At a series of hearings across the state, officials with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency got a pretty clear idea of what many in Florida think of the agency’s proposed water quality standards for the state’s lakes, rivers, streams and canals: They stink.

The agriculture community -– along with people from other sectors of Florida’s economy -- spoke strongly against the EPA standards at the public meetings held by the agency Feb. 16-18.

EPA wants to replace the state’s existing site-specific standards with numeric limits that would apply to different categories of water bodies. The proposed rule comes despite the fact that Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection has been working for more than a decade toward the same goal through painstaking, scientific steps. The EPA’s move is the result of a lawsuit brought by activist environmental coalition Earthjustice, which sued because it thought the DEP and EPA weren’t moving fast enough to set criteria to clean up the state’s surface waters.

The Tallahassee and West Palm Beach gatherings were filled, and the Orlando hearing was standing-room-only. A crowd of around 500 packed the meeting room, with the overflow spilling into the lobby outside.

Representing the EPA’s Office of Water were Ephraim King, director of the Office of Science and Technology; Jim Giattina, director of the Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds; and Jim Keating, environmental protection specialist of the Standards and Health Protection Division. King’s opening remarks focused on how the EPA arrived at the proposed standards, basing them in large part on data gathered over many years by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Keating gave a presentation outlining why EPA took its broad-brushed approach, saying it allows the agency to move more quickly to address “the broader range of impairments” in Florida waters.

Most of the speakers who addressed the EPA panel at the hearings opposed EPA’s proposal, citing the lack of sound scientific data to support the standards, the arbitrary nature of the criteria and the astronomical costs to comply with them. According to Florida Farm Bureau, 237 people spoke at the three hearings. More than three-fourths – 76.4 percent – opposed the rule. About 20 percent supported it, and almost 4 percent were neutral.

Florida agriculture isn’t alone in criticizing the proposed standards. Municipal wastewater and stormwater treatment utilities and numerous other industry sectors will have to spend many, many millions to pay for extensive infrastructure upgrades. And those costs will be borne by taxpayers.

Several FFVA members and staff were among the speakers in all three locations. FFVA Board of Directors members Pam Fentress and Rick Roth gave remarks, as did representatives from many other members' companies, including the Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Florida, King Ranch and Collier Enterprises.

One of the biggest criticisms is that the EPA standards are overly broad and fail to take into account the diversity and unique nature of Florida’s lakes, rivers, streams and canals. As a result, bodies of water that now are deemed healthy will be considered impaired.

Kerry Kates, FFVA’s director of water and natural resources, spoke on behalf of the association at the Tallahassee hearing.

“The agricultural community is particularly apprehensive about how individual operations could be affected.  The economic downturn has greatly impacted Florida’s growers.  Coupled with the devastation incurred by the recent unprecedented freeze, many in the agricultural community have been left reeling,” Kates told the panel.  “Given the estimated costs to upgrade current public infrastructure to meet the proposed criteria, it can be assumed that the costs to the agricultural community would be staggering. 

“It is highly doubtful that our farming communities would be able to weather the financial burden that would result from attempting to comply with this proposed ruling,” he continued.  “This not only affects the agriculture operations, but the many communities that have built up around them, where agriculture is the hub of their local economies.  There are a myriad of towns throughout this state that are directly dependent on agriculture.  If those operations should cease to exist, those towns and communities would collapse.”

Among other concerns, John Alexander of Alico said he was leery of the standards because they have arbitrarily set and are unattainable. Nor can the standards be met with current technology and without significant additional costs that agriculture can’t sustain, he said.

“It’s noteworthy that even South Florida rainfall exceeds the permitted 10 parts per billion [of phosphorous] as the rainfall contains 30 parts per billion. I rest my case that they are set arbitrarily without science,” he said.

Alexander pointed out the work that growers and ranchers have done to improve water quality.

“Those of us who live and work in agriculture in South Florida have made tremendous progress in reducing both nitrogen and phosphorous being discharged on our properties over the past 15 years. We’ve gone from being accused of being the problem to becoming a major part of the solution,” he told the EPA panel. “We understand the problem and we are committed to doing even more. But I suggest you let the Florida DEP continue its work to establish numeric nutrient criteria based on science and local knowledge in accordance with the Clean Water Act without specific dictation from Washington.”

Rick Roth of Roth Farms Inc. in Belle Glade addressed the panel at the West Palm Beach public hearing. “Floridians cannot afford another tax from Washington by way of regulation at a time of double-digit unemployment and record foreclosures, especially since the proposed criteria are unnecessary to protect the biological health of the water bodies,” he said. “They are technically unachievable and could create expensive unintended consequences.”

Joe Wright of V&W Farms in Highlands County spoke of the millions of dollars his company has already invested in environmental infrastructure, including converting its operation from a confined facility to rotational grazing. For its efforts, his company has received the Agricultural Environmental Leadership Award given by the state Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.

“We are absolutely state of the art … you cannot get more environmentally friendly than our dairy farm. But I am very, very worried about this rule,” Wright said. “First of all, it’s an indictment of the Florida DEP. I’ve dealt with them for 20 years -- they’ve not always been easy to deal with, but they’ve always been fair.

“Some people in this room claim to be environmentalists, but I’ve put my $3 million where my mouth is. And I don’t want to be collateral damage from a change in the rules,” he added, concluding that he was “concerned that this is more a battle of ideology than it is science or economics.”

The agency is set to issue final standards in October. It has extended the original March 29 deadline for written comments another 30 days. Kates said he is preparing FFVA’s response and is urging members to file their own comments as well.

Information about the water quality standards and tools to help develop and submit comments to the EPA can be found on FFVA’s Web site on the home page.