Finding II. ~Relevant to Management Determination for the Everglades Agricultural Area, Draft Copy, 1975

Toxic Lake Okeechobee, June 11, 2023 , Ed Lippisch

Today I share Finding II. of “Conclusions of the Special Project to Prevent the Eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee Relevant to Management Determination for the Everglades Agricultural Area,” Draft Copy, 1975.

This information was gathered by my husband and I at the State Library and Archives of Florida in Tallahassee. 

I recently I posted Finding I.

Again, I state how important it is that this historic documentation is not stored in our state archives like something out of “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” but rather ready and available to the public. Otherwise, history is rewritten by those with most the power and influence.

For instance, today, one will ofter hear in regards to pollution in Lake Okeechobee, –from those working for and in  the EAA,– “The Everglades Agriculture Area (EAA) doesn’t backpump anymore. Our water is cleaner when it leaves than when it came in.” (basically, we are not responsible for the condition of Lake Okeechobee, others are….)

What is missing in this response is that in spite of its numbers the Everglades Agricultural Area remains responsible for damages that plague Lake Okeechobee TODAY.

If you smoked unfiltered cigarettes from the 1940s through the 1980s and then, because of a law suit, the University of Florida and the South Florida Water Management District helped you create Best Management Practices” that did a great job cleansing  your smoke through giant air filters, (like Storm Water Treatment Areas filter the EAA’s  dirty water of nitrogen and phosphorus,) would it be correct to say the damage in your lungs has disappeared?

No. The damage in Lake Okeechobee from backpumping is still there and continues to be built upon. The filthy backpumped water of the past is a major reason for the pathetic condition of Lake Okeechobee today. It is time for the EAA and its masters  to take responsibility for this and to stop hiding behind their modern day state sponsored improvements.

~begin text:

“With regard to eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee drainage water from 30 percent of the EAA land area is back pumped into Lake Okeechobee during the wet season. An average of 330,000 acre-feet of water entered the lake annually at Structures S-2 and S-3 from the Miami, Hillsboro and New River Canals . In addition drainage districts and the private interest pump approximately 150,000 acre feet of water into the lake from various locations. The EAA irrigation demands draw an average of 438,000 acre-feet from the lake annually…”

Conclusions of the Special Project to Prevent the Eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee Relevant to Management Determination for the Everglades Agricultural Area, Draft Copy, 1975.

Finding II.

Water Backpumped from the Everglades Agricultural Area contributes significantly to the cultural eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee. 

The following research evidence is proffered in support of Finding II.

(page 23.) Joyner (1974) found that water pumped from agricultural areas to the southeast is generally the poorest in quality of all water entering Lake Okeechobee….

(page 24.) Brezonik further states: It is clear from the data that Lake Okeechobee presently receives an abundant supply of nutrients. Both nitrogen and phosphorus loading rates or near or above all  the (dangerous) levels reported in the scientific literature. (Table 2.) If all backpumping were ceased, the nutrient loading rates would decrease by about 20 percent.  This would still leave area loading for nitrogen above the dangerous values, but the volumetric rate would be slightly under the dangerous volumetric rate of Brezonik and Shannon (1971). The photophores loading without backpuming would be lower than all but Vollenweider’s  (1968) dangerous rate….

Lake O 2023

 

12 thoughts on “Finding II. ~Relevant to Management Determination for the Everglades Agricultural Area, Draft Copy, 1975

  1. Thank you Jacqui for shining a spotlight on the root cause of the nutrients in Lake O muck. We suspect your truth telling spotlight is the reason the EAA did not want the Senate to reapprove your next term on the SFWMD. Sadly, that action has a chilling effect on the Governing Board.On the other hand, you are totally free to to speak the truth to the SFWMD Governing Board!

  2. Jacqui,
    Thanks for doing this research and making it available to us. How do we get our politicians to understand and act? It feels like a torturous fight.
    Jim

    1. It is a hard fight. I think the best way is to try to meet with them face to face. If that is not possible, send a handwritten note. If no time, an email or call to staff does get logged. There are other ways too of course but written is documented. Just keep talking to with friends and everyone one can. 🙂

  3. Thanks for your continued concern for Lake Okeechobee. As one of the management team for the special project from the start and a principal author of the 1976 Final Report on the special project to prevent the Eutrophication of Lake Okeechobee, I am pleased to find our efforts and findings are still relevant. I still have my personal copy of the final report and marvel that we pulled it off with the help of so many researchers and agencies. Just wish the current powers that be could see the benefit of a healthy environment.
    Thanks for your diligence,
    Rotha Allen Randall (formerly MacGill)

  4. It boggles my mind that scientist can study the amounts of nitrogen and phosphorous in the lake and never mention one word about how to remove those nutrients. God uses plants, and the more nutrients there are the more plants he will provide. Right now we need LOTS OF PLANTS!!!

  5. Your quote the report “If all backpumping were ceased, the nutrient loading rates would decrease by about 20 percent” — so the report you quote found backpumping was found to be responsible for 20% of the nutrient load at the time. And as you noted, backpumping was discontinued so that would be less than 20% of the current nutrient problem. Correct?

Leave a Reply