Saturday, August 11, 2007

The Green Monster Returns


This photo was taken on Wednesday along Julington Creek by Dr. Gerry Pinto while doing his bi-monthly aerial manatee survey. It serves as a reminder that the nutrient pollution problem has not been resolved and could even lead to a more substantial bloom like we had in 2005. We will keep monitoring the "Green Monster" and let you know if it gets worse or if the algae turns out to be toxic like in 05'. Read the latest article that was in the Daily Record about the recent algae sitings.

Thursday, August 9, 2007

Pollution Pipeline



As I’ve mentioned before, the Georgia Pacific Paper Mill’s (GP) discharge permit is up for renewal. We have been following the application as it moves through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection‘s (DEP) process.

You may remember that DEP issued GP a permit in 2002 that would allow the mill to build a 1,500 ft, 48 inch diameter pipeline that would move its discharge point from Rice Creek to the heart of the St. Johns River. GP has said that building the pipeline was a last resort effort; the pipe would be used only if all of the plant upgrades left them no choice. Now, the Mill seems to have changed its tune, and according to a new GP website, the company now plans on constructing the pollution transfer system in the near term.

Riverkeeper opposes the construction of this pipeline. We believe the mill should not be able to move its pollution from Rice Creek to the River and the mill should do more to reduce its impacts from the environment. GP is the second largest source of nitrogen in the lower St. Johns discharging over 200,000 lbs/year. Nitrogen is the cause of the Green Monster. The Mill’s pollution also has such an impact on the dissolved oxygen levels in Rice Creek that the mill has to inject liquid oxygen into its waste stream. There are still byproducts of the mill’s bleaching process that have been shown to cause impacts to fish reproduction processes.

Riverkeeper and our partner, Clean Water Network of Florida, will continue to follow the permit renewal process. Given the prospect of massive water removals from the river, discharge permits such as GP, will have even more significance for the River’s health. We will keep you posted on this important issue. We will need your help in this battle.

What is that sucking sound?



If you haven't already heard, Central Florida is planning to withdraw large amounts of water from the St. Johns River and the lower Ocklawaha. This issues is huge, and it grows daily. We’re busy plowing through hundreds of pages of documents, and there is much more to learn. We will be producing a white paper and/or fact sheets on this topic. Here’s what we know right now:

The St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) has stated that central Florida has out-stripped the Floridan aquifer’s ability to provide a sustainable drinking water source beyond 2013.

The District has told communities they will have to seek alternative water sources (AWS). The SJRWMD has stated that 155 million gallon days (MGD) can be “safely” removed from the St. Johns River between the headwaters and State Road 44. This number was based upon a study done by a consultant hired by the district. By “safely”, the District means 155 MGD withdrawal will not affect the aquatic health of the river or its ecosystem.

At a July 18 meeting in Orlando, various cities and counties submitted ~ 46 withdrawal projects/proposals vying for the 155 MGD.

Because river water has a high salt or mineral content, most withdrawals will involve reverse osmosis, or RO. A by-product of RO is high mineral content and/or very salty water. Also, RO water is high in nutrients. The byproducts are called “concentrate”.

The SJRWMD has recently started a study to document the problems with concentrate on the river environment—the study will end in a year. RK is concerned SJRWMD could issue numerous withdrawal permits BEFORE the study is complete.

The SJRWMD is also focusing its attention on the lower Ocklawaha River. Although District staff has not set an MFL, minimum flow level, for the Ocklawaha River, the agency is telling counties to expect to be able to withdraw 90 to 108 MGD from the river.

The only county proposing to withdraw water from the River that has a mandatory water conservation plan is Volusia County. None of the other counties or municipalities that are planning water withdrawals has mandatory water conservation programs.

One of the largest water withdrawals, Yankee Lake, is planned in an area just south of the Wekiva Aquatic Preserve! Also, this plant will eventually discharge concentrate into the river.

This current process will only provide drinking water needs until 2025, less than 20 years into the future.

If you are concerned about this process you can contact the Executive Director of the SJRWMD, Kirby Green, at kgreen@sjrwmd.com or 386-329-4262 and Barbara Vergara, Chief of Water Supply, at bvergara@sjrwmd.com or 386-329-4169.

If you want to contact the policy makers of the SJRWMD, the Governing Board, you can send a email c/o Linda Lorenzen, executive assistant, and ask her to forward your correspondence to the board. Her contact is llorenzen@sjrwmd.com.

Thanks again for caring for our beautiful St. Johns.

Friday, July 27, 2007

Water Wars

July 24, 2007

Central Florida shouldn't take water from St. Johns
By RON LITTLEPAGEThe Times-Union

Lovers of the St. Johns River be warned.

The St. Johns River Water Management District is gung-ho about plans to take perhaps as much as 150 million gallons a day out of the river to quench the thirst of Central Florida where growth continues out of control.

And it's not just the St. Johns. Millions of gallons could also come out of the Ocklawaha, a major tributary of the St. Johns.

And it's not just water for Central Florida. South Florida and Southwest Florida are bellying up to the bar as well in a behind-the-scenes ploy to get around the public outcry that came when a similar idea was proposed a couple of years ago.

A major problem is no one knows for sure what sucking that much water out of the St. Johns and Ocklawaha would do to the health of the rivers.

It's easy to tell the water management district is serious about proceeding. Why else would it pay the law firm of Fowler White Boggs Banker about $1 million to facilitate planning sessions for the projects?

One such meeting was held in Orlando last week where about 40 entities expressed interest in staking out claims on water from the St. Johns and the Ocklawaha.

The St. Johns Riverkeeper, Neil Armingeon, attended the meeting and described the atmosphere as being "like dogs fighting over a hunk of meat." When he asked about challenging the projects, Armingeon said he was told, "Hey, dude. It's a done deal."

Well, it shouldn't be a done deal.

When communities spend perhaps as much as $300 million on a plant to treat the river water to make it potable, do you really believe the water management district is going to say, sorry, it turns out we were wrong and the health of the river is being adversely affected, so stop using the water?

And there's no satisfactory answer as to what will happen to the effluent from the plants. When you remove the dirty stuff from the river water, where does it go? Back into the river in concentrated form?

"This is madness," Armingeon said.

The water management district insists withdrawing the water will be safe. I know scientists who disagree.

One big question is how taking that much fresh water out of the St. Johns would affect the river's salinity levels and ecology.

Gov. Charlie Crist has been presenting himself lately as an environmentalist. I applaud him on his efforts to cut greenhouse gases.

He also needs to make it clear to the boards of the state's water management districts that their mission is not only water supply.

It's also protecting the health of the state's waterways.

He has a perfect opportunity to drive that point home.

The board of the St. Johns River Water Management District has nine members. The terms of three of those members have expired. Crist needs to appoint people who get it.

One thing didn't come up at the Orlando meeting where hands were wrung over finding alternative water supplies to meet the needs of burgeoning development.

Half of the water being taken from the aquifer is being used for irrigation.

Institute strict conservation programs and leave the St. Johns and Ocklawaha alone.
ron.littlepage@jacksonville.com, (904) 359-4284

Thursday, June 21, 2007

Study Reveals Significant Compliance Problems

If you watched our new documentary, Revenge of the River, then you know that we have been working on an analysis of Clean Water Act permit compliance for the Lower St. Johns River. Well, the study, Lower St. Johns River Compliance Report, is finally complete and the findings are rather troubling.


In 1972, Congress passed the Clean Water Act, a law that marked a new direction in the management of pollution discharged to our waterways. As authorized by the Clean Water Act, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program was created to regulate point sources (e.g. a pipe) that discharge pollutants into the waters of the United States. In Florida, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has been authorized to administer the NPDES permit program. Thus, DEP has the primary legal authority to implement, oversee, and enforce the permit process.


St. Johns Riverkeeper and the Public Trust Environmental Law Institute of Florida, Inc. initiated the study to analyze the DEP NPDES permit data specific to the St. Johns River. The groups established an 20-month time frame, from January 1, 2005 to August 31, 2006, as the study period.

The purpose of the Lower St. Johns River Compliance Report is to: (1) evaluate the effectiveness of facilities in complying with the limits and conditions of their NPDES permits, and (2) educate the public and provide insight into how DEP oversees the NPDES program and fulfills its responsibility of protecting our waterways. The results clearly indicate that problems exist with the compliance of NPDES permits and the administration and execution of the NPDES program. This analysis serves to document those shortcomings and provide recommendations to address those problems.


Key Findings:

  • The permit review documented 252 violations of NPDES permit limits or conditions and 46 Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs) for a total of 298 total violations during the 20-month study period. SSOs totaled almost 266,000 gallons of material, with the majority relating to sewage.
  • Nitrogen-related violations were the most frequent type of violation with 73 incidences. Other Water Quality issues were a close second with 65 occurrences. Bacteria violations numbered 44, and Oxygen related violations totaled 26. There were 21 violations involving heavy metals, followed by 12 violations involving toxic chemicals. There were 11 flow violations. When combined with the 46 SSO violations, flow and SSOs combine to create a substantial problem.
  • JEA’s Julington Creek Water Reclamation Facility (WRF or WWTF) led all facilities in the number of violations with 37. The Julington Creek wastewater treatment facility was followed by Paradise Point WWTF with 27 violations. Hiawatha and Hart Point WWTF each had 22 permit violations.
  • JEA facilities, the majority of which are wastewater treatment facilities, violated their permits a total of 64 times. JEA facilities accounted for over 90% of the SSO violations, 42 of the 46 events.
  • The review noted that DEP designated 27 facilities as “Out-of-Compliance” and documented 36 various “compliance” related incidences. Eighteen facilities were designated as “Significantly-Out-of-Compliance”.
  • A review of the data indicates that some facilities were allowed to operate for long periods of time with an out-of-compliance designation. In some cases, the time period was over a year. For example, the DEP declared East Putman County Road WWTP as “significantly-out-of-compliance” in March 2005. A year later, the facility was again designated as “significantly-out-of-compliance”. The Palatka WWTF was listed as “out-of-compliance” in July of 2005. A return inspection almost a year later, in June 2006, resulted in the plant being declared “significantly-out-of-compliance”.


Currently, the Lower St. Johns River is designated as “impaired” or polluted because of too much nutrient (nitrogen) pollution, and most of the creeks and tributaries in Duval County have high levels of fecal coliform bacteria. In other words, our river and creeks are already polluted. These permit violations are violations of the law--illegally contributing additional pollution to our waterways causing further degradation.


If we are going to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to restore the health of the St. Johns, then compliance and enforcement of our environmental laws must be a priority, as well. The facilities that are violating the terms of their permits must do a better job of complying with the law. DEP, the state agency charged with protecting the river, must do a better job of enforcing the laws and encouraging compliance. We deserve better, and so does our river.


For more information, visit our website – www.stjohnsriverkeeper.org. You can download the Lower St. Johns River Compliance Report and view the original documents from the DEP files that verify the violations.

Monday, June 11, 2007

River of Late.......

The following is from the latest river observations of Ben Williams, former Riverkeeper Board member, avid fisherman, and owner of Fisherman's Dock seafood market.

Ospreys - Though over the last few decades they have become pleasantly ubiquitous, they can still serve as barometers of things. In that vein, it's worth noting that of late we've noticed at least a couple of nests where the parents have managed to rear 3 chicks to fledge. I'd venture that this is a result of the current conditions in the river. Both because of the great schools of mullet, and because of the large number of distressed freshwater fish, easy picking abound. I should also add that, because of the good crab season we're having, there are more traps around, and therefore, more discarded bait to be scavenged each morning. Less chance of a young osprey not getting a full belly and, therefore, less need for his less strong sibling to go even hungrier.

And speaking of traps and discarded bait, gators love it too. We've noted gators working away from the bank at sunrise in Lake George, precisely when you'd usually expect to see them going in the other direction, and they're working out towards the trap lines.......think they've learned something?

And it is that salt water that is of special note. Marker 18, on the north head of the bar at Browns landing, which is about a dozen miles south of the 17 Bridge at Palatka, had barnacles on it as of Saturday. Not little tiny pinhead ones either, but rather barnacles of BB size or larger. NEVER seen them so far south. Asked around. Found a few fishermen older than I to ask and their response was the same. In the old days, 30 years ago, even the docks in the Toccoi area were barnacle free. And it was big news when, a decade ago, barnacles were growing within sight of Palatka, way beyond that now.

And with those barnacles, riding too on the salt, have come the fish. Tarpon, 3 I know of hooked by one bass fisherman on Friday last. And snook, and porpoise south of Green Cove, and jellyfish to the Shands and beyond, and the crabs are carrying sponge south of town, which pushes the crabbers farther south to escape those they can not sell legally. And here at the house, Fruit Cove, a few hundred yards south of Julington Creek, the fish feeder's school of bream has dwindled. Driven from the constant source of food by the salt, I assume. And I think it a good assumption for, and trust me I know what I am looking at, as I look off the dock I see few freshwater fish. Where a couple of months ago there would be groups of small bass and sundry panfish species wandering the shallows, today, none.

But it's not as if there is no life there, for the saltwater species have replaced them. Mullet, and schools of small croakers, and spots, and pinfish, and all sorts of minnows. And where we would see shad, we're now seeing porgies. And a few hours ago I noted vast numbers of tiny marine shrimp, the result of the spring spawn, moving along the bank. And their general direction of movement, as is to be expected this time of year, is south.

And the eel grass is in full retreat here near Julington. Since January, it's transitioned from lush to sparse, with gone on the way. It's headed where it was a decade ago, white sand and sight casting reds off the dock................... But to the south, Lake George and the river proper, there the grass is coming back with a vengeance. The bars in the river, bars which for the last 4 or 5 years have been just that, sand bars, are now sprouting grass. And in Lake George, how beautiful it will get is anyone's guess. We were there yesterday. Along the east shore, there are places where it extends hundreds of yards from the bank, farther than we can ever remember seeing it. And the west shore, according to reports as I've not been over there lately myself, has recovered nicely from the lashing of the hurricanes. The grass, which had been rooted up in mass by the waves of those storms, is well on it's way to lush also.

And more good news. With the exception of a report or two from Crescent Lake, there has been no sign of our ugly green friend. Of course, it's only in the last couple of weeks that the water has hit the mid 80s steady, which may change things, but then the salt will have some effect?

And the mullet.............! If there have been more mullet in the river in recent years, we missed it. It's hard to explain this, but generally while we do see some significant size variation in the mullet populating the river, the mullet in the river will be more of the larger and fewer of the smaller. Of course, the river harbors mostly black mullet and not the silvers that tend to run smaller. But what we're seeing is a population structure with a far greater number of small, as in what fishermen call "finger mullet", than usual. And the numbers are huge. Doctors Lake is literally seething with them. How this unusually large population of vegetarians will effect things, who can tell.

And then there is the bottom in the shallows. When we have grass, the grass tends to impede the passage of sediments down the river. Here at the house, and in many places, a muck layer will develop behind and amongst the grass. The bottom not covered by grass will be dark. Now though, even in the shallows, sand is much more visible. And where did the muck go? And where did the nutrients bound up in that muck go? And is this good? And is this a natural cycle that allows the river to purge to some extent? Questions that prove we need science and scientist because we fishmongers can only guess. I guess it's a good and natural thing, guess being the operative word.

Tuesday, May 1, 2007

Revenge of the River


Riverkeeper's new documentary, Revenge of the River, looks at some of the critical issues facing the St. Johns River and explores what can be done to prevent our booming population from overwhelming our river. As our state continues to experience rapid growth and development, we are faced with significant challenges and critical decisions that will impact the future of our river. Will we decimate our remaining wetlands, lower or inadequately enforce our environmental protections, deplete our groundwater, and establish communities that are unsustainable? The decision is ours. We still have time to reconcile with our river before it seeks its revenge.

DVDs will be available soon. For more information, call 904-256-7591.