ATV Florida Forum

EPA won't limit dirty-water transfers to Glades
In a case with national implications, federal regulators refused to monitor South Florida water managers' practice of pumping polluted water into Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades.

By CURTIS MORGAN
cmorgan@@MiamiHerald.com

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Monday that Florida's controversial practice of pumping polluted water from farms and suburbs into the Everglades and Lake Okeechobee is none of the federal government's business.

In a decision with national implications that appears to defy a 2006 ruling by a Miami federal court judge, the EPA announced it would not require federal permits for ''transfers'' of water from one body to another for water-supply, flood-control, irrigation and other common purposes -- no matter how dirty that water might be.

''Clean water permits should focus on water pollution, not water movement,'' said Benjamin Grumbles, an EPA assistant administrator, in a release intended to ''clarify'' a rule the agency first floated in 2005 in response to two lawsuits brought against the South Florida Water Management District by the Miccosukee Tribe and environmental groups. Both cases have been closely watched across the country, particularly in western states, where such transfers are common.

`BURDENING'

The district, in an unattributed release, said the EPA had affirmed the rights of states to protect and manage water supplies without ``burdening the taxpayers with additional layers of federal oversight.''

The EPA's permitting program ''was created -- appropriately -- to stop polluters from dumping waste into the nation's waterways,'' the district release said. ``It was not designed to govern the movement of water for water-supply and flood-control purposes.''

Attorneys for the Miccosukee Tribe and environmental groups accused the Bush administration of opening a door that could make it easier for industries and agencies to pollute lakes and rivers.

Dexter Lehtinen, an attorney for the tribe, called the decision a ''last gasp'' from an out-going White House that has repeatedly sought to erode federal authority under the Clean Water Act -- in the face of contradictory court rulings.

''The only thing the district is right about is EPA is on their side,'' said Lehtinen. ``They have been on their side through this pollution saga. There is nothing new about EPA being on the side of polluters.''

The district, supported by the EPA, has argued that a federal permit wasn't needed because the state agency wasn't the original source of the tainted water, but was simply moving it between two similar places. In one lawsuit, the water was from drainage canals that crisscross sugar farms delivered into Lake Okeechobee. In the other, it was water from the suburban canal system of West Broward sent to a conservation area considered part of the natural Everglades.

SUPREME COURT

In 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned lower-court rulings ordering a federal permit for the S-9 pumping station in Broward. But the justices declined to settle the long-running legal dispute, returning the case to U.S. District Court in Miami to determine whether there was a ''meaningful difference'' between where the pump draws its water and where it deposits it.

But in December 2006, U.S. District Judge Cecilia Altonaga ruled in a second case that back-pumping billions of gallons of farm runoff into Lake Okeechobee ran afoul of ''unambiguous'' congressional intent in crafting the Clean Water Act to reduce pollution in U.S. waters.

In that ruling, which remains under appeal, Altonaga specifically rejected the EPA's proposed interpretation of transfers and dismissed district arguments that a federal permit would interfere with a state's rights to allocate water or prove ''prohibitively'' expensive or complex.

The EPA release cited the uncertainty created by the Supreme Court ruling but does not mention Altonaga's subsequent decision. The agency, calling water transfers ''vital to the nation's water supply and infrastructure,'' said it would focus its permitting efforts on reducing pollution at its source.

`SHAMEFUL'

David Guest, an attorney for Earthjustice, which represented the Florida Wildlife Federation in the Lake Okeechobee case, said he intended to file a challenge of a ruling he said threatens the environment and public health.

A permit wouldn't necessarily halt all pumping, but environmentalists argue it would impose limits and force the district to find options for moving, treating or storing flood waters, including in reservoirs already under construction.

''Instead of stepping in to tighten clean-water protections and clean up the pollution, the EPA has now chosen to legalize it,'' Guest said. ``It is shameful.''

Idiots!!!!!!!!!!!

let me guess some one that works for the EPA is in some way connected to someone in big $ugar companie$$$$$$             you cant tell me its not so!    I bet some of these guys are gettin alot of fringe benefits

HA!  Hoisted by thier own pertard!

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2008/jun/12/nesting-birds-could-cause-problems-everglades-clea/

Nesting birds could cause problems for Everglades cleanup
Sun-Sentinel
Originally published 09:10 p.m., June 12, 2008
Updated 09:10 p.m., June 12, 2008

In a twist of environmental irony, legal protections for nesting birds could stand in the way of cleaning water used to replenish the Everglades.

Black-necked stilts and other migrating birds are flocking to former agricultural fields turned into 40,000 acres of man-made wetlands, which filter contaminants from stormwater that flows to the Everglades.

The problem is, the long-legged birds nest on the ground at the water line and they are protected by long-standing federal regulations.

That causes a problem for water managers, who need to move water through the stormwater treatment areas so pollutants that wash in from sugar cane fields and other farmland can be cleaned out before the water flows to the Everglades.

So far, the South Florida Water Management District has been able to redirect water to dodge the nests. But as summer rains increase, the choice could be flooding the nests or dumping water into the ocean.

After back-to-back years of drought, the district contends it doesn’t make sense to bypass the treatment areas and dump water that could be used to help the Everglades.

"You are doing restoration. You shouldn’t be penalized for it," district governing board member Michael Collins said.

Since 1994, Florida has invested $1.8 billion in buying land and building more than 40,000 acres of stormwater treatment areas. Plans call for 60,000 acres of the filter marshes as part of a multi-billion-dollar plan to restore water flows to the Everglades

Representatives for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledged Thursday that the primary purpose of the stormwater treatment areas is to clean water heading to the Everglades. The agency committed to working with the district to come up with a wildlife management plan.

That could be considered a "covering your butt" move that still leaves the nesting birds as an obstacle to getting water flowing through the stormwater treatment areas, district board member Shannon Estenoz said.

"We have got to keep in mind that (treatment areas) are there to help us restore a larger ecosystem," Estenoz said.

It takes about 28 days for the birds’ eggs to hatch and leave the nest, said Chip Merriam, the district’s deputy executive director. That nesting cycle just happens to match the beginning of the summer rainy season, he said.

"It is going to rain," Merriam said. "We are going to do damage to nests."

The black-necked stilts aren’t the first birds to land in the way of Everglades restoration. In late 2006, the district agreed to spend $200,000 to build a canal around three barn owl chicks nesting in an abandoned shed.