Skip to main content

Tag: wetland buffer

Vote could reduce wetlands protection

BRADENTON – In response to a preliminary Manatee County commission vote to reduce wetland buffers on Aug. 17, the environmental community is making it clear that scientific evidence backs up the importance of wetland protection.

In a press release announcing a Sept. 26 Value of Wetlands Science panel discussion sponsored by the environmental advocacy group Suncoast Waterkeeper, its executive director, Dr. Abbey Tyrna, began with a quote from County Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge, who said at the August meeting, “I’m not being shown any data to back up good intentions.”

Tyrna noted that the Aug. 17 meeting had four hours of public comment and included both passion and logic from scientists, engineers, professionals and residents opposing the change.

“(Van Ostenbridge) is just one of the six Manatee County commissioners

in charge of protecting remaining wetlands and aquatic buffers under the Manatee County Comprehensive Plan who claim there is insufficient science to support current policies,” she wrote. “In the face of outright disapproval from their constituents, the board still voted 6-1 (to reduce local wetland buffers), with the only opposing vote coming from Commissioner (George) Kruse.”

On Thursday, Oct. 5 at 9 a.m., Manatee County commissioners will consider adopting an ordinance to amend the comprehensive plan to “achieve consistency with state standards” for wetlands.

The proposed changes include eliminating the 50-foot wetland buffer requirement along inflowing watercourses and reducing wetland buffers from 50 feet to the state minimum of 15 feet and an average of 25 feet for Outstanding Florida Waters and Aquatic Preserves.

“If it’s true that all the Board of County Commissioners need is scientific data, then we are in luck – there are plenty of scientific studies on wetlands and water quality being conducted across the state,” Tyrna wrote.

“This panel is a continued effort to save our wetlands and follows a public petition which has garnered 2,168 signatures and counting,” she wrote. “Other organizations supporting this fight include ManaSota-88, East Manatee Preservation, Waterline Road Preservation Group, Speak Out Manatee, Florida Kids for Clean Water, Manatee League of Women Voters and Manatee Fish and Game.”

The Sept. 26 science panel at the Bradenton Woman’s Club drew more than 150 people including Kruse, the lone voice of dissent in the 6-1 commission vote.

“All we heard on that board (of county commissioners) was there was no science behind this,” Kruse said. “I knew that wasn’t true. It may be one thing to disagree with the science, but the science is definitely there.”

He said he attended the panel discussion an as audience member to hear speakers with firsthand knowledge of wetland science.

“I know there will be at least one vote against this” at the Oct. 5 meeting, Kruse said, referring to himself. “We just need three more.”

Speakers at the Sept. 26 Value of Wetlands Science Panel at the Bradenton Woman’s Club were Ed Sherwood, executive director of the Tampa Bay Estuary Program, A.J. Reisinger, assistant professor of Urban Soil and Water Quality at the University of Florida and Jim Bays, president of Stewards of Our Lakes (SoUL.)

Tyrna moderated the discussion. Each speaker spoke for 15 minutes and the presentation was followed by a question and answer period.

“Tampa Bay is one of 28 national estuary programs established by Congress as estuaries of national significance,” Sherwood said. “We’re interested in protecting wetlands because our estuary is continuing to be urbanized. We only have about 32% of the natural lands undeveloped in the watershed.”

Sherwood said habitats that are key to fish and wildlife have been lost as land development is expected to increase.

“There’s not enough space,” Sherwood said. “A lot of it has already been developed and those opportunities don’t exist. So we need to do our best with what we have now to look at our existing native habitats while looking for new and novel ways to expand our opportunities.”

It’s taking more and more effort to find those restoration opportunities, he said.

“In the past 30 years, we’ve lost about 180,000 acres of opportunity,” Sherwood said. “Development that’s going on has outpaced our ability to restore these key habitats. We’ve converted restorable lands to developed lands. We need to continue to make investments in restoring these key habitats.”

In addition to environmental benefits, Sherwood said the watershed has economic benefits.

“In Manatee County alone, there’s about $70 million in flood protection benefits just from the wetlands over a 30-year period,” he said. “There’s both economic and intrinsic value to these habitats.”

Resinger discussed scientific studies showing the role of stormwater systems role in flood control and the enhancement of water quality.

Bays outlined other benefits of wetland buffers.

“It’s not just the wetlands that are important, but the areas around them,” Bays said. “They remove pollutants, provide water storage and preserve habitat for animals that live along the perimeter.”

Other ancillary benefits include opportunities to grow plants that will mitigate the effects of climate change, provide trails for such activities as birdwatching and have an aesthetic value, he said.

“A 30- to 50-foot buffer is needed to achieve nutrient removal and protect wildlife,” he said.

During a question and answer period, Tyrna read a question submitted by an audience member.

“What do you say to people who do not believe in science to guide decision-making?” she read.

All three panelists agreed that conversation is key.

“I think we live, work and play in the Tampa Bay region because of certain aesthetics,” Sherwood said. “At the end of the day, I think we can have common conversations about what makes Tampa Bay special.”

“You need to figure out connections and reach people where they are,” Reisinger said.

“I would first ask them what is guiding your decisions,” Bay said. “I believe it’s a matter of education and outreach for those folks.”

Meeting attendees received cards with information about the upcoming Thursday, Oct. 5 meeting at the Honorable Patricia M. Glass Chambers at the Manatee County Administration Building, 1112 Manatee Ave. W. in Bradenton, suggesting that parties meet, call or email their county commissioners to register their opposition and attend the meeting.

Commissioners shrink wetland buffers

Commissioners shrink wetland buffers

BRADENTON – After a lengthy and contentious land use meeting in which environmentalists, scientists and citizens spoke against a comprehensive plan amendment that would diminish county wetland regulations, Manatee County commissioners voted 6-1 to adopt the state’s less restrictive wetland regulations.

The changes to county wetland regulations would reduce the 30-foot wetland buffer for development and remove the 50-foot buffer for environmentally sensitive coastal wetlands to the state’s 25-foot minimum. The changes will require amendments to the county’s comprehensive plan and land development code.

Dan DeLisi, of DeLisi Inc., a land planner and former chief of staff for the South Florida Water Management District, spoke at the Aug. 17 meeting.

“I was asked to look at where there are overlapping regulations where the state is already providing regulations and is redundant,” he said. “There is a proposed amendment in your comprehensive plan.”

Part of that amendment is the removal of state and local regulatory overlap, DeLisi said.

“Essentially what these amendments would do is defer permitting to the state of Florida,” he said. “These amendments do not cause impacts to wetlands.”

The statement provoked laughter and jeers from the audience.

“We’ve got our regulations and you’re saying we should defer to the state. Let’s get to the heart of the request,” Commissioner George Kruse said to DeLisi. “We’re not doubling up regulations. The state doesn’t have regulations per se, the state has set minimums.”

Kruse spoke out against the amendment.

“The state’s trying to take control of this and now we’re trying to give it to them voluntarily before they take it,” Kruse said. “We’re supposed to keep it here, because you all vote for us and we control local and the state controls state. The state is trying to gut wetland and water quality protection. Why are we going to facilitate that?”

Kruse noted that two developers and a developer’s attorney were at the meeting but none of them came up to speak in favor of reducing wetland buffers.

“There’s no way they’re going to go on the record supporting this,” he said. “There’s no way they’re going to put their name and face together with gutting our wetland protection.

“We’re taking everything from the exact same consultant who was against us on the exact same policy twice,” Kruse said, referring to DeLisi and his involvement in previous litigation with the county. “It’s like we won the Super Bowl and hired the quarterback for the losing team to run our team next year.”

Public comment

Suncoast Waterkeeper Executive Director Dr. Abbey Tyrna was one of many speakers who spoke against the amendment to the county’s comprehensive plan during the public comment session of the meeting.

“I represent today the 1,704 people who signed our petition to save our wetlands,” Tyrna said. “Wetlands are tied to our human wellbeing, and they’re tied to our human wellbeing because of the ecosystem services they provide, which is plentiful.”

Tyrna said wetland benefits are tied not only to water quality but to flood regulation, climate regulation, recreation, tourism and local fisheries.

“Let’s talk about policy 3.3.1.5 (of the county’s comprehensive plan) here,” Tyrna said. “It states all wetlands and watercourses will be protected from land development activities by requiring the establishment of natural area buffers adjacent to all post-development wetlands and watercourses within a watershed overlay.”

Based on that policy, buffers are required to be a minimum of 50 feet wide adjacent to all non-isolated wetlands, and a minimum of 30 feet adjacent to all isolated wetlands, she said.

Following public comment during the five-hour-long meeting, Commissioner Jason Bearden made a motion to approve the text amendment, with a second by Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge.

Other commissioners who voted in favor of approval were James Satcher, Amanda Ballard, Mike Rahn and Ray Turner.

Kruse cast the lone dissenting vote.

As the vote was announced, someone from the audience shouted, “Shame!” as others stood up and walked out.

A statement from the county was released following the meeting that said:

“Today the Manatee County Board of County Commissioners voted in favor of transmitting a comprehensive plan amendment to the state of Florida concerning wetland protection policies.

This proposed amendment, if approved would eliminate redundancy and duplication in the permitting of wetland impacts, and development near or around wetlands and surface waters, which are already protected under existing state and federal regulations.

By aligning with numerous other counties and municipalities in Florida, the board’s primary objective is to gain efficiency while still achieving the same environmental results, ultimately benefiting the taxpayers of Manatee County.”