Sara Fain • My View • December 29, 2008 Tallahassee.com

In recent weeks, we've seen plenty of criticism about the details of the proposed purchase by the South Florida Water Management District of 181,000 acres of U.S. Sugar Corp. land for the benefit of Everglades restoration.

While the deal is not perfect, perhaps the naysayers cannot see the forest for the trees. The very ability to manage water — provide drinking water, prevent flooding and maintain basic ecosystem functions in South Florida — is at stake, and the opportunities made possible by acquiring this land are the key to long-term success or failure.

There is no question that Florida's Everglades are suffering. Every day that we don't move forward on restoration, this intricate ecosystem breaks down a little more.

Over the recent years, South Florida suffered from one of the longest and worst droughts in its history. One result was a raging fire in eastern Everglades National Park, an area constantly starved for water. This fire burned almost 40,000 acres. Peat soil that took thousands of years to accumulate was lost in a single afternoon.

Yet, more recently, Water Conservation Area 3A, north of Everglades National Park, was drowning with dangerously high water levels. These unnatural extremes are devastating not only to the environment, but to our native wildlife, including the Florida panther, American crocodile, wood stork, snail kite, Cape Sable seaside sparrow and coral reefs.

The harm we have witnessed from either too much or not enough water in different parts of the Everglades ecosystem is a stark demonstration of the well-documented, fundamental flaws in our antiquated water management system.

According to a recent report by the National Research Council's Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress, if progress is not made soon on important restoration projects, the Everglades' continuing degradation may, at least in part, become irreversible.

The committee stated: "Ongoing delay in South Florida ecosystem restoration not only has postponed improvements to the hydrological condition but also has allowed ecological decline to continue. . . . Unless near-term progress is achieved on major restoration initiatives . . . the Everglades ecosystem may experience irreversible losses to its character and functioning."

Much has been stated about the high cost of this land purchase. Yet, little attention has been paid to the many benefits that will come from this important investment.

With more than 7 million people already living in South Florida, we've outgrown a water-management system built for fewer than 2 million residents. The new design takes the natural system into account and will be a tremendous improvement. And with the fortuitous U.S. Sugar land acquisition, we'll now have the acreage required to create reservoirs and treatment areas to restore clean water flow from Lake Okeechobee to the Everglades, reducing harmful discharges out to our sensitive estuaries.

Tourism will benefit

Millions travel from all over the world to visit the Everglades every year, filling hotels, rental cars, restaurants and other tourist attractions. Recreational use of natural areas and parks by both tourists and residents is one of the most important economic activities in Florida. Research shows that protected lands actually correlate more with greater economic growth than do lands utilized for natural resource exploitation.

Is $1.3 billion too much to save a unique ecosystem that exists nowhere else in the world and has received international recognition for its incredible biodiversity? Is it too much to ensure that we have a clean water supply and economic development for future generations of South Floridians?

The Everglades Coalition of more than 6 million members believes it is not.

When President Truman dedicated Everglades National Park in 1947, he stated: "The benefits our nation will derive from this dedication will outlast the youngest of us. They will increase with the passage of years. Few actions could make a more lasting contribution to the enjoyment of the American people than the establishment of the Everglades National Park."

As Gov. Charlie Crist provides great leadership for the Everglades, we look to the 110th Congress and the Obama administration to renew its commitment to support and fund the restoration plan. Only with a strong federal-state partnership can we truly achieve our goals.

There's still plenty of work to be done to get there. During the 24th annual Everglades Coalition Conference in Miami on Jan. 9, a key session titled "Restoration after the Sugar Deal" will explore some of the issues we will face. Experts will discuss Everglades restoration as it pertains to growth management, political and public partnerships, endangered and invasive species, wildlife habitat, energy policies and water quality.

 [ send green star]

This is great news, thank you for keeping us updated ceci.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Purchase Agreement Subject To Funding

CLEWISTON, FL. -- After extensive deliberation, due diligence and public input, the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Governing Board today voted 4 to 3 to accept a proposal to acquire more than 180,000 acres of agricultural land for Everglades restoration from the United States Sugar Corporation, contingent upon a specific amendment to the negotiated purchase and sale contract.

The transaction, subject to financing and U.S. Sugar's concurrence with the revised contract condition, would provide water managers with the opportunity to store and treat water for the benefit of the Everglades's "River of Grass", Lake Okeechobee and the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee rivers and estuaries. The proposed purchase is the largest public land acquisition in Florida's history and the single most important action to protect the Everglades since the designation of Everglades National Park sixty years ago, say the Water Management District officials.

"This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to acquire land in the Everglades Agricultural Area for restoration. The immense environmental benefit of these lands and their value to Florida's unique Everglades ecosystem cannot be overstated," said SFWMD Governing Board Chairman Eric Buermann. "Without losing sight of Governor Crist's bold vision for restoration, the Board has evaluated the details of the proposed acquisition and listened carefully to the input of Floridians, the Florida Legislature and local elected leaders. Amending the contract before us is an important step for delivering an agreement that not only meets South Florida's environmental needs but also better protects the interests of the taxpayers. This is good government and the public process at work. We are hopeful that U.S. Sugar will agree to this essential and necessary improvement to the contract and accept the Board's revision."

The District would take ownership of a minimum of 180,000 acres land and its improvements for a purchase price of $1.34 billion.
Under a separate agreement, U.S. Sugar would lease and manage the land for agricultural operation for seven years, avoiding more than $40 million in land management costs to the District over the life of the lease.

The lease arrangement would allow the release of the first 10,000 acres of property to the District at any time after the first year with appropriate notice. An additional 30,000 acres may be released in year six, on or after December 30, 2015. The lease agreement would also allow for the release of up to 3,000 acres in connection with land transfers to municipalities or other governmental entities. The company would retain ownership of its major assets, including a sugar mill, refinery, railroad and citrus processing plant.

Subject to court validation and suitable market conditions, the District would issue certificates of participation to fund the land acquisition. The parties must close on the purchase within 90 days of bond validation and no later than September 25, 2009.

To protect the agency's core mission in light of a fluctuating and challenging economic climate, the Governing Board strengthened financing conditions within the purchase and sale agreement offered by U.S. Sugar. Before closing, a newly proposed clause would allow the Governing Board to review the most current economic conditions – including interest rates and revenue streams – and verify the District's capacity to finance the purchase and accomplish its existing statutory mandates and legal obligations.

The District's extensive due diligence included multiple land appraisals, environmental assessments and engineering evaluations over more than 180,000 acres. The in-depth reports and data associated with the acquisition were presented to the Governing Board during a series of monthly public meetings and made available through the District's Web site at www.sfwmd.gov/riverofgrass as part of the public proceedings and deliberation.

The Everglades once covered almost 11,000 square miles of South Florida. Just a century ago, water flowed down the Kissimmee River into Lake Okeechobee, then south through the Everglades to the Florida Bay – the ultimate destination of the pure sheet flow. Because of efforts to drain the marshland for agriculture, development and flood control, the Everglades is today half the size it was a century ago.

The Everglades is home to more than sixty threatened and endangered species, including the Florida panther, American crocodile, snail kite and wood stork. The mix of salt and freshwater makes it the only place on Earth where alligators and crocodiles exist side by side.

 [ send green star]

Associated Press - December 16, 2008 6:13 PM ET

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) - The organization that controls water supplies for most of South Florida has approved a $1.34 billion buyout plan to restore the Everglades.

The South Florida Water Management District voted Tuesday for the buyout of U.S. Sugar Corp. in what could be the most expensive conservation land purchase in Florida's history.

The vote is not automatically binding. The state was granted an extra financial escape clause and it's still subject to financing. U.S. Sugar must also approve it.

The plan is considered key to restoring natural water flow to the Everglades after decades of overdevelopment and farming.

But local lawmakers are worried about making the deal during an economic crisis that has forced the state to cut services to residents.

 [ send green star]

 I understand that a compromise that makes all parties happy is beneficial, but two years seems like a long time to get this all sorted and who knows how much more red tape and disagreements may come up to push those two years even further along on the calander.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

U.S. Sugar in Clewiston, Fla., will keep its mill and other assets.

MIAMI — United States Sugar Corporation has agreed to sell 181,000 acres of farmland to the State of Florida for $1.34 billion in a slimmed-down deal intended to rescue the Everglades while letting the company stay in business.

The price is $410 million less than Gov. Charlie Crist offered for the entire company in June. It is also a simpler transaction involving only real estate — U.S. Sugar would retain its mill, citrus processing facilities and other assets — leaving open the possibility of preserving the company’s 1,700 jobs.

“This is a unique opportunity,” said Robert Coker, a senior vice president with U.S. Sugar. “We’re going to go back and re-evaluate our business.”

Over the long term, Mr. Coker said, the company would consider producing biofuels and finding other uses for assets like its sugar mill and railways.

In the short term, he said, little would change. Business would continue in Clewiston, the central Florida town where the company has been based since the 1930s. U.S. Sugar, the nation’s largest sugar producer, would lease its former land from the state for the next seven crop cycles, paying a total of about $60 million.

The agreement would grant the South Florida Water Management District, the state’s overseer of the purchase, the right to take 10,000 acres in that time for hydrology projects and an additional 30,000 in the seventh year. But most of the company’s land could continue to be farmed until the state needs it to reconnect Lake Okeechobee to Everglades National Park and Florida Bay.

Mr. Coker said he expected to see sugar on the land for at least a decade. “If they’re not building something on it, they will want someone to caretake it and they will probably want rent,” Mr. Coker said. “I hope we’ll be the ones doing that.”

A continued U.S. Sugar presence would please residents of Clewiston, who rely on the company for work in a county with an unemployment rate of 14 percent. Mayor Mali Chamness said she was “still concerned about the future” and wanted assurances from state officials that U.S. Sugar would not be put out of business after seven years.

Not surprisingly, Everglades advocates called for something else: an end to Big Sugar. David Guest, a lawyer with Earthjustice, said sugar production damaged the Everglades by releasing 100 pounds of phosphorous per year per acre. Taking the land out of production as soon as the deal allows “relieves an immediate stress,” Mr. Guest said.

He added that there would be other conflicts to come as well, over how much engineering was required to restore the Everglades, which projects to finance and how to pay for them.

Carol Wehle, executive director of the South Florida Water Management District, said the first challenge would be raising the $1.34 billion, primarily with bonds, amid a financial crisis. And with a “yes” vote from the district’s governing board at its December meeting, the final hurdle to state approval, the planning process will begin.

“We’ll take a two-year period to figure out what’s best for the Everglades,” Ms. Wehle said.

If history is a guide, it could take longer. Delays are common in environmental restoration for many reasons, as Mr. Crist found on Tuesday. He reportedly sees this deal as an emerald of his record, but after gathering reporters at the Miami home of the Everglades’ biggest champion, Marjory Stoneman Douglas, Mr. Crist had to cancel his appearance to announce the deal. His plane had mechanical difficulties; his office said he would host a do-over on Wednesday.

 [ send green star]

Tribune file photo by CHRIS URSO

Sugar cane fields can be seen on U.S. Sugar's Bryant Mills plant property on Aug. 28.

The Associated Press

Published: November 11, 2008

The revised deal for a territory about the size of Chicago would mean the state will not buy the company's high-tech sugar mill, railroad lines and citrus processing plant, said the sources. However, the acreage involved wouldn't be significantly reduced.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the details before Gov. Charlie Crist's scheduled announcement of the potential deal today.

Under the initial proposal, U.S. Sugar was set to go out of business after six years once the deal was signed. Now it's unclear how long the land will remain in agriculture since the new proposal calls for farming to be phased out over time as restoration projects are designed. That could mean the company - which has about 1,700 employees - will remain in business longer.

Farming in the region has long been considered a hindrance to restoring natural water flow to the Everglades, blocking flow patterns and contributing pollutants and fertilizers to the ecosystem.

The new proposal still requires the approval of the boards of U.S. Sugar and the South Florida Water Management District.

Crist's office did not return calls seeking comment, but released an advisory saying he would appear today.

U.S. Sugar Vice President Robert Coker had no comment.

The fundamentals of the agreement Crist announced in June have changed significantly over the ensuing months. At the time, the historic pact was lauded by many environmentalists as a boon for Everglades restoration.

Declaring the deal "as monumental as the creation of our nation's first national park," Crist said the state would take over all of U.S. Sugar's 187,000 acres, effectively putting the company out of business. However, a resolution to be discussed at a meeting of the South Florida Water Management District board on Thursday suggests the revised plan would take over 182,500 acres - or about 285 square miles.

The sources familiar with the deal said acreage subtracted from the initial deal includes land on which the company's assets sit.

 [ send green star]

By ERIC STAATS (Contact), CHARLIE WHITEHEAD (Contact)
Updated 7:08 p.m., Tuesday, November 11, 2008

MIAMI — A scaled-down version of a vast state buyout of sugar farms for Everglades restoration received mixed reviews Tuesday from Southwest Florida legislators.

U.S. Sugar, the nation’s largest producer of sugar cane, announced in statements Tuesday that the state has agreed to pay $1.34 billion, instead of the $1.75 billion originally proposed, under a revised deal.

The state will acquire nearly the same number of acres it would have from U.S. Sugar in a deal announced last June, but it no longer has plans to buy up the company’s high-tech mill, railroad lines or citrus processing plant, the company said.

Gov. Charlie Crist had been scheduled to announce the deal at the former Miami home of Marjory Stoneman Douglass, one of the state’s most revered environmentalists and the author of the influential 1947 book “The Everglades: River of Grass.”

But Crist’s plane had mechanical trouble and was forced to make an emergency landing Tuesday. Officials said the governor would make his remarks at the home this morning.

A scaled-back buyout makes sense given tough economic times and forecasts for declining state revenues for Florida, state Sen.-elect Garrett Richter, R-Naples.

“Not to say the purchase of the land is good or bad, well-timed or poorly timed, but it is prudent for leadership of our state to inspect, rethink and prioritize how we spend money,” Richter said.

State Rep. Trudi Williams, R-Fort Myers, said she’s not sure the deal can’t be scaled back further. She said she doesn’t want the state to buy any more land than it needs for restoration.

“It needs work,” Williams, a former member of the South Florida Water Management District governing board, said of the deal with U.S. Sugar.

Charles Dauray, the west coast representative on the water management district board, said he looks forward to learning all the new details at a governing board meeting Thursday.

“I’m as anxious as anyone to hear the governor’s announcement,” Dauray said.

Negotiations among the water management district, U.S. Sugar and “interested third parties” are ongoing, Dauray said.

Those third parties might be interested in buying assets that Florida might not now buy from U.S. Sugar, he said.

“The financial and real estate world has changed since the transaction was announced on June 24,” leading to the change in terms, U.S. Sugar said in a statement.

Environmentalists praised the new deal, saying it’s simpler and less expensive. They already had lauded the original proposal because it would convert farm land into conservation land, allowing water managers to create a system to clean and store water before sending it south into the Everglades.

Now, “In a turbulent credit market it simplifies the deal,” said Kirk Fordham, CEO of the nonprofit Everglades Foundation.

David Guest, an attorney for the ecological law firm Earthjustice, likened the deal to getting a hot dog without relish and mustard.

“It’s cheaper and what you really wanted in the first place,” said Guest, who has spent decades fighting for Everglades restoration.

According to the statement from U.S. Sugar, the deal includes the following terms:

— The state takes over approximately 181,000 acres as opposed to 187,000.

— U.S. Sugar is allowed to lease back the land at $50 per acre, per year for seven crop cycles or six years. After that, U.S. Sugar will still own the processing facilities and could continue to operate them even without farmland. The mill could simply refine raw sugar produced elsewhere or be converted for the production of alternative energy. The company did not say what it planned.

The new proposal still requires the approval of the boards of U.S. Sugar and the South Florida Water Management District, a government agency responsible for water quality and environmental restoration. That deal could be signed as early as December according to the statement from U.S. Sugar.

Still unclear, however, is how much of the land will go to conservation and how much will stay as farmland, according to the Everglades Foundation’s Fordham.

Regardless of this deal, some 300,000 acres in the Everglades, or about 500 square miles, will remain in agriculture production by other companies.

Farming in the region has long been considered a hindrance to restoring natural water flow to the Everglades, blocking flow patterns and contributing pollutants and fertilizers to the ecosystem.

 [ send green star]

Slight financial problems on Wall street right now so maybe thats the real source in truth of things moving slow!?

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Everglades restoration bogged down by poor planning-04 October 2008 RESTORATION of the Florida Everglades is stuck in a bureaucratic quagmire. Despite a deal earlier this year in which the state bought 75,000 hectares of Everglades farmland, restoration is moving slowly, risking further deterioration of the fragile ecosystem and irreversible species losses. The US National Research Council panel charged with reviewing an ambitious restoration programme for the area says in a report this week that the plan - being mounted jointly by the state and federal agencies - "is bogged down in budgeting, planning and procedural matters and is making only scant progress". It blames the delays on the federal planning process and conflicts between government agencies and private groups. None of the four pilot projects and four infrastructure projects begun in 2000 has been completed. The delays make it impossible to assess the ecosystem's response to the project, the report warns. Time is running out as the number and area of tree islands in the marsh continues to shrink, while invasive species are spreading. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Report: Everglades in decline as restoration lags - By BRIAN SKOLOFF, Associated Press WEST PALM BEACH — A multibillion-dollar effort to restore Florida's Everglades has made little progress amid funding shortfalls, bureaucratic red tape and disagreements, according to a congressionally mandated report that warns the vast wetland is in peril. The National Research Council, in findings Monday, warned that degradation of the Everglades could become irreversible if action isn't taken quickly. "The Everglades ecosystem is continuing to decline. It's our estimate that we're losing the battle to save this thing," said William Graf, the report's committee chairman and head of the department of geography at the University of South Carolina at Columbia. The South Florida Water Management District, which oversees restoration for the state, said in a statement that it agrees with the report's findings "that restoration progress is hampered by limited federal funding and a complex and lengthy federal planning process." Approved by Congress in 2000, the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, or CERP, was originally estimated to cost about $7.8 billion and take 30 years to complete — a price tag that has since ballooned due to rising costs. The intent is to help restore some natural water flow after decades of diversions for development and agriculture, which have shrunk the Everglades to half its historical 4 million acres. The 2000 plan made the federal government and Florida 50-50 partners. To date, the state has committed more than $2 billion and pushed ahead alone with a few projects. Congress has only appropriated several hundred million dollars. Lake Okeechobee, the liquid heart of the Everglades, remains heavily polluted with phosphorous mostly from fertilizer runoff. Wildlife habitat is disappearing and at least 67 threatened or endangered species face extreme peril. About a million acres are contaminated with mercury, the report noted. "Unless near-term progress is achieved on major restoration initiatives, the Everglades will likely face further loss of species and habitat deterioration, which could be difficult or impossible to reverse," the report said. Meanwhile, the NRC committee commended Florida for its ambitious land acquisition, including a $1.75 billion proposal to buy some 300 square miles of farmland from U.S. Sugar Corp. that has long been a hindrance to water flow. However, much of that land may remain in agriculture, and the committee noted effects of such a deal may be more than a decade away. Dexter Lehtinen, an attorney who represents the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians living in the Everglades, has long fought for restoration. He said the effort has been mired in plan changes, talk and not enough action. Many environmentalists lauded a potential buyout of U.S. Sugar, announced by Gov. Charlie Crist in June, as a boon for Everglades restoration. At the time, Crist proclaimed the planned buyout as the savior of the wetlands — "as monumental as the creation of our nation's first national park." But as details of the plan emerge, officials now say only about half the 300 square miles the state would acquire from the company would actually go toward environmental restoration. The rest likely will remain in agriculture. Lehtinen said that deal just adds another delay to the monumental, undone task of rescuing the Everglades while officials negotiate the sale with U.S. Sugar and rework restoration plans. "We're biting off more than we can chew rather than chewing what we've got," Lehtinen said. "And that's going to kill the Everglades." David Guest, an attorney for Earthjustice who has spent decades fighting for Everglades restoration, agreed that the U.S. Sugar deal may cause more delays. But he thinks it will eventually provide a much-needed shortcut. "The CERP was premised on the need to deal with water quality issues" around farms, Guest said, noting that much of that land will now be taken out of agriculture, removing a major obstacle over time. (If I've posted this story before, please accept my apologies, I thought it was relevant to the short one above it)

 [ send green star]

I am starting to wonder if this land will be purchased in our lifetime!

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

September 25, 2008 Among the people nervously watching Wall Street's meltdown: the state officials in charge of pursuing Gov. Charlie Crist's buyout of U.S. Sugar for Everglades restoration. The South Florida Water Management District is in charge of negotiating the buyout. The agency expected to finance the purchase -- which could cost as much as $1.75-billion -- by borrowing the money from nine different bankers. Leading the district's list of bankers: Morgan Stanley. Also on the list: Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers. So when the news broke about all three taking a nosedive, it put an additional kink into the already complex negotiations. --Craig Pittman "When I saw that, I said, 'Oh crap,' " Carol Wehle, executive director of the South Florida Water Management District, said Thursday while attending the Water Congress in Orlando.Wehle said she has no idea at this point how the financing will play out at this point, but she said, "Good thing we're not closing on this tomorrow." [SFWMD image of Everglades] Posted by Times Editor at 4:02:54 PM on September 25, 2008 in Charlie Crist | Permalink

 [ send green star]

If I have got this right-the state of Florida after buying the land can start using it after 6 to 7 years!?.Also"... The plan would put US Sugar out of business and leave 1,700 people unemployed..."

Well for the older ones(but with more experience!) loosing their jobs thats probably going to be tough though in theory it shouldnt be(Keeping age discrimination in mind!).For the younger ones they have time to look for a new job but idealy the State could help here too-young and older.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

And what 'Red Tape" will cause delays in 2009?

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

WEST PALM BEACH, Florida - The state of Florida is buying 300 acres of land in the Everglades from U.S. Sugar, but the process has slowed due to financing uncertainties. A project set for signing in November, the sugar swap is now reaching into 2009.

The proposal grants Florida the land after seven years. The state then intends to put the Everglades region under conservation and restoration efforts. While many environmentalists celebrate the deal, residents of the surrounding communities worry they may lose their jobs. The plan would put US Sugar out of business and leave 1,700 people unemployed.

According to the Associated Press, “The multibillion Everglades restoration effort, bogged down for years by bureaucracy, funding shortfalls and missteps, is the largest of its kind in the world. It is aimed at undoing or rerouting decades of flood-control projects that were built to make way for houses and farms.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By BRIAN SKOLOFF – 7 hours ago

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — A gigantic land deal for a territory larger than the city of Chicago, intended to help restore the dying Everglades, has been delayed as both sides work out details of the proposal for the state to buy some 300 square miles from U.S. Sugar Corp, officials said Wednesday.

Declaring the proposal "as monumental as the creation of our nation's first national park," Republican Gov. Charlie Crist made the announcement about the deal in June while standing in the Everglades.

The initial announcement said the state would buy some 300 square miles of U.S. Sugar's holdings in the Everglades south of Lake Okeechobee, including its cane fields, mill, refining facilities, citrus groves, and railroad line.

U.S. Sugar would be allowed to farm the 187,000 acres for six more years, after which it would go out of business, leaving some 1,700 workers unemployed.

The state would then protect the land from development, which has been encroaching on the Everglades for decades.

Officials said in June they planned to sign a contract on the deal by November.

It likely won't happen now until sometime in 2009, according to officials with the South Florida Water Management District, which oversees Everglades restoration for the state.

The district had planned to borrow the money through bonds for the deal and pay off the debt with property taxes from its 16 county region stretching from Orlando to the Keys.

Officials now say they are hoping to negotiate simultaneous sales of some of U.S. Sugar's assets, such as its mill and railroad, before completing the sale. They also say they are seeking partners in the purchase.

"The word is out on the street and they know that we will not be holding onto these assets," Ruth Clements, the district's director of land acquisition, told board members on Wednesday.

State officials have said they also planned to build a network of reservoirs and marshes on the land to filter water flowing into the Everglades and help restore the River of Grass to a cleaner, more natural state.

For generations, farming and development have blocked the natural flow of water and allowed fertilizers and other pollutants to spill into the wetlands, slowly killing the ecosystem.

But just how long it will take to seal the deal remains unclear.

The deal would not end sugar production in the Everglades. Some 300,000 acres of land, or close to 500 square miles, used by other companies would remain in production.

Still, many residents in the region around U.S. Sugar's land, communities that have relied on the company as an economic engine for decades, fear its shutdown will ruin their livelihoods.

"I'm a lifer here, and would like to be a real lifer, but I'm concerned that I may be displaced by all of this," said attorney Melanie McGahee, from Clewiston, where U.S. Sugar is based. "We're sitting out here as business owners and longtime residents and families and not knowing what our future holds."

McGahee said she is concerned that many people, including environmentalists who have hailed this deal as a huge step forward for the Everglades, will simply see the people of Clewiston "as a small price to pay."

"But we are 6,000 families out here," she said.

The multibillion Everglades restoration effort, bogged down for years by bureaucracy, funding shortfalls and missteps, is the largest of its kind in the world. It is aimed at undoing or rerouting decades of flood-control projects that were built to make way for houses and farms.

 [ send green star]

Good gravy, this is going to be the Never Ending Battle!!!

Paul while its great in theory to propose Stevia as an alternative crop to sugar cane, in the long run I don't see it as an alternative crop that would be embraced readily. I use stevia and have for many years, the porblem is the stigma and controversy that Stevia has due to the FDA lable many years ago as a "Banned Unsafe Product". Originally 1980's Stevia was on the FDA's GRAS (Generally Regarded as Safe) list. Then as popularity grew it magically it was removed from that list at the same time Aspartame entered the scene and saccharin was found to be a carcinogen. In 1991 the FDA banned Stevia, claiming (as it still does) that it was an "unsafe food additive," even though it has been used extensively in South America, Japan, China, Germany, Malaysia, Israel, and South Korea, and is available in many other countries.  What it all boils down to in my humble opinion is: that its all about Money for the FDA not  a more healthy -medicinally beneficial cost effective alternative.

Here is some of an interesting article about the FDA and teh Stevia controversy:

Stevia extracts are used in the Far East as a sweetener in items produced by American companies, such as Diet Coke and sugar free versions of Wrigley's gum and Beatrice Foods Yogurts, as well as for its therapeutic value. The FDA was forced to lift the ban on Stevia due to the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994. Since that time Stevia has been legal in the U.S., but only if specifically labeled as a dietary supplement. It cannot be used commercially in food products as a sweetener or labeled as a sweetener. In 1998, the FDA made a raid on a Stevia producer located in Texas and attempted to burn all of the books in their warehouse. One book relays the story of FDA's suppression of Stevia and another is a cookbook, which makes use of Stevia as a sweetener, not a supplement. There has been much speculation about the FDA's actions and policies concerning this beneficial herb, but evidence points to the very real probability that these things are the result of lobbying pressure exerted by chemical companies producing synthetic sugar substitutes.

 [ send green star]

Stevia(Stevia rebaudiana)is a NATURAL  sugar alternative which is about 300 times sweeter than sugar and therefore needs MUCH less land for cultivation and is financially at least as productive as sugar beet.Maybe Sugar Farmers in the Florida area should be informed of this alternative in a time where fights over land and priorities are being fought.For more see link;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevia_rebaudiana

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Andy Reid
Sep 09, 2008 (South Florida Sun-Sentinel - McClatchy-Tribune News Service via COMTEX) --

Sep. 9--Backlash from Florida's farming community keeps growing over the state's proposed $1.75 billion buyout of U.S. Sugar Corp. to make way for Everglades restoration.

A postcard campaign launched over the weekend targets Gov. Charlie Crist, imploring the governor who helped broker the deal to meet with Glades area farmers, businesses and residents worried about the economic results of losing U.S. Sugar.

"We do not want to be sacrificed in the name of Everglades Restoration!" read the 7,000 pre-printed postcards organizers are distributing with the hope that they end up in the governor's mailbox.

In addition, the chairman of the state Senate's agricultural committee is questioning how the South Florida Water Management District can afford the buyout while also paying for other long-promised Everglades projects and addressing the job losses expected from losing U.S. Sugar.

Sen. J.D. Alexander, R-Winter Haven, is chairman of a Senate appropriations committee the district answers to about how it spends taxpayers' money. In Alexander's Sept. 3 letter to the district he warned: "It is essential that the financial and economic impacts of this acquisition be thoroughly reviewed ... to ensure this action benefits the citizens of the state."

Glades communities have called for the district and governor to commit to keeping as much land as possible in agricultural production and to provide land and money to attract new businesses. They also called for keeping U.S. Sugar's mill and citrus plant operating after the deal is done.

"We don't know what we are going to be left with ... We need to be heard," said Ardis Hammock, one of the organizers of the campaign.

Crist on June 24 announced the landmark deal to put U.S. Sugar out of business over the next six years and use the company's 187,000 acres to help restore flows of water from Lake Okeechobee to the Everglades.

Since then, the district and U.S. Sugar have been negotiating the details of a contract, due this month, to spell out the final cost and how to pay for it.

The district proposes borrowing the money for the deal, and paying off the debt with property taxes from 16 counties from Orlando to the Keys.

But that financing method was once intended for other Lake Okeechobee and Everglades restoration projects. Alexander, a citrus grower who represents several of the counties around Lake Okeechobee, questions how the district will meet all those financial obligations.

"It doesn't leave us any room to build the reservoirs and storm-water treatment areas necessary to implement a plan that is going to make a major difference," Alexander said Monday.

Because of the U.S. Sugar deal, district officials are considering delaying or scaling back some restoration projects while also seeking more federal money.

The district's board will get an update Wednesday on the proposed U.S. Sugar deal, intended to close by Nov. 30.

Crist's economic development staff is meeting with leaders in areas affected by the U.S. Sugar deal to explore alternatives to protect and attract jobs, Crist spokesman Sterling Ivey said.

 [ send green star]

Thank you Paul, sadly I have read the report. Its all summation at this point-However seems highly likely to be the future scenario for Florida and its wild inhabitants. It will undoubtably mean the ending to any wild population of panthers(if by some miracle they were to hang on until that said time) as well as untolled multitude of so many other species. Heartbreaking to think that one day what I see outside in and around the glades will only be seen in the Zoos across the state-never more will they know freedom ,life,or a quality existance.

I am keeping my fingers crsossed in hopes that we get a  future Governor in office who will realize that the Tourism and the Economy would be so badly damaged by the loss of so much habitate culminating in the drastic loss of wildlife, that they will not allow the population growth as well as buisness growth to flow into the remaining wild wetlands. Until the 2060 report comes to reality, I am still fighting for the return and restoration of what belongs to the Wildlife of Florida-and the Big Sugar land would be a good chunk to start with. Once again -unfortunately time is not floridas indigenous species friend-they do not have 5 -10 years to wait around for land to be available on which they can claim territory,free from immediate space conflict, to be able to hunt, raise a family , etc. Its all a hurry up and wait event right now, one which I do not feel to upbeat about. The positive news I feel is that Angela recently saw a Panther in the Suwanee area-statistically thats kinda high up in Florida for the Panther(or so it has been for at least 10 years or better). Maybe this means that they are spreading back out -up into northern florida areas(where once they did roam) in order to avoid conflict and to be able to support themselves and cubs. I truely hope there will be a miracle for our Panthers, I do not want to see them become just another statistical species lost along the way due to the negligence or indifference of our society. The Panthers and animals were here first Dog gone It-as were the Native Americans ,and just look what has been done to them !!!! It's truely  shameful, disheartening, and sickening.

 [ send green star]

I agree with you Debbie but about the"years"did you read the "Florida 2060"report?.Here again;

http://www.wildlifeextra.com/go/news/florida-wildlife060.html

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

I received the same generic  responce letter too-Wooopppiiiii(means nothing because it is full of nothing pertinent, just a bunch of blah blah blah if you ask me). This  sugar deal seems to be fast becoming the "Pipe Dream" full of potholes and what If's. If and when this comes to a reality-I fear it will be so far down the road(years and years) to really be of benefit for our wildlife who need the habitate restored yesterday-not 10 yrs down the road-if ever. Oh I just don't have high hopes for this right now-I was all excited at first, but sadly now I am not so hopeful.  This is real Bummer.

 [ send green star]

US Sugar is pulling Christ's chain. They will continue doing it for years.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

I see another generic response it appears.  I found the below paragraph interesting.

Governor Crist
believes this ecosystem is a key component of our state's economy and
quality of life.  The Governor believes we must protect the beauty, the
natural water systems, and the more than 65 endangered and threatened
species that make their home in the Everglades.

If he is so concerned and believes in the ecosystem, then why is there not enough push and demand from high up to conserve and save the area.  It appears to be more talking than the boots doing the walking so to speak. 

 [ send green star]

On the subject of land and the future in Florida:

http://www.wildlifeextra.com/go/news/florida-wildlife060.html

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

The thing that disturbs me about the map, is how the reserves seem a lot smaller than the agricultural  areas??

 [ send green star]

Quote:"...The taxpayers of Florida cannot afford to buy land we do not need...".

A)So whose wasting taxpayers money making them so poor!!?.

"...land "WE"do not need.."!!?.Is that"we" now taxpayers or Sen.J.D.Alexander!!?Certainly isnt the voice of the Panthers!.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

August 25, 2008

 [ send green star]

NPR.org, June 24, 2008 · Florida is buying 187,000 acres of South Florida land from U.S. Sugar Corp., a move that will boost efforts to restore the Everglades, state officials said Tuesday.

U.S. Sugar will hand over the farmland to Florida for $1.75 billion; the company is then expected to go out of business in six years, company and state officials said.

Most of U.S. Sugar's land is south of Lake Okeechobee, in an area vital to the Everglades' health. Announcing the agreement, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R) said the deal provides a long-sought "missing link" that will help restore the natural flow of water from Okeechobee south to Florida Bay.

"This represents — if we're successful, and I believe we will be — the largest conservation purchase in the history of the state of Florida," Crist said.

The Everglades wetlands is the largest subtropical wilderness in the United States, and it is home to rare and endangered species, such as the American crocodile and the Florida panther.

Details still have to be worked out, but U.S. Sugar Chief Executive Officer Robert Buker said he expects shareholders would receive $350 a share.

The company would keep using the land to produce sugar for the next six years and provide a severance package for its nearly 1,900 employees to ease the transition.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

When will the U.S. Sugar lands be transferred to the State for Everglades restoration?

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Yes of course!!!..but you tell us first and then I will tell you if you are right!!!haha!.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Yes, very interesting indeed.......anyone spot the problem with this image?

 [ send green star]

Interesting map.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Hmmm....I guess we will have to wait and see what happens. Gesh, so frustrating!

 [ send green star]

All along I have had a feeling that theres more to this then is revealed and now we get to read Patrik Jonssons article written in the CHRISTIAN Science MONITOR-alarm level red!.

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Removing land from cane production could help save this environmental jewel.By Patrik Jonsson

Miami - Banged out in secret meetings, a $1.75 billion taxpayer-funded plan to buy 187,000 acres of US Sugar's cane fields in the Lake Okeechobee basin marks one of the largest conservation buyouts of a major industry in the US, promising to break a major chokehold on the slowly dying Everglades.

But will it really work – and at what cost?

Those are the tough questions facing Floridians from Cracker families of the lake plains to suburbanites in Palm Beach. In a state usually more generous toward sun-seekers than swamp falcons, the buyout reflects a major change of political direction on behalf of the state's fragile backwaters.

What's more, the implications of the US Sugar deal could go far beyond the Sunshine State, offering a new Republican vision for downsizing polluting industries in a globalized economy while reducing – in Big Sugar's case – $2 billion in annual subsidies from Uncle Sam.

But University of Miami economist Richard Weiskoff warns that the buyout could turn out to be a backroom deal among political and industrial interests that fails to deliver salvation for one of the world's wildest and most important ecosystems.

"This was a great opportunity for US Sugar to get out of the business and give a potentially big boost to [Republican Gov.] Charlie Crist and the Republicans on the environment," says Daniel Smith, a political scientist at the University of Florida in Gainesville.

But it also seems like such a sweetheart deal, he says, that critics of the deal could be blinded to the potential for cleaning up the Everglades.

Two months after a June 24 announcement that shocked Floridians, the deal is now coming into sharp relief.

The main players include Governor Crist, who is aiming for an environmental legacy that could help his GOP vice-presidential bid; a powerful sugar corporation looking for financial liquidity in a tight global sugar market – perhaps to finance entry into new businesses; a necklace of poor farm communities with few new opportunities; and powerful environmental groups with growing clout in Tallahassee.

Though technically separate from the US Army Corps of Engineers' $7 billion Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), the purchase of the so-called Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) lands would provide a significant boost to a sluggish restoration effort.

Taking huge chunks of cane country out of agricultural use would not only reduce the amount of damaging fertilizers, but could also provide up to 1 million acre feet of water needed to manage in- and out-flows to the dying fringes of the River of Grass.

The Everglades needs at least 5 million more acre feet of water capacity in order to thrive, says Kenneth Ammons, the deputy director of the state's restoration efforts.

Then there's the human cost of taking land out of sugar production: The possible loss of 10,711 farm-related jobs, according to a recent study by the University of Florida.

 [ send green star]

"This is unprecedented in terms of a state buyout of a private company for the purposes of conservation," says University of Florida economist Alan Hodges, who authored the study.

The proposed purchase, which could be finalized by November, addresses two interests with political clout in the Tallahassee power structure: sugar and environmentalists. Both have been challenged – sugar by globalization, and environmentalists by the slow (some say insignificant) progress of the 14-year restoration process, which was sparked by a 1988 lawsuit against the state by former US Attorney Dexter Lehtinen.

"The sugar industry in Florida has been problematic for years," says David Reiner, the president of Friends of the Everglades, an environmental group in Miami. "It's always been two-faced: The economic bonus to the state has been huge, but the ecological damage it causes has been tremendous."

To many farm families, the purchase is a sellout of a patch of Old Florida, an attack on the state's poorest, least politically powerful counties.

Not only will the tax burden fall on the 16-county South Florida Water Management District, but farmers say they're unfairly being held out as scapegoats for a statewide, even national, issue: The influx of 16 million Florida residents since 1960, bringing commercial and residential development and more challenges for water – both as a resource in terms of added pollution .

"They removed the mangroves, filled in the swamplands, and inhabited the barrier islands," says Butch Jones, a Glades County commissioner.

"If you want to put Florida back like it used to be, those areas should also" be reverted, he says.

Last week, Federal District Judge Federico Moreno handed Crist's plan a victory when he rejected a motion by the Everglades-dwelling Miccosukee tribe of Indians to restart construction of a $750 million reservoir. The Miccosukee say the reservoir would provide more rapid relief than the 10 years it likely would take for the US Sugar buyout to restore their water resource.

According to court testimony and local news reports, the state stalled construction on the reservoir in part because it needs the cash to finance the buyout, raising the stakes even further for the plan to work.

"If people are told, you have to readjust in the interest of the Everglades, that's noble," says Professor Weiskoff, author of "The Economics of Everglades Restoration."

"But if it's to make US Sugar wealthy and shaft the Everglades in the process, then they're right to be skeptical," he says.

 [ send green star]

By ERIC STAATS

NAPLES — The Panther Island Mitigation Bank and Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary already are neighbors in northern Collier County.

Now they also are partners in what the big business and the nonprofit call a pioneering cross-border restoration project with a twist.

The deal will mean almost 1,800 acres of degraded farm fields and non-native vegetation at the 11,000-acre sanctuary will be restored on the tab of developers whose state and federal environmental permits require mitigation credits for destroying wetlands and wildlife habitat.

Environmental groups often malign mitigation banking as a too-easy out that shortchanges the environment.

Here’s the twist: Under the deal with the mitigation bank, Corkscrew managers will help guide the design of the restoration project on sanctuary land and will exercise controls to make sure developers who buy credits in the new mitigation bank aren’t selling out the environment in the process.

“We just don’t participate in that kind of thing,” Corkscrew manager Ed Carlson said Monday.

Carlson equated the controls to having “veto” power over mitigation plans that use credits from the sanctuary.

Wetlandsbank Group CEO Stephen Collins said Corkscrew will have “a right to make their concerns known.”

“We all want to be sure they’re getting true replacement (of wetlands destroyed),” Collins said.

Wetlandsbank Group is a partner in the Panther Island joint venture with landowners Barron Collier Cos. and past and present directors of engineering and land planning firm WilsonMiller.

As the 2,800-acre Panther Island bank sells out, the joint venture is handing over the restored land to Corkscrew along with a $1.5 million endowment to maintain the land.

So far, almost 1,900 acres have been transferred and another 300 acres are expected to be transferred by the end of the year, Collins said.

The new mitigation bank would restore 1,120 acres Corkscrew got through a land swap with South Florida Water Management District earlier this year.

Corkscrew had owned the swapped land since the 1960s. The sanctuary bought the land in response to a panic, later deemed unfounded, that the Golden Gate Estates canal system would drain the sanctuary, Carlson said. The land had been clear cut by logging companies, and the water management district had proposed putting hiking trails on it.

Instead, the sanctuary gave the land to the water management district in exchange for water management district land that squared off the sanctuary’s borders and fronted on the Panther Island mitigation bank.

The sanctuary mitigation bank also would take in another 640 acres adjacent to the swapped land.

“What we’re losing are wetlands that aren’t viable and converting them to wetlands that are viable,” Carlson said. “It’s a win for the environment.”

The restoration will focus on restoring shallow wetlands that are disappearing from the Southwest Florida landscape.

While they might be dry for months, the wetlands fill up with water at just the right time to provide nesting wood storks crucial foraging habitat.

The loss of so-called “short hydroperiod” wetlands is central to legal challenges environmental groups, including the National Audubon Society that owns Corkscrew sanctuary, have filed to stop the Mirasol project northwest of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard.

The sanctuary mitigation bank still must pass muster with state and federal permitting agencies, and restoration might not begin until sometime next year, Collins said.

He said the new mitigation bank would be “adding to an eco-asset.”

“I think we’re enabling the sanctuary to expand and undertake restoration it otherwise wouldn’t be able to do,” Collins said. “I think it’s a win-win for everybody.”

 [ send green star]

Has there been any updates to this yet Ceci?  I just can't understand why they don't see how important it is to have the everglades.

 [ send green star]

I must have misunderstood this but"Leave it to Beaver"is referring to attorney Dexter Lehtinen`s wife!!???.Lehtinen also suggests that the "sugar deal"is a cover up or in his words"its going to be used as an excuse".

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

Well now, this is certainly an interesting turn of events.. Could it be the proverbial monkey wrench in the works. Its pretty serious if he is calling for a violation of "Sunshine Law". This does not sound good and it could take years for this issue to be resolved-hoefully not but thats the reality of it. I guess we wait and see if "BIG SUGAR Deal" goes sour or sweet. This is a bummer!!! Thanks for the heads up Ceci.

 [ send green star]

By ASSOCIATED PRESS
Originally published 3:29 p.m., Friday, August 1, 2008

MIAMI — Florida's proposal to acquire 300 square miles of Everglades land from U.S. Sugar Corp. was illegally brokered in closed-door meetings, an attorney claimed in a lawsuit filed Friday.

Attorney Dexter Lehtinen, who has led efforts to restore the Everglades, is challenging a historic $1.75 billion deal in which U.S. Sugar would go out of business and sell its land to the state for restoration. He filed the lawsuit against the South Florida Water Management District.

Lehtinen contends meetings about the deal were illegal because they evaded Florida's Sunshine Law, among the broadest open-government legislation in the country. It mandates advance notice of government meetings and their agendas, a provision Lehtinen claims was ignored in the lead-up to the U.S. Sugar deal.

"There are a lot of unanswered questions that they've managed to not answer," Lehtinen said by phone after the filing was made in Circuit Court in Palm Beach County. "I'm not trying to stop the purchase. I'm just trying to stop a process in which there are no answers and there's no way to get answers."

Lehtinen said the public has been denied specifics on how the proposal would be funded and whether other Everglades projects would have to be scaled back to make money available.

"If this is added on to the existing projects then it's OK," he said, "but I have every indication it's not going to be added on. It's going to be used as an excuse."

Lehtinen doesn't expect his lawsuit to dissolve the deal, but he said he wants all further discussions to be held in accordance with the Sunshine Law and he wants to know what effect the U.S. Sugar buyout would have on current environmental programs.

Sterling Ivey, a spokesman for Gov. Charlie Crist, who brokered the deal, said, "We support the South Florida Water Management District and have confidence that the district has operated within the public record laws of Florida."

The water management district issued a statement saying the agency "remains committed to open government and conducting itself according to the letter and spirit of the law throughout these complex and delicate negotiations."

Crist announced in June that the state and the nation's largest producer of cane sugar were close to an agreement on turning over the land for Everglades restoration. The deal would mean the end of U.S. Sugar's operations and the loss of 1,700 jobs.

Officials hope to have a final agreement by November. U.S. Sugar would then be allowed to continue farming for another six years.

Water managers plan to use the land to construct a network of marsh treatment areas and reservoirs to clean and store water before sending it south into the Everglades.

Lehtinen is a former state legislator and Miami U.S. attorney who brought a key federal lawsuit in the 1980s aimed at stopping environmental damage in the Everglades. In private practice he has long represented the Miccosukee Indian tribe in similar lawsuits aimed at accelerating Everglades restoration. He is a Republican, like his wife, U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

Remember "Leave It To Beaver"? This is "Leave It To Ileana the Destroyer". Anything that happens that is environmentally positive will see her come a-runnin' to plant herself in the ground against it! She is probably the worse and most dangerous Congresswoman Florida has ever had.

 [ send green star]

The Associated Press

The Tampa Tribune

Published: June 28, 2008

WEST PALM BEACH - WEST PALM BEACH - A planned $1.75 billion deal to buy out U.S. Sugar Corp.'s land in the Everglades could end up costing twice that much, including interest payments, water managers said Friday.

Earlier this week, Gov. Charlie Crist and U.S. Sugar Corp., the nation's largest cane sugar producer, announced a tentative deal for the state to buy the company's nearly 300 square miles in the Everglades.

However, the eventual cost to the South Florida Water Management District, which oversees Everglades restoration, based on a 5.5 percent interest rate during the proposed 30-year financing plan, would be $3.5 billion. That doesn't include money the state will have to spend preparing the land for restoration purposes.

The district plans to pay for the land, in part, through the issuance of bonds.

"The amount we'll be paying U.S. Sugar remains the same," Carol Wehle, executive director of the South Florida Water Management District, said Friday.

"If we had the money, we'd write a check tomorrow, but we don't," she added.

The agency hopes to recoup some money by refinancing over the course of the deal, and by selling off some of U.S. Sugar's assets that it won't need, such as the company's sugar mill and citrus plant.

Negotiations on the deal are still ongoing. Officials hope to have final agreement by November.

 [ send green star]

By Bruce Ritchie • FLORIDA CAPITAL BUREAU

The biggest conservation land deal in Florida history won't require state or federal money or a tax increase for South Florida residents, state officials said.

The South Florida Water Management District would pay $1.7-billion for the 187,000 acres of U.S. Sugar Corp. land with future property-tax collections in the district's 16 counties. The district has various tax rates in different areas, but it's roughly 60 cents on every $1,000 of taxable property value of property. In 2007 the district had property-tax revenue of $553 million. It's total budget, from all revenue sources, was $1.2 billion.

"It really is a reallocation of Everglades funds that have already been identified to ensure we take advantage of this great opportunity," Florida Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Michael Sole said.

The state already has more projects on its conservation lands purchase list than it can afford to buy in the next few years.

While federal support for Everglades restoration has lagged, the South Florida Water Management District has issued revenue bonds called "certificates of participation" to pay for restoration projects ahead of schedule. It will use the same type of bonds to pay for the U.S. Sugar land.

The new purchase may require a rescheduling of some Everglades restoration projects — but not a tax increase, said Thomas Olliff, assistant executive director of the South Florida Water Management District.

"We believe we can fund it fully with the revenues that we have with our current tax rate, then we would simply pay for it over a 30-year of time," Olliff said.

Environmentalists who support the purchase praised state officials for putting together the deal.

"It's a very clever way of doing things," said Eric Draper, policy director for Audubon of Florida.

"We are cheerleaders today but we certainly are going to be scrutinizing every portion of this deal," said Kirk Fordham, executive director of the Everglades Foundation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am waiting patiently for the other shoe to drop, this can't be as good as it sounds, it never is! It has to be for drilling in the future, maybe something else? I know the SFWMD is NOT to be trusted, I am truly befuddled. Any thoughts?

 [ send green star]

Mare, there's already a shortage. BUT, as it is summer and it has rained a bit, there is hope. The 'glades are starting to recover well from the fires, all we can do is pray there will be no more.

The lake though remains 4 feet below normal, it did go up a little to about 9.5 ft. For that recovery we are going to need tons of rain and a miracle, I'm afraid.

 [ send green star]

I hope this will benefit the alligators and other wildlife within it's walls.  However, I also wonder about the water.  I fear a shortage will come about.  And then, where will they get it all from? And who's really going to suffer..

 [ send green star]

By Jim Efstathiou Jr. and Alex Morales

June 25 (Bloomberg) -- Florida's planned $1.75 billion purchase of thousands of acres of wetland from U.S. Sugar Corp. will reconnect scattered parts of the Everglades to capture new water supplies for a thirsty state.

In one of the largest environmental land deals in U.S. history, Florida will get the ``missing link'' between Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades, Governor :S:d1" rel="nofollow" >Charlie Crist said yesterday. The state will regain control of water reserves that are being channeled to the sea to allow for real estate and industrial development.

``Every day, 1.7 billion gallons of water are redirected by canals and pipelines into the ocean, water that could be used to provide for Florida's expanding population,'' said :S:d1" rel="nofollow" >Maude Barlow, author of the book ``Blue Covenant: The Global Water Crisis and the Coming Battle for the Right to Water.''

The conservation effort will help replenish groundwater needed for drinking supplies and buffer the area against hurricanes. It also will cut the flow of agricultural chemicals entering the region known for its alligators and crocodiles.

Since the 1600s, more than half of the original wetlands in the lower 48 United States have been destroyed, with recent losses concentrated in the southeast around Florida, according to the Common Sense Environmental Fund, a Washington-based nonprofit conservation group. The Everglades have shrunk to 50 percent of their size during the last century by dredging to prevent flooding and accommodate construction.

 [ send green star]

Endangered Crocodile

``This is the biggest environmental news of the past 60 years for Florida, since the formation of Everglades National Park,'' :S:d1" rel="nofollow" >Kevin Erwin, a land expert Wetlands International, a Wageningen, Netherlands-based conservation group, said in an e- mail.

The region is home to endangered species including the American crocodile, Florida panther and West Indian manatee. The southern extreme is protected by the Everglades National Park, which at 1,590,000 acres is the largest subtropical wilderness in the U.S. Conservation measures don't extend as far north as Lake Okeechobee.

More than 18 million people lived in Florida, according to U.S. Census Bureau data for 2006. The state's population rose by 13.2 percent from 2000 to 2006, more than double the growth rate for the entire U.S.

Crist yesterday ordered the South Florida Water Management District, a government agency in West Palm Beach, to begin talks to buy as much as 187,000 acres (76,000 hectares), according to a statement posted on his Web site. Friends of the Everglades and other groups have gone to court to stop Florida from pumping contaminated water from farmland into Lake Okeechobee.

Counter to Trend

``It's bucking the trend of the privatization of water,'' said Barlow, who chairs Food & Water Watch, an environmental interest group. ``They're going to restore it for the state, for the ecology, for drinking water.''

Reconnecting the natural flows between Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades will eliminate the need to pump surplus water contaminated with chemicals from agricultural areas into the lake. ``Back-pumping'' water from sugar plantations or vegetable farms causes ``severe pollution'' in the lake, Erwin of Wetlands International said.

``The conversion of hundreds of thousands of acres of marsh into sugarcane destroyed the hydrology of the 'glades,'' said Erwin. ``The nutrients that were added to this historically `nutrient-poor system' caused significant damage to the Florida Bay, and the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries. It will now be possible to clean this water and re-establish the natural water flows once again.''

November Close

Under the plan, the state will buy U.S. Sugar Corp.'s land, including 200 miles (322 kilometers) of railroad, a sugar mill and refinery, as well as a citrus-processing plant. The proposal allows U.S. Sugar to continue farming for the next six years.

Florida hopes to close the deal in November, said Paul :S:d1" rel="nofollow" >Dumars, chief financial officer for the water management district, in an interview today. Certificates of participation, a type of bond used to build public buildings such as schools, will be issued to finance $1.7 billion of the deal. The balance will come from Florida's capital reserves, Dumars said.

 [ send green star]

Where in the heck is the money going to come from?? I mean we just mandated that state wide municpalities roll back and function on 2004 tax year amounts, that means alot of fire, police, park and recs and many other branches of cities emplyees-have been drastically undercut for funding and in many cases resulting in the wide spread loss of jobs.This is putting a serious strain on our already perilous economy here. 

 But don't get me wrong...I am all for  buying Big Sugar out(and rectofying all their damage they did to the glades) Believe me if we can buy it from Big Sugar-Thats a win win-I am just worried about it actually coming to fruision with the state of floridas economy right now. Praying like a fiend on fire that this all pans out and Big Sugar gets the hell out of the Everglades(where they should have never been to begin with). Thanks Ceci for the positive news.

 [ send green star]

SHIFTING PLANS

Environmental groups hope state leaders can now cancel plans for 300 expensive underground storage wells, a key component of the current plan that they have long complained is an unproven concept that could contaminate drinking water sources.

Stuart Applebaum, deputy of restoration program management for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is co-managing the restoration with the district, called the potential purchase ''very exciting'' but agreed it will likely demand revisions in the overall restoration plan.

''It gives us a lot of more possibilities we didn't have before,'' he said.

But the buyout also comes with potential large trade-offs for the restoration effort. Revising the plan and waiting six years to take ownership will almost certainly delay restoration projects that are already running years behind. And the financing scheme may put much of the state-funded work to improve the Glades on hold indefinitely.

The district proposes to shift money from ongoing projects to bankroll the land buy, and borrow an additional $500 million that would be repaid from the agency's routine tax collections.

Eric Draper, policy director for Audubon of Florida, praised the deal but also expects the land buy to become the state's signature Glades project for the next decade. ''It will suck up all the money and all the engineering attention,'' he said.

FEDERAL FUNDS

Others hope the deal will coax a reluctant Congress to free up promised federal money for the restoration. The federal government had pledged to split the restoration costs with Florida, but so far state taxpayers have borne the brunt of the bill.

The deal allows for the possibility of selling some of U.S. Sugar's assets to remaining growers -- most notably a state-of-the art complex to process sugar and citrus that the company spent $100 million to open just four years ago.

District officials said they arrived at the price of $1.75 billion based on nearby farmland values, a value Buker said worked out to about $9,400 an acre.

Ruth Clements, who heads the district's land acquisition office, said the state will require three independent appraisals confirming the price.

U.S. Sugar officials said the state had tried to buy parcels of its land in the past but had never before bid for the entire company. Judy Sanchez, a company spokeswoman, said the state's offer came ''basically out of the blue,'' but Buker credited Crist for pushing a proposal negotiated by a handful of people on the governor's staff and at the water district.

Still, despite lingering questions, environmentalists were celebrating what many called a landmark deal with a longtime enemy.

''There are a lot of moving part to this, and the devil is in the details,'' said John Adornato of the National Parks Conservation Association, but ``this is like 2000 again with everybody holding hands.''

 [ send green star]

Love to see good news! Thank you CeCi, lets keep faith in Gov that this will proceed as intended

 [ send green star]

 [ accepted]

By Craig Pittman, Times Staff Writer
In print: Wednesday, June 25, 2008

To jump start the stalled $10-billion Everglades restoration project, Gov. Charlie Crist came up with an idea so wild it took everyone's breath away. On Tuesday, he announced it would actually happen: Florida will buy every bit of land now owned by the nation's largest sugar company and use it to restore the River of Grass.

Although many details of the $1.75-billion deal still must be worked out before it closes in November, the bottom line is this: U.S. Sugar will continue farming its land — 187,000 acres, three times the size of Orlando — for six more years, then shut everything down and hand it over to the state.

Under the deal, U.S. Sugar Corp. said, it will sell all its holdings to the state, "including sugarcane land, sugar mill, refinery, citrus plant, citrus nursery, rock mines, railroad and railcars and all equipment." The land is in Hendry, Glades and Palm Beach counties.

Company executives called the decision bittersweet, since it will end more than 70 years of farming there. U.S. Sugar produces 700,000 tons of sugar a year, or about 10 percent of all sugar produced in the nation. The company, which operates its own railroad, employs 1,700 workers, most of whom live in Clewiston, "the sweetest town in America."

Crist said U.S. Sugar agreed to negotiate to sell the land seven months ago, after the South Florida Water Management District board voted to stop the damaging practice of backpumping dirty farm runoff into Lake Okeechobee. The board vote followed a federal court decision in favor of Earthjustice and the Florida Wildlife Federation, which had challenged the practice as a violation of the Clean Water Act.

The purchase turns a restoration effort "that was beginning to look stalled by inadequate financial and land capital into an unprecedented opportunity to completely rewrite the course of Everglades restoration," said Jeff Danter, state director of the Nature Conservancy.

It is also likely to help solve a continuing problem with the pollution now fouling Lake Okeechobee, which frequently wound up spreading to Fort Myers and Stuart, said Sen. Burt Saunders, R-Naples.

Historically the Everglades functioned as a safety valve for the lake. When heavy rains north of the lake sent swollen currents down the Kissimmee River, the river flowed into the lake and filled it until it spilled over. The spillover then slowly flowed through the wide River of Grass south to Florida Bay.

But in the name of flood control, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers straightened the Kissimmee's bends, turning it into a funnel for pollution from the farms and ranches north of the lake. And the corps built a dike around the rim of the lake, cutting off the flow to the Everglades. The lake became a reservoir full of phosphorous and algae blooms.

And whenever it got too full, the corps and the South Florida Water Management District would send the excess flowing eastward through the St. Lucie River and westward through the Caloosahatchee River. The pollution from the lake wreaked havoc in those rivers' estuaries, harming fishing and tourism on both coasts.

The U.S. Sugar purchase "provides the opportunity for the corps of engineers to release more water to the south," said Saunders, who chairs the Senate Environmental Preservation and Conservation Committee. "That will eliminate the need to release that water to the Caloosahatchee and the St. Lucie."

However, the corps and the state will have to find a way to clean the pollution from the lake's water first, said Terry Rice, a retired colonel who once oversaw all corps operations in Florida.

"You can't put anything in the Everglades that's dirty," Rice said. The Everglades is already suffering from too much phosphorous, and adding the lake water to the load won't help, he said.

"Right now," he said, "we're talking about a whole lot of extra water and no way to clean it."

 [ send green star]

Posted on Tue, Jun. 24, 2008

PALM BEACH POST FILE, 2007

This photo shows clarifiers at a U.S. Sugar Corp. sugar mill in Florida.

• State pursues sugar buyout to aid Glades

The nation's largest producer of cane sugar is set to go out of business in a deal to sell its land to the state of Florida for Everglades restoration.

Gov. Charlie Crist and U.S. Sugar Corp. representatives announced Tuesday the state was working on a deal to buy U.S. Sugar's 187,000 acres, nearly 300 square miles, in the Everglades south of Lake Okeechobee. The potential deal calls for the state to pay about $1.7 billion dollars for the land.

Negotiations are still ongoing, but officials hope to sign an agreement by September. Once the deal is in place, U.S. Sugar would be allowed to farm the land for six more years before shuttering its business.

Post Your Comment

 [ send green star]

OH I am keeping my fingers crossed and hoping this comes to fruition, and that they do right by floridas wildlife and enviroment and don't pave the whole darn thing over and build yet another useless and needless mall and golf course.

 [ send green star]

Do you think it will be saved and not bulldozed into a golf course and anything stupid like that?  Is this a for sure thing? No if's and's or but's.  I  pray it is for the wildlife and all that live within.

 [ send green star]

Bush, McCain, Crist reopen debate on drilling in Florida

By Bruce Ritchie • FLORIDA CAPITAL BUREAU • June 22, 2008

The eastern Gulf of Mexico is home to shallow estuaries and vast sea grass beds along with sponges, sea fans, scallops and grouper and schools of snappers — among other marine life.

Beneath this rich aquatic ecosystem also lies crude oil and natural gas — energy supplies that President Bush and the oil industry say would help offset rising gasoline prices.

Bush, Republican presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain and Gov. Charlie Crist this week reopened the debate on drilling when Bush said he is willing to lift an executive moratorium on drilling in the eastern Gulf if Congress is willing to do the same. Crist, who previously opposed drilling off the coast, said the state should study the issue.

A House committee this week is scheduled to consider lifting a ban on drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, according to the office of U.S. Rep. Allen Boyd, D-Monticello and a drilling opponent.

Already, images of rising prices at gas stations are competing with images of the 1969 Santa Barbara, Calif., oil spill. But there's more rhetoric than facts or studies to back up perceptions that drilling is either safe or a risky business.

One of the first areas that could be targeted for oil production is the Destin Dome south of Panama City.

Areas in the eastern Gulf of Mexico where drilling is now barred contain nearly 4 billion gallons of crude oil and more than 22 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, according to U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The royalties and lease fees from drilling could pour millions of dollars into the state's coffers at a time when the budget and state services are being cut, said David Mica, executive director of the Florida Petroleum Council.

The oil industry says drilling and production is safer than in 1969, when an estimated 3 million gallons of crude oil spilled onto the beaches of southern California after a blow-out at an oil drilling platform.

The industry since the 1970s has installed prevention devices on oil rigs, Mica said. Computer sensors, undersea robots and other technologies also help reduce spills.

"It's not your grandfather's oil company," Mica said. "That's trite, but it's part of the story."

But environmental groups say that even without leaks, drilling produces a toxic waste called drilling mud that can be discharged into gulf waters. The federal Minerals Management Service says such wastes must be tested and cannot be discharged if they contain toxins.

"There is always the possibility of a catastrophic spill," said Holly Binns, field director for the group Environment Florida.

Oil and gas production off of Texas and Louisiana already has contributed to the loss of coastal wetlands, said Donald F. Boesch, co-editor of a 1987 report funded by the National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

But he said dredging canals for pipelines no longer is necessary, and he added that other advances have surely been made since the 1987 study.

"Nothing is risk free," he said. "Any time you run pipelines to shore there are risks of blowouts and risks of ruptures. At the end of the day there is a trade-off (for energy) you have to make."

At Florida State University, a team of researchers is considering how to document the sea life and water chemistry in the Big Bend before drilling and development occur. Little is known about the sea life or how it could be affected, said W. Ross Ellington, a biology professor and FSU associate vice president for research.

"From the standpoint of an environment that has been relatively unspoiled, any type of activity which disrupts or potentially disrupts that pristine nature is something we have to be concerned about," Ellington said.

 [ send green star]

June 23, 2008

 [ send green star]