More Illegal Activity -- Filling in Wetlands

[Bobby J]

GreenRoom,
Now I am going to have to stalk you!!!

 

[greenroomsurfer]

It"s ok Bobby J. I know where ya keep your surfboards hahahahah!!!!

 

[Bobby J]

:nono1: Hey wait!!!! That is sacred!!! Just don't tell Shelly!!!

 

[John R]

thanks for that update greenroom, quite a sad way to do one's business. hopefully bfraine can clarify his position.

 

[waltondude]

I am late to this thread but from what I read I thought this information taken from a presentation at a chamber function on affordable housing my change some perspective.

The file is attached, I hope.

 

[Smiling JOe]

Waltondude, how has this info changed your perspective? Please share.

 

[seacrestkristi]

O.K. boys and girls, let me set the record straight. I live down the street from the wetlands that where filled in. The contractor , the property owner (an attorney who specialty is land development) and the people filiing in the high priority saltwater marsh did this on a holiday, knowing fully well what they were doing. Code enforcement and FDEP were closed and the cops said they could do nothing. The sad thing is, the county will not pull anyone's license, fine anyone, or repair what they have damaged. Life goes on till enough of us ***** and bug our county officials. The squeaky wheel gets the grease so to speak. Last and not least on the mosquito issue, the only time down here in our little swamp the little critters come out is after the spray truck comes down the strret. Anyone disagrees, you know where to find me. MAHALO AND HAPPY EASTER.

Inconsiderate and sneaky too! SPECIAL :shock: Can you spell SAATAN ?

 

[Bobby J]

I am late to this thread but from what I read I thought this information taken from a presentation at a chamber function on affordable housing my change some perspective.

The file is attached, I hope.

 

[Smiling JOe]

I am late to this thread but from what I read I thought this information taken from a presentation at a chamber function on affordable housing my change some perspective.

The file is attached, I hope.

Waltondude, again, I don't understand what you are suggesting. Please elaborate. Are you saying that because there is so little land left in SoWal, we should allow filling in of wetlands?

I've never understood mitigation. So you buy more wetlands (unbuildable land) and reserve as mitigation (still unbuildable) so that you can build on the first parcel of wetlands. I understand that is legal, but it sure doesn't make sense. By protecting wetlands via mitigation, you are protecting wetlands which are already protected, yet it allows you to fill in other wetlands, which are supposed to be protected in the first place. Does anyone want to explain the logic in that?

 

[Bdarg]

Waltondude, again, I don't understand what you are suggesting. Please elaborate. Are you saying that because there is so little land left in SoWal, we should allow filling in of wetlands?

I've never understood mitigation. So you buy more wetlands (unbuildable land) and reserve as mitigation (still unbuildable) so that you can build on the first parcel of wetlands. I understand that is legal, but it sure doesn't make sense. By protecting wetlands via mitigation, you are protecting wetlands which are already protected, yet it allows you to fill in other wetlands, which are supposed to be protected in the first place. Does anyone want to explain the logic in that?

I will give an explaination a try.

Politics!

There, did that help, or should I add the word lobbyist?