Dynamic Compaction in Florida

[Cindy]

In reference to some claims about Alachua Sink issues, I took a spare moment to see why a Geologist would bring up dynamic compaction use in Florida if it had "never" been used. I did a short search on the web and on the first page alone found three companies who have had projects in Florida and are continueing to provide this service in the state of Florida. See the web pages for Geo-Solutions, Geotechnical Engineering, Terrasystems-inc. I have found in my own life that the works "never" are best left out of letters. It's a big state. The words "never" are poorly chosen as were many other words on that letter. Just another public service anouncement from your friendly cave guide. Cindy Butler

[Genesis]

The specific claim Cindy was that the specific protocol to be used at that site was the dropping of concrete blocks from helicopters.

You do remember that, right? And that it was retracted? And that in the retraction, it was admitted that this particular technique - dropping concrete blocks from helicopters - had never been used in Florida - right? And you recall that it was admitted - under pressure once again - that there was in fact no plan to use dynamic compaction at that site.

You also remember why I challenged that claim, right?

It was due to the blatent stupidity of using that sort of method of accomplishing the goal - both in terms of cost and efficacy. Nobody in their right mind would use choppers for such a purpose.

If you recall, a central point of that debate began over the original claim that the store would collapse the cave due to direct soil loading from the structure's weight. That straw man was shot down as well.

You know how this went down before the crash. There were a serious of specious and outrageously false charges made about this development plan, all of which were of the form "imminent collapse/destruction of the cave system WILL occur if this thing is built - we must all stop WalMart!."

As each straw man was set up it was knocked down - and when the environmental arguments were dosposed of then the debate turned to people arguing that all the local store owners would be run out of town on a rail and we should oppose it for THAT reason.

Never mind that a central point of your argument against was runoff contamination of the cave. But gee, that letter you posted (just before deleting it, and then ultimately the entire thread going poof!) admitted that for the last couple of months the system has been undiveable due to...... runoff. With no development on the parcel.

Why is it that a clean debate - without twisting what's posted or just outright deleting one's words is so difficult?

And what's wrong with standing behind what you say and believe, instead of editing or outright removing it, then pretending that those words never left your fingers?

[Cindy]

You used the verbage in the letter Karl. It is obviously not true. SRWM is a organization that deals with construcion in this state, they are educated and experienced in these matters. You wrote claims that are completely off base and untrue, this makes the letter you wrote out of context and poorly done. That's not twisting things. There are several ways of doing dynamic compaction and I believe the dropping the weight from a helicopter was used as an example by the person who posted to demonstrate how much compaction is taking place on the soil. I didn't post that and there is nothing to refer to so it's a little difficult to say.

Interesting how when you talk about twisting facts it is done in such a way as to try to make me or anyone else involved in this effort to save this cave as being involved in outragious claims and wrong doing by you. It's simply not true and you are spreading misinformation based on preconcieved ideas that you have based solely on your dislike of me as a person. What you have written doesn't make the people involved look bad because it's public record what we have said and done.

No one involved in the project to save that cave has used any anti-wal mart sentiments. The fact remains WalMart is the company that is building over the cave. We would have said home depo if it had been that company or Target. The fact remains that WalMart is the company. We didn't go out looking to get into that action I can assure you.

If you had gone to the meetings you would know that. Again, reactions made by you from second hand information and little snipits of articles that you pick apart and regurgitate to fit your own personal fantasy about this situation. Frankly all the wording about what other people wrote is pretty silly because you don't have who wrote them or what was said. You take a lot out of context. When the real information if presented in the light of day the claims that are made are shown for what they really are, Nonsense.

The cave frequently has visability problems. If you knew the cave you would know that WalMart is building downstream of where we dive. Run off issues are alarming to the homeowners and the people living downstream of that area. Again you are making statements without any basis in fact of any kind. The flooding and cave damage issues have nothing to do with what you are talking about. Karl why don't you get some information that is based on anything other than your personal memory and predjudice against me before the next post. You did remind me of why I didn't ask you for help after my phone call with you. That was very usefull, Cindy

[JP]

is someone posting while pissed?

[Genesis]

Cindy, this is not personal and I don't "dislike" you. I don't know you at all, other than by what you've posted - we've never met. What you have done is accuse me - more than once - of things that are just flatly false, including being a "paid lobbyist". In THAT instance you knew that was a false charge, becuase you and I explicitly talked about this on the phone - and I made very clear to you that I engage in no paid activism on ANY issue.

I do think you've been co-opted and taken "ownership" of something without careful consideration, but this does not make you an awful person - just perhaps misguided.

As for the names and such, we have some trouble with going there, no? That complaint is a lot like an arsonist making a stink about there being no evidence after they've burned it all up.

This is, ultimately, about balance and false claims by those seeking to block the project. Or at least - it should be. Some of it spilled over onto my forum; the thread there went 4 pages and still is present, since nobody can tamper with it there...

Kelly led the charge there with the false claims, and one by one they were shot down. The raw jingoistic "no Walmart" stuff showed up there too and was in clear evidence.

I'm all for protecting the environment. I remain unconvinced that there is a real, demonstrable risk to the cave that is not addressable by dealing with the runoff issues - and those can be dealt with.

The arguments about the fuel station on site are specious. There WAS an issue with that 20 years ago, but no longer. Federal laws have changed on this and the current systems are basically bombproof.

The argument about vehicle runoff is even more specious; you've got I75 and 441 right there and more cars cross that road (and potentially drop things) than the parking lot will/does. Plus, they've planned to build a retention pond.

I've seen one well-reasoned argument for changes to the retention pond format proposed, and I support that. Focusing our argument on making sure the runoff issue is addressed would, IMHO, serve us well - it would position us as being truly concerned with the environment rather than trying to "stop all things Walmart".

The latter is almost certain to fail. Alachua can use the 400 jobs this store will bring, it can use the sales tax revenue (they already have a lol option taxes that make both gasoline and general goods significantly more expensive than surrounding counties) and they have an unemployment problem. In addition the county has a significant population of people who are on limited incomes and the reduction in their household costs that will come with the Supercenter is NOT trivial for those people.

Dismissing these factors when you're one of the people who "has theirs", especially when you don't even live in the county, is particularly offensive to me. As one of the people who "has his", I do remember what it was like when I DID NOT. Been there, done that, got the Tshirt.

If people want to try to kill the development with specious arguments they can take their best shot, of course. Just don't think you will do it without concerned citizens with an opposing point of view also speaking out.

[Kelly Jessop]

Kelly led the charge there with the false claims, and one by one they were shot down.

I know of no rule # such and such that prevents libel,but be cautious before you continue further!

I have "led" no charge, only in support of. No false claims that I am aware of, maybe less than optimal examples to express a point. And if it supports your ego to feel that you've shot me down, then that is fine, I have thick skin.

I am in support of Cindy, Jim, Drew, Buford, and many people who have worked in the background with the intent of preserving a cave system, something that is slowly becoming endangered as time progresses. I compliment these people who stand in the public spotlight and meet frustration over what they see as being right, not for personal profit.

[Genesis]

If the goal was preservation, you and the rest would have worked to get rid of Sonny's and the other development in the area already, supported work to eminent domain the entire area, turn it all into a zoned area where no development could take place, etc.

But - of course - you haven't done any of that.

Kelly, who posted the original thead over at Scubaforum? That would be the person who "led" with the issue there, yes?

Let me provide a direct cite:

I understand it is a practice when building a structure of this size to drop several ton blocks from a helicopter to crush karst terrain and fill it in with concrete.

Your words on 10/9/05 at 9:27:57 AM.

You were asked repeatedly to support that claim, and were unable to do it.

Now you're threatening me for pointing out what you actually said? I'm impressed!

I can keep going with the cites if you'd like - you accused WalMart of all sorts of things in that thread, including employing illegal aliens (which, by the way, was not true - a cleaning CONTRACTOR had hired them - WalMart wasn't making the hiring and firing decisions, so how would they know?)

This thread was "done over" quit extensively back in October. Its still there, for those who wish to read it.

As I stated then and will continue to, I have concerns about runoff management. The original hue and cry was all about WalMart trashing the cave by dropping concrete from choppers - when in fact the soil studies were, at the time the charge was made, already done, filed, looked up and pulled by another user on the forum.

Look, if you folks all really want to stop this, there is a legitimate way to do it. Get the county to eminent domain the land, rezone it to "recreational" or something similar preventing development (e.g. make it a park - a legitimate public purpose), pay off the current owner his fair due under the Constitution, and you're done. I've repeatedly pointed out that this is a perfectly legitimate response to this sort of concern and its developer-neutral.

But that sort of approach requires people to actually state what they're for, not what they're against. The current approach being taken is just like a political race in which one party puts forth a plan, and the other trashes it - but offers no alternative. That is a losing strategy, and meanwhile, as was just pointed out here, you have what appears to be a quarry right over near Little River. Where is the activity and screaming to stop THAT?

The parcel in question is zoned for the activity contemplated. If you want to stop it then get it rezoned, which is a taking, and compensate the landowner.

That's the RIGHT way to do this sort of thing in America.

From the other thread. I only want to bring up one point and didn't feel like starting a new thread about it, and since that post was locked, I figured I'd just toss it in here.

There have also been claims that allowing fuel sales on the property will inevitably lead to releases of gasoline into the groundwater - and thus fuel sales should be absolutely barred. This, as I’m certain you know, is simply not true. Modern fueling systems are designed with double-wall tanks and full-time electronic monitoring between the two tank walls. Intrusion into the center space is immediately indicated on an alarm panel, and disables the fuel pumps as well. There is simply no reason to believe that this sort of installation, properly conducted, results in any material risk of groundwater or soil contamination by petroleum products.

There is more to the potential risks to groundwater than catastrophic leaks of gasoline. I do know some states are phasing out the use of the additive MBTE [Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether], and I also know that the EPA is considering changing their specifications as to facilitiate the removal of a need for MBTE as an additive.

The problem is not just limited to leaking tanks. I've seen reports where a car accident that resulted in a 10 gallon gas leak contaminated 12 wells. I also know that just a few years ago in the town I lived in New Hampshire, they had to run public water to somewhere on the order of 50 homes in the vacinity of two gas stations. Their tanks were not leaking; the contamination came from the spillage that occurs everyday at self serve pumps. 1 drop of gasoline with the MBTE additive will contaminate 500 gallons of drinking water. There was enough spillage at those two gas stations to contaminate 50 wells in an area where the aquifer is 200 feet deep.

To believe that water contamination risks from gasoline additives rests soley in the hands of the storage tanks and pump systems is extremely naive, IMHO.

Feel free to google search for MBTE contamination and form your own opinions on the issue.

[Cave Ranger]

Oh!! Yes!!! I finally got it!!!

Lime Rock mining with, Dynamite, Earth Moving Dozers, Dumptrucks, and Backhoes all powered by Diesel fuel and operating within a 1 mile radius of the "Little River Cave" is acceptable.

Retail Mega-Store started by a lower middle class Oklahoma farmboy who started with nothing and created one of the top two or three American success stories in this century by offering lower prices, higher than average wages and frequented by lower income Families built next to "Alachua Sink" is totally unacceptable.

It took me awhile but it is all very clear to me know. I'm going to contact Walmart and see if they would like to purchase my property over by "Little River" and they could build there and avoid getting raked over the coals. I'll make a killing!!

Does anyone know if you can fit a Super Walmart on 5 acres??? No? Damn! I guess I'll have to call Walgreens then.

[Kelly Jessop]

Oh!! Yes!!! I finally got it!!!

Lime Rock mining with, Dynamite, Earth Moving Dozers, Dumptrucks, and Backhoes all powered by Diesel fuel and operating within a 1 mile radius of the "Little River Cave" is acceptable.

Retail Mega-Store started by a lower middle class Oklahoma farmboy who started with nothing and created one of the top two or three American success stories in this century by offering lower prices, higher than average wages and frequented by lower income Families built next to "Alachua Sink" is totally unacceptable.

It took me awhile but it is all very clear to me know. I'm going to contact Walmart and see if they would like to purchase my property over by "Little River" and they could build there and avoid getting raked over the coals. I'll make a killing!!

Does anyone know if you can fit a Super Walmart on 5 acres??? No? Damn! I guess I'll have to call Walgreens then.

This falls in the FWIW category,but several years ago I voiced a concern because it seemed that about the same time that the limerock pit became very active,visibility decreased at LR. But,this was at the same time we had the drought and the aquifer was at its lowest levels,and syphoning a lot of tannic water when it did flood. I asked a geologist who assured me that the water source for LR doesn't come from that area,and more likely wasn't affecting the system. I still have concern,and made mention of it again recently(on another forum). Another area that worries me is the expansion of the lime rock operation in Lafayette Co on Hwy 27. We all should have concern because with increased development there will be further encroachment on the caves we dive. Drive to Cow lately-I could fill a pick up truck full of the for sale signs of land.