Title: The Eighth Annual Conference on Water Management in Florida - Summary - Havana, Florida -oCTOBER 26, 27, 1983
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00002972/00001
 Material Information
Title: The Eighth Annual Conference on Water Management in Florida - Summary - Havana, Florida -oCTOBER 26, 27, 1983
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Publisher: NWFWMD
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: NWFWMD Collection - The Eighth Annual Conference on Water Management in Florida
General Note: Box 13, Folder 9 ( The Eighth Annual Conference on Water Management in Florida - 1983 ), Item 1
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00002972
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text

.2



* *.


12.


1-



At .. -


A -


.2cr


US= -.


-I


**The Elbikf 7 Annual Conf erman

On W M 4WeJl L raunu


.


/21/


F'F -777!' -^-


- ";'
L





EIGHTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE ON
WATER MANAGEMENT IN FLORIDA



SUMMARY


Edited by

George Fisher
Public Information Officer
Northwest Florida
Water Management District


Illustrated by

Robert Mills
Public Information Specialist
Northwest Florida
Water Management District


For Additional Copies Write:

Public Information Office
Northwest Florida
Water Management District
Route 1, Box 3100
Havana, FL 32333


TABLE OF CONTENTS


Newsmakers Meet the Press:
Florida's Water Managers in a Question and Answer Forum ............4

Ten Years of Progress:
A Chronicle of the "New" Water Management Districts ............... 12

Governor's Luncheon Address by Senator Bill Grant ................... 18

Information Sessions:
Land Acquisition: Water Management Priorities .....................22
Water Sources: The Practical Alternatives ........................ 26
Local Government Assistance Programs .............................29
Wetlands Protection: Legislative Directions ......................... 33
Organizational Development in Resource Management ................ 38
Planning Issues in Water Resources................................. 42
Data Management: Priorities and Implementation
of a Statewide System ............................................ .48
The Water Quality Assurance Act of 1983...........................51

Banquet Address by Senator Pat Neal...............................56

Address by Governor Bob Graham ................................... 62

Conflict Resolution: Negotiating Resource Management Issues ......... 62

Growth Management: The Role of the Water Management Districts .... 71


The costs for printing and distributing this public document were included in
the registration fee charged for the Eighth Annual Conference on Water
Management in Florida.


I











J


- L------~ `~C


-Two


4a1 J/anayemen/ i (i/a

901um*' Route 1, Box 3100, Havana, Florida 32333 wa
. WUliam McCartney (904) 487-1770
Executive Director




Editor's Note and Credits:
On October 26 and 27, 1983, the Northwest District hosted the Eighth Annual Conference on Water Management in
Florida. For the second year in a row, the Center for Professional Development at Florida State University provided excellent
facilities and incomparable staff assistance for this increasingly popular conference.

Every year since our District held its first Annual Meeting in 1976, the interest and participation of the other water manage-
ment districts and the Department of Environmental Regulation have grown dramatically. The Northwest District's Annual
Meeting has, as a result, evolved quickly into a statewide conference aimed at addressing all the major resource management
issues.

The Northwest Florida Water Management District wishes to express its deepest appreciation to everyone on the long list of
participants. It is a constant source of amazement to discover that year after year we can have the most articulate and
knowledgeable of our water experts participate without remuneration in this conference.

Our District also wishes to recognize the considerable efforts and contributions we benefited from while organizing this con-
ference. Most notable among the many who helped are Ed Albanezi and Mildred Horton at the St. Johns River Water
Management District, Carolyn Mobley and Kirk Webster at the Suwannee River Water Management District, John Morgan
and John Wehle at the Department of Environmental Regulation, Dorothea Zysko and Governing Board Chairman Bruce
Sampson at the Southwest Florida Water Management District, and Sandra Close and John Wodraska at the South Florida
Water Management District. Each took a sincere interest in the arrangement of the program and helped greatly to make the
conference a success.

We all hope you will find this Summary useful and entertaining. It is intended primarily to provide a record of our manage-
ment situations and attitudes at this point in time.


George Fisher


















DAVAGE RUNNELS WILLIAM C. SMITH MARION TIDWELL T,!L COLDEWEY
Chairman Destin Vice Chairman Tallahassee Sec./Treas. Chumuckk Ltt t. Joe

W. FRED BOND CANDIS M. HARBISON R. L. PRICE, JR. DR. LOUIS J.AI "1%U C HER B. LINES
Pensacola Panama City Graceville is ,am.n Quincy


___







Newsmakers Meet The


Press







NEWSMAKERS MEET THE PRESS:
FLORIDA'S WATER MANAGERS IN A QUESTION AND ANSWER FORUM


MODERATOR
Jere Moore, Chief Cabinet Liaison

THE PRESS
Mary McLachlin
Daytona Beach News Journal

Mike Richardson
St. Petersburg Evening Independent

Randy Loftis
Miami Herald

Victoria Chruchville
Orlando Sentinel


Steve Cohen
Suwannee Democrat


THE PANELISTS
Jack Maloy
South Florida Water Management District

Bill McCartney
Northwest Florida Water Management District

Kirk Webster
Suwannee River Water Management District

Gary Kuhl
Southwest Florida Water Management District

Vicki Tschinkel
Department of Environmental Regulation

Sonny Vergara
St. Johns River Water Management District


Being an editorial writer,I need first to register my pro-
test that on this panel we first amendment writers are being
moderated by someone from the executive branch. Gover-
nor Graham has been trying to moderate the Florida Press
for several years, and it looks like he scored this morning
with Jere here.
I'd like to ask Secretary Tschinkel the question, Do you
believe water in Florida is a State resource?


Vicki Tschinkel:

It is a resource that the State has the responsibility for
managing and allocating. The law that we're operating
under recognizes a delicate balance among people that
have had use of water before the State instituted its permit-
ting process. But it recognizes that prior right can be
modified over time, in the public interest, under certain
circumstances.


Mike Richardson

So you believe the statutes are adequate for protecting
water?


Vicki Tschinkeli

I don't see a problem with the way the statutes are cur-
rently for making changes in allocations. We do know this


issue hasn't been clearly adjudicated to everybody's satis-
faction. Given that there is only one questionable judicial
interpretation most of us involved in water management
do feel the statutes speak clearly on the issue.


Jack Maloy

I believe the question Mike is asking is "Do people who
got into the permit system earlier than other people have
some prior right to water?" It's a very significant question
because you have to understand that we have, in effect, a
prior appropriation law. When the Water Resource Act
was passed, anybody who was using water had two years to
apply for a permit and they would be "grandfathered in".
The rest of the water use program is supposed to allocate
the remainder of the water among the people who come
on-line in the future.
Let's think about the year 1995 when we have permits
that are up for renewal along with somebody new who
wants to make use of water in a basin which is over
allocated. We have surface water basins in south Florida
now where we don't issue any more permits. What hap-
pens when both surface and ground waters in a basin are
completely allocated? Are you going to say to the new per-
son who requests water that they can't have any? As
presently drafted, Florida law says that's exactly what
you'll do. We won't probably reach that point for another
ten years, but there are a lot of people who want to know
the answer today. The only answer I know is that when it's
all allocated, that's it.


Mike Richardson:







Vicki Tschinkel

I don't believe that's what the law says. When com-
peting water use permits come in at the same time, the
district has the authority to make adjustments based on
reasonable, beneficial use. The district, for example, can
look to see whether there is waste or if legitimate conserva-
tion measures are being taken. One of the interesting
things you have done in south Florida is to compare water
use among municipalities and discovered very different
uses per capital. The District can certainly consider that
kind of information in reallocating water.
At some point, you are going to exhaust those possi-
bilities and then the question will be, "Who should get the
cheaper supply of water?". Then we're really going to be
making some tough decisions.


Victoria Churchville

As a relative newcomer to Florida, it appears to me that
this State is very aggressive in acquiring land and parti-
cularly in restoring water quality and natural flood control
through land acquisition.
My question is in three parts: What would be the ef-
fect of Proposition I on Everglades restoration, water
management in general and land acquisition in
particular? I'd like to start with Sonny Vergara because
St. Johns is the most ambitious of the districts in land ac-
quisition. I'd like to point out that in 1979 and 1980, the
district's budget was $5.2 million and of that, $3.76 million
was ad valorem property taxes. In 1983-1984, the budget is
$22.9 million, and an estimated $11.9 million of that is
from property taxes. If Proposition I passes, you're going
to have some juggling to do because it will limit your ad
valorem to the 1980 levels.


Sonny Vergara


If it passes, I don't know that we'll have any more of
these conferences. Just in terms of what the Legislature has
given us to do, the basin inventories and generally prepar-
ing the State for the impacts of growth, we won't be able to
continue. In the St. Johns District, it will have a
devastating effect.
To answer your question on the impact to land acquisi-
tion, I need to explain how St. Johns has used ad valorem
taxes to supplement the Save Our Rivers funding. The
original formula had 25 percent going to St. Johns, or bet-
ween $7 and $8 million per year for ten years. During the
first year, we received about $3.4 million. Because St.
Johns wanted an aggressive marshland and wetlands ac-
quisition program for the upper St, Johns Basin, the
Governing Board felt that to complete the acquisitions
within a reasonable period of time, they would have to do
something extraordinary. That extraordinary action was to


levy ad valorem taxes for this wetlands acquisition pro-
gram. The first year, it gave us an additional $5.2 million
that brought our total amount for land acquisition up to
some $9.4 million. This year, we're expecting $5.2 million
from Save Our Rivers, for a total of about $10 million.
Proposition I would effect that because we would not be
able to levy the increased taxes. The upper St. Johns pro-
blems would continue probably for another generation.


Victoria Churchville

Mr. Maloy, What effect would Proposition I have on
the Governor's plan to restore the Everglades?

Jack Maloy

The Everglades restoration program is pretty much con-
tained already in agency budgets. The exception is the
Kissimmee River restoration. Our programs have been in
effect for many years and there has not been a tremendous
jump in revenfies since before 1980. Our 1981 revenues
were somewhere around $44 million and our budget now is
around $48 million. Cutting $4 million out of a program
isn't the easiest thing to do, but the effect is not nearly as
drastic as it would be with St. Johns.
The Kissimmee River restoration, as we're presently
planning it, will probably not be completed and evaluated
until 1986 or 1987. From then on, there would be a need
for major appropriations. The other Everglades restora-
tion programs, such as the 1-75 construction, which is 95
percent federally funded, some work on the Tamiami
Trail, and the Holy-Rotenberger area will be completed,
but there is a question mark around the Kissimmee restora-
tion program.

Victoria Churchville

Is bonding an alternative for land acquisition?

Jack Maloy

That's the approach we've taken. About the only thing I
learned as Director of the Florida Keys Aquaduct Authori-
ty was how to borrow money. We took the same approach
on the Save Our Rivers program because we felt that
escalating land costs over the next ten years would pro-
bably equal if not exceed any interest we would have to pay
on borrowed money. In an attempt to get the program off
to a running start and to be able to acquire all of the lands
we needed within two to five years, we pledged Save Our
Rivers revenues as revenues to amortize the bond issue.
And to go back to the original question, I cannot see us at-
tempting to meet the requirements of Proposition I
through manpower reductions because water resource pro-
blems are going to continue, and the most valuable asset
we have is experienced personnel.








Bill McCartney


From the Northwest District's point of view, if Senator
Pat Neal lives up to commitments he made in Brooksville a
couple of weeks ago, Proposition I may, in effect, raise
our budget. Everybody knows we have a millage cap in the
Constitution. The bulk of our funding comes from sources
other than ad valorem taxes. But under Proposition I, we
could maintain only some programs and those mandated
by the State would probably have to slip.
One other thing: for the last three years, the State
Legislature has increased the duties and responsibilities of
the water management districts substantially. There are
bills proposed for this session that would expand and add
programs to the water management districts. If District
budgets or revenue capabilities are cut, who is going to
take over the programs that are needed to manage waters
when we're the third largest State in the nation? I en-
courage everybody to read and understand Proposition I.
It could have a long-term, devastating effect on the in-
frastructure to deliver services for environmental pro-
grams.


Jere Moore

It is incumbent upon each one of us to make sure the
voters understand the significance of this.


Kirk Webster

As a bureaucrat speaking to any audience, even this one,
I think one is immediately suspected when commenting
about the impact of Proposition I or any other thing that
would curtail income.
Words like "devastating" have been used and that well
may be the impact. At the Suwannee River District, we are
approaching this in a rational manner. We are attempting
to develop contingency plans for when Proposition I
passes. We're thinking in terms of minimal programs that
we would be able to carry on in the face of drastic cuts in
our income. What is minimal is subject to interpretation
and you might say we have a minimal program in opera-
tion right now. For example, we have not implemented a
surface water management rule. We are beginning to
prepare that rule for adoption within the next couple of
years. Proposition I is going to have a tremendous impact,
but we are trying to make plans so that we can survive.


Mary McLaughlin

There's a question here that Mr. Wiginton wanted to ask
on the relationship between hazardous waste and ground-
water quality. In addition, just a couple of weeks ago, we
heard from South Florida and St. Johns that they seem to


be at odds with DER's position on injection wells.


Vicki Tschinkel

I'm not aware of any problems with the South Florida
District on injection wells. The district has been extremely
supportive of the Department's rule development on the
Orlando Conserve Project which is a shallow injection of
highly treated wastewater effluent. This became extremely
controversial in the Legislature last year and under Rep.
Chuck Smith's leadership, a bill was passed that made this
a one-of-a-kind program where we needed to come up with
rules and to get some experts in to help us develop those
rules. We have done that.
On the other side, the St. Johns District has become con-
cerned with a deep injection well which will be used partly
for disposal of sewage effluent. The staff of the district
had been participating on a Technical Advisory Committee
to come up with a proposed design for the well, but the
Governing Board was concerned about the policy issue. I
think that singles out Florida's number one environmental
problem in pollution control, and that is human waste.
There is no consensus on what needs to be done. The water
management districts and the department have been en-
couraging recycling of sewage effluent for some time, but
the question of the risks people are willing to assume with a
recycling program is still in debate. We have very little
ability in Florida to discharge to surface waters because
our water bodies are so nutrient sensitive and it's an ex-
tremely wasteful practice from a water management stand-
point. In principle, we all agree on the benefits of recycling
but when specific opportunities for recycling actually sur-
face, then the debate gets started.


Sonny Vergara

What is bothering our Governing Board is the policy
issue of what to do with human waste. They are aware of a
lot of other issues such as precedent-setting situations in
which the importation of water across district boundaries
has been proposed.
The Governing Board also generally feels that the "jury
is not in yet" on deep well injection as a feasible way to
dispose of human waste. They are aware that information
on the confining beds that will contain the injected
material is interpolated and somewhat suspect. If the
geologic interpretation is wrong, problems result. Another
interest they have is what kinds of long-term monitoring
have been set up for deep well injection by DER. We're
talking about a day-to-day process involving millions of
gallons a day going into the ground-water system, and con-
tinuously monitoring it in perpetuity. The Board needs to
understand how that will be done.
The Governing Board is also aware potable water is used
as a vehicle to take the waste to wherever you're going to


C


C II







dispose of it. The concern is that if you're just putting it in
the ground, are you not wasting good potable water? They
want to look at how waste has been treated because it
might be possible to reuse it.
That brings us to South Brevard. They feel they have no
water left in the county and are faced with having to im-
port water from another district. But they are taking
potable water and injecting it under the rug, so to speak,
and our Board is wondering if there is not some way that
they can have that water processed to make it usable for
purposes where potable water isn't necessary, such as ir-
rigation. There are some huge agricultural areas there that
might be able to use that water. We're not at odds with
DER. We have to have some questions answered, and they
are probably the same questions DER has been wanting to
answer anyway.


Jack Maloy

This is a great example of the difference between the
planning process and the regulatory process.
In the regulatory process, because of State and statutory
requirements, you will have to make a decision imme-
diately. In the planning process, you can take all the
elements into consideration.
I don't think there's a stronger critic of deep well injec-
tion than me. I speak not only as a director of a water
management district, but as a former chairman of a plan-
ning board that put $45 million into a deep well program,
and it hasn't ever worked. We're taking an extremely
valuable resource and because we can't come to grips with
the social aspects of the problem, we're only trying to find
the most cost-effective way to get rid of the problem. I say
cost-effective because of the homeowner's bill for sewage
treatment and disposal, and what would happen to it if we
suddenly went to the present state of the art and required
everybody to discharge to surface waters after nutrient
processing. The sewage bill would probably quadruple.
From the lower east coast of Florida we pump about 600
million gallons a day to supply our urban population with
drinking water. Every drop of it is lost for any additional
use. When you start talking about the availability of water
for the future, that's an extremely large amount that, if we
could use it again, would represent a major increase in our
water availability. But we still have this social problem
with recycling and drinking of sewage. So, we put it in
deep wells because we can get assistance to help pay for it.
We have had the same emotional arguments against using
recycled water for the last ten years and some of them are
brought up by one of our adjoining water management dis-
tricts. Until we can deal with the issue of whether this
water, after it goes through all this treatment process, is
safe enough to reuse, we're going to be saddled with tem-
porary fixes like deep well injection. Ten years from now,
we'll wonder why we did it because if you think our old
garbage sites are a problem today, wait till these deep wells


begin causing problems. We've got several in Florida that
are generating some problems now.


Gary Kuhl

In the St. Petersburg area, there are four or five injec-
tion wells that have gone through the permitting process
and been reviewed by our Governing Board. In that parti-
cular area, there is saltwater intrusion and injection can be
used to somewhat offset that problem. We have gone to
great lengths in reviewing that process and we feel that
there are some positive benefits. In another instance in
southwest Florida, we have attempted injection to offset
some of the impacts in heavy pumpage areas. In the phos-
phate region, we utilize recharge wells to pump surface
water into the Floridan Aquifer. The concern there is that
the water naturally includes some radioactive materials. It
has been a real concern for both DER and the district to
come up with some innovative ways to offset the impacts
and not have water quality problems. There is a place for
deep well injection and there are some very positive
benefits particularly along the coastal areas.


Victoria Churchville

Who should have jurisdiction over deep well injection?

Vicki Tschinkel

It needs to be the agency which has responsibility for
balancing the various options on where sewage should go.
You must look at both the surface and groundwater issues,
along with reuse possibilities and drinking water quality
standards. You must have all the pieces of the puzzle
together in one place.
The districts have a lot of expertise in ground water that
our Department does not have. We need their assistance
particularly in defining the resource, and we've been rely-
ing on them for that purpose.


Steve Cohen

In the Suwannee District we've got a few problems that
may be a little bit insular, but we need some answers. Dur-
ing the drought of 1982 the question of interbasin transfers
really hit home. It seemed every time you turned around
we were feeling the bump of a 12-foot pipe that was sup-
posedly coming from Southwest Florida. I want to ask
Mrs. Tschinkel, assuming the population growth will con-
tinue, What would DER's position be in a situation where
one water management district didn't want to give up its
water and another water management district had the votes
to take it?


I








Vicki Tschinkel

Let's assume the Legislature doesn't require interbasin
transfers or pass a bill that says Suwannee River has to
provide the water. Under the current system, we have col-
lectively made a decision that is contained in the State
Water Policy. It says that there will not be, pending an ap-
peal to the Governor and Cabinet, any transfer of water
from one water management district to another unless
both districts agree to it.


Kirk Webster

As far as the Suwannee River Water Management Dis-
trict is concerned, if another area with greater population
and political power wished to come and take water from
the Suwannee River or ground water from the district, they
could muster the votes to do so. The question is whether
the other water management districts will develop the types
of conservation programs that would stall or perhaps do
away with that event.
All the water management districts will have to make
every effort to develop realistic conservation programs,
because otherwise we will be embroiled in some very bitter
battles over the transfer of water.


Randy Loftis

I'm going to ask Mr. Maloy a question about the Corps
of Engineers and I promise not to pound on the table if I
don't like his answer. That's a private joke between Jack
and me and 500,000 newspaper readers.
Jack, explain what has been happening with the rela-
tionship between the South Florida District and the Corps
of Engineers in the last few months. Things have not been
as friendly as in the past. I'm wondering what is the true
nature of the situation, and what role has the initiative
taken by Governor Graham had to do with it?


Jack Maloy

For those of you who do not understand this question, I
must say that I banged on the table a couple of weeks ago
at one of our Board meetings to express some displeasure
with some Corps of Engineers' activities in our District.
Not with their construction activities because they don't
build anything for us anymore. Some people think we're
the "ditch diggers" but we haven't dug a canal in the
South Florida Water Management District in the last ten
years. We've got a lot of them to operate and maintain and
that's the problem.
The Corps of Engineers, through Congressional authori-
zation, paid for 80 percent of the construction costs of ma-
jor projects in our district. They are in charge of the design


and construction of those projects. The role of the water
management district is to operate and maintain those
systems after construction. Operation and maintenance is
totally paid for with our ad valorem taxes. We have one
that was designed in 1948 as a flood control project. The
demands put on it are different now. When you want to do
things with it other than drainage and flood control-like
trying to maximize water supply and environmental bene-
fits-you see that the design concepts and memorandums
that were written in the '50s and '60s are not as responsive
to a broader array of needs as you want them to be.
Our issue with the Corps is that we feel that as "on-the-
job managers", we should be given greater authority to
operate this project. Unfortunately, Congress has man-
dated that certain things be done in certain ways. Our
displeasure with the Corps is the practical issue of whether
we must continue to operate this system the way it says we
must in those manuals that were written 15 or 20 years ago.
If every time we want to deviate from those manuals we
must go through a long procedure requiring public hear-
ings, rule changes, and the issuance of environmental
assessments. We feel the Governing Board ought to be
given the responsibility for actually operating and main-
taining that project in order to optimize its abilities. It's aq
issue that is being looked at in other parts of the country
also. It might interest you to know that we spend $22
million a year in South Florida to operate and maintain
that $500 million system.
I guess I got a little impatient with that slow process of'
changing the operation schedule. We are involved with the
Everglades National Park now, and re-visiting ways to op-
timize this system for other values than it was originally
designed to serve. To do that, the South Florida Wat
Management District will be attempting to get more au-
thority to operate the system than we presently have.
You also may not know that the operation of Lake
Okeechobee during high water times is the sole prerogative'
of the Corps of Engineers, as is the operation of those
Everglades conservation areas where we had the deer
drownings. It's that relationship that we seek to alter
because we have an extremely competent staff with a lot of
experience, and we feel we should be given the authority to
make those management decisions. At times, those deci-
sions have to be made in two or three days while the Corps
process takes two or three months. In south Florida, a
12-inch rain can come and go and three months later what
difference would it make if they finally agree you can d
something different. Let me also share with you one oth
fact: as local sponsor of a project, our Governing Boar
must, when a facility isturned over to us for operate
sign an agreement that holds the Federal Governm
harmless. We think we're capable of operating and o
timizing this system for the benefit of the 4.5 million
pie in our District who pay for it now.


Randy Loftis


C_ _I_ __;jj___l~_






Are any of the other Districts facing similar changes of
relationships, not only with the Corps, but with any
federal agencies?


Bill McCartney


one. It will not, however, be a totally non-structural pro-
ject, but a compromise.


Mike Richardson


In northwest Florida it's just the reverse. For the first
time in history, we have agreements between the states of
Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers on the Apalachicola/Chattahoochee/Flint River
system. All three states and the Corps are participating
now in an Interim Water Assessment Study that will lead
to a water budget for the entire system.
The Corps, and especially its new District Engineer, has
been extremely cooperative. We are very fortunate to be
working with the Department and the other states to ac-
complish our objectives on the Apalachicola/Chattahoo-
chee/Flint River system.



Kirk Webster

The Suwannee District has been promoting non-
structural floodplain management in our area, and as a
part of that, we have been working toward getting the
Corps of Engineers involved in a modeling project on the
river so we can find out where the actual flood elevations
are. There has been some anguish, but things are moving
well. We are staking out some new ground and are looking
at a non-structural approach in cooperation with the
Corps.


Sonny Vergara

Starting several Presidents ago, the Corps began form-
ing executive policies for promoting non-structural flood
control. That means you leave the floodplain the way it is
so it can flood during a normal and natural cycle, rather
than trying to build systems to allow people to build on a
floodplain and then divert the water elsewhere or try to
control it somehow.
The Corps of Engineers is a bureaucracy and it takes
time for new ideas to be implemented. While that time is
passing, the policies fluctuate. In the upper St. Johns
Basin, the Corps had a very structuralized project designed
and under construction. We ran into that inertia, but the
Corps is working with us and straining its own policies to
the limit. Of special interest are its funding policies that
allow it to become involved in funding the acquisition of
floodplains for nonstructural purposes. They do, however,
have hundreds of bureaucrats at the top that don't under-
stand this situation. It takes a lot of education, politics,
and popular support for that kind of thing. We don't feel
we have pressured the Corps enough. But we're going to
take a structural project and turn it into a nonstructural


The Citizen's Choice Amendment, according to Secre-
tary of State, will be known as "Amendment I". There are
those who believe that calling it Proposition I suggests that
it's similar to Proposition XIII. Those who have studied it
think Proposition XIII is like Amendment I in much the
same way Mickey Rooney is like Mohammed Ali.
I perceive that the Department of Agriculture rarely in-
teracts with water management districts. In the case of
EDB, for 21 years it was applied in the State of Florida at
two-and-one-half times the recommended dose. All of a
sudden, we find we have a severe water quality problem.
Mrs. Tschinkel, what are you going to do to get the
Department of Agriculture to talk to the people who have
to handle water?


Vicki Tschinkel

There's no argument that our track record on pesticides
has not been exemplary. We've followed several other
states in that respect. One of the most astonishing things
we found with the Water Task Force hearings was that the
EPA label, which wasn't being followed in this case
anyway, didn't take ground-water issues into account. The
Federal Government looked at the health of the people ap-
plying it and the effect on the fish and wildlife if it leaked
into a stream. The thing that concerns most of us is what
we don't know about these pesticides.
The Governor has appointed to the new Pesticide Coun-
cil people that are very highly qualified in toxicology and
hydrology. I will also serve on the new Pesticide Council.
I'd like to see the Commisioner of Agriculture convene
that Council as soon as possible.
Everybody has learned a lesson from the EDB issue. It's
a real shocker. In our new ground-water monitoring pro-
gram, we are going to do a very extensive pesticide scan in
rural areas because we would rather find what we're going
to find on purpose, rather than to have somebody else find
it.
California recently did some pesticide scans and came up
with a list of about 50 or 60 different pesticides it found in
ground water. We are going to use that same list in our in-
itial pesticides scans in Florida. We will communicate that
information to Agriculture as soon as possible.


Mike Richardson

There are three water supply authorities in the State of
Florida. Do you see these as new tools for water manage-
ment or are they a threat to water management districts.







Gary Kuhl


The Southwest District has three of the authorities
within our boundaries, and we are supportive of that con-
cept. We are able to use leverage, through our permitting
system, to accomplish some of the water conservation pro-
grams and long-range planning that we would like to see as
water managers.


Bill McCartney

I think we're going to see more regional water supply
authorities. We will also see solid waste and sewage treat-
ment on a regional level. There was legislation proposed
for this last year and the Governor's commitment for this
term is for regional utility authorities.


Jere Moore

This has been a very informative program. Thank you to
the newsmakers and to the news gatherers and to all of you
who participated.







Ten Years


Of Progress







Ten Years of Progress: A Chronicle of the

"New" Water Management Districts






Organized by the Suwannee River, St. Johns River and

Northwest Florida Water Management Districts


Introduction

Water management has a long and interesting history in
Florida, and has been marked by several major changes in
emphasis and organization. From the mid-1800's until the
1920's, drainage was the dominant concern. Construction
projects opened vast areas for development in the 1920's,
but when hurricanes struck, thousands were drowned in
floods. After the disastrous loss of life, flood control
became a primary concern of state and federal govern-
ments. The Okeechobee Flood Control District was
organized primarily to work with the Army Corps of
Engineers on flood control and navigation projects in
south Florida. In 1949, the Central and Southern Florida
Flood Control District succeeded the Okeechobee Flood
Control District. Over the years, Central and Southern not
only promoted flood control, but initiated conservation
and water supply activities. In 1961, the Southwest Florida
Water Management District was formed as a result of
flooding in the Tampa Bay and mid-central Florida areas.
In the late 1960's, as a consequence of drastic increases
in population and a prolonged drought, there arose a
general concern about Florida's environment that focused
on water shortages, saltwater intrusion and flooding. Con-
sequently, a conference was called by Governor Reuben
Askew and from this emerged the Water Resources Act of
1972 which is also known as Chapter 373 of the Florida
Statutes. This act renamed the Central and Southern
Florida Flood Control District to become the South
Florida Water Management District, and.created three new
water management districts in the northern and eastern
portions of the state. The following is a brief chronicle of
these new water management districts.
The nine-member Governing Boards for the Suwannee
River Water Management District, the Northwest Florida
Water Management District and the St. Johns River Water
Management District were first appointed by Governor
Reuben Askew in late 1973. Beginning with very small
numbers of employees and in rented, makeshift head-
guarters, these districts have made considerable progress


during their first ten years of existence. Located in north-
central Florida, the Suwannee River District covers 7,600
square miles with a population of approximately 175,000.
This area includes all or portions of 15 counties. The
Suwannee River meanders through the heart of the district
which bears its name. Other major rivers include the
Aucilla, Withlacoochee, Santa Fe, Alapaha, and the
smaller coastal rivers, the Steinhatchee, Fenholloway, and
Econfina. The Suwannee District headquarters was com-
pleted and occupied in February 1981 on 12.5 acres two
miles east of Live Oak. The staff currently consists of ap-
proximately 40 people, including professional, technical,
and clerical employees.
The Northwest Florida Water Management District
headquarters was completed and occupied in December
1978. The building was made possible by a $320,000
Economic Development Administration grant, with sup-
port from Governor Reuben Askew and Gadsden County
which endorsed $100,000 of its funds to the district. The
headquarters is located about 13 miles west of Tallahassee
on U. S. Highway 90 in Gadsden County. Field offices are
maintained in Marianna and Pensacola. The Northwest
District encompasses some 11,200 square miles extending
from the St. Marks basin in Jefferson County to the Per-
dido River in Escambia County. Sixteen counties are in-
cluded, with Jefferson County being shared with the
Suwannee River Water Management District. Northwest
Florida occupies 19 percent of the land area and contains
about 8.5 percent of Florida's population. Eleven large
rivers and many smaller streams drain the district, in-
cluding the Apalachicola River, which is the largest river in
the state. Eight of the 11 major rivers enter from Alabama
and Georgia, furnishing 80 percent of northwest Florida's
surface water. The Northwest District has a permanent
staff numbering about 42 persons, a large proportion of
whom are professional hydrogeologists, hydrologists,
hydroengineers, water resource planners, and geographers.
The St. Johns River Water Management District encom-
passes all or part of 19 Florida counties, including 12,400
square miles and nearly 250 miles of Atlantic coastline.






The two major basins that make up the district are the
Greater St. Johns River Basin and the Oklawaha River
Basin. Demand for district water resources comes from
nearly a quarter of the state's population including the
larger cities of Jacksonville, Daytona Beach, Melbourne,
Cocoa, Vero Beach, Titusville, and parts of Orlando and
Gainesville. There are also over one million acres of
farmland within the district. The district today has about
200 staff members, with more than half employed in pro-
fessional and technical positions. District headquarters is
located in Palatka with field offices in Melbourne and Mt.
Dora. The district also operates water control structures at
Apopka, Moss Bluff, and Lisbon.


General Programs

During the first decade of resolving problems unique to
their areas, these three northern districts have developed
several programs and orientations in common. For exam-
ple, each of the districts has had an excellent Technical
Assistance Program. Starting as very basic programs
assisting farmers with drainage problems and homeowners
with water well questions, Technical Assistance has grown
tremendously. Today, the districts provide assistance with
problems such as: flooding, erosion, drawdown and drain-
age, hydrologic and hydrogeologic evaluation and ground-
water monitoring. District Technical Assistance is respon-
sive to local governments, other state and federal agencies
and to private groups.
Each of the districts also, in cooperation with the U.S.
Geological Survey, maintains a regional surface-water and
ground-water network. The surface-water network is a
systematic program to obtain and document an inventory
of streamflow and stream and lake level data for use in
planning and development of water resources. The net-
work also provides the hydrologic data that is essential to
daily operations. The ground-water network is used to
evaluate conditions for each aquifer in northern Florida. It
provides basic documentation of the effects of natural
variations -and the effect of human activities on the
ground-water resources. St. Johns and the Suwannee dis-
tricts have carried the data collection process one step fur-
ther in order to determine realistic water allocations for
permitted agricultural water users. Monitoring sites are
established on co-operator farms on a voluntary basis.
Using an ultrasonic flow meter, pumpage can be deter-
mined in gallons per minute. With the pumpage rate esta-
blished, the simple installation of an electric hour meter is
all that is needed to determine water use. There is no equip-
ment or labor cost to the co-operator. The districts are able
to conduct quantitative water use research, and it is not
necessary for farmers to buy expensive monitoring equip-
ment.
The Florida Legislature in 1981 enacted the Water
Management Lands Trust Fund, commonly known as the
"Save Our Rivers Bill". This ten-year program will, over


the life of the bill, provide approximately $32 million to
the Northwest and the Suwannee districts and $80 million
to the St. Johns district. Lands to be purchased with these
funds are those needed specifically for the preservation,
protection and management of water resources. The St.
Johns district had the distinction of making the first pur-
chase under the Save Our Rivers bill; their purchase of the
nearly 29,000-acre Seminole Ranch in the upper St. Johns
has served as a model for water management land acquisi-
tion. Northwest, in cooperation with The Nature Conser-
vancy, is also on the verge of acquiring some 17,000 acres
of pristine bottomland hardwood forest along the Escam-
bia River.
The regulatory and permitting activities of the three new
districts also exhibit some similarities, though regulatory
programs did not play a major role in any of their manage-
ment schemes during the first few years of operations. The
major emphasis then was on data collection and analyses,
and on local technical assistance. All three districts have
established strict water well construction standards and
realistic means of enforcement, all have programs affect-
ing the management and storage of surface water, and in
1982, each district established a Consumptive Water Use
program that is adapted to the water demands in a specific
portion of the state. Northwest has an especially unique
approach in that it provides the greatest protection to the
resource in the coastal areas where it is most susceptible to
damage and where demands are greatest. In most of the
Northwest District, where supplies are abundant and com-
petition for water is minimal, there is the least amount of
regulation. Each of these districts regards its permitting ac-
tivities as being of very great importance in monitoring
water use and protecting the resource for now and the
future. The water shortage plans that are in the process of
being developed or implemented reflect that concern.


St. Johns River Water Management District

Chapter 373 of the Florida Statutes is widely regarded as
a remarkable piece of work. It provides Florida with an
enormous amount of protection for its water resources and
the natural environment, while at the same time providing
the Governing Boards of the individual districts con-
siderable latitude in how and when they implement their
many mandates and responsibilities. The water manage-
ment programs that have evolved in the last ten years are,
accordingly, as varied as the natural and cultural en-
vironments served by the districts. In the St. Johns
District, for example, the major water resource problem is
the protection of the hydrologic cycle for future genera-
tions of Floridians. Florida's largest in-state river, the St.
Johns, is a major surface water system that impacts seg-
ments of the 19-county watershed in different ways, rang-
ing from recreation and commercial fishing to varied agri-
cultural and industrial uses. Migratory birds on their way
to the Caribbean or South America depend heavily on the







marshes and swamp forests that buffer the main stream.
The riverine habitat supports many state-protected species
to ensure a continuing healthy wildlife population which
pleases marsh lovers and bird watchers alike.
The St. Johns is, however, a major river system suffer-
ing from loss of 62 percent of its floodplain, and the
swamp forests and marshlands that were once considered
useless nuisances are now recognized to have significant
value to man, including flood protection and water puri-
fication. The Upper St. Johns River Basin, which was
mostly floodplain and marsh, has been subject to land
reclamation projects related to growth and development
since the 1920's. These projects include drainage by nearly
240 miles of canals, dikes and dams, as well as highways
and sewers discharging into the waters of the upper basin.
The effect of these activities has been a critical and intensi-
fying cycle of flood, drought, fire, saltwater intrusion, and
pollution resulting in the loss of plant and animal life
dependent on water-related habitats. The cumulative im-
pact of drainage-initially encouraged as land "reclama-
tion" in the early 1900's-has exaggerated the extremes of
drought and heavy rainfall. The location of farms and resi-
dences on diked and channeled floodplains has increased
the risk of flooding. During times of severe drought, "low
flow" has dwindled to "no flow". During typical dry
seasons, the drained peat soil becomes vulnerable to un-
controllable fire. Decomposition and oxidation of the rich,
organic muck result in measurable loss of valuable soils.
The river's poor water quality, which directly correlates
with low flow, has been further degraded by industrial
wastes, sewage, and urban and agricultural runoff. The
district estimates the river system is losing an estimated 230
million gallons per day of water via diverson from the
marsh to the ocean. Additionally, the erratic fluctuations
of the freshwater supply in the marshes have not kept the
river stages high enough to retard saltwater intrusion.
To reverse the degradation of the St. Johns River Basin,
the St. Johns District established, as its primary goal, the
implementation of a comprehensive surface-water
management plan to reclaim and protect floodplains and
marshlands, where feasible, as a permanent and nonstruc-
tural means to restore or simulate the benefits of the
natural ecosystem. Key ingredients of the plan include
significant improvement in storage and water supply capa-
cities, flood control benefits, recovery of basin waters now
diverted to tidewater, and the improvement of marshland
habitat for fish, wildlife and public recreation. A unique
aspect of the plan provides for poor quality runoff and
agricultural discharge to be segregated into stormwater
management areas for holding and filtration by marsh
vegetation, after which it can be either recycled for irriga-
tion benefits or released for flow maintenance down-
stream.
In February 1983, the St. Johns District Governing
Board formally adopted the Surface-Water Management
Plan after a number of citizen-involved years of develop-
ment. The plan requires acquisition of approximately


45,000 acres, in addition to marshlands already owned by
the district, much of which would be converted from diked
and leveed areas into marshes. The Governing Board of
the district has aggressively begun to implement its plan
through the acquisition of Seminole Ranch, nearly 29,000
acres of endangered marshland of the St. Johns River.
These steps by the district represent a determined effort to
achieve resource management and protection through the
use of natural systems rather than costly structural means.


Suwannee River Water Management District

Since its inception, the Suwannee River Water Manage-
ment District has focused on several areas of concern. The
Suwannee River Study began in 1979 when the Suwannee
River was designated an "Outstanding Florida Water",
giving the river the highest water quality protection under
Florida law. Permits will not be issued for any activity
which significantly degrades existing ambient water
quality. To set actual numerical standards, the DER, with
assistance of the Suwannee River Water Management
District, began a biological and chemical water quality
study of the Suwannee from Wilcox north to the State line.
Collection of data from Wilcox south to Suwannee Sound
had already begun with the Estuary Study in 1979. Data in-
cluded vertebrate and invertebrate sampling as well as con-
tinuous tidal monitoring and will be used to establish the
effects of artificial reductions in the rates of freshwater
discharge in the river. Further use of the collected informa-
tion will determine effects of this reduction on the
ecological composition and productivity, and on saltwater
intrusion into the coastal ground-water aquifer. In coor-
dination with the estuary study, the Suwannee River Study
will characterize the Suwannee's ambient water quality and
define the numerical water quality standards on which to
base "significant degradation".
To provide a more complete data base and better corre-
lation with the data from the estuary project and Suwan-
nee River Study, the Suwannee River Modeling Project:
was developed. The model used is a fully calibrated and
verified water quality one from the Environmental Protec-
tion Agency. The principal objective of this project is to
use the collected data to develop the Evironmental Protec-
tion Agency model for the Suwannee River.
Another major concern of the district has been flood-
plain management because this directly affects citizens liv-
ing in flood prone areas and the river itself. The Suwannee
River floodplain management, mapping, and modeling
project had its beginning in 1980 when Governor Bob
Graham appointed a Suwannee River Resource Planning
and Management Committee. A major committee product
was a Floodplain Development Ordinance encouraging a
nonstructural approach to floodplain management for the
Suwannee River and its major tributaries. Funds were ap-
propriated by the Florida Legislature in 1981 to initiate the
mapping and modeling project to produce a technical data


T


I ENNO_~_ km







base that would strongly support local governments in im-
plementing the ordinance. The data base was compiled
from aerial photography and ground surveys and consisted
of hydrologic and topographic data. Products include river
cross sections, topographic maps and the placement of per-
manent monuments for helping to establish building eleva-
tions. This project will also provide cross sections along
the floodplain used in the Corps of Engineers' HEC-2
model. Ultimately, the data from the project will be used
by the Corps of Engineers in floodplain modeling. The in-
formation obtained in Phase I includes a 216 square mile
area which extends from the confluence of the Santa Fe
and Suwannee rivers to Dowling Park. Phase II will in-
clude the area from Dowling Park upstream to the state
line. The project is then expected to proceed to the
Withlacoochee and Alapaha rivers as funding becomes
available. Hopefully, the floodplains of all major rivers in
the Suwannee River Water Management District will be
mapped and modeled.
Although the Suwannee River projects were primarily
concerned with surface water, the district is also concerned
with ground water. Several basin studies have been com-
pleted which will assist in the environmental review of
water use permit applications. They will help answer the
question, "What effects will the use of large quantities of
water have on the local environment?" From these studies,
it has been possible to determine the three aquifers that
underlie the district, the geologic formations, and the
ground-water chemistry of each basin. These studies are
also useful in determining rate and direction of ground-
water movements and in establishing highs and lows in the
potentiometric network of each basin. Ground-water and
surface-water relationships are also explored. These basin
studies have also proved to be extremely useful in the
evaluation of water use permits.
Tied in with basin studies and water use permitting, the
Water Use Inventory Program was begun in 1978 to deter-
mine the amount of withdrawal from the aquifer. The
primary concern was for irrigation use which is the largest
seasonal use in the district. During the spring and summer,
data is collected monthly in the Suwannee District from
approximately 200 irrigation wells and mailed to district
headquarters. This data is entered into the computer and
used to create a profile of irrigation water use during the
preceding month. Other water uses, such as industrial and
public-supplied, are also reported monthly.
To help manage and analyze the large amounts of infor-
mation collected during these projects, the Governing
Board of the Suwannee District approved the purchase of a
PRIME 550-II minicomputer in 1981. Using an advanced
communications system, the computer is linked to 21 ter-
minals. Because of the volume of information to be stored
and analyzed, the district uses a data base management
system called INFO. The data bases that are presently
maintained include ground-water levels, permitting ac-
tivities, water use inventory, and rainfall. The Geographic
Information System is designed to convert mapped


features into digital data nma can men be drawn by a
mechanical plotter or displayed on a terminal screen. After
the data conversion, called digitizing, selected features can
be displayed at any scale. Data can be stored in layers
similar in concept to manually prepared map overlays.



Northwest Florida Water Management District

Perhaps the most unique feature of the Northwest
district is its constitutional and statutory millage cap of .05
mills. Generally, less than one third of its annual budget
has consisted of ad valorem funds. The Northwest district
has been very aggressive and successful in acquiring federal
grants to carry out needed programs. One of these was the
study of Water Resources of Southern Okaloosa and
Walton Counties completed in 1980. The study provides
the information needed for the development of future
water supplies in Fort Walton Beach and surrounding
areas. Data collection and construction portions of the
study were completed in cooperation with the Coastal
Plains Regional Commission and the U.S. Geological
Survey.
The Industrial Water Availability Study, which was also
funded by the Coastal Plans Regional Commission, is an
evaluation of the quantity and quality of the water supply
in 12 potential industrial sites across northwest Florida.
This three-year project provides a detailed description of
the availability of water in each area and is used to direct
appropriate industries to sites in northwest Florida.
A third major project was the Regional Water Supply
Development Plan that involves the rapidly developing
coastal area from Pensacola to Panama City Beach. Fund-
ed in part by the Economic Development Administration,
the project provides a long-range plan as well as the
economic and engineering feasibility of the various options
to ensure an adequate water supply for this high growth
area. The initial plan was completed in 1982, but is being
constantly reviewed and updated to include new water
resources and water use information.
The district's first major construction effort was the
"Lake Jackson/Megginnis Arm Stormwater Renovation
Project". Built as a research and demonstration project
for the renovation of urban stormwater runoff on Lake
Jackson in Leon County, the project is of national
significance because of an innovative design that combines
a stormwater detention pond with a filtering system and an
artificial marsh. The project, built in cooperation with the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation, was completed
in the summer of 1983.
Investigations, funded by the Florida Legislature and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
continue on areas in and around Choctawhatehee Bay. The
Bay area, located in southern Okaloosaiand Walton coun-
ties, is among the most rapidly developing areas in all of







northwest Florida. In an effort to minimize urban impact
and to protect the natural systems of the Bay, the district
has undertaken a number of intensive research projects
focusing on its physical, historical and biological
characteristics. The primary goal of these studiesis to pro-
vide a long-needed preliminary evaluation of the Bay.
When final investigations are completed, these studies will
serve as an information source for managing the Bay
system and as a comprehensive basis for future studies on
this large and very complex estuary.
In order to organize and coordinate its water manage-
ment efforts, the northwest district has entered into a
Bksin Planning Program. It is a phased effort, addressing
first a pilot project on the Little River, and then the five
major hydrologic basins within the district.
In 1979, the northwest district also established its Local
Government Basin Advisory Committees. These five com-
mittees are based on the five major drainage basins within
the district. Each basin committee consists of members
representing eah county commission and large city in that
basin. A member of the District Governing Board residing
in the basin co-chairs the committee, and district staff are
appointed as liaisons:' The Basin Advisory Committees
provide a formal mechanism for two-way communication
between city and county governments and the district.
They also serve as an important forum for input to the
district's Annual Work Program, Basin Planning, Rules
and Technical Assistance.


The Outlook For The Future

The first ten years for the three new water management
districts have been quite paradoxical. On the one hand,
there has been slow and sure progress, On the other hand,
there has been quick growth. The districts have had to res-
pond to pressing issues that could not wait, but they have
had to do so while exercising extreme care and caution.
If their first decade was bustling, the next ten years pro-
mise to be even more so. Of primary concern will be the
need to continue to go forward. The districts must con-
tinue to emphasize the need for adequate flood control by
effective regulation of the kinds of development that will
impact the drainage capabilities of the land. Water con-
sumption and use must be carefully monitored to ensure
the proliferation of clean potable water supplies. The dis-
tricts must continue to work with other state and federal
agencies to guarantee a satisfactory effort regarding water
quality protection. The preservation of wetlands must re-
main a top priority for all the districts, because pristine
systems are still unsurpassed when it comes to water
quality preservation. The districts must continue to stay in-
volved with well construction and well plugging activities.
Related to this, the districts' regulatory programs will have
Sto be designed and periodically modified to ensure that the
water resource is being protected.
Perhaps the greater challenge facing the water manage-


meant districts "..l how they can
effectively deal Icrease in
population grow The dis-
tricts will have to idt fs
connected with growth. andl long-
term planning accordingly. A as the
quantification of potable water supplies. h
must be put on the development of a re or effec-
tiveness to use and protect water supplies. The districts
must remain ever vigilant to guard against the over-
development of floodplains and recharge areas. This can
be accomplished in large part through the effective
management of these lans. Perhaps the crux of whether
the water management districts will succeed or fail during
the next ten years will be in theirability to effectively col-
lect data while engaging in active resource management.
Having adequate stores of information and integrating
this data into modeling programs with proven effectiveness
may chart the course for the next decade.
A corollary to the future of water management district
activities lies in the cooperation and leadership demon-
strated by our state lawmakers and the executive branch of
government. Florida has been fortunate during the last
decade to have elected leaders who are most sensitive to the
needs of the environment. Strong executives and landmark
legislation have allowed Florida to be among.the nation's
leaders when it comes to protecting our water resources for
the future. But it hasn't always been that way. Those
charged with the responsibilities of water management
must see to it that these resource management issues con-
tinue to maintain a high profile with our governmental
decision-makers. The painful lesson has already been
learned that itlis far easier to prevent harm to the resource
than it is to halt or reverse it.
The quality of life in Florida can be improved and main-
tained for countless decades to come through wise and ef-
fective management of its bountiful natural resources. The
challenge awaits us.


I.


- F








Governor's Luncheon Address


I I







Governor's Luncheon Address


Sponsored by the Suwannee River

Water Management District


Senator Bill Grant

I would like to focus today on three things: politics,
property rights, and public relations. However, first I
would like to review some of the staggering facts concern-
ing our state's growth that have become apparent in the
last few years. There are 29,000 new residents moving to
Florida each month. It is overwhelming. In places where
there used to be nothing but scrub oaks and palmettos,
there are condominiums, developments, and things we
never dreamed. By 1990, it is estimated that we will go
from being the ninth largest state to the seventh largest
state in the union and by the year 2000, federal estimates
say we will have 17 million people in the state of Florida,
the third largest in the nation.
We are growing so fast it's mind boggling. We are going
to receive impactments of every kind in every conceivable
way. I read a report the other day that said we were going
to need 1.9 million homes for new residents and we have to
replace 1.5 million homes already. By 1990, we will have
more than 3 million new homes. The budget for the state
of Florida has also increased from about $4 billion ten
years ago to almost $12 billion today.,
The tremendous growth in Florida has caused some
major things to happen in the way we live and the way we
project to live. One-third of the people who live in Florida
live in southeast Florida. By 1990, 60 percent of the people
will live in about seven or eight counties in the state. Some
78 percent are going to live around the perimeter of the
state.
In south Florida, the traffics roads, and industrial and
agricultural development have caused some problems in
water management. Central Florida's real issue is who has
the water, who controls its, and who has access to it. Here
in north Florida, we are more agriculturally oriented and
we have a different set of problems. The growth that we're
experiencing is in hazardous waste sites and impact on
water quality.
We have a natural abundance but it's easy to see that
water managers have an incredibly complex and de-
inanding job to do. In a book by Theodore White, he says
the' most basic reason people support a government is
because they desire protection from perceived danger. He
makes a compelling argument- for that position by using
the example of the Communist movement in China during
the Chinese/Japanese War in the 1930's. For any govern-


ment to succeed, it has.to have the support of the people in
order to govern. There are water managers, land use plan-
ners, and an outstanding array of programs to help us in
our goals, such as "Save Our Rivers", the "Safe Drinking
Water Act", the "Water Quality Assurance Act", the
local government "Comprehensive Plans", water manage-
ment districts, hazardous waste plans, and the "Save Our
Everglades" group.
There is, however, still an outstanding amount of igno-
rance and a lack of appreciation for what we are trying to
do. There is a great misunderstanding about what water
managements are trying to do. There is perhaps even
animosity. You need the support of the people you regu-
late. Sometimes, in our enthusiasm to do the job we believe
in, we fail to establish a good working relationship with the
county commissioners, city officials, and concerned
citizens. They do not understand the nature of the taxing
authority and they don't really appreciate or understand
the way you spend money managing water. I think it would
serve the interests of water management in general to reach
out to local government officials and the general public,
not only to explain the nature of your taxing authority but
to explain costs, benefits, and even reiterate the long-term
and short-term goals of what you're trying to do. The
general public doesn't understand that the taxing authority
is constitutional authority, that in a state-wide referen-
dum, the people of this state gave water management
districts that authority to tax without being elected in a
popular election. We must show them that these taxes are
being spent wisely for a good purpose. If we don't, we may
lose our taxing authority. Property rights is another critical
issue in water management. We don't deal with water in
the abstract, we must deal with it on an emotional level as
well as on a constitutional basis. People are concerned
about those who regulate their property rights. Water is a
critical issue because we've absolutely got to have it in
order to live. We may have too much zeal because we can
see how important the work is that we are doing but we
may forget just how emotional property rights are. Any
changes that we make in those rights are going to bring a
sure response. It's going to be expensive and bring con-
troversy. One thing I learned as a banker is that the easiest
thing in the world to do is spend somebody else's money.
Regulating somebody else's property is easy too, just as
easy as regulating somebody else's land. But it never comes
without pain. We need to remember that when we practice


IF I


I --c~-~n;CI7;rl







politics to modify property rights, we stand in danger of
losing popular support of government at all levels. To en-
dorse an action simply because it means support of en-
vironmentalists, farmers, labor or whoever, is bad public
policy. We need to be careful in our approach to public
policy and not put politics in our public policy regarding
water. You've got to be careful when you start pitching
politics in property rights.
Finally, I want to say, concerning public relations, that
as water managers and members of the government, you
and I probably have two strikes against us before we even
get started. Number one, people basically don't like to be
told what to do. Number two, people are generally not go-
ing to appreciate you telling them what to do. People often
say to me jokingly, "Don't do me any more favors, don't
pass any more regulations, don't pass any more laws,
don't -o anything for me. I'm tired of your helping me."
I came across a little story and wanted to share it with
you. It's called "Divide & Conquer".
In the beginning, God created heaven and the earth;
quickly he was faced with a class action suit for failure to
buy the environmental impact statement and a consump-
tive water use permit from the water management district.
He was granted a temporary permit for the heavenly part
of the project but stimied with the cease-and-desist order
for the other part of the project. At the hearing, God was
asked why he began the earthly project in the first place
and he replied, "He liked to be creative."
Then God said, "let there be light", and immediately,
the officials demanded to know how the light had been
made. Would there be a strip mining or thermo pollution
involved in the permitting? God explained light would
come from a huge ball of fire. God was granted provi-
sional permission to make light, assuming that: no smoke
would result from the ball of fire, he would obtain a
building permit and conserve energy, and he would have
the light out half the time. God agreed and said he would
call the light day and the darkness night. Officials replied
that they were not interested in sematics.
God said, "Let the earth bring forth green herbs and
such as may seed." DER agreed so long as the mating
season was over and the habitat was not disturbed.
Then God said, "Let the waters bring forth the creeping
creatures that may fly over the earth." Officials pointed
out that this needed prior approval of the Game and
Freshwater Fish Commission coordinated with Heavenly
Wildlife Federation and the Heavenly Angelic Society.
Everything was okay until God said He wanted to com-
plete the project in six days. Officials said it would take at
least 100 days to review the application and impact state-
ment. After that, there would be public hearings for 10-12
months, and finally, God said, "Oh, just forget it."
I thought the story was funny. I wanted to mention it
because people generally don't like regulations. They view
us who make laws and establish regulations with a bit of,
"Why are you doing this to me, you are not really helping
me." It reminds me of the three greatest lies: 1) I'm an ex-


ecutive male. 2) I'll still love you in the morning. 3) I'm
here from the government and I came to help you.
In our job, we've got to decide if we are going to be
policemen or if we are going to be public servants. That
decision determines how we do our job. Policemen make
people do things because it is the law. That's their role.
People generally do what they are told to do but they're
not going to do much more. However, as public servants,
we must try to get people to do things voluntarily by mak-
ing our requests reasonable and understandable, and by
making people want to comply because they believe in it.
As public servants and managers of this precious resource,
I think we should be aware we have a responsibility to
garner a good relationship with the citizens of our state
and that's going to take some effort on our part. I think we
should give and give.
I talked with a man not long ago who was very frus-
trated because he wanted to dig a well and was told he had
to obtain a permit. He said, "You know, my great, great
grandfather settled this very place where I'm living before
Florida was even a state." He said, "You see that old well
over there? We took water out of it for years and we got
another well here but I don't ever remember getting a per-
mit. Why do I have to get three? Why do I have to have a
permit? We need to try to understand that anytime we
put into effect a new rule or law, people, land rights, and
land values will be affected.
We have to be resourceful. As a banker, everything I do
involves about five different examinations. The kind of
regulator that I appreciate comes in and says "Grant, you
are not doing this the way the book says it ought to be
done. That's a violation and I have to report it." Then, he
goes further and says, "You know, I think there is a way
you can stop that and if we put our heads together, we can
come up with some method to accomplish what you are
trying to do without putting you out of business." People
appreciate that kind of approach. Too many times we get
tunnel vision because we are so involved enforcing regula-
tions. We forget that when we set up a regulation, lives are
affected. We don't need to accept just any regulation, we
need the very finest.
Our attitude is critical, like that of the patrolman who
caught the guy speeding. The highway patrolman had been
after this fellow for about 15 minutes and they had set up a
roadblock ahead of him. He just happened to glance up in
his rearview mirror and saw something way behind himi
that looked like a blue light. He slowed down to 55 mph
and the highway patrolman almost ran over him. The offi-
cer got out of the car and came around and said, "What
happened, buddy, you run out of gas?" He liked the offi-
cer right away even though he got a ticket. The trooper
didn't acost or abuse him. There is a difference in the way.
you enforce the law. Some guys make you like them and
others don't. People appreciate a good attitude.
I think it's good to be tough. I like our law because it is
easy to get along with and it is tough-minded. I think it's
alright to have a reputation for beigtgough and firm, but







you must also be fair and considerate of the circumstances
in which we operate. We are going to have to understand
politics, property rights and good public relations. How we
do something is just about as important as what we do.
We've got to work at it together. I appreciate the job
you're doing. I know it's a tough one and many times
there's not a great deal of thanks. We appreciate you and
we want to work with you.


-------- -


OF







Concurrent Information Sessions







Hosted by Marion TidweH
Governing Board Member
Northwest Florida Water
Management District






Land Acquisition:
Water Management Priorities




Joe Flanagan
Suwannee River Water Management District

Bob Grafton
South Florida Water Management District

Jim Miller
St. Johns River Water Management District

Dick Dawdy
Northwest Florida Water Management District

Fritz Musselmann
Southwest Florida Water Management District




Joe Flanagan

SThe acquisition programs are very different in each
district. The Suwannee District is only in the land acquisi-
tion program because of the Save Our Rivers legislation.
Governor Graham canoed down the Suwannee River a
number of times and said, "It might be a good idea if the
state bought some of this land." And everybody involved
in it said, "That sounds like a real good idea." Our ap-
proach is a passive one. We don't believe we have the man-
power, or expertise to go out and look for parts of the
district to purchase. Because of this, we've gone on a
public awareness campaign, attempting to notify the land-
owners in the district that there is a Save Our Rivers pro-
gram and that the Suwannee River District has $3.6 million
available for purchase of lands for public use.We then rely
on landowners to contact us saying, "I have a tract with
10,000 acres that is a wetland that could be better used by a
public agency than by me."
We recently bought the Brunswick Pulp and Paper Tract
in the lower Suwannee River. This tract is 5,547 acres, and
the purchase price was-$1.9 million, which we feel was a
good deal. From now on we're going to let the public know


that we have money available, but that we're not going to
buy prime development Irt We want to buy wetlands
that would require d*(gap d ll permits.
The Save Our Rivers fa g comes from a five cent per
hundred dollar addioa to fte 4umentary stamp tax.
The S uwsdoat Q E*i IMMMt of the additional
tax. Projections are that we wil reeve $30 million over a
ten-year period. At this point, we have accumulated $3.6
million.
Based on the projections of $30 million over a ten-year
period, we concluded that we could buy one percent of all
the land in the district. Because of that constraint, we
decided to exclude a great deal of non-wetlands from con-
sideration. I concluded that between three and six percent
of the Suwannee District could be classified a wetland.
Since we could theoretically purchase one percent of the
district land, we decided to target the wetlands.
Part of the Brunswick is owned by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and was envisioned to be a national
wildlife refuge. The Reagan Administration stopped the
funding for it and the district was asked to buy part of it to
lease back to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. We agreed
that this was a valid idea and we enlisted the services of the
Nature Conservancy to act as a go-between between the
district and the Brunswick Pulp and Paper Corporation.
Once the Brunswick tract purchase is finalized, our next
project will be a similar area on the lower Econfina River.
This is wetland that we feel doesn't have any other viable
commercial or developmental use.
Because the Suwannee District has a very low number of
staff available for land evaluations, we try to use other
agencies to help us including: the Game and Freshwater
Fish Commission, Department of Environmental Regula-
tion, and Department of Natural Resources, as well as
people from the Nature Conservancy. The Nature Conser-
vancy became involved because they could provide legal,
technical, and financial support. The purchase price of the
Brunswick tract was $1.9 million, and the Conservancy
bought the entire tract. We then purchased from the Con-
servancy the portion of the tract that we were interested in.
They gave us an interest-free loan for three years, and we
agreed to a down payment of $400,000 and three payments
of $500,000. Another tract we examined is the Andrews
tract below Fannin Springs on the Suwannee River. There
are approximately 2,800 acres in the entire tract and with
800 wetland acres adjacent to the river and 2,000 acres of
an upland-type. Our district felt that we should not even
entertain thoughts of purchasing the entire 2,800 acres, but
only the 800 acres that was wetland. Our Governing Board
passed a resolution to the C.A.R.L. Committee saying that
we would pursue purchase of the 800 acres if the C.A.R.L.
Committee would pursue purchase of the remaining 2,000
acres. We feel that because of the limited resources
available to the Suwannee District, it is wise to develop a
cooperative effort between state money and water manage-
ment district money. We've entered into a six-year lease
agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the


ii


~_________~____~__C__ ~ ~_






Brunswick tract. The Fish and Wildlife Service will
manage it as a national wildlife refuge. We envision that
the Federal Government would have enough funding in the
future to buy this land back and actually complete their
wildlife refuge purchase.
For other lands, such as the Andrews tract, we envision
entering into an agreement with the Department of Natural
Resources to increase the size of the Manatee Springs State
Park or the Game and Freshwater Fish Commission to
manage hunting and other recreational use.

Bob Grafton

At South Florida, we decided to find those areas that are
water-related, and which have the biggest problems that we
needed to do something about. Our initial five-year plan
included six areas and the first area we addressed was the
land in the three water conservation areas where we store
water.
Approximately 30 years ago, we bought part of the
lands, and acquired easements to flow and store water on
the balance. We are now discovering that the acquisition of
less than fee title is coming back to haunt us but it was a
matter of dollars at the time. The cost is a great deal more
now than it would have been then, but we do need to ac-
quire the fee title on those privately held lands which total
approximately 88,000 acres. We're not only concerned with
water storage, since our easements allow us to flow and
store the water, but also with the environmental aspects
such as the preservation of the natural Everglades.
The second priority area is the Loxahatchee River, one
of the few natural rivers in our District. We are considering
the establishment of a corridor from Indiantown Road to
Johnathan Dickinson Park to preserve the river.
Our third area is the savannas in St. Lucie and Martin
counties, which are just behind the ocean dunes. It's a
freshwater area that needs to be preserved. It's privately
owned now and we need to stop the development in this
sensitive environmental area.
Next are the lands around Lake Okeechobee that were
impacted by the raising of the level of the lake. The fifth
area is in south and southwest Dade County, and contains
lands that had been sold to Aerojet by the state. These
lands are in the natural drainage path to Everglades Na-
tional Park, and we appeared to be the only ones who
could preserve them. The sixth area is the Kissimmee
River, and we have been discussing the acquisition of
approximately 18,000 acres behind our six water control
structures on the river.
It was originally anticipated that we would receive $100
million in Save Our Rivers money. However, in the first
two years of the program, we have only received slightly
more than $9 million. I think we will probably realize
somewhere around $65 to $75 million out of the program.
We did not put the six areas in any order of priority. We
felt that when we had the money available we would go
forward on all six fronts and be ready to deal with land-


owners in all six areas.
The Trust for Public Land, which is an organization
similar to the Nature Conservancy, negotiated with Aero-
jet Corporation for 50,000 acres. Aerojet donated 32,000
acres and sold them approximately 18,000 acres. This
donation resulted in a $5 million tax benefit for Aerojet.
The Trust for Public Land took the donation and agreed to
pay for the 18,000 acres during a period of five years with
an ascending interest rate mortgage.
Although we were interested in the land, we felt the pur-
chase price would be somewhere around $20 million, and
we didn't want to spend that much money. I went to the
C.A.R.L. people and they put it ot their program. We
then made a joint purchase from the Trust for Public
Land. The district purchased 32,000 acres for about $6.5
million, while the C.A.R.L. fund purchased the other
18,000 acres for approximately $12 million. The C.A.R.L.
committee purchase involved land that had some avail-
ability for use, while we purchased land that was not as
valuable. Through that cooperative effort, we were able to
purchase lands in southwest and south Dade. They're both
adjacent to Everglades National Park, and will be used for
the benefit of Everglades National Park.
Another example of ingenuity and government coopera-
tion is the Garrison transaction. We wanted the OGrris
property to help preserve the Loxahatchee River. We had
two appraisals made and they were both in thdl~Rtae'f
$520,000 for three acres. The property is in the tdn of
Jupiter and is zoned commercial. We were faced with this
property being developed adjacent to the river we were try-
ing to protect. We approached the Loxahatchee Environ-
mental Control District because they owned a piece of
property outside the town of Jupiter, but very dose to the
Garrison property. They sold us three and one half acres
for approximately $25,000. Next we talked to the Garrison
people about a trade for their property. They were in-
terested if it could be zoned commercial. We began the
long process of changing the zoning so that we could trade
for the Garrison property. We finally got the zoning of-
ficials to rezone half the property to general commercial.
Since we were able to rezone only half the property, we
paid Garrison $115,000 for it. We ended up gi etin the
property for about $140,000 instead of the appraised price
of $520,000. It's those kinds of things that have to be done
to make the program work.
We are proceeding in all areas, except the Kissiamsee
River. If the demonstration project to fill the Kissimmee
River is successful, then in all probability there will be a
desire to acquire all 32,000 acres of the floodplain on the
Kissimmee River. I don't know where the money to pur-
chase 32,000 acres in the Kissimmee River will come from
since it will probably cost somewhere around $40 million
dollars.

Jim Miler

Our staff consists of a director, an agent and a lam






manager. We do land management within the Office of
Real Property Acquisition that is responsible for acquiring
land as well as putting it under some type of land manage-
ment.
We do not have a large staff nor do we intend to have
one. We want to manage lands through cooperative agree-
ments with the Game and Freshwater Fish Commission
and other agencies.
The Seminole Ranch property was purchased and com-
pleted under the Save Our Rivers program. This transac-
tion would not have been possible were it not for the
Nature Conservancy's financial assistance. They put up
the front money for half the acquisition and we repaid
them, with funds from the Save Our Rivers program.
Our five year plan was quite general last year, but will
become more specific with regard to the upper St. John's
basin. The St. Johns is a young district, but we got into the
land ownership business pretty quickly when 92,000 acres
of land were transferred from the Southwest and South
Florida Districts.
Our governing board does not wish to acquire lands by
condemnation but it is a very important aspect of land ac-
quisition. All our acquisition contracts are done on the
threat of condemnation, which has very real tax advan-
tages. We recognize our ability to condemn property if the
board needs to do that in the future, although it has not yet
been necessary.
The first acquisition under the Save Our Rivers program
was used on the Seminole Ranch property and totaled
about $9.4 million. Since then, we've purchased or com-
mitted to purchasing an additional 9,000 acres.
Our entire program for the upper St. Johns River basin,
which the Corps of Engineers is involved, totals about $55
million. There are just enough funds in this program and
our board has provided additional monies in the form of
ad valorem taxes. Our 1982 acquisition budget was ap-
proximately $9.4 million, while this year's is about $10.2
million. Because of some carryover from last year, we have
a total budget this year of $14 million.
The district plan is well on its way. One of the reasons
we have been successful with our negotiations is that we're
working well ahead of the plan. We use preliminary ap-
praisals because they cost us a fraction of an actual ap-
praisal and because the cost is credited towards the actual
appraisal fee if we do end up with a contract. We generally
write contracts on the price of the property subject to an
appraisal which will support that contract.
We often acquire large ownerships such as the Seminole
Ranch which are more than just wetlands. We try to dis-
pose of those "surplus" lands, preferably by exchanging
them. We're working on a deal now to exchange some
lands which will help us acquire lands in the upper basin, A
portion of Seminole Ranch is under agreement for a hunt-
ing area with the Game Commission and we also have
some areas closed for environmental reasons. We coor-
dinate with other agencies such as Forestry for fire
management and the Game Commission for hunting and
game management.


Mr.~ here to clear up






Dick Dawdy ,v istiis 'i


anyone else. i4lot of money or
a big1n4 a ay previous
large ,bqause of the
fundi i northwest is
sort o' F the Save Our


diea not provide funds
for ". esl^riiajoiHiC^o Jon areas or for the

We'jeisoi have to try to acquire
as ne c ithe money that was going to be
available to us and that we needed flexibility in our priority
list. We did not want to say that we would buy the
Apalachicola River one year and the Choctawhatchee
River the second year. By not prioritizing possible land ac-
quisition areas, we had the flexibility to look for good ac-
quisition opportunities. We also did not say that we had to
acquire fee simple title to the property. In addition to pur-
chasing development rights, we could purchase land and
lease back only certain rights. This would give us control
of the land rather than just the development portion.
We included many water resources in our five year plan,
including rivers such as the Apalachicola, Choctawhatchee
and Escambia; creeks such as Econfina which provides the
water for Panama City; first magnitude springs; lakes such
as Lake Jackson; recharge areas; well fields; retention
storage areas; and unique water features. We were wonder-
ing how we were going to accomplish all these acquisitions
when the Nature Conservancy approached us in 1981.
They're the largest land conservation organization in the
United States and a tax exempt organization, which means
they can provide tax rightoffs for donated lands.
The Conservancy had just initiated a program called,
"The Rivers of the Deep South", that was funded by the
R.K. Mellon Foundation. Among the six rivers were the
Choctawhatchee and the Apalachicola in the Northwest
District.
The Nature Conservancy said they would buy these
floodplain lands at the lowest possible price and sell them
to us over a number of years. They alo said they would
provide the match monrdiesCfil~ w t.l~i~ter major con-
cern of ours. Since the A chCoctawhatchee
Rivers were suggested by a areas we might
want to look at in the ihwe actively pur-
sued purchases on thestwi P discovered that one


'-.^-^p-r


.-.. rI.






timber company, Southwest Forest Industries, owned the
majority of the suitable land on the Apalachicola and
Choctawhatchee Rivers.
The recent "recession" was, however, a near depression
for a lot of the paper companies, and the last thing they
needed was to make a donated land sale to achieve a tax
write-off. Another big problem was that timber companies
usually want to trade land, not sell it. These lands were
purchased many years ago at a very reasonable price and
the paper companies are not anxious for the taxman to get
an idea what the land is worth now. The problem we've en-
countered is finding lands to trade since the majority of the
large tracts in northwest Florida is in the hands of paper
companies. We haven't given up the search for trade lands
but at the same time, the Nature Conservancy approached
us again after receiving $25 million from the R. K. Mellon
Foundation to protect the wetlands of the United States.
The Conservancy also discovered that the St. Regis Paper
Company had floodplain land on the Escambia River near
Pensacola that they were willing to sell at a reduced price.
We investigated and found that St. Regis had 17,700 acres
of land and wanted to sell 10,000 acres of this land to the
Nature Conservancy and donate the other 7,700 acres.
The Nature Conservancy agreed to sell this 17,700 acres
back to the district over a period of years, and to provide
the match monies we desperately needed. The Nature Con-
servancy benefits by getting their money back. St. Regis
benefits from the great public relations and receives a tax
write-off because of the donation. The people of Florida
benefit because of the acquisition of 17,700 acres of land
adjacent to the largest city in northwest Florida. The pur-
chase price will be less than half of the timber value alone
and the land will remain open for public hunting, fishing
and bird watching. It's a great deal, because everyone
benefits from the sale.
In the coming year, the district is going to continue look-
ing for trade lands for Southwest Forest Industries' lands,
as well as for Neal Land and Timber Company which owns
over 35,000 acres of floodplain land on the Apalachicola
River, north of the Southwest Forest Industries property.
We're going to have to make this money go just as far as
we possibly can because the citizens of Florida deserve the
utmost for their money.


Fritz Musselmann

The Save Our Rivers program requires a district match
of four-to-one on all monies over the first two million
dollars that a district receives each year. The Southwest
District has eight basin boards that are looking to protect
their constituents. We have a difficult time trying to satisfy
our Governing Board as well as eight basin boards in deter-
mining which projects might be picked for the Save Our
Rivers program.
We also have the problem of how we can equitably
spread that first $2 million that did not require a match


throughout the district. Because of that, our Governing
Board decided that all the dollars that we would receive
from Save Our Rivers would require a match. .
The Governing Board also formed an ad hoc committee
which consisted of one member from each one of the basin
boards. This committee worked with the staff to set up the
criteria to be followed to evaluate and determine the pro-
jects in our plan.

We have spent approximately $3 million under the Save
Our Rivers program and have acquired about 1,800 acres
of land. Including the acquisitions prior to the Save Our
Rivers program, our district has acquired some 104,000
acres of land at a cost of approximately $39 million. These
lands include the Green Swamp flood retention area, parts
of the upper Hillsborough flood retention area, the lower
Hillsborough flood retention area, the Anclote water
storage lands, and property adjacent to the Anclote River.
This fiscal year we plan to acquire another 12,000 acres in
the Green Swamp flood retention area that has been
designated an area of critical state concern. Five rivers
originate in this area; the Withlacoochee, Peace,
Okalawaha, Hillsborough, and Kissimmee. This portion
of the project has presented quite a unique problem
because developers have subdivided about six section Of
the land into one and one quarter to ten acre tracts that
were sold for $500 to $1,000 an acre. Today we're offering
$350 an acre for those same lands and achieving about a 50
percent negotiation success rate. We are having to con-
demn the other 50 percent.
We are currently negotiating to acquire flowage
easements from Agri-Timber on approximately 45,000
acres of land. However, by the time we determine all the
rights that we need to acquire in a "flowage easement",
the cost may be the same as an actual fee purchase.
Buckhorn Springs is just a 145-acre tract of very pretty
and pristine land with a two mile long creek two miles
north of the Alafi River. We are pursuing acquisition of
the parcel since the spring contributes about 12 million
gallons of the water to the river. Rather than having to
purchase the property, we are negotiating to prevea
development of the property for at leant the next SOyisea
The owners are considering donating a site fobr vieA
vironmental education facility to be built on the property.
Another project we're pursuing this year is the Atclote
water storage property. We have already acquired 5,000 to
6,000 acres and will be budgeting purchase of the third,
fourth, and fifth parcels through 1986. We are obtaining
options to purchase the lands.
The last acquisition we are pursuing this fiscal year is the
Bill Evers Reservoir in Manatee County. We are going to
be acquiring a corridor to protect water quality down to
the Bill Evers Reservoir. The City of Bradenton is very en-
thusiastic about this particular acquisition and they've
agreed to contribute $100,000 a year over the next five
years toward the acquisition of those properties.







Hosted by Fred Bond
G ivermig Board Member
Northwest Florida Water Management District







Water Sources: The Practical

Alternatives







Dr. Kris Baros
CH2M Hill

David Pyne
CH2M Hill





Dr. Kris Buros

David Pyne and I will talk only about two of the prac-
tical alternatives: desalination and recharge recovery. Both
are used in Florida. Desalination provides you a water
source where no fresh water source existed previously, us-
ing brackish or saline water of some type. Recharge
rgovery, on the other hand, provides you with a method
to extend the water supply. In essence, it makes the water
supply much better for much longer periods of time. I will
start off by talking about the desalting alternatives.
Desalting here in Florida is an easy thing to do. All
desalting processes have the same type of flow scheme.
Basically, it's a big black box. You bring in saline water
and produce fresh water and reject the salt. The fresh
water comes out, and you sell that to the customers. The
brine comes out, and you try to get rid of it. The other side
of this is that you have to put in energy and chemicals that
increase the water cost.
For seawater, you can use distillation and with brackish
water you can use electrolysis and reverse osmosis. For
small uses, there is solar humidification, and some distilla-
tion and freezing processes are also used for seawater
desalination, but these aren't the main type of use.
All except freezing are being used in Florida. However,
desalting, especially seawater desalting, is fairly expensive.
Distillation, although its uses are limited here, is a major


desalting ess used more
than any In it, seawater
acts as a i 'once here to
betwei takoen into the
first at a vapor
presuii he water ex-
plIeode in y into fresh
water. i n tonto the next
stage. t tyhal.lbto the heat
loss of vacuum so



that it neath e ~a gh the laem
plant weele oera w r dne after the

Eotro.rt a'" r Elect a ble/ t'for brackish
water. The n1e20-iZa do not pass
water, they pis' iot&.' highly ionized
solution. wou S. in saline water,
and the n 'steh the mem-
branes, btit '*W wat 'ciI iins are attracted to
the negativr'se mr t comI~W omes through. The
water is run tlhuw# 6ive anid negative poles horizon-
tally in about 20bpati%, ,,entually reducing by half the
total dissolved solids.
Reverse osmosis is lso used for seawater. It was
developed based on the theory that if you have a semi-
permeable membrane with fresh and salty water on either
side of that membrane, it has a tendency for fresh water to
move through the membrane in order to dilute the salt-
water. That isn't how it works entirely, but that's how the
name came about. It is a very simple operation. You treat
saline water in a pressure-dependent operation. In reverse
osmosis, saline water is pressurized against a semi-
permeable membrane and fresh water will pass the mem-
brane. Pretreatment to protect the membrane is necessary.
The key is the membrane. There are two types of mem-
branes that have surfaced after about 15 years, and they
are the hollow-fiber membranes and the spiral membranes.
Both are used in Florida.
In the typical flow scheme in a reverse-osmosis plant in
Florida, you pretreat the brackish water with chemicals to
prevent precipitants from forming on the membrane. It is
then run through some cartridge filters to filter out the big
lumps. A high-pressure pump runs the system. Pressure
depends upon the salt content for brackish water which
may be between 3,000 TDS and 8,000 TDS. A pressure be-
tween about 250 and 450 PSI is required. There's a lot of
energy needed, along with big pumps and a lot of money.
The critical part of it is the membranes that come in all dif-
ferent sizes. A large size one can treat about five million
gallons a day.

For brackish water, electrodialysis and reverse osmosis
are very similar. Both require pretreatment, large amounts
of energy and a high cost. In reverse osmosis, it requires
the energy to provide high pressure. In electrodialysis, the
energy is required to run a rectifier. Both of them produce
brine which you must dispose of and both need, generally,


r- lMi.


~P~i~'







some type of post-treatment.
There are already applications in Florida for desalina-
tion techniques. One is producing ultra-pure industrial
water. There are two industries that use this. One is the
power industry for use in high pressure boilers. The biggest
one using it now is the electronics industry. They often put
in a reverse osmosis plant to reduce the salt and to filter.
Although desalting in Florida has about 35 million
gallons per day of installed capacity, it isn't the answer to
all water resource problems. It is an answer in appropriate
places. We need to make sure that desalting here in Florida
is used where it's appropriate and where it's wise, and
make sure that we don't say that this is the answer to
everything, because it isn't.

David Pyne

Because there are 29,000 new people coming to Florida
every month, we need to figure out where we're going to
get the water to supply all of these people until 1995 and
2000. The engineering community, regulators and users of
the water need to use their resourcefulness, ingenuity, and
creativeness to try to develop solutions to our problems.
One of the solutions is desalination, another for some
communities is recharge recovery.
Recharge recovery is a new alternative for municipal
water supplies. Water demand increases each year. The
average-day demand climbs along with the maximum-day
demand. Too many communities in Florida are within a
year or two of not being able to provide for their maximum
day demand, and several communities in Florida passed
that point two or three years ago. It is a pretty expensive
situation for some communities because the next stage of
expansion to get you through.the next 1 MGD, 5 MGD, 10
MGD, maximum-day demand generally represents a multi-
million dollar investment for facilities that are generally
going to be used only a few days a year. Furthermore, they
probably won't be used to their full capacity for another
five or ten years and that's millions of dollars of invest-
ment in idle capacity.
Typically, during the maximum month of the year, de-
mand is about 120 percent of the average annual demand.
The minimum month of the year is perhaps around 85 per-
cent. Within that maximum month, it's not unreasonable
to expect on a maximum day, it might be another 25 per-
cent higher than that. Many communities also use well
field supplies. During the dry season, the water levels go
down, and yield from the well field declines. Surface reser-
voir supplies are used by other communities. The biggest
time of supply is in the summer when demand is the lowest
because it rains more. It's a case of non-coincidence supply
and demand and we don't have too many options for sur-
face storage. Even in those areas where surface storage is
viable, we lose a tremendous amount of water by evapora-
tion. We could go out and build another well field or reser-
voir, if you can find a suitable site and if you've got a lot of


money burning a hole in your pocket, and the situation is
appropriate, you can build a desalting plant. Recharge
recovery is an interesting alternative.
It is nothing more than storing water underground as a
municipal water supply. At Lake Manatee, there are
periods during the summer that have more water than it
can handle, and it just goes over the dam, down Manatee
River, and out into the Gulf. During the dry season,
there's not enough water and the reservoir levels start
dropping. In recharge recovery, the water is withdrawn
from the reservoir during the wet season of the year when
demand is down, treated to drinking water quality, allow-
ed to flow down into an aquifer storage zone and then be
pumped out to meet peak drinking water demands during
the following dry season.
The big difference in using recharge recovery is that
we're not talking about building major treatment plants or
pipelines to distant well fields, but basically fine-tuning ex-
isting capacity right at the plant site. We are displacing a
poor quality water with treated drinking water, and storing
it there for a period of several months.
Based upon the work I've seen so far, I think it's going
to cost less than $.54 per 1000 gallons, mainly because the
yield is substantially higher than we thought Jt would be
two years ago when we started on this process. There are
pros and cons here. We could get more water out of it by a
little fine tuning of the diversion schedule. The county says
they could actually put a little more water through the pro-
ject if Department of Environmental Regulations would
give them a permit for it. On the other hand, from the
regulatory view point, maybe the water management dis-
trict would not like to see all of that water going down in
the ground, but would like to see some more of it going out
into the estuary.
State-wide, some effort has been made to look at re-
charge recovery. Some are just paper studies, others are
testing installations constructed by the USGS and results
have been published or are in the process of being pub-
lished. Two are operating installations; one at Lake
Manatee and one in Naples.
A lot of lessons have been learned. We found that if you
try to recharge with raw water, the wells get clogged with
frogs and weeds. The success of Lake Manatee thus
reflects the successes and failures of other programs.
The concept also has applicability in other areas of
Florida, such as where the Floridan aquifer is fresh. If
you've got suitable storage, it may be far more cost effec-
tive to operate your facilities at a steady rate year around,
using aquifer storage, than it would be to build another 10
MGD treatment plant, or a five or ten mile pipeline to a
new well field.
One of the side benefits is that we're providing a new
tool for water management in Florida. Recharge recovery
is a real asset as a management tool to protect the environ-
ment. It also offers another possibility in that we believe it
may be possible to store excess water in wet years. If the







-eat year happens to be dry, then you pull some of that
e'r back out. As a way of increasing a safe yield for
some of our surface water supplies, it offers the potential
p converting a 95 percent safe yield into a 99 percent.
Orsp of the alternatives being investigated in Cocoa is the
p9mpubility that, rather than parallel a pipeline with a 42
4p& pipe at the cost of several million dollars to meet that
.p day per year maximum demand, they'll run the ex-
roPg pipeline flat out all year round. When demand is
r~ ,tjey'U store raw water underneath the plant, close
tbhe coastline. When demand rises above the capacity of
prisoting pipeline, they just pump the water back out
#qp underneath the plant and run it through the plant.
fpm though the system may not work perfectly, and,
maybe you don't get 100 percent recovery of your water,
but it is cost effective.
SIn general, if you have a seasonal variation in water sup-
9ly or demand, if you have a major capital investment in
testing or proposed facilities, if you have appropriate
i"ifer storage, and if you're about to invest several
billion dollars, it would be worth your while to take a look
at this rather than just casually setting it aside.


Won. Fred Bond

Thank you for a very stimulating program. It has cer-
tainly educated me.


-A Ui

*-'.kl 1


r'~llliil~-_ II I E


~~;.;;---------m---~-__~_~-1-pi~l*Fe d







Hosted by Blacher Lines
Governing Board Member
Northwest Florida Water
Management District





Local Government Assistance
Programs







John Wodraska
South Florida Water Management District

Dean Campbell
St. Johns River Water Management District

Rich McLean
Southwest Florida Water Management District

Jim Cason.
Northwest Florida Water Management District

John Shoemyen
Suwannee River Water Management District



Hon. Blcher Lines

We are particularly pleased to host this session because
we have had some real success in being of assistance to
local and county governments. In many of our rural coun-
ties, a large amount of technical expertise is not readily
available and we have been able to provide that and help
S protect the water resources.


John Wodraska

We have 16 counties and 137 units of local government
in South Florida. Everybody that's run for election in the
last seven years in South Florida has had to address one
issue-growth management. And almost everybody who
gets elected through this process pledges either controlled
or restricted growth. Hardly anybody gets elected pro-
posing a program of uncontrolled growth in South
Florida. When elected, they become concerned with the big


problem of "What does controlled growth mean?". It is
there that the role of the water management district and
local government assistance can be refined and developed.
When I started with the district, we developed a program
to address local government concerns. I went around to
every county and city commission and explained the pro-
gram we had. When they had a rezoning application, we
would advise them on the impact of putting an additional
5,000 or 50,000 people in a certain area. Some of the most
conservative county commissioners admitted they had to
take advantage of that offer to help local government
make informed decisions.
Beginning in 1973, with the DRI program, we assumed a
very active role but that did not address most of the
development taking place in South Florida. We also
started a rezoning program for every county and most of
the major municipalities because any rezoning application
has a potential impact on water resources. We have an ac-
tive program to review comprehensive plans. We tried a
pilot program last year and did an element of the com-
prehensive plan for a unit of local government. People
question that role for the water management district, but
the City of West Palm Beach is the only municipality in
South Florida that is dependent on a surface water supply
that is very susceptible to drought. We wanted them to
look at their local groundwater supplies and were uc-
cessful in convincing their consultants and city fathers that
was the right direction to go. That is a proper role for the
water management district, and we've been recognized for
it.
One of the things we've learned in providing technical
assistance is that you have to have a commitment from the
city fathers or county commissioners. We had a program
in southwest Broward County where they were going to
stop interchanges from being built on 1-75 because of the
potential contamination of Biscayne Aquifer. Consultants
were talking about taking a year or two to study it and we
promised that within 90 days we would have an answer.
We were able to produce computer overlays of their com-
prehensive plan and existing land uses, say where they
should not put septic tanks and where future well fields
would be, and offer other tangible recommendations that
local government could put their teeth into. This was at the
request of the county commission.
My advice to anybody getting into a local government
assistance program is to go first to the local elected of-
ficials and convince them of the value and expertise of the
water management district. They really can't afford to
have on their own staffs the expertise that we have in the
water management districts now.
It's in our best interest to establish as many constituen-
cies as we can. We worked with our 137 units of govern-
ment during a drought by going to them individually and
saying we've got a collective problem. The comments we
heard were: "If we can do this in a partnership as opposed
to you regulating us and if we can address these problems
together, we're going to be much more receptive to it."





' -n ~ 1r


Local government is one of our strongest constituencies.
Reach out to these people. It's an enormously powerful
function of government in Florida, and they're not going
to come to you. You have to assure them that you have a
service they can rely on.


Den Campbell

TheSt. Johns District, since its inception, has done a lot
of projects, and scientific studies on request by local
governments or other state agencies who don't have exper-
tise with ground and surface water problems. The district
has always been receptive to this type of request but in the
formative years, there was not a methodology established
for local governments to come to the district and say what
they needed done. We couldn't always attack a problem
primarily because of financial constraints. Requests from
local governments tended to be accepted only if they were
timely. If they came in at the right time during the budget
process, then funds could be allocated and the problem ad-
dressed.
.In order to rectify this situation, the St. Johns District in
1980 developed a process to mail out notification to local
governments, state agencies, and regional planning coun-
cils and to provide a specific format to apply for research.
The advantage was that we got the applications at the time
of the year to plug them into the budget process and
evaluated on uniform standards.
In January of 1980, we began this program. We called it
our Regional Water Resources Assistance Program. The
district, being in Palatka and having all or parts of 19 dif-
ferent counties, is not always able to identify all local water
resource problems. Local governments are much more
aware of the problems, and this gives us an opportunity to
have someone come in and tell us about them. If we cannot
react immediately, we are at least aware of the concerns in
a particular area and we can begin tailoring our programs.
The district has been involved in such things as protec-
tion of primary shallow aquifers, long-term monitoring of
aquifer quality and quantity, regional floodplain planning
and management, and ground and surface water basin
modeling. It's been a very diverse interaction based
primarily on local governments' needs at a specific time.
The form of assistance has been either through direct
staff involvement in which the district will address the
problem or through funding a third party. The programs
where we have interaction with the local governments have
been the most popular. For example, we've done flood-
plain mapping for several counties. They applied for
photogrammetric mapping for which the district funded
the mapping portion and supplied the engineering expertise
fos interpretation; the counties supplied the surveying and
ground truthing teams.
The criteria we use for accepting or rejecting a particular
application is based upon the availability of district
revenue, the need for priority action, the degree to which


the proposed trict objectives
and state law, rlicant has the
technical, f capability or
responsibility i- selves.
During the iYI budgeted
at s183,290. TI i eobled that and
began mult'l i E t. Ever since
the inception of a considerable
amount of rri~ tri projects are funded
at $217,0006 I 1-over projects,
for a totl
We've had good "* sslies. but the
larger counties do tea L oi biggest share of the
funds. The Regional Wa~mr Assistance Program
is one of the most visibt a ndstr em of money, and the
counties are very obsenrvat vwun it comes to how this
money is doled out. They like to compare what they pay in
and how much they're gttig beck. Unfortunately, they
tend to overlook the other district programs and base the
district's interest in a particular county only on what the
assistance program is roviin for them.
We've found fitr public relations, and
it lets the applicant see the district putting tax money back
into an area and helping them. We have problems, but the
benefits pretty much out weigh them.


Jim Cason

We view technical assistance as an alternative to regula-
tion. Any time we can lend assistance rather than go
through the regulatory process, we have and will continue
to try to do that.
Our assistance consists primarily of engineering, plan-
ning, and various field activities with an emphasis on water
well logging for other agencies. Our planning assistance
consists of reviews and helping applicants fill out applica-
tions for various permits. Some of our rural areas like
Liberty County have no engineering capabilities. We could
keep two people busy full time just doing permit comple-
tions. We help not only with evaluations, but with collect-
ing the data that's required to get permits.
Most of our assistance is provided as a result of requests
from local government officials. Rarely do we provide it to
private people, and we do not do it in a manner that would
conflict with private enterprise. We're sensitive to the fact
that there are a lot of consulting firms who make their liv-
ing by selling technical assistance to people, and we don't
want to get into conflict with them.
In the future, our technical assistance will include com-
puterized modeling. of surface and groundwater. We've
developed some good models, and we already receive
rather routine requests for assistance in evaluating pro-
blems that are best addressed on the computer.
We started the Basin Advisory Commmittees that meet
twice a year with local government officials or their ap-
pointees. We become aware of problems they have and if


g ** .,.I..J~i~ -- M~ill- U.







we cannot respond immediately, we take these requests for
help or information and try to work them into our long-
range programs.


Rich McLean

Our assistance to local governments can be broken into
two parts. "Informal" assistance involves working with
local people and local governments supplying them with
information and helping in development and review of
plans. "Formal" assistance can also be looked at in two
parts. We have agreements with regional planning councils
to review such things as DRIs, DISs, and to comment on
them from the water management district point of view.
We also review and comment on Comprehensive Plans as
they're revised by the local governments.
The second and most formalized of our assistance to
local governments involves projects. The SWFWMD is dif-
ferent from the other water management districts in that
we have nine basin boards which handle most project re-
quests. Our Governing Board has final approval after the
basin boards go in the field and make contact with local
governments.
Once the Board determines a project is necessary, the
staff and district resources necessary to work on it are
decided. A recommendation is then made which includes
the fiscal capabilities of the particular basin board. If the
Board accepts it, we develop a contract with the local
governments, spelling out the obligations of the parties.
Some of the projects we've worked on in the past with
local governments involve hydrologic assistance, impact
analysis, analysis of reservoir yields, and help in the for-
mation of regional water supply authorities. We produce
computerized aerial and floodplain maps for the local
governments' use in managing flood zones.


John Shoemyen

Most of the people in our district are two or three
generation Florida natives. Not one county in our district
voted for the Constitutional Amendment creating the
water management districts. In the old days of state's
rights, local government control at any level was not
welcome. That is the political climate in our water manage-
ment district.
I'd like to briefly describe one of our local government
assistance programs which aids local governments in non-
structurally managing their floodplain.
Governor Graham's Critical State Concern Program
gave the water management district the ability to give out
the technical information to the 11 counties who are in the
floodplain of the Suwannee and its major tributaries. Only
one county had any land use control or zoning. Due to
local pressure, the Federal Government was kept from
turning it into a wild and scenic area. The local units of


government thought the Department of Environmental
Regulation would come to their rescue and stop the prob-
lems with flooding and uncontrolled development. Unfor-
tunately there's a limit to what the Army Corps of
Engineers and Department of Environmental Regulation
can do to stop this kind of development.
We've had examples of people who heard there's an or-
dinance coming and tried to buil* quickly to beat the
flood. One had approximately nine feet of water in their
home this year. The technical assistance the water manage-
ment district provides to those 11 counties is the ordinance.
It's an example of a regional agency using local land use
controls to achieve something instead of having the
Federal Government or the state trying to work through a
state-level agency to work in a rural area.
Since our last hundred-year storm in 1973, we've had ap-
proximately 8,000 residential lots platted in the floodplain.
As water managers, we are concerned for the public health
aspects and damage occurring. Those homes, when built
under the emergency phase of the FEMA insurance pro-
grams will get subsidized insurance from us citizens of the
United States of America. It is a disaster in terms of a
federal program encouraging development in an area in
which local government doesn't have the technical know-
how or the political clout to stop the developesat ;
The water management districts' role is the responsibili-
ty for giving out the hundred-year flood election for every
river mile and the ten-year flood elevation. That's in com-
pliance with the FEMA emergency and regular phae and'
makes sure the people can get their subsidized insurance.
The ten-year floodplain is used by HRS to permit septic
tanks. For many years, this piece of information was not
available for the local sanitarian's use when they permitted
septic tanks.
The vegetation stabilization zone, or 75-foot setback, is
another element of these ordinances. Homes are elevated
and stay back 75 feet, which we hope approximates the
floodway. We are working on a mapping and modeling
project to obtain accurate data for the floodway.
However, we had to act now in a non-structural policy to
make sure the problems won't be there when we finally
have a solution.
The 75-foot setback was arrived at by water manage-
ment district staff working with the local building officials
to ascertain what they felt they could enforce and would
work in their counties. The development 6f this or-
dinance was overseen by each county attorney. Subdivision
roads are built without fill at natural grade so that we
don't increase flooding into other areas where it doesn't
normally occur.
The district maintains the county permit data base.
Permits requiring a floodplain development permit are
tracked inhouse on our computer.
Structurally, you have the Department of Community
Affairs appointed by the Governor to monitor ihat 11
county area and 1,200 square miles of floodplain. The Im-
plementation Oversight Committee of the regional plan-








ning council is being changed to a committee of the water
management district with all 14 counties in our district
being represented to oversee the progress of the implemen-
tation of that floodplain ordinance and work on future
problems.
Our program is unique because the data comes to us
digitally and then with the help of the computer staff, we
simplify the data and model it so county commissioners
can use it when a plat approval comes before them.
In approximating the hundred-year floodplain in the
area, we can tell which roads are going to be under water,
how many homes will not have access, and the number of
boats necessary for disaster relief.
Because of the effect on land sales and development,
realtors and developers may disapprove. First, you have to
prove your credibility and make the counties trust you, and
then work with them to show them how to use this data so
that they understand how limiting the development in the
1,200 square miles protects the water resource.
,The water management district is just beginning to feel
the development pressure that south and southwest Florida
are feeling. We are, perhaps, less prepared to handle it
because of our lack of zoning and county engineers.

John Wodraska
The water management districts, all five of them, have
established their technical credibility. What distinguishes
us from USGS in collecting data and mapping is how we
can be of assistance to local government and try to engage
public opinion and help make those tough decisions in
growth management.
If you're going to be successful with local governmental
officials, you do not make land use decisions. However,
we do make land management decisions. The water
management districts have come a long way in establishing
themselves as technically competent organizations. Now
the charge, in the next five to ten years, is how are we really
going to turn this technical knowledge and expertise into
something tangible with these local elected officials who
have to make tough growth management decisions. How
are they going to make better and more informed deci-
sions? My job as a manager is to influence scientists
because they always want more data, They never have
enough to produce a decision. You have to give local
government something .to sink their teeth into because
they're making regulatory and zoning decisions on a day-
to-day basis. You have to make some assessments and the,"
water management districts are in a lot better position to
do that than any other agency in Florida.


John Shoemyen

The water management districts do not have the land use
controls. Early on in our project we realized the counties
were going to have to bite the bullet. One tool in our


arsenal probably was Governor Graham's interest at a
state level. That was a possible threat to the counties to
adopt floodplain ordinances. There were only, in our
areas, three development interests who were totally against
this project. I worked with the developers who realized
that in the long run this type of very simple ordinance,
which is not a taking, does not affect property values other
than raising the property values f good land, would be to
their benefit. I sold it by saying, "If you sell a lot on the
Suwannee County side, you can tell the guy who buys it
that the Hamilton County side of his view won't be
destroyed. I worked on the positive elements of this or-
dinance with each audience that I dealt with, leaving the
two or three development interests out in the cold. They
had some effect on the ordinance and in the implementa-
tion phase. We worked with county attorneys, local
building officials, local HRS, and local environmental
groups. All II counties adopted the ordinance.
The legislature could have mandated that the state come
back in and make them pass the ordinance with the state
handling the permitting. I did not use the state threat
because all they had to do was say bring on the state
because they're not really afraid of the state. We used a
more positive approach explaining the good it does for the
individual citizens.

John Wodraska

Concerning land use controls and floodplain zoning, the
legislature has gotten us involved in the permitting side of
sold waste planning. We have offered our technical
assistance to solid waste authorities to help locate solid
waste sites. We have put our credibility and technical ex-
pertise on the line annd the people in solid waste say they
are glad to see somebody else willing to join the in the
crucial issue facing local government. Another area where
thereis a void is the planning and regulatory side of what to
do with wastewater. Several counties in our district lack
any cohesive planning in disposal of wastewater. The
district has extended a hand saying, "We're interested in
working with you in these kinds of programs."


i;ZicU


I







Hosted by Representative Chuck Smith








Wetlands Protection:
Legislative Directions







Silvia Alderman, Attorney
Department of Environmental Regulation

Henry Dean, Attorney
Department of Natural Resources

Jack Maloy, Executive Director
South Florida Water Management District

Rob Rhodes, Attorney
Holland and Knight


Representative Chuck Smith

Good afternoon. My name is Chuck Smith and I appre-
ciate being asked to referee this afternoon's session on
wetlands. Since 1850 we have allegedly destroyed more
than 60 percent of Florida's wetlands through dredging,
diking, damming, or otherwise destroyed. If that's an ac-
curate statement, perhaps it's time we got concerned about
Florida's wetlands.


Silvia Alderman


I want to spend a few moments telling you what DER's
jurisdiction is in wetlands. The Department of Environ-
mental Regulation regulates activities in certain wetlands
under Chapters 253 and 403 of the Florida Statutes.
Chapter 253 is the original public trust doctrine, which
translated into regulation of natural resources below the
mean high water of navigable water line. The navigable
water bodies, which are regulated under this chapter, are
those that were navigable at the time Florida became a
state in 1850. They're generally the lakes that are


meandered at this time; however, meandering of a lake is
merely a presumption that it is a navigable lake. It does not
have to be meandered to be a navigable lake. Under
Chapter 253, the standard for permiting issuance gen-
erally relates to protection of habitat and to natural
resources. The landward limit of jurisdiction under that
chapter is the mean or ordinary high water line. Under
Chapter 403, which is principally a water quality oriented
statute, the landward extent of jurisdiction becomes more
complicated. Jurisdiction on 403 deals with all the waters.
Any stationary installation reasonably expected to be a
source of pollution to those waters needs a permit from
our department.
In the area of dredge and fill, we narrowed down the jur-
isdiction of the Department by rule, and that is found in
Rule 17-4.28 which lists certain categories of waters that
are regulated for dredge and fill purposes. Those cate-
gories of waters generally include river, certain lakes,
streams, the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, bays,
bayous, and estuaries. When you're talking about lakes, it
has to be a lake that has multiple ownership, or that has a
discharge to other property. It has to be greater than 10
acres or deeper than two feet. It also has to be a lake that
does not become dry every year.
That in a nutshell is the 403 jurisdictional extent. As you
can see, what we're doing is really regulating activities of
the water bodies to their NATURAL landward extent. We
are not regulating wetlands. The state does not have a
wetlands statute as such.
Do we have sufficient authority to protect wetlands in
Florida? I don't believe we do. There is not a statute to
define wetlands or that specifically identifies them as
something that should be protected. The department needs
some authority that will assist it in being able to reach
areas that are normally wetlands but during an unusual
climatic situation, you have a drought. That may be by
rule or statute. The statute gives us the authority to
develop a soil index if we want ,but the problem is that we
don't have the manpower or themonty to do it. We need
to be able to protect the habitats above mean high watr.
The only test for habitat protection that we have nowV i if
the Chapter 253 and it is below the mean high water line.
We protect habitats indirectly through Chapter 403 in that
we regulate activities in these wetlands so long as they are
within the landward extent and to the extent that the
habitat is performing a water quality function. But there is
no specific ability of the department to protect a habitat
above the mean high water line.
Other areas that we definitely need to look at is the need
to regulate special isolated areas such as the Everglades.
The other thing we need to do is develop a state policy on
wetlands identifying their value and the direction that the,
state should take in regulating activities in wetlands.
Finally, we need to have the ability to consider litigation so
that a trade-off can take place.


33







Henry Dean


When I talk about the "taking" issue and wetlands pro-
tection and property rights, the bottom line, as all lawyers
learn, is that we may think there has been a taking if we
represent a developer, and we may think there has not been
a taking if we represent a water management district or a
state agency. Until the courts define it, we don't know.
With respect to wetlands protection, and the public in-
terest as opposed to the issue of constitutional protection
regarding private property rights, I think we must look at
Article V of the Federal Constitution which provides for
due process and just compensation. The due process clause
is abso contained in the Florida State Constitution in Arti-
cle 1, Section 9. With that in mind, the real issue here is a
balancing of the public's interest in protecting natural
resources as opposed to the constitutional right of private
land owners to use property to its highest and best use.
We're talking about balancing the health, safety and wel-
fare interests of the public at large with the constitutional
right that property is not to be deprived from a person
without due process and just compensation.
Some of the types of regulations that apply to the state
and regional level include the development of regional im-
pact process, consumptive use and discharge permits,
water quality regulations, and air quality permitting. DNR
also administers the coastal control line where certain stan-
dards have to be met in order to build seaward of the line.
What I'd like to do is to describe the current state of law
in Florida, based on the latest pronouncements from the
Florida Supreme Court, on the tests applied for when
regulation becomes so severe that it amounts to a taking.
That test was firstenunciated in the U.S. Supreme Court in
1922 when Justice Holmes said it was okay to regulate but
at some point that regulation may become so severe it will
be a taking and must be compensated for.
When you analyze the taking issue and wetlands protec-
tion, you also have to bear in mind the distinction between
the state's powers of condemnation through eminent do-
main and its police powers to regulate. The state has the
authority under certain circumstances to condemn pro-
perty, but it must meet the public needs test, and there
must be an immediate need for it. In the 1981 estuary pro-
perties case, the Florida Supreme Court set up a six step
test to address whether or not a regulation, or the applica-
tion of the regulation constituted a taking. These steps in-
clude; 1) whether there is a physical invasion of the proper-
ty; 2) the degree to which there has been a reduction in the
value of the property, or stated another way, whether the
regulation precludes all economically reasonable use of the
property; 3) whether the regulation confers a public
benefit or prevents a public harm; 4) whether the regula-
tion promotes the health, welfare, or morals of the
public; 5) whether the regulation is applied arbitrarily and
capriciously; and 6) the extent which the regulation cur-
tails investment-backed expectations. That's the test, but
they went on to say that each case will be looked at in-


dividually.
Florida has had a vuyt in the whole issue
of balancing public dvivate property rights.
All that interest l4d.ttll it 1978 of the Property
Rights Act. This sMlay t for a permit has
been denied at the slW he can go to circuit
court within 90 days, aald f j jai demonstrate a "no
reasonable beneficial we" of is property based on that
denial, then the judge ca cqSir order the permit granted
or he can grant compr ~t .
The last thing I'd e dds is the whole area of
estoppel needs to be nki lsl al.a ase, and the
doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. One
must exhaust all administrative remedies before pro-
ceeding into circuit court. The only exception is within 90
days you can elect to go into circuit court under the pro-
perty rights act.

Jack Maloy
I think it's quite appropriate that we have a wetlands
symposium right after the admonitions from our luncheon
speaker. The reason we don't have wetlands legislation in
Florida is politics and private property rights. There is a
piece of legislation which will state very clearly the goals
and objectives of this state as they relate to wetlands. How
can we have a gameplan when we don't really know what it
is we're trying to accomplish. What the public wants to
know is how is it going to affect my piece of property and
how is it going to affect my right to do certain things.
Let me talk to you about the frustrations of attempting
to develop, erect and evaluate programs without any clear
goals and objectives. I'm talking mainly about the execu-
tive branch of government in Florida, and its efforts to
protect wetlands without any clear goal to establish in the
legislature. The judicial branch is the last place in the
world you want to make policy, but policy is being made in
the courts through precedents in the absence of clear legis-
lative goals. There are a lot of conflicting ideas, goals,
directions and decisions because we have a decision mak-
ing process broken into the federal area, the 404, and
coastal zone management. The water management districts
are also protecting wetlands under surface water manage-
ment. It's like grabbing at any straw to carry out some
kind of a program. People in Florida have enough pro-
blems with the way we administer laws that are very clear
on the books.
I feel wetlands protection is an idea whose time has
come. All the necessary homew6orkhas been done over the
last 10 years, and thosempeOp who-were concerned about
the fact that any ktid of wdwaaJb legislation would act
against them am tno so utp ldty that we'd better get
some. But eveanwke4 r ll!gbdal and objectives at the
state level, it's gobig lea Asie glJgough to administer.
That's why people ,i adlepti.llUparts of the states get
conflicting signals ata illta pmnit program runs and
operates and bow reophrell treated differently in one


II


- ---- ~~-._.---~.~--------~~ -- 1






district than they are in another. And that's going to con-
tinue. But who's to say it's fair if you don't have stated
policy goals and objectives?


Representative Smith

We have heard from three individuals representing
government. Now you will have the opportunity to hear
from the other side. Our next panelist is Rob Rhodes, an
attorney and partner in the law firm of Holland and
Knight and a specialist in environmental law. He is also the
Assistant General Counsel for the Florida Phosphate
Council.


Rob Rhodes

This year, according to conventional wisdom, we are
hearing this is going to be the year of wetlands legislation.
The legislation that is being talked about will impact many
people. What I hope to do today is run through the current
status of the legislation and give you some reflections from
the perspective of the developer. DER has very broad
authority in evaluating permits to protect fish, marine
wildlife, and other natural resources in the public interest.
The authority of the department to regulate Chapter 403
waters or other waters to the landward extent is somewhat
limited to water quality considerations. Although the
department, through various means, is able to protect
those interests, there is no specific statutory authority in
Florida to do so.
In 1983, I think everybody got tired of talking about
wetlands legislation, and a truce was called. Part of that
truce involved forming a citizens advisory committee to the
Senate Natural Resources Committee to work on resolving
some of the conflicts associated with wetlands legislation
and to come up with a bill for some kind of consensus be-
tween the regulated community, the regulators and en-
vironmental interests. Representative Jon Mills, who is
also interested in working on this in the House, will help
both sides of the legislature develop wetlands legislation
within the next few months. My knowledge is limited to the
Senate Advisory Committee work where the main issue is
for DER to have the authority to consider fish and wildlife
ecology issues under Chapter 403. The DER is currently
limited to water quality considerations, and they would
like to have the authority to regulate those areas in the
same way they do the 253 waters. They want to apply the
public interest tests and consider the impacts upon fish and
wildlife and other ecological values. The developer com-
munity views this as a rather extreme enhancement of DER
authority. Before you characterize these individuals, who
will not be named, as a kind of Neanderthal people who
are somewhere to the right of Atilla the Hun, please con-
sider the property rights issue alluded to earlier. We have
to remember that the average farmer who wants to sell a


few acres to a guy to build a condominium development is
not impressed with the fact that this land is "moist" a lot
of the time. The state has the right to regulate your pro-
perty, reasonably, for the protection of the health and
welfare of the public, and it's easy to explain that you can't
spew out noxious fumes that might drift off your property
and hurt somebody. Nor can you put bad things into flow-
ing water. But it is hard to explain to somebody why he
can't use the trees and the ground on his property in the
way that he wants to. It's even harder when you move
from the police power to the public trust concept or to the
public interest test, because that is perceived as broader
than the police power and gives more power to the state to
tell you what you can do with your property. The public
trust doctrine and the public interest test were developed for
these traditionally navigable waters, and what we tend to
forget is that in most cases the people who live on either
side of those waters do not own the bottom. The state ac-
tually owns the bottom and therefore you're not actually
interfering with property rights. A person who wants to do
something in those areas is really trying to get something
that he doesn't own. But it's different when we're in areas
up away from the navigable waters.
The regulated community is interested in talking about
working out legislation that will accommodate the desires
of the department, but not for free. What we're talking
about now, and we're getting into legislation development,
is the trade-offs and how to accommodate the mutual con-
cerns of the DER, the environmental interest groups, and
the regulated community. It breaks down into two major
areas. One is jurisdictional limits, and the other is defining
public interests. The hard one is the one that DER doesn't
like to talk about-limiting jurisdiction. Right now, DER
thinks its jurisdictional limits are too narrow. The depart-
ment is trying to fatten up the jurisdiction through a rule
they are developing which will establish additional
wetlands indicator species. That rule has to be adopted in
the legislature, and they're working vigorously to do it, It
is a relatively controversial rule, and it seems to me the
vegetative indicators list right now is creating more prob-
lems than it is worth from the standpoint of overall wet-
lands protection.
The other thing, in addition to limiting jurisdiction, is to
define "the public interest". There is great concern among
the regulated community that the phrase doesn't mean
anything. Two things the developers would like to see are a
wetlands classification system and a recognition of the
concept of litigation. If we cannot agree upon a point for
stopping jurisdiction, then the regulated community would
like to agree upon a system to evaluate the wetlands we
have. One of the few things the Neal committee agreed
upon was that we do not believe it's appropriate to protect
and preserve every wetland in the state of Florida or that
it's appropriate to allow the development and destruction
of every wetland. Somewhere in between the two is ob-
viously the truth, and we think in order to make those
graduations there has to be a statutory establishment of the







classification system.
Finally, the regulated community would like to see a
statute on the concept of mitigation; for accepting the fact
that certain wetlands can be reclaimed, restored, or re-
placed, or that they can be offsetby preservation of wet-
lands in other locations through conservation easements or
other mechanisms. We're trying to define what mitigation
is, and when it could be used, and it's a very difficult task.


Representative Smith

You have heard from these four individuals. It is now
your opportunity to either ask them a question or suggest
something that you think is better than what that they have
suggested.

None of you mentioned or even raised the issue of
whether there is any question over who should have juris-
diction. The St. Johns Water Managermeat District is now
buying up all of these wetlands to restore a river system. Is
there no question about that jurisdiction?


Jack Maloy

That issue was put to rest a long time ago. We're all one
department, and once clear legislative goals are established
and the rules are developed, it won't make much difference
who administers the program. The problem we have now is
there are different programs because there is no clear direc-
tion. Legislation would solve that problem.


Rob Rhodes

The general perception of the regulated community is
that they don't care who does it, as long as there's only one
agency doing it.


In the question of wetlands jurisdiction, and the land-
ward extent of that jurisdiction, the focus seems to be on
vegetative and soils indexes. Has any consideration been
given to simply considering whether or not the land is wet,
based on hydrographic information?


Silvt Alderman

The answer to that is no.


Jack Maloy

The surface water management rule that the SJRWMD
is proposing for adoption includes hydrologic records as a


test. We thn
records i1"
curate, autho
have them a8 '
areas.


and ground water
F` h ayve some fairly ac-
ble. We don't
i la We have them in many


Is there a move afoot 8 came up with some kind of a
"vaehe ftdex ..vtr fJkfrdD' ^ il that can provide in-
formation to thee coDl 'lilbre they set aside
sacrificial lands.


Representative Smith

The basic assumption is that it has been done because so-
meone made the calculation that 60 percent of the wetlands
have been destroyed.


Jack Maloy

One of the reasons that a lot of this work has not been
done is because of the tremendous cost associated with do-
ing it. We're doing some work like that in Lee County with
aerial photography and it is "money" intensive to get the
kind of information that we need to support any kind of
regulation or rule.


Slvia Alderman

There are several different inventories that have been
done by various groups on wetlands. One of the things you
find is different definitions of wetlands. It may or may not
be useful to my agency, for instance, if the definition of a
wetland includes the areas that we probably do not regu-
late, or perhaps will never be able to regulate because of
the political climate.


Represenattive Smith

I first had occasion this morning to see a wetlands
classification map done by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Ser-
vice. In the next two or three weeks, I'm going to try to
find out how to interpret it.


Rob Rhodes

I don't think that anyone realistically expects that we
will grind development to a halt until we do a state-wide
classification became of the economics involved and
because of the fad that eertarf areas are simply not subject
to any kind of stress. We do have two opportunities and
one is development of a system that could be applied pre-
dictably to an area, as opposed to having a map that says


~ -.------ --------,~,--~----I -.rr~-r~-""i;.. ------


: s;i;:







that these are okay and these are not. The other option is
to look at segments, breaking the thing into a little bit
more manageable bites.

I'd like to ask Silvia about a portion of Chapter 403.
You mentioned areas that are exempt from the water
quality standards because they are small isolated bodies of
water. How do you make the distinction?

Silvia Alderman

Let me make sure you understand that 403 includes two
different types of regulation. There are those covering the
stationary installations, which is the discharge of any still
waters in the state. There is also dredge and fill under
which there are certain lakes that are not subject to
jurisdiction because of their size and if they do not
discharge to other water bodies. The origin of that is the
provision in Chapter 403 that defines waters of the state as
waters that are not wholly owned by one person.


~







Hosted by Candis Harbison
Governing Board Member
Northwest Florida Water
Management District





Organizational Development

in Resource Management








John Wodraska, Assistant Executive Director
South Florida Water Management District


Dr. Patricia Bidol
The University of Michigan


John Wodraska

People in water management typically say, "How come
your agency can deal with so many different issues?"
There is the Upper Chain of Lakes with people worrying
about property rights where the water elevation is going to
be set and the millions of dollars that are going to be at
stake. Other issues revolve around the Kissimmee River
restoration, the deer problems in the Conservation Areas,
and the loss of much of the bird rookery in the Everglades
National Park and much of the red fish and trout in
Florida Bay. Those are just some of our non-stop issues.
Our agency is consistently looked to for technical com-
petence when we're confronted with a technical problem.
The serious problem facing us is, how do we deal with all
of these issues? I was convinced that in the same way we
find consulting help on technical challenges, there must be
some management strategies or some organizational pro-
cess that would help us deal with people issues. You work
harder and longer, and you're treading water all of the
time and you keep sinking. The more successful we
were, the more weight was added.
A fellow from the Corps of Engineers had been commis-
sioned to look at that agency's future and move it in the
direction it should be heading, and to examine the alter-
native ways of dealing with resource management. We
hired him and began developing techniques to put us in a
pro-active position. We began explaining to the public that
we could listen, and both sides could develop a fuller
understanding of the issues. Since we were facing some


tough decisions, everyone involved should understand just
what must be looked agta AiLing those decisions.
We had a lot of issues pending, and we realized the bad
news was that we would have even more. How we coped
with them could determine the existence of our organiza-
tion. We had to ask ourselves if we could properly address
and respond to theissues,or were we just trying to put out
brush fires and not really being responsive?


Dr. Bidol

At the University of Michigan we try to help students
who intend to manage natural resource agencies. We also
teach natural resource managers in career seminars. The
South Florida District.is used in a lot of our case studies as
an example of an agency with technical excellence.
Florida's water resource agencies are all perceived to be
ahead of their comparable organizations in the rest of the
United States.
Natural resource agencies, along with other major
organizations, are facing an increasingly turbulent en-
vironment. Every organization is facing increased competi-
tion, uncertainty and increased demands from consumer
groups, developers, and a variety of other sources. No
longer can you work within a vacuum and not consider in-
put from a variety of sources.
All predictive research indicates these pressures are not
going to go away. There will be more crises. How is an
agency like yours going to survive in 1983? What can you
do to increase your odds for survival so you don't burn out
individually or as an agency? How can you ensure you
don't work 18 to 20 hour days and still feel that you
haven't accomplished anything?
The project I direct works with agencies trying what we
call Organizational Development Theory. It is a discovery
of what can be done internally to make an organization
more effective in relating to different publics. If an agency
cleans up its act internally and doesn't look at how it
relates externally, it can become more efficient internally
but will tread water more. Our hypothesis is: it's the inner-
play between external inputs and internal organization that
increases effectiveness.
Most of the organizations we work with don't take the
approach that South Florida did. Most agencies try to
change their approach in a piece-meal fashion. Unfor-
tunately, if you go too long just working internally or on
external responses, you get out of synchronism. You must
develop your battle plan in the beginning or you will in-
crease your vulnerability and get into more trouble. Try to
be comprehensive in what you want to do in your agency.
We're talking about managing organizational behavior
both internally and externally so you can understand,
predict, and control your responses to all the inputs that
shape what your agency does. You need to see your total
organization so that you can analyze your organizational
behavior and figure a problem solving plan to handle it.
The trick is to do it in such a way that you're able to con-


- I -- I~------i---~~-







gruently structure your responses.
When I first came into the South Florida District, I
asked Woody and Jack, "What is your most immediate
problem?" They were undergoing one of the waves of
ethics charges. The response was not the ethics charges,
but the morale of the agency. They felt I needed to look at
leadership behavior and how the leadership was interacting
with the work force-what is called the "informal work
relationships". They wanted to find out if their informal
working relationships were such that people can do their
jobs. Jack and Woody felt they were deficient in this area.
I did extensive interviewing of the department heads and
other key people after I had read all the newspaper clipp-
ings, memos and information relative to all the events for
the year and a half prior to my involvement. The over-
whelming response was that Woody and Jack are extreme-
ly capable technically, but their leadership style was not as
functional as people would like. The division directors felt
there was no delineation of operations and who was in
charge of policy because they were being shared between
these two men. The department heads recommended that
the two men who had the main leadership function set up
clear delineations in their leadership patterns.
The next thing the department heads said the district
needed was a clear definition of what business it was in.
We brought together all of the department heads and divi-
sion managers to try to determine the core mission of the
agency. We got a lot of good ideas, but no clear message.
They ended up turning the final working over to the
department heads and said, "You now have our best
wisdom on it.

John Wodraska

I'd like to interject some history here. In 1950, when the
Corps of Engineers developed the Central and Southern
Florida Project, they gave us a map with green and red
lines. The purpose of our agency was to make all of the
green lines into red lines. You could look at the map and
know how well we were doing. When we got together 52
monitors in a room and asked, "What is the main mission
of our agency?", we could only agree on three things: en-
vironmental quality, flood control, and water supply. We
couldn't agree on what the order was. Eventually we de-
cided it's balancing those three things. Writing out our
mission statement was done to establish some balance and
guidelines for the future. If it hasn't rained for 60 days,
water shortage plans are the most important. If it hasn't
stopped raining for 60 days, flood control is the most im-
portant. In the meantime, protecting and managing our
estuaries and trying to restore the bird rookery at
Everglades National Park will have top priority.
When we brought all the field station superintendents
and othermanagers together, the total experience added
up to about 1,000 years. They appreciated one another's
point of view, and it was an interesting interaction of the
people who know the district best.


All water management districts have obtained technical
competency. The problem is that we turn out technical
publications that only graduate students can use. Nobody
questions our technical expertise but we haven't done a
very good job of explaining ourselves to the environmental
community. They look at us as scientists, not as people in
the community sharing their values.
We have changed somewhat in the last year. We put on a
symposium on solid waste disposal and resource recovery.
We got favorable feedback from local government saying,
"Someone is finally telling us what our options are in deal-
ing with garbage." We've written local governments and
solid waste authorities indicating we'd like to get involved
and, help with our technical expertise, to help locate solid
waste facilities in the future. A single letter has created a
great deal of favorable response from a local government.
The same thing has happened with waste water. We held
a meeting in Broward County with 26 municipalities that
never talked to each other. Everybody came because they
were afraid other people were going to come. They soon
realized that they have to look at Broward as an entire
county, and if the water management district says we're
going to run out of water in a drought, we'd better do
something. That's what regional government really is: the
bringing together of local governments to p solve
regional problems. In the last couple of years, we have
relied not only on technical competence but also on,our
reputation to come up with alternatives for local govern-
ment to use in solving some of these tough problems.


Dr. Bidol

You must first get your technical expertise in line and
then find ways to improve participation and interaction.
That is partly what the "external resources control unit"
will be looking at. How to gather data, what are the key
issues, and whether to have a symposium or another
forum. The agency has to define what its core mission is to
develop criteria for action strategies, so it will know how to
utilize its work force. If you have a drought, a flood or a
"Save the Everglades" team come in on you, you know
how to respond. If you don't have a clear defined mission
and goal for yourself, you will end up- saving the
Everglades and, instead of a pat on the hack, you get a
kick in the rear. People don't like to be helped unless
they're part of the participation process.
Governmental agencies all over the United States #,a
unappreciated because they don't have a clear identity ftr
themselves. People can't say that the agency said "yes" or
"no" because this is what they stand for; the view is that
they say "yes" or "no" to whoever pushes the hardest.
The district has been trying to sharpen its analysis of
what environmental pressures are on it. Environmental
pressures may come from other natural resource agencies,
fiscal realities, political realities, federal sources, or
whatever. They are asking what are the impacts coming at


I I


I0i8nc '




Tii,-'- ., ____


us, what is the history of our agency in responding to
them, what people, time, technical, and money resources
do we have, and how do we define the core mission? The
core mission is determined as the result of all that analysis.
South Florida knows that it is exemplary for its technical
competence. It will build on that to shape its core mission.
The next thing an agency needs to do is look at the in-
Sterplay between its formal and informal practices. For in-
stance, governmental agencies often aren't very clear
about job descriptions. They often give annual perfor-
mance reviews but don't have written goals for individual
employees. You often burn out your workforce because
you don't make clear contracts about what their time and
energies should be spent on. You give them additional
work, but don't take away work already given them.
South Florida is looking very carefully at its formal and
informal arrangements. It's looking for signs of what is
called "professional suicide and burnout". In governmen-
tal agencies, there are a few charismatic individuals that
you know you can give special priority work to. You give
your talented men and women this great new special pro-
ject that's urgent for the agency. Everybody is concerned
about it but if that person cant produce, what happens to
his career? The bright individuals will put their hearts into
a project for you, but then you ask them why they are do-
ing it because you changed your direction and forgot about
the project. They either get angry and quit or file ethics
charges against you. It is the normal pattern across the
United States. Part of it is people who are burnt out and
who are no longer doing a good job for the agency. In
other cases, they just put their time in and the agency is
paying for a lot of dead weight. Professional suicide is
common in governmental agencies because you haven't
defined employee contracts, or made clear your real mis-
sion.
The South Florida District is also developing a data col-
lection mechanism to identify emerging issues. This gives
managers lead time to reshape the agency and to see if your
response conforms to your core mission.
Natural resource agencies, as a whole, need to stick
together. We should not throw rocks at our colleagues
while other people are throwing rocks at them. That's self-
defeating because your turn is next, and all of this stuff
thrown at the other agency will be used against you. The
South Florida District is trying to build a proactive image
for all of you in Florida.
As a result of the analysis done by the leadership and the
data gathering that I did, an "issues management unit"
was formed. Normally, a natural resource district has a lot
of departments with highly technical specialists within the
units. They often don't work across units very easily but
they have to in order to respond externally to things like
"Save the Everglades". South Florida now has a highly
trained person who heads a unit to help put together, at the
request of department heads, the key issues. This unit
doesn't pull people for an interdisciplinary team. Depart-
ment heads identify a hot issue that requires the work of


more than one 0 by
key personnel from l~Cf i dede
to solve that ppbhL. .A i ir~

Jobh Wodrha .' ,..r f

The first task fort elq t Quality
Assurance Act an '_ E Wc pulled
people from reg-lIatm j'lgal linked for
an answer within a twoM 1iB as" to that,
we always sent the nad proved
themselves. The, raet m a a'eiLated this
group because is gta l topics and
got all the visibility.; into the
line o rga n iza tio n h as ei `'r~tien the se
types of projects cne tra organization
and say, "You tell as wl M9bu a l i ought to do."
DER is happy with ,a0i 't a.wi*u .Water Quality
Assurance Act and a r:~ lt idgctors and line
organization feel the agety isibeing~tlo what they have
to say. f.:
Let me go back to the4l-pwrPat n making about our
relationship with other distriCt S id.blt natural resource
agencies are associated with .re- ilbr, when people
criticize South Florida for ahirrics charge, it affects
Northwest, St. Johns, and govea'nie ingeneral. I can't
emphasize enough that we've Argot a stake in this thing.
It's in our best interest not to mIp.at o another. We have
to come up with a better orgaantinatoi get better camara-
derie. What one district does or DER does, reflects on
what the public thinks is happening to natural resources.

You didn't mention interface liaison with the strong
special interest groups such as the Florida Citrus,
Phosphate, local governments.


John Wodraska

We have created three divisions in our new department.
We send them to talk to people and to understand how
they feel. We don't put them in a position where they have
tonegotiate because they might lose some of the sensitivity
to gather information. We wantto make sure those special
interest groups feel that we're genuinely listening to them.
The goal is to bring all of that information back to the
district and help make better decisions about how we're
going to manage our resources.


Dr. Bdoel

That unit has three divisions: regulatory, community
relations, and media. It serves all of -e 'functions of
gathering data in a proactive way. TflioiSzation is
unique in that every line manager is AWM manager.
They don't need only to have tedialobeir tl*elence and
F 'K .







managerial supervisory skills, but they also need conflict
management skills,
To do that, the district formed an executive council of
all department directors and the executive director. The ex-
ecutive council very proactively works with Jack and
Woody to look at what the key issues are in a given week.
There may be immediate issues, or long range ones.
Woody and Jack are still making the decisions, but it in-
volves the top leadership very actively in the directions of
the agency.
What Woody and Jack are trying to do is take some
practical steps. They had the courage to expose the
dissatisfaction of the present state and thus found the need
for the executive council. They helped people participate in
the change, without giving up final authority. An agency
cannot survive if you don't celebrate your victories. Other-
wise, morale goes down. Doing these things doesn't take
away the pressure but it reduces the internal stress from
reacting.


John Wodraska

We forget that people need to be motivated positively,
not negatively. In beginning this reorganization, I was in-
terested in establishing a process to deal with issues. If
anything, it's lengthened my work day, but it's given me a
clearer idea as to where we're going on each of these issues.
We're still massaging this thing. There are a lot of in-
teresting ideas that have come out and a sense of en-
thusiasm. We needed a shot in the arm, and I think this has
given it to us. It has given us tools to deal with internal ad-
ministrative practices, as well as natural resource issues.
Collectively, the managers have gotten together and con-
cluded there are ways to improve this whole organization.
It's not a way to cut your work week down, but it makes
you feel more satisfied when that week is done. There's a
feeling of accomplishment.







Hosted by Bob Price,
Governing Board Member
Northwest Florida Water
Management District





Planning Issues in

Water Resources







Pete Rhoads
South Florida Water Management District

Richard Owen
Southwest Florida Water Management District

Jim Frazee
St. Johns River Water Management District

Kirk Webster
Suwannee River Water Management District

Rich McWilliams
Northwest Florida Water Management District



Pete Rhoads

Many of you have heard the phrase "you can't separate
water quantity and quality". A good corollary is, "you
can't separate water resources and land use planning". I
would like to illustrate this with "The Saga of the East
Everglades: A Case Study in Conjunctive Land and Water
Resource Planning".
East Everglades is a 200 square mile area in western
Dade County. Its fate, over the past 50 years, has in large
part been determined by changing public objectives. The
area has been characterized by conflicts: development in-
terests versus environmental preservation and restoration,
and private rights versus public interest. The area is quite
complex from both a scientific and an engineering stand-
point, and has significant legal issues that are emotionally
charged and politically difficult. These are the common
elements of a typical south Florida water supply problem.
The key "actors" in this saga are: Everglades National
Park, Dade County, the farming community, the residents
of the area, and the South Florida Water Management


District.
On the east side of the East Everglades: i'the southern-
most extent of the East Coast Containment Levee that was
one of the early elements of the flood iMtrol'prdject to
prevent the Everglades water from entr'f~ thedeveloped
urban area. This is a recharge area fr the Biscayne
Aquifer and it is relatively permeable.'iglig tanals will
cause rapid interaction between ground auntrf race water.
For this reason drainage in the East Everglades area is a
very sensitive topic. In theory, if the area were to be pro-
vided drainage, it has the potential to reduce water
availability through intercepting recharge and passing it to
tidewater. A fairly sound aquaclude underlies the Biscayne
Aquifer and saltwater intrusion of that aquifer system is
also a concern.
From a physiographic viewpoint, East Everglades has
relatively low relief. Next to the levee on the east side,
elevations are on the order of seven and a half feet. Eleva-
tions decline toward the northeast Shark River Slough,
which covers about the northern one-third of the area.
This northeast Shark River Slough is part of the original
headwaters of the tributary to Everglades National Park,
flowing southward, thep in a generally southwest direc-
tion, and eventually discharging through the park into
Whitewater Bay.
Rocky Glades area, which covers the middle portion of
East Everglades, and Taylor Slough, another broad slough
area, tributary to Everglades National Park, constitutes
the southern part of the area. There's no physical divide
between East Everglades area and the adjacent national
park.
The area is essentially a wetland. The northeast Shark
River Slough and a significant port ion of Rocky Glades are
inundated, on the average, for over a month each year.
In the rest of the area, except for a few out-parcels,
water is within a foot of the surface for at least a duration
of a month in typical years. The only major exception lies
along the eastern edge of the area, adjacent to the levee.
This part of the area in inundated on a frequency of less
than 36 days. Actually the highest elevations are within
that area and it's the driest part of the East Everglades.
The land use of the area ranges from urban to commer-
cial to agricultural. However, this area has no structural
flood protection and most development is confined to the
higher ground.
It might be helpful to understand how the current land
use developed over the years between the mid-30's and
1947. Everglades National Park was set up and land ac-
quisition for the park was begun. One of the key points,
from a planning perspective, is that the East Everglades
area was not incorporated into the park, despite the north-
east Shark River Slough being a major surface water
tributary to the park.
In 1947 and 1948, major hurricanes hit the area followed
by initiation of the Central and Southern Florida Flood
Control Project. The East Coast Levee was constructed
first, in the early 1950's. In essence the levee intercepted


_ _~__~_ i j _____ __~_


la I I I I







the surface water that previously had flowed overland to
the east and funnelled it southward along the levee,
generally following the topographic decline. In 1962 the
Water Conservation Areas to the north were enclosed and
a levee closed off the East Everglades area from northward
flow coming down into it. The construction of that levee
was for water supply, flood control, and to control water
in the water Conservation Areas. It substantially reduced
the overland flow into the East Everglades area.
In 1963, the Corps of Engineers produced a report called
the Southwest Dade Report, which proposed to drain the
East Everglades area using conventional flood control
methods-canals, pumps, and levees. Drainage could, in
theory, be provided to that area, but year-round drainage
was not anticipated.
The plan's concept was to remove the water during the
dry season and put it in the Everglades National Park and
other areas. During the wet season, the area would be per-
mitted to flood. However, the plan was never accepted.
The concept of land use was to reclaim that Everglades
land, to develop that land, and put it to a beneficial
economic purpose. This was the early '60's concept coming
to fruition.
In 1967, a levee was constructed along the northern part
of the western boundary of the area. That levee and the
canal associated with it were designed to get water from
Conservation Area III into Everglades National Park dur-
ing drought periods. Through appropriate structure opera-
tions, water could now be released into the park.
The years 1968, 1969, and 1970 were very wet periods in
south Florida. The East Everglades area was inundated,
but there was relatively little development within the area.
However, those three years were followed by a "dry
decade". That dry decade is particularly important
because it made a good portion of the East Everglades
available to local developers. During the next few years, a
substantial amount of low-density residential development
occurred in East Everglades. The land looked dry and was
without wetlands vegetation.
At about that time there was a change in public percep-
tions of environmental matters. In 1974, Dade County
became concerned about the pace of development within
East Everglades. A development moratorium was estab-
lished and the county conducted studies through the plan-
ning department. The ultimate conclusion was that every-
body seemed to have forgotten about collecting data in the
East Everglades area. There hadn't been any people there
or any agriculture and it was one of those forgotten areas.
In 1977 the East Everglades Resource Planning Project
was initiated and funded by a 208 grant. The Dade County
Planning Department, Everglades National Park, DER,
and the South Florida Water Management District par-
ticipated in collecting the data needed, compiled a com-
prehensive planning mode, and produced an appropriate
land and water management plan for the area. It proposed
a series of land use categories based upon water resource
constraints. Because of concerns regarding drainage and


also because of many environmental concerns, the deve-
loped area was proposed for a development density of one
unit per 20 acres, some areas were proposed for agri-
cultural expansion, and other areas were too wet and
shouldn't be farmed anyway because of their environ-
mental values. The plan proposed the most stringent land
use restrictions thai we're aware of in the country on
private property.
The plan came out in June, 1980, and was presented in
rancorous workshops. .The Dade County Commission
took the first couple of steps toward adopting and enacting
this plan. In August, 1981, they were to adopt a zoning or-
dinance based on the plan, but it appeared that it would
not pass. However, on August 16, 1981, tropical storm
Dennis flooded this area. Even in the protected areas of
East Everglades, there was substantial flooding and
agricultural losses. That storm made the residents and
landowners realize that they did need flood protection and
land use restrictions in order to continue to reside in that
area. In October, 1981, Dade County adopted the plan.
The most recent and significant milestone within this
area occurred earlier this year. Everglades National Park
said they were having an ecological emergency. Because of
water conditions within the park, they felt that actions
were required very quickly to change the flow rate into the
park. Park officials felt that a major problem was that the
flow rate had been cut in half and the water was now iav-
ing to go into the western portion of the park. They recom-
mended to the water management district that the flow sec-
tion be put back into the delivery scheme to the park; and
use existing structures to release additional water into the
park. They felt this would ameliorate the hydroperiod and
the recession rate problems the park had experienced.
Currently, the seven-point plan of the park is being im-
plemented. The Corps of Engineers has a contractor work-
ing to alleviate some of the problems. One of the key
things that has not been solved thus far is proposed
changes in the operation of the main water control struc-
ture in the area. Various interests are involved, primarily
south Dade agricultural interests and the needs of the
residents, the Corps of Engineers, the water management
district, and, of course, Everglades National Park. How it
is going to be resolved remains to be seen.
Evergladel'National Park wants the northeast Shark
River Slough put back into the flow section so they can
receive water in a more natural manner. However, this
may raise a potential conflict between flooding in the ur-
banized area and the adjacent potential agricultural area.
It may also affect the agricultural areas on the east. The
farmers under the East Everglades plan are permitted to
farm in certain areas. They're being squeezed for land in
the area east of the levee and they want to be able to go
west of the levee and farm.
We must also consider the needs of the water manage-
ment district. The broad public interest here is to try to
find a solution which meets some of the objectives of each
of these groups.







From a planner's perspective, a couple of things are evi-
dent. In the project planning process, if you have good
data, you make better decision and land use planning is
absolutely vital and important to the water resource plan-
ning process. As stated before "you can't separate water.
quantity and water quality" and "you cant separate water
resource plans from land use plans". The two go together.
You separate them at your own risk.
As a final point, planning is a continuing process that
must flow and evolve as smoothly as possible. I think there
is a tendency, despite our best desires, for planners to rest
on their laurels when we have a good plan. The world
doesn't work like that. We must keep a continuing plan-
ning process going.


Richard Owea

I decided to look at what the Planning Department at
Southwest does and actually go through our different
functions. We have four "planners" in our division, con-
sisting of two geographers and two economists. I've
divided our functions into two categories: "reactive" or in
repose to a request, and "proactive" or planning.
In the reactive role, we coordinate the review of DRIs,
ADAs, planned unit developments, local government com-
prehensive plans, and various development-related
documents. We also are interagency coordinators when
dealing with local government.
We review the economic impact statements that are in-
volved in rule making and the economic portions of
reports by consultants. The internal coordination we per-
form involves helping the various divisions and depart-
ments at the district to better coordinate their own ac-
tivities and their own proposed projects.
We have a project proposal form for each fiscal year
when new or continuing projects are proposed., We ask
people to identify the staff requirements of every depart-
ment and every division to avoid duplication between pro-
jects.
The proactive roles are planning-oriented. The water
shortage plan was assigned as a primary function of the
planning department. Our plan was approved by our
governing board this past July and it should be in rule
form soon.
Our board and senior staff identified a water conserva-
tion plan as a priority item for the district. It involves
developing a document that would review and inventory
different alternatives and techniques available for water
conservation. It should create specific projects that can be
recommended to be implemented either by the district or
local governments,
We also distribute the estimates and projections pro-
duced by the University of Florida between the different
water management districts for those counties that overlap
district boundaries and between our nine basins within the
district. It helps to delineate areas for possible aerial map-


ping and distribute project CPCtd between our
basins. We estimate pitr uP, rural, in-
dustrial, power na


process for identifyingl probhms
within each of our pi upon
surface hydrologic a.ha its
own basin boards. epog which
the district 09olgrniaabMw JEach
basin acts on tPrwm poo*4i Ng i and
total budgets within thi ar 0 -4 rod by the
district board. This create mre spciM c is for each
basin.
What we intend to do is allow each ba board to em-
phasiz within each program wbar they want their dollars
spent. We hope to be able to take levwou expenditures
and allocate them to these program based on the purpose
of the projects. Current budgets would be allocated along
with projected budgets and capital exenditures. Each
basin will have the opportunity to go n under each pro-
gram and set up policies and program empas or obc-
tives indicating where they want to allocate their budgets.
By looking at their previous program emphasis, knowing
what the resource problems are within their particular
basin and the full range of their responsibilities, they ought
to be able to make more informed decisions.


Jim Frazee


'm going to emphasize ground water particularly in the
St. Johns District. Two very important things have occur-
red over the last several years that have dramatically
changed the way we look at ground water. We're looking
at ground water in a configuration of natural basins. We
begin planning with an "up frost" idea of where the in-
puts and outputs are in a natural type situation-not an ar-
tifical county line or state boundary. We've allocated and
inventoried for many years and we know how many wells
and approximately how much water we're using in many
areas. However, in a lot of areas, we don't know how that
relates to that upper number-how much water is actually
available.
Key issues to be solved are supply versus demand, and
will we in the future need some alternate supply. Will inter-
basin transfers be necessary in the future, or can we use
other alternatives so that we can stay within the natural
basins? When we talk about interbasin transfer we're talk-
ing about surface water units, not ground water units. In
some cases, we cross water management district bound-
aries and are still within the same natural ground water
basin.
In identifying areas of current and future concern, we
have got to know where our problems are and project
where they're going to occur in the future to deal with
these issues. This would enable us to build that extra water
plant in the proper place as it's needed asd thus avoid hav-


1. ~ ~...= '-----r --- r--:---- -- ------ ---- ---- ----- -- ----







ing to design in a brush fire type situation.
Water conservation and reuse are options that have
become dramatically evident as input into all the permit
evaluations. One of the key things we've got to determine
is the balance between the allocations that we're providing
to users through our permitting systems versus how much
supply is actually there and how will alternate sources or
techniques of processing the water effect how we define
what the available supply is? We must program water
needs and availability using ground water planning units
and develop some long-term program so that we know
them before the problems actually occur.
The St. Johns district has a program called basin
management planning that provides for the water resource
inventory, intergovernmental coordination, the input of
our resource plans into the comprehensive plans and all the
other statements that are addressed by the planning depart-
ment. This information allows our permitting division to
form guidelines so they'll know what they should address
in each one of the ground water basins and eventually in all
the surface water basins. We're constantly updating and
fine tuning the regulatory and planning programs to come
up with better answers to perhaps define that upper
number.
We've proposed five ground-water planning units, based
on natural boundaries, in the St. Johns district. This
allows us to develop some conceptual idea of how we're
going to be able to solve a lot of these issues and perhaps
find that upper number.
We're in level one now, which uses available data to
look at the input/output scheme in each ground water
planning unit, to get an idea of what the 1980 base looks
like, and to generally describe the condition and status of
each one of these ground water planning units. We've also
begun work on level two, which is our projections, in five-
year increments, of what change can be forecast between
now and some future date in each ground water planning
unit.
In level three, we will develop an understanding based
on our projections of where, what, and how to solve future
problem areas and determine recommendations to local,
regional, and state governments.


Kirk Webster

The key short-term planning issue that concerns the
Suwannee River District is Proposition One. We had our
CPA do an analysis of the probable impacts of it on our
district. One conclusion was that the district would lose its
taxing authority. You can't lightly dismiss that kind of im-
pact. To start planning our response, we decided to look at
reorganization-that old solution to problems-and pre-
pare for reductions in staff and programs.
We chose a select number of our staff to work with us in
refining the final reorganization. We announced we
wanted to create a non-organization and that we were go-


ing to completely eliminate departments. We said we were
going to go to a water management planning program that
would revolve around projects and programs rather than
traditional departments. The result was utter confusion.
When you start tearing apart the departmental structure,
everyone begins to worry about who is going to protect
him and make sure he will get all the things he deserves.
We managed to explain that we were trying to create a
new level of management in the organization and to spread
out responsibility to a new mid-level group of managers.
Department heads were moved into the executive office
where they are creating a stronger planning function fw
both short and long range activities. This put our key exe-
cutive people into a situation where they don't make small
day-to-day decisions. We have capable people who can do
that and we gave them the opportunity to grow within the
organization.
One of the main priorities in eliminating the department
concept was that you only do the things that pertains tc
your department. We told our people that if Proposition
One comes along and we had staff reductions, we would
have a smaller number of people doing more jobs.
We must prepare our organization for survival; It is not
survival of the organization per se, but the survival of the
concept that we're going to manage water in the Suwannec
River Water Management District.


Rich McWilliams

Planners love issues. Issues are things that youhaven'1
solved. If you've solved it and know what tb do about it,
that keeps engineers in business. If you've solved it and
done something about it, everybody's out of a job. I.
you've got good issues, there is a great margin of jot
security for planners.
We really don't have a perception by the public of watei
management needs, supply and growth in northwest
Florida. This area is virtually rural south Alabama. At
least that is the way it's been and people have been rather
happy with it. Those things are going to change, and I can
show you some ways that they're going to have to change.
In the late 1970's, our district completed a number ol
ground-water studies, particularly in coastal areas, and
found a number of problems that scared us. South of Pen-
sacola, there is an area called Perdido Key, which is a very
attractive, developing area, and it doesn't have any signifi-
cant water source. Water has to be piped from Pensacola.
On a portion of Santa Rosa Island, south of Pensacola,
there is a place called Pensacola Beach with no local watet
supply. It has to be piped all the way across Pensacola Bay
from Pensacola. In the same area is a little town called
Gulf Breeze with such limited local water that they have tc
pipe it almost 20 miles from the east.
In the Ft. Walton Beach area, there has been a poteni-
tiometric drawdown of over 200 feet in the past 40 years.
Further to the east is Destin, which has had a 60 or 70 foot








reduction in the potentiometric level and some of the
highest growth rates in the state. Southern Walton County,
which is very rural and attractive, has very poor water
quality in some areas and very limited availability in others
and has a very high growth rate. Panama City Beach had
already started to exceed the amount of ground water that
was available locally. They were, in effect, mining water.
We saw that we were dealing with a very attractive
coastal area from Panama City Beach al the way to Pen-
sacola. It was readily developable and available. It was a
rural area that had not fostered land development regula-
tions to any extent. We still have counties with no zoning
and hungry for development.
For years, government agencies have been working with
the counties in promoting economic development. Large
portions of the area had low median incomes, low tax
bases, low salaries, and very little industry. But, develop-
ment was coming. The Chambers of Commerce along the
coast, which had been after the tourists going to south
Florida, were starting to get them. The tourist trade
doubled once and started to double again in northwest
Florida.
We were worried about the growth potential, the very
limited water resources in some parts of the area, and the
great number of public water supply systems along the
coast. We did a survey and found that we had 70 public
water systems in the extreme coastal areas from Panama
City to Pensacola. We were looking at a narrow area that
was hemmed in by West Bay and Eglin Air Force Base.
The results of this survey were interesting. Most of the
smaller systems we found operated on a really short-term
framework. Few were planning for the future. Some
systems had accomplished some good planning, but it was
mainly the larger ones. Many of the systems weren't aware
of the combined effect on each other because there hadn't
been much effect. A lot of them needed to expand, but
they didn't have the capital. Virtually all of them have to
design to meet the July 4th weekend needs when all the
tourists are there. During the rest of the year, the residents
have to support the cost of that large system.
The growth we could see for that area was unbelieve-
able. Destin right now has, on a peak day, maybe 20,000
people. In less than 35 years, we're looking at 60,000.
Southern Walton County has less than 20,000 on a great
day now. In about 35 years, it could be 150,000. Panama
City Beach has, right now, maybe 50,000 on a hot summer
day and we're looking at a 150,000 there.
We hired a consultant to evaluate about 40 alternatives
for developing water to supply local needs. We set up a
"technical advisory committee" wit all the water supply
systems in the area and a "program advisory committee"
composed of agencies with related operational responsi-
bility in the area. The results of our consultants indicated
that the problems in this area were probably solvable with
the existing resources, except for one major area. This was
Ft. Walton Beach, Destin and southern Walton County.
Our consultant proposed that the most cost effective ac-


tion was for the water management district to develop a
major well field on Eglin Air Force Base and to pipe this
water to Ft. Walton and Destin and over to southern
Walton County. Eglin Air Force Reservation sits on a
magnificent reservoir of ground water that probably
wouldn't ever be needed by the Air Force and could be
used by others. But up to this point, Egli has not been
able to deal with local governments in developing water
supplies because it would be an adminbisrate nightmare.
The result was a recommendation that the district develop
and transmit a massive amount of water. It made a lot of
local people nervous because we were talking about
massive growth and a need to proid4 for it.
As part of the water supply plan, we started looking at
conservation issues. We worked water conservation
measures into some water use projections that we used in
the plan and then realized that probably the most "conser-
vative" way to do it was to assume they'd never be used.
Water conservation is not a drawing card for tourists. It is
not attractive from a number of standpoints. However, it
could result in a substantial savings. In the City of Pen-
sacola, for example, water use doubles in the summer
because of lawn sprinkling. Think of the amount of water
that could be saved by reasonable regulation of lawn
watering. It would also help in reducing a system's need
for seasonal capacity.
There are two goals for our conservation effort. We
want to be able to go back and help these systems develop
their own conservation plans and show them how different
approaches will affect water use. Also the study should
help us gage the effectiveness of some things we may have
to do in restricting some water uses under conditions of
water shortage.
Another item I want to mention is Interstate Manage-
ment. We develop water shortage plans that extend right
up to the state line. Then, if we implement the plan, what
are we doing? Saving more water for Georgia to pump?
These things have got to be. coordinated between the states
and we haven't done it with our rules and regulations or
with our plans.
The Secretary of the Army threatened to bring Federal
Law to bear to force Florida to allow rocks to be taken out
of the Apalachicola channel. This resulted partially from
coordination problems with Georgia and Alabama. At any
rate, there was a memorandum of agreement, signed by the
Governors of the three states and the Corps of Engineers,
to look at the Apalachicol-Chattahoocee-Flint River
System, over a period of couple of years and to come up
with some strategies for managing the system and to try to
be nice to each other.

The studies are starting and we feel good about it. The
Corps is taking an active role.
To meet what is projected to be phenomenal growth in
your coastal area, did the thought ever occur that you
could come up with some sort of water resource caryng
capacity, some upper number, and then give that ibifora-


I ~ __ ~ ___:_i ___ ~__ _1_ ~ ~i__~ll arr~i-ill-X-.ll__ -1







tion to local planners and let them accommodate that
growth by coming up with their own schemes such as zon-
ing, density control, or whatever?

Rich McWilliams

The water management districts historically are not in
the growth management business. That has been an activ-
ity of local government. However I know that in many
cases it doesn't function properly. In our case, we deter-
mined what we thought would be the most reasonable ap-
proach. We couldn't ignore the fact that the Eglin Reserva-
tion sits on a tremendous ground water supply that other-
wise would have been available for use in the coastal area.
The situation we were trying to combat was having that
much water reserved from any use, especially in a growth
area.
Historically, we look at growth management as how do
we cope with the growth, not how do we control the upper
number. It is a very controversial issue and it is now being
addressed in a little different sense. In general, they're say-
ing growth is going to occur and that people don't want to
stop the growth in this area. We want to have improved
lifestyles in some of these areas. We're really dealing on a
water management level as to how best plan for the water
resource needs of the community 10, 20, and 30 years
down the line. Growth is going to occur and we'd better get
ready for it and manage it the best we can. It can take a lot
of different tracks down the line, but it is going to occur
and growth management seems to be how we cope with it,
not how we establish an upper number.







Hosted by the Department of
Environmental Regulation








Data Management: Priorities
and Implementation of a
Statewide System






Jon Winter
Department of Environmental Regulation

Sam Johnston
Department of Environmental Regulation

Robin Fletcher
Department of Environmental Regulation

Dean Jackman
Department of Environmental Regulation



Jon Winter

The Department of Environmental Regulation is
charged in the Water Quality Assurance Act to organize a
central repository for all water-related information
gathered in the state by local governments, water manage-
ment districts, and other state agencies, and to assist the
public and private users in assessing this data. It gives DER
the authorization to insure quality control and to prescribe
the format in which the data is to be collected and submit-
ted. DER is also in charge of publishing and maintaining a
bibliography of water resource investigations. We decided
to limit our initial efforts to water quality data for ground
and surface water, as well as with the monitoring site
characteristics well log information and some water use in-
formation. The sources for this water quality data include
DER, water management districts, local government and
other state agencies.
During this first year of the project, our efforts are to be
directed at designing and populating the data base. Once
established, we can update the data base periodically. In
the following year, we will concentrate on extraction
routines, statistical routines and interpretations, and
graphic presentation of the data. Many organizations use


the services of STORET, the EPA data system, and we will
continue its use. To compile data, we distributed a survey
to more than 40 agencies to identify available sources of
water quality data and its format.
On November 1, our DER personnel will begin contact-
ing agencies with data in an automated format and gather-
ing the agencies' concerns. We'll also send people to our
offices to manually collect water quality data from permit-
ting files, reports and others materials. We will start that
effort in our own agency and will have manpower available
to go to local and regional agencies to eamadt ata from
paper files in order to get that date o the system. By
January 1, we'll complete the system specifications and
begin developing programs necessary to convert data. By
January 15, we will have a final format available as to the
way both automated and manually recorded data has to be
submitted. We'll then begin establishing procedures and
schedules for data submission. By March 1, we will begin
loading the statewide data base.


Sam Johnston

The ground-water section is working with the Bureaus of
Water Analysis and Information Systems to coordinate
and collect these data. We feel there is a lot of monitoring
data out there that isn't on computer tapes that will be
especially relative in efforts to collect the data and we will
hire three temporary OPS people to extract these data. Ef-
forts will begin with our regional offices, water manage-
ment districts and local environmental programs.
We will then contact the state agencies in Tallahassee,
such as the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commis-
sion, the DER, the Bureaus of Geology and Aquatic Plant
Research and Control, and perhaps the Department of
Community Affairs, with regards to DRIs and EISs, to ob-
tain that data.
Compiling the bibliography is going to be an ongoing
task. We have done a computer search of about seven or
eight data bases and come up with more than a 1,000
references with regard to water resources in Florida that we
have to sort through to determine overlap between the data
bases and its relevancy. We want to put them together in a
format that can be easily understood and used in permit-
ting, trend analysis or whatever.


Robin Fletcher

Data quality assurance is sort of a new kid on the block.
A lot of people don't understand it, and some probably
have a tendency to fight it, but most people have indicated
that they want good quality assurance in any program
they're involved in. The quality assurance program will
almost exclusively have to be implemented for data
generated in the future. We're ready to assist you in
establishing a good quality assurance program, either in







the sampling or data analysis and even in any of the other
categories, such as data manipulation programs. For the
data that you might be submitting, you're encouraged to
provide any additional supporting information regarding
how the data was obtained, methods to analyze it, the for-
mula used to reduce it, or any pertinent information that
might pertain to that data. This will help the people who
will ultimately use it as much as it will help us to identify
what the uses of that data might be and may also expand
the bibliography. If you feel the data you have might be
used for any reason, go ahead and submit it and let the
decision be made as to whether or not it will be incor-
porated to us.


Dean Jackman

One of the responsibilities that we're going to have in
conjunction with Sam Johnston is to allow persons who
need data, for whatever purpose, to have one contact per-
son. We may divide this up into ground water and surface
water needs. The questionnaire that we've prepared is a
beginning to determine how much data each monitoring
agency has. This gives Jon an idea how big his system has
to be, and how best to develop it. We're all going to be
working together to determine the types of data, collect the
data, and get it into a single format. This questionnaire has
been mailed to state and local agencies and some federal
agencies to find out roughly what is involved.
In our initial effort, we're trying to get as much informa-
tion as possible for historical, as well as for future, data.
Our intent is to establish a procedure where we can regu-
larly receive the data. The first efforts will be water quality
data and then later quantity data.
Any agency that has collected data is going to ultimately
be required to reduce that data to the format that we come
up with. We're not trying to dictate how you manage this
data locally, or how you collect it locally, but the format in
which you transmit it to us. Initially we're probably talking
about tape transfer. There may well be a conversion pro-
cess that the data has to go into to get it into a format that
you can submit to us. Some people don't have computers
so, we'll accept data on paper or on tape with a specified
format.
Once the data gets to a central data base, it will not lose
its identity as to its source. Any subsequent extractions will
be limited to certain sources, or if all sources are included,
you will be able to segregate data from different sources. If
there are questions as to the quality of data for a particular
period of time from a particular source, it can be removed.
It is encouraging that almost every public agency and
every private consulting firm are moving towards esta-
blishing a quality assurance program in their laboratories.
To establish quality assurance, you must find out where
and how the samples were taken, how they were analyzed,
and all the data reduction information in order to come up
with comparable information at a later date. We won't


analyze that data, but we will make it available upon re-
quest.
The data format that we're using now provides for the
identification of the agency which sampled and analyzed
the data storage and treatment system offered by EPA.
There are two code numbers. One is entitled "collecting
agency", and the second code number is "analyzing
agency". We can determine who performed the analysis by
checking the parameters that contain these codes. In most
cases our stratification and levels of confidence correspond
with the origins of the data and the people doing the
analysis.
The hardware selection is predetermined equipment that
we already had available. It's a Univac database package
called DMS-1100. In addition, we're talking about having a
distributed information system installed in Florida within
the next two years. We've already got two machines in,
and we'll have a small network in place this calendar year.
At that point, cooperators, water management districts,
and state and federal agencies, will be tying into that and
will pick it up at that level. Agencies that don't have a com-
puter, but do have terminal facilities will be able to have
access through a dialup-network.
The whole issue of computer-to-computer communica-
tion is one that's being addressed on the statewide level.
This session of the legislature also passed a law that
established an Information Resource Commission. One of
the main concerns is inter-agency communications and in-
formation processing.
The major data base will reside in Tallahassee. It will
contain the monitoring stations, the locations and the ac-
tual data that was collected at various parameters,
physical, chemical, and possibly some biological data.
While we're building the data base, we have to anticipate"
uses and users of the data.
We have an inventory that we've been putting together
for ambient fix stations. We have canvassed-the major
monitoring agencies. We have approximately 1000 stations
in that listing. Frequency of monitoring was included and
gives some indication of the size of the data base that we're
going to need.
We don't expect to find a great deal in ground-water
data. Much of it will be developed from special projects,
and many of those special projects have been developed by
our own agencies. The data base will be used by us for
water quality assessment of the state of Florida and in
establishing a ground-water monitoring network. When
reviewing an application for a solid waste landfill, or
whatever that installation may be, it will provide back-
ground information. It will help determine the impacts of
that pollution installation on the background. All we have
now are these computer sheets, and by being able to
develop that data, and represent it graphically, it would
predict what the impacts may be on the receiving body of
water. This is a very real use, both for our agency, water
management districts, public water supplies, new well
fields, etc.







We also have a data base that encompasses water-related
sources. It's divided into two subsystems. One is permit-
ting inventory related and the second is the monitoring
data relating to those sources. That also has two
segments-an inventory portion and a monitoring monthly
operating report portion. We have a similar thing in the air
program. We have air permitted sites and air quality
monitoring sites and associated data. We have an ad-
ministrative data base system that tracks applications as
they come in the door and go through the process of per-
mitting. We're going to include our water related data
base, but we're not going to try to produce a mega-
database or anything.


_~_ _.__ _~ __ ___ __._







Hosted by the Department
of Environmental Regulation








The Water Quality
Assurance Act of 1983







Greg Parker
Department of Environmental Regulation

Bill Buzick
Department of Environmental Regulation


Greg Parker

The data collection part of the act is intended to
establish the Department of Environmental Regulation as
the central depository of scientific information generated
through water use and ground-water research throughout
the state. Thirty bureaus are involved in the work effort.
My bureau, the Bureau of Water Quality and John
Woodard's, the Bureau of Information Systems, are tak-
ing a lead role in the development of this program. A series
of meetings with the various agencies have been initiated to
develop a general inventory of the data available.
It is essential to have a computer data bank and a de-
tailed annual bibliography of available information so
planning agencies can make land use decisions. We have to
also develop a "needs and status report" for the
legislature, a detailed financial impact, and a request for
additional funding to continue the program. The depart-
ment's two operation response teams are also being ex-
panded to develop a third team. The team consists of a
four member technical group, and a driller and a driller's
helper. The new positions will expand the capacity of the
department to evaluate uncontrolled hazardous waste
sites.
The ambient ground-water monitoring program is being
developed to provide regional planning information for
the protection of well fields, for the design and location of
well fields and landfills, and to evaluate trends in water
quality on a regional basis. The first year's effort for the
ambient monitoring program will be funded at a level of
$1.7 million. In the first year's effort, data will be com-

51


piled determining the location of existing wells, the suit-
ability of these wells as monitoring stations, and the loca-
tion of potential new wells to fill the gaps where existing
wells are not available. We will also sample suitable ex-
isting wells.
We've already completed an initial phase of the project
that has identified approximately 1,000 wells that could be
utilized for the monitoring program. During the firstyear,
a limited number of new wells (approximately 200 to 400)
will be drilled. Major public water supply well fields will be
tested for priority pollutant parameters. The work is being
handled through contractual arrangements with the water
management districts, except for a relatively small number
being contracted with the USGS to evaluate some public
water supply well fields. Wells drilled in each year's effort
will be thoroughly evaluated. With an estimated cost of
$600 per well for the analysis, we expect a total cost of
about $540,000 for the sampling effort for wells analyzed
in the first years. In the second year, we will drill approxi-
mately 400 new wells at a cost of $800,000. The new wells
will also be sampled in the second year at a cost of about
$240,000. In the third year, approximately 300 wells will be
drilled and analyzed. Analysis will continue on the existing
wells with the total cost being approximately $1.5 million.
The 1986-87 effort will complete our well drilling. We
expect to have at least 2000 new ambient ground-water
quality wells completed by the fourth year. We will repeat
analysis of the old wells established throughout the dura-
tion of the program. Total cost for the last year is esti-
mated at $2 million. Annual maintenance costs for con-
tinued monitoring and testing of the wells drilled during
the program, by the fourth year, would cost approximately
$1 million.
How do you determine the number of additional wells
necessary for evaluating the network and to what extent
does the water management district share in that decision?
Greg Parker

A detailed program has to be developed after making an
assessment of the first year's effort. I provided working
numbers that we have identified so far. The whole pro-
gram is subject to refining the well locations and sampling
priorities, and in accomplishing specific objectives that
become apparent as we review initial results.
These are intended to be part of your ambient network ef-
fort?

Greg Parker

Yes, and if warranted, we can shape the program to give
us regional trends to measure the effort of specific sites.
For example, pesticide accumulation in ground water
could be evaluated on a regional basis.
The well field contamination issue is not assigned to my
bureau, but part of the legislation charges the department
with developing rules for prevention of degradation of







water quality or well fields to insure that various criteria
are considered.
In the Status Report is an item we term the "package
plant inspection program". The legislature intended that
we develop a continuing program for inspecting small
sewage treatment facilities to ensure their compliance with
state standards. We're in the process of hiring 12 addi-
tional field people to inspect every permitted sewage treat-
ment plant in the state every year. Our efforts will be spent
not only getting compliance, but also educating and train-
ing operators of these facilities to manage the systems
better. We will attempt to have our field people identify
solutions to problems associated with those facilities prior
to formal enforcement actions.
Are those people going to be certified in wastewater treat-
ment? Are you going to put them through school?

ill Bazick

They will be trained prior to starting the inspections.
There may be legal problems with us certifying ourselves
and allowing the people to do this kind of work, but some
of the people who will be doing the inspections are already
certified operators from our district offices.


Greg Parker

The water management districts are involved in im-
plementing the program for plugging wells and developing
a priority system to advise the legislature concerning fun-
ding. In October the water management districts were sent
letters providing a draft of the proposed format for the
work plans, including a brief assessment of existing pro-
blems and a summary of existing corrective programs. The
proposed work plan includes listing the location and
owners of abandoned wells and a proposed methodology
for updating inventories that includes location techniques,
field inspections, and public notification techniques. There
is an additional section on the well plugging priority
schedule listing specific wells. Other items include the plug-
ging methodology and a summary of costs on a per well
basis. The intention is to make all the districts' informa-
tion consistent so that it can be easily reviewed by the
legislature.
Part five of the bill is the pesticide section. Its purpose is
to provide representation on the new Pesticide Review
Council. It's a nine member council with one from DER.
The Pesticide Review Council reviews and develops test
criteria for restricted-use pesticides affecting water
resources. Review criteria will be developed for pesticides
as well. Because of the recent EDB problems in the central
ridge area and in Jackson County, we established a special
interagency task force on EDB problems in drinking water.
It consists of the Department of Agriculture and Con-
sumer Services, DER, HRS, and the Department of Com-
munity Affairs. We have established water distribution


points for individuals affected by EDB contamination and
are evaluating the ground-water contamination problems.
Out of approximately 900 wells tested, about 180 wells
contain EDB concentrations exceeding the .1 parts per
billion health advisory level established by the State Health
Officer, Dr. Steve King.
Part six of the bill involves the management of hazard-
ous waste. The focus of this section is the development of
county, regional and statewide hazardous waste assess-
ments, including a "small-quantity generh nbtifration
program". The regional planning councils and the local
county governments lre at he com* of All iMevlipment
of these programs. Pertinent information on how local
assessment programs function is the new legislation. It
divides the state into three distinct groups for three years.
In the first year, local assessments will be underway in the
Northeast Florida, East Central, Tampa Bay, the South
Florida Regional Planning Councils, and in all the major
metropolitan areas. In the second year, assessments of the
West Florida, Central Florida, Southwest Florida, and the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Councils are to be com-
pleted. In the last year, we have the Apalachee, North-
Central, and Withlacoochee Regional Planning Councils.
Funding dollar amounts are based on population.
The assessment guidelines provide a step by step pro-
cedure as to how they can be developed. They consist of
three components. The first is a survey of potential gener-
ators of hazardous waste. The second is identification of
abandoned dump sites, and the third is an evaluation of
operating procedures related to how sanitary landfills cur-
rently handle hazardous waste. The first assessment report
is due by July, 1984.
Other aspects of the hazardous waste legislation includes
the siting of a multi-purpose hazardous waste facility by
the state. Each county has to select a potential site. The
regional planning council then reviews the proposed sites
and makes a recommendation for one or more regional
sites. The sites selected are to be storage and treatment
facilities, and not permanent disposal facilities. Legislation
includes a prohibition against tk, development of a
hazardous waste landfill in the state, other than on a six
month emergency basis. The department has, t develop
rules for design criteria of the facility, to work with the
ERC in the selection of a site, and to engage a contractor
to design and construct the site. The majir impact of this
section of the Water Quality Assurance Act is to solve the
basic problem with small quantity generators and to assess
state needs for treatment and transfer or disposal facilities.
This section also sets up a hazardous substances
management requirement for county and municipal agen-
cies as well as schools, universities and institutions. The
hazardous substances management programs require the
agencies to notify the department of the types and annual
quantities of materials they generate as waste. They then
must notify the department of their current management
practices, including transportation, storage treatment, and
disposal. They must also submit a written plan for the


~_







management of hazardous materials in accordance with
the guidelines developed by the department. Finally, spill
prevention control and counter measures to control
hazardous materials incidents must be developed. Water
management districts are required to provide technical
assistance to local and regional agencies during the selec-
tion of the local hazardous waste storage facilities and the
regional transfer facilities.
The objective of the "amnesty days" is to create a public
awareness of the need to manage this type of waste while
purging the state of small quantities of hazardous waste
that may be stored in garages, warehouses, etc. The first
exercise is mandated for May and June of 1984. Some
$400,000 has been earmarked by the legislature for the
department to carry out this task but it may not be suffi-
cient.
Part six concerns the disposal of solid waste. This area
involves the water management districts because of their
assistance to many local governments in developing land-
fill design criteria. In the new act, we have requirements
for closure permits for landfills. Closure permits will in-
clude the development of an investigation program and the
development of financial responsibility. The act also in-
cludes the prohibition of construction of new landfills
within 3000 feet of Class 1 surface waters. There is also a
notification provision for individuals who dispose of solid
waste on their own land. It would enable the department to
obtain information on the type of waste, its location, and
the management methods used to control its disposal.
The act also includes the promotion of public awareness
of the requirements of the act. About five percent of the
amnesty days budget is to be devoted to a public participa-
tion and public awareness program, workshops, and con-
ferences. The act does not allow a permit to be given to a
hazardous waste storage treatment facility by default. It
also extends the general period of review from 90 days to
135; this legislation was developed to allow the state to get
control of the hazardous waste management program from
EPA.

Bill Buzick

The department established an Emergency Response
Program. This rule will govern our expenditure of funds
for short-term emergencies. There are other elements of
the act the legislature indicated we need to carry out with
the $8.5 million clean up trust fund. One area was related
to pollutant spills for which funds were earmarked. DNR
developed a rule, in cooperation with DER, establishing,
jurisdiction for responding. We handle inland spills while
they handle the coast area. The rule was approved by the
Governor and Cabinet. A tracking system which identifies
our emergency response work is being developed. It will
account for some 100 to 200 monthly incidents relating to
spills, situations involving hazardous chemicals, drums
floating on the beach, and so forth.
Part nine of the act relates to the new sewage treatment


plant grant program. Of the $100 million earmarked for
sewage treatment plant construction, $40 million will go to
small communities. The priority lists and other rules are to
be adopted in December by the Environmental Regulation
Commission. The program will tie very closely with the
federal program, with some differences for small com-
munities. We anticipate grants to be made in November,
1984. Small communities of 35,000 population or less will
be eligible, with $3 million being the maximum possible
grant while $16 million will be the largest grant for larger
facilities.
Part ten of the act requires some reorganization of
boundaries and the colocation of staff. We have realigned
most of our boundaries to coincide with the water manage-
ment districts and all five positions have been filled.
Another item is the stormwater program delegation to the
Southwest Florida Water Management District. We've
already delegated the stormwater program to South
Florida and the St. Johns District is currently working on
their stormwater program. We will delegate the program to
them when they are ready.


Greg Parker

The program on the underground and above-ground
storage tank and integral piping was developed in response
to the problems with underground tanks at gasoline sta-
tions. We're going to try to inventory the tanks and
develop a registration program to establish a data bank
that locates the tanks.
In terms of construction standards, we have developed a
draft rule modeled after the Sumter County, New York,
rule for storage tanks. In it, the frequency of testing is
based upon the age of the tank. A tank that is 20 years old
would require annual testing. There are two options, so
far, for construction standards. One allows the continued
use of field tanks if protected with underground imper-
meable barriers or encased in vaults with monitoring
equipment. The second requires using the new "state of
the art" storage tank devices, such as epoxy-coated double
wall tanks that have integral monitoring equipment be-
tween the wall layers., Financial responsibility aspects of
the rule would require setting aside funds as insurance
against spills or leaks. The American Petroleum Institute
has been working with gasoline station dealers and oil
companies on this issue for about a year. Our intention
would be to review their progress and adopt many of their
conclusions. Another purpose of our rules would be to en-
courage consistency among local programs. Many,
through their building permit operations, require various
specifications for the installation of storage tanks. We
want to collect data on what's being developed in the local
programs, circulate that information, and make all the
rules consistent. DER's rules would give local programs a
model they could tailor to local conditions because inspec-
tion and control over the tanks can best be handled by







local programs. The Department of Agriculture has the
responsibility to inspect gas stations, but they do it on a
random basis, inspecting less than perhaps 10% of the
tanks.


Bil Buzick

The department was allocated certain monies from the
Water Quality Assurance Trust Fund to carry out clean up
activities. Internally, we have broken down $8.5 million in-
to four categories: emergencies, state's sites clean up,
pollutant spills, and matching monies required for the
Federal Super Fund Program. We have just completed a
source removal project in Orlando requiring roughly $1
million from the fund. These problems are a lot more ex-
pensive than we envisioned. We recently developed criteria
for selecting state sites for fund related actions. We call the
new inventory the Site List. The list identifies our present
actions on a number of sites throughout the state, and the
unit within and outside the department responsible for
resolving issues associated with the sites. We are looking at
22 sites where we may be spending a portion of the Water
Quality Assurance Trust Fund monies on clean up or
related activities. The criteria we use in trying to determine
if state monies are appropriate for clean up activities at a
particular site will have to be met before we spend monies
on a site.


I


1 I I '







Banquet Address








Hosted by the St. Johns River

Water Management District







Banquet Address









Hon. Idwal Owen

Our speaker this evening was born in Iowa and moved to
Florida when he was some 20 years of age. He's an alum-
nus of the University of Pennsylvania and the Wharton
School of Finance. He was a dairy farmer and he's Presi-
dent of Neal Communities in Bradenton, Florida. He was
elected and re-elected to the Florida House of Represen-
tatives and was a successful candidate for the Senate in
1978. Last year he was runner-up for the Allen Morris
Award and has had a very distinguished career as a Senatfr
and a Representative. As chairman of the Natural
Resources Committee, he will have much to say concerning
the disposition of critical water issues facing us now and in
years to come. He's also the Chairman of Sub-committee
"A" which has something to do with funding. It's with
great pleasure that I introduce the very distinguished
Senator from the 24th district, the Honorable Pat Neal.


Senator Pat Neal

We in real estate development try to accentuate our
farmer roots and Im glad that you recognized that I come
from a long line of farm families. Those of you at the
Growth Management Conference last week heard the best
speech I ever heard Bob Graham give. I spent today recon-
structing that speech to give tonight but then called the
Governor and couldn't get a commitment that he wouldn't
give the same speech in the morning. So I've drawn up a
new speech which is an exceedingly treacherous one for a
politician to give, but it is my predictions as to what is go-
ing to happen to us as Floridians and to the water manage-
ment districts in the 1984 Legislature. I want to issue a
complete exculpatory disclaimer to my predictions, and
say only that they arethe thoughts I gathered as a full-time
member on many different committees which are trying to
evaluate what we in this state are going to do with the 11


million people that we have now and the 17 million people
that we may have in 1" years.
I will go through Department of Evironmental Regula-
tion issues first. The number-one Senate priority is an ef-
fective wetlands policy. We have for eight years tried to
have a consistent policy with respect to regulations affect-
ing our wetlands and the regulation of dredge and fill. In
the sixth of those eight years, I guess I was largely responsi-
ble for the failure of legislation to pass, and I have con-
cluded the reason was that we weren't able to set ap-
propriate standards for giving the Secretary and the per-
sonnel in the Department sufficient guidelines, criteria and
standards on which to evaluate permitting issues. Since
that time, I've learned some things about Secretary
Tschinkel and about wetlands. We can create a legislative
agenda to create a state wetland policy. The lesson I've
learned is that if all the affected groups get together and
communicate on a wide variety of complex issues, it's very
likely they can reach agreement on most of them. What
follows is how I number these issues. First, I think we can
have a state policy for wetlands protection. Second, I think
we will change some of our statutory guidelines for
jurisdiction in the Department to include wet prairies and
areas in the Everglades where the Department has no
jurisdiction. We probably will also change our definition
of dominance and choose some other indicia for DER
jurisdiction particularly in the area of soils. We may or
may not go ahead with the ubiquitous species standards. I
particularly have some concerns about the pine flat woods.
I am not sure if we're ready to extend DER's jurisdiction
into the low pine flat woods but I'm ready to listen and I
think it will be one of the more sticky issues for us to
resolve before April. Third, and probably most important,
I think we will finally have some statutory guidelines for
mitigation considerations in permitting dredge and fill.
That means we're going to decide what is and is not ap-
propriate for mitigating standards when a dredge and fill
application is being made. My personal view is, if we can
statutorily define "preservation of wetlands function",
'then we have a mitigatipS standard that works as long as
we eliminate some of the criteria having to do with money,
gift of land, and other things which don't necessarily
recreate wetlands functions. Fourth, we're going to im-
prove the process somewhat. I think we can fund jurisdic-
tional "swat teams" that will be able to give consistent
wetlands determinations throughout the State so that we
can define what is and is not a wetland and what is and is
not subject to jurisdiction. We're going to have some prob-
lems. This bill, I hope, will have the magnitude of the
Water Quality Assurance Act and if it does, there is going
to be plenty for the House and Senate to talk about after
the session is over.
In our last session, we had 39 committee meetings. The
House took some positions that may have been extreme for
bargaining purposes, and perhaps the Senate did also. I'm
worried about how to give sufficient direction to the
Department in evaluating fish, wildlife and habitat issues


____~___I____;__~ ~ ___~~






as considerations for permitting. I'm having trouble, and I
think a number of other committee members are going to
have problems with the ubiquitous species. There is also
the question of the agricultural exemption in wetlands per-
mitting. Most of us are aware that as our state grows, the
biggest consumer of wetlands will still be agriculture. It is
the single component of our industrial base that has been,
for the most part, exempt from wetlands permitting guide-
lines. It is also very anxious about that exemption. The
Committee will take up the question of the agricultural ex-
emption but I'm not sure what the result will be. My pur-
pose in mentioning it is to issue fair warning that it is part
of the legislative discussion. We hope to have a bill for fil-
ing in February, under consideration during the year, and
perhaps concluded before the Legislature is over. This
Legislature will take a long time like it did last year because
of the magniture of issues like education expenditures, the
unitary tax and Proposition I.
The second big environmental issue will be whether we'll
have a separate state policy for coastal barriers, and if
we'll ever amalgamate our coastal barriers policy into one
coastal barriers statute. I think we'll move in that direction
and I think the Legislature can pass construction standards
for dwellings and other structures on barrier islands. We
can also pass something similar to last year's House Bill
which would have withheld state funds in order to dis-
courage development on barrier islands. I would like to use
that bill to expand eminent domain power so we can use
the State's fiscal power rather than its police power to ex-
tract property rights from people in the coastal barrier. It's
a far more appropriate policy to acquire coastal barriers
for the use of future generations than to use the state's
police power for that purpose. The single biggest dif-
ference between the proposed 1984 Act and the proposed
1983 Act, I hope, will be that we can adopt, in full public:
view, the maps of the communities that will be affected.
People who own property on coastal barriers can see
whose property will be withheld from development. They
can be involved in the process and there can be public air-
ing as to what communities will be affected. The 1983 Act
had a definition so ethereal that most people affected were
not aware they were. It would have led, if adopted, to a
State policy that didn't have proper public discussion.
Third, I'll go into the State Planning Bill. It will be the
most difficult of all. We've seen a tremendous new em-
phasis in the Department of Community Affairs on what
Dr. DeGrove calls an "integrated policy framework".
That's an appropriate direction for state government to
take, but it's a new one and it has not had uniform public
understanding or support. We're a growing State, we have
had plenty of examples of disintegrated public policy for-
mation, or what I like to call "disjointed incremetalism".
An example of disjointed incrementalism is the contrast
between what we have been trying to do in State policy
toward directing growth such as the creation of compact
urban centers or preserving unique agricultural land and
what the Legislature did in the waning days of 1978. We


couldn't reach agreement on a major tax policy that the
Governor and most of the members of Legislature had
campaigned on that year, so we agreed on a House policy
that we didn't like but knew would be attractive to the
voters and we passed a homestead exemption of $25,000. It
is clearly a growth generator that did not consider any of
the other incremental decisions that we were making at
that time. We're going to have to see some progress in the
creation of an integrated policy framework. We'll have
modifications in Chapter 380, the Development of
Regional Impact Law, that will involve some measure to
prevent the two major difficulties with the DRI Law. One
is that we've given incentives to small scale development
below the DRI threshold. The second is that in our Tampa,
Jacksonville, Miami, and Orlando experiences, the DRI
worked to prevent, or make more expensive, development
in the downtown urban core. There is also some recogni-
tion that many of the DRI functions can be related to local
government which are so much more sophisticated in 1983
than they were in 1972 when that law was created. We may
see delegation of the DRI function to local governments
that are certified competent by some process that we've yet
to come up with.
Another major issue you will hear about is whether the
water management districts will assume the function of the
regional planning councils. My personal view is that water
management districts have been well functioning agencies
with a well-defined statutory role that they perform com-
petently. If we gave them the regional planning council
functions which include exceedingly difficult political
issues, I fear we'll give them more than they are currently
prepared to handle. We will end up not only without a
solution to our regional planning council questions but
with further problems in the water management districts.
There is substantial support in the House for moving the
DRI function and most of the regional planning council
functions to the water management districts, but that's a
policy I will resist.
You will also see an effort to integrate policy upward
through the creation of regional policy plans to conform
with the State plan. These will not have land use maps but
will elicit, in nominative terms, the State policies that we
wish to encourage in our different units of government. I
fear greatly the preemption of local government planning
powers by state government and unless that issue can be
resolved, I question whether we'll have a meaningful State
Planning Bill except for perhaps two particular areas. One
is the "LULU's", or Locally Unpopular Land Uses. We
may have a State policy where "LULU's", the siting of
prisons, hazardous waste dumps, landfills, or homes for
the profoundly retarded, may have some preemption to the
State cabinet. The second is in the areas of critical State
concern. There will be an attempt made to have local plan
regulations, in areas of critical concern or in areas where a
local resource management council has created a set of
findings, reviewed for conformity with adopted State
goals. There's been enough discussion on those topics at







the ELMS Committee level and at different growth
management seminars to indicate there is enough interest
in that to work itself into legislative policy. That's a new
and difficult area for Florida, and one that may take years
to germinate, but it is exceedingly important to the Gover-
nor, people in the House, and to the people of this State.
I'll leave the issue of an integrated policy framework by
saying that it's a tough legislative task for which there is no
clear direction yet among the Senators generally, and for
which there is substantial evidence of strong resistance by
powerful political components of our economy.
I'd like to talk now about the water management dis-
tricts. We will take up some water management district
functions and statutory authority during the 1984 session.
We will have a "glitch" bill to repair some of the errors
made in the 1983 Water Quality Assurance Act and we will
open up some of the policies created last year in the areas
of hazardous waste funding, allocation of funds, person-
nel functions, and pesticides and pesticide licensing, all at
DER. Once opened up, as in most legislative experiences,
there will be a number of water management district con-
cerns addressed.
We will also be hearing a report from Senator Joe
Carlucci, Chairman of the Select Sub-committee on Water
Management Issues. He has had three meetings that were
extremely useful to the committee in evaluating the func-
tions of water management districts. The committee has
not taken any serious exception to the major policy areas
that the water management districts were created to per-
form. I see no substantial objection, on the part of the
committee, to the land acquisition policies implemented at
the water management districts. Neither do I see substan-
tial policy changes in your regulatory or resource manage-
ment functions.
The committee has been most interested in pursuing the
fiscal policies of the districts. I can imagine that isn't
especially popular with the people in this room, but as
elected members of the Legislature, oversignt is an essen-
tial part of our jobs. Members of the Legislature look
upon themselves, properly or not, as the legitimate, elected
representatives of the people whose job it is to steward the
people's tax dollars. Two areas have been of particular at-
tention during these hearings. One is in the personnel
policies of the districts. The question has been raised at
two districts about whether there were consistent personnel
policies, whether they were being uniformly followed,
whether the pay plans followed any consistent and docu-
mented policy, whether they were appropriate for all
members of the district, whether there was a consistent
career path for district personnel, and whether the district
Board Members were conscious of the fiscal decisions in
their personnel policies.
The second major finding is a minor irritant. I hope the
use of airplanes by water management districts does not
sink us all. A word to the wise, coming from the Chairman
of the Committee that apropriates to at least two water
management districts, should be sufficient. Most of us


drive to Tallahassee, and it would be great to see you driv-
ing rather than flying.
Now, a special message to Don Morgan and Bill Mc-
Cartney. I'm Chairman of the Committee that funds DER,
the Department of Natural Resources, the Game and Fresh
Water Fish Commission, and the Suwannee and Northwest
Water Management Districts. I'm from a water manage-
ment district that assesses substantial millage and has a
tremendous public works and land acquisition policy that
has been, for the last six years, self-supporting from local
ad valorem and grant type funds. There is going to be con-
tinued pressure on the Suwannee District to tax to it's
statutory cap before asking for further money from the
Legislature. It will be my personal direction to defund, if
possible, or to compromise to whatever position I can sus-
tain, appropriations for the Suwannee District as a manner
of legislative consistency and to free funds for more impor-
tant statewide programs in DER's regulatory framework.
There is no conclusion I can reach that the Suwannee
District's regulatory or management function is sufficient-
ly different from any other District's to cause them to
receive State funds when they're below their statutory
village cap.
In regard to the Northwest Florida Water Management
District, I advise you to do what you can about your
millage cap. I've talked with Senator Barron who says it is
no accident that your millage cap is .05 mill. He didn't
mean to make it .5 mill, he meant to make it a 20th of a
mill, and it is. He feels it is appropriate public policy and
that the differences of the Northwest Water Management
District with the other districts are great because you have
rural communities with surficial water flows. You do not
have the ground-water system or urban growth problems
of south Florida. The need for drainage in south Florida
also differs from that of northwest Florida. The Northwest
Florida exceptionality was created expressly for the system
that exists there. That is apropriate legislative policy, and
consistent legislative policy would hold that the State
should not fund the Northwest District for programs not
going to the other districts, and where the funds could be
used for more appropriate state-wide programs.
There is another solution to the problems of each of
these two districts. The solution would be to transfer a
greater part of your fiscal burden to user fees on people
who use potable water supplies in your districts. If you
need statutory authority for those fees, I shall be happy to
talk with you about it and to help cause the Legislature to
give you additional power to raise funds outside the ad
valorem tax.
I have two things relating to general State legislation.
Vicki Tschinkel said one is different than most of the other
environmental functions which she would like to see per-
formed by our State. I'm going to try very hard this year,
when the sunset act sunsets the law regulating billboard
signs on state highways, to create for Florida a visual
pollution law to prevent construction of highway signs.
They ruin the visual aspects of our countryside and give







Florida a bad name with the millions of people who come
to our State. We can create a highway information system,
such as they have in Vermont or Virginia, with most of our
tourist facilities having small brown 4 x 4 foot signs on our
interstates. I would like also to have legislative authority to
change the function of our Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission to broaden its function and concern with
whole systems management. This will include management
of non-game species, habitats and other than consumptive
species, as well as a more wide-ranging regulatory func-
tion.
That's seven major pieces of legislation in a year when
there are a number of other important issues. Each, except
for the State planning one, has some consensus among
members of the Senate. Each also has a substantial body of
public support. The Senate, particularly under Curtis
Peterson, is trying to act as something other than a reactive
body. We are going to try to stake out responsible en-
vironmental positions early in the legislative forum. These
positions will respect not only our need to better manage
our State's resources but will also respect private property
and the rights of people to govern their own economic
well-being. I hope to help guide the legislation to en-
courage people to restrict growth and to restrict hazardous
substances, and to assure that the water supplies are pro-
perly managed and regulated in a manner consistent with
the public interest and are fiscally managed so that the tax
dollars are properly stewarded.
I will now sit down somewhere near the door and ask for
your input. It's been a pleasure to break bread with you
and I thank you for inviting me.
Mr. Owen
On behalf of all the Districts, I can say we found your
address informative and enlightening and, along with the
millions of people that come to Florida every year, we ap-
preciate your keeping the highway signs in check. We're
ever so grateful for your time and effort to be with us
tonight and we hope you'll come back and visit again with
us sometime. Thank you.


59


ii









Address By
Governor Bob Graham







Hosted by the St. Johns River Water Management District









Address by Governor Bob Graham


Governor Bob Graham
I appreciate the opportunity to share this time with you
again. As I have said when I have talked to this Conference
on previous occasions, I don't believe that there is a more
important group of Floridians in terms of what is going to
happen in this State and how our State will look 10, 20, or
50 years from now, than the people who are in this room
today. I think it is very important that those of you who
have responsibility for managing our most critical natural
resource, our fresh water, have a clear vision of what kind
of consequences we want to achieve in this State and what
kind of Florida this generation wishes to leave as its legacy.
I spoke yesterday in Miami to a National Conference of
the Urban Land Institute, an organization of persons who
are in the land development business as practioners, con-
sultants, and academics. One of the questions that came up
during the course of the day was "How is Florida going to
manage this tremendous population growth which has
been projected?" Population growth has doubled every 20
years since 1940 and is projected to almost double again
between 1980 and the year 2000, placing us, according to
the U. S. Bureau of Census, at over 17 million people and
will make us the third largest state in the country. I thought
it interesting and significant that a national audience
should focus on the specific issue of water availability in
questioning Florida's ability to manage its growth. My
response was that, Florida is not like many other fast-
growing states in the west or the southwest where essential-
ly a zero sum game has to be played. As you add people,
you have to subtract other water demand functions. In
Arizona they almost have a formula: if x number of people
move into the State, y number of acres of agriculture is ter-
minated as the water is shifted from one use to another.
We don't have to face that problem in Florida. We here in
north Florida live in the midst of some of the great river
systems of eastern north America. In the southern part of
the State, we're in a subtropical rain forest. We have a


tremendous gross amount of water in our state. The ques-
tion is, "Can we manage that water in qualitative terms?".
"Can we preserve its integrity?". "Can we manage our
periods of cyclical wet and dry to provide an adequate
amount for all the variety of purposes in our State?".
That's the fundamental issue that is going to undergird all
of our growth management issues. The people in this room
today are the individuals who are going to have more to
say about how we handle that issue than any other single
group. With that rather heavy load of responsibility, I ap-
plaud you for what you have done and wish you well for
the conference that you are participating in this week.
I am an optimist, and I believe it is an optimism based
on a record of accomplishment. If you look back just a
little more than a decade ago, Florida had only two water
management districts. And the history of those districts
was largely one in which the goal was not the management
of water but thereclamation of land, to take it from a
wetland condition and put it into a condition so that it
could be ued for urban or agricultural purposes. In 1972,
for the first time, the State committed itself to a com-
prehensive set of districts and charged all five with a
management responsibility to preserve and effectively
utilize this resource. In the 10-year period since that time, I
think we have made monumental progress toward identify-
ing our problems, toward identifying a set of strategies to
deal with those concerns, and putting them into effect.
The year 1983 has been, and 1984 will be, an important
year in terms of that process of effectively managing our
most vital natural resource. 1983 was a year in which the
Legislature passed the Water Quality Assurance Act; a
year when we prepared for additional legislation on preser-
ving our wetlands and managing our inevitable growth; a
year when the legislative environmental leadership has
declared that wetlands are no longer to be thought of as
wastelands but wonderlands of life; a year when Floridians
became more aware than ever before of the importance of
keeping our aquifers clean, free of pesticides, hazardous






wastes, and other pollutants. 1983 has been a year in which
each of the five water management districts has had an im-
portant assignment, important achievements, and even
more important challenges for the future as we prepare for
the continued growth of our State.
Each of the water management districts has had a signi-
ficant role to play in the recent months in terms of pre-
serving our freshwater supply. I would like to recount for
each of you a brief progress report on your brethren dis-
tricts. The Northwest Florida Water Management District,
facing the challenge of rapid growth has completed a
Water Supply Plan for most of its coastal area. The district
has worked extensively with local governments and Eglin
Air Force Base to assist in managing the explosive growth
of the area. The district has also been fully implementing
its consumptive use permitting program. The Northwest
Florida District faces some important challenges in the im-
mediate future. It will face the implementation of its Water
Supply Plan and it will move forward on the "Save Our
Rivers" program. It must increase its efforts to raise its
revenue limitations to be consistent with other districts. All
the districts should support Northwest Florida in this im-
portant effort.
The Suwannee River Water Management District has
continued to abide by its effective flood control policy.
The district has steadfastly provided support to local
governments to help resist the pressure to relax their firm
stand on floodplain zoning. This support to local govern-
ments is essential to maintaining the floodplain manag-
ment program of the district. Suwannee faces the challenge
in the coming year to develop programs to provide a com-
prehensive analysis of ground-water quality and quantity.
Heavy agricultural water use is affecting quantity and
water quality issues make news in local papers in that
district on almost a daily basis.
The St. Johns River Water Management District has
proposed to adopt its rule on management and storage of
surface water within the next two weeks. The rule has been
two years in the making, hotly debated and greatly amend-
ed. It is intended to allow a delegation of stormwater quali-
ty permitting and to simplify the permitting process. The
St. Johns District looks this year to the continued acquisi-
tion of land and the regulation of surface watei as vital
tools in its fight to restore the St. Johns River. It is impor-
tant that this effort-be adequately financed, including the
use of ad valorem funds levied by the District.
The Southwest Florida Water Management District is
continuing to work with local governments to develop a
functional floodplain management program in both the
heavily urbanized areas and the more rural areas of the
district. Through the "Save Our Rivers" program, the
district is also purchasing portions of floodplains. "Swift-
mud", and I wish we could figure out a way where all of
the Districts could have such a colorful acronym, in the
coming year should increase its efforts in floodplain
management and other growth management issues. The
challenges in the fast-growing southwest Gulf coast area
include guaranteeing adequate clean water supplies, ad-


dressing the impact of wastewater and solid waste, and
providing leadership for its delegated water quality pro-
grams.
The South Florida Water Management District has
moved quickly to shoulder its key responsibilities in the:
new "Save Our Everglades" initiative. A central element
for preparing for growth in the south Florida area will be
the protection of the Everglades. Because of its vital role in
supporting the web of life in south Florida, the "Save Our
Everglades" program has been initiated. The system we
call the Everglades begins in the headwaters of the Kissim-
mee River, flows through Lake Okeechobee and continues
through the "River of Grass" all the way to the fisheries of
Florida Bay. The goal of the district and the program is to
make the Everglades system of the year 2000 look and
function more like the Everglades of the year 1900 than the
Everglades of today. As a key step in that program, I am
announcing today the creation of the Kissimmee River-
Lake Okeechobee-Everglades Coordinating Council.
Next week I will issue an executive order formally
establishing this Council. The purpose of the Council is to
oversee the implementation of the "Save Our Everglades"
program. It will be Chaired by Secretary Victoria
Tschinkel. I am directing John DeOrove, Secretary of the
Department of Community Affairs, and Paul Pappas,
Secretary of the Department of Transportation, to serve
on the Council, and I will also request the participation of
Mr. Doyle Conner, Commissioner of Agriculture, Dr.
Elton Gissendanner, Executive Director of the Department
of Natural Resources, Colonel Robert Brantly, Executive
Director of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Com-
mission and Mr. John Maloy, Executive Director of the
South Florida Water Management District. This Council
will send quarterly and annual reports to me that will in-
clude recommendations for legislation and executive ac-
tion and for any additional measures needed to protect and
restore the Everglades and its related natural systems.
In addition, an interagency agreement on the restoration
of the Kissimmee River has been reached and will come
before the Cabinet at our next meeting. This agreement
spells out the details ef this project which is intended to
restore the meandering, natural character of this artificially
straightened and degraded river system. By restoring'the
wetlands on the banks of the Kissimmee, we will begin the
long process of restoring the total Everglades system. The
South Florida District must also continue to provide
leadership on growth management, integrating that growth
with the requirements of the natural systems that support
all the life in south Florida. The district must lead the way
to continued environmental restoration.
As I said in the beginning, I do not know of another
group of Floridians with a bigger set of responsibilities, or
a more worthy task than those which are before you. In a
very literal sense, you hold the future of our State in your
hands. You will make decisions that will determine
whether Florida in fact becomes America's third most
populous State or whether we become a dried up ecological


L






danger zone. There are pressures on us in all areas to cut
corners, to be expedient, to allow the short-sighted view to
overcome the far-sighted strategy. It is vital to remember
that in a sense Florida can be thought of as a lifeboat
which floats between the Atlantic ocean and the Gulf of
Mexico. Our aquifers are the only canteens that we have
available on our lifeboat. Our highest goal is to set our
lifeboat's course in the right direction, to keep it off the
rocks as we small through the storms of change and growth.
You and I and all Floridians are in this same boat. There is
no other source of salvation. I am proud to have such com-
petent shipmates.








Panel


Discussions


1






CONFLICT RESOLUTION:
NEGOTIATING RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ISSUES


MODERATOR
Hon. Robert "Bob" Clark, Chairman, South Florida Water Management District


THE PANELISTS
Patricia Bidol, Ph.D
Assocciate Professor/Consultant
The University of Michigan

Jerry Delli Priscoli, Ph.D.
Senior Policy Analyst
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Don Miller
Everglades Protection Association, Inc.


John Wodraska
Assistant Executive Director
South Florida Water Management District

Fred Bensch
West Dade Acres Homeowners Association

James Humble
Lime-Avocado Trustees


PANEL CHARGE

In an era when water resource decision-ma kig has become increasingly laden with conflict due to the increased sophistica-
tion of interest group politics, new approached o managing environmental disputes regarding policy priorities, allocation of
fixed resources, and environmental quality standards have begun to emerge.

Facing seemingly intractable institutional problems, natural resource managers have begun to look with renewed interest at
the art of negotiation and the promise that the use of such techniques might hold. More than a process to balance competing
objectives, advances in negotiating technique appear to be opening up new frontiers and providing opportunities for highly
creative and innovative solutions to resource mae ement problems.


Hon. Robert Clark

The problems faced in the east Everglades might serve as
a good example of water management conflicts you might
expect in the future. Our panel consists of three of the key
figures involved in the various issues and in the east
Everglades. There are many more groups that we could
have included, but we have chosen these three and they
have graciously accepted to take part.
The issues these men are here to discuss are only half the
program. The real meat of this panel is the technique and
the concept of dealing with resource imues through nego-
tiation. Dr. Bidol and Dr. Priscoli wiltl providing that
part of the presentation. They will be 0i their east Ever-
glades issues to illustrate how we-uad yo-as agency
representatives who will be dealing vkh iilar conflicts
can deal with them.


Don Miller

I represent recreational fishing interests, and I come
from Islamorada. It was not the Chamber of Commerce in
Islamorada that decided to name Islamorada the "Fishing
Capital of the World". That came about because of the


location of this area which provides a unique mix and
abundance of game fish. For that reason, thousands, if not
millions, of people have come to the area to fish. It has
created, over the past 30 to 40 years, a very significant
social and economic structure.
Everglades National Park lies at the extreme end of the
system and has its own management that is independent
from the state level and other agencies. Our involvement is
to assure the health of the Everglades National Park. This
relates to water management because of the waters that
once came down the Everglades freely are now being
diverted through the canal and levee systems of the upper
regions in the Conservation Areas and the upper regions of
the Everglades.
The east Everglades once were private lands, and the
park's south to northeast boundary line runs very closi to
the Florida Keys. Those of us who live down there and
traverse it by boat regularly cross that line and are visitors
to that park.
I was asked to address two questions: What are the
problems and why am I concerned about them?

Our concern, obviously, is the health and welfare of
those people who derive their livelihood from the recrea-
tional aspects of sport fishing in the southern parameters







of Florida. One problem is that there are some erroneous
perceptions of the Everglades and the Everglades National
Park. Everglades National Park is 1.4 million acres of
public ownership or federal land. The western portion,
which ranges down from 10,000 Island areas to Cape
Sable, is a mangrove area. The beginnings of the
freshwater river systems come down out of the Shark
River. Combined with that portion of Florida Bay and
Everglades National Park, two-thirds of that park is a
marine and coastal environment. The upper reaches are a
totally freshwater system. As we come south out of the
park we immediately enter into a marine and coastal en-
vironment. That portion of Florida Bay and Everglades
National Park represents 25 percent of the park's acreage,
some 380,000 acres of water and bay bottom. Perhaps a
misnomer is the use of the term "Florida Bay". It is more
"lagoonal" because it's made up of a series of saltwater
lakes, entrapped by mud and grass flats and is extremely
shallow. Its deepest points are around six feet and most are
less than six. Perhaps at least a third of that bay has six
inches of water over the grass flats. The vulnerability of
that bay and its needs are dependent on that freshwater
system that flows south.
The issue that is important to our group is that the
Everglades National Park receive the full attention and
concern of those who manage the water north of the park.
We support the Seven Point measure the park requested of
the district and the Corps to implement a new water regime
into that system. We are sure that if it is not done, we will
lose the park and the benefits of that estuary which may be
the most productive estuary system in this latitude.

Fred Bensch

I would like to point out the position I am in with rela-
tion to the park. I bought my few acres in 1972, got my
building permit in 1975 and built a 3,000 square foot house
between 1975 and 1978. From 1981 to 1982, Dade County
and government changed the name of the game when they
designated my land as a sensitive wetland.
We are in a'rural environment that borders the Ever-
glades National Park. I played by the rules. I went before
my County Commission and obtained a legal building per-
mit to be where I am. I built a home there and invested my
life savings. I made these decisions on a certain set of facts
but they've changed those facts. That's not fair to me or
my family. If government has a concern for the environ-
ment, let government set the rules for the game and then
the little people will play by the rules but I've been
violated.
My land is in the process of a taking right now, Dade
County and government have put in a "one in 40 rule"
(One house in 40 acres). None of the 1,500 landowners in
my 8.5 square miles owns 40 acres. The average size of the
land in my neighborhood is 3.5 acres. I represent these
people as the President of the West Dade Homeowners
Association. There are 600 people who are in the same


boat that I'm in. And yes, there is a good need, but they
are too willing to sacrifice me. I can't stand still for that. I
have to be treated fairly. I'm getting tired of being swept
under the rug. Every time there's consultation, it seems we
have no opinion. That is our problem. We accept this op-
portunity to say our piece, and I hope that you realize that
I speak for 600 people.
I think the restoration of the Everglades is a fine project.
I think the Everglades needs help. I think the environment
needs help, but don't sacrifice me in the process. I've made
commitments to my family and to myself. As a working
person, I've made things in my earlier life that I was hop-
ing to bank on in my senior years. All this has changed.
Government has me in a hell of a predicament.


James Humble

I'm a landowner representing the commodity groups to
the east of L-31 and the agriculture which exists to the west
of L-31 as well. There are approximately 600 acres being
farmed to the west of the L-31 canal. Dade County and its
Comprehensive Master Plan designated that land for farm-
ing, and additional land out there was going to go to farm-
ing.
When government makes the decisions it's making now,
it's important that they analyze very carefully the impacts
of these decisions in the slough and how they relate east of
L-31 canal. The commodity groups in south Dade are cona
cerned about the fact that there may be impacts on an ex-
isting flood protection system in that area.
Through the eight months we've been involved in this
legally, we've become more aware of some of these pro-
blems in south Dade. As an industry which produces $250
million worth of commodities, has the second highest
return per acre in the United States, is the fifth largest pro-
ducing county in Florida, we are concerned about the im-
pacts of the assumptions being made by the agencies in-
volved.
If the park and its restoration is truly in the public good,
it must follow that the processes of moving land from the
private sector to the public sector-if that be the
case-must be followed in a legal way, in a manner which
does not impact on the basic property rights of land-
owners. The amount of land being taken out of the private
sector here, the reduced tax base for Dade County, the im-
pact on the citizens of Dade County, must be considered in
this. The Everglades National Park is a fragile environ-
ment. The production of food is also a fragile environ-
ment.

John Wodraska

The Governor's Save Our Everglades objectivesl to
make the state look in the year 2000 more like it did in the
year 1900. You know the impact man has had ithis akeO,
and you can hear from these gentlemen about the-oonflict


I I







and the problems caused by that, and the problems that
water management is facing now and will continue to face
in the future.
We brought these three gentlemen here today not to try
and make you experts on the east Everglades and Shark
River slough and Florida Bay problems; but to make a
point to all the water management districts. The point has
to do with conflict management. I think each of us is fac-
ing growing conflicts, maturing conflicts, and the South
Florida District has looked at this and said, as water
management districts, we're developing new capabilities.
We looked around and we said, "You know, our real
problem is a people problem." How are we going to deal
with the residents who want to live in areas that are to be
reclaimed? How are we going to accommodate agriculture
with its demands, recognizing the importance agriculture
has to our economy and its importance to the state? And,
obviously, the sport fishing is anotherissue. We don't have
anybody here from Everglades National Park, but they
would have told you that 90 percent of the bird rookery
has been decimated by water management practices.
When the public hears "water management practices",
they don't differentiate between that and the water
management district.: Everglades superintendent Jack
Morehead has said many times that he recognizes there is a
big difference. In the past, Everglades National Park has
told us how much water they want and we've met that
delivery schedule but we really didn't know that much
about the natural environment in the park.
If we want to try and restore some of, the things the
Governor has mentioned in the Save Our Everglades pro-
gram, we have to come up with some new techniques and
ideas on handling the people problems in our district. I
think these issues are going to be faced in every water
management district in Florida..
We're not trying here to solve the problem in the east
Everglades. I think everybody at the table is apprehensive
about what they might say even though we are trying to use
it as an example to tell you of things that might come in
your district and how these problems might be avoided in
the future.


Dr. Patricia Bidol
This is a mature conflict. Interest is very sharp and the
conflict has gone along for enough time, with enough in-
teraction between all the people that would be affected by
whatever decision is being made, and there has been a
move to have the Governor's Office make a change in
governmental regulations. And when changes in regula-
tions occur and litigation occurs, you often take away
some of your options for resolving an environmental con-
flict where more of the parties will feel they have won. As
you listened to some very honestly stated sharing by these
three gentlemen, you could see that the effects of current
regulations and possible litigation would be such that
people at this table, and some others, would be losers.


Theoretically, the greater public good would be a winner,
and in the long range, the quality of ecological life in
Florida, and possible economic fife, would be winners
also. In the process, you're hearing some poignant stories
that there may be some short-range losers. When a conflict
is this mature, it's very hard to back up and try to figure
out some things that are more "win-win".
I wanted to share with you some of the things that have
not been done. In this case, I'd like to use a scenario in
Michigan. There's a community called Traverse City,
which is on Lake Michigan. Next to it is.a federal and a
state park. Traverse City is a very wealthy, middle class
community similar to Jupiter. It is surrounded by rural
areas where farmers are just barely making their cherry
crops profitable. On Lake Michigan you have fishermen
who, for generations, have lived off game fishing and
some commercial fishing. Many families get their whole
livelihood bringing people from lower Michigan up to
Traverse City to go cross country skiing. You also have
hard-core environmentalists who believe that area is so
ecologically fragile that no fishing, cherry growing, or
cross country skiing should occur. There is also a snow-
mobile industry that has a drastic impact on this area.
A few years ago there was a move, through some pro-
posed regulations and suits that were filed, to change that
whole area into a protected quiet area. Federal and state
lands could only be used for limited backpacking and all
other activities would have to cease. Every one of the
major groups was ready to go to court to file their own -
suits to have their own kind of outcome.
I directed an environmental conflict office, and we were
approached by a group of women, by the mayor of
Traverse City, and by two or three environmental groups
who felt that if all this litigation occurred, and if the
Governor's Office helped to designate this a quiet area, it
would have a drastic impact on the social and economic en-
vironment. There ended up being 28 major interest groups
in Traverse City that for economic, ecological or social
reasons had a vested interest in what happened.
We attempted to persuade all the stakeholders to not ac-
tivate their lawsuits. We also were successful at getting
most of the stakeholders to sit down together. Six months
into the case, we discovered that Shell Oil and other oil
companies had the rights to drill for oil there but they did
not want to sit down with these other stakeholders. The oil
companies were, however, willing to be represented by the
head of the Michigan Forest Department.
These people met for three years trying to figure out a
way to have "win-win" occur, where most of the interests
could be met. Every two or three weeks they were meeting
to figure out compromises to what we call "anticipatory
conflict resolution". That's where you try to interact
before it reaches the impasse of a change in litigation or'
regulation.
Eventually, they worked out a way where some of the
federal and state lands were swapped with each other. We
ended up with a small area designated to be a total quiet







area with very limited backpacking. The snowmobile and
motorcycle activities were able to occur in a region shifted
about 25 miles south of where it used to be and we ended
up able to have the fishing.
We still had some litigation and regulations occurring.
The oil company was willing to pay a lot of money for a
different way of drilling so that there would be minimum
ecological damage, even though they were not sure if they
would find anything, but they agreed to these kinds of con-
ditions.
Through ad hoc bargaining, which is a very informal
thing; through the use of third party facilitators and
mediators, which is certainly more formal; through being
willing to sit down and go through an arbitration process
but not litigation; you can move your way up to the op-
tions of litigation. There are some people who feel it is too
risky to work out a "win-win", and so they deliberately
say, "I want to win and them to lose."
You have a fuller range of options than you normally
know. A lot of things I'm suggesting, you are already
doing. Many of you are doing them without full awareness
of the consequences. You're having great successes in find-
ing alternative ways to handle the resolution of natural
resource issues, but I guess I would like you to continue to
try to play around with some structured, conscious deci-
sions in the area.

Dr. Jerry Priscoll

What I do at the Institute and with the Corps is help the
different interests discover the alternative techniques for
conflict management. We've developed training programs
throughout the Corps and other agencies and try to use the
techniques in different places.
There are lots of techniques. What is applicable here and
what isn't is something that I can't say at this point. This is
a mature conflict. I don't know which we'd use, except to
say that we've seen many cases that go to court, or people
fighting in a "win-lose" situation.
In conflict management there is the idea that if you just
sit down everybody will come to some agreement. Some-
times that happens, but I haven't seen it happen very
often. But between sitting down and going to court, or go-
ing out and shooting somebody, there are many options.
There's a whole range of techniques, but the techniques
in many cases are new to the environmental field and new
to some of the natural resource areas. We don't know a lot
about them, and they take a lot of motivation to try. Cer-
tainty is an important motivation. It is important to know
how things are going to be in the future. The reduction of
costs, particularly litigation costs, is an issue. Anticipation
is another major motivation particularly for people who
have been through fights before, and it is very often a fac-
tor among people who have been through fights with one
another before.
There are-some technique jargon we use such as "facili-
tative" and "collaborative problem-solving". One step


beyond just sort of sitting down and agreeing is bringing in
a facilitator, a person whose job it is to get the parties' in-
terests out on the table in some way and try to help create
solutions and perhaps agreements.
From facilitative or collaborative problem-solving we
move to mediation, which is received in environmental
areas with very mixed reactions. I've heard people say that
it has worked, that it was just frustrating, or that nothing
happened.
The point about facilitative problem-solving and media-
tion is try to move from the "win-lose" situation, to a
"win-win" situation, or a perception of "win-win". There
is also the "lose-lose" situation, and also the withdrawal
situation that is just to ignore it.
A couple of other points I'd like to mention are some of
the words I hear so often and we talk about quite a bit in
these courses. We talk about techniques and things dealing
with interests. Once represented, what kinds of things do
they want? The overlying problem to all this is the issue of
trust. Parties in conflict are in many cases either not
trusting one another or increasingly distrusting one
another in a spiral of conflicts. Looking at different
techniques helps communicate the message and it com-
municates something about the relationships that are set
up.
About four or five years ago we worked on some general
permitting on the west coast of Florida. The people in-
volved were at first skeptical. The idea was if you could get
a general permit you might not have to get the five or six
permits that were usually asked per year for building or
condominium development, whatever. And with five or six
permit requests a year, two or three are litigated. If you
could get the people who are normally doing this work to
agree on the permit specifications ahead of time, perhaps
you'd avoid all this cost and so forth.
We tried a facilitative problem-solving situation. We
brought in all the different parties of interest and over a
period of three or four workshops actually had a design for
the general specifications.
In a negotiation or a mediation you have a third party.
Sometimes it's a lawyer or someone who's trusted by all in-
terests. The third party tries to communicate that the pro-
cess, not the results, is going to be legitimate. Somebody
might win, somebody might lose, everybody might win or
everybody might be unhappy. Nobody knows what's going
to happen, but the mediator guarantees the integrity of the
process. He must communicate with the different groups
and have some basis of legitimacy.
One of the important points that's often lost with
facilitative problem-solving and mediation is that you do
have to discuss what was the final outcome or the format
of the final outcome. There's got to be some kind of a
tangible formal thing that closes the process, preferably,
some kind of an agreement that states what is agreed upon.
Often several agreements are reached, possibly only in
principle or in concept. If we can reduce the amount of
litigation by 40 percent, it would be real nice.


I







Dr. Patricia Bidol


The only other thing I wanted to say as an outside con-
sultant who does a lot of this work is that I really am im-
pressed that parties are willing to come here and to share
themselves with a group like this. This helps to set a model
to expand the awareness in Florida that there are alter-
native conflict methodologies available. And to me, that
kind of courage I heard in some of the other presentations
impresses me with the quality of work that the water dis-
tricts are attempting to do in Florida. If that happens, I
think you're going to be able to not only utilize some of the
methodologies that are used in the rest of the country, but
I suspect you're going to create some new ones that we can
use elsewhere.


John Wodraska

You have to be conflict managers yourselves. You can't
go out and hire that expertise and expect other people to
resolve your conflicts. In the field of resource manage-
ment, I don't know if we can sustain resolving these con-
flicts unless we get into what they've tagged as a
"win-win" situation.
The purpose of exposing the east Everglades situation to
you was to give you a case study of one that is really
developed. One of our Board members said this was worth
the Pulitzer prize because it's got classical elements: the
future of the bird rookery and the fishery in Florida Bay
and one-half of the winter tomatoes eaten in this country
come out of the area.
I think we have to call on greater skills than we learned
in college 10 or 20 years ago, and they are available. It's in
our best interest to go out there and try them.







GROWTH MANAGEMENT:
THE ROLE OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT


MODERATOR
Hon. Bruce A. Sampson, Chairman, Southwest Florida Water Management District

THE PANELISTS The Honorable H. Lee Moffitt
Gary W. Kuhl Speaker
Executive Director Florida House of Representatives
Southwest Florida Water Management District
William Ockunzzi
The Honorable Robert Martinez Executive Director
Mayor, City of Tampa, and Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council
Former Vice Chairman
Southwest Florida Water Management District Victoria J. Tschinkel
Secretary
PANEL CHARGE Florida Department of Environmental Regulation

The issue of growth management has received considerable attention in the last few years due to the State's continued and
rapid increase in population. Growth management is a complex issue involving a multitude of components andseveral levels of
government. In 1981, numerous areas of Florida experienced severe drought and the resulting water shortages served to focus
attention on the water resource and water supply implications of our increasing population.

The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation and the five water management districts are charged with protecting
and regulating the State's water resources. Local governments are charged with regulating land uses. Yet, land use and water
use are inextricably linked. Further, impacts of growth on the land and water resources may not be confined to local gover-
ment boundaries.

Chapter 380 of the Florida Statutes requires water management district participation in the Development of RegionalIm-
pact process. This participation is limited to providing permitting information and a report on issues within their jurisdiction.

Should the role of the water management district be modified or expanded?

Resource use and/or management conflicts sometimes arise between local governments and water management districts.
For example, the continuing development of floodplains results in excessive drainage to prevent flooding, and thereby reduc-
ing the water storage capabilities of those lands.

Should water management districts be specifically authorized to regulate land use within floodplains?

Wetlands serve vital functions in the hydrologic cycle and ecological systems. Major emphasis has been placed on the
ecological benefits and water quality enhancement capabilities of wetlands. Little attention, however, has been directed to the
quantity of water necessary for the maintenance of viable wetlands.

Should more effort be made toward integrating and coordinating the-isting wetlands regulations under thejurisdiction of
the Department of Environmental Regulation and the surface water management programs of the districts?

The water management districts are developing ground-water basin resource availability inventories as required by the
Legislature in 1982. It was the intent of the Legislature that limitations in available supplies be reflected in future growth and
development planning at the local level.

Is additional authority necessary for water management districts to ensure that the legislative intent is realized?

Local governments are having to respond to flooding problems as a result of development in flood-prone areas.

How best can water management districts assist local governments?







Mr. Samson

It is my pleasure to welcome you to the final item on our
agenda. We've all heard a great deaf from many people, in-
cluding those on this panel, on this issue. Our district felt it
was appropriate that we spend a few minutes this morning
on the specifics of where the water management districts
should fit.
Chapter 380 of the Florida Statues requires water
management district participation in the Development of
Regional Impact process. This participation is,limited to
providing permitting information and a report on issues
within their jurisdiction. The first question is, Should
the role of the water management districts be modified or
expanded?


Ms. Tschinkel

The water management districts have a very important
role in looking at land use questions. Several have been in-
volved fairly aggressively in land use issues. Suwannee is
an obvious example; South Florida has been very active in
zoning issues; and Southwest Florida has been attempting
to get the local governments to be more cognizant of flood
zoning issues. I feel the districts need to be more involved
in the DRI process. This is an opportunity for them to
comment on permitting issues where they have rules and
regulations. It also is an opportunity to point out to the
regional planning councils the issues pertaining to water
management overall. We at DER are startingto do that on
groundwater quality issues in relationship to certain land
use choices. The DRI process allows regulatory agencies to
step out of their usual role and talk about broader land use
questions and to coordinate the information better. On the
whole question of the regulations under Chapter 380 and
land use, I believe the water management districts could
consider taking an expanded role in the service delivery
area. It would help direct land use development around the
State.


Mr. Moffitt

There is no question that we need to integrate our land
use management and our water use. A clear step toward
this would be to include serious technical assistance by the
water management districts to local planning officials.
Greater integration could be achieved through water
management district approval of all water-related elements
in the local comprehensive plans. Consolidating DRI
reviews under a single land and water resource manage-
ment agency would also make such reviews less onerous in
terms of data collection and the time needed to conclude
them. Water management districts should be allowed to in-
itiate appeals of local government DRI decisions to the
Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission.


Regional planning councils could be subordinated, in some
respects, to the water management districts. We could still
allow the RPCs to perform their roles, but give water
management districts a broader regional responsibility for
approving certain elements in the local comprehensive
plan, DRI reviews and overseeing and coordinating the
regional planning council efforts.


Mr. Ockunzzi

I think the water management districts' role in Chapter
380 is only limited by the resources of the individual
district and time constraints to process a DRI. What the
regional planning councils need from the districts with
regard to Chapter 380 falls in three categories. First, we
need the best data, analysis and technical opinion. That
has to come from the districts to balance whatever the
private developer might tell us about the water situation.
Second, we need a comment on the likelihood that a pro-
ject will receive approval from the water management
district and, if possible, we need the actual decision of the
water management district so we can incorporate that into
balancing transportation, environmental, public facility,
energy, housing, and economic impacts. Finally, we need
definitive comments on the recommendations that are go-
ing into the regional planning council's DRI report, and, if
possible, recommended-conditions to be submitted to the
regional planning council by the water management
district for incorporation into the regional planning coun-
cil's report.
Growth management involves massive public expendi-
tures to support the additional six or seven million
people we are going to have by the year 2000. There are an
awful lot of public policy decisions that are going into
where and how those new residents are to be housed. We
have a task force that wants to build a bullet train from
Tampa to Orlando to Miami. If we are going to make that
decision based solely on the availability of water resources,
maybe the third link of that bullet train ought to go from
Orlando to Jacksonville. That's the kind of public policy
question that needs to be resolved through a strong state
planning process requiring consistency at lower levels of
government. We also need to improve on the integration of
the planning programs that are carried out by regulators,
economic developers, housing specialists and transporta-
tion people so we all have the same objective.

Mr. Kuhl

I don't believe that the water management districts
should assume the responsibilities of the regional planning
councils. Most people consider the water management
system a good one. However, a lot of the effectiveness
would be lost if they assumed a number of regional plan-
ning council responsibilities. We do need to have clear cut
agreements between the water management districts and







the regional planning councils as to the timing and content
of the reviews. Perhaps a little more clout could be given to
the input by the districts as well as to the DRI process. We
are mainly in an advisory role and more emphasis should
be given to the input. As we complete basin inventories
mandated by the Statute, we will be able to give more site-
specific data and information, and help more in the DRI
process. As it is now, the water management districts are
asked to respond to questions for which they really don't
have all the necessary data.


Mr. Martinez

We need to determine if the role of the districts will be
increased to the point that they are no longer advisory but
in fact have the force of law. If that's to be the case, we
need to look at the governing board in terms of composi-
tion and how members are appointed, and if the final ap-
peal should be to an elected body. When you are setting
policy on land use, then there has to be a statewide stan-
dardization, as to how these rules are to be formulated and
interpreted. Otherwise the competition between regions
will not be equal. As you give districts more responsibilities
and authority to mandate, it removes that responsibility
from the people and elected officials.
The districts and regional planning councils generally
have various interpretations on good government in their
area of responsibility. The water management districts can
handle more responsibility but should they be the agency
responsible for wholesaling water to those units of govern-
ment that need it? Do we need to create West Coast
Regional Water Supply Authorities all over the state or do
we have a coherent policy for those chosen to regulate our
water resources? We also need to look at how these agen-
cies operate before they're turned loose on the public and
local government.


Mr. Ockunzzi

I don't think water management districts should be
authorized to regulate, by zoning, land uses within
floodplains. There are three or four ways water manage-
ment districts can provide assistance to local governments
in resolving problems. Regulating land use relates to many
things besides floodplains. Land use regulation gets to the
heart of many economic issues that relate to the growth
and development of our cities and the creation of activity
centers around major urban universities where we're put-
ting a lot of public money into flood-prone areas. We have
to coordinate the State's policy relative to floodplains and
public investments. Water management districts should
also review existing legislation, local codes and DER
regulations and carry out a program like the Floodplain
Management Task Force has proposed for the federal
flood insurance program. They can determine if those


regulations are adequate to deal with floodplain 'manage-
ment and, if not, they should recommend minimum stan-
dards for the Legislature to enact and for local govern-
ments to carry out through the Local Government Com-
prehensive Planning Act. We should go to an elected body
to establish those minimum standards. Water management
districts can also provide financial assistance to counties
and localities to develop and carry out master drainage
plans much like Pinellas County did with their own money
a few years ago. After the plans are developed, the water
management districts should assist local governments,
again on a matching basis, in doing some of the remedial
work. The Pinellas Park Water Management District, a
special flood control district, has found itself buying
homes in an area that chronically floods because there just
isn't any other way to solve a poor local land use decision.


Mr. Kuhl

I don't believe we need another state- level regulatory
program. However, the water management districts do
have a lot of the tools to assist in regulation of floodplain
areas. The water management districts could assist in set-
ting minimum standards for floodplains and their develop-
ment. You have to be careful because different situations
in Florida demand different standards. A number of
districts are providing model floodplain ordinances to
local governments for implementation. Implementation is
a little slow, but local governments should actually come
up with, and go through with, a regulatory program. It is
going to take some incentive, either from a legislative or
state level, for local governments to proceed with a
floodplain protection program.


Mr. Martinez

I think the district has a role in the protection of the
floodplains. We need a map overlay of the floodplain as
part of the local comprehensive planning element. It would
come from the appointed people who are experts in the
field but go ultimately to those who are elected at the city
and county level for implementation. Enforcement would
be done by the city and county because they would be the
agencies that would adopt it for its implementation. It is
necessary, with the level of urbanization in many areas of
Florida, that something be done.


Ms. Tschinkel

The water management districts are caught in the whole
flooding issue. If there are poor local decisions made, the
pressure is put on them to do something about the
flooding. There is a heavy price that has to be paid in taxes
and in loss of natural resources when floodplain develop.







ment occurs. From a logistical point of view, it may be extremely
The districts have a very heavy carrot and stick available helpful if they can end up with some common boundaries.
to them. They can say to local governments, "Here's what If we could consolidate some of the bureaus and divisions,
we see as the most flood-prone areas and this is what we that would be helpful.
would like to see you adopt as zoning or construction stan-
dards for these areas. And we don't intend to come in and
help you out if you get in some kind of a problem". There Ms. Tchinkel
is also a more positive approach involving cost sharing. In
south Florida, development is starting in areas that are in One of the important issues on consolidation is the role
very rural, wet areas. One of the options is to indicate to the Federal Government has in this area. With the legisla-
them, "We are not prepared to put in an oldfashion water tion we want to see this year, we might be able to consider
management structure but we will cost share with you an delegation of the 404 program from the Federal Govern-
approach to minimize the current flooding situation if you ment, that would allow us to work together and come up
take steps to terminate poor zoning practices so this isn't with decisions. The districts, under the State Water Policy,
going to be worse in the future". Those approaches might are becoming increasingly aware of the effects of draw-
work better than a state regulatory program. downs and other consumptive uses on wetland areas. The
districts are very aware it is easy to destroy wetlands
through mismanagement of water. Another issue has to do
Mr. Samson with coordination of permitting on dredging and filling.
There's no better example than the regulation of phos-
Wetlands serve vital functions in the hydrologic cycle phate mining where the issues of water quantity and
and ecological systems. Major emphasis has been placed wetlands protection are closely tied together. This is a
on the ecological benefits and water quality enhancement situation where the alteration in flows, quantities and tim-
capability of wetlands. Little attention, however, has been ing is terribly disrupted. We are also looking towards
directed to the quantity of water necessary for the main- restoration of floodplains and floodplain habitats. During
tenance of viable wetlands. Should more effort be made the course of the mining, the Southwest District has helped
toward integrating and coordinating existing wetlands ensure that key wetland areas have enough flow and the
regulations under the jurisdiction of the Department of right kind of stations for monitoring the flow to those
Environmental Regulation and the surface water manage- areas, and as restoration begins, to be sure the water's
ment programs of the districts? routed properly. The coordination is improving.

Mr. Ockzzi Mr. Moffitt
Mr. Ockunzzi


All agencies should increase their efforts. From a plan-
ning council perspective, I envision receiving conflicting
opinions from the water management district and the
Department of Environmental Regulation on a wetlands
issue that we might be reviewing on a DRI or in a local
comprehensive plan. It exemplifies the need for a state
policy that makes all agencies work from the same point of
departure in dealing with the various issues.


Mr. Kuhl

Coordination efforts really need to continue. They have
improved between the water management districts and the
Department of Environmental Regulation. The state water
policy recognizes the need for both the Department and the
districts to consider the impact of facilities on wetlands.
Perhaps additional legislative definition on the role of each
of these agencies is required. One area the water manage-
ment districts can concentrate on is pulling together the
water quality/water quantity aspects.


Mr. Martinez


One thing that comes through is the need for us to better
define a state water use plan and the policies that regula-
tory decisions can be based on. The State needs to see that
it is done and that they are followed. I am constantly
troubled by who is going to resolve the inherent conflicts
that are going to develop between the cities, counties,
regional planning councils, water management districts
and DER. I'm not content with leaving the local govern-
ments or regional planning councils as they are. Some
regional entity must have an expanded role with proper
checks and balances, so we can have a coordinated effort
for land and water planning within particular regions.
Local governments, regional planning councils, and coun-
ties are going to resist it. And water management districts
will be terrified if additional responsibilities are thrown
their way. The bottom line is that we must start putting
greater responsibility into a regional entity so we can have
a better coordinated plan on water planning and on land
planning in particular regions.


Mr. Samson

The water management districts are developing ground-







water basin resource availability inventories as required by
the Legislature in 1982. It was the intent of the Legislature
that limitations in available supplies be reflected in future
growth and development planning at the local level. Is ad-
ditional authority necessary for water management dis-
tricts to ensure that the legislative intent is realized?


Mr. Kuhl


I don't think any additional authority is necessary. It's
going to take some time, but the flip side of knowing what
the resource can provide is going to be defining what and
where the long-range demands are going to be and how
they can be offset with other programs such as water con-
servation or water reuse. The water management districts
can begin with existing authority and through the per-
mitting process, to really push the long-term planning
aspects of water supply.


Mr. Martinez

If the intent is to provide the water management districts
with greater authority to regulate growth, the issues of sur-
face water reuse, conservation and the allocation of the
resources between industrial, agricultural and urban use
have to be addressed. Simply to look at groundwater for
management of growth is, in my opinion, not an accep-
table activity. You need to take into consideration all the
sources of water that may be available. We need also to
talk about what conservation methods can be utilized in in-
dustry and agriculture. The numbers show the consump-
tive part may be the smallest element of water use.


Ms. Tschinkel

The degree to which looking at water availability from
all the sources is going to be important to various con-
sumptive use and water reuse decisions made by the water
management districts and the Department. Those decisions
are going to involve the price of water. There are a lot of
water managers who agree that the way you manage water
resources and growth (as opposed to protecting sensitive
areas) is how far the regulatory and management system
pushes up the price, and how far the political system will
allow that.


Mr. Moffitt

It was the intent of the Legislature to take into con-
sideration the limitations of water in making our growth
decisions. What do we do when a local government allows
rezoning for a large development bordering a floodplain or
in a recharge area, or if there's not sufficient water


available to service the area? What recourse do we have to
nudge a local government into making better planning
decisions? Those are the issues we need to look at on a
regional basis. There has to be some coordinated approach
to water and land use, and some regional entity that can
encourage local governments to properly plan and zone.


Mr. Ockunzzi


I think all sources of water and all eventual uses of that
water should be considered in making these decisions. The
real issue is, by whom and where is that decision going to
be made? The deficiency in growth management is plan-
ning for growth management. We need a state plan and we
must be careful about delegating responsibility for pre-
paring that plan. There is a role for the Legislature, Gover-
nor and Cabinet in approving the plan and resolving dis-
putes between the programs of the different agencies. In
Florida, we're moving away from an agricultural and
tourist-oriented society developed around small com-
munities; we're becoming the third or fourth largest state
in the country and orienting ourselves toward building
great cities that are international communities. The deci-
sions involved in setting up the infrastructure need to have
an equal and balancing effect on water management deci-
sions.


Mr. Samson

Local governments are having to respond to flooding
problems as a result of development in floodplains and
flood-prone areas. How best can water management
districts assist local governments?


Mr. Martinez

Some are already being done, but not in the most effi-
cient way. You must continue to maintain a good data base
with computer terminals made available through the
district. Aerial mapping that is current, developing an
"overlay" for the land use element for cities and counties
and giving a better definition of flood control should be in-
cluded. If you could give definitions as to what is an urban
flood problem and not a drainage problem, you could be
very helpful. We need to give urban flooding a new defini-
tion.


Ms. Tschinkel

There's one thing the districts and the Department could
do that would be helpful. We see, around the State, very
successful deVelopment that take care of sheet-flooding


___







problems. Another type of technical assistance we can of-
fer is to explain what kinds of flood control are most en-
vironmentally acceptable and appropriate that could be
built into local ordinances.


Mr. Moffitt

Mr. Samson, what is your reaction to the changing of
the boundaries of the districts to coincide with county
boundaries? We also have one district that has a much
lower millage rate than the others. The need has been
demonstrated to increase the mileage so they're all on the
same level. My view is that, if we expand the tle of the
districts, we may want to look at the question of changing
the boundaries and that, very definitely, the Northwest
District should have its village increased so it can do the
job.


Mr. Samson

The issue of district boundaries coinciding with county
lines was an item for discussion in the last legislative ses-
sion. At Southwest, district boundaries are essentially
following surface water hydrologic conditions and aren't
necessarily tied to groundwater. And,given the growth
Northwest is experiencing, it is most appropriate for all the
districts to strongly support Northwest, and allow them to
seek a constitutional amendment. The coastal areas are
growing rapidly and it is going to be increasingly difficult
for Northwest to discharge their responsibilities with their
current funding capabilities. It is particularly difficult in
the area of planning and of meeting responsibilities if one
must continually go to the Legislature or agencies annually
to seek funding. Not knowing what those funding results
will be results in an inordinate amount of time spent rais-
ing money and less time spent planning and discharging
responsibilities.


Mr. Kuhl

On the boundary issue, I think there is a need to look at
that again. On one side of the issue Polk County is split by
three water management districts. A number of other
counties certainly have two water management districts in-
volved. It is very difficult for those counties to deal with
the permitting for the water management districts, DER
and all the other agencies. The other side of the coin is that
at least the boundaries we have are based on some techni-
cal merits. On the millage issue, I am certainly supportive
of seeing Northwest's millage increased because they are
going to need the funds to accomplish the goals that the
Legislature wants us to do.


Mr. Don Crame

Since the early 1970s, the question of who is going to
decide state growth policy has been successfully avoided;
Today each of you talked about the need to have that
agency. Somehow, a group of people under the ELMS
Committee or the leadership of the Speaker or the Presi.
dent of the Senate, will have to address the issue. We've
been playing with it since the State Comprehensive Plann-
ing Act was passed. What can we do to resolve that pro-
blem?


Mr. Moffitt

Everybody agrees we need to do something about;
growth in Florida. We know that growth is inevitable and
what the impact of that growth is going to be on the quality
of life and the delicate environment of the State. The ques-
tion is how are we going to resolve all of the competing in-
terests in such a way that we can live together and have
some sort of definite growth policy plan. It's hard to
decide who's going to make those decisions. I talk about it
in the Legislature and all the legislators sit there, heads
nodding that growth management is a good idea. When
you start talking specifics and about a growth policy for
the state, they take off in 19 different directions. If we
were to talk about it in this room, that probably has their
most educated body on growth that we have in this State,
our approaches and goals on policy decisions would scatter
in a lot of different directions. But we need state policies
to guide and direct everybody charged with managing
Florida's growth. I don't know if the Legislature can set
that state policy. By the time you have resolved all the
competing interests in the Legislature, the end product
probably wouldn't accomplish much. We're going to have
to create some sort of "300 pound gorilla" and give it the
responsibility to come up with a growth policy and thek
we're going to have to stick to it and everybody's going to
have to bite the bullet. That "300 pound gorilla" probably
ought to be the executive branch. They have the resources
and the Governor is the one that answers to the electorate.


I-








A --7- 7 7
2~ c-'.It- j.- .. a
*, L.7 rn-.




Y -.
*- .i.















-- --- - m












e,
7















.4,.~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~' .* -7 7.-.- .-.7i 7 '


**; ** .a.il 7..*.'

--;-- '-~ ~~ 1- -- ---r ; I-
"N








-gl
















-'j.74.7


Z.- -7



.-:
I~r-' r~~ !~t~- 5 :~ -I-k.v-.-



s-.7





Vtu~




--ft~




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs