The Economic Benefits of Preservation

Hello, Mayor Van:

As you probably know, I always appreciate reading your Mayor's Blog, and your post today, on its first anniversary, about our City's unique natural charm, was especially satisfying to me. As you point out, even folks that grew up here are beginning to understand the value of what we don't have here (Wal-Mart’s, nightlife, cineplex’s, etc.). However, I am surprised at one statement you made at the end of your post:

“However, in anticipation of that day and until we begin realizing the economic benefits of preserving the natural uniqueness of the community” . . .

Please indulge me, and take the time to read the following paragraph quoting Mr. Jim Fowler, (Yes, of Mutual of Omaha Fame) that I stumbled across on the Net a year or so ago, and found surprisingly insightful. He is responding to a reporter’s questions about Four Mile Run, a watershed and creek in his boyhood home of Fallschurch, VA.:

“I'm a little different from all those conservation types. I'm looking at one of these messages for the new century: why do we need open space? I don't want to save a creek for the creek's sake, but what's in it for human beings. I don't think we're going to save anything if we go around talking about saving plants and animals only; we have to translate that into what's in it for us. You have to explain very clearly to someone working for his or her family why all this open space is important to us. I was impressed that here's a person that's interested enough in Four Mile Run to want to do something, and are interested in the same things that I had been saying. That's why I went back to Falls Church when he contacted me. I consider myself a spokesperson for the natural world. That's really the challenge of this century, to develop spokespeople. Eventually we have to tie the saving of the natural world to our own public welfare. Almost all these hotspots around the world, most have been destroyed to the point where there is no wildlife and very little of the natural world left. How we treat the earth effects our social welfare and our national security. There is no country in the world that's more devastated from natural resources than Afghanistan. They're able to survive with goats and sheep, but they've pretty much destroyed everything else. That's true of all the other places where there's been tremendous social tragedy. Haiti looks like a bomb hit it. Somali is turning into a desert. Rwanda, you can hardly find a place to plant a potato, it's so crowded. It is tied very directly to our social welfare. The quicker we humans learn that saving open space and wildlife is critical to our welfare and quality of life, maybe we'll start thinking of doing something about it. That film really has the potential to bring it more home locally why it is important.”

The most powerful argument of all for saving open space is economics; in most states, tourism is the number two industry. And nature tourism is right up near the top. Preserving a river or a creek can bring a lot of revenue. The other thing is quality of life; if you have a place where you can go and have a picnic with your family, it doesn't matter if it's a recession or not, you can include that in your quality of life. [Bold print is mine]

“When all that's gone, like in Eastern Europe, you can't find a place to have a picnic or have the love of nature in your heart. That's why Four Mile Run and other creeks like it are so incredibly important; it's part of quality of life.” --------

Jim Fowler 10/09/01 Interview with Jeff Bagato
The Washington City Paper

That was back in 2001, and with the help of sophisticated bioengineering, and lots of money, Four Mile Run has been preserved, and is an ongoing center of outdoor recreation for the Fallschurch Area. Where does the money come from in times like this? Has it paid the community back yet? The answer to those questions, I do not know. But I do know that the best practice is to not allow the overdevelopment and destruction of the watershed to begin with, since remediation is always very costly.

I am thinking about St. George Island. We know the consequences of too much development, especially on septic tanks, but we can't seem to muster the political will to say "no".

In contrary to your assertion today, it is my view, that in the City of Apalachicola, we are already reaping the benefits, tangible and non-tangible, of not having over developed the waterfront YET; as noted in your quoted comments of visitors, and the Chamber of Commerce's reports that we have not, in terms of bed tax, seen a slump in visitors. We wish they would spend more, yes; but in these times, visitor and residents alike, yearn more than ever, for the simple, natural beauty of the River and Bay, which is what Apalachicola has always represented. I had an opportunity to visit Panama City Beach in late March and April in the height of Spring Break Season, and I can tell you that the most prevalent sign in front of establishments stated "YES, WE ARE OPEN", because the overall appearance there was like that of a ghost town. Similarly, many, many, beachfront addresses on the Cape that I canvassed for the Census in April, had obviously not been rented since November, as evidenced by the dry-rotted telephone directories lying neglected at the front entryways.

I believe our goal in Apalachicola should not be a fast recovery to the "Boom" levels seen in 1995 through 2004, but a slow and steady rise in year-round quality of living and opportunity for all of our citizens, not just property owners. People who own property here and mostly live elsewhere while it stands vacant, pay large tax bills, yes; but they do not significantly contribute to the fabric of the community, and overall, do not contribute to the local economy to the same extent as their neighbors who are full-time residents. Perhaps we can broaden our appeal to not just vacation visitors, but to environmental educational retreats (the FSU Coastal and Marine Lab and the Buffer Preserve and in Gulf County get an amazing amount of use by out-of-area visitors), and recreational rehabilitation (nationally, we are going to be seeing a wave of YOUNG Vets with disabilities that will be looking for outdoor recreational challenges that address their needs), and there may more skilled job creation in those areas. Better paying jobs may lead to more year-round residents. I also feel that despite our current budget crunch, your intelligent leadership, along with your staff, is getting us there. If we step cautiously, protecting our natural resources, I believe we can find ways to capitalize even more specifically on our God-given natural assets, and preserve them.

In addition, as the 2009 Hurricane season begins, I would be remiss not to point out something that I learned from an April 2009 Florida Forever Report titled the Economic Benefits of Land Conservation: Florida’s coastal resources were estimated to provide, on average, more than $11 billion a year in storm protection services. Coastal wetlands can reduce the damaging effects of hurricanes on coastal communities by functioning as valuable, self-maintaining ‘‘horizontal levees’’ for storm protection. They also provide a host of other ecosystem services that “vertical levees” (i.e., engineered structures) do not. Their conservation and restoration are extremely cost-effective strategies that have enormous economic benefits for society.

Considering Apalachicola's vulnerable location, this would certainly have to be considered as one of our not-so-intangible benefits. I have attached the PDF of the report, if you are interested. It is not too lengthy.

Thank you, as always, for your sincere and unselfish service. Let's have a chat 'n' chew sometime soon. I have a couple of ideas to feel you out about.

Best regards to you and Gail,
Robin