Saturday, March 5, 2011


Lloyd's February 2011 Radio Show


29:04 minutes (6.66 MB)
Lloyd's February 2011 radio show interview with new Delta Watermaster Craig Wilson.  To listen or
download click HERE:

Unreasonable Use Law Goes Unenforced

California has had a law on the books for over 80 years preventing unreasonable use of water. How come it is not enforced? To learn more click HERE:http://fresnoalliance.com/wordpress/?p=2624

Friday, March 4, 2011

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/node/8739

Delta Agreement to “Protect Listed Species” or Another Ploy to Export More Water


Posted on 04 March 2011
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend to friendSend to friend 

By Patrick Porgans
Planetary Solutionaries

Last Thursday a federal judge approved a settlement agreement to protect the tiny Delta smelt, one of a number of species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that dwell in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.  The smelt may be on the verge of extinction. Its 15-minute claim to fame was immortalized during a 60 Minute segment that mistakenly credited it for the demise of California’s agricultural industry. Incidentally, last year, when CBS aired the program, California’s agricultural industry posted record-breaking profits, as it did during the entire four-year of California’s so-called “drought”.

The agreement is the result of protracted legal battles concerning the decline of and protection for Delta smelt and salmon. Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) pumps that export water to contractors south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta are the focus of the dispute. The Court-approved settlement is being celebrated by water contractors, farmers, government officials and environmental groups as a positive development. It also provides time for the U.S. Fish&Wildlife Service (USFWS) to improve the methodologies it uses to evaluate the impacts of the pumping on the smelt in response to a December ruling by U.S. District Judge Oliver W. Wanger, which invalidated key parts of a much-debated plan to protect the smelt.

Wanger also made a ruling back in May 2009, when he issued an injunction, agreeing with the plaintiffs that the reduction of exports to their agricultural operations would result in "irreparable" economic and environmental harm in violation of NEPA. On May 31, 2009, the government Delta pumping plants reportedly went silent as the Delta smelt “take” was just 27 fish away from exceeding the “take” limit, which would have meant that both the Department of Water Resources (DWR), operator of the SWP, and the Bureau of Reclamation, operator of the CVP, would have been in “violation” of the ESA. It is interesting to note, that the fish count “take” and salvage numbers are not made by either USFWS or California Department of Fish and Game biologist. The counts are performed by DWR and Bureau maintenance personnel. Even when the “take” is exceeded, it just reinitiates consultation among the parties, and usually what happens is they agree to increase the number of fish they can “take” kill.

read more ...//www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/node/8739

Thursday, February 10, 2011

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2011/02/jerry-brown-to-cancel-sale-of-california-state-buildings.html

PolitiCal

On politics in the Golden State

Jerry Brown to cancel sale of 11 California government buildings

The Junipero Serra Building in downtown L.A.

Gov. Jerry Brown said his administration will abandon the proposed sale of 11 government buildings, including the Junipero Serra State Building and Ronald Reagan State Building in downtown Los Angeles, that would have netted an estimated $1.2 billion to help balance the state budget.

Brown said the building sale, negotiated by the administration of former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, amounted to a budget gimmick. State offices would have remained in the buildings after the sale and paid rent under the previous administration's plan. The plan would have provided some short-term cash, Brown said, but ultimately cost taxpayers more money over time.

"The sale of the buildings didn't really make much sense," he said at a Wednesday morning Capitol press conference. "It is in effect a gigantic loan with interest payments equal to 10% every year."
Brown is proposing to do other internal borrowing from state funds at a lower rate to cover the funds that would be lost this year by canceling the sale. "We found an alternative that can save a lot of money," he said.
The sale of the buildings had been tied up in court in recent weeks, after two former building commissioners argued it was an illegal waste of taxpayer money.

Brown said he also was reconsidering whether the state should sell other property, such as fairgrounds it owns in Orange County and San Diego County.

"This is not the best time to be selling real estate," he said. "I think we have time to consider what we ought to do with that. "
-- Shane Goldmacher and Evan Halper in Sacramento

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

THE FIDDLERS BURN AND GOD GETS THE BLAME

By Boutris Wittfogel
The State Water Resources Control Board recently offered a surreal clinical demonstration of the body's collective Kryptonic aversion to upholding laws designed to protect drinking water.  At issue is a provision of the California Water Code so plainly defined in statute it is known throughout the  water world as the Mandatory Minimum Penalty law.  Read the State Water Resources Control Board's own report about how mandatory the Mandatory Minimum Penalty law is.

Here’s a brief snippet from that report:  In 2000, new legislation (Senate Bill 709) required that certain permit violations under the Water Code be subject to mandatory minimum penalties (MMPs).  While the State Water Resources Control Board and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (collectively Water Boards) did assess MMPs as a result of the new legislation, the 2007 Water Boards’ Enforcement Report showed that 7,880 violations (from Jan. 1, 2000 through Dec. 31, 2007) did not received a penalty at or above the mandatory minimum amount.  If a local police agency had this record of law enforcement they would be under investigation by the FBI.

Three years later, the regional boards and the state board still avoid enforcing Water Code section 13385 and imposing the “mandatory” penalties. Read more .... www.lloydg.carter.com
 

Breaking news: EPA vetoes Spruce Mine permit

January 13, 2011 by Ken Ward Jr.

Word is just coming down that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has vetoed the largest single mountaintop removal permit in West Virginia history.

The move is part of an Obama administration crackdown aimed at reducing the effects of mountaintop removal coal-mining on the environment and on coalfield communities in Appalachian — impacts that scientists are increasingly finding to be pervasive and irreversible.

The final EPA decision document withdrawing the Clean Water Act Section 404 permit is available hereEPA has also now posted some appendices to that document, including a response to comments.
EPA officials this morning were alerting West Virginia’s congressional delegation to their action, and undoubtedly preparing for a huge backlash from the mining industry and its friends among coalfield political leaders.

In making its decision to veto the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ approval of the 2,300-acre mine proposed for the Blair area of Logan County, EPA noted that it reviewed more than 50,000 public comments and held a major public hearing in West Virginia. EPA officials said their agency is “acting under the law and using the best science available to protect water quality, wildlife and Appalachian communities who rely on clean waters for drinking, fishing and swimming.”

Peter S. Silva, EPA’s assistant administrator for water, said:

The proposed Spruce No. 1 Mine would use destructive and unsustainable mining practices that jeopardize the health of Appalachian communities and clean water on which they depend. Coal and coal mining are part of our nation’s energy future, and EPA has worked with companies to design mining operations that adequately protect our nation’s water. We have responsibility under the law to protect water quality and safeguard the people who rely on clean water.
The agency also said:
EPA’s final determination on the Spruce Mine comes after discussions with the company spanning more than a year failed to produce an agreement that would lead to a significant decrease in impacts to the environment and Appalachian communities. The action prevents the mine from disposing the waste into streams unless the company identifies an alternative mining design that would avoid irreversible damage to water quality and meets the requirements of the law. Despite EPA’s willingness to consider alternatives, Mingo Logan did not offer any new proposed mining configurations in response to EPA’s Recommended Determination.
In addition, EPA argued:
EPA believes that companies can design their operations to make them more sustainable and compliant with the law. Last year, EPA worked closely with a mining company in West Virginia to eliminate nearly 50 percent of their water impacts and reduce contamination while at the same time increasing their coal production. These are the kinds of success stories that can be achieved through collaboration and willingness to reduce the impact on mining pollution on our waters. Those changes helped permanently protect local waters, maximize coal recovery and reduce costs for the operators.

Readers will recall that the Obama EPA began looking more closely at the Spruce Mine in September 2009.  But debate over the proposed operation dates back to the late 1990s, when then-U.S. District Judge Charles H. Haden II issued an injunction that blocked the mine, which then was proposed for more than 3,000 acres. After the Haden ruling, the company reduced the size of its proposal and the operation underwent much more intense scrutiny, in the form of a full-blown Environmental Impact Statement by the Corps of Engineers, which approved the new mining configuration in January 2007.

EPA began the veto process in October 2009 and issued in March 2010 a preliminary determination that the mine would cause unacceptable impacts. EPA held a public hearing in May 2010, and EPA Regional Administrator Shawn Garvin issued the formal recommended veto in October 2010.
In today’s announcement, EPA outlined these concerns that the proposed mining operation would have:

– Disposed of 110 million cubic yards of coal mine waste into streams.
— Buried more than six miles of high-quality streams in Logan County, West Virginia with millions of tons of mining waste from the dynamiting of more than 2,200 acres of mountains and forestlands.
— Buried more than 35,000 feet of high-quality streams under mining waste, which will eliminate all fish, small invertebrates, salamanders, and other wildlife that live in them.
— Polluted downstream waters as a result of burying these streams, which will lead to unhealthy levels of salinity and toxic levels of selenium that turn fresh water into salty water. The resulting waste that then fills valleys and streams can significantly compromise water quality, often causing permanent damage to ecosystems and streams.
— Caused downstream watershed degradation that will kill wildlife, impact birdlife, reduce habitat value, and increase susceptibility to toxic algal blooms.
— Inadequately mitigated for the mine’s environmental impacts by not replacing streams being buried, and attempting to use stormwater ditches as compensation for natural stream losses.

Monday, January 3, 2011

Supreme Court Terminated Governor’s Last-Ditch Petition to Sell State Properties

Patrick Porgans
Planetary Solutionaries
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and his campaign supporters received a major setback Dec. 28, when the California Supreme Court’s Acting Chief Justice Patricia Benke ruled against his petition and plan to complete the sale of 11 state office properties before leaving office.
The court’s ruling was a correct one. Gov. Schwarzenegger’s plan to sell 11 of the state’s iconic properties – including the Ronald Reagan building in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Civic Center – supposedly was to help pay off a portion of the State’s multi-billion dollar deficit and increasing debt load.
read morehttp://www.state-politics.com/west-coast/supreme-court-terminated-governors-last-ditch-petition-to-sell-state-properties/