Mark Woods: An idea for an addition to America's Best Idea — Florida Springs National Park

Among all the crazy Florida news this year: We came close to a rezoning change that would have allowed an out-of-state company to build a huge gas station above a serpentine cave leading to the largest and deepest freshwater spring in the world — Wakulla Springs.

It’s bad enough when we’re willing to risk damaging Florida’s unique natural resources for another subdivision, strip mall or theme park. But another gas station?

The good news: When hundreds of citizens showed up for a Wakulla County Commission meeting — coverage described it as the largest turnout anyone could remember — plans were delayed and possibly derailed.

But this was the latest of a long history of leaders being tempted to put a few new bucks ahead of Old Florida (which, as it exists, has tremendous economic value).

It’s worth repeating and thinking about this fact: Florida has the largest concentration of freshwater springs on the planet.

Perhaps partly because of that abundance — we have hundreds of springs, pumping billions of water a day, what’s the big deal if we lose one here and there? — in a relatively short historical time we’ve managed to tarnish a feature of the state that should be viewed as a national treasure, the kind you’d find in a national park.

Which leads me to an idea.

Each year when the National Park Service celebrates another birthday — the Organic Act of 1916 was signed by President Woodrow Wilson on Aug. 25 — I use it as an excuse to write another column about our national parks.

Some years I’ve written about the existing NPS sites in our backyard. This year I’d like to throw out an idea for a new national park in our state: Florida Springs National Park.

Yellowstone was the world’s first national park, established in 1872. America has since deemed 62 other parks worthy of the ultimate NPS designation. (A few I question, but most seem quite worthy.) For you trivia buffs, California has nine, followed by Alaska with eight, Utah with five and Colorado with four. Florida has three, all in the southernmost part of the state: Everglades, Biscayne and Dry Tortugas.

Florida Springs National Park could be our fourth.

I am hardly the first person to come up with this idea as an addition to what Wallace Stegner, then Ken Burns, called "America's Best Idea."

Robert Knight, director of the Florida Springs Institute, has spent several years pitching a “Great Springs and Rivers National Park.”

It’s a fitting name. Our 33 first-magnitude springs (earning that status by discharging at least 100 cubic feet of water a second) aren’t just isolated wonders. They are the lifeblood of a North Florida watershed that — as Knight noted in op-eds he wrote for newspapers around the state — “rivals the Everglades in size and magnificence," with hundreds of artesian springs "arranged like beautiful blue beads" along once pristine rivers.

He said that recent state initiatives aren’t enough to restore the springs to their former glory, when they were compared to the greatest hydrological wonders of North America.

“Notwithstanding the state’s press releases, the data and our own eyes don’t lie — many of Florida’s most precious springs are dying,” he wrote.

He suggested that, like the Everglades, Florida’s springs need the protection and preservation that comes with being a national park.

A long way from a national park

Reached by phone a few days before the National Park System celebrated its 107th birthday, Knight said he’s backed off pushing for a new national park. It’s not that he doesn’t believe in the idea anymore. He’s been told that, in today’s political climate, the headwinds are too strong.

So they’re now looking at creating a National Heritage Area.

That’s a designation first established by President Ronald Reagan in 1984, when he signed a bill creating the Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Area. There now are 62 NHAs. They are not National Park Service sites.

It’s not a bad step. But it’s a long way from a national park.

There’s no question that, particularly today, it is a major undertaking to achieve national park status.

National monuments — one of more than a dozen types of NPS sites — can be created with the stroke of a presidential pen. But to achieve the “national park” designation requires an act of Congress. And that typically requires a member of Congress from the state where the park is located to be a champion. And community support. And the ability to get past all kinds of hurdles, both near and far.

A year ago I wrote about the years of efforts in Georgia to take Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park in Macon and elevate it to national park status. At the time, it felt like those efforts were about to pay off and push it across the finish line, making Ocmulgee Mounds National Park the first in the state with that status. A year later, that still hasn’t happened.

And that’s a place with land that has been a part of the National Park System since the Great Depression.

That isn’t the case with a potential Florida Springs National Park.

But we do have a lot of existing public land in North Florida — much of it federal land in national forests.

National forests aren’t managed by the Department of the Interior and the National Park Service. They fall under the Department of Agriculture umbrella. But the key is that we already have these large swaths of land. With 574,000 acres, Apalachicola National Forest is more than 10 times the size of Acadia National Park. Ocala National Forest is another 430,000 acres.

“To protect the springs, you have to protect the springshed, which is generally 1,000 times bigger than the spring itself,” Knight said. “That’s the good thing about Ocala National Forest. The springs in that forest are protected from fertilizer.”

The Suwanee River basin is another story. Knight says it has been destroyed, that it’s become a shadow of its former self. But he also gives reason for hope for all of our springs.

“As a scientist, I know all these springs can come back to health with proper protection,” he said. “If we just did what we need to do, it wouldn’t take long at all to have pristine springs again.”

National and State Parks

Many of our most prominent springs are in state parks. This doesn’t have to be a barrier to a Florida Springs National Park. One of my favorite national parks is Redwood — or as it’s officially known, Redwood National and State Parks.

It has this name because, in the middle of the national park, there are state parks. They were there before the national park was established in 1968. And they remain there now, managed by California State Parks.

When my parents took me to the Redwoods as a kid, we camped at Prairie Creek State Park. When I went back to Redwood as a parent for (shameless plug alert) what became the prologue in “Lassoing the Sun: A Year in America’s National Parks,” we camped among the towering trees in Jedediah Smith State Park.

It’s a federal-state collaboration that works quite well. And it’s possible to envision something like that being done here, perhaps with Silver Springs State Park and Ocala National Forest, or Wakulla Springs State Park and Apalachicola National Forest.

But never mind me picturing a Florida Springs National Park.

'Nationally significant'

Fran Mainella, a former director of the National Park Service and Florida State Parks, has talked about the idea. Last year when she was a guest on a podcast (“The Nature of Florida”), host Oscar Corral asked her if she thought creating a national park built around our spings was a pipe dream.

“No, I do not think it’s a pipe dream,” she said. “Knowing our springs, they’re so significant, so unique — which is all part of the criteria.”

According to the National Park Service, to even be considered as a potential new national park, a place needs to be considered “nationally significant.” And to be considered nationally significant, it must meet four standards.

∎ it is an outstanding example of a particular type of resource.

∎ it possesses exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the natural or cultural themes of our nation’s heritage.

∎ it offers superlative opportunities for recreation for public use and enjoyment, or for scientific study.

∎ it retains a high degree of integrity as a true, accurate, and relatively unspoiled example of the resource

Check, check, check and — if we protect and restore our springs — check.

While the criteria for a new national park goes beyond that, the key question basically comes back to: Will it preserve a piece of America that the existing park system doesn’t already preserve?

One of the current 63 is devoted to springs (Hot Springs National Park in Arkansas) and others include some springs. But there isn’t another national park in America with springs quite like we have here in Florida. Because there isn’t another place in the world with springs quite like we have here in Florida.

This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: Florida's springs worthy of becoming national park