[Senate Hearing 115-226]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-226
THREATS FACING
FLORIDA'S TOURISM DRIVEN ECONOMY
=======================================================================
FIELD HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
AUGUST 10, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
29-979 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking
ROY BLUNT, Missouri MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
DEAN HELLER, Nevada CORY BOOKER, New Jersey
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MIKE LEE, Utah GARY PETERS, Michigan
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
CORY GARDNER, Colorado MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
TODD YOUNG, Indiana CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
Nick Rossi, Staff Director
Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
Renae Black, Senior Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on August 10, 2017.................................. 1
Statement of Senator Nelson...................................... 1
Witnesses
Dr. Paul Sanberg, Senior Vice President, Research, Innovation,
and Knowledge Enterprise, University of South Florida; and
President, National Academy of Inventors, on Behalf of Judy
Genshaft, President, University Of South Florida............... 2
Rick Kriseman, Mayor, St. Petersburg, Florida.................... 3
George Cretekos, Mayor, Clearwater, Florida...................... 3
Janet Long, Chair, County Commission; and Chair, Tourist
Development Council............................................ 4
Sherry L. Larkin, Ph.D., Professor, Food and Resource Economics
Department, Associate Dean for Research and Associate Director,
Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Institute of Food and
Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida (UF/IFAS)......... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 9
Robin A. Sollie, IOM, FCCP--President/CEO, Tampa Bay Beaches
Chamber of Commerce............................................ 15
Prepared statement........................................... 18
Maryann Ferenc, Chief Executive Officer, Mise en Place, Inc.; and
Member, Board of Directors, U.S. Travel Association............ 23
Prepared statement........................................... 25
Mitchell A. Roffer, President, Roffer's Ocean Fishing Forecasting
Service Inc.; and Adjunct Faculty, Florida Institute of
Technology, Department of Ocean Engineering and Sciences....... 29
Prepared statement........................................... 32
Appendix
Letter dated August 7, 2017 to Senator Bill Nelson from Terry A.
Gans, Mayor, Town of Longboat Key.............................. 55
Letter dated August 24, 2017 from Nan Summers, Grants
Coordinator, Parks and Natural Resources Department, Manatee
County, Florida................................................ 57
THREATS FACING
FLORIDA'S TOURISM DRIVEN ECONOMY
----------
THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
St. Petersburg, FL.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1 p.m. at the
University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, University Student
Center, 200 6th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, Florida, Hon.
Bill Nelson, presiding.
Present: Senator Nelson [presiding].
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Nelson. This meeting of the Senate Commerce
Committee will commence. Thank all of you for coming. This is
an overwhelming outpouring of interest in the subject matter of
today's hearing. Thank you all very much for coming.
This is an official meeting of the Senate Commerce,
Science, and Transportation Committee. It is a field hearing.
As we start the meeting, let's welcome the U.S. Naval
Suncoast Squadron's Sea Cadet Corps, and they are going to lead
us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Cadets?
[Pledge of Allegiance.]
Senator Nelson. And if you will remain standing, I'd like
to call on Reverend Watson Hayes, Executive Director of the
Pinellas County Urban League, for the invocation.
Pastor?
[Invocation.]
Senator Nelson. Well, we are so grateful to our host. I
want to have one of them to say a word before we get started in
the Committee hearing. Though President Genshaft couldn't be
with us, we have several of her very capable colleagues from
the University, and a special thanks to the College of Marine
Sciences for its high-caliber research into our vast natural
resources.
Thanks also to the City of St. Pete, Pinellas County, for
hosting us and to our colleagues, Kathy Castor, Charlie Crist,
who represent this area so ably in the U.S. Congress. Thank you
for being here.
I'm pleased that so many of our colleagues are here--also
County Commissioner Janet Long, St. Petersburg Mayor Rick
Kriseman, Clearwater Mayor George Cretekos, and Dr. Paul
Sanberg from USF.
So I'd like to ask, Dr. Sanberg, if you might give us some
words of greeting.
STATEMENT OF DR. PAUL SANBERG, SENIOR VICE
PRESIDENT, RESEARCH, INNOVATION, AND KNOWLEDGE
ENTERPRISE, UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA; AND
PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ACADEMY OF INVENTORS,
ON BEHALF OF JUDY GENSHAFT, PRESIDENT,
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Dr. Sanberg. Sure. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
Ranking Member Nelson, my name is, again, Paul Sanberg, and
I'm the Senior Vice President, USF, for Research, Innovation,
and Knowledge Enterprise, and also President of the National
Academy of Inventors. I'm honored to be here on behalf of
President Judy Genshaft and the University of South Florida
system. It's our great pleasure to host the Senate Commerce,
Science, and Transportation Committee for this important field
hearing on the threats facing Florida's tourism driven economy.
Thank you, Senator Nelson, for bringing us together here at
the beautiful USF St. Pete campus.
I'd just like to ask any St. Pete or USF, in general,
system faculty, staff, students to please stand, just to show
your support here.
[Applause.]
Dr. Sanberg. We would also like to recognize Congresswoman
Castor and Congressman Crist for their participation in today's
hearing. Thank you also to St. Pete Mayor Rick Kriseman,
Clearwater Mayor George Cretekos, and Pinellas County
Commissioner Janet Long, who have joined us today. Welcome,
everyone.
Across the USF system, researchers work daily on solving
global issues, including the health and sustainability of our
beautiful natural environment. The people of Florida are served
by world class independent research institutions which conduct
the most rigorous and credible science possible. The Federal
Government is a vital partner in this important endeavor.
Many of you will remember the important role that science
played in responding when our tourism economy was threatened
because of an environmental disaster, the 2010 Deepwater
Horizon spill. Because our state had invested in research
vessels operated by the Florida Institute of Oceanography, and
because we had advanced instrumentation and world class
expertise, researchers from USF and across Florida were among
the first to begin an independent analysis of the spill's
impact.
In the immediate aftermath of the spill, we are grateful to
have had the leadership of Senator Nelson, Congresswoman
Castor, and Congressman Crist to sustain and move this massive
scientific effort forward. These three public servants played
pivotal roles that enabled a robust examination of the spill's
impact to continue. As a result, Florida citizens are more
informed stewards in our fragile environment.
Our strong partnership in supporting education and research
remains one of Florida's most important tools in securing a
healthy, safe, and successful future. We are delighted to have
the opportunity this morning to share the research our
university faculty are working on with the staff from the
Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. We look
forward to learning more about the Committee's interest during
this afternoon's hearing, as well as hearing testimony from the
distinguished panelists.
Thank you very much.
Senator Nelson. Thank you so much.
I'd like to introduce and recognize two family members.
First of all, my wife of 45 and a half years, Grace Nelson.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. And Dr. Charles Crist, Charlie's dad. Would
you stand up and be recognized?
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Now, we're very fortunate to have our two
mayors with us, and I want you all to bring us some greetings.
Mayor Kriseman?
STATEMENT OF RICK KRISEMAN, MAYOR,
ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA
Mr. Kriseman. Thank you, Senator.
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Rick Kriseman. I'm the
Mayor of St. Petersburg, and on behalf of myself and my City
Council members, many of which are here with us today, we want
to welcome you to the Sunshine City of St. Petersburg and to
the beautiful USF St. Pete campus. My thanks to Senator Bill
Nelson for his leadership in Washington, his work on this
important committee, and his strong advocacy for Floridians
every single day.
As everyone knows, tourism is vital to our economy here in
St. Pete and to cities big and small throughout the state of
Florida. So I thank you, Senator, for addressing threats to our
tourism-based economy and for your past and future actions to
prevent such threats.
Senator Nelson, Congresswoman Castor, and Congressman Crist
all have strong track records on these issues, and I thank them
for everything that they've done for our state, our county, and
our city. And, in particular, I thank them for being such great
partners with the City of St. Petersburg.
Welcome, everyone.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Mr. Mayor?
STATEMENT OF GEORGE CRETEKOS, MAYOR,
CLEARWATER, FLORIDA
Mr. Cretekos. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for being here.
Thank you to everybody who has joined us.
You know, Pinellas County, Clearwater, is number one in
tourism because we understand how important it is for our
tourist industry partners to work with government, and we thank
the Federal Government for the leadership that you, Senator,
and our representatives, Crist and Castor, have provided, and
even Governor Scott, in making sure that our legislature and
our residents understand that we are competing not against each
other, but we're competing against the world to bring tourists
to Pinellas County, to the state of Florida.
We've done a very good job with that, and our industry
partners understand that they are in a service industry, that
they provide hospitality, and the reason we've been so
successful is because they and their staffs do that, and we
would appreciate you all taking that message back to Washington
and to those in Tallahassee so that they can understand that
tourism provides jobs and provides growth in the state of
Florida.
One other thing I need to mention. We also have to protect
beach re-nourishment and the importance of offshore oil
drilling, and, Senator, thank you for your leadership in that
regard. We cannot allow rumors to circulate around the world
that Florida is contaminated when that has never been the case.
So thank you, Senator, for allowing me to be here today.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Commissioner?
STATEMENT OF JANET LONG, CHAIR, COUNTY COMMISSION; AND CHAIR,
TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
Ms. Long. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all of you
for being here on this glorious afternoon in Pinellas County.
Senator Nelson, you have been our champion, and we are so
grateful that you are bringing this United States Committee
field hearing today on this beautiful campus of USF. As Chair
of the County Commission this year and Chair of the Tourist
Development Council, I am grateful and sincerely appreciate
everyone who is here, taking their time out of their busy
schedule to attend what is going to be one of the biggest
issues going forward in our county.
Tourism is our number one industry, and not only here, but
throughout the state of Florida. This industry provides to us,
right here in Pinellas County, 100,000 jobs for our county
residents, and it drives--are you ready for this? This is a
really big number--$9 billion, $9 billion in revenue and
economic impact to this county every single year. In July, it
was the 47th straight month of year-over-year tourist
development tax growth for Pinellas County. But the threats
that this county faces in our industry from beach erosion to
red tide to the potential of increased offshore drilling, is
very real.
So I look forward this afternoon to hearing the testimony
and hope to get a better understanding of the diversity and the
severity of the threats that face our industry.
So thank you, Senator, for your leadership, and our Federal
delegation. What would we do without you?
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. You might be also interested to know that
in the midst of everything you see that looks like it's
dysfunctional in Washington, Marco Rubio and I actually get
along. And, of course, we invited Marco to come. He could not.
He's off someplace else. But we do a lot of things together
that you never see; the appointment of all the academies, the
appointment of Federal judges, the U.S. attorneys, et cetera.
By the way, just a word for you until we get into the
subject matter of the hearing. As a result of what you have
seen play out over the course of the last couple of weeks in
Washington, with the dramatic vote of John McCain in the middle
of the night, with now being able to move on from that subject,
there was an immediate response in a bipartisan way of a number
of senators coming together--informal meetings, sit-down
meetings in each other's offices, and then culminating with a
dinner just before we left Washington of 14 of us, evenly
divided, seven and seven, who are talking about the fixes to
stabilize the existing current law on healthcare.
So maybe, just maybe, we are seeing a change of the way
that things have been operated. This being, if successful, a
prelude to what else can be done down the road on income tax
reform and desperately needed infrastructure in this country.
That's not just roads and bridges, but it's airports and
seaports, it's broadband, it's sewer plants and water plants,
and so forth, that are so desperately needed.
Now, the way the Committee usually operates--the Chairman
makes an opening statement, the Ranking Member makes an opening
statement, and then the witnesses are introduced, and then we
go to questions. I have invited my two colleagues in the
Congress to ask questions with me, and we have a star spangled
panel today on this subject.
If you think back, now, why are we here? In large part, it
has already been addressed by the statements that you've heard.
But think back to a quarter of a century ago. Southwest of
where we are right now, 330,000 gallons of number six fuel and
an additional 32,000 gallons of jet fuel, diesel, and gasoline
spilled into Tampa Bay. That was just 24 years ago. Two tank
barges and a ship sat disabled due south of Mullet Key,
blocking the entrance to the Bay, the main shipping channel. It
was closed for nine days.
Oil coated Fort DeSoto Park and Egmont Key almost
immediately, and then the winds and the tides carried the bulk
of the fuel out into the Gulf until a storm pulled the mess
back onto Pinellas County barrier islands, from Redington
Shores to St. Pete Beach and Boca Ciega Bay. At that time, more
than 2 million visitors used the boat ramp at Fort DeSoto Park
each year.
So it's fitting that today, we are hearing about the
threats to our state's tourism driven economy and what we can
do about it to mitigate the risk. Last year, a record 113
million visitors, both international and domestic tourists,
came to Florida. The tourism industry supports about a million
and a half jobs in this state. So there's a lot at stake, and I
think we'll hear some of that from our panelists today.
You think about our brand. It's sunshine, it's sea breezes,
it's white sand beaches, it's family friendly theme parks, and
it's world class fishing and seafood. So when red tide comes
along or if toxic algae closes a beach, tourism dollars go
elsewhere. Hurricanes, oil spills, sea level rise, and Zika
threaten our brand. But we can take steps to protect our
tourism industry, and that's what this hearing is about.
Ever since your Senator was a young Congressman, I've been
in this fight to protect Florida's unique environment and its
tourism-dependent economy. Thus, it was quite natural, in a
bipartisan way, with a Republican senator, my colleague, Mel
Martinez--in 2006, we enacted into law a moratorium on oil
drilling off of Florida in the Gulf of Mexico.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. That moratorium is the only place in the
entire outer continental shelf of the United States that is off
limits to oil rigs, and it's off limits until the year 2022.
The United States Air Force has asked us to extend that another
5 years to 2027, and they've done so--why? This is the largest
testing and training area for the United States military in the
world, and it's unfettered in their ability for all of the
development of new systems and sophisticated weaponry. They
have no impediments.
You take a famous range like the Nevada Test Range. You've
heard of the secret area there called Area 51. You superimpose
that over the Gulf test range and it's just a little spot. This
is the largest testing and training range in the world, and the
reason the Air Force has asked us to extend it is they want to
invest in very expensive, updated, new telemetry as they are
testing these systems, and they want the security of knowing
that that investment is going to be there so that they've got
that range for at least 10 years. Yet we are in a fight,
because the very attempts in the defense bill to get the
moratorium extended to 2027 are being vigorously opposed by the
oil industry.
So just think back. What were some of the consequences?
Remember the spill off of Louisiana? That was way off of
Louisiana, but the winds shifted. They started bringing it to
the east. They brought the oil as far east as Pensacola Beach,
and those sugary white sands of Pensacola Beach were completely
covered in oil, and that photograph flashed around the world.
The winds kept coming east, and they brought it to Destin
and Sandestin. We kept it out of the pass, unlike Pensacola
Pass, because the oil got into Pensacola Bay. We kept it out of
the pass at Destin, getting into the very large Choctawhatchee
Bay. That was done with booms and buoys. The winds carried it
far east--there were tar balls on Panama City Beach--and then
the winds reversed, and they started carrying it back to the
west.
But the damage was done. When those photographs flashed
around the world, they thought there was oil all over the
beach, and the tourists did not come to the Gulf Coast beaches
all the way down south to Naples and Marco Island for an entire
season. That was a consequence of having oil on Pensacola
Beach.
You remember back at one point, 36 percent of the entire
Gulf was closed to fishing. A recent study showed us estimates
that recreational anglers lost $585 million in fishing
opportunities as a result. So the bottom line is if there is an
oil spill, it spells disaster for state and local economies.
So what are we going to do going forward? We want to
certainly maintain our vibrant tourism economy. We want to
maintain our very delicate environment in the bays and
estuaries, where so many of the critters come in and the marine
life is spawned, and then goes back out to sea.
Another issue that we're going to have to face is Florida's
and the U.S.'s Brand USA. Brand USA is a quasi-government
private partnership that promotes tourism from foreign
countries to the United States. It has had a very positive
effect on Florida's economy. It attracts millions of foreign
tourists to the United States, many of whom, of course, come to
our state.
The President has proposed in his budget doing away with
Brand USA. Eliminating it, I think, is classic definition of
penny-wise and pound-foolish, and I know the three of us are
going to try to convince our colleagues to preserve this
important Federal program. The fact is that it's de minimis
compared to the other items in the Federal Government, and yet
it returns such tremendous dividends to our state.
OK. Let's get to our witnesses. Dr. Sherry Larkin is a
Professor of Resource Economics and Associate Dean for Research
at the University of Florida. She's also Associate Director of
the Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. Ms. Robin Sollie
is President and CEO of the Tampa Bay Beaches Chamber of
Commerce, working out of their St. Pete Beach headquarters,
representing the business and tourism interests of several Bay
communities.
Ms. Maryann Ferenc serves on the Board of Directors for the
U.S. Travel Association and Brand USA. Dr. Mitchell Roffer is
the President of Roffer's Ocean Fishing Forecast Service based
in Melbourne and Miami, and he has provided targeted, science-
based fishery forecasts for 30 years.
So welcome to all of you. Take about 5 minutes apiece.
Let's start with you, Dr. Larkin, and we'll work right down the
panel.
STATEMENT OF SHERRY L. LARKIN, Ph.D., PROFESSOR,
FOOD AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT,
ASSOCIATE DEAN FOR RESEARCH AND ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,
FLORIDA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION,
INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES,
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA (UF/IFAS)
Dr. Larkin. Good afternoon, Senator Nelson and
distinguished panel members. My name is Sherry Larkin. I'm a
natural resource economist at the University of Florida.
My research examines how our common property resources can
be better managed by considering the biological, ecological,
and economic dynamics that affect sustainability and generate
benefits to society. A component of my research involves
estimating the economic value of so-called nonmarket goods,
which are environmental services, like clean air and water and
healthy fish and wildlife populations, in order to include such
information in decision modeling.
While most of my research has focused on fisheries, I have
examined environmental stressors like red tides and oil spills
in my 20-year career here in Florida. I first came to Florida
in 1997. I envisioned Miami and the Everglades and hoped to
visit all of the famous beaches. But what I learned in my first
few weeks has set the tone for my career and enticed me to
stay, and that is that Florida's economy, and especially
tourism, is based on our natural resources, especially from
things like our spring water that flows to our coasts to the
diverse flora and fauna that we share our coastal habitats
with.
In the most developed and undeveloped communities
statewide, protecting and enhancing our natural resources and
conserving them for future generations is in our economic self-
interest, whether they be used directly or indirectly, by full
or part-time residents, or by visitors from other states and
nations that may one day be our neighbors. In what follows, I
outline Florida's strengths, opportunities, and aspirations for
ensuring a strong and vibrant nature-based tourism economy.
Strengths. I believe Florida has three basic strengths in
that regard. First, we're already a strong brand recognition as
a tropical vacation destination and supporting built
infrastructure. Second, Florida has a rich and diverse
environment. Third, visitors seek out nature-based experiences
while in Florida, either indirectly at our famous theme parks
that highlight them or directly through visits to state parks.
Recent corporate investments by Disney to expand into coastal
resorts and even redesign and rename their downtown to
highlight our local freshwater springs signals that corporate
America recognizes the potential for additional nature-based
tourism.
Opportunities. The neo-classical economic framework
identifies six distinct economic values associated with human
use of the environment that can be measured. I included a
graphic on page 3 [see page 11 for reference to graphic]--I'm
not sure if all of you have that--but they are basically of two
types. There are so-called non-use--or use values, first, I'll
talk about--because they're generated from people that
literally use the resource directly, such as from fishing or
indirectly from activities like birdwatching.
And then there are the non-use values, where an individual
values the protection of a resource, not for their own personal
use, but rather to ensure that it continues to exist. Think of
polar bears that perhaps nobody will ever even see in person.
This total economic value framework allows economists to
make a ``deep dive'' into the investigation of what constitutes
and contributes to economic value, which also helps identify
opportunities for investment to increase that value. I have
used this framework for the Florida legislature's Office of
Economic and Demographic Research to value, you know, making
the public whole following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill as
required by the Oil Pollution Act.
The analysis generated a conservative estimate of $643
million for lost direct-use value and $854 million for lost
existence value. That is $1.5 billion for just two of the six
types of economic losses, and those are to Florida residents
alone. These figures actually also exclude job losses and lost
tax revenues from reduced visitor spending.
Aspirations. In closing, Florida's economy fundamentally
depends on our tourism, which, in turn, is dependent on our
natural resources. But the industry does face numerous threats,
some natural and others manmade, all of which can be
prioritized in part with economic analysis of, for example, the
following four types of projects.
One, built and natural infrastructure to expand
recreational opportunities and support rural development. Two,
technological innovations, such as marine aquaculture, to jump
start a blue revolution for job growth. Three, improve
terrestrial and freshwater environmental systems that generate
spillover and downstream economic benefits for nature-based
tourism. And, four, prevent, mitigate, or control invasive
species to protect our old Florida brand, ecotourism, and
commercial sectors of our economy.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I would be happy
to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Larkin follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sherry L. Larkin, Ph.D., Professor, Food and
Resource Economics Department, Associate Dean for Research and
Associate Director, Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Institute
of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida (UF/IFAS)
Good afternoon Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and members
of the Committee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to provide
testimony regarding the threats to Florida's tourism industry,
especially those that are directly and indirectly linked to natural
resources of our estuaries and wetlands, surrounding gulf and ocean,
and our coastline.
My name is Sherry Larkin and I am a natural resource economist at
the University of Florida. My research examines how our common property
natural resources can be better managed by considering the biological,
ecological and economic dynamics that affect the regeneration and
sustainability of environmental assets (primarily fish stocks) that
generate economic benefits to society. A component of my research
involves estimating the economic value of so called ``non-market
goods''--environmental goods and services, such as clean air and water,
and healthy fish and wildlife populations, are not traded in markets--
in order to include such information in decision modelling. This type
of analysis is necessary when considering environmental issues that
affect human systems, and public programs that have the potential to
generate non-market benefits (such as recreational experiences) or to
mitigate, control or prevent negative economic consequences. In
addition to my academic achievements as a professor, including that I
am the current President of the North American Association of Fisheries
Economists, I have served on the Science and Statistical Committee of
both the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Councils.
While most of my research has focused on fisheries, I have examined
environmental stressors like red tides and oil spills in my 20-year
career in Florida.
For this hearing, I was asked to discuss challenges to the tourism
economy in the State of Florida, and provide suggestions for how these
challenges could be addressed to protect existing tourism
opportunities. My comments will primarily represent the research with
which I have been involved, but my opinions will be reflective of my
collaborators and colleagues within UF/IFAS that are conducting
research under the auspices of the Florida Agricultural Experiment
Station and the Florida Sea Grant College Program.
I came to Florida on a one year post-doc in 1997, never having been
east of Indianapolis. I envisioned Miami and the everglades, and hoped
to visit Key West to enjoy those famous pink shrimp, but what I learned
in my first few weeks has set the tone for my career--Florida's tourism
is based on our natural resources, from our spring water that flows to
our coasts, to our diverse flora and fauna that we share our coastal
habitats with, and in the most developed and undeveloped communities
from Key West to Pensacola. Protecting and enhancing our natural
resources and conserving them for future generations is in our economic
self-interest whether they be used directly or indirectly for full and
part time residents, and visitors from other states and nations that
might one day be our neighbors.
As a natural resource economist, and with respect to our
environment and natural resources that have and generate economic
value, we aim to provide information to help make strategic
investments; yes, all projects provide value, but what about costs,
lost opportunities and relative values? In the face of limited
resources, I am here to argue for the use of economic analysis in
decision-making both from my disciplinary expertise and my own
research, but also as a representative of all UF/IFAS researchers that
I serve in my role as an associate dean for research and associate
director of the Florida Agricultural Experiment Station.
In what follows, I outline--from an economic perspective--Florida's
strengths, opportunities, and aspirations for ensuring a strong and
vibrant tourism economy.
Strengths . . . of Florida's tourism economy
Florida has a rich and diverse high-quality environment--from
freshwater springs that attract divers worldwide, to numerous iconic
mammals and reptiles (alligators, manatees, sea turtles, panthers, Key
deer, etc.), unique birds (roseate spoonbills), 825 miles of coastline
with diverse beach characteristics and palm, pine and oak trees that
highlight our tropical to upland habitats that reinforce our ``old
Florida'' brand. A brand that has been fostered by past public
investments and that I sought to model in a theoretical contribution to
the literature. A brand that arguably supports a robust tourism
industry.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
While beaches may be the first destination for the majority of
visitors, data shows that visitors seek to enjoy our natural resources
and that enjoyment translates into economic value and return to the
state. (see box). Clearly, our natural resources are the key to our
tourism, and coastal tourism in particular--where 80 percent of
Floridian's live and work--has been an economic engine for the state.
Recent corporate investments by Disney to expand into coastal resorts
and even redesign and rename their ``downtown'' to highlight our local
freshwater springs indicate the potential growth of our natural
resourced-based tourism.
Opportunities . . . of identifying and increasing the economic value
associated with nature-based tourism
From a neo-classical economic perspective, anything that gives an
individual satisfaction or ``utility'' to the point that they are
willing to forgo scarce resources to obtain it has an ``economic
value.'' Whether the scarce resource is time, money, or some other
object of trade, the value of the trade is a conservative estimate of
the value of the non-monetized natural resource because the trade would
only happen if the individual derived at least the same or greater
level of satisfaction.
In total, there are six distinct economic values associated with
human use of the environment that can be measured (Figure 1) and they
are of two types: so-called ``use values'' because they are generated
from people literally using the resource today (either directly such as
from catching and eating fish or indirectly from ecosystem services or
recreational boating, beach going, or wildlife viewing),\1\ or from the
value of holding the resource with an option of using it in the future
(such as set aside areas of biodiversity for future recreation or
medical products) and ``non-use values'' where an individual values the
protection of a resource--not for their own personal use--but rather to
either ensure it exists (think polar bears and koalas that maybe no one
will ever see), or for the benefit of others either today or in future
generations (that is, altruistic and bequest values, respectively).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Further distinction can be made within these categories, and
different names are used to convey the nature of each value. Such
categories include those that focus on the ``services'' provided
including provisioning (direct use value), cultural (indirect use
value, recreation in particular), regulating and supporting (indirect
use value, ecosystem services like habitat, water filtration, wetlands,
and nutrient cycling etc.).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 1. Total Economic Value (TEV) of a natural resource to an
individual and society can be measured as the sum of up to six distinct
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
values (in yellow).
This total economic value (TEV) framework allows economists to make
a ``deep dive'' into the investigation of what constitutes and
contributes to economic value. And while some of these values are
relatively straight forward to estimate--such as the value of seafood
or cost to travel to the coast for recreational boating, others are
more salient and require advanced methodologies and strict protocols
for data collection in order to begin the judicial process of damage
assessment under conditions established following the 1989 Exxon Valdez
oil spill (Bishop et al., 2017. ``Putting a value on injuries to
natural assets: The BP oil spill'' Science 356(6335): 253-254).
The TEV framework has been used to estimate the value of opening up
new natural areas to recreation, investing in infrastructure that can
allow for greater use, or protecting existing coastal areas;
alternatively, it can be used to value losses or potential losses in
the same. By integrating scientific information on changes in either
the biophysical or human infrastructure--whatever the cause (rising
seas, rising temperatures, storm events, or algal blooms)--with the
economic (be it either costs and benefits, risk assessments, and impact
analysis), decision makers are poised to make informed decisions with
the highest return on investments (ROIs).
While the TEV framework estimates the value to individuals that can
be extrapolated to society as a whole, economists have also utilized
impact analyses that estimate the ripple effects of a change in
economic activity at the county, regional, or state level--that is, by
estimating a change in the spending in an economy and associated
secondary effects (indirect and induced from multipliers) of the change
in spending. This is an important tool as it highlights the linkage
between the economic value of the environment and natural resources and
the job creation and community benefits derived. This was highlighted
in a recent Florida Sea Grant Report entitled ``Living on the edge: The
balance between economy and environment'' that claimed
Most of Florida's 20 million residents live in coastal
counties, and over 80 million tourists visit the coast each
year. This concentration-of people, activities and economies
contributes more than 80 percent--almost $562 billion--to the
state's economy annually.
I would argue that the premise is false, that is, there isn't a
balance; the environment and economy are inextricably linked and what
benefits one, benefits the other and vice versa.
I have used the TEV framework on behalf of the Florida
Legislature's Office of Economic and Demographic Research to value
making the public ``whole'' following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill--
as required by the Oil Pollution Act. The analysis generated a
conservative and risk-adjusted estimate of $854 million for lost
passive use value and $643 million for lost direct use value from
forgone recreational trips in the aftermath; or nearly $1.5 billion of
lost TEV associated with just two of the six economic values that
Floridians could have for a restored Gulf environment in the short run.
This means the analyses would support investing up to $1.5 billion in
preventing similar damages to the Gulf of Mexico's natural resources.
In addition, the study also estimated the losses to the state of
Florida from forgone trips by domestic visitors (via IMPLAN
software).\2\ In particular, visitor spending fell $1.3 billion due to
cancelled trips over a 28-month period. The associated regional
economic impacts equaled a reduction of $2.03 billion in output
(industry revenues), and employment loss of over 20,000 job-years, and
$1.37 billion in decreased value-added. In addition, the corresponding
loss in sales tax revenue totaled $77.8 million dollars. For
comparison, the state was awarded $2 billion on behalf of its trustees
to compensate for economic losses following the spill, primarily due to
tourism effects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Impact Analysis for Planning (IMPLAN) software uses national
and regional economic data to measure the ``ripple effect'' on a
regional economy that is caused by a change in spending by non-
residents. The total economic impact from a change in spending by non-
residents of the study region (direct effect) includes the secondary
effects of economic activity lost from reduced purchases of
intermediate products through the industry supply chain (indirect
effects) and activity lost from reduced employee household and
government spending (induced effects). Economic multipliers are used to
capture the distinct secondary effects on the regional economy by
accounting for the ``leakage,'' or the degree to which demand for goods
and services in the region is met by businesses that import from other
regions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, I have participated in studies that have generated
economic information for resources in Florida (see box for examples).
Economic analyses provide a rigorous framework upon which to evaluate
investment in environmental and natural resource assets that in Florida
are surely to be used and enjoyed by tourists. Such a framework is
critical when investment dollars are scarce and scientific information
is costly. And given an increasing demand from population growth,
choices will be imminent.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
No discussion of environmental and natural resources would be
complete without mention of climate change and associated concerns over
sea level rise and extreme weather events. One way to frame the issues
is to first consider--or not consider at all--whether the cause
matters. If we, as a society, have strategies that mitigate, control
and possibly prevent associated environmental and economic damage with
a high degree of certainty and at costs that are less than the value of
rebuilding existing infrastructure, what then? Economic analyses can
compare the future costs with the benefits of proposed strategies to
assess the ROI.
Aspirations . . . for moving forward
My personal and professional hopes are that society makes
investment decisions based on sound science, including sufficient
knowledge of the biophysical world and interdependent social sciences
that collectively shape societal outcomes. I also hope that the
inherent interconnectedness of the natural and physical world become
better understood by all so that strategic investments, while seemingly
narrow in their objective, can eventually lead to significant
socioeconomic benefits. I offer two examples before ending with a list
of suggestions to help mitigate future threats to Florida's tourism
driven economy.
The first example involves the political decision to close a
fishery over concerns of stock collapse. The town of Cedar Key was
essentially removed of its lifeblood after a public vote to ban net
gear for the capture of mullet in the mid-1990s. The public investment
that ensued to retrain fishermen to farm hard clams was significant.
Fast forward 20 years and Cedar Key is the leader in the production of
hard clams, which has supported a relatively high-valued locally caught
fresh source of seafood with spill over externalities to the supporting
rural community. Fishing jobs have increased, a working waterfront is
maintained, tourism is burgeoning, and public and private investments
are increasing. This public investment 20 years ago has resulted in
recent substantial investments by the Florida Aquarium and the new UF/
IFAS Nature Coast Biological Station, which houses new UF faculty
conducting research along the Big Bend Region. The seemingly private
benefits of reinvesting in fishermen has provided public benefits in
the form of rural development and expanded tourism opportunities that
are independent of out-of-state brand name hotels.
The second example highlights the potential for further development
of aquaculture in Florida. UF/IFAS has researchers, including nearby at
Apollo Beach and in Ruskin, that are seeking to (1) farm corals for
restoration of the Florida Bay and the Keys in order to improve water
quality, habitats for other species, and support increased snorkeling,
diving and fishing; (2) rear live bait fish that have high economic
value and the potential to reduce pressure on the harvest of wild
forage fish from the ecosystem, a move that would leave forage fish to
support an increase in valuable reef fish species; and (3) augment
populations of popular recreational marine species such as snook, red
drum and scallops. Today, the recreational scallop fisheries along the
northern Gulf coast of Florida provide substantial economic activity to
several rural coastal communities.
In closing, Florida's economy is fundamentally dependent on our
tourism, which is in turn dependent on our natural resources. But the
industry faces numerous threats, some natural and others man made; all
of which can be addressed in part with investment. Florida's brand name
will continue to grow with continued investments that evaluate the
benefits and costs of each choice, which may require scientific
information. Below are types of investments--some obvious, some not so
obvious--that show the breadth of activities to achieve this objective:
1. Investment in built and natural infrastructure. Improve or create
new on-site recreational facilities such as parking lots, boat
ramps, and boardwalks. Improve off shore and underwater
ecosystems that protect the built environment in coastal areas
(e.g., oyster reefs), and that serve as habitat for species
that can supply additional recreational opportunities (diving,
fishing, and/or snorkeling). These investments will directly
strengthen local economies by improving access and visitation
opportunities, and expand Florida's portfolio while providing
rural development.
2. Facilitation and support of technological innovations such as
aquaculture. Biological research to close the life cycle of
high-valued species, legal research to reduce regulatory
burden, engineering studies to improve design and economic
studies to improve efficiency and evaluate the ROIs can all
help to augment wild populations for recreational harvest
(e.g., fish species) and increase the supply of fresh fish to
tourists to boost the local experience, and further build the
Old Florida brand. These investments would serve to initiate a
``blue revolution'' in the U.S. and the new industries would be
associated with job growth.
3. Continued protection of wildlife. Collaborate with and augment
efforts by conservation organizations to ensure habitat areas
are sufficient for iconic species like sea turtles, manatees
and goliath grouper that have tremendous popularity among
tourists. Bird watching is one of the fastest growing hobbies
as enjoyment is not limited by physical ability, and birders
are willing to travel to see unique species like sandhill
cranes, whooping cranes, and bald eagles. Public investment to
support private lands that sustain valuable species for the
benefit of all are well justified. Such investments could
include the additional expense of beach renourishment projects
that are suitable for sea turtle nesting (i.e., proper sand,
slope and compaction) and conservation easements for
agricultural lands that ensure continuous acreage to support
larger mammals; this is because investments in terrestrial and
freshwater environmental systems generate spillover and
downstream economic benefits that support nature-based tourism.
4. Invest in efforts to prevent, mitigate or control the spread of
invasive species that can introduce pests and diseases that
threaten the survival of iconic plants and animals (think large
palms, citrus, and endangered panthers and black bear, some of
which are currently threatened), and human health (e.g.,
mosquitos). Florida is ground zero for the unintended and
undetected introduction of new species that do not have local
predators to keep populations in check. The risk is exacerbated
by the ongoing expansion of port capacity and international
trade. UF/IFAS research has shown that early investments in
detection (biological risk assessments) are substantially more
cost effective than controlling the spread of established
species (pythons and melaleuca come to mind); consider
investments in risk assessments for example to preserve the
aesthetics of our tropical environment and sustain the economic
benefits derived from ecotourism that are critical to nature-
based tourism and commercial sectors of our economy.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I would be happy to
answer any questions that you might have.
Relevant Publications/References by S. Larkin
(reverse chronological order)
Book Chapters
Bi, X., T. Borisova, S. Larkin, and J. Longanecker. 2015.
``Economic Value of Recreation along the Freshwater Portion of the St.
John's River,'' Chapter 6, p. 225-261. In St. John's River Economic
Study (C.T. Hackney, ed.). University of North Florida, Jacksonville.
Bi, X., T. Borisova, S. Larkin, and J. Longanecker. 2015.
``Estimation of the Current and Potential Level and Value of Ecotourism
in the St. John's River Basin,'' Chapter 7, p. 263-268. In St. John's
River Economic Study (C.T. Hackney, ed.). University of North Florida,
Jacksonville.
Larkin, S. 2014. ``Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill,'' in Environmental
and Natural Resource Economics: An Encyclopedia, p. 105-107. T.C. Haab
and J.C. Whitehead (eds.). Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, LLC.
Gardner, C., S. Larkin, and J.C. Seijo. 2013. ``Systems to Maximise
Economic Benefits in Lobster Fisheries,'' chapter 5, p. 113-138, In
Lobsters: Biology, Management, Aquaculture, and Fisheries (2nd ed.).
B.F. Phillips (ed). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Adams, C.M., S. Larkin, K. Morgan, B. Degner, and J. Stevely. 2008.
``Measuring the Economic Implications of Red Tide Events on the Gulf
Coast of Florida, USA: An Overview of University of Florida Research
Efforts,'' pp. 223-232. In Mitigating Impacts of Natural Hazards on
Fishery Ecosystems. K.D. McLaughlin [ed.] American Fisheries Society,
Symposium 64.
Peer-reviewed Journal Articles
Avila, J., S. Baker, K. Grogan, S. Larkin, and L. Sturmer. In
review. ``Ecosystems Services Generated by Hard Clam Aquaculture and
Valuation of the Industry in Florida'' Journal of Society and Natural
Resources.
Whitehead, J., T. Haab, S. Larkin, J. Loomis, S. Alvarez, and A.
Ropicki. In review. ``Lost Recreational Value to Northwest Florida from
the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill Using Revealed and Stated Preference
Data.'' Marine Resource Economics.
Elrich, O., X. Bi, T. Borisova, and S. Larkin. In press. ``A Latent
Class Analysis of Public Attitudes toward Water Resources with
Implications for Recreational Demand.'' Ecosystem Services.
Court, C., R. Clouser, A. Hodges and S. Larkin. In press.
``Economic impacts of cancelled recreational trips to Northwest Florida
after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.'' Regional Science, Policy and
Practice.
Camp, E., R. Ahrens, K. Lorenzen, and S. Larkin. 2017. ``Trade-offs
between Socioeconomic and Conservation Management Objectives in Stock
Enhancement of Marine Recreational Fisheries''. Fisheries Research
186(2): 446-459.
Borisova, T., X. Bi, S. Larkin, and J, Loganecker. 2016.
``Assessing Nature-Based Recreation to Support Economic Development and
Environmental Sustainability Extension Programs.'' Journal of Extension
54(4): 5RIB1.
Anderson, C., J.L. Anderson, J. Chu, J. Meredith, F. Asche, G.
Sylvia, M.D. Smith, D. Anggraeni, R. Arther, A. Guttormsen, J.K.
McCluney, T. Ward, W. Akpalu, H. Eggert, J. Flores, M.A. Freeman, D.
Holland, G. Knapp, M. Kobayaski, S. Larkin, K. MacLauchlin, K.E.
Schnier, M. Soboil, S. Tveteras, H. Uchida, and D. Valderrama. 2015.
``The Fishery Performance Indicators: A Management Tool for Triple
Bottom Line Outcomes.'' PLoS ONE 10(5): e0122809.
Alvarez, S., S. L. Larkin, T. Haab, and J.C. Whitehead. 2014. ``A
Revealed Preference Approach to Valuing Non-market Recreational Fishing
Losses from the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill.'' Journal of Environmental
Management 145(1): 199-209.
Larkin, S.L., R.G. Huffaker, and R.L. Clouser. 2013. ``Negative
Externalities and Oil Spills: A Case for Reduced Brand Value to the
State of Florida.'' Journal of Agriculture and Applied Economics 45(3):
389-399.
Adams, D., A. Bwenge, D. Lee, S. Larkin, and J. Alavalapati. 2011.
``Public Preferences for Controlling Upland Invasive Plants in State
Parks: Application of a Choice Model.'' Forest Policy and Economics
13(6): 465-472.
Morgan, K., S. Larkin, and C. Adams. 2011. ``Empirical Analysis of
Media versus Environmental Impacts on Park Attendance.'' Tourism
Management 32: 852-859.
Morgan, K., S. Larkin, and C. Adams. 2010. ``Red Tides and
Participation in Marine-Based Activities: Estimating the Response of
Southwest Florida Residents.'' Harmful Algae 9(3): 333-341.
Larkin, S.L. and C.M. Adams. 2008. ``Public Awareness and Knowledge
of Red Tide Blooms.'' Journal of Extension 46(2): 2FEA8.
Larkin, S., and C. Adams. 2007. ``Harmful Algal Blooms and Coastal
Business: Economic Consequences in Florida.'' Society and Natural
Resources 20(9): 849-859.
Other Reviewed Publications
Larkin, S., and C. Adams. 2013. ``Summary of Literature that
Addresses the Economic Consequences of Harmful Algal Blooms.'' EDIS
(Electronic Data Information Source) document FE936, University of
Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Huffaker, R., R. Clouser, and S. Larkin. 2012 ``Contract for
Analytical Services Related to the Deepwater Horizon Disaster:
Estimation of lost indirect and passive use economic values to
Floridians'' Food and Resource Economics Department, UF/IFAS,
Gainesville, FL.
Larkin, S., J. Georges, A. Hodges, M. Allen, and D. Jones. 2012.
``The Economic Impact of the 2011 Florida BASS Federation Tournament to
Osceola County and the Economic Value of Participants.'' EDIS document
FE916, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Larkin, S., S. Alvarez, G. Sylvia, and M. Harte. 2011. ``Practical
Considerations in Using Bioeconomic Modelling for Rebuilding
Fisheries'', OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Working Papers, No.
38, OECD Publishing.
Adams, D.C., A.N. Bwenge, D.J. Lee, S.L. Larkin, and J.R.R.
Alavalapati. 2011. ``Economic Value of Upland Invasive Plant Management
in Florida State Parks.'' EDIS document FR352/FOR290. University of
Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Larkin, S., K. Lucas, C. Adams, and J. Stevely. 2011. ``Strategies
to Address Red Tide Events in Florida: Results of a 2010 Survey of
Coastal Residents.'' EDIS document FE891. University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL.
Swett, R.A., C. Adams, S. Larkin, A.W. Hodges, and T.J. Stevens.
2011. ``Economic Impacts of Artificial Reefs for Six Southwest Florida
Counties.'' TP-178. Florida Sea Grant College Program, UF/IFAS
Extension, Gainesville, FL.
Morgan, K.L., T. Stevens, R. Degner, S.L. Larkin, and C.M. Adams.
2010. ``Economic Impacts of Alternative Regulatory Scenarios on the
Florida Fresh Half-shell Oyster Industry.'' EDIS document FE835.
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Morgan, K.L., S.L. Larkin, and C.M. Adams. 2008. ``Public Costs of
Florida Red Tides, 2007.'' EDIS document FE711. University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL
Senator Nelson. Thanks, Dr. Larkin.
Ms. Sollie?
STATEMENT OF ROBIN A. SOLLIE, IOM, FCCP--PRESIDENT/CEO, TAMPA
BAY BEACHES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Ms. Sollie. Thank you, and----
Senator Nelson. By the way, while you all are working on
that, let me call your attention to the poster over here.
[Poster is on display.] That, of course, is the peninsula of
Florida. All of that yellow in the Gulf is the area that is off
limits in law to drilling, and, as you see, in a position from
Clearwater Beach to the edge of the line on the west, which is
called the Military Mission Line. That's 235 miles away. When
you get down as far as Naples, it's something like 260 miles.
Up in the panhandle off of the beach there, it's 125 miles off
of Panama City Beach, and that is one of the national assets.
We are now--look down there where the Keys are. So when the
U.S. Navy Atlantic Fleet had to shut down its training in
Puerto Rico in the island of Vieques, all of that training
comes here now. So they'll send the squadrons of F-18s in the
Navy down to Key West Naval Air Station, which is on Boca Chica
Key, and when they lift off, you can see from that map, in 2
minutes, they are in restricted airspace. So they don't have to
spend a lot of fuel and time to get to their training area.
Then you can see from the bottom all the way north to the
panhandle where the big Eglin Air Force Base is. That's a
distance of 350 miles. They can test weapons. For example, they
could shoot a cruise missile in its testing operation from the
south, and it'll go 350 miles in testing it, and then if they
wanted to land it in the sea, they could. If they wanted, they
could land it on land, and its impact could be on the huge
Eglin Air Force Base.
So, visually, that's a good pictorial for you to see how
big that training range is.
OK. Ms. Sollie?
Ms. Sollie. Thank you very much. Thank you for having me
this afternoon. I'm extremely honored to be here and honored to
be representing the coastal communities of Pinellas County and
the business community as well.
My first slide in my presentation--thank you, panelists.
You've taken care of everything up there in your opening
remarks.
I would like to emphasize, as we discuss tourism and we say
tourism industry, that everyone here in the audience and our
elected officials remember that it's truly economic impact. It
is an economic driver. In many times and instances, it is left
out of economic development because we think about
diversification of jobs in the markets that we have within the
county, and tourism needs to always be in the conversation when
we talk about economic development and the economy.
The numbers are there. Twenty-three percent of the sales
tax generated is generated by our tourists that come to the
destination. We have businesses that are built in these
communities because they thrive and are alive because of the
tourists that come here. When I have my closing, I can
definitely depict what had happened in 2010, especially in the
beaches and the coastal communities in Pinellas County as a
result of 2010.
So you asked me to present to you what we see as threats to
our tourism economy. I did that in conjunction with polling a
lot of our businesses in the coastal communities, and we came
up with some high-impact threats, mid-level impact threats, and
low-level impact threats.
Obviously, oil drilling off of Florida's coast--we can talk
about it over and over, and it's an unfortunate situation. What
happened in 2010--we're still, you know, trying to understand
and ascertain--thank you, Dr. Sanberg--to understand the impact
on the health of the Gulf of Mexico, let alone what happened
when tourists stopped coming here as a result of that tragic
explosion that was nowhere near Florida. So we say and we ask,
to mitigate this threat, to continue the moratorium on the
exploration and oil drilling off Florida's coast.
Our second high-level impact threat is storm surge and
hurricanes. Obviously, we can't control when a storm comes to
our coastline or when a hurricane does. But what we can do is
we can control the health of the natural resource of our
shoreline. When a storm comes or a hurricane comes, there's
severe amounts of beach erosion. Debby came to our coastline
and tore up our beaches, from Redington Shores, Sand Key, all
the way down to Pass-A-Grille. A few years later, in 2016,
Hurricane Hermine came by--again, eroded our shoreline. One was
a tropical storm. One was a hurricane. They both have the same
impact of beach erosion to the beaches.
If we don't have a healthy beach, our tourists and our
residents don't have a beach to go to. Our businesses around
those beaches end up suffering. So we do ask, to mitigate that
threat, that we continue--and thank you, Senator Nelson--
continue funding nourishment, increase funding nourishment
along with the contributions that we do on a state and local
level when it comes to beach nourishment.
Then third, we classified this as mid-level only because if
funds are diverted from Brand USA and, unfortunately, here in
the state of Florida, Visit Florida, it has a slow, residual,
painful effect on tourism. It's not a high immediate effect,
like a storm or an oil spill. But to divert funds from a
marketing agency that we need vitally to make sure that we are
a competitive industry globally, especially when we have
emerging markets, like Dubai and Cuba--we have cruise ships
that are going to Cuba, taking thousands and thousands of
passengers there. So we want to encourage, to mitigate this
threat, that you fight for us on our behalf up there to
continue to fund Brand USA and continue to use those funds for
the intended purpose, to market us globally so we can stay
competitive.
Transportation--big one. We're number four in the nation
when it comes to transportation, due to our infrastructure and
our roads. That sounds great, but when we lift up the hood and
we look at our destinations, Pinellas County, Orlando,
connectivity, transportation is more than a road. It's
easements to create the future of transit. We need transit. We
need mobility.
We have travelers who come to this destination. The
demographic is changing. Foreign travelers--their expectations
are much higher when it comes to public transportation.
Millennials--we have to think for the future. We need to have
the ability to make sure that our tourists can be mobilized in
a variety of facets, and that even includes the Federal funding
in any capacity for our airports and the fees involved there so
we can continue to be that competitive market.
So the threat there, to mitigate that, is please continue
to explore funding and, whenever possible, expanded funding,
and I'd say be advantageous. Let's be cutting edge in some
cases. We're way down at the bottom here in Pinellas County
when it comes to transit.
Another threat--Zika. Zika, and you could say, slash, red
tide or any other type of maybe algae bloom or anything that
may happen in the ocean or within our environment. We say it's
low, because the impacts, again, aren't an immediate
ramification of loss of revenue and jobs and tourists
automatically fleeing from us. However, they do impact us.
It's very hard to track. It's very hard to understand. But
we do ask, to mitigate those threats, that you continue to fund
research and development to eradicate whatever that is, or to
find cures, or be able to at least minimize the ramifications
of any of these blooms, Zika, whatever would impact national
media hype, as I like to call it, to make it look like we're
not a place that you should visit as a result of this.
And then, finally, we talk about sea level rise. That is a
low and is a long-term effect. I know there was an article in
the Times today about sea level rise, and it's escalating. But
we don't see immediate results today, right, of sea level rise.
It's one of those things--we say, ``Oh, our grandkids or our
grandkids' grandkids are going to see that.'' We need to
address it now.
We are working in environments in Pinellas County with many
municipalities that have specific land use plans, and at a
county level, we need to address the land use plans for
redevelopment or new development that has sea level rise in the
vision so that we can plan for the future, so that our coastal
communities are protected long-term, and those tourists will
continue to enjoy our destination, and our residents can
continue to thrive in our destination as well.
You know, I talk about the recipe. What is the recipe?
Because we never know how this is going to pan out. We can't
always plan for the impact of what any of these may present to
us. If you think about 2010, we had three things that occurred.
We had an oil spill, we had a cold snap--we can't control
that--and we had a recession. Maybe we could have controlled
that in some capacities in hindsight, but, pretty much, we
couldn't.
We lost thousands of jobs. We had businesses closing. Bed
tax collections were down. We had to cut marketing funding
during that time. Our sales tax collections go down as a result
of that as well.
So we, as leaders, need to continue to plan for the future,
plan as if, because when it comes, we don't know in what
variety it will come. It will, unfortunately, and we will need
to be prepared, fully funded, and fully healthy and nourished,
and we appreciate it.
I accept any questions, and thank you for the opportunity
to present.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Sollie follows:]
Prepared Statement of Robin A. Sollie, IOM, FCCP--President/CEO,
Tampa Bay Beaches Chamber of Commerce
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify today regarding
``Threats to Florida's Tourism Economy''. On behalf of the businesses
in our communities we appreciate all you do each day for our country,
the state of Florida and our local communities.
Introduction
As the CEO of the Tampa Bay Beaches Chamber of Commerce (TBBCoC), I
have the privilege to represent over 730 businesses with the majority
directly tourism related (accommodations, restaurants, and
attractions). The TBBCoC geographical reach is the entire coast line of
Pinellas County, which are 12 municipalities and 1 un-incorporated
community. The culmination of these communities is an estimated 8,872
businesses and over 156,000 residents (*Stats from Pinellas County
Economic Development http://www.pced.org/?page=DemoBusiness).
Important facts regarding the Tourism industry and its economic
impact:
112 million Visitors to the State of Florida in 2016
Over 1.4 million Tourism related Jobs in the State of
Florida in 2016
Approximately $110 billion Economic Impact to the State of
Florida in 2016
23 percent of Sales Tax in Florida is generated by visitors
Pinellas County alone has over 100,000 jobs, nearly 6
million visitors in 2016, $10 billion economic impact in 2016
Diversification in Tourism: sports, film, leisure, and
meetings all make up the industry
(*Stats from www.visitflorida.org & www.pinellascvb.org)
The numbers are very powerful for the entire state and Pinellas
continues to lead as a destination. As an industry we continue to keep
our pulse on what elements could damage, interfere or even disrupt this
vital economic driver. Managing threats is a strategic process with a
precise recipe (planning & funding). Mitigating the long term effects
could be managed if proper planning occurs. The elements the industry
has found to be threats are:
Oil Drilling off Florida's Coast (High)
Storm Surge/Hurricanes (High)
Continued Funding of Brand USA & Visit Florida (High)
Transportation (Mid/Long Term)
Zika (Low)
Sea Level Rise (Low/Long Term)
The degree at which any of these threats effect Florida's economy
is a moving target which in some cases could be timing, media, and if
there are multiple threats simultaneously. It's obvious some threats
cannot be controlled, but how we react, fund or plan can be within our
control.
Oil Drilling (High Level)
One of the highest threats we have to Florida's tourism economy is
the idea that lifting the ban on oil drilling off the coast of Florida
is a viable and lucrative option. There is no amount of money/proceeds
from oil exploration and drilling that can outweigh the risk that is
has on the entire coast of Florida. In 2010, this was experienced
firsthand through the Deepwater Horizon explosion.
As a result of this explosion, only small amounts of oil came to
Florida's coast in the Panhandle. Not one drop washed to Pinellas
County's coast; yet the magnitudes of losses are still being
calculated. As of this date, businesses and municipalities are still
working on their claims process to compensate for lost revenues.
The environmental consequences have been studied by a variety of
agencies one of which is here in Pinellas county; USF's College of
Marine Science, the lead institution for the Center for Integrated
Modeling and Analysis (C-IMAGE), an international research consortium
which was created to study the effects of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon
oil spill, their research is outlined here: http://news.usf.edu/
article/templates/?a=7309&z=220 and mentions as one of 4 finding that
prolonged oil toxicity in fish continues. Many of these agencies
continue to monitor the ramification of this spill on the marine life
and Gulf of Mexico's overall health and indicate that it may be years
before we truly fully understand the depth of this impact.
During this tragedy and many months afterwards, the Tourism
industry had to fight the perception that there was oil on our beaches,
and that our beaches were closed, while re-structuring tourism
marketing expenditures to crisis messaging.
One of the largest resorts on the West Coast of Florida, Tradewinds
Island Resorts had the following impact on their business (during the
2010 spill):
Call volume from potential visitors went down by as much as
25 percent
Since the oil spill (April 21st through June 2010), two
resorts were down by over approximately $1.7 million dollars in
revenue. If you assume the hotels that represent the rest of
the 35,000 rooms experienced similar revenue losses per room,
that is over $70 million dollars in revenues lost in just
Pinellas County
Keep in mind these losses don't consider restaurants,
suppliers, attractions or other secondary businesses which rely
on visitors staying in hotels
(*Taken from Keith Overton written testimony July 12 to the National
Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling)
It is simple; the Deepwater Horizon explosion was off the Louisiana
Coast and still had major threats and consequences to the entire
Florida Tourism Industry.
ACTION TO MITIGATE THIS THREAT: Continue the extensions of the
moratorium on drilling off Florida's coast.
Storm/Hurricane Surge and Beach Erosion (High Level)
The threat of storm/hurricane surge results in beach erosion; this
holds true for the entire coast of Florida. In Pinellas County we are
very proactive in what measure we need to take regarding beach
nourishment. Beach nourishment is vital to the health of the beaches
for our visitors and residents to enjoy as well as our wildlife (birds
and turtles).
The #1 reason travelers come to the state of Florida is to visit
the coastal communities and enjoy the award winning beaches.
A stat sourced from visitflorida.org/resources/research ``The
most popular activities for domestic visitors in 2015 were
beach or waterfront activities (41 percent)''
In June 2012, Tropical Storm Debby and in 2016, Hurricane Hermine
came for a visit. Both of these visitors left their baggage behind.
That baggage was the damage to the beach--large amounts of erosion
along Pinellas County.
Andy Squires, Section Manager for Coastal Resources in Pinellas
County provided specific data regarding Tropical Storm Debby and
Hurricane Hermine.
Hurricane Hermine Impact to Pinellas Beaches
(Reference PDF, page 28, Table 1 for summary of sand losses)
Table 1. Volume Changes Measured along the entire Sand Key,
Treasure Island, and Long Key
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Impacted Pinellas beaches for 2 days between Sept 1-3, 2016
Sand Key sand loss from erosion totaled about 481,200 cubic
yards
For reference, a typical volume of sand placed each 6 year
nourishment cycle is typically about 1.3 mm cubic yards. The 2
day storm eroded over 1/3 the volume of sand that is typically
eroded over a 6 year duration
Loss of dry beach width ranged from 5 feet along Indian
Rocks Beach to 35 feet along Indian Shores
Treasure Island sand loss from erosion totaled 69,000 cubic
yards and loss of dry beach width ranged from 11 feet at Sunset
Beach (part of Treasure Island) to 24 feet at middle of
Treasure Island
For Long Key (St. Pete Beach) sand loss (note Table 1 has a
typo) from erosion totaled about 80,200 cubic yards; Loss of
dry beach width ranged from 6 feet to 23 feet
Tropical Storm Debby Impacts to Pinellas Beaches
(Reference PDF, page 20, Table 1 for summary of sand losses)
Table 1. Volume Changes Measured along the Long Key, Treasure Island,
and Long Key
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Impacted Pinellas beaches for 3 days from June 24-26, 2012
Sand Key sand loss totaled about 424,000 cubic yards and dry
beach width loss ranged from 10 feet to 34 feet
Treasure Island total sand loss was 93,500 cubic yards and
dry beach width loss ranged from 10 to 21 feet
Long Key (St. Pete Beach) total sand loss was 113,400 cubic
yards and dry beach loss ranged from 11 to 26 feet
In summary the overall impacts to erosion from each storm were
similar. This demonstrates that a tropical storm can have extreme
impacts and risk to our beach environments.
ACTION TO MITIGATE THIS THREAT: Continue and increase funding for
beach nourishment projects throughout the state of Florida; along with
funds at the local level.
Transportation (Mid-Level)
Florida is #4* in the Nation when it comes to transportation and we
must continue to stay competitive. However, many of our popular
destinations fall well below average as it relates to transportation
options (transit/mobility). With the increase in traffic from foreign
travelers and a rise of the millennial traveler, both demographics
desire and expect access to better mobility options.
Transportation options are vital to stay competitive.
(Source: http://www.flchamber.com/did-you-know-florida-road-
conditions-rank-best-in-the-country/)
ACTION TO MITIGATE THIS THREAT: Encourage funding for progressive
transportation projects to ensure we can stay competitive in the ever
changing travel market.
Funding Brand USA & Visit Florida Emerging Competitive Markets (Mid-
Level)
With emerging competitive markets (Cuba and Dubai for example)
vying for our tourists it is imperative that agencies like Brand USA
(and Visit Florida) are adequately funded and funded for extensive
periods of time. This will ensure the marketing is earmarked to
continue to attract global travelers to our award winning destinations.
ACTION TO MITIGATE THIS THREAT: Continue funding this agency to
remain competitive to emerging markets like Cuba and Dubai.
Sea Level Rise (Low level)
We do not see any immediate consequences in the business
communities; however, if our state and local agencies do not start to
draft land use plans accordingly for the long term effects of this, we
will experience impacts. Sea level rise will continue to become a
pressing issue in the years to come. It is vital to plan for the future
and set the legacy we leave behind.
Pinellas County executed a study titled: ``Awareness and
Implications of Sea Level Rise''. It is clear that if coastal
communities begin to plan for sea level rise, there are options to
protect the majority of the acreage that will eventually be impacted.
(See Table 29, from Awareness and Implications of Sea Level Rise--
Document is also attached).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
ACTION TO MITIGATE THREAT: Start the planning now in conjunction
with coastal communities; collaborate to have a unified approach.
Zika Virus (low level)
Though a low level threat at this time, depending on press,
containment, number of cases it is still a threat to certain parts of
the tourism market. Some resorts reported minor cancellations when they
could track, but many times it is difficult to track.
ACTION TO MITIGATE THREAT: Fund research and development of
eradicating this disease or a cure to how harmful it is.
Conclusion
We recognize many of the threats that Florida's Tourism economy
faces are uncontrollable circumstances. It is the deliberate pre
planning and funding we invest now that will mitigate and help soften
the immediate and long term effects on Florida's overall tourism
economy.
Additionally, we do not know the exact ingredient for successful
mitigation. However, we do know that in 2010 we had a recipe for a
major hit on this industry which was an oil spill, a severe cold snap
and the recession. The three combined resulted in a considerable dip in
bed tax collections, sales tax, 1000s of job losses and business
closures. We need to be pro-active and innovative as we protect this
industry.
As a voice for over 730 business members and 14 communities we urge
this committee to acknowledge all aspects of tourism and consider your
ability to invest in the future of this indispensable economy.
Senator Nelson. Thanks, Ms. Sollie.
Ms. Ferenc?
STATEMENT OF MARYANN FERENC, CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, MISE EN PLACE, INC.; AND MEMBER,
BOARD OF DIRECTORS, U.S. TRAVEL ASSOCIATION
Ms. Ferenc. Senator Nelson and members of the Florida
congressional delegation, I am honored to testify before you
today as CEO and Proprietor of Mise en Place, the restaurant,
and Mise en Place Hospitality Group, the business, which was
born recently of that foundation. I am also here as a Board
Member of the U.S. Travel Association, representing all sectors
of the national travel and tourism industry. On behalf of 876
Floridians and 15.3 million Americans whose livelihoods depend
on a vibrant travel sector, thank you for holding this field
hearing. It couldn't be more important to us.
Tourism is Florida's largest industry and an integral
component of the new economy. Tourism provides employment to
individuals from all walks of life and all levels of education.
Beyond that, tourism provides community, a sense of place, and
creates destinations that other industry sectors, such as
technology, desire to call home. Tourism has recovered faster
than any other industry from the economic recession. My
testimony will briefly address the progress we've made on each
of the five policy priorities and how the Congress can help.
Brand USA. I remember attending World Travel Market in
London for the first time and being shocked by the
underwhelming presence of the United States at the show. Then
the public-private partnership Brand USA was formed with the
bipartisan support of this committee and Congress as a whole.
Brand USA has an important mission to attract millions of new
international visitors by marketing the entirety of the United
States and communicating ever-changing entry and visa policies,
all at no expense to American taxpayers.
As a member of the Board of Directors, I can report that
Brand USA's activities are supported by private sector
contributions matched by a $10 fee on visitors from the Visa
Waiver Program nations. According to Oxford Economics, Brand
USA has generated nearly $3.9 billion in Federal, state, and
local taxes. This has supported 50,900 incremental jobs
annually and overall yielded an astonishing 27-to-1 return on
investment.
Nonetheless, the President proposed defunding Brand USA in
2018 by redirecting its resources to the Department of Homeland
Security. We have been gratified by the bipartisan
congressional response, including from Senator Nelson and
Senator Thune of this committee. Last month, the House
Appropriations Committee rejected the White House
recommendation, and we seek your support as the legislative
process continues.
Survey of International Air Travelers, or SIAT. SIAT,
conducted on a monthly basis continuously since 1983, provides
information on passenger trip planning, travel patterns,
demographics, and spending. This travel data from inbound
foreign visitors is critical to the promotion strategies of
destinations in Florida and across the nation.
The administration's 2018 budget proposed disrupting SIAT's
funding, but the Senate Appropriations Committee last month
included report language explicitly rejecting the
administration's proposal and even encouraged an increase in
the sample. The pending House version of the Commerce funding
bill is silent on SIAT, so we still have work to do, and we
would appreciate your support.
The Passenger Facility Charge, or PFC. PFC is an
indispensable tool for local communities to make their own
decisions about how to finance airport modernization. Adjusting
the PFC ceiling would allow each airport authority to tailor
its own PFC rate in order to maximize efficiency, reduce
project costs, and ensure fiscal responsibility.
At Tampa International Airport, the PFC was used to expand
Airside F, enabling new service from four international
airlines. One daily nonstop flight from Europe creates $156
million annual impact for this region and creates 1,200 jobs.
The Mise en Place companies are a good example of those jobs.
We joined forces with other companies to create TPA
Hospitalities and will soon own and operate eight food service
establishments at the Tampa International Airport.
Last month, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved an
increase in the PFC cap from $4.50 to $8.50 for originating
passengers. This would be the first increase in 17 years and
protects rural passengers from having to pay a higher PFC twice
on connecting flights. As we pursue this priority further, we
would be very grateful for your help.
Open Skies. Open Skies agreements have yielded hundreds of
thousands of American travel and manufacturing jobs, billions
of dollars in U.S. economic growth, lower airfares for
travelers, and more flights to airports beyond the major
gateways. Regrettably, the large legacy airlines have sought to
disrupt Open Skies agreements with Gulf carriers. U.S. Travel
is part of a diverse coalition of airlines, travel businesses,
destination, and cargo companies opposed to this attack on our
Open Skies treaties. We welcome your assistance as we continue
to press this issue with the administration and in the
Congress.
Balancing security and travel facilitation. In recent
months, the administration has proposed or implemented a
battery of new policies intended to protect national security,
and the travel industry certainly appreciates the need to adapt
to evolving terror threats. But there is more to the equation.
In the echo chamber of the foreign press, the stricter views
and entry policies announced in recent months could serve to
discourage potential visitors. For instance, we were alarmed
when the Trump administration recently reversed the State
Department's goal to meet a three-week Visa interview goal for
Visa applicants. The U.S. Travel Association, joined by 20
national travel and business leaders, has asked President Trump
to reconsider.
We detailed the economic fallout from visa processing
delays and asked the White House to reiterate our nation's
commitment to an efficient, world class visa process. We urge
your continued diligence as such security policies are brought
forward.
We are open for business. It's our role to create the jobs.
But there are government policies that can help rather than
hurt. As outlined above, we need to continue to support the
SIAT, adjust the PFC cap, support Brand USA, and defend Open
Skies. Taken together, these policies can go a long way toward
conveying a clear global message to international travelers
that America is open for business and open to the millions of
travelers that wish us well.
Thank you again for this opportunity to participate in
today's hearing, and thank you so much for your support to date
on travel and tourism. It is appreciated by all of us.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ferenc follows:]
Prepared Statement of Maryann Ferenc, Chief Executive Officer, Mise en
Place, Inc.; and Member, Board of Directors, U.S. Travel Association
Senator Nelson and members of the Florida congressional delegation:
I am honored to testify before you today as the CEO and owner of
Mise en Place, a premier Tampa restaurant and event company since 1986,
and the hospitality business which it created--the Mise en Place
Hospitality Group. I am also here as a board member of the U.S. Travel
Association, the trade association representing all sectors of the
national travel and tourism industry. On behalf of the 876,000
Floridians and 15.3 million Americans whose livelihoods depend on a
vibrant travel sector, thank you for holding this field hearing. It
couldn't be more important to us.
The mission of U.S. Travel is to increase travel to and within the
United States--which together yields $2.3 trillion in economic output
annually, supporting one in nine American jobs. Last year, America
attracted 75.6 million international visitors, making travel the
Nation's top service export.
Tourism is Florida's largest and, I would submit, most impactful,
industry and an integral component of the new economy. Tourism provides
employment to individuals from all walks of life and levels of
education as well as a unique opportunity for on-the-job training that
results in substantial possibilities for advancement. Beyond that,
tourism provides community, a sense of place and destinations that
other industry sectors, such as technology, desire to call home. In
2016, we welcomed 112.8 million visitors, who spent $108.8 billion and
supported 1.4 million Florida great jobs and highlighted countless
great places to work and live as well as to visit.
We are a resilient, self-reliant industry--and have recovered
faster than any other industry from the economic recession. We thrive
when we serve the public well by providing safe, efficient, productive
and enjoyable travel experiences.
In this context, we today respectfully urge your support for:
full funding of Brand USA;
retaining the Survey of International Air Travelers;
lifting the cap on the Passenger Facility Charge user fee;
protecting U.S. Open Skies agreements; and
balancing needed visa and travel security protocols with a
clear welcome message for international visitors to the United
States.
My testimony will briefly address the progress we've made on each
of these priorities and steps the Congress can take to enhance travel's
contributions to our economy.
Brand USA
By attracting international visitors, Brand USA enhances economic
growth, spurs job creation and advances public diplomacy--all at no
expense to American taxpayers. As a member of its board of directors, I
can report that Brand USA's activities are supported by private sector
contributions, matched by a $10 fee on visitors from Visa Waiver
Program nations.
Brand USA was created by statute in 2010 to help address the post-
9/11 decade of declining U.S. share in the booming global travel
market, costing the U.S. economy nearly a half-million travel-related
jobs. Prior to 2010, the United States was one of the few developed
countries in the world without a national destination marketing
organization. I remember attending World Travel Market in London for
the first time and being shocked by the underwhelming presence of the
United States at the show. It was a graphic manifestation of the impact
of travel which the U.S. was ignoring. The Travel Promotion Act,
enacted and reauthorized in 2014, and supported by large congressional
majorities, sought to restore our leading position in the highly
competitive worldwide travel marketplace.
Overseas business and leisure travelers are critical to local
economies across our Nation. To help attract these visitors, Brand USA
has forged working relationships with hundreds of communities--large
and small, urban and rural--and leveraged their varied promotional
efforts into a coherent, cost-effective and productive national
marketing campaign.
According to Oxford Economics, over the last four years, Brand USA
has attracted 4.3 million incremental visitors; $13.6 billion in
related spending; and $29.5 billion in total economic impact, including
nearly $3.9 billion in federal, state and local taxes. This has
supported 50,900 incremental jobs annually and overall yielded an
astonishing 27-to-1 return on investment.
In addition to marketing the U.S. as a destination, Brand USA is
charged with communicating our evolving visa and entry policies, by
addressing confusion about our security protocols that can discourage
potential visitors from choosing U.S. destinations. Brand USA helps
ensure that such visitors get accurate explanations of our changing
rules--and ultimately return home to spread the word about America's
attractions and hospitality, generating goodwill for years to come.
In short, Brand USA is an extraordinarily successful public-private
partnership--and not only for gateway cities. During my terms on the
United States Travel and Tourism Advisory Board, under the auspices of
the Department of Commerce, I witnessed the power and impact of
thoughtfully-created, high-quality public-private partnerships as we
deployed a whole-of-government approach. I was inspired by the
organization and its efforts to represent all of our industry. I found
it to be both inspiring and personally rewarding to support the close
and successful partnership of extraordinarily talented civil servants
and truly remarkable travel and tourism professionals. Brand USA is
another fine example of this and its work has been particularly
beneficial for small destinations with limited marketing resources that
can leverage Brand USA's coordinated outreach overseas to market their
brands in the global marketplace.
Nonetheless, the President's Fiscal Year 2018 budget proposes to
de-fund Brand USA by redirecting its resources to the Department of
Homeland Security. We have been gratified by the bipartisan
congressional support for Brand USA, including from Senator Nelson and
Senator Thune of this Committee. Furthermore, last month--the House
Appropriations Committee rejected the White House recommendation
We appreciate the House Appropriations Committee's acknowledgement
of the uniformly positive impact of Brand USA's work--and seek your
support as the process continues in the Senate. With misperceptions of
the size, quality, and vitality of America's welcome mat now in the
foreign press, Brand USA's efforts and proven-results have never been
more important to our communities.
Survey of International Air Travelers (SIAT)
The Survey of International Air Travelers (SIAT), conducted on a
monthly basis continuously since January 1983, provides information on
passenger trip planning, travel patterns, demographics and spending.
This travel data from inbound foreign visitors is critical to the
promotion strategies of destinations in Florida and across the Nation.
The Administration's FY 2018 budget proposed disrupting SIAT's
funding--but the Senate Appropriations Committee last month included
report language explicitly rejecting the Administration proposal and
even encouraging an increase in the sample size--important because the
Commerce Department is also considering reducing the survey size and
raising its fees.
The pending House version of the Commerce funding bill is silent on
SIAT, so we still have work to do--and we would appreciate your
support.
Passenger Facility Charge
A key barrier to the travel industry's growth and future
competitiveness is the poor condition and performance of our Nation's
airports. As a result of misguided Federal policies, too many of our
Nation's airports are outdated and unable to handle passenger demand.
These problems are forecast to worsen and will soon be
unsustainable. Within the next four years, the top 30 U.S. airports
will experience passenger volumes, congestion and delays equal to the
day before Thanksgiving at least once per week. The Federal Aviation
Administration predicts that travel demand will exceed capacity at many
of the Nation's largest airports within the next 15 years, unless
airports achieve sustainable levels of capital investment.
The Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) user fee is an indispensable
tool for local communities to make their own decisions about whether
and how to finance airport modernization. Adjusting the PFC ceiling
would finally allow each airport authority to tailor its own PFC rate
on a project-by-project basis in order to maximize efficiency, reduce
project costs and ensure fiscal responsibility. This would also allow
large hub airports to rely almost entirely on local user-fee funding,
and enable Congress to redirect Airport Improvement Program (AIP)
grants for large hubs to smaller airports that require more Federal
assistance. At Tampa International Airport, the PFC was used to expand
Airside F, enabling new service from Copa Airways, Edelweiss Air,
Lufthansa Airlines and, in three weeks, Icelandair. This is in addition
to British Airways expanding their service at Tampa International
Airport and Southwest Airlines adding commercial service to Havana,
Cuba. One daily non-stop flight from Europe creates a $156 million
annual impact for this region and creates 1,200 jobs. These jobs are
essential to the economic health of our State. The Mise en Place
Companies are a good example of the PFC being used in a way that spurs
growth and jobs. We joined forces with other local companies and a
national concession powerhouse to create TPA Hospitality Partners, LLC,
to invest millions of dollars in retail build-out at the airport, and
to own and operate eight food service establishments.
I'm pleased to report that last month, in the FY 2018
transportation-funding bill, the Senate Appropriations Committee
included an increase in the PFC cap, from $4.50 to $8.50 for
originating passengers. By adjusting the Federal limitation on the cap,
the Committee language would unlock desperately needed airport
infrastructure investments that will improve the passenger experience,
facilitate growth in domestic and international air travel, and make
America's economy more globally competitive. This would be the first
increase in 17 years and would protect rural passengers from having to
pay a higher PFC twice on connecting flights.
The Senate committee language was supported across the political
spectrum, from the Heritage Foundation to the U.S. Conference of
Mayors. But the path ahead is uncertain. There is no such provision in
the Senate FAA reauthorization bill; and as you well know, the overall
appropriations process faces parliamentary turbulence. Still, this is
significant progress on which to build--and we're grateful for the
Senate's leadership.
Open Skies
In recent decades, a cornerstone of American aviation policy has
been the 100+ Open Skies agreements that the U.S. has negotiated with
countries around the world. By reducing government interference in air
travel, Open Skies agreements have yielded hundreds of thousands of
American travel and manufacturing jobs, billions of dollars in U.S.
economic growth, lower airfares for travelers, more flights to airports
beyond major gateways and new opportunities for U.S. airlines willing
to take advantage of them.
Regrettably, the large legacy airlines have sought to disrupt
existing Open Skies agreements with the Gulf carriers. U.S. Travel has
participated in a diverse coalition of airlines, travel businesses,
destinations, cargo companies and others opposed to this attack on our
Open Skies treaties.
On the merits of the Open Skies debate, we feel strongly that:
Open Skies is critical to fixing America's trade deficit.
These agreements grow international inbound visitation. Every
dollar spent by an overseas visitor to the U.S. counts as an
export and closes our trade deficit. In 2016, U.S. travel
exports contributed $246 billion to our balance of payments.
Open Skies creates jobs and has great economic impact across
Florida. In 2016, Gulf carrier flights brought 143,000
additional visitors to Fort Lauderdale, Miami and Orlando.
These additional visitors spent $451 million at Florida
businesses in these markets, which supported more than 6,000
jobs and $291 million in income to Floridians.
Open Skies agreements boost made-in-America manufacturing.
Because of Open Skies, the Gulf carriers have committed to
purchasing American products and strengthening our
manufacturing base. The three Gulf airlines have over 300
Boeing planes on order or currently in use, including 777s and
new Dreamliners. These orders support thousands of American
manufacturing jobs across the Boeing supply chain.
In recognition of the broad economic benefits of U.S. Open Skies
agreements, the Senate Appropriations Committee recently included
positive report language on Open Skies in the 2018 transportation-
funding bill. The Committee directed the Transportation Department to
consider whether any further action is necessary in response to
allegations by the large legacy U.S. carriers regarding unfair
subsidies--and further encouraged DOT to protect the interests of
travelers, the travel industry and the broader economy if any further
action is taken.
Open Skies agreements have led to hundreds of thousands of new
American travel and manufacturing jobs, billions in U.S. economic
growth, lower airfare for travelers, more flights to more airports, and
new opportunities for U.S. airlines. Overall, they create a widespread
effect for not only the large companies, as is often thought, but also
a trickle down effect that actually benefits to small companies,
communities and individuals. The Committee's report dismisses the U.S.
legacy carriers' parochial arguments to roll back those agreements--and
we will continue to press this issue with the Administration and in the
Congress.
Balancing Security and Travel Facilitation
In recent months, the Administration has proposed or implemented a
battery of new policies intended at protecting national security--from
the President's executive order on immigration and travel to stricter
vetting of visa applications. The travel industry certainly appreciates
the need to adapt to evolving terror threats because, without
confidence in public safety, no one will choose to travel here.
But there is more to the equation, for the United States--and
especially for Florida, one of the Nation's prime destinations for
inbound international visitors. America needs to convey a clear global
message that, while we aggressively confront all threats, we still
welcome overseas visitors coming here to relax on our beaches or close
deals in our boardrooms.
As specific security proposals have been rolled out over the last
few months, travel professionals across the country have sought to help
Federal officials explain and implement them. At the same time, we have
drawn on our expertise to analyze and detail for policymakers how these
changes impact the real-life travel experience--with particular concern
about unnecessarily exacerbating delay, confusion and inefficiency for
travelers.
The international travel marketplace is highly competitive. While
the United States--and states like Florida in particular--are highly
attractive destinations, foreign travelers have countless other
choices. And it is clear that one factor in consumer decisions about
where to travel is the perception of a potential destination's
hospitality.
America is renowned as a welcoming nation. From our iconic cities
to the Nation's heartland, visitors know ordinary Americans will greet
them with open arms--but only if they can get here. In the echo chamber
of the foreign press, the series of stricter visa and entry policies
announced in recent months could serve to discourage potential
visitors.
In the years after the September 11 attacks, labeled by our
industry as the ``Lost Decade,'' travel to the United States plummeted.
We battled back to regain our historic share of the marketplace, but it
took ten years--and was then possible only because of sustained White
House commitment to a National Travel and Tourism Strategy. This inter-
agency strategy, announced in 2012 in Orlando, not only set ambitious
goals for volumes of international visitors, but also made sensible,
low-cost management reforms that yielded remarkable success.
For instance, delays in the visa process had gotten so serious that
applicants in key visiting nations--such as China, India and Brazil--
had to wait over three months for a visa interview. After a
presidential order requiring most visa interviews within three weeks,
the delays were reduced to a few days, removing a disincentive to
travel here and reducing misperceptions about U.S. policy. That was
outstanding work that could be used as a model. I recall once more my
time on the Travel and Tourism Advisory Board. The work on this
subject, by dedicated individuals from the private and public sector,
was long and arduous with results that were broad and deep. Great
progress was made and overwhelmingly positive effects were realized--
more travel, more jobs, more prosperity and, we believe, more security
through greater understanding of one another as people and communities.
For this reason, we were alarmed when the Trump Administration
recently reversed the State Department's goal to meet a three-week visa
interview goal for most visa applicants. After engaging the
Administration to review its rationale, U.S. Travel--joined by 20
national travel and business leaders--wrote to President Trump to ask
him to reconsider. Our letter detailed the significant economic impact
of visa processing delays, then asked the White House to reiterate our
Nation's commitment to an efficient, world-class visa process--and to
back that statement up with full staffing of consular personnel to meet
the growing demand from overseas visa applicants.
The good news is: so far this year, visitors are still choosing
travel to the United States. The data is still very preliminary since
international travel is typically planned long in advance, but our
fingers remain crossed. And this is where Brand USA comes in: never has
its statutory mission of explaining our security protocols overseas
been more essential.
Open For Business
In Florida and across the nation, the travel community is being
challenged on a daily basis but we remain upbeat and optimistic. The
United States remains the top global destination. We're working each
day to grow our share of the competitive and lucrative international
market--while also serving the needs of our domestic travelers.
It's our role to create the jobs--but there are government policies
that can help, rather than hurt. As outlined, above, we need to adjust
the PFC cap, support Brand USA, and defend Open Skies. By accelerating
airport modernization, promoting the United States as a global
destination, and preserving successful international air route
governance, we can go a long way to conveying a clear global message--
to both leisure and business travelers--that America is open for
business.
Thank you again for the opportunity to participate in today's
hearing.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Ms. Ferenc.
Dr. Roffer.
STATEMENT OF MITCHELL A. ROFFER, PRESIDENT,
ROFFER'S OCEAN FISHING FORECASTING SERVICE INC.; AND
ADJUNCT FACULTY, FLORIDA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,
DEPARTMENT OF OCEAN ENGINEERING AND SCIENCES
Dr. Roffer. Thank you. I'd like to thank you, Senator
Nelson, for inviting me, and the panel for hearing me. I wish
the screen had been put on the side.
While I have done 10 years worth of research, the NASA
funded research involved the Gulf of Mexico and various
fisheries here and around the United States. Today, I'm going
to be talking more about the fishing industry.
So when we wake up in the morning, Floridians and tourists,
we all have the assumption of clean water and clean air, and up
to now, we've had it. So the assumption of clean air and water
goes to an abundant source of resources that includes fish and
undersea fisheries and biodiversity. Healthy ecosystems is, in
fact, the economic engine in the state.
Recreational boating in Florida has put together
approximately $10 billion in value. Eighty-three thousand to
115,000 jobs have gone to strictly recreational boating in the
state of Florida. The Tarpon Bonefish Foundation estimated the
actual impact of the state's saltwater fishing as $7.6 billion.
So the fishing industry is quite a big deal in the state of
Florida.
As we know, we have a decline in water quality, as we've
seen recently around the state. It's a decline in revenue, as
we've heard from other panelists and yourself, Senator Nelson,
as well as a loss of reputation which we've also heard. The
biggest threats that I've seen is now what's under our
control--is water quality and habitat degradation and loss.
Secondary threats, but big threats as well, not under our
control, unfortunately, is climate change, and these things
involve changes in fish migrations. The water gets too hot, the
fish don't visit Florida anymore, and we don't have fish in our
areas for fishermen to go, or the catchability changes. Climate
change involves sea level rise, changes in pH, as well as
changes in oxygen levels.
So the threats in our state come from inside the state and
outside the state. We didn't have to go too far--and you've
already discussed it--if you turn around just briefly, you'll
look at a reminder of the Deepwater Horizon spill, what it did.
We talked about the beautiful beaches in Panama Beach were
turned into, unfortunately, an oil color. And we also should
not forget the Deepwater Horizon and the amount of oil that
spilled that destroyed animals and potentially our beaches
throughout the entire state.
We look at the polluted water, not just the oil that was
recoverable. The water--we tracked the water that actually
touched the oil at some point and tracked it using satellite
data around the state. We noticed that it came off the West
Florida shelf and down into the Keys, and then we lost
continuity with it, and we really couldn't tell. So had we not
had the loop current pulling this oil away and the wind not
cooperating, we would have had a lot of oil on the west coast
of Florida as well as the Florida Keys.
So in terms of Gulf Stream connectivity, we have a great
deal of threat in terms of industrial threat or even terrorist
threat, one from the Gulf of Mexico using a loop current in the
Gulf Stream system. The other is from Mexico and Cuba. Put
something in the Gulf Stream, and it will go into the Florida
Keys and the east coast of Florida. Also, we have threats from
out-of-state that work down the east coast of Florida from the
north. These are all critical issues in terms of water quality.
So in-state water quality threats--we've changed our
patterns of water flow throughout the state. The water used to
run straight down the Everglades. It was a great thing.
Unfortunately, at the time, people thought it was best to put
in canals and divert the water to the coast. Unfortunately,
people have been dragging our feet to get that water flow back
to the Everglades where now Florida Bay is starving from lack
of freshwater. So other water projects in the state have
changed the flow alternations which, in fact, changes the
ecosystem in the state.
One of the other threats to the state of Florida is the
lack of user remediation. Users are not required in the state
of Florida to clean their water after using it, whether it's
you or I, or industry. They use the water and they put it right
back into the canals, the rivers, and the bays, and then the
rest of us have to suffer. Algae blooms--polluted water is
dumped right back in. I mean, Lake Okeechobee is a classic
example of agricultural dumping into the lake, and that water
now has been spread to both sides of the state, causing a great
deal of problems.
Another threat is no environmental bond is taken for
remediation insurance for people who use the water and have
coastal businesses. An example--people simply, when they have
an environmental problem, like they had at Piney Point several
years ago in Manatee County--``Well, we'll go out of business.
We won't worry about the problem. We'll walk away from it and
let--that's the state's problem.'' That became a big problem.
Added phosphate to the water, and now people are even talking
about putting that water in subsurface and doing some internal
drilling to put that nutrient rich water away.
Algae blooms is a major, major threat. We have too much
nitrogen and phosphorus in our ecosystem. It comes from a whole
host of varieties of sources. We've changed from really great
sea grasses, which support a lot of our ecology, to a real big
mess. This is an example, the picture here, showing what
happened just last year from the water spill coming down from
Lake Okeechobee--fish kills, animals were killed, and look at
the human advisory. This goes in the news all around the world,
and people--``Why should we come to Florida anymore?''--because
you can't even touch the water. So this is a big problem.
Boatwork people have lost money. Hell's Bay Boatworks lost $1.5
million--a very popular skiff making company in central
Florida, Titusville.
Red tide comes from too much nitrogen and phosphorus, which
we can control. It is a major problem. Sarasota, Pinellas
County--you recognize this picture. This is from your beaches
here just a few years ago. Smelly fish on the beaches. The
beaches--they're not going to go there--plus the toxic in the
air, the burning of the eyes and the lungs of the tourists.
Another threat we have in the state of Florida is the lack
of an integrated coastal ocean observing system. We have no way
to monitor the health of our ecosystem as it is right now, none
whatsoever. There are some minor studies done by the state. We
really need an integrated ocean observing system in the state.
This is like having a doctor checking the health, the diagnosis
of the ocean. It protects the economic engine. It just doesn't
tell people about where there's blooms. It's very important.
Nationally, there's a bill, Bill 1425, that's up, and we would
like all your support for that.
Climate change--as I go into my final slides on this. It's
more than just warming. It's oxygen loss. It's pH. When you
have pH declining, heavy metals increase the toxicity. One of
the panelists mentioned that, well, sea level rise is not a big
deal. Ask the people in South Beach if sea level rise is not a
problem. This has become a daily occurrence now in South
Beach--closing beaches. That's a big problem. When your beaches
close due to sea level rise and municipal waste going in
because the sewers are backing up, that's a problem.
Habitat loss--well known. Our coral reefs are dying from
overheating from global warming as well as vessel groundings.
Look at the beautiful coral on the left in 1980, and in 2011,
and even worse now. This is our economic engine, and we're
letting it crash in front of us. Habitat loss from development
has taken away so many mangroves, which filter the water, which
help keep our economy going strong.
The threat from highly migratory species. If that's not
managed properly, then the fish will lose--will decline in
abundance and won't come into our waters. A lot of the fish
that I'm talking about are internationally managed, but some in
the state. I won't get into the red snapper issue whatsoever.
There's other issues with regard to fisheries management,
namely, the antiquated management assessments that they have--
single models. But that's in my written testimony. I won't go
into that now.
Port development and industrialization. Yes, we need better
transportation in the state, but we do not need to become like
New York or Newark, New Jersey. The picture up at the top is
from Cape Canaveral as it presently looks. The picture below is
from Newark. Which one would you rather have? I certainly
wouldn't want our ports and bays to look something like this.
Additional threats are in my presentation as well as my
testimony. We have outdated municipal water treatment
facilities. Sewage is dumping right into the water and
elsewhere--not good for tourists when they see pictures of
floating poop in our water.
Loss of groundwater. Municipalities gain too much water
without proper management plants. Intake from power plants for
cooling. We haven't talked about nuclear meltdown. That used to
be a thing of science fiction in the movies, but Japan showed
us otherwise a couple of years ago. Importation of exotic
species, and, of course, loss of access to the water and the
need to dredge waterways is very important to have our access
to the water.
So I've taken a little bit too much time, but I thank you.
The picture behind you shows how some people enjoy the water,
and let the questions begin.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Roffer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mitchell A. Roffer, President, Roffer's Ocean
Fishing Forecasting Service Inc.; and Adjunct Faculty, Florida
Institute of Technology, Department of Ocean Engineering and Sciences
Introduction
I am Mitchell A. Roffer, President of Roffer's Ocean Fishing
Forecasting Service Inc., and Adjunct Faculty at the Florida Institute
of Technology, Department of Ocean Engineering and Sciences. I received
my Doctorate from the University of Miami's Rosenstiel School of Marine
and Atmospheric Science in Biological Oceanography.
ROFFSTM provides a variety of consulting services to the
recreational and commercial fishing industries, as well as, to the oil
and gas industry, ocean towing industry, environmental consulting
organizations, as well as, to academic and government organizations. I
am actively involved in ocean research with a variety of collaborators
from academia, the government sector and non-governmental
organizations. I was a member of NASA's Ecological and Biodiversity
Science team for 11 years. Thus, I am in constant contact with a broad
range of people who conduct business in Florida, as well as, fish in
Florida in addition to those visitors who travel to Florida to fish and
use the water.
When people visit Florida as tourists and when Floridians get up
each morning they assume that the air and water will be clean and that
the waters will provide an abundance of marine life whether it be fish,
marine mammals like dolphins and manatees, turtles, or birds. Over the
years Florida has had sufficient clean air, clean water and healthy
marine life to support good fisheries and fantastic tourism. The
National Marine Manufacturers Association estimated that the total
annual economic impact of recreational boating in Florida is $10.35
Billion. Recreational boating provides for approximately 83K jobs in
5.5K businesses. See (http://www.nm
ma.org/assets/cabinets/Cabinet508/
Florida_Boating_Economics%20State.pdf). The State of Florida (http://
www.myfwc.com/about/overview/economics/) cites very similar numbers.
Governor Scott's Report (http://www.flgov.com/2016/06/10/gov-scott-
florida-continues-to-lead-the-nation-in-saltwater-fishing-jobs-and-
revenue/) indicates that with 2014 data from NOAA, indicates that
Florida is number one in the Nation in jobs supported by the
recreational saltwater fishing industry at 114,898 jobs. The report
states ``Our state's world class boating and fishing also helped
attract a record 105 million tourists in 2015.'' According to the
report, Florida's commercial seafood industry was third in the Nation
in 2014 in numbers of jobs supported with 92,858 jobs. Florida is also
second in the Nation when it comes to highest sales, income and value-
added impacts from the commercial fishing industry with 18.3 billion in
sales impacts. The 2014 data are the latest economic data available.
The Bonefish & Tarpon Trust estimated that statewide, saltwater
fishing has an annual economic impact of $7.6 billion. When considered
by region, some of the annual economic impact numbers are: $1 billion
for the Florida Everglades; $765 million for the Florida Keys; $110
million for the tarpon fishery in Charlotte Harbor; and $59 million for
the Treasure Coast tarpon fishery.
These are the economic yields are only possible if Florida
continues to have clean air, clean water and healthy ecosystems, our
true economic engine. Unfortunately, during the last few decades we
have witnessed declines in the water quality and habitat which are
impacting the fisheries and associated economies. For example a recent
Miami Times article cites that that Hells Bay Boatworks of Titusville,
FL which manufactures fishing skiffs, lost $1.5M in boat sales in
Florida in association with declining water quality and fish abundance.
The article reports loss of sales for other boat manufacturers as
well--all due to Florida's water quality and habitat issues.
Threats to Florida's Coastal Ocean Economy
Threats Coming from External Sources
Threats to our coastal ocean economy come from sources external and
inside (domestic) the State of Florida. Threats from outside the state
include pollution from oil and gas development as evidenced by the BP
Deepwater Horizon where oil from another state was transported by the
currents and winds to the Florida panhandle and along the west Florida
coast. If we were not so lucky to have a very large Loop Current eddy
form and pull the oil westward, the oil would have reached the Florida
Keys and southeast Florida. (images of oil and currents).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 1. ROFFSTM Oil Oceanographic Analysis from May
24, 2014 with evidence that what ROFFSTM was mapping was oil
from the British Petroleum Deepwater Horizon oil spill
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 2. A reminder of what the Deepwater Horizon oil spill looked
like at ground level.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 3. Map of the water (red) that came in contact with the BP
Deepwater Horizon oil. Note that ROFFSTM was able to
reliably follow the polluted water into the Florida Keys.
Oil and chemical pollution along with other hazardous materials
could easily come to Florida from Mexico via the Yucatan Current and
Cuba via the Florida Current both part of the Gulf Stream. It could
also come from other south Atlantic states (e.g., North Carolina, South
Carolina and Georgia) as the currents all provide pathways to Florida
as shown in Figure 4.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 4. Modified from a ROFFSTM Oil Oceanographic
Analysis shows blue arrows as the major ocean current paths of oil and
other pollutants to enter Florida waters.
Domestic Florida Threats
Perhaps the biggest threat to Florida's fisheries and nature-based
economy come from within. Altered freshwater flows to our estuaries are
causing significant damage to coastal ecosystems, with predictably
negative impacts on fisheries and tourism. The 2016 algae bloom in the
St. Lucie Estuary was bad enough it made national news, as did the
large fish kills in the Indian River Lagoon and Florida Bay. As bad as
these events were, they are reflections of a much larger issue--a long-
term and worsening strategy of water and habitat management. Clean
water and healthy habitats are the factory that produces the fisheries
and nature-based tourism for which Florida is famous. Unless the
strategy is changed to protect and restore water quality and habitats
rather than exploit them, the state's fisheries and mature-based
tourism will continue to decline, as will their economic impact.
A major issue is the poor water management within the State.
Industrial and other users of our precious water resources are not
required to completely remediate their water after they use it. So
fantastic amounts of nutrients, pesticides, hormones from cattle,
citrus and other agriculture get dumped into the canals and rivers that
either run to coasts via the canal system or enter our lakes. These
result in algae blooms that kill our ecosystems. For example, Lake
Okeechobee receives nutrient and pesticide polluted water and then
algae blooms form. Some like cyanobacteria are harmful to humans.
The polluted Lake Okeechobee water is diverted from its natural
flow to the Everglades to the east coast and west coast via Port St.
Lucie and via the Caloosahatchee River estuary. In the last few years
we have experienced massive fish kills from the toxic water from both
the toxins in the water, from the massive abnormal amounts of
freshwater in which the fish, marine mammals, and invertebrates can not
survive in. The algae shades the sea grass resulting in its demise.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 5. A montage of dead animals from polluted water around Port
St. Lucie in 2016. The Department of Health posted warnings to avoid
contact with the water.
When either the fish die or the algae dies, the decomposition uses
most of not all of the available oxygen producing anoxic conditions
which kill the remaining organisms. This is happening all over the
state in different degrees. In my backyard, the Indian River Lagoon
system lost between 60 percent and 80 percent of its sea grass from
algae blooms blocking the light from the bottom vegetation. Also when
the plants die the increased turbidity from the sediments along with
the algae bloom prevent new vegetation from growing back.
The algae bloom threat to the Florida fishing economy also comes in
the form of red tide and other hazardous algae blooms (HABS) that not
only kill fish, but also produce airborne irritation that causes
serious respiratory problems along with coughing, sneezing, and burning
eyes to coastal visitors. Loss of beach traffic and fishing causes
significant economic loss. The HABS threat is directly related to the
increase in nutrients entering the water from numerous sources
including agriculture, urban runoff, leaking septic tanks, residential
use of fertilizer, and grass clippings entering the water, etc. Another
threat is the lack of economic data on the losses from such events.
Florida State and local tourist departments do not like to talk about
red tide and algae blooms. They would rather show photos of beautiful
beaches and amusement parks.
What happens to the Florida economy when algae bloom occur? Fish
leave the area and/or die and people stop fishing and buying equipment,
bait, and boats. In the past 18 months it has been estimated that
Hell's Bay Boatworks, a major Florida boat manufacturer has lost $1.5
million in revenue recently due to the loss of sales. They minimized
their losses recently by shipping their boats out of state for sale
which historically they never did. Other Florida-based boat
manufacturers have lost 80 percent of their revenue. (see Miami Times
article by Isabella Gomes August 04, 2017. http://
www.miaminewtimes.com/news/florida-boat-industry-underwater-from-water-
crisis-9502729)
While our coastal areas are getting too much freshwater from the
center of the State, the southern Everglades and especially Florida Bay
is suffering from lack of freshwater. The National Academy of Sciences
has considered this as well as all the so-called water managers. A
short review can be found in the Miami Herald (http://
www.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article126205254.html).
Apparently Florida Bay needs approximately 30 Billion more gallons of
freshwater per year. See the free National Academy of Sciences
``Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Sixth Biennial Review--
2016'' (https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23672/progress-toward-restoring-
the-everglades-the-sixth-biennial-review-2016).
Another threat is the loss of groundwater and the pollution of
groundwater. In my opinion we are selling too much of our groundwater
and managing our surface freshwater poorly. In some cases like the St.
Johns River Management District, they are allowing municipalities to
extract more freshwater from the St. Johns River than a safe water
budget requires. Downstream the ecosystems suffer from lack of water.
To fix these problems one must stop the pollution, fix the plumbing
and restore the ecosystems. This takes expertise, comprehensive study
and monitoring and of course time and money. Brevard County has taken
steps to repair and restore the Indian River Lagoon through a special
sales tax the residents voted for. Only time will tell if we waited too
long to act.
Another domestic Florida threat to the coastal ocean economy is
from industrial waste pollution being dumped into our Florida waters.
This threat includes phosphate mining discards and storage water from
the industrial processing. I remind you of the Piney Point, Florida
polluted waste water ``containment'' ponds breaking and entering the
Tampa Bay in 2003. A ``solution'' permitted by the Florida Department
of Environmental Protection was to allow partially treated highly
polluted water to enter the coastal waters of Manatee County. Now there
is serious discussion about injecting this polluted water underground.
We learned from the BP Deepwater Horizon that polluters often want to
remove the surface pollution to keep the public and media from seeing
it. A related threat is that businesses are not required to post a
meaningful, non-refundable environmental remediation bonds. Thus, many
polluters ``go out of business'' and walk away.
One domestic threat to our Florida economy is the lack of a fully
funded, comprehensive coastal ocean monitoring system. This would allow
objective, non-politically motivated scientists a continuously funded
system to gather the necessary data to understand the changes in the
health of the ecosystems. Automated and non-automated warning systems
based on complete sampling regimes can be devised. Presently the State
only samples a relatively few areas on a limited schedule. Based on my
experience and opinion, it appears they do not sample extensively or
comprehensively so that they do not find problems or the sources of the
problems. A coastal ocean observing system would protect the economic
engine of Florida by monitoring the health of the ecosystem and provide
information that would be used to create management strategies to fix
the problems before they become too severe. The idea is to identify the
results of the good management practices and non-effective practices.
Having a coastal ocean observing system is like having a full time
medical doctor watching your health. Observations and diagnoses must be
made to properly treat the patient. In our case the patient is the
Florida ecosystem and Florida tourist economy. Such a system would also
likely save lives from the resulting real-time current data and
improved search and rescue models.
Another domestic threat to our economic engine is the loss of fish
nursery habitats and the degradation of all fish related habitats. This
is important as the amount of habitat greatly influences the total
abundance of a fish species. It is well known that habitat quality and
connectivity will influence fish health, survival, and abundance.
Cutting the natural flow of water and destroying nursery and essential
habitat will destroy the fisheries that are an economic engine in
Florida. According to Dr. Aaron Adams of the Tarpon Bonefish Trust who
studies such issues, there has been a loss of approximately 50 percent
mangrove habitat in Florida. At least 9.3 million acres of wetlands,
more than two million acres of seagrass and up to 80 percent loss of
naturally occurring oyster beds. This has caused a decline in the
abundance of many fish that are fished recreationally and commercially.
Given that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission does a
good job managing fisheries, it is clear that the declining fisheries
are due to habitat loss and degradation. We can not afford to lose any
more habitat and the negatively affect habitat should be remediated.
These habitat losses stem a variety of causes particularly coastal
development, water pollution, poor management of the freshwater flow in
the State.
The loss of coral habitat is a particular threat to Florida's
fisheries and tourist economy. Coral habitats are nursery areas for
many fish that are important components of the Florida fishing economy
such as snappers and groupers. They are also the habitat for important
adult fisheries. Coral reefs have been destroyed by improper anchoring
and by direct damage by boat groundings.
A much larger threat to the coral ecosystem is coral bleaching from
overheating of the waters and also due to the decline in pH of our
oceans. Not only do corals die from overheating, they are also more
susceptible to diseases. See Eakin et al., 2010 (https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0013969) for more details)
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 6. Photo of the same area of Florida corals taken in 1980
and 2011. Photo credit Mote Marine Laboratory
Another Florida domestic threat to our fisheries tourist economy is
the dumping of treated and untreated wastewater into our canals,
rivers, estuaries and oceans. The threat is that many water and
municipal managers think that the solution to pollution is dilution.
This is a dangerous threat to the Florida economy. Firstly the polluted
water should be totally remediated by its users before being returned
to our rivers, bays and oceans. Just last week the Miami Metro-Dade
County sewage outfall pipe was found to be leaking polluted water in
the coastal waters. See http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/
environment/article164655777.html
Part of this wastewater threat is that water treatment plants in
the State have not increased their operational capacity or modernized
their treatment technology. Far too many pharmaceuticals, pesticides,
pesticide by-products and nutrients enter our waters from our permitted
municipal water treatment plants. These are negatively affecting our
fisheries ecosystems from the rivers and bays to the ocean ecosystem
including hard and soft reef ecosystems.
Improved wastewater treatment is especially urgent given that many
Florida homes must be converted from septic tanks to municipal sewerage
systems. Numerous studies have demonstrated that many regions of
Florida are not appropriate for septic systems, and in many locations
the density of homes is too high for septic systems to be effective.
These septic systems leak excessive nutrients into Florida's coastal
waterways, adding to the problems associated with surface runoff.
Inadequate or improper fisheries management is a threat to the
State fisheries tourism. Since Florida fisheries operate in State and
Federal waters the fisheries are managed by the State and by the South
Atlantic Fishery Management Council and the Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council. The threat is the lack of modernization of their
stock assessment methods from data collection to single species models
that do not incorporate environmental data--covariants into their
assessment. Estimates of abundance are often biased and often do not
reflect what the fishermen are experiencing in the water or what modern
estimates of abundance would show. Over managing the fisheries results
in opportunity losses, but under-management or mismanagement results in
overfished stocks. A multi-species, habitat oriented and
environmentally sensitive system of stock assessment and management
needs to be established.
Another threat to Florida fisheries is the poor management and
over-fishing of fish stocks outside Florida that migrate to Florida.
When populations that migrate to Florida decline in abundance, then it
affects the Florida fisheries. Tuna, swordfish, sailfish along with
blue and white marlin are examples of this. See Restrepo et al., 2003
(https://doi.org/10.1071/MF02057) and http://www.takemarlinoffthe
menu.org/global_status_of_billfish. Recent efforts to ban commercial
swordfish longline fishing in Florida waters has been effective for
Florida's recreational swordfish fisheries. The threat is to open this
fishery to commercial longlining again. The bycatch of many other
valuable species occurs during longlining operations.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 7. Example of recreationally caught swordfish in Florida
(left). Photo credit Richard Gibson and Marlin Magazine.
Another threat to the Florida fisheries economy is the mortality of
fish caught, removed from the water to take photos that damage the
fish, and returned to the water. This threat comes in the form of lack
of enforcement of existing laws on removing highly migratory species
from the water, and also due to the lack of educational programs to
educate fishers of this issue.
Port development is yet another threat to the Florida economy. The
tourist economy benefits from cruise ships bringing visitors to
Florida. However, the further development for cargo and ships that
transport chemicals including petroleum is a threat as they add
additional pollution to the port areas and the surrounding land areas
through increased truck traffic as associated pollution. My personal
view is that Florida ports should not become like the Port of Newark,
NJ. Port expansion usually results in the loss of essential fish and
bird habitats.
Another threat to the Florida fisheries economy is leakage of
nuclear waste and overheated water from nuclear power plants. A further
threat is the loss of fish larvae and juvenile fish that are killed
when the power plants pump water to cool their power production.
Additional threats come from fish and other wildlife being imported
illegally or disposed of illegally. One only has to look as far as the
Burmese python in south Florida and central Florida. The lionfish is
another example of alien species changing our ecosystem. See http://
myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/nonnatives/ for a list.
A final threat to the Florida fisheries economy is climate change.
The change in the absolute abundance along with the changing of the
migratory patterns in time and space is a major issue. For example
warmer winters have resulted in the late or reduced arrival of the
migratory sailfish into south Florida waters. Without reliably good
fishing many tourists who have traveled to Florida are not traveling to
other locations (e.g., Costa Rica, Guatemala, and Dominican Republic)
to fish. Temperature increases are causing significant coral reef
mortality and disease. Sea level rise and increase flooding in some
Florida locations like Miami have a negative impact on marina
operations including boat dockage and storage.
Most Important Threat
To list which single overall threat is the biggest is a difficult
task. In the present and near term, water quality along with the
degradation and destruction of habitat is the biggest threat. In the
future, water availability and quality along with climate change are
likely to be the biggest issues.
I would like to acknowledge help in the writing/editing of this
testimony including photo sources: Aaron Adams (Bonefish Tarpon Trust),
Mark Eakin (NOAA), George Maul (Florida Institute of Technology) and
Kellie Ralston (American Sportfishing Association).
Senator Nelson. All right. Thank you, Dr. Roffer.
I want to welcome all the folks from so many different
counties that have come today. Would all the elected officials
who are in the audience--would you stand and be recognized,
please?
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Thank you very much.
Would all the members of the Chambers of Commerce in the
entire Tampa Bay region--would you stand and be recognized?
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Very good.
And we have a number of environmental advocacy groups that
are here. Would you stand and be recognized?
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Well, as you can see, there's broad
interest.
Now, in a Senate hearing, what is typical is the Chairman
will start the questions first, and then the Ranking Member
will ask. Since I'm running the show, I'm going to break the
normal, and because of our two congressional colleagues--I want
you all to have the first chances.
So, Madam Congresswoman?
Ms. Castor. Well, good afternoon, everyone. Thank you,
Senator Nelson, for calling us all together. You simply cannot
understate the importance of having a leader like Senator
Nelson from the state of Florida as the leader in the Congress
when it comes to these issues on the Commerce Committee,
Science----
[Applause.]
Ms. Castor. So thank you very much. And you are right.
Travel and tourism are the lifeblood of Florida's economy, and
we've all got to work together to do everything we can to
protect it and to ensure that it thrives.
Robin, you'll remember this. It is etched in my memory,
more than most things in my career, my professional career--was
in the days after the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster, when we
convened a working group of small business owners there at the
TradeWinds on the beach, and we had one business owner who was
weathering the recession. But, boy, the BP Deepwater Horizon
came in and it was a very difficult one to punch. She cried.
She brought me to tears. She was facing significant layoffs and
maybe an end to her business, and she was not alone.
In the days--remember that the oil spewed out for five
months, 5 months, and that was what the rest of the world saw.
No oil on the beaches in the whole Tampa Bay area, and yet the
tourists didn't come. So we've learned lessons, haven't we?
We've got to do everything to ensure that that never happens
again.
And God bless the folks here at the University of South
Florida and the College of Marine Sciences, and, Dr. Sanberg, I
know you're very proud of them, and Dean Dixon, Dean Hogarth.
Boy, we had Dr. Weisberg explaining the loop current to
everyone, and Dr. Hollander that was fighting for the oil
sample that we had to kind of--we had to shame BP into
providing--fighting for the research dollars to come. So thank
you. The Weatherbird research vessel was out sampling the oil
before anyone else was. So this was ground zero for protection
of our economy and our environment.
Senator, you were kind of modest, because you didn't
mention the role that you played in passing the RESTORE Act in
the years after the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster. You all
remember the RESTORE Act was the law that we passed to ensure
that 80 percent of all of the fines and penalties that BP and
the other polluters had to pay came back to the Gulf Coast.
Now, the importance of the RESTORE Act is more plain than
ever, because we're facing very significant cuts from the Trump
administration when it comes to science, research, whether
we're talking about NOAA or EPA or the other science-based
agencies. But those RESTORE Act funds will continue to flow for
years to come, and they will be very important in addressing
algae blooms and the change of climate. But I wanted to thank
you for that, because I don't think that should go unmentioned
today.
But we learned our lessons, and I think, as we set
priorities for leaving here, we do have to prioritize the
offshore oil drilling, and it's very heartening to hear there
is a bipartisan effort to extend the moratorium from 2022 for
another 5 years. I have filed the Coastal Protection Act for a
number of years now that would make the moratorium permanent.
[Applause.]
Ms. Castor. And we have bipartisan support. But what we
need is a unified Florida delegation. It's only through
bipartisan unity that we are going to get that accomplished. So
I'm going to highlight that to you all.
The other huge challenge that we're facing, of course, is
the change in climate, and this is going to be very costly to
our businesses and everyone that lives in Florida and
everywhere else. But think about what we're facing here in
Florida when it comes to cost--higher AC bills, beach re-
nourishment that our local government officials fight for,
higher flood insurance rates, property insurance rates,
property taxes, because our local governments are going to have
to be more resilient in improving water and waste water
infrastructure. So if we do not act now to get ahead of this,
we are going to be facing a very difficult future.
So in addition to clean air and clean beaches, it's time to
fight for clean energy in Florida. And, Mayor Kriseman, I want
to thank you----
[Applause.]
Ms. Castor.--because here in the Sunshine City, you've been
the most outspoken advocate--and I see Councilman Rice and
Councilman Nurse and Commissioner Welch. This is the place
where it can happen. Did you all know that Florida is one of
the worst states in the country in producing energy through
renewables--one of the worst, the Sunshine State. New Jersey,
Georgia, North Carolina produce more energy through solar power
than the Sunshine State. I think we can do a lot better, and we
can have our community thrive. We can grow, we can build jobs
in this clean energy sector, and it will improve our tourism
based economy.
I'd like to offer into the record, Senator, the editorial
from the Tampa Bay Times just today. They're coming fast and
furious after the National Report of Scientists on Climate, the
University of Florida Report that was out today.
So I'll offer this for the record, ``Climate Threats to
Florida Mount.''
[The information referred to follows:]
Tampa Bay Times--Thursday, August 10, 2017--Opinion--Times editorials
Climate threats to Fla. mount
The latest Federal report on the Earth's warming climate doesn't
mince words about the disturbing trends, man's contributions or the
dangers that millions across the globe already face, especially in low-
lying coastal areas in Florida and elsewhere. It is yet another call to
action for federal, state and local officials--and they all have a role
to play in curbing emissions of heat-trapping gases, shoring up
infrastructure, improving flood control and finding more efficient ways
for societies to grow and manage their populations.
Drafted by scientists at 13 Federal agencies, the report cited the
warming trend as ``global, long term and unambiguous.'' Global
temperatures have increased by about 1.6 degrees over the past 150
years, the study found, and thousands of studies have created ``many
lines of evidence'' to conclude that human activity is primarily behind
the changing climate. The authors found it ``extremely likely'' that
most of the warming since 1951 was caused by humans, and that even if
emissions were to cease, existing levels of greenhouse gases in the
atmosphere would cause temperatures to increase at least a half-degree
Fahrenheit over this century.
The report, by 30 lead authors representing agencies such as NASA,
Federal laboratories, the private sector and universities, is part of
the National Climate Assessment. That is a congressionally mandated
analysis that seeks to build on the existing science and provide a
snapshot of the current state of climate change. It found an increase
in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather, and warming in the
Arctic at twice the rate of the global average--a phenomenon that
couldimpact sea levels, the weather and other patterns in the lower 48
states. One-third of the sea level rise since 1880 has occurred since
1990, and coastal communities from the Gulf of Mexico to the Atlantic
are at increasing risk of routine flooding, saltwater intrusion into
the drinking water supply and the collapse of roads, utilities and
other vital infrastructure. That puts Florida's east and west
coastlines at risk, yet Gov. Rick Scott's administration has beenless
aggressive than local governments in South Florida and Tampa Bay in
addressing the challenges.
The findings contradict the talking points of the Trump
administration, which has openly questioned the science behind climate
change and the degree that humans contribute to it, and which has moved
to reverse the clean-air initiatives of the Obama White House. The
unpublished analysis was made available to the New York Times days
before Sunday's deadline for the 13 Federal agencies to approve the
report. Making the report public at least forces the Trump
administration to explain why it does or does not stand behind the
science.
This national assessment lays a foundation for securing Federal
funding and regulatory direction on climate policy, and it offers state
and local governments the technical assistance they need to incorporate
the impact of climate change into their planning for infrastructure,
land use and other long-term issues. States and cities, though, cannot
cede all responsibility to the Federal Government. Studies show
Florida, for example, has invested trillions of dollars in
infrastructure with virtually no consideration given to rising sea
levels. Rising seas could swell Tampa Bay up to 19 inches over the next
quarter-century,putting tens of thousands of residents at risk. The
Federal study is another wake-up call about a threat that is real, here
and more pressing by the day.
Ms. Castor. This is the challenge of our time. We do not
want to be left with our children and grandchildren asking us,
``What did you do? What did you do? Did you address this? Did
you fight for our way of life?'' We're so fortunate to live
here.
So maybe I'll ask my question. Robin, you remember that day
when we would bring businesses together. What would it mean to
them now to know that they would have a little more breathing
room if we were able to extend the moratorium on oil drilling
off the coast of Florida or make it permanent?
Ms. Sollie. It would mean the world to them,
professionally, and I think, personally, because they not only
work on the beaches but they live on the beaches. We talk about
this, as you know, and have been for many, many years, and
thank you for your support on the issue. They're fearful. They
don't want to see that happen again. So extending the
moratorium or getting it to be permanent is amazing, and we, as
an organization in coastal communities, will do everything we
can to support your role in helping make that happen.
Senator Nelson. The editorial will be introduced into the
record.
Congressman?
Mr. Crist. Thank you very much, Senator. I want to add to
what Representative Castor had to say in thanking you. Thank
you, Senator Nelson, for your great leadership in this arena.
You understand, as a Floridian, how important all these things
are to all these people in this room and beyond, how it affects
tourism, how it affects their businesses, whether they be
restaurants or hotels or resorts on the beach, or people who
are fishing, charter people. It has an enormous impact on
everything that we do.
You know, I tell people all the time I have the honor of
representing the most beautiful district in America. So does
Kathy.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Crist. And, of course, the Senator has the opportunity
to represent the most beautiful state in America. All of you
here understand that and the importance of what we're talking
about and these issues, how sea level rise affects us in a very
direct way, Commissioner, and what it does when it comes to
flood insurance, the things that Representative Castor
addressed as well.
So I'll pose the following question to anybody who would
like to respond to it. With nearly unanimous scientific
consensus that man-made climate change is, in fact, real, how
can we proactively protect our businesses that rely on tourist
dollars from the impacts of more severe weather-related events,
such as hurricanes and flooding?
Ms. Ferenc. I would say--thank you very much for the
question, and, again, thank you for the opportunity to answer.
I would say that it's the reason why organizations across the
county, locally, and at the state level, and then at the
national level, are so important to us, because getting the
word out to our state and beyond and internationally now when a
disaster occurs is what is the difference between it being a
moment and it being a long, long problem for the economy of the
state.
So we really can make a difference, and we saw that. I
think we've gotten much better at it since the oil spill, and
we've improved, both at the local and state levels, and at the
national level, in terms of getting a message out immediately.
But I think it's the reason why we need to continue to do such
things like fund Visit Florida and fund Brand USA so that we
can be--so we are prepared at those levels. If we have the
funding, we can get that word out and really minimize the
damage that a hurricane can do in terms of the economic impact
to the state.
Dr. Roffer. I think education is part of the issue here,
too. We have to educate the public with what the real threats
are versus the non-real threats and how to prepare for a storm
and how to build properly. I lived in Miami through Andrew,
and, fortunately, I survived without too much damage to the
house. But the building codes changed as a result of Andrew,
and it was just a really--truly was a minimum increase, and
there should be more increases in the building code as these
storms, in theory, are supposed to be getting stronger each
time due to the warming of the ocean. So educating the
builders, educating the public, and then getting the word out
to everyone what the real threats are and how to prepare for
them properly.
Ms. Sollie. The way I heard your question and how it
affects businesses and how we can make it easier for them to
mitigate and deal with it as it's naturally occurring for us
day in and day out, or it's an immediate occurrence, right,
with a hurricane. I think, nationally, we need to make
accessibility to the small businesses more achievable.
In a lot of instances, whether it's renewable energy, using
solar panels, protecting their building against sea level rise
or floods or whatever it is, the entry, the cost for a small
business owner, which is the lifeblood of our nation, right, is
too extreme for them to invest in that, to mitigate something
that they can't see immediately, but they know it'll help them
later when this happens. But they've got to pay their electric
bill, right? They've got to pay their lease.
So I think that there needs to be some, again, planning,
some foresight to develop programs that could help us fund
small and medium sized businesses to help mitigate whatever
that circumstance is in the whole breadth of these threats.
Dr. Larkin. So thinking proactively makes me think back to
my first point, which was investing in natural and built
infrastructure, so certainly things like oyster reefs, offshore
oyster reefs, and planting sea grasses that can protect coastal
shores. But when we think about things, I guess, to follow up
on Robin's point, we think about projects and private companies
investing and perhaps spending more to develop in a way that
protects from sea level rise. A portion of that spending is for
a public good, not just a private good. So, certainly, they
benefit, absolutely, but there is a public good component that
all of us benefit from, that does justify public investment in
that resource through a variety of programs.
Senator Nelson. Let me see if I can nail down a couple of
more points for the record. What I've found is that the sea
level rise that is occurring--and this is not forecast. This is
not projections. This is measurements that, over the course of
the last 40 years, have shown that the seas in southeast
Florida have risen five to eight inches. In fact, the people of
southeast Florida are getting sensitized to this, because
they're seeing it on the 6 o'clock news. They're seeing the
water sloshing over the curbs in Miami Beach, same thing in the
Las Olas section of Fort Lauderdale. But what I've found in
other parts of Florida--it's out of sight, out of mind.
What do you think is going to change in order for this to
sink in? What, in fact, has happened? Anybody?
Ms. Ferenc?
Ms. Ferenc. I would say from that question and from many of
the comments that you have made today that an education process
and a campaign, perhaps within our own industry, of
understanding more critically how our environment is tied to
the health of our businesses and allowing us an opportunity to
take more responsibility in the paths that we carve out for
ourselves and how we're going to conduct ourselves in the
future and what's going to be important to us might be a
worthwhile effort.
Senator Nelson. Yes, ma'am. Dr. Larkin?
Dr. Larkin. So one of my points was improve terrestrial and
freshwater environmental systems. One of the things that
happens in conjunction with sea level rise are changing weather
patterns. So I think when we do research that tries to
integrate sort of the biophysical with the economic and all the
other components is helping people--going back to the education
point--realize how integrated it is, and it may be investments
in things to address those changing weather patterns that might
go a step further.
Senator Nelson. Dr. Roffer, you certainly indicated this in
a number of your slides as you were talking about fish and all
the other things. The effects of climate change are real. Are
the commercial and recreational fishermen and the charter boat
captains--are they beginning to see any differences out there
on the sea?
Dr. Roffer. Quite a bit. You know, when--for example, the
south Florida sailfish fishing has been very poor--southeast
Florida sailfish fishing for the last couple of years has been
very poor, because we've had warm winters, and the sailfish
haven't migrated from the Carolinas down into Florida all the
way to the Keys. So, for example, Charleston had one of the
best sailfish fisheries they've ever had because the sailfish
were up there. So fishermen are clearly seeing the change in
migration of the fish, and sailfish is one of them.
Cobia is another one that's not--that doesn't stay in the
state as long as it had once before. It migrates with the warm
water. As the seasons warm up, they're migrating further north
and out of our area. So a lot of money goes into cobia fishing
and sailfish fishing. People have noticed changes in the
upwelling pattern of the Gulf Stream off of the east coast of
Florida. We're not sure if it's real or not. The fishermen are
telling us about it. So a change in upwelling will affect the
availability and the catchability of these fish.
So to answer your question, yes, fishermen are starting to
see it, and those that are seeing it are starting to understand
it and realizing this is real.
Senator Nelson. Are they speaking out?
Dr. Roffer. No, they're not speaking out. A lot of the
problem becomes--with commercial fishermen and fishermen and,
particularly, charter boat captains--in saying that their catch
is decreasing is admitting to their potential clients that
they're not catching fish anymore. So you're not going to get
people in the Keys saying, ``Well, don't come down to the Keys
anymore because the sailfish are in Charleston.'' So they're
not saying it.
They can't advertise--the fishermen saying that it's
hurting us. Privately, they'll tell you. But, publicly, it's
very hard to get their testimony because they're basically
giving negative advertising for their business. The researchers
can, in fact, tell this. The recreational fishermen can report
it, and people like myself.
Senator Nelson. And that's part of the problem. We're not
willing to have an open discussion about this issue of what's
happening to the Earth. For example, I was shocked, visiting
some of the agencies under the jurisdiction of the Commerce
Committee, highly technical agencies, NIST, NOAA, NASA, et
cetera, and what I had found with regard to one of those
agencies right at the turn of the new administration was that
the word has gone out that they were not to use the two words,
``climate change.''
It has been reported here in the state of Florida that a
similar edict--had gone out to all state employees--don't use
``climate change.'' Now, if you can't even have a discussion
about it, or alternatively, we see scientists--and I have seen
this in Washington as well--attempt to be muzzled as to the
free expression of what their scientific conclusions are on
whatever the issue is, then I think we'd better get concerned
and we'd better get vocal about this.
Dr. Roffer. I agree. I'm constantly on social media, and
I'm involved in a newsletter that goes out to quite a few
people in the country, talking about such issues.
Unfortunately, with the climate in D.C., the political climate,
the words, ``climate change,'' has to be basically taken out of
proposals. You have to use the words, environmental variability
or environmental change. It means the same thing, but it's not
that blow-up word when someone searching says, ``Oh, throw that
out.''
I have to give NASA a lot of credit. NASA has stayed within
the climate change realm. I know I've been funded under a
climate change with NASA, looking at bluefin tuna and highly
migratory species, and they feel they're doing what's right for
the country, and until they're forced to change, one way or the
other, they're going to continue using the words, climate
change. But, unfortunately, other agencies are forced not to
use it, which I think is un-American.
Senator Nelson. Let me ask--yes, ma'am. Ms. Sollie?
Ms. Sollie. As leaders, we're involved in the conversation
in-depth, and so we hear sea level rise or climate change. We
know where our thoughts are going, and we want to plan for our
future or protect our businesses or the constituents we serve.
I think we need to come up with a methodology and education,
even as an industry, to speak in more layman terms so that the
general public understands what we're saying, and not in a
threatening way, just to get it in their mindset.
We're humans. We live on instant gratification, right? And
so, again, this is something that's gradually affecting our
lives. But until they can see an experience, understand it, I
don't think we, behind these doors today, can get the momentum
that we really need to be powerful.
And I do want to add for the record that we're fortunate in
Pinellas County. We are ahead of the curve. In 2006, Tampa Bay
Regional Planning Council did a study on sea level rise, and I
have it here with me. It depicts the acreage within the county
that's actually protectable. So out of 109,000 acres, 78,770
are in a protection--almost certain protective zone. So maybe
we can plan as municipalities or counties to take steps so that
we can demonstrate this to other regions on how we can start to
address the issue.
Senator Nelson. Yes, ma'am?
Dr. Larkin. One of the mechanisms available to university
researchers is to work with Florida Sea Grant College Program.
It's a program that's housed at UF, but it represents all
universities here in Florida. Through that program, there are
local agents that help communicate the science to the public.
I think what's really effective about that is that they all
have advisory boards on different issues, so the members of
those advisory boards are folks that--probably some of these
folks in the room here today that really have a direct contact
to folks on the shore, and we see them as an extremely valuable
resource. I know that their funding was, you know, one of those
ones that was highlighted to be cut, and I think some of it was
allowed to be saved, which let us do a big sigh of relief. But
they've been so effective. It's kind of like the example that
you have been talking about. It's hard to imagine it was on the
chopping block just because of how successful it has been, and
it is a real valuable tool.
Senator Nelson. That Sea Grant Program is within NOAA, and
that is within the jurisdiction of the Commerce Committee, and
one of those successes that you're talking about is what
happened at Cedar Key. The fishermen have successfully
transitioned to a clam aquaculture. Now, it has a $39 million
value to the state of Florida.
So, Dr. Larkin, further expand. How would cutting that
investment, which is the proposal in the President's proposed
budget, affect these natural resources impact jobs?
Dr. Larkin. Right. I mean, you talked about the Cedar Key
example, and that's just a really good one, because that is an
example of where a fishery had used a particular gear--net
gear--to harvest mullet, and because of a political vote by the
public was immediately shut down. So it was devastating to a
little community that probably most people had never heard of.
But the training that ensued, the ideas for how we are
going to address this issue with this community, started with
public investment, and those Sea Grants agents were ground
zero. They were in a very difficult position, I mean,
retraining a whole community of folks that have spent their
lives, generation after generation, fishing one way for one
thing.
So now you fast forward, and not only--you mentioned the
commercial value of what's harvested. That industry, that type
of investment, is almost like investing in a museum. It is an
attraction. People now come because those businesses operate
like little public aquariums. People can walk in, and they'll
show them the process. They come and they now visit, and other
private investment has ensued. There's a little artist colony
there now. So it has seeded private investment and allowed that
community to flourish, and there are other examples like that
as well.
Senator Nelson. As the Earth heats up--and I'm assuming
that most everybody here understands the scientific reasons
behind this, although there are people that deny that this is,
in fact, happening. It's simply as the sun's rays come in and
hit the Earth, part of the heat is absorbed, but a lot of that
heat is reflected off the surface of the Earth and radiates
back out into space. When you put certain gases, like carbon
dioxide or methane into the air, and it goes into the upper
atmosphere, it creates what is known as the greenhouse effect,
like a greenhouse glass ceiling, and it traps the heat.
Of course, as the Earth heats up, look what covers two-
thirds of the Earth--oceans, and the oceans absorb 90 percent
of the heat. And when water is heated, what happens to it? It
expands, and, thus, we are seeing the phenomenon that has been
chronicled here by our panelists.
One of you mentioned, I think, wells. Lo and behold, that's
happened right here in a south Florida city. It's well field
had to be moved further west because of the sea level rise and,
therefore, the salt water intrusion into the well field. So
it's happening, and it's going to cause great infrastructure
investment.
I want to ask the two mayors. Are city mayors starting to
think about the investments that you're going to have to make
because of the changes in the climate?
Mr. Cretekos. Senator, the City of Clearwater was the first
in the state and in the Southeast to have a natural gas
refueling station, and we've started doing our vehicles--
natural gas vehicles. We've partnered with Duke Energy to be
the first city in Pinellas County to finish LED lights on all
of our street lights, and we have a green print program that we
adopted about 5 years ago to put us on the path of
sustainability.
Senator Nelson. Mr. Mayor?
Mr. Kriseman. Yes, we're--and I thank the council members
that are here who have been also pushing these issues. We're
embarking on an integrated sustainability action plan for the
City of St. Petersburg. We're looking at doing a long-term plan
that really takes into account both the impacts of climate
change and sea level rise, in particular, on our city, because
we've seen the maps and we know the risk that our city is at,
and we know that we are going to have to make significant
changes to how we conduct our government, but how we conduct
our city.
Our zoning changes are going to have to be implemented. How
we build out is going to have to change. So we are looking at
doing all those things in addition to a commitment to become
100 percent renewables in the city.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Commissioner, is this discussion in front
of the county?
Ms. Long. Yes, Senator, and I thank you very much for that
question, because I want to share with everyone a real living
example of how elections matter. This County Commission now
uses the words, climate change, sea level rise, and
sustainability, and when I first came on the County Commission
5 years ago, I was stunned to learn that our county staff were
not allowed to use those words in discussions with the
commissioner.
On top of that, we are planning--our county is--a
sustainability and sea level rise, climate change conference in
partnership with the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council a few
months from now. So I hope you'll stay tuned to that.
On top of that, I am so proud that all of our facilities
within county government have moved to things like LED
lighting. We invested a lot of money into a cooling system in
downtown Clearwater and worked with partnerships all over the
City of Clearwater--the mayor is aware of this--and have saved
over a million dollars a year in energy by using this cooling
system.
So the long answer to your question is yes. It is high on
our list. We have many bridges in our county that need to be
replaced, and one of the big deep dive discussions is how high
do we have to build the new bridges in order to ensure that in
the future our citizens will not be at risk again.
One more thing, if I may be so bold, is to say elections
matter. The issues we're talking about today are handled best
by good, sound, public policy, and when we put people in office
that don't believe in science, well, that's a problem, and we
only have one Earth. Our oceans and our natural resources, our
most important treasures--shame on us. What will our
grandchildren say when they look back and go, ``What were you
thinking?''
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Dr. Sanberg, you're the head of research.
USF has been particularly positioned as one of the leaders of
the Florida Institute of Oceanography led by the Dean that I
think you introduced as the Dean--stand up, Dean.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Thank you.
The Florida Institute of Oceanography ends up being the
recipient of some of the funds that we carved out in the
RESTORE Act, specifically for researching the health of the
Gulf in the future. Now, there's a lot of oil out there, and a
lot of it is still lurking around the bottom of the Gulf.
Do you want to comment on any of your future plans in the
Gulf research?
Dr. Sanberg. Sure. Of course, you have the experts right
over there, so a comment, in general. I think that there are a
few things. One is that the Florida Institute of Oceanography
is a statewide institute, and it's housed here at USF and in
St. Pete, a great place to be housed. But it's a collaboration
between most marine groups around the state, and so when money
comes in, it gets diffused, based on research projects around
the state to look at all sorts of activities on all the coasts.
The other thing that's a real advantage is that we had a
new ship that was recently built, the Hogarth, and it is a
superb world class ship to continue to do research out in the
Gulf, especially to look at these problems and issues related
to the oil that's out there, the current health of the Gulf,
the fisheries, just a number of things.
And the other thing is that students--one thing is we are a
research university, but we have great students, and we have
students that want to be out and work with these great
professors that we have in marine sciences and all the other
areas. So these activities are extremely educational. They're
also STEM-related activities, which really helps a great deal
in the education of future Floridians and to move into this
field.
The other thing I was just going to say, when I'm listening
to all the witnesses here, speakers, is there are a number of
things that you've brought up, and education, I think, is a key
one, especially in tourism. We offer a master's in global
sustainability with a concentration in tourism at USF. It's a
very important program for us. And I guess the question, if I
was going to ask one, is are there other educational programs
for the Floridians of tomorrow that they could really train in
and they could be helpful to all the industries that are being
affected?
Senator Nelson. Anybody want to comment on that? Is Dean
Hogarth here? I would certainly want to recognize him, because
he certainly worked with us on the oil spill. Let me ask you
another question. One of you mentioned invasive species. So we
know the problem with lionfish, the Burmese python. You could
say the Burmese python is related to weather, because the only
thing that we found, how you can get at this population, is a
cold snap that is sustained over time. Otherwise, it's very
difficult to find them, and the Park Service is thinking there
might be 150,000 of them in the Everglades.
Zika--infectious diseases, another byproduct. It's
primarily in warm areas. Did any one of you who mentioned that
want to expand on this?
Yes, ma'am. Dr. Larkin?
Dr. Larkin. If you'll allow me a moment, I do want to
mention one thing. We talked about built environment solutions
for dealing with global warming. There is a role for natural
systems, too. So we all know that trees sequester carbon, and
we have researchers that are working on creating new forages
for cattle that will help reduce methane. So there's a variety
of solutions.
With respect to--and tourism. We have a Department of
Tourism that also offers programs that, hopefully, will help in
that scientific regard. The invasive species one is a good one.
We have little beetles that are attacking our trees and our
avocados.
The pythons--so, actually, we have some researchers who
just compared the effect of the cold snap between the American
crocodile and the python, and, actually, what it found was
while it knocked both populations down, it only had a long-term
effect on the potential northern migration of the crocodile,
not the python. So we are still concerned about it moving
north.
Senator Nelson. You know, we used to think that the
python--by the way, have you seen the pictures? You know, they
caught one that was 18 and a half feet long. You pick up one of
these things, and it's 200 pounds, and it's solid muscle. We
thought maybe they wouldn't go any further north than the humid
marshy environment of the Everglades, but if there is
increasing warming temperatures, you're right, Dr. Larkin. That
snake is going to move north.
Dr. Larkin. Right, and, you know, we know they're
responsible for a loss of 95 percent of the rabbits and other
small mammals in the Everglades.
Ms. Sollie. And it wouldn't be good for the tourism
industry either if they travel north.
Senator Nelson. No.
Dr. Larkin. Right. So, I mean, there's--you know, then you
start affecting food web that's involved, and then you start
affecting other of our iconic species.
Senator Nelson. All right. Either one of our members of
Congress have any further questions?
[No verbal response.]
Senator Nelson. Charlie?
Mr. Crist. I'm good. Thank you.
Ms. Ferenc. Senator, may I make another comment about a
solution?
Senator Nelson. Please.
Ms. Ferenc. We talked about threats, and then there has
been some talk of solutions, and there's been some success
stories, and many of them seem to revolve around this notion of
public-private partnership. I have had the honor to sit on the
Travel and Tourism Advisory Board, and I know that there is
also the Transportation Advisory Board. This is all at the
Federal level. I believe Joe Lopano is in the audience from the
Tampa Bay International Airport. I believe he sits on that
advisory board at this time. And, of course, Brand USA is a
public-private partnership.
I've seen such amazing work done when the public sector and
the private sector come together in that intense and sustained
fashion, and that some of the problems that we're talking about
today, you know, we saw these issues come before the Travel and
Tourism Advisory Board, and the progress that we hope not to
give up on now that was made during that time, during long,
arduous battles between the private and the public sector, and
coming to good solutions for both sides, for security and for
increased travel, and many other issues that were brought up in
that way. Transportation is one that was brought up in the last
round and, of course, I'm sure is being discussed now in that
particular partnership.
But I think that these might be other issues that might be
brought before the Travel and Tourism Advisory Board itself. Is
climate change something that can be worked on there? Just the
value of the public-private partnerships at the Federal level
and at the State level, I think, is just truly amazing, and I
offer that as a part of the solutions, to not forget how
valuable they are.
Dr. Roffer. As a closing comment, I would like to remind
everyone on the panel and out in the audience that the true
economic engine in Florida is a healthy ecosystem, which comes
from clean air and clean water. That's the building block right
there, and the solution to pollution is absolutely not
dilution.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. Dr. Roffer, you had spoken--picking up on
that theme there about stopping the pollution with regard to
the Everglades--about fixing the plumbing and restoring the
ecosystems. We have been working for a long time on Everglades
restoration to stop or reverse what man had done over three-
quarters of a century, which was to completely reverse the
natural plumbing of the Everglades, which sent the water
southwest of Orlando as it moved slowly through the Kissimmee
chain of the lakes, as it went into a marshy Lake Okeechobee
after having come down a winding, meandering stream called the
Kissimmee River, and then slowly went through the marshes south
into the River of Grass, the Everglades.
All of that was changed in three-quarters of a century. The
Kissimmee River became a straight ditch, et cetera. You know
the situation. Turning on the plumbing and reversing that
requires sustained commitment from the Federal and the state
government. Now, unbelievably, last month, the South Florida
Water Management District threatened to pull out of the
independent scientific assessment of restoration progress
that's done every 2 years pursuant to Federal law.
I think some counties are addressing the problem head-on,
but it stops and starts with the effort to restore the
Everglades, and it's going to affect Floridians mightily. What
have you seen, Dr. Roffer, over the years on the ground--you're
out there with the fishermen--the need for restoration of the
Everglades?
Dr. Roffer. I see fish dying, an increased number of fish
kills, and I see water quality degrading very quickly, and our
fishing industry is hurting, even though the charter boat
captains won't admit that their catches are going down. I've
talked to many people, and finally you get Hell's Bay Boats
admitting publicly that they lost one-point-something million
dollars because they couldn't sell boats in the central part of
Florida.
People are getting very frustrated. They believe that the
fox is guarding the hen house, that some people in the sugar
industry and agriculture are affecting these people in
management and making them change their minds and opinions. And
pulling out of a science-based committee to make the water flow
is corruption, if you ask me. It may not be an actual dollar
corruption, but certainly it's a mental corruption, and there
might be money involved, but I'm not pointing fingers at this
point.
But, clearly, we need to get that flow to go back down as
fast as we possibly can. Every day you read about somebody--
``Well, there's a reason we can't''--you can do it if you want
to put your effort into it and going there.
So people are starting to get--the public is starting to
get more educated on the issue and starting to raise their
signs and their posters. You see it. People who get elected and
changes--if you get people--representatives--and not the ones
here--I know in central Florida--that wouldn't care anything
about environmental and water quality who all of a sudden
started putting environment and water quality on their web
pages and started to come to meetings.
So if the grass roots people are out there, I honestly
believe that the people, the grass root vote, will out-do the
political money coming from those spots. The public has to
raise their pitchforks, so to speak.
[Applause.]
Senator Nelson. We have had tremendous interest, and there
were a number of people who requested to testify here at this
hearing, and, obviously, we had to keep it within certain
limits, thus, the four witnesses that we have. But I want to
invite you for your testimony, if you will submit it, it will
become a part of the written record. And I declare that the
record will remain open for two weeks for additional members of
the Senate Commerce Committee to submit additional memorandums
and/or questions.
So thank you all for coming today. This has been terrific.
With that, the meeting is adjourned.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 2:56 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]
This page intentionally left blank.