Mormon Newsroom updated its article about Deseret Cattle and Citrus in central Florida to include information about the planned development for the area. At least they're being slightly more transparent about how the "conservation" they preach about is just an attempt to make their environmental degradation more palatable. If anyone is interested, I have some commentary on the article (found here: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-ranch-balances-agriculture-conservation-central-florida).

The ranch "was working to protect Florida’s ecosystem." Not likely. Cattle compact soil, destroy vegetation, and add nitrates which can change the nutrient composition, thus allowing invasives to outcompete native species, or lead to eutrophication and lowered levels of dissolved oxygen in aquatic systems.

The ranch "[operates] in harmony with the land and natural systems, whether in managing cattle and citrus or in protecting deer, turkey, quail, alligators, cypress trees and wading bird habitat." Cattle push out native species - especially herbivores with a similar niche. Even though deer aren't exactly under threat of extinction or extirpation, a change in grazing mammals translates into changes in vegetation and resource partitioning, which adds ecological strains and potentially decreases biodiversity and stability.

"We try to do what's right for the environment. Sometimes that means going above and beyond what's required by regulation or law." Doubtful. Even assuming this is true (which, to be fair, is possible because their irrigation methods are better than most), cattle farming is inherently resource exhaustive, while other forms of agriculture at least have the potential of promoting grassland or seasonal wetlands.

"Because of the ranch’s scale, it can employ specialists such as a natural resource manager and a full-time wildlife biologist." Normally I'd question the integrity of the specialists, since I've seen several instances of projects with large financial or political implications deliberately being overlooked, but it seems like there's at least a fairly comprehensive catalog of species found there. One of which, the article notes, is the wood stork. The wood stork is a threatened species whose decline is due to a number of things, two of which are fragmentation of wetland habitat (such as through excessive ranching or development) and resource loss due to changes in water regimes. The latter can be partly attributed to the ranch's "water conservation methods" such as constructing storm-water retention ponds "to capture and naturally treat water before it enters the St. Johns River." While it's true that wetlands provide ecological functions such as cleaning agricultural runoff, creating artificial bodies of water mandates diverting water from somewhere else, interrupting patterns of sediment deposition, etc. As for irrigation, methods such as the ranch's micro-jet irrigation is actually great! I'd be interested in knowing the statistics on what percentage of that water is from groundwater versus the Taylor Creek Reservoir. Regardless, cattle are one of the worst offenders when it comes to water use, and the best way to conserve water through cattle ranching would be to simply... not. A shift away from ranching and more toward exclusively plant agriculture would be a definitive improvement.

Even if the ranch were perfectly sustainable, with an abundance of resources, biodiversity, and habitat connectivity, the plan to develop the area runs completely contrary to that vision. "Deseret’s commitment to wise stewardship includes looking decades into the future to plan for growth in one of the fastest growing regions of the U.S. More than 10 million people will call central Florida home by 2080." Anyone with even a vague grasp of environmental stewardship should understand that, while housing is necessary, it should be provided through infield development. Sprinkling in fluff about how the development will result in "vibrant communities that address the environment and improve quality of life" doesn't better the situation.

The article itself is so counterproductive that I'm not entirely certain what to make of it. I know it's not new but, like I said, it's been updated recently. Thoughts?

President Newsroom is openly talking about 2080 and no Second Coming in sight?

Jesus must be so pissed.

(Not to mention all the oldsters who were promised in their PB that they'd see Christ's Return in the flesh.)

There goes my school lunch money.

I've had relatives associated with the ranch for the entire time LDS Inc has owned it. It is apparently a very well run operation. It gets conservation and production awards, writeups in trade journals, visits from foreign ag representatives. They've been running the ranch for 60ish years, and it was a cattle operation before they bought it, so they do appear to be running it sustainably.

Also, central Florida development authorities have high environmental standards for new housing development (unlike Utah!) and they have forced Farmland Reserve to do the right thing. They were required to provide more wetland protection and set-aside, and more park land than what they originally proposed.

I'm glad to hear that! The ranch itself certainly seems far better than average in several areas, although the development is worrying. Also I'm just always very skeptical of this sort of thing, since my area has a large issue at the moment with land development proposals in agricultural areas that are being accepted with faulty Environmental Impact Assessments.

a prophet-making venture.