There are many risks associated with potential copper, nickel and other sulfide mining operations within that watershed, including possible contamination from acid mine drainage and tailings basin failures. The U.S. Forest Service announced it is "deeply concerned" by potential mining near the Boundary Waters, and may withhold consent to renew two mining leases within the same watershed as the wilderness area. The agency announced a 30-day public comment period "to better understand public views" on the proposed renewal of the two leases. The Boundary Waters are too important to put at risk of this dangerous mining pollution. We can protect this natural treasure by not allowing toxic sulfide mines near the Boundary Waters, but the mining companies are using their political influence and deep pockets to try to fast-track mine proposals. Together we can make the Boundary Waters watershed off-limits to toxic mining.

Three trees on upper San Carlos Ave. are slated to be cut down unnecessarily. PG&E petitioned for them to be taken out because they require regular maintenance. The City of Oakland is taking comments now through July 1 and our voices can make a difference. Staff at the Public Works Department have received a few calls already and say that these calls carry weight. These are beautiful old trees that keep our street green, shady, and provide a home for birds, insects, and other wildlife. It would be a shame if these trees were removed simply because they’re an inconvenience for PG&E. Can you help save these trees by signing this petition? Thanks for sharing your voice and keeping Oakland green(ish)! Signatures will be forwarded to the city on June 30.

It Matters: The Utah legislature approved an investment of 53 million taxpayer dollars to build a coal port in Oakland, California. There are levels upon levels of potential conflicts of interest (http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2016/groups-call-for-federal-investigation-of-utah-plan-to-finance-oakland-coal-export-terminal). More importantly is the impact this coal port will have on Utah and Oakland communities. The coal port project is designed to benefit a small few, while Utah coal towns and Oakland families will ultimately bear the burden of the devastating economic, environmental, and health consequences that will inevitably result from the port. Call to Action: As Utahns, we have a unique opportunity to add our voice with Oakland’s local leaders - let’s make it count! Tell the Oakland City Council to block this port. Californians do not want it, and neither do Utahns! Don’t be Fooled: The money used to fund the Oakland coal port are mineral royalties redistributed to states through the Mineral Lands Act (MLA) for the purpose of rebuilding infrastructure and countering other negative effects of mineral extraction on communities. This money is not intended to be used to build and expand mining, but to help communities recover. There is also no shortage of existing port capacity, which means it is not only a misappropriation of funds - it is unnecessary. This port is not an investment in the future of Utah or Oakland economies. It is another shady deal made behind closed doors meant to line the pockets of Bowie executives, not the miners in Price, Utah. Add your name to our petition to voice your support. Visit our website (http://betterutah.org) for more information or to get involved with our efforts. For more information, or to verify our claims, follow these links below. We encourage you to do so! Alliance for a Better Utah website: http://betterutah.org No Coal in Oakland website: http://nocoalinoakland.info WOEIP Says Coal Scheme Violates Civil Right Act: http://nocoalinoakland.info/does-the-coal-plan-violate-federal-civil-right-law/ California Senate moves to Delay Oakland Coal-Export Plant: http://www.sltrib.com/home/3957335-155/california-senate-moves-to-delay-oakland If Coal is Too Dirty for the U.S., Why Would Oakland Build a Dock to Export it to Asia?: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-adv-oakland-coal-port-20160506-story.html

As a mother raising my kids in California’s agricultural heartland, I was horrified when I learned that my 8-year old son has traces of 50 different hazardous pesticides in his body. The shocking discovery came when a French TV station recently showed up in my community of Orange Cove in the San Joaquin Valley. They analyzed hair samples from six local children, including my son, and found that all six of the kids had at least 50 pesticides in their hair. And many of these agricultural pesticides have been linked to a host of serious health harms including asthma, cancer, ADHD, autism, neurological disorders, and reduced IQ. Why did it take a foreign TV station to point out what is happening to rural kids in California? Why isn’t the state doing anything to stop it? It turns out the California Department of Public Health reported back in 2014 on the massive use of agricultural pesticides near schools – more than half a million pounds of 144 hazardous drift-prone pesticides are applied within a quarter mile of schools in California every year. But the Department of Pesticide Regulation, responsible for protecting California residents from pesticide exposure, still has not acted. It is time to regulate pesticide use near schools. DPR must: • Establish protection zones prohibiting use of the most hazardous pesticides – namely, pesticides of public health concern as recognized by the California Department of Public Health, pesticides labeled “Danger-Poison,” and pesticides designated as California-restricted materials – within 1 mile of schools, licensed day care facilities, school bus stops, and known school routes. • Require that the above 1-mile protection zones be enforced at all times. • Require notification of schools and licensed day care facilities at least 1 week before any other agricultural pesticides are applied within 1 mile of their properties.

Governor Christie is standing in the way of voters who overwhelmingly passed a ballot measure to fund open space preservation projects. If Christie gets his way, money for open space preservation that’s already sitting in the state Treasury will be diverted, and less land will be protected for our children and grandchildren! The legislature has never overridden one of Christie’s vetoes before. But this time things are different. Voters – from all parties – overwhelmingly called for open space funding. Money is already set aside. And open space has support from Democrats and Republicans in the legislature. If enough of us speak up, we can show legislators that their constituents will have their back if they buck Governor Christie. Send a message to your lawmakers now. Add your name to the thousands who have spoken out for open space and who support a vote to override Governor Christie.

This project was stagnant awaiting funding for 16 years. Earlier in February of this year, Governor Hogan and County Executive Kittleman announced that not only were the two going to fund the project, but that it would start the following summer. 16 years earlier a sound study done revealed that the sound levels were too high for residents, yet in the plan put forth recently, there is no money, no plan, no concern whatsoever for sound mitigation for the residents along the highway. In a previous project to expand MD 216 to four lanes, sound mitigation was put in place from the very beginning; MD 216 carries on a daily average less traffic than MD 32. The State should not be allowed to proceed without a solid plan and requirement for sound mitigation.

The consequences of climate change are escalating, and momentum is building across the nation for meaningful action. In order to swiftly reduce carbon pollution, we call for a national price on carbon that returns the revenue as regular checks to benefit American households. Experts agree that we need a price on carbon to stabilize the climate. Carbon pricing is the most straightforward way to ensure that the true cost of dirty energy is reflected in the marketplace. As taxpayers, we are forced to pay the costs of climate change when hit by extreme weather, droughts, wildfires, food shortages, and more. A price on carbon shifts the burden of these unfair costs to those who are responsible for--and can reduce--greenhouse gas pollution. A strong price on carbon levels the playing field for low-carbon, sustainable energy like wind and solar, and it promotes investments in emission reduction technologies. It unleashes American innovation and stimulates new, low-carbon drivers of economic growth. Finally, a carbon price that returns revenue back to households in the form of a dividend will protect low and middle-income families, bring together both sides of the political aisle, and build voter support over time to ensure a solution that is built to last.

Beekeepers lost an average of 44 percent of their colonies last year—even more than the year prior. Other research out this year indicates that native bees are declining, too. Why are the bees still dying? Largely thanks to bee-killing neonicotinoid pesticides! Bees are responsible for every one in three bites of food we eat, so we can’t afford to keep losing them. The EPA has the power to help bring back bee populations by restricting the use of bee-toxic pesticides. This June, beekeepers, farmers, and people like you are coming together for the “Keep the Hives Alive Tour.” We’re driving around the country with a truck full of dead bees in order to raise awareness about the plight of pollinators and how toxic pesticides contribute to their decline. The tour will end in Washington, DC on June 22nd with a large demonstration in front of EPA to urge the agency to take action on toxic pesticides and support sustainable agriculture. We must ramp up pressure on the EPA to act NOW. We’re aiming to reach 2 million petition signatures by June 22nd, but we need your help to reach our goal! What’s stopping the EPA from taking action? The pesticide industry. The pesticide industry is doing everything it can to protect its profits. We know the EPA is hearing from Bayer, Syngenta, and other major agro-chemical companies that spend millions of dollars on PR campaigns to shift the blame away from pesticides—despite a wealth of research linking pesticides to bee declines. We need YOUR help to tell EPA to stop dragging its feet and take strong action on bee-killing pesticides. We need to turn up the heat to make sure the harmful effects from these pesticides are eliminated once and for all. The EPA needs to hear from you—not just Bayer and other companies massively profiting from these toxic pesticides. This June we have the ability to do just that – help us make your voices heard! Tell the EPA it needs to do its job and protect bees, the planet, and all of us from pollinator-killing pesticides NOW!

The leaders of the UK, US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the European Union encouraged all countries to join them in eliminating “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies” within a decade. We think that's a decade too late.

Petition to repeal Connecticut's natural gas plan Connecticut’s energy policy supports the expansion of natural gas pipelines in our state by 900 miles with the goal of converting 300,000 homes and businesses to gas. This policy is based on the false notion that natural gas is “cleaner, cheaper, and more reliable”. Natural gas is obtained through a process known as hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”, which consist of drilling and injecting fluid into the ground at high pressures. This form of extracting comes at the price of numerous environmental, safety, and health hazards. Natural gas by itself contains 97% methane and is a leading contributor to the contamination of water in addition to being a major source of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. There have been over 1,000 documented cases of water contamination next to areas of natural gas drilling as well as cases of sensory, respiratory, and neurological damage due to ingested contaminated water* . We need your help to change Connecticut’s pro-natural gas energy policy. With the growth of clean fuel alternatives, Connecticut has the opportunity to use other renewables such as Bioheat, biodiesel, wind, solar, and hydro that can be utilized to insure that the environment is protected. With your help we can reverse the direction of the energy policy in our state. Please sign the petition below so that policy makers are aware of your opposition to the expansion of natural gas in our state. * What Goes In & Out of Hydraulic Fracking. (n.d.). Retrieved June 10, 2016, from http://www.dangersoffracking.com/

Over widespread objections, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed raising the levels of radiation allowed in your drinking water. In the case of an emergency, your water would be allowed to contain the equivalent of 250 chest x-rays in radiation, for extended periods of time. High levels of radiation are dangerous, and there is no justification for exposing people to them, emergency or not. For the EPA to even consider this increase is incredibly irresponsible. Tell them to withdraw this terrible proposal.

A new proposed rule from the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) considers requiring state and metropolitan transportation organizations to track, measure, and reduce carbon emissions as well as other air pollution from transportation projects. If enacted, this new measure would help increase investment in public transit, expand safe bikeways and pedestrian walkways, relieve traffic congestion, and clean up the air we breathe. But it won't happen without your support. Transportation makes up 31 percent of all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions and is responsible for about 53,000 premature deaths each year. Reducing emissions from transportation will clean up our air and save lives. We need your help to fix the problem. Tell U.S. DOT you support this rule now.