In the following, Everglades farmers have taken all five items in Senate President Joe Negron's memo of last week to his senators, “Update Regarding Lake Okeechobee Discharges,” and replied to each one. This reply was presented to Negron as an attachment to Monday's letter to him.
Here's how the farmers addressed all five of Negron's points:
1. If Florida advances funds to complete the rehabilitation of the Herbert Hoover Dike around Lake Okeechobee, the federal government will not repay the money to Florida. We will have simply spent hundreds of millions of dollars of General Revenue funds on what is unquestionably a federal responsibility.
RESPONSE: Senator Negron has long advocated that the state of Florida should have an equal role in the management of Lake Okeechobee. See his February 2014 letter to Congressman Miller where he states:
“To address these long-term impacts and consistent with the recommendations of the Select Committee, I am asking Congress to take the following actions: (1) remove the Army Corps’ sole jurisdiction over Lake Okeechobee releases in the manner outlined in the attached report; and (2) direct the Army Corps to develop an interim risk assessment and lake-level schedule to account for the rehabilitation that has been completed or is ongoing to repair the Herbert Hoover Dike.”
Inherent to asking for equal status in management decisions is a financial commitment to sharing in the operation and maintenance cost. In his 2016 Candidate Questionnaire in the TCPalm, Senator Negron stated that the state should take over maintenance and operation of Lake Okeechobee from the Army Corps of Engineers. See Question 16.
2. As I have consistently advocated from day one, Florida's best scientists should determine the Lake Okeechobee Release Schedule (LORS) and not the Army Corps of Engineers. Achieving this goal would take an act of Congress, a highly unlikely outcome.
RESPONSE: Moving forward with a south-of-the-lake reservoir will also take an Act of Congress to receive federal cost share and is equally unlikely due to the excessive cost and low return on investment. The financial liability of expediting the Herbert Hoover Dike repairs is approximately $400 million dollars versus the potentially $2 billion cost share of the proposed EAA Reservoir. The Dike repairs would allow for short-term storage (1.25 feet equals 564,000 acre feet) for a fraction of the cost of a southern reservoir that will hold less water.
3. Once the Herbert Hoover Dike rehabilitation is complete in 2024, the Army Corps of Engineers is not committed to storing one more gallon of water in Lake Okeechobee. The LORS must go through a multi-year review process, with the Corps predicting only negligible modifications to the release schedule. The Corps wants to avoid expected negative impacts it believes would result if the Lake is managed at higher levels than the present.
RESPONSE: Advocates of the Herbert Hoover Dike repairs are not suggesting that the Lake be managed at higher levels.The additional short-term, interim storage of 564,000 acre feet in the Lake would provide significant reductions in lake releases. In Dr. Paul Gray’s 2016 letter (attached), he states “Were the HHD safer today, the Corps could contemplate reducing or halting the current disastrous releases to the estuaries for a period of time to benefit them, and resume releases later. With the HHD in its present condition, such an option is not feasible and is an example of how a safer Dike can allow improved management.”
Furthermore, the modification of LORS does not have to wait until final repairs are completed and will be completed years in advance of the construction of a southern reservoir.
4. Under both the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) and the Central Everglades Planning Project (CEPP), redirecting damaging Lake Okeechobee discharges southward to improve the flow, timing, and distribution of water through the Everglades has already been authorized. The issue is not if we will have additional southern storage, it is when and where.
RESPONSE: Project sequencing is very important. The first phase of EAA storage was authorized in CEPP. Additional storage was determined to NOT be cost-effective at this time due in part to the other projects that have to be completed first. If additional storage is determined to be feasible in the future, it can be accomplished on existing public lands known as the A-1 and A-2. This option was included in the Central Everglades Plan. National Academies of Science, UF, and the CEPP plan recognize that the next increment of EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA RESERVOIR could be built on existing A-1 and A-2 lands.
See Page 129 of the National Academies of Sciences Report, Progress Towards Restoring the Everglades: The Sixth Biennial Review -- 2016: “The Central Everglades project implementation report (USACE and SFWMD, 2014a) states that the A-2 FEB could be converted to a deep reservoir at a later date to provide an additional increment of storage. Likewise, the A-1 FEB was constructed with space outside the levee embankment to allow room for increasing the height to allow for greater storage.”
See Page 57 of the University of Florida Water Institute Report, Options to Reduce High Volume Freshwater Flows to the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee Estuaries and Move More Water from Lake Okeechobee to the Southern Everglades: Building a deeper Reservoir on the Talisman site EAA (A-1and A-2)is a decision that “could be revisited during the development of the detailed design phase for the CEPP FEB.”
See Page 6-82 of the Army Corps of Engineers' Central Everglades Plan Project Implementation Report and Environmental Impact Statement: “The recommended plan A-2 FEB does not preclude future increments of CERP planning for additional storage in the EAA to provide additional water supply deliveries for either agricultural irrigation or environmental water deliveries. For example, the A-2 FEB could be converted to an STA or deeper reservoir that works in conjunction with the State’s existing STA system to accommodate any future upstream storage and treatment to further increase water deliveries to the Water Conservation Areas, and/or the CERP EAA -- Phase I Component I storage functions could be implemented."
5. If the Florida Legislature approves and funds additional water storage south of Lake Okeechobee, the Army Corps of Engineers will reevaluate the order of priority in the 2016 Integrated Delivery Schedule (IDS). Florida is a partner in Everglades restoration, and its decisions influence and impact federal participation in the 50-50 matching program. An example of this reality is the Corps' recent initiation of the Lake Okeechobee Watershed one year earlier than planned after adverse discharge events.
RESPONSE: The IDS simply schedules the planning timeline. Inclusion in the IDS does not guarantee federal authorization or cost share. A detailed and costly multi-year feasibility study that culminates with a Project Implementation Report and Environmental Impact Statement is required before Congress can consider authorizing a project. The acquisition of lands prior to conducting a legitimate feasibility study puts the state expenditures at risk. To be clear, Congress has not authorized a 60,000-acre EAA Reservoir. CERP recommended an "assumed" initial design of 60,000 acres/6 feet deep but clearly states that the final size, depth, and configuration will be determined through more detailed design. That detailed design work was completed in the Central Everglades Plan, which evaluated the larger 12-foot-deep reservoir but concluded that it was not cost-effective. To date, no federal or state agency has determined that 60,000 acres of land in the EAA is necessary, technically feasible or a cost-efficient use of taxpayer dollars. (See Page 9-9 from the Final CERP Feasibility Report and EIS and see Page 3-13 Final Central Everglades Planning Project Implementation Report and Environmental Impact Statement.)
READ MORE FROM SUNSHINE STATE NEWS
Leader Departs as Enterprise Florida Remains Under Fire
57 Farmers Fire Back at Negron in His 'War' Against Everglades Ag
