The Communiqué Newsletter for September 2007
Presidents Report by Lyndel Hale
(no report at this time)
Vice Presidents Report by Dennis Barnhardt
I have been involved some what with the organizing committee for the “Save Our Lakes Day” luncheon and to be quite honest I am thrilled to see the enthusiasm by the committee members who are working very hard to orchestrate this function. It has been awhile since I have seen such enthusiasm and dedication. I applaud each and everyone of you. I hope everyone takes advantage of this momentous occasion. They are also selling “Save Our Lakes” t-shirts.
I recently read an article that was published in the Lake Region Monitor written by James Williams. The title of the article immediately caught my eye, “Water Management District rep says, “Effective groups avoid bad science; connect with local governments”. If you are not aware James has been doing a series of articles on the water issues in the past issues.
Another article he wrote June 28th. was titled, “Is effluent wastewater the new Lake Brooklyn option?” The article made mention of our group and the concept we are asking the water management and local governments to look at.
If you read the first article mentioned above you saw where he quoted a “Deputy Executive Director” Mike Slayton as saying, “We do consider the needs and recommendations of citizens initiatives”, “but it’s a mixed bag. Some groups have a detailed understanding of the issues and the science, while others have a gut feeling, an intuitive stance, but wrong.” “The most effective groups must do their science homework and avoid advocating solutions where the science doesn’t hold up or solutions that benefit only a few or will have a negative impact on other water consumers or districts down the pipeline.” “Slayton added that effective groups usually clearly define their issue, have a positive recommendation and he said, they are committed to their projects over the long haul. “Bad science, or lobbing grenades won’t work,” Slayton said, meaning that caustic sound bytes rarely get the water management district’s, the D.E.P.’s or even the Legislature’s attention.” (the latter part was not Mr. Slayton’s quote but an interpretation by Mr. Williams.)
So what was the article implying? To be honest with you I was alarmed to the idea that the article may be directed to the Save Our Lakes organization. We have worked very hard to establish our credibility with the community and our local governments. I think our past history speaks for itself.
I called Mr. Mike Slayton and spoke with him concerning his interview with L.R.M. reporter James Williams. I asked him if his comments were directly reflective towards our “group”? He assured me that in no way was he referring to the Save Our Lakes organization. “By no means was there any innuendoes directed towards your group.” He apologized if there was any mistaken implications referring to our organization. He said he was misquoted several times by James but he doesn’t make a practice of arguing with the reporters after the fact.
Mr. Slayton said he was asked by James, in his opinion what type of groups “generically” speaking are effective. Which led him to the group known as Friends of the Sebastion River, which formed an alliance with the SJRWMD to clean up the river.
Our President, Lyndel Hale, spoke with Mr. James Williams in reference to the article. During their conversation James made mention that he felt (we) would have a hard time convincing the voters on the idea of dumping sewer water into Brooklyn Lake. Lyndel tried to assure him the water would not be sewer water, but rather we would like to entertain the idea of using recycled water such as proposed by Mr. Peter Schreuder who is a professional geohydrologist. This is only one of the ideas that Mr. Schreuder proposed to research. That is the ultimate purpose of doing the study in order to evaluate all options.
Look people we would never advocate putting sewer water into the lakes. The effluent water is treated and purified. The D.E.P. has stringent regulations pertaining to the discharging of effluent water and they are about to get even tougher. Many cities around the country, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, are treating wastewater. This is not a new idea nor an experiment, it has been tried and proven.
The water management districts through out the state of Florida are looking into solutions to water resources for future growth. They realize that we are going to be in a serious shortage for drinking water if our state continues to grow at the rate it is. The Aquifers are slowly declining with all of the consumption we are putting on them now. It just makes good sense if we try to put back some of that water we are pumping out of the aquifer. As we have said repeatedly, our area is a natural recharge area to the aquifer system, so why not take advantage of a natural system that is already in place.
This could be a “win - win” situation for everyone. Our lakes are a reflection of the water table, which also reflects the aquifers. When the water table goes down it effects the aquifer and vice versa. How many of you have had to replace your wells for a deeper well?
Did You Know?
It should be obvious to most of you by now we are experiencing another drought spell since January 2006 to May of this year, which has left our area with a 17 inch rainfall deficit (rainfall taken on White Sands Lake). Now with that being said, we have seen June and July dump some above average rainfall. (rainfall taken on White Sands Lake for June = 9.15 inches and July = 13.05 inches, which is about 8 1/2 inches above the normal average).
To compound the drought we have seen some well above average temperatures along with some windy days attributing to spells of extreme dry air making for rapid evaporation.
What is most disturbing is to see our lakes decline at a very rapid rate. White Sands Lake for instance has dropped nearly four feet in depth in that time frame from Jan. 2006.
We certainly could use some good downpours. We don’t necessarily want to see any thing like Hurricane Dean hit our area with all the devastation that it has caused. (Our hearts and prayers go out to those who are trying to recover from Hurricane Dean.) This is suppose to be our “rainy” months (June, July, August and September) when we would average about 27 to 28 inches for the four-month period. After that the months of October, November and December would only average about 7 1/2 inches total for the three months.
In the research we have been doing we have looked at rainfall amounts for any indication to see if there is any cycle with wet periods and dry periods. We have collected rainfall data as far back as 1900 and there does not appear to be any set pattern or cycles as some tend to think.
We have seen some rather lengthy wet periods in the 1940’s, 1960’s, 1970’s. We have noticed some dry spells in the 1910’s, 1930’s, 1950’s and 1990’s, which has also been carried over into the 2000’s. One of the years that was recorded to be the driest year on record was in 1917 with only 32 inches.
On the other hand 1953 was recorded to be the wettest year on record with an incredible 73.30 inches of rainfall. Ironically that led into one of the driest periods that had been recorded at that time from 1954 to 1956. Because of that rainfall in 1953 Lake Geneva was seeing some near flooding conditions with water levels above 106 feet above sea level. Which brings us to “Did you know?”
In April 1954 the Fourth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida met with a hearing to consider the ramifications of the flooding issues connected with Lake Geneva. Their investigations found an alleged “Artificial obstruction or barrier” placed at the outlet channel of Lake Geneva into Old Field Pond. The court ordered that the defendants remove the barrier and lower the outlet to an elevation of 105 feet, which was suppose to be the natural out flow for the lake.
This raises an eyebrow because there was some flooding issues with Old Field Pond and Putnam Hall back in 1946, which was directly connected to the drainage of Lake Geneva. The residents of both Lake Geneva and the Old Field Pond area were up in arms because of the flooding.
Some of the residents of Lake Geneva signed a petition. According to a letter written to the State Road Dept. by R. L. Tilley, Lake Geneva was overflowing. “A petition bearing thirty-one signatures was presented to the board (July 1, 1946.). The petition reads as follows.” “We the undersigned do hereby petition the Commissioners of Clay County to lower the culvert, which is the outlet of Lake Geneva, along the county road known as the Lake Geneva, Melrose Road. It is believed that the lowering of the culvert and the cleaning out of the old creek bed will lower the lake approximately 18 inches. This is necessary due to the damage to property and trees by the existing level of Lake Geneva.” “Regardless of the outcome of the above matter Mr. Pangborn asked me to write you about placing a culvert where you made a fill at the natural drain of Oldfield Pond at Hillcrest. This was to be done by you if and when it became necessary, and the commissioners from that district says it is needed right now if present conditions prevail.”
The State Road Dept. reply to the letter written by R. L. Tilley on July 3.) “Our investigation indicates that any enlargement of the drain out of Lake Geneva would result in a faster flow into Oldfield Pond and would inundate Road 28 for a length of _ mile where it crosses the pond. This would also endanger the normal level of Lake Geneva since it would tend to make low water levels even lower at dry times. For these reasons we would object to alterations in the Lake Geneva channel.”
It would appear that the State Road Dept. and the Clay County Commissioners would not be in agreement as to what needed to be done. Later that year the Clay County Commission authorized a new culvert be placed at the outlet channel in order to relieve the flooding of Lake Geneva.
We have yet to see any documentation where the culvert was indeed placed and the fill was removed during that year 1946. According to the letter written by Mr. Tilley, he implied the road department placed the “fill”. So was this fill removed or could this be the same obstruction noted in the court order in 1954? So who placed the “artificial barrier” and when? Lake Geneva has had its share of flooding in the past. Ironic, now it is drying up.
Presidents Report by Lyndel Hale
(no report at this time)
Vice Presidents Report by Dennis Barnhardt
I have been involved some what with the organizing committee for the “Save Our Lakes Day” luncheon and to be quite honest I am thrilled to see the enthusiasm by the committee members who are working very hard to orchestrate this function. It has been awhile since I have seen such enthusiasm and dedication. I applaud each and everyone of you. I hope everyone takes advantage of this momentous occasion. They are also selling “Save Our Lakes” t-shirts.
I recently read an article that was published in the Lake Region Monitor written by James Williams. The title of the article immediately caught my eye, “Water Management District rep says, “Effective groups avoid bad science; connect with local governments”. If you are not aware James has been doing a series of articles on the water issues in the past issues.
Another article he wrote June 28th. was titled, “Is effluent wastewater the new Lake Brooklyn option?” The article made mention of our group and the concept we are asking the water management and local governments to look at.
If you read the first article mentioned above you saw where he quoted a “Deputy Executive Director” Mike Slayton as saying, “We do consider the needs and recommendations of citizens initiatives”, “but it’s a mixed bag. Some groups have a detailed understanding of the issues and the science, while others have a gut feeling, an intuitive stance, but wrong.” “The most effective groups must do their science homework and avoid advocating solutions where the science doesn’t hold up or solutions that benefit only a few or will have a negative impact on other water consumers or districts down the pipeline.” “Slayton added that effective groups usually clearly define their issue, have a positive recommendation and he said, they are committed to their projects over the long haul. “Bad science, or lobbing grenades won’t work,” Slayton said, meaning that caustic sound bytes rarely get the water management district’s, the D.E.P.’s or even the Legislature’s attention.” (the latter part was not Mr. Slayton’s quote but an interpretation by Mr. Williams.)
So what was the article implying? To be honest with you I was alarmed to the idea that the article may be directed to the Save Our Lakes organization. We have worked very hard to establish our credibility with the community and our local governments. I think our past history speaks for itself.
I called Mr. Mike Slayton and spoke with him concerning his interview with L.R.M. reporter James Williams. I asked him if his comments were directly reflective towards our “group”? He assured me that in no way was he referring to the Save Our Lakes organization. “By no means was there any innuendoes directed towards your group.” He apologized if there was any mistaken implications referring to our organization. He said he was misquoted several times by James but he doesn’t make a practice of arguing with the reporters after the fact.
Mr. Slayton said he was asked by James, in his opinion what type of groups “generically” speaking are effective. Which led him to the group known as Friends of the Sebastion River, which formed an alliance with the SJRWMD to clean up the river.
Our President, Lyndel Hale, spoke with Mr. James Williams in reference to the article. During their conversation James made mention that he felt (we) would have a hard time convincing the voters on the idea of dumping sewer water into Brooklyn Lake. Lyndel tried to assure him the water would not be sewer water, but rather we would like to entertain the idea of using recycled water such as proposed by Mr. Peter Schreuder who is a professional geohydrologist. This is only one of the ideas that Mr. Schreuder proposed to research. That is the ultimate purpose of doing the study in order to evaluate all options.
Look people we would never advocate putting sewer water into the lakes. The effluent water is treated and purified. The D.E.P. has stringent regulations pertaining to the discharging of effluent water and they are about to get even tougher. Many cities around the country, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, are treating wastewater. This is not a new idea nor an experiment, it has been tried and proven.
The water management districts through out the state of Florida are looking into solutions to water resources for future growth. They realize that we are going to be in a serious shortage for drinking water if our state continues to grow at the rate it is. The Aquifers are slowly declining with all of the consumption we are putting on them now. It just makes good sense if we try to put back some of that water we are pumping out of the aquifer. As we have said repeatedly, our area is a natural recharge area to the aquifer system, so why not take advantage of a natural system that is already in place.
This could be a “win - win” situation for everyone. Our lakes are a reflection of the water table, which also reflects the aquifers. When the water table goes down it effects the aquifer and vice versa. How many of you have had to replace your wells for a deeper well?
Did You Know?
It should be obvious to most of you by now we are experiencing another drought spell since January 2006 to May of this year, which has left our area with a 17 inch rainfall deficit (rainfall taken on White Sands Lake). Now with that being said, we have seen June and July dump some above average rainfall. (rainfall taken on White Sands Lake for June = 9.15 inches and July = 13.05 inches, which is about 8 1/2 inches above the normal average).
To compound the drought we have seen some well above average temperatures along with some windy days attributing to spells of extreme dry air making for rapid evaporation.
What is most disturbing is to see our lakes decline at a very rapid rate. White Sands Lake for instance has dropped nearly four feet in depth in that time frame from Jan. 2006.
We certainly could use some good downpours. We don’t necessarily want to see any thing like Hurricane Dean hit our area with all the devastation that it has caused. (Our hearts and prayers go out to those who are trying to recover from Hurricane Dean.) This is suppose to be our “rainy” months (June, July, August and September) when we would average about 27 to 28 inches for the four-month period. After that the months of October, November and December would only average about 7 1/2 inches total for the three months.
In the research we have been doing we have looked at rainfall amounts for any indication to see if there is any cycle with wet periods and dry periods. We have collected rainfall data as far back as 1900 and there does not appear to be any set pattern or cycles as some tend to think.
We have seen some rather lengthy wet periods in the 1940’s, 1960’s, 1970’s. We have noticed some dry spells in the 1910’s, 1930’s, 1950’s and 1990’s, which has also been carried over into the 2000’s. One of the years that was recorded to be the driest year on record was in 1917 with only 32 inches.
On the other hand 1953 was recorded to be the wettest year on record with an incredible 73.30 inches of rainfall. Ironically that led into one of the driest periods that had been recorded at that time from 1954 to 1956. Because of that rainfall in 1953 Lake Geneva was seeing some near flooding conditions with water levels above 106 feet above sea level. Which brings us to “Did you know?”
In April 1954 the Fourth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida met with a hearing to consider the ramifications of the flooding issues connected with Lake Geneva. Their investigations found an alleged “Artificial obstruction or barrier” placed at the outlet channel of Lake Geneva into Old Field Pond. The court ordered that the defendants remove the barrier and lower the outlet to an elevation of 105 feet, which was suppose to be the natural out flow for the lake.
This raises an eyebrow because there was some flooding issues with Old Field Pond and Putnam Hall back in 1946, which was directly connected to the drainage of Lake Geneva. The residents of both Lake Geneva and the Old Field Pond area were up in arms because of the flooding.
Some of the residents of Lake Geneva signed a petition. According to a letter written to the State Road Dept. by R. L. Tilley, Lake Geneva was overflowing. “A petition bearing thirty-one signatures was presented to the board (July 1, 1946.). The petition reads as follows.” “We the undersigned do hereby petition the Commissioners of Clay County to lower the culvert, which is the outlet of Lake Geneva, along the county road known as the Lake Geneva, Melrose Road. It is believed that the lowering of the culvert and the cleaning out of the old creek bed will lower the lake approximately 18 inches. This is necessary due to the damage to property and trees by the existing level of Lake Geneva.” “Regardless of the outcome of the above matter Mr. Pangborn asked me to write you about placing a culvert where you made a fill at the natural drain of Oldfield Pond at Hillcrest. This was to be done by you if and when it became necessary, and the commissioners from that district says it is needed right now if present conditions prevail.”
The State Road Dept. reply to the letter written by R. L. Tilley on July 3.) “Our investigation indicates that any enlargement of the drain out of Lake Geneva would result in a faster flow into Oldfield Pond and would inundate Road 28 for a length of _ mile where it crosses the pond. This would also endanger the normal level of Lake Geneva since it would tend to make low water levels even lower at dry times. For these reasons we would object to alterations in the Lake Geneva channel.”
It would appear that the State Road Dept. and the Clay County Commissioners would not be in agreement as to what needed to be done. Later that year the Clay County Commission authorized a new culvert be placed at the outlet channel in order to relieve the flooding of Lake Geneva.
We have yet to see any documentation where the culvert was indeed placed and the fill was removed during that year 1946. According to the letter written by Mr. Tilley, he implied the road department placed the “fill”. So was this fill removed or could this be the same obstruction noted in the court order in 1954? So who placed the “artificial barrier” and when? Lake Geneva has had its share of flooding in the past. Ironic, now it is drying up.
all rights reserved by LRCA, Inc. reprints only with written permission web design by 3twigs Design www.3twigs.com