Bill Overview
Title: Little Manatee Wild and Scenic River Act
Description: This bill designates a specified segment of the Little Manatee River in Florida for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. The Department of the Interior shall complete a study of the Little Manatee River and submit the results to Congress.
Sponsors: Rep. Buchanan, Vern [R-FL-16]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by the designation of the Little Manatee River as a Wild and Scenic River
Estimated Size: 1500000
- The bill focuses on a specific river segment in Florida.
- Local residents who live near or engage in activities around the Little Manatee River will be directly affected.
- Environmental groups and nature enthusiasts are likely stakeholders due to the ecological significance of the designation.
- Local government and businesses, particularly those involved in tourism or outdoor recreation, will be impacted.
- The ecological and recreational policies tied to the river may have indirect effects on state-level governance and legislation.
Reasoning
- Since the policy affects a specific area in Florida, the focus will be on residents, businesses, and stakeholders in that region.
- The budget restriction implies a need to prioritize efforts on the most impacted groups, such as local communities and environmental groups.
- Given the ecological importance, environmentalists and nature enthusiasts are vital in assessing long-term policy impact.
- The policy could lead to both positive and negative effects on local tourism-dependent businesses, influencing their perception.
- Those not directly linked to the river might see minimal to low impacts, ensuring a diverse perspective in the interviews.
Simulated Interviews
Environmental Scientist (Wimauma, Florida)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this designation can positively impact the local ecosystem.
- Preservation efforts might restrict some recreational activities, but the ecological benefits outweigh these limitations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Owner of a Canoe Rental Business (Ruskin, Florida)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried that new regulations will limit access to the river, hurting my business.
- I support conservation efforts but I'm concerned about how they'll impact local tourism.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Outdoor Enthusiast (Tampa, Florida)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I enjoy the natural beauty and calmness of the river.
- I support protection but fear increased tourism and regulations could disrupt my enjoyment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Retired School Teacher (Florida)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm optimistic about this policy helping preserve our local environment.
- I hope it might also educate younger generations about the importance of conservation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
State Park Volunteer (Bradenton, Florida)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fully support the policy expansion as it ensures protected status for the wildlife habitats.
- The challenges will be in balancing accessibility with preservation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 4 |
Local Government Employee (St. Petersburg, Florida)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy requires careful monitoring to balance ecological preservation with community growth.
- I see potential for improved strategic environmental planning.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
University Student (Sarasota, Florida)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This study and subsequent designation could serve as a case study for my field.
- Conservation is crucial, but so is understanding local community dynamics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (B&B) (Clearwater, Florida)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- An increase in eco-tourism could boost my business, but any restrictions on access need careful consideration.
- Such conservation policies directly impact local business dynamics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Local Historian (Florida)
Age: 68 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- In my experience, these designations benefit both cultural and natural heritage.
- Documenting and protecting rivers like the Little Manatee is essential.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 5 |
State Policy Analyst (Tallahassee, Florida)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The study will provide critical data needed for future policy directions.
- Understanding the economic versus environmental aspects is key to developing balanced policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000 (Low: $800000, High: $1200000)
Year 2: $500000 (Low: $400000, High: $600000)
Year 3: $500000 (Low: $400000, High: $600000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The bill focuses on a specific river segment, limiting its geographic and regulatory reach.
- Federal government costs are associated mainly with the completion of an environmental study.
- Long-term effects could include ecological protection measures that aren't covered under the current cost estimates.
- Local stakeholder engagement will be key to successful implementation and reception.