Pact of Secrecy signed for Water Talks
This morning in the online edition of First Coast News I read an article titled the same as this blog. Officials from Alabama, Georgia and Florida have all signed a "confidentiality agreement" regarding ongoing negotiations over water rights. It also noted that our Federal Goverment is involved in this as well. I don't care what their intentions are, the water doesn't belong to local, state, or federal goverment to control and manipulate behind closed doors. When it comes to life sustaining water they need to just deal with the aggravation of the people knowing what they're doing.
Related: Report Abuse | Marsha's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: Growth | natural resources | water
Submitted by whitewolf on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 10:31am.
Now that the dog is out of the house. This isn't a secret anymore. There will be a lot of howling in the night to have the talks brought out of the kennel.
Those who give up freedom for security have neither. Submitted by Angela on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 11:09am.
The article states, "The Franklin County Oyster and Seafood Task Force obtained a copy of the agreement through an open records request" That's all you have to do as a ciizens make a records request and unless exempted by law you can get a copy too.
Submitted by Baxley on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 11:27am.
On the last page of today's (2-20-08) Business Section in the TU, bottom right corner is an application to the SJRWMD to remove 187 million gallons of water from the Florida aquifer, best I can tell. If you ever want to publish your deepest, darkest secret and ensure nobody ever sees it, bury it in a legal notice in the newspaper. This notice is nearly unreadable, but there it is in black and white - 187 million gallons per day, annual average, to be pumped from the aquifer at a variety of wells. I don't know that I would have paid much attention to it other than the conversation lately on the blog re "water wars". I saw 187 million gallons, and tried best I could to read the whole thing. I won't lie - I couldn't do it. I'll try again later after another cup of coffee. The question that popped into my head was - how does this compare to the request to pump water directly out of the St. Johns? Don't we pump a gazillion gallons per day already out of the aquifer? This particular application made reference to the Rivertown DRI in St. Johns County. Shouldn't (or didn't) the DRI application address water usage? I know it had to. I guess, harking back to Marsha's "Too Much Information" blog, I'm wondering how much of this is emotional hyperbole on the part of people who are genuinely concerned about water resources, and how much is in fact something we should really be worrying about? Like Rich, I like to know the source of the info, but I'm also a fact & figure guy. How much water per day does an average person use? How much water is out "there" to use? Is water at least partially a renewable resource? I mean it comes out of the ground, and eventually one way or another, ends up in the ground again. I realize we are using it/contaminating it, so there is a finite amount of clean, fresh potable water, but how well are we managing it? This is a great idea for one of those big spreads MCS has done in the past. I'm sure some of you guys have info to share, and we can always "Google" it. Just wondering.
Submitted by Marsha on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 2:36pm.
I can read till the cows come home but I will never change my mind on this issue. If the human race was so slick that we could ascertain the long term effects to the eco-system our planet would not be in the shape it's in. The only long term solution other then responsible growth is desalination. In fact if the oceans water levels are predicted to increase to the point where our coastal areas are in danger it seems to me taking the water out of the ocean makes sense in more ways then one. Draining the St Johns is not a long term solution, they've already admitted that much so why go there? They cannot know the long term effects, they're making their best guess and probably embellishing on it so we'll all go "aww shucks ok then".....and I won't.....ever.
Submitted by SoloVoce on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 3:23pm.
Marsha, Interesting thread. You hit upon one solution that has gotten bad press. I'm no expert by any stretch, but I know a bit @ desal. While my wife was stationed in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, back in the 80's, all of our fresh water was provided by the desalinisation method. The water tasted fine & I noticed no difference while showering. Some pople did notice a difference, but that was attributed to their being used to soft or hard water. We all adjusted. The main problem comes down to this. IT IS JUST SO EXPENSIVE! Is it? Yes. But what start up enterprise hasn't been? Name it. Buggy whips, electric lights, telephone, VCR's (I remember an old episode from Columbo with William Shattner that had an early VCR & he said it cost $4,000.) or cell phones. It's basic economics 101. It is expensive to start up until the mass market gets involved. You reach the break even point, the market takes care of the rest & you start making a profit & it becomes available to the masses at an affordable price. The second part of the problem is more difficult. We have been a very naive, arrogant & wasteful society. We thought the forests were an endless commodity. We were wrong. We thought that fossil fuels were a cheap, endless commodity. We were wrong. The same thing goes for water. I assume that you have read the ongoing figures that show exactly where we waste water. Our homes are probably the biggest source. Toilets, faucets & especially our lawns. Getting the public to change their attitudes will probably be the biggest hurddle. Until then, we continue to doom ourselves down the drain. JATFUR. RichK
Submitted by Marsha on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 3:49pm.
Rich I am probably the least educated on the matter of anyone but this is another issue where I willingly assume tunnel vision. Even if the battle to protect the St Johns fails in another 30-40yrs after that the problem will still be there and how much worse will it be at that point, we'll have a dorked up river and who knows what else and still be looking at a water shortage. It will be really hard to change wasteful habits, it will be tougher still for those who depend on those services to make a living but the cow is about out of the barn already. We need long term solutions not short sighted cop outs. Submitted by Sunflower on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 4:16pm.
Marsha - thanks for bring this very important and crucial topic to the forefront of this blog. The "confidentiality pact" is outrageous and the signers of this agreement should be taken to task. If they are elected, the voters can speak. Before an election, the public should speak - no, SHOUT! When something that affects us all - especially this, our lifeblood so to speak, is being kept "confidential", it reeks of our 'leaders" again being up to no good. This problem with our water shortage was caused by humans - all of us - and it's going to take ALL of us to fix it. Everyone should be involved with these situations/solutions and the knowledge it takes to conserve and to change the source of our usage. We can't just have government issuing edicts and making decisions on what is "best for us". It's obvious they haven't been doing such a fine job there. The people in charge need all the input and advice they can get - not just from bureaucrats, but from all of us!! Rich - great statement about the desalination plants being costly and your references to electronics and other startups, etc. Absolutely it's costly to begin with, but how costly will it be when it is our ONLY solution and becomes a necessity and not a choice? In the meantime, 60% of our drinking water is being used for irrigation. Thanks again for this blog topic. I wish the title didn't have to be what it is. JudyB Submitted by SoloVoce on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 4:19pm.
Marsha, Unfortunately, you're right. Welcome to the club of solo voces. I'm not sure exactly what we can pin it on, but there are far too few voices out there who espouse a long range, realistic view. RichK Submitted by Sunflower on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 4:40pm.
I just received the following in my email. It is legit and might be interesting to attend if you have time and don't mind the drive. The School of Engineering (UNF) will be hosting a seminar, co-sponsored by the Northeast Florida Engineer’s Week Committee, titled "Florida's Vanishing Water," presented by Cynthia Barnett from 12:15 to 1:15 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 21, in the Science and Engineering Building, Building 50, Room 3104. Barnett is the author of “Mirage: Florida and the Vanishing Water of the Eastern U.S.” and is the associate editor of Florida Trend magazine. All are welcome to attend and refreshments will be provided. For more information, contact Dr. Steve Nix at mailto: snix@unf.edu or ext. 1390.
Submitted by Angela on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 8:44pm.
Sunflower this lady is great! If you can attend the seminar it would be worth the ride. If you can't her book is a must read for anyone concerned about Florida's water problems. It is easy to understand too. She has a website you can visit and get her book. Thanks for the information.
Submitted by Marsha on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 8:46pm.
Georgia is trying to extend it's reach into Tennessee by claiming that the state line that was to be on the 35th parallel when it was surveyed over two hundred years is wrong. State of the art equipment vs what existed back then. Its not just land they're after, by moving the state line that far in if they are able to pull it off will give them access to a major river in Tennessee. This move is all about the water. It will be interesting to see what happens
Submitted by islander on Wed, 02/20/2008 - 9:02pm.
The boundary between Ga and TN has been in dispute for at least 50 years. Copper Hill, Ducktown, McCaysville and a few other area cities have been on both sides of the border for years. One town has redrawn it corporate limits several times, each at the insistence that either TN or GA has the line wrong. The TN people want no part of GA and their tax structure. TN has a rather high sales tax, but nominal taxes elsewhere. GA has a state income tax, and ad valorem taxes that add up to much more. I suspect home rule will govern this issue. The first GA-TN Water War: http://www.mcgehee.cc/index.php/zone/comments/the_great_georgia_tennessee_border_war_over_water/ Sorry, but the link will have to be cut and pasted. Insert link is grayed out.
Submitted by Marsha on Thu, 02/21/2008 - 10:36am.
As a disclaimer let me say I did not visit a gazillion websites for the use of water per person. My information comes from the Riverkeeper only. Considering it's limited relevance due to an averaging of statistics with a margin for error I didn't think it was worth hours of investigation. For those of you who in general are against draining the St Johns River I have a link for you below where you can sign what amounts to a petition I reckon. There are also some handy links if you care to voice it in your own words. However small the amount, once it begins where will it end. Once they say yes how do they say no? Based upon the slow pace our goverment works at the only practical solution is a long term solution for me.
Submitted by Marsha on Thu, 02/21/2008 - 10:49am.
Islander I'd never heard of it until shortly before I posted. No doubt there are alot of people like me out there. It may be an long and ongoing fight but the issues over water has brought a national spotlight to it. Egad can you imagine if this begins to happen with other states, going back over 200yr records looking for a mistake or a loophole so you can get to a water source. The time may be coming when lack of water may take over global warming as the major threat to the planet. Maybe this whole housing market situation is a blessing in disguise where the enviroment is concerned, but it's only going to pop up somewhere else so long as life span continues to grow, and babies are born. The law is full of statutes of limitations, we need one for this. Anything over 200yrs ago is like a common law marriage. When enough time has passed, it is what it is. Submitted by Angela on Thu, 02/21/2008 - 11:00am.
Here is a link to a Florida Trend magazine article. I think Fl Trend is a great magazine. They write about alot of the issues we talk about on the blogs. It is by Cynthia Barnett and it provides a link to her website. We also pay a flat fee for water and sewer in Clay County regardless of how much water we use. I would say that's not much of an incentive to conserve on the part of the consumer. Which is discussed in the article. http://www.floridatrend.com/article.asp?aID=1928894.1649591.599131.5926892.92232102.697&aID2=46078 Submitted by semiredneck on Thu, 02/21/2008 - 3:16pm.
Tampa has a plant due to open shortly: http://www.water-technology.net/projects/tampa/ The inflated cost of $150 million is comparatively cheap when you consider the use/need of the commodity. Yes, there will be an everday expense above the initial outlay, but the demand is there. I seem to remember an hydrologist being quoted a few years ago, "if Florida was running out of water, the fresh water springs in the Atlantic would quit flowing." or something like that...... Submitted by SoloVoce on Fri, 02/22/2008 - 7:24am.
Marsha, et al, We're not the only people noticing this problem. I came across a story in the New York Times, 02.22.08, by Shaila Dewan titled, Georgia Claims a Sliver or the Tenn. River. Obviously, others are paying attention also. RichK People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's newRecent comments |
Marsha,
I think you're right on the money. That meeting should have fallen under the Sunshine Law whether it was held in Georgia, Florida or Timbuctu. It would be interesting to contact Gov. Crist's Open Government office to see if they would respond to a request for a copy of the confidentiality agreement that resulted from the meeting.
Angela, are you up for a little investigative work?