Posted on 03/18/2002 4:15:25 PM PST by Willie Green
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:08 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- Cutting crews can resume chopping down healthy citrus trees within 1,900 feet of those infected with canker under a bill signed into law Monday by Gov. Jeb Bush.
Despite protests from homeowners, the bill moved quickly through the House and Senate and crews expected to remove another 200,000 trees this year.
"We've got to look at the overall economic impact on our state and move forward," said Bush spokeswoman Elizabeth Hirst.
Agriculture brings in $9 billion a year in central Florida and employs more than 100,000 people.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
The law allows the state to destroy healthy trees located within 1,900 feet of a tree infected with citrus canker. It also authorizes judges to issue search warrants for entire counties and allows Department of Agriculture workers to go onto private property in search of citrus trees, ending a legal dispute over whether the department had that authority. (Emphasis added.)
On Monday, Broward County Commission Chairwoman Lori Parrish said the county must take on the legal challenge, explaining: "No homeowner could take on the state government, [this is for] the people of Broward County who couldn't afford to do it by themselves ... You go to work and you wind up with four guys in your backyard with a McCulloch chain saw."
State officials say stopping the disease is a priority in Central Florida, where citrus is a key industry.
But the program generated immense hostility in South Florida from homeowners who thought the eradication crews were trespassing on their land and seizing their property simply to protect a powerful industry.
An estimated 2 million trees -- including 400,000 in South Florida -- have been destroyed since the canker epidemic began in 1995.
The legislation was approved by the House and Senate last week. Gov. Jeb Bush signed it Monday.
Meyers said the new bill can make a legal fight more complicated: "It narrows our challenges," he said. "There are more hurdles to be able to prevail."
Meyers said the state agency had been "running amok. They've changed the law so they are no longer acting unlawfully. It's unnecessary, it's unduly destructive, but those aren't the standards. The applicable standards are whether it is unconstitutional."
"We've got to look at the overall economic impact on our state..."
What a bunch of BS. Come onto your property and cut down your tree, healthy of not. Just look at the economic impact of whose pockets this bill lines. Better camoflauge those nice apple trees out back in the Northwest.
You should be scared. Get on the friggin phone and let 'em have it.
Astute and witty remark.
Citrus Canker - Separating the facts from the myths.
The following myths were part of an editorial appearing in the St. Petersburg Times.
Myth: It could be the plot of a science fiction movie, but the events are actually playing out in Florida. An unseen alien invader slips into the state and moves silently from host to host, sapping their health and turning them into carriers. The threat is not apparent to some citizens, however, so they resist their government's initial attempts to eradicate the invader
Fact: Residents did not know their legal rights. About 300,000 citrus trees were cut before Judge Fleet's ruling stopped the cutting of exposed trees. He found this was a violation of Florida's laws and due process. The IFO's didn't even let homeowners know that their trees were being cut down. The 1900 ft policy had simply been declared by the Commissioner, instead of being part of the rules which requires public meetings to discuss the rules. It was also brought out during the hearings that, according to Dr. Gottwald, the 1900 ft policy had been decided upon in December 1998, by a secret meeting among grove owners, regulators citrus industry leaders and researchers.
Myth: As the stalemate grows, the invader threatens to decimate the state. The invader is citrus canker, a bacterial disease that attacks citrus trees, first disfiguring and then destroying them. It slipped into the state in the mid-1990s, apparently through the Miami airport, and has spread north through Broward County.
Fact: Citrus canker does not disfigure or destroy a citrus tree. Even the Department has been clear on this. It can blemish the fruit. Nobody knows whether this is a reemergence of the previous epidemic or a reintroduction. DNA analysis definitely shows minor genetic differences in the "A" strain today. Nobody can say with certainty that these genetic differences did or did not exist in the previous epidemic. Detailed DNA analysis was not routinely done on samples in the prior epidemic, and ACC can mutate.
Myth: The proven eradication method is admittedly harsh. When a tree shows the telltale lesions on its leaves or fruit, the Florida Department of Agriculture digs up and destroys the tree and every other citrus tree (even those that appear healthy) in a 1,900-foot radius of the infected tree. Residents with backyard fruit trees in South Florida objected to the tactic, and the Agriculture Department did appear to be heavy-handed in early stages of the fight against canker. But residents are reimbursed: $100 for the first tree and $55 per tree after that. And they are allowed to replant two years after the canker is gone.
Facts: There is nothing "proven" about 1900 ft and the evidence is mounting that this is an extreme measure to take in controlling canker. Most of the exposed trees, uncut since Nov 2000 have not turned positive. The USDA states in their accomplishment report, of the 200,000 exposed citrus trees (which according to the department are trees which in time will show symptoms) there are 50 to 150 positive citrus trees per week that are found infected. It does not appear that for the vast majority of these trees are "trees which in time will develop symptoms of canker". FDACS has consistently refused to provide any information on the new finds.
No checks are being mailed to residents.The first $100 is in Walmart certificates. The per tree payments is a joint program between the USDA and the FDACS. The USDA is just about out of money and has a backlog of claims. Replanting time is two years from the very last discovery in the quarantine area. This could 3-5 years from now, considering what happened in Manatee County (new discovery after 20 months).
Myth: A handful of residents resolved to stop the state effort, and they nearly succeeded. Three legal challenges in Broward County have slowed the program. The state can still destroy trees that show signs of canker, but not nearby trees that appear to be healthy.
Fact: The program was halted for two weeks in Broward under a temporary injunction. After November 2000, the Department filed in Appeals Court-delaying the program for 8 months instead of making the program workable. The Department stubbornly refused to adopt a rule for 12 months after Judge Fleet (and later Judge Laningham) told them that the 1900 ft had to be in their rules. They did not want to adopt a rule, because they knew it could be challenged.
It is noted that the Appeals court sided with the Department in June 2001 and based on the Department's arguments, the case went to the Administrative Court. The program has not been "hog-tied", as Mr. Bronson put it, by Broward County but by the Department's own refusal to operate within the law.
Myth: The arguments against the eradication effort are based on emotion. It is upsetting to lose a prized citrus tree. But the state has science on its side. A peer-reviewed study by federal and state scientists proved that 95-percent of the canker bacteria spreads within 1,900 feet of an infected tree. A nearby tree can become infected -- and more important, be a carrier -- before the cankers appear.
Fact: No proof exists. No where in draft documents distributed by the Department is there any recommended "eradication radius". The statement "95% of the canker bacteria spreads within 1900 ft of an infected tree" is pure PR from the Department. It is not contained in Dr. Gottwald's testimony, in any of his presentations, nor in the "interim report" prepared in Oct 1999 nor in the current manuscript. It is only found on the Department's website and brochures.
Myth: While state law allows the Agriculture Department to destroy trees that harbor and are "exposed to disease," two judges have rejected the state's tactics because the rules do not specifically mention the 1,900-foot zone. Meanwhile, a state map shows the spreading threat, with blotches of canker-infected trees now showing up in Palm Beach County.
Fact: The Department maps never show single trees, only 1900 ft circles drawn around "suspected" trees. One such owner, came forward in November 14, 2001 to the Public Hearing, wanting to know why the citrus tree he had bought two weeks ago in Loews, now was condemned with Citrus Canker. The Department wrote me that this was a false identification, that the tree had Citrus Bacterial Spot. But the circles are drawn and no one can contest them because the data is unavailable.
The Department has refused to provide any information on new positive trees. I have requested and been refused basic information on the Palm Bay discovery in Brevard County. One lesion on one tree is enough to draw a circle enclosing 0.40 square miles.
Myth: The Florida Legislature can resolve the problem -- and should, as quickly as possible. Two bills (HB 1539 and SB 1926) address the issue. The House bill is responsive and would define "exposed to disease" as any tree within 1,900 feet. The Senate bill, on the other hand, would put another barrier in front of the Agriculture Department, requiring it to get a warrant signed by a judge for each property on which it wants to remove a tree. That could amount to thousands of warrants a day.
Fact: Senator Geller's bill, SB 1926 has now been amended with the warrant clause removed. The prior warrant clause stated that warrants "may" be used (not required), however the preconditions to issue a warrant made this impossible, similar to a "life vest loaded with lead".
FDACS objection to SB 1926 as as originally drafted, was it did not change the definition of an"exposed" tree (a tree which will develop symptoms over time). The Department changed that to any tree within their 1900 ft eradication circle to get out of defending their policy in Court on April 16, 2002.
Myth: Here is what is at stake: If the state fails to stop the march of citrus canker, it could reach commercial groves in Central and South Florida. If canker appears on that fruit, the state would have to stop exporting fruit. Once a significant number of trees declined and began to die, both the juice and fruit industries would be under serious economic strain. Meanwhile, many backyard trees that some residents are trying to save would have already died.
Fact: There is no known case of citrus canker killing a tree in the US. Trees in Florida are not dying of citrus canker. Exports to most countries will continue even if every grove the state was under quarantine which is highly unlikely. China, Brazil and Argentina have canker and they export fruit around the world.
A hearing has been set for April 16, 2002 in Admin Court to examine the science of the 1900 ft rule in front of a judge. The Department has said that the 1900 ft policy has been examined and reviewed by the top scientists in the country. They can draw on any of these experts to testify. The municipalities have at best, two retired pathologists.
The Department has no intention of appearing in court and defending their policy. Can their science be so weak, as it will not stand up to this legal challenge? If this science is so weak, maybe it should not be part of Florid Statutes.
The Department continues the absurd notion that nothing less that their radical cutting program can possibly succeed.
Myth: The Florida citrus industry is valued at $9-billion. It is one of the state's most important economic engines. Yes, the cure for citrus canker is upsetting. But failure in the fight against disease is much worse.
Fact: Fresh grapefruit on-tree value is estimated to be $156 million dollars by the Florida Agricultural Service System. The idea that millions or billions might be lost is far-fetched. The next wave will cost taxpayers about $100 million dollars, with $60 million from State money and $40 million in Federal dollars.
What is upsetting is the extreme measures that the Department and now the legislators have gone to, in order to prevent a full examination of the 1900 ft policy and the supporting data by the courts.
What is at stake is the right of the Department to "Go Anywhere and Do Anything" verses the resident's right to a balanced and fair policy. Before the clear cutting of citrus in Miami-Dade and Broward, residents deserve their day in court.
Dave Lord
7-Mar-02
County moves to fell new tree law
Commission OK's suit to stop state from cutting citrus
aelliott@herald.com
Broward County will sue the state of Florida over a new law granting broad authority to immediately begin destroying citrus trees -- a move which could impact the entire state's canker eradication program.
Commissioners voted 8-0 Tuesday to challenge the constitutionality of the law, giving attorneys the green light to file suit on behalf of residents, along with several other cities and private citrus groves.
Fort Lauderdale and Davie will join the lawsuit, which may be filed as early as this week, the county's chief appellate counsel, Andrew Meyers, said. Miami-Dade County also may join. ''The bottom line is the government is not allowed to do this to people and no individual homeowner has enough money to fight the state of Florida,'' said Lori Parrish, chairwoman of the Broward County Commission. ``So if all of us get together for our residents then we can help them protect their personal property rights.''
Miami-Dade's County Attorney Randy Duvall likened the powers granted the state's agriculture department to those exercised by British colonial officials prior to the American Revolution.
''The only difference is that the people who carry these warrants to your door are contract workers instead of British soldiers in red coats and black boots,'' Duvall said.
The roughly two dozen residents present were pleased with the vote.
''Once the legislature spoke, it was over but for what this county commission just did,'' said Fort Lauderdale resident Ellen Schneider. ``They continued the fight.''
Also expected to join the new suit: Coral Springs, Plantation, Pompano Beach and several private citrus groves, Meyers said. The cities of Boca Raton and Delray Beach are considering joining, he said.
On Monday, Gov. Jeb Bush signed a law giving the state Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services the authority to destroy thousands of backyard citrus trees regardless of whether they show signs of canker. The department needs only a single search warrant covering an entire county.
Duvall said any claim would likely be grounded on the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure, Duvall said, adding that he has talked to Broward County attorneys about the lawsuit. A decision from Miami-Dade commissioners could come within 10 days.
Proponents of the new law reacted to the lawsuit with disappointment. ''A lawsuit doesn't mean we will stop,'' said Liz Compton, spokeswoman for the canker eradication program of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. ``An injunction that says we can't cut exposed trees would be the only thing that stops us.''
The state is expected to resume the cutting of trees within four to six weeks in Broward and Miami-Dade counties and sooner in Palm Beach County. A court ruling halted the destruction of trees in November 2000.
In Palm Bay, a residential community in Brevard County, state workers have received permission to cut from 175 of the 240 properties.
Broward County first joined a lawsuit against the Department of Agriculture in October 2000, along with 15 Broward cities and individuals. They won the suit, but the decision was reversed by the state's appellate court in June 2001.
Further court proceedings forced the Department of Agriculture to draft an official edict stating that all citrus trees within a 1,900-foot radius of an infected tree could be destroyed.
In November, seven South Florida cities, along with Broward and Miami-Dade counties, challenged the edict, which was scheduled for trial in April.
''But rather than risk losing in administrative court, the [Department of Agriculture] and Florida Citrus Mutual were able to get the law changed,'' said Meyers.
Herald staff writer Phil Long contributed to this report.
Saturday, August 11, 2001
By LAURA LAYDEN, lllayden@naplesnews.com
Barron Collier Co. has watched the state destroy close to 100,000 citrus trees in its groves because of a disease called canker. Earlier this year, the local grower received $26 from the federal government for every tree it lost. Though that might seem like a lot of money, it didn't begin to make up for the company's production losses — last year, this year or in years to come.
Barron Collier Co. has watched the state destroy close to 100,000 citrus trees in its groves because of a disease called canker.
Earlier this year, the local grower received $26 from the federal government for every tree it lost. Though that might seem like a lot of money, it didn't begin to make up for the company's production losses — last year, this year or in years to come.
A second wave of canker compensation started arriving in grower's mailboxes Monday and should provide some relief, however.
"I think the combination of the two will certainly help," said Tom Jones, director of government affairs for Silver Strand, a Barron Collier Partnership. "It's not going to make us whole by any means, compared to what we've actually lost in trees and production.
Money for production losses for commercial growers became available July 18, and most growers who applied for it should have received their checks this week, said Stacey Peacock, a plant protection and quarantine officer for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which is doling out the funds.
"We've paid everyone that has applied and had their application in by July 18," he said. "Really, we've processed everything we've gotten in."
State agricultural officials say canker is threatening to wipe out Florida's $9.13 billion citrus industry, and they have launched an aggressive program to stamp it out. To date, more than 1.3 million commercial trees have been destroyed, including more than 872,000 in Collier and Hendry counties.
About 250 growers applied for the tree replacement funds earlier this year, and about 80 percent of those growers made claims for production losses, Peacock said.
Nearly $75 million was made available to compensate growers for tree and production losses, including a direct appropriation of about $58 million. The money hasn't run out yet.
"I know we have about $20 million left," Peacock said. "So we are in good shape at this point."
Claims have ranged from $2,000 to several million dollars, depending on the size of the grove that was affected, he said.
The money is available until Sept. 30 for commercial growers hurt by the state's canker program.
How much a grower collects depends on the type of trees he lost. Grapefruit growers get $3,342 per acre, growers of Valencia oranges and tangerines can collect $6,446 an acre, and lime growers are entitled to $6,503 an acre.
The money is not meant to cover all of a grower's losses. That would be too lucrative, especially for those looking for an excuse to get rid of a grove.
"We are not trying to give them full compensation because that would be an incentive to have canker," Peacock explained.
Growers with younger trees benefit more from the formula used to determine the amount given for production losses. It does not take the age of the trees into account, though mature trees are more valuable because of their productivity.
Barron Collier Co. lost some of its oldest trees to canker, which causes ugly lesions on limbs, leaves and fruit and makes citrus unmarketable as fresh fruit.
"Everything we lost was in full production," Jones said. "I mean, we lost mature trees. They were probably all eight to 20 years old."
Even without the compensation, Barron Collier Co. would have survived, Jones said. That's because the company is one of the state's larger growers, and most of its trees still haven't been hit with canker, he said.
Generally, the state's eradication program calls for all diseased trees, and any trees within 1,900 feet of those trees to be destroyed. That's a tall command, but it has been easier for growers to accept because they knew they were going to be reimbursed for some of their losses.
"I think without the compensation it would have been much harder to participate in the program," Jones said. "I mean you are asking people to destroy tens of thousands of trees. That is a pretty big pill to swallow."
Some commercial growers have waited a long time for help from the federal government. Some claims go back to 1986.
There were hopes the money would come sooner, but it got tied up in red tape.
"Whether or not anyone went broke waiting on the money I have no way of knowing," Jones said. "But I think it's a good program, and it's going to help citrus growers."
Jones fears if the disease is not brought under control it will eventually spread to every tree, and citrus will no longer be grown in the Sunshine State.
Canker has hit some growers harder than others. With the exception of some lime growers in Metro-Dade County, most growers seem to have been able to stay afloat without the federal assistance.
Casey Pace, a spokeswoman for Florida Citrus Mutual, the state's largest growers' association, said more growers probably would have gone under if it weren't for the compensation program.
"If they didn't get the payment they would probably either go out of business, or sell part of the land in order to pay expenses, such as taxes," she said. "Without an income coming in they would have had to find money from somewhere."
Even with the compensation, some feel there may be companies that could be out of business in a few years because of the losses they've suffered.
You've GOT to be kidding.
I want PINEAPPLE ORANGES!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.