Tag Archives: WRAC

Getting the Numbers Straight With U.S. Sugar, SLR/IRL

This pie chart shows an average of Lake O discharges in acre feet to the estuaries from 1996-2015. (Dr Gary Goforth 2015)

After last Thursday’s WRAC meeting at the South Florida Water Management District, I left somewhat miffed.

(http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xweb%20about%20us/meetings)

The numbers seemed wrong….

These meetings are difficult to follow, and almost surreal at times. On Thursday, this was especially true with “paid” protesters yelling outside against the option land purchase, and afterwards the group’s slick sun-glassed/suit-wearing organizer coming inside to pat one of the WRAC members on the back.

I sat there thinking “life really is stranger than fiction,” no wonder south Florida satirist and writer Carl Haaisen says almost all of his material is “simply out of the newspapers…”

Another oddity for me was when Bubba Wade, representing US Sugar Corporation, during WRAC members’ comments referencing “2013,” in defense of not purchasing the option lands, quoted the acre footage of water to the St Lucie Estuary/IRL as “4.5 million acre feet annually,” —and thus justifying that if the 26,000 acre option lands located south of the lake were purchased, even with that water “exchanged,” it would never be “enough…”

I’m thinking to myself: “445,000—4.5 million…I saw “that” number in a Palm Beach Post article too, but I swear it said billion and not million acre feet….where are these numbers coming from? Is Bubba using the right numbers? I think they are wrong….Am I wrong?”

After the meeting, I even walked up to Mr Wade, who I have met on many occasions and feel I have a good working relationship with saying: “Bubba, where did you get your numbers? I am almost sure the St Lucie River, no maybe the estuaries received around 1.5 million acre feet of water in 2013, not 4.5 million acre feet to the SLR. What are the numbers? If we can’t agree on what numbers we are talking about, how we ever agree on anything at all? ”

Bubba was talking out loud trying to figure where he got his numbers, and I was wondering where I got mine as well…in the end we just stared at each other…

When I got home I consulted Dr Gary Goforth. I have interpreted and put into laymen terms what he wrote to me below.

It shows that the numbers change depending on what years one is talking about, and over how long a period of time.

First of all…. : For calendar year 2013, 1.584 million acre feet of Lake water was sent to the estuaries… The St Lucie gets about 20% of that…. But in figuring out “distribution,” one does not just look at one year….Dr Goforth shared again his hand out from last month’s SFWMD Governing Board meeting:

The chart below shows in acre feet, the “distribution of Lake Okeechobee releases from water years 1996-2015.” “20 years” of reference, gives a more accurate estimate of the long-term average of annual values than a shorter time period. Of course every year annual flows vary. For years 1996-2015 the average number of acre feet to the SLR/IRL is 270, 224.

This chart, taken from the ACOE and SFWMD and shown here in a slide presentation by Mark Perry of Florida Oceanographic, shows a 10 year period from 1996-2005.

The above chart is different as it shows a ten-year, not a twenty-year average, 1996-2005). Here the number, 442,000 looks more like Bubba’s 4.5 million acre feet. (I found this chart in Mark Perry’s presentation on his website at Florida Oceanographic.)This must be the chart Bubba Wade was referring to…?

Which number is better? Which number is correct? That depends what one is trying to prove. Right? 🙂

In any case, when quoting numbers, it is good to know which reference chart one is quoting. One one should also reference which chart one is using….This goes for me as well as for Mr Wade of U.S. Sugar….

Heading of Dr Goforth's chart showing estimated releases from Lake O to SLR from 1931-2013. — Heading of Dr Goforth’s chart showing estimated releases from Lake O to SLR from 1931-2013.

A section of Dr Goforth's chart 1988-2013. — A section of Dr Goforth’s chart 1988-2013. Years 1988-2013 showing acre feet flows from Lake O to SRL.

Lake Okeechobee conversion sheet, Everglades Coalition break out session, 2015. — Lake Okeechobee water/conversion sheet, Everglades Coalition break out session, 2015.

_______________________________

WRAC, SFWMD, (http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xweb%20about%20us/wrac)

Mr Malcom (Bubba) Wade, US Sugar Corporation, (http://www.ussugar.com/press_room/bios/wade_bio.html)

Dr Gary Goforth: (http://garygoforth.net)

Florida Oceanographic/Mark Perry’s power point presentations: (http://www.floridaocean.org/p/233/advocacy-environment#.VSKHyrrRwl8)

_____________________________________

This photo is to reference a comment on this blog:

Page 16 of Jeff Kivett's System constraints document, SFWMD, 2015 as shown to respond to blog comment. 4-7-15 — Page 16 of Jeff Kivett’s System constraints document, SFWMD, 2015 as shown to respond to blog comment. 4-7-15

This is THE photo where the 4.5 million acre feet comes from. Thank you to Christine Stapleton of the Palm Beach Post for sharing when I asked where she got her sources for her article referred to in comments in this blog post. THE PROBLEM with the slide is that this is referring to ALL WATER into the estuaries: "local runoff" and Lake Okeechobee water. This conversation is not about ALL WATER/"LOCAL" runoff water---it is about Lake Okeechobee and how the ACOE and SFWMD make us take this water that IS NOT OURS. The 4.5 M number makes it sound like it is not possible to fix lake O. This is untrue. IT is fixable at 1.5 million acre feet or even twice that much. If nothing else the issue could be alleviated. — 4-7-15: This is THE source where the 4.5 million acre feet comes from. (Jeff Kivett’s SFWMD constraints doc.) Thank you to Christine Stapleton of the Palm Beach Post for sharing when I asked where she got her sources for her article referred to in comments in this blog post. THE PROBLEM with the slide is that this is referring to ALL WATER into the estuaries: “local runoff” and Lake Okeechobee water. This conversation, this blog post, the land purchase south of the lake, is not about ALL WATER/”LOCAL” runoff water—it is about Lake Okeechobee water and how the ACOE and SFWMD make us take this water that IS NOT OURS. The 4.5 M number mentioned by Mr Wade or Ms Stapleton makes it sound like it is not possible to “fix” lake O, or to buy enough land that would help the estuaries or hold clean, and convey water,. This is untrue. It is “fixable” at 1.5 million acre feet or even twice that much. If nothing else the issue of lake O being the toxic nail in our estuaries could be half way alleviated.

Cultural Shift, Yet SFWMD/WRAC Still Focusing on “Constraints” not “Possibilities?” SLR/IRL

Burning sugarcane fields in the EAA. (Photo Jacqui Thurlow-Lippisch, 2012.) — Burning sugarcane fields in the Everglades Agricultural Area near Palm Beach County. This area south of Lake O used to be the Everglades and today is the EAA. This area is a constraint to moving water south. (Photo Jacqui Thurlow-Lippisch, 2014.)

The St Lucie and the Caloosahatechee estuaries are part of the Everglades as was the Everglades Agricultural Area….

A sugar refinery in the Everglades Agricultural Area. (Public photo.) — A sugar refinery in the Everglades Agricultural Area, (EAA). Refineries are a constraint to moving water south. (Public photo.)

Black Gold, the muck soils south of Lake Okeechobee. (Photo JTL, 2014.) — Black Gold; the muck soils south of Lake Okeechobee that make the sugar industry wealthy. These soils are a constraint to moving water south. (Photo JTL, 2014.)

Sugar fields burning near Clewiston. (Photo JTL, 2014.) — Refinery near Clewiston– a historical town built of the sugar industry located south of Lake Okeechobee. This city and others are a constraint to moving water south but could benefit from ecotourism economy along with agricultulre. (Photo JTL, 2014.)

Gail M. Hollender, begins her book, “Raising Cane in the ‘Glades, The Global Sugar Trade and the Transformation of Florida,” by stating in Chapter 1:

“…at a point in time usually unspecified, the Everglades made the transition from “worthless swamp” to “cherished wetland.”

Nothing has affected to flow of water south to the Everglades more than the creation of the EAA south of Lake O. (Map Everglades Foundation.) — Nothing has affected to flow of water south to the Everglades more than the creation of the EAA south of Lake O. The EAA is a constraint. (Map SFWMD.)

This satellite photo shows water on lands in 2005. One can see the lands in the EAA are devoid of water. This water has been pumped off the lands into the Water Conservation Areas, sometimes back pumped into the lake, and also stored in other canals. (Captiva Conservation 2005.) — This satellite photo shows water on lands in 2005. One can see the lands in the EAA are devoid of water. This water has been pumped off the lands into the Water Conservation Areas, sometimes back pumped into the lake, and also stored in other canals. Nonetheless, there are ways to move more water south through these canals and by creating a reservoir to store, clean and convey water south (Captiva Conservation 2005.)

Option Lands Map SFWMD River of Grass, Option 1 is 46,800 acres and shown in brown. (SFWMD map, 2010) — Option Lands Map SFWMD River of Grass, Option 1 is 46,800 acres and shown in brown. Option lands could be purchased to help move water south of the lake to the Everglades. (SFWMD map, 2010)

In the 1970s there was a “cultural shift” regarding the importance of “environmental protection.” America recognized the destruction it has promoted in building the country, especially in terms of agriculture and development.

“Cultural shifts” are powerful, and drive the evolution of our world. I believe the “Everglades shift” will eventually drive the restoration of the Everglades as well as the St Lucie River/Indian River Lagoon. It is what the people want…often the broad knowledge of history becomes an enemy to itself. So is it with sugar and the Everglades Agricultural Area. Just look at the photos above.

Nonetheless, sometime the “powers that be,” and their most important stake holders prefer to concentrate on why history should remain as it is, and has been, even if destructive, focusing on “constraints” rather than “possibilities” of the system.

This happened this past Thursday.

I was unable to attend the South Florida Water Management District’s (SFWMD) Water Resources Advisory Commission, (WRAC), (http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xweb%20about%20us/wrac) because I had a board commitment to attend FAU/Harbor Branch’s Indian River Lagoon Symposium.

I was somewhat taken aback when I returned from a long day at the symposium, looked at my computer, and saw an email from the SFWMD addressed to me, and all members of the WRAC entitled:

“System Constraints Follow-up Details – January and February WRAC”–“…a follow-up to your request to provide specific details associated with the constraints to moving water south through the system– with a professionally created 19 slide power point presentation.

“My request?”

NOT.

Slide 1 of the SFWMD power point presentation "Constraints to Sending Water South, 2015.) — Slide 1 of the SFWMD power point presentation “Constraints to Sending Water South,” 2015.

Let me explain..

At the January WRAC meeting, (http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xweb%20about%20us/gb%20application) I sat in as an alternate for Mr Joe Capra, and in the course of that meeting, a few members of the agriculture industry, as well as a couple of others who often support the agriculture industry, I will not state names but they are important, big players. I like and respect these people, but still— I must call them on this.

They asked the SFWMD to create a presentation showing the “constraints” for sending water south so that people would understand (why it can’t be done…) In other words, why those people along the estuaries should “shut-up.” Why we should preserve a destructive history.

I got my nerve up saying: “Where I come from, we don’t want to talk about constraints; we want to talk about possibilities; we want to talk about change….” implying the District should “show that too.”

Upon seeing the email, I realized the SFWMD did not honor my request, but did show the “constraints” asked to be shown by the agriculture industry. Oh well…usually when government suppresses people, their motivation actually increases.

So is it with me, and I imagine it is so with you…

Dear, SFWMD district, please remember: your core mission is to “manage and protect the water resources of the region by balancing and improving water quality, flood control, natural systems, and water supply.” I don’t see anywhere in here where it says we must keep things the same and focus on constraints.

Let’s build a new future! Thank you!

SFWMD: (http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xweb%20about%20us/history1)(http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/sfwmdmain/home%20page)

Sugar Cane historic postcard, ca. 1906. (Thurlow Collection.) — Sugar Cane historic postcard, ca. 1906 glorifying and “romanticizing”the sugar industry. (Thurlow Collection.)

Cartoon Sugar/IRL, 2014. (Public) — Cartoon postcard showing a modern-day perspective–the cultural shift apparent–mocking the sugar industry and its effects on environmental protection of the SLR/IRL/Everglades. (Public, D. Goldstein, 2014.)

INSPIRATIONAL QUOTE:

“It is time we stopped viewing our environment through prisms of profit, politics, geography, or local and personal pride. It is time for us to work together—to accept the truth about our problems in south Florida, and to set about solving them. It is time for us to do all of these things—because you know as well as I that the alternative will be disastrous to our economy as well as to our environment.”

——Florida Gov. Rubin Askew, (served 1971-1979) Rubin included, by law, the mission of Florida’s water districts to envelop “environmental protection.”

What is the WRAC and Can Martin County Become the Bull Gator for the Indian River Lagoon?

WRAC the jaws behind the SFWMD? (Photo courtesy of Clyde Butcher) — Right now agriculture interests are perhaps the most powerful force, “the bull gator,” of the SFWMD’s WRAC. (Photo courtesy of Clyde Butcher.)

bull (bo͝ol) n. 1. The male of certain large animals, such as the alligator, elephant, or moose that periodically fights upcoming bulls to maintain position or dominance. 2. An exceptionally large, strong, and aggressive person.

Perhaps the most important part of understanding our Indian River Lagoon water issues, is being honest about which interests have the most influence, who has the power to change things, and learning to take advantage of opportunities to become a competing bull gator at the table of water management.

Understanding the Water Resources Advisory Commission is a good place to start. The WRAC is a body that is appointed by the South Florida Water Management District’s Governing Board and represents a broad range of business, agricultural, environmental, tribal, governmental and public interests. It is an advisory board in essense to the SFWMD. (http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xweb%20about%20us/wrac)

The Chair and Vice Chair of the Commission are members of the SFWMD Governing Board. The Governing Board is appointed by the governor.

WRAC’s number one bull gator is not named “Alfred the Alligator,” but “Agi. How can I say this? Well I have served as an alternate for three years.

Monthly, I have sat through the long meetings with detailed scientific presentations by the SFWMD on water issues; it’s enough to leave your mind completely fried by lunch time but incredibly insightful. The real fun starts when all the members are allowed to give their opinions and concerns. Unlike many public arenas, the WRAC allows its members to speak passionately and openly on their interests. The agriculture community is very powerful on this committee and represent status quo.

Historically the WRAC is relatively new, I believe created in the 1990s, however; Florida’s flood districts, (under various names,) the state of Florida, the Federal Government and Army Corp of Engineers have worked and advised each other how to drain lands in South Florida since the late 1800’s.

This was originally done to help the state’s fledgling agriculture industry. But the agriculture and draining machine grew up and went too far destroying the natural system of Sorth Florida.

In the 1970’s under Governor, Rubin Askew, the water districts were restructured and received an additional mission to “flood control,” that of restoring the Everglades. And in 1994, the “Florida Forever Act” made clear the public expected their government to preserve Florida’s natural future. (River of Interest, Water Management in South Florida an dthe Everglades 1948-2010,” 2011)

This new mission to restore and not just to “drain and maintain” is struggling to find its footing, as history is a heavy cloak to change. This change will only come through the people–mind you, WRAC is an extension of “the people.” The WRAC is a key.

Last Thursday in a rare and appreciated opportunity for Martin County, the SFWMD/ACOE allowed the county to hold its “After Action” meeting during the WRAC. Almost five hours were dedicated for the purpose of critique.

The Commission first allowed Gary Goforth and Kevin Henderson, from Martin County, to present on how “more water could have gone south,” during the horrific summer of 2013. Then the SFWMD gave its response of why “it couldn’t.”

Basically, the District expounded upon their many “constraints” to sending more water south: the EAA’s legal flood protection; water quality standards; a consent decree from the Federal Government requiring phosphorus levels to be 10 parts per billion once they reach the Everglades; limited capacity in the Storm Water Treatment Areas (STAs ); preference for EAA water over Lake Okeechobee water; flood protection of the east coast and towns south of the lake; the FWC, endanged species, and a restrictive Tamiami Trail, were the most obvious.

Representatives form the agriculture community were some the first to speak in support of the SFWMD’s presentation. In one case, the “water game” was cited, a game that is used to teach how difficult is is to manage the water. “I challenge any of you to have done better,” in essence, was said. The room was silent.

Then the conversation continued and something interesting happened.

Representatives other than Martin County started asking questions of the top gators…

“How far does the EAA have to keep the water level down in its fields? Could the EAA grow rice or another crop that would allow for more water on the fields? “Could the water go another way? ” Perhaps naive, but there was a clear voice to look for answers for the plight of the estuaries reflected in the questions of many on the commission.

It may not seem like much right now, but I do believe Thursday’s meeting was one that could allow Martin County to evolve from years at the table as a baby gator into that of a bull. As the only way to remain “on top” is to have the support of your fellow alligators….

“Golden Handcuffs, our Federal/State Partnership”

C-44 STA Groundbreaking 2011, a Federal/State partnership — C-44 STA Groundbreaking 2011, a CERP project

In 2000, after many years of compromise and work, the stakeholders of WRAC, or the Water Resource Advisory Committee, of the SFWMD, “agreed” on a monumental Everglades restoration project called CERP, or the Central Everglades Restoration Project. This accomplishment, and that it was, was approved and celebrated through the WRDA bill signed by our federal government, with the State of Florida, giddy, cheering on. Unfortunately, only one of the 60 projects of CERP, Spreader Canal 111, has been completed in fourteen years. Moving forward with projects is torturously slow. Time goes on, people, positions, the economy, and politicians change; and we forget…http://www.evergladesplan.org/about/rest_plan_pt_01.aspx

To overcome this molasses like state/federal partnership, in 2011, the SFWMD and the ACOE came up with CEPP, fast tracking of some of the components of CERP, “to move more water south…” The goal was to complete the study and recommend to Congress in 18 months. http://www.evergladesplan.org/docs/fs_cepp_jan_2013.pdf This goal was accomplished but another Federal WRDA bill and a final OK, presently “await.”

Absolutely, Florida’s government has its problems, but in essence, the fast tracking stopped as soon as CEPP got to the Federal Government causing the people of Florida to wonder what is happening and continue fighting at home. Recently, our state government complained that “the feds” have not come forward with their promised share, and “being credited” it is an issue. Also, you hear about “cost sharing,” a complicated arrangement where the state cannot outspend the feds or visa versa. So if the feds don’t move forward after the state has spent money, the State has to just wait, and wait, and wait…

On its most basic level, the state and federal arrangement is a relationship of sorts. CERP/WRDA is a contract, kind of like a marriage or business document. In the end, if both parties don’t contribute, things go sour. The biggest problem for us in this relationship is that we are so dependent on the Federal Government and their money, ironically, just like the Sugar Farmers are dependent for their price limits through the US Farm Bill. And just like the Farm Bill, WRDA is so intertwined other other things/dependencies that have nothing to do with the original contract, that we can’t pull away, we can’t let go. We are handcuffed waiting for the money…

So the years go by, and a child grows up and votes and serves our county and has children before another Everglades CERP project is built. I say our best chance of throwing off the golden handcuffs and saving the Everglades and our dying estuary, the St Lucie River, Indian River Lagoon, is truly educating our youth on the faults and dreams of our system. They certainly can come up with something better.