Suwannee Riverkeeper

Regular Postings Closed till Jan 1, 2011 unless you are notified by Email

2010-07-05T09:17:00.001-07:00

Levy nuclear plant pushed back

2010-05-06T05:02:00.000-07:00

The Progress Energy plant won't be online until at least 2021 now.

By Fred Hiers
Staff writer

Published: Thursday, May 6, 2010 at 6:01 a.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, May 5, 2010 at 11:22 p.m.

Progress Energy Florida is asking Florida regulators for permission to cut its customers' nuclear recovery costs next year by 21 percent, reducing the average nuclear cost of $6.99 per month on customer monthly bills down to $5.53. The reduction is part of Progress Energy's decision to postpone major construction on its proposed Levy County nuclear plant.

Company spokeswoman Cherie Jacobs said the company predicts the project, once slated to be online by 2016 and cost about $17 billion, will now be operational no sooner than 2021 at a cost ranging between $17.2 billion to $22.5 billion...

http://www.gainesville.com/article/20100506/ARTICLES/5061056/1002/news01?Title=Levy-nuclear-plant-pushed-back-

Coast Guard: Fishing case shows the need for safety equipment

2010-04-30T09:19:00.000-07:00

http://www.gainesville.com/article/20100430/ARTICLES/4301016/1105/NEWS?Title=Coast-Guard-Fishing-case-shows-the-need-for-safety-equipment

By Karen Voyles
Staff writer

The U.S. Coast Guard said a predawn medical emergency on a fishing boat is a prime example of the importance of having safety equipment on board that is operating correctly.

At about 1:45 a.m. Thursday, a Coast Guard aircraft crew received a distress call over a VHF-FM radio. The crew of the fishing boat Scamp told officers they were in the Gulf of Mexico and a 44-year-old man on board was suffering stomach pains.

The aircraft crew relayed the information to the Coast Guard command center in St. Petersburg. Officials said that as a result of a consultation with a flight surgeon the decision was made to launch a 27-foot response boat crew from Yankeetown at 2:17 a.m.

The man was medically evacuated from the fishing boat at about 3:45 a.m. while the boat was about 15 miles west of Crystal River. The man was taken to the Halfway Boat Ramp in Crystal River, where an ambulance crew was waiting to take him to an area hospital. Details on his condition were unavailable later Thursday.

In a news release about the incident, Coast Guard officials said the "rescue illustrates the vital importance of safety equipment for all seasoned and recreational boaters. The Coast Guard reminds boaters that cell phones are not a reliable means of communication on the water, and recommends the use of a registered EPIRB, PPIRB, fully functioning marine band radio and proper use of life jackets."

More information on mandatory and recommended lifesaving equipment is available from the Coast Guard's Boating Safety website at www.uscgboating.org.

Could Cleaner Air Actually Intensify Global Warming?

2010-04-25T19:11:00.000-07:00

NPR: Is the solution to global warning more pollution?

April 25, 2010

As much of the world marked Earth Day this past week, the Environmental Protection Agency reported that air pollution has declined dramatically over the past 20 years. It sounds like good news, but science writer Eli Kintisch argues that there's a surprising downside: Cleaner air might actually intensify global warming.

"If we continue to cut back on smoke pouring forth from industrial smokestacks, the increase in global warming could be profound," Kintisch writes in an opinion piece for the Los Angeles Times.

Kintisch isn't talking about greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide; he's talking about another kind of pollutant we put in the sky -- "like aerosols from a spray can," he tells NPR's Guy Raz. "It turns out that those particles have a profound effect on maintaining the planet's temperature."

Greenhouse gases and aerosol pollutants work in opposing ways on the Earth's climate, Kintisch explains. "The greenhouse gases warm the planet when they're emitted, because they absorb heat reflected up from the ground -- the greenhouse effect. These aerosols, though, do the opposite. They block sunlight, they make clouds more reflective -- and by doing that, they actually cool the planet.

"The problem is that we're cutting the cooling pollution as we make our air cleaner," he says.

The Scope Of The Problem: Still A Mystery

The entire article http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126226938&f=1002&sc=igg2

Earth Week is a sham

2010-04-22T19:09:00.000-07:00

The fact remains that the Earth is just not that into us anymore. We had our shot with her, but we blew it and no amount of sweet-talking from Ed Begley, Jr. or Al Gore is going to change that.

http://www.gainesville.com/article/20100422/COLUMNISTS/4221011?p=1&tc=pg

FWRI Florida Manatee GIS Research Internship - Summer 2010

2010-04-15T13:00:00.000-07:00

Subject: [MARMAM] FWRI Florida Manatee GIS Research Internship - Summer 2010

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's (FWC) Manatee Geographic Information System (GIS) section is looking for a detail-oriented intern or volunteer to work in St. Petersburg, Florida.

The intern’s primary responsibilities will involve assisting staff members in GIS tasks such as digitization; creation and modification of shapefiles and geodatabases; database management and development; and Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) of spatial data. Other responsibilities may include data entry and special projects.

Qualifications:

Working knowledge of ArcGIS 8.x or 9.x

Knowledge of GIS theories and methods, as demonstrated by coursework or training

Basic database knowledge; Microsoft Access literacy preferred

Ability to work independently and as part of a group

Application Process:

We are currently accepting applications for the summer of 2010 (May – August). Internships require a minimum two-month commitment. Starting and ending dates are flexible; hours are also somewhat flexible. Please indicate in your cover letter the position for which you are applying. Send a hard copy of your resumé with your cover letter, college transcripts (unofficial copies are sufficient if not applying for internship credit), a list of three references, and contact information to the following address:

Robin Allen

Internship Coordinator

Fish and Wildlife Research Institute

100 Eighth Avenue SE

St. Petersburg, FL 33701-5020

Applications may also be submitted as an e-mail attachment to: Interns@MyFWC.com

This intern position is open until filled.

All positions are unpaid. Housing and transportation are NOT provided.

Experience science firsthand at MarineQuest 2010

2010-04-15T12:52:00.000-07:00

http://research.MyFWC.com/mqpresskit.

http://myfwc.com/NEWSROOM/10/southwest/News_10_SW_MarineQuest2.htm.

Experience science firsthand at MarineQuest 2010

Visitors of all ages can explore the world of science at the 16th annual MarineQuest at the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI). The free open house takes place Saturday, April 17, from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the FWRI headquarters, 100 8th Ave. S.E., in downtown St. Petersburg.

Last year, thousands flocked to the FWRI open house for a hands-on learning experience. The event features more than 60 exhibits with interactive displays and live animals. Participants can learn about cutting-edge research and join FWRI biologists as they demonstrate how they rescue distressed manatees, tag fish and monitor red tide. Live critters in touch tanks will be on display, as well as other live animals, including alligators, sharks, rays and hatchery-reared redfish. Visitors also can talk one-on-one with some of Florida’s top scientists and law enforcement officers and or attend presentations on shark attacks, spiny lobsters, panthers and more.

Special activities for children include wildlife origami, face-painting, the Japanese art of “gyotaku” fish painting, and “reel” fishing for redfish.

More than 30 organizations, including government agencies and conservation groups, also will have displays at the event.

Free parking for the Saturday open house is available at the University of South Florida St. Petersburg parking garage.

Sponsors include the St. Petersburg Times, the City of St. Petersburg and the University of South Florida St. Petersburg.

Midweek Red Tide Update, 04/13/2010

2010-04-15T11:42:00.001-07:00

No water samples have been received this week from northwest Florida.

On the east coast of Florida, Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in a water sample collected this week alongshore of Brevard County.

In southwest Florida, Karenia brevis was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore of Sarasota, Manatee and Collier counties. Additional samples collected south of Marathon in the Florida Keys (Monroe County) also contained no K. brevis.

Sampling will continue this week, and complete results will be available in the next scheduled status report on Friday, April 16.

EPA PUTS OFF NEW PROTECTIONS FOR FLORIDA'S COASTAL WATERS

2010-04-15T08:47:00.001-07:00

For Immediate Release: Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Contact: Jerry Phillips (850) 877-8097; Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337

EPA PUTS OFF NEW PROTECTIONS FOR FLORIDA'S COASTAL WATERS

New Scientific Peer Review Defers Estuarine and Coastal Standards until 2011

Tallahassee - Long-awaited federal standards to stop excess nutrients from fouling Florida's coastal waters will not be ready this year, according to correspondence released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Instead, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will proceed with standards for springs, lakes and streams this year but standards for estuaries and coastal waters will undergo a new "third party review of the scientific basis" - a process that will last until 2011.

This action means that relief for Florida's most polluted waters will not be forthcoming anytime soon. EPA will only propose new standards for estuaries and coastal waters in 2011, beginning a long public comment and rulemaking process that will likely extend well into 2012, a presidential election year.

The March 17, 2010 letter from Peter Silva, EPA Assistant Administrator for Water programs, to Michael Sole, Secretary of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) states:

.

"First, the Agency has decided to delay finalizing promulgation of the 'downstream protection value,' or DPVs with respect to downstream estuary protection and to address this issue in the 2011 estuary and coastal rulemaking….Second, EPA will seek additional third party review of the scientific basis for water quality standards to protect downstream estuarine and coastal waters. We commit to consult with FDEP on the scope of third party review and will announce in early April the specific plans for that review."

EPA is proposing to create objective or numeric standards for Florida waters as a result of settling an environmental lawsuit charging the agency with failure to enforce the Clean Water Act. The EPA numeric standards would replace state narrative criteria, which have been widely criticized as ineffective.

"This appears to be more foot dragging by EPA, which has spent years avoiding doing its job for Florida's waters," stated Florida PEER Director Jerry Phillips, a former water enforcement attorney with FDEP. PEER has criticized EPA's proposed standards as too weak as a result of political compromises. "If the estuarine standards need scientific peer review, why don't the standards for springs and streams also need scientific review?"

Despite the current controversy, numeric water quality criteria are not new in Florida. A numeric phosphorus criterion for the Everglades was established more than a decade ago and yet the Everglades still receives an excess of 100 tons of phosphorus per year, based on EPA's own studies. This month, U.S. District Court Judge Alan Gold is holding a hearing to consider holding EPA in contempt of court for failing to abide by his 2008 decision ordering enforcement of the Everglades' standards.

"If EPA has not protected the Everglades, with its already established numeric phosphorus limits, why should we expect anything different even if EPA does establish numeric nutrient criteria for the other water bodies in the state?" asked Phillips, noting that EPA has yet to appoint a Regional Administrator for Florida and the other Southeastern states. "The Obama administration promised change but all we have seen so far is more of the same. Real change is needed and the EPA Southeastern Regional Office is as good a place as any to begin."

U.S. JUDGE THREATENS EPA WITH CONTEMPT ON EVERGLADES

2010-04-15T08:46:00.000-07:00

For Immediate Release: Thursday, April 15, 2010

Contact: Kate Hornyan (202) 265-7337

U.S. JUDGE THREATENS EPA WITH CONTEMPT ON EVERGLADES

EPA Administrator Jackson Personally Summoned to Detail Pollution Compliance

Washington, DC - A frustrated federal judge stopped just short of a formal contempt of court finding against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its failure to stem mounting pollution in the Florida Everglades. The court did suspend the State of Florida's authority to issue water pollution permits and ordered EPA to immediately undertake dramatic remedial action to reduce Everglades pollution levels.

The April 14, 2010 ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Alan Gold followed a contempt hearing into repeated violations by EPA and Florida's of a 2008 ruling by Judge Gold directing the agencies to comply with phosphorous limits for sensitive Everglades waters. In withering language, Judge Gold found EPA guilty of "dereliction of duty…contrary to the Clean Water Act" and -

Ordered EPA to formally notify Florida that it is in violation of federal law and "establish specific milestones to ensure that the State of Florida does not continue to ignore, and improperly extend the compliance deadline for meeting the phosphorous…criterion in the Everglades Protection Area" (Emphasis in original);

Suspended the power of Florida to issue any new water pollution discharge permits affecting the Everglades until EPA certifies the state is in compliance with the judge's order; and

Required EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to "personally appear before this Court on Thursday October 7, 2010 at 9:00 am to report to the Court on compliance with the order."(Emphasis in original)

Judge Gold is still holding in reserve whether to make a formal contempt finding, carrying civil or criminal penalties, against EPA and Florida.

This severe court action underlines the profound breakdown of EPA's clean water program in Florida, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). "In Florida, EPA's clean water program is an utter basket case," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, noting that this is only the latest in a long string of adverse court rulings suffered by the agency. "While this case has long roots, today Judge Gold takes EPA to task for decisions and evasions entirely within the Obama administration."

EPA still has yet to even name a Regional Administrator to oversee its programs in Florida and other southeastern states, several months after the agency named "RAs" for most of the other regions. Ironically, today Administrator Lisa Jackson is delivering an address at the "Coming Together for Clean Water" conference on healthy watersheds.

At the same time, EPA has been forced by other court rulings to directly set water quality standards for all Florida waters but that effort is beset by many of the same deficiencies found in its handling of the Everglades. PEER and the Council of Civic Associations (CCA), a citizens group for government accountability, have severely critiqued EPA oversight and have repeatedly called for a house cleaning in the EPA Southeastern regional office.

###

Read Judge Gold's latest ruling

See the 2008 court decision with which EPA has yet to comply

View the call by PEER and CCA for changes in EPA Florida operations

Look at the weak EPA effort to address worsening pollution in Florida's waters

Examine the CCA testimony this week on proposed water standards

2ND NOTICE - SIGN ON TO PROTECT FISHING AND SWIMMING WATERS IN FLORIDA

2010-03-30T17:16:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends of Florida’s Waters –

Last week you should have received an urgent email from me with an attached comment letter regarding DEP’s plans to create a new “Designated Use” for Florida’s water quality standards which will be called Class III – Limited. What that means in reality is that these waters will be too polluted to swim in and will be barely able to support aquatic life. Right now, under Florida law, waters that are this polluted, go on the Impaired Waters List (required by the Clean Water Act) and are prioritized for pollution reductions. With the new Designated Use, Class III – Limited, these waters would be allowed to remain impaired indefinitely, and could continue to receive new and/or expanded discharges of pollution.
As we all know, all waters flow downstream and every stream, lake and canal in Florida will eventually end up in an estuary and then into either the Gulf or the Atlantic Ocean. The idea that some of our lakes, canals and even streams and rivers are not worthy of Clean Water Act protections is hard (if not impossible to swallow) for those of us who spend most of our time trying to protect these waters for everyone’s use and enjoyment. . . especially future generations.

So far 33 groups, businesses and organizations signed onto the attached letter to FDEP Secretary Mike Sole. The comment letter that we sent in December had more than 50 signatures. I would love to put at least 100 signatures on this letter. The more groups and businesses that sign on in support of our comments, the more impact we will have. We have made great progress so far in convincing FDEP to slow down their push to weaken our water quality standards. Now we want to stop this serious policy change entirely, but Clean Water Network of FL cannot do this without your help.

If your group or business is not one of the 33 that I heard from already, would you please take a few minutes to read over the attached letter and then if you agree with it, send me a quick email to let me know that I can add your organization or business to the list of supporters? Make sure to provide a contact person for the group.

If you have already signed on, I just want to thank you for everything you do for Florida’s waters and for better policies.

Everyone can also help by sending this to all of your contacts and ask them to keep it going. We need a wide variety of organizations, businesses, civic groups, etc. to add support to our efforts to keep our waters swimmable and fishable.

Thank you in advance for any help you can offer.

For all our waters,

Linda Young

Director

A project of the TIDES center

Post Office Box 254, Tallahassee, Florida 32302

Phone: 850-322-7978

llyoung2@earthlink.net

www.cleanwaternetwork-fl.org

March 24, 2010

Secretary Michael Sole

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

3900 Commonwealth Blvd.

Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000

Dear Secretary Sole:

Thank you for your reply to our December 11, 2009 letter regarding proposed revisions to the surface water quality classifications rule. While we are glad to see that you decided to keep the current classification structure and not create several new classifications of waters, your current plan will still not protect Florida’s waters for their highest and best uses. You characterized the new proposal for a Class III –Limited classification as an improvement over the former proposal, and we would like to respectfully disagree. Just on the surface, it is difficult to understand how waters that are not suitable for swimming would be appealing as a place from which to consume fish. We urge you to reconsider this approach, which will result in the downgrading of numerous Florida waters.

Mr. Secretary, over the past few months you have given several presentations across the state regarding the proposed numeric nutrient criteria that will soon be promulgated by the US EPA for the State of Florida. You have repeatedly used very strong words to criticize EPA’s proposed nutrient criteria, even though they are almost identical to those proposed by your own department. It is curious to hear your vehement objections to something so close to your own proposal. Your messages add to the confusion that many taxpayers in Florida currently feel as they try to make sense of the many changes that are being proposed for Florida’s water quality standards, for example:

• Proposed federal numeric nutrient criteria

• Proposed state numeric nutrient criteria

• Proposed new classifications/uses for Florida waters by the state

• Proposed new Site Specific Alternative Criteria (SSAC) conditions by the state

• Technical Support Document, which is almost 50 pages of fine print about how Use Attainability Analyses, Use downgrades and SSACs would be applied

• Impaired water lists and TMDLs

• BMAPs

The list goes on and on and it can be broken down within each of the above items. It may not seem like water-quality-change-overload to you and your colleagues, who change water quality protections for a living, but for the hardworking taxpayers who pay your salary and try to keep up with the changes that affect the waters in their communities, it is a lot of changes in a very short time. We would like to ask you again to stop your efforts to create a new unswimmable and barely fishable use for Florida waters. Not only is it bad policy, it is not timely, as the people of this state are struggling to understand the EPA’s nutrient criteria and what it will mean for their communities and their personal use of Florida’s waters, and how it will affect our waters for future generations. In fact, without knowing exactly what the final numeric nutrient criteria will be, it seems premature to be pushing the new unswimmable/barely fishable designated use through the legal process in Florida.

EPA’s proposed nutrient criteria describes the process of Use Designation and Use Attainability Analyses (UAA) in EPA’s existing regulations, but is far from explicit in its recommendations and possible rule language in three areas related to the use of UAAs to downgrade current use designations. In our comments on EPA’s proposed criteria, we will be asking EPA to place greater emphasis on the existing requirement to re-evaluate downgraded uses every three years. Is Florida ready to commit in writing to doing that for any and all waters that would potentially get downgraded to Class III-Limited? FDEP removed Section 3.6 from the prior draft entitled, Future Re-evaluation of Use Assignments, which emphasized that DEP is required to re-evaluate waterbody use designations resulting from UAAs during each future triennial review of its WQS if those revised uses do not meet the Section 101(a)(2) goals of the CWA (waterbodies with a use below the default uses of Class III). This section should be reincluded because of its importance in reminding applicants (and FDEP) that downgrades are not permanent and must be re-evaluated. In fact, this is required for any water body segment with water quality standards that do not include the uses specified in section 101(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act to determine if new information has become available making those uses attainable [40 C.F.R. Section 131.20(a)]. We will be urging EPA to bring attention to this requirement and to explain in detail how it should be carried out. It would make sense for Florida to wait until EPA does this before a state change to water classifications is finalized. Once the new Class III-Limited designated use is available to the hoards of big polluters who are supporting your plans to weaken our water quality standards, we can assume with confidence that your agency will be begin to receive high volumes of applications for SSACs, UAAs and reclassifications. That does not even account for the reclassifications and SSACs that DEP is likely to initiate. The work-load will be daunting, even for your dedicated staff who are always eager to find new ways to “manage” water quality challenges. For your taxpayers, who may want to have a voice in proposed downgrades to the waters they use, it will make effective participation even more arduous.

In addition, where removing or downgrading a use would have negative impacts on overall water quality goals, we will urge EPA to require Florida to gather the information needed to assess future attainability in order to trigger a thoughtful analysis under Section 131.20(a). Is this anticipated in your Technical Support Document? We urge the state to assure the citizens of Florida that this would be done for any water that is proposed for a downgrade. We also need to know in advance what the process to upgrade our waters will be. Does your department have this information for us yet?

Another concern we have with your proposed change to Florida’s water quality standards and the Technical Support Document is that there is nothing in either that would provide assurance to Floridians that existing uses will be protected. In fact, during a public hearing regarding the proposed revisions we asked Jerry Brooks, Director of DEP’s Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration, whether a downgraded water body would remain on the Impaired Waters List and be ineligible for new and expanded discharges after the downgrade, and he said absolutely not. He told us the water body would come off of the 303(d) list and new and expanded discharges would be allowed a long as they did not cause or contribute to violations of the new SSAC. We strongly object to this policy. It will guarantee that the downgraded water will never regain its previous use (before being downgraded) and that it will continue to deteriorate.

You state in your letter to us that your amended proposed rule will protect existing water quality conditions. You assert that it prohibits the lowering of existing water quality within a Class III-Limited waterbody, through the limitations associated with Site Specific Alternative Criteria. It is not clear how an existing use would be protected when a water body is downgraded and the criteria are made less protective.

Not only does your proposal lack minimum criteria for Class III-Limited waters until a SSAC is approved for each individual waterbody, which violates the Clean Water Act at 33 U.S.C., Section 1313(c)(2)(A) , but nowhere in your proposal (rule or TSD) do you require detailed identifications of the uses that will be protected in downgraded waters. You are in essence asking the taxpayers to “trust” you or your successors to make good decisions about our waters as you downgrade their uses. You will essentially be allowed to set criteria at levels that will keep the waters off of the 303(d) list and which will allow discharges to continue unabated and new and expanded discharges to be permitted. That is too much to ask from us and we must insist that you abandon this plan. We believe that Florida DEP would be tempted to ignore the requirements in the Clean Water Act to protect existing uses in both the UAA and the antidegradation Tier I protections, thereby undermining the law and resulting in the continued decline of water quality in Florida.

One issue that is most troubling to us is an apparent contradiction in your responses regarding downstream waters protection. In a reply letter dated January 22, 2010 you state:

“Your letter was also insistent on downstream water protection, which we agree is critical. I want to emphasize that we have consistently maintained that downstream waters must be protected as part of any proposed reclassification. Both the previous rule draft and the proposed rule revisions reflect this downstream waters protection concern. The rules and draft support document, which will be incorporated into the rule by reference, clearly indicate that a waterbody cannot be reclassified to a lower use if this would lead to any loss of a downstream use.”

This morning, I received a copy of an email you sent to Dr. Ray McAllister in response to his concerns over the proposed unswimmable/barely fishable designated use. You wrote (in part):

“Our disagreement with EPA has been primarily associated with the “downstream protective values” proposed in their rule. While I support the intent of trying to establish numeric equivalents to protect downstream estuaries, the modeled approach that EPA has used is truly fundamentally flawed and inaccurate. Fortunately, EPA has agreed to not pursue this approach right now and work on this aspect of the Rule in future efforts.”

If the Department is committed to protecting downstream uses, why are you so opposed to EPA’s effort to do just that? You say that you don’t like their modeling approach, which is always an easy way to discredit someone else’s efforts. We would appreciate a more detailed explanation of exactly how you plan to protect downstream waters after upstream waters are allowed to become downgraded and more polluted. Jerry Brooks has stated in public workshops that you would be using mixing zones and other relief mechanisms in the downstream waters in order to comply with water quality standards. While these “tricks” may meet the letter of the law, they do not fulfill the spirit of the Clean Water Act and will not result in waters your taxpayers will feel safe swimming and fishing in.

Most important to our organization and our members is that all taxpayers have access to the process that could be used to adversely affect waters that all Floridians have a right to use and enjoy. You say in your January 22 letter that any applicant who petitions for a lower use classification will bear the burden of proof that the existing uses will not be removed and that the proposed use is the highest attainable use. We wish that we could rely on that and have assurance that this will be the case. Unfortunately, your Department has a long history of catering to polluters (i.e. Impaired Waters Rule, SSAC rule - type 2, and a long list of NPDES permits that are lax, don’t meet CWA requirements such as dioxin limits and are rarely if ever enforced) and it would be fool-hardy for anyone seeking greater protection for the health of the water and ordinary citizens to expect assistance from DEP. You offer comfort through the fact that a citizen can have input to the Florida Environmental Regulation Commission (ERC) and the US EPA. As for the ERC members, they are all representatives of big polluters and special interests in Florida and not one of them provides a voice for the ordinary taxpayer in the state. The US EPA has shown no interest in protecting Florida’s waters or standing up to you and your Department in at least 10 years. We do have the option of filing suit in federal court when and if EPA approves the downgrading of Florida waters, however, few citizens have the money to take their grievances into federal court. Some environmental groups such as ours may be able to file suit over some downgrades, but the sheer volume of we can expect will make it impossible to effectively prevent wide-spread abuses.

It is easy to understand why the special interests represented on the Technical Advisory Committee that you appointed for this issue are so eager to have new avenues for avoiding the Clean Water Act. However, I am not aware of anyone or any organization in support of this proposal that does not have something to gain financially by its passing.

Finally, we incorporate by reference the comment letter submitted by the Conservancy of SW Florida, except where there may be inconsistencies. There are many issues that we have not delved into here, but which we have raised previously in writing and at your public workshops.

As stated previously, we are not only opposed to the creation of a Class III-Limited designated use, but are greatly concerned that this issue is not receiving the public attention that it deserves. If you insist on moving forward with this effort, we urge you to hold as many more public workshops as would be needed for everyone in the state to attend one without having to drive more than 50 miles to get to it. You are embarking on a major policy change that will affect people’s property values, health, businesses, communities, culture and most importantly, the future of Florida’s waters. You must not do this at a time when there is so much turmoil and confusion over state and federal proposals and before you even know what EPA’s final numeric nutrient criteria will include as it relates to your designated uses rule change.

We appreciate that you have moved your final rulemaking before the ERC from earlier this year to a few months from now, but that short delay is still woefully inadequate.

We will be sending a subsequent copy of this letter shortly, with other organizations signed on in support of these comments.

For all of Florida’s waters,

Linda L. Young

Director

Midweek Red Tide Update, 03/30/2010

2010-03-30T16:54:00.001-07:00

No water samples have been received this week from northwest Florida.

On the east coast of Florida, Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore of Broward County.

In southwest Florida, Karenia brevis was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore of Sarasota and Collier counties. Samples collected offshore of the gulf side of the Florida Keys (Monroe County) contained concentrations of K. brevis ranging from not present to very low.

Sampling will continue this week, and complete results will be available in the next scheduled status report on Friday, April 2.

Red Tide Status Reports, 03/26/2010

2010-03-26T14:55:00.000-07:00

EAST COAST

Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore of Brevard County or offshore of Broward County.

NORTHWEST COAST

Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore of Escambia and Okaloosa counties. Samples collected late last week offshore of Okaloosa, Walton and Taylor counties also contained no K. brevis.

SOUTHWEST COAST

Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore between Pinellas and Collier counties. Samples collected late last week offshore of Sarasota County also contained no K. brevis. One sample collected late last week offshore of the Dry Tortugas (Florida Keys, Monroe County) contained background concentrations of K. brevis.

Southwest Coast Bloom Boundary: A localized bloom of K. brevis was detected last week offshore of Monroe County, on the northern side of the lower Florida Keys. No samples were taken in the area this week.

Tables and maps of sample results are attached. This information is also available on our Web site: (http://research.myfwc.com/features/view_article.asp?id=9670). The Web site also provides links to additional information related to the topic of Florida red tide including satellite imagery, experimental red tide forecasts, shellfish harvesting areas, the FWC Fish Kill Hotline, the Aquatic Toxins Hotline (for information or to report human health effects), and other wildlife related hotlines: (http://research.myfwc.com/features/view_article.asp?id=9670#Links).

Oilfield math

2010-03-26T14:31:00.000-07:00

Oilfield Math

A 15 mpg clunker that travels 12,000 miles a year uses 800 gallons of gas a> year.

A 25 mpg vehicle that travels 12,000 miles a year uses 480 gallons a year.

Therefore, the average Cash for Clunkers transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year. The government claims that 700,000 clunkers were turned-in, so that's 224> million gallons saved per year. That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil. 5 million barrels is about 5 hours worth of US consumption. More importantly, 5 million barrels of oil at $70 per barrel costs about $350 million dollars. So, the government paid $3 billion of our tax dollars to save $350 million. In other words, we spent $8.57 for every dollar we saved.

I'm pretty sure they will do a great job with our health care,

Carl Hiaasen on Amendment 4 - Florida Hometown Democracy ballot initiative

2010-03-26T14:20:00.000-07:00

Author and Columnist Carl Hiaasen Supports Amendment 4

Gainesville---The Florida Hometown Democracy campaign bagged a winner .....At the March 2nd lecture sponsored by U.F.'s Graham Center, long-time observer of Florida's political scene and environmental issues, Carl Hiaasen, spoke decisively in favor of Florida Hometown Democracy's Amendment 4. It will appear on the November 2nd ballot statewide. A Miami Herald columnist for twenty-five years, Hiaasen said, "There's a huge constituency for saving what's left of Florida" He railed against the out-of-control development, saying he supported the amendment for offering a voice to Florida's citizens.

Calling Florida "a place that's hard not to love," he said he thought people were tired of seeing the loss of the state's natural beauty. The Amendment 4 issue came up in response to a question from a person in the audience of some 300 people. "Do you support Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment 4?" Hiaasen quickly responded, "I do. I think the Hometown Democracy Amendment is wonderful."

"They’re [politicians and developers] squirming like, you know, worms on a frying pan right now about this whole thing: the idea that people would actually have a say in what kind of developments go to their [neighborhood] .

"I mean obviously it could be abused, but the point of this Amendment is that if you live in a place, and they’re going to come in and put in a huge subdivision or a huge mall or something, that you could actually have a vote on whether or not that’s a good idea or not.

"It isn’t just a group of people that you go in and you listen to them and you make a decision. You stand up and they ignore you – which happens -- I don’t know what happens in your town -- but in South Florida that was the M.O. They would put that last on the agenda that night -- the big Zoning Board change, the zoning change – you know, to go from pastures and agriculture to 16-unit-per- acre density apartment complex. OK, true.

"They always would put it on at like 3 or 4 in the morning, when everybody was gone or tired or left, and then they would slide [it] on through.

"Now, the idea that they might actually have to deal with public sentiment on these issues has got them all running for cover. The Florida Chamber of Commerce is upset, everybody’s upset, because “It’s gonna give away the jobs. People! Don’t you understand?”

"So they’re squirming and hopping around. I love to watch that.

"I don’t know that it’s going to pass, but I love to see how frantic they are about it because the idea of public involvement, trust me, is the last thing they want. That is the last thing they want. They do not want to hear your opinion.

"When these projects – the way they get started and the way they funnel through the political system – with the lobbyists -- and this is going down to the city commission level, city council level. It doesn’t matter.

"It’s all the same game. And that is, you get to people, and you get their support. Even if it means contributing $10,000 to their campaign; one way or another they’ll do that. People can be bought all different ways, but nobody sitting on [the council/commission] changes their vote for no reason. That’s the first lesson you learn. It’s that when you’ve got a 5-4 vote and there’s an adjournment, and now you’ve got a 5-4 vote the other way, something happened in those 5 minutes, OK. That wasn’t just a change of conscience.

"So this will put it directly in the public’s lap. At least in certain neighborhoods, they can make these decisions. I think it would be a great thing as an experiment to see how it does.

"I don’t know that it’s going to pass, but I like the idea."

To another question from the audience---" Why was there no opposition in Florida to weak land policies in both depressions, 1933 and 2008?"

Hiaasen replied:

"Greed. Greed. There’s no mystery to that. It’s not just Florida, by the way It’s not just endemic to Florida.

"The point from the beginning has been to get as many people here as we possibly could, and cram them into as much space as we could. Especially waterfront, oceanfront property. That’s been the whole game from the beginning. It’s not going to change, ever, you know. It’s just about money. It’s not about the place. It’s not about, you know, the quality of life, really. It’s about making money.

"And that’s what rules the day, generally speaking, in most states, politically. Anything that’s seen as an impediment to making money, the cry goes out, “You’re costing us jobs! Oh you’re costing us jobs!”

"We could put in this rock-mining pit in West Dade, and, “You’re going to cost us 17 jobs!” You know, 40 acres of digging up limestone on the edge of the Everglades. “But it will cost us 17 jobs!” or whatever. It’s ridiculous. That’s the battle cry. They’ve all got the same script. It doesn’t matter where you are. You go in any state and hear it."

Carl Hiaasen has authored twenty-one satirical novels with Florida settings. His next novel, "Star Island", is due out this Fall. He has also written children's books and collaborated with Jimmy Buffett to produce a movie of his book, "Hoot". The full lecture, "On Florida", can be viewed at www.graham.centers. ufl.edu/

Pam Sizemore-House Fund Raising Cancer Event

2010-03-26T09:23:00.000-07:00

fund raiser cancer event

1:00pm Saturday, April 3rd Cross City

Pam Sizemore-House, Gayle Barringer Lovelace, and 10 other guests

STATEMENT FROM DEP SECRETARY MICHAEL W. SOLE REGARDING ISSUANCE OF FINAL ORDER FOR INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY (IP)

2010-03-11T16:52:00.000-08:00

STATEMENT FROM DEP SECRETARY MICHAEL W. SOLE REGARDING ISSUANCE OF FINAL ORDER FOR INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY (IP)

TALLAHASSEE – “After careful consideration and based on the conclusions of Judge Bram D.E. Canter’s recommendation, I have signed a Final Order to approve International Paper’s permit application and the company-planned reconfiguration of its Pensacola Mill at Cantonment in Escambia County.

“The final order will, after years of legal challenges, issue a permit for the mill. The permit strictly outlines all of the necessary improvements International Paper needs to make in order to protect the area’s natural resources as well as enhance the biological diversity and productivity of the nearby wetlands.

“Specifically, the permit requires International Paper to upgrade their wastewater treatment and relocate the existing discharge from Eleven Mile Creek to an effluent distribution system in a 1,381 acre wetland tract, with an additional 1,188 acres that will be managed as a conservation area. These changes in land management activities and the relocation and modification of the effluent distribution system will result in the restoration of the historic ecosystems. The permit also requires IP to achieve compliance with all water quality standards and permit limits by the end of the consent order.

“We look forward to working with both International Paper and community members to ensure that the mill’s enhancements protect the region’s natural resources and economy.”

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

What is being announced?

Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Secretary Michael W. Sole today signed a Final Order adopting the Administrative Law Judge’s Recommended Order and approving a proposed permit and Consent Order for International Paper Company (IP). The permit authorizes a company-planned reconfiguration of its Pensacola Mill’s wastewater treatment and disposal system. The mill is located near the town of Cantonment in Escambia County. DEP’s Final Order specifically approves the proposed National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and the proposed Consent Order.

What are the environmental benefits of the new permit?

IP’s permit and accompanying consent order will result in an upgrade of its industrial wastewater treatment plant and relocation of its discharge from upper Eleven Mile Creek to a 1,400-acre wetland tract located 10 miles south of the mill. There, the mill’s effluent would be distributed and would flow into lower Eleven Mile Creek and Perdido Bay. IP’s use of the wetland tract will set the Eleven Mile Creek on a course of recovery, improve the environmental health of Perdido Bay, and set aside substantial areas of important habitat for permanent protection.

What type of permit has the facility been operating under?

IP’s pulp and paper mill has been operating under an administratively continued 1989 wastewater permit and Consent Order. The Consent Order, which accompanied the permit, required the mill to conduct water quality studies and engineering evaluations, and develop plans to achieve compliance with water quality criteria for Eleven Mile Creek and Perdido Bay. By 1995, IP – then known as Champion International – had invested millions of dollars in mill modifications toward meeting this requirement.

When did the facility apply for a proposed permit?

On April 5, 2005, DEP noticed its intent to approve the requested NPDES Permit to authorize the industrial wastewater treatment improvements, including relocation of the discharge from Elevenmile Creek to the wetland, and three other agency actions (proposed Consent Order, an order allowing the experimental use of the wetland, and waiver to allow public access to Tee and Wicker Lakes which are a part of the proposed treatment wetlands).

These actions were petitioned by the Friends of Perdido Bay and additional residents near the mill in May 2005, and an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) within the Department of Administrative Hearings was assigned to the case. An administrative hearing on the proposed permit began on May 31, 2006, and concluded on July 28, 2006. The ALJ entered his Recommended Order on May 11, 2007, recommending DEP deny the proposed agency actions.

On August 8, 2007, DEP entered a Final Order adopting the ALJ’s recommendations.

On August 10, 2007, IP filed an appeal of DEP’s Final Order with the First District Court of Appeal. The company requested the Department grant a stay of the Final Order to allow IP’s Pensacola Mill to continue to operate while the appeal process moves forward.

On August 22, 2007, the Department entered an Order granting IP’s request for a stay of DEP’s Final Order, and placed additional requirements on IP’s discharge.

When did the facility apply for the current proposed permit?

After the 2007 Final Order, IP conducted additional studies, modified the project and re-applied for the four authorizations. In July 2008, the Department issued its Notice of Intent to issue an NPDES permit, a Consent Order, an exception for the experimental use of wetlands and a variance for the modified project. Petitioners, Jacqueline Lane, Friends of Perdido Bay, Inc., and James Lane, challenged DEP’s four proposed agency actions. Prior to final hearing, IP withdrew its request for the exception for the experimental use of wetlands and variance. After final hearing in the matter, and being bound by certain findings in the DEP’s 2007 Final Order, ALJ Canter entered an order recommending the DEP enter a Final Order granting NPDES Permit No. FL0002526 and approving Consent Order No. 08-0358 for the IP Pensacola Mill.

What are the next steps?

Any party with standing may appeal the Final Order to the First District Court of Appeal within 30 days of entry of the Final Order.

Midweek Red Tide Update, 03/09/2010

2010-03-09T16:33:00.001-08:00

No water samples have been received this week from the east coast of Florida or northwest Florida.

In southwest Florida, Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore of Sarasota and Collier counties or offshore of the Florida Keys (Monroe County).

Sampling will continue this week, and complete results will be available in the next scheduled status report on Friday, March 12.

Visit (http://research.myfwc.com/features/category_sub.asp?id=4434) for the Florida Red Tide Current Status Report and select the statewide summary or a region of interest for more information and sampling details.

EPA invites citizens to keep 'Eyes on Drilling'

2010-03-08T11:55:00.000-08:00

http://www.pennenergy.com/index/blogs/washington-pulse/blogs/OGJ/washington-pulse/post987_2866464857426730017.html

Penn Energy

EPA invites citizens to keep 'Eyes on Drilling'

The US Environmental Protection Agency has created a toll-free tip-line for citizens to report non-emergency suspicious activity related to oil and gas development. Called "Eyes on Drilling," the number for the tip-line, which EPA's Philadelphia regional office announced on Jan. 27, is (877) 919-4EPA. Tips may be provided anonymously, it added.

The agency, which also is accepting tips by e-mail at eyesondrilling@epa.gov, said it will accept information from people who observe what appears to be disposal or wastes or other illegal activity. "While EPA doesn't grant permits for oil and gas drilling operations, there are EPA regulations which may apply to the storage of petroleum products and drilling fluids. The agency is also very concerned about the proper disposal of waste products, and protecting air and water resources," it continued.

The notice said that EPA wants to better understand what people are experiencing and observing as a result of oil and gas drilling activities. The information collected may also be useful in investigating industry practices, it indicated. The tips should include the location, time, and date of such activity, as well as materials, equipment, and vehicles involved, and any observable environmental impacts.

EPA's regional office in Philadelphia clearly issued the notice because of growing interest in the Marcellus Shale natural gas formation. Production of gas from it will require hydraulic fracturing, which it said results in 20-30% of the fluid used flowing back to the surface with produced brines which contained dissolved materials from the formation, it said in the notice.

"Operators are urged to recycle their flowback water for reuse in the fraccing process, but some of the flowback is taken offsite for disposal," it continued. "Chemicals used in the process are often stored on-site. Spills can occur when utilizing these chemicals or when transporting or storing wastewater, which can result in the contamination of surface water or ground water, which is used for many purposes including drinking water."

The service adds another government element to an already complicated situation as Pennsylvanians, New Yorkers, and West Virginians try to grapple with potentially heavy gas production in areas which have no experience with it. It won't be surprising if opponents use it to cause trouble. But it also will be there in case actual landowners and nearby residents see genuine problems.

----------------------------

Cook Inletkeeper

P.O. Box 3269

3734 Ben Walters Lane

Homer, AK 99603

p.907.235.4068 ext 22

f. 907.235.4069

c.907.299.3277

skype: Inletkeeper

bob@inletkeeper.org

www.inletkeeper.org

Thousands of contamination sites could be removed from cleanup list

2010-03-07T18:08:00.000-08:00

Thousands of contamination sites could be removed from cleanup list

from FloridaEnvironments.com by Bruce Ritchie

Underground petroleum tanks are being replaced at a convenience store in Tallahassee.From the Florida Tribune:The chairmen of key House and Senate committees have filed bills that supporters hope could lead to the removal of hundreds or thousands of low-risk petroleum contamination sites from the state's cleanup list.The two measures - HB 1385 and SB 2592 - would allow 4,985 contamination site
http://fltrib.com/articles/state-could-shrink-cleanup-list

Rulings Restrict Clean Water Act, Hampering E.P.A.

2010-03-07T15:18:00.000-08:00

February 28, 2010

Rulings Restrict Clean Water Act, Hampering E.P.A.

By CHARLES DUHIGG and JANET ROBERTS

Thousands of the nation’s largest water polluters are outside the Clean Water Act’s reach because the Supreme Court has left uncertain which waterways are protected by that law, according to interviews with regulators.
As a result, some businesses are declaring that the law no longer applies to them. And pollution rates are rising.
Companies that have spilled oil, carcinogens and dangerous bacteria into lakes, rivers and other waters are not being prosecuted, according to Environmental Protection Agency regulators working on those cases, who estimate that more than 1,500 major pollution investigations have been discontinued or shelved in the last four years.
The Clean Water Act was intended to end dangerous water pollution by regulating every major polluter. But today, regulators may be unable to prosecute as many as half of the nation’s largest known polluters because officials lack jurisdiction or because proving jurisdiction would be overwhelmingly difficult or time consuming, according to midlevel officials.
“We are, in essence, shutting down our Clean Water programs in some states,” said Douglas F. Mundrick, an E.P.A. lawyer in Atlanta. “This is a huge step backward. When companies figure out the cops can’t operate, they start remembering how much cheaper it is to just dump stuff in a nearby creek.”
“This is a huge deal,” James M. Tierney, the New York State assistant commissioner for water resources, said of the new constraints. “There are whole watersheds that feed into New York’s drinking water supply that are, as of now, unprotected.”
The court rulings causing these problems focused on language in the Clean Water Act that limited it to “the discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters” of the United States. For decades, “navigable waters” was broadly interpreted by regulators to include many large wetlands and streams that connected to major rivers.
But the two decisions suggested that waterways that are entirely within one state, creeks that sometimes go dry, and lakes unconnected to larger water systems may not be “navigable waters” and are therefore not covered by the act — even though pollution from such waterways can make its way into sources of drinking water.
Some argue that such decisions help limit overreaching regulatory efforts.
“There is no doubt in my mind that when Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972 they intended it to have broad regulatory reach, but they did not intend it to be unlimited,” said Don Parrish, the American Farm Bureau Federation’s senior director of regulatory relations, who has lobbied on Clean Water issues.
But for E.P.A. and state regulators, the decisions have created widespread uncertainty. The court did not define which waterways are regulated, and judicial districts have interpreted the court’s decisions differently. As regulators have struggled to guess how various courts will rule, some E.P.A. lawyers have established unwritten internal guidelines to avoid cases in which proving jurisdiction is too difficult, according to interviews with more than two dozen current and former E.P.A. officials.
The decisions “reduce E.P.A.’s ability to do what the law intends — to protect water quality, the environment and public health,” wrote Peter S. Silva, the E.P.A.’s assistant administrator for the Office of Water, in response to questions.
About 117 million Americans get their drinking water from sources fed by waters that are vulnerable to exclusion from the Clean Water Act, according to E.P.A. reports.
The E.P.A. said in a statement that it did not automatically concede that any significant water body was outside the authority of the Clean Water Act. “Jurisdictional determinations must be made on a case-by-case basis,” the agency wrote. Officials added that they believed that even many streams that go dry for long periods were within the act’s jurisdiction.
But midlevel E.P.A. officials said that internal studies indicated that as many as 45 percent of major polluters might be either outside regulatory reach or in areas where proving jurisdiction is overwhelmingly difficult.
And even in situations in which regulators believe they still have jurisdiction, companies have delayed cases for years by arguing that the ambiguity precludes prosecution. In some instances, regulators have simply dropped enforcement actions.
In the last two years, some members of Congress have tried to limit the impact of the court decisions by introducing legislation known as the Clean Water Restoration Act. It has been approved by a Senate committee but not yet introduced this session in the House. The legislation tries to resolve these problems by, in part, removing the word “navigable” from the law and restoring regulators’ authority over all waters that were regulated before the Supreme Court decisions.
But a broad coalition of industries has often successfully lobbied to prevent the full Congress from voting on such proposals by telling farmers and small-business owners that the new legislation would permit the government to regulate rain puddles and small ponds and layer new regulations on how they dispose of waste.
“The game plan is to emphasize the scary possibilities,” said one member of the Waters Advocacy Coalition, which has fought the legislation and is supported by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Association of Home Builders and other groups representing industries affected by the Clean Water Act.
“If you can get Glenn Beck to say that government storm troopers are going to invade your property, farmers in the Midwest will light up their congressmen’s switchboards,” said the coalition member, who asked not to be identified because he thought his descriptions would anger other coalition participants. Mr. Beck, a conservative commentator on Fox News, spoke at length against the Clean Water Restoration Act in December.
The American Land Rights Association, another organization opposed to legislation, wrote last June that people should “Deluge your senators with calls, faxes and e-mails.” A news release the same month from the American Farm Bureau Federation warned that “even rainwater would be regulated.”
“If you erase the word ‘navigable’ from the law, it erases any limitation on the federal government’s reach,” said Mr. Parrish of the American Farm Bureau Federation. “It could be a gutter, a roadside ditch or a rain puddle. But under the new law, the government gets control over it.”
Legislators say these statements are misleading and intended to create panic.
“These claims just aren’t true,” said Senator Benjamin L. Cardin, Democrat of Maryland. He helped push the bill through the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “This bill,” he said, “is solely aimed at restoring the law to what it covered before the Supreme Court decisions.”
The consequences of the Supreme Court decisions are stark. In drier states, some polluters say the act no longer applies to them and are therefore refusing to renew or apply for permits, making it impossible to monitor what they are dumping, say officials.
Cannon Air Force Base near Clovis, N.M., for instance, recently informed E.P.A. officials that it no longer considered itself subject to the act. It dumps wastewater — containing bacteria and human sewage — into a lake on the base.
More than 200 oil spill cases were delayed as of 2008, according to a memorandum written by an E.P.A. official and collected by Congressional investigators. And even as the number of facilities violating the Clean Water Act has steadily increased each year, E.P.A. judicial actions against major polluters have fallen by almost half since the Supreme Court rulings, according to an analysis of E.P.A. data by The New York Times.
The Clean Water Act does not directly deal with drinking water. Rather, it was meant to regulate the polluters that contaminated the waterways that supplied many towns and cities with tap water.
The two Supreme Court decisions at issue — Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers in 2001 and Rapanos v. United States in 2006 — focused on the federal government’s jurisdiction over various wetlands. In both cases, dissenting justices warned that limiting the power of the federal government would weaken its ability to combat water pollution.
“Cases now are lost because the company is discharging into a stream that flows into a river, rather than the river itself,” said David M. Uhlmann, a law professor at the University of Michigan who led the environmental crimes section of the Justice Department during the last administration.
In 2007, for instance, after a pipe manufacturer in Alabama, a division of McWane Inc., was convicted and fined millions of dollars for dumping oil, lead, zinc and other chemicals into a large creek, an appellate court overturned that conviction and fine, ruling that the Supreme Court precedent exempted the waterway from the Clean Water Act. The company eventually settled by agreeing to pay a smaller amount and submit to probation.
Some E.P.A. officials say solutions beyond the Clean Water Restoration Act are available. They argue that the agency’s chief, Lisa P. Jackson, could issue regulations that seek to clarify jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act.
Mrs. Jackson has urged Congress to resolve these issues. But she has not issued new regulations.
“E.P.A., with our federal partners, emphasized to Congress in a May 2009 letter that legislation is the best way to restore the Clean Water Act’s effectiveness,” wrote Mr. Silva in a statement to The Times. “E.P.A. and the Army Corps of Engineers will continue to implement our water programs to protect the nation’s waters and the environment as effectively as possible, including consideration of administrative actions to restore the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act.”
In the meantime, both state and federal regulators say they are prevented from protecting important waterways.
“We need something to fix these gaps,” said Mr. Tierney, the New York official. “The Clean Water Act worked for over 30 years, and we’re at risk of losing that if we can’t get a new law.”

*************************************************

Joy Towles Ezell hopeforcleanwater@yahoo.com "We are the ones we've been waiting for."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HopeForCleanWater/ http://grooups.yahoo.com/group/EANoF/

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FloridiansAgainstIncineratorsInDisguise/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SaveTaylorCountyFloridaResidents/

850 584 7087 office & fax 850 843 1574 cell

Midweek Red Tide Update, 03/02/2010

2010-03-07T15:14:00.001-08:00

No water samples have been received this week from the east coast of Florida or northwest Florida.

In southwest Florida, Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore of Sarasota, Charlotte and Collier counties or offshore of the Florida Keys (Monroe County).

Sampling will continue this week, and complete results will be available in the next scheduled status report on Friday, March 5.

EPA Proposes Standards to Protect Florida’s Waters: Action would decrease amount of phosphorus and nitrogen pollution

2010-03-07T15:04:00.000-08:00

EPA Proposes Standards to Protect Florida’s Waters: Action would decrease amount of phosphorus and nitrogen pollution

Release date: 01/15/2010

Contact Information: Enesta Jones, jones.enesta@epa.gov, 202-564-7873, 202-564-4355

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing water quality standards
to protect people’s health, aquatic life and the long term recreational uses of Florida’s waters, which are a critical part of the state’s economy. In 2009, EPA entered into a consent decree with the Florida Wildlife Federation to propose limits to this pollution. The proposed action, released for public comment and developed in collaboration with the state, would set a series of numeric limits on the amount of phosphorus and nitrogen, also known as “nutrients,” that would be allowed in Florida’s lakes, rivers, streams, springs and canals.

Nutrient pollution can damage drinking water sources; increase exposure to harmful algal blooms, which are made of toxic microbes that can cause damage to the nervous system or even death; and form byproducts in drinking water from disinfection chemicals, some of which have been linked with serious human illnesses like bladder cancer. Phosphorus and nitrogen pollution come from stormwater runoff, municipal wastewater treatment, fertilization of crops and livestock manure. Nitrogen also forms from the burning of fossil fuels, like gasoline..

“Florida has led the way with rigorous scientific analysis and data collection needed to address nutrient pollution. By relying on the best science, we can set standards that protect people’s health and preserve waterbodies used for drinking, swimming, fishing and tourism,” said Peter S. Silva, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Water. “New water quality standards, developed in collaboration with the state, will help protect and restore inland waters that are a critical part of Florida's history, culture and economic prosperity.”

Nutrient problems can happen locally or much further downstream, leading to degraded lakes, reservoirs, and estuaries, and to hypoxic “dead” zones where aquatic life can no longer survive. High amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus in surface water result in harmful algal blooms, dead fish, reduced mating grounds and nursery habitats for fish.

A 2008 Florida Department of Environmental Protection report assessing water quality for Florida revealed that approximately 1,000 miles of rivers and streams, 350,000 acres of lakes and 900 square miles of estuaries are not meeting the state's water quality standards because of excess nutrients. These represent approximately 16 percent of Florida’s assessed river and stream miles, 36 percent of assessed lake acres and 25 percent of assessed estuary square miles. The actual number of miles and acres of waters impaired for nutrients is likely higher, as there are waters that have not yet been assessed.

The proposed action announced today also introduces and seeks comment on a new regulatory process for setting standards in a manner that drives water quality improvements in already impaired waters. The proposed new regulatory provision, called restoration standards, would be specific to nutrients in the state of Florida.

In August 2009, EPA entered into a consent decree with Florida Wildlife Federation, committing to propose numeric nutrient standards for lakes and flowing waters in Florida by January 2010, and for Florida's estuarine and coastal waters by January 2011. These dates are consistent with those outlined in EPA’s January 14, 2009 determination under the Clean Water Act that numeric nutrient standards are needed in Florida. EPA also agreed to establish final standards by October 2010 for lakes and flowing waters and by October 2011 for estuarine and coastal waters.

EPA will accept public comments on the proposed standards for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register. EPA will also hold three public hearings on the proposed rule in Florida to obtain input and comments on the direction of EPA’s rulemaking. These hearings are scheduled for February 16, 17 and 18, 2010 in Tallahassee, Orlando, and West Palm Beach, respectively.

More on the proposed rule and public hearings:
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/rules/florida/

SALT MARSHES A Natural and Unnatural History

2010-03-07T14:56:00.000-08:00

SALT MARSHES

A Natural and Unnatural History

Judith S. Weis and Carol A. Butler

“Rutgers University biologist Weis and science writer Butler compile an outstanding study of North American salt marshes, their natural histories, contributions to human well-being, and what their destruction means to human life and property. After describing the formation and maintenance of coastal marshlands (through tidal and river flows), Weis and Butler discuss in detail the plants and animals that populate marshes, arranged by general complexity, beginning with small invertebrates and insects. Next is a historical overview, introducing the calamitous, long-held belief that marshes are little more than wastelands (the first attempts to “reclaim” marshlands came from European settlers) and a painful exploration of invasive species and their effects. Research data on the widespread benefits of marshlands precede a specific case study, looking at how the Hackensack Meadowlands were destroyed by more than 250 years of “development, drainage, diking, filling, garbage dumping, and sewage pumping.” Ongoing restoration projects are also profiled, and the volume concludes with thorough notes. This account should make an informative treat for any armchair conservationist.”

__ Publisher’s Weekly, 8/31/2009

“Judith S. Weis and Carol A. Butler put salt marshes into a broad environmental context. With chapters on marshland species, pollution, and restoration, this book is both valuable and encompassing for anyone interested in the future of salt marshes.”

—John M. Teal, scientist emeritus, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

Exploring the fascinating biodiversity of these boggy wetlands, Salt Marshes: A Natural and Unnatural History (Paper $23.95, August 2009, 978-0-8135-4570-7), by Judith S. Weis and Carol A. Butler, offers readers a wealth of essential information about a variety of plants, fish, and animals, the importance of these habitats, consequences of human neglect and thoughtless development, and insight into how these wetlands recover.

“In an accessible and sophisticated manner, Salt Marshes draws on extensive ‘local knowledge’ and a thorough grasp of much broader scientific literature to show the impact of humans on marshes and estuaries. This book is an important contribution to popular writing on coastal systems.”

—R. Scott Warren, Tempel Professor of Botany Emeritus, Connecticut College

SALT MARSHES

A Natural and Unnatural History

Judith S. Weis and Carol A. Butler

Paper $23.95 | ISBN 978-0-8135-4570-7

Cloth $49.95 | ISBN 978-0-8135-4548-6 | 272 pages | 72 illustrations | 6 x 9

Publication Date: August 2009

Please email requests for review copies and be sure to include the title, author, ISBN number, as well as the address of the person to whom the book should be sent.

RUTGERSPRESS.RUTGERS.EDU

Lisa Fortunato

Publicity Manager

Rutgers University Press

100 Joyce Kilmer Ave.

Piscataway, NJ 08854

732-445-7762 Ext 626

http://rutgerspress.rutgers.edu

RIVERKEEPER CLEAN BOATING CAMPAIGN

2010-03-07T14:40:00.000-08:00

ACT NOW I Take Action

Take action to protect your Suwannee River, your family, and your country!

RIVERKEEPER CLEAN BOATING CAMPAIGN

The Bottom Line Is Do Not Let Anything Fall In the Water!

Engine, Fueling, and Bilge Care

Consider purchasing a cleaner, more efficient four-stroke engine

Tune your engine regularly

Inspect fuel lines for leaks or cracks

It is unlawful to pump any bilge water that appears oily or has a sheen

Having oil absorbent pads in the bilge can prevent oil from entering the environment

Keep fuel and oil from getting into the water at these 3 sites:

~ Fuel filter fitting – clean up with marine absorbent pad

~ Fuel tank air vent – pump fuel slowly

~ Bilge pump – use bilge pump

Prevent spillage by not topping off tank, remember, fuel expands as it warms

Avoid using detergents or emulsifiers to clean the bilge:

~ Detergents can pollute the water. Emulsifiers will disperse the oil, making the water appear clean, but it still may contain harmful pollutants

Dispose of absorbents at marina oil recycling collector or wrap and dispose of in home trash

Boat Maintenance

Ask your Dockmaster what kinds of vessel maintenance are allowed

Clean water starts with good boat cleaning and maintenance methods, using the least toxic chemicals available

Do all hull scraping, sanding, and chemical stripping on shore and catch all debris

Drape vessel with tarps to catch wastes from small to medium sized maintenance projects. Take longer projects to a boatyard

Read labels and buy products that are environmentally safe. Use as little as possible.

Buy ‘non-toxic’ and ‘phosphate-free’ cleaners

Or use cleaning alternatives found in your cupboards at home:

~ For example, baking soda and a scrub brush can be used to clean heads, and one cup white vinegar in two gallons of warm water will make a good floor cleaner.

Avoid cleaners with bleach, ammonia, lye, or petroleum distillates

Clean boat bottoms ashore, over hard surfaces or tarp, and contain debris for disposal

Remember-cleaners can travel from the driveway to the storm drain and then to the river

Do not spray paint in the marina

Use a hard, less toxic or non-toxic hull paint

Use orange-pink colored propylene antifreeze / coolant instead of very toxic blue-green colored ethylene glycol

Gently wipe hull often with soft cloth to remove soft growth

Recycle used oil, oil filters, antifreeze and batteries and dispose of cleaning products properly. Many classify as household hazardous wastes.

Share leftover paint, varnish, cleansers, etc., with other boaters

Boat and Sewage Control and Pumpout Use

Do your part to help keep sewage out of America’s boating waters

Use the shoreside facilities before casting off

Prevent dumping any untreated sewage into any U.S. waterbody. It’s illegal.

Keep diapers, sanitary napkins, oils, solvents and other harmful chemicals out of toilets

When in ‘no discharge’ waters, secure the toilet closed so it cannot empty overboard

Use only environmentally compatible holding deodorants

Boats with holding tanks: If boat has a y-valve and through hull, keep them locked closed when inside coastal waters.

Boating Litter and Fish Waste

Teach everyone on board that tossing anything into the water is just not done. Nothing overboard.

Smokers, use an ashtray and bring butts ashore.

Bring back all cans, bottles, and litter. Recycle as much as possible.

Pick up trash in the water or along the shore if you can reach it safely

Keep litter bags aboard and use them

Recycle fish parts by composting with peat moss or burying in the garden as fertilizer. Or freeze and re-use fish parts as bait on your next trip

Use fish cleaning stations

Avoid releasing dead or alive bait into the water; they are often foreign species

It Is Very Important To Contain These Wastes and Dispose Of Them Properly

Saw dust or concrete dust
Sanding dust containing paint or varnish particles
Caustic paint strippers
Alkaline or acidic cleaners (For example, 2 part teak cleaners)
Engine oil, gas, and grease
Waste waters or bilge water
Hull paint residue containing cuprous oxide (copper) or TBT
Organic solvents, including paint thinner, chemical strippers, and parts cleaners

WANT TO GIVE THE GOVERNMENT MORE CONTROL OVER YOUR LIFE? OKAY, THEN DO NOTHING NOW!!!

2010-03-07T14:21:00.000-08:00

By Linda Young of the Clean Water Network

The rule that is being weakened is Chapter 62-302.400 F.A.C. (designated uses). You can learn more about this issue on the following website: http://www.facebook.com/l/c6a2c;www.cleanwaternetwork-fl.org

Would you like to give some Florida bureaucrats even more control over health and economic matters in your life? Would you like to have even less power in your own back yard and community? Would you like to give away your power to big corporations that have inordinate influence over your elected officials? No? Neither would I, but that’s what the Crist administration is about to do to us.

If you are thinking that this has to do with health care or banking “reform”, . . . well, not exactly. It has to do with water quality in your community and maybe even in your back yard. Florida is moving forward at tsunamic speed, to give bureaucrats with the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) the ability to downgrade many waters in Florida and to take away the few rights that you now have to protect those waters. Who is giving them this unprecedented ability to seize your rights? They are empowering themselves and they feel no compunction to inform you about it in advance. Imagine that!!!

DEP shared their scheme with the taxpayers of Florida on Christmas Eve, ho-ho-ho and we all have until January 21st to read approximately 45 pages of legalese and submit comments. There was one public meeting held on the January 7th, at which the public had an opportunity to discuss the matter and ask questions. Oh, you say that you didn’t know about the meeting? Well, don’t you read the Florida Administrative Weekly on a regular basis so you can know when you are about to be robbed by your government?

All cynicism aside, DEP plans to finalize major changes to Florida’s water quality standards in March. The exact plan is changing all the while, but as it stands today, they want to create a new category of waters in Florida that are not swimmable and barely fishable, if at all. These would be things like lakes, canals, and sloughs that were artificially created or natural water bodies, like lakes and streams that were altered before 1975. These waters today would be part of the long (and growing) list of Florida waters that are overly polluted and in need of a clean-up plan. Many of them receive and discharge pollution that causes toxic algal blooms, fish kills, polluted groundwater, and other serious problems that are rampant in Florida. Today, they are not legally eligible for further new pollution. Today, the goal for most of these waters would be to locate the pollution sources that are fouling these waters and try to correct the problems, near or at the source and primarily (in most cases) at the expense of the polluters. DEP wants to change that.

DEP’s new category of unswimmable/barely fishable waters would be allowed to remain overly polluted forever. How polluted? You won’t know until DEP decides. Today these waters have numeric pollution limits that you can look up on the internet. That will change and the new pollution limits will be decided by DEP. There will effectively be nothing that you or I can do to stop them or reverse their actions.

DEP says that this will save money. For whom? The people who live downstream of these permanently polluted waters? Not likely! For the people who may live right on the permanently polluted waters? Possibly. However, does someone living on a polluted canal or lake save money when their property values are lowered because it’s harder to sell polluted-water-front property? Do you save money when you are constantly getting sick from breathing air-borne toxins that are drifting into your yard and home from a nearby algae bloom?

If you would like to know more and think that the taxpayers of Florida deserve to have a public meeting on this issue, near your community, then you need to write, email or call the governor and your legislators TODAY! Tell them that you want to know more about this and have a meaningful opportunity to participate in the decisions that DEP is making about your water, health and money. The rule that is being weakened is Chapter 62-302.400 F.A.C. (designated uses). You can learn more about this issue on the following website: http://www.facebook.com/l/c6a2c;www.cleanwaternetwork-fl.org

Governor Charlie Crist
Via E-mail Charle.Crist@myflorida.com
Phone 850-488-7146
Fax: 850-487-0801
Address: Office of the Governor
The Capitol
400 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399
--------------------

To reply to this message, follow the link below:
http://www.facebook.com/n/?inbox%2Freadmessage.php&t=1314268610666&mid=1b6bfdfG621f914aGfacc5bG0

Yanking phosphorus

2010-03-07T14:17:00.000-08:00

Published on January 11, 2010

In the latest effort to stop eutrophication of state waterways, the Washington legislature takes up bills to limit phosphorus content in lawn fertilizer.

With support from environmental organizations and key industries with a stake in surface water quality, the Washington legislature will take up legislation that would tightly restrict the use of phosphorus in lawn fertilizer. Near identical bills were introduced today (Monday) in the state senate and house that, if passed, would put in place lawn fertilizer restrictions a year from now, in January 2011. The Senate bill is co-sponsored by Spokane senators Chris Marr and Lisa Brown, and the House bill is co-sponsored by Spokane Rep. Timm Ormsby.

“We really appreciate Senators Brown and Marr and Representative Ormsby for taking the lead on this,” said Spokane Riverkeeper Rick Eichstaedt. “The legislation offers a common sense approach to attacking non-point source phosphorous pollution. The science tells us that this can have significant benefits to water quality in places like Lake Spokane that suffer from low dissolved oxygen and toxic algae blooms. This approach has been used in a number of jurisdictions including King County and the states of Michigan and Minnesota. The prime mover for the bill has been the Washington Lake Protection Association and the development of the bill has involved coordination with a broad range of interested parties, including Avista, the City of Spokane and Inland Empire Paper Company.”

Under terms of both bills people would be barred from applying fertilizer’s containing more than .67 percent phosphate by weight or, for liquid fertilizer, “at a rate not greater than .3 pounds per thousand square feet of turf.”

The bill does include some exceptions that would relax the phosphate limits where:

(1) Laboratory tests show phosphorous at levels “insufficient to support healthy turf growth,

(2) New seed and sod for turf require additional phosphorus during a first growing season,

(3) For golf courses using application standards approved by the Department of Ecology.

The draft bills explain that turf fertilizers “containing now or very low amounts of phosphorous are readily available” and that maintaining established turf does not depend “upon the addition of phosphorous fertilizers.”

“While significant reductions of phosphorus from laundry detergent and dishwashing detergent have been achieved,” the bills read, “similar progress in reducing phosphorus from turf fertilizer has not been accomplished.”

Skipjack: The Story of America’s Last Sailing Oystermen

2010-03-07T14:11:00.000-08:00

We would like to alert you to the publication of a new book about the challenges of commercial fishing in a great estuary like Chesapeake Bay:

Skipjack: The Story of America’s Last Sailing Oystermen by Christopher White, published last month by St. Martin’s Press (MacMillan). 372 pages. Photographs. $25.99. Featuring the only wind-powered fishing fleet in North America.

“SKIPJACK is not only a powerful elegy for a great American fishery, it's an act of defiance against all that has conspired to empty the dredges of these beautiful boats.”

--Richard Adams Carey, Against the Tide

“SKIPJACK is exciting, frustrating, and poignant as a few aging men and boats struggle to keep a remarkable way of life alive just a little longer.”

--Chesapeake Bay Magazine

“The author resists any temptation to romanticize his skipjackers as quaint rustics simply overtaken by the modern world. He listens as they admit that they were often their own worst enemies. But he is just as clear-eyed when observing their virtues: a relentless work ethic, stubborn independence and a cultural taproot to traditions of surpassing humanity.”

--The Washington Post

Description: The dramatic narrative tells the story of the last watermen to captain and crew on oyster dredge boats under sail—beginning with three unforgettable Chesapeake skippers who are followed through a pivotal season—and presents the history and future of oystering and waterman towns in Maryland. As oystermen have become more efficient, abandoning sail and tong, the fishery has become less sustainable. We look toward the remaining skipjacks as the last symbols of sustainability on the Bay.

Skipjack is available at your local bookseller, including independent stores, Barnes & Noble, and Borders, and online at Amazon.com and other leading internet book dealers.

Hope you enjoy the book!

Red Tide Status Reports, 03/05/2010

2010-03-05T13:49:00.000-08:00

EAST COAST
Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore of Brevard County.

NORTHWEST COAST
Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in samples collected this week offshore of Okaloosa and Walton counties.

SOUTHWEST COAST
Karenia brevis, the Florida red tide organism, was not detected in water samples collected this week alongshore between Pinellas and Collier counties or offshore of the Florida Keys (Monroe County).

Fish Kills may be possible due to recent cold weather and are unlikely to be red tide related. More information can be found in the following article on the FWRI website: (http://research.myfwc.com/features/view_article.asp?id=34439).

Visit (http://research.myfwc.com/features/category_sub.asp?id=4434) for the Florida Red Tide Current Status Report and select the statewide summary or a region of interest for more information and sampling details.

The University of South Florida's College of Marine Science Center for Prediction of Red Tides (http://cprweb.marine.usf.edu) uses coupled biophysical 3-D models to track and predict harmful algal blooms in the southeastern United States. Various experimental products include Karenia flag maps of bloom locations (http://cprweb.marine.usf.edu/products/karenia-satellite-flags), 3.5 day HAB trajectory forecasts along with nowcasts, which are reports of current conditions, and forecast models (http://cprweb.marine.usf.edu/models).

Judge recommends issuing International Paper permit

2010-03-05T13:27:00.000-08:00

Pipeline from east coast paper plant to the ocean.

Judge recommends issuing International Paper permit

http://bruceritchie.blogspot.com/2010/01/judge-recommends-issuing-international.html

But in his findings, state Administrative Hearing Officer Bram D. E. Canter said the discharge would not be "unreasonably destructive" to the wetlands.

Bob Fulford comments on our February Fly Over of Fenholloway & Protor/Gamble/Buckeye Cellulose Plant

2010-03-05T13:20:00.000-08:00

For whatever it's worth are some thoughts on our trip. I notice Katerine's e-mail address is not on this so perhaps one of you has it and can forward this to her.

These thoughts and observations are as they come to me and are in no particular order.

Having said that I will begin by saying that we had an excellent pilot and an interesting aircraft. While the weather, visability and wind were less than ideal the flight and the pilot's willingness to pretty much fly over whatever Stan suggested made for a good look-see.

I got the left hand rear seat so my view and photo vantage was somewhat limited but I did see pretty much all there was to see. I have not processed my photos yet so don't know what, if anything, I got. I had to open the lens pretty wide and slow the shutter speed way down and that, along with the moderate bumpiness, means I may have some blured pics. However, Stan and Katherine each had cameras going so my guess is that between us we have something useful.

As we circled over the mill at Perry I was reminded of Benito Mussolini's son's observation as he dropped bombs on innocent Ethiopians in the prelude to WW ll that the bombs bursting looked, from the air, like giant, beautiful rose blossoms unfolding.

As we circled over the steaming sludge ponds with the areators going in circles and that black nastiness they contain flowing into the river, I was reminded not of a rose but of an open sore; a running open sore; an open sore that has been oozing that poison into the river and Gulf all these years. For what! A lot of money for the few that steal our environment, a few jobs for the benighted working folk and some filters, diapers and Kotex! A devil's bargain if ever there was one.

On the way to the Gulf, following the meander of the Fenholloway, and later flying down the coast and up the Suwanee, one can see from the serpentine routes of all the water ways that the land there is very flat; any water and any pollutants that water contains has plenty of time to leach into the aquifer. The landscape is also dotted with sinkholes, windows on the aquifer, as it were. As I looked down on the tree farms, dairy farms, rock mines and cement plants (actually did not see the cement plant as it is farther north than our flight path but I know where it is. Even Jeb Bush knows where it is and now says he's sorry it's there) I was reminded of the time when a victorious army would plow salt into the fields of the vanquished. But wait: That was their enemy! Are we our enemy? Don't we know that the accumulation of pollutants in the soil and water will ruin us?

Go back now to the over-flight of the dead zone. Unfortunately because of the poor light and very strong wind out of the NW I could not discern any color differential. The surface was covered with frothy streaks that I think are there because of the effluent as further down the coast the wind streaks did not have the froth. As soon as this weather lays I will go take another look. There is no way that what I saw going into the river can come out in the Gulf and not be visable...very visable.

One other note. Because of the tree farm industry the landscape is covered; criss-crossed with roads that I would guess are for the tree farm business. My guess is that they are built with and maintained by the taxpayers. (I would like to be disabused of that notion) and result in fragmentation of the landscape to the detriment of the wildlife.

Thanks again to SouthWings, Caroline and Roy Zimmer.

Bob

BATTLE OVER FLORIDA'S WATERS RAGES ON

2010-02-22T19:18:00.001-08:00

Dear friends of Florida’s waters:

February has been a busy month for water issues, as many of you know. The US EPA held three public meetings last week in Tallahassee, Orlando and W. Palm Beach to brief the public on its proposed new rule that will hopefully offer better protection to Florida waters from red tides, toxic algal blooms, fish kills and sea-grass die-offs. EPA officials were met by largely hostile crowds of industry polluters and their spokespeople as well as agricultural interests (everything from fern growers, to good ol’ boy hog farmers, to big sugar and big dairies– you name it). There were also many pro-clean water voices there speaking primarily in favor of EPA taking over the job of setting standards for nutrient pollution. EPA was sued by several Florida environmental groups and has no choice but to set some kind of numeric limits on the amount of nitrogen and phosphorus that can be dumped in our waters. The lawsuit does not get into the question of what the correct amount of pollution should be and that is now the controversy.

In our opinion, the numbers that EPA is proposing are not unreasonable nor are they perfect or overly protective. The biggest problem with EPA’s proposal is that it also includes numerous confusing and convoluted ways for Florida to avoid implementing the numbers, even if they were signed into law. So, the debate continues. CWN-FL is working on getting one or more scientists and attorneys to help us draft comments that would make it possible to sue EPA over the final numbers if they are ridiculously unhelpful. You will have an opportunity to sign on to our comment letter before it is submitted in late March.

DESIGNATED USES – Florida continues to move forward with its proposed new category of waters that would be unswimmable and barely fishable. This new category would be used for waters that are currently polluted and need to be put on a pollution diet (TMDL). The pollution diet could be avoided and DEP could continue to issue new permits for more and more pollution if the water was officially down-graded to this new category of unswimmable/barely fishable. This strategy by DEP and its polluter friends is designed to avoid the Clean Water Act and dove-tails with EPA’s proposed numeric nutrient criteria. This is obviously very troubling. There are too many problems with it to elaborate here, but one big problem that you may want to think about until we get you a complete analysis, is that you would not know what waters would get this new “non-swimmable/barely fishable” designation until an unknown time in the future. DEP or anyone with some money, could decide to take a water body through the process of down-grading it with a Use Attainability Analysis (UAA) and with one or more Site Specific Alternative Criteria (SSACs). You would also not know what the pollution limits would be until they finished their monkey-business. The opportunity to challenge a down-grade would be essentially non-existent. Technically, you could spend hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to challenge the down-grade but your efforts would take you to an administrative hearing at DOAH and that is a totally unachievable (to your success) route. Please don’t waste your time or money. We will continue to update you on this disturbing effort being undertaken with your tax dollars by your state agency . . . The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Don’t Expect Protection).

BAY COUNTY AIRPORT: We continue to monitor and watch (by air) the destruction of West Bay and its tributaries in Bay County, by the new Bay County airport. We met with the DEP in Pensacola on February 17th and learned that DEP Secretary Mike Sole signed a secret letter to the Bay County Airport Authority on February 3rd that authorized the airport and its contractors to dump millions of gallons of polluted water into the creeks that lead to West Bay. Of course they have already been doing this for the past several years as the construction struggles forward. Each small rain, compounds the site’s disintegration. We are told by on-site engineers (confidentially of course or they would be fired) that mold is already overtaking the baggage handling area, one wall of the terminal is sinking and cracking, the tower has cracks and the pavement outside the terminal is cracking and sinking into the soggy ground beneath. Remember that your state and federal tax dollars are paying for the construction of this completely unneeded new airport. There is no point in writing Governor Crist or anyone on the federal level. They hear from me on a regular basis with dozens of aerial photos to document the destruction that is on-going. They absolutely do not care about anything but subsidizing the St. Joe development company which is depending on the new airport for infrastructure and a building block to the new city they plan to construct on the surrounding 70,000 acres which are heavily populated with creeks, wetlands and cypress swamps. The photo below was taken on Feb. 8, 2010.

IMPAIRED WATERS RULE – Our attorney continues to work on our Impaired Waters Rule case against the US EPA. It will be many months before there is anything more to report, but we will keep you posted if anything noteworthy happens.

NEW WEBSITE – Our new website is getting REALLY close to becoming a reality. We are working on moving content from our current website over to the new site and adding exciting new features and information. We are hoping to have it available for you to see, explore, participate in very soon, so stay right there on the edge of your seat and you will be the first to know when it is ready for “prime-time”.

Thank you to everyone who attended the EPA meetings (discussed above) and for all the other critical work that you do to protect Florida’s waters.

Also a very special thank you to everyone who sends in their membership contributions and donations. These monies are critical to our work and are very appreciated.

For all of Florida’s waters,

Linda Young, Director

Reminder - Sat. Feb. 27th Nature Coast Gathering, 10:00am to 3:00pm, Crystal River - please RSVP for headcount

2010-02-22T19:16:00.001-08:00

Please RSVP if you can make the Gathering so we have a headcount for lunch, etc. This Nature Coast Gathering will focus on how we can all work together on some specific “legacy issues” that will be in play during the upcoming legislative session in terms of the Nature Coast (drilling in Florida waters, Florida water issues, coastal habitat issues).

ALS0 – THERE IS STILL A LIMITED OPPORTUNITY TO CONTACT SOUTHWINGS ABOUT CONSERVATION FLIGHTS OVER THE NATURE COAST! Please contact Caroline Douglas ASAP (see below).

DRAFT AGENDA:

I. Intros and Welcomes - 10:00am

II. Review of/unveiling of the NEW Nature Coast Coalition Website! – Cindy Liberton, Next Steps Collective - 10:15am

III. Brief Updates on Large Projects/Threats to the Nature Coast – (Sunwest Harbourtowne, Tarmac Mine, etc.) - 11:15am

IV. Update from Campaign Organizers on the Florida Hometown Democracy Amendment – 11:30am

LUNCH – 12:30am

IV. Issue Discussion regarding the 2010 Florida Legislative Session – Special Guest, Sue Mullins – 1:00pm

-Offshore Drilling Threats to the Gulf Coast of Florida

-Water Policy (Supply/Quality – Rivers/Springs)

-Coastal Habitats Acquisition and Management

V. Shared Nature Coast Coalition Strategy – 2010 Legislative Session – 1:30pm to 3:00pm

-Coordinated efforts to make Nature Coast issues Florida issues, and how we protect our region

VI. Next Steps and Follow Up (End meeting at 3:00pm)

SATURDAY FEBRUARY 27TH, 2010

10:00AM TO 3:00PM

CRYSTAL RIVER PRESERVE STATE PARK

3266 North Sailboat Avenue

Crystal River, Florida 34428

Visitor Center: is located at 3266 North Sailboat Ave. Take U.S. Hwy 19 3/4 mile north of the Crystal River Mall. Turn left onto State Park Drive at the Days Inn. Follow State Park Drive until it dead ends at the Crystal River.

**SouthWings is working to schedule flights in/around the Nature Coast region with groups and organizations who have issue work in play in the region and could benefit from flights over the region. This could include flights with reporters, decision makers, agency staff, funders, etc. SouthWings is working to set those flights on FRIDAY FEBRUARY 26th. For more information please visit www.southwings.org and contact:

Caroline Douglas
Conservation Program Director, SouthWings
caroline@southwings.org

35 Haywood Street, Ste 202
Asheville, NC 28801
Phone: 828-225-5949
Fax: 828-225-7562
Website: www.southwings.org

Joe Murphy

Florida Program Director

Gulf Restoration Network

352-583-0870 (office)

813-468-0870 (cell)

Florida Office:

34413 Orchid Parkway

Ridge Manor, Fl. 33523

joe@healthygulf.org

www.healthygulf.org

Shired Island in Dixie County is the Dirtiest Beach in Florida, for the fourth year in a row; it is also the only beach in Dixie County.

2010-02-22T19:14:00.001-08:00

Source: National Resources Defense Council

http://www.nrdc.org/

Results: In 2008, Florida reported 634 coastal beaches, 306 (48%) of which were monitored once a week, and 328 (52%) were not monitored. For the fourth consecutive year, NRDC looked at the percent of monitoring samples that exceeded the state’s daily maximum bacterial standards (all reported samples were used to calculate the 2008 percent accidence values, including duplicate samples and samples taken outside the official beach season, if any). In 2008, 4 percent of all reported beach monitoring samples exceeded the state’s daily maximum bacterial standards.

For twenty-five years Buckeye-Quaker has created the most polluted river in Florida, the Fenholloway River, by dumping 60 million gallons of treated Class 5 toxic waste water into the river every day. The accumulation of this toxic waste water has, after twenty-five years, has created six of the top ten Dirtiest Beaches in Florida and a ten square mile Dead Zone in the Gulf.

On the Big Bend Coast, in the so-called Pure Water Wilderness, the Big Bend Canoe Trail passes through the Fenholloway Dead Zone. As the Gulf Stream flows south through the Dead Zone the pollution is carried off and creates six of the Dirtiest Beaches, not just in the Big Bend Area but in the entire State of Florida

Six of our beaches with the highest percent pollution exceedance rate are within the first forty miles south of the mouth of the Fenholloway River and its ten square mile Dead Zone. Last year clams harvested from north of the Steinhatchee River, passed the Fenholloway River were banned from commercial sale and public consumption.

The Fenholloway River flows from the North Coast of Taylor County. In 2009 the dirtiest beaches in the Big Bend were:

1. Shired Island in Dixie County (90%), (Between Shired Island and Horseshoe Beach lies Horseshoe Beach Cove where a new Dead Zone is forming).

2. Dekle Beach (62%), in Taylor County

3. Alligator Point (56%) Taylor County

4. Keaton Beach (41%) in Taylor County

5. Hagen’s Cove (40%) in Taylor County

6. Cedar Island (27%) in Taylor County

Dixie County had the highest percent exceedance rate (90%) in 2009 and for the last 4 years has been rated the dirtiest beach in Florida, Shired Island.

The next beach within the top ten dirtiest beaches is found in Levy County, ranked number seven and has an 11% exceedance rate. The first impediment to the Gulf flow from the Fenholloway Dead Zone is the twenty mile long Great Suwannee Reef, at the reefs north end the water is changing from Class II into Class III water at an ever increasing rate. At the south end of the reef is Cedar Key, the 2nd largest aquaculture framing area in Florida. Any marine life form growing in an exoskeleton (clams, crabs & etc.) must have Class II water to grow and thrive. They will die in Class III water.

Some people have the gall to defend dumping 60 million gallons of Class 5 toxic waste water into the Fenholloway River on a daily basis for 25 years while others are greedy enough to sell tourism in this area as part of the “Pure Water Wilderness”.

Suwannee Riverkeeper®, a non-profit charity, has the gall to make a three year independent scientific field study, overseen by independent PhDs with CDC Atlanta Credentials, scientifically proving the facts and then standing in the way of this environmental crime by telling the truth and letting the chips fall where they may.

Sincerely,

Stan Meeks

Suwannee Riverkeeper®

Contact info

suwanneeriverkeeper@earthlink.net

PO Box 1669

Old Town, FL 32680

Web Site www.suwanneeriverkeeper.org (under construction)

Member of Waterkeeper®Alliance

http://www.waterkeeper.org