my point of view…

Lake Belt Lawsuit is the Pits

After a decade of environmental reports, agency coordination, and a lot of compromise, limestone producers in Florida’s Lake Belt region face yet another challenge. Three environmental groups — the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the National Parks Conservation Association — filed suit against the agencies approving the plan.
The groups filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Washington. The suit contends that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service failed to live up to their legal obligations to protect wetlands and endangered species by agreeing to let 10 aggregates companies mine 5,409 acres near the Florida Everglades (see AggMan, July 2002, “The Future of Mining in Southern Florida,” p. 36).
The groups claim that mining in the Lake Belt region will destroy wildlife habitat just as state and federal governments spend $8 billion to restore the Everglades. And that $46 million in impact fees being used to purchase and restore 7,500 acres of wetlands adjacent to the Everglades? It’s just not enough, they say. Using a war cry of “save the endangered wood storks,” the environmentalists say that they know better than the Fish and Wildlife Service.
So, who is right? Let’s review the facts.

Fiction: NRDC’s Brad Sewell describes the Corp’s environmental impact statement as “shoddy” and said that the agency never conducted the required biological opinion to determine the impact of mining on endangered species.
Fact: Corps project manager Bob Barron said, “We followed the process laid out by the Endangered Species Act. The Corps made a determination that the project would not adversely affect species, and the Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with that assessment.”

Fiction: Environmentalists claim that the Corps did not follow Clean Water Act regulations requiring it to mitigate wetland loss before permitting them to be filled.
Fact: The 10 limestone producers are restoring 7,500 acres of adjacent lands to offset wetlands loss.

Fiction: The lawsuit claims that the mines will increase seepage into the ecosystem and contaminate the drinking water supply.
Fact: While concerns over groundwater seepage remained when the permits were issued in April, the permit provides that the industry will propose a full solution.

Fiction: Environmentalists say that they are “suing to stop an act of tremendous environmental destruction” and that the Corps needs to act in a manner that is fully responsive to the public.
Fact: While the Corps did issue a 10-year permit for the 5,409 acres in April, more than 70 percent of the acreage was already approved under individual permits to the various producers. If anything, the Corps used the group permit to tighten restrictions, not loosen them.

Despite the lawsuit, a spokesman for producers remains cautiously upbeat. “We feel that the permit review process was extensive, was comprehensive, and was conducted by a variety of government environmental agencies,” said Kerri Barsh, an attorney for Florida Rock Industries, Rinker Materials Corp., Tarmac America, and White Rock Quarries. “And we believe that the decision of the Corps to issue the permits will ultimately be upheld.”
If not, the wood stork may find some company on the endangered species list. Maybe it’s time for Congress to consider that aggregate resources are also in need of protection and develop the appropriate legislation.

Therese Dunphy, editorial director
therese@aggman.com

October 2002 my point of view... Lake Belt Lawsuit is the Pits				my point of view… Lake Belt Lawsuit is the Pits After a decade of environmental reports, agency coordination, and a lot of compromise, limestone producers in Florida’s Lake Belt region face yet another challenge. Three environmental groups — the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the National Parks Conservation Association — filed suit against the agencies approving the plan. The groups filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Washington. The suit contends that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service failed to live up to their legal obligations to protect wetlands and endangered species by agreeing to let 10 aggregates companies mine 5,409 acres near the Florida Everglades (see AggMan, July 2002, “The Future of Mining in Southern Florida,” p. 36). The groups claim that mining in the Lake Belt region will destroy wildlife habitat just as state and federal governments spend $8 billion to restore the Everglades. And that $46 million in impact fees being used to purchase and restore 7,500 acres of wetlands adjacent to the Everglades? It’s just not enough, they say. Using a war cry of “save the endangered wood storks,” the environmentalists say that they know better than the Fish and Wildlife Service. So, who is right? Let’s review the facts. Fiction: NRDC’s Brad Sewell describes the Corp’s environmental impact statement as “shoddy” and said that the agency never conducted the required biological opinion to determine the impact of mining on endangered species. Fact: Corps project manager Bob Barron said, “We followed the process laid out by the Endangered Species Act. The Corps made a determination that the project would not adversely affect species, and the Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with that assessment.” Fiction: Environmentalists claim that the Corps did not follow Clean Water Act regulations requiring it to mitigate wetland loss before permitting them to be filled. Fact: The 10 limestone producers are restoring 7,500 acres of adjacent lands to offset wetlands loss. Fiction: The lawsuit claims that the mines will increase seepage into the ecosystem and contaminate the drinking water supply. Fact: While concerns over groundwater seepage remained when the permits were issued in April, the permit provides that the industry will propose a full solution. Fiction: Environmentalists say that they are “suing to stop an act of tremendous environmental destruction” and that the Corps needs to act in a manner that is fully responsive to the public. Fact: While the Corps did issue a 10-year permit for the 5,409 acres in April, more than 70 percent of the acreage was already approved under individual permits to the various producers. If anything, the Corps used the group permit to tighten restrictions, not loosen them. Despite the lawsuit, a spokesman for producers remains cautiously upbeat. “We feel that the permit review process was extensive, was comprehensive, and was conducted by a variety of government environmental agencies,” said Kerri Barsh, an attorney for Florida Rock Industries, Rinker Materials Corp., Tarmac America, and White Rock Quarries. “And we believe that the decision of the Corps to issue the permits will ultimately be upheld.” If not, the wood stork may find some company on the endangered species list. Maybe it’s time for Congress to consider that aggregate resources are also in need of protection and develop the appropriate legislation. Therese Dunphy, editorial director therese@aggman.com