Costly Loss Of Wetlands Certain If County Kills Its Own Rules

Published: Jun 23, 2007

Ignoring the public and the facts, four Hillsborough County commissioners gave preliminary approval to eliminating the Environmental Protection Commission's wetlands protections.

Their sole purpose, it appeared, was to please those developers who have long sought to get rid of the safeguards. The vote came without public discussion, similar to how earlier this year commissions abruptly killed planning provisions that had been opposed by builders.

Environmental activist Mariella Smith called Thursday's vote "the lowest moment in our county's history." That's going too far for a county where commissioners have been led off in handcuffs for taking bribes from developers, but what Commissioners Kevin White, Jim Norman, Ken Hagan and Brian Blair did was nevertheless dismaying and discouraging.

Hagan maintained revenue cuts ordered by the Legislature made the move necessary, but EPC had already made enough cuts to meet the state's requirements without eliminating the 29-employee division.

And the promises of savings are illusionary. The division's budget is $2.1 million a year, but it brings in at least $1.2 million a year in permit revenues.

Investing less than $1 million a year to protect a natural resource that prevents flooding and erosion, stores and filters water, nurtures wildlife and provides natural beauty is a bargain.

As U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor, a former county commissioner, points out, taxpayers will end up with the bill for drainage and water-quality problems that often result from filling in wetlands.

She also warns the county's stance will put at risk federal funds for water projects, since local safeguards are a key consideration.

Blair says his chief concern was duplication, since the Southwest Florida Water Management District also regulates wetlands.

But Blair and company ignored EPC Director Rick Garrity's plan to establish a one-stop permitting process that would coordinate the county and water district regulations.

Make no mistake. Without the county's involvement, Hillsborough will lose many more wetlands.

Last year, the water district handled 166 wetlands permits in Hillsborough. The county reviewed 446.

And Hillsborough's ordinance, which was adopted 22 years ago to do something about the piecemeal loss of marshlands, protects wetlands under a half-acre. The state's rule does not.

A half-acre - larger than most lots - is scarcely insignificant.

Moreover, county regulators work with developers early in the process to avert the need to destroy any wetlands. If this would prevent the reasonable use of the land, the county allows wetlands to be destroyed, but they must be replaced with man-made wetlands. Such replacement is called mitigation.

The district is far more likely to approve wetlands destruction without pursuing alternatives and it allows mitigation to take place outside Hillsborough. And while the county carefully monitors mitigation sites to ensure they work, the district's record for follow-up is checkered. As University of Florida ecology professor Peter Frederick told the Tribune's Mike Salinero, "... in the vast majority of cases, the created wetlands do not replace the biological functions of the naturally occurring ones they replaced."

Commissioners Mark Sharpe and Rose Ferlita deserve praise for fighting on behalf of the protections. And Commissioner Al Higginbotham appeared interested in hearing all sides.

The county must still hold a public hearing later in the summer before the move is official. Perhaps Commissioners White, Norman, Hagan and Blair eventually will recognize the importance of stewardship. But they'll have to start paying attention to the public and the science, and not just to the development industry.