Water Fowl Foul Water

This is the June challenge from the Love Your Rivers Campaign, which happens to speak to an issue dear to my heart.  Hmm, I wonder what this says about me... Anyway, I have long been a loud complainer about poop of all kinds, so this really toots my horn, dog poop, bird poop, people poop:

June 2011 Challenge Craptastic!

People and our furry and feathered friends contribute to the ickiest form of river pollution: number two. Many of Oregon's most common river problems—from unsafe bacteria levels to wildlife-choking algae blooms—are caused in part by poorly managed poo-lution. Ducks and dogs can’t help it, but you can: Take this month’s pledge. Your challenge Always pick up after your pet Don’t feed the ducks If your home has a septic tank, maintain it regularly Take this challenge and you’ll be entered to win a a two-person basic skills kayak class from Alder Creek Kayak ($130 value). Take at least six monthly challenges before October 2011, and you’ll have a chance to win the grand Love Your River prize.

Free Webinar on Nitrate in Groundwater - Focus on Oregon's Southern Willamette Valley Groundwater Management Area

This is very short notice, but perhaps someone can take advantage out there?

There is a joint presentation on the issue of nitrate in groundwater – here is a fantastic opportunity to hear the latest information on the Southern Willamette Valley Groundwater Management Area - as well as views from Wisconsin’s Public Drinking Water Program and an update from USGS on their NAWQA project including national data on nitrate in groundwater.

Here is the EPA website information – and there is a link to register for this Webinar below.

+++++++++++++++++++++

EPA's Watershed Academy is pleased to sponsor its 57th free Webcast Seminar.

Webcast on Tuesday, March 29, 2011 - 10 AM PT

"Nitrogen and Phosphorus Pollution Series: Nitrate in Ground Water"
by Jill Jonas, Director, Bureau of Drinking Water and Groundwater, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,
Audrey Eldridge, Coordinator for the Southern Willamette Valley Groundwater Management Area, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, and
Neil M. Dubrovsky, PhD, Chief, Nutrients and Trace Elements National Synthesis Project, National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA), U.S. Geological Survey



Please use this link to register

http://water.epa.gov/learn/training/wacademy/webcasts_index.cfm

So much for the water they drink (Part 2)

I have a bit of a correction to make from my previous post. I misinterpreted some comments/events and ascribed the pushover vote to the wrong pushover. The second vote to repeal the local ordinance to protect groundwater will come from the Republican party, not the Democratic party, in Deschutes County. I apologize for the error. Either way, I smell blood in the water but I be afeared it is the local habitat for endangered fish species that is food for the sharks and not the so-called higher thinkers that make the decisions for that region of Oregon.

By the way, the word on whether the Democratic vote on this issue will be a pushover as well is still out. The vote will purportedly take place on this Wednesday, March 23rd.

Further, the juiciest bit of gossip is that the local representative from the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality expressed dismay at the possibility of this ordinance being repealed. From what I have read on the issue so far, which I am sorry to report has taken much more of my life than I intended (there is a huge amount of info available online, is that the DEQ has taken a completely milk-toast stance on the issue. They have been so politically correct in their verbiage that you can't tell if they support protecting groundwater quality or not. They say the right things over all in terms of DEQ's program goals, but when it comes to the specifics of this matter in Central Oregon that affects one of the major rivers in the state, the tone and words are best described as bland, almost to the point of indifference. What did we the people hire these "professionals" to do?

Anyway, it appears from this vantage point that the endangered fish species (steelhead) in this basin don't have a voice. Where are the advocates that will fight to restore and prevent the further decline what was formerly a world class trout fishing stream? Where are the folks that would take action under the Endangered Species Act and use this nice little Citizen's guide to better understand their rights?

Here is state and local government using public resources to work to ensure there is one more reason not to come to Oregon.

Steering effectively or defectively?

I received this the other day from the Oregon DEQ Online Subscriptions hotline and it spurred some questions in my mind. The press release talks about developing a steering committee for an issue that I've touched on in the past, the groundwater pollution problem in Central Oregon (DEQ calls it the S. Deschutes/N. Klamath Groundwater Protection Project).

In short, the DEQ appears to be embarking on a Groundwater Management Area type effort and has solicited applications for membership on a steering committee for the project. In this case, membership "qualifications" consist of needing to live in or somehow represent the region of discussion and the applicant's experience.

Now that word "experience" piqued my interest and so I looked at the form that people needed to fill out to apply. Did it ask about people's educational or professional backgrounds? Hobbies? No. It asked why people were interested, if they wanted to represent an organization or not, if they had the time to commit to the committee. Maybe the nebulous question of "Why do you think you would be a good steering committee member?" gets at experience but it's certainly not obvious that that is the point of the question. After all, I could be a good steering committee member because I read the materials and stay awake during meetings (in other words, I educate myself and I participate).

Perhaps the experience question was settled to DEQ's satisfaction during the interview part of the selection process. We'll never know. It appears that DEQ is not willing to be transparent enough to put even the interview questions online. (Which begs the question of whether each applicant was even asked the same questions.)

In any case, to get back to my original point of query, experience in water, groundwater, water quality or other such related fields does not appear to be a prerequisite for participation. That is not necessarily unusual. The question that niggles in the back of my head is whether the people on this committee will be open and willing to listen to the experts that would need to be brought in on a complex issue like this. That the people on this committee have not already made up their mind about what has to happen, or not, and how things have to happen, or not.

I assume there are at least a few of the diehard opponents to the previous groundwater protection efforts who have ended up on the committee. After all, these are the folks that have committed themselves to running the marathon in their fight against the guv'mint. There were only 22 applications so the odds are excellent that the committee is stacked opinion-wise against taking action. This does not bode well for a balanced process, especially if the reasonable folks participating get out-blown by the folks experienced at being blowhards in public settings.

So is DEQ prepared to facilitate these kinds of meetings? Do they have the know-how, the experience, the huevos to really facilitate and achieve a balanced discussion in the Oregon Way to come up with a solution that protects public health and the environment? History says not. History says that DEQ will sway to the tune of the squeakiest wheel regardless of science or public good. In fact, history says that DEQ will avoid the Oregon Way altogether.

Needless, to say, given the track record, I will not hold my breath. But it is worth watching because, ultimately folks, this affects the top of the Deschutes watershed.

Oregon DEQ Subverts the Process and Wastes True Believers in Greywater

Sad news from Rainbow Todd Jarvis about the DEQ's graywater advisory committee:

http://rainbowwatercoalition.blogspot.com/2010/05/wasting-true-believers-in-greywater.html

with commentary from AquaDoc, Michael Campana

I am happy to report that Todd Jarvis appears to be safe and sound despite his recent experiences with DEQ - he didn't drink the Kool-Aid.

DEQ and Groundwater Management

Interesting to note the Environmental Quality Commission meeting agenda for this week includes an informational item about the Lower Umatilla Groundwater Management Area (staff report is available here).  The opening of the staff report states, "Oregon’s 1995 Groundwater Protection Act requires DEQ to declare a 

groundwater management area if groundwater contamination, resulting at least in part from nonpoint source activities, exceeds certain contamination levels." The staff report goes on to say that it is worth continuing to use voluntary methods to control contamination in the region even though groundwater nitrate levels have not declined and in fact show increasing trends. 

Perhaps I noticed this item because within the same week I received a notice that the DEQ is holding a public meeting about establishing a steering committee for what they are calling the S. Deschutes/N. Klamath Groundwater Protection Project.  On the map on the web site for this project it shows a statewide map of the incidence of detected nitrate-nitrogen levels in groundwater around the state and there several bright red spots of 10+mg/L around the state.  

What does a Groundwater Management Area get us as citizens of Oregon?  Voluntary action while groundwater contamination increases .... establishing yet another steering committee while groundwater contamination continues ... sometimes it is time to call a spade a spade and put that spade to work improving things.

EPA Launches Web Forum on How to Best Protect America’s Waters

Unfortunately I got this too late to post and/or participate but it is interesting to read the comments that resulted from this:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking public input on how the agency can better protect and improve the health of our waters.  For a two-week period, EPA is holding a Web discussion forum on how the nation can better manage some of the most significant water pollution problems facing our nation. The feedback received on the online forum will help shape the discussion at EPA’s upcoming conference in April, Coming Together for Clean Water, where EPA will engage approximately 100 executive and local level water leads on the agency’s clean water agenda.

"We look forward to reviewing the ideas and feedback from the public,” said Peter S. Silva, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Water. “This online discussion is for anyone who wants to share their best solutions for restoring healthy waters and creating sustainable communities across the country."

EPA wants to receive input from water professionals, advocates, and anyone interested in water quality issues about best solutions—from planning, scientific tools, low impact development, to green infrastructure and beyond—in controlling water pollution and how resources can be better focused to improve these efforts.

To join the discussion: http://blog.epa.gov/waterforum/

Oregon Environment eNewsletter - Spring 2010

This is supposed to be available at Oregon DEQ's site but the link appears to be broken:

In This Issue

* DEQ Launches 'Oregon Carbon Calculator'

* DEQ Works to Improve Water Quality Standards

* Chemical-free Lawns Benefit Kids, Pets and Environment

DEQ Launches 'Oregon Carbon Calculator'

A new interactive tool on the DEQ website lets Oregon residents measure their carbon footprint and discover ways to improve it. The Oregon Carbon Calculator calculates all direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions from personal transportation, household energy use, and consumption of food, goods and services.

Find out how your household's carbon footprint compares to households of similar size and income. And learn how you can take action to reduce your carbon footprint from a number of specific ideas and strategies.

The Oregon Carbon Calculator is made possible through Oregon DEQ's support of the CoolClimate Network, a program of the University of California, Berkeley, and through financial support by the California Air Resources Board and the CoolCalifornia.org partnership. Oregon DEQ selected this calculator for its approach and depth in calculating human impacts to climate change.

DEQ Works to Improve Water Quality Standards

DEQ is responsible for establishing water quality standards and policies to protect aquatic and human life in Oregon. Staff are busy working on a number of important water quality improvement projects for Oregon, including the following:

Reducing persistent pollutants. DEQ has prepared a draft legislative report detailing sources of 118 persistent toxics in Oregon waterways and measures to help reduce them. Public information sessions will take place throughout the state in early April. DEQ will submit the final report to the Oregon Legislature on June 1. More information.

Upper Klamath, Lost River Subbasins. A plan to improve water quality in the Upper Klamath and Lost River subbasins is out for public comment. Due to questions about water availability in the Klamath basin, DEQ has extended the comment period through May 27. More information.

Turbidity standards. DEQ is updating the water quality standard addressing turbidity, a measure of water clarity. Once technical work is completed, DEQ will convene a work group and develop a revised rule on the standard – sometime in late 2011. More information.

Standards for new fish consumption rate. DEQ continues to work with communities and other interested groups to develop new standards regulating toxic emissions into waterways to protect human health based on a higher fish consumption rate. More information.

Willamette basin streamside habitat study. In early March, DEQ released a report estimating it could cost up to $1.2 billion to restore streamside vegetation throughout the Willamette basin. The loss in streamside vegetation -- due to pollution stemming from farming, forestry and urban activities – has resulted in increased polluted runoff into streams, leading to increased water temperature and diminished aquatic life. View the report.

Chemical-free Lawns Benefit Kids, Pets and Environment

It may surprise you to learn that the best weed control for a lawn is provided by healthy soil, not synthetic fertilizers and herbicides. Some lawn chemicals actually kill the soil microbes necessary for a healthy lawn.

Using a "weed and feed" product to fertilize a lawn also broadcasts toxic herbicides across the entire lawn. These herbicides can stay there for weeks. Rain or watering can wash the chemicals into storm drains that lead to rivers and streams where fish are at risk. Moreover, herbicides are toxic chemicals that can be unsafe for children and pets.

There are safe and healthy ways to care for your lawn without the use of toxic herbicides. Visit DEQ’s Healthy Lawns, Healthy Families website to learn about natural lawn care and how lawn-care habits affect water quality.

Calendar of Events

Visit our online calendar for more information on these and other events. 

April 5-7: Information meetings in Eugene, Medford, Bend and Portland on Draft Report on Reducing Persistent Pollutants in State Waters.

April 16: State Furlough Day. All DEQ offices and vehicle emissions inspection stations closed.

April 26-27: Public meetings in Salem and Eugene on Willamette Valley Field Burning Rule Revisions.  

April 28-29: Oregon Environmental Quality Commission meeting, Coos Bay. Details to come.

June 18: State Furlough Day. All DEQ offices and vehicle emissions inspection stations closed.  

* * *

Got Household Toxic Waste?  New clickable map shows collection events throughout state

Many of us have products at home containing hazardous substances. Examples include pesticides, herbicides, solvents, paints, motor oil and antifreeze. It’s important to dispose of these products properly to avoid contaminating our water supply or threatening the health of sanitation workers.

Never dispose of household toxic trash down the sink, on the ground, down a storm drain, or in your garbage can. Instead, take your unwanted products to a household hazardous waste collection site.

You can use our online clickable map to see when a household hazardous waste collection event will be in your area of the state.

Learn more about household hazardous waste and what you can do to minimize it in your home.

*********************

Sending this quarterly newsletter electronically rather than in hard copy format saves about 67,000 sheets of paper a year. This equals an estimated 17 million BTUs of energy and reduces greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 2.1 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (240 gallons of gasoline). Please don’t print this newsletter unless necessary.

Public involvement and progress

We've all seen the effects of citizen involvement, uninvolvement and devolvement in various public settings.  Here is a report from the National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation on the 2008 conference on  dialogue and deliberation.  (link:  http://www.thataway.org/?p=2387)  It seems to contain a lot of optimism about how we can bridge communication gaps through traditional approaches of increasing public education by way of getting the word out there early and often...

I like to believe that there's optimism for how public discourse moves forward, but I have to wonder, given the intense inculcation of cultural beliefs and biases that various populations receive from the cradle forward, whether trying to impose a veneer of civility at as late a stage as public participation in public policy making will actually change how groups interact.  If we can't maintain civil discourse on something that many more people agree is needed in some form or another (health care reform and I refer to the spate of racially charged epithets strewn about recently) then how can we possible hope to progress on issues where there is no baseline agreement?