Judges ruling protects Georgia's marsh
(PRWEB) July 10, 2007 -- The Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) failed to protect the marsh by improperly granting a buffer variance to a Brunswick developer.
That was the decision of Judge Gatto, a state administrative law judge, in a suit brought by the Altamaha Riverkeeper (ARK) and Satilla Riverkeeper (SRK). The ruling (Docket NO: OSAH-BNR-ES-0710689-60-GATTO) reverses the decision of EPD Director, Carol Couch. According to court documents, the developer Robert M. Torras, Sr. repeatedly disturbed the buffer and failed to stabilize the two-acre Aiken Island site which is being developed into the "Brunswick Landing Marina."
The judge ruled in ARK's (www.altamahariverkeeper.org) and SRK's favor saying, "The developer failed to provide the EPD Director with evidence that impacts to the buffer had been avoided or minimized. Therefore, the Court concludes that the EPD Director improperly granted a variance application."
ARK began documenting major problems on the site in 2004, including large areas of marshland fill. In the course of ARK's three-year investigation, ARK filed numerous complaints with the Coastal Resource Division of the Department of Natural Resources (CRD) and EPD officials. According to ARK, the regulatory agencies failed to establish the correct location of the jurisdiction line (where the marsh meets the upland). The improper delniation led to the developer bulldozing the marsh and dumping 126 truckloads of dirt into the marsh.
Altamaha Riverkeeper, James Holland says the suit could have been avoided. "The EPD and CRD are responsible for protecting our salt marshes and other natural resources but it took the judges' ruling to enforce the law. If the state regulators had enforced the law in the begining instead of playing politics, the environmental damage could have been avoided. "
Gordon Rogers, the Satilla Riverkeeper agrees. Rogers says " Beginning in 2004, the EPD regional staff made recommendations that strong enforcement action should be taken against the developer . This action would generally require the repair of environmental damage and result in financial penalties. Instead, the EPD leadership ignored the staff recommendation which led to continued environmental damage to waters of the state."
According to Don Stack, Council for the Petitioners, "This ruling demonstrates what the environmental community has been trying to prove: the state agencies responsible for environmental protection are more concerned with economic development than protection and preservation of our natural resources."
To read the court documet, Altamaha Riverkeeper and Satilla Riverkeeper v. Carol Couch, Director Environmental Protection Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, go to ARK's website: www.altamahariverkeeper.org
###
|
