A recent New York Times investigation questioned the price tag, environmental value and the politics of the deal with U.S. Sugar to restore the Everglades. But several environmental activists say the New York Times allowed itself to be used as a tool of Crist’s enemies.
[L]awyer David Guest, head of the Florida chapter of Earthjustice: “That’s not accurate. That’s not a correct representation,” he said. “You will not find a responsible environmentalist in the state of Florida that does not say that in a strong, clear voice.”
And here’s Manley Fuller, president of the Florida Wildlife Federation: “I think that it doesn’t paint a completely accurate picture,” said Fuller. “There was a suggestions that there was something nefarious. I think they sort of blew up the political intrigue angle on this more than they needed to.”
WUSF’s story (from whence the above excerpts came) gets into some mad inside-baseball stuff–soil analysis, U.S. Sugar vs. Florida Crystals, and tariffs? Blech–but nails the short of the whole debacle with this line: “Cave questioned whether environmentalists are rallying around Crist because they really want this land deal – and overlooking some of its shadier aspects.”