THE SIXTH ANNUAL
CONFERENCE ON WATER
MANAGEMENT IN FLORIDA
OCTOBER 29 & 30 1981
ANNUAL CONFERENCE ON WATER MANAGEMENT IN FLORIDA
Tallahassee Leon County Civic Center
Thursday, October 29,1981
11:30 a.m. 1:00 p.m.
12:45 p.m. 1:15 p.m.
1:30 p.m. 2:45 p.m.
Keynote Address by Governor Graham
Panel 1: South Florida Water Management District
Water Supply for the Future: A Question of More Water or Fewer People
Panel 2: Southwest Florida Water Management District
Regional Water Supply Authorities: Bane or Blessing?
Banquet Address by B. Joseph Tofani, President, U. S. Water Resources
Friday, October 30, 1981
8:30 a.m. 9:00 a.m. Coffee and Donuts
9:00 a.m. 10:15 a.m. Panel 3: Suwannee River Water Management District
Water Use Priorities: Competition or Cooperation?
10:15 a.m. 11:45 a.m. Panel 4: St. Johns River Water Management District
Structural vs. Nonstructural Water Management
12:00 Noon Conference Adjourned
WATER SUPPLY FOR THE FUTURE:
A QUESTION OF MORE WATER OR FEWER PEOPLE
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
HON. BOBBY CLARK, Chairman, South Florida Water Management District Governing
HON. JACK DURRANCE, County Commissioner, Alachua County
MR. ALAN GOLD, Attorney, Greenberg, Traurig, Hoffman, Lipoff, Quentel & Wolff
HON. MAGGIE HURCHALLA, County Commissioner, Martin County
MR. ED KELLERMAN, Vice President, Ray L. Hart & Associates
HON. HARRY RODDA, County Commissioner, Lee County
COL. FRANZ ROSS, JR., Chairman of County Commission, Charlotte County
MR. HARRY A. STEWART, General Counsel, Broward County
The 1980-81 water shortage produced much publicity, some hardships and more than a
few concerns regarding whether this year was a freak drought event, or whether central and southern
Florida had outgrown its water supply.
Even with the safeguards for protecting the resource, the salinity content of coastal water
supplies increased, crops burned and water-dependent businesses suffered. Lake Okeechobee dropped
to its lowest recorded level and local governments faced a whole new set of problems in enforcing con-
Since the passage of the 1972 Water Resources Act, water management districts have had
the ability to permit consumptive use and surface water management. The district's roles had been
limited to assuring the water use request was for a reasonable-beneficial use, did not impact existing
users and was in the public interest.
New concerns began emerging that transcended the current water shortage, however, in-
cluding: Was it fair to allocate new uses at a time when existing users were required to conserve?
Should all users be cut back equally, or should businesses that relied on water be allowed to maintain
a higher percentage of use? Had District and local governments done their jobs planning for water
shortages, growth needs and water supply facilities? Had the water management districts been too
liberal in issuing permits?
How could the relationship between the water management district and local
governments be better defined so as to protect the water resources while
supplying water to meet the needs consistent with land use plans?
Should local governments begin to develop water supplies using advanced
technology (reverse osmosis, wastewater reuse, etc.) or should they rely on
augmented regional water resources to meet demands now and in the future?
Would it be practical, feasible and/or desirable to rely on water as a limiting
resource in terms of growth and what roles should the water management
districts, local governments and water suppliers play in growth decisions?
REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY AUTHORITIES:
BANE OR BLESSING?
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
HON. BRUCE SAMSON, Chairman, Southwest Florida Water Management District
MR. GERALD A. FIGURSKI, Attorney, Pasco County
MS. JEANETTE HAAG, Attorney, Withlacoochee Regional Water Supply Authority
MR. GENE HEATH, General Manager, West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority
HON. STANLEY W. HOLE, Governing Board Member, South Florida Water Manage-
MR. TOM LAWTON, self-employed
MR. DALE H. TWACHTMANN, Administrator of Tampa Water Resources & Public
Works, City of Tampa
Chapter 373, Florida Statutes, provides that a regional water supply authority may be
developed for the purpose of developing, storing and supplying water for county or municipal pur-
poses in such a manner as will give priority to reducing adverse environmental effects of excessive
or improper withdrawals of water from concentrated areas. The regional water supply authorities are
formed voluntarily by interlocal agreement entered into by the affected local governments. An author-
ity may levy ad valorem taxes, acquire water rights, exercise the power of eminent domain and issue
revenue bonds, upon the approval of the electors. To date, two regional water supply authorities have
been established: the West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority serving Pasco, Pinellas and
Hillsborough counties and the Withlacoochee Regional Water Supply Authority serving Hernando,
Citrus, Marion, Sumter and Levy counties.
Has the regional water supply authority administrative system proved to be
of benefit in meeting the challenges of developing, storing and supplying
water for county and municipal areas while reducing environmental damage?
What is the most desirable composition for the board of a regional water
What are the implications of allowing regional water supply authorities'
boundaries to extend into more than one water management district? Should
this be allowed?
What are your thoughts on these alternative administrative systems which
can serve the needs of regional water supply:
a. Water management districts acting as water supply authorities;
b. A State water supply authority; and
c. Regional water supply authorities being allowed to directly serve private
WATER USE PRIORITIES:
COMPETITION OR COOPERATION?
SUWANNEE RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
HON. JONATHON WERSHOW, Secretary/Treasurer, Suwannee River Water Management
District Governing Board
MR. WES ATWOOD, Manager of Environmental Control, Florida Phosphate Council
MS. MYGNON EVANS, Florida Citrus Mutual
MR. ARTHUR FINNEY, JR., Director, Pinellas Water System
MR. GARY GURNTO, Environmental Relations Department, Reedy Creek Improve-
MR. JOHN MILLICAN, Environmental Control Manager, Buckeye Cellulose Corporation
MR. DON TURK, Director of Public Relations, Florida Farm Bureau
1981 has been a year of drought for the State of Florida. Ground and surface water levels
have dipped to historic lows in many parts of the state. All of the water management districts have
called for mandatory cutbacks and/or voluntary reductions in the use of water. When the present
drought is broken, it will only be a matter of time before another drought is experienced. The variabil-
ity and unpredictability of rainfall could combine with a doubling of population by the year 2000o
produce severe environmental and economic ardships for the state unless a rational management ap-
proach is taken to assure that water is allocated to those uses that are considered to be the most
reasonable and beneficial.
What is the perspective of your organization on the availability of water
supplies locally and statewide?
In the event of competition among various users for available water supplies,
are present consumptive use regulations adequate to properly allocate water?
If not, what improvements might be suggested?
Is the interbasin transfer of water a viable alternative to mitigate possible fu-
ture water shortages? Is there a need for a statewide water supply system?
In the event of severe water shortages, what should the allocation priorities
Are voluntary water conservation measures adequate or should consump-
tive use permits have explicit water conservation measures as a condition
of granting the permit?
STRUCTURAL VS. NONSTRUCTURAL
ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
HON. FRANCES PIGNONE, Chairman, St. Johns River Water Management District
MS. RITA BARRON, Executive Director, Charles River Watershed Association
MR. BRENT BLACKWELDER, Director, Environmental Policy Institute
MR. DON DUNCAN, Chief of Policy Development, Department of Army Engineers
MR. ARTHUR L. HARPER, JR., Vice President Community Operations, General De-
MR. ARTHUR R. MARSHALL, Systems Ecologist
MR. ESTES WHITFIELD, Senior Governmental Analyst, Office of the Governor
The State of Florida is faced with unprecedented population growth, rapid economic
expansion and increased competition for available water supplies. In addition, the state is confronted
with the need to mitigate negative impacts on its water resources resulting from rapid development
and the activities of an earlier era when, without benefit of today's hydrologic and environmental
awareness, structural water management practices were widely used to drain and "reclaim" wetland
interior portions of Florida to create lands suitable for agricultural and urban uses. Efforts to identify
cost-effective, holistic solutions to our water resource challenges have brought a move toward greater
emphasis on nonstructural water management alternatives and progress in implementing nonstructural
What is meant by the terms structural and nonstructural water management
alternatives, and what are the advantages of each in terms of cost, environ-
mental benefits and levels of protection?
What circumstances would provide an opportunity for using either structural
or nonstructural measures, and under what circumstances would one be pre-
ferable over another? Does such an opportunity exist in Florida today? Do
conditions exist in which a combination of the two would be appropriate?
Where structural systems presently exist, how and when should conversion
to nonstructural measures be considered?
The State of Florida has made significant progress in implementing nonstructural alterna-
tives by funding land acquisition, enacting legislation providing funds for future acquisition programs,
adopting coastal and floodplain regulations and adopting state policies that encourage nonstructural
measures. These actions, however, were taken with only limited assistance from the federal govern-
Does the current process for federal approval and funding of water resource
projects provide fair and equitable consideration of both structural and non-
structural measures, or is the process weighted toward one or the other?
What factors, if any, in the planning and budgeting process hinder equitable
evaluation of both alternatives?
What actions are needed at the federal level to ensure adequate assessment
and fiscal support of both structural and nonstructural alternatives?
Florida's State Legislature, during its 1981 session, overwhelmingly adopted a bill esta-
blishing the "Save Our Rivers" program which will generate approximately 320 million dollars over
the next ten years for the purpose of acquiring wetlands, floodplains and aquifer recharge areas vital to
preservation of Florida's water resources and necessary for flood control, water conservation storage,
water quality maintenance and protection of fish and wildlife habitat. The program was strongly
supported by state and local officials, environmental and water management agencies and citizens
throughout the state an indicator of Florida's growing interest in using nonstructural means to solve
its water problems.
What is the prognosis for the future use of nonstructural water management
alternatives? Does it appear that future policymakers at the federal, state
and local levels will continue to view nonstructural approaches as viable
water management practices, or is the current emphasis a passing trend?
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
NORTHWEST FLORIDA T. JOHNS RIVER
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICTWATER MANAGEMENTDISTRICT
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA 1
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
SOUTH FLORIDA 0\
WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT