complete agenda - Florida Department of Environmental Protection

ARC Summary August 13, 2010
Mr. Ballard asked ARC whether anyone had any comments about an Impasse category. Dr.
Frederick said he’d always seen an Impasse category as very important to the process for two
reasons. First, it allows DSL to make a good offer, then if it’s not taken, to move the property in
a transparent way to a different place, a bookkeeping category. Secondly, it would allow ARC,
the public and landowners to see where things are. Sometimes when a project has been on the
list for fifteen or more years, one has no idea what its history has been. He realized that for a
large property with many landowners, it would be hard to ever move anything to an Impasse
category, but parts could be moved. He knew there were various issues there. But, he still felt
it had some value. He didn’t think ARC would be running afoul of the legislature by doing that.
It’s a bookkeeping thing. He didn’t think ARC had to rank projects in it. He then asked could
ARC just create and use it. Mr. Ballard responded that he thought ARC could. He confirmed
that DEP attorney Sandra Stockwell was in agreement.
Ms. Ball asked the Division how that would affect them from a negotiation and execution
perspective. Ms. Deborah Poppell, DSL Director, agreed with Dr. Frederick’s comments. She
said she realized that it looks like DSL holds a lot of property on the books but it happens
sometimes, and has recently, that an owner is an unwilling seller for a couple of years, but then
the market goes down and that changes. From a transparency standpoint, DSL is fine about
putting a property in a category when an impasse is reached. It would send a signal to
landowners that DSL is not holding up money or waiting for owners to make their mind up. It’s
either take an offer, or DSL will move on to others. She said she personally liked the idea. Mr.
Ballard asked for other comments from ARC. Mr. Reecy agreed; he liked it too.
Mr. George Willson said he wanted to speak briefly, as an Audubon board member, on water
resources. What Audubon and NRDC and others are looking at in terms of climate change is
change in meteorological patterns such as rainfall events. He hadn’t looked at the modeling yet,
but NRDC just put out a national study with color-coded graphics county-by-county nationwide
looking at change in weather patterns. They assume risk to the year 2050. When species and
habitat protection and natural resource function are assumed, the assumption includes an
average annual rainfall. There is sea level rise with climate change. There is also rainfall
pattern change. Looking at Florida’s latitude, it is really a desert with a lot of rain and sandy
soils. What happens Florida doesn’t have that same rainfall pattern? In that case, the surficial
aquifers won’t bleed out into creeks, wetlands and springs. Our Floridan Aquifer will also react
differently. There will be different tidewater flow. So, when ranking projects, one of the things
ARC may want to look at is the ability of large tracts that are also hydrologic basins to continue
to function. Do we expect them to continue to function looking at the potential change in rainfall
patterns over the next 50 or 100 years and realize that it’s just all assumptions? This is another
huge impact on the resources that are managed in Florida.
This is one of the top things Audubon is focusing on over the next few years as well as the
competition for water resources as groundwater runs out in the three southern districts. By
2012 Audubon will focus on lakes and streams. In creating Chapter 17-40, the Florida water
code in 1980 or 1981, it was assumed that minimum flows and levels (MFLs) would be
established for stream flows. It was also assumed that reservation of rights for species and
habitat would be included. But if a state agency is managing a spring in Florida and the spring
declines(an increase in pollution) it’s very hard for that managing agency that doesn’t have a lot
of background or baseline data to call a water management district’s assumptions on a permit.
into question. He said that the permit is usually being driven by a lot of high-tech talent that’s
paid for by a utility. He added that the state is “behind the curve” on assumptions on preserving
current systems.
He suggested that another thing ARC might focus on as land acquisition is slowing is – what
does Florida now have, and what might be at risk due to a change in weather patterns in
addition to sea level rise? He affirmed that it’s really coming; changes are occurring in a lot of
parts of Florida. A lot of Florida Audubon chapters are worried about it. They’re fighting over
15