Home

Blog

MOTION FOR INJUNCTION FILED TO POSTPONE DREDGING

MOTION FOR INJUNCTION FILED TO POSTPONE DREDGING Hurricane Irma caused flood impacts along the St. Johns River in September 2017

On December 4, 2017, St. Johns RIVERKEEPER filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction to postpone the first phase of the impending St. Johns River harbor deepening project until significant deficiencies in the studies by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) are addressed and resolved in order to protect our river and our community.  

In 2013, the Corps authorized a plan by JaxPort to deepen the last 13 miles of the St. Johns River channel from 40 to 47 feet to accommodate larger Post-Panamax ships. Earlier this year, JAXPORT announced a new plan to dredge 11 miles of the channel, instead of 13 miles, in an apparent effort to reduce the cost of the project.

St. Johns RIVERKEEPER contends that the new 11-mile plan must be formally evaluated by the Army Corps of Engineers to fully assess environmental impacts and the economic feasibility of the project before federal funding can be authorized and dredging is allowed to proceed.

“This new 11-mile plan simply does not exist according to the Army Corps,” states Lisa Rinaman, the St. Johns Riverkeeper. “Federal law requires JaxPort’s new plan to be thoroughly studied and evaluated, including the recalculation of the Benefit Cost Ration (BCR), yet nothing has been done by the Corps to fulfill this requirement.”

In addition, the Army Corps failed to conduct a valid flood analysis, despite the fact that their own study predicts an increase of up to a foot in storm surge and tide levels

in some areas due to the dredging. The lack of analysis not only presents a potential environmental risk, but also does not take into account the negative impacts and costs to homes and businesses from more severe flooding.

“In the wake of Hurricane Irma, the urgency and importance of assessing the potential flooding impacts from dredging is even more apparent,” explains Rinaman. “Failure to evaluate these impacts when we know that the dredging will likely increase storm surge and tide levels only puts our community and our river at greater risk and makes us more vulnerable in the future.”

On a November 30, 2017, the Army Corps responded to St. Johns RIVERKEPER’s amended legal complaint by announcing plans to reopen the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) evaluation process to “consider whether the recent flooding conditions in the vicinity of the Jacksonville Harbor Navigation Project following the 2017 nor’easter and Hurricane Irma constitute significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the Jacksonville Harbor Navigation Project or its impacts.”  

You can submit comments regarding flooding impacts to Paul Stodola at paul.e.stodola@usace.army.mil by December 30, 2017. Comments can also be mailed to Paul Stadola at Jacksonville District Corps of Engineers, 701 San Marco Blvd., Jacksonville 32207-8175.

While representing an important step toward addressing a major deficiency in the Corps’ analysis, this critical assessment of flooding impacts must be completed before the project begins, not after the fact.

Federal law requires the Corps to address all potential impacts, including mitigation, and to incorporate the anticipated costs into the final project Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR). The BCR is utilized to evaluate the economic feasibility of a project and determine eligibility for federal funding.

“We have been unwavering in our position that the Corps underestimated the impacts from the dredging, the analysis is incomplete, and the proposed mitigation does nothing to protect our river. The fact that flooding impacts and a new 11-mile project have not even been evaluated further validates our concerns and reinforces the urgent need to fully vet the Deep Dredge before it’s too late to turn back,” summarizes Rinaman.

Click here to read the Motion for Injunction. 

Contact St. Johns RIVERKEEPER with questions at (904) 256-7591

St. Johns River Survey Results

The Jacksonville University (JU) Social Science Research Center recently released the results of a November 2016 survey of Jacksonville area residents about the St. Johns River.  The results are compared to finding from a similar poll that was conducted in 2012.

The following information was provided by JU.

FAST FACTS:

  • Of those familiar with the proposed project to dredge a portion of the St. Johns River, 51% say they are opposed to it.
  • Rates of using the river for recreation/enjoyment by Jacksonville area residents remained similar from 2012-2016. Only about 25% of area residents fish on or along the St. Johns River, 30% boat, 10% swim and 50% walk along the river at least once a year.
  • The number of residents that consider the river degraded and in need of a major cleanup increased from 52% to 59%.
  • The number of residents who think there is a direct connection between their actions and the health of the river increased from 55% to 69%, but fewer residents say they are knowledgeable about what they can do to help protect the river, a drop from 48% to 37%.

COMPLETE POLL RESULTS

1. How familiar are you with the current debate about dredging the St. Johns River? Would you say that you are very familiar, somewhat familiar, or not really familiar with that debate at all?
2016                                                                                      
Very familiar                               28%                  
Somewhat familiar                      45
Not really familiar at all               27


2. In general, would you say that you support or oppose the current plan to dredge a portion of the St Johns River?
2016
Support                                         34%
Oppose                                          51
Don’t know/Not sure/Undecided    15

3. Thinking about the past year, please tell me how often you have enjoyed the following activities on or along the St. Johns River. How about fishing? Would you say that over the past year you have fished on or along the St. Johns River at least . . .
                                     2016                 2012
Once a week,                  5%                    4%
Once a month,               15                     13
Once a year, or              26                     29
Not at all?                      74                     71

4. How about boating, canoeing, kayaking, or jet skiing? Would you say that over the past year you have boated, canoed, kayak, or jet skied on or along the St. Johns River at least . . .
                                     2016                2012
Once a week,                  5%                   6%
Once a month,               15                    17
Once a year, or              29                    37
Not at all?                      71                    63

5. How about swimming? Would you say that over the past year you have swam on or along the St. Johns River at least . . .
                                     2016                2012
Once a week,                  1%                   2%
Once a month,                4                      7
Once a year, or               8                     11
Not at all?                      92                    89

6. How about hunting or observing wildlife, walking? Would you say that over the past year you have hunted or observe wildlife or walked on or along the St. Johns River at least . . .
                                     2016                2012
Once a week,                 13%                  15%
Once a month,                36                     33
Once a year, or               47                     43
Not at all?                       53                     57


7. Which of the following statements do you think best describes the health of the St. Johns River? Is it:
                                                                                                 2016   2012
A polluted river not worth saving                                                 4%    3%
A degraded river which has value, but needs a major cleanup    59     52
River in good condition in need of improvements in some areas 31     41
DK/NA                                                                                            6       4

8. What do you see as the biggest source of pollution in the St. Johns River? Is it . . .

                                                              2016            2012
Industrial and commercial activity,       34%              29%
Storm water runoff, or                           8                   26
littering and dumping?                         47                  36
DK/NA                                                  11                   9

9. Do you feel you knowledgeable about what you can do to help improve the health of the St. Johns River?
                                                           2016               2012
Yes                                                       37%               48%
No                                                        63                   52

10. Do you think there is a direct connection between your personal actions and the health of the St. Johns River?
                                                           2016               2012
Yes                                                       69%                55%
No                                                        31                   45

11. On a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means "you don't try at all" and 10 means "you try very hard", how would you rate your personal efforts to protect the St. Johns River.
                                                          2016                 2012
1-5                                                       50%                 43%
6-8                                                       43                    41
9-10                                                      7                     16

About the Surveys:

The 2016 survey results are based on telephone interviews conducted in November 2016 among a sample of 448 adults, 18 years of age or older, living in the Jacksonville Metropolitan area. The survey was conducted by interviewers at Jacksonville University under the direction of the Jacksonville University Social Science Research Center. A combination of landline and cell phone random digit dial samples were used.

The 2012 results are based on telephone interviews conducted in November 2012 among a sample of 379 adults, 18 years of age or older, living in counties along the St. Johns River. The percentages reported here represent the 171 interviews obtained from residents of the Jacksonville Metropolitan area. The survey was conducted by interviewers at Jacksonville University under the direction of the Jacksonville University Social Science Research Center. A combination of landline and cell phone random digit dial samples were used.

2017 State of the River Report

2017 State of the River Report

The 10th State of the River Report was recently released by a team of academic researchers from Jacksonville University, University of North Florida, and Florida Southern College.   This annual report provides a summary and analysis of the health of the Lower St. Johns River Basin (LSJRB), addressing four main areas of river health: water quality; fisheries; aquatic life; and contaminants.  This year, the Report includes a new section about the Bottlenose Dolphin that inhabit the St. Johns.  You can access the complete report and information about specific tributaries at www.sjrreport.com

Here are some of the highlights from the 2017 River Report Executive Summary. 

The trends of some indicators have improved:

  • Total nitrogen levels in the mainstem and tributaries have declined.
  • Total phosphorus levels in the mainstem and tributaries have declined.
  • Dissolved oxygen levels in the mainstem are improving.
  • Conditions for three critical wildlife species have shown improvement: the bald eagle, the wood stork, and the Florida manatee.

The trends of some indicators have worsened:

  • Salinity has gradually risen over the last two decades and is expected to continue its increase, with increasing potential negative impacts on submerged aquatic vegetation and the aquatic life that depends upon it.
  • Nonnative species increased from 56 total species in 2008 to 80 in 2017, and the spread of lionfish and Cuban treefrogs is of particular concern due to their impacts on the native ecosystem.
  • Wetlands continue to be lost to development pressures.

The trends of many indicators are unchanged:

  • Dissolved oxygen levels in the tributaries have remained unsatisfactory and have not shown improvement.
  • Chlorophyll a, an indicator of harmful algal blooms, has not decreased in the ten-year timeframe and shows no indication of decreasing soon.
  • Fecal coliform levels remain significantly above water quality criteria in many tributaries.
  • Submerged aquatic vegetation has experienced some very recent regrowth due to rainfall, but the long-term trend is uncertain.
  • Most finfish and invertebrate species are not in danger of overfishing, with the exception of channel and white catfish, which both have the potential to be overfished in the near future. 

Here are some other Report highlights and takeaways from St. Johns RIVERKEEPER.

NUTRIENTS 
In the last decade, lawsuits initiated by St. Johns RIVERKEEPER and several other environmental organizations have successfully forced regulatory agencies to adopt more stringent nutrient pollution standards for the St. Johns.   While nitrogen levels have declined as a result of these new rules, the status remains "UNSATISFACTORY" in both the mainstem and tributaries.  In other words, we have made progress, but we also have a ways to go. Future growth and development could undermine these efforts, if we don't hold regulatory agencies and polluters accountable to further reduce nutrient pollution. 

ALGAL BLOOMS
From 2008-2012, algal blooms were rated as WORSENING by the River Report, while trends were UNCHANGED from 2013-2017.  According to this year's report, "the data do not show overall reductions of chlorophyll over the past 10 years, and the occurrence of yearly blooms..."   So, while nutrients have declined, frequent algal blooms are still occurring in the river, indicating that further reductions in nutrients are necessary.   Also, more freequent monitoring and sampling of blooms is needed to accurately assess the extent of the problem. The report indicates "that some blooms are not sampled and analyzed, and thus are not figured into hard numbers that are used to determine the health of the river."

SALINITY
According to the 2017 Report, "the current STATUS of salinity is rated as unsatisfactory because of its impacts, and the TREND of salinity is rated as worsening because it is increasing."  This is due to human activities, such as dredging and water withdrawals, and natural causes, such as sea level rise. 

FECAL COLIFORM BACTERIA
Fecal coliform end up in our waterways from failing septic tanks, sewage overflows, pet waste, and manure from farms. "For all ten years of this Report series, the status of fecal coliform bacteria in St. Johns River tributaries has been rated UNSATISFACTORY due to fecal coliform numbers that have been persistently higher than the water quality criteria."  

DISSOLVED OXYGEN
The 2017 Report states that"the current overall STATUS for DO [Dissolved Oxygen] in the LSJR [Lower St. Johns River] mainstem is satisfactory and the TREND in the freshwater portion of the mainstem is unchanged, while the trend in the marine/estuarine portion of the mainstem is improving....However, the STATUS for DO in the LSJR tributaries is unsatisfactory (dependent on location, time of day, and season) and the TREND is worsening."  Dissolved oxygen (DO), or the concentration of soluble oxygen in the water, is critical to the health of fish and aquatic plants and animals. DO can be can be impacted by temperature, salinity, sediments and organic matter from erosion, agricultural and residential runoff, industrial wastewater, and excess nutrients. This is why it is critical that we prevent runoff of sediments and fertilizers, reduce the discharge of nutrients into our waterways, and avoid activities that can increase salinity and temperatures in our tributaries.  

SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION (SAV)
Grass beds are critical to the health of the river, providing essential habitat and food sources for many important invertebtrates, fish, and manatee. Scientists use SAV distribution and abundance as major indicators of ecosystem health.  The status of SAV was rated as UNSATISFACTORY in the 2017 Report, but "reduced sampling frequency and coverage has led to much of the uncertainty associated with trend analysis." According to the Report, "The grass beds monitoring program should be resumed and expanded as soon as possible especially in light of efforts to further deepen the port channel, and the pending environmental and habitat changes that are likely to ensue as a result of global warming, rising sea levels, El Niño events, and storms." Dredging at the mouth and potential water withdrawals in Central Florida will increase salinity farther upriver, causing further damage to important SAVs.

WETLANDS
"Given the continued trend of mitigation via purchase of mitigation credits and off-site conservation areas in place of on-site mitigation, the outlook for local wetlands in the LSJRB does not look promising."

TURBIDITY
Problems with turbidity can occur when muddy waters from construction sites wash into creeks and rivers.  This was a major problem and priority of St. Johns RIVERKEEPER during the early years of the organization.   According to the 2017 River Report, turbidity in the tributaries of the river was UNSATISFACTORY from 2008-2013, but was changed to SATISFACTORY in 2014.  While improvements have been made, rapid growth is occurring throughout the watershed of the St. Johns, making construction-site compliance and stormwater management more important than ever.   That is why we recently launched our Get the Dirt Out volunteer monitoring program.  

CONTAMINANTS
"The STATUS of point sources of toxics emitted into the atmosphere is satisfactory because the rate of emissions is similar to the rest of the state and the TREND is improving. The STATUS of point sources of toxics discharged into the LSJR [Lower St. Johns River] surface waters is unsatisfactory because the rate of discharges exceeds the rest of the state, and the TREND is unchanged."

"Of particular concern is the large Cedar-Ortega basin, which has repeatedly exhibited among the highest levels and frequencies of contamination over the years. It has been recognized at least since 1983 that the large, complex network of tributaries is burdened by years of discharges of wastewaters and runoff from small, poorly managed industries, and from identified and unidentified hazardous waste sites. This is particularly true of Cedar River."

Lost Springs of the Ocklawaha

Lost Springs of the Ocklawaha

For over 45 years, the Ocklawaha River (the largest tributary of the St. Johns River) and its springs and wetlands have been impacted by a dam that was built in Putnam County as part of the failed Cross Florida Barge Canal. The Rodman Dam (now known as the Kirkpatrick Dam) resulted in the clearing and flooding of approximately 7,500 acres of floodplain forests, while submering over 20 springs beneath a massive pool of water.

However, the pool behind the dam must be drawn down every 3 to 4 years to remove invasive plants that flourish and choke the waterways, and the “lost springs” reemerge.

We are excited to announce a new multimedia exhibition from painter/activist Margaret Ross Tolbert (and last year’s Oyster Roast featured artist) and environmental filmmaker Matt Keene that chronicles the tragic demise of the iconic springs of the Ocklawaha River.

Presented by the University of North Florida Lufrano Intercultural Gallery and Museum of Contemporary Art Jacksonville (MOCA), the “Lost Springs of the Ocklawaha” exhibition features images, sculpture and film of Cannon Springs and Tobacco Patch Springs created by numerous artists, including Tolbert and Keene.

Here is a list of all the upcoming "Lost Springs" events: 

September 21 - 'Lost Springs of the Ocklawaha' Opening Reception at UNF's Lufrano Gallery, 5 - 8 pm
This multimedia exhibition runs through Tuesday, October 24.   Click here for more details. 

Sept 23 - December 31 - “Margaret Ross Tolbert: Lost Springs” in the UNF Gallery at MOCA

Sept 24 - "Lost Springs” Reception and Film Premier at MOCA, 1 - 4 pm
Screenings of the film take place at 1:30 and 2:30 p.m. in MOCA’s Theater.

Sept 28 - "Lost Springs" Film Screening in the UNF Student Union Auditorium (Building 58W, Room 2704), 7 pm

October 3 - "Lost Springs" Film Screening in the UNF Student Union Auditorium (Building 58W, Room 2704), 7 pm

October 12 - "Lost Springs" Film Screening in the UNF Student Union Auditorium (Building 58W, Room 2704), 12:30 pm

November 2 - "Lost Springs" Film Screening and Panel Discussion featuring Tolbert and Keene in the MOCA Theater, 7 to 9 pm. 

All events are free and open to the public.  Click here for more about these upcoming events at UNF and MOCA. 

Learn more about the artists, exhibition and film in these recent Florida Times-Union and EU Jacksonville articles and on the Lost Springs website.  

You can also find more information here about the benefits of restoring the Ocklawaha. 

JAXPORT Avoids Dredging Debate

JAXPORT Avoids Dredging Debate Image credit: Florida Times-Union

In an attempt to head off public scrutiny of the proposed dredging, JAXPORT has recently deployed three strategies - 1) delay the ask for local funding until the dredging is well underway, 2) make false claims the project has already been fully vetted and 3) hide behind St. Johns RIVERKEEPER's lawsuit against the Army Corps of Engineers to avoid participation in any public dialogue. 

BYPASS THE PROCESS

In June, JAXPORT announced a new plan to dredge 11 miles of the St. Johns River, instead of 13, that would not require funding from the City of Jacksonville until 2020.  This would allow JAXPORT to begin dredging later this year, before the project has been fully vetted and approved by the local community.  Throughout the entire decision-making process, it has always been presented to the public that the City Council would be the last stop and best opportunty to ensure that the proposed dredging has been comprehensively reviewed, scrutinized and debated.  Under this new plan, JAXPORT does not plan to come back to the City Council for funding until the project is well underway and Jacksonville is on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars. At that point, the opportunity for a meaningful public debate may be lost and the City Council will be boxed in a corner.

IMPRESS THEM WITH PAPER

JAXPORT recently provided Jacksonville City Council members with a four-inch binder of public meeting notices, agendas, and minutes related to harbor deepening discussions that have occurred in the past 6 years.  

JAXPORT would like us all to believe that the proposed dredging has already been thoroughly evaluated and publicly vetted and no further discussion is necessary.

However, we took the time to analyze all of the documents in the binder, and nothing could be further from the truth.   In fact, we participated in most of the referenced meetings while JAXPORT sat silently along the sideline.

The documents submitted to City Council actually demonstrate that JAXPORT has made little attempt to provide or even encourage a robust community dialogue and comprehensive assessment of this project. Most of the meetings cited only included brief updates on the status of the dredging or a specific component of the project and did not provide a complete picture of the project or a platform for broad public participation and discussion.

Numerous documents even refer to presentations and comments that St. Johns RIVERKEEPER provided to various organizations, commissions, and boards regarding the shortcomings of the dredging plan, the unanswered questions that remain, and the need for a more comprehensive vetting of the project. 

In response to JAXPORT's attempt to shutdown public dialogue, we submitted a letter to the Council members calling for a transparent public discussion about the pros and cons of the dredging project.  

Our letter included an assessment of the JAXPORT binder documents, demonstrating that there have been no public meetings have been held to discuss:

  • the new 11-mile dredging plan,
  • the total cost of the harbor expansion (including tenant relocation costs and landside improvements),
  • funding sources and Jacksonville’s anticipated financial obligations, the recent analysis by Dale Lewis and Dr. Asaf Ashar questioning the economic viability of the project, or
  • the tradeoffs in local public programs and services that would be necessary in future years.

In addition, these meetings all failed to adequately address the flaws in the Army Corps of Engineers' economic and environmental assessment and the lack of mitigation that exists to offset the inevitable damage that will occur to our river.

The bottom line is that these documents demonstrate a lack of transparency and a lack of full disclosure, reinforcing the need for robust public dialogue and comprehensive evaluation by City Council and the local community before the project begins. 

BLAME THE OTHER SIDE

The third strategy that JAXPORT is using is the excuse that our lawsuit against the Army Corps of Engineers is preventing them from participating in any public debate or forum regarding the proposed dredging.   As a result, JAXPORT has refused to particiipate in a recent Rotary Club meeting with Dale Lewis (local logistics expert who has questioned the economic viability of the project), a public forum that was being organized by the Dupont Foundation, or any potential public meetings held by the Jacksonville City Council to discuss the pros and cons of the project.  

However, the lawsuit is aimed at the Army Corps of Engineers, not JAXPORT.  The port voluntarily decided to intervene in our lawsuit.  As the City's attorney told the JAXPORT Board, intervention provides the benefit of "knowing exactly what's going on" and discussions "could be held in the Shade as JAXPORT is subject to sunshine laws and public record laws."    Our lawsuit is not preventing JAXPORT from participating in public dialogue and debate about the dredging.  JAXPORT is preventing it to avoid public scrutiny. 

CLICK HERE to learn more about this important issue and how it will impact the future of the St. Johns River.  

Also, read this letter that we recently submitted to Jacksonville City Council President Anna Brosche outlining our concerns and the actions that must take place to protect our river and local taxpayers before the project proceeds. 

READ: Ron Littlepage: Why are dredging supporters afraid to have a debate over spending the public’s money?

View All Blog Posts

Join the Riverkeeper

Latest Blog Posts

MOTION FOR INJUNCTION FILED TO POSTPONE DREDGING
MOTION FOR INJUNCTION FILED TO POSTPONE DREDGING
St. Johns River Survey Results
2017 State of the River Report
2017 State of the River Report
Lost Springs of the Ocklawaha
Lost Springs of the Ocklawaha

All blog posts

explore your river

Take an interactive journey through river sights & sounds!

Get the Guidebook

Learn about the ecology and rich history of the St. Johns River.

Boat Tours

Come aboard the Water Taxi for an incredible guided tour along the St. Johns River.