Monthly Archive for June, 2006

Dreaming of sustainability in Florida

Published on June 30, 2006 in Community, Economy, Environment, Governance, Growth, Mysteries and Sustainability. 2 Comments

Why isn’t sustainability gaining traction in exurban Florida? Here in Indian River County (with Vero Beach, Sebastian, Fellsmere, Indian River Shores, and Orchid as the recognized municipalities), the word and the concept are sort of familiar, but they haven’t yet become really integrated into our community consciousness, much less our policies and practice.

We talk about “sustainable development,” but in local parlance this seems to be a fashionable buzz-phrase that sounds good, but lacks real content. We make noises about sustainability, but no concrete, specific actions have been proposed at the collective or community level.

Governor Jeb Bush blessed a regional planning effort, The Committee for a Sustainable Treasure Coast, which recently released its final report. Months have now passed, and it has provoked no public reaction, no public discussion, no calls to action from elected officials in our county.

A look elsewhere can sometimes be instructive, or even inspirational. I regularly check in at the websites of The City of Portland, Oregon, as well as Clackamas and Multnomah Counties, Oregon, to see what they are up to. Portland has an Office of Sustainable Development, whose mission is: to provide leadership and contribute practical solutions to ensure a prosperous community where people and nature thrive, now and in the future. They have initiated a host of major programs, and have implemented a diverse array of practical policies to achieve the goal of creating a sustainable community now.

In 1993 Portland became the first U.S. city to adopt a strategy to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the heat-trapping gas primarily responsible for global warming. In 2001 Multnomah County joined the effort to create the Local Action Plan on Global Warming charting an aggressive goal of reducing carbon dioxide emissions to 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2010. On a per capita basis, Portland and Multnomah County emissions have fallen 12.5% since 1993, an achievement likely unequalled in any other major U.S. city.

The City of Portland has just been named the 2006 No. 1 Most Sustainable City in the U.S. by SustainLane.com, a web resource for community sustainability, which annually ranks cities in the U.S. Check out their ranking of your city.

What’s holding us back is a mystery.

Worm reefs and engineered beaches

Published on June 26, 2006 in Environment, Mysteries, Science and Sustainability. 0 Comments

We’re addicted to sand pumping in Florida. In Indian River County no less than elsewhere. Our coast and its nearshore worm reefs are unique. Though not as colorful as coral reefs, worm reefs are just as threatened by our activities. And they are essential to a diverse community of creatures including fishes large and small, sharks, dolphins, and sea turtles.

Reef-building polychaete worms, like those in the subtropical waters of central Florida, filter sand from the nearshore waters, mix it with mucous, and make rock reefs sturdy enough to survive awhile. Much about these reefs remains unknown. We do know that worm reefs stand up to storms, but we don’t know how they handle the extra sand we put on beaches.

As part of the permitting for sand placement on our beaches, our County is required to monitor how the nearshore worm reef community is responding. This is an ongoing monitoring program, and unfortunately it is difficult for citizens to stay informed as to its findings.

The potential for burial of these reefs is high. So is the potential for confusing natural and artificial causes of such burials, especially when so little is known about these reefs, and the context of the management and monitoring is so politically charged. Such confusion, and the controversy it creates, are just a part of the cost of engineering our dynamic coasts.

State of the beach 2006

Published on June 25, 2006 in Community, Environment, Mysteries, Science and Water. 0 Comments

Hot off the presses, EPA’s BEACH Program: 2005 Swimming Season Update has just been released (June 23, 2006), and a summary pdf is available for download. The report was the subject of “What you can catch from the waves,” by Nancy Keates, which appeared in the Wall Street Journal, on Friday, 6/23/06. The coverage is timely, and cautionary, though not alarmist.

One aspect of the annual EPA beach reports that should be cause for concern, is that the sources of bacterial contamination of our beaches are almost never identified. Oh, sure, in a handful of high visibility cases, like the sewage release at Waikiki mentioned in Keates’s story, the source of pollution is known. The pollution involved in most beach closings is never identified or located. That is beyond the scope of the current EPA monitoring program.

Also, only the most rudimentary bacterial testing is conducted. Routine cultures for coliform bacteria and enterococcus is the extent of it. No viruses. No toxins, heavy metals, organics, etc. And, only a portion of the nation’s beaches are presently monitored. Still, the program is a good start and worthy of continued support and future expansion.

An interesting analysis of the preceding year’s results by Erika Jensen and Sandra McLellan at actionbioscience focuses on the media and public perception of the beach water quality issue. Some of their conclusions are borne out in the Wall Street Journal article mentioned above. Intriguing how we seem to make light of the risks, even when we’re in the ER with septic shock from a small cut exposed to polluted swill.

The NRDC Clean Water and Oceans site is still a great overview of our beaches and their water quality problems, though the latest EPA results have yet to be analyzed or reviewed.

For anybody interested in the water quality at Summerplace beach, just north of Wabasso Beach (Indian River County, FL), please note: over the weekend the usual pack of dogs running free on the beach were joined by a pair of horses. Enterococci, anyone?

Save our sand?

Published on June 23, 2006 in Community, Economy, Environment, Governance, Mysteries, Science and Sustainability. 1 Comment

The Army Corps of Engineers and Miami-Dade County dropped plans to dredge 1,000,000 cubic yards of sand from the St. Lucie Shoal, but only after citizens and lawmakers from the Treasure Coast area voiced strong opposition. The plan was intended to supply mined sand to a 13-mile stretch of Miami-Dade beach. Today’s report at TC Palm noted that opposition was spearheaded by the Treasure Coast Surfrider chapter, and by State Sen. Ken Pruitt.

At an earlier public meeting, covered by the Palm Beach Post, Sen. Pruitt blasted the Corps’ plan, and vowed “to fight to the death before you take one grain of sand.” Sounds great to those of us living on the Treasure Coast. But, Pruitt further observed that the fight to protect local sands had just begun. Indeed.

The Army Corps of Engineers and Miami-Dade County were “scoping” for sand sources up and down the Florida coast because they have exhausted their local offshore sources as a result of decades of sand pumping projects. Barging it over from the Bahamas is now off limits under federal law.

Treasure Coast residents might be well advised to look at this as a warning, rather than a victory. In the future renewed pressure from Miami and other needy locales is inevitable. But, this isn’t the warning I’m thinking of. As Pogo long ago said, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

We want to exhaust our own offshore sand sources by pumping them onto our own beaches. We want the chance to leave our kids a legacy of offshore dredge craters, smothered reefs, and impoverished fishing, diving and surfing opportunities. Then we can join Miami-Dade County in the search for ever more distant and costly sources of sand to pile onto our beaches, in the name of “renourishment.” The mystery is how this approach will ever lead to sustainable management of the coastal environment, or creation of sustainable coastal communities.

Dark skies for sea turtles

Published on June 22, 2006 in Community, Environment, Mysteries and Sustainability. 2 Comments

Year after year our Indian River County staff sends beachfront homeowners a brochure explaining why keeping the beach dark at night is important during the sea turtle nesting and hatching season. This is not a complicated matter. Not at all. It’s mainly for the benefit of the hatchlings, who tend to head toward light when they emerge from the nest. If that light comes from someplace other than the ocean, that’s where they head. Too often they end up in frontyards, driveways, and (squashed on) roads because beachfront homeowners get disoriented by the complexity of this issue. Here in Summerplace, we have several homeowners who prefer nighttime lighting of their landscaping over helping globally endangered sea turtles survive. Or, they just can’t be bothered. Now there’s a mystery.