I live in Oregon. The entire West coast is on fault lines, prime for earthquakes. Obama just approved 1,500 new oil fracking wells, which can contribute to this huge devastation. People living on the West coast are more important than oil.

The Cayadutta Creek, one of the most polluted streams in New York during much of the 20th Century, is now supporting trophy-sized brown trout in the lower portion of the stream below the sewage treatment plant to the Mohawk River (where NYS has not been stocking). These fish are now being threatened by overfishing and need to be protected by a "Catch and Release Only" zone.

The Pinelands Reserve is under threat from two proposed gas pipelines that could devastate this pristine forest area and drinking water resource. Pipelines used to transport oil and gas pose health and safety risks to New Jersey communities, including leaks and explosions. Building out and laying the pipeline projects would also devastate the treasured Pinelands. It is time for our elected officials to take action to protect the future of the Pinelands. Senator Sweeney has the influence to stop these projects in their tracks.

The U.S. Forest Service has announced they will "cut and leave" AND "burn" 3,600 acres of mature forest in the Mark Twain National Forest, in the Roaring River area. This is a management practice that is being used all over the country. They plan to create a stark "glade," destroying the existing habitat. They will be burning every 3 to 5 years in perpetuity. This will displace or kill all existing animals and plants. Carbon sequestration must be included in the new plan. Our forests are the greatest terrestrial carbon sink on the planet. The trees are already doing the job that scientists are struggling to accomplish. To our Representatives, we ask that you seriously consider “The 2015 Climate Initiative” by Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture and adopt its suggestions into our US Forest plan. The time is NOW to reevaluate the way our National Forests are being managed. (Correction, the old plan isn't 16 years old, it is from 2005 and it is very much outdated.)

California's Central Valley produces a large portion of the fruits and vegetables sold across the U.S. But did you know that oil field wastewater is being used to irrigate crops in two water districts in the region? And even though it’s happening in California, it impacts all of us at the grocery store. Mandarin oranges, carrots and grapes are just some of the crops grown in areas that are selling farmers wastewater from oil drilling operations — and it's unclear to what extent this toxic water could be impacting the food we eat. There has been no comprehensive testing to ensure that our food and health is protected from the hundreds of chemicals used in oil operations, some of which have been shown to be carcinogenic and toxic. It's inexcusable that the oil industry is allowed to use American families' dinner plates as a disposal site for toxic oil field wastewater. Tell California Governor Brown to stop allowing oil field wastewater to be dumped on farm fields!

The Lake Washington watershed is being exposed to asbestos and other hazardous toxins. Citizens think that it is impractical to ensure that the fine breakup of materials on barges will occur with zero discharge, including fugitive dust and runoff regardless of the permit stating that there will be no discharge.

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.

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.