Fresno Audubon Blog

How easily we have come to kill ancient living beings in the name of green energy...

2011-12-23T00:17:00.000-08:00

... and this time even in the name of green energy! Only fools would object to such wanton destruction in the name of sustainable climate friendly energy projects, we are told. Be a fool, feel for the silent ancient Mojave yucca, and weep with me...

via youtube.com

A BrightSource contractor working on the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating Station in California's Mojave Desert kills a Mojave yucca (Yucca schidigera) that was likely between 400-800 years old.

This video is posted under Fair Use provisions of US copyright laws, as a means of exposing activities by BrightSource that contravene that company's agreements and obligations to protect the fragile desert wildlife on the site it is now bulldozing.

The BLM recently reported that they expect as many as 140-150 tortoises to be found on the 4,000-acre site. If BrightSource is breaking its promises to transplant and preserve ancient desert plants, how can we trust what they're doing with the tortoises?

Imagine if this were a more charismatic plant, say a similar-aged Redwood or Sequoia tree - would you weep then? Would you be outraged?

Posted via email from a leaf warbler's gleanings

Don't Drink the Water... for this too is California!

2011-10-12T15:07:00.001-07:00

via fresnobee.com

This is not a scenario from some generic developing third world banana republic where environmental regulation is lax and the government/economy is weak and there is simply no wherewithal to provide safe drinking water to the public.

This is here in the central valley of California. In some of the richest most productive agricultural areas of the world, home to some of the world's richest farmers (or agriculture corporations), in an American state whose economy rivals some of the richest nations in the world.

This is not the third world. Or is it?

While the US is plunging towards third-world-dom, lead by a priceless bunch of narrow-minded rightwing (that includes both political parties) "leaders", the central valley of California has probably always had an air of the third world about it. My own first inklings of the economic disparities and deprivations hidden underneath America's shiny global facade came from reading Steinbeck's epic "Grapes of Wrath", much of which is set right here in the valley. That book, along with "East of Eden" (both of which I devoured while in college in Bombay) also gave me my first new mental images of California that diverged from the more romantic ones perpetuated through Hollywood's glamour on the one hand, and Ansel Adams' Yosemite landscapes on the other. Here in this valley, sandwiched between those two more picturesque, salubrious California dreamlands, lies a third world that tells many a different tale: of massive land transformation and farm-worker exploitation; of green revolutions and pesticides; of laser-leveled land crisscrossed by massive canals and shrinking aquifers; of dried up prehistoric swamps and over-irrigated farmland abandoned to leaching selenium; of Steinbeck's Okies and today's illegal aliens; of big agribusiness and industrial animal farms; of sprawling suburbs and highways; of endangered species and disappearing ecosystems; of exotic invasive species (the other "illegal aliens") and designer GMOs; of weed and meth and gangs and prisons; of vineyards and fruit orchards and nut farms overflowing with riches; of migrant farmworkers dying of dehydration and schools where feeding the malnourished children must take precedence over any "education"; of some of the nation's foulest air and dirtiest water. This too is California.

That last item on litany above, Water, is the subject of a special investigative series by Mark Grossi, currently being published by the Fresno Bee under the headline "Don't Drink the Water"! Now that's a standard warning I'm is used to hearing when talking about travel to India or Mexico, or other developing countries. The Bee is telling us local residents here in this rich, poor, messed up valley: Don't Drink the Water! At least read the special report first, and find out what cocktail may be flowing out of your faucet.

Don't Drink the Water!

Welcome to California. This is indeed the third world within the first.

Posted via email from a leaf warbler's gleanings

To be a bird, oh to keep on singing, in a noisy urbanizing world

2011-07-28T23:55:00.000-07:00

[Crossposted at Reconciliation Ecology, and A leaf warbler's gleanings]

Among the many ways we are transforming the planet and its habitats for other species, one that is only now receiving some attention is that os sensory pollution. This is when we pollute the environment in such ways as to interfere with the sensory perception and communication systems of animals - i.e., dull their senses in potentially important ways. While much attention has been paid—and justly so, ever since Rachel Carson's clarion call—to the wide variety of chemical pollutants we've introduced into habitats all over the world, we haven't really paid much attention to the sensory effluvia that come in the wake of modern civilization. Two common ways we mess up the sensory systems of animals are by interfering with the visual and auditory channels of communication: e.g., increasing turbidity in water makes it difficult for fish to see and communicate with each other using visual signals (color patterns, changes to and movements thereof); increasing noise from our cacophonous machinery on land and in water makes it difficult for animals to talk to each other. We are a flashy, noisy, brash, uncouth, species indeed! No consideration for the sensibilities of our planet-mates.

But that may be changing. Sensory pollution is getting increasing attention from biologists in recent years, as exemplified by a symposium on the topic at Behavior 2011, the joint meeting of the Animal Behavior Society and the International Ethological Conference, being held at Indiana University this week. I wish I had been able to attend, especially for this symposium, because I've been thinking about and trying to study the effects of urban noise on bird song and behavior for some years now. Although I couldn't travel to the meeting, I'm happy that my lab was well represented - see below!

After co-authoring the first comprehensive review of urban bioacoustics (i.e., the study of how animals use sound; in cities), then moving to Fresno with this job, actually measuring the effects in wild birds, and testing some of the theoretical ideas outlined in our review was one of my first priorities. Easier said than done, though - especially for a naive faculty member coming to grips with the nature of teaching and the student body at an institution like CSU-Fresno! Between my increasingly heavy and chaotic teaching load, and several unreliable graduate students, it became rather a stop-start project - more stop than start for several years. That all changed a year ago, however, when two eager new graduate students entered my lab, already interested in birdsong and very keen to tackle the subject of urban noise. Over the past year, Jenny Phillips and Pedro Garcia have been studying the effects of noise on the songs of two species (seen above) that occur in urban and rural areas around here: the White-crowned Sparrow, winter visitor to the valley from northern breeding grounds, and the House Finch, year round resident in these parts. An interesting opportunity to compare what noise pollution does to the songs and singing behavior of two rather different species: one migratory, the other sedentary, one singing to claim territory and warn competitors, the other warbling in the spring to attract mates!

Today, Jenny and Pedro presented the first results from their research as a poster at Behavior 2011. Having helped them analyze their data and design the poster over the past few days, I've been something of an anxious parent this week, wondering how they are doing out there on their own, even as I followed the #behav11 hashtag on twitter to see what I was missing! A short while ago, a tweet (of course) informed me that "...they did a gr8 job!!" Phew! Not that I expected anything less...

If you, like me, missed the whole meeting, allow me to share their poster here, starting with this abstract:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EFFECTS OF URBAN NOISE ON SONG STRUCTURE IN A SEDENTARY AND A MIGRATORY BIRD SPECIES

Jenny Phillips, Pedro Garcia, Lauryn Moles & Madhusudan Katti

California State University, Fresno, United States

Many animal species are dependent upon vocal communication to mate and defend territories. Selection will favor individuals that produce vocalizations that transmit best in their environments. The sensory drive concept suggests that environmental conditions, such as ambient sound, will influence the evolution of vocal behavior. Thus, background noise levels may have a profound effect on communication. We study how urban noise affects the cultural evolution of birdsong in two species: the migratory white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys gambelii) and the sedentary house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus). These two species are ideal study organisms because they each have one song type, are territorial, and are easy to identify. We recorded songs and ambient noise concurrently across the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area (FCMA) and in outlying rural areas for comparative analysis of acoustic properties, in particular the frequency and temporal structure of songs. Because song influences fitness via phenotypic and genotypic mate quality, understanding how song changes in an urban environment may allow us to predict species adaptability in a changing world.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

And here is the full poster - leave a comment if you have any thoughts on this ongoing study:

Phillips_et_al-ABS2011-Poster.pdf Download this file

Posted via email from a leaf warbler's gleanings

Revisit FCBOS Friant Ranch Meetings

2011-06-17T11:55:00.000-07:00

Fresno County Board of Supervisors-Friant Ranch Day 1, 12-07-2010 by Fresno Audubon

Fresno County Board of Supervisors-Friant Ranch Day 2, 2-01-2011 by Fresno Audubon

Barn Owl Nest Boxes Now Available!

2011-06-17T11:15:00.000-07:00

Barn owl nest boxes for natural pest management now available from Fresno Audubon! Available while supplies last. Matt-559.715.2473

What: Barn Owl Nest Box Suggested Donation $25/box Cash, Check, Credit

When: Pickup Fridays through July starting 6/24/11 9am-Noon

Where: Discovery Center 1937 North Winery Avenue Fresno, CA 93703

Friends of Lost Lake Park Advocate for EIR to Fresno BOS

2011-05-31T17:10:00.000-07:00

Fresno County Board of Supervisors Lost Lake Park Master Plan EIR 5.24.11 by mwilkes512

Fresno Audubon Supports LWCF

2011-05-26T15:06:00.001-07:00

LWCF Costa Thank You Letter_FINAL 5.24.11

Lost Lake Master Plan Review

2011-05-16T16:21:00.000-07:00

2011 - 05-15-11 - Analysis of the 04-18-11 LLPMP

From Silent Spring to Silent Night: A Tale of Toads and Men

2011-05-04T12:05:00.000-07:00

As the semester winds down here at Fresno State, the Tri Beta Biology Club has a couple more special treats for us. For this week's Biology Colloquium, we bring you a real role model in Dr. Tyrone Hayes, an African American field biologist (yes, they exist, despite the stereotype) who became one of the youngest Full Professors at the University of California Berkeley. He will share his groundbreaking (and corporation-shaking) research on the effects of the herbicide Atrazine on amphibians, a taxon that has been in global decline for some time now, with pesticides hammering some of the nails in their collective coffin. Here's an excerpt about Dr. Hayes' work from the PBS documentary Frogs: The Thin Green Line:

And if that isn't enough to grab your interest, this might:

Here are details of the colloquium:

Tri Beta Biology Club presents:

FROM SILENT SPRING TO SILENT NIGHT: A TALE OF TOADS AND MEN

Dr. Tyrone Hayes

Professor of Integrative Biology

University of Californa, Berkeley

on Friday, May 6, 2011

at 3:00 PM in AG 109 (download maps here)

The herbicide, atrazine, is a potent endocrine disruptor. My laboratory’s studies in amphibians have shown that atrazine both demasculinizes and feminizes exposed males at levels as low as 0.1 ppb. Our previous worked examined morphological effects, including the loss of androgen-dependent sexually dimorphic features, and the development of estrogen-dependent features in exposed males. These findings are consistent with an induction of aromatase, resulting in decreased androgen secretion and inappropriate estrogen synthesis and secretion. Our ongoing studies focus on behavioral effects in male frogs exposed throughout life and demonstrate both the loss of male reproductive behavior and the induction of female-typical behavior in exposed males. These data on amphibians and the proposed mechanism are consistent with findings across vertebrate classes, including humans, and raise concern about the role of this common environmental contaminant in reproductive hormone-dependent cancers and declining fertility in humans.

Call the Biology department (559•278•2001) for more information. You can also download the flyer here.

Posted via email from a leaf warbler's gleanings

2011-04-26T16:15:00.000-07:00

Vote for Fresno Audubon on Wednesday June 29, 2011

in the Toyota 100 Cars for Good Program

Remind Me as the Date Approaches

Toyota’s 100 Cars for Good program will award 100 vehicles over the course of 100 days to 100 deserving nonprofit organizations based on votes from the public. A total of 500 finalists were selected based on their application as reviewed by an independent panel of judges who are experts in the fields of philanthropy and social responsibility. They are vying for the opportunity to win a new Toyota vehicle. Winning organizations will use the vehicles to help expand their reach and mission within the community.

Earth Day 2011: Lost Lake Park Clean-Up!

2011-04-25T18:14:00.000-07:00

Lost Lake Park, a unique and valued natural resource for Fresno County communities, has fallen into severe disrepair as maintenance budgets are defunded and Fresno County considers alternative operation models.

Basic necessities at the Park are difficult to meet without community involvement and support and so this Earth Day Fresno Audubon sponsored a Lost Lake clean-up in partnership with the County of Fresno, the California Conservation Corps, and Friends of Lost Lake Park.

Volunteers removed graffiti from rocks, painted bathrooms and kiosks, and performed light maintenance in the children's play area. Despite flooded conditions and ice cold water, families barbecued, cyclists prepared for a ride, and some even, posted on submerged picnic tables, tried their luck at catching a meal from the river.

Fresno Audubon values and supports Lost Lake Park as an open public space for community members to engage in a natural outdoor environment. Lost Lake Park provides many Fresno County communities the opportunity to connect with nature and observe and be inspired by wildlife.

Volunteer workdays will continue at the park.
Watch fresnoaudubon.org for details.

Sorry Desert Tortoise. No room for you in Google's Earth Day Paradise.

2011-04-22T15:43:00.000-07:00

Today is Earth Day, a once grassroots movement seeking to remind people to pay attention to the earth which has now grown to become a global event apparently "celebrated" by over a billion people - much of it courtesy of your neighborhood multinational corporations who have co-opted the day to urge you to buy more products at special discounts to "celebrate Earth Day". They must mean "celebrate our collective destruction of this earth for profit and a few fun consumer products and gadgets". Why, instead of actually going out and planting a tree today, you can enjoy playing Lorax Garden" on your iPhone! Download for free today!! After all, why bother getting your hands dirty in an actual garden when you can get virtual karma playing it on your smartphone. Surely that's what the Lorax wanted us to do, no?

As part of these corporate celebrations of the once-grassroots movement, Google sports this image of an impossibly idyllic edenic paradise as their doodle for the day:

Lovely, isn't it? Pandas and penguins and tigers living in harmony with the corporate logo tastefully hidden amid the verdant scenery!

Unfortunately, Google's vision of paradise has no room for the Desert Tortoise, the Joshua Tree, or the ancient mesquites and all the other poor denizens of the Mojave Desert, just a few hundred miles outside Google's corporate office windows. You see, just last week, Google upped their investment in the "green" solar energy company Brightsource, pouring in another $168 million to support that company's massive solar projects in the Mojave Desert. Never mind that the project is already killing endangered tortoises, destroying their habitat along with that of all the other denizens of the Mojave's unique biodiversity. And never mind that this kind of concentrated power generation with associated transmission costs and losses is an outdated model for this century. After all, combating global warming by switching to non-fossil-fuel energy sources is the be-all and end-all of environmental movements these days, we are told. By none other than the Atlantic's Alexis Madrigal, who thinks conserving land is just "boring" compared to using exciting new "green" technologies to destroy habitats! This massive solar power generation technology is so exciting, it seems, that even Science Friday invited Madrigal to celebrate it on their Earth Day broadcast - where Ira Flatow forgot to ask any questions about the ecological impact of putting massive solar plants in the Mojave:

via sciencefriday.com

What's doubly sad this Earth Day is that Madrigal is not alone. Too many environmentalist nonprofits and activists have bought into this model of green technology. One that merely substitutes one kind of power generation for another "greener" one without questioning the whole model! Why must we generate power at such massive scales, entailing land degradation, transmission losses, and a host of other problems, rather than developing smaller-scale technologies for distributed power generation from rooftops and parking lots? Whatever happened to "small is beautiful"? And why not put larger plants, if they're needed, in brownfields and other land that we've already severely degraded through our other uses instead of bulldozing tortoise habitat? After all, there is plenty of such land within California's urban/agriculture matrix which already covers more of the state than the remaining desert patches. If Germany, not known for its bright sun, can generate a significant amount of its power from rooftops in a distributed model, why must the US have to destroy remnant habitats still containing biodiversity? And why is Google, a company once at the cutting edge of innovation, with a motto "don't be evil", a supposed champion of the open-source internet as a force for democracy, i.e., distributed power, now investing in concentrated large-scale power projects mired in the old models of centralized production and distribution?!

Why aren't more environmental groups raising these questions? Why is it left to a handful of "useful idiots" like Chris Clarke and Solar Done Right?

More importantly, why are we not asking the more fundamental question: WHY ON EARTH DO WE NEED TO KEEP USING SO MUCH DAMN ENERGY??!! Why can't we cut down on the energy we currently waste, become more efficient, and work on reducing our massive ecological footprint by using less power-hungry products?

Oh, I forgot... how can we ask these questions, when the corporations are dangling all that shiny new magical technology in front of us all the time? Bright shiny smart phones where we can go play the Lorax game... what were you going on about the environment for, mate?

Sorry Lorax. Sorry Desert Tortoise. Sorry Mesquite. And Sorry Earth. We've sold you all out for a few shiny baubles. Happy Earth Day.

Measure would exempt water projects from key law

2011-04-19T21:45:00.000-07:00

From the Fresno Bee:

By Michael Doyle / Bee Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Central Valley water projects would be exempt from a key environmental law under a controversial measure introduced by rural California lawmakers.

The bill authored by freshman Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Atwater, would permit water projects to be built without completing the federal environmental studies that have been required since 1970. The bill also would make it harder to challenge projects in court.

Full article

Fresno County considers outsourcing park care

2011-04-18T06:02:00.000-07:00

Outside groups recruited as county continues to struggle with budget shortfalls.

Posted at 10:25 PM on Sunday, Apr. 17, 2011

By Kurtis Alexander / The Fresno Bee

Fresno County leaders have begun recruiting outside groups to help run a public park system wracked by budget cuts.

Plans for the Table Mountain Indian tribe to operate Lost Lake Park are back on the table -- after falling prey to controversy two years ago -- and local businesses such as Sun-Maid Growers of California may be asked to help with maintenance at other parks.

Full Article

Good article describing how we are killing nature's rodent control by using rat poisons.

2011-04-17T13:35:00.000-07:00

Rat poisons infiltrate wild food chains

By Tom Knudson / The Sacramento Bee

Outside Palm Desert, a young bobcat dies mysteriously at a nature preserve. South of Nevada City, a farmer finds an owl dead near his decoy shed. In San Rafael, a red-shouldered hawk bleeds heavily from its mouth and nose before succumbing at an animal care center.
Each of those incidents shares a link to a widely used toxin that is turning up at dangerous levels in wildlife across California: rat poison.
Over the years, rat poison has spared state residents untold filth and disease. But a new generation of highly toxic, long-lasting poisons is killing not only rats, mice and ground squirrels, but whatever feeds on them, too.
As a result, toxins are rippling outward from warehouses to woodlands, from golf courses and housing complexes to marshes and nature sanctuaries.
In California, the victims include bobcats, barn owls, red-tailed hawks, coyotes, kit foxes, kestrels and scores of other predators and scavengers.
"Rodenticides are the new DDT," said Maggie Sergio, director of advocacy at WildCare, a Bay Area wildlife rehabilitation center that has responded to dozens of poisoning cases. "It is an emergency, an environmental disaster. We are killing nature's own rodent control."
Full article

Nest Box Construction with Youth

2011-04-11T12:45:00.000-07:00

Fresno Audubon Builds Community and Conservation Awareness: A Day Constructing Nest Boxes with Local Youth

Engaging community members in hands-on activities with tangible conservation outcomes is key in building and sustaining a conservation constituency.

On March 31st Fresno Audubon partnered with the Fresno Housing Authority for a day of nest box construction. Alicas Conley with the Fresno Housing Authority helped coordinate the multi-location event with Fresno Audubon volunteers Marian Orvis and Ed Case.

Over the course of the day two groups of approximately 30 diverse and underrepresented youth and adults in South West and Central Fresno assembled 10 Tree Swallow nest boxes. Participating volunteers glued, assembled, and painted boxes with messages welcoming birds, warning of possible threats, and wishing future chicks luck in their adventures.

Constructed boxes will be strategically placed with available data from ebird.org and monitored using nestwatch.org.

Fresno Audubon enjoys working with new audiences and strives to create experiences which inspire conservation in youth. If your interested in participating in our nest box program: assembling boxes, monitoring boxes, or volunteering as a guide in future nest box assembly events please contact:

Matt Wilkes, mwilkes@fresnoaudubon.org or (559) 715-2473

2011-03-30T14:23:00.000-07:00

Central Valley Birding: A Workshop and Field Trip Series

2011-03-18T11:49:00.000-07:00

Volunteers Wanted

Central Valley Birding: A Workshop and Field Trip Series

Fresno Audubon plans to host a combination workshop-field trip series for beginning birders, and other interested parties, and is in need of volunteer presenters and trip leaders.

The proposed workshop series will cover the following local habitats:

Birding at Home: A Backyard and Urban Experience
Birding on the Valley Floor: Central Valley Wildlife Refuges and Grasslands
Birding near Water: Central Valley Rivers, Lakes and Ponding Basins
Birding in the Foothills and Sierra Nevada: Lakes and Mountains

Presentations will be held at a centrally located community facility and should be designed for as wide an audience as possible. Workshops and field trips need not be lead by the same individual/s. Trip locations should complement workshop content. This series may include one presentation and one trip per month for 4 consecutive months. Presentation and trip dates to be scheduled with volunteer participants.

If interested in delivering a presentation or leading a field trip in the Central Valley Birding: A Workshop and Field Trip Series contact:

Matt Wilkes, mwilkes@fresnoaudubon.org or (559) 715-2473

Bird and Nature Watching Resource Library

2011-03-18T11:42:00.001-07:00

WANTED!

WHAT: Your Used Birding Gear
PURPOSE: FREE and OPEN Community Bird and Nature Watching Events
WHERE: Local Schools, Parks, Field Trips, and Workshops
FOR WHO: Youth, Families, and Beginning Birders
WHEN: Coming Soon...

Fresno
Audubon seeks donations of used birding gear to develop a resource
library for FREE and OPEN local bird and nature watching events for
youth, families, and beginning birders.

We
aim to introduce new audiences to bird and nature watching, NO GEAR
REQUIRED, and your used birding equipment can help us get there!

Dust off your old binoculars, scopes, tripods, field guides, and backpacks and send them to:

Fresno Audubon

Bird and Nature Watching Resource Library

P.O. Box 9324, Fresno CA 93791

We ask that equipment be clean and in operable condition. All Bird and Nature Watching Resource Library items will be kept local for the benefit of Central Valley communities.

Recycle
your old gear with Fresno Audubon and provide your community with the
opportunity to enjoy what you have for years-our great Central Valley
birds and wildlife. All donations tax deductible.

WANTED!

WHAT: Your Used Birding Gear
PURPOSE: FREE and OPEN Community Bird and Nature Watching Events
WHERE: Local Schools, Parks, Field Trips, and Workshops
FOR WHO: Youth, Families, and Beginning Birders
WHEN: Coming Soon...

Fresno Audubon seeks donations of used birding gear to develop a resource library for FREE and OPEN local bird and nature watching events for youth, families, and beginning birders.

We aim to introduce new audiences to bird and nature watching, NO GEAR REQUIRED, and your used birding equipment can help us get there!

Dust off your old binoculars, scopes, tripods, field guides, and backpacks and send them to:

Fresno Audubon

Bird and Nature Watching Resource Library

P.O. Box 9324, Fresno CA 93791

We ask that equipment be clean and in operable condition. All Bird and Nature Watching Resource Library items will be kept local for the benefit of Central Valley communities.

Recycle your old gear with Fresno Audubon and provide your community with the opportunity to enjoy what you have for years-our great Central Valley birds and wildlife. All donations tax deductible.

Youth Birding Program

2011-03-18T11:27:00.000-07:00

Volunteers Wanted

Youth Birding Program

Fresno Audubon is seeking volunteers to lead birding and nature hikes at Millerton Lake, and surrounding areas, for local youth ages 8-20. Trips may include up to 25 diverse and underserved youths and will be scheduled at 2-3 hours. Trip dates will be calendared with volunteer trip leaders and partnering community agencies and may begin as early as April.

If interested contact:

Matt Wilkes, mwilkes@fresnoaudubon.org or (559) 715-2473

Fresno Audubon Collaborates with Cub Scouts

2011-03-18T11:19:00.000-07:00

On the afternoon of March 14th I joined a local Cub Scouts group out at Bud Rank Elementary, at 168 and Shepard, for a bird watching tour and feeder construction workshop. The group was comprised of approximately 15 Cub Scouts and a few parents who were interested in an experience that would be fun, educational, and promote stewardship for the environment.

Half the group joined me and a few chaperons around campus and into the surrounding neighborhood for some light birdwatching while the other half stayed behind to construct milk-carton bird feeders. The Cub Scouts planned to display the feeders in their yards to observe and record bird numbers and diversity. Common species such as Black Birds, Sea Gulls, and Doves excited everyone on our tour and sparked genuine interest in learning about birds and their role in the web of life. All youth had a set of binoculars and excitedly scanned the horizon hurriedly focusing to catch a glimpse of the new, rare, and exotic. A number of Cub Scouts were particularly interested the sketches, calls, and distribution maps from the Sibley app on my iPhone.

Engaging youth in constructive outdoor opportunities such as these is critical for our communities and the environment as it promotes:

Enjoyment for Nature
Greater Interest in Birds
Hands-On Interactive Educational & Social Opportunities
Understanding of Birds as Indicator Species for Environmental Health
Conservation of Birds & their Habitats

The afternoon event wrapped up quickly with tentative plans for Fresno Audubon and the Bud Rank Elementary Cub Scouts to collaborate soon in creating future opportunities for youth to connect in an outdoor setting.

If interested in volunteering with Fresno Audubon to provide continued and enhanced opportunities for youth to connect with the outdoors in our Youth Birding Program please contact:

Matt Wilkes, mwilkes@fresnoaudubon.org or (559) 715-2473

2011-02-23T16:53:00.000-08:00

View Bald Eagle in a larger map

2011-02-22T11:03:00.000-08:00

Urban Bald Eagle sighted at Shaw and 99 ponding basin!
http://bit.ly/hwCWic

Fresno: Become a Citizen Scientists! FREE & Now Enrolling.

2011-02-08T09:50:00.001-08:00

Many of you may have read the recent article on Citizen Science by Jordan Wellwood from Audubon CA in the latest edition of the Fresno Audubon YELLOWBILL. If not check it out. It's quick but important.

Citizen Science is not just for techies, science nerds, or lifelong birders. It can be a lot of different things to different people depending on the project and its goals. Citizen Science is educational, fun, social, and interactive. Importantly, Citizen Science provides opportunities for community building and engagement for all ages-interests-and abilities, can inform disciplines with data virtually unobtainable by any other means, and can provide a friendly and welcoming first experience into activities and subjects dominated by experts.

Fresno Audubon supports Citizen Science and invites community members of all ages, expert and casual/beginning-birders, to participate in local opportunities. Citizen Science projects supported by Fresno Audubon include the Lost Lake Christmas Bird Count (2010 data), Great Backyard Bird Count, FBC-Spring Bird Count, eBrid Program, and nest box bird monitoring.

Join us Monday March 21st for a program on the global Citizen Science project eBird. Project Leader Brian Sullivan will be covering the eBird website, how to's, and bird identification. Participate, become a Citizen Scientists, and support a healthy and sustainable Central Valley Sierra foothill environment for people, birds, and other wildlife.

Fresno Audubon NEW WEBSITE!

2011-02-01T15:46:00.000-08:00

Check out the NEW Fresno Audubon website with updated content and new features. Our goal was to build a website that would grant the community greater access to communicate with the Fresno Audubon team. This site will be updated frequently to ensure you have the latest information on what Fresno Audubon is up to and how to get involved. Don't forget to check out our Action page where our various Advocacy, Education, and Science programs are described. Browse around and let us know what you think. Share our new site with your network, come to our events, and support a healthy and sustainable Central Valley environment for people, birds, and other wildlife!

Birds, people, and environmental justice - Audubon steps into the breach!

2011-01-26T16:50:00.000-08:00

Can one - need one - say anything more than this?

via thedailyshow.com

Thank god for the birds, indeed!

Posted via email from a leaf warbler's gleanings

Size, shape, and other keys to identifying birds - a handy tutorial series

2011-01-01T17:38:00.000-08:00

via allaboutbirds.org

This is the first part of a nice new series of videos on birdwatching basics from All About Birds. I will share them all here and will likely be recommending them to my students and aspiring Fresno Bird Count volunteers as an excellent way to develop their birding skills. No substitute to actually spending time outdoors with binoculars and a field guide, of course - but on rainy days like this weekend, you could do worse than watch these videos!

Posted via email from a leaf warbler's gleanings

2010-12-18T17:38:00.000-08:00

Yosemite Area Audubon Society Christmas Bird Count December 19 8am

http://mariposa.yosemite.net/audubon/cbc.html

Fresno Audubon CSUF Interns Wanted

2010-12-17T09:19:00.000-08:00

Fresno Audubon is currently looking to fill 3 CSUF Spring 2011 intern positions-Outreach, Organizational Development, and Media.

Read the job descriptions HERE.

BEES!

2010-12-07T17:05:00.000-08:00

Our January program will be on backyard beekeeping, colony collapse disorder, and will also host special honey tasting!

Our speaker will be Chris Hiatt of Hiatt Honey Company.

From Chris:

A study by Cornell University found that every third bite of food we consume is a result of honeybee pollination. Over the last three years more than one in three honey bee colonies has died nationwide, posing a serious risk to our natural food supply.

One cause of these losses is a phenomenon called Colony Collapse Disorder, or “CCD.” When a hive experiences CCD, the honey bees mysteriously desert their hive and die. I will discuss this along with how to maintain a hive in your backyard and how to follow local laws. In addition, I will talk about and show pictures of a normal year in beekeeping, including many of the different crops our bees pollinate.

I am co-owner of Hiatt Honey Company which is one of the largest beekeeping outfits in the country. It was started by my father 43 years ago. I received a Bachelor's in Horticulture from Brigham Young University, and have started to farm almonds on the side. I am married and have three girls and a baby boy. In my "spare" time (ie. whenever my wife agrees to it), I like to go birding and ride my dirtbike.

Please Join Us on Tuesday, January 11 at 7:30 p.m.

All programs are held at the University of California Center, located at 550 E. Shaw Avenue in Fresno (see map).

December Newsletter!

2010-12-07T16:59:00.000-08:00

ybill1012

Santa Clara Valley Audubon files lawsuit over solar project in Panoche Valley

2010-12-07T16:42:00.000-08:00

From Audubon CA's Chapter Blog - posted by Garry George. The outcome of this lawsuit is of great importance to Fresno Audubon.

Hollister, CA – Following the approval of a conditional use permit and other authorizations for the Panoche Valley Solar Project, Save Panoche Valley and Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society joined in filing a petition in Superior Court challenging the certification of the Panoche Valley project Environmental Impact Report. A project of Solargen Energy, Inc., the entire proposed project footprint is roughly 5,000 acres of grazing land in Eastern San Benito County.

The Panoche Valley is designated Core Habitat for the blunt-nosed leopard lizard, San Joaquin kit fox, and giant kangaroo rat, all federally and state endangered species. Additionally, the valley is designated an Audubon Important Bird Area of Global Significance due to rare bird species, including the Mountain Plover, a candidate for the federal endangered species list.

The petition itemizes numerous inadequacies in the environmental analysis that is provided to inform decision-makers.

“The environmental analysis has been reviewed by the California Department of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Both of these agencies, as well as numerous environmental organizations, have found the analysis, as well as the mitigations that are proposed to compensate for harmful impacts on endangered species, to be grossly inadequate. In other words, the project might have irreversible impacts on the survival of several species, and it has the potential to significantly contribute to the risk of extinction of these species” said Shani Kleinhaus, Santa Clara Valley Audubon’s environmental advocate.

The petition goes on to list inadequacies in the analysis of impacts on air quality, prime farmland, soil erosion, cultural resources, hazardous materials and emissions, hydrology and water quality, wildfires, and noise. “At its most basic level, the environmental document is supposed to inform the public and decision-making body of the full extent of impacts the project will have on the environment and on public safety and health. This document was so quickly put together it never addressed these basic issues or do so only in a cursory manner,” said Kleinhaus. “In no way does this environmental impact report provide the public and public officials with the information necessary to make an informed decision as to the losses, the costs and the risks associated with this project.”

The draft environmental impact report looked at four different project alternatives, and even with the smallest sized alternative, government agencies found irreversible, unmitigable impacts on wildlife and habitat. “One of many issues with this analysis was the narrow range of alternatives that were studied,” said Kleinhaus. “We expected alternatives to review brownfield sites, distributed solar as an alternative, and other locations in San Benito Co. None of these were analyzed. In addition, there is a feasible alternative that is less environmentally damaging, which involves developing the solar project on the Westlands property in Fresno County.”

“Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society supports sustainable energy programs that foster the development of renewable energy resources while focusing on energy conservation. We encourage the promotion of solar energy projects, policies and programs that focus on solar energy production in existing and planned communities, but do not impact landscapes that have agricultural or habitat value,” said Kleinhaus. “We support projects that do not endanger species, or the survival and health of the residents of rural communities.”

Glimmer of Hope for the Desert Bill

2010-12-07T16:37:00.000-08:00

From the Mojave Desert Blog -

The U.S. Senate is considering legislation that would combine several land and water conservation bills into one package--called an omnibus bill--and putting it up for a vote before Congress concludes business at the end of the year. Senator Feinstein's proposed California Desert Protection Act of 2010 (CDPA 2010, S. 2921) could be a part of the omnibus bill. If CDPA 2010 is not included, or if the omnibus bill never materializes, the proposed National Monuments in California's Mojave and Sonoran deserts may never receive protected status.

As a recap for those not familiar with the bill, CDPA 2010 would balance conservation of natural areas and preservation of recreation opportunities by establishing:

Mojave Trails National Monument: 941,413 acres of Mojave Desert along Historic Route 66 and the southern boundary of the Mojave National Preserve. Many of the valleys in this area were proposed for industrial development, and could still be vulnerable to destructive uses if the legislation does not pass.

Sand to Snow National Monument: 133,524 acres of habitat connecting desert habitat adjacent to Joshua Tree National Park and wilderness in the high country of San Bernardino National Forest.

Additional or expanded wilderness: 346,108 acres of new wilderness areas or additional acreage for existing wilderness areas. Much of the new or added wilderness would be in the northern Mojave Desert. The western Mojave and northern Colorado Desert region (part of the Sonoran Desert) would not see many new protections.

Recreation areas: The bill would legislatively designate five off-highway vehicle (OHV) use areas, all in the Mojave Desert. As a compromise for designating land within proposed monuments or wilderness areas as off-limits to OHV, the legislation would secure off-road enthusiasts' access to several large parcels of land.

CA Desert Protection Act Map
Also please view this post, which implores readers to urge Senator Feinstein to include the CDPA in an omnibus bill before the end of the year.

More rare red foxes found in Sierra

2010-12-06T11:18:00.000-08:00

Researchers have found more rare Sierra Nevada red foxes near Sonora Pass, confirming that one of America's rarest mammals hangs on as a surviving population where it was long feared extinct.

The latest discoveries came in September and October with new images from remotely triggered cameras, confirmed later by genetic analysis of feces gathered in the area. They build on the August discovery of a single fox in the same area.

"Before, there was the possibility we may have had the sole survivor," said Adam Rich, a wildlife biologist with the Stanislaus National Forest. "But now we know there's a small population out there. That gives us hope that even though they're rare, we still might have them around for a while."

The Sierra Nevada red fox is considered one of the most threatened mammals in North America.

More from Sac Bee reporter Matt Weiser here

Brown's Office Brokers Settlement to Save Birds and Make Altamont Wind Turbines More Efficient

2010-12-06T11:15:00.000-08:00

OAKLAND -- Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced an agreement to upgrade the quarter-century-old wind turbines in Altamont Pass to make them more efficient and less deadly to migratory birds.

"This landmark settlement mandates the replacement of outmoded wind turbines with newer models that are more efficient, generate more power and are less harmful to eagles, falcons and other birds," Brown said.

The Altamont Pass Wind Resources Area in Alameda and Contra Costa counties is the site of the world's first wind turbines. These units, constructed more than three decades ago, are now outdated, inefficient and deadly to thousands of birds each year.

More here

Pilot project encourages rice, wildlife in Sacramento Valley

2010-12-02T09:51:00.000-08:00

A productive partnership between ag and conservationsists:

A California rice industry-wildlife development pilot project underway in the Sacramento Valley is a prime example of farmers and environmental groups partnering to achieve mutual long-term goals.

The pilot program, underway in part at the Davis Ranch operated by the Sycamore Family Trust in Colusa County, is designed to tweak rice production management to spur habitat and wildlife expansion in the epicenter of California’s rice industry.

Among the major players include the California Rice Commission, PRBO Conservation Science, Audubon California, and The Nature Conservancy.

The $1.3 billion California rice industry wants to further improve its commitment to wildlife habitat development in part to maintain support for flooded rice production. Environmentalists view the rice industry as a natural gateway to improve and expand the habitats and populations of critters.

By Cary Blake. Full article at Western Farm Press

Where in the world is the Yellow-billed Magpie? Help us find out this weekend!

2010-06-03T01:50:00.000-07:00

See and download the full gallery on posterous

What a handsome corvid, the Yellow-billed Magpie. How curiously restricted, its global range:

This lovely bird is another one I consider myself fortunate to have seen up close (e.g., when I took the above pictures in Pinnacles National Monument recently), given that it is one of those rare endemic species found only in a particular small corner of the world. This one, as you can see in the above map (from the Birds of North America account for the species), happens to be restricted to parts of Central California, west of the Sierra Nevada mountains, along the San Joaquin Valley all the way west to the Pacific coast. You can find a more dynamic, birder-generated current map of sightings via eBird.

The distribution range has shrunk historically with humans taking over much of its habitat for farms and suburbia, but numbers may have been relatively stable until the turn of this millennium. It has remained a species of concern given its limited range, and how much we humans covet its habitat. Nevertheless, the bird appears resourceful enough to have adapted to living amid human enterprise in some of the world's richest farmland in the valley and the sprawl of the San Francisco Bay Areas! Must be those clever corvid genes that have made the bird flexible enough to deal with some of the insults from us.

Our insults have run quite the gamut, including direct loss of habitat, concerted poisoning and bounty hunting campaigns because the bird is thought to be an agricultural pest (especially for the fruit/nut crops common around here, I think), and most recently, the arrival of West Nile Virus (WNV) in California. That last has landed the Magpie on Audubon's watchlist, for it has turned out to be perhaps the most susceptible to the virus. The population may be declining in recent years - but we don't really know what its status is with any certainty! Remarkable that, given how many excellent biologists live and work in and around the species' range at some of the world's top universities!

And I include myself among the ornithologists in the region who would like to keep a closer eye on this species. When I arrived in Fresno, West Nile Virus had just hit the state, and I grew curious about the range of the Yellow-billed Magpie because it wasn't to be found in or around Fresno! The distribution map intrigued me when I first found it because the bird is reasonably abundant in suburban / rural / farmland habitats north of Fresno county all the way up to Sacramento; and along the coast range to the west its range extends farther to the south as well. Yet, for some reason, it wasn't to be found in Fresno, even in habitat that I would be hard pressed to tell apart from areas 50-100 km north of us where the species is common! I haven't found a satisfactory explanation for this gap in its distribution, for I'm sure it used to be here, but not any more. Some oldtime bird/wildlife watchers in Fresno have hinted that the species was actively exterminated from the county because of a bounty on its pretty head several decades ago when it was considered a pest! That might explain its disappearance, but its not clear why it hasn't come back. Is it still being hunted/poisoned by farmers? Or has the habitat been altered enough to deter recolonization, presuming northern populations are productive enough (which they may not be). I suspect there is enough in those questions for a potential masters thesis, but haven't managed to find a student sufficiently motivated to go chase them. Know any?

Meanwhile, recent studies at UC Davis have focused on modeling habitat needs, on the effects of WNV on the birds, and on loss of genetic diversity through inbreeding. Those studies (follow the link for more info) have drawn upon help from citizen scientists who can report sightings of live and dead birds, the latter being collected for WNV screening. Visit Magpiemonitor.org for more on participation and results.

Right now, we all get a chance to help more broadly as well, by participating in a survey this weekend, organized by California Audubon and eBird. Here's the invitation:

Yellow-billed Magpie survey set for June 4-7, 2010
If we want to help the Yellow-billed Magpie survive, we need to know where it is living and in what numbers. And that’s where you can help. Audubon California is sponsoring a four-day statewide survey of Yellow-billed Magpies enlisted the help of volunteer birders.

Taking part is simple: All you need to do is log into eBird and record your observations.

Shortly after the survey, we’ll tally up the results and every participant will receive a report of the findings. Audubon California will use these findings to guide our conservation efforts for this bird.

Click on the links to the left to learn more and to take part in this important volunteer project.

via ca.audubon.org

I hope you can participate in the survey on what promises to be a nice weekend for birdwatching in the valley. At least, if you are out and about anywhere in this species range this weekend, I hope you will keep en eye out for this not inconspicuous bird and report any sightings.

Happy Magpie tracking!

Reference:

Reynolds, M. (1995). Yellow-billed Magpie (Pica nuttalli) The Birds of North America Online DOI: 10.2173/bna.180

Posted via web from a leaf warbler's gleanings

Alaotra Grebe: another one (that we know of) bit the dust...

2010-05-26T23:17:00.001-07:00

London, England (CNN) -- The Alaotra Grebe, a small diving bird native to Madagascar has been officially classified extinct, according to a leading bird conservation organization.

BirdLife International reported that the species, once found on Lake Alaotra, the largest lake in Madagascar, declined rapidly due to carnivorous fish being introduced to the lake and the use of nylon gill nets by local fishermen.

"No hope now remains for this species. It is another example of how human actions can have unforeseen consequences," Dr Leon Bennun, BirdLife International's director of science, policy and information said in a statement.

via cnn.com

And so the bad news continues as we march on, oblivious, right through this Holocene mass extinction, uncaring, unaware of, or unwilling to admit our own culpability. Read the rest of the CNN story and Birdlife's report for more bad news about species on the brink. That we know of.

Posted via web from a leaf warbler's gleanings

Why does the desert tortoise have to take one for the "green" energy team?

2010-05-23T00:07:00.001-07:00

And other frequently asked questions answered here about the problems with putting giant industrial solar energy projects in the desert ecosystems of the American Southwest (and indeed elsewhere in the world, I daresay, where they may have other denizens than the Desert Tortoise). Although, that question above on behalf of the tortoise isn't asked frequently enough.

Chris Clarke takes on a gamut of these FAQs (and promises to add more links over the coming days, so bookmark this post, folks) starting with this popular one:

Aren’t you just a bunch of NIMBYs?

Many of us who oppose giant, remote industrial solar development are advocating, as an alternative, distributed generation from many sources including rooftop photovoltaic (PV) panels on businesses and homes. That pretty much makes us the exact opposite of NIMBYs. We want the stuff in our backyards.

via faultline.org

Posted via web from a leaf warbler's gleanings

Tiger Salamander Now Protected Under State Law

2010-03-03T23:15:00.000-08:00

Calif. salamander protection could affect farming

By SAMANTHA YOUNG, Associated Press Writer

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

(03-03) 17:07 PST Sacramento, Calif. (AP) --

State wildlife officials Wednesday ruled that the California tiger salamander deserves protection as a threatened species, subjecting landowners to more scrutiny if they want to build or farm in the amphibian's habitat.

The California Fish and Game Commission made the decision after finding roughly 400,000 acres of the amphibian's habitat is threatened by future development and the expansion of farming, mostly in the Central Valley. The tiger salamander lives in nearly half the state's counties, in a region that stretches from Yolo County north of Sacramento to Santa Barbara County.

"We have learned over the years, at our peril, that remoteness is no guarantee of conservation," commissioner Michael Sutton said. "What is remote today may well be suburban sprawl tomorrow."

The 3-2 vote came over the objections of the wine industry, business groups and homebuilders, which complained scientists were unable to show accurate population counts for the salamander and had exaggerated how much rural land might be developed in the future.

"This recommendation relies principally on anticipated loss of habitat," Tim Schmelzer, who oversees regulatory affairs at the Wine Institute, told the commission. "That projected loss is considerably overstated."

For example, similar federal protections and local city and county plans that guide future development were not consulted, Schmelzer said.

At least one commissioner agreed with the industry, questioning state scientists who predicted at least a third of the salamander habitat would be developed over the next 10 years without any protection.

"It's insanity. It will never happen," said commissioner Daniel Richards, who voted against the listing.

The tiger salamander breeds in seasonal pools and ponds, but spends most of its 10-year life underground primarily in the Central Valley. Those key spawning habitats have severely diminished over the years. In 1997, only 12 percent of the Central Valley's 5 million acres of historical seasonal pools remained, said Sonke Mastrup, chief deputy director at the Department of Fish and Game.

The remaining habitat is also at risk for being broken up and isolating the species, Mastrup said.

The tiger salamander was listed as a federally protected species in 2004 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The state commission, which met in Ontario east of Los Angeles, had twice previously denied listing the salamander, and was sued in 2004 by the Center for Biological Diversity. A state appellate court ordered the Department of Fish and Game to reconsider the issue.

"I think we are beholden to the law, beholden to the biology and I think we have no choice," said commissioner Richard Rogers.

State law is typically more protective of vulnerable species than federal law, leading to worries that farmers, developers and vintners might have to do more to protect the salamander if they want to build or move into sensitive habitat.

Farmers and developers in Santa Barbara, where the salamander is considered an endangered species under federal law, already have been required to set aside land for the species.

While it's unclear how the state intends to implement its regulation, Schmelzer, who also spoke on behalf of the building industry, said the commission's action will create "more hoops" for businesses.

"Suddenly projects that are within the habitat that will be protected are going to be subject to two layers of approvals," Schmelzer said in an interview after the vote. "It's a waste of time and money."

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/03/03/national/a142839S45.DTL
© 2010 Hearst Communications Inc. | Privacy Policy | Feedback | RSS Feeds | FAQ | Site Index | Contact

Volunteer Opportunities

2010-02-28T08:44:00.000-08:00

We have a few opportunities for you to give a bit of your time to local conservation efforts:

Bird-a-thon Co-chair: If any of you have children/grandchildren you surely know about jog-a-thons and other such fundraisers for schools. The bird-a-thon is similar in that sponsors can make a per bird pledge or a flat amount for a donation. This is a great fundraiser because it acts as a means to recruit new members, we get "paid" for doing what we love, and we are asking new people to give money. I basically need someone to drum up support for this at meetings, trips, etc. We are also looking for just good ol' participants.If you are interested: contact me. I have all of the materials ready to go - I just need someone to champion the cause.

Supporters' BBQ Co-chair:We typically hold an annual potluck, but this year I would like to add a special twist. The purpose is to thank all of the great people that have helped us out in some way(we'll probably give out awards to some of the more prominent supporters). I need help identifying a good venue, sending out invitations, and coordinating food. The event won't be anything fancy - just a nice picnic and a chance for people to socialize and be appreciated for their contributions

Volunteers for Panoche Valley Clean-up: We postponed this event due to rain and other factors. The new date is to be determined, but we are hoping to expand our efforts on the new date to include some habitat enhancement work on nearby BLM/DFG lands. Like before, birding and a light lunch are part of the deal. I will send out the date as soon as I get it.

Wood Duck Boxes: Thanks to all who volunteered! We had more than enough volunteers for this particular project so we didn't need all of your services. There will be opportunities in the future for Tree Swallow and Bat Boxes so I will keep in mind those people who volunteered.

Field Trip leader needed: The River Parkway Trust would like someone to lead a bird walk the morning of April 17th at the Coke Hallowell Center in conjunction with their Festival of Feathers.

Thanks! Contact me at fresnoaudubon@gmail.com for details on any of the above.

-Brandon Hill

March Program: Eco-Friendly Pest Management for Home and Garden

2010-02-23T15:12:00.001-08:00

March Program: Eco-Friendly Pest Management for Home and Garden

Tuesday, March 9, 2010 - 7:30p.m. Programs are held at the University of California Center, 550 E. Shaw Avenue, Fresno(Across from Fashion Fair Mall)

On March 9, Ingrid Carmean will be presenting information on the causes of various pest infestations and how to avoid them, which
pests need to be controlled, which can be ignored or tolerated, and what to do when you have a problem. Madeleine Mitchell, a Master Gardener, will
be presenting the second half of the session on Integrated Pest Management (IPM) on your landscape.

Ingrid is a Board Certified Entomologist and an Ecowise certified IPM Practitioner. She has owned her own Pest Control Company since 1993 practicing IPM in the Fresno area and serving mostly a variety of large governmental and institutional clients. For four years she was a trainer with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation’s School IPM program.

-Brandon Hill
President, Fresno Audubon
559.978.2369

Avian Ecology of Oak Woodlands - Talk by Rodney Olsen

2009-11-09T12:42:00.000-08:00

Tuesday, November 10, 2009
7:30pm - 9:00pm
550 E. Shaw(Across from Fashion Fair Mall)

Local biologist and professor Rodney Olsen will discuss the avian ecology of oak woodlands. In this exploration, we will discuss the importance of oak woodlands to bird reproduction, feeding, and migration. We will also explore current threats to oak woodland communities and local conservation efforts.

From the Economist:

2009-10-23T09:37:00.001-07:00

California's water wars

Of farms, folks and fish
Oct 22nd 2009 | LOS ANGELES
From The Economist print edition

A truce in California’s long and bitter fight over water at last appears possible

IN 2007 Oliver Wanger, a federal judge in California, ordered the huge pumping stations of the Sacramento Delta, the largest estuary on the west coast of the Americas, to reduce by a third the water they delivered to two aqueducts that run south to the farms of the San Joaquin Valley and onward to the vast conurbations of southern California. His reason was the delta smelt, a translucent fish less than eight centimetres (three inches) long that lives only in the delta and is considered endangered under federal law. The pumping plants were sucking in the fish and grinding them up. The next year, a “biological opinion” by the federal Fish and Wildlife Service reinforced Judge Wanger’s order. Pumping from the delta remains restricted.

The consequences of these restrictions, which coincided with a drought that is now in its third year, reach far beyond one small population of fish. About two-thirds of Californians get at least some of their water from the delta, so with the stroke of a judicial pen the entire state, the world’s eighth-largest economy and America’s “fruit basket”, entered an economic and political crisis.

Water has divided Californians since Mark Twain remarked that “whiskey’s for drinking, water’s for fighting over.” But this latest conflict comes as America’s largest state is politically gridlocked and holding back a national economic recovery. From Australia to Israel, parched places all over the world are now looking to California to see whether, and how, it solves one of the most intractable problems of thirsty civilisations in dry regions.

The pumping restrictions were a huge victory for environmentalists, who fill the ranks of one of the three armies in California’s perennial water wars. With increasing success since the 1970s, greens have argued that the delta in particular, and California’s dammed rivers and wetlands in general, are on the verge of ecological collapse and must be saved.

For the other two armies, the restrictions amounted to a stinging defeat. One army consists of urban consumers in the dry south, represented by the Metropolitan Water District, which supplies water to about 19m people, over half the state’s population, and gets 30% of its supply from one of the two delta aqueducts. The authority has had to pay farmers in the Central Valley to give up their allocations and let their fields lie fallow, says Jeffrey Kightlinger, its boss. This year it also had to impose mandatory conservation measures.

The pain has been far worse, however, for the third force: agriculture. The farmers and farm workers who have been hardest hit live in the western San Joaquin Valley, which is supplied by the Westlands Water District, America’s largest irrigation authority. Westlands has contracts to draw water from the other (federally financed) aqueduct. Tom Birmingham, its boss, says that, because of the drought and the pumping restrictions, it is receiving only 10% of its entitlement this year.

The result, says Mr Birmingham, is fallow land, farm workers being laid off and “people standing in food lines for hours”. In some areas unemployment runs at 40%. There are scenes reminiscent of John Steinbeck’s “The Grapes of Wrath”, though most of the poor and jobless are not white “Okies”, but Latinos. Just as the “dust bowl” swept across the Great Plains in the 1930s, so in the San Joaquin Valley, fields are reverting to desert and signs read, “Congress created this dust bowl”.

“All my almond trees are going to die,” says Shawn Coburn, a farmer in the area. He began farming in 1992 and has done everything he can to use water more wisely. He has planted fewer tomatoes and melons and more almonds and wine grapes because these crops drink less and yield more. He says he has conserved all he can with technology. Like other farmers, he has also dug wells to tap the shrinking aquifers, even though he knows he is making the entire valley floor sink. In one place, he says, the ground around a telephone pole has dropped by six feet (nearly 2 metres).

The environmentalists are not denying that their victory has cost agricultural jobs. But Jonas Minton of the Planning and Conservation League, a Californian non-profit outfit, thinks that a public-relations firm paid by the farmers has been exaggerating their misery. In any event, he says, the problem is not a court ruling but a system in which the state has pledged eight times as much water to title-holders as exists in nature and therefore cannot, of necessity, give everybody his due.

Bill Metropulos, a lobbyist at the Sierra Club, another environmental group, agrees. “I cannot control a drought,” he says. Westlands’ Mr Birmingham can complain, he says, but, “Why do we have to give him more water?” It so happens that Westlands’ water rights rank below those of other title-holders and “there is simply not enough water to go around.”

Angry and bitter words are thus flying on all sides, which is as it has always been in California. But this time the crisis has become so severe that the state’s legislators in Sacramento, notoriously incapable of agreeing on anything serious, including a punctual budget, appear on the brink of a breakthrough. A complex package of legislation was almost passed in September and failed only because time ran out in that session. The legislators are now talking again. A deal could emerge for a vote within weeks.

Peace among coequals?

Timothy Quinn, director of the Association of California Water Agencies, which represents the suppliers of about 90% of the water consumed in California, credits the pumping restrictions for this progress. He says Judge Wanger forced all sides to acknowledge the seriousness of the situation. His decision was the “equivalent of an earthquake” whose shock was severe enough to shake California’s democracy. Therein lies, perhaps, the opportunity.

The details of the legislation negotiated so far are complex, but its main feature is a phrase, “coequal goals”—though how coequal goals differ from equal ones is not clear. For most of the previous century, says Mr Quinn, California and the entire West had an “extraction mindset” according to which man was meant to subdue and exploit nature. In water matters, this meant ever more dams, reservoirs and aqueducts. However, over the past four decades the environmentalist mentality grew up as an alternative, emphasising “sustainable” use of nature.

California’s water policy in the past has swung “like a pendulum” between these two principles, depending on which lobbyists have won the latest victory, says Lester Snow, the director of California’s water department. Enshrining the objectives of both sides as “coequal” in state law would thus mean progress, by requiring all factions to consider both fish and farms, both nature and the economy, both sustainability and reliability.

“It’s a huge step,” agrees Mr Kightlinger of the Metropolitan Water District. In practice, most water managers in the state already take sustainability seriously, but making equality official would force all sides to “play nicely”, he thinks. The old rivalry between urban and agricultural water use has already faded, he says, and today’s animosity between both of them and the greens may also subside.

Westlands’ Mr Birmingham says that, in practice, water usage has already become equal. Whereas agriculture used to consume 80% of the state’s water supply, today 46% of captured and stored water goes to environmental purposes, such as rebuilding wetlands. Meanwhile 43% goes to farming and 11% to municipal uses.

The environmentalists, as today’s top dogs, are less excited about equal goals. At present the state’s water infrastructure is run with a single goal, which is to protect nature, and this, says Mr Metropulos of the Sierra Club, provides complete clarity of purpose. Equality, he thinks, will only lead to new conflicts and litigation. When the time comes for trade-offs, he asks, “Who’s going to make the decision? It is undefined.” He is lobbying against the legislation, although he is unlikely to prevent it.

Dealing with the delta

The next layer of legislative proposals will concern the Sacramento Delta, the inland network of streams and rivers, many contained by dykes and levees, that form the hub of California’s water infrastructure. Californians hate rain but love water, so three-quarters of them live in the arid south, spurn the wet north where three-quarters of the rain falls, and expect water to come to them by pipe, canal or aquifer, preferably courtesy of the taxpayer.

The Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and their tributaries, carrying the rain from the north and the melting snowpack from the Sierra Nevada in the east, meet in the delta and flow out through San Francisco’s Golden Gate. The trick has always been to intercept the fresh water in the delta before it gets salty and to send it south as well as west to the San Francisco Bay area.

Those in the south get it through two huge infrastructure networks. The federal Central Valley Project, dating from 1937, uses 20 upstream reservoirs and two pumps to take water to the southern Central Valley, largely for farmers. The State Water Project, begun in 1960 by Pat Brown, a visionary governor, uses another 22 upstream dams and reservoirs and its own pumping plant to send water into the other aqueduct, largely for urban use.

By pumping fresh water south, however, these two projects wreak ecological havoc. Sceptics like to inveigh against the unprepossessing delta smelt, which George Radanovich, a Republican congressman, has called “a worthless little worm that needs to go the way of the dinosaur”. But other fish species such as the Chinook salmon, the steelhead and the longfin smelt are also threatened, and each species is a part of a complex food chain. About 25% of the state’s sporting fish and 80% of its commercial fish live in or migrate through the delta.

Pumps kill, levees leak

The pumps kill fish and other species, and not just by grinding them up. They also change, and occasionally reverse, the water flow of the small rivers in the delta’s vast labyrinth of streams, creeks, sluices, islands and marshes. In natural circumstances, the delta is brackish and its salinity changes with the tides. The pumps, by drawing in river water, keep the delta water artificially fresh. Native species die, invasive species thrive.

Beyond that, the ageing delta’s levees are a human disaster in the making. The delta sits on top of seismic faults that may rupture, and many of the islands that make it up are below sea level. A large earthquake could disrupt the state’s water supply and inundate the delta itself.

The best answer, says Ellen Hanak, a water expert at the non-partisan Public Policy Institute of California, is to build either a canal or a tunnel around the delta. Fresh water could then be tapped upstream on the Sacramento River and conveyed round the delta to the aqueducts without grinding up fish, reversing river flows or changing the delta’s salinity, which would again fluctuate with the tides. The water going south would be fresher too. A canal would thus “separate the water for the fish from the water for the economy and the people,” says Mr Quinn.
AP
AP

Resuscitation required, just add water

The trouble is that such a peripheral canal is a political hot button. In 1982 Jerry Brown, Pat Brown’s son and California’s governor at the time, put a canal on the ballot but the voters rejected it. Even now, many people are passionately against it. Farmers and residents in the delta itself fear that a bypass would mean that politicians and public money would abandon them amid their disintegrating levees, and others would grab their water. The Sierra Club is against a canal because “it is not going to make new water” and “we want to reduce exports from the delta” rather than reroute its flows, says Mr Metropulos.

The legislation under negotiation is therefore taking a different approach. Instead of decreeing a bypass canal or tunnel outright, it seeks to establish a new authority with the power to take this decision itself. This is sorely needed. Mr Snow at the water department has counted more than 200 entities, from cities and counties to fisheries and reclamation or irrigation districts and even mosquito-abatement boards, that share responsibility in such a way that nobody has any. A new and nimble “Delta Council” would seize authority from all of them and actively manage the delta for the first time. And it could do this by building a canal.

Dam money

One sign of progress by Californian standards is that, if the deal gets stuck, it will be largely over relatively banal issues such as money. The legislation is likely to mandate investment in new dams and reservoirs, which appeal to Republicans, and also in waste-water recycling, desalination and groundwater storage, which are the environmentalists’ and Democrats’ preferred sources of water. But Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Republican governor, has said that he will veto any legislation that does not include billions of dollars in new bonds to pay for these new projects.

State Republicans, allied to farmers, are pushing for “general-obligation” bonds that would be put to the voters on a ballot and, if approved, paid out of general state tax revenues. Democrats are concerned that the interest on such bonds would aggravate California’s continuing budget dispute and come at the expense of education, health care and other things they mind about. They prefer bonds that would be repaid by the users of new dams, ie, the water agencies that can pass costs on to their customers. Water thus trumps ordinary politics. Republicans, who usually claim to be against big government, want taxpayers to pay; Democrats, generally accused of being big spenders, want to match infrastructure costs with water revenues to send the right price signals.

The legislation is likely to encourage water conservation by setting targets for reducing consumption. One guess is that it may call for a cut of 20% per person by 2020. That cannot be a bad idea. On the other hand, little progress is being made on monitoring groundwater levels, even though many aquifers are shrinking. Some of the state’s water districts voluntarily measure groundwater levels, but Republican legislators have opposed making such reporting mandatory on the ground that it would mean trespassing on private property. “California is the last bastion of the Wild West when it comes to groundwater,” says Ms Hanak. It may stay that way.

Whatever happens, the legislation will not deal with the long-term threats to California and its neighbours. Climate change is already showing up “in the data”, says Mr Quinn. The snowpack of the Sierra Nevada, California’s most reliable water-storage system, is shrinking and may stop yielding predictable run-off in the spring and start producing sporadic and unusable, not to mention disastrous, floods. The delta is already below sea level and, as the sea rises, it may be submerged. Even today the south is a desert wherever irrigation does not reach. It will become even drier.

For professional water managers such as Mr Kightlinger, this makes the continuing talks in Sacramento frustrating. “‘I’m for screwdrivers but not for hammers’: that’s how they talk,” he says. But he thinks all the tools are needed if California’s population and economy are to keep growing.

Of those tools, water recycling, a euphemism for cleaning up sewage, is perhaps the most promising. Recycled water is local and does not disappear in a drought. But many consumers continue to struggle with the idea that what they are drinking today someone else restored to the water system yesterday. Desalination, which removes minerals from seawater or, more often, brackish groundwater, is an alternative. But it takes a lot of energy to push water through the dense filters that remove unwanted salts and other molecules. Water markets, which allow those with too much water to trade it easily with those who have too little, could also help.

If there is to be any progress, however, Californians first have to bury their hatchets. If the talks stall, the political fallout will be big. Tom Campbell, the most thoughtful Republican candidate for governor in next year’s election, thinks water is by far the most important issue facing the state. Willie Brown, a former speaker of California’s Assembly and mayor of San Francisco, believes “a political earthquake is rumbling in the Central Valley over water, and it could cause a real tsunami for the Democrats in the 2010 elections if they don’t handle it well,” since Democrats are more associated with environmentalists and several of them face re-election.

A chance to make history

For the same reason, if the negotiations succeed, even a mediocre deal would amount to the most important water legislation since the era of Pat Brown, says Mr Quinn. Westlands’ Mr Birmingham feels that many environmental groups, such as the Natural Resources Defence Council and the Nature Conservancy, have become “genuinely interested in working with water agencies”, even though others are “using water as a means to limit housing development”.

“I am very optimistic for the long term,” says Mr Birmingham. “The real question is how are we going to survive between now and the time when new conveyance facilities become available,” which could be a decade or more. “If we continue to live under the existing biological opinions, irrigated agriculture in the western San Joaquin Valley cannot be sustained,” he says. For farmers such as Mr Coburn and his 26 Latino workers, never mind his almonds and wine grapes, the help may arrive too late. This is perhaps the only thing they have in common with the delta smelt.

Water Conservation: Daily Choices

2009-10-23T09:34:00.000-07:00

An "Oh, Shit!" Moment on Climate?

2009-10-14T09:45:00.000-07:00

Climate Roulette

By Mark Hertsgaard

They say that everyone who finally gets it about climate change has an "Oh, shit" moment--an instant when the full scientific implications become clear and they suddenly realize what a horrifically dangerous situation humanity has created for itself. Listening to the speeches, groundbreaking in their way, that President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao delivered September 22 at the UN Summit on Climate Change, I was reminded of my most recent "Oh, shit" moment.

It came in July, courtesy of the chief climate adviser to the German government. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, chair of an advisory council known by its German acronym, WBGU, is a physicist whose specialty, fittingly, is chaos theory. Speaking to an invitation-only conference at New Mexico's Santa Fe Institute, Schellnhuber divulged the findings of a study so new he had not yet briefed Chancellor Angela Merkel about it. The study has now been published. If its conclusions are correct--and Schellnhuber ranks among the world's half-dozen most eminent climate scientists--it has monumental implications for the pivotal meeting in December in Copenhagen, where world leaders will try to agree on reversing global warming.

Schellnhuber and his WBGU colleagues go a giant step beyond the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN body whose scientific reports are constrained because the world's governments must approve their contents. The IPCC says that rich industrial countries must cut emissions 25 to 40 percent by 2020 (from 1990 levels) if the world is to have a fair chance of avoiding catastrophic climate change. By contrast, the WBGU study says the United States must cut emissions 100 percent by 2020--i.e., quit carbon entirely within ten years. Germany, Italy and other industrial nations must do the same by 2025 to 2030. China only has until 2035, and the world as a whole must be carbon-free by 2050. The study adds that big polluters can delay their day of reckoning by "buying" emissions rights from developing countries, a step the study estimates would extend some countries' deadlines by a decade or so.

Needless to say, this timetable is light-years more demanding than what the world's major governments are talking about in the run-up to Copenhagen. The European Union has pledged 20 percent reductions by 2020, which it will increase to 30 percent if others--like the United States--do the same. Japan's new prime minister likewise has promised 25 percent reductions by 2020 if others do the same. Obama didn't mention a number, but the Waxman-Markey bill, which he supports, would deliver less than 5 percent reductions by 2020. Obama's silence--doubtless a function of the fact that Republicans are implacably opposed to serious emissions cuts--allowed Hu to claim the higher ground at the UN. Hu went further than any Chinese leader has before, pledging to curb greenhouse gas emissions growth by a "notable margin" by 2020. Obama dropped his own bombshell, however, urging that all G-20 governments phase out subsidies for fossil fuels. "The time we have to reverse this tide is running out," Obama declared. Alas, the WBGU study suggests that our time is in fact all but gone.

Obama, like other G-8 leaders, agreed in July to limit the global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above the preindustrial level at which human civilization developed. Schellnhuber, addressing the Santa Fe conference, joked that the G-8 leaders had agreed to the 2C limit "probably because they don't know what it means." In fact, even the "brutal" timeline of the WBGU study, Schellnhuber cautioned, would not guarantee staying within the 2C target. It would merely give humanity a two-out-of-three chance of doing so--"worse odds than Russian roulette," he wryly noted. "But it is the best we can do." To have a three-out-of-four chance, countries would have to quit carbon even sooner. Likewise, we could decide to wait another decade or so to halt all greenhouse emissions, but this lowers the odds of hitting the 2C target to fifty-fifty. "And what kind of precautionary principle is that?" Schellnhuber asked.

There is a fundamental political assumption underlying the WBGU study: that the right to emit greenhouse gases is shared equally by all people on earth. Known in diplomatic circles as "the per capita principle," this approach has long been insisted upon by China and most other developing countries and thus is seen as essential to an agreement in Copenhagen, though among G-8 leaders only Merkel has endorsed it. The WBGU study applies the per capita principle to the world population of 7 billion people and arrives at an annual emissions quota of 2.7 tons of carbon dioxide per person. That's harsh news for Americans, who emit 20 tons per person annually, and it explains why the US deadline is the most imminent. But China won't welcome this news either. Its combination of high annual emissions and huge population gives it a deadline only a few years later than Europe's and Japan's.

"I myself was terrified when I saw these numbers," Schellnhuber said. He urges governments to agree in Copenhagen to launch "a Green Apollo Project." Like John Kennedy's pledge to land a man on the moon in ten years, a global Green Apollo Project would aim to put leading economies on a trajectory of zero carbon emissions within ten years. Combined with carbon trading with low-emissions countries, Schellnhuber says, such a "wartime mobilization" might still save us from the worst impacts of climate change. The alternative is more and more "Oh, shit" moments for all of us.

Study

About Mark Hertsgaard
Mark Hertsgaard (markhertsgaard.com), a fellow of The Nation Institute and The Nation's environment correspondent, is the author of five books, which have been translated into sixteen languages. His next book, Living Through the Storm: How We Survive the Next 50 Years of Climate Change, is forthcoming from Houghton-Mifflin.

Population and water

2009-10-14T09:36:00.000-07:00

By Peter Gleick, President of the Pacific Institute

Population discussions raise lots of hackles. And they bring the crazies out of the woodwork like termites when the Orkin Man appears. But I hope to post a series of pieces on population and water because we must stop ignoring the role of population in our environmental and water problems.

The amount of water on Earth is fixed. We're not losing it to space and we're not getting more (with negligible exceptions). The amount of water in a river basin or watershed is fixed. It goes up and down with natural variability, and it may change over time due to climate changes, but water is a renewable resources and our use of it does not affect the amount we get next year.

But population is not fixed. It is growing, and growing rapidly in some places. As a result, the amount of water available per person ("per capita") is declining. Here is a simple example: assume that the average flow of water in a river basin is 10 million acre-feet per year and the population using that water is 20 million people. Then on average, the water available for use is around 450 gallons per person per day, if you could use it all (which would, of course, destroy the river ecosystem, but that's another topic). If the population of the basin doubles to 40 million, the water availability per person drops in half, to around 225 gallons per person per day. If the population doubles again, water availability drops to just over 100 gallons per person per day. The math is easy, but the consequences can be severe: abundance can become shortage. In simple terms, addressing water problems in the face of population growth come down to three choices: (1) increase the water supply, (2) decrease the water demand per person, or (3) change the number of people. Water policy in the past century focused only on increasing supply. Most of the work of the Pacific Institute has focused on the second because we believe the options for new supply in most places are increasingly limited, expensive, and environmentally damaging, and we see enormous potential for reducing demand. Almost no discussion, anywhere, focuses on the third choice. But the failure to address population in the long run will be disastrous. And the "long-run" is no longer so far away.

Water (Population) Numbers: While total water availability remains fixed, the population of the United States has grown from around 150 million in 1950 to over 305 million today. The population of California in 1950 was 10.5 million; today it is around 37 million. The population of the state of Georgia in 1950 was under 4 million; today it is approaching 10 million. The population of Jordan in 1960 was around a million; today it is 6 million. The population of Israel in 1960 was just over 2 million; today it exceeds 7 million. The population of Iraq in 1960 was around 7.3 million; today it exceeds 31 million.

Is it any wonder that California's, or Georgia's, or the Middle East's water problems have worsened?

In a recent paper, Richard Seager of Columbia and his colleagues analyzed the recent drought in the southeastern United States. This drought led to water use restrictions, depleted flows in the major river basins of the region, and growing political tensions over water sharing between Georgia, Alabama, and Florida. The authors of this paper concluded that the recent drought in the Southeast was not climatologically different from past droughts, but was felt more severely largely due to the growth in population in the region. In July, a Federal judge ruled that Atlanta had to fundamentally change the way it obtains its water, and noted that

"Too often, state, local, and even national government actors do not consider the long-term consequences of their decisions. Local governments allow unchecked growth because it increases tax revenue, but these same governments do not sufficiently plan for the resources such unchecked growth will require. Nor do individual citizens consider frequently enough their consumption of our scarce resources, absent a crisis situation such as that experienced in the ACF basin in the last few years. The problems faced in the ACF basin will continue to be repeated throughout this country, as the population grows and more undeveloped land is developed. Only by cooperating, planning, and conserving can we avoid the situations that gave rise to this litigation." (emphasis added)

Climate change is going to cause serious impacts on water resources, but even without it, we are running up against water constraints that will worsen if we continue to ignore the population elephant in the room.

More to come.

Peter Gleick

Restoring an Ailing River in California

2009-10-14T09:33:00.000-07:00

By Jeremy Miller

For the first time in 60 years, water will flow through two long stretches of the San Joaquin River in California, a waterway that has been transformed — and often run dry — by engineering and agricultural, industrial and urban development.

This month, water surges were released from Friant Dam, near Fresno, into the San Joaquin River’s main channel. The releases come after nearly two decades of negotiations between the Natural Resources Defense Council, the federal Bureau of Reclamation and the Friant Water Users Authority, a group representing agricultural water users in the area.

Local farmers are troubled at the loss of water from the Friant-Kern and Madera canal systems, especially in light of a three-year drought that has ravaged the Central Valley’s croplands. But environmentalists say the releases are a vital first step in an immense restoration plan for the San Joaquin — one with the potential to stimulate the regional economy.

“The restoration effort will create construction-related jobs, help revive the commercial salmon fishing industry and bring a vital public resource back to life for future generations to enjoy,” said Monty Schmitt, a scientist for the council, in a statement.

In March, $400 million in funds for restoration and flood control work on the San Joaquin were made available with the passage by Congress of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act, which also added 2 million acres of land in nine states to the nation’s wilderness areas.

The decline of the San Joaquin began in the late 1930s with the state’s huge Central Valley Project, which resulted in dozens of dams and hydroelectric plants, and hundreds of miles of aqueducts and canals on the valley’s two major watersheds –- the San Joaquin and the Sacramento.

According to Tina Swanson, the executive director of the Bay Institute, this will be the largest river restoration project in the country and will focus on a 150-mile stretch between Friant Dam and its former confluence with the Merced River.

In two reaches totaling 63 miles, the river runs completely dry; in sections where water remains, it is often badly polluted with pesticides and other agricultural chemicals (PDF).

“The project is unprecedented,” Ms. Swanson said. “In essence we are bringing a dead river back to life.”

Environmentalists say that restoring flow to the entire length of the San Joaquin will not only flush out polluted stretches and potentially rejuvenate the region’s historic salmon runs, but will also help stabilize water conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta, the river’s natural endpoint and origin of the California Aqueduct, which brings drinking water 450 miles to 22 million residents in Southern California.

Chinook salmon, said Ms. Swanson, are planned for reintroduction to the river in 2013.

“The true measure of success will be the ecosystems,” she said. “If we can bring back a self-sustaining, spawning population of fish, we will have done our job.”

2009-10-13T16:12:00.001-07:00

October 13, 2009

Cleansing the Air at the Expense of Waterways

By CHARLES DUHIGG

MASONTOWN, Pa. — For years, residents here complained about the yellow smoke pouring from the tall chimneys of the nearby coal-fired power plant, which left a film on their cars and pebbles of coal waste in their yards. Five states — including New York and New Jersey — sued the plant’s owner, Allegheny Energy, claiming the air pollution was causing respiratory diseases and acid rain.

So three years ago, when Allegheny Energy decided to install scrubbers to clean the plant’s air emissions, environmentalists were overjoyed. The technology would spray water and chemicals through the plant’s chimneys, trapping more than 150,000 tons of pollutants each year before they escaped into the sky.

But the cleaner air has come at a cost. Each day since the equipment was switched on in June, the company has dumped tens of thousands of gallons of wastewater containing chemicals from the scrubbing process into the Monongahela River, which provides drinking water to 350,000 people and flows into Pittsburgh, 40 miles to the north.

“It’s like they decided to spare us having to breathe in these poisons, but now we have to drink them instead,” said Philip Coleman, who lives about 15 miles from the plant and has asked a state judge to toughen the facility’s pollution regulations. “We can’t escape.”

Even as a growing number of coal-burning power plants around the nation have moved to reduce their air emissions, many of them are creating another problem: water pollution. Power plants are the nation’s biggest producer of toxic waste, surpassing industries like plastic and paint manufacturing and chemical plants, according to a New York Times analysis of Environmental Protection Agency data.

Much power plant waste once went into the sky, but because of toughened air pollution laws, it now often goes into lakes and rivers, or into landfills that have leaked into nearby groundwater, say regulators and environmentalists.

Officials at the plant here in southwest Pennsylvania — named Hatfield’s Ferry — say it does not pose any health or environmental risks because they have installed equipment to limit the toxins the facility releases into the Monongahela River and elsewhere.

But as the number of scrubbers around the nation increases, environmentalists — including those in Pennsylvania — have become worried. The Environmental Protection Agency projects that by next year, roughly 50 percent of coal-generated electricity in the United States will come from plants that use scrubbers or similar technologies, creating vast new sources of wastewater.

Yet no federal regulations specifically govern the disposal of power plant discharges into waterways or landfills. Some regulators have used laws like the Clean Water Act to combat such pollution. But those laws can prove inadequate, say regulators, because they do not mandate limits on the most dangerous chemicals in power plant waste, like arsenic and lead.

For instance, only one in 43 power plants and other electric utilities across the nation must limit how much barium they dump into nearby waterways, according to a Times analysis of E.P.A. records. Barium, which is commonly found in power plant waste and scrubber wastewater, has been linked to heart problems and diseases in other organs.

Even when power plant emissions are regulated by the Clean Water Act, plants have often violated that law without paying fines or facing other penalties. Ninety percent of 313 coal-fired power plants that have violated the Clean Water Act since 2004 were not fined or otherwise sanctioned by federal or state regulators, according to a Times analysis of Environmental Protection Agency records. (An interactive database of power plant violations around the nation is available at www.nytimes.com/coalplants.)

Fines for Plants Modest

Other plants have paid only modest fines. For instance, Hatfield’s Ferry has violated the Clean Water Act 33 times since 2006. For those violations, the company paid less than $26,000. During that same period, the plant’s parent company earned $1.1 billion.

“We know that coal waste is so dangerous that we don’t want it in the air, and that’s why we’ve told power plants they have to install scrubbers,” said Senator Barbara Boxer, the California Democrat who is chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. “So why are they dumping the same waste into people’s water?”

Though the Environmental Protection Agency promised earlier this decade to consider new regulations on power plant waste — and reiterated that pledge after a Tennessee dam break sent 1.1 billion gallons of coal waste into farms and homes last year — federal regulators have yet to issue any major new rules.

One reason is that some state governments have long fought new federal regulations, often at the behest of energy executives, say environmentalists and regulators.

The counties surrounding Hatfield’s Ferry, which are home to multiple universities, are an example of what hangs in the balance as this debate plays out.

Last year, when Hatfield’s Ferry asked the state for permission to dump scrubber wastewater into the Monongahela River, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection approved the request with proposed limits on some chemicals.

But state officials placed no limits on water discharges of arsenic, aluminum, boron, chromium, manganese, nickel or other chemicals that have been linked to health risks, all of which have been detected in the plant’s wastewater samples, according to state documents.

Records show, and company officials concede, that Hatfield’s Ferry is already dumping scrubber wastewater into the Monongahela that violates the state’s few proposed pollution rules. Moreover, those rules have been suspended until a judge decides on the plant’s appeal of the proposed limits.

“You can get used to the plant, and the noise and soot on your cars,” said Father Rodney Torbic, the priest at the St. George Serbian Orthodox Church, across the road from Hatfield’s Ferry. “But I see people suffering every day because of this pollution.”

Officials at Hatfield’s Ferry say there is no reason for residents to be concerned. They say that lawsuits against the plant are without merit, and that they have installed a $25 million water treatment plant that removes many of the toxic particles and solids from scrubber wastewater. The solids are put into a 106-acre landfill that contains a synthetic liner to prevent leaks.

Officials say that the plant’s pollution does not pose any risk. Limits on arsenic, aluminum, barium, boron, cadmium, chromium, manganese and nickel are not appropriate, the company wrote in a statement, because the plant’s wastewater is not likely to cause the Monongahela River to exceed safety levels for those contaminants.

“Allegheny has installed state-of-the-art scrubbers, state-of-the-art wastewater treatment, and state-of-the-art synthetic liners,” the company wrote in a statement. “We operate to be in compliance with all environmental laws and will continue to do so.”

The plant’s water treatment facility, however, does not remove all dissolved metals and chemicals, many of which go into the river, executives concede. An analysis of records from other plants with scrubbers indicates that such wastewater often contains high concentrations of dissolved arsenic, barium, boron, iron, manganese, cadmium, magnesium and other heavy metals that have been shown to contribute to cancer, organ failures and other diseases. Company officials say the emissions by the plant will not pose health risks, because they will be diluted in the river.

Though synthetic liners are generally considered effective at preventing leaks, environmentalists note that the Hatfield’s Ferry landfill is less than a mile uphill from the river, and that over time, other types of liners have proven less reliable than initially hoped.

The Environmental Protection Agency, in a statement last month, said it planned to revise standards for water discharges from coal-fired power plants like Hatfield’s Ferry. Agency studies have concluded that “current regulations, which were issued in 1982, have not kept pace with changes that have occurred in the electric power industry,” officials wrote.

But some environmentalists and lawmakers say that such rules will not be enough, and that new laws are needed that force plants to use more expensive technologies that essentially eliminate toxic discharges.

Cleaning Up Pollution

“It’s really important to set a precedent that tells power plants that they need to genuinely clean up pollution, rather than just shift it from the air to the water,” said Abigail Dillen, a lawyer with the law firm Earthjustice, which represents two advocacy organizations, the Environmental Integrity Project and the Citizens Coal Council, in asking a Pennsylvania court to toughen regulations on Hatfield’s Ferry.

Ms. Dillen, like other environmentalists, has urged courts and lawmakers to force plants to adopt “zero discharge” treatment facilities, which are more expensive but can eliminate most pollution.

State officials say they have established appropriate water pollution limits for Hatfield’s Ferry, and have strict standards for landfill disposal.

“We asked the plant for estimates on how much of various pollutants they are likely to emit, and based on those estimates, we set limits that are protective of the Monongahela,” said Ron Schwartz, a state environmental official. “We have asked them to monitor some chemicals, including arsenic, and if levels grow too high, we may intervene.”

However, environmental groups have argued in court documents and interviews that Hatfield’s Ferry probably will emit dangerous chemicals, and that they fear the state is unlikely to intervene.

Similar problems have emerged elsewhere. Twenty-one power plants in 10 states, including Alabama, Kentucky, North Carolina and Ohio, have dumped arsenic into rivers or other waters at concentrations as much as 18 times the federal drinking water standard, according to a Times analysis of E.P.A. data.

In Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio, Wisconsin and elsewhere, power plants have dumped other chemicals at dangerous concentrations. Few of those plants have ever been sanctioned for those emissions, nor were their discharge permits altered to prevent future pollution.

Records indicate that power plant landfills and other disposal practices have polluted groundwater in more than a dozen states, contaminating the water in some towns with toxic chemicals. A 2007 report published by the E.P.A. suggested that people living near some power plant landfills faced a cancer risk 2,000 times higher than federal health standards.

Lobbyists Block Controls

In 2000, Environmental Protection Agency officials tried to issue stricter controls on power plant waste. But a lobbying campaign by the coal and power industries, as well as public officials in 13 states, blocked the effort. In 2008 alone, according to campaign finance reports, power companies donated $20 million to the political campaigns of federal lawmakers, almost evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.

In interviews, E.P.A. officials said that toughening pollution rules for power plants was among their top priorities. Last month, the agency announced it was moving forward on new rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from hundreds of power plants and other large industrial facilities. Lisa P. Jackson, who was confirmed to head the agency in January, has said she would determine by the end of the year whether certain power plant byproducts should be treated as hazardous waste, which would subject them to tougher regulations.

But for now, there are no new rules on power plant waste. And many states are trying to dissuade Ms. Jackson from creating new regulations, according to state and federal regulators, because they worry that new rules will burden overworked regulators, and because power plants have pressured local politicians to fight greater regulation.

For instance, Pennsylvania has opposed designating the waste from Hatfield’s Ferry and other power plants as hazardous. In a statement, the Department of Environmental Protection said the state had “sufficient state and federal laws and regulations at our disposal to control wastewater discharges at levels protective of the environment and public health.”

But residents living near power plants disagree.

“Americans want cheap electricity, but those of us who live around power plants are the ones who have to pay for it,” Mr. Coleman said. “It’s like being in the third world.”

Karl Russell contributed reporting.

Mountain deserves saving

2009-10-08T06:37:00.001-07:00

By Bill McEwen / The Fresno Bee

The Choinumni have a name for the rocky mountain at the base of the Sierra. They call it Wahahlish, meaning "someone cried."

Once the mountain -- and its wildflowers, burrowing owls, coyotes, rattlesnakes and native artifacts -- belonged to the Choinumni, a Yokut tribe whose members lived in villages near the Kings River but also looked for food in the adjoining foothills.

Now Jesse Morrow Mountain belongs to Cemex, which wants to mine and process aggregate there -- an operation that would consume about 40% of the acreage, spoil the views, foul the air and overload local roads.

But, while the global cement company holds title to the land, the mountain really belongs to everybody who has -- or might yet -- admire its beauty.

Yes, this humble mountain belongs to the thousands of tourists motoring along Highway 180 to Kings Canyon and Sequoia National parks. It's the first peak they see as they climb into the Sierra.

It also belongs to the folks who follow the Blossom Trail each spring. And to the people in the bed-and-breakfast stops who soak up the sight of rows of wine grapes finally giving way to the mountain.

Now, nearly a decade after another sand-and-gravel company bought the mountain and its 2,000 acres for $2 million from a cattle rancher, Cemex wants to cash in.

The time to preserve Jesse Morrow Mountain and to stop all who would ruin it is now. Fresno County released the draft environmental impact report for the proposed project Friday, and you have until Dec. 1 to voice your opinions on the county's findings.

Tonight the county will pass out information from the report and accept written citizen comments in a 90-minute meeting that will start at 6 o'clock in the Sanger High School multipurpose room.

Four county planners and two consultants will be available to answer questions one on one, but county planning officials aren't planning a mass discussion of concerns.

"It's peculiar we have a process that minimizes public engagement," Fresno County Supervisor Henry R. Perea says. "It didn't work well for the dairy ordinance" passed by the supervisors in 2007. "The strategy was not to let the people speak. That didn't work; it's not going to work now."

The report, which totals more than 700 pages, has been in the making for several years. It talks a lot about steps Cemex could take to lessen the destruction.

But it concludes that there would be "significant and unavoidable impacts" to the mountain's topography and vegetation. There also would be substantial harm to air, traffic and Choinumni cultural resources.

And while berms would hide some of the mining work while it's in progress, the end result would be a carved-up mountain.

In the report is a snapshot of a proposed deal between the mine operators and the Choinumni: the company would lease 40 acres on the mountain's north side to the tribe for $1 a year for a cultural preservation center and give $40,000 for the first 400,000 metric tons of aggregate shipped from the site. When the mine has all of its permits, the tribe would receive title to the 40 acres.

Grass-roots opposition to mining the mountain emerged when the project was announced in 2002. But volunteer efforts often are no match for corporations with deep pockets, expert lawyers -- and the support of elected officials who've accepted their campaign donations.

Supporters of the mining operation say that there is a shortage of aggregate in Fresno County. They claim that without this mine, building costs will go up. The operation would also create jobs and provide work for haulers.

But what about agricultural tourism, a job cluster that the Board of Supervisors claims to support? With spoiled views and more traffic, the mine might cost more jobs than it produces.

Besides, what price can you put on the sight of this mountain, its green slopes alive with the promise of all that is right with the world on a spring day? Why must Fresno County always cave to the wishes of the profiteers?

Once in awhile, we must protect what is ours. This is such a time. Jesse Morrow Mountain belongs to all of us.

The columnist can be reached at bmcewen@fresnobee.com or (559) 441-6632. His blog is at fresnobeehive.com.

Nest Box Initiative Progress Report

2009-09-26T07:54:00.000-07:00

Roughly seven months ago I introduced our nest box program which had the goal of partnering with farmers and others to install nest boxes on their land.

Here's where we are at so far:

-Approximately 1,100 board feet of wood donated.

-$550 donated by farmers in response to our efforts

-Donations(lumber and cash) by:
- Fairless Farms(Caruthers)
- Don Cameron of Terranova Ranch(Helm)
- Southern California Edison - Steve Byrd
- Moss Lumber Co.

Farmers and other recipients
-McFarlane Farms(Sanger) - Citrus and Almonds
-Fairless Farms(Caruthers) - Raisins
-Richard Walker(Lindsay) - Citrus
-Don Cameron(Helm) - Diversified farmer/organic and conventional
-Shaun(Caruthers) - Raisins and Almonds
-Peter Filippi(Sanger) - Citrus etc.
-Il Giardino Farms - Organic vegetables
-CSUF Ag Lab
-San Joaquin River Parkway Trust - Jensen River Ranch property
-Hudson Farms(Sanger) - Peaches

Media Coverage
- KMJ Farm Report
- Fresno County Farm Bureau Friday Follow-up
- The Grower (potential)
- Western Ag Press (potential)

Species Affected:
- Wood Duck
- Tree Swallow
- Kestrel
- Barn Owl
- Burrowing Owl

Number of Boxes
- In a few weeks we will be hitting 100 boxes

Number of Non-Members who Built
- 14 at roughly six boxes each

Members and others who built or helped in other ways:
-Carl Davies
-Ronald DuBois
-Brandon Hill
-Ed Case
-Ken and Sandi Schulte
-Ruben and Mary Rodriguez
-Wilfred Laemmlen
-Diane DuBois
-Jeff Davis
-Liz Hudson (Fresno County Farm Bureau)

Thanks to everyone for their help! If I missed anyone I apologize and please let me know I missed you.

Huge solar farms proposed in Valley

2009-09-21T14:34:00.001-07:00

By Tim Sheehan

A pair of solar farms proposed for the Panoche Hills of western Fresno County and eastern San Benito County could become the biggest installations of their kind in the world.

Solargen Energy Inc., based in Cupertino, has submitted an application to Fresno County planners for its Panoche Ranch Solar Farm on 2,600 acres of rangeland near the Little Panoche Reservoir. Solar photovoltaic panels spread across the acreage would produce up to 250 megawatts of electricity.

A few miles down Little Panoche Road, across the San Benito County line, Solargen has proposed an even larger project in the Panoche Valley, where solar panels could occupy as much as 10,000 acres and generate up to 1,000 megawatts of power.

If - and it's a big if - the projects are built, the 1,250 megawatts of electricity generated would dwarf the output of any other solar photovoltaic installation currently operating anywhere in the world. The largest such project now is a 266-acre spread of panels near Olmedilla de Alarcon, Spain, which produces 60 megawatts of electricity in peak daylight hours.

Solargen's plans are the latest - and largest - to emerge to harvest Central California's abundant sunlight to generate electricity without creating pollution.

But they're likely to face opposition from groups concerned about endangered species and Panoche Valley residents who don't want millions of solar panels dotting their scenic valley.

Ideal location?

Solargen CEO Michael Peterson said the sites are well-suited to large-scale solar production - even more so than the floor of the San Joaquin Valley, which can be blanketed in winter fog.

That means the solar potential of the two sites is about 90% of what it is in the scorching Mojave Desert, Peterson said.

Other factors are existing Pacific Gas & Electric Co. high-power transmission lines that cross overhead, offering a ready connection to the power grid; and the relative isolation of the two sites. "There's not a huge population and not a huge disturbance," Peterson said.

Documents submitted to Fresno County planners indicate that the smaller of the two projects would install more than 1.2 million solar panels. The 2-by-4-foot panels would be arranged in rows, tilted to face south, and held aloft about four to five feet off the ground by single-pole steel supports. The rows of panels would be spaced as much as 15 feet apart.

Underneath the panels, native plants and grasses would be grown, kept in check with seasonal grazing by sheep.

The entire property, which is uninhabited by humans and is used as grazing rangeland, covers more than 2,600 acres. About 1,000 acres would be used for the solar project. That includes a 16-acre substation that would tie the electricity into PG&E's transmission lines.

The rest of the land would be preserved as habitat for threatened and endangered species, including the San Joaquin kit fox, giant kangaroo rat and the blunt-nosed leopard lizard.

The larger project in San Benito County, if built out to its maximum, would install more than 3.5 million solar panels over about 10,000 acres. At that size, it would be able to produce 1,000 megawatts of power. But Peterson said it's more realistic to expect the installation to be smaller.

Even at half the maximum size, with an electrical output of about 500 megawatts, the San Benito County project would still be far larger than any other solar-panel operation today.

A matter of scale

As abundant as sunlight is, solar power remains a mere drop in central California's energy bucket. Most of the existing development of solar power is on the rooftops of businesses and homes. There are other projects being proposed in this part of the state, but the only one to get off the drawing board is a 5-megawatt, 40-acre solar farm now under construction in Mendota.

Electricity isn't the only benefit that Solargen hopes to bring to central California. Peterson said the company also hopes to build a manufacturing plant in Fresno County that could eventually employ up to 150 people making solar photovoltaic panels for its two large solar farms and other projects.

"It'll be less expensive for us to produce the panels as opposed to going out and buying them from an outside company," he said.

And cost is going to be an important consideration for Solargen. Peterson said he expects it will cost close to $4 billion to built both sites.

The company is in early negotiations to sell electricity to PG&E - an agreement that would provide a stable stream of revenue against which Solargen could borrow the money it needs for construction, the company said. It could take five to seven years to build the two farms, Peterson said.

Environmental concern

The price tag isn't going to be the only obstacle Solargen will have to overcome to build either of the two solar farms. Environmentalists are worried about the effects the projects will have on the animals and plants that call the two valleys home.

Brandon Hill, president of the Fresno Audubon Society, said his and other groups will be looking carefully at what Solargen plans to do to ease the effects. "We're going to try to approach this in a constructive manner," Hill said. "Hopefully they will listen to our concerns and respond where feasible."

The Fresno County site, just south of Little Panoche Reservoir, "is an important place to us" for bird watching, Hill said.

In San Benito County, however, outright opposition is brewing among Panoche Valley farmers who grow organic crops and grass-fed livestock sold at premium prices in the Bay Area.

Kim Williams, who with her husband Richard farms pasture-reared laying hens, fear Solargen's project will "cover the entire flat part of the valley with solar panels." That, she said, would ruin the area for the environmentally friendly farming and for the endangered animals and plants that live in the valley.

The solar farm would spoil efforts by the valley's residents - who number less than 200 - to promote the Panoche Valley as an area for ecotourism and agritourism, "a place to let people in the Bay Area see where their food is coming from," Williams said.

Williams said she's philosophically against companies that want to make a huge profit from cheap sunlight. "I'm opposed to utility-scale solar projects that take over prime land," she said. "Solar needs to be promoted on rooftops."

Audubon's Hill said he supports solar technology because it has fewer environmental consequences than fossil fuels.

"With really good mitigation, they can set aside a good chunk of land for wildlife for the rest of our lives," he said. "But with all the farmland that in theory should be retired on the west side of the [San Joaquin] Valley, why not put panels out there?"

Peterson said he's mindful of the environmental concerns.

"In order for us to become energy independent, we can't do it one rooftop at a time," he said.

"We won't be able to make everyone happy. That's just a given," Peterson added. "But we're doing our best to try to make this friendly to the environment."

In addition to setting aside nearby land for kit foxes, kangaroo rats and other species and steering clear of burrows or areas frequented by blunt-nosed leopard lizards, Solargen officials said, environmental engineers have recommended changes to fencing around the sites to allow critters to pass through, raising the panels off the ground to allow sheep to graze, continuing the traditional rangeland use of the property, and minimizing the number of solar panels to avoid disturbing sensitive areas.

"We're spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, on environmental issues just to get to the starting line," McAfee said.

The reporter can be reached at tsheehan@fresnobee.com or (559) 441-6319.

Panoche Valley Solar Power Plant Study

2009-09-06T16:44:00.001-07:00

Please consider that this is a study paid for by SolarGen and many of the claims are more representative of opinion than of fact. This document is most useful for getting a feel for what the project is rather than its potential impacts.

Panoche Valley Solar Factory Initial Study

Dr. Peter Gleick on Temperance Flat Dam Feasibility

2009-09-05T18:11:00.000-07:00

Rigged feasibility study shows desperation for new surface reservoirs: Temperance Flat falls flat

A couple of weeks ago, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation released its Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation "Plan Formulation Report." Despite its long name, and the very odd fact that it is dated October 2008 but was released just recently, this massive report is simply a feasibility study for the proposed Temperance Flat dam on the San Joaquin River -- one of the two surface storage dams being intensively pushed by a few special interests as a critical solution to our water woes. This report, which I just managed to read, is remarkable. Its purpose is to show that Temperance Flat is feasible and makes sense. But in fact, this report actually shows that Temperance Flat is a bad idea, will create far fewer benefits than costs, and will be an ecological, recreational, and economic failure. And the "new" water it will create will be minimal and hugely expensive.

The study looked at a wide range of dam projects, but quickly rejected most of them as infeasible. They settled on four possible alternatives -- a bigger and a smaller reservoir, with and without a new canal to move water across the valley (not the so-called "peripheral canal," but a new local canal). Yet of these four alternatives, even the Bureau of Reclamation (BoR) couldn't make the ones with the smaller reservoir create more benefits than costs. This left the big reservoir, with and without the canal. They then dumped the canal option, because it didn't add any new net benefits. Thus, they could only make one possible configuration make sense. And here is the problem, even that configuration doesn't make senseâ€¦

Water Number: 1.06. The best that the Bureau of Reclamation could do to make Temperance Flat look feasible was to come up with a benefit/cost ratio of between 1.00 and 1.06. 1.06? This means that even after rigging the numbers in favor of the project, they could barely make it appear that the benefits exceed the costs. And yes, the numbers are rigged. Certain "benefits" are exaggerated. Certain major costs are excluded. And even worse, other alternatives that can provide the same benefits at lower costs are simply ignored.

Here are a couple of examples just to give readers here a flavor. [The entire report would benefit from a smart independent economist reviewing all the assumptions and redoing all the benefit/cost assessment with more realistic numbers, but the BoR excludes most of the equations and actual numbers from this study]:

o The new reservoir will destroy riverine habitat with American shad and striped bass spawning habitat, it will destroy nearly half of the trout habitat in the study area, and it may completely extirpate the shad population (among other ecological impacts they acknowledge but don't quantify). What value does the BoR assign in their benefit/cost to these ecosystem losses? Zero.

o The new reservoir will destroy one of the few remaining free-flowing stretches of the San Joaquin with many long class 2, 3 and 4 rapids separated by long scenic pools used by rafters and kayakers. What value do they assign in their benefit/cost ratio to this loss? Zero.

o There are dozens of sacred Native American village, gathering, and religious areas in the area to be flooded. Even the BoR acknowledges over 150 archeological and historical sites in the area, without having conducted a comprehensive survey, and local Native American community representatives have strongly objected to the reservoir on these grounds. What cost does the BoR assign to this cultural destruction in their benefit/cost ratio? $6 million in construction costs for "mitigation" but zero for the destruction of these sites.

Most egregious is that around 80% of the project benefits supposedly result from improved water supply for municipal, industrial, and agricultural users. The problem is that they estimated the value of this benefit at "the estimated cost of the most likely alternative water supply" if the dam was not built. If 80% of the benefits of $169 million a year are attributed to water supply, and the project yields (at best) 180,000 acre-feet of water in an average year, the BoR is assigning a value of nearly $850 per acre-foot to these benefits. Yet the BoR explicitly excludes conservation and efficiency improvements, arguing they don't exist in the region -- a blatant falsehood. Because conservation and efficiency improvements are actually far cheaper than new supply, if they had used the "estimated cost" of improved efficiency, the value of the "benefits" of the water supply would drop substantially, and the "benefit/cost" ratio would plummet.

Finally, does anyone really believe that the construction cost -- estimated in this report at over $3.35 billion -- will not rise substantially? Has any major reservoir been built even close to the cost first estimated by the Bureau of Reclamation? Fix any one of these errors in the feasibility study and the benefit/cost ratio drops below 1. Fix them all and the project is an economic disaster.

Given the stark reality of these numbers, how can anyone still support Temperance Flat? Easy. The people receiving the benefits are not the people bearing the costs, many of which are public, environment, and cultural. Unless we have politicians willing to stand up for the public good, bad projects will continue to impoverish California's environment, cultural history, and pocketbook. This "feasibility" study puts a price on everything except the things with true value.

Major solar farm planned in Panoche Valley

2009-09-03T20:54:00.000-07:00

Thursday, September 03, 2009

By Adam Breen (editor@freelancenews.com)

One of the largest solar energy projects in the United States, encompassing up to 30,000 acres in San Benito and Fresno counties and potentially costing $4 billion, is proposed for the rural Panoche Valley.

County planning officials are reviewing preliminary documents on Solargen Energy's proposal, as some residents of the rural area are questioning the merits of placing solar panels on land they say is both agriculturally productive and environmentally sensitive.

"They've given us a draft application that we're doing a cursory review on," said Byron Turner, assistant planner for San Benito County. "As we understand it, they are proposing solar panels on a 1,000-megawatt solar farm and ancillary facilities in a phased development at a rate of 200 megawatts a year."

In a July report, Solargen says that it has optioned "more than 13,000 acres of land and has letters of intent or is negotiating to acquire control of an additional 18,000 acres" between the two counties, in what it terms "a uniquely valuable area for solar energy development."

Michael Peterson, chief executive officer of the three-year-old company, said the total amount of land that would be developed in San Benito County under the plan would be 5,000 to 6,000 acres, 40 percent of which would contain solar panels.

The company's documents say the proposed solar plant site has 90 percent of the solar intensity of the Mojave Desert; direct access to the electric grid - as power lines cross the Panoche Valley; and is within 100 miles of large population centers of the Bay Area.

"The beauty of that valley is that engineers said it looks like God has created a solar farm there; plus PG&E lines run through it," Peterson said, noting that construction on the solar farm would take place over six or seven years, building from the center.

"You would think that there's a lot of sun in California, but in the Central Valley there's a lot of fog and on the other side of the valley there's coastal fog. The Panoche Valley has characteristics that are unique and good for solar."

Mitigation measures

The company's report notes that the land in question "is large, mostly flat, has lost most water rights, and is now grazing land." Other land would be set aside as "mitigation land" to allow for continued growth of native grasses and to provide access to native animal species, according to Peterson.

"We have approached this on an environmentally-sensitive basis," he said. "We've gone to the flat land of the valley and tried to acquire other land around the valley for mitigation. The land is farmed land that has been disturbed; it's not in its natural state. We would take this previously farmed and grazed land and have land set aside forever to compensate for any species that may be displaced through the projects."

Solargen has had talks with state fish and game and wildlife officials regarding potential mitigation measures to lessen the impact of the project on the environment and wild animals in the area. Peterson said the company will request that a mitigated negative declaration be approved by San Benito County, meaning a full environmental impact report (EIR) would not be required. Turner, however, said he expects that the project "meets the scope of an EIR," which would mandate more intense study and public review of development plans.

Residents' concerns

Maxine Davis, who owns land in the Panoche Valley, called the area "a unique area with little traffic or pollution."

"It's a place where one goes to escape the busy city life ... The thought of our beautiful valley being covered by a sea of black solar panels is frightening and would turn this pristine grassland into a desert and change it from a pristine grass valley to an industry area."

While she said she is a proponent of solar power and supports Solargen's plan to build its solar farm near existing PG&E transmission lines that run through the valley, Davis wondered why the company could not build its plant closer to the lines near Interstate 5, which is east of the valley in Fresno County.

"I am in support of solar power yet I do not agree with ruining an agriculture and wilderness area to financially benefit a private company because the land is less expensive for them to build a solar farm on than other areas," she said.

County Supervisor Reb Monaco, who has met with Solargen representatives, said that as is the case with nearly every development proposal that he has seen, "they all have some very positive aspects and some negative aspects."

He said the solar farm is "promising from an economic standpoint, potentially" though "the rub will come with how you deal with endangered species in the area. Obviously, you'll need an EIR. It has to be well planned out."

Monaco noted that the county has begun writing policy to address the concept of renewable energy in its general plan, spurred in part by Solargen's proposal.

Local financial impact

Peterson said the potential financial benefit to San Benito County is "absolutely huge. It may as much as double [the county's] tax revenue."

He said Solargen representatives have told county supervisors that "our goal is to generate a lot of employment that is local" perhaps working with regional job centers to commit to employing a certain amount of San Benito County residents.

"We're committed to employing as many local people as possible," Peterson said, adding that there would be construction jobs for six or seven years while the solar farm is built out in phases. He said up to 100 people would work on site, though final numbers have not been calculated.

There are no plans for Solargen to provide power directly to San Benito County residents, company officials said.

Company financing

Projected revenue figures in Solargen's July report, which predicted $15 billion in revenue and $5 billion in pre-tax profit over 25 years "is outdated," Peterson said. He said revenue estimates must wait until the company enters into "off-take agreements" with utilities to purchase the power generated by the plant.

"It could generate $8 or $9 billion in revenue," he estimated, adding that it will take $4 billion worth of capital to finance the project.

Since the Panoche solar farm would be built in phases over nearly a decade, "it doesn't have to be funded all at once," Peterson said. Panel manufacturers and "strategic investment partners" will provide the initial financing and other construction money can be secured against future anticipated profits.

Adam Breen
Adam Breen is a staff writer with the Weekend Pinnacle.

2009-09-01T19:37:00.000-07:00

Fresno to study 3 water conservation plans
City Council will take up measures after task force formed.
Published online on Tuesday, Aug. 25, 2009
By Russell Clemings / The Fresno Bee

Three months after forming a task force on water, the Fresno City Council will consider Thursday three water-conservation measures prompted by the drought.

Written by Council Member Andreas Borgeas, the measures:

-- Call for plans for reusing "graywater" -- waste water from washers, showers, bathtubs and other less-than-hazardous sources -- for landscape irrigation and limited indoor use.

-- Expand an existing rebate program for highly efficient home plumbing fixtures so businesses can qualify for the rebates, too. The program is funded at $22,000 in the fiscal year that started July 1.

-- Start a process leading to requirements for highly efficient fixtures in new construction in the downtown freeway triangle.

The council has previously called for changes in state and federal water policies, voting in July, for example, to back legal challenges to rules protecting two fish species from water project operations in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.

The city also tightened its outdoor watering rules in April, banning all irrigation between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m.

But Borgeas said the city also should be "taking a good look into our backyard and seeing what we can do."

The measures have support from the Fresno Chamber of Commerce and the Building Industry Association "with one condition -- that they work with us on implementation," said Michael Prandini, the association's president and chief executive officer.

"We just don't want them to jump out too far in front" of what the association considers to be viable technologies, Prandini said.

Borgeas said the graywater measure is intended to give the city power to adopt tighter standards than those announced in July by the state Building Standards Commission.

Similarly, the downtown standards would complement recently adopted state standards. Water supplies downtown are considered a major limitation on higher-density development envisioned there.

The council's water task force, on which Borgeas serves, was formed in May but has not yet had a formal meeting because of more pressing council business like the city budget, followed by vacations in July and August.
The reporter can be reached at rclemings@fresnobee.com or (559) 441-6371.

Destination: Pixley National Wildlife Refuge

2009-09-01T19:34:00.000-07:00

visaliatimesdelta.com

August 26, 2009

Staff reports

Editor's note: Looking for things to do? The Times-Delta spotlights one of the region's recreational destinations each Wednesday.

During the hustle and bustle of modern life, it is easy to take the simple pleasures of nature for granted.

For those interested in re-connecting with the natural world, the Pixley National Wildlife Refuge offers several opportunities to catch a glimpse of some of the most impressive winged species in the country.

The Pixley refuge is a winter home to the majestic sandhill cranes, which begin arriving in September from northern nesting grounds. By January, their numbers may peak at around 6,000 birds.

Their distinctive call blankets the refuge when several thousand birds return to the wetlands at night after a day spent feeding in nearby agricultural fields.

Sounding a lot like a frog, the cranes' call cannot be mistaken for that of any other bird.

The Pixley refuge provides a place for the cranes to roost undisturbed except for the distant noise of an occasional passing train.

The cranes return every year of their 20-year-plus life span to the wetlands.

In their mature state, sandhill cranes are silvery gray with a red cap on their heads. They mate for life.

Adult cranes in Pixley can be seen with their "colts," or juvenile cranes, in the winter after the colts have hatched and before the birds return to their nesting grounds in Northern California and Oregon.

Other birds at refuge

Several other species of birds including hawks, eagles and owls also live in the refuge. An estimated 150 species can be seen, including the horned lark, western meadowlark and various species of sparrow.

That has not always been the case.

In 1992, Congress passed the Central California Improvement Act, which supplied Pixley with a reliable water source that allowed for the creation of 300 acres of wetlands in the refuge. Until a few years ago, the public was not allowed in the refuge for fear that the wildlife would be disturbed.

The refuge eased its restrictions at the request of the Tulare Audubon Society, which helped build a viewing platform in the refuge to enhance the nature-watching experience.

Take the Avenue 56/Earlimart exit off Highway 99. Turn right on Avenue 56 and take another right on Road 88. Drive about a mile and a half on Road 88 until you reach a small sign and parking lot on the left side of the road.

Interior Dept.: Calif. Water a National Priority

2009-08-12T18:01:00.000-07:00

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: August 12, 2009

Filed at 8:42 p.m. ET

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- California's ongoing water crisis is a major national priority, akin to restoring the Chesapeake Bay or Florida's Everglades, a top Obama administration official said Wednesday.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar will hold a public meeting in Washington next month to discuss plans to restore the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, the freshwater estuary that supplies drinking water to two-thirds of Californians and is one of the most vital wildlife habitats on the West Coast, Deputy Interior Secretary David Hayes said.

Hayes was in Sacramento to update farmers, city dwellers and environmentalists about federal efforts to free up water for crops and fisheries, and to preside over the latest round of water fights as the state hobbles through its third year of drought.

''California's delta is as important a national resource as the Everglades, or the Great Lakes in the Midwest, or the Chesapeake Bay,'' Hayes said. ''Not only is it a crucial ecosystem that is in peril, but more than 20 million Americans in the most populated state in the nation rely on it for their drinking water. The status quo is not sustainable.''

Water is a precious resource in California. In recent years, legal battles over dwindling supplies have interrupted and reduced irrigation flows to the San Joaquin Valley, which supplies much of the nation's produce, forcing farmers to fallow hundreds of thousands of acres and idle farmworkers.

Low rainfall also has meant there is less water in the delta and rivers to sustain native fish, which has resulted in the cancellation of commercial salmon fishing season for the past two years.

In late June, Salazar traveled to Fresno, the heart of the valley, and assigned Hayes to help find solutions to ease the toll of the state's water shortage on growers.

Since then, the government has directed millions in stimulus funds to the federal Central Valley Project, which manages the dams and canals that move water around the state, and to farmers to build more than 90 new wells to pump more groundwater.

Still, in valley towns where lines for emergency rations of rice, dried beans and canned goods have at times stretched for a block, officials warned that wasn't enough to put jobless families back to work.

Fifty mayors are calling for President Barack Obama to visit the area himself, saying three years of drought coupled with court-ordered protections for threatened fish species have sapped critical irrigation supplies.

Hayes said relaxing protections for endangered species would not solve the state's water woes. Solutions need to restore the delta ecosystem as a whole.

''This ecosystem is one of the jewels of the West Coast,'' Hayes said. ''Some new engineering may be what saves California.''

State and federal agencies are evaluating several conservation strategies for the estuary, including a controversial proposal that could cost up to $17 billion to build a canal to move water around the ecosystem.

Speaking before Hayes at Wednesday's meeting, residents of the fragile delta islands said they feared those plans ignored their livelihoods and communities.

Environmentalists and fishermen said any federal solutions should prioritize safeguarding vulnerable native species, expecially the record-low numbers of chinook salmon that once flourished off the coasts of California and Oregon.

Gary Bobker, program director of the Bay Institute, a nonprofit environmental organization, said the delta ''has a compromised immune system and any one of the stressors could push it over the edge.''

Uniersity of Pacific Study on Ag Job Losses

2009-08-12T10:23:00.000-07:00

PDF

VANISHING HABITAT: As the delta goes, so go our salmon

2009-07-05T08:30:00.000-07:00

VANISHING HABITAT
As the delta goes, so go our salmon

Zeke Grader

Sunday, July 5, 2009
This salmon smolt is one of 550,000 released into the bay...

California is without its salmon for a second year. Prospects for the reopening of the season next year are encouraging, but the future of this iconic fish beyond that is uncertain.

Pacific salmon - born in free-flowing streams, reared in rivers before going to sea and then returning to their natal streams to spawn and die - face innumerable threats. These include predators - larger fish, birds, marine mammals and man - and the whims of nature.

Civilization has presented its own challenges to these fish. Large dams now block or impede their passage on most major salmon rivers. Mining and logging operations have devastated salmon habitat. Diversions have dried up streams or caused water temperatures to rise to lethal levels.

About 90 percent of California's salmon, however, face another problem: the decline of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta/San Francisco Bay estuary, the migratory path where the fish need to grow and gain strength before heading to sea.

Much of the estuary's shallow-water habitat, where salmon fed and hid from predators, has been lost. Municipal and agricultural discharges have polluted the waters, and invasive species have adversely affected the estuary's ecology.

But the single largest problem for salmon migrating through this estuary between Sierra streams and the Pacific is the amount of freshwater that is withdrawn - upstream and within the delta. In some years, more than 50 percent of the freshwater headed for the estuary is diverted.

Baby fish become caught in the massive state and federal pumps, and even more become lost within the delta and are easy targets for predators when their migratory route is no longer west to the sea. Trucking to the bay is now afforded hatchery salmon but not for the progeny of natural spawners migrating through a nursery transformed to a gauntlet.

The estuary is dying. California has long viewed the delta as a massive reservoir it could endlessly plumb for agriculture and development. Water "wasting" to the sea is seen as a massive leak. In reality, the delta is an ecosystem - it is our Everglades, our Chesapeake Bay. An estuary's lifeblood is its freshwater inflow mixing with saline tidal flows to create a rich, brackish water that nourishes salmon, crabs, sole, oysters and shrimp.

As the estuary dies, so do California salmon. Another icon is lost. Salmon, however, are different from grizzlies or bald eagles.

These wild fish are what sustained California's native peoples for 10,000 years. They fed the miners headed for the gold fields. They are fine dining, the purpose of a day's ocean excursion, what we grill on the Fourth of July. They are food, jobs, recreation and part of who are on the Pacific Coast.

So we have a choice: Are we going to destroy our salmon or restore them? Restoring California's salmon fishery begins with the delta. We can reallocate flows to the estuary, as the science recommends, or continue business as usual - diverting more from the delta or grabbing flow upstream through a peripheral canal. The better choice, it seems, is to develop sources of water outside the delta, saving the estuary and creating a truly reliable water supply. In the end, sustaining salmon might sustain California.
LEGISLATION Protect water, protect fish

California isn't only out of money; it's out of water. Next week, the Legislature will take up a package of bills to find a way to create a more reliable water supply in the state. Here's a summary.
SB12

Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto: The bill establishes the Delta Ecosystem and Water Council to advance two equal goals: restoring the delta ecosystem and creating a more reliable water supply in California. The bill is scheduled for a hearing by a joint session of the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife and Senate Natural Resources and Water committees on Tuesday.
AB39

Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael: This bill requires development of a new plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta that implements the Delta Vision Strategic Plan issued by the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force. The plan calls for improving the existing water channel through the delta to move the water south and creating a second channel to carry the water around the delta to the pumps that export the water south. The document refers to the channel as a conveyance facility. In years past, this idea was referred to as the peripheral canal.
AB49

Assemblymen Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles, and Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael: Requires a 20 percent reduction per capita in urban water use by 2020. This bill is scheduled to be heard Monday in the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee.
SB457 and SB 458

Sen. Lois Wolk, D-Davis: This bill requires the Delta Protection Commission to review all general plans of cities and counties within the delta protection area. This bill authorizes the commission to cover the cost of the review by imposing a per acre-foot fee on any water diversion within the delta watershed, and a fee on any water conveyed through or around the delta.

Zeke Grader is the executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations, which represents 14 commercial fishing groups.

Fresno ranked greenest in Valley

2009-07-05T08:25:00.000-07:00

We posted about this almost two weeks ago, but the Bee now has a story on the topic that is worth reading
Fresno ranked greenest in Valley
Published online on Saturday, Jul. 04, 2009
By Mark Grossi / The Fresno Bee

Out of 100 Central Valley cities, Fresno has the greenest ideas for growth over the next three decades, says a groundbreaking study by the University of California at Davis.

But Fresno still may not be able to protect land, water and air from explosive growth, says lead author Mark Lubell. He doubts other cities will have much luck either. Green policies still could be pushed aside for pollution-causing sprawl that earns more money for city treasuries.

"The status quo is very difficult to derail," said Lubell, an associate professor of environmental science and policy at UC Davis. "Cities need money. A sprawl-oriented growth pattern raises income from sales tax and development fees."

His suggestion: Consider revising Proposition 13, the property tax limit passed more than 30 years ago. He said one way cities compensated for the loss of income was by allowing more development at the edge of town, where businesses found cheap property and a growing base of customers.

The longer commutes created by sprawl generated more air pollution and greenhouse gases in one of the nation's dirtiest air basins.

These issues soon will become more important, Lubell said. The Central Valley -- which includes the San Joaquin and Sacramento valleys -- is forecast to expand from 7 million to 12 million residents by 2040, making it one of the fastest-growing places in America. For the last 18 months, Lubell and a team of researchers looked at Central Valley cities to see whether they are preparing for sustainable growth. In the study, sustainable growth refers to such factors as air quality, ground-water recharge, high-density residential land use and renewable energy sources, such as solar.

The UC Davis study, published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Planning Association, is considered by planners and researchers to be the first serious attempt to rank these growth policies among the region's 100 incorporated cities.

Fresno seems best prepared, the study showed. The city has the state's top waste-recycling program, an emphasis on clean-fuel vehicles and an idea for a vast environmentally friendly development on the southeast flank.

Lubell said a revamped Prop. 13 might bring in enough income to soften the debate over the need for more money. Fresno and other cities could fill in downtown gaps, provide better transit to get people out of their cars and promote communities where people walk to stores.

Even if Prop. 13 remains untouched, Central Valley cities still should adopt green-growth policies, Lubell said. Look to Fresno, Sacramento and other top-ranked cities in the study for ideas, he said.

Why are these cities so progressive? These bigger cities are trying to fix decades of planning mistakes, he said. By using more progressive planning policies, smaller, lower-ranked cities could skip those mistakes, Lubell said.

To determine the rankings, researchers assigned numeric values to green growth policies relating to land use, zoning, transportation, pollution prevention, energy conservation and economic development. Cities were given points for their policies and commitments to green growth.

Fresno ranked highest, primarily on the strength of two initiatives -- Fresno Green, which links the economic goals to cleaning the environment, and the Southeast Growth Area, which is targeted to absorb at least 20% of city growth in the next two decades.

Fresno also gets credit for a solar energy farm at Fresno Yosemite International Airport and the successful recycling to divert wastes from landfills.

Keith Berthold, Fresno's interim planning director, said the Southeast Growth Area is envisioned with a massive network of trails, open space, compact growth and viable transit options. The area could surpass the 2020 state goals of greenhouse gas reduction and become a leader in California. "We think we can reduce ozone and particulate matter by one half in this area," he said. "These will be walkable, livable neighborhoods."

Council Member Henry T. Perea said the UC study is vindication of hard work officials have done to clean up Fresno, which has had a reputation for bad air and a failing downtown.

Visalia was fourth in the rankings, behind Sacramento and Davis. Visalia is known for a robust and walkable downtown, which has live entertainment, restaurants and businesses.

Fred Brusuelas, city planner and assistant community development director, said the city's plan for the southeast quadrant will include six small communities with central business areas where people can walk to coffee shops or businesses.

He said the city wants to harvest stormwater in the area by keeping it in a small creek and directing it to grassy, open areas where it can seep into the ground.

"We don't want to put it in a storm drainage line and move it to another part of the city," he said. "We want it to percolate into the ground and increase the underground water table in that area."

Researcher Lubell said cities must put such environmental approaches on an equal footing with economic and social values, even through tough economic times.

"With this research, we're hoping to spark a commitment to sustainable planning," he said. "So often when there are budget problems, green policies are viewed as boutique polices. So they are the first things that go away."

Feds step into State Parks aspect of budget battle

2009-07-01T08:50:00.000-07:00

Paul Rogers, San Jose Mercury News

Posted: 06/30/2009 08:19:05 PM PDT

The federal government is threatening to take possession of several of California's most prominent state parks - including Angel Island and Mount Tamalpais - if Sacramento lawmakers close them to balance the budget.

That's the message from the National Park Service, which also has told Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that California will be blocked from receiving future money from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the leading federal source of funding for parks, if it closes state parks now.

The warnings came in a letter June 8, obtained Tuesday by the Mercury News, from John Jarvis, the Pacific regional director of the National Park Service to Schwarzenegger.

In May, the governor proposed closing 220 state parks to save an estimated $143 million. The state is facing is $24 billion deficit.

With the warnings, the National Park Service has now waded into Sacramento's budget stalemate, arguing that California has more to lose if it closes state parks than it will gain in savings.

"We understand there is an economic crisis and cuts will be made in things. We are not unrealistic," said David Siegenthaler, a National Park Service manager who helped draft the letter.

"But we think there must be ways to keep these parks open, even if it means with reduced hours and services. That's better than closing them."

Schwarzenegger this week said he will veto a budget plan passed by the Assembly that would impose a new $15 annual surcharge on vehicle registration to keep the

parks open, and allow all California residents free entry. The charge would raise $363 million a year, supporters said, more than twice the amount needed to save parks.

However, the governor considers the $15 a tax.

"The governor has been very clear that he will not support additional tax increases," said Lisa Page, a Schwarzenegger spokeswoman.

Of the warnings from the National Park Service, she added: "The governor understands there are consequences to these difficult cuts, but with a $24 billion deficit, there are no good options."

National park leaders contend that California would be violating the terms of two laws if it closes state parks.

First, the state has received $286 million since 1965 from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund. Created by President Lyndon Johnson, the fund collects royalties from offshore oil drilling and uses them to buy land for national parks, forests and wildlife refuges. The fund also issues grants to state and local parks to pay for everything from land acquisition to new trails, visitor centers and rest rooms.

Parks that receive the funds are required to remain open to the public. California has received Land and Water Conservation Fund money for 69 of the 220 state parks that Schwarzenegger has proposed to closet.

State parks that have received the federal funding include Henry Coe, Fremont Peak, Big Basin Redwoods, Castle Rock, A-o Nuevo, Bodie Ghost Town, Mono Lake, Andrew Molera, Humboldt Redwoods, Point Lobos, Hearst San Simeon State park, Anza-Borrego Desert, Sutter's Fort, Mount Diablo and Fort Ord Dunes.

Federal law does not allow the government to demand repayment from California if the parks are closed, but it can shut the state off from future funding, Siegenthaler said.

The second law California would be violating, he said, is a 1949 statute that created the federal Lands to Parks Program. That law allows surplus government property, such as old military bases, to be transferred to state parks.

But it also requires the parks remain open to the public in perpetuity. California has six state parks that were former federal property transferred under the law.

If the governor closes the parks, the feds will take the lands back, Jarvis warned. What happens then is unclear. They would likely be transferred as surplus property to the federal government and be offered to federal agencies, universities, even private developers.

The parks are: Angel Island, a former immigration station in San Francisco Bay; a beach and parking lot at Point Mugu State Park near Malibu; the summit of Mount Diablo in Contra Costa County, which was once a Naval microwave relay station; four miles of sandy state beaches at the former Fort Ord near Monterey; Point Sur in Big Sur; and Border Fields, a 418-acre state beach on the San Diego-Tijuana border.

Parks advocates said they are heartened that the federal government is stepping into the debate.

"This is a heads-up that the closure of parks isn't so easy. It's a shot across the bow that there are serious complications here, as if the public outcry were not enough," said Elizabeth Goldstein, executive director of the California State Parks Foundation.

Goldstein's group has been studying whether to launch a campaign to put the $15 vehicle license fee on the November 2010 ballot. It would require two-thirds approval if placed on by the initiative process and a simple majority if the Legislature puts it on.

Movement of Growers and Farmworkers is Astroturf not Grassroots says this commentary

2009-06-30T08:21:00.000-07:00

THE PR FIRM FROM HELL
As published in the June 30th, 2009 edition of the Fresno Community Alliance newspaper
(First of two parts)
By Lloyd G. Carter

Cesar Chavez knew the power of a good march. He led by example and he never stopped trying until he found a way. And this is exactly what we are going to do. We never will stop until we find a way, find a way together here, because this is the right thing to do, because we need water, we need water, we need water, we need water [chanting with crowd].

Gov. Schwarzenegger, on April 17, at the San Luis Reservoir, following a four-day grower-funded march in which non-union farmworkers were paid to walk 50 miles from Mendota. Chavez’ United Farm Workers union did not participate. UFW co-founder Dolores Huerta called it shameless exploitation of the late labor leader’s legacy.

The masters of “astroturfing” are trying to convince you, the media, California and Washington, D.C. that San Joaquin Valley farmworkers’ new best friend is Big Agribusiness, the same industry that has exploited them for decades. Say what?

Campaigns & Elections magazine defines astroturfing as a "program that involves the manufacturing of public support for a point of view in which either uninformed activists are recruited or means of deception are used to recruit them." In other words, rich people with a lot of money but no popular support for their cause (getting richer), will create the illusion of broad public support by half truths, manipulation, disinformation, spin doctoring, creating false impressions, and cash. It also involves ghost writing op-ed columns and letters to the editor from little people, to generate the perception there is widespread public support for the client’s position. Grassroots is bottom up. Astroturf is top down.

The late Texas Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, a vice-presidential candidate and a lobbyist, is credited with coining the term "astroturf lobbying" to describe the synthetic grassroots movements conjured up by powerful lobbying and public relations firms. Astroturfing is specifically prohibited by the code of ethics of the Public Relations Society of America, the national association for members of the public relations profession.

But that hasn’t stopped the spin doctors at Burson-Marsteller (B-M), the astroturfing PR firm that has been hired by the California Latino Water Coalition (created around 2006-2007), headed by comedian Paul Rodriguez, and Orange Cove Mayor Victor Lopez, co-chairs of the coalition, and technical advisor Mario Santoyo, assistant general manager at the Friant Water Users Authority, which represents federal irrigation districts on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley from Madera County south to Bakersfield.

B-M has been helping the Friant growers for three years, trying to derail the lawsuit settlement to restore a living San Joaquin river to 60 miles of dry riverbed on the San Joaquin Valley floor. Republican Rep. Devin Nunes has been the most outspoken of the settlement critics and has called for the Governor’s resignation for failing to push new water projects hard enough. (Nunes seems blissfully unconcerned California is facing a $24 billion budget deficit.)

MSNBC talk show host Rachel Maddow, in a March telecast, called B-M “the PR firm from Hell” and said it had been hired to improve the “image” of AIG, the company which has received $170 billion in taxpayer bailout money. (You can see Maddow ripping B-M on YouTube below.)

How much B-M is being paid by the growers who fund the Latino Water Coalition - if it is being paid - is not publicly available. No one in the mainstream media has inquired about the financing, except the New York Times, which noted in a story on the mid-April, four-day “March for Water” that farmworkers were paid to participate. Classic astroturfing tactics.

Founded in 1953, B-M is now one of the largest public relations firms in the world, and in 2000 was the first PR outfit to hit $300 million in revenues. In 1999, Harold Burson was named by PR Week magazine and website as the PR industry’s “most influential person of the 20th Century.” The PR Watch website has considerable material on B-M’s past and present outrages. Big name employees include George W. Bush’s first press secretary, Karen Hughes, and his last press secretary, the acid-tongued, irritable Dana Perino. However, the agency is not just staffed with Republican mudslingers. Spinmaster Mark Penn, the staunchly anti-union polling consultant and former chief strategist of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, is the current Chief Executive Officer of B-M.

B-M’s client list includes a who’s who of corporate scoundrels and tin horn dictators, including:

1. Blackwater USA - After the private security firm killed 17 Iraqi civilians, they turned to B-M for “crisis management.” Former B-M executive Robert Tappan, who had been a State Department official, worked at the PR firm’s lobbying subsidiary, BKSH & Associates. Tappan helped Blackwater founder and head Erik Prince prepare for his testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. (In February, Blackwater, purportedly on the advice of B-M, changed its name to the mysterious Xe, pronounced Zee.)

2. Babcock & Wilcox, manufacturers of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant, hired B-M to “manage” public perception after the 1979 meltdown.

3. Nigeria’s brutal regime employed B-M in the late 1960s to counteract allegations it was committing genocide in the breakaway province of Biafra. “Crisis management” was also provided the Indonesian regime accused of abuses of its citizens.

4. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, at the behest of the Argentinian military dictatorship, headed by General Jorge Videla, B-M organized a campaign against Argentinian human rights organizations which were contending a “Dirty War” against the populaton was taking place, including the murder and disappearance of thousands of people. In her book “The Shock Doctrine”, Naomi Klein wrote:

“Victor Emmanuel, the Burson-Marsteller public relations executive who was in charge of selling the Argentine junta's new business-friendly regime to the outside world, told a researcher that violence was necessary to open up Argentina's "protective, statist" economy. "No one, but no one, invests in a country involved in a civil war," he said, admitting that it wasn't just rebels who died. "A lot of innocent people were probably killed," he told author Marguerite Feitlowitz, but, "given the situation, immense force was required." ”

5. Saudi Arabia’s medieval royal government has employed B-M for more than 30 years to promote its interests and image. B-M prepared U.S. advertisements for Saudi Arabia following the September 11 attack on the World Trade Center, due, in part, to the fact 15 of the 19 airplane hijackers were Saudi citizens.

6. B-M handled public relations for Union Carbide Corporation following the 1984 explosion and disaster at a Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India which killed 2,000 employees and neighbors and injured or blinded thousands more.

7. B-M set up the National Smokers Alliance on behalf of Philip Morris to fight tobacco regulation in the early 1990s.

8. Bromine Science and Environmental Forum (BSEF), which Burson-Marsteller created on behalf of chemical companies from the U.S., Israel and Japan who wanted to avoid an EU ban on bromine flame retardants suspected to have serious environmental and health impacts. For years the BSEF (lobbyists from the Brussels offices of Burson-Marsteller) lobbied against the EU ban on these substances, without clearly disclosing the nature of the group and the clients.

Major companies in the finance, pharmaceutical and energy industries currently utilize B-M’s services, according to B-M’s own website. In 2006, the company gave 57 percent of its campaign contributions to Republican candidates.

B-M, according to the May 17, 2007 issue of The Nation magazine, is owned by an even larger PR empire called the WPP Group. The decision to hire Mark Penn as the head of B-M was heavily influenced by Howard Paster, President Clinton's chief lobbyist to Capitol Hill and an influential presence inside WPP. "Clients of stature come to Mark [Penn]constantly for counsel," claimed Paster, who informally advised Hillary Clinton. The press release announcing Penn's promotion noted his work "developing and implementing deregulation informational programs for the electric utilities industry and in the financial services sector." (Italics added.)

Both these PR and lobbying efforts - to deregulate energy and financial services - led to the California electricity crisis and manipulation of the state’s energy supply by Enron, the 2003 blackout in the Northeastern U.S. and the current collapse of the financial services sector.

So, what then does B-M expect to do for the California Latino Water Coalition? B-M’s Patrick George, who works out of B-M’s Sacramento office is listed as the media contact on the Latino Water Coalition press releases. The B-M website boasts that it has won the last nine California statewide initiative campaigns it has been involved in and it was expected to be involved in a $10 billion water bond issue in 2008 before the economy collapsed. There will undoubtedly be an effort to put another water bond on the 2010 or 2012 California ballot.

Some Western San Joaquin Valley growers acknowledge they are contributing to the Latino Water Coalition. It is clear the poverty-stricken farmworkers aren’t paying the tab, and that it is agribusiness bankrolling the operation. The coalition website (www.gotwater.org [1] ) and KMJ radio commentator Ray Appleton, a major supporter of the Coalition, both solicit donations from the general public. Appleton does it on air. Mario Santoyo said on former Fresno Mayor Alan Autry’s radio show that Comedian Rodriguez is not being compensated for any of his efforts. In an interview with the Yuma, AZ newspaper Rodriguez called himself the “poster boy” and claimed Cesar Chavez was “like an uncle” to him. Presuimably, the Friant growers were paying B-M big bucks before the PR firm got involved in the Latino Water Coalition.

The transparent objective of B-M’s astroturfing is to put a “human face” on efforts to get more multi-billion dollar water projects built with taxpayer funds to: (1) meet the water needs of industrial farming operations of the western San Joaquin Valley, and (2) halt (or replace) the loss of water by southeastern San Joaquin Valley growers in Tulare and Kern counties due to the restoration of the San Joaquin River.

These are among the public relations objectives:

1. Conflate the interests of growers who want water with the needs of farmworkers who need jobs, so that it appears the largely Latino farmworker population fully supports the efforts of growers to get more taxpayer-financed cheap water, even while the basic needs of the farmworkers, such as decent wages, clean drinking water, and decent housing and working conditions, continue to go unmet.

2. Make it appear as if the entire San Joaquin Valley is threatened with reversion to desert because of a “two-inch bait fish” instead of revealing that it is only the junior water rights holders who are suffering irrigation cutbacks and that thousands of growers with senior water rights are getting a full allotment this year. Emphasize a “man-made drought” as the problem, not the real drought which is occurring (according to state officials). Some growers are making fat profits selling water at extortionate prices to their fellow water-short farmers.

A May 15 letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein from Lester Snow, head of the California Department of Water Resources, indicated that Westlands Water District, through Delta deliveries, carryover, groundwater, transfers and exchanges is actually getting 86 percent of its normal water supply this year. The groundwater, of course, is of low quality in many cases and cannot be quickly replaced.

3. Demonize environmentalists and brand them as elitists from San Francisco who care more about a “minnow” (i.e., the Delta Smelt) than they do about human beings, especially the tens of thousands of farmworkers who will lose their seasonal jobs which now pay an average of $8,000 a year.

4. Reduce the crisis in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to a black and white issue of “fish versus farmers” or “fish versus food” and avoid the complexities of Delta restoration and the hierarchy of water rights. Rarely or never mention salmon (much less the commercial salmon industry), or steelhead, or killer whales, or sturgeon in simplifying the issue. Make it the smelt - a bait fish - versus human beings.

5. Ignore the concerns of the United Farm Workers union and the Teamsters union (which represents farmworkers in the Valley) and ignore or demonize environmental justice advocates. Don’t get involved in supporting bills in the state legislature to improve the lives and working conditions of farmworkers. Big Ag routinely opposes those bills and the governor vetoes them.

6. Stage marches and rallies in the tradition of Cesar Chavez, and invoke Chavez’ name where politically expedient, and conceal the fact that the marchers are being paid to participate. In a slickly-produced YouTube video, Comedian Rodriguez said when he was a boy he had marched with Cesar to help unionize farmworkers and was now asking people to participate in the mid-April “March for Water” to help growers in Cesar Chavez’ memory. Dolores Huerta shakes her head at this tactic.

7. Because growers, particularly large corporate operations, billionaire farmers like Stewart Resnick, and wealthy family mega-farms (like the Woolfs of the Westlands), have never been particularly sympathetic figures in the news media, the decision was made to make Latino farmworkers the “human face” of this astroturfing campaign, perhaps to sway urban Latino state legislators.

Jon Stewart’s “Daily Show” frequently runs a montage of video clips showing Republican (or Democrat) politicos mouthing the same sound bite of the day, which usually comes from a talking points paper prepared by a PR firm. That’s what has been occurring the last two years with the “human face” buzz phrase.

For example:

July 2, 2007 - Fresno County Supervisor Phil Larson, who represents the Westlands Water District area, and allows his public office phone number and staff to be utilized by the Latino Water Coalition, told a House Subcommittee that cutbacks of irrigation water to protect the Delta Smelt was causing hardship among farmworkers, stating, “There is a very human face to the decisions that are made.”

July 24, 2008 - Fresno Bee Capitol correspondent E.J. Schultz, writing about a grower-financed rally in Sacramento, in which busloads of farmworkers were at the Capitol building to show the “human face” of water politics, wrote:

“Wednesday's rally was designed to give a human face to the state's water woes. At least 300 farmworkers, most from the Valley's parched west side, marched and carried homemade signs declaring "agua es vida," or water is life, and "agua = trabajo," or water equals work.”

April 14, 2009 - Laura King Moon, Assistant General Manager of the State Water Project, which represents the mega-farms of the western Tulare Basin, including the 150,000 acre J.G. Boswell cotton empire, issued this statement: “Today, the California Latino Water Coalition began the first day of a four-day march across the San Joaquin Valley to highlight the severe water shortage that grips the Valley's farms, cities and jobs, as well as our broader
state. Their goal is to raise statewide and national awareness of the water crisis that faces them and to put a human face on one of the most important issues facing California today.”

April 14, 2009 - A column by Fresno Bee writer Bill McEwen carried the headline
“March to put Human Face on Water Crisis.” McEwen wrote that with a “recession and a third year of drought intensifying the state’s troubles – and putting a human face on our water problems - solutions might be coming. This human face will be shown to the nation and the world when the California March for Water begins this morning in Mendota.”

April 17, 2009 - Tim Quinn, Executive Director of the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), appeared at the conclusion of the March for Water and stated to a crowd estimated at 3,000 people (Coalition officials put the estimate at 10,000) that the water crisis highlighted “the human face of the misery evoked by water shortages.”

KMJ broadcaster Ray Appleton has repeatedly said on his noon hour show the purpose of the Latino Water Coalition is to put a “human face” on the campaign.

It must be admitted B-M’s astroturfing campaign in the San Joaquin Valley has been remarkably successful. The “human face” of the new water projects campaign is now that of the downtrodden farmworker, not the rich grower.

But Dolores Huerta, co-founder of the United Farm Workers, is not fooled and calls the Latino Water Coalition an obvious front group for the growers which is exploiting Cesar Chavez’ legacy. She said Cesar was an ardent environmentalist and would never have participated in the April March for Water or demonized the environmentalists. She also notes the Latino Water Coalition has not lobbied for bills to make it easier for farmworkers to unionize nor has the coalition demanded a living wage, decent housing and clean drinking water for farmworkers before any new dams are built. The governor, she notes, has vetoed bills to help farmworkers unionize.

The Valley’s newspaper and television coverage of the Latino Water Coalition has been extensive and, at times, almost fawning. No hard questions are being asked about where the money is coming from or why the Latino Water Coalition is not lobbying in Sacramento and Washington for improved working conditions, decent housing and clean drinking water for the farmworkers they claim are part of their coalition. However, outside the Valley, the sales job has been tougher, particularly in the Nation’s Capitol.

Thus, more “marches” are being planned, including a protest outside the new Fresno federal building on July 1, and the air transport of an unspecified number of farmworkers to Washington, D.C. to show lawmakers the “human face” of failing to build more multi-billion dollar water projects to primarily benefit agribusiness. Presumably, non-union farmworkers will have to be recruited and paid to participate in this latest stunt. The astroturf needs a mowing.

Part Two of this series will focus on the roles of Comedian Paul Rodriguez, Orange Cove Mayor Victor Lopez, growers’ employee Mario Santoyo, KMJ radio commentators Ray Appleton and Inga Barks, Fresno County Supervisor Phil Larson and others in the B-M astroturfing campaign. Lloyd G. Carter has been writing about San Joaquin Valley water issues for 40 years, including 20 years as an award-winning reporter for United Press International and the Fresno Bee.

Local Environmentalists Haze and Carter Discuss Water on KFCF 88.1

2009-06-30T08:18:00.000-07:00

Peter Gleick : Truth drought: California's real shortfall

2009-06-30T08:15:00.000-07:00

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar came to California on Sunday to hear firsthand about California's drought. Unfortunately, some of what he heard was misleading or false. Certainly farms and farmers are suffering, so are fish and ecosystems. But so is the truth. Here are three oft-repeated falsehoods.

Myth 1: Farmers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley are receiving "just 10 percent of their allocation this year."

Myth 2: Water shortages are causing massive new farm unemployment.

Myth 3: Farmers are bearing disproportional impacts of water shortfalls because of court rulings in favor of fish.

All three of these statements are false, and they've been shown to be false so many times that continuing to repeat them verges on intentional deception on the part of those who repeat them to gullible politicians or lazy reporters.

1. Farmers in the Central Valley get water from many places, and when one source dries up, another temporarily takes its place. In a remarkable letter sent by DWR Director Lester Snow to Senator Dianne Feinstein on May 15th, official data show that the major Central Valley districts will use at least 75% of their average water use by mixing sources, using stored groundwater, participating in water transfers, and so on. Not 10%. And the biggest moaner is the Westlands Water District. Yet Snow points out that they will apply at least 86% of their normal water. On the other hand, the San Joaquin Valley wildlife refuges will get 75% of its promised water, less than many of the agricultural districts. Some farmers get less than others in dry years because of their junior water rights -- and they always have. Are they arguing to revamp the water rights system? That would be a worthy discussion to have.

2. The overall job problem is not a water problem -- it is a result of a global and national economic crisis. Increases in unemployment are worse, by far, in non-farm industries. In Fresno County, unemployment today is substantially lower than it was just five and ten years ago (see Figure 1) and farm employment grew; non-farm employment shrunk. Indeed, the only sector showing increases in employment in May 2009 (see http://www.calmis.ca.gov/file/lfmonth/frsn.pdf) was the farm sector. In some of the hardest hit areas, unemployment is much higher -- but it is always much higher. Unemployment rates in Mendota are above 30% now. But you know what? Nine years ago, unemployment in Mendota was 30%. Six years ago, it was 36%. The problem in Mendota isn't just the current drought. The Central Valley of California has been plagued by poverty and lack of access to reliable jobs and basic services, like clean drinking water, for decades. Turning the pumps back on will do little, if anything, to address the systemic injustice that farm worker communities endure in both wet years and dry.
Figure 1. Fresno County civilian unemployment rate from 1990 to 2008, from the California Employment Development Department, Sacramento, California. While unemployment has grown in the past two years, it is far below what it was in the past decade.

3. It's not the fish. Two months ago, DWR director Lester Snow testified before Congress that if there had been no court order to protect fish, CVP deliveries to the San Joaquin Valley would only be 5% higher. The problems farmers are facing aren't due to the tiny portions of water offered up for ecosystems; they are due to a drought and a dysfunctional water management system that has been slowly collapsing for decades.

The longer misleading arguments and facts are put forth to politicians and the media, the longer it will be before a serious and effective solution can be found to our water challenges.

'Two Gates' project could ease water crisis

2009-06-30T08:14:00.001-07:00

By Mark Grossi / The Fresno Bee

A bold experiment in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta could protect threatened fish and ease California's water crisis. But it faces steep challenges.

The idea is to submerge massive barriers in river channels to prevent the delta smelt from swimming toward certain death at water pumps in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

The experiment, called the "Two Gates" project, comes up at water rallies and political strategy sessions among San Joaquin Valley lawmakers who support the idea. They hope it will bring more water to 25 million residents and millions of farmland acres.

The gates -- which have not been fully detailed publicly -- would be mounted on sunken barges in two large channels in the central part of the delta. They would prevent turbid water from flowing south toward the pumps. The adult smelt tend to follow the turbid water, scientists said.

With the gates closed, the pumps could continue sending water south without harming the fish.

But there are serious hurdles ahead. The public hasn't seen any details. There is no funding yet for the $26 million project. And environmental analysis of such projects can take years.

Still, farmers and city officials hope the gates could be installed by December. A detailed plan might be available for public review in the next several weeks.

Politicians are pressuring government wildlife agencies to analyze it quickly. Water officials hope to tap federal stimulus money.

That's not enough to bring environmentalists and fishing organizations on board.

"This thing is an embryo right now," said Bill Jennings, chairman of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance in Stockton. "I don't even know what we're talking about."

The experiment is the brainchild of state and federal contractors -- farm and city officials -- who are coping with reduced water deliveries for smelt protection. Further pumping cutbacks are expected for other suffering species, such as Chinook salmon and green sturgeon.

The delta's pumps, long considered a factor in dwindling fish populations, send water into San Luis Reservoir. San Luis storage this summer is less than 30% of average because of delta pumping restrictions and the three-year drought.

The California Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation are studying the Two Gates proposal, which water contractors began assembling last year as water cutbacks continued.

City and farm contractors developed the idea with their own consultants and presented it to state and federal officials this year, said Tom Birmingham, general manager of the Westlands Water District.

Westlands and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California were among the water contractors that pushed the idea.

Michelle Light, state water resources regional planning officer, said the engineering and design work have progressed well. She said the state's analysis is moving quickly because of water shortages and the dwindling smelt population.

Katherine Kelly, chief of the federal reclamation bureau's Bay Delta office, added that there would be a July meeting of scientists to discuss the details of the proposal. No date has been scheduled yet.

Even if the project is completed by December, Birmingham cautioned farmers and others not to consider Two Gates a guarantee of increased water supply.

"There is a perception that construction of this project will lead to an increase of water," he said. "This really is an experiment."

Two Gates would be an innovation compared to previous solid barriers that could not be easily opened and closed. Such solid barriers have been used in the past to protect fish, maintain water quality and keep water at desired levels in the sprawling river delta, according to the water resources department.

Dan Nelson of the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Authority, representing west-side farmers, said Two Gates is flexible by comparison. Besides opening and closing, the barges can be moved to see if they work better in other locations.

Rep. George Radanovich, R-Mariposa, said Two Gates has strong political support from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. He said he will continue to pressure wildlife agencies for a quick turnaround on their study of the project.

Woodworkers Wanted!

2009-06-29T17:48:00.001-07:00

Fresno Audubon needs folks with basic woodworking skills to construct owl and kestrel boxes for farmers across Fresno County.
Boxes not only provide homes for nesting birds, they also provide farmers with a low-cost/environmentally responsible means of rodent control.

We will supply plans, lumber, and other components. Monetary and in-kind donations of materials are also welcome, but of secondary importance at this time. Contact me at the email or phone number below to help our farmers and the environment simultaneously!

Brandon Hill, President
Fresno Audubon Society
559.978.2369 - bhill968@gmail.com
http://fresnoaudubon.org/

An example of our state being soft on poachers

2009-06-29T15:25:00.000-07:00

From Tom Stienstra

SOFT SENTENCE: The Department of Fish and Game reported that three generations of convicted poachers, Ronald Kemp, 74, Paul Kemp, 46, and Joseph Kemp, 20, all of Colusa County, were found with seven sets of antlers, various packages of deer meat that DNA tests showed represented 14 deer, none which had DNA that matched the antlers, 47 goose tracking collars (cost to Fish and Game: $5,000 apiece), and an illegal stuffed curlew, along with other violations. After being convicted, the department reported that the grandfather, father and son were ordered to pay approximately $5,500 in fines and court costs and were placed on three years probation, the first year of which they are prohibited from hunting.

Feds take action on Central Valley water problems

2009-06-29T14:10:00.001-07:00

More from Central Valley Business Times:

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar told a Sunday town hall in Fresno that the federal government will address “continuing conflicts associated with transporting water from northern California through the Bay Delta – that includes fisheries-related conflicts and other deteriorating environmental conditions in the Bay Delta.”

Mr. Salazar says he has assigned Deputy Secretary David Hayes to coordinate the federal response to California water supply and related environmental issues with the state and stakeholders.

Other steps are to include:

• Renewed federal involvement and leadership in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and federal engagement in water supply issues that extend beyond the scope of the BDCP and the immediate geography of the Bay Delta.

• Significant progress will be made on the most contentious water supply and environmental issues by the end of 2009, including but not limited to the issues raised by the BDCP, he says.

• Continued efforts to distribute $220 million in Recovery Act funding for specific water and environmental infrastructure projects in California. Of this amount, $160 million will be directed to the Central Valley Project. An additional $40 million in drought relief funds will be announced within the month, the majority of which will go to California’s Central Valley.

• The expedited review of infrastructure projects that could potentially add flexibility to water delivery systems, including the proposed “Two Gates” project and the canal “intertie” project.

Mr. Salazar says the Bureau of Reclamation has already taken steps to stretch the scarce water supply including the processing of more than 70 water transfers that total approximately 245,000 acre-feet of water for the San Joaquin Valley.

He says the department has also approved rescheduling requests by Westside and Friant Division CVP contractors to allow them to preserve and use prior year allocations of approximately 250,000 acre-feet in San Luis Reservoir and 57,000 acre-feet in Millerton Lake.

Announcement of 2010 rescheduling guidelines is expected by Aug. 1, several months in advance of prior practice, he says.

“When a community is suffering the way this community is suffering, all parties must come together and work in good faith to find solutions,” says Mr. Salazar in remarks prepared for the Sunday town hall meeting. “We want to continue all these actions and also to learn from you today any other ways in which we can help.”

Environmentalists dispute water shortage = job loss claims

2009-06-29T13:40:00.000-07:00

From the Central Valley Business Times

The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance says that blaming Central Valley job losses on claims of water shortages is disingenuous at best.

"The truth is more water won't wash away the Valley's recession and endangered species are the victims, not the problem,” says CSPA Executive Director Bill Jennings.

Referring to Sunday’s Fresno town hall meeting by Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Valley congressmen and others, Mr. Jennings says “we hope Secretary Salazar will seek out the facts and see through the transparent efforts by Governor Schwarzenegger, Valley elected officials and the hydrologic brotherhood to use the red-herring of economic recession as justification for depriving the Delta of essential water."

Mr. Jennings says a careful reading of data collected by the California Economic Development Department finds that during three years of drought -- between May 2006 and May 2009 -- farm employment went up 13.7 percent in Kern County, 12.1 percent in Fresno County, 19.3 percent in Tulare County, 2 percent in Merced County, 5.3 percent in Madera and 8.4 percent in Stanislaus County.

“While we're told that 262,000 acres have been fallowed in Fresno County, the county's Department of Agriculture was releasing a report that revealed 2008 was another record year with agricultural production dollars up 5.9 percent over the previous record year of 2007,” Mr. Jennings says.

San Joaquin Valley farm unemployment has always been high and, while the present economic disaster has exacerbated conditions, farm unemployment has not fluctuated according to wet and dry years, he says.

“Who is not telling the truth: our elected representatives or the California Employment Development Department? And, who is distorting the truth about actual water shortages?” he says.

He says one problem is that over the years California has issued water rights for eight times the average amount of water in the Bay-Delta watershed. Another, Mr. Jennings says, is that Valley farmers have recently planted “hundreds of thousands of acres of perennial crops based upon the most junior water rights that assume interrupted supplies during the inevitable droughts that occur more than a third of the time in the state.”

There is enough water in California to provide for people and rivers, if it's used wisely, says Mr. Jennings, arguing that a combination of reclamation, recycling, groundwater banking, conservation and desalination “offer a virtual river far larger than any additional supplies secured via new surface storage or a peripheral canal.”

Fish are not the problem, he says. "A dysfunctional water delivery system, greed and failure to comply with existing laws have brought us to the edge of disaster," says Mr. Jennings. "Common sense, sound science and a proper respect for law can lead us back from the abyss."

The problem with measuring climate change impact in GDP

2009-06-29T10:30:00.000-07:00

From Matt Steinglass

June 27, 2009

Jim Manzi writes:

The expected impacts of human-induced climate change are marginal as compared either to the sloppy, sentimental and self-righteous rhetoric that surrounds this issue…

There will be no snow left on Kilimanjaro within a few years. The economic cost of that change to US GDP is zero. There will be no year-round snow left in the Himalayas in 100 years. The economic cost of that change to US GDP is tiny. There will be no Everglades in 100 years. The economic cost of that change to US GDP is marginal. There will be no Venice in 100 years. The economic cost of that change to US GDP is tiny. There will be no New Orleans in 100 years. The economic cost of that change to US GDP is extremely small.

There are two issues here. First, GDP measures income, not wealth. If your house burns down, it will most likely not change your income. Does that mean you should spend nothing to protect your house from burning down? Second, GDP only measures things that can be measured in money. But the worth of many precious things cannot be measured in money: Yellowstone National Park, the independence of one’s country from foreign rule, the existence of elephants and polar bears, clean air, the ruins of the city of Ur, the fact that humans have traveled to the moon, etc.

As far as I know, the only reasonable way to measure the worth of these things is to find out how much people are willing to pay to preserve or get them. The economic value of clean air in 1965, before the passage of the Clean Air Act, was zero. How much is the cleaner air we have today worth? You could say it’s worth nothing, since we breathe it for free; and indeed it doesn’t really show up in GDP figures. But if you’ve ever lived in a city without any pollution controls, you know that in fact its value is immense, and probably the best way to measure how much clean air is worth would be to measure how much the American people have been willing to spend over the past 40 years to get it. And the only way to find out how much it’s worth to keep snow on Mt. Everest, keep Florida above water, keep polar bears in existence, and so forth, is to find out how much Americans are willing to spend on these things. I would bet it’s actually far more than $50 a year per person for the next 100 years.

Valley Politicians Perpetuate the Myth of "Fish Versus People"

2009-06-26T10:57:00.001-07:00

While we don't agree with everything in the following article we do believe it adds something valuable to the current discussion.

by Dan Bacher

Bowing to pressure from Representatives Jim Costa (D-Fresno) and Dennis Cardoza (D-Merced), the Department of Interior will hold a "town hall meeting on the drought in California" on Sunday, June 28, from 2:30 to 4:00 p.m. at the Fresno State Satellite Student Union, 2485 East San Ramon Avenue in Fresno.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is expected to announce new stimulus monies for the Central Valley and talk about the Bay Delta Conservation Plan process. Salazar, Deputy Secretary David J. Hayes and Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Mike Connor are also expected to field complaints from corporate agribusiness interests that they are not receiving enough water from the Central Valley and California Water Projects.

You can expect San Joaquin Valley agribusiness representatives to blame all of their economic problems, real or imagined, on Delta smelt and the recent NMFS biological opinion to protect Central Valley salmon stocks. You can also be sure that Westlands and other agribusiness interests will put intense pressure upon Salazar and the other Interior officials to support the peripheral canal and dams proposal that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Senator Dianne Feinstein are campaigning for.

Since President Obama took office in January, Congressmen Cardoza and Costa have requested that the incoming Interior Secretary come to the San Joaquin Valley, according to a joint press release from Cardoza and Costa that falsely portrays the battle to restore the California Delta and the thousands of jobs that depend on it as a "fish versus peoples" scenario. They claim that unemployment is the result of a "regulatory drought" caused by relatively modest court-ordered restrictions on pumping to protect Delta smelt and Sacramento River winter run and spring run Chinook salmon.

"The San Joaquin Valley has been especially hard hit by drought in the past few years," their joint release opined. " Additionally, water deliveries to Valley farmers from the San Joaquin Delta have been curtailed by regulators who have placed an undue amount of blame on famers for declines in fish populations to the north."

“The Central Valley simply cannot continue down its current path," claimed Cardoza. "This regulatory drought is destroying our farmers, our families and our local economy. Further, we are facing a genuine risk of having to import additional food to supply our nation. I look forward to providing Secretary Salazar with as much insight as possible about the extreme hardship in our agricultural community and look forward to the assistance that he is capable of providing.”

"The Secretary knows about the hundreds thousands of acres of fallowed fields, the high unemployment and the possibility of a fourth year of drought,” said Costa. “The lack of water has rippled into every facet of our economy. We now have those who normally sow and reap our nation’s food, standing in food lines to feed their own families. As part of this important visit, I will be explaining to the Secretary the need for both short and long term water solutions in California, which include repairing the Delta, improving water supply and quality, and environmental restoration.”

Valley Democrats Cardoza and Costa have formed a de facto unholy alliance with far right Republican Congressmen Devin Nunes and George Radinovich as they bow down before Westlands Water District and corporate agribusiness. While falsely blaming modest regulatory protections for "fish populations to the north" for the Central Valley's problems, Cardoza and Costa neglected to mention the impacts that massive water exports out of the California Delta have had upon the thousands of people that have been employed in the commercial and recreational fishing industries and the coastal and Central Valley communities that depend upon healthy fisheries for their economic health. The closure of recreational and commercial salmon fishing season off California and Oregon this year and in 2008 has had a devastating impact upon coastal communities in both states.

"While they are bitching about fish protections robbing them of water (not true!), the Bureau of Reclamation is preparing now to ship 40,000 acre-feet of Central Valley Project water to Southern California – swimming pools and golf courses," noted Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations.

Cardoza and Costa were two of the 40 Democrats that voted for an amendment to HR 2847, sponsored by Representative Nunes, that would have yanked funding for a court-ordered federal plan to prevent the extinction of Sacramento River spring run and winter run Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, green sturgeon and the southern resident population of killer whales (orcas). The orcas depend heavily on Sacramento River chinook salmon, including the imperiled fall run, as a food source. The odious amendment was defeated in a close vote of 208 ayes to 218 nos in Congress on June 19.

To see an outrageous rant by Devin Nunes falsely blaming the San Joaquin Valley's economic woes on a "three inch minnow," go to this video of the debate in Congress over the Nunes amendment: http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/includes/templates/library/flash_popup.php?pID=287094-101&clipStart=16632&clipStop=17481

It is crucial that recreational anglers, commercial fishermen, Indian tribal members, Delta family farmers, Delta farmworkers and environmental justice advocates suffering from the devastating impact of increased Delta water exports in recent years show up at the meeting in Fresno to counter the "fish versus people" lies of Valley politicians and corporate agribusiness. After all, what about OUR JOBS?

For more information including the place where the town meeting will be held, contact Kendra Barkoff at (202) 208-6416

The Real Facts about Unemployment in the San Joaquin Valley

Meanwhile, Dr. Mark Rockwell of the Northern California Federation of Flyfishers has compiled revealing data covering unemployment figures in the San Joaquin Valley and around California that counters the Nunes/Costa/Cardoza/Radanovich allegations of a "regulatory drought," the false "people vs. fish" argument that is now being pushed by agribusiness, Central Valley legislators and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"Is it really 'fish vs. people' as the Governor and Representative Nunes say?" asks Rockwell. "To listen to all of the rhetoric these days you’d think that people are suffering only because a federal judge and the federal wildlife agencies decided to protect fish. Representative Nunes and our Governor are calling it a regulatory drought and families are suffering as a result. Articles in the L.A. Times and many other papers in California have picked up the story without really checking on data available from the state Employment Development Department records."

Here is a link that shows the data pretty clearly: http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/?pageid=133

However, the raw data doesn’t tell the full story unless you dig into it, as Rockwell has done. "So, here are some of the facts from the data that brings some clarity to the issue," said Rockwell. "Make no mistake; unemployment is a problem in Mendota and Fresno County. However, it is a problem in almost all of California’s agricultural counties, and Fresno is by far not the worst. If you take the numbers as given for all counties in California for May 2009, and then look at the 9 previous years as well it is quite revealing."

• For Mendota, the town portrayed as the worst and where the Governor has visited twice to rail against the Endangered Species Act and his claim of regulation caused unemployment, it shows 38.8% unemployment for May 2009.

• For Mendota, the 9 year previous average is 28.1%. Mendota has led Fresno County in unemployment for the past 10 years.

• Fresno County, (Representative Nunes country, including Mendota) shows 15.4% unemployment for May 2009, with a 9 year average of 10.5%.

• Of the 18 most agriculture dependent counties in California the average unemployment rate is 15.6% for May 2009. Seven other counties have worse unemployment than Fresno (Imperial, Sutter, Alpine, Colusa, Merced, Yuba and Stanislaus), with the highest in Imperial County in the Southern California desert at 26.8%.

• Six of the seven counties with greater unemployment than Fresno are not heavily affected by the Central Valley Project water cutbacks - and many are able to compensate via groundwater and use cutbacks.

• Lastly, when looking at the 2008 unemployment figures and averages, Fresno County has the eighth highest increase in unemployment (2008 to May 2009), meaning seven other counties have a greater increase in unemployment over the last year than Fresno- Imperial, Colusa, Merced, Sutter, Yuba, Stanislaus and Tulare. Six of these have limited impact from Central Valley Project reductions or are not affected at all by them.

"What this data clearly shows is that unemployment is chronic in Mendota (28.1% average), worsened by the drought, as with all other agriculture dependent counties," disclosed Rockwell. "The owners of the big farms there are certainly not sharing their profits well with the labor community that serves them. There is much to be done to improve their plight, and it should not include disaster relief from the tax payers (as requested by the Governor and our Senators)."

DWR director Lester Snow testified before Congress nearly two months ago, essentially saying if there was no court order to protect fish, there would only be a 5% increase in CVP water to the San Joaquin Valley. "This shortage is drought caused, not regulation caused," noted Rockwell.

"Who really gets left holding the proverbial bag?" questioned Rockwell. "Of course, it is the federal taxpayer and the public trust. It is time agribusiness took more responsibility for the problem and started to work for a solution, not for the drought but to help the farm workers they sometimes employ."

Rockwell's conclusion? "This isn’t 'fish vs. people,', it is 'fish and people.' Both are suffering in this is the third consecutive low water year," said Rockwell.

The irony of this situation is that the same San Joaquin Valley corporate agribusiness interests that are claiming to speak out for farmworkers have kept farmworkers in poverty and misery for many decades. They have ruthlessly suppressed the right of farmworkers to organize, denied them decent housing, refused to provide them with safe and clean drinking water and sprayed fields with dangerous pesticides that sicken their children and threaten their lives. As documented in the books of Carey McWilliams and others, the big growers' grip on power in the Valley was based on a particularly vicious form of "Farm Fascism" that didn't hesitate to employ guns and clubs to suppress farmworkers' rights.

As during the 1930's when "Farm Fascism" reigned supreme in the Valley, corporate agribusiness continues to control the politicians from both the Democratic and Republican parties. Schwarzenegger, Costa, Cardoza, Nunes and Radinovich are doing everything they can to please their masters - corporate agribusiness giants - at great expense to fish, fishermen, family farmers and farmworkers and the California economy.

Note: Rockwell provides an interesting side note regarding subsidies to these farms: In 1978 the taxpayer subsidy to the Federal San Luis Unit of the CVP (which supplies water to the west side San Joaquin) was estimated at $770 million or about $1,540.00 per acre (United States Bureau of Reclamation figures).

Today that value would be about $5,227.00 per acre using the Cost of Living Calculator for 2007. Another interesting fact is that people in Madera, Merced and Fresno Counties received about $132 million in farm subsidies in 2006. People in Trinity County, where the water for the Western San Joaquin Valley comes from, received $585.00 (United States Department of Agriculture figures on the Environmental Working Group’s Website Feb 16, 2009).

Drought town hall

2009-06-26T10:56:00.001-07:00

Secretary Salazar, Senior interior officials and members of California congressional delegation to hold public hearing on water supply issues in Fresno on Sunday

FRESNO, CA - Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, Deputy Secretary David J. Hayes, Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Mike Connor and members of the California Congressional Delegation will hold a town hall meeting on water supply issues and challenges facing California on Sunday, June 28, in Fresno, Calif.

Who: Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, Deputy Secretary David J. Hayes, Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Mike Connor, and Members of the California Congressional Delegation
What: Town hall meeting on water issues in California
When: Sunday, June 28, 2:30 - 4 p.m.
Where: Fresno State Satellite Student Union, 2485 East San Ramon Avenue, Fresno, CA

2009-06-25T07:30:00.001-07:00

Bay Area water hypocrisy exposed

By Bill McEwen / The Fresno Bee

Instead of invoking more tired "blame SF 'wackos' for our problems" rhetoric how about writing a column about Valley hypocrisy on water? Daily , I see countless instances of people watering in the heat of the afternoon, letting water run into gutters, and planting water intensive landscapes. These people either don't see the connection between their own actions and the larger picture or do not care. Maybe they need a wake-up call, but seeing as how local media/"leaders" are better at reflecting public opinion than trying to shape it I doubt that will happen anytime soon.

One of these days, a water-starved farmer will walk into federal court and demand that O'Shaughnessy Dam come down, finally restoring glacial Hetch Hetchy Valley to its natural grandeur and releasing a natural flow into the Tuolumne River.

Such a lawsuit wouldn't get the farmer more water. But it would expose the hypocrisy of Bay Area environmentalists who depict San Joaquin Valley residents as ignorant hillbillies making a mess of the desert and the Delta with their irrigated farms.

Hetch Hetchy -- the twin to Yosemite Valley -- should have been restored decades ago, say many environmental groups, including the Sierra Club.

But the only way the dam falls is if a federal judge orders it. And no environmental group will sue. Why?

They say it's better handled with cooperation and education. My explanation is simpler: it's because the dam holds some of the best drinking water on earth -- granite-filtered water reserved mostly for the allegedly environmentally conscious folks of San Francisco and other Bay Area cities.

Amazing, isn't it?

Environmentalists sue to restore the Owens River and Mono Lake. Environmentalists sue to restore the San Joaquin River and bring back its salmon run.

But they won't unleash their lawyers on Hetch Hetchy, one of the world's great wonders, or demand that San Francisco surrender its drinking water so that the Tuolumne River can teem with salmon again.

Can I prove that environmental groups are picking other battles to avoid a backlash among their Bay Area supporters? No. But it sure looks that way.

Here in the Valley, east-side farmers are giving up, on average, 170,000 acre-feet of water each year for the reintroduction of salmon into the San Joaquin.

Shouldn't Bay Area residents forfeit a similar amount -- about half of Hetch Hetchy's storage capacity -- to recharge the Tuolumne, the San Joaquin and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta with cold Yosemite water?

Shouldn't we enjoy Hetch Hetchy Valley, as it was before powerful San Francisco interests stole Tuolumne water rights -- and broke John Muir's heart -- in the early 1900s?

San Franciscans beg to differ. They claim that the dam has created a beautiful lake and Hetch Hetchy Valley was overrated -- its spectacular vistas mere figments of Muir's imagination. Two of the loudest opponents against restoring Hetch Hetchy are Sen. Dianne Feinstein and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Three years of drought and the dramatic degradation of the Delta are hog-tying west-side farmers. They are trying to survive with a fraction of their usual water deliveries.

What are San Franciscans giving up? Not their precious Hetch Hetchy tap water.

Let's give the San Francisco greenies a dose of aggressive environmentalism. Let's sue to restore Hetch Hetchy.

Sustainability Report w/ Fresno ranked as No. 1 Valley City

2009-06-25T06:48:00.000-07:00

2009_UCD-ITS-RR-09-06

Fresno first on UC Davis sustainability index

2009-06-24T17:53:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, June 23, 2009, 12:32pm PDT

Sacramento second on UC Davis sustainability index

Sacramento Business Journal

Sacramento is relatively well-prepared to accommodate the expected Central Valley population boom with sustainable-growth policies, according to a University of California Davis study.

The capital city scored second out of 100 Central Valley cities on the study’s sustainability index, which measured sustainable-growth policies and procedures. Fresno topped the list with an index score of 33, out of 50, while Sacramento scored 31.5 and Davis scored 30.

The study, “Achieving Sustainability in California’s Central Valley,” considered whether Central Valley cities, which are expected to grow from a population of 7 million to 12 million over the next 30 years, could be both big and green.

“I’m actually pretty pessimistic about the possibility,” associate professor Mark Lubell, the study’s lead author, said in a news release. “Sustainable growth is growth that minimizes environmental impact while meeting goals for economic viability and quality of life, for both present and future generations. Our study identified some very serious obstacles to achieving the goal, but also identifies some variables and recommendations that might help.”

A news report including Fresno Audubon

2009-06-19T04:33:00.001-07:00

Video

You're not sure if you should laugh, cry, or get angry...Commentary from Devin Nunes

2009-06-18T08:25:00.000-07:00

Another View

By Devin Nunes
In recent weeks, I have suggested that registered Democrats of the San Joaquin Valley change their party affiliation. My intent isn't a plea to grow Republican registration and it is not a partisan attack. It is simply an observation necessary to inform Valley residents -- you and your family are under siege and the Democratic Party is leading the attack.

Don't get me wrong, Democrats have, in the past, contributed to the greatness of our state, as well as the San Joaquin Valley's rich agricultural heritage. For example, President John F. Kennedy and other Democrats from his generation helped build significant portions of California's massive water infrastructure on which the world's most diverse and productive farming region depends.

However, these aren't the Democrats who control the party today. Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her radical liberal Democrats have taken their place. Many of these liberals have been in Congress for the past 30 years and have ushered in far reaching environmental laws -- some of which were crammed into must-pass legislation in the dead of the night. These laws have whittled away our ability to deliver water to families in the San Joaquin Valley. Just last week, the Obama Administration released a new biological opinion that will take as much as 500,000 acre feet of water from our dry communities. This new diversion of precious water for questionable environmental purposes comes on top of losses we have seen as a result of the Delta smelt and the San Joaquin River Settlement.

It has become increasingly clear that radical greenies now control the agenda in Washington. Indeed, numerous news accounts have detailed the interwoven connection between environmental radicals and the Democratic Party. This relationship results in aggressive campaigns to unseat Republicans and install liberal Democrats who are willing to do their dirty work.

Republicans have tried to make changes that would allow California's water system to accommodate both human and environmental needs. But, any attempt to take a balanced approach is met with stiff resistance. In fact, after his effort to reform the Endangered Species Act, former Republican Congressman Richard Pombo, found himself buried in negative advertising by environmental groups -- to the tune of millions. In the end, Pombo was ousted by the environmental movement in favor of a liberal Democrat from the Bay Area. This new liberal radical joined his friends in Congress whom have spent their entire career systematically destroying our economy in the San Joaquin Valley.
Many lawmakers try to have it both ways. Dancing the Potomac two-step, they insist they support farmers and rural communities while at the same time doing nothing to stop the onslaught against us. The ability of such lawmakers to have it both ways; to pay lip service to our crisis while marching to the tune of environmental radicals, is the core of our problem.

This brings me to our present crisis: the man-made drought.

Time and again, I have told my colleagues in Congress that we are experiencing a man-made drought and not simply an act of God. In point of fact, cyclical low rainfall is a characteristic of life in the San Joaquin Valley and our region has survived much worse droughts with far less economic impact. The difference in this situation is that, through legal and legislative action, our water has systematically been diverted away from families in the Valley and subsequently dumped into the ocean.

Residents of the San Joaquin Valley need to hold their leaders accountable. While there have been many meetings, public hearings, and rallies, they are meaningless if our elected leaders are permitted to make promises to us in front of the camera, then do nothing behind their office door.

Sound bites and slogans should not be substituted for action. I have spelled out three simple initiatives to elected leaders in Washington and Sacramento -- initiatives which would bring water to our region.

l The 'San Joaquin River Settlement' must be replaced with a reasonable restoration plan which permits the construction of Temperance Flat. This would provide more water for communities on the Eastside of the Valley;

l The 'Endangered Species Act' must be temporarily waived to ensure water deliveries from the delta arrive to the Valley's Westside communities immediately;

l The federal and state government should approve the construction of a canal which bypasses the Delta. This peripheral canal will be paid for by those who use it.

Now is the time to tell your elected leaders to replace talk with action. Because water, not words, will feed our families.

Congressman Devin Nunes, R-Visalia, represent the 21st district in California including Kingsburg.

TONIGHT: The False Dichotomy of Fish versus People: A Talk on the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta

2009-06-18T08:17:00.000-07:00

The False Dichotomy of Fish versus People: A Talk on the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta
Thursday, June 18 - 7 p.m. - Fresno Downtown Library - 2420 Mariposa St - Sarah McCardle Room

A talk about the collapse of the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, the Campaign Director for Restore the Delta will discuss the consequences, causes, and proposed solutions for Delta collapse. Barbara is one of the leading advocates for a fishable, farmable, swimmable, and drinkable Delta.

About the Delta:
* Over 700 native species of fish, animals, and plants can be found in the Delta.
* 23 million Californians are dependent on the Delta for drinking water.
* Over 500,000 acres of the Delta is farmland
* The Delta is one of the most important stopover regions for migrating birds.
* The Delta supports a fishing, boating, and recreation economy worth $500 million annually.

About Restore the Delta: Based in Stockton, California, Restore the Delta works in the areas of public education and outreach so that all Californians recognize this region as part of California’s natural heritage, deserving of restoration. Restore the Delta advocates on behalf of local Delta stakeholders with government water agencies to ensure that water management decisions will protect and benefit local Delta communities. We encourage local Delta residents to undertake actions to ensure the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta’s sustainability.

For more information contact Brandon Hill at 559.978.2369/ bhill968@gmail.com – FREE Event

Water supply improvements in the San Joaquin Valley

2009-06-10T12:54:00.001-07:00

Water supply improvements in the San Joaquin Valley

June 8, 2009 | Posted by Spreck Rosekrans in Water Supply

Spreck Rosekrans Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

Anybody reading newspapers or watching television news over the last two months has heard frightening stories of water shortages that threaten the viability of agriculture in the San Joaquin Valley. But information compiled by the California Department of Water Resources reveals that in 2009 water supply in most parts of the valley will be in excess of 80% of average.

Central Valley Project deliveries to Westlands Water District, for example, were forecast to be zero as recently as March. Westlands now projects they expect to use 86% of average annual supplies this year. Their total supply is a combination of deliveries from the Delta, water banked last year, groundwater pumping and purchases.

The data, compiled last month by the Department of Water Resources and based on a series of interviews with staff from each of the districts, was attached to a letter from DWR Director Lester Snow to U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein on May 15 . As the table notes, the information is subject to change.

The information paints a very different picture for agriculture this year than we have seen reported this spring. The water shortages are much lower than previously reported. This year's supplies do, of course, rely on levels of groundwater pumping that would not be possible every year. Still, one can only conclude that the water supply situation is not as dire as previously reported and that San Joaquin Valley farms will still be able to grow food for our kitchen tables this year.

Table with water numbers
While the allocation is up notice that there is a large amount of land lying fallow.

Help us count Yellow-billed Magpies June 5-8 (This Weekend!)

2009-06-03T07:27:00.000-07:00

The Yellow-billed Magpie is one of California’s most striking birds. Popular among birders and compelling among conservationists, the bird lives only in California’s Central Valley and coastal ranges. For a variety of reasons – including habitat loss, poison, and West Nile Virus – the Yellow-billed Magpie population has found itself at risk in recent years, and it is now an Audubon Watchlist species.

If we want to help the Yellow-billed Magpie survive, we need to know where it is living and in what numbers. And that’s where you can help. Audubon California is sponsoring a four-day statewide survey of Yellow-billed Magpies enlisted the help of volunteer birders.

Taking part is simple: All you need to do is log into eBird and record your observations. You don’t need to survey on all four days to take part – just go out when you can and let us know what you see and where.

Shortly after the survey, we’ll tally up the results and every participant will receive a report of the findings. Audubon California will use these findings to guide our conservation efforts for this bird.

More info.

Email me at bhill968@gmail.com and I can give you a few ideas of where you can find these birds.

Only modest progress on Delta improvements says Delta Report Card - no action from governor

2009-05-29T10:58:00.001-07:00

DeltaVisionDraftReport Card5-09 DeltaVisionDraftReport Card5-09 Matt Weiser

Publish at Scribd or explore others: School Work Research Law & Government water planning

Thanks to @matt_weiser

Endangered Species Act Small Part of Water Problem-

2009-05-29T08:36:00.000-07:00

Water managers talk joint solutions
ESA issues only a small part of water problem, Snow says

Wes Sander
Capital Press

Thursday, May 28, 2009

In a rare joint appearance, top water managers said last week that species restrictions and water supplies can find balance if competing stakeholders work together.

Outcomes from such a collaboration will hinge largely on whether stakeholders can accept existing and future species regulations, said consultant Steve Thompson said during a panel discussion staged at the Association of California Water Agencies' annual conference in Sacramento on May 21.

"If you look at the state of California, if you look at the federal government, if you look at private industry right now, this is a true tipping point in the state of California," Thompson said. "A big part of that is endangered species and how we react to them."

The water officials used the event to emphasize the notion that California's water woes can only reach resolution through an all-inclusive process.

"We have a group of state and federal agencies here together that are truly committed to working together, and have one of the best working relationships I've ever seen," said Renne Lohoefener, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's California-Nevada Region. "And I think we can solve this."

Lester Snow, director of the state Department of Water Resources, pointed out collaborative habitat conservation plans - like the Bay Delta Conservation Plan now being shaped by the state - as the best means of balancing water interests with conservation.

"Unless we can move to a comprehensive approach ... and develop habitat conservation plans, we're never going to get what we want as water managers, and the species aren't going to get what they need," Snow said. "And the courts and the attorneys are going to get plenty of what they want, and that's a lot of billable hours."

Snow rejected the suggestion of lifting ESA restrictions from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta while solutions are worked out. Species regulations, he said, are responsible for only a small part of the state's water shortage, and lifting them wouldn't change the state's current 40-percent allocations by much.

"If ESA did not exist this year, we'd probably only be at 45, 47 percent," he said. "And I don't say that to say that we don't have ESA issues that have to be corrected and addressed.

"You have to simultaneously solve those equations that are co-equal objectives in the Delta, and that is a healthy and stable ecosystem and an adequate and reliable water supply, and you have to do it at the same time," Snow said. "If you put one over the other, we will never get out of this conflict."

Don Glaser, regional director of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, likewise described ESA regulations as a permanent piece of the puzzle.

"I think there is not a (political) will to change the act," Glaser said. "So what that says is we as managers, and you as a community of interest, we need to find a different way to apply the act for a more durable outcome."

The Bay Delta Conservation Plan, Glaser said, can function as the first piece in a set of solutions that might build on one another.

"Everything is in motion. And there isn't one static thing relative to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem, and the species that dependent on it, that's reliable. Glaser said.

"So I personally commit myself and our agency resources to the state being successful, because we need one thing that will stand still for a period of time so that we can put the other pieces on it to find a lasting solution."

(Federal)Biologists aren't keeping track of endangered species, says GAO

2009-05-28T09:17:00.000-07:00

By Brendan Borrell

The coastal California gnatcatcher has been listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act since 1993. You would think that when construction of the Sky Ranch development east of San Diego was predicted to harm seven gnatcatcher breeding pairs three years ago, the government would keep close tabs on those numbers, termed “incidental take.”

Not so, says a new report issued by the U.S. Government Accountability Office this week. “Out of 497 listed species in the western states,” the report’s authors write, “GAO identified 3 species for which the [U.S. Fish & Wildlife] Service has a formal Web-based database for tracking cumulative take: northern spotted owl, marbled murrelet, and bull trout.”

The gnatcatcher is not so lucky. According to the report, it is “one of the most frequently consulted-on species in southern California” but biologists simply rely on their “firsthand knowledge” of data collected within their own offices to keep tabs on the species even though they “recognize the need for a more formal method.”

The USFWS provided a biological opinion on the Sky Ranch project in 2005 and approved the take of 7 pairs in exchange for the preservation of additional habitat for the birds. That information, however, was not subsequently used to update the bird’s overall status for which data are already scarce.

The GAO report also notes that the USFWS was not keeping abreast of which projects were in compliance with their recommendations. In an accompanying letter, Will Shafroth, assistant secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks concurred with the GAO’s findings.

“It’s a substantial issue, and it’s something we’ve recognized for a long time,” says Noah Greenwald, an endangered species expert at the Center for Biological Diversity.

In fact, when Greenwald first started working at the organization in 1998, he reviewed 28 “biological opinions” issued by USFWS on the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher, and found that the service lacked a consistent definition of how much take could jeopardize the species. In the end, the 28 biological opinions failed to stop any of the proposed projects from going forward, and resulted in an allowed take of 17-20 percent of the total population.

Greenwald calls this “death by a thousand cuts,” and says that “Year after year, they say you can take this many of the willow flycatchers or that many of the California gnatcatcher, and they don’t keep track of how many takes they’ve issued and what the total impact of that is.”

Smelt operations a hedge against extinction

2009-05-28T09:13:00.000-07:00

By Dylan Darling
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Scientists at the Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery are studying the Delta smelt, learning how to breed the fish in captivity in case the wild population suffers a crash.

If the fragile Delta smelt winds up going extinct, the species could be restored where the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers merge using a population being bred in the north state.

Scientists at the Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery, a small operation nestled on the Sacramento River close to Shasta Dam, have reared the fish since last year. There are now 1,400 of the tiny fish at the hatchery, and the goal is to create a stock of thousands.

The project is expected to continue while the smelt remain in danger of sliding into extinction, said Scott Hamelberg, hatchery manager for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

"We are all, of course, keeping our fingers crossed, hoping that doesn't happen," Hamelberg said.

Although the hatchery's crew members have mostly worked with winter-run chinook salmon that can be more than 30 inches long and weigh more than 30 pounds, they've learned how to handle the smelt. The small fish usually grows only to 3 inches in length, weighs a couple of grams and usually lives for about a year or two.

"You just do everything smaller," said John Rueth, assistant manager at the hatchery. "They are actually very similar to salmon."

Spawning the smelt requires squeezing eggs out of the females and sperm out of the males. Although, unlike with salmon, Rueth said the work on the smelt requires tweezers.

Also unlike the salmon, the smelt accumulating in the tanks at the hatchery are not for release, he said. Instead, they and another population being bred by University of California at Davis researchers in Byron are being held in case the wild population completely disappears.

Having the smelt living about 200 miles from the Delta at Livingston Stone allows the population here to also serve as a backup for the Byron stock in case there is an earthquake, power failure or other problem that kills the fish, said Bob Clarke, fisheries program manager for the Fish and Wildlife Service's regional office in Sacramento.

"You don't want to put all your fish in one spot," Clarke said.

The agency has two hatcheries in the state, Livingston and Coleman National Fish Hatchery near Anderson. Because of the problems with the smelt, the green sturgeon and Sacramento perch, the agency is considering building a new hatchery in the Delta, Clarke said.

He said a new hatchery could cost as much as $20 million, but it could be years before it's built.

In the meantime, the smelt safety net will stay in the north state.

"For years, they'll be breeding (the Delta smelt) at Livingston Stone," Clarke said.

State Parks on Budget Hit List

2009-05-28T08:39:00.000-07:00

As many as 25 state parks within an hour of San Francisco, including redwood forests, beaches, coastal woodlands and historical sites, could be closed in a desperate attempt to reduce the state's giant budget deficit.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's latest proposal to tackle the state's $24.3 billion shortfall includes the elimination of all general fund contributions to California's 279 parks within two years.

It is a nightmare scenario that would mean the public could be barred from visiting 223 parks - that's 80 percent of the state-owned parks, according to park officials.

"That's just horrendous," said Elizabeth Goldstein, president of the California State Parks Foundation. "It could impact these environmental and cultural resources for decades and decades."

The proposal, which will no doubt be subject to intense lobbying in the Legislature between now and July 1, when the fiscal year starts, is to cut $70 million of the $150 million the park system receives from the state's general fund in fiscal year 2009-10. The remainder would be cut out in the 2010-11 budget.

Eliminating state contributions, most of which go toward paying staff, would mean maintenance workers, office technicians, park superintendents, landscapers, rangers, environmental scientists, administrative officers and bookkeepers would have to be laid off. Camping, boating and day use fees would also have to be raised, said Roy Stearns, the parks spokesman.
Parks that would close

Stearns said parks that cannot be operated with minimal staffing or become self-sustaining through fees or other sources of revenue would have to be closed.

If Schwarzenegger's cuts are adopted by the Legislature, they would be enacted July 1, but park officials said that they would keep the parks open at least through Labor Day to collect user fees throughout the summer. Stearns said camping reservations have been sold through November.

The governor also has proposed deep cuts to public education, health and human services, and prisons.

The latest proposal is far more severe than last year's budget proposal, which would have cost California parks 129 jobs and closed as many as 48 state parks, including nine in the Bay Area, saving the state close to $14 million.

Based on that list, the Bay Area parks that are most threatened by closure include Henry W. Coe State Park near Morgan Hill, which, at 87,000 acres, is the largest state park in Northern California.
Forest near Guerneville

Armstrong Redwoods State Reserve, a foggy primeval forest near Guerneville in Sonoma County, is one of at least four stands of giant redwoods that the public could be blocked from visiting. Visitors to quiet, leafy Tomales Bay State Park and windswept, 170-acre Candlestick Point State Recreation Area could be stopped at the entrance gates. Even the old governor's mansion in Sacramento could be shuttered under the proposed budget.

"That is a good starting place, but it is going to be a much, much bigger list than that," said Goldstein.

Among the iconic locations that could potentially see campgrounds or facilities closed, she said, are Mount Tamalpais, China Camp and Samuel P. Taylor State Park in Marin County, Mount Diablo, Angel Island and several coastal beaches along the Peninsula.

The parklands of the East Bay Regional Park District and Golden Gate National Recreation Area would not be affected.
Reasons behind the cuts

Drastic cuts are necessary, the governor said, because of the slipping economy, declining revenues and a deficit that deepened after voters rejected five budget measures designed to help close the gap. Goldstein argued, however, that the savings derived from cutting the parks out of the budget would amount to 0.26 percent of the $24.3 billion budget gap.

"It's a very, very tiny portion of the financial need, but the impacts would be draconian to say the least," Goldstein said. "Not only is this bad for people who are relying on state parks more than they ever have for recreation and vacation, but it is also bad for the communities surrounding these parks."

Stearns said 79.6 million people visited state parks last year. A huge number of reservations for campgrounds have already been made throughout the summer and into November, he said. Analysts estimate park visitors spend roughly $2.6 billion a year in and around the parks.

Goldstein said for every dollar spent, the state parks generate $2.35 in tax revenue from economic activity in the local communities surrounding the parks. That means the state could potentially see a reduction in revenue by closing the parks.

That's not even counting the loss of day-use fees and the cost of patrolling the closed parks to make sure arsonists, vandals, transients, hunters and marijuana growers don't move in, she said.
Yet another blow to parks

The latest proposed cuts are yet another blow to the largest state park system in the nation. California state parks cover 1.5 million acres. Already, they were operating on little more than a shoestring budget, having absorbed years of cost cutting and staff reductions.

As it is, the state parks have $1.2 billion in deferred maintenance on the books, said Stearns and others, who contend that the proposed cuts would cause that number to increase.

"We really reject the basic premise that this is an appropriate way to close the budget gap," Goldstein said. "The potential implications for the state park system are very dire."

Peter Fimrite, Chronicle Staff Writer

Fresno and Madera counties are home to only two state parks

Obama Supreme Court pick has small but solid record on environmental rulings

2009-05-26T17:10:00.000-07:00

By Kate Sheppard
Barack Obama has selected Sonia Sotomayor as his first nominee to the Supreme Court. If confirmed, she will be the first Latin American and only the third woman to sit on the highest court in the land. The hot topic of conversation surrounding her nomination is affirmative action, but over in Gristland, we’re wondering, just how green is she?

Her limited record on environmental cases is pretty promising, indicating that she will likely follow in the footsteps of the justice she would replace, David Souter, who was a reliable green vote.

“This is the best Supreme Court nomination in many years,” EarthJustice president Tripp Van Noppen gushed to Grist. “She’s got more judicial experience than any nominee in 70 years, more federal judicial experience than any nominee in 100 years ... She’s very strong in terms of experience.”

He acknowledged that she doesn’t have many major environmental decisions to her name, but said that her record indicates she will be faithful to the rule of environmental law.

“She’s ruled both ways on environmental cases, so it’s not like she’s ideologically committed one way or another, and that’s not what we look for in a judge,” said Van Noppen. “We look for a willingness to be fair in applying the law.”

The most significant environmental case in Sotomayor’s record is her ruling in 2007’s Riverkeeper, Inc. v. EPA. The case centered on whether or not the Environmental Protection Agency should be allowed to consider the cost-effectiveness of measures to protect fish and other aquatic life forms in rivers and lakes near power plants.

Sotomayor argued in her decision that the EPA should not use cost-benefit analysis to determine what technologies to use for cooling-water intake structures at power plants. The Clean Water Act says that these intake structures must use the “best technology available” to prevent harm to aquatic life (i.e., fish getting stuck on machinery, or smaller fish getting sucked right up into the system), but it doesn’t specify what would qualify as such. Sotomayor argued that the determination should be based on the environmental benefit, honoring the original intent of the Clean Water Act:

“... assuming the EPA has determined that power plants governed by the Phase II Rule can reasonably bear the price of technology that saves between 100-105 fish, the EPA, given a choice between a technology that costs $100 to save 99-101 fish and one that costs $150 to save 100-103 fish (with all other considerations, like energy production or efficiency, being equal), could appropriately choose the cheaper technology on cost-effectiveness grounds.

The Agency is therefore precluded from undertaking such cost-benefit analysis because the [best technology available] standard represents Congress’s conclusion that the costs imposed on industry in adopting the best cooling water intake structure technology available (i.e., the best-performing technology that can be reasonably borne by the industry) are worth the benefits in reducing adverse environmental impacts.

In April, the Supreme Court overturned her decision in a 6-3 ruling in favor of the power companies – a major disappointment for enviros.

“[Sotomayor] took the line that we and most environmental groups would agree with, which I think is the proper construction of the statute,” said Jay Austin, a senior attorney at the Environmental Law Institute. “This clearly shows that she understands these issues.”

But Van Noppen also pointed to a 2004 case in the Second Circuit, Environmental Defense v. the United States Environmental Protection Agency, in which she sided against environmentalists who challenged the EPA’s acceptance of a New York state plan to meet national air quality standards for ozone. She didn’t author the decision, but agreed with the majority in deciding for the EPA.

Still, Van Noppen said her record indicates both that she acknowledges the rights of citizens to challenge regulatory authorities if they fail to uphold their legal mandat, and that she affirms the authority of environmental regulatory agencies. This perspective differs markedly from the one shared by the Court’s four conservative justices – Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, and Samuel Alito – who have repeatedly challenged both these premises.

“She’s likely to honor citizens’ rights to use the courts to enforce the law, because that’s the way those laws are written, and to use the authority of those agencies to carry out their mission as it has been created by Congress,” said Van Noppen.

Court is in order

If Sotomayor is confirmed, it won’t shift the court on this and similar issues. Though Souter was appointed by Republican George H.W. Bush, he tended to side with the more liberal members of the court—he was among the justices who sided with Sotomayor’s original decision in the Riverkeeper case.

“I’m not sure any Obama appointee was going to be in the position to shift the court at this point, given that you’re talking about replacing Souter’s vote, and he was pretty good on all of our issues,” said Austin.

Sotomayor was also a Bush appointee, named to the District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H.W. Bush in 1991 and promoted to the Second Circuit by President Bill Clinton in 1997. Environmentalists are optimistic she’ll follow Souter’s example, voting for the most part with liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, and Stephen Breyer. (The only justice counted as a swing vote on environmental issues is Anthony Kennedy.) In the next few years, new lawmaking on climate change is expected and several key climate cases could reach the high court. It was the Supreme Court which, in 2007, determined that the EPA has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act if it determines that carbon dioxide is a threat to public welfare. The EPA concluded last month that it is in fact a threat, triggering the beginning of regulation of these planet-warming gases.

“The climate change decision two years was a landmark case,” said Van Noppen. “Until that ruling came from the Supreme Court, there was a major obstacle in front of the EPA on moving forward on climate change ... Once that obstacle was removed, it gave a more sympathetic administration the ability to do some things, so that’s a way that a Supreme Court decision could have a big affect.”

It’s quite likely that the Supreme Court will be again be tasked with determining some of the tough questions about just what is within the EPA’s regulatory authority when it comes to climate change. Any regulations coming from the agency will inevitably meet challenge from industry, environmentalists, or both. And if Congress moves to write new law dealing with climate change more specifically by capping and putting a price on carbon dioxide, the new law will also meet a host of legal challenges which could eventually funnel up to the highest court in the land.

Meanwhile, there are also a number of suits in district courts challenging the legality of the various regional programs to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions that could become more pertinent if Congress doesn’t write a new law this year. Industries that operate in multiple states have balked at the fact that they exist within different regulatory frameworks right now, and have raised the issue of whether this violates interstate commerce laws.

Other major issues that could come before the Court in the next few years include revisiting exactly what bodies of water are covered under the Clean Water Act, which has been a subject of debate for years because the original language in the legislation is not entirely clear. Whether or not wetlands and rivers and streams that exist only during certain seasons should be covered by the law needs to be decided, whether by new legislative language or a Court ruling.

The Endangered Species Act is another major environmental law almost constantly under litigation in district courts, and key decisions could funnel up to the Supreme Court in the near future. One area that could be ripe for a Supreme Court evaluation are questions of what existing laws can do to protect species threatened by climate change, an issue that environmentalists have raised repeatedly when it comes to the polar bear. The Center for Biological Diversity has filed suit in federal court against six agencies of the federal government on the basis that they have not addressed the impacts of warming on endangered species.

“Ultimately, the Supreme Court will probably have to decide how narrowly or broadly the courts are going to look at climate change policy,” said Austin. By all indications, Sotomayor will side with the liberal justices on the issue.

Kate Sheppard is Grist’s political reporter.

Fresno Audubon and Water Conservation - Our most recent actions and plans for the future

2009-05-22T11:11:00.000-07:00

According to a recent survey of our membership, 84% think water conservation and efficiency is an important issue for us to address. Despite the seemingly vast support for water conservation initiatives, I know some will express concerns that Fresno Audubon should not be taking up such an issue.
First, if we don't advocate for conservation and efficiency, who will? I am unaware of other local groups working on this issue.
Secondly, local elected officials(generally) do not lead on this issue. The people do not lead either - Fresno has one of the highest per capita usage rates in California. There is a need for action.
Thirdly, human needs and consumption of water will and are having an effect on the availability of water for habitat. There is a connection between water supply and the health of the ecosystems we are all so passionate about even if it is not easy to see all of the time. Promoting conservation and sustainable use of water is one way of helping to ensure adequate water supply to the environment.

What we are working on:
- Today I met with Steven Sotomayor, Chief of Staff for Fresno City Councilman Andreas Borgeas to discuss ways in which the city can assume a leadership role in the realm of water conservation.
Our suggestions:
1.Expanded Residential Incentive Program including:
Rain barrels
Synthetic turf and/or water efficient landscape rebates
Weather based irrigation controllers
Gray water systems
These suggestions were well received, but would need to pass a cost-benefit test before implementation.

2. Revise the City of Fresno Approved Plants List to include only plants with minimal water needs. A number of the plants on the current list are not drought tolerant.
Also well received. I am going to be working on my own draft revision of the list .

3. Implement Common Sense Steps in Fresno's Water Shortage Contingency Plan and additional measures.
A. No restaurant, hotel, café, cafeteria or other public place where food is sold, served, or offered for sale, shall serve drinking water to any customer unless expressly requested

B. Prohibit use of potable water to clean, fill or maintain decorative fountains, lakes or ponds.

C. Require hotels and motels to provide customers the option of choosing not to have towels and linens laundered daily. The hotel or motel shall prominently display notice of this option in each bathroom and sleeping room using clear and easily understood language. City of Fresno or other organization could furnish appropriate signage.

It was suggested that a public-private partnership might be the best way to achieve all of the aforementioned goals and that the City could be a supporter. I agree. This will take some work should we decide to pursue it, but a voluntary partnership will not evoke the public anger that government regulations might.

D. Consider organizing a citizen task force on water to assist with enforcement of regulations, outreach, and aforementioned survey of city landscapes. Provide volunteers with reasonable incentives for service.

Other Steps
Comprehensive review of irrigation practices on city maintained landscapes to identify and eliminate waste and instances of noncompliance with city regulations and/or situations in which drought tolerant landscaping could be implemented.
Comprehensive review of water use in municipal buildings. Identify/eliminate waste. Investigate feasibility of upgrades to efficient fixtures and set timelines for implementation.

Basically, a very good meeting. We plan on continuing our dialogue on water conservation and working for the implementation of our ideas.

Please, if you feel so inclined, thank Andreas Borgeas and staff for inviting us to the table on this important issue.

Correspondence Between Fresno Audubon and CSUF re: Water Use

2009-05-21T13:52:00.000-07:00

My letter regarding decorative fountains on campus as a source of water waste(among other things):

Dear Facilities Management:
The current drought has brought the attention of many to wasteful uses of water. One such area apparent on the Fresno State campus are the decorative fountains. While said fountains are aesthetically pleasing and likely recirculate their water, much is still lost to evaporation particularly as the hot summer months are fast approaching. Other municipalities and government agencies such as the City of San Diego are considering shutting off decorative fountains in order to conserve. We ask that you do the same.

Fresno State should take the lead role in encouraging water conservation and start on its own campus. This can include turning off the fountains, watering landscapes and ag lab land at night or in the early morning rather than at midday when water is lost to evaporation, or ensuring replacement fixtures in campus buildings are the most water efficient available.

Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing your feedback.

Their response, which at first blush seems like "We've done enough.":

Mr. Hill,

I received your email calling on Fresno State to take more of a leadership roll in water conservation. Fresno State has been very proactive in the areas of sustainability and conservation of resources. The Lot V solar project is just a recent example of such efforts. This University also understands the importance of water as a finite resource and has taken a significant leadership roll in developing ways to utilize water more efficiently by establishing the International Center for Water Technology.

Grounds Manager, Ryan McCaughey, and Farm Director, Dr. Ganesan Srinivasan take water conservation very seriously. Both are fairly new to the Campus and both immediately began working on this issue. Ryan reports that the Campus reduced the amount of water used to irrigate the 380 acre academic core of campus last year by an estimated 33%. This was achieved through alternative watering schedules, repairing failing irrigation lines and installing better controls. The farm is also implementing better watering practices to not only conserve water, but also to eliminate breeding grounds for mosquitoes and to reduce the financial costs related to overwatering.

We at Fresno State understand that water is a very valuable resource that requires responsible stewardship. We are always looking for ways to make headway on this and other conservation issues. Recently, the Campus created the Office of Sustainability. Assistant Vice President, David Moll is its director. Feel free to contact him if you should have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding sustainability issues and efforts.

Thank you for taking the time to write and share your suggestions and views.

Respectfully,

Rick Finden

Associate Director of Plant Operations

Water Meters - Fresno Focus on the CA Report

2009-05-19T08:07:00.000-07:00

Making Meters Mandatory (Audio)

California's Water Meter Rebellion Withers (Text)

Things Audubon has been up to in the last week.

2009-05-18T18:18:00.000-07:00

-Attended a meeting for the Sierra National Forest Motorized Travel Management Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Studying the document and preparing to submit comments.

-Consulting with County of Fresno Resources Manager about the first phase of Lost Lake Park projects

-Taking more requests for owl boxes and advising farmers on box placement issues.

-Scheduling the next season of programs

-Looking into how Fresno Audubon can have a voice in the City of Clovis' General Plan update.