 |
Economics
Click on your Choice:
download this chapter in a PDF file view web pages: |
Providing Adequate Infrastructure
Transportation System | Labor | Environmental Restoration / Regional Water Management
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION /
REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT:
Conclusion: Need to find ways to address agriculture's concerns with the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) to achieve environmental restoration and meet the water-related needs of the region.
Suggested Actions: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should work with ag interests to explore the benefits to CERP of developing conservation strategies that:
Link land use to water use.
Look at topography as well as hydrology.
Utilize the abilities of agricultural land uses to:
recharge ground water supplies,
retain water in periods of drought;
detain water in periods of flood;
support wastewater reuse (where feasible);
provide vegetative covers, settling ponds and evaporation ponds that can remove particulates and pollutants from water flowing into environmentally sensitive areas;
support wetland systems;
provide vegetative covers for carbon sequestering;
provide wildlife habitat;
provide buffers between natural areas and urban areas;
generate oxygen; and
contribute to soil creation, conservation and health. Identify impacts to rural and farming communities from Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan implementation and other restoration projects (work closely with Implementation Issue Team)
Identified as a possible task for assistance from the Governor's Commission for the Everglades
Address agriculture's concerns with the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). These include assurances that:
the current water supply to existing users will be maintained, and plans will be made to meet future needs;
needs for flood protection, not only for agricultural areas but urban areas, will be addressed;
current CERP plans that call for the conversion of 200,000 to 300,000 acres of prime agricultural land to CERP storage and other purposes not be acquired or taken from unwilling sellers until it has been be demonstrated on a smaller scale that these project components are feasible, workable and scientifically valid;
the Conceptual Plan will be accepted as a guide and framework for identifying and evaluating C&SF Project modifications while recognizing that periodic revisions will be necessary to reflect improved scientific understanding; and
significant uncertainty remains regarding the technical feasibility and cost effectiveness of many components in the conceptual plan.
"I understand that this is a report to the Federal Working Group. You may not want to include my comments that I think reflect the positions of agriculture generally as to the Restudy [now known as the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan] because the Federal Team has a completely different view of what the Restudy should accomplish. If you can't reflect agriculture's views on the Restudy you ought to consider deleting this part of the Report entirely so that it doesn't detract from the rest that I believe has widespread agricultural support.
"Your statement of the ‘who' only mentions the Corps of Engineers. The Restudy and any project components that area actually implemented will be an undertaking not just of the Corps but theoretically an undertaking of the Corps and the local sponsor of the State of Florida, the South Florida Water Management District, as equal partners with equal funding responsibility.
"Your statement of the ‘what' accepts the federal view generally of the Restudy as an ‘environmental restoration project.' This is not the view of agriculture. We worked hard in 1996 and earlier to ensure that the purposes of the Restudy were not just to achieve environmental restoration but to also ‘provide such features as are necessary to meet the other water-related needs of the region, including flood control, the enhancement of water supplies and other objective served dy the C&SF Project.' (From WRDA 1996)
"We have always recognized the need to modify the C&SF project to better meet all needs, both economic and environmental. We have never rejected the purpose of meeting environmental needs but have had no success in persuading the Federal team of the need to provide a balanced approach to meeting all needs.
"Your statement of the ‘how' is that agencies should explore the benefits of restoration and develop conservation strategies with the list of features you provide. These features stress the environmental benefits that can be expected from agriculture.
"The problem with this is not that these expectations are misplaced but that they do not address agriculture's concerns at all with the Restudy. The concerns are that the Restudy does not provide assurances that the current water supply to existing users will be maintained, much less meet future needs. In addition, the Restudy almost totally fails to address wide spread needs for flood protection, not only for agricultural areas but urban areas as well. The Restudy plan calls for the conversion of 200,000 to 300,000 acres of prime agricultural land to Restudy storage and other purposes. Finally, the implementation plan calls for initial authorization of project components that have not been determined to be feasible yet based on the authorization additional agricultural land will be acquired or taken from unwilling sellers before we know whether the project component makes sense."
Susan Brown
of U.S. Sugar emphasized these points in a position paper presented for approval to the Agricultural Advisory Committee of South Florida Water Management District on December 14, 1999. The position paper, that was unanimously approved, reads:
AGRICULTURE'S POSITION ON COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN (CERP) Florida agriculture affirms the multi-purpose commitment of the Comprehensive Plan as contained in the WRDA 1996 authorization. "The Comprehensive Plan shall provide for the protection of water quality in and the reduction of the loss of freshwater from the Everglades. The plan shall include such features as are necessary to provide for the water-related needs of the region, including flood control and the enhancement of water supplies and other objectives served by the C&SF Project." Congress should affirm this statement of purposes and priorities in authorizing the plan.
Congress should accept the Conceptual Plan as a guide and framework for identifying and evaluating C&SF Project modifications while recognizing that periodic revisions will be necessary to reflect improved scientific understanding.
Congress should recognize that significant uncertainty remains regarding the technical feasibility and cost effectiveness of many components in the conceptual plan.
The pilot projects recommended in the Final Report should be authorized and implemented, including ASR, Lake Belt reservoir technology, L-31 seepage management and wastewater reuse.
The analysis and justification of recommended project components should be based on the existing Principles and Guidelines for Water Resources Implementation Studies and completed in sufficient time to allow the local sponsor to obtain approval under state law.
Other project components that were authorized prior to July 1, 1999
should be fully funded and implemented including the Kissimmee
River Restoration, Modified Water Deliveries to ENP, the C-111Project and STA 1 E.
Discussion on this issue is needed so these concerns and suggestions can be incorporated into this action step.
Recommendations:
Who: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) and SFWMD, working with NRCS and DOACS
What: Need to address agriculture's concerns with the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). USACOE and SFWMD, working with NRCS and DOACS, should ensure that agriculture has an equitable role in the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) process to achieve environmental restoration and provide such features as are necessary to meet the other water-related needs of the region, including flood control, the enhancement of water supplies and other objectives served dy the C&SF Project (from WRDA 1996)
Designed
& Maintained by The Mousepad, Inc.
Send email comments and inquiries to: info@privatelands.org
Photo courtesy of South Florida Water Management District
Copyright 2000 by Florida Stewardship Foundation | All rights reserved.