275 



dividu£ds who filed protests. The United States Fish 

 and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, also 

 opposed the dredging and filling because it "would 

 have a dLstinctly harmful effect on the fish and wildlife 

 resources of Boca Ciega Bay." 



A public hearing was held in St. Petersburg in No- 

 vember, 1986, and on December 30, 1966, the District 

 Engineer at Jacksonville, Florida, Colonel Tabb, rec- 

 omnnended to his superiors that the application be de- 

 nied. He said that "The proposed work would have 

 no material adverse effect on navigation"^ but that: 



"Careful consideration has been given to the 

 general public interest in this case. The virtual- 

 ly unanimous opposition to the proposed work 

 as expressed in the protests which were re- 

 ceived and as exhaustively presented at the 

 public Jiearing have convinced me that approv- 

 al of the application would not be in the public 

 interest. The continued opposition of the U.S. 

 Fish & Wildlife Service despite efforts on the 

 part of the applicants to reduce the extent of 

 damage leads me to the conclusion that ap- 

 proval of the work would not be consistent with 

 the intent of Congress as expressed in the Fish 

 & Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended, 12 

 August 1958. Further, the opposition of the 

 State of Florida and of county authorities as 



«There was evidence both that it would aid navigation and that it 

 would obstruct navigation. There was similar evidence on pollu- 

 tion. 



