Oil, Mining and Gas (OMG) Water Pollution

Clean Water Network’s next regional caucus, “Oil, Mining and Gas (OMG) Water Pollution in the Lower Mississippi River Basin,” is right around the corner!  This caucus is scheduled for September 15-16, 2010, and will take place in Little Rock, Arkansas, at the Holiday Inn Presidential, 600 Interstate 30, Little Rock, AR 72202

This interactive event will explore water pollution issues relating to a wide range of mining and drilling practices including hydraulic fracturing. The caucus will also feature a timely session on the Gulf spill disaster to update participants on specific issues related to clean up and recovery. To review the draft agenda, click HERE. (Note: agenda has recently been updated with a new panel)
Registration: Early bird registration- by August 20th- $75 (CWN members), $110 (Non members). After August 20th- $100 (CWN members), $140 (Non members).  Registration includes lunch, two breakfasts, a reception and all caucus materials.  Note: Limited registration scholarships are still available! Preference will be given to CWN members that register by August 20th. If you are interested in applying for a travel and/or registration scholarship, please contact Gordon Culver at gordonculver@cwn.org.

Posted in Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts, Streams and Wetlands Impacts, Waste Discharge Pollution | 1 Comment

Protect California’s Coast and Ocean-Oppose AB 1552

California Coastkeeper Alliance * Heal the Bay * Sierra Club California * NRDC * Clean Water Action California League of Conservation Voters * Planning and Conservation League Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations * Southern California Watershed Alliance Santa Monica Baykeeper * Environmental Health Coalition * San Diego Coastkeeper * Ocean Conservancy Pacific Environment * Defenders of Wildlife * * Los Cerritos Wetlands Land Trust * San Diego Coastkeeper Seventh Generation Advisors * Bolsa Chica Land Trust * Orange County Coastkeeper

Surfrider Foundation * Environmental Justice Coalition for Water * Food & Water Watch

Protect California’s Coast and Ocean -Oppose AB 1552

End the Last-Minute Exceptions to Publicly Adopted Environmental Rules

WHAT: On May 4th, after a five-year public process that involved numerous public hearings; input from dozens of stakeholders including the CEC, California ISO, CPUC, LADWP, U.S. EPA, as well as environmental, energy and fishing stakeholders; and several detailed, state-funded, independent analyses; the State Water Board adopted its final “Policy on the Use of Coastal and Estuarine Waters for Power Plant Cooling.” The Policy addresses the significant harm caused by antiquated cooling systems that pull in coastal, bay and Delta water and circulate it “once through” power plants. The Water Board submitted 16,000 pages of administrative record to OAL in support of the process and Policy (see www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/npdes/cwa316.shtml#otc).

WHY: Federal Clean Water Act Section 316(b) requires the state to adopt regulations to control the impacts of these “once-through cooling” (OTC) systems. These requirements were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2009. Some facts supporting the need for the state’s Policy include the following: ○ Coastal power plants are permitted to withdraw almost 18 million acre-feet of water for cooling per year,

killing tens of billions of fish and other marine life each year. This translates to 41⁄2 to almost 13 times the amount of water running through the entire State Water Project annually. Just the 12 Southern California plants using OTC kill up to 30% of the number of fish recreationally caught off Southern California each year.

WHO: The need for this Policy was strongly supported by (among others) the Ocean Protection Council and State Lands Commission in separate 2006 resolutions, and the CEC in a 2005 Report. The final Policy was supported by a statewide coalition of conservation, fishing, environmental justice and energy groups, as well as numerous state Assembly Members and Senators and U.S. EPA.

AB 1552: This bill would carve out a specific exception from the Policy for a single stakeholder – the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power – and encourage others to seek their own special exceptions in a gut-and-amend process that is the antithesis of the careful public discussions and independent evaluations that led to the final Policy’s adoption. AB 1552 would overturn specific State Water Board decisions on how to count flow reductions (resulting in situations where no action at all could be counted as compliance), would change the definition of a “feasible” action to be inconsistent with the applicable and definition in the technology-forcing Clean Water Act, and would extend the deadline for compliance by over a decade to at least 2031, and perhaps indefinitely. AB 1552’s overturning of the OTC Policy for a single stakeholder is not only ill-advised, it is unnecessary. State Water Board staff and NGOs have been working closely with LADWP to identify a compliance path, and this work is ongoing.

Protect California’s Coast and Ocean, and the Integrity of a Five-Year Public Process. Please Oppose AB 1552. Thank you.

Questions: Jim Metropulos, Sierra Club California, 916-557-1100, ext. 109, jim.metropulos@sierrclubca.org Linda Sheehan, California Coastkeeper Alliance, 510-219-7730, lsheehan@cacoastkeeper.org

Posted in Coastal Impacts | 1 Comment

Tell Senate EPW to Support Safe Treatment of Polluted Stormwater Runoff!

Tell Senate EPW to Support Safe Treatment of Polluted Stormwater Runoff!

Senator Cardin has just introduced the Safe Treatment of Polluted Stormwater Runoff (STOPS Runoff) bill, S.3602. This bill creates a standard to control stormwater pollution for all federally funded highway projects (see fact sheet from Senator Cardin’s office). The standard that would apply to these roads is the same one that now applies to federal facilities: “The following minimum standards shall apply to the construction of covered projects to maintain or restore, to the maximum extent technically feasible, the pre-development hydrology of the project site with regard to the temperature, rate, chemical composition, volume and duration of flow.”

Our friends at American Rivers have drafted a STOPS Runoff support letter to send to ranking members on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.  You can read a copy of the letter HERE.  Please consider signing on to this support letter!  If you would like to sign on, email Stacey Detwiler at sdetwiler@americanrivers.org by August 28th.  In addition to your name, send Stacey your title and the name and location of your organization. OMG Caucus Early Registration Extended Until Friday!

Posted in Environmental Impacts, Waste Discharge Pollution | Leave a comment

The Master Variable: Instream Flo

The Master Variable: Instream Flow

A hands-on workshop and introduction to the Sierra Water Trust Project

Saturday, August 28th, 2010 from 1:30 to 4:30 p.m.

Lake Tahoe Community College Student Center, South Lake Tahoe, CA

Attend this event and broaden your understanding of watershed-health to include in-stream flow. This “master variable”, known as the quantity and timing of stream flow controls all aspects of river health. Learn how to assess and monitor the in-stream flow needs in your watershed and its relation to watershed health and riverine ecology.

Posted in Streams and Wetlands Impacts, Watershed Related Concerns | Leave a comment

SUPPORT FOR SB565 (PAVLEY)

Sent this e-mail today to Assemblymembers Chesbro & Evans.  I urge others to do the same. — Jim
SUPPORT FOR SB565 (PAVLEY) – My wife and I live on Mark West Creek, major tributary to the Russian River, We have been here for 42 years.  In their 1965 Stream Flow Assessment and Fish Count, CDFG reported 9,500 fish/mile and is still listed by CDFG & NOAA (NMFS) as a major coho salmon spawning area.  Recently two vineyards were planted, 9 wells installed and virtually overnight our famous robust creek went to a trickle.  I am a retired Hydrologist and have excellent historical data.  Flows never went below 2 cfs with a normal dry flow of 4 cfs.  Two years ago, the flow dropped to .06 cfs or about 3% of past minimum flows.  In other words, a garden hose.  All the fingerlings (1,000′s) died, and last year the same scenario and even after a very rainy winter 2009/2010 all my fish will again die this year which includes coho salmon. We are tree farmers, member of Forest Landowners of California, Farm Bureau.  We farm responsibly.  We do everything to protect the water, a very precious resource, that we all need including the fish and city dwellers.
These illegal diversions and overappropriation, especially of the acquifers, must stop.  This isn’t about greed, money & politics.  This is about doing the RIGHT THING.  I have been asked by many of my neighbors to send this to you.
Jim
Some of you have received this message.  I was asked by Jim Metropolis to distribute this urgent message to try and garner some support for this bill that will help stop illegal diversion and maintain instream flows.
Please Call Please call:
Assemblymember Chesbro at (916) 319 – 2001.
Please call Assemblymember Evans at (916) 319 – 2007.
Please tell them that:
We need this bill to help stop illegal water stealing – to maintain instream flows – protect water rights of those who legally hold them (including cities) – and protect beleaguered fisheries.
Assembly Floor Alert – SB 565 – SUPPORT – Read Below
Dear water, fish and river friends:
Senator Fran Pavley’s SB 565 would give the State Water Resources Control Board new penalty and investigative powers dealing with water rights.
SB 565 is sponsored by Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills) and co-sponsored by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) and Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael. It is supported by the Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations and Planning and Conservation League (PCL). Major ag water users have opposed the bill.
Here’s the deal: Fran Pavley’s water rights enforcement bill (SB 565) is getting fierce opposition from big ag, including Western Growers, Farm Bureau, ACWA and the Wine Institute. Their lobbying (and characterization)against the bill has caused some normally rock solid enviro/fisheries members, including several in Northern CA, to go soft on the bill. This includes Wes Chesbro and Noreen Evans.
As we all to well know, illegal water diversions are a huge problem for fisheries restoration efforts up and down California and in the Delta. The bill has been improved to provide more due process and fairness to small diverters who worry about SWRCB running amok (such as waiving penalty for first time offense, added hearing/process rights, and creating a de minimus exception for the serious fines).
Please send a quick note TODAY of strong support for this bill to our representatives: Noreen Evans and Wes Chesbro. The bill is being heard for the final time in the next 2 days, and their support is critical for its passage. Time is of the essence. The bill faces an Assembly floor vote as soon as Wednesday or Thursday.
So far, the only people these members have heard from so far is Ag.
Noreen Evans email via website:
http://legplcms01.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.aspx?district=AD07&
Wes Chesbro email via website:
http://legplcms01.lc.ca.gov/PublicLCMS/ContactPopup.aspx?district=AD01
SUPPORT SB 565 (Parley)
Water Rights Administration and Enforcement
The conflicts between water for farms and water for fish are well known.  Farms need water to irrigate crops, fish need water to survive.  The water rights system is designed to accommodate the needs of both farms and fish.  When the State Water Board grants water rights, it specifically reserves water for the needs of fish.  But that system falls apart when people take water they don’t have a right to take.
The problem is real.  In a recent study of illegal diversions on North Coast streams, the State Water Board found that at least 45 percent of the diversions are illegal.  Meanwhile, the commercial salmon fishery has been devastated, and reports of fish becoming stranded due to water diversions are becoming more and more common.
SB 565 would:
Provide the SWRCB with adequate authority to investigate and stop unlawful diversions of water; · Modernize the penalties for unlawful use and illegal diversion of water, which have not been significantly updated in nearly 20 years;
SB 565 has been substantively amended numerous times to strengthen protections for legal water right holders – protections to ensure that SB 565 contains appropriate checks and balances on the State Water Board’s authorities, reinforced due process protections, and special consideration for small water users.
SB 565 helps ensure that the water that is supposed to be there for the environment and lawful water users is there.
We urge your “Aye” vote on SB 565 (Pavley) to end the illegal use of California’s scarce water resources and protect lawful water users. For more information contact Dennis O’Connor, Senator Pavley’s Office (916) 651-4116 / dennis.oconnor@sen.ca. Alan Levine Coast Action Group P.O. Box 215 Point Arena, CA 95468
Phone: Week Days 707 542-4408 Weekends 707 882-2484
Posted in Groundwater Impacts, Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts, Streams and Wetlands Impacts, Water Conservation Issue, Watershed Related Concerns | Leave a comment

10 water laws of the West

by Hugh Holub on Aug. 16, 2010

Central Arizona Project aqueduct

[Note: I am a water attorney. Years ago I was asked to give a speech summarizing Western water law to a group of non-lawyers. This was the result....]

Introduction: It does not take a law degree to understand water law and policy in the western United States. Ten basic legal and historical principles govern the rights to and uses of water in the West. By understanding these ten Water Laws of the West anyone can then understand the current issues of water and its relationship to the future of the West.

I. The Law of Gravity: The First Water Law of the West is the Law of Gravity. Water runs down hill. The initial uses of water in the West involved the use of gravity to tap rivers and divert their flows into canals for delivery to farms and mines. This is also known as Newton’s Law.

II. The Law of Los Angeles: The Second Water Law of the West is the original law of Los Angeles. This L.A. Law states that “water runs uphill to money“. The development of energy technologies to lift water against the pull of gravity is the basis for modern Western civilization. Los Angeles pioneered the effort to defy gravity with money in the early 1900′s with its Owens Valley Aqueduct. Southern California is now served with a network of pipelines and canals such as the Metropolitan Water District’s Colorado River Aqueduct. Phoenix, Tucson, San Francisco and Denver also utilize massive pumping and diversion systems to transport water from great distances in defiance of gravity to serve their growing urban populations.

III. The Law of Supply Creating Demand: The Third Water Law of the West, also invented by Los Angeles, is that “if you don’t have the water, you won’t need it.” This is sometimes stated as “he who brings the water brings the people”. Both are attributed to William Mulholland, a pioneer director of the Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (DWP). Los Angeles and other Western cities operate on the premise that in order to assure growth of their cities, water supplies for the future must be developed well in advance of that growth. This is in contrast to the general approach in Western cities of developing freeways and other public infrastructure long after the growth has actually happened.

IV. The Law of I Got It First: The Fourth Water Law of the West, embodied in the West’s surface water laws, is the doctrine of “prior appropriation” translated into “first in time is first in right”. First in time for most water uses in the West were farms and mines. Instead of “first in time is first in right”, we have seen the evolution of “we’ve got more votes than you in the state legislature” to decide who gets water.

V. The Law of Beneficial Use: The Fifth Water law of the West is that to have a right to water it must be “beneficially” or “reasonably” used on that appurtenant land. This is only understood in the context that water left flowing in a river maintaining the survival of fish in that river and vegetation growing along side that river was not originally defined as a “beneficial” use in Western water law, whereas drowning gophers or growing rice in deserts were deemed “beneficial” uses. In recent years, environmentalists have succeeded in gaining recognition of “instream” beneficial uses of water and a new category of water rights is beginning to emerge to preserve flows in rivers. However this process is emerging only after most rivers and streams in the West have been dammed and dried up by diversions of the flows to the previously established beneficial uses. To fully appreciate why this happened, it must be remembered that the fish in these streams only recently were able to obtain the services of water lawyers via various environmental and conservation organizations.

VI. The Law of Worthless Land: The Sixth Water Law of the West is that without a water right or access to water, land is worthless. There is not enough water available to use all available land for all the potential beneficial uses. Thus lands with water rights or access to water have value for use, whereas land without water rights is known as the desert, with zero value except when being subjected to state and local property taxation. It is also a historic fact that farmers, ranchers and miners figured all this out about a hundred years before the average city council or environmental group, thus most Western water laws are heavily weighted in favor of using water for farming, ranching and mining. This law is also known as the “appurtenancy” rule meaning the rights to the use of water are tied to specific parcels of land, which are usually owned by farmers, ranchers or miners.

VII. The Law of Expropriation: The Seventh Water Law of the West focuses on how water (and other natural resources) are obtained for Western civilization. This Law depends on finding some fairly impoverished and unsophisticated water right holder (usually Indians, farmers, or rural communities) on the other side of the mountain a city can steal water rights from. Los Angeles pioneered this approach by buying up the Owens Valley on the east slope of the Sierra Nevada for water rights nearly 100 years ago. What we are now experiencing is not so much a water shortage, but a shortage of people on the other sides of the mountains who are willing to let their water resources be stolen from them by cities. “We didn’t run out of water,” said a city official, “we ran out of dummies we could steal water from”.

VIII. The Law of the Price is Right: The Eighth Water Law of the West is that there is no water shortage if the price is right. It is widely believed in city halls that the farmers will sell their water rights if the price is high enough so the farmers can go raise martinis in La Jolla instead of cotton in the Salt River Valley of Arizona, or the Imperial Valley in California. Thus when someone asks “is there enough water for Los Angeles or Phoenix or Tucson to grow?” the answer is probably yes–if you don’t care about how much the water will cost.

IX. The Law of Water Monopoly: The Ninth Water Law of the West is that water management in an arid environment almost always results in the creation of a water monopoly. Thus (along with the discovery of fire and religion) the first steps towards civilization included the construction of irrigation ditches and the immediate creation of some sort of bureaucracy to run the system. Not surprisingly where irrigation water monopoly civilizations rose, they lasted for thousands of years. The Westlands Irrigation District in the Central Valley of California and the Salt River Project in Arizona are merely the modern counterparts of one of humankind’s most ancient of institutions–the water monopoly. Many western urban areas figured out the value of water monopoly and created enormously powerful regional agencies such as the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and the Central Arizona Water Conservation District in Arizona, to do essentially the same thing–building vast networks of canals to bring water to their constituents.

X. The Law of Vanishing Civilizations: The Tenth (or Last) Water Law of the West should be called the Hohokam Law of Water and Gravity. Under this law, if there is no rain, there is no water to flow down hill. What went up–the buildings and the civilization–may crumble to dust if Mother Nature decides to hold a long drought. Lying beneath the streets of Phoenix and downtown Tucson are the ruins of ancient Hohokam Indian cities that vanished prior to 1400 AD. Phoenix is the second city to be built on the same site in reliance on the erratic flows of the Salt River. When there are curtailments of water deliveries to Los Angeles due to drought many Southern Californians had been heard to ask “what do you mean this used to be a desert?”

Conclusion: The principles that govern Western water law and policy have a long and somewhat distinguished history. It should also be noted that similar arid environment ditch-dependent civilizations ultimately collapsed under extreme environmental stresses, internal political conflict, and invasion by barbarian hordes. This is worth contemplating during a drought with various water interests fighting over who will get water in times of future shortages while the streets of Santa Monica or Scottsdale or Tucson are filled with RVs with New Jersey license plates.

Posted in Water Conservation Issue | 1 Comment

Meds wind up in tap water despite drug disposal regulations

Christina Jewett, California Watch
July, 2010

The federal government has a patchwork of laws attempting to deal with the problem of pharmaceutical drugs showing up in city tap water across the nation.

Senator Herb Kohl, D-Wis., highlighted the issue during a congressional hearing in Washington, D.C.

“We need to provide Americans with better information about what to do with their leftover medications. Contradicting guidelines put forth by the Drug Enforcement Administration, Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service need to be reconciled,” Kohl said in a statement. “Americans deserve a safe and effective way to get drugs away from their homes and keep them out of our drinking water.”

California has its own set of rules, in addition to federal guidelines, but they have not resulted in water that’s free of unwanted pharmaceuticals.

An Associated Press investigation published last year probed the issue of meds in the water, finding that pharmaceuticals flow through the taps in the homes of 41 million people living in 24 metropolitan areas.

Among them are Los Angeles, Long Beach and Riverside County, where water tested positive for traces of anti-anxiety and anti-convulsant medications. The probe also turned up a female sex hormone in San Francisco water.

The journalists also found nine medications in watersheds near Los Angeles, Long Beach and Riverside. While the drugs found in those areas were not identified, testers found traces of Prozac, a blood pressure medication and an antibiotic, among others, in an area defined as Southern California.

The issue is not widely discussed or disclosed to consumers, AP reporters found: When water providers find pharmaceuticals in drinking water, they rarely tell the public. When researchers make the same discoveries, they usually don’t identify the cities involved. There are plenty of reasons offered for the secrecy: concerns about national security, fears of panic, a feeling that the public will not understand – even confidentiality agreements. ‘That’s a really sensitive subject,’ said Elaine Archibald, executive director of California Urban Water Agencies, an 11-member organization composed of the largest water providers in California. She said many customers ‘don’t know how to interpret the information. They hear something has been detected in source water and drinking water, and that’s cause for alarm – just because it’s there.’

A Southern California coalition of government agencies compiled a “No Drugs Down the Drain” website on the issue, breaking down the health impacts of tainted water. The major concerns to date regarding the presence of medications in surface water bodies have been increased bacterial resistance to antibiotics and interference with growth and reproduction in aquatic organisms such as fish and frogs. Aquatic organisms are sensitive to low levels of exposure and are particularly vulnerable when exposure occurs during developmentally sensitive times such as before birth and during juvenile stages of growth. Effects of exposure can include a gender-ratio imbalance (e.g., more females than males within a given population), intersex conditions (the presence of both male and female reproductive organs within an individual organism), poor egg hatching success, decreased fertility and growth and altered behavior (e.g., lethargy and disorientation).

California has regulations in addition to federal rules. The Department of Toxic Substances Control defines some drugs as “medical waste” and watches how large medical providers, such as hospitals and clinics, dispose of them. Still, the agency does not regulate smaller medical providers or individuals. The agency is taking a closer look at the issue, though, convening a stakeholder meeting July 20 on “model programs” dealing with home-generated medical waste. For now, The Associated Press published a guide on how to get rid of unwanted medications and the DTSC lists disposal sites in Northern and Southern California.

Posted in Pharmaceutical Contamination, Waste Discharge Pollution | Leave a comment

Support Senate Bill 565 on Water Diversions

Please call Assemblymembers Wes Chesbro and Noreen Evans and ask them to support Senate Bill 565 by Senator Fran Pavley on the Assembly floor this week.

SB 565 would:• Provide the State Water Resources Control Board with adequate authority to investigate and stop unlawful diversions of water;
• Modernize the penalties for unlawful use and illegal diversion of water, which have not been significantly updated in nearly 20 years;
We hear that Chesbro and Evans may not support the bill because of opposition by the Wine Institute and others. They need to know that illegal diversions of water are harming the fish and other wildlife on the North Coast.
Illegally diverting water is theft and harms not only the environment but the legal holders of water rights.
Please call Assemblymember Chesbro at (916) 319 – 2001. Please call Assemblymember Evans at (916) 319 – 2007.
Attached is more information about the bill.  Please forward this to others and ask them to contact Evans and Chesbro and urge them to support SB 565.
Feel free to contact me for more information.
Jim Metropulos Sierra Club California jim.metropulos@sierraclub.org www.twitter.com/SierraClubCA

Posted in Agriculture Impacts, Climate Change Impacts, Groundwater Impacts, Lakes and Resevoirs Impacts, Streams and Wetlands Impacts, Water Conservation Issue, Watershed Related Concerns | Leave a comment

The Master Variable: Instream Flow

The Master Variable: Instream Flow

A hands-on workshop and introduction to the Sierra Water Trust Project

Saturday, August 28th, 2010 from 1:30 to 4:30 p.m.

Lake Tahoe Community College Student Center, South Lake Tahoe, CA

Attend this event and broaden your understanding of watershed-health to include in-stream flow. This “master variable”, known as the quantity and timing of stream flow controls all aspects of river health. Learn how to assess and monitor the in-stream flow needs in your watershed and its relation to watershed health and riverine ecology.

Posted in Streams and Wetlands Impacts, Watershed Related Concerns | Leave a comment

DWR seeks advisers for Water Plan Update 2013

The Advisory Committee for Water Plan Update 2013 is being formed to help develop and refine policy recommendations for the plan. There also is a proposal to establish interest-based and regional-based fo- rums. These groups would be chaired by AC members associated with a particular interest or region. More information and a link to the application are available below . The application should be returned by Aug. 25.

http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/ac/index.cfm

Posted in Climate Change Impacts, Groundwater Impacts, Streams and Wetlands Impacts, Water Conservation Issue | Leave a comment