Worth a read:
Filed under: Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Tagged: Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Comments Off on A Legacy That Cannot Be Undone -NRDC
Good news for a change.
The Washington Supreme Court threw a major wrench Thursday in plans for a big oil terminal on the coast, saying the proposal must be reviewed under a 1989 state law designed to protect marine life following the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska. In the latest of a string of victories for tribal and environmental groups challenging fossil fuel projects in the Northwest, the justices unanimously reversed decisions by a state board and the state Court of Appeals, which held the Ocean Resources Management Act did not cover plans by Houston-based Contanda to ship crude out of Grays Harbor. Gene Johnson reports. (Associated Press)
http://www.thenewstribune.com/latest-news/article126104464.html
Filed under: Around the Salish Sea, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection | Tagged: Environmental Protection | Comments Off on Court throws wrench in plans for big Washington oil terminal -AP
This week, the EPA finally confirmed what we’ve known all along: fracking contaminates drinking water.
Feedback from:
http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/12/epas-final-fracking-report-re-writes-takeaways/
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/epa-report-fracking-hydraulic-fracturing-safety-risks/
https://psmag.com/dont-drink-the-water-93f4f1751554?gi=6c343acb4eb
http://www.wsj.com/articles/fracking-can-impact-drinking-water-epa-report-finds-1481652649
Last year, after a 5-year study on the impacts of fracking on drinking water, the EPA released a highly flawed draft report. The topline claimed that there were no “widespread, systemic” impacts on drinking water from fracking.
Filed under: Environmental Activism, environmental education, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Tagged: Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Comments Off on EPA declares fracking contaminates drinking water
For a couple of decades now, scientists, tribes, and environmentalists have fought a battle against pro-development counties to protect in-stream flows so that decimated salmon stocks and the endangered Orcas that feed on them, can survive. This biased piece, that only talks about the fallout of the mismanagement of the resource, make it seem as if it’s just suddenly appeared because of one Supreme Court ruling. There is a long history of this being debated and fought since the 1990s. During the height of the hottest and driest part of the year, late summer, as salmon are returning to spawn up rivers, we find that because of the perfect storm of global warming, over population, lax regulation, and farming needs, that the stream levels are too low to sustain the fish.
If anyone should be blamed by these families who are finding themselves in limbo, it should be their own elected officials, county and city officials, who have fought every possible attempt to put reasonable limits on water use. If you wanted to sue someone over this, start with the real estate agents that likely downplayed or didn’t discuss the issue of water rights, and move to the county who should have clearly delineated the risk when they put in the tax plots for development.
In the late 90s, before I was even aware of this issue, I looked for property near Early Winters up in the Methow. We found a lovely piece of land, across the road from the river, and backing up on a spectacular ridge. We put some money down on it, and then I started reading the documentation of the property and also checked up on the issues of the valley. I found a number of stories talking about WRIA and water rights issues. The more I checked, it became clear that I might not be able to count on the water from the river, nor from any well I might drill. I decided that I wasn’t willing to take that risk, and walked away from the land. Assuming that all is well, without checking it out, is not a good idea.
Do you want salmon or not? And why would you think that you get to decide that? We have treaty rights to deal with. It’s as much a tribal question as it is a question of the innocent people being conned by local officials who are fighting the in-stream rules. These officials will cry to the new Trump administration for relief, and likely they will get some. But as global warming heats up, and the snowpacks that provide our water vanish, this is the future. And it’s here, now.
As a counter to this article and the issues it raises, you can take a look at a short film I did a few years ago for the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe and the Dungeness River Management Team, two groups that are fighting for best practice management on the Dungeness. And they are making great progress. https://vimeo.com/81054977
As counties across Washington respond to a far-reaching state Supreme Court decision involving water rights, angry and frustrated property owners are finding they cannot depend on groundwater wells to build new homes as they have in the past. In October, the court sided with four residents and the group Futurewise who argued that Whatcom County failed to protect water resources by allowing new wells to reduce flow in streams for fish and other uses. The court said counties must independently ensure water is legally available before granting new building permits. The decision is likely to affect thousands across the state and represents the latest struggle to balance competing needs of people and wildlife for limited water. Phuong Le reports. (Associated Press)
http://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/business/national-business/article120131733.html
Filed under: Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Tagged: Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Comments Off on Some building halted as counties react to water rights case – AP & Bellingham Herald
The work has already begun to get a meaningful carbon tax passed in Washington State. I don’t know if the population of this state is willing to pay more in taxes, which is really what is at the heart of this whole issue, but there is no other way forward. I would prefer to see a massive push towards converting to solar, wind and getting people into electric cars, but the ‘powers that be’ in the environmental movement keep coming back to this notion of a carbon tax being something that the population will buy. Given Trumps’ election, I’m not so sure that this is true, but I’m willing to go along.
This plan includes a coalition of organizations that could actually get this done, and it’s up to the folks who failed with their ballot measure to suck up their loss, and join this coalition to get this through. This initiative, while still raising taxes on gas, would use the money to put tens of thousands of people to work with it. That, to me, seems like a win/win situation.
With Trump headed for the White House, climate activists look to states for action to cut carbon emissions, and plan for a new legislative push in Olympia
Seattle Times original article.
Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Puget Sound | Tagged: Puget Sound | 7 Comments »
The recent announcement from the White House did not come out of the blue. Congressman Denny Heck introduced the Puget SOS Act in September of 2015 and has been working advance the legislation since. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3630/text
By this summer, it appeared that the Act, like many other pieces of federal legislation wasn’t going to get through Congress to the President by the end of his term. Congressman Heck along with Congressman Kilmer began working with federal agencies and the Puget Sound Partnership to look for other ways to move action on recovery of the Sound, and to foster greater federal investment and attention to the region. The funding announced is welcome, but the formation of a federal Taskforce in DC is perhaps more important, as it puts Puget Sound at an administrative level of attention closer to Chesapeake Bay, the Great Lakes and the Florida Everglades.
Of the $600M in new money, $450M is to support projects that came out of the Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project , a joint effort of the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife that started a major effort to evaluate nearshore problems and project ideas in 2001. The final Engineer’s Report released this year identifies over $1 billion in nearshore related projects, and the three projects targeted for the first phase estimated to cost $450M. The $20M for the Skokomish River and the $23M for the Mud Mountain Dam are similarly well vetted USACOE projects that address specific habitat or barrier problems and were ripe for inclusion in a funding package.
The $124M in federal funding is for the implementation of the Puget Sound Action Agenda and represents a 5 year commitment for EPA to match an equal investment from the state of Washington. It should be noted that all of the investments will require Congressional or state legislative appropriations, but the commitments from the executive branch, EPA and the Department of Defense to move forward on these positive steps to recover Puget Sound are significant.
This is all important work, but does not encompass even all the nearshore habitat needs, let alone the water quality issues we face which by some estimates amount to a staggering $500 billion dollar price tag if we were to capture and treat all stormwater in the Puget Sound Basin.
But as I mentioned previously, perhaps the most significant portion of the recent announcement is the formation of the federal Taskforce. From the announcement:
“The Task Force announced today is designed to effectively approach the multi-faceted threats these ecosystems face through development of a “Puget Sound Action Plan” to better coordinate federal programs and focus restoration efforts. The Task Force will develop this action plan in collaboration with the State of Washington and in consultation with tribal governments, as well as through input from a diverse group of stakeholders.
In particular, the Task Force will build on identified priorities in three categories: stormwater management, shellfish sustainability, and habitat protection and expansion.”
It should be noted that the “Puget Sound Action Plan” is for the federal agencies, and we can hope that it parallels the Puget Sound Action Agenda developed by Puget Sound Partnership, and that it focuses greater federal investment of our national time and treasure to recover Puget Sound and the Salish Sea.
The announced investments are relevant, valuable and timely. I would not get too worked up about whether you were deeply involved in the timing or content of the recent announcement, which was driven by strategies relevant inside the Washington, DC beltway. I would put your energy into supporting the planned expenditures in Congress and in the state legislature, and I would focus on getting your voices heard as the federal Taskforce works with regional interests to develop their action plan.
Filed under: Around the Salish Sea, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Government, legislation, Puget Sound | Tagged: Environmental Protection, Government Legislation, Puget Sound | Comments Off on Thoughts on the new Puget Sound Task Force – Salish Sea Communications
A very important ruling just came down, that came out of the Dungeness River valley, and should pretty much end the opposition to the work being done by the Dungeness River Management Team. A bit of good news, and continues to show that the efforts by these collaborative groups are grounded in a legal framework that is upheld when challenged. For a quick overview on the work that has been done on the river by the Dungeness River Management Team, you can view my video on it, called, Working For the River.
Seattle, WA – On Friday, October 21, 2016, Thurston County Superior Court Judge Gary Tabor upheld the Instream Flow Rule for the Dungeness River basin, denying a challenge from a group of property owners and developers. The Center for Environmental Law and Policy (CELP) intervened in this matter to defend the Rule, working with the Department of Ecology. CELP Staff Attorney Dan Von Seggern argued the case along with Ecology’s attorneys. After the decision, he stated: “This is a win for the environment and for water management in Washington. The Dungeness Rule strikes a balance by protecting streamflows, fish, and senior water users, while still providing water for responsible development. CELP is pleased with Judge Tabor’s decision and hope that this Rule will provide a guide to protecting other rivers in our state.”
In upholding the Rule, Judge Tabor held that the Rule was not unlawful and that Ecology did not exceed its authority when it adopted the Rule. He also reaffirmed that permit-exempt wells are subject to the “first-in-time” system of water appropriations used in Washington. The Dungeness River is home to steelhead, bull trout, and four salmon species. Most of these fish are listed as “Threatened” under the Endangered Species Act. Low river flows, particularly in summer and early fall, block upstream migration of spawning salmon and risk causing extinction of these fish. Historically, much of the River’s flow has been diverted for irrigation, although irrigators have agreed to limit withdrawals to no more than one-half of the river’s summer flow. Uncontrolled development using private (“permit-exempt”) wells further depleted streamflows and added to the pressure on fish populations. The Dungeness Rule protects instream flows that are needed to support salmon populations and other instream values, while allowing new residential development through mitigated use of water from permit-exempt wells.
The Dungeness watershed is in the rain shadow of the Olympic Mountains and is unique in the Northwest as the only coastal watershed that is dry enough to require irrigation for agricultural crops. The River is relatively short, flowing 32 miles from the Olympic Mountains to the Strait. It is used by chinook, coho, chum, and pink salmon as well as steelhead, cutthroat, and bull trout. All salmon stocks are depressed relative to historic levels, and chinook, chum salmon and bull trout are listed as Threatened under the ESA. Insufficient stream flow has been identified as a key cause of reduced fish levels.
The Dungeness Rule was developed over a 20-year period through a collaborative process that included state, local, and Tribal governments, property owners, environmental groups, and water users. “This rule is an example of how rules can be set to make sure water resources in the rivers and streams are protected,” said Trish Rolfe, CELP’s Executive Director.
Water for development is provided through a water bank, which ensures that streamflows are not depleted by water for development. Amanda Cronin of Washington Water Trust explains that the Dungeness Water Exchange “provides an efficient one-stop shop for individual home builders in the Dungeness Valley. Eligible homebuilders simply begin the building permit process at the County and then submit a mitigation application and one-time payment to the Exchange.”
Judge Tabor ruled from the bench and a written decision is expected in the coming weeks. The case is Bassett et al. v. Ecology, Thurston County case No. 14-2-02466-2.
Filed under: Environmental Law, Puget Sound | Tagged: dungeness river management team, Puget Sound | Comments Off on Court Upholds Dungeness Instream Flow Rule that protects river and fish
I have heard from some that the Governor appears to be jumping on the PR bandwagon a bit too fast in some cases, getting ahead of his own parade. This article seems to point to that issue. While there is no doubt that Inslee is one of the most forceful proponents for the environment in the Governor’s mansion we have ever seen, it seems that closing the circle and working more closely with agents of change, will secure the changes he needs to make a difference. Having his own agencies fighting them is not a way forward, and undermines his credibility.
Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee’s strategy as a warrior for the environment is once again coming under fire from other fighters in the environmentalist movement. They’re angry the state Department of Ecology he oversees is appealing a court order requiring new clean air rules be adopted by the end of the year, even though Inslee himself lauded that legal decision in statements issued by his office and campaign last month. Jerry Cornfield reports. (Everett Herald)
Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Tagged: Environmental Protection, Governor Inslee, Puget Sound | Comments Off on Inslee’s commitment to the environment questioned – Everett Herald
There is nothing more important for Earth Day, than to re-evaluate your commitment to helping be a force for change. One person can have an enormous amount of influence on the future. Here’s the story of a man who never stopped recommitting. A true hero for the environment, as well as many other arenas of life.
I’ve just completed a radio documentary on the life and times of Wolf Bauer in time for celebrating on Earth Day. It aired in April. Here is the link to the podcast version.
The Life and Times of Wolf Bauer is my one hour radio documentary on the life of a most extraordinary modern outdoorsman, who died in January a month shy of his 104th birthday. Pioneering mountain climber, mountain rescue founder, ceramics engineer, kayak pioneer, coastal geologist, environmentalist. Featuring new interviews with Jim and Lou Whittaker who Wolf mentored, George Yount who flew and kayaked with Wolf, and Jim Johannessen who worked with Wolf on his pioneering shoreline restorations.
Filed under: Environmental Activism, Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Tagged: Environmental Protection, Puget Sound, wolf bauer | Comments Off on The Life & Times of Wolf Bauer – Podcast
This is a good thing. I’m glad to see the Federal government use the economic, rather than the legal stick to attempt to change behavior. Unfortunately for the forests, and the coastal streams, some of this comes too late. Would have been nice to have had boots on the ground to make sure the right decisions were made, since obviously the locals logging companies didn’t give a damn. The Oregon Department of Forestry was not created yesterday. They have had the charter to protect streams from destruction by logging for decades now, and apparently haven’t done so. Has anyone compared their regs to ours? Could we be up for such a lawsuit next? Certainly driving around the Peninsula especially out past Physt could make you think so. The logging there has dumped trees directly into the streams along the south side of the road. It hardly looks like the kind of outcome you would expect.
After warning Oregon that its rules don’t adequately protect water in coastal streams from logging, two federal agencies are denying the state $1.2 million in grant funds. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration sent a letter this week notifying the state’s natural resources director that Oregon hasn’t done enough to prevent pollution from forestry practices like logging and road building. Cassandra Profita reports. (EarthFix)
Filed under: Environmental Law, Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | Tagged: Environmental Protection, Puget Sound | 1 Comment »
Interesting article in Mother Jones from last May on Bernie’s record. While certainly a ‘climate hawk’, his efforts have mostly been for naught, except for one passed in 2007 (when Dems held the control of the Senate) and was co-authored with Hilary Clinton (!). As this points out, the real challenge is to take back Congress, which is not likely to happen this year, unless Democrats come out in huge numbers like they did for Obama the first time. Clinton’s on again off again support of TPP (the trade pact with Pacific rim countries that threatens to undermine American environmental law) is another difference between the candidates. Blind belief in trade has made for some extraordinary gains for third world countries as well as the US (the US benefitted economically on the whole from NAFTA, while certain segments of the economy lost huge numbers of jobs, and Mexico also saw huge losses and huge gains).
Additionally, for a view of Hilary’s record, check out the League of Women Voters. While there are some on the left that are attempting to demonize her, I would suggest that both candidates would do their best to help protect the environment, even with a Republican led Congress.
Array
Filed under: Environmental Law, Puget Sound | Tagged: Puget Sound | Comments Off on Bernie Sanders, Hilary Clinton and Climate Change Law
More on the variety of fronts that global warming has the environmental community fighting.
The University of Washington held its first annual symposium on environmental law last week. The idea is to choose a topic and examine how it fits into current and future regulations. This year’s focus—ocean acidification. It is sometimes called the evil twin of global warming. Ocean acidification is caused when carbon pollution from fossil fuels dissolves into our waterways. Scientists say it may cause serious harm to life on the planet; some say it is already damaging the local shellfish industry. It is also pushing the envelope of current environmental law. Bellamy Pailthorp reports. (KPLU)
http://kplu.org/post/uw-symposium-ocean-acidification-pushing-boundaries-environmental-law
Filed under: Environmental Law | Tagged: ocean, UW Law school | Comments Off on UW Symposium: Ocean Acidification Pushing Boundaries Of Environmental Law – KPLU
