A Sweet Deal

As hundreds of stormwater professionals gather in Florida in August for the seventh annual StormCon conference, they’re converging not too far from the site of a surprising and unprecedented land purchase. In June, the state of Florida agreed to buy 187,000 acres from a private company to help restore the Everglades.

The company, United States Sugar, is the largest producer of sugarcane in the US and has been part of the years-long wrangling between agriculture and the Everglades. Its land is located north of Everglades National Park and south of Lake Okeechobee. With the purchase, the state will gain control of nearly half of the land in the controversial Everglades Agricultural Area south of the lake.

The purchase is still being negotiated by the South Florida Water Management District, which will have control over the land. United States Sugar will continue its operations for the next six years.

As conservationists know, it’s not necessarily the amount of land that matters as much as its location and function, and the tract in question is critical to the drainage system of the entire region. Years of diverting water and carving up the land have prevented water from flowing between Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades as it once did, leading to a drying out of portions of the Everglades, loss of peat soils, and shrinking plant and animal populations. Rather than reaching the Everglades, freshwater that overflows from Okeechobee now goes to the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico, damaging saltwater estuaries. (In part, the algae blooms in the Gulf of Mexico are a result; see the article on dead zones on page 46 of this issue.)

Water flowing to the Everglades instead of to the ocean will especially be beneficial in times of drought—something that is particularly relevant now. Of course, as Kenneth Ammon of the SFWMD points out, the movement of water won’t be entirely natural, but will be managed with reservoirs and other mechanisms to control flows. Still, the land acquisition makes many of the expensive planned workarounds—complex systems of pumps and wells—unnecessary.

Many considerations are involved in a negotiation of this sort; because an existing business is involved, the future of its employees must be taken into account, and getting a price that the company’s shareholders consider fair is also part of the equation. Some have criticized the state for paying too much. As the company pointed out in materials released after the deal was announced, selling was “a bittersweet decision,” but “increased regulatory concerns and several consecutive years of hurricane and drought” were factors in deciding to accept the state’s $1.75 billion offer.

The larger question is whether this purchase will set any sort of precedent for the protection of other natural areas. Private organizations often buy land or use a mechanism such as a conservation easement to protect large areas, but it’s unusual for a state government to get directly involved. Some of the purchase will be paid for with bonds and fees on water bills. Granted, the Everglades is a special case, not only in size and environmental significance, but also in the amount of litigation and legislation so far involved in its protection. But the perceived success of the project—not only the purchase, but how the land is managed in years to come—will help other states decide whether pursuing a similar course is worthwhile.      

Author's Bio: Janice Kaspersen is the editor of Stormwater magazine.