Last week, a federal judge in Tallahassee approved a settlement in an environmental suit that requires the EPA to set nutrient limits for lakes, streams and creeks in Florida.
For the first time, there would be strict limits on the output of these chemicals, common byproducts of lawn fertilization, sewage treatment, farming and cattle production.
We were surprised to find that Florida, unlike most other states, does not already have limits on these chemicals. Rather, the state has adopted “narrative” standards, allowing for flexibility — or total neglect — when the situation calls for it. Opponents of the new regulations, a coalition of lobbying groups representing business and farming interests, argue that the weak economy means now is not the time to increase costs for business and government.
But for more than a decade, as Florida’s economy and housing market boomed, these same lobbying groups argued against regulations, claiming they would hamper growth.
It is precisely this growth, bringing with it the endless suburbs now synonymous with Florida, that has created an environmental mess in Lake Okeechobee, major rivers and the beaches of Southwest Florida. Lawn fertilizer runoff causes algae blooms that kill fish, leave waters too unhealthy to swim in and cause respiratory problems for residents and tourists.
We believe that the real threat to Florida’s economic future (not to mention the well-being of its residents) is not new regulations, but these lobbying groups themselves, who have been all-too effective up to this point.
Because a wheezing stroll down an algae covered beach won’t appeal to most tourists.
