Everglades Reporter

Friends of the Everglades

Spring 2000

Friends Opposes Rockmining in the Everglades

                Friends of the Everglades opposes additional rock mining in western Miami-Dade County, as described by the draft Lakebelt Programmatic EIS prepared by the US Army Corps of Engineers.  We believe that this mining will result in the unjustifiable loss of 21,000 acres of additional Everglades wetlands.  The negative impacts of this wetland loss are grossly underestimated by the EIS.  Permitting the removal of rock from the aquifer will remove viable habitat and replace it with sterile 60 to 90 foot-deep holes in the ground, which will significantly increase seepage from the Pennsuco wetlands, Water Conservation Area 3B and Everglades National Park.  The loss of surface wetlands will also result in exposing Dade’s drinking water supplies to increased contamination.  The Plan reviewed by the EIS provides no means of preventing or controlling predictable urban development of the areas adjacent to these deep quarry pits nor does it attempt to quantify secondary and cumulative environmental impacts of such development.  Once lost, the rock in the aquifer and the wetlands above it are irretrievable.

                Friends believes that all or most of the unmined land in the Lakebelt study area should be publicly acquired and subsequently used for purposes of Everglades restoration.  Further development in Miami-Dade County should be focused to the east and the destruction of natural areas should be halted.  To the extent that new development requires either lime-rock for fill, or lime-rock for cement production, those needs should be met from areas outside of the Everglades.

The long-awaited Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on reuse of Homestead Air Force Base has finally arrived, in draft form, and it is a major disappointment to those who had expected it to give serious consideration to the impacts of a major commercial airport between Biscayne National Park and Everglades National Park. 

                The government’s (US Air Force and Federal Aviation Administration) contractor, Science Applications International Corporation (“SAIC”) hired a pro-development and pro-commercial aviation consultant (Landrum and Brown) to do much of the study.  As a result, the consultants selected data in such a way as to show the loudest background noises in the area as “ambient noise levels” in order to minimize the increase in noise that would be produced by commercial air operations at the airport.  It summarily dismissed the addition of tons of unburned jet fuel and other airborne contaminants into the waters of the surrounding national parks and treated as inconsequential the potential for spills of hazardous materials at the airport or at businesses in the secondary development that will inevitably occur around a major commercial airport.  This despite an ample record of massive fuel spills at many Florida airports, including Miami International (Dade County had to close its Miami Springs well field because of contamination from Miami International Airport), and a record of serious discharges of toxic materials at businesses around airports. 

                The Dade County Commission approved a long-term, no-bid contract with a politically well-connected group of local builders, without protections for the public that competitive bidding provides.  This is business as usual for Dade County and its airport operations and risks the survival of both national parks.  The Miami Herald has had a recent series of articles detailing how Dade County officials gave their friends contracts for little or no work, and spent exorbitant amounts on various items.  One particularly outrageous example is the toilet seats that were installed at MIA at a cost of $8,000 each.

                The SEIS treats as inconsequential the increase in flight operations, from approximately 20,000 each year of single engine Air Force fighters that presently occur, to up to 231,000 flights of multi-engine cargo aircraft each year with a single runway, or 370,000 flights each year if a second runway is constructed.  The fact that the fighters climb rapidly out of hearing range while cargo planes climb slowly is disregarded.

                Friends of the Everglades, formed over 30 years ago to oppose a jetport north of Everglades National Park, is equally committed to opposing the commercial jetport alternative for this site.  There have been several other proposals for this site and they deserve further study.  The commercial airport proposal is a still-born idea, but Dade County and Homestead/Florida City officials continue to try to breathe life into it. Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt and Environmental Protection Agency Director Carol Browner have said that the site is unsuitable for an airport.  The big question is whether their boss, the President, will support their position or the county’s plan.  Observers believe that the Democrats want to curry favor with local Hispanic voters and see the Homestead Air Force Base property as a plum that could be tossed to Dade County with little political fallout, to create a favorable election climate. Voter support across the country for Al Gore, who claims to be an environmentalist, could depend on the Administration’s actions on Homestead.  Nowhere else in the United States would a major commercial airport be so close (1-1/2 miles) to a national park.  Several national conservation organizations have vowed to make it a national issue with all their members.  Another group of local environmentalists has threatened to sue if the transfer to Dade County is approved.   Get a copy of the Draft SEIS and read it.  Deadline for comments is March 7, 2000.  Send your comments on the proposed transfer to:

            One of the really thorny problems facing Everglades Restoration is the future of the EAA.  The current owners are enormously wealthy and accordingly influential with elected officials.  They see their current best interest in raising sugar cane and collecting huge subsidies through the sugar quota system (Read the November 1999 issue of Harpers Magazine for an excellent explanation  of this).  They also know that the muck soils of the EAA are rapidly disappearing and they will soon reach the point when sugar cane will no longer be a feasible crop.  They envision replacing the cane fields with subdivisions full of condominiums and golf courses.  And people, lots of people.  If developed, the 750,000 acres of the EAA could itself double south Florida’s population.

            At the same time, scientists and environmental activists understand that restoration of the Everglades, if it is to be successful, must eventually reflood the greater portion of the EAA.  The development scenario and the reflooding scenario for the EAA are inherently mutually exclusive.  We can do one, but not both.

            The Everglades Coalition, of which Friends is a member, recently adopted a proposal that lands in the EAA should be acquired, to reduce the loss of spatial extent of the Everglades, beyond that proposed by the Corps Restoration Plan.  The Coalition voted to endorse purchase of the privately held lands in the EAA, as they leave current agricultural production.  There is currently no funding mechanism to accomplish such purchase, but that mechanism is desperately needed if restoration is to succeed.  The coalition also requested that the National Academy of Sciences committee examining the Everglades restoration plan “consider and project long-term impacts on the Everglades of expansion of urbanization into the EAA...” 

            Friends urges all its members to contact their members of Congress and ask for funding for a major land acquisition initiative in the EAA.   Explain to your friends what is at stake if this land is not acquired and reflooded.  Benefits of such an acquisition program would include increased spatial extent of wetlands, reduction of contaminated water in the Everglades, reduced loss of fresh water to the oceans, increased water storage capacity, protection of estuaries and Lake Okeechobee, improved hydropatterns, and reduction and reversal of soil subsidence.

            Please call our office if you have any questions about this proposal.

Young Friends Begins Third
Year of Outreach Program

                Friends of the Everglades has begun the third year of presenting its Young Friends of the Everglades program to 4th grade students in the Dade County school system.  This program teaches environmental awareness, protection of the Everglades and water conservation.  It is funded with a Community Based Organization Grant from Miami-Dade County’s Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM), plus the Water and Sewer Department and Solid Waste Management Department. 

                We are exceptionally fortunate to have two fine educators working with us on this.  Jim McMaster has presented this program to over 10,000 students in the past two years.  Carolyn Carlson Yellen, a previous volunteer for Friends of the Everglades joins us this year.  With two outreach educators, we hope to reach nearly twice the number of children we presented the program to last year.  Thanks to both of them for their hard work.

            On January 28 and 29, Friends attended the first of a series of meetings, called by their organizers “The Biscayne Bay Partnership Initiative”.  Like most proceedings with a clever title, this one is not what it appears.  In the introduction to the January 28 meeting, the organizers talked about “improving”  protection for Biscayne Bay.  They were strangely silent, however, about the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Act, which Friends of the Everglades worked hard to get passed decades ago, which has provided excellent protection for the Bay against destructive development, and which we have repeatedly forced state regulators to recognize and enforce, over their stubborn resistance.  The special act that has protected Biscayne Bay had only one very brief mention in a half-day introduction to the “Initiative”. 

            The Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Act has a critically important provision that makes it effective:   At Section 3(a), the Act states: (a)  No further sale, transfer, or lease of sovereignty submerged lands in the preserve shall be approved or consummated by the board of trustees, except  upon a showing of extreme hardship on the part of the applicant and a  determination by the board of trustees that such sale, transfer, or lease is in the  public interest.

            When the Act first became law in 1974, the shores of Biscayne Bay were being rapidly gobbled up by private marinas.  Those marinas typically created serious water quality problems due to bilge pumping and raw sewage, turbidity and disturbance of bottom sediments by prop wash.  Additionally, coastal vegetation such as mangroves, and bottom vegetation such as seagrasses were killed by construction and operation of the marinas, and never returned.  The result was that the Bay became increasingly polluted.       

            The Aquatic Preserve Act stopped the proliferation of bay construction projects and has allowed the bay to slowly begin recovering.  The language of the act, particularly the “extreme hardship” provision, which prevents the lease or conveyance of sovereignty  (state-owned) bay bottom by the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund unless the applicant has an extreme hardship, stopped the loss of bay bottom for marinas.  Inability to get a lease for sovereignty lands cannot, in and of itself, constitute a hardship. 

            Thus, if inability to have a marina reduces the potential value of a project,. failure of trustees to convey bottom lands does not and cannot constitute a hardship. 

            One result of the Aquatic Preserve Act has been a significant increase in the number of “dry” storage facilities, where boats are kept on racks rather than in the water.  Ultimately, this is better for the boats, which don’t require as much maintenance when they are kept out of the water, and better for the bay, because the boats don’t require toxic bottom paints that would leach into the bay.

            The “public interest” provision allows government activities that are necessary for public (not private) necessity, such as bridges or other public projects.

            Developers who would like to build marinas in Biscayne Bay, particularly the developer of a hotel on Brickell Key who wants to put in a giant marina but has not been able to do so because of the extreme hardship requirement, would like to eliminate the restrictions of the Act.  This one has tried to structure a deal with the City of Miami to call his private marina “public’ to get around the extreme hardship restrictions.  They don’t want to use their valuable uplands for boat storage, and want the public to provide the space for their docks.  If the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Act were not in place, the dock builders could resume their profitable and very damaging assault on the Bay.  It now appears that the Biscayne Bay Partnership Initiative is the mechanism by which they mean to accomplish the elimination of the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Act.  

            In his speech at the beginning of the proceedings, Governor Bush gave away the hidden agenda of the Initiative, when he said the process would “resolve conflicts” in the Bay.  The only conflicts are between those who would like to exploit and damage the Bay for their own profit and those who want to see the Act enforced.  The Governor can eliminate those conflicts by eliminating the Act that protects the Bay. 

            A second clue to the hidden agenda of the BBPI was the concerted failure of any of the organizers to mention the Act as the main controlling law regarding activities on the Bay.  Citizens around the state should be warned that this assault on Biscayne Bay is only a part of a much larger movement in the Legislature to eliminate Aquatic Preserves statewide.  The plan is to have the 2001 Legislature rescind both the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Act (Section 258.397, F.S.) and the generic aquatic preserve act that applies to other aquatic preserves around the state.  This will open all of our aquatic preserves to new exploitation.  Haven’t we learned anything in all these years?  Have we forgotten how hard we worked to establish these precious protected areas?  We all need to contact our elected representatives and make it clear to them that we want our aquatic preserves protected, not disembowled.               The third hint to the hidden agenda is that the actual work plan for the BBPI calls for the several panels to conduct the “Fact Finding” phase (Phase II) without any public input.  The public input in the plan only occurs in Phase III when the already written report will be reviewed.  The four main panels are to provide their input to a “Policy Panel” composed of a group mainly composed of politicians, who will write the actual report.  Would you like to bet that the real final report is already written? 

            We here at Friends of the Everglades believe the Initiative’s final report to the 2001 Legislature will recommend elimination of all of the aquatic preserves in the state, as well as elimination of the extreme hardship requirement.  It will also recommend establishment of a Governor-appointed, i.e., political, committee, ala the Water Management District, that will decide whether to allow projects to proceed in the Bay.  We expect such a committee to operate like the South Florida Regional Planning Council, which has never disapproved a development in Dade, Broward or Monroe County.   Oh, by the way, the people who are behind the BBPI are the same ones who created the Regional Planning Council system.          

            This process is pernicious.  It threatens all of the environmental progress we have made in Florida during the past three decades, since the adoption of  most of the nation’s, and Florida’s environmental laws.  If successful, it will discard the bipartisan work of generations of Floridians to protect our precious and fragile natural resources, and replace it with the old system where our resources are available to anyone who has the connections necessary to take the Governor to lunch.  This process is being directed by development industry lobbyists who want to have all restrictions on development removed, and they have the full cooperation of both the Governor, the Department of Environmental Protection and the Legislature. 

            If we value our natural resources, it is up to us, the citizens of Florida, to act to prevent their loss.   Pogo said, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”  Pogo was right.  If we don’t protect our environment, we will get what we deserve, dirty water, dirty air, diseased fish and then no fish, human disease, and a damaged economy, and the list goes on and on.                      The people who would eliminate all of our environmental protections would be well advised to realize that a clean environment is good for the economy.  More people buy boats, fishing equipment, and other recreational equipment when the environment is clean.                              

Everyone benefits from a clean environment, and everyone loses when it is dirty.   We must not allow the desires of a few developers who will exploit the resources, then leave, to cause the loss of our priceless natural treasures.

            For the past several years, the State of Florida’s South Florida Water Management District and US Army Corps of Engineers have been working on a “comprehensive review” of the giant drainage project that, during the past 50 years, has dramatically damaged the Everglades ecosystem.  The alleged purpose of this review was to “restore” the Everglades.  This “restudy” has resulted in a “restoration plan” that proposes a very complex, very expensive plumbing system, then proposes an implementation schedule for that plan.

            Friends of the Everglades, like others in the environmental community, enthusiastically supported the concept of the comprehensive review, because it focused state and federal agencies on the need to protect the Everglades.  Unfortunately, Friends now believes that review has gone awry and failed in its stated purpose.

            At Friends of the Everglades, we have looked carefully at the proposals contained in the Corps plan and attempted to project what the long-term results of implementation of the proposals would be. 

            Our conclusion is not only that the Everglades restoration as currently planned won’t work, but that it will, in our opinion, insure the eventual destruction of the Everglades as we know it.  There are several reasons that we believe this: 

·    First among these is that the proposed system is entirely artificial.  It rejects outright the natural processes that have been crucial to the creation and maintenance of the Everglades for thousands of years.  These critical processes, abandoned by the proposed plan, include movement of water by gravity, maintenance of sheet-flow through saw-grass marshes, and the primary role of evaporation and rainfall in maintenance of the “Rain Machine” to deliver clean water to the Everglades.  Water Management District and Corps of Engineers planners reject these processes because they can’t “control” them.

·    The new plan continues to cut the historic Everglades ecosystem into pieces and treats each piece as a “tank” which the Water Management District would pump water into or drain water from.  The completed system would restore the Everglades in the same way putting a saltwater aquarium in your living room restores the Pacific Ocean.

·     There has been no adequate consideration of the water quality at any point in the system.  A large percentage of the massive expenditures for the proposed system is dedicated to preserving the very industries that have been systematically poisoning and drying out the Everglades for the last 50 years, particularly agriculture in the Everglades Agricultural Area. 

·    There is no clear delineation between the expenditures allegedly intended for restoration of the natural system and those for provision of water supplies for agriculture and residential populations.  This will result in expenditure of federal funds for provision of water supplies for human populations that should be paid for with state or local funds, a federal subsidy for more explosive uncontrolled population growth in South Florida.  Meanwhile, those federal funds become unavailable for real restoration.  Friends members will recall that Joe Podgor, Marjory and a small group of Friends members were the ones who successfully petitioned EPA to have the Biscayne Aquifer designated as a “sole source aquifer” in the late 1970s.

·    The water supplies for human consumption and for the “natural system” are mixed together.  This commingling will inevitably result in more competition for the same water, as human demand for water increases, and the natural system will inevitably lose in that competition, as it has for the last 50 years.  We know how that competition works.

·    The proposed plan also relies heavily on the State of Florida’s “Everglades Forever Act”, (EFA) which Friends of the Everglades has long denounced as being anti-Everglades.  Among other things it allows continued pollution of the Everglades by Big Sugar, and shifts the cost of cleaning up the sugar industry’s discharges from the industry to the public.  It then focuses on a method, called “stormwater treatment areas”, for cleaning up those discharges, which Friends of the Everglades believes can never be successful.  Friends members will recall that when the Everglades Forever Act was first proposed, it was to be named for Marjory Stoneman Douglas.  When Marjory learned that the act would allow unregulated pollution until 2006, she demanded that her name be removed from it. 

      Friends of the Everglades continues to oppose the discharges that the EFA approves, which we believe violate the federal Clean Water Act and Florida Water Quality law, and which we further believe are destroying the River of Grass. 

            Development of the current plan was compromised in its early stages by political maneuvering to put agriculture and development activities ahead of restoration of the natural system.  This was, we believe, in large measure promoted by large campaign contributions by the sugar industry to political candidates in state and federal races.  These political contributions have had the desired effect.  The process was perverted and the public’s interest in a viable natural system was disregarded in favor of the interests of the campaign contributors. 

            If we fail to speak out against this replumbing plan, but allow the state and federal governments to spend 7.8 Billion Dollars, or more, on a project that doesn’t have what it will take to successfully restore the Everglades, there is the strong likelihood that those governments won’t be willing to pay more for another restoration effort later.  Pursuing a defective plan now will destroy the South Florida’s credibility to raise more funds in the future.

            Friends of the Everglades members who want to clearly understand the situation should consider the Everglades of today as a dying patient on life support.  The canals and pumps that provide the inadequate supply of water that is today’s life-blood of the Everglades are analogous to the tubes to provide nourishment to a comatose person.  We know that the present system is causing the slow decline of the Everglades.  The plan proposes to permanently cut out the heart of the Everglades, i.e., Lake Okeechobee and the Rain Machine that should supply clean water, and replace it with more pumps, canals and artificial lakes.  There is no way this can be called “restoration” of the natural system.

            To be acceptable, the restoration plan must include restoration of the Rain Machine,  sheet flow from Lake Okeechobee, and positive segregation of water for the natural system from water for human needs, with separate funding..

            Friends of the Everglades urges its members, and all those who want to see a truly restored Everglades system, to write to their Congresspersons and State Legislators and ask them to insure that dollars spent in the name of restoration actually accomplish restoration.

            The Environmental Fund for Florida (“EFF”) is a coalition of 23 of Florida’s leading environmental groups, including Friends of the Everglades, united to raise funds to protect Florida’s natural resources. Realizing that payroll deduction is the most effective way for most Floridians to participate in preserving Florida and its natural resources, EFF targets workplace giving for its fund-raising efforts.

            Through payroll deduction, you can designate a gift to Friends of the Everglades or any of the other EFF member organizations in your company’s annual campaign, and your contribution will be deducted throughout the year from your paycheck. Donations to EFF and its Member Organizations are tax-deductible.

            Today, EFF is able to reach thousands of Floridians through many successful workplace campaigns. If you are a business leader, consider starting a workplace giving campaign to show your support for Florida’s environment. If you are a concerned citizen, ask your employer to join EFF so that you and your associates may give to Florida’s environment through payroll deductions. You may also donate directly to EFF, if you prefer.

            Contributions to EFF support habitat preservation and restoration, wildlife protection, water and air quality monitoring, smarter planning for future growth and development, and environmental advocacy

            The Environmental Fund for Florida and all participating member organizations are 501(c)(3) nonprofit charities and are registered with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs to solicit funds. Contributions are tax deductible.

             For Florida Residents: A copy of EFF’s official registration and financial information may be obtained from the Division of Consumer Services by calling toll-free, 1-800-435-7352 within the state.  Registration does not imply endorsement, approval, or recommendation by the state.

Friends of the Everglades needs your support to continue our work to protect the Everglades.

If you have made a contribution to Friends of the Everglades within the past year, then your membership is current.  Otherwise, please renew your pledge to the Everglades today by renewing your membership in Friends of the Everglades.

Membership is only $10.00 per person and $1.00 for students. Sign up the whole family.

Give a membership to a friend or relative as a birthday or holiday gift and help the Everglades.

If you are working on your estate planning, ask your advisor about the benefits of gifts of appreciated property to a charitable organization.

Consider making a gift of a life insurance policy to Friends of the Everglades.  Such a gift can result in reductions in estate taxes and significantly increase the amount received by your loved ones.  Call us for details.

We need volunteers.  If you live near our office, or in Tallahassee, West Palm Beach or Gainesville and would like to help, please call us for more information. 

Thanks for all of your support.

FRIENDS OF THE EVERGLADES
7800 RED ROAD, SUITE 215K
SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA 33143

Information about donations

                Friends of the Everglades needs your financial support.  Our budget for this year, now nearly $150,000, is mostly (60%) made up of restricted-grant funding.  The remainder still only allows us to hire one part-time staff person to address all our adminsitrative needs.   

                We need desperately to increase our efforts, to communicate with our members, and to educate the public, by hiring one or more full-time staff people, but we need additional funds to do this.

                With our $10.00 dues, even if every member renewed his or her membership, we would still raise less than $50,000 in dues revenues.    This means that only about ¼ of our annual funding is expected to come from dues, so contributions from individuals and foundations are critical to continuing our operations. 

                There are many ways for you to help.  Some are as easy as volunteering to make phone calls or write letters.  Some involve assisting at our office, easiest if you live near South Miami.  If you are in a position to make a donation, your donation will be deductible to the extent allowed by law.  Friends is a non-profit charitable organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. 

                If your estate will be subject to federal estate taxes at your death, there are ways to include Friends of the Everglades in your estate planning, and thereby increase the amount your family will receive after payment of estate taxes.  We are now working with a major insurance company to develop an insurance-funded charitable deduction program to help our members protect their estates while helping us protect the Everglades.  Please contact us for details.

Our sincere thanks to the following persons for their generous donations:  Sheryl Schoendorfer in memory of Nell Jones, Mac’s Fish Camp owner, Gail Frizzell in memory of Mrs. Marge Buhrmaster, and John Sumoski in memory of Bud Swenson of Lake Worth, Florida.