 |
|
|
Editorial: Gov. Crist should veto legislation that may contribute to the demise of sea grass beds
By TCPalm Staff When is a sea grass protection bill bad for sea grass? When it contains an amendment that may potentially hasten the destruction of sea grass. Such is the case with House Bill 7059, which didn't receive one opposing vote in the House Policy and Budget Committee April 15 — it passed 30-0 — or in the state House and Senate, each of which approved the bill, unanimously, at the close of the 2008 Legislature. But don't be fooled by the unblemished record. Upon further review, HB 7059 has been found to be wanting — and for good reason. Most environmental groups originally supported the legislation because it established fines, up to $1,000, for boaters who damage sea grass beds with their propellers. However, this support vanished overnight after an amendment — which wasn't disclosed by the bill's author, Rep. Will Kendrick, R-Carrabelle, when he outlined the salient points in the legislation at the April 15 committee meeting — came to light in recent weeks. Now, many of these same environmental groups are asking Gov. Charlie Crist to veto the bill. Unfortunately, HB 7059 may hasten the destruction of sea grass by possibly creating a mechanism — mitigation banks — that would allow developers who destroy sea grass beds on submerged, state-owned land to buy credits with companies to plant sea grass beds elsewhere. Mitigation banks have a dubious track record on land. They've never been tried under water. Consequently, environmentalists are crying "foul!" "Here's the bottom line," said David Guest of Earthjustice, an environmental advocacy group. "The stealth amendment that got put in changed it from sea-grass protection bill to a sea-grass destruction bill. It is premised on the fiction you can destroy sea grass at will and avoid impacts by buying credits at a mitigation bank. "It simply doesn't work. It's a license for chicanery, which is why they had to sneak this provision into the bill." "I don't believe environmentalists are opposing the bill because of the possibility of sea grass mitigation banks," Kendrick said. "They don't want the additional accountability for the Florida Forever program that also is contained in the bill." Sure, Mr. Representative. Is the state of Florida prepared to inaugurate a completely new policy — one that has received no vetting, whatsoever, in the court of public opinion? This would be an egregious mistake. Gov. Crist should veto this bill. BAIT AND SWITCH? "The Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund may ensure the preservation and regeneration of sea grass ... by providing for the establishment of sea grass mitigation banks ... to offset the unavoidable impacts of projects where such banks meet the applicable public interest test of chapters 253 and 258. This subsection shall not prohibit mitigation for impacts to sea grass or other habitats on sovereignty submerged lands for other types of projects ..." Amendment to House Bill 7059 JUST SAY NO Telephone: (850) 488-7146 < < < back to Articles & News of Interest Archive |
|
| Fair Use Disclaimer The Pelican Island Audubon Society web site, www.pelicanislandaudubon.org, is a nonprofit, noncommercial web site that, at times, may contain Copyrighted material that have not always been specifically authorized by the Copyright owner. The Society makes such material available in its efforts to advance the understanding of issues related to Florida’s natural environment in hopes of helping to find solutions for those problems. It believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such Copyrighted material as provided for in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Persons wishing to use Copyrighted material from this site for purposes of their own that go beyond “fair use” must first obtain permission from the copyright owner. All articles are copyrighted by the respective newspapers. |
|
All
images and text copyright Pelican Island Audubon Society. E-mail: piaudubon@bellsouth.net |
|