On April 11, 2002, the Corps of Engineers issued its Record of Decision approving 10-year permits to the limestone mining industry to turn more than 5000 acres of Everglades wetlands into open mining pits. And, according to planning documents, that's just the first phase: the project is eventually slated to open up a 30 square mile hole in the middle of the historic Everglades. The Corps argues that, in theory, decades from now some of the pits could be used as water reservoirs for the Everglades. But experts question whether the pits would be built in such a way as to safely or cost-effectively function as reservoirs. Agencies like the EPA and Department of Interior have previously objected to the thousands of acres of unique wildlife habitat (including for the endangered wood stork) that would be destroyed, the harm the pits would have on restoring historical water flows in the Everglades, and the contamination threat the mines pose to the adjacent drinking water aquifer (which will then need to be mitigated at the cost of hundreds of millions of tax dollars).
Studies of these threats, possible solutions, along with alternative ways to store and deliver additional water to the Everglades, are currently underway. But the Corps will allow mining to go forward before the studies are completed. "Given the likelihood that this great pit in the earth will irretrievably harm the Everglades and the public drinking water supply, the Corps "mine first, study later" decision is a gross violation of the law and the agency's responsibilities to the public," said Brad Sewell, Senior Attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
Thousands of citizens have contacted the Corps objecting to the permits. Many environmental organizations also formally objected to the permits during the comment period, and several of these, including NRDC and Sierra Club, previously filed a notice of intent to sue to stop the permits.
Contacts:
* Barbara Lange, Sierra Club, 305-447-9472
* Bradford H. Sewell, Natural Resources Defense Council, 212-727-4507, cell 917-302-8837
###
What Agencies and Scientists Have Said About the Rockmining Permits
"[E]xcavation of deep water lakes in close proximity of Everglades National Park could pose a serious threat" to the ongoing Everglades restoration plan. - Letter to Col. T. Rice, Commander, USACE from R. Ring, Superintendent, Everglades National Park & C. Johnson, Supervisor, USFWS (Oct. 1, 1997)
The Lakebelt area "represents the last remnant of the short hydroperiod marshes that are critical to the proper functioning of the Everglades ecosystem." - Electronic Mail Message to Sarah Bellmund, Everglades National Park from Karyn Ferro, ENP (May 12, 1999)
The Corps' studies eliminated feasible alternatives based on a "bias driven by dollars." - Electronic Mail Message to K. Ferro, ENP from P. Cloues, National Park Service (April 8, 1999)
The Corps "mine now, mitigate later" proposal does not "meet the public interest test" under the Clean Water Act because the "miners [may] go out of business" before conducting the necessary mitigation and leave nobody who is "responsible for the mitigation." - Electronic Mail Messages between K. Ferro, ENP and S. Bellmund, ENP (April 7-18 1999)
There will be no way for the federal resource agencies to control the future mitigation process because they are not even on the "mitigation committee." - Electronic Mail Message to S. Sima, FWS from K. Ferro, NPS
Neither the draft nor final Environmental Impact Statement by the Corps provides "reasonable assurances that the plan will protect the wellfields from contamination from surface water influence." - Letter to G. Fernandez, Lakebelt Committee from W. Brant, Miami-Dade Water and Sewer Department (Jun. 19, 2000)
"[T]here are 2 nearby bird rookeries" in the Lakebelt area, "these rookeries are used by a variety of wading birds, including at times, the endangered wood stork, and the tricolored heron, which is listed as a species of special concern by the State of Florida," and "the area under consideration for mining is known to be used by these birds" - Letter to H. Hayes, Bureau of Mine Reclamation from Susan Ritter, ENP (June 10, 1997)
"[T]he area of the proposed rock mine" is necessary for the restoration of the Everglades, "a key component in providing improvements in Cape Sable seaside sparrow and snail kite habitats in [Everglades National Park]," and "is also key in providing recovery benefits . . . for wood storks and American crocodiles" - Facsimile to B. Rieck, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from H. McSharry, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Sept. 3, 1998)
The adverse impacts caused by the proposed mining activities "will hinder our abilities to restore the natural hydropatterns of the Everglades" and "if we hinder our abilities to restore the greater Everglades ecosystem, we hinder our abilities to recover listed species." - Briefing Statement for Regional Director, FWS (Mar. 25, 1997)
"The conversion of the existing short-hydroperiod wetland habitat within the Lakebelt area to deep, open-water lakes removes an extensive area of this critical wetland habitat from the system, replacing it with non-natural habitat of little or no value to the Everglades ecosystem. The size, habitat type, and location of this area make it critical to the ecological integrity of the Everglades ecosystem. The loss of peripheral habitats along the eastern side of the remaining Everglades has been identified as a significant factor in the decline of wading birds, whose populations are adversely affected by the removal of early dry season foraging areas." - Comments of the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior at 8 (May 26, 1999)
"The proposed [Corps] action has the strong potential to increase the risk of water quality contamination at the wellheads and result in the need to upgrade water facilities to treat the water. The cost of such an upgrade has been estimated at approximately $250 million." - Letter of David Dermer, Mayor of Miami Beach, November 20, 2001
EPA expresses concerns about the "adequacy of the [mitigation] fee," lack of agreement on littoral shelves, long-term mitigation, and that the rock mining "could degrade water quality and pose a threat to nearby Miami-Dade NW Well Field." - April 26, 2001 letter from EPA to Corps
Dade County requests that the Corps deny the permits and defer their consideration until "all issues, especially those associated with the long term protection of the Northwest Wellfield, are resolved." - Letter from DERM and WASA to Corps, dated March 30, 2001
Additional Questions and Answers on the Corps' Rockmining Permits
Why is the Corps' mitigation plan inadequate? The Corps' mitigation plan relies upon the acquisition and restoration of approximately 7000 acres of adjacent wetlands. Concerns that have been raised about this plan include: (a) it is not equivalent to trade pits for wetlands (regardless of the wetlands' supposed "quality"), (b) many experts believe that the mining pits will suck water out of these wetlands and thereby cause significant damage to their natural hydrology, (c) restoration plans involve using the same wetlands for water retention areas, thereby causing another conflict with their ability to function as natural restored wetlands, and (d) federal agencies will not control the state-run mitigation plan (i.e., the payment of fees, removal of exotic vegetation, and acquisition of title), thereby calling into question assurances that the mitigation program will accomplish its intended purpose.
Why isn't the Corps' three-year review process sufficient to cope with problems with the permits? The Corps does not intend to include the public, at all, and other agencies, to any meaningful degree, in this "review." Issuance of the permits counting on rescinding or modifying them later is not responsible public policy.
The Corps says that the abandoned mining pits are essential for Everglades restoration. Is that true? No. The Everglades restoration plan also includes the "WPA" set of components, many of which will be done quite early in the CERP process. These components geographically "fit around" the mined areas. According to the Corps' latest planning efforts, the WPA includes the so-called "C-9" component, the "C-11" component, and other reservoirs. These projects will be done much sooner the so-called "lakebelt" components, comprised of some of the mining pits, thereby provide for substantial water storage earlier on in the process. Moreover, existing rockmining pits could be used for reservoirs. The Corps has failed to explain why these less destructive alternatives could not be used to partially or fully satisfy the Everglades' restoration needs.
The environmentalists requested that the Corps conduct a Supplemental Environmental Impact Study. What was the Corps' response? We have not received a response to our request (attached), but in light of the permits' issuance it is safe to assume the request was rejected.