improve and manage." It would have been difficult to have come up with broader words to allow for use of the funds for purposes other than land acquisition. Further, the range of properties included in the list — from beaches and historic or geologic sites to working farms and urban open spaces -- is virtually open-ended, going far beyond large areas of open land. Even worse, the inclusion of “enhancing public access and recreational enjoyment” of any of the types of properties that can be acquired or improved is limitless. It is not an exaggeration to say it includes not only bike and hiking paths but roads and bridges to beaches, beach renourishment, golf courses or even hotels. These are all within the meaning of improving public access and recreational enjoyment.
Another defect in the amendment is that it does not set a minimum percentage of the fund that can be used only for acquisition. If it required a third or half of the fund to be used solely to acquire conservation lands, particularly open, undeveloped land, the Legislature could not use it solely or primarily for improvements in access and enjoyment.
The amendment also lacks a procedure to bypass legislative refusal to carry out the properly expressed intent. If it had established a committee that included a broad range of interests to draw up a list of conservation land to be acquired with trust funds, the Legislature could not avoid using the fund as the voters intended.
The past unwillingness of the Legislature to fund the acquisition and restoration of conservation lands gave rise to the demand for a constitutional amendment to force it to do so. The overwhelming vote for Amendment 1 shows the people of Florida want that to happen. Unfortunately, Amendment 1 was so poorly drafted it does not accomplish its primary goal. The Legislature may be making a bad policy choice not to fund the purchase of conservation land, but it is not violating Amendment 1. The only realistic remedy is another initiative amendment in 2016 to correct the defects in Amendment 1.
Robert J. Martineau of Sarasota County is Distinguished Research Professor of Law (Emeritus), University of Cincinnati. He taught legislative drafting for many years, is the author of three books on drafting laws including constitutional amendments in plain English, and has extensive legislative drafting experience.

150622-b
Miccosukee Tribe chairman speaks out on Everglades water quality
Palm Beach Post - by Christine Stapleton
June 22, 2015
Members of the Miccosukee Tribe — many who live in the southern Everglades — traditionally let their lawyers speak publicly about restoration of their homeland. Rarely are they seen at public meetings and court hearings in their 20-year-old lawsuit against state and federal agencies.
That changed Saturday when the Tribe’s Chairman, Colley Billie, took the stage at the Big Sugar Summit sponsored by the Sierra Club and explained the Tribe’s primary concern: Water quality. Longtime Everglades activists and litigators were shocked that Billie agreed to speak at the event and gave him a standing ovation after his 20-minute speech.
“When I was about 6-years-old, the water was clean,” said Billie, one of seven children whose family lived in the Everglades. “Believe it or not, we used to drink directly from the Everglades.”
Many of the 200-plus people in the hotel ballroom were environmental activists who had devoted much of the year rallying unsuccessfully for a land purchase for a major water storage project. Water quantity had been their focus.
However, Billie focused on water quality, saying the nutrient-rich water now flooding tribal lands is killing wildlife on their hunting grounds.
“For hundreds of years the Everglades has been our home — a refuge as we avoided removal,” Billie said, referring to the forced removal of most of the tribe to the west in the 1800s. About 100 never surrendered and hid out in the Everglades. The tribe now numbers more than 600 and are direct descendants of those who eluded capture. “However, after years of degradation caused by others, our way of life has been irrevocably altered.”
In the 1990s, the Miccosukee filed and joined in several successful lawsuits against the government for failing to clean up the Everglades. Billie criticized the state and federal government for failing to complete a single restoration project despite more than 20 years of lawsuits. Billie faulted a “lack of coordination and follow through” that has resulted in a “haphazard” approach to the clean-up.
Billie acknowledged that some progress has been made, but said there are two issues on which the tribe will not budge: The Tamiami Trail bridge project and the maximum phosphorous limit of 10 parts per billion for water flowing into the Everglades National Park. The Tribe believes raising the Tamiami Trail, which separates tribal lands from the Everglades National Park, will destroy two villages, invade their privacy and hurt their businesses along the road.
As for phosphorous limits, water managers can’t move water under the Tamiami Bridge to the park because phosphorous limits are above 10 ppb — the limit approved by a federal judge. That mean water stacks up at the southern end of the Everglades, flooding the Miccosukee tribal lands. Although the exceedances are small, Billie said the Miccosukee will not budge on the 10 ppb and will insist that number be met.
“I am here today to ask the Sierra Club and all of you to focus your efforts on restoring water quality,” Billie said. “It is only by working together that we will be able to restore the Everglades.”

150621-
Legislative session winners and losers in Tallahassee
Herald/Times - by Herald/Times Staff, Tallahassee Bureau
June 21, 2015
Bills that passed and failed in the 2015 legislative session. To become law, bills must not be vetoed by Gov. Rick Scott. Bills that passed are in BOLD.
Criminal justice
CAPITAL FELONIES (FAILED): Requires unanimous verdict of all 12 jurors in capital felony cases to recommend death sentence. (SB 664/HB 139)
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANTS (FAILED): Requires police to tell confidential informants their legal rights and makes negligence of informants a felony. (SB 372/HB 267)
CIVIL CITATIONS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Allows police officers to issue civil citations to young people who have already committed a nonviolent offense. (SB 378)
DEATH PENALTY (FAILED): Abolishes capital punishment in Florida. (SB 1322/HB 4003)
‘GROVELAND FOUR’ (FAILED): Apologizes to families of four unarmed black men and boys killed by white sheriffs’ deputies in Groveland in 1949. (SB 1332)
PRISONS (FAILED): Increases oversight of state prisons and creates penalties for guards who abuse inmates. (SB 7020)
TICKET QUOTAS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Prohibits police departments from using ticket quotas to generate revenue. (SB 264)
SEXUAL OFFENSES (SIGNED INTO LAW): Extends statute of limitations for rape cases. (HB 133)
BODY CAMERAS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Shields video taken by police body cameras on private property from disclosure under public record laws. (SB 248)
Economy
ECONOMIC INCENTIVES (FAILED): Limits use of state money for incentives to attract jobs and prohibits incentive payments until goals are met. (SB 1214/HB 5401)
AMERICAN FLAGS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Requires state, counties and cities to buy only American-made U.S. flags by 2016. (HB 225)
BEER GROWLERS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Allows Florida craft breweries to sell beer in 64-ounce “growlers.” (SB 186)
EQUAL PAY (FAILED): Requires that women get equal pay with men on state contracts. (SB 98/HB 25)
ENTERPRISE ZONES (FAILED): Extends program of tax incentives to businesses that create jobs in areas with high unemployment, poverty and crime. (HB 903/SB 392)
FILM INCENTIVES (FAILED): Restructures tax credits for movie and TV productions and eliminates the first-come, first-served system in place now. (HB 451/SB 1046)
Education
CAMPUS GUNS (FAILED): Repeals an existing law banning concealed weapons from college campuses. (HB 4005/SB 176)
CHARTER SCHOOLS (FAILED): Requires school districts to share construction and
maintenance money with charter schools. (HB 7037)
CHOICE (FAILED): Allows students to attend any school in the state that has space. (HB 1145/SB 1552)
CLASS SIZE (FAILED): Gives school districts flexibility to meet the constitutionally mandated limits on class size. (HB 665/SB 818)
COLLEGE PRESIDENTS (FAILED): Creates public records exemption for state college and university presidential searches. (SB 182/HB 223)
COLLEGE AFFORDABILITY (FAILED): Eliminates the sales tax on textbooks; requires colleges and universities to publish the price of each class before the semester begins. (HB 7125/SB 938)
COACHES (FAILED): Requires the immediate termination of any coach who is ejected from an organized athletic event involving children 12 or under. (HB 479/SB 238)
CONSERVATIVE MOVIE (FAILED): Requiring all middle schools and high schools to show students the film "America: Imagine the World Without Her." (HB 77/SB 96)
DIGITAL CLASSROOMS (FAILED): Requires the development of a five-year plan to address technology needs in public schools. (HB 1264/SB 7050)
K-12 GUNS (FAILED): Allows designated schools employees to carry concealed weapons on school grounds. (HB 19/SB 180)
PRINCIPAL AUTONOMY (FAILED): Creates a pilot program giving certain principals more freedom over budget and hiring decisions. (HB 357/SB 1552)
TESTING (SIGNED INTO LAW): Scales back testing in public schools, puts school grades on hold until the new Florida Standards Assessments are deemed valid, enables districts to start school as early as Aug. 10. (HB 7069)
UNIFORMS (FAILED): Encourages school districts to adopt mandatory school uniform policies for grades K-8 by providing a cash incentive. (HB 7043/SB 1474)
TEACHER SALARIES (FAILED): Sets $50,000 minimum salary for new teachers. (SB 280/HB 261)
COLLEGE NAMES (FAILED): Changes names of some Florida colleges by dropping the word “state” from their titles. (SB 1252)
Elections
ONLINE REGISTRATION (SIGNED INTO LAW): Requires state to create online voter registration system by October 2017. (SB 228)
MAIL BALLOTS (FAILED): Allows cities to hold elections in which all ballots are cast by mail. (SB 7064/HB 1161)
CIVIL RIGHTS (FAILED): Allows constitutional amendment so that convicted felons can automatically regain the right to vote. (SB 208)
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY (SIGNED INTO LAW): Sets March 15, 2016 as date of next presidential preference primary in Florida. (HB 7035)
WRITE-IN CANDIDATES (FAILED): Repeals requirement that write-in candidate reside within the district represented by office sought at time of qualification. (SB 840/HB 4043)
General government
IMMIGRANT DRIVERS (FAILED): Allows undocumented immigrants to obtain Florida driver licenses. (SB 300)
SEXUAL ORIENTATION (FAILED): Prohibits state-licensed counselors from attempting to change a minor’s sexual orientation. (SB 204/HB 83)
PLANNING COUNCILS (FAILED): Reduces regional planning councils from 11 to 10 and abolishes Withlacoochee council in Ocala. (SB 484/HB 873)
MELON HAULERS (FAILED): Exempts operators of melon hauling vehicles from having to obtain commercial driver licenses. (SB 1072/HB 831)
TUPELO HONEY (FAILED): Designates tupelo honey as official state honey. (SB 556)
PUBLIC UTILITIES (SIGNED INTO LAW): Reforms Public Service Commission, including setting term limits. (HB 7109)
TAX CUTS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Cuts about $400 million in taxes, including through sales tax holidays. (HB 33A)
TAXPAYERS’ EMAILS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Keeps confidential the email addresses of taxpayers who receive electronic tax notices from county tax collectors. (SB 200)
INSPECTORS GENERAL (SIGNED INTO LAW): Requires national searches to replace vacant inspector general positions in agencies under control of governor. (HB 371)
Guns
BACKYARD GUNS (FAILED): Prohibits backyard recreational gun use. (HB 623)
EVACUATIONS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Allows people to carry concealed weapons without a license during emergency evacuations. (SB 290)
Health
ABORTIONS (SIGNED INTO LAW): Requires 24-hour waiting period and at least one in-person doctor appointment before an abortion. (HB 633)
KIDCARE (FAILED): Eliminates five-year waiting period for lawfully residing immigrant children seeking to enroll in Florida's subsidized health insurance program. (SB 294/HB 829)
MEDICAID EXPANSION (FAILED): Creates a state-run marketplace for private health insurance available to low-income Floridians who work and pay small monthly premiums. (SB 2A)
NEEDLE EXCHANGES (FAILED): Allows the University of Miami to run a needle exchange pilot program in Miami-Dade County. (SB 1040/HB 475)
NURSES (FAILED): Allows advanced registered nurse practitioners to prescribe and dispense medications. (HB 27A)
RIGHT MEDICINE (FAILED): Creates a commission to review insurance plans that limit therapies and pharmaceuticals. (SB 784/HB 863)
RIGHT TO TRY (SIGNED INTO LAW): Allows terminally ill patients to try experimental treatments. (HB 269)
TELEMEDICINE (FAILED): Creates standards for telemedicine and using web and videoconferencing technology to treat patients. (HB 545/SB 478)
TRANSGENDER BATHROOMS (FAILED): Prohibits transgender people from using restrooms aligned with their gender identity. (SB 1464 /HB 583)
Miami-Dade
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT (SIGNED INTO LAW): Clarifies that the Miami Downtown Development Authority can collect property taxes. (SB 278)
EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITIES (FAILED): Reshapes the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority. (HB 989/SB 1276)
VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARDS (FAILED): Eliminates a loophole in state law allowing third-party companies to challenge property values. (HB 695/SB 972)
Other
CUBA (PASSED): Memorial to rebuke President Barack Obama’s decision to open diplomatic relations with Cuba, opposes the potential opening of a Cuban consulate in Florida. (SM 866)
DRONES (SIGNED INTO LAW): Bans surveillance of private property using unmanned flying drones. (SB 766)
GUARDIAN ROTATION (SIGNED INTO LAW): Encourages courts to use a rotation system to appoint guardians to manage the affairs of incapacitated senior citizens. (SB 318)
GUARDIAN RULES (FAILED): Establishes a new Office of Public & Professional Guardians to review allegations of fraud and abuse involving guardians who manage the affairs of incapacitated senior citizens. (HB 1225/SB 1226)
PLASTIC BAGS (FAILED): Allows coastal communities with fewer than 100,000 residents to develop pilot programs to limit the use of plastic bags. (HB 661/SB 966)
POOL SAFETY (FAILED): Establishes a commission to study potential electrical hazards around swimming pools. (HB 795/SB 926)
TEXTING (FAILED): Makes texting while driving a primary offense, allowing officers to pull people over for doing so. (HB 1/SB 192)
RENTAL CARS (FAILED): Requires non-residents who rent cars in Florida to buy liability insurance. (SB 976/HB 819)
ADOPTION (SIGNED INTO LAW): Allows gay people to adopt children. (HB 7013)
RELIGIOUS PROTECTIONS (FAILED): Allows adoption agencies to refuse service based on religious convictions. (HB 7111)
WATER (FAILED): Changes regulations for water pollution and springs. (HB 7003)

150620-a
State budget exceeds Amendment 1's requirements
Orlando Sentinel - by Alan Hays, FL Senator, Guest columnist
Hays: There's more to conservation than acquiring land.
In November 2014, 4.2 million Floridians, roughly 20 percent, or one in five of the nearly 20 million people who call our state home, voted in favor of the Water and Land Conservation Amendment (Amendment 1).
As stated in the ballot summary, the amendment dedicates 33 percent of documentary-stamp tax revenue to "acquire, restore, improve and manage conservation lands including wetlands and forests; fish and wildlife habitat; lands protecting water resources and drinking water sources, including the Everglades, and the water quality of rivers, lakes, and streams; beaches and shores; outdoor recreational lands; working farms and ranches; and historic or geologic sites," for 20 years.
The Legislature has worked diligently to implement this amendment, which will set aside $741.8 million from existing revenue this year. It is projected to generate $22.3 billion over the next 20 years.
The good news is the Legislature did not wait for the passage of Amendment 1 to renew its dedication to funding Florida's environment; nor did we limit funding for this purpose to the mandatory $741.8 million.
Recovering from a recession that impacted every area of the budget, the Legislature last year appropriated well more than $3 billion in funding for environmental programs, dedicating approximately 21 percent of documentary-stamp revenue as well as general revenue, federal grants and other state funds to conserve, protect and enhance the natural resources we Floridians treasure.
This tremendous level of funding demonstrates the long-term and broad-based commitment to conservation by our local, state and federal governments that has led to the purchase of more than 10 million total government-owned acres across
Florida, a commitment clearly reflected in the balanced budget the Legislature passed on Friday.
The 2015-16 budget provides substantial funding for land acquisition, springs protection, recreational trails and restoration of the Everglades. The budget provides nearly $200 million to pay for existing debt the state owes within Florida Forever, the Everglades and the Florida Keys. In addition to dedicating more than $50 million toward the purchase of even more conservation land, the budget dedicates hundreds of millions to improve the management of and expand public access to lands the taxpayers already own.
We also dedicated tens of millions to nourish Florida's beaches, restore our lakes and protect rural and family lands from development. We set aside funds to protect endangered plants and to mitigate the harm caused by invasive species that threaten various habitats across Florida. We also allocated significant funding to improve the quality of our water resources.
As you can see, there is a whole lot more to being a conservationist than acquiring property.
And while the proponents of Amendment 1 would now like us to believe their purpose was to require the state to purchase more land, the ballot language above clearly shows there is no requirement to spend a specific portion solely on land acquisition. Neither does the language indicate the entire sum is to be used for new purchases.
Rather, the actual text of the amendment recognizes the broader responsibility in protecting and improving the state's natural resources. In fact, arguing in favor of Amendment 1 before its passage, proponents contended the amendment would not require cuts to other programs or increases in revenues since nothing in the amendment prevented the use of funds for existing programs, including operating expenses.
Some have compared Amendment 1 funding for the environment to the Florida Lottery funding dedicated to education. Let's be clear: The lottery generated new funding for the state. Amendment 1 does not generate any new funding. Rather, it mandates the allocation of an existing revenue stream now be set aside to fund environmental purposes. Currently, about 21 percent of doc-stamp revenue supports environmental programs, and these expenditures were continued. Amendment 1 required an increase to 33 percent, so the general revenue fund that supports our school system, health care and other state needs was reduced by $174 million to implement the amendment.
Addressing Florida's environmental needs is a marathon, not a sprint. Our budget not only meets, but by every measure exceeds the requirements of Amendment 1, which, unlike the current rhetoric, recognizes that being good stewards of Florida's natural beauty means more than simply buying land.
Sen. Alan Hays represents District 11, which consists of parts of Lake, Marion, Orange and Sumter counties. He has served the last three terms as chair of the Senate AppropriationsSubcommittee on General Government, which includes agriculture and natural resources.
Related:           Amendment 1 funds   Orlando Sentinel

150619-a
Does the will of the voters matter ?
PalmBeachPost
June 19, 2015
Maybe not when it comes to allocating Amendment 1 funds
A few weeks after Amendment 1 passed with a whopping 75 percent approval of Florida voters last November, we began warning that legislators would have difficulty resisting such a large pot of money for their own purposes.
A record 4 million Floridians voted for the water and land conservation ballot initiative — including 84 percent in Palm Beach County, nearly 80 percent in Martin and 81 percent in St. Lucie.
“Those high numbers should protect it from budgetary tricks in the Florida Legislature, at least for the first year,” we wrote.
We were wrong. Lawmakers will vote, and are expected to approve today a $78.7 billion state budget that largely flouts the will of those who voted for Amendment 1, which goes into effect July 1.
That’s a shame, as their intent was clear: For the next 20 years, spend 33 percent of the money raised from documentary stamp taxes on real estate sales to pay for land conservation and water preservation across Florida. As the largest state conservation money measure in U.S. history, it is expected to raise $750 million in the first year. Over the next 20 years, it could raise as much as $18 billion.
State lawmakers decide where the money will go, but the amendment is written to be self-implementing. The state already has in place the mechanisms for selecting projects.
Gov. Rick Scott, seen here at the Pine Jog Environmental Education Center. (Lannis Waters/The Palm Beach Post)
All of this, however, appeared to fall on deaf ears when it came to Gov. Rick Scott, and Republican leaders in the Florida House and Senate. The 2015-2016 budget offers a paltry $17.4 million for Florida Forever, the state’s land-buying program, $20 million for Kissimmee River projects, $81.8 million for Everglades restoration and $47.5 million for the state’s natural springs.
Meanwhile, according to an analysis by the Post’s Christine Stapleton, “… of the $724 million legislators spent from the Amendment 1 trust fund, $152 million will pay for salaries at agencies that oversee environmental concerns, including hunting, freshwater fisheries and archaeological and historic sites.”
It does make sense that another big chunk of Amendment 1 money — $191 million — is budgeted to pay off debts for prior land deals. But other expenses to be paid with Amendment 1 money, such as $1.2 million for risk management insurance premiums and $17.4 million in “other personal services,” should be paid from general revenue.
Pardon the pun, but it simply doesn’t hold water.
Related:           Amendment 1 coalition: Legislature's plan 'insult' to voters  Tallahassee.com (June 20)
Amendment One Spending Legality In Question      WFSU

150619-b
Environmentalists call for stop to sugar-cane burning in Palm Beach County
Sun Sentinel - by Andy Reid
June 19, 2015
The Sierra Club wants Big Sugar to stop the harvesting practice of burning sugar cane fields.
Environmentalists say sugar cane burning causes air pollution in Palm Beach County.
Plumes of smoke that rain ash on Palm Beach County communities are igniting a renewed fight between environmentalists and the sugar industry.
The Sierra Club on Friday called for sugar cane growers to stop the decades-old harvesting practice of burning cane fields that cover more than 300,000 acres of western Palm Beach County.
The burning gets blamed for asthma attacks, coughs and itchy eyes in communities both near and far from where sugar cane is harvested. The Sierra Club argues that the burning also worsens air pollution that could lead to more serious long-term health threats.
"It's time to end a practice that makes our community sick," Julie Hathaway, of the Sierra Club, said Friday at a press conference in West Palm Beach. "Big Sugar pollution is an irritant and perhaps a danger."
But the state health department maintains that sugar industry burning doesn't exceed air-pollution standards and that air-quality monitoring shows that the agricultural burning isn't a risk.
U.S. Sugar Corp. spokeswoman Judy Sanchez said the Sierra Club is using air-pollution concerns as the latest attempt to shut down the sugar industry to get more land for Everglades restoration.
"This is just another in a long series of attacks on sugar farmers to drive farmers out of this area and take farmland out of production," Sanchez said.
Many of the sugar cane fields south of Lake Okeechobee sit on former Everglades land, drained to make way for farming and development.
Each year, usually between October and April, sugar cane growers set fire to their fields — about 40 acres at a time — to burn away the leafy portions that surround the stalk. The fires flare up quickly and burn out fast, sometimes leaving snakes as casualties and sending charred rabbits dashing away.
The stalks don't burn because they are packed with water. Once the stalks are exposed, the harvesting machines roll in to chop down and collect the stalks that are taken to the mills for processing.
The fires, smoke and ash are most noticeable in the Glades communities where sugar cane is grown, but the effects can drift east to Wellington and Royal Palm Beach and even farther inland depending on the wind.
Environmental advocates maintain that the burning is an antiquated, unnecessary process that other sugar-cane-producing regions in Australia and Brazil have abandoned.
"They can do (the same) here. They are unwilling to move into the modern world," said Earthjustice attorney David Guest, who called the burning a "toxic pollution source."
Instead of burning the leafy material that springs from the stalks, sugar growers could cut it and leave it as mulch to enrich fields and lessen the need for fertilizer, according to the Sierra Club. The material also could be burned at waste-to-energy plants of some sugar industry operations, according to the group.
Environmentalists argue that the state of Florida hasn't done enough to address the air pollution concerns. And they say that burn permits needed for the fires are issued without enough protection for nearby communities.
Yet the Health Department spokesman in Palm Beach County, Tim O'Connor, said that air-monitoring equipment near the sugar cane fields and in nearby communities show that the burning doesn't violate federal air-quality standards.
U.S. Sugar maintains that burning is still the best way to dispose of the leafy portions of sugar cane that aren't needed to produce sugar. Just cutting it and leaving it as mulch isn't good for the mucky South Florida soils and would result in rotting the sugar cane, Sanchez said. And trucking the leafy material away to dispose of elsewhere would add to fossil fuel emissions that also pose air pollution concerns, according to Sanchez.
Despite the sugar industry pushback, environmental advocates say air pollution threats from burning cane fields are real and deserve more attention.
"We are not going to give up," said Frank Jackalone, of the Sierra Club

150619-c
Sierra Club hosting Big Sugar Summit in West Palm Beach
Sun Sentinel - by Andy Reid
June 19, 2015
The Sierra Club is holding a Big Sugar Summit to bring attention to concerns about the sugar industry.
The Sierra Club is holding a Big Sugar Summit in West Palm Beach Saturday to highlight concerns about the sugar industry’s effect on the Everglades and South Florida air quality.
The daylong event at the Embassy Suites at 1601 Belvedere Road in West Palm Beach focuses on topics including: the history of the sugar industry in Florida, how the industry affects the Everglades and Big Sugar’s far-reaching political influence.
Scheduled speakers include environmental group representatives, professors, scientists, the chairman of the Miccosukee tribe and others. The event lasts from 9 a.m. to p.m.
“We are going to pull back the curtain on the sugar industry,” said Frank Jackalone of the Sierra Club.
Kicking off the effort, the Sierra Club Friday held a press conference announcing a new push to try to end the practice of burning sugar cane fields.
Environmental advocates argue that the burning, which makes it easier to harvest sugar cane stalks, can trigger asthma attack and cause other health problems for those living near the fields as well as communities close to the coast, depending on which way the wind is blowing.
Sugar industry representatives counter that the burning doesn’t violate federal air quality standards.
The Sierra Club’s sugar industry summit and the cane field burning concerns are the latest attempts by environmental groups to “drive (sugar) farmers out of the area and take farmland out of production,” according to U.S. Sugar Corp. Spokeswoman Judy Sanchez.
The burning that gets blamed for asthma attacks, coughs and itchy eyes in eastern communities, far from where sugar cane is harvested, worsens air pollution that can lead to more serious long-term health threats, according to the Sierra Club.

150619-d
State, water district using $1.4M to ease nitrate flow at dairies
Gainesville.com - by Christopher Curry, Staff writer
June 19, 2015
The Suwannee River Water Management District and the state will use $1.4 million in public money to fund projects to reduce the flow of nitrates into groundwater at seven north Florida dairies in the Santa Fe River and Suwannee River basins.
The majority of the projects that the district Governing Board approved on June 9 involve the expansion of the on-site ponds and lagoons that store cow waste the dairies use as fertilizer on the crops the cows eat. The dairies will able to fertilize less often to keep the ponds from filling, reducing the amount of nitrates seeping into the ground and groundwater, said Kevin Wright, a professional engineer with the district.
In some cases, unlined ponds that allow nitrates to leach into the groundwater will be converted to lined ponds or concrete.
The dairies receiving funding ranged from large operations like Alliance Dairies’ Piedmont Dairy in Gilchrist County, the American Dairyco operation in Gilchrist and Shenandoah Dairy in Suwannee to smaller family-owned operations like Lonesome Meadows Farm and Barrington Dairy in Suwannee County and TW Byrd’s Sonc Inc. in Lafayette County.
In an email, Alliance Dairies’ Charlie Smith said the Piedmont Dairy is in compliance with its state-required plan for managing nutrients and its state permits so the company might not have incentive to make the on-site improvements without the partnership with the water management district.
The project at Piedmont will include expanding the lined lagoon on site and installation of drop nozzles that spread fertilizer more efficiently.
Merrillee Malwitz-Jipson, president of the environmental groups Our Santa Fe River and Save Our Suwannee, said she has concerns about using taxpayer monies to fund the projects.
“I’m pleased that the state recognizes dairy farms need to reduce their nitrate loading,” Malwitz-Jipson wrote in an email. “However, allowing our taxes to pay for their fixes is a lot like corporate welfare. These are not small farms, these large farms have created large wastes, FDEP should be holding them accountable to their pollution contributions to our watersheds. Large-scale farming should be responsible farmers and deal with their wastes as any other business would be required to do so.
The district is funding the projects with $920,000 from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for nitrate reduction projects at dairies in springsheds, $250,000 from the Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services and about $258,700 in district funds.
The dairies have much smaller required contributions -- at least 10 percent of the project price.
Wright said the lion’s share of the money was public funding because of the public interest in protecting the area’s springs and rivers.
Some projects will expand the storage capacity of the lagoons and ponds to hold a minimum 21 days of waste when the industry standard is seven days.
At some dairies, the systems for spraying the waste as fertilizer will be converted to more efficient drip nozzle systems to reduce the amount applied.
Based on the applications from the dairies that sought money after the district put out an invitation to apply, the projects will combine to reduce the amount of nitrates going into the ground by 100,000 pounds a year.
The Suwannee and Santa Fe are both polluted by nitrates and the water management district and state have set the goal of getting nitrate levels in each district to 0.35 milligrams per liter.
Some $5 million in funding is going to fund projects that reduce water usage and nitrate pollution at agricultural businesses in the district.
There are some 35 to 40 dairies in the district, Wright said. A 2008 Florida Department of Environmental Protection report said dairies accounted for about 19 million pounds out of the 132 million gallons of nitrates going into the ground in a year in the Middle Suwannee, Lower Suwannee and Santa Fe basins.
In an email, Alliance Dairies’ Charlie Smith said the Piedmont Dairy is in compliance with its state-required plan for managing nutrients and its state permits so the company might not have incentive to make the on-site improvements without the partnership with the water management district.
The project at Piedmont will include expanding the lined lagoon on site and installation of drop nozzles that spread fertilizer more efficiently.
“Piedmont Dairy is in compliance with our Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) that was approved by DEP and is the basis for the Industrial Wastewater Permit that was issued by DEP and allows us to operate the dairy,” Smith wrote.
“To that extent there is no reason for us to add capacity to our wastewater system and to spend those dollars that are required for a cost share project. The increased capacity will allow us, however, to manage that waste more effectively. We can hold that wastewater in the lagoon during rain events instead of having to irrigate to lower the level in the lagoon. The ability to delay effluent applications for optimal nutrient uptake by crops will significantly reduce nutrients losses, particularly nitrogen, to groundwater. For that reason added wastewater storage capacity would seem to be a win/win for both the state and our farm.”
Representatives of other dairies could not be reached for comment.

150618-a
As budget vote looms, environmentalists threaten Amendment One lawsuits
WFSU.org - by Lynn Hatter
June 18, 2015
Nearly 75 percent of Florida voters backed the state’s new environmental conservation constitutional amendment. Amendment One backers call that overwhelming approval a mandate to the legislature to follow through on funding. But the $750 million generated for Amendment one, doesn’t look like the windfall environmentalists had hoped for.
Florida lawmakers will approve a state spending plan for the upcoming fiscal year later today. And already Amendment One backers are threatening lawsuits. The proposed budget includes $80 million dollars for Everglades Restoration, $50 million for Springs protection but only $17-million dollars for Florida Forever—the state’s hallmark land buying program.  And Senate Appropriations Chairman Tom Lee says Amendment one supporters have a right to be disappointed.
“This is a 20-year program, we need to take the long-term view. I think the legislature will get there. I’m sure there will be litigation, there always is in this state, seems like. But the criticisms aren’t unfair. They’re not. But I think we can and we will do better in time," Lee said.
But other lawmakers believe the current spending plan fulfills the Amendment One directives.  During a recent interview with The Florida Channel’s Beth Switzer, House Speaker Steve Crisafulli defended the state’s budgeting decisions:
"Amendment One doesn’t talk about exactly were you spend and how much. It’s the prerogative of the legislature to decide where we want to focus our efforts. This year we decided that, came to an agreement with the Senate, and we have a compromise budget out there that we will have an opportunity to vote on, on Friday."
That vote is coming later today. And environmentalists say they’re weighing their options. Will Abberger is with the Trust for Public Land and led the push for amendment one. He believes the legislature has violated the amendment by using some of the money to fund personnel, not projects.
“There are agency operating expenses that are legitimate Amendment One expenses if they’re related directly to land conservation, land management, land acquisition and restoration- the purpose of Amendment One," he said. "But to think we’re going to shift over entire divisions in the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission that were previously funded by other sources, into Amendment One, is the reason we see so little new funding for real conservation in this year’s budget.”
But he also admits, a lawsuit could be tricky. The legislature has sole budgetary authority. And while Amendment one steers a portion of revenue from home sales toward land conservation. And the amendment’s authors had to be careful not to tread on lawmakers’ budget power. But as Abberger explains, that tight-rope has led to the current predicament.
“Amendment One dedicates a third of the documentary stamp tax to land conservation….for 20 years. Within those side-boards described by the amendment the legislature does have discretion in how to appropriate those funds.”
A vote on the state budget can occur as soon as 5:37 today. Lawmakers have been under a 72-hour cooling off period. Abberger was a guest on WFSU’s It’s About Florida program.

150618-b
Current climate change debate misses mark of what’s really important in South Florida
RiseMiamiNews.com – by Marion D. Thorpe, Jr. MD MPH,  former Chief Medical Officer for the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration
June 18, 2015
The matter of climate control has intensified recently with the Pope’s entry into the fray. Though it can be argued that the Pope is outside his realm of knowledge when addressing scientific matters, there is no denying that the Pope’s encyclical points to man as a destructive force that is negatively impacting the many delicate balances that exist in nature. Though the Pope concedes that other factors may be at play as well, he clearly places blame on mankind. Very likely, he will articulate this blame when he addresses our US Congress in September of this year.
Now that the Papal spotlight is on Congress, politicians are all but forced to weigh in on matters pertaining to global emissions, carbon credits, rain forest maintenance, and so forth. As the political rancoring ensues, there will be much talk of man-made causes versus natural causes that impact our climate. I’ll leave that debate to scientists and politicians for the moment.
My focus entails examination of the Climate’s impact on the Health of the Public. Regardless of how Ozone depletion may occur, it’s effects regarding the increased incidence of adverse health outcomes must be resolved.
Yes, I strongly support saving the Everglades. I also strongly support saving lives from preventable conditions such as skin cancer, asthma, and malnutrition. I call upon all public health leaders to resist the media driven tendency to place blame on man or nature; but rather, we must unite our efforts to promote Health Promotion and Disease Prevention in the context of what I term the “Climate of Confusion” regarding environmental factors and our collective health.
With the entry of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush into the 2016 Presidential field along with others including Hillary Clinton, there will be much room for debate as to the causation, prevention, and remedy of climate issues.
For now, I set aside my own political “hat” and serve as a trained and concerned member of the community who demands more emphasis on the public’s health within the arena of climate debate.

150618-c












Temperince MORGAN
Executive Director

150618-c
Florida’s Nature Conservancy gets it: It’s about land management
FlaglerLive.com - by Nancy Smith
Juna 18, 2015
Most Florida environmental groups this special session made a lot of noise — you heard them — and spent a lot of money, but in the end, came away empty-handed and bitterly unhappy.
Not The Nature Conservancy.
The Conservancy (TNC), largest private conservation landowner in the world, including more than 60,000 acres in preserves from the Keys to the Florida Panhandle, walked its own path during both legislative sessions, never putting the U.S. Sugar Corp. option on its wish list.
What it did is quietly win record funding for its own top priority — land management.
The Nature Conservancy, understand, is all about land management.
“We applaud the Legislature,” said Marianne Moran, TNC’s director of government relations. “The budget going through right now includes $106 million in new management dollars. Adding that new money to an estimated base of $60 million means a record for Florida land management allocation. That’s going to help address the significant backlog on our state lands.”
Florida has a total of 9 million acres of conservation land, a colossal number — more conservation land than the total land in four states. “We should be proud of that,” TNC Associate Director of Conservation Kristina Serbesoff-King told me. “We are quite fortunate in this state. But it also means we have a heavy responsibility.”
This is why I say The Nature Conservancy gets it.
“Buying new land is only part of the solution to protect Florida’s land, water, wildlife and recreation,” Moran said. “Funding land management is critical because it helps the state realize the recreational and natural attributes provided by acquisition.”
Unfortunately, she said, in recent years “there’s been a political temptation to buy lands, cut the ribbon, then walk away without a plan to adequately fund management. This makes no sense and has had a detrimental effect on our resources. It’s something TNC recognized and wanted to lead on in 2015.”
Moran hit the nail on the head. She struck a chord. It’s always seemed to me land management is the cost of doing business. You can’t buy land if you’re not going to pay to take care of it. It’s like buying a business, putting all your money into the big-ticket item without leaving room to pay for rent, utilities, advertising, insurance — the recurring cost of doing business. If you don’t take it all into account, the business fails.
Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam knew how far behind land maintenance is in Florida, and said as much in March to legislators looking to form a spending plan for Amendment 1 money.
The Nature Conservancy is wise to this because that’s what they do. Conservation means what it says. Have a look at their website.
“If you don’t manage invasives, waterways clog,” Moran explained. “If you don’t burn, scrub-jay habitat disappears and long-leaf forests aren’t replanted … and wetlands cannot be restored as intended.”
TNC had only two priorities for this year’s budget: funding for land management that would eclipse the allocations of the past five years; and a significant increase in the Rural and Family Lands Program. Rural and Family Lands came out ahead, too, funded at $15 million.  “We see this conservation easement program as the most targeted means of land protection, and it’s the most cost-effective for the taxpayer,” she said.
Asked why TNC didn’t list U.S. Sugar’s 46,800 acres among its priorities, Moran replied, “Florida has many conservation priorities.  Considering the current backlog of billions of ongoing and planned Everglades restoration projects waiting to be implemented, we need to finish what we started.” She said The Nature Conservancy nevertheless continues to support a dedicated funding source for Everglades restoration.
Many who deal with TNC on a regular basis credit Executive Director Temperince Morgan, on board for only about a year, with recent successes.
There’s just so much to admire about the common-sense approach TNC brings to its conservation mission.
In the first place, unlike other environmental entitites, it has not historically been a litigious organization. Lawsuits are tactics for others when they can’t get what they want; working with leadership to come up with a solution is the TNC way.
In the second place, they look at the Everglades and see and hear beyond the political noise, looking at problems few agencies are addressing.They see the Burmese pythons and other exotic animals. They see uplands so flooded in rainy spells that  deer and other animals become trapped and starve there. They see a deadly exotic climbing fern, Lygodium microphyllum, overtaking islands, forcing out animals that grazed there. They see dying coral reefs in Florida Bay.
They are a lone voice sounding the alarm for many ills in a port-of-entry state, in a tropical climate where everything, good and bad, grows prolifically. And they are entirely refreshing.

150618-d
Floriduh, another state where corruption is legal ?
TallahasseeDemocrat - My View by Ray Bellamy, a long time Tallahassee physician
June 18, 2015
Remember when we had a democracy? I thought so. Now a Princeton University study confirms what we knew intuitively: A few well-connected elites and organized groups tied to huge corporations control our country, regardless of the will of the voters.
Small business owners — don’t get excited when you hear this, whether you are a Chamber of Commerce member or not. The major beneficiaries of this power are corporations way beyond our reach.
In our state, we have passed, through diligent voter effort, two recent Constitutional amendments aimed at correcting what our Legislature has refused to address.
The redistricting amendments were to prevent our Legislature from drawing up safe districts to preserve their power. And guess what? After the amendments passed with strong majorities, our legislators did just that.
So then, to try to save some of what remains of our formerly pristine parts of Florida, Amendment 1 was passed overwhelmingly by citizens concerned about dying and polluted springs, water stress issues in Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades, and signs our lawmakers want to endanger our precious aquifer with massive water withdrawals for fracking and chemical contamination.
Well, as predicted by those experienced in the ways of Floriduh, most of that Amendment 1 money will likely be hijacked to pay for ongoing commitments, gifts to Big Ag and doing the bidding of Big Sugar.
So now this brings us to the refusal to use federal funds to assist the medical needs of some 800,000 poor people in this state. Some analysts tell us Medicaid expansion here would save 900 lives annually and be a strong positive financial benefit to our state economy, hospitals, jobs in health care and the like.
Is the reason for denial of assistance to these needy folks that these unfortunate residents don’t vote in high numbers? Is it because of pressure behind the scenes from Koch Brothers and their well-funded Americans for Prosperity? Or does the fact our legislators have very generous taxpayer-supported heath care coverage of their own, their own entitlement so to speak, cause our elected lawmakers to look the other way?
The systemic causes of our legislative dysfunction are many, but a few stand out: money, safe gerrymandered districts packed with favorable voters, and our political structure in Floriduh which hands extraordinary power to a few individuals.
So there you have it — dysfunction and legislators who no longer represent our wishes. Sad. Democracy once existed here but is now on life support.

150618-e
Jeb Bush on climate change: A long history of consistent inconsistency
TheNation.com – by Zoë Carpenter
June 18, 2015
Early in Jeb Bush’s first term as governor of Florida, a group of scientists called a press conference to warn of the consequences of global warming. Rising sea levels and extreme weather events threatened the state’s tourism industry, its citrus and tomato growers, and its coastal cities, the scientists said. Then they called on the governor to respond with an action plan. Bush’s office responded to say that he was otherwise occupied. “At this point, global warming is not the top priority,” a spokesperson told the Orlando Sentinel. “We’re trying to get people back to work and balance our budget.”
Fourteen years later, Florida has been declared “uniquely vulnerable” to the rising sea, and Bush is still using the same old line to dodge the climate question. “I don’t think it’s the highest priority,” he said in May, adding, “I don’t think we should ignore it, either.” In trying to fill the moderate slot on the GOP primary ticket, Bush has offered a few inconsistent mouthfuls on climate change, which he acknowledges is happening but not to an extent that has him ready to do anything about it.
In April, Bush surprised climate hawks when he called for the United States “to work with the rest of the world to negotiate a way to reduce carbon emissions.” A month later, he seemed to have changed his mind. “For the people to say the science is decided on this is really arrogant, to be honest with you,” Bush said. On Tuesday he dismissed the pope’s climate-change encyclical. On Wednesday, during a campaign stop in Iowa, he changed his tone yet again. “I live in Miami, a place where this will have an impact over the long haul. And I think we need to develop a consensus about how to approach this without hollowing out our industrial core, without taking jobs away from people, without creating more hardship for the middle class of this country,” he said. “I believe there are technological solutions for just about everything, and I’m sure there’s one for this as well.”
ADVERTISING
Bush’s acknowledgement of the need for some kind of solution is striking, alongside the ossified denialism that rules the Republican base. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves—the bar has been set laughably low. Given the tiny window the world has in which to radically lower its emissions, Bush’s cavalier faith in some future technological solution is a punt. Scientists expect Miami will be walloped by climate effects not just “over the long haul” but in the immediate future. At this point Bush is not developing a climate plan; he is groping clumsily for a political strategy that will make him look like less of a doofus than candidates who fall back on the old “I’m not a scientist” line. For contrast, remember that when John McCain ran for president in 2008, he was pushing cap-and-trade.
Harold Wanless, who chairs the geological sciences department at the University of Miami, criticizes Bush for being “crudely dismissive” of climate change throughout his career. Wanless was one of the scientists who urged Bush to take action back in 2001, and he’s pushed Florida senator and GOP candidate Marco Rubio on the issue, too. “Whoever leads the country has to take an active role in it. We have to get rid of this partisan silliness,” he said. “It’s going to start to be unbearably difficult for places like Miami-Dade County to exist—and many other places around the country.”
There was one brief and little-noticed period during his time as governor in which Bush directed some attention to climate change, if quietly. In the waning months of Bush’s governorship an environmental consultant named Susan Glickman got a phone call from Colleen Castille, who was then Florida’s environmental secretary. “She said, ‘Governor Bush wants to do a white paper on carbon,’ to which I responded, ‘No shit,’” Glickman recalled in an interview. The paper that the Department of Environmental Protection prepared in late 2006 is far more straightforward about the causes and effects of climate change, as well as plausible responses, than Bush has been since.
“For Florida, a comprehensive climate policy could perhaps be best considered as an exercise in prudent risk management,” it reads. “By virtue of our geography and the relative distribution of our population and development in our coastal areas, Florida is likely to be more adversely affected by global climate change than other interior states.” The report goes on to note that state policies designed to reduce greenhouse gases should be “an act of leadership designed to spur further action at the national and international level.” And it recommended that in the absence of national legislation, Florida lawmakers consider adopting some kind of “carbon pricing” within three to five years “to mitigate against an open-ended federal response.”
Bush never responded to the white paper. Reportedly, it was passed along to his successor, Republican Charlie Crist, who made climate action a centerpiece of his administration. But Glickman, who is now the Florida director for the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, says the fact that Bush requested such a report at all demonstrates that he “knows better” than the noncommittal stance he’s adopted as a presidential candidate. “With an issue as important as the climate of our planet, and with as much as Florida has at stake, it’s deeply disturbing that he’d ignore basic science for political purposes,” Glickman said. (Colleen Castille did not respond to multiple requests for comment.)
Bush’s convoluted position on the climate is echoed by his environmental record more broadly. His strong point as governor, according to the Sierra Club’s Frank Jackalone, was his support for a land-acquisition program intended to protect natural resources and animals. Bush has also pointed to his resistance to his brother’s proposal to open parts the Gulf of Mexico near the Florida coast to oil drilling as evidence of his environmental accomplishments, along with Everglade restoration and support for alternative energy. But these “green skeletons” come with an asterisk. Bush ultimately compromised his stance on offshore drilling, and his bid to save the Everglades, however well intentioned, turned into something of a debacle.
On alternative energy, Jeb Bush’s legacy amounted to an effort to diversify the fuel mix in electricity generation, which was heavily reliant on natural gas, according to Glickman. “But his response at the time wasn’t about capturing energy efficiency and bringing renewables on. It was about über-expensive nuclear and coal-fired power plants,” she said. In 2006, Bush signed legislation that allowed utility companies to foist the cost of new nuclear power plants onto customers before the plants were even built—and even if they were never built, as was the case with Duke Energy’s nonexistent Levy County plant, which cost Floridians $1.5 billion. The DEP climate report’s treatment of alternative energy was similarly shallow, as it focused on nuclear power, “advanced coal technology,” and ethanol, while skirting solar and other renewables.
A little more than a year after that white paper came out, Bush told a ballroom full of Dallas business people that he was skeptical that human activity was driving global warming. He described himself as “light green” on the environment. Perhaps he meant the same shade as a dollar bill.

150618-f
Salaries instead of land buys ? Enviros decry Amendment 1 spending plan
PalmBeachPost – by Christine Stapleton
June 18, 2015 
After reviewing details of the proposed state budget released Tuesday evening, environmental groups that campaigned for Amendment 1 say Florida legislators used much of the $750 million anticipated from the amendment for inappropriate expenses not included in the voter-approved ballot initiative for land and water conservation.
That includes merely shifting expenses for salaries and administration from the state’s general revenue fund in this year’s budget to Amendment 1 money in the budget for the year that begins July 1, said Will Abberger, chairman of Florida Water and Land Legacy, which sponsored Amendment 1.
“It just seems to be a fund shift, much as the Legislature shifted lottery money for education,” Abberger said, referring to the constitutional amendment voters approved in 1986 that dedicated proceeds from Florida’s lottery to education. “Rather than enhancing, all they’ve done is taken things paid for by general revenue and shifted it to the Amendment 1 pot.”
A Palm Beach Post analysis of the proposed budget, which faces a final vote Friday in the House and Senate, found that of the $724 million legislators spent from the Amendment 1 trust fund, $152 million will pay for salaries at agencies that oversee environmental concerns, including hunting, freshwater fisheries and archaeological and historic sites.
Other expenses that will be paid with Amendment 1 money include $1.2 million for risk management insurance premiums and $17.4 million in “other personal services.”
Another large chunk of Amendment 1 money — $191 million — will be used to pay off debts from prior land deals.
Although a summary of the amendment that appeared on the ballot made no mention of debt service, language in the amendment itself says legislators can use Amendment 1 money to pay off bonds issued for other environmental land buys, such as Everglades restoration.
But House Speaker Steve Crisafulli earlier this week maintained that legislators followed the language of Amendment 1.
“I think the budget shows it covers the acquisition and maintenance of land and water,” Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island, said. “That was the overall premise of Amendment 1, and I certainly believe that what we put in play achieves that.”
The ballot initiative, which 75 percent of the state’s voters approved in November, requires for the next 20 years that 33 percent of the proceeds from documentary-stamp real estate taxes go to a trust fund for land and water maintenance and acquisition across Florida.
Sen. Alan Hays, a Umatilla Republican who as chairman of the General Government Appropriations Subcommittee helped decide the Amendment 1 allocations, said voters who believed the amendment was about buying land for Everglades restoration are “grossly misinformed.”
“There is a whole lot more to being a conservationist than acquiring property,” Hays said.
As for the budget, 27 percent of the real estate document tax collected is already devoted to environmental programs and projects, Hays said. Amendment 1 will only add another 6 percent to what is already being spent, he said.
Similarly, Palm Beach County lobbyist Todd Bonlarron said when he spoke at voter education events before the election, he explained that Amendment 1 was about more than buying land, despite being advertised as a way to guarantee that 33 percent of money collected from a tax on real estate documents would be used “to acquire and restore Florida conservation and recreation lands,” the actual title of the amendment on the ballot.
“Clearly, the environmentalists wanted to see more in land buying and ultimately the Legislature came down on, ‘We’re going to spread it about among all categories,’” Bonlarron said. “Some people were OK with it, and others were very disappointed.”
When legislators finished divvying up the Amendment 1 money, $44 million appears earmarked for land buys, according to The Post analysis.
About $17.4 million will go to Florida Forever, only $5 million more than the state land preservation program received this year.
In Palm Beach County, Amendment 1 money will be used to renourish beaches in central Boca Raton and on Jupiter Island.
On Tuesday, groups who backed Amendment 1 were so upset that they were suggesting litigation, but tempers cooled by Wednesday and were replaced with a pledge to watch how the Amendment 1 money is spent.
Eric Draper, executive director of Florida Audubon, said he, too, questions some of the Amendment 1 budget allocations. Still, it could be appropriate to pay the salaries and other expenses in agencies and programs that fulfill the mission of Amendment 1.
“There is a line somewhere and it’s not going to be real clear line,” said Draper. “We have to acknowledge, honestly, that there are expenses considered Amendment 1 expenses that we had before Amendment 1, and it’s reasonable those would be funded by Amendment 1.”
Draper believes that there are “a substantial amount of agency expenses” that should be questioned. Comparing the legislative budget requests that were submitted by agencies during the budget process and comparing those requests to how the money is actually spent will determine whether Amendment 1 money is actually being spent on legitimate Amendment 1 purposes, Draper said.
Abberger said his group is “not contemplating a lawsuit at this time.” Draper said while environmental groups will keep close watch, he is already looking to next year’s Amendment 1 budget.
“I think we need to acknowledge the fact that the Legislature didn’t skunk us,” Draper said. “We didn’t get everything in year one. What can we get in year two?”
Related:           Despite Amendment 1, Florida Forever comes up short in budget, again

150618-g
Ten Mile Creek project transfer moving through Congress - Rubio staff:
TCPalm.com – by Tyler Treadway
June 18, 2015
STUART — The leaky Ten Mile Creek reservoir is getting closer to holding water, according to staffers of U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio.
On Thursday, members of the senator’s staff, local politicians, environmental activists, scientists and representatives from the Army Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District shared updates on issues facing Lake Okeechobee and the Indian River Lagoon.
Rubio, a Republican candidate for president, was in Washington, D.C., to vote on the Senate appropriations bill.
Lauren Reamy, a Rubio legislative assistant, told the group legislation to shift responsibility for the Ten Mile Creek project from the corps to the water management district has been approved by the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee.
The bill sponsored by Rubio and U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat, would put the project on the list of energy and water appropriations for fiscal year 2016.
U.S. Reps. Patrick Murphy, D-Jupiter, and Tom Rooney, R-Okeechobee, filed a companion bill in the House; but that chamber already has approved the energy and water appropriations without the Ten Mile Creek project.
That difference can be worked out when the House and Senate get together to create a compromise bill, Reamy said.
The 2 billion gallon reservoir and 132-acre stormwater treatment area west of Fort Pierce were built to remove nitrogen and phosphorus from the creek before the hits the North Fork of the St. Lucie River. But soon after the project was completed in 2006, corps officials discovered the reservoir leaks.
The corps, which ran the construction project, and the engineering firm of Post Buckley Schuh and Jernigan, which designed it, are in court trying to determine who’s to blame and who will pay for the fix.
In April 2014, the water district offered to take over the project. With a few months of work and about $8 million, the district says, the reservoir would be able to hold up to 4 feet of water and treat about 5.7 billion gallons of water a year. That’s enough to cover all of Fort Pierce under 1 foot, 3 inches of water.

150617-a
Amendment 1’s intent ignored
TBO.com - Editorial
June 17, 2015
The Florida Legislature was back to its old lottery tricks this special session, doing as they wish with Amendment 1 dollars without regard for citizens’ will or the law.
Amendment 1, aimed at providing reliable conservation funding, was the biggest vote getter on the ballot last year, backed by 75 percent of voters.
But that seemed to mean little to lawmakers in their budget agreement completed this week.
They are using Amendment 1 dollars to fund ongoing expenses, including salaries, to free up general revenue funds. Conservation efforts will not be notably improved. This is the same kind of switch lawmakers did with the Florida Lottery, which voters endorsed with the intent that funds would be used to enhance public education system with extra teachers and other new resources.
But lawmakers simply used the lottery revenue to meet schools’ basic needs and reduce the amount of general revenue funds that went to public schools.
Backers of Amendment 1 tried to write the measure in a way that would tie spending to conservation-related purposes. It requires one-third of the state’s existing documentary stamp revenues to be used for protecting and managing lands and should generate about $700 million a year. The measure did not raise taxes.
But lawmakers simply are ignoring the referendum’s intent, using the money for ongoing expenses, water projects that benefit agricultural operations and other efforts that have little to do with saving Florida’s natural heritage. They are risking a lawsuit by environmentalists, who may be able to make the case that the Legislature is ignoring a constitutional mandate.
Deciding appropriate Amendment 1 spending, particularly during a tough budget year, was always going to be a difficult task. Some spending caution would have been understandable.
But conservation simply did not appear to be a priority for this Legislature.
The budget agreement between the House and the Senates calls for only about $17 million to go for buying land under the Florida Forever program that seeks to preserve valuable natural land. Environmentalists had sought $170 million. Gov. Rick Scott had recommended $100 million for Florida Forever.
By way of comparison, back in the days of former Gov. Jeb Bush, Florida Forever would spend about $300 million a year to buy and preserve important tracts.
Funding understandably dropped during the recession, but as the economy recovered lawmakers still largely neglected the popular program, even as they made it easier for developers to bulldoze what remains of natural Florida.
The budget agreement does include some worthy expenditures on springs, Kissimmee River restoration and such. It covers debts service on past land buys.
We give Sen. Tom Lee of Hillsborough County credit for vainly trying to raise at least $100 million for land purchases. The Senate has been criticized for not agreeing to bond money for such transactions, but Lee says the Senate wanted to ensure any bond money only would go to projects that had been properly scrutinized, but such vetting could not be guaranteed this session.
Lee urges critics to be patient, that next year more money should go to conservation. Perhaps. But it is difficult to have much faith in a governing body that could so cavalierly dismiss 75 percent of voters.

150617-b
Judah talks water quality with civic association
NorthFortMyersNeighbor – by Chuck Ballaro
June 17, 2015
Former county commissioner Ray Judah warned that if the state doesn't buy the U.S. Sugar land, it will not only be much more expensive to do so in the future, it will also mean water quality in Southwest Florida will continue to deteriorate as water from Lake Okeechobee continues to flow east and west instead of south as it should.
Judah, speaking on behalf of the Florida Ocean Coalition, spoke at the monthly North Fort Myers Civic Association meeting at the rec center about water issues in the Caloosahatchee and how these problems can be solved.
Lake Okeechobee and the Caloosahatchee River were not connected until the 1880s, when Hamilton Diston agreed to help improve commerce in the state by connected those waterways.
In the 1920s, the St. Lucie River was connected to Indian River Lagoon on the east coast, and, following some hurricanes in that decade that cost many lives, the state built the Hoover Dike.
The consequence is that the Everglades is starving for water. Whenever the lake gets too high, the water is released down the two rivers as opposed to the south as it historically did.
Another consequence, Judah said, was the destruction of the estuary that occurred during the 2013 rainy season.
"The polluted water that came down from the lake changed the salt/fresh content and killed everything," Judah said.
Amendment 1 passed in November by a nearly 3 to 1 margin, and is expected to raise billions, Judah said.
Judah added on the state level, a game of deception has been played by the sugar industry and the legislature, with local representative Matt Caldwell, R-District 79, being among them.
Judah said the best way to send water to the south would be to build a spillway in that direction to release excess runoff before or during a storm.
That's where the U.S Sugar land comes in. The state has the option to buy the 46,800 acres at a low cost before Oct. 12 or see the price of the land, as well as the amount of land they would have to buy, increase.
"If we can get that acreage, that would be the ideal solution to address the problems in the lake, treating it, and sending it to the 'Glades," Judah said.
The clean water is necessary, Judah said, for the tourist industry depends on it.
"We have a $70 billion tourist economy in Florida and $3 billion here in Lee County. It's predicated on clean water," he said. "The people had a right to support Amendment 1 for where the money needs to be spent, and the legislature needs to understand that."
In other business, the civic association also heard from Becky Sanders-Lucas of Habitat for Humanity, who discussed the goings-on with her organization and answered questions.
Also, Wendy Fahl, a 14-year resident, was named to one of the openings on the civic association board of directors, saying that her area of interest is code enforcement.
Meanwhile, Christie Hager and John Mooney complained about the constant yard sales in their neighborhood off Orange Grove.
"Every weekend the traffic piles up. People are parking on the median," Hager said.
"It's a blight on our neighborhood with nice homes. People would have second thoughts moving here if they saw that," Mooney said.

150617-c
NASA: Earth is rapidly running out of fresh water
BrevardTimes.com
June 17, 2015
Researchers say that about one third of Earth's largest groundwater basins are being rapidly depleted by human civilization, despite having little to no accurate data about how much water remains in them, according to two new studies led by the University of California, Irvine (UCI), using data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites.
This means that significant segments of Earth’s population are consuming groundwater quickly without knowing when it might run out, the researchers conclude. The findings are published Tuesday in Water Resources Research.
"Available physical and chemical measurements are simply insufficient," said UCI professor and principal investigator Jay Famiglietti, who is also the senior water scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. "Given how quickly we are consuming the world’s groundwater reserves, we need a coordinated global effort to determine how much is left."
The studies are the first to comprehensively characterize global groundwater losses with data from space, using readings generated by NASA’s twin GRACE satellites that measure dips and bumps in Earth’s gravity, which are affected by the mass of water.  
For the first paper, researchers examined the planet's 37 largest aquifers between 2003 and 2013. The eight worst off were classified as overstressed, with nearly no natural replenishment to offset usage. Another five aquifers were found, in descending order, to be extremely or highly stressed, depending upon the level of replenishment in each - still in trouble but with some water flowing back into them.
The most overburdened aquifers are in the world’s driest areas, where human populations draw heavily on underground water. Researchers say that climate change and population growth are expected to intensify the problem.
"What happens when a highly stressed aquifer is located in a region with socioeconomic or political tensions that can't supplement declining water supplies fast enough?" asked the lead author on both studies, Alexandra Richey, who conducted the research as a UCI doctoral student. "We're trying to raise red flags now to pinpoint where active management today could protect future lives and livelihoods."
The research team -- which included co-authors from NASA, the National Center for Atmospheric Research, National Taiwan University and UC Santa Barbara -- found that the Arabian Aquifer System, an important water source for more than 60 million people, is the most overstressed in the world.
The Indus Basin aquifer of northwestern India and Pakistan is the second-most overstressed, and the Murzuk-Djado Basin in northern Africa is third. California’s Central Valley, used heavily for agriculture and suffering rapid depletion, was slightly better off, but was still labeled highly stressed in the first study.
The Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains aquifer, which extends from South Florida northward along the U.S. east coast to Delaware and includes all of the U.S. Gulf Coast states, is also below the depletion/replenishment tipping point, although not as stressed as California's Central Valley.
"As we’re seeing in California right now, we rely much more heavily on groundwater during drought," said Famiglietti. "When examining the sustainability of a region’s water resources, we absolutely must account for that dependence."
In a companion paper published in the same journal, the scientists conclude that the total remaining volume of the world’s usable groundwater is poorly known, with estimates that often vary widely. The total groundwater volume is likely far less than rudimentary estimates made decades ago. 
By comparing their satellite-derived groundwater loss rates to what little data exist on groundwater availability, the researchers found major discrepancies in projected "time to depletion." In the overstressed Northwest Sahara Aquifer System, for example, time to depletion estimates varied between 10 years and 21,000 years.
"We don’t actually know how much is stored in each of these aquifers. Estimates of remaining storage might vary from decades to millennia," said Richey. "In a water-scarce society, we can no longer tolerate this level of uncertainty, especially since groundwater is disappearing so rapidly." 
The study notes that the dearth of groundwater is already leading to significant ecological damage, including depleted rivers, declining water quality and subsiding land.
Groundwater aquifers are typically located in soils or deeper rock layers beneath Earth’s surface. The depth and thickness of many large aquifers make it tough and costly to drill or otherwise reach bedrock and understand where the moisture bottoms out. But it has to be done, according to the authors.
"I believe we need to explore the world's aquifers as if they had the same value as oil reserves," Famiglietti said. "We need to drill for water the same way that we drill for other resources."
Related:           'The water table is dropping all over the world,' new NASA study ...           National Post
A Third of Global Groundwater Basins Are Overstressed: Study     Rapid News Network
The Earth is Running Out of Water — NASA          Thrasher Backer
'Terrifying' NASA Find: We're Running Out of Water         Newser
New NASA data show how the world is running out of water         Washington Post (blog)

150616-a
Amendment 1 supporters ‘Exploring every option’
CBSlocal.com
June 16, 2015
TALLAHASSEE (CBSMiami/NSF) – Backers of a ballot initiative known as Amendment 1 contend lawmakers “ignored” the desires of voters by using a boost in environmental funding to cover the costs of daily state operations while setting aside too little for land buying.
“Funding for springs falls short. Funding for the Everglades restoration falls short,” said Will Abberger, a leader of the successful drive to pass the constitutional amendment in November. “They’re shifting things that have previously been paid for, like agency operations, from general revenue to Amendment 1.”
House and Senate leaders late Monday finished negotiations on a state budget for the fiscal year that starts July 1. In recent days, talk has circulated in the Capitol about possible legal challenges to the way lawmakers are carrying out Amendment 1, and Abberger said “we’re exploring every option we have.”
“To say that $17.4 million is adequate for Florida Forever out of $750 million available isn’t consistent with Amendment 1 and flies in the face of logic,” he said.
The concept of the constitutional amendment was spawned as funding diminished for the Florida Forever program.
Florida Forever, which uses bonds backed with revenue from documentary-stamp real-estate taxes, authorizes lawmakers to spend up to $300 million a year for preservation. But as the economy went sour during the recession, so did funding for Florida Forever.
House Speaker Steve Crisafulli on Monday maintained that lawmakers followed the language of Amendment 1.
“I think the budget shows it covers the acquisition and maintenance of land and water,” Crisafulli said. “That was the overall premise of Amendment 1, and I certainly believe that what we put in play achieves that.”
The ballot initiative, which voters overwhelmingly approved in November, requires for the next 20 years that 33 percent of the proceeds from documentary-stamp taxes go for land and water maintenance and acquisition across Florida.
For the upcoming year, funding under Amendment 1 for such land and water programs will grow to more than $740 million, from around $470 million in the current budget year that ends June 30.
Lawmakers exited budget talks this weekend saying they had set aside $81.8 million for Everglades restoration, $55 million to buy land and $47.5 million in funding for restoration of the state’s natural springs. However, some of the numbers are hazy. The most notable is the $20 million allocation for the restoration of the Kissimmee River, of which about $2 million is anticipated for buying land.
The Senate rejected efforts by the House and some senators to increase money for land acquisition and to allow the money to be bonded to generate even more. A number of Republican lawmakers have argued that the state needs to first maintain the land already within public hands.
House Minority Leader Mark Pafford, D-West Palm Beach, said Monday he would support litigation over the Amendment 1 funding.
Pafford said that Republican leadership “does what it wants” and doing what people want “doesn’t seem to be a priority.”
“Amendment 1 is legislative malfeasance, and the state should be sued,” Pafford said.
The Amendment 1 budget decisions, however, drew praise from the H2O Coalition, which is led by the business advocacy group Associated Industry of Florida.
“This budget puts the needs of Floridians ahead of the wishes of those seeking to buy up land at all costs,” Brewster Bevis, senior vice president of Associated Industries of Florida, said in a prepared statement. “They are pushing an agenda that isn’t backed by science and one taxpayers simply cannot afford.”
Related:           Florida Lawmakers Include Amendment 1 Spending In State Budget         WLRN-15 hours ago

150616-b
Corps releases comprehensive study on Aquifer Storage & Recovery capabilities
US-ACE Press Release
June 16, 2015
JACKSONVILLE, FL - - The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jacksonville District has released a comprehensive study on research related to the use of Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR), an Everglades restoration component proposed as part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) to recharge, store and recover water underground for ecological restoration uses.
The ASR Regional Study was developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) to reduce uncertainties of ASR implementation on hydrological, ecological, and geotechnical conditions in the Greater Everglades.
“The ASR Regional Study documents the results of over a decade’s worth of scientific and engineering investigations,”  said April Patterson, Jacksonville District project manager for the study. “The results of the report will serve as a technical guide when considering ASR implementation as part of future Everglades restoration efforts.”
As part of the CERP, it was estimated that up to 333 wells could store water underground for the Everglades and natural systems. These wells, known as Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) wells, would be part of a system to take surplus fresh surface water, treat it as required for permit compliance, and then store it in the Floridan Aquifer System (FAS) for subsequent recovery during dry periods. ASR technology offers the potential to store and supply large volumes of water beneath a relatively small surface footprint.
The study investigates the feasibility of regional-scale ASR, using state-of-the-art methods and models. Investigations were performed in collaboration with the SFWMD, U.S. Geological Survey, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
View the key findings of the study: http://1.usa.gov/1G00CYQ
The ASR Regional Study and additional information available at: http://bit.ly/ASR_RegionalStudy.

150616-c
Lawmakers reach late-night accord on budget, will likely get hit with lawsuit over environment
PoliticalAnimal - by Kate Bradshaw
June 16, 2015
Top GOP state legislators were working till nearly midnight (which for them is like 4 a.m.) finalizing a state budget proposal in the most stereotype-reinforcing manner possible: in a back-room deal, with no media, with plenty of attention to monied interests.
But at least they got it done, which is why they were in Tallahassee in June to begin with. The budget now still needs to pass in the State House and Senate, then it needs the signature of Governor Rick Scott, who could certainly wield his veto pen on some of the projects he deems unnecessary.
It's unclear exactly how much the budget will add up to, but those who negotiated it estimate it will amount to somewhere between $76 and $80 million, reports the News Service of Florida, also noting the budget contains $301 million added in at the last minute for various projects. (Oh, by the way, they also passed a $400 million state tax cut package that randomly eliminated the state sales tax on gun club memberships.)"This has been one of the most remarkable sessions for open, transparent debate and fervent positions on both sides, respecting each other, respecting their positions and yet having that debate," said House Appropriations Chair Richard Corcoran (R-Land O' Lakes), according to NSF. "This is the way government should work."
Senate Appropriations Chairman Tom Lee (R-Brandon) said the additional $301 million wasn't as last-minute as it seems.
"You're just now seeing it, but this has been the product of multiple days of discussions, multiple weeks, two sessions, and the fact that you're just now seeing it doesn't mean there hasn't been a real inclusive process that we followed to get to this place," he said.
Senate Minority Leader Arthenia Joyner (D-Tampa) called B.S., saying that only a privileged few were really able to keep up with the process.
"Just the mechanics of trying to keep up with what comes in front of you is difficult for people who have some knowledge about the process and, God forbid, people who don't have any knowledge about it, then they're lost," she told reporters.
Among projects that will get funding, assuming the budget passes unscathed (kind of a big assumption), are dollars to fund construction of a USF medical school in downtown Tampa (Vinikville, if you will) as well as a business school at USF's St. Pete campus.
There was plenty of what Tampa Bay Times reporter Steve Bousquet considered pork as well, including  "a $1 million handout to the beef and beef products industry," an expansion of a sports training complex in Bradenton that went from $50,000 to $2 million over two days and, randomly, $100,000 for a rodeo arena enhancement in Davie (among many others).
They also added $19.5 million to the budget of Enterprise Florida, the agency that seeks to attract businesses to the state, which was a sore spot earlier on in the special session, which started June 1. Bousquet surmises that money was tacked on as a means of appeasing Gov. Scott, who can axe pretty much whichever project he chooses.
Meanwhile, environmentalists are poised to sue over lawmakers' proposed use of $700 million in funds voters expressly asked that the state set aside to buy and protect sensitive environmental lands. Voters approved Amendment 1 overwhelmingly — 75 percent of them voted for it.
But now, as you'd probably guess, there's a bit of a discrepancy between what environmentalists want and what lawmakers are proposing.
While Amendment 1 backers thought $300 million in environmental land buys was a reasonable number, lawmakers have signed of on using just $7.4 million to that end. They want to spend about half the Amendment 1 money on environmental protection measures funded elsewhere in the budget.
Among the most egregious F-yous to the spirit of the law and the sensibilities of those who voted for it is a $13.65 million giveaway to ag giant Alico for a practice called "water farming," which, as the Times put it, "pays private farmers to hold back water from Lake Okeechobee in an effort to filter pollutants before they reach the Everglades basin." This, despite the fact that buying state land for that use is much more efficient — but not for the lawmakers who, according to the Times, benefited substantially from Alico's PAC donations.

150616-d
Lawsuit could be brewing against state over Amendment 1 funding
Miami Herald - by Craig Pittman and Michael Auslen, Herald/Times Tallahassee Bureau
June 16, 2015
TALLAHASSEE - - House and Senate leaders declared Sunday that they had set aside $55 million for buying new public land from a ballot measure that passed last year by 75 percent of voters.
It wasn’t until Monday that environmentalists realized lawmakers were setting
aside far less, setting up a likely legal showdown over what exactly Amendment 1
means.
The problem: The ballot measure, Amendment 1, dedicated more than $700 million for conservation and preservation. Environmentalists had hoped that lawmakers would approve at least $300 million to buy conservation and preservation lands.
Instead, lawmakers carved up the money for other projects, including millions for an agricultural giant.
Sponsors of Amendment 1 said the weekend agreement earmarks only $17.4 million for the acquisition of parks and wildlife habitat under the state program Florida Forever.
 “This is an insult to the 4.2 million voters who voted Yes for Amendment 1,” said Will Abberger, chairman of Florida Water and Land Legacy, the Amendment 1 sponsor committee. “Last November Florida voters to sent a loud and clear message to the legislature: make funding for conservation land acquisition a priority. The legislature is ignoring Florida voters.”Abberger and Audubon of Florida executive director Eric Draper said they were exploring “all options”, which could include legal action against the Legislature for violating the intent of Amendment 1.
Even one of the top negotiators of the agreement, Senate Appropriations Chair Tom Lee, R-Brandon, said a legal challenge is certain.
House Speaker Steve Crisafulli defended the Amendment 1 spending plan.
“The budget shows it covers the acquisition of land and water,” Crisafulli said.
“That was the overall premise of Amendment 1, and I certainly believe that what we’ve put in play achieves that.”
Yet lawmakers want to spend about half the Amendment 1 money on projects and programs that have historically been paid for out of other parts of the budget. After Gov. Rick Scott signs a budget, it won’t be clear exactly how his Department of Environmental Protection will spend the money the Legislature allocated for it. Much of the spending plan is vague.
Line items like “state park facility improvements” could mean anything from conservation-minded infrastructure projects to building new bathrooms, Draper said.
Others have much clearer meanings. One particular line item will use Amendment 1 dollars to help Alico, an agricultural giant, hang onto a big contract for a controversial project called water-farming.
House and Senate budget negotiators agreed to include $13.65 million from the Amendment 1 funds for the water-farming project, which pays ranchers to hold back excess rainwater from filling up Lake Okeechobee. Critics call it akin to corporate welfare. An audit has found that paying private landowners to hold the water back is far more expensive for the taxpayers than using land already owned by the public.
That’s not what the Amendment 1 money was supposed to be spent on, said Estus Whitfield, environmental adviser to four governors who is now overseeing the Florida Conservation Coalition.
“Water-farming has always been in my mind something that benefits large landowners at very expensive prices for the public,” Whitfield said. “I was involved in a lot of discussions about Amendment 1, and water-farming never came up.”
Last year the agency in charge of the water-farming project, the South Florida Water Management District, ran out of money for its water-farming program. The money that agency was using came from the taxpayers who most benefited from the project, who live in the 16 counties of South Florida.
To keep the project rolling, and guarantee its own $120 million, 11-year contract would go through, Alico lobbied legislators to take money from all of the state’s taxpayers and spend it on water-farming.
Before last year’s session, and between last year and this year, Alico also took key legislative leaders on a four-hour helicopter ride around Lake Okeechobee that cost about $5,000, then donated thousands of dollars to their political action committees. Among those who took the rides and PAC donations: Sen. Lee.
Lee said Alico experts talked to him during the tour about the best way for the Legislature to spend the millions of dollars that would be generated by Amendment 1, as well as the water-farming project. A month later, Alico wrote a check for $10,000 to Lee’s PAC, the Conservative. In February, it wrote a second $10,000 check to Lee’s PAC.
Officials with neither Alico nor the South Florida water district wanted to comment Monday on the water-farming project collecting money from Amendment 1 because the budget is still not final.

150616-e
U.S. House Appropriations approves $150 million for Everglades restoration
SunshineStateNews - by Kevin Derby
June 16, 2015
U.S. House Appropriations Approves $150 Million for Everglades Restoration By Kevin Derby June 16, 2015 - 3:00pm - See more at: http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/us-house-appropriations-approves-150-million-everglades-restoration-interior-environment-funding#sthash.Gd1cl9Sc.dpuf
U.S. Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., showcased his pride in federal funding for the Everglades contained in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill passed Tuesday by the U.S. House Appropriations Committee.
Said Diaz-Balart, “As founder and co-chairman of the Everglades Caucus, I am very pleased with the Everglades funding levels in the Interior Appropriations bill for FY 16. Everglades National Park is a natural treasure that we must preserve and protect for future generations. I have worked diligently with my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee to ensure that the Everglades restoration and operations programs were adequately funded.”
The South Florida congressman pointed to almost $140 million from National Park Services funds that would go to restore the Everglades at the following national parks: Big Cypress, Biscayne, Everglades and Dry Tortugas.
Democrats call it too little.
Diaz-Balart noted the federal government would send $4.8 million to ensure the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) is finished on schedule, while almost $4 million will go to the Critical Ecosystems Studies Initiative (CESI) and $1.9 million for the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force.
Pointing to the  Energy and Water Appropriations bill which the House passed last month, Diaz-Balart said it contains $64 million to repair the Herbert Hoover Dike around Lake Okeechobee and $130 million for Army Corps of Engineer projects in the Everglades.. 
“Restoration is crucial to protect our state’s ecosystem and provides for our drinking water supply,” Diaz-Balart said on Tuesday. “Furthermore, restoration and operations funds can result in a boost to our state’s economy. I look forward to continue working with my colleagues to ensure that the Everglades may flourish for many years to come.”
The House Appropriations Committee approved the $30.17 billion bill on a 30-21 vote on Tuesday, almost $250 million below last year’s appropriations bill and $3 billion less than what President Barack Obama asked for. 
“This bill supports important Department of Interior and environment programs that protect and promote our natural resources within a responsible, sustainable budget,” said U.S. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers, R-Ky., on Tuesday. “The bill also preserves the role of the federal government -- making sure that the government is doing its job well, while ensuring that it is not harmful or intrusive into the lives of the American people or our economy.”
Democrats pushed back at the bill, noting that it leaves the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with around $720 million less than last year. 
“The air every American breathes, the water every American drinks, are all at risk because of the funding cuts and policy attacks in this bill,” said U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., the ranking Democrat on the U.S. House Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee. 
Earlier this week, the White House said it opposed the Republican appropriations plan.
Related:           Diaz-Balart Ensures Everglades Funding in FY16 Interior Appropriations Bill        Mario Diaz Balart Blog

150616-f
Wells may not deliver enough Everglades help
Sun Sentinel - by Andy Reid
June 16, 2015
Federal findings call for building fewer wells than once planned to help replenish the Everglades.
Water pollution concerns and other problems have hampered wells proposed for Everglades restoration.
The Everglades and South Florida drinking water may not get long-sought help because of concerns about wells proposed to replenish the parched River of Grass.
Less than half of the 333 proposed wells should actually be built, according to new findings released Tuesday by the Army Corps of Engineers.
That could leave a lot less water than originally proposed for Everglades restoration.
"This report is a wakeup call," said Eric Draper, Audubon Florida executive director. "It reinforces the need to identify the [water-storage alternatives] that are viable."
Building wells, along with reservoirs and water pollution treatment areas, has long been part of the multibillion-dollar plan to revive the Everglades and also improve South Florida drinking water supplies.
But the prospect of building hundreds of Everglades restoration wells has been dogged by concerns that they could end up pumping pollutants into underground water supplies and have other unintended consequences.
Reducing the number of proposed wells is meant to avoid hurting existing water supplies, already tapped for drinking water. And the 131 wells that could be built would also need "rigorous monitoring" to check for water pollution and other potential problems, the Army Corps found.
Despite the concerns, the wells remain a feasible water-storage alternative that can help Everglades restoration, according to the Army Corps.
"It will be something to be considered," Army Corps spokeswoman Jenn Miller said.
Everglades restoration requires storing and redirecting more of the rainwater that now gets drained away to protect South Florida neighborhoods and sugar cane fields from flooding.
Building "aquifer storage and recovery" (ASR) wells is a big part of the Everglades restoration plan that federal and state officials approved in 2000.
Fifteen years later, the wells remain stuck on the drawing board and most of the 60-plus Everglades restoration projects have yet to be completed.
The idea is for wells during the storm season to pump rainwater deep below ground and then bring it back up during dry times to move more water south to the Everglades. Getting more water to the Everglades helps save struggling wildlife habitat and beefs up wetlands that supplement South Florida drinking water supplies.
Building above-ground reservoirs is also part of Everglades restoration plans. But including the wells has long been a politically attractive alternative because they don't require buying as much land and aren't as costly as reservoirs.
Yet there are concerns that Florida's porous limestone isn't conducive to pumping water below ground and keeping it confined to certain areas.
In addition to reducing the number of wells, the Army Corps' report recommends spacing them out and keeping pumping pressure low to avoid fracturing underground rock as well as creating cracks, holes and sinking ground.
Water fed into the wells should be treated for bacteria before being pumped below ground, according to the Army Corps. Also, the wells should be phased in and continually studied to monitor the effects on water quality, the report found.
Arsenic was found in early water samples withdrawn from test wells, but those elevated levels went away over time and should not pose a threat to other water bodies, according to the Army Corps.
Environmental advocates say that state and federal officials need to identify water storage alternatives if wells won't be holding as much water for the Everglades as once envisioned.
"The question becomes now, what's the contingency plan?" said Tom Van Lent, Everglades Foundation science director. "Without more water storage, we don't have a way of converting the water we are throwing away into water we can use."
This year, environmental groups have been pushing for state leaders to use voter-approved money to buy more sugar industry land south of Lake Okeechobee to build a reservoir, but so far lawmakers haven't been willing to do it.

150615-a
County, environmentalists prepare for battle over Everglades air show
WGCU.org - by Kenny Malone & Doug Hanks
Jun 15, 2015
Miami-Dade County leaders and local environmental groups appear to be on a collision course over a potential air show in the Everglades. The event could start as soon as 2017 and would be more industry expo than high-flying stunt show.
The problem arises from the proposed site: The Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport. The far-flung airport - originally called the “jetport” - was intended to be the largest airport in world but became a major issue for conservation groups.
Doug Hanks covers Miami-Dade County for the Miami Herald and says the airport is about 50-miles away from downtown Miami and was built about 50 years ago.
 “It’s so far west it’s really in Collier County - just on the edge", explain Hanks. "And if someone needs to do like, sort of like, test flights or get their hours in or do some test landings they’ll do it here. It’s got a huge, huge runway. But it’s just not used as much as any of the other airports.”
The airport is surrounded by the Big Cypress National Preserve. County officials say they would only use the airport once they’re sure the new air show wouldn’t put the Everglades at risk.
But some environmental groups are already voicing their objection to the plan, saying it could open the door to more events at the remote airport.

150615-b
Florida legislators reach deal on conservation money
WTSP.com
June 15, 2015
TALLAHASSEE – Florida legislators are setting aside money to buy land for environmental projects, but it's a lot less than environmental groups wanted.
House and Senate budget chiefs on Sunday night reached a deal on how much the state will spend in the coming year on projects such as springs restoration and work on the Everglades.
Part of that deal includes $55 million to buy land, including $17.4 million for the Florida Forever program.
Florida voters last year voted for Amendment 1, which changed the state constitution to earmark hundreds of millions of dollars for conservation programs like Florida Forever.
Legislators say they are complying with the amendment.
But Will Abberger, chairman of the group that sponsored the amendment, said the budget deal does not follow the intent of voters.
Related:           Florida lawmakers enter last stretch of special session with some ... Bradenton Herald

150615-c
Geochemical triggers of arsenic mobilization during managed aquifer recharge
Environ.Sci.Technol. – by Sarah Fakhreddine et al.
June 15, 2015 (web publ. June 9, 2015)
ABSTRACT - - Mobilization of arsenic and other trace metal contaminants during managed aquifer recharge (MAR) poses a challenge to maintaining local groundwater quality, and thus also to ensuring the viability of aquifer storage and recovery techniques. Arsenic release from sediments into solution has occurred during purified recycled water recharge of shallow aquifers within Orange County, CA. Accordingly, we examine the geochemical processes controlling As desorption and mobilization from shallow, aerated sediments underlying MAR infiltration basins. Further, we conducted a series of batch and column experiments to evaluate recharge water chemistries that minimize the propensity of As desorption from the aquifer sediments. Within the shallow Orange County Groundwater Basin sediments, the divalent cations Ca2+ and Mg2+ are critical for limiting arsenic desorption; they promote As (as arsenate) adsorption to the phyllosilicate clay minerals of the aquifer. While native groundwater contains adequate concentrations of dissolved Ca2+ and Mg2+, these cations are not present at sufficient concentrations during recharge of highly purified recycled water. Subsequently, the absence of dissolved Ca2+ and Mg2+ displaces As from the sediments into solution. Increasing dosages of common water treatment amendments including quicklime (Ca(OH)2) and dolomitic lime (ca. CaO·MgO) provides recharge water with higher concentrations of Ca2+ and Mg2+ ions and subsequently decreases the release of As during infiltration.

150615-d
Gov. Rick Scott reappoints 5 members of Southwest Florida Water Management District’s Governing Board
TheLedger.com – by Staff
June 15, 2015
Gov. Rick Scott has reappointed five members of Southwest Florida Water Management District’s Governing Board.
Reappointed were: Jeffrey Adams, a St. Petersburg attorney; Elijah “Ed” Armstrong, a Dunedin attorney; Randall “Randy” Maggard, a Zephyrhills appliance store owner; Michael “Mike” Moran, a Sarasota insurance salesman; and Paul Senft, a Haines City insurance salesman and consultant.
Governing Board members are unpaid citizen volunteers who are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Florida Senate.
The Governing Board sets policy for the 16-county west central Florida district, which includes most of Polk County.

150615-e
Have you ever actually seen an Everglades restoration project ?
PalmBeachPost – by Christine Stapleton
June 15, 2015
After months of being blamed by environmental groups for the past, present and future demise of the St. Lucie Estuary, the South Florida Water Management District unveiled its latest public relations effort last week –
Recognizing that multi-billion dollar Everglades restoration projects are in remote, uninhabited areas rarely seen by humans, the district has installed a high-tech webcam to a 300-foot-tall communications tower at the C-44 Reservoir construction site.
The reservoir and 6,300 acre wetland are being built to store and clean water headed to the St. Lucie River and Estuary at a cost of $566 million. When complete in 2019 the reservoir will store up to 16-billion gallons of water.
The wetlands, especially designed with plants that remove nutrients from the water, includes 32 miles of berms and 30 miles of canals.
The health of the estuary was the battle cry of environmental groups who insisted the district purchase 46,800 acres of land from U.S. Sugar under a land deal set to expire in October. The groups believe that the U.S. Sugar land could be used to build another reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee, which could cut the harmful releases of fresh water in to the brackish estuary.
The district voted against the deal, focusing efforts and finances on projects already underway.
“The public now has a bird’s-eye-view of progress on a project critically important to residents who live, work and play around the St. Lucie River and Estuary,”  said Kevin Powers, vice-chair of the district’s board. “It’s exciting to see planning efforts and taxpayer dollars being turned into a project.”
However, images from the cam, which are updated every two hours, are less than exciting. For example, a truck seen in one shot is absent two hours later.
The cam also provides daily panoramas of the construction site, a calendar of archived photos and features the ability to zoom in and out of the high-resolution photos.

150615-f
Legislature reaches agreement on Amendment 1 spending
Florida Water Daily
June 15, 2015
From the Orlando Sentinel (link):
For the coming year, about $757 million in Amendment 1 funds are required to be spent on environmental projects. Lawmakers have allotted $55 million for land buys, $47 million to restore the state’s springs, $20 million to improve state parks and $81.8 million for Everglades restoration projects.
Much of the rest is going to manage lands the state already owns, increase water quality, beach refurbishment and for ongoing projects and operations of state environmental agencies. House Republican leaders have countered environmentalists’ arguments that more land buying money was needed by saying the state already owns plenty of land and much of it is overgrown with invasive species due to neglect.
From the Palm Beach Post (link):
In a blow to conservation groups, the state’s top environmental land-buying program, Florida Forever, was set at $17.4 million Sunday night in budget negotiations between the House and Senate.
Senate Budget Chief Tom Lee, R-Brandon, defended the Florida Forever spending as part of $55 million on a variety of land programs, which include $20 million for longstanding work on the Kissimmee River in Central Florida.
From the News Press (link):
The largest share of the land-buying money, $20 million, will go toward improvements to the Kissimmee River, while another $17.4 million will go to the state’s Florida Forever land acquisition program. The state will also spend $15 million on protection easements and agreements on private land.
In a new item that emerged Sunday evening, lawmakers also agreed to use $2 million for a project on Howell Creek in Central Florida. That watershed is in the district of Senate Rules Chairman David Simmons, R-Altamonte Springs.
From the Tampa Bay Times (link):
Many, including House Democratic Leader Mark Pafford, D-West Palm Beach, have previously suggested that litigation could be coming if the full $700 million-plus isn’t spent directly on land acquisition and conservation.
[Florida Audubon Society executive director Eric Draper] said a lawsuit would be premature until it’s clear exactly how money is spent. One of the areas he’s watching is money set aside for “land management,” which he said could include things like building parking lots at existing state-owned parks and conservation lands. More than $10 million in new spending from the Amendment 1 money is being set aside for those purposes.

150615-g
Multi-state agency the only answer to ongoing water wars
June 15, 2015
JayBookman.Blog
It’s smart to heed good advice, particularly when it comes from someone who can punish you if you don’t. Ralph Lancaster, appointed by the U.S. Supreme Court as special master in a decades-long fight over water rights between Florida and Georgia, qualifies as such a person.
“I urge you, again, to try to settle this matter,” Lancaster told attorneys for both states earlier this month. “… whatever the result is, whatever the court does with this case after I make my report, we’re talking a lot of money and a result that I suggest neither one of you may be very happy with. So, again, and again, and again, I’m going to urge you to discuss settlement seriously.”
That was less a threat than an observation. Court-imposed solutions tend to have all the subtlety and flexibility of a sledgehammer. And in trying to manage a resource as complex as the Chattahoochee, Flint and Apalachicola rivers, subtlety and flexibility are priorities. That’s why Gov. Nathan Deal has been meeting with fellow governors in Alabama and Florida to try to solve this mess out of court, in less adversarial settings. Should Deal succeed, it would be a crowning achievement.
The good news is that Deal and his colleagues now have a successful model to emulate. Since 2008, a group of stakeholders from Alabama, Florida and Georgia have been meeting without official sanction to try to accomplish what politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats have not been able to accomplish. They include representatives from all sections of the 500-mile-long watershed, from oystermen in Apalachicola Bay to environmental groups in north Georgia. They have talked, shared viewpoints and data and tried to reach consensus.
Early on, after it became apparent that they needed data and science to fuel their work, they raised $1.7 million in private capital to provide that science. The result, after seven years of work, is a 130-page “sustainable water management plan” for the whole basin, in which they address contentious issues and reach consensus on most of them.
Some of it’s good news for Atlanta. The report documents that the metro region is not the villain in the story, but in fact has taken significant steps to reduce its impact on downstream neighbors. It found that all of north Georgia, including metro Atlanta, consumes less than half as much water from the basin as do farmers in south central Georgia.
The report also makes a variety of policy suggestions, including raising the water levels at Lake Lanier by two feet, thus adding 25.4 billion gallons of storage. However, it casts significant doubt on Deal’s plan to build new reservoirs, noting that “stakeholders do not agree that new surface-water reservoirs or aquifer storage … are environmentally sustainable.”
Its most important recommendation is that Alabama, Florida and Georgia agree to a “transboundary institution” that allows the three states to work out their differences just as the stakeholders did, by drawing upon science, and by collaborating and cooperating rather than by filing suit.
“Competing interests are understandable, but the absence of a mechanism to work through differences must not continue,” they conclude.
That too is very wise advice that should be heeded.

150614-b
Perhaps DEP chief will tell Cabinet what’s going on in Palatka
Ocala.com – by Bruce Ritchie
Special to the Star-Banner
June 14, 2015
DEP Secretary Jon Steverson says he has never fired anyone for enforcing the law. Yet his fingerprints — or at least tacit backing — are all over the ouster of top staff at the St. Johns River Water Management District.
The resignations last month of Executive Director Hans Tanzler and four top staff members at the district, based in Palatka, has prompted criticism from environmentalists and newspaper editorial writers about political interference from Tallahassee.
Dinah Voyles Pulver of the Daytona Beach News Journal reported on May 8 that the departures prompted concerns that Gov. Rick Scott and his administration may be working to further limit the agency’s power and authority.
“On March 24, I met with Hans (Tanzler), at which time he informed me he was going to resign,” Robert Christianson, director of the district’s strategic planning and financial services division, told the News Journal. “He also shared that the secretary of DEP informed him that the administration wanted a new culture in the leadership of the St. Johns district and that other senior staff would be let go.”
Former water district board member Richard Hamann said the moves are part of a pattern by Scott’s administration.
“They want to make the districts instrumentalities of DEP, and thus, the governor’s office, and they definitely want them to be reduced in terms of their influence,” said Hamann, an attorney in the Center for Governmental Responsibility at the University of Florida.
But John Miklos, agency chairman and Orlando consultant for developers on environmental matters, described the departures as a common trend when a new executive director arrives, according to the Orlando Sentinel.
“To act like it’s some kind of conspiracy is asinine,” he said.
Similar house-cleaning occurred five years ago at DEP soon after Scott took office. Steverson became a DEP special counsel and a deputy secretary overseeing water management district policy and budgets.
All five chiefs of the state’s water management districts had resigned by March 2012, when Doug Barr left after 20 years as executive director of the Northwest Florida Water Management District. Steverson replaced Barr, then was tapped by Scott last December to lead DEP.
During a Senate confirmation hearing in April, Steverson was asked by audience member Amy Datz of the Florida Democratic Environmental Caucus whether he could change the mindset at DEP, where she said employees fear for their jobs because they are enforcing state environmental laws.
“No, I have never fired anyone for enforcing the law, not for any job I have ever held,” Steverson responded to the Senate committee. “First and foremost I will always follow the law.
“I have never engendered a spirit of if you don’t do this the way I said, you’re gone. Or if you follow the law, you’re gone.”
He began to explain further but was cut off by Sen. Charlie Dean, a Republican from Inverness who is chairman of the Senate Committee on Environmental Preservation and Conservation.
“Mr. Secretary, that is sufficient,” Dean said.
Steverson was among dozens of Scott appointees not confirmed by the Senate before the legislative session ended on May 1. He was reappointed by the governor on May 5.
This time, the Cabinet will fill the position, Scott said, after conducting a nationwide search.
When Steverson goes before the Cabinet for the appointment, perhaps he’ll be asked by Cabinet members about the resignations at the St. Johns River Water Management District. Maybe he can explain how they will help the district or whether he had anything to do with it, since neither the department nor the water management district will say.

150614-c
Storm surge risk limited to coastal areas
PalmBeachPost.com - Point of View by James Ness, retired deputy fire chief, Lake Worth, FL
June 14, 2015
The June 5 article “Area second-worst in storm surge risk” was interesting. Back in the day, we were all taught that the dynamics of the ocean off the Palm Beach County coastline, and the geology and land elevation of the regions just west of the Intracoastal Waterway, were safe from most hurricane-driven storm-surge risks.
Those facts remain today. Current surge maps from www.floridadisaster.org show little chance of the types of surge activity that, for example, Tampa might receive. While the surge maps show little or no surge west of U.S. 1, the 2012 photo used as an example, of Wellington under water, is misleading: It gives the impression that a hurricane-driven storm surge was responsible for that flooding.
Those of us who recall that storm, Tropical Storm Isaac, should remember the massive amount of rain that accompanied it (15-plus inches). It is well known that the control of secondary flooding during a tropical event is difficult to manage, given our circumstances.
Many factors come into play; we should remember that where we live was once a swamp. Billions of dollars have been spent by the South Florida Water Management District to control the enormous amounts of water that a hurricane can dump on an area.
No doubt there will be significant damage to many homes and businesses in the event of a major hurricane. However, it appears that that damage will be mainly from wind and rain and not because of a storm surge.
The SFWMD continues to address these flooding issues as more and more land is given over to housing. We live in a paradise; tropical storms and high winds are just a couple problems we must cope with — and storm surge appears to be an issue for only a small sliver of land along the coast.
Perhaps the article should have been titled “Area second-worst in storm flooding risk.”

150613-b
Federal lands don't belong to states
ShreveportTimes.com
June 13, 2015
The federal government owns large chunks of the West. It owns 65 percent of Utah, 69 percent of Alaska and 83 percent of Nevada. Some Westerners see unfairness in that. They should not.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska recently slipped an item into a nonbinding budget resolution, calling on the federal government to dispose of all its land other than the national parks and monuments. That would put U.S. national forests and wildlife refuges —from the Arctic to the Everglades — up for grabs. The Senate narrowly passed it.
Three years ago, Utah’s Republican governor, Gary Herbert, demanded that the federal government turn millions of its acres over to his state. Just like that.
Thing is, the land is not Utah’s to take. Federal lands do have an owner, the people of the United States. Those acres belong as much to residents of New Jersey and Ohio as they do to the folks in Salt Lake City.
Has anyone asked you whether you want to give away federal land ? Me, neither.
Some insist that the laws creating the Western states required the federal government to hand over much of the land it retained. Not so, says University of Utah law professor Robert Keiter.
On the contrary. The Utah Enabling Act stated that the inhabitants of the proposed state had to “forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof.” That sounds pretty straightforward.
The property clause of the U.S. Constitution and subsequent Supreme Court cases hold that the U.S. keeps public lands in trust for all Americans. The government may keep, sell or give away the land — as well as decide what may be done on it.
Sales of federally owned land should go to the highest bidder, with the proceeds dropped in the U.S. Treasury. If the state of Utah cares to participate in the auction, good luck to it.
In reality, the federal government has, over the years, disposed of many millions of its acres — some sold, some given to homesteaders, some handed to the states.
Western states didn’t care about this mostly parched land until the feds started building huge irrigation projects in the 1920s. Many states, including Utah, actually refused offers of public lands because they didn’t want to lose federal reclamation funds, mineral revenue and highway money.
How did the federal government originally obtain title to the Western lands ? Through treaties with France, Britain and Mexico.”
So American taxpayers did indeed pay for that land and made it more fruitful. That’s why it’s ours, all of ours.

150612-a
Fishing guides urge action on Glades restoration. Amendment 1 money tied up in state budget fight
KeysNet.com - by Kevin Wadlow
June 12, 2015
Sixteen sportfishing guides and marine professionals from the Florida Keys signed onto a letter urging Florida legislators to spend Amendment 1 money on Everglades restoration and improving South Florida waters.
"Water managers cannot continue to serve the needs of farmers, utilities and developers at the expense of the coastal ecosystems, estuaries and reefs that support our economy," says a May letter sent to Gov. Rick Scott and the Florida Senate president.
"These habitats produce most of the fish, crustaceans and bivalves that support more than $7.6 billion in annual revenues generated by recreational fishing alone in Florida," the letter continues.
Islamorada guides who added their names to the letter include Sandy Moret, Paul Tejera, Matt Belanger, Brian Helms, Matt Pribyl, Rick Miller, Craig Brewer, Drew Moret and Mike Makowski.
Stuart guide Mike Connor launched the campaign, saying the letter "reflects the profound anger of our community, across every district in the southern half of the state, over your unwillingness to appropriate the funds necessary to restore our estuaries and other natural resources that create our jobs and are our core economic engines."
The Florida Legislature failed to enact a budget in the spring's regular legislative session, and now is meeting in a special session to write the budget which includes an estimated $730 million in Amendment 1 money.
Amendment 1 to the Florida Constitution passed with more than 75 percent of a statewide vote in a November referendum. It calls for allocating a percentage of taxes from real-estate documents to purchase of sensitive lands, Everglades restoration and other conservation projects.
Monroe County commissioners and state conservation groups have expressed concern that legislators have been reluctant to commit the money to land purchases and other efforts.
Keys Glades forum
Experts speaking Tuesday at a Key Largo forum will trace how restoring the Everglades can help preserve the Florida Keys reef.
Ken Nedimyer, founder of the Coral Restoration Foundation, will join University of Miami fisheries biologist Jerry Ault and Stephen Davis from the Everglades Foundation at the 2015 Florida Keys Restoration Forum, at 7 p.m. at the Murray Nelson Government Center.
Moderator Julie Dick of the host Everglades Law Center said the panel will "explore how Everglades restoration and sound [marine] sanctuary management planning are essential to protecting the water quality, fisheries and coral reefs of the Florida Keys."
"Water quality in Florida Bay is significantly influenced by the broader Everglades ecosystem," Dick said.
Status of money earmarked for conservation spending under voter-approved Amendment 1 will be addressed at the forum.
The forum also will spotlight the ongoing process to write the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary's new management plan. Nedimyer chairs the Sanctuary Advisory Council.
"Speakers will evaluate the science and effectiveness" of possible sanctuary measures, including "marine reserves, coral restoration and boater education and enforcement," Dick said.

150612-b
Land conservation not a priority
Herald-Tribune - by Lloyd Dunkelberger
June 12, 2015
TALLAHASSEE — Environmental advocates saw the passage of Amendment 1 by 75 percent of Florida’s voters last November as a convincing endorsement for state land-buying programs like Florida Forever, which once had $300 million a year to acquire environmentally important tracts.
But as lawmakers head into the final week of their special session, it is clear that they are not viewing the Water and Land Conservation Amendment as a priority in the new state budget.
“I think we’re going to be lucky to see $100 million on land acquisition generally,” said Eric Draper, a lobbyist for Florida Audubon.
Audubon was part of environmental coalition that was asking lawmakers to put $155 million into Florida Forever. Gov. Rick Scott recommended $100 million.
But as the House and Senate headed into their final budget negotiations, the Senate had $37 million for Florida Forever and the House was at $15 million. The land acquisition totals will be boosted by other initiatives, including natural springs protection, Kissimmee River, Lake Apopka and rural land easements.
Lawmakers will also provide funding for Everglades restoration, although likely well short of the $150 million that Gov. Scott called for. And overall land-buying total won’t be anywhere close to the $300 million that Florida Forever once had.
A last bid by the House to boost environmental land acquisition by borrowing money through state bonds was rejected by the Senate.
“We’re far from where we need to be,” said Sen. Thad Altman, R-Rockledge.
Lawmakers say they are meeting the requirements of Amendment 1, which called for the state to dedicate a third of the annual tax on real estate transactions to environmental programs. It should work out to about $740 million in spending in the new budget year, which begins July 1.
But working within that constitutional framework, some key legislative leaders are emphasizing other programs, like projects for water supply or stormwater treatment, over the land acquisition.
Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla, who oversees the budgets for the state environmental agencies, said he supports using the Amendment 1 funding for programs “other than purchasing more acreage.”
“I would suspect that the majority of the Legislature feels that we have enough land already with the exception of some specific property that is necessary for springs protection, wildlife corridors or beach projects,” Hays said, saying roughly 10 million acres or a third of the state is under public ownership.
“As far as I’m concerned every acre of land that is purchased from this point forward needs to have a specific reason why it’s necessary to buy it, not just nice to have, but necessary to buy it,” Hays said.
Draper said Hays’ conservation land figure is inflated by large military bases in the Panhandle and vast stretches of the Everglades in South Florida that are underwater, arguing that many important environmental properties deserve protection in a state with 19 million residents.
“We also have a lot of libraries. It doesn’t mean because we have a lot of libraries that we have too many and just because we have a lot of parks doesn’t mean we have too many parks,” Draper said.
He said voters were aware of the consequences of the amendment, noting its first words reference the “Land Acquisition Trust Fund.”
“I don’t think the voters were voting for something other than land acquisition because the amendment said land acquisition,” Draper said. “The legislators who saying we have too much land are simply substituting a personal opinion for the decision of the voters.”
Debate over how the Legislature met its obligations under Amendment 1 could spill over into a post-session court challenge, although Draper said his group does not plan any lawsuits. But he said he could see some challenges by others on issues like using Amendment 1 money to fund state agency expenses.
Draper said the environmental advocates will renew their message to the voters that Amendment 1 was designed to boost Florida’s acquisition of environmentally critical land.
“What we will do is continue to organize public and political support for land acquisition being an environmental strategy and somehow we have to get past those members of the Legislature who have substituted their personal and ideological values for the voters,” Draper said.
QUOTE OF THE WEEK:  “This is a landmark piece of legislation that I think will save lives in the future and prevent people from looking for snake oil in other countries,” said Rep. Ray Pilon, R-Sarasota, after Gov. Rick Scott signed his bill (HB 269) that will give terminally ill Floridians access to experimental drugs under review by the Food and Drug Administration but not yet approved.
About Amendment 1
The Florida Water and Land Conservation Amendment is known as Amendment 1 because of its placement on the November 2014 general election ballot.
It was approved by 75 percent of the voters.
Advocates said it was aimed at reviving key environmental programs that have declined in recent years, including Florida Forever, the state’s major land-buying program that once had $300 million a year but has nearly dwindled to a halt in recent years.
It was supported by a broad range of environmental groups and civic organizations, including Audubon Florida, Everglades Foundation, Florida Defenders of the Environment, Florida Education Association, the League of Women Voters of Florida and former governor and U.S. Sen. Bob Graham.
The amendment requires the state to spend one-third of the annual real estate tax collections on environmental programs. It is estimated that should amount to around $740 million in the new budget.

150611a-

150611-a
Empty promises
DailyCommercial.com
June 11, 2015
When it comes to water, the Florida Legislature just cannot, will not act, and certainly not with any sense of vision, let alone urgency. Even the voters’ overwhelming mandate on the distinctly named Water and Land Conservation Amendment, or Amendment 1, could not move our lawmakers to do not only the people’s will but what is undeniably in the state’s best interest.
As Florida lawmakers wind down their special session to complete work they were unable to do during the regular legislative session, it is fairly clear that once again — for the second year in a row — the high-minded rhetoric we heard from legislative leaders about water policy reform, about springs protection, about water supply development, about Everglades restoration were nothing more than empty words and promises.
 “Expectations, quite frankly, should be pretty low when it comes to water projects,” House Agriculture and Natural Resources Chairman Ben Albritton, R-Wauchula, told the News Service of Florida on Monday.
There you have it. We should have “low expectations” when it comes to water projects. Those are the projects we count on to reduce pollution to our springs, rivers and lakes. Those are the projects that are essential to ending the ever-increasingly greening of waterways across Florida from too many nitrates. Those are the projects all parts of Florida, but especially thirsting South Florida, are depending on to stop the draining of our aquifer and, yes, the Everglades.
The one-third of the state’s documentary stamps — an estimated $480 million — that are supposed to be earmarked for Amendment 1 projects, that is, water and land conservation efforts, will not be dedicated to that purpose this year.
No, lawmakers, led by our own Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla, have adopted their own interpretation of the Water and Land Conservation Amendment and siphoned off some $200 million to fund existing agency operating expenses, salaries and such. Lawmakers are left to dicker over whether or not some projects, including springs protection, should even get funded.
House Speaker Steve Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island, promised, yes, promised Floridians water policy reform would be a priority this year. And what happened? On the third day of the regular session, the House passed a 94-page water bill that underwent a total of one committee hearing and was not even been vetted by the Department of Environmental Protection. But rest assured, the varied business and agriculture special interests all had their say, effectively gutting what started out as promising legislation.
There is still some time for lawmakers to do the right thing regarding some of the water projects and much of the Amendment 1 mandate. But we are doubtful these men and women, who listen more to the lobbyists and their legislative leaders than to the voters who put them there, will do the right thing.
Florida is in a water crisis. Our aquifer is polluted and being drained. Our waterways and coastlines are being tainted by nitrates and stormwater runoff. The mighty Everglades is in very big trouble.
And what do we get from our lawmakers and governor?
Empty words and promises.

150611-b
Reconsider purchase of U.S. Sugar lands
Sun Sentinel - Editorial Board
June 11, 2015
Because of what has happened since the beginning of the year — and because of what has not happened — the state should take another look at buying U.S. Sugar land that could accommodate projects to enhance Everglades restoration.
The state has not adopted any policy or policies that show how Florida will restore sufficient water flow and quality.
Neither has the state shown that it intends to heed voters' clear intent when, by a huge majority last November, they approved Amendment 1 with the explicit understanding that acquiring land for environmental conservation would be a high priority.
The same legislative dysfunction that has stymied progress on health care has undermined attempts at adopting coherent water policy.
What has happened is just as significant. Important and thoughtful voices have urged political leaders to reconsider actual and de-facto decisions not to buy the U.S. Sugar land.
What voices ? We would point, most recently and most prominently, to Bob Graham, a former Florida governor and U.S. senator. Writing in the Tampa Bay Times, Graham excoriated the South Florida Water Management District for its recent unanimous decision not to acquire land south of Lake Okeechobee that could be used to store and cleanse water destined for the Everglades.
Graham wrote that the district "has failed us," and that the state and federal governments should revoke its "now rudderless" authority to buy land for Everglades restoration. He argues that oversight should instead be entrusted to the U.S. Department of the Interior.
Meanwhile, Graham urged the state to allocate at least $300 million "to purchase critical water cleanup and storage sites" south of Lake O.
U.S. Sugar has used its considerable lobbying and public relations power to spread the notion that it would be wasteful for the state to spend Amendment 1 money to buy the 46,000 acres that Graham referred to and on which the state has an option that expires Oct. 15.
The sugar grower would rather keep the land in production and, of course, expects that eventually it would fetch a better price from developers than from a state dedicated to preservation.
Instead of buying the sugar land, this PR offensive has stressed, the state instead should concentrate on constructing reservoirs along the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie rivers. Those projects would help to mitigate severe environmental damage from persistent releases of dirty water from Lake O into those rivers.
While we initially agreed with the state's stay-the-course strategy, we've come to learn this limited approach has several problems. While reservoirs along the rivers would be beneficial, they would not be sufficient. Opponents of buying the sugar land have not said what they would do instead that would be sufficient.
Then there is the deadline problem. If the state does not act by the October deadline, it will forfeit its chance to acquire the land. The state needs to think long and hard before letting such an opportunity lapse.
This is not an easy decision.
There is significant doubt that purchasing the U.S. Sugar land would itself be anything close to a panacea for the pollution and supply problems plaguing South Florida's prime water source. The land deal still possible is nothing like the grand plan envisioned in 2008 by then-Gov. Charlie Crist and U.S. Sugar. In those optimistic days, the state intended to acquire 187,000 acres.
Do not replace those too-optimistic expectations, however, with expectations that are too pessimistic. Look instead for ways in which acquiring the 46,000 acres still available would enhance efforts to clean and protect the water supply.
At this moment, both the land and the money to buy it are available. That is not a coincidence. The public, in voting for Amendment 1, intended those factors to coincide. The window now is very brief. The state, upon further considering, still might decide the purchase would not help. But as of now, the state has reached that negative conclusion for political, rather than scientific or fiscal reasons.
Because of what has and has not happened, Florida must reconsider buying the U.S. Sugar land and reach a decision that provides a guarantee that saving the Everglades is a promise that will happen.

150611-c
Sen. Thad Altman committed to protecting, preserving Indian River Lagoon
SpaceCoastDaily.com
June 11, 2015
Champion of the Indian River Lagoon
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA — Senator Thad Altman (R-Rockledge), who represents Brevard and Indian River counties, said Wednesday despite special interest attacks to the contrary, the revitalization of the Indian River Lagoon remains his top legislative priority, in addition to the restoration of the Florida Everglades, as week two of special session continues in the Capitol.
The Senate’s proposed budget allocates $37 million for Florida Forever, the state’s land acquisition program, which was contested by Altman who filed an amendment during the 2015 session to fully fund the program.
The state senator to the Space and Treasure Coasts has long been a champion of the Indian River Lagoon. During the 2014 legislative session he secured $10 million for the dredging of the northern lagoon, alongside an additional $10 million for dredging the Eau Gallie River to aid in the restoration of this unique natural resource.
He is currently fighting to secure an additional $20 million for these projects.
Thad Altman
Senator Altman continues to advocate to secure funds for the Indian River Lagoon saying, “the removal of latent muck in the system is critical to the lagoon’s health.”
Nutrients and pollutants in muck generate algae blooms that damage sea grasses and other marine life, which are essential to the health of the Indian River Lagoon ecosystem.
As a member of the Senate Subcommittee on General Government Appropriations, which has been tasked with the initial implementation of Amendment 1, Altman is also committed to being a voice for Florida voters who approved the constitutional amendment to dedicate money to environmental conservation with an overwhelming 75 percent of the vote.
The amendment states money from the voter initiative must fund the “Land Acquisition Trust Fund” and can only be used for “the acquisition and improvement of land, water areas and related property interests.”

150610-c
The Floridan Aquifer and intrusion
TBO.com - Letter of the Day by Dr. E.A. Shinn, a retired member of the U.S. Geological Survey
June 10, 2015
The commentary by Andrew Bowen misleads the public about offshore drilling (“Drilling offshore threatens aquifer with saltwater intrusion,” Other Views, June 5). He indicates offshore drilling on the shelf off Florida will allow saltwater to enter the freshwater Floridian aquifer. In fact, it is just the opposite.
The Floridan Aquifer is artesian; thus, there are well-known freshwater springs offshore. Artesian to the unaware means the water is under pressure. In South Florida, the water will gush about 40 feet above sea level when tapped by a well. In South Miami, there are some 25 sewage disposal wells near Homestead that pump more then 200 million gallons of treated sewage into the Floridan Aquifer every day. That’s right. I said pump. Huge water pumps are required to force the tainted liquid down into this aquifer. Without pumps, the water would shoot up about 40 feet above the land surface.
This aquifer is near the surface in North Florida, where it is fresh and supplies drinking water for many communities. However, the water quality changes as it moves southward. The subterranean flow is downhill toward the south, and because of an overlying seal the pressure gradually builds up. As the water moves southward and seaward, it also dissolves salts and becomes undrinkable. Because it is not potable, dozens of deep injection wells pump wastewater into this aquifer. The unknown factor is exactly where does it go? The offshore springs are the only known outlets.
Deep-well injection of wastewater using large pumps is currently allowing expansion in the Florida Keys, including Key West. Since such wells have been installed in Marathon (the Floridan Aquifer there is about 3,000 feet down), the human and business population is proliferating. Regrettably, the research on septic tanks and shallow-well injection my team conducted in the Florida Keys in the 1990s when I was with the USGS helped pave the way for centralized sewerage and deep-well injection. Sewage treatment and deep-well injection fostered the population explosion. It’s like a double-edge sword, because deep injection may also save the coral reefs from nutrient pollution caused by septic tanks and shallow-well injection.
Blowouts such as the one that occurred at the Deepwater Horizon well are most likely to occur when the drill taps into a salt dome capped by clay and sand. The Florida Shelf, however, is composed of limestone, which seldom causes pressure buildups like that found out in the deep Gulf, where most production is related to salt domes.
Finally, I point out that some 32 deep-test oil wells were drilled on the West Florida Shelf and Florida Keys reef areas before the moratorium. There were no blowouts or oil pollution even though most wells detected oil in the Lower Cretaceous about 11,500 feet down. Some 12 small oil fields in the Everglades area east of Naples are currently producing oil. The first discovery was near Sunniland in 1943.
For more information on the geology of the Gulf of Mexico, see the recent book, “Geologic History of Florida” by Dr. Albert C. Hine, USF College of Marine Science.
Eugene A. Shinn, Ph.D, St. Petersburg, FL

150609-a
Land buy won’t fix Everglades
Daytona Beach News Journal - Dan Peterson, director of the Orlando-based Center for Property Rights at The James Madison Institute
June 9, 2015
During the 2015 special session, a controversial topic involving Amendment 1 funding entangles a push to purchase land south of Lake Okeechobee in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA). Extreme elements of the environmental movement have made it sound as though the simple purchase of one property will “save the Everglades.”
If the Everglades ecosystem is to finish being restored, a much broader approach must be considered and implemented at a steady pace. Everglades waters, as far north as Orlando, are part of a system that is connected south, east and west, including three major watersheds: the Lake Okeechobee, Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie. These watersheds include 18 sub-basins covering more than 5 million acres.
Political ads try to tell us the easy ticket to saving the Everglades, and providing drinking water to South Florida (an enormous fallacy), is the purchase of 46,000 acres, an option the state no longer has. Not only is this simplistic, it is unrealistic and misleading. Only 26,000 acres of that land were in the EAA.
A much bigger picture needs to be considered to efficiently use Amendment 1 funding for a real and lasting resolution to Everglades restoration.
First, an urgent need exists to protect the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries from the devastating effects of phosphorous-rich water within the respective local drainage basins, as well as from periodic Lake Okeechobee discharges. Water should be stored and treated within each basin to remove high levels of nutrients. Billions of taxpayer dollars are already funding multiple projects at various stages of completion to address these situations. Although important approved projects remain unfunded, it is clear these problems are not being ignored.
Thinking strategically, a targeted plan would be to relieve northern pressure on Lake Okeechobee. The water volume that can be stored to the north is limited, and water flows faster into the lake than can be drained. That’s because the entire Lake Okeechobee watershed — 5,000 square miles — flows into the lake, a body of only 700 square miles. After prolonged heavy rains, when water levels threaten the Herbert Hoover Dike’s integrity, the Army Corps of Engineers has a public-safety mandate to release water out the east and west coasts.
An essential component to solving the Lake Okee- chobee-discharge problem is storing and treating water before it gets to the lake. Studies, plans and funding aimed at this critical issue are important for the system’s long-range health. Immediate action is necessary.
Finally, an important element of restoration also involves conveying and treating water from Lake Okeechobee to the Everglades. The Corps of Engineers, after three studies, approved the Central Everglades Plan to do just that. An outcome of the study was recognition that there are limits to how much water the Everglades can take without causing irreparable damage.
Considering these points and the need for holistic restoration, if the acquisition of more land is needed, it should be based on criteria such as appropriate location, scientifically based suitability, best land-use principles, the impact on local economies and cost effectiveness. Concerning the land in the center of the environmentalist political rhetoric, the South Florida Water Management District considered the utilization of some of the dispersed acreage in question for a reservoir and determined it was not an effective investment.
Florida already owns EAA land, which could be utilized to store and treat water, saving taxpayer dollars from needlessly being spent. If land is to be purchased, the free-market principle of a willing buyer purchasing from a willing seller should be employed, provided the land meets certain criteria. Demands from a few vocal advocates for government to exercise its power of eminent domain should only be considered as a last resort and should be backed by strong scientific reasoning and broad political support.
Amendment 1’s dedicated funding can restore Florida’s ecosystems. Projects should be evaluated and prioritized based on their value. Focus must be placed on solutions rather than faulty political rhetoric.

150609-b
Lawmakers have yet to agree on environmental spending
WCTV.tv - by Matt Galka
June 9, 2015
TALLAHASSEE -- Healthcare may have been the main reason lawmakers had to hold a special session to craft a state budget, but there’s still nearly a $1 billion environmental spending agreement that needs to be reached as mandated by voters under Amendment 1.
Lawmakers have yet to agree on how to spend the more than 700 million dollars they have to work with under the voter approved Amendment 1. A big difference: whether or not to invest the money in long term bonds. Environmentalists think it’s a smart idea.
“Voters, when they approved amendment 1, they approved using the amendment 1 dollars to pay the service on bonds so that’s the smartest way to get the money for springs and Everglades and the parks that we need,” said Eric Draper with Audubon Florida.
The House is on board but the Senate is opposed. Senate budget Chief Tom Lee says it’s hypocritical for the House to reject federal money for healthcare but then want to bond environmental money.
“For whatever reason there’s a preponderance of the members of the legislature that didn’t want to draw down federal money to ameliorate the problems we have in our budget, but they want to whip out a credit card, conveniently and blow a lot of money in the environment,” said Sen. Lee (R-Brandon).
Because the House and Senate can’t seem to come to an agreement, both chamber’s budget chairmen will have the ultimate decision.
The Everglades Trust, which wants to use Amendment 1 money to buy U.S. sugar land around the glades, has launched attack ads on lawmakers they claim aren’t doing enough.
Sen. Joe Negron (R-Stuart) wants to bond around $40 million dollars for everglades purchases.
“I think it’s appropriate given the language in Amendment one that we use financing to make environmental land purchases,” he said.
Whatever the outcome, environmentalists are clear on one thing: lawmakers are only spending a fraction of what they should be to honor the will of voters.
Related:           Lawmakers continue to resist Florida land-buying mandate  Sun Sentinel
Florida lawmakers ignoring the clear message sent by ...       Florida Times-Union
Where is Florida's environmental money?      WJXT Jacksonville

150609-c
'Low' expectations advised on Florida water, land projects
WJCT.org - by Jim Turner, News Service of Florida
June 9, 2015
Proponents of water and land conservation are being advised to have "low" expectations as the environmental portion of the state budget is pieced together.
The House and Senate remain split on funding for land acquisition with money from last year's voter-approved Water and Land Conservation ballot initiative, known as Amendment 1.
Lawmakers are also struggling with a flood of requested individual water projects, leaders of the budget talks on agricultural and natural resources said Monday.
"Expectations, quite frankly, should be pretty low when it comes to water projects," said House Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations Chairman Ben Albritton, R-Wauchula. "Ultimately we've got to figure out how we'll get this thing landed."
Sen. Alan Hays, a Umatilla Republican who chairs a subcommittee that pieced together the Senate's Amendment 1 funding package, said lawmakers are trying to divvy up about $50 million among more than $1 billion in local water-project requests from across Florida.
"You can figure the delta yourself," Hays said. "We are striving, our best, to do the right thing for as many people as we can. But believe me, it is an exceptionally difficult task."
The ballot initiative requires for the next 20 years that 33 percent of the proceeds from an existing real-estate tax, known as documentary stamps, go for land and water maintenance and acquisition across Florida.
For the upcoming year, the increased funding under Amendment 1 for such land and water programs will grow to more than $740 million, from around $470 million in the current budget year that ends June 30. The current year's funding includes daily operations within state environmental agencies.
With the potential for one more day of conference committee talks before unresolved issues are moved to the House and Senate budget chairmen, lawmakers from the two chambers had yet to settle a philosophical difference on bonding some of the Amendment 1 money for land acquisitions.
The House supports bonding. A number of senators, including Hays, oppose such financing.
"I made it very clear, I personally am opposed to bonding," Hays said Monday. "Borrowing money is a last resort for necessary things, not nice to have things."
The Senate proposal includes $57 million for land acquisition, but none is designated to be bonded. Sen. Joe Negron, R-Stuart, has proposed adding $40 million for land acquisition that could be bonded to push the amount available to around $400 million.
Negron's goal would be to use that money to secure some land in the northern Everglades that can be used to both redirect some of the water flow out of Lake Okeechobee — away from areas to the east and west of the lake — and to increase the water supply to South Florida.
Sen. Thad Altman, R-Rockledge urged Hays to consider bonding as a means to increase the money for land acquisition, saying voters who supported Amendment 1 wanted land buys.
However, Hays snapped back that he and Albritton are "following the complete language of Amendment 1."
The Senate has proposed $124 million toward restoration of the Everglades, including $20 million for improvements to the Kissimmee River. The House is at $57 million for Everglades projects, with no allocation for the Kissimmee River.
The Senate wants $40 million for the restoration of the state's natural springs and $5 million to improve Lake Apopka. The House has proposed $2 million for Lake Apopka with no match for the springs.
Both the House and Senate are at $25 million for beach projects. State park upgrades would get $15 million under the Senate plan and $20 million from the House.
The House has proposed $20 million for the Conservation and Rural Lands Protection program and $16 million for the Okeechobee Restoration Agricultural Projects, both priorities of House Speaker Steve Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island. The Senate has countered with less than $900,000 for the Rural Lands program and didn't put any money toward the Okeechobee projects.

150609-d
Storage south of lake not vital to Everglades restoration
PalmBeachPost - Opinion by Michael Collins
June 9, 2015
Passion is not a substitute for facts. Neither is politics.
Unfortunately, the recent letter by the CEO of the Everglades Foundation makes an impassioned and political plea for building an expensive, taxpayer-financed reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee that ignores a number of critical realities.
The Foundation would have us believe that another reservoir south of Lake O is somehow vital both to Everglades restoration and to Florida’s water supply. He wants us to believe this because his organization is determined to persuade the Legislature and other elected leaders to buy up farmland, take it out of production and add to the government’s already-ample real estate portfolio.
But here’s the problem: Spending hundreds of millions of our tax dollars to grab private land and build a reservoir where he wants to build it will do virtually nothing for our water supply, will not solve critical water-quality problems in the estuaries — and will delay critical restoration projects needed for Everglades restoration we all support.
Eikenberg states that millions depend on the Everglades for their drinking water. That’s simply not true. Only Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade counties are even adjacent to the Everglades, and 90 percent of their drinking water comes from the deep Biscayne Aquifer.
The Everglades Foundation knows that, just as they know that regulations don’t allow farmers, cities or businesses to increase their water use if doing so will have any impact on either the Everglades or Lake Okeechobee.
Suggesting that without a new reservoir, the Everglades will continue to “starve” for water? What does he think we have been doing for the past 60 years? With the water management system put in place — at incredible expense — since the 1950s, the flow of water into the Everglades has grown from 200,000 acre-feet per year to more than 800,000 acre-feet. That’s a 400 percent increase, and more important, planned projects and work will continue to increase the amount of water flowing into the Everglades, without buying more land and building an expensive reservoir south of Lake O.
Everglades water supply is not the only progress being ignored. He says: “Communities are suffering. The Everglades is threatened. The public has been waiting for more than 15 years for tangible restoration of the Everglades and is demanding action — right now.”
It’s just wrong to so glibly dismiss the tremendous progress that has been made, the billions that have been invested and pledged, and the cooperative efforts that are making historic improvements in both water quality and quantity in the Everglades and related critical estuaries.
Eikenberg’s “reservoir” rhetoric south of Lake O is a perfect example. Yes, water storage was contemplated 15 years ago in the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. Today, after 15 years of science, study, discussion and cost-benefit analysis, water storage, water treatment areas and shallow flow basins are part of the consensus scientific restoration plans among water managers, elected officials, stakeholders and experts. State and federal scientists have agreed that allocating precious restoration dollars on an expensive reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee is not worth the cost and will, in fact, divert resources from other, more effective and critical, projects.
In 2013, Eikenberg endorsed the “Restoration Strategies Plan” approved by the federal and state agencies, the Florida Legislature and the federal court. Now, he’s reversed course. Apparently the Everglades Foundation believes that all of the federal and state scientists and the federal court didn’t get the restoration planning right for 25 years. Is he suggesting going back to court and bring Everglades restoration to a screeching halt again?
Floridians have proven their commitment to Everglades restoration time and again, with their dollars, their land and their willingness to compromise. Eikenberg appears to be dressing up a special-interest desire to idle farmland and the jobs it supports to make it look as though it is a critical part of that restoration effort.
Facts are inconvenient sometimes.

150608-a
Amendment 1 Everglades restoration money more complex than just buying land
SaintPetersBlog – by Dan Peterson, director of the Orlando-based Center for Property Rights at The James Madison Institute.
Jun 8, 2015
During the 2015 special session, a controversial topic involving Amendment 1 funding entangles a push to purchase land south of Lake Okeechobee in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA). Extreme elements of the environmental movement have made it sound as though the simple purchase of one property will “save the Everglades.”
If the Everglades ecosystem is to finish being restored, a much broader approach must be considered and implemented at a steady pace. Everglades waters, as far north as Orlando, are part of a system that is connected south, east and west, including three major watersheds: the Lake Okeechobee, Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie. These watersheds include 18 sub-basins covering more than 5 million acres.
Political ads try to tell us the easy ticket to saving the Everglades, and providing drinking water to South Florida (an enormous fallacy), is the purchase of 46,000 acres, an option the state no longer has. Not only is this simplistic, it is unrealistic and misleading. Only 26,000 acres of that land were in the EAA.
A much bigger picture needs to be considered to efficiently use Amendment 1 funding for a real and lasting resolution to Everglades restoration.
First, an urgent need exists to protect the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries from the devastating effects of phosphorous-rich water within the respective local drainage basins, as well as from periodic Lake Okeechobee discharges. Water should be stored and treated within each basin to remove high levels of nutrients. Billions of taxpayer dollars are already funding multiple projects at various stages of completion to address these situations. Although important approved projects remain unfunded, it is clear these problems are not being ignored.
Thinking strategically, a targeted plan would be to relieve northern pressure on Lake Okeechobee. The water volume that can be stored to the north is limited, and water flows faster into the lake than can be drained. That’s because the entire Lake Okeechobee watershed – a 5,000 square mile basin – flows into the lake, a body of only 700 square miles. After prolonged heavy rains, when water levels threaten the Herbert Hoover Dike’s integrity, the Army Corps of Engineers has a public-safety mandate to release water out the east and west coasts.
An essential component to solving the Lake Okeechobee-discharge problem is storing and treating water before it gets to the lake. Studies, plans and funding aimed at this critical issue are important for the system’s long-range health. Immediate action is necessary.
Finally, an important element of restoration also involves conveying and treating water from Lake Okeechobee to the Everglades. The Corps of Engineers, after three studies, approved the Central Everglades Plan to do just that. An outcome of the study was recognition that there are limits to how much water the Everglades can take without causing irreparable damage.
Considering these points and the need for holistic restoration, if the acquisition of more land is needed, it should be based on criteria such as appropriate location, scientifically based suitability, best land-use principles, the impact on local economies and cost effectiveness. Concerning the land in the center of the environmentalist political rhetoric, the South Florida Water Management District considered the utilization of some of the dispersed acreage in question for a reservoir and determined it was not an effective investment.
Florida already owns EAA land, which could be utilized to store and treat water, saving taxpayer dollars from needlessly being spent. If land is to be purchased, the free-market principle of a willing buyer purchasing from a willing seller should be employed provided the land meets certain criteria. Demands from a few vocal advocates for government to exercise its power of eminent domain should only be considered as a last resort and should be backed by strong scientific reasoning and broad political support.
Amendment 1’s dedicated funding can restore Florida’s ecosystems. Projects should be evaluated and prioritized based on their value. Focus must be placed on solutions rather than faulty political rhetoric.

150608-b
Flamingos in Florida: Back for good ? Birders can see them in spring
EyesOnNews.com
June 8, 2015
Flamingos have returned to a remote site in Palm Beach County for nine years.
For years, the only flamingos in Florida were at zoos, Hialeah Race Track or decorated people’s lawns.
Today, however, the Audubon Society says flamingos are back, and maybe for good.
Instead of random sightings, Audubon reports a flock of migrating flamingos has returned to the same spot in Florida for nine springs now. In 2014, 147 were counted. In 2015, there were eight.
Still, says Mark Cook, lead scientist of Everglades Systems Assessment at South Florida Water Management District, “They keep coming back every year.”
The flamingoes have picked a remote location, a water treatment facility in western Palm Beach County,  Stormwater Treatment Area 2 (STA2). It’s a 9,000-acre man-made wetland designed to remove excess nutrients from the water supply. It is 80 miles north of any spot flamingos had been sighted in the recent past. (In the 1800s, there were hundreds of thousands of flamingos along the coast.)
In 2015, as news of the flamingos got out, birders sought to visit the restricted site. To manage the international interest, the water district asked the local Audubon Society to run weekly car tours of the area.
This year, 620 participants took part in 13 trips between March 7 and May 2.

150608-c
Lawmakers at loggerheads over buying land for conservation
Tampa Bay Times – by Michael Auslen
June 8, 2015
TALLAHASSEE — While lawmakers continue to grapple over how to spend more than $700 million directed by taxpayers for conservation, they've made one point clear: Florida will spend just a fraction of that pending windfall on buying land to protect.
The current proposals from the House and Senate include $26.8 million and $57 million, respectively, on land buys.
That may seem like a big gap to bridge, but to some lawmakers and environmentalists, the real problem is that both numbers are far too low. Eric Draper, executive director of the Florida Audubon Society, said even the Senate's request amounts to a few square miles of new land for conservation.
"We fall way, way, way short," said Sen. Thad Altman, R-Rockledge, who is among the camp urging that more than $300 million a year be spent on buying land to preserve. "There's a strong public mandate."
Altman is referring to Amendment 1, the land and water conservation measure approved by 75 percent of voters in November, directing state money specifically "to acquire and restore Florida conservation and recreation lands."
But what appears to be a straightforward edict from voters has become mired in legislative politics and fueled disagreement over how best to spend the estimated $730 million in Amendment 1 money the next fiscal year.
More could be spent to buy land this year if the state borrows money. But the idea, which has been embraced by the House, has been rejected by many in the Senate.
"The House is very interested in and supportive of bonding as it goes forward," House natural resources budget chair Ben Albritton, R-Wauchula, said Sunday. "Money's cheap today."
Environmentalists and Democrats agree. Rep. Kristin Jacobs of Coconut Creek, the top House Democrat on the natural resources budget committee, said bonding could help the state buy lots of land and start protecting it sooner.
The original House budget included $205 million of bonding-funded land buys.
"The longer we wait to buy the land, the more it's going to be, the higher the interest rates will be," Jacobs said.
But Senate budget chair Tom Lee, R-Brandon, said bonding would be a fiscally irresponsible and hypocritical move for the Legislature to make, especially after the House voted down a plan to accept federal Medicaid dollars just last week.
"There is a preponderance of members of the Legislature that don't want to draw down federal money to ameliorate problems in our budget, but they want to whip out a credit card conveniently and blow a lot of money in the environment," Lee said. "It's been our perspective that it's somewhat hypocritical and perhaps inconsistent."
Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla, the top senator on Amendment 1 spending, said he's going to continue to fight against issuing bonds, which he called a "four-letter word" in a budget conference over the weekend.
On Monday, Altman took Hays to task during a public meeting, suggesting that the Senate budget proposal doesn't respect the will of the people.
After the meeting, Hays clarified his position: "Borrowing money is a last resort for necessary things, not nice-to-have things."
Such a stark divide with just over a week and a half remaining in special session means the Amendment 1 and conservation issues will almost certainly be left up to Lee and House budget chair Richard Corcoran, R-Land O'Lakes, to decide.
But unless the Senate agrees to finance new land purchases with bonds, it will be hard to find much more money in the budget to spend on acquiring land for conservation, Draper said.
Other than that and a few other big-ticket items — including $20 million to $40 million for Everglades restoration and as much as $40 million to restore springs — much of the funds set aside by Amendment 1 will replace spending the state has for years used on infrastructure and agencies.
Both the House and Senate budgets call for hundreds of millions of dollars in budget items to be moved from other funds and merged into the Land Acquisition Trust Fund, which was set up to handle Amendment 1. Groups like the Audubon Society and Florida's Water and Land Legacy have said that's not how the constitutional amendment was intended to be implemented.
Environmentalists further argue that no money generated by Amendment 1 should be spent on things like state park facilities ($15 million to $20 million) or the operation of existing water-protection and wetlands programs ($5 million to $7 million).
"Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Amendment 1 funding has kind of vanished into the bigger budget," Draper said. "It's very hard to track down now."
If the Legislature fails to boost acquisition beyond current plans, some supporters of Amendment 1 believe the issue will head to the courts for resolution.

150608-e
Simple purchase won't save the Everglades  
Sun Sentinel - by Dan Peterson, director of the Orlando-based Center for Property Rights at The James Madison Institute
June 8, 2015
Buying land south of Lake Okeechobee isn't the panacea some think it is.
During the 2015 special session, a controversial topic involving Amendment 1 funding entangles a push to purchase land south of Lake Okeechobee in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA). Extreme elements of the environmental movement have made it sound as though the simple purchase of one property will “save the Everglades.”
If the Everglades ecosystem is to finish being restored, a much broader approach must be considered and implemented at a steady pace. Everglades waters, as far north as Orlando, are part of a system that is connected south, east and west, including three major watersheds: the Lake Okeechobee, Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie. These watersheds include 18 sub-basins covering more than 5 million acres.
Political ads try to tell us the easy ticket to saving the Everglades, and providing drinking water to South Florida (an enormous fallacy), is the purchase of 46,000 acres, an option the state no longer has. Not only is this simplistic, it is unrealistic and misleading. Only 26,000 acres of that land were in the EAA.
A much bigger picture needs to be considered to efficiently use Amendment 1 funding for a real and lasting resolution to Everglades restoration.
First, an urgent need exists to protect the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries from the devastating effects of phosphorus-rich water within the respective local drainage basins, as well as from periodic Lake Okeechobee discharges. Water should be stored and treated within each basin to remove high levels of nutrients. Billions of taxpayer dollars are already funding multiple projects at various stages of completion to address these situations. Although important approved projects remain unfunded, it is clear these problems are not being ignored.
Thinking strategically, a targeted plan would be to relieve northern pressure on Lake Okeechobee. The water volume that can be stored to the north is limited, and water flows faster into the lake than can be drained. That’s because the entire Lake Okeechobee watershed – a 5,000 square mile basin – flows into the lake, a body of only 700 square miles. After prolonged heavy rains, when water levels threaten the Herbert Hoover Dike’s integrity, the Army Corps of Engineers has a public-safety mandate to release water out the east and west coasts.
An essential component to solving the Lake Okeechobee-discharge problem is storing and treating water before it gets to the lake. Studies, plans and funding aimed at this critical issue are important for the system’s long-range health. Immediate action is necessary.
Finally, an important element of restoration also involves conveying and treating water from Lake Okeechobee to the Everglades. The Corps of Engineers, after three studies, approved the Central Everglades Plan to do just that. An outcome of the study was recognition that there are limits to how much water the Everglades can take without causing irreparable damage.
Considering these points and the need for holistic restoration, if the acquisition of more land is needed, it should be based on criteria such as appropriate location, scientifically based suitability, best land-use principles, the impact on local economies and cost effectiveness. Concerning the land in the center of the environmentalist political rhetoric, the South Florida Water Management District considered the utilization of some of the dispersed acreage in question for a reservoir and determined it was not an effective investment.
Florida already owns EAA land, which could be utilized to store and treat water, saving taxpayer dollars from needlessly being spent. If land is to be purchased, the free-market principle of a willing buyer purchasing from a willing seller should be employed provided the land meets certain criteria. Demands from a few vocal advocates for government to exercise its power of eminent domain should only be considered as a last resort and should be backed by strong scientific reasoning and broad political support.
Amendment 1’s dedicated funding can restore Florida’s ecosystems. Projects should be evaluated and prioritized based on their value. Focus must be placed on solutions rather than faulty political rhetoric.

150608-f
Taking climate change seriously in school
Washington Post - by Catherine Rampell Opinionc olumnist at The Washington Post
June 8, 2015 
BERLIN - - I'm in a different country, but sometimes it feels like I'm on a different planet.  I realize that's a cliché, but in a way it's true. The planet comes up in Germany a lot, and it doesn't sound anything like the one I live on in the United States.
At home, our planet is doing more or less okay. And if it's not - if, instead, the climate is slowly changing - there's not much we can do about it. A third of Americans say that climate change is not a serious problem or not a problem at all, according to a recent YouGov survey. Just one in 10 Germans feel the same way.
It's little wonder why.
In the United States, where Republican politicians compete to out-doubt each other on the issue, we're still fighting over whether schoolchildren can be taught that climate change is real. In Germany, children have been learning about sustainability and climate change for years.
And the efforts are only intensifying.
Take Emmy-Noether-Schule, an 800-student secondary school in east Berlin I visited recently. Educators there consider climate change so pressing that they integrate it into just about every class you can think of (including, when the instructor is so inclined, Latin). About a quarter of the content in the 10th-grade English textbook, for example, is about threats to planet Earth. That means when kids learn to use the conditional mood in English, their grammar exercises rely on sentences like this: "If we don't do something about global warming, more polar ice will start to melt."
Likewise, in an 11th-grade geography class dedicated entirely to sustainability, students write poetry about klimawandel (climate change). My favorite couplet, from an ode by student Hannah Carsted: "The water level rises/ The fish are in a crisis."
During my visit, Hannah and her classmates asked me about U.S. skepticism on an issue that, as far as the rest of the world is concerned, seems fairly settled. Why haven't Americans been chastened by extreme weather events, such as Hurricane Sandy or the California drought (yes, they knew about both), that are predicted to proliferate if we do nothing to curb carbon emissions? Why don't we believe what scientists tell us? I tried to explain the vast, vocal network of conspiracy theorists who believe that 97 percent of climate scientists have been hoaxing the world - and who have created a parallel universe of pseudoscience to prove it.
"That just seems unimaginable," another student declared.
It's easy to write off this reaction as unique to crunchy-granola east Berlin, which is kind of the Berkeley of Germany. But the textbook I mentioned is used throughout the country, and this summer German education ministers will issue guidelines for teaching sustainability in English, French, Spanish, the visual arts, music, history, mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics and even phys-ed. And similar efforts are underway in developing economies such as the Dominican Republic, South Africa, Vietnam, Kenya and Mauritius, according to Alexander Leicht, UNESCO'S chief of the Education for Sustainable Development section.
In France, as in Germany, course work on sustainability and climate change has been part of most schools' curricula for a while (partly the result of a 1992 U.N. treaty that the United States also signed, then ignored). And as France gears up to host a major U.N. climate conference in December, education officials are exploring whether to require every French school to conduct its own model-U.N.-style simulated negotiation in which students play-act international negotiations on emissions targets, then learn what happens to our (shared) planet as their efforts succeed. Or, perhaps more likely, stall.
The American public seems a bit less interested in those U.N. proceedings, let alone in simulating them in schools nationwide. The French foreign ministerwarned recently that the talks will be hamstrung by the toxicity of the issue in the United States. Which seems true enough; in that YouGov survey, which was conducted in 15 countries across four continents, Americans were not only most likely to express indifference about climate change; we were also most likely to say our own government was already "doing too much" to stop it.
What intrusive government interventions could these Americans possibly be referring to? That, dear friends, remains unimaginable.

150607-
Gutting the EPA
Gainsville Sun - Editorial
June 7, 2015 
It was ironic that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker chose a Florida forum to argue that states would do a better job protecting the environment than the federal government.
Walker was among a half-dozen Republican presidential candidates who attended Florida Gov. Rick Scott's economic summit last week in Orlando. At the event, Walker called for major parts of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's funding and responsibilities to be sent to the states.
"Every state has an equivalent of the EPA," he said. "Every state that has it, not that they're all perfect, but they're much more effective, much more efficient and certainly much more accountable at the state and local level than they are in Washington."
Walker wouldn't have needed to walk far to find examples of just how bad a state can be at protecting the environment.
Under Scott, Florida has slashed funding for environmental protection, water management and land conservation. Longtime employees of regulatory agencies have been forced out. Public lands have been slated for private uses.
Water resources, such as our region's springs, have become more polluted and depleted. Yet, Scott has fought greater limits on pollution, such as the EPA's new rule restoring Clean Water Act safeguards to wetlands and streams.
Climate change provides the best example of the differences between Florida and the federal government when it comes to the environment.
As The Associated Press reported last month, Florida is already dealing with the effects of climate change such as sea-level rise. Coastal cities such as historic St. Augustine are seeing more frequent flooding that is only going to get worse.
But the AP found that the state lacks a clear plan or coordination on the issue. Scott wouldn't address whether the state has a long-range plan when the AP asked him about it. State employees have been banned from even using the term climate change under Scott.
Florida also has failed to take steps to cut the carbon emissions that contribute to climate change. State lawmakers have rolled back emissions limits and refused to fix laws that impede the expanded use of solar power.
In the absence of state action, the EPA has developed regulations to cut carbon emissions from power plants and other sources. The rules gives states the power to develop their own plans to reduce emissions, but Florida has so far sat on its hands.
Walker picked the wrong place to argue that states do a better job on the environment. Not only is environmental protection imperfect in our state, our political leadership has vacillated between indifference and outright hostility on the issue.
Gutting the EPA would only make our state and its natural resources more vulnerable.

150606-a
El Nino changes wind pattern over Atlantic
Tallahassee Democrat - Peter Ray, Guest columnist, FSU Meteorology Department Chair
June 6, 2015
The official start of the 2015 Hurricane Season is upon us. It officially runs from June 1 through Nov. 30, although there have been hurricanes in May, and some that only were in December, but also extended into early January. This year, on May 8-11 we have already had the first Tropical Storm, Ana. These early starts are unusual events but do happen from time to time.
The next storm will be named Bill, and if we get lucky the 16th storm will be named Peter. I am not holding my breath, and then will have to wait another 6 years for that special storm as the names are repeated every 6 years unless retired to the Hurricane Hall of Fame. From 1995 through 2005 was one of the most active decades in recorded hurricane history in the Atlantic basin and it has been pretty calm this last decade. But don’t count on it being the new normal.
It is expected that there will be fewer Atlantic hurricanes than normal, probably similar to last year. But just as in real estate, it isn’t the number as much as it is location, location, location. Remember that in 1992, it didn’t matter that there were 4 hurricanes (in itself a very low number). What mattered was that there was one —Andrew.
Part of the reason for the expected low number is the effect of el Nino, a warm pool of water in the equatorial Pacific, off the west coast of South America that is related to an increase of upper level wind across the Atlantic Ocean. El Nino events are hard to predict and they come irregularly and in all sizes and strengths, but on the average then come every seven years.
This increase in wind shear decreases the ability of tropical storms to become hurricanes. Added to that is that the surface waters in the Atlantic are among the coolest in the last 20 years. This is particularly true in the eastern Atlantic, where many of the earlier storms form. The fact that this is in the eastern Atlantic will have little effect, however, on the strength of storms as they approach the U.S. coastline. In the western Atlantic, the waters are a bit warmer.
In contrast, the Pacific will probably have, as it has been having, an above active year.
Next week: More on what to expect this year. Just remember it only takes one (Andrew) and it is location, location, location.

150606-b
Palmetto officially opens long-awaited $4.2 million ARS well to store reclaimed water
Bradenton.com - by Mark Young
June 6, 2015 
PALMETTO -- Palmetto residents frustrated with a lack of water for irrigation during dry weather will now have access to about 2.4 million gallons of reclaimed wastewater.
The city Aquifer Recovery and Storage well, with an ultraviolet cleansing system, is one of five in the state using UV technology to kill bacteria. The city began testing the system to meet Florida Department of Environmental standards last summer, and officials expected testing to take about year. A couple of months ahead of schedule, city officials, FDEP, Southwest Florida Water Management District and other agency representatives celebrated the well being in operation Friday with a ribbon-cutting ceremony.
"It's a tremendous celebration today," said Palmetto Mayor Shirley Groover Bryant, who said the system will serve 50 percent of city water customers with room for growth, as the city adds reclaimed water lines. "A lot of people, past employees and city commissions, have worked for a long time to make this happen."
The city spent $2.1 million on the well, with the water district contributing the balance of the $4.2 million. SWFWMD Executive Director Robert Beltran said long-term goals are to reuse 75 percent of reclaimed water.
"Palmetto is already exceeding that at 84 percent," said Beltran.
Bryant said the city investment is a triple win. It will substantially increase reclaimed water use by residents, saving the city treatment costs and eliminating discharge into Terra Ceia Bay.
The city storage capacity for treated wastewater had been limited. Millions of gallons of excess water a year had to be discharged into the bay due to a lack of storage. The cycle would have heavy use during dry periods, forcing it to implement water restrictions, and then heavy rain periods would fill the existing above-ground tank to the point of having to discharge water.
Now, excess treated water can be safely pumped into the ARS well for storage. Public Works Director Allen Tusing said the permit allows the city to use 2.4 million gallons a day for customers, which is more than enough even during the dry season. The well can could easily handle an additional 600,000 gallons of water. Brett Taylor, a city-contracted wastewater project manager for Veolia, said the city's future is bright.
"This provides opportunities for the city to expand its horizons," he said.
Tusing said the city has been pumping water into the well with more than 1 million gallons already stored thanks to recent heavy rains. The increase in reclaimed water does not affect city drinking water, which is on a different system.
Palmetto's drinking water will continue to be pumped into the city by Manatee County.

150606-c
Three cities to join lagoon council
Florida Today – by Jim Waymer
June 5, 2015
This recent early morning sunrise near Oak Hill on the Mosquito Lagoon, part of the Indian River Lagoon system, which has suffered severe algae blooms in recent years that have killed seagrass and wildlife. Vero Beach, Sebastian and Fellsmere plan to join the recently formed Indian River Lagoon Council, tasked with cleaning up the estuary.
When Indian River County balked at joining the new Indian River Lagoon Council, Sebastian, Fellsmere and Vero Beach jumped at the chance.
On Friday, the Indian River Lagoon Council voted unanimously to add those three cities as one voting member on the council.
The three-city Indian River County Lagoon Coalition could formerly join the lagoon council by August, officials said.
The lagoon council, formed earlier this year, runs the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary Program. It’s now separate from the St. Johns River Water Management District, which formerly ran the lagoon program.
The lagoon council includes Brevard, Volusia, St. Lucie and Martin counties, the St. Johns and South Florida water management districts and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Officials say the newly formed lagoon council will forge a more unified voice to garner — and lobby for — more state and federal money for lagoon cleanups.
Lagoon advocates wanted the 24-year-old lagoon program out from under the St. Johns River Water Management District.
But the idea ran into trouble when Indian River County decided not to join the new council. County Commissioner Bob Solari had cited concerns over transparency, and that three state regulatory agencies are getting votes on the new council. That defeats the purpose of increasing local control, he said.
The three Indian River County cities will chip in $50,000 as their share to join the lagoon council, splitting the cost among them.
The plan is for Brevard and the four other counties on the council also to each chip in $50,000 annually, while the two water management districts contribute $500,000 each per year. DEP would give $250,000 annually.
The new lagoon council wouldn’t be able to tax, but it could double funding — to $2 million or more annually — to the lagoon program, officials said. The additional money would come from the counties and other sources.
And now the revamped lagoon program wouldn’t be restricted from lobbying for funding since it’s no longer run solely by a government agency.
Lagoon advisory board members had wanted the new program set up before this year’s legislative session.
Brevard County Commissioner Curt Smith said he planned to push for more state funding. He pointed out how Brevard is where most of the lagoon’s ecological problems are, while counties to the south have received much more state money for lagoon-related projects in recent years.
“We by far have the most interest in this,” Smith said. “We’re going to get a lot more of that 100 percent, because it’s time.”
Brevard has requested about $46 million from the Legislature this year for lagoon-related projects, twice what the county received last year.
Sebastian Mayor Richard Gillmor called the lagoon the region’s “greatest commercial asset.” The estuary must be restored, he said, to protect property values and to prevent the economic devastation that would result from a collapsed ecosystem.
“It would be insurmountable,” Gillmor said.

150606-d
We don't need Sugar's land for Everglades
Miami Herald – by Dan O’Keefe, Chairman of the AFWMD Governing
June 6, 2015
For months, environmental groups and concerned residents have advocated for the South Florida Water Management District to exercise a 46,800-acre land-purchase option with U.S. Sugar Corporation before an October deadline.
After listening closely to their arguments and the technical expertise of district staff, and reviewing the option agreement, the SFWMD Governing Board voted unanimously not to exercise the option.
To hear some tell it, all of Everglades restoration - including protection of the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries - will fail, or at least be seriously impaired, without this particular land.
The Governing Board took the opposite view - that restoration will be impaired if the district does make the purchase.
Here's why:
▪ The purchase price for the land, required to be set at fair-market value, is estimated at $500 million to $700 million. Using district resources even partially toward the purchase would eliminate critical funding needed for progress on restoration projects already being designed and built on lands already purchased and in public ownership. This includes the much-needed reservoirs along the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee rivers to help protect and restore those estuaries.
▪ The option agreement requires the purchase of all 46,800 acres scattered over numerous parcels, eliminating the ability to purchase only the land needed for the reservoir that advocates want.
▪ The contract negotiated in 2010 with U.S. Sugar also contains a 20-year "leaseback" provision on the option lands.
Of the 46,800 acres in this option, the District could currently access only 1,100 acres - insufficient for the reservoir project.
▪ If constructed at a future date, a large reservoir at the suggested location would require extensive new canals, pump stations and other structures to move water to and from the project. Engineering and construction estimates are at least $1 billion for additional infrastructure alone.
▪ This project would do very little to decrease discharges to the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee rivers.
The District has prioritized its resources to complete water-quality and water-storage projects already under way in order to reap the benefits from these projects as soon as possible.
In the coming years, this agency is fully committed to directing staff resources and public dollars on three critical efforts:
▪ Identified Restoration Strategies projects to improve Everglades water quality.
▪ Priority projects in the state-federal Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), including the C-43 and C-44 reservoirs.
▪ Moving water south through implementation of the Central Everglades Planning Project (CEPP).
Each of these large-scale initiatives has received broad public support and collectively are the wisest and most cost-effective path forward.
All of this work will require a significant financial commitment from the state of Florida and its federal partners.
For the state's part, Gov. Rick Scott has proposed an ambitious $5-billion funding plan over the next 20 years for Everglades restoration, most of which should be matched by the federal government, creating a $9-billion source of funds.
The governor's proposed funding includes money to plan for the best, most cost-efficient locations for additional restoration projects, including additional water storage needed both north and south of Lake Okeechobee.
If approved during the Legislature's special session, this dedicated, ongoing source of revenue would eliminate the stops and starts that slowed restoration work in the past and frustrated advocates.
It is a significant investment for steady progress that we should all get behind - not a costly land buy with too many strings attached.

150605-a
EPA report: Fracking no harm to drinking water
Jacksonville.com – by Matthew Daly
June 5, 2015
WASHINGTON | Hydraulic fracturing to drill for oil and natural gas has not caused widespread harm to drinking water in the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency said Thursday in a report that also warned of potential contamination of water supplies if safeguards are not maintained.
A draft study issued by the agency found specific instances where poorly constructed drilling wells or improper wastewater management affected drinking water, but said the number of cases was small compared to the large number of wells that use hydraulic fracturing, better known as fracking.
The EPA assessment tracked water used throughout the fracking process, from acquiring the water to mixing chemicals at the well site and injecting so-called “fracking fluids” into wells, to collection of wastewater, wastewater treatment and disposal.
The report identified several vulnerabilities to drinking water resources, including fracking’s effect on drought-stricken areas; inadequately cased or cemented wells resulting in below-ground migration of gases and liquids; inadequately treated wastewater discharged into drinking water resources; and spills of hydraulic fluids and wastewater.
Congress ordered the long-awaited report in 2010, as a surge in fracking fueled a nationwide boom in production of oil and natural gas. Fracking rigs have sprouted up in recent years in states from California to Pennsylvania, as energy companies take advantage of improved technology to gain access to vast stores of oil and natural gas underneath much of the continental U.S.
Fracking involves pumping huge volumes of water, sand and chemicals underground to split open rock formations so oil and gas will flow. The practice has spurred an ongoing energy boom but has raised widespread concerns that it might lead to groundwater contamination, increased air pollution and even earthquakes.
An estimated 25,000 to 30,000 new wells were drilled annually from 2011 to 2014, the report said. While fracking took place in at least 25 states, most of the activity occurred in four states: Texas, Colorado, Pennsylvania and North Dakota.
About 6,800 public drinking water sources serving more than 8.6 million people were located within 1 mile of a fracked well, the report said.
The report identified 151 cases from 2006 to 2012 in which fracking fluids or chemicals spilled on or near a drilling well. The spills ranged from 5 gallons to more than 19,000 gallons, with equipment failure the most common cause. Fluids reached surface water in 13 cases and soil in 97 cases, the report said. None of the spills were reported to have reached groundwater.
Industry groups hailed the EPA study as proof that fracking is safe, while environmental groups seized on the report’s identification of cases where fracking-related activities polluted drinking water.
“After more than five years and millions of dollars, the evidence gathered by EPA confirms what the agency has already acknowledged and what the oil and gas industry has known: hydraulic fracturing is being done safely under the strong environmental stewardship of state regulators and industry-best practices,” said Erik Milito, upstream group director of the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry’s top lobbying group.
But Lauren Pagel, policy director of the environmental group Earthworks, said: “Today EPA confirmed what communities living with fracking have known for years: Fracking pollutes drinking water.”
“Now the Obama administration, Congress and state governments must act on that information to protect our drinking water and stop perpetuating the oil and gas industry’s myth that fracking is safe,” she said.
EPA officials said the report was not intended to prove whether fracking is safe, but instead was aimed at how state regulators, tribes, local communities and industry can best protect drinking water and reduce the risks of fracking. The report has cost $29 million since 2010, the EPA said, with another $4 million expected this year.
“It’s not a question of safe or unsafe,” Tom Burke, deputy assistant administrator of EPA’s Office of Research and Development, said in a conference call with reporters.
The issue for the EPA is “how do we best reduce vulnerabilities so we can best protect our water and water resources?’” Burke said.
Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said the report was “the latest in a series of failed attempts” by the Obama administration to link fracking to systemic drinking water contamination.
“The Obama administration is now zero for four,” Inhofe said. “EPA, the U.S. Geological Survey and others have said that hydraulic fracturing is indeed safe.”
But Sen. Edward Markey, D-Mass., said fracking and related activities have the potential to severely impact the nation’s drinking water and endanger public health and the environment.
“While the number of cases [where fracking has contaminated drinking water] may be small, the impacts to public health and safety are large,” Markey said. “EPA must ensure that these activities occur appropriately with robust safeguards to ensure clean and safe drinking water.”

150605-b
Everglades Trust launches attack mailers
PalmBeachPost – by Christine Stapleton
June 5, 2015
The Everglades Trust has taken a page from the playbook of nasty political campaigns by mailing attack ads targeting lawmakers who it claims are hypocrites and have not done enough for Everglades restoration.
The negative mailers are targeting legislators on the direct impacts in their districts, such as toxic algae, while hitting others on what the trust calls hypocrisy.
The mailer targeting Democratic Rep. Katie Edward of Plantation features a check for $29,250 made out to Edwards from “Big Sugar Special Interest.”
The flip side features a photo of Edwards beside the question: “Political Paybacks or Clean Drinking Water?” and claims “BIG SUGAR is calling in their favors and pressuring our legislators to turn their backs on the will of the voters.”
Democrat Rep. Kristin Jacobs of Pompano Beach responded on her Facebook page to the mailer attacking her.
“The attack mailer is baseless and frankly, just plain bizarre,” Jacobs wrote. “My entire career has been dedicated to sponsoring and passing landmark sustainable water and land conservation policies, many of which have become best practice models across the U.S. It is why the White House invited me to be with President Obama during his recent visit to the Everglades.”
The Trust, a political non-profit that lobbies and supports grassroots restoration initiatives, launched its most recent campaign two weeks after the board of South Florida Water Management District voted unanimously against buying 46,800 acres of land south of Lake Okeechobee from U.S. Sugar.
The Trust and its sister organization, the Everglades Foundation, spearheaded the campaign to buy the land with radio, television and Facebook ads, claiming a reservoir could be built on the land that would relieve damage to the St. Lucie Estuary and Caloosahatchee River. Water from the lake is dumped into the waterways when lake levels become too high and threaten the aging dike around it.
Mary Barley, president of the Trust whose husband, George was a founding member of the Everglades Foundation, said in a statement: “As toxic algae and pollution threaten our waterways, we draw attention to the hypocrisy of politicians who claim to care about our environment, but instead protect the corporate interests, like Big Sugar, that contribute tens of thousands of dollars to their campaigns.”
When asked about the mailers, Erik Eikenberg, CEO of the Foundation and a member of the Trust’s board, said “I’m not the one making those decisions.” Eikenberg said he was in Tallahassee this week meeting with lawmakers about how money raised by Amendment 1 should be spent.
Eikenberg declined to say whether he endorsed the mailers or knew of the Trust’s mail campaign: “I’m running the Everglades Foundation everyday,” Eikenberg said.
Related:           Everglades Trust mailers target two Broward Democrats      Palm Beach Post

150605-c
Finish the job
Cape Coral Daily Breeze
June 5, 2015
How can you tell a politician is lying ? His lips are moving.
It's a wry joke, usually guaranteed to bring a chuckle.
But this time, few among the 4.2 million Floridians who voted to require that a portion of fees already being collected by the state be used to "acquire, restore, improve, and manage conservation lands" are laughing.
During their regular session, our state legislators ignored provisions delineated in the new constitutional amendment approved by 75 percent of the voters.
Instead of earmarking the funds for the purchase of an estimated 46,800 acres southwest of Lake Okeechobee to mitigate pollution-fraught discharges from Lake O while benefitting Everglades restoration, the politicians in Tallahassee instead talked about diverting the funding to operating expenses.
Specifically, with nearly $750 million in voter approved money on the table, the "water quality" pols we entrust to 1) represent the people who elected them and 2) adhere to the state's bedrock governing document, its constitution, brought forth a measure to allocate just over $200 million of that.
For "operating and regulatory" expenses for existing agencies.
Not for land acquisition.
Not for restoration.
Not for natural habitat improvement.
But essentially for "management" of existing properties, the cost of which has been funded from other sources and as slick a legislative loophole as we have seen politicians attempt to slide through.
Former Lee County Commissioner Ray Judah, a longtime proponent of conservation who now serves as the coordinator of the Florida Coastal and Oceans Coalition, said it best:
"It is unfortunate that the legislature is looking at siphoning off money that was intended to purchase environmentally sensitive land pursuant to the language of the Florida Constitutional amendment and use that money to pay for regulatory agency operations," he said. "This is a bait-and-switch type of tactic similar to what they did to the lottery."
Indeed.
And it is bait-and-switch that, unfortunately, is being supported, or at least condoned, by some of the legislators we elected to represent us here in Southwest Florida.
Let us be clear: Despite a no-go vote proffered by the South Florida Water Management Governing Board, the purchase of the acreage that would allow land to be set aside to build a 26,000 acre reservoir to direct water from Lake Okeechobee south - instead of west to the Caloosahatchee and east to the Indian River - so it could naturally filter and replenish the Everglades, has overwhelming support.
Voters, environmental groups and yes, local officials throughout Southwest Florida hailed the passage of Amendment 1 as it provided a funding source for the so-called EAA/U.S. Sugar land purchase, a project that has been moving forward since 2008 when the "Reviving the River of Grass" deal first was approved under then-governor Charlie Crist.
Purchase of both acreage in the Everglades Agricultural Area and the 26,000-acre Sugar Hill property, which the owners have contractually agreed to sell, has been deemed vital to not only the restoration of the 'Glades but to the long-term health of southwest Florida's watershed and our local economy.
Allowing the discharge of polluted, "unfiltered" water to flow into the Caloosahatchee to the detriment of not only the river but gulf shore waters in unconscionable - especially since the money is not only there, but voters specifically agreed that the purchase of land and land restoration was important enough to be imbedded into the state constitution for the next 20 years.
State Sen. Joe Negron, R-Stuart, who chaired the Select Committee on Indian River Lagoon and Lake Okeechobee Basin, is now proposing that $40 million to $50 million be budgeted and then used to provide bond financing of up to $500 million the U.S. Sugar Land is estimated to cost. (More realistic numbers are actually $350 million to $400 million at the $8,000 per acre at which the land has been market valued).
We urge our local delegation to support the proposal, if not one to earmark the entire purchase price in the upcoming budget year.
As clean water advocates across the state urged legislators this past weekend, it's time to "finish the job."
The voters have spoken. Their mandate - and their trust - should not, must not, be betrayed.
Spend the Amendment 1 tax dollars are they were intended to be spent.

150605-d
How Big Sugar's shadow fell across a Miami-Dade County resolution
Sun Sentinel - by Alan Farago
Will agricultural interests ruin Everglades restoration ?
For students of Big Sugar and its control of Florida, sub-section county government, Tuesday’s discussion and vote on a resolution proposed by Miami-Dade County Commissioners Daniella Levine Cava and Rebeca Sosa was a master class. The resolution, aimed at lawmakers now in special session, from the outset seemed innocuous but doomed. Instead, it passed. Here, in part, is what it said:
 “RESOLUTION URGING THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE TO SET ASIDE $500 MILLION IN FUNDING
FROM AMENDMENT 1, OR OTHER AVAILABLE SOURCE, TO ACQUIRE LAND SOUTH OF LAKE
OKEECHOBEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF STORING AND TREATING WATER FROM THE LAKE AND
SENDING IT SOUTH TO THE GREATER EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM.”
The Miami Herald reported that conservationists wanted to “persuade lawmakers to buy U.S. Sugar land before a deal expired. Backers of Amendment 1, overwhelmingly supported in November, say the state needs to buy land for water storage south of Lake Okeechobee and also order the South Florida Water Management District to lay out a plan for designing and building a reservoir they say is part of the original restoration plans.”
In the regular session, Big Sugar went to the mat deploying its proxies; Gov. Rick Scott, GOP legislative leaders and the governor’s appointees on the South Florida Water Management District governing board. What does Big Sugar want ?
Its first objective is to kill the 2008 deal set in motion by then-Gov. Charlie Crist between the state and U.S. Sugar Corp. to sell to the public more than 133,000 acres of sugar cane fields in the Everglades Agricultural Area. Bit by bit, Big Sugar whittled the deal down to a nub.
Why was this 2008 deal so important to the Everglades and Floridians ? Granted, the U.S. Sugar property was not all in one parcel to solve the problem of “connecting” Lake Okeechobee to the remnant Everglades by creating additional and badly needed storage treatment marshes.
On the other hand, taking that much land out of sugar cane production – at a projected cost of more than $1.2 billion – would lay the groundwork for the next step in the campaign to save the Everglades: putting pressure on the land owners of the more centrally located lands within the Everglades Agricultural Area: i.e., the Fanjul billionaires and King Ranch.
The entire politics of Florida is a synchronized machine to deliver maximum profits to Big Agriculture. Most Floridians never see the components of the machinery, because the engineering and fine-tuning all takes place in Tallahassee and Washington D.C., where great gobs of money passes between the regulated and regulators: in this case, our elected representatives.Big Sugar isn’t the only actor. Citrus, cattle and dairy operations north of Lake Okeechobee also feature prominently. What distinguishes Big Sugar is that growing its crops requires constant surveillance and monitoring of fresh water resources to irrigate its fields and to dry them down at the appropriate cycles of the crop season. It’s the Goldilocks principle of porridge-making at work: “Never too hot, never too cold.”
Sugar is less resilient to stress than cattle. So Big Sugar has managed to control the levers and the taxing authority and operations of the South Florida Water Management District.
Nevertheless Big Ag and Big Sugar’s interests in control to maximize profits are inseparable. Their aim: maximize profits by “externalizing” costs. The foremost of those costs related to fertilizer pollution in the case of sugar and excrement in the case of cattle. (The less obvious but even more damaging costs are to public health.) It has always been Big Ag’s and Big Sugar’s objective to have taxpayers front the costs of its pollution to the greatest extent possible, so the Big Sugar cartel can make the most money possible. It’s American Exceptionalism, defined.
In 2014, conservationists – after decades of fighting the Legislature to secure funding for acquisition of environmentally sensitive lands – went to the polls to pass a constitutional amendment allocating a third of the documentary stamp tax used in all real estate transactions for the express purpose of buying land. In doing so, they took away one of Big Sugar’s most potent barriers: “You don’t have the money to buy our lands.” Well, now if the Legislature follows the law, we actually do have the money.
So that’s what the struggle has been in the Legislature. Although healthcare gets the headlines, the fate of poor people is not what propels Republican legislators out of bed in the morning. What does is when their most powerful campaign contributors, Big Sugar, have something they want them to do.
One wouldn’t imagine that a simple county resolution in support of allocating $500 million from Amendment 1 would animate Big Sugar to action. But the county is Florida’s most populous and politically influential, Miami-Dade. Why the resolution is important to Miami-Dade was made clear by one of the measures co-sponsors, Daniella Levine Cava. (Rebeca Sosa, the former chair of the commission, was the other co-sponsor.) It has to do with drinking water for nearly 8 million South Floridians. Providing more water storage and cleansing marshes in the Everglades Agricultural Area is an insurance policy on the future availability of sufficient clean and affordable drinking water for urban residents. It is not just about the Everglades. “It’s the drinking water, stupid.”
So what happened Tuesday?
Gaston Cantens, a former legislator from Miami-Dade who earned his street cred pushing through 2003 changes to Everglades water law benefiting Big Sugar (resulting in nearly a decade of delay and federal litigation by Friends of the Everglades and the Miccosukee Tribe in which the state ultimately lost) is now the chief government operative for the Fanjuls. He and lobbyists on Big Sugar’s payroll are everywhere in Tallahassee. They don’t come down to Miami-Dade often because there’s nothing much for them to do unless it involves meddling they deem in their interests, which was the case Tuesday.
Their proxies on the county commission were led by Pepe Diaz and Juan Zapata. Pepe Diaz’s “flood concerns” dovetails exactly with Big Sugar’s objectives. Listening to Diaz on the Everglades is like attending a two-hour piano concert in which only two notes are ever played: “me” and “flood concerns,” over and over and over again. Juan Zapata is a relative newbie to Big Sugar’s fold.
At any rate, through the course of the 40 minute debate on the resolution, both Diaz and Zapata read from carefully rehearsed scripts, written by Big Sugar lobbyists. In addition to Diaz’s flood concerns, there was repeated mention of Big Sugar’s veiled threat: that if the county commission approved a resolution to use Amendment 1 moneys to buy Big Sugar lands like those being advocated by conservationists, there would be retribution against Miami-Dade County’s “legislative priorities” in Tallahassee. This threat was voiced several times in several styles. That was the shadow descending.
I will give Pepe Diaz credit for his dancing steps on one of Big Sugar’s main worries: water quality. You see, Everglades restoration depends on getting the water from the cesspit of Lake Okeechobee very clean. If it is not clean to federal standards for the Everglades, the River of Grass is doomed. Big Sugar won’t say so, but the game it is playing is “running out the clock,” just like the Miami Heat when they can protect their lead.
Juan Zapata made an argument I’d never heard before, and it gets high marks for creativity. After Daniella Levine Cava emphasized that the future president of the Florida Senate, likely to be Joe Negron, supports the allocation of $500 million for land acquisition (he hasn’t said where) to use lands to clean up frightful water pollution in Martin and Palm Beach counties, Zapata asked his commissioners to consider how business really gets done in Tallahassee: “As soon as the Senate signals it wants something, the House immediately puts a stop to it.” What an interesting analysis why a single-party state government (Democrats are powerless, thanks to so called fair redistricting) should be red-flagged by voters.
Left unsaid by Zapata: how the gridlock in Tallahassee is exactly the result of Big Ag’s vital interest in paralysis of government’s regulatory functions.
Finally, Diaz and Zapata urged their colleagues on the dais to water-down the resolution sponsored by Levine Cava and Sosa. There was much discussion how the measure, as worded, could waste the time of lobbyists and run counter to the real “priorities” established early in the year by the county commission. Let’s take out a few words here and there, Zapata and Diaz both said. Credit to Levine Cava: she carefully led the county attorney to explain that a resolution “urging” the legislature to act wouldn’t change anything in the order of county priorities.
In the end, the measure passed 7 – 5. Among the notables voting against the measure, Chairman Jean Monestine.
So now, Florida’s biggest county is on record supporting the Legislature and Gov. Rick Scott acting on Sen. Negron’s request to allocate $500 million to purchase of environmentally sensitive lands – creating the slimmest glimmer of hope that the state will exercise its option to buy some U.S. Sugar land before next October, when the chance will disappear forever.
So Big Sugar’s shadow descended on the Miami-Dade County Commission Tuesday without taking anyone’s first born son. And for that, in the immortal words of Tosh.O, we are grateful.
Alan Farago writes the daily blog, Eye On Miami, under the pen name, Gimleteye.
He is president of Friends of the Everglades, a grass roots conservation organization based in Miami, FL.

150605-e
Lawmakers push to keep waters off Florida drill-free
News-Press – by Ledyard King, Washington
June 5, 2015
WASHINGTON — For years, Florida has successfully guarded its offshore waters from oil drilling, mindful of the role beach tourism plays in the state's economy.
Those efforts face a new test now, as Congress and the administration propose opening up areas off Florida's Atlantic and Gulf coasts to oil and gas exploration.
Last year, the Interior Department approved requests to conduct seismic testing off the Atlantic coast as far south as Cape Canaveral. The administration did not include waters off Florida among areas approved for drilling leases earlier this year, but state officials worry they could be included in the next round.
Last month, Gulf Coast senators led by Republican Bill Cassidy of Louisiana introduced a bill that would open up oil drilling within 50 miles of Florida's Gulf Coast starting in 2017. The state's existing 125-mile buffer expires in 2022.
The moves have left some members of Florida's congressional delegation and state officials scrambling to protect the state's largely pristine and nationally celebrated coastline, especially with memories of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon BP oil spill fresh in their minds.
Describing Florida as "under siege (by) Big Oil," Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson recently introduced a bill that would keep the 125-mile buffer in place until 2027.
On Thursday, Democratic Rep. Gwen Graham of Tallahassee and Republican Rep. David Jolly of Pinellas County announced similar House legislation.
"An oil spill like Deepwater Horizon just 50 miles off northwest Florida beaches would be devastating for our region," Graham said on the House floor. "We can't allow that to happen."
But some Sunshine State Republicans, including Sen. Marco Rubio, haven't automatically ruled out an idea that once seemed unthinkable.
"We're still reviewing the proposals, but Sen. Rubio supports developing our domestic energy resources responsibly and effectively, including offshore drilling and oil exploration," Rubio spokeswoman Brooke Sammon said.
Rubio, who is running for president, was not among Gulf Coast senators co-sponsoring Cassidy's bill.
Concerns
One concern about opening up the eastern Gulf to drilling is whether such operations would hamper military exercises by Naval Air Station Pensacola and other bases off the western Panhandle.
GOP Rep. Jeff Miller, who represents the Pensacola area, "supports drilling in the Gulf of Mexico as long as it does not encroach upon the military mission in the Gulf," spokesman Dan McFaul said.
Jeb Bush, who is close to announcing a White House bid, championed the 125-mile buffer when he was Florida's governor. Spokeswoman Allie Brandenburger, without referring to the Cassidy bill, said Bush "believes in opening up federal lands and water for drilling in a thoughtful way, in order to enhance America's energy security."
Cassidy's bill would direct the Interior Department to hold three lease sales in the eastern Gulf in 2018, 2019, and 2020. Offshore production would not be visible from the Florida coast, according to a news release from his office.
The bill also would provide Florida as much as $12.9 billion in drilling revenue over an 18-year period, the release said.
"Florida is a part of the Gulf and their residents should benefit from the Gulf's natural resources," Cassidy said. "Families across the nation, including in Florida, would hold jobs with better wages and better benefits that are created by expanding offshore energy production. I don't understand why anyone would deny Floridians, or anyone else, access to these jobs."
A spokeswoman for Florida Gov. Rick Scott said Thursday he hasn't reviewed the legislation.
Florida's Department of Environmental Protection voiced concerns to the Obama administration about seismic testing, asking for more time to study the potential impact on marine life.
Not all congressional Republicans are open to the notion of more drilling.
Rep. Bill Posey, R-Rockledge, joined Graham and other Democrats in sponsoring a bill last month that would impose a moratorium on seismic testing in the Atlantic unless studies conclude it would have a "minimal" impact on marine life.
And Jolly opposes drilling off Florida's western shores.
"An oil spill off the coast of Pinellas County would be disastrous to our quality of life and our local economy," he said. "We must ensure that we do not put our Gulf Coast at greater risk by drilling closer to our shores."
Related:           Jolly supports moratorium on oil drilling        Tampa Bay Newspapers
Andrew Bowen: Drilling offshore threatens Floridan Aquifer with ...          TBO.com

150605-f
On water issues, Scott remains defiant and clueless
Jacksonville.com – by Ron Littlepage
June 5, 2015
The singular issue that will most impact Florida’s future, one that isn’t talked about nearly enough, is water.
For a glimpse into that future, take a look at California today.
While Florida may not suffer the kind of drought that is contributing to California’s woes, our state’s penchant for more development at any cost will strain our water resources to the point of crisis.
This is how insane it is in Florida.
Three of the state’s water management districts, none of which can be trusted to do the right thing since they are squarely under the thumb of Gov. Rick Scott, are working on the Central Florida Water Initiative.
The reason why is rampant over development in that part of the state has already maxed outtraditional water supplies, which mainly come from the Floridan aquifer.The initiative’s goal is to find alternative water supplies to meet the needs of growth through 2035, and, yes, that will likely mean taking hundreds of millions of gallons a day out of the St. Johns River.
At the same time, the giant Deseret Ranch is pushing plans to develop 133,000 of its acres in Osceola County into a new community that will add a half million more people to the area, all of whom will be sucking up more water.
And that’s not the only mega development in the planning stages.
Last week, Scott hosted a meeting of Republican presidential hopefuls in which he bragged about what he’s done for Florida.
He didn’t tell the whole story.
Scott didn’t mention that he has cleansed the water management districts of anyone who might make protecting the state’s water resources a higher priority than development.
He didn’t talk about the latest bloodletting that occurred at the St. Johns River Water Management District, which is part of the Central Florida Water Initiative and where senior employees with decades of valuable experience were shown the door.
Scott also neglected to clarify that the study the initiative relies on to argue taking that much water from the St. Johns wouldn’t harm the river was based on a ridiculous assumption.
The study concluded that more development would mean more impervious surfaces, which would mean more storm water runoff going into the St. Johns to replace what is withdrawn.
Great. More runoff carrying oil and gasoline residue, pesticides and fertilizer into a river that already has health problems.
The study also said that rising sea levels would add more water to the St. Johns, which obviously would increase the river’s salinity.
It’s understandable why Scott didn’t talk about that since he doesn’t believe in climate change.
He also didn’t tell the Republican hopefuls who heaped praise on Scott that even
though Florida is perhaps the most vulnerable state to sea level rise, he has
done exactly zilch to prepare for it.
Scott might argue that the purpose of the gathering was to talk about the economy, not water.
Well, there’s nothing more important to Florida’s economy than water.
If we don’t take better care of our water and put more emphasis on conservation and become familiar with the word mandatory like California has, our much touted tourism industry will dry up when the only spring that will bring visitors to Florida will be the new Disney Spring, set for completion next year.

150604-a
Everglades Trust targets lawmakers on use of Amendment 1 dollars
Miami Herald Blog - Posted by Michael Auslen
Jun. 4, 2015
The Everglades Trust's mailing campaign, which will target constituents of lawmakers whose districts are affected by pollution of the Everglades.
The Everglades Trust is hitting some lawmakers' districts with mailings saying they're in the sugar industry's pockets.
"Last November, 75% of Florida voters approved a constitutional amendment to buy land that would protect our drinking water, save our rivers and beaches, and help save the Everglades," the mailing says. "But now BIG SUGAR is calling in their favors and pressuring our legislators to turn their backs on the will of the voters."
The issue at hand is the use of state money to buy land for conservation, in this case south of Lake Okeechobee.
Environmental groups have generally criticized the House and Senate budget proposals for not spending enough on land acquisition, which they say needs to be higher under Amendment 1, passed by three quarters of Florida voters last November.
Among the land that some want to see bought by the state's Florida Forever program is a tract owned by U.S. Sugar south of Okeechobee.
The final details of how much Amendment 1 money will be available for buying land has yet to be determined, as budget negotiations between the two chambers have not begun.

150604-b
Flows to Caloosahatchee Estuary to be reduced
USACE Press Release no. 15-059
June 4, 2015
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jacksonville District has announced a slight reduction in flows for its next pulse release to the Caloosahatchee Estuary.
The adjustment in discharges will take place tomorrow (June 5).  The new target flow for the Caloosahatchee Estuary will be a seven-day average of 650 cubic feet per second (cfs) as measured at W.P. Franklin Lock (S-79) near Fort Myers.  No water from the lake is expected to be released through St. Lucie Lock (S-80) near Stuart.  However, flows at either the Franklin or St. Lucie structures could occasionally be exceeded by runoff from rain that accumulates in the Caloosahatchee or St. Lucie basins—those flows will be allowed to pass through the spillways as necessary.
“The lake level continues to drop,” said Jim Jeffords, Operations Division Chief for the Jacksonville District.  “However, all forecasts are still trending wet over the coming days and weeks.  We will continue to monitor and adjust as necessary.”
Today, the lake stage is 12.66 feet.  It is currently in the Base Flow Sub-Band as defined by the 2008 Lake Okeechobee Regulation Schedule (LORS).  Under current conditions, LORS authorizes the Corps to discharge up to 650 cfs combined to the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie systems. 
For more information on water level and flows data for Lake Okeechobee, visit the Corps’ water management website at http://www.saj.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/WaterManagement.aspx

150604-c
Scientists find a way to reduce mercury in wetlands
The Sacramento Bee - by Edward Ortiz
June 4, 2015
Scientists have found new ways to reduce mercury in wetlands, providing hope that Sacramento-area waterways can be decontaminated of the potentially toxic element that dates back to Gold Rush-era mining activities.
The new research, published recently in Environmental Science and Technology, found that dosing wetlands with two chemicals, iron or aluminum salts, was successful in removing mercury from wetlands.
Researchers spent two years on the project and built nine wetlands on public land in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta at Twitchell Island. They applied water with aluminum salts to three wetlands, water with iron to another three and regular water to the last set of three, according to Tamara Kraus, a research soil scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey and a co-author of the study.
To determine the effects, researchers introduced mosquitofish. They found mercury levels in the mosquitofish decreased by 62 percent in wetlands dosed with aluminum salts and by 76 percent in wetlands where iron was used.
The mercury lingering in area rivers, creeks and wetlands dates back to the 19th century, when miners used the element to help extract gold in the Sierra Nevada foothills.
Controlling mercury levels in area rivers, creeks and wetlands is a key health issue because many people continue to eat fish they catch from mercury-contaminated waters, despite advisories.
“The mercury levels are of concern to us because people are still fishing regularly out of the Delta,” said Sonney Chong, chairman of Capital, an umbrella organization representing the Asian American and Pacific Islander community.
A 2013 assessment by the California Department of Public Health found that Hmong, Laotian and Cambodian residents are avid fishermen in the Delta, but that some have low awareness of the mercury issue.
 “They’re feeding their family. It’s an outright source of food, so they’ve ignored the advisories,” Chong said.
Ingestion of mercury can lead to problems that include mental impairment and other developmental abnormalities, especially in fetuses and young children.
Mercury bioaccumulates in fish tissue and is passed up the food chain in greater quantities as larger fish eat small fish.
In 2011, a survey of 16 species of sport fish from 63 locations done by the State Water Resources Control Board found that fish caught in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta watershed had higher concentrations of mercury than anywhere else in the state. The highest contamination was in fish high up the food chain – smallmouth and largemouth bass, striped bass and the Sacramento pikeminnow.
Contaminated river sites included the American River at Discovery Park and the south fork of the American River at Coloma. Fish tested from the San Joaquin River pier at Point Antioch and at Louis Park in Stockton also showed high mercury levels.
Scientists are focused on methyl mercury, a more toxic form that occurs when mercury binds with organic molecules in the environment. It is the only form that accumulates appreciably in fish, birds and humans.
“Wetlands are really good environments for fish and wildlife. They are also very good at methylating mercury,” said Joshua Ackerman, lead author of the study and a research wildlife biologist at USGS.
Besides lingering mercury from the Gold Rush, mercury seeps into wetlands and waterways from the air. Coal-fired power plants are one of the largest sources of mercury in the nation, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
In the new study, researchers found that iron and aluminum salts acted as coagulants, changing mercury so it can settle to the bottom, according to Kraus. That takes mercury out of the water column, so fish are less likely to consume it, but leaves it in the sediment.
“The smaller particles clump together to form larger clusters,” Kraus said.
Leaving mercury in the sediment has been an issue for state agencies, including the CALFED Bay-Delta Program, which was an original sponsor of the research, said Keith Coolidge, spokesman with the Delta Stewardship Council.
“The CALFED agency did express concern,” Coolidge said. “The agency felt that disturbing wetlands could allow inert mercury to convert into methyl mercury which could then be absorbed into the food chain.”
Although promising, the coagulant approach is also challenging due to high costs, said William Horvath biogeochemist at UC Davis. He said there may not be enough political support to pay for a plan that still leaves mercury in the riverbed.
In some cases, such as large rivers, flow patterns would make dosing difficult. Reservoirs would require a large amount of dosing and engineering compared with wetlands, Horvath said.
“It would cost millions,” Horvath said.
The coagulant approach at Twitchell Island is an offshoot of earlier research that showed water quality could be improved by using coagulants. Chemicals were used as coagulants in Florida’s Everglades and at Lake Tahoe to remove organic carbon from drainage water, Horvath said.
The coagulant approach is also being studied at the Cache Creek settling basin
near Woodland. That basin is affected by the nearby Reed, Harrison and Manhattan mercury mines. The Cache Creek watershed is responsible for a large amount of the mercury that enters the Delta estuary.
In that ongoing research effort, the coagulated material is being collected in basins and moved off site to a wastewater facility.
Related:           Levels decrease in fish when iron or aluminum added to water, researchers find
Eating mercury-tainted fish can result in mental impairment, developmental abnormalities
Element in area waterways dates back to Gold Rush

150603-a
Land south of lake is crucial to Everglades restoration
PalmBeachPost – Point of View by Eric Eikenberg, chief executive officer of the Everglades Foundation
June 3, 2015
Last month, the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) voted to forgo purchasing U.S. Sugar Corp.-owned land to build a vital reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee in the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA).
This decision is a setback to Everglades restoration and to communities enduring damaging discharges of polluted Lake Okeechobee water along Florida’s east and west coasts.
The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) was signed into law in 2000, with bipartisan support, and specifically called for a reservoir to store water in the EAA. The EAA reservoir is so crucial to Everglades restoration that it was put on a fast-track list by Gov. Jeb Bush a decade ago.
Everglades restoration is a good investment in Florida’s future. Every dollar spent on restoration generates a $4 return. Additionally, a reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee in the EAA would qualify for a 50/50 cost share with the federal government.
Water storage is the heart of Everglades restoration and is vital to Florida’s water supply. Nearly 8 million Floridians, and millions of tourists who visit every year, depend on the Everglades for their drinking water. Without the EAA reservoir, we will continue to waste billions of gallons of fresh water — while, paradoxically, the Everglades and Florida Bay are starved for water.
We have a responsibility and an opportunity to reduce pollution and toxic algae in the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie rivers and estuaries. Doing so would protect local businesses, tourism and home values.
There is nothing more conservative than conservation and protecting our resources. A reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee is essential to protecting the Everglades.
Communities are suffering. The Everglades is threatened. The public has been waiting for more than 15 years for tangible restoration of the Everglades and is demanding action — right now. The state needs to identify and acquire land in the EAA to build this critical reservoir, as promised in the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.
The Everglades Foundation looks forward to working with Gov. Rick Scott, the Florida Legislature and SFWMD to finish what we’ve started and to find a viable alternative site for this critical project.

150603-b
Water tops list of environmental issues
AgAllert - by Christine Souza
June 3, 2015
Concerns about current and future water supplies were a unifying theme as Farm Bureau staff members from across the nation gathered in Sacramento last week to discuss environmental issues affecting American farmers and ranchers.
The American Farm Bureau Federation Environmental Issues Conference brought representatives from at least 20 states together, to discuss a range of topics including water quality, air quality, endangered-species rules and other regulations affecting family farmers and ranchers. But with the conference setting in California's capital, discussion of water supplies often rose to the fore.
In welcoming the group to Sacramento, California Farm Bureau Federation President Paul Wenger provided an update about the state's already stretched water supply and the regulatory and legislative impacts that have resulted from the drought.
"There is a mindset in California that we can conserve our way out of this. There is no way that I've ever seen that you can divvy up a dollar and make two dollars. You have to go bring in more water," Wenger said. "Three years ago, in May of 2012, all of our reservoirs were full to the brim. We should not be where we are today. The challenges are real, they are drastic, but we have to adapt to the challenges that we have."
CFBF Administrator Rich Matteis discussed how the state Legislature and voters responded to the drought last year, including by adopting statewide groundwater legislation and passing a bond measure that would set aside $2.7 billion to construct additional water storage. This year, he said, Gov. Brown's order for mandatory cuts in urban water use resulted in a renewed focus on agricultural water.
"Certainly, the drought has caused a lot of attention to what we do and how we do it," he said, noting that Farm Bureau has responded through both one-on-one interactions with elected officials and regulators, and through the news media.
Joe Cain, commodity division director for the Kentucky Farm Bureau, reported that water issues are becoming more of a factor in his state.
"Kentucky is getting very engaged in water issues. We don't have water (supply) problems, but we want to be proactive," Cain said, adding that Kentucky Farm Bureau President Mark Haney established a Water Management Working Group that is meeting to develop a strategy on dealing with water.
Kentucky receives about 45 inches of rainfall annually and has several aquifers that feed into the state, which provide plenty of surface water, Cain said, but the Farm Bureau has taken a renewed interest in water issues, as many farmers make a transition from on-farm water sources to municipal water.
"We feel like if there is a drought, we will have some issues. We are working on a more effective drought mitigation plan and have some strategies that will be announced this fall," Cain said.
Cain's Farm Bureau neighbor to the east, Wilmer Stoneman, who handles government regulations at the Virginia Farm Bureau Federation, reported the organization is also looking into water as the state studies groundwater and "drastically low" aquifers.
During the conference, the CFBF team of environmental attorneys briefed fellow state Farm Bureau representatives on issues related to land use and property rights, the California water rights system, water quality regulation and the regulation of irrigated agriculture.
In talking about the future of farming in California, CFBF environmental attorney Chris Scheuring said, "In California, our protection of land through voluntary, incentive-based means for the most part is going to be successful, but land is only half of the equation. The other half of the equation is water."
As part of the conference, CFBF environmental policy analyst Justin Fredrickson led a tour for Farm Bureau staff members that included the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation C.W. "Bill" Jones Pumping Plant in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the nearby Tracy Fish Collection Facility, which intercepts migrating fish before they enter the delta water pumps.
The group also visited Montna Farms in Sutter County, to see how California rice fields provide habitat for at least 230 different species of birds each year.
The AFBF Environmental Issues Conference attracted Farm Bureau staff members from as far away as New Jersey, Kentucky and Florida, and from states as diverse as Michigan, Texas and Wyoming.
"It really is a way for our professional regulatory staffers to get together and learn from one another, to put best practices into place and to gain information from one another that allows us to do our jobs better," said Don Parrish, AFBF senior director of regulatory relations. "And when we do our jobs better, our members benefit."

150602-a
Amendment One and Florida’s special legislative session
WGCU.org - by John Davis
June 2, 2015
Florida’s 20 day special legislative session began June 1st and while much of lawmakers’ focus will be on healthcare spending and negotiating a balanced budget, environmental advocates also see opportunities for increased spending on land and water conservation efforts. Last fall, nearly 75% of Florida voters approved Amendment One, which allocates 33% of documentary stamp fees to a land acquisition trust fund to be used for land and water conservation. 
Over a 20 year period, that’s expected to generate an estimated $22 billion for conservation. Amendment One is aimed at reviving the Florida Forever conservation land-buying program that faced steep cuts during the recession. We’ll explore how lawmakers are looking to allocate Amendment One dollars and what environmental advocates say they’re goals are for the session. Plus, the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recently finalized their Waters of the United States rule which clarifies the EPA’s power to enforce the Clean Water Act. We’ll explore the future impact of the federal rule in Florida. 
Guests:
Eric Draper, Audubon Florida, Executive Director
Manley Fuller, Florida Wildlife Federation, President
Rae Ann Wessel, Sanibel Captiva Conservation Foundation, Natural Resource Policy Director

150602-b
Clearwater opens second R-O water plant
Suncoast News - staff report
June 2, 2015
CLEARWATER — The city of Clearwater will celebrate the grand opening of its second reverse-osmosis water treatment plant Thursday morning. Officials announced the celebration last week, which will take place at 9 a.m. at 21133 U.S. 19.
The Clearwater treatment plant already went online in May and treats brackish water using state-of-the-art technology to produce up to 6.25 million gallons per day of additional drinking water for Clearwater customers. Reverse osmosis is a process that purifies water by removing dissolved particles, minerals and ions. The plant is the latest such water treatment operation to go online and expects to be followed shortly by another in Tarpon Springs.
Dunedin has had an R-O water plant in operation since 1992. Oldsmar has also been supplementing its drinking water supply with an R-O plant of its own since 2013. These plants turn potable water beneath Pinellas County that was rendered brackish by saltwater intrusion decades ago. Project managers in Tarpon Springs updated city officials last month that their own $45 million facility north of the Anclote River will begin producing its first water by the end of June.
Clearwater’s Reverse Osmosis Water Treatment Plant No. 2 is a $34 million project that included three components: the brackish water reverse osmosis water plant, a brackish wellfield with raw water piping and a concentrate disposal well. Two storage tanks were built as part of the project, as well, the city reported. “For decades to come, this new water plant will serve the needs of the city‘s water customers by providing them with a high quality drinking water,” Tracy Mercer, Clearwater’s public utilities director, said in a press release. “We are appreciative of the support of our citizens and our customers.”
Similar to Tarpon Springs’ treatment plant, Clearwater’s is cooperatively funded by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. Thursday’s grand opening and ribbon cutting is open to the public and will be attended by Clearwater Mayor George Cretekos and other officials from the city and the regional water management district

150602-c
Florida's underwater springs are wasting water
Jacksonville.com - Letters by Times-Union readers (John Leynes, St. Johns)
Jun 2, 2015
UNDERWATER SPRINGS - Lots of wasted water.
Much has been written about Florida’s diminishing water quality and aquifer resources and increased water withdrawals from the St. Johns River.
The karst limestone structure beneath Florida extends out under the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico.
There are 16 known underwater springs, or submarine springs, offshore around the Florida coast. These springs vent and waste aquifer water. Based on my estimates of comparative springs, that means about 300 million gallons of fresh water per day are vented into the ocean.
These submarine springs will also be the source of salt water intrusion into the aquifer if the levels and flow drop below a certain point. This would result in a long-term human disaster for Florida.
These holes can be plugged to retain the equivalent output of about five Silver Rivers each day.
This would also result in an increase in the aquifer levels, quantity and quality of water in our rivers and lakes, and would probably postpone for many years the need for drastic and costly solutions that require additional water withdrawal from the St. Johns River.
Reductions in water-related taxes, the state budget and streamlining of water management districts could follow.

150602-d
House passes Posey-Murphy plan to help Indian River Lagoon
SpaceCoastDaily.com
June 2, 2015
Enjoys broad bipartisan support:
WASHINGTON, DC – On Monday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation (H.R. 944) to reauthorize funding for the National Estuary Program (NEP). 
Reps. Bill Posey and Patrick Murphy, two of four principle co-authors of H.R. 944, were able to secure the inclusion of their bipartisan plan (H.R. 573) to re-prioritize existing funding so more money is available for estuaries with critical needs like our Indian River Lagoon.
In July, Posey and Murphy introduced the Estuary Urgent Needs Priority Program Act to meet high priority needs across the nation’s 28 national estuaries.
“This common sense plan will help provide critical funding for our nation’s estuaries, and make available additional funding to estuaries that are experiencing urgent and challenging ecological problems, including our own Indian River Lagoon,” said Rep.Posey.
“I’m pleased to see this important legislation move forward in a strongly bipartisan manner.”
This year, toxic algae blooms have already threatened our waterways in the Treasure Coast,” said Rep. Murphy.
“This legislation provides additional financial resources to directly address the challenges we continue to face in the Indian River Lagoon.  I appreciate the House’s bipartisan work on this effort and urge the Senate to quickly take up this measure.”
In addition to providing strong funding for base NEP grants, the Posey-Murphy plan directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to prioritize funding to provide additional awards for estuaries that are experiencing urgent and challenging ecological problems.
Some problems include: sea grass loss, reoccurring harmful algal blooms and invasive exotic species or jellyfish proliferation. These awards would be provided on a competitive basis and would be funded through funds already authorized for the NEP program. The base bill also secures higher levels of funding for each estuary’s base grant.
Under H.R. 944, the National Estuary Program is reauthorized for Fiscal Years 2016-2020 for $27 million.
The Posey-Murphy plan makes 15% of appropriated funds available for the additional competitive awards to estuaries with urgent needs.  The bill also gives direction to the EPA to ensure that no less than 80% of the funding is reserved for estuary base grants.
The National Estuary Program, which enjoys broad bipartisan support, was created in the 1987 Clean Water Act Amendments. It is run through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to protect and restore water quality and ensure ecological health of estuaries of national significance.
There are 28 “estuaries of national significance” that span multiple states and congressional districts all over the country.  Each estuary uses local input and local priorities to create a management plan that addresses the issues of water quality and ecological health.

150602-e
Lagoon worse in Brevard, but politics sends money south
Florida Today – by Jim Waymer
June 2, 2015
Seventy percent of the Indian River Lagoon system — and most all of its ills — fall within Brevard County, but 90 percent of the state money to cure the ailing estuary has been flowing south, lately.
A FLORIDA TODAY analysis found almost all the wildlife deaths and seagrass loss that prompted mass rallies, public forums and national attention in the past few years happened in Brevard. Despite the disparity in ecological fallout, the Florida Legislature has pumped 10 times as much money to projects linked to the Everglades or taming Lake Okeechobee releases, which happen 60 miles to the south and have no measurable effect in Brevard's portion of the lagoon.
Meanwhile, internal debate has stalled a new council formed to lobby for more government money for lagoon cleanups. And as the Legislature reconvenes Monday for a 20-day special session, $46 million in lagoon projects within Brevard hang in the balance. Conservationists hope the recently passed Amendment 1 conservation measure will boost state funding for lagoon cleanups. They also want to capitalize on the fact that current legislative leaders — Senate President Andy Gardiner, R-Orlando, and House Speaker Steve Crisafulli, R-Merritt Island — represent districts that include Brevard.
But legislators have proposed diverting close to a third of the expected $750 million in yearly Amendment 1 money to salaries for state parks staff and wildlife officers and other daily operations for several state agencies. Senate proposals have ranged from $2 million to $350 million for Florida Forever, the state's conservation land buying program. The House proposes $205 million for Florida Forever, but as much as $100 million would go to water management districts, for water resource programs, according to Florida TaxWatch, a nonprofit government watchdog group.
Those budget proposals have triggered fears that state money won't go where the crux of the lagoon's problems lie and that politics will continue to dictate where the money flows.
"It's very important to use the Amendment 1 dollars to fix the Indian River Lagoon, because the lagoon has been so highly impacted by the drainage of wetlands," said Eric Draper, executive director of Audubon Florida.
And most of the lagoon's recent ecological fallout happened on the Space Coast.
According to a FLORIDA TODAY analysis of state databases, Brevard County's portion of the lagoon accounted for:
•136 of 143 unusual manatee deaths from mid 2012 to early 2014, or 95 percent. Four were in Indian River County and three in Volusia County.
•67 of the 77 unusual dolphin deaths since early 2013, or 87 percent. The other 10 were in Volusia County. The causes of both the dolphin and manatee deaths remain unknown and under state and federal investigation.
•All of the approximately 250 unexplained pelican deaths happened within Brevard between late February and mid-April 2013, most concentrated around Merritt Island and Melbourne.
•Brevard lost 24,443 acres of seagrass (43 percent) in the lagoon and its tributaries, between 2009 and 2013. By comparison, Martin County, a primary beneficiary of the state-funded Lake Okeechobee projects, actually gained 3,584 acres of seagrass during the same period, an 18 percent increase. The 2011 "superbloom" of algae that killed about half of the lagoon's seagrass spanned from Brevard's northern border to Melbourne, with a secondary bloom only reaching as far south as Fort Pierce.
Lake Okeechobee fuels algae blooms
To be sure, the St. Lucie Estuary, which flows into the southern lagoon, has its own litany of health problems —mainly toxic algae, fish kills and fish lesions fueled by pollution from Lake Okeechobee.
As much as 6 billion gallons per day can flow from the lake to the southern lagoon, via C-44 canal, an amount almost equal to the entire state's freshwater withdrawals for tap water and irrigation.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers tries to keep Lake Okeechobee's water level between 12.5 and 15.5 feet. But the lake can rise up to six times faster than water can be discharged into the Everglades, where wetlands filter the pollution. So when heavy rains hit in 2013, the Corps had to discharge huge volumes of polluted water from the lake into the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee Rivers.
Nitrogen and phosphorus from surrounding sugar farming trigger toxic algae blooms that cause the fish kills and other ecological problems. Too much fresh water also can cause dips in salt content that can kill or harm marine life.
Activists along the southern lagoon can point to the "smoking gun" of brown slugs of water that arrive from Lake Okeechobee after the Corps releases, which makes the region better poised than Brevard to ask for large-scale state and federal fixes.
On the Space Coast, the lagoon's problems are more diffuse, including some 90,000 septic tanks, fertilizer runoff, sewage spills and soil erosion.
"We don't have a singular boogeyman," says Alex Gorichky, a Brevard native and lagoon fishing guide. "We're like death by a thousand pinpricks."
Florida funds the lagoon
Last year, state lawmakers funded all of a special Senate select committee's recommendations, allocating $231 million toward projects to help the lagoon and the Lake Okeechobee basin.
A major project for the Okeechobee basin is the C-44 Reservoir and Stormwater Treatment Area, a component of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. The project will build a 3,400-acre above-ground reservoir in Martin County to store up to 16 billion gallons of water, or about the equivalent of 25,300 Olympic-sized swimming pools.
Tying lagoon projects to Everglades restoration also helps boost prospects for state funding.
Florida has committed $60.5 million for the C-44 project for over the next two years.
While lagoon restoration projects along the southern portions of the lagoon are further along, many of Brevard's restorations are in the permitting or planning stages.
Brevard received $10 million in state money last year for muck dredging: $9 million toward five priority sites to get dredging started by this summer. The other $1 million went for Florida Institute of Technology to study whether the dredging improves water quality and seagrass.
Dredges are expected to begin removing muck at the mouth of Turkey Creek in July.
Muck is the rotted plant matter, clays and soils from construction sites and yards that coats the lagoon bottom. It has been likened to "black mayonnaise."
By blocking sunlight to seagrass, muck limits seagrass growth and contributes to bacterial decay, which consumes oxygen, potentially causing fish kills.
The viscous stuff harbors excess nutrients that can fuel algae blooms that kill fish. Muck also produces noxious chemicals, such as hydrogen sulfide responsible for the lagoon's occasional rotten-egg smell.
This year's $46 million request to the Legislature includes $25 million to complete muck dredging at two or three "hotspots," according to county documents.
Florida Tech scientists estimate 5-7 million cubic yards of muck blankets the northern lagoon, enough to fill a football field 1,000 yards high.
In addition to Brevard's request, another $10 million request to the Legislature would help the St. Johns River Water Management District dredge 625,000 cubic yards (about 41,000 dump truck loads) of muck from a 4-mile stretch of the Eau Gallie River and its southern leg, Elbow Creek. That would add to $10 million the Legislature allocated for the project last year. St. Johns plans to begin dredging the river by the end of 2017.
Brevard's request also includes $6.2 million for groundwater restoration and research — $5 million of which would go toward a voluntary cost-share program to help homeowners and businesses reduce groundwater pollution.
Brevard also wants $3 million in state money for sewer upgrades, including work in West Cocoa, along North Courtenay Parkway and a project that would expand sewer service to North Merritt Island.
Other state funding requests would boost Brevard's oyster and shoreline restoration efforts.
Conservationists had hoped a newly formed body to run the Indian River Lagoon program would forge a more unified voice to garner — and lobby for — more state and federal money for lagoon cleanups.
But thus far, the new Indian River Lagoon Council has stalled and squabbled over how its finances and governance will work.
Earlier this year, Brevard, Volusia, St. Lucie and Martin counties, and three state agencies, took over the lagoon program from the St. Johns River Water Management District.
But a major lagoon-side county that bears the estuary's name — Indian River County — balked at joining the council.
"We can and will return the lagoon to health, but as elected officials we must proceed in a way that is open and transparent and is consistent with the principles of good government," Indian River County Commissioner Bob Solari said at a county commission meeting in January. "The reorganization has been rushed from the start with the single goal of getting a new organization in place as soon as possible."
House Speaker Steve Crisafulli had vowed to revamp the state's water policies this year. But when legislators hit an impasse on Medicaid expansion, Crisafulli adjourned the 2015 regular session three days early, without passing a budget.
So this month's special legislative session was called.
A major water policy overhaul passed the House this year, but a Senate version failed to pass before the end of the regular session.
Now some worry Medicaid and taxes could eclipse the lagoon and other water issues.
Sen. Thad Altman, R-Rockledge, says Amendment 1 money should go toward buying more buffer lands for the lagoon. He points to the Indian River Lagoon Blueway project, where some 900 acres representing six miles of undeveloped Brevard lagoon frontage remain and are potentially available to buy.
"If you don't acquire them and they get developed they're lost forever," Altman said. "The people did not vote to dedicate the doc stamp dollars to salaries or overhead, they voted for land acquisition."
Regardless of what happens in Tallahassee, government alone can't solve all the lagoon's problems, says Virginia Barker, interim director of Brevard's Natural Resources Management Department.
Residents must do their part by reducing pollution from their yards, pets and cars, she said. Or they can volunteer to help non-profit and civic groups to restore the estuary.
"It's all of us that created this problem," Barker said, "and it's all of us that are going to have to fix it."

150602-f
Some strong leadership would go a long way
Miami Herald – by David Yarnold
Florida’s Everglades are parched, and the folks in Miami and other parts of South Florida are facing water shortages. It’s not a pretty picture. The good news is there’s a big fix and it’s remarkably straightforward. The money is available. Commitments have been made. Legislation has been passed.
So, what’s the hold-up ? Leadership.  It could come from the Legislature, from the private sector or from the governor’s office. Most likely, it’ll need to come again from the same Floridians who voted 3-1 in November to dedicate almost $1 billion a year to conserving water and land for people and wildlife.
This is why it’s happening: To the north of the Everglades, Lake Okeechobee regularly overflows with water that drains off land as far north as Orlando. That water, loaded with pollutants, flows to the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Chemicals in the water ravage coastal wetlands, destroying the homes and food sources for Florida’s magnificent birds and fish. The water then drains into the ocean.
The solution isn’t a mystery. The idea is to create reservoirs between Lake O and the Everglades plus a large band of wetlands that would act as filters for the polluted water. The clean water that comes out on the other end refills the aquifer that provides drinking water for more than 6 million South Floridians while replenishing the Everglades.
The Florida Everglades is one of America’s natural wonders and one of our most popular recreational playgrounds. It’s a paradise for birders, fishermen, boaters and others who love the outdoors. And it’s a major economic draw for Florida tourism, generating tens of millions of dollars a year. It’s also a unique landmark that helps define Florida.
Anyone who knows Florida’s Everglades will tell you about its birds and the amazing sense of wildness they create. But last year, populations of the elegant tri-colored heron were down 83 percent. Roseate spoonbills, wood storks, Everglades snail kites and Little Blue Herons are also threatened. Those birds truly are what birds have always been — the early-warning systems that tell you about clean water and healthy places for birds and people.
Florida has an option to buy a large swath of sugar cane fields between Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades. The South Florida Water Management District appears to be taking a pass on that option. There are other lands to be had, and the money to buy them already has been banked.
The message from Big Sugar, which wants a higher price for its land than what it offered to the water district five years ago, is that other Everglades projects should be completed before buying new land. The problem with that self-interested argument from some of the same people responsible for polluting Lake O’s waters is that the happy marriage of money and available land doesn’t come along often, and we’re at one of those rare moments.  Floridians spoke in force just six months ago. An overwhelming 74 percent of state voters approved buying more land for environmental restoration and preservation, specifically including these lands in the Everglades Agricultural Area. Voters said Yes to a constitutional amendment dedicating fees from real-estate sales to help pay for that restoration and preservation.
And this is where leadership matters. The Florida Legislature, meeting in a special session, can’t continue to defy three-quarters of the state’s voters, no matter how much campaign funding they get from the sugar companies.
During the special session, we hope legislators get the message the voters have sent: Appropriate funds for the Everglades, and direct state agencies to get to work building the projects that will put water where it belongs — in the Everglades, not flowing uselessly to the coast.
Time is running out, not only for this opportunity to set land aside for clean water, but for the Everglades itself.

150601-a
Weekend Opinions
Florida Water Daily
June 1, 2015
Water-related editorials, OpEds, and Columns from around the state.
Former Governor and Senator Bob Graham discusses Everglades Restoration and the decision not to purchase US Sugar land south of Lake Okeechobee (link):
As a former governor, it pains me to say this: The South Florida Water Management District has failed us. It appears unable to fulfill its responsibilities, especially land acquisition. The state and its federal partner should reconsider the 2000 decision to grant to the now-rudderless district the authority to purchase land for Everglades restoration and place it in the hands of the guardian of Everglades National Park, the U.S. Interior Department.
From the Editorial Board of the Tampa Bay Times (link):
Lawmakers need to show a sense of urgency. Without additional funding, the state has little leverage in negotiating for new property. Water managers need time to design the recharge areas. State and local officials also need more stringent water-monitoring procedures for this effort to be comprehensive rather than piecemeal. All of this takes time, vision, a united approach and a sustained commitment of real money.
The Tampa Bay Tribune remarks on the recovery of the Tampa Bay seagrass (link):
Local residents who remember when much of Tampa Bay was a polluted, turbid soup can only marvel at the news that researchers report the bay now is as healthy as it’s been in 60 years.
And during a political season when there will be a lot of histrionics about the need to jettison government regulations or get rid of environmental agencies, citizens should know that Tampa Bay’s recovery would not have occurred without tough laws and smart government investments.
Bruce Ritchie discusses the resignations at the SJRWMD and the FDEP Secretary Jon Steverson (link):
During a Senate confirmation hearing in April, Steverson was asked by audience member Amy Datz of the Florida Democratic Environmental Caucus whether he could change the mindset at DEP, where she said employees fear for their jobs because they are enforcing state environmental laws.
“No, I have never fired anyone for enforcing the law, not for any job I have ever held,” Steverson responded to the Senate committee. “First and foremost I will always follow the law.
The CEO of the Everglades Foundation, Eric Eikenberg, discusses the upcoming special session of the Legislature (link):
Communities are suffering right now. The Everglades is threatened right now. The public has been waiting for more than 15 years for tangible restoration of the Everglades and is demanding action right now. The state needs to identify and acquire land in the EAA to build this critical reservoir as promised in CERP.
The Everglades Foundation looks forward to working with Governor Rick Scott, the Florida Legislature, and SFWMD to finish what we’ve started and find a viable alternative site for this critical Everglades restoration project.
Bart Weiss, president of WateReuse Florida, discusses the importance of water reuse (link):
Florida’s subtropical environment is also sustained by rainfall. That’s the balance for water managers: provide enough water for our needs while protecting the environment.
However, that job is getting tougher and tougher to do. So, we have to make the most of the water we have – all of it – rainfall and stormwater runoff, lakes, aquifers, canals and ponds and rivers.
But, Florida already makes use of a very valuable water resource: reuse. Florida has led the nation in recycling or using reuse water for decades. We use it to irrigate lawns and golf courses, we use it for industry. We rehydrate wetlands and, in some places, reuse is being used to help stop saltwater intrusion. This didn’t happen overnight. It took decades and tremendous foresight and investment from local governments, utilities and the water management districts. It will take this same investment and leadership to ensure the state meets its future water resource needs in economically feasible and environmentally sustainable ways.

150601-b
Will Miami-Dade County ask lawmakers for $500 million Amendment 1 money for Everglades land buy ?
PalmBeachPost – by Christine Stapleton
June 1, 2015
On Tuesday the Miami-Dade County Commission will consider asking lawmakers to set aside $500 million of Amendment 1 money for buying land south of Lake Okeechobee for Everglades restoration.
A three-page resolution sponsored by Commissioner Daniella Levine Cava echos much of the language used in a social-media, email and television campaign by the Everglades Foundation and Everglades Trust to convince the South Florida Water Management District to purchase 46,800 acres of land from U.S. Sugar for a reservoir south of Lake Okeechobee.
The district’s governing board voted against the land deal on May 14, citing its desire to complete projects already underway before buying more land south of Lake Okeechobee.
In the resolution, Levine Cava cites the master restoration plan approved in 2000, which calls for a reservoir to be built south of the lake. The resolution also calls for lawmakers to dedicate 25.7 percent of the money raised by Amendment 1 for Everglades restoration, a proposed by Gov. Rick Scott.
Voters approved Amendment 1 in November, requiring one-third of money raised by real estate documentary stamps be dedicated to land conservation and restoration. Amendment 1 is expected to raise $750 in the upcoming budget year.
Activists gathered in nine cities around the state on Saturday to urge lawmakers to dedicate money from Amendment 1 to purchase land south of the lake.

150601-c
2015 Florida legislative update:  Environment, Growth Management and Water
HKlaw.com – (Holland & Knight) by Lawrence N. "Larry" Curtin, Clay Henderson, Lawrence E. Sellers, Roger W. Sims, Stacy Watson May
June 1, 2015
The Florida Legislature concluded its 2015 regular session on May 1, 2015. However, for all practical purposes, the session ended on April 28, when the House unexpectedly adjourned three days early after it became clear the two chambers could not agree on a budget. The Legislature will return for a special session on June 1. The following is a summary of what has happened so far:
BILLS THAT PASSED
Growth Management
CS/CS/SB 1216 relating to community development was the major growth management bill to be passed by both houses and approved by the Governor. The bill makes a number of changes to the growth management process – primarily as it affects large community developments such as sector plans and developments of regional impact (DRIs).
Sector Plans
For sector plans, the bill clarifies that amendments to master plans and detailed special area plans shall be processed through the requirements for coordinated state review. It further clarifies that agricultural or silvicultural uses within a sector plan may be authorized if consistent with the long-term master plan. Sector plans require provisions for conservation of sensitive areas; the bill provides that conservation easements may be used for mitigation and defined through digital photography.
RPCs
The Legislature continued its trend of reducing responsibilities of regional planning councils (RPCs). The bill eliminates the Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council and essentially removes the role of regional planning councils from the DRI process.
DRIs
To that end, the bill subjects DRIs to the state coordinated review process so that new DRIs are not required to have specific review by the regional planning council.
Other
The bill also addresses a number of other growth management issues. It eliminates some findings regarding compatibility with adjacent military installations and exempts some small local governments that use less than 1 percent of a public water utility's total permitted allocation from having to amend its comprehensive plan in response to an updated regional water supply plan. The bill also creates a 10-year "connected city corridor" program for Pasco County that makes it easier to tie mixed-use developments to transportation corridors. The bill also adds "sinkholes" to a list of characteristics of blighted areas for the purposes of community redevelopment areas.
Left Out
There were several controversial provisions of the bill that did not survive. One provision would have required local governments to add a private property rights element to their comprehensive plan. A second would have restricted local control of "constrained agricultural lands," and a third would have limited certain concurrency fees.
The act became effective on May 15, 2015; Chapter No. 2015-30.
Property Rights
CS/HB 383 makes clarifications to the Bert J. Harris, Jr., Private Property Rights Protection Act and creates a new cause of action independent of the act for property owners subject to unlawful exactions of the type dealt with in 2013 by the United States Supreme Court in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District. Under the bill, a property owner is required to provide advance notice of the intent to file a suit seeking damages for a prohibited exaction and provide an estimate of the owner's damages. The governmental entity must then justify the exaction as proportionate or offer to remove or reduce the exaction. At trial, the governmental entity will have the burden of proving that the exaction has the requisite nexus to a legitimate public purpose and is proportionate. The property owner will have the burden of proving damages. Attorneys' fees and costs may be awarded to the governmental entity, but the court is required to award attorneys' fees and costs to the property owner if it is determined that the exaction has no nexus to a legitimate public purpose. The bill clarifies that it is applicable only to action taken directly on the property owner's land and not activities that are authorized on adjoining or adjacent properties (essentially codifying the majority opinion in City of Jacksonville v. Smith).
Unless vetoed, the act becomes effective on Oct. 1, 2015.
Ratification of DEP C&D Liner Rule
HB 7083 ratifies the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) rules requiring liners and leachate collection systems at construction and demolition debris disposal facilities.
Unless vetoed, the act will be effective upon becoming law.
Ratification of MFLs
HB 7081 was adopted in order to expedite the effective date of minimum flows and levels (MFLs) for the Lower Santa Fe and Ichetucknee Rivers and associated priority springs. The St. Johns River Water Management District asked DEP to adopt a rule implementing the MFLs due to cross-basin impacts originating outside the district. DEP also proposed regulatory flow recovery provisions since the current flow data showed significant declines from historic levels. A challenge to the DEP-proposed rule was filed with the Division of Administrative Hearings, thus delaying the effective date of the rule. The Legislature passed HB 7081 to allow prompt implementation.
Unless vetoed, the act will be effective upon becoming law.
SLAPP
CS/SB 1312 amends provisions relating to strategic lawsuits against public participation (often referred to as "SLAPP suits") thought to be brought to silence critics, particularly in the environmental arena. Under existing law, only governmental entities are prohibited from filing such suits to retaliate against persons or groups exercising rights to participate in government activities. The bill extends the applicability of the anti-SLAPP statute to suits filed by anyone – not just governmental entities. The bill protects free speech in connection with public issues in two categories: (1) speech made before a governmental entity in connection with an issue that the governmental entity is considering or has under review; and (2) speech in connection with a play, movie, television program, radio broadcast, audiovisual work, book, magazine article, musical work, news report or similar works. The second category does not require any connection to a governmental proceeding. The bill provides for expeditious resolution of a suit that is claimed to be a SLAPP suit.
The act becomes effective on July 1, 2015. Chapter No. 2015-70.
Surveillance by a Drone
CS/CS/SB 766 prohibits any person from using a drone to capture an image of privately owned real property or of the owner, tenant, occupant, invitee or licensee of such property with the intent to conduct surveillance without his or her written consent if a reasonable expectation of privacy exists. The bill authorizes the use of a drone by a person or a business licensed by the state, or a contractor thereof as long as such use is to perform reasonable tasks within the scope of practice. Such licensed professions include real estate brokers, real estate appraisers, land surveyors and construction contractors. The bill allows property appraisers to use drones solely for assessing property for ad valorem taxes. The bill also allows the capturing of images by or for a utility for the operation and maintenance of its facilities, the inspection related to construction of its facilities, the assessment of vegetation growth on rights-of-way and conducting environmental monitoring. In addition, the bill allows aerial mapping and cargo delivery if the person is operating in compliance with FAA regulations.
The act becomes effective on July 1, 2015. Chapter No. 2015-26.
BILLS THAT HAVE YET TO PASS
Agritourism
SB 594 would have prohibited local government enforcement (and not merely adoption) of an ordinance, regulation or rule that would have placed limits on agritourism. The bill died on the Senate calendar.
Amendment 1 Funding
A major priority during the 2015 Regular Legislative Session was the implementation of Amendment 1. The Water and Land Conservation amendment was an initiative ratified by 75 percent of the voters during the 2014 general election. By its terms, the initiative dedicates one-third of the existing documentary stamp tax revenues to the Land Acquisition Trust Fund to acquire, restore, improve and manage conservation lands for a term of 20 years. The Revenue Estimating Conference forecast that the amendment will raise $750 million for fiscal year 2015-2016 and in excess of $20 billion for the life of the amendment. Although the initiative sponsors stated that no implementing legislation other than an appropriation was required, several bills were introduced in both houses relating to the implementation of what is now Article 10, Section 28 of the Florida Constitution. None of the implementing bills made their way through the Legislature during the regular session, but several are within the call for the special session because they have budgetary implications.
SBs 576, 578, 580, 584 and 586 were substantive implementation bills for Amendment 1. Each bill had a House counterpart and passed its respective house. They were each to be referred to a conference committee, but no conference committees were appointed. SB 584 was a major revision of the Land Acquisition Trust Fund (LATF) and allocations within the documentary stamp tax. The other bills were fairly minor in that they established new trust funds (known as "baby LATFs") within different departments to be able to spend Amendment 1 revenues. Separate bills are required by the Florida Constitution to establish new trust funds or retire existing trust funds. These bills would have repealed existing documentary stamp dedications for land management to be replaced with the new constitutionally required dedication. These bills also would have repurposed the Land Acquisition Trust Fund to give the Legislature maximum flexibility for appropriations under the amendment. Both houses also passed their versions of a water bill (SB 918 and HB 7003) that would have authorized Amendment 1 appropriations for various water resource development projects and springs protection.
The Senate, House and the Governor are far apart on appropriations for Amendment 1. For land conservation, the Governor recommended $100 million, while the House approved $8 million and the Senate approved $15 million. All three propose to use a significant portion of Amendment 1 revenues to fund existing programs. The Governor recommended $156 million, while the Senate and House approved $230 million and $236 million, respectively, primarily for salaries for existing state employees. Bonding is also an area of disagreement. The House bill includes $200 million for bonding water projects, while the Senate and Governor oppose new bonding. All three propose paying $150 million of existing debt service through Amendment 1. Some of the line items in the appropriations bill reference SB 918 and are dependent on passage of the implementation bills.
The call for the special session in June includes the budget, along with SBs 576, 578, 580 and 584. Look for some provisions of SB 586 and SB 918 to be offered as amendments to SB 584.
Contaminated Sites
HB 841/SB 1302 would have provided clarification for the use of risk-based corrective action (RBCA) and the authorization of alternative cleanup target levels without requiring institutional controls. The bills would have expanded the definition of "background concentration" to include some anthropogenic sources. The bills would have created a mechanism for approving long-term natural attenuation for more than five years. The bills also would have revised the cleanup target levels for surface water as long as groundwater contaminants did not cause water quality exceedances in the surface water. Both bills died on the House calendar, but look for these to be reintroduced in the 2016 legislative session.
Environmental Control
HB 653 and SB 714 started out as the annual "environmental train," addressing a potpourri of environmental issues that were generally not controversial. These included various organizational changes within the DEP. The bills would have: prohibited permitting agencies from modifying permitted water allocations during the term of the permit under certain conditions; prohibited water management districts from reducing permitted allocations during the term of the consumptive use permit for agricultural irrigation under certain conditions; directed the water management districts to adopt rules providing water conservation incentives, including permit extensions; and required the water management districts to promote expanded cost-sharing criteria for additional water conservation practices. In addition, the bills would have provided that the reclamation timing requirements for phosphate mines and the required financial assurance do not apply to constructed clay-settling areas where their beneficial use has been extended. Finally, the bills included several provisions dealing with solid waste, including: (1) the creation of a solid waste landfill closure account to provide funding for the closing and long-term care of solid waste management facilities; and (2) providing that for local flow control ordinances, resource recovery facility does not include a landfill gas-to-gas energy system or facility. The House bill was amended on the floor to include most of the House water bill, HB 7003, and then died in the Senate without having been considered.
Land Application of Septage
Effective Jan. 1, 2016, the land application of septage is prohibited. SB 642 and HB 687 would have repealed the ban, and other proposals would have extended the date. None of these measures were enacted; so the ban on the land application septage will take effect on Jan. 1, 2016, as scheduled.
Two-Year Extension of Certain Permits
HB 7067, a comprehensive economic development measure, included a provision that would have provided for yet another two-year extension of certain environmental resource permits. The measure passed the House but died in the Senate.
Oil and Gas Regulation
The Legislature attempted to deal with hydraulic fracturing during the regular session, but the bills fell victim to the early adjournment by the House and the impasse over the budget. HB 1205 and SB 1468 would have preempted permitting of the so-called high-pressure well stimulation activities and would have established that these activities are subject to the same permitting requirements that apply to drilling an oil and gas well. The bills would have required DEP to conduct a study on high-pressure well stimulation and required the agency to designate the national chemical registry as the state's registry for disclosure of chemicals utilized in the process. HB 1209 and SB 1582 would have provided a limited public records exemption for the information required to be submitted on chemical utilization with exceptions. SB 166 and HB 169 would have prohibited hydraulic fracturing in Florida. This issue is likely to return for the 2016 Session beginning in January.
Petroleum Restoration
SB 314/HB 733 would have expanded the Abandoned Tank Restoration Program and increased the number of sites eligible for state-funded remediation, including sites where a property owner knew of petroleum contamination at the time of purchase. The bills would have changed the name from Low Score Site Initiative (LSSI) to Low-Risk Site Initiative (LRSI). The bills also would have removed certain criteria and increased the funding limit and time frames in which the LRSI assessment and groundwater monitoring must be completed. The bills also would have increased the annual funding allocation for the Advanced Cleanup Program from $15 million to $25 million and allowed a property owner or responsible party to enter into a voluntary cost-sharing agreement to bundle the assessment and remediation of multiple sites. Both bills died on the Senate calendar.
Private Property Rights Elements
HB 551/SB 1424 would have required local governments to include private property rights protections within their comprehensive plans. The property rights element would have required establishment of principles, guidelines, standards and strategies to guide local government decisions on proposed developments. The bills died in committee. There was also an unsuccessful effort to add this language to the growth management bill.
Water/Policy/Springs Protection
SB 918/HB 7003/HB 653 addressed water policy generally and particularly springs protection and rehabilitation. The Outstanding Florida Springs established by SB 918 included first magnitude springs and a number of named springs. The House version designated Priority Florida Springs to include first and second magnitude springs, though it does not name any springs. Both bills addressed the integrated nature of springs and aquifer systems, and various provisions were identified for protecting and restoring impaired springs. These provisions included use of MFLs and basin management action plans, particularly for "priority focus areas" within spring sheds where the aquifer is most vulnerable to pollution from the surface or shallow water table conditions. Both bills directed DEP to investigate designated springs and develop strategies to rehabilitate or protect the springs and implement the statute. The bills also addressed the Everglades and related river systems, employing best management practices and basin management action plans. Finally, the Senate bill codified the Central Florida Water Initiative objectives of protecting stressed groundwater systems and developing alternative water supplies.
*   *   *
The Legislature will return for a special session scheduled for June 1-20, 2015, primarily to enact a state budget – the only bill the Legislature is required to pass.

1506dd-z       

1506dd Title - Source - Author - Date - Text                                                 JUNE 2015                             

yymmdd-y

1506dd-z

1506dd Title - Source - Author - Date - Text