Water quality is crucial to all life on Earth. Amendment 1 and HB 937 would take away the voice of the people to help protect MO water.

Judge: State should grant Clean Harbor permit, with caveat • By MARISSA BARNETT The Daily News • http://www.galvnews.com/news/article_73e95ea6-1797-5681-a9af-37f352a94b2d.html#comments SAN LEON A company seeking to dump treated wastewater into a tributary flowing in Dickinson Bayou failed to include certain testing required by law in its permit application, a state administrative judge ruled. The application should be granted by the state’s environmental agency, but only if the state inserts a legally required request for testing and monitoring of the discharged waste, Administrative Judge Joanne Summerhays said. Clean Harbors San Leon Inc. in May 2015 applied for an amendment to its existing permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to discharge up to 105,000 gallons of treated wastewater and treated stormwater each day into a tributary on its property that flows to Dickinson Bayou. The proposal quickly drew the ire of neighboring property owners and residents, particularly in San Leon, who worried the company’s plan will further pollute the bayou. A coalition of residents, including local oyster company owners and representatives of the San Leon Municipal Utility District, protested and sought a hearing from the State Office of Administrative Hearings, which considers disputes over permits. In a proposal for decision published April 24, the administrative judge ruled the draft permit had not required Clean Harbors to conduct whole effluent toxicity testing, or WET as it’s called, on its discharged wastewater, which is a violation of state code. The judge recommended the amendment be accepted, but with the requirement. The environmental commission will ultimately make the call on the amendment to the permit, but it weighs the administrative judge’s proposal. The state had almost allowed a company to dump more wastewater into unnamed waterways with little oversight or regulation over how it affects the environment, said Lisa Halili, an owner of Prestige Oysters in San Leon. People who protested the plan celebrated the move as a step in the right direction because it requires hazardous waste companies doing business in Galveston County to have some accountability in protecting the waterways. “The recommendation to include WET testing is a very big win because it will require Clean Harbors to constantly monitor potential toxicity in receiving waters,” said Joe Manchaca, president of the San Leon Municipal Utility District. The testing measures the toxic effects of pollutants on species specific to the area where it’s dumped, Summerhays said. “WET testing is an integral tool in the assessment of water quality for the protection of aquatic life because it can measure both chronic and acute impacts on the survival, reproduction, or growth of test organisms,” Summerhays wrote. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality will review the proposal for decision and submit responses if there are any concerns or disagreements, agency spokeswoman Andrea Morrow said. Once the process is complete, it will be scheduled for a monthly agenda meeting, Morrow said. The commissioners will then decide on the application, Morrow said. Marissa Barnett: 409-683-5257; [email protected] The San Leon community is opposed to this permit because we do not want Dickinson Bay poisoned by Clean Harbors. In San Leon everyone loves this area to fish, catch shrimp and oysters and enjoy all aspects of water recreation in this bay. The pollution from this project will ruin our way of life, poisoning our seafood and must not be allowed. We can not allow Clean Harbors to dump 12,000 pounds of oily grease in our bay each year. We are a small unincorporated area easily taken advantage of by corporate bullies who look to prey on rural areas such as ours. It is time to take a stand for communities and families and stop poisoning our water. The state of Texas needs to be held accountable for the decisions made on behalf of its citizens. Tell the TCEQ do not rubber stamp this Clean Harbors San Leon permit. There are so many people now entering this cause that I believe that the folks fighting for Dickinson Bayou have a good fighting chance of winning. People, we need you now more than ever in this cause to protect Dickinson Bayou. Please email Ann Bright of Texas Parks and Wildlife at [email protected] and let her know that you do not want any more harmful chemicals dumped into our bayou. You do not have to live here to support this cause. If you eat shrimp, crabs, oysters or fish, or like fishing, boating or water recreation, you need to support this. It only takes a minute or two to email Texas Parks and Wildlife to help save this bayou. http://www.coastmonthly.com/2016/12/accidental-activist/ http://seabreezenews.com/issues/2016%20issues/1216%20-%20December%202016/Page_01c.pdf

On April 4, 2016, MV@Play and Gale Associates presented to the MVRHS school committee a $12-million proposal to build a centralized athletic facility on a 3.6-acre parcel of land on the MVRHS campus. Funding would initially come from private donors, but MVRHS, and all six Island towns, would be expected to pay for future upkeep. The plans, designed to be implemented in three phases, the first beginning as early as September 1, 2016, include the installation of four artificial turf playing fields: one inside the track, plus three others. The intent is to eventually host all soccer, lacrosse, field hockey, and football practices and games (from the youngest players through high school and adult leagues) there for decades to come. From financial, maintenance, health, environmental, and playability perspectives alike, natural grass is a far better choice. Artificial turf fields are not as low-maintenance nor as cost-effective as their billion-dollar industry suggests. According to Gale Associates, installation costs for a new artificial turf field with GreenPlay infill costs $850,000, assumes a 14-year carpet life, and the only maintenance is grooming with a towed groomer 4-5 times per year. The limited warranty covers only 8 years, however, and can be voided for a multitude of common conditions/maintenance practices. The life cycle costs of natural grass fields, when compared to those of artificial turf, are essentially the same—assuming the artificial carpet lasts 6 extra years after warranty expiration, and the cost of replacement doesn’t rise. Not mentioned: the premature failure rate of artificial turf fields, the costs of replenishing the infill, whether we would switch to crumb rubber if the GreenPlay infill becomes moldy, the intensive maintenance costs and practices necessary to keep the carpet sanitary and safe—including sweeping up debris like trash and leaves, brushing to straighten fibers, deep raking to loosen infill, spraying disinfectant and anti-static chemicals, manual removal of gum (with a solvent, then hand-pried out of the fibers), cleaning of spilled drinks, vomit, spit, sweat, blood, and animal droppings (dog, goose, etc.), and repairing loose seams to avoid liability issues. Given the exorbitant costs and many complications associated with artificial turf fields, it would be highly irresponsible for MVRHS to assume financial responsibility for their upkeep. Forbes. “Buyers’ Remorse Surfacing over Artificial Turf Fields.” October 23, 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2014/10/22/buyers-remorse-surfacing-over-artificial-turf-fields/#7203e2c321ff City Limits. “NYC’s Fake Grass Gamble: A $300 Million Mistake?” August 24, 2010. Winner of the 2010 Sigma Delta Chi Award for Investigative Reporting. http://www.spjvideo.org/sdx/sdx10/mag-inv-reporting-r.pdf Red Hen Turf. “The Dirt on Turf: What You Need to Know About Synthetic Turf and Natural Grass for Athletic Fields.” http://redhenturf.com/pdfs/TheTruthAboutArtificialTurf.pdf Artificial turf fields are not safe. According to Mount Sinai Hospital Children’s Environmental Health Center, “All components of an artificial turf field (fiber blades, infill, backing, colorants, sealants, antimicrobials, and flame retardants) contain potential chemicals of concern and can leach from the product.” They urge extra caution when the site is in close proximity to a water source potentially contaminated by chemical leaching, as MVRHS is (directly above the Island’s sole source aquifer). Further, the antimicrobials and fungicides required to routinely sanitize the fields “not only increase the likelihood of chemical exposures, they may pose health risks for children chronically exposed to them.” Although the newly proposed infill is labeled “organic,” such terms are not regulated in the turf industry, nor are manufacturers required to list all chemicals. Risk of joint injuries, turf burns, “turf toe,” and heat-related complications are proven to be more likely on artificial turf, and it is a fertile breeding ground for harmful bacteria including those that cause antibiotic-resistant infections such as MRSA. Artificial turf also denies our children hours of time that would otherwise have been spent on grass and dirt, the immunological and psychological benefits of which are well documented. Mount Sinai Hospital Children’s Environmental Health Center. “Artificial Turf: A Health-Based Consumer Guide.” February 2016. http://media.wix.com/ugd/fd0a19_f5aa0824698341499b4228ebabf90cb5.pdf Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “MRSA and the Workplace.” August 27, 2015. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/mrsa/ (Note: the artificial turf proposed for MVRHS would likely qualify for all five C’s of the MRSA risk factors.) Most athletes dislike playing on artificial turf. From professional athletes down to the youth level, the majority of players regard artificial turf as a second-tier playing surface. This strong preference is based on increased post-game recovery time, risk of injury, and heat stroke on artificial turf, as well as a fundamental preference for playing the sport on grass. These issues led a group of international soccer players to file a lawsuit against FIFA for forcing them to play the 2015 Women’s World Cup on artificial turf. Lawsuit against FIFA and the Canadian Soccer Association regarding the use of artificial turf at the Women’s 2015 World Cup. http://equalizersoccer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/141001_2_Application-Sec-24-Schedule-A.pdf Change.org. “FIFA: The World Cup Should Be Played on Natural Grass.” https://www.coworker.org/petitions/fifa-the-world-cup-should-be-played-on-natural-grass (Note: more than 70 national team players from 17 countries signed this petition.) BMC Sports Science, Medicine, and Rehabilitation. “The Perceptions of Professional Soccer Players on the Risk of Injury from Competition and Training on Natural Grass and 3rd Generation Artificial Turf.” March 2014. http://bm...

Corporate interests rule everything in america, from television to congress. There are a few safe spaces left, and the national parks are one of them. If this deal goes through, and Jarvis is allowed to stay in his post, we move past the point of no return.

New Jersey is the nation’s most densely populated state, and we’re running out of open space. Back in 2014, voters took action to keep parks, farms, and historic areas from being developed. But that dedicated money for open space has been accruing in the Treasury and can’t be spent predictably until Governor Christie signs the Open Space Implementation Bill. Once this bill becomes law, New Jersey will have reliable, dedicated funding to preserve open spaces, parks, farms, and historic areas, and to clean up polluted areas. The bill also guarantees that the funds don’t get diverted to pet projects or used to plug holes in the state budget. Last year, Governor Christie pocket vetoed a similar bill. It’s time for Governor Christie to do the right thing. Nearly two-thirds of New Jersey voters supported open space funding, and the full legislature has voted for it twice. We can convince Governor Christie to change his position, but we’ve got to flood him with messages so that he sees the overwhelming majority of New Jerseyans and their elected representatives support this law!

It is time that we start to ban lead bullets in this country! Many people may not think that lead bullets are a problem, but there's quite a bit of lead deposited into our ecosystems every year, and it's extremely detrimental to our future. My name is Brenden Whitelaw, and I've lived on my family farm for most of my life. There are a lot of things people don't like to recognize, one of which is how lead is destroying the ecosystems of many farming valleys. The main problem that I've recognized while growing up here is a rampant rodent population due to the extermination of natural predators like coyotes, and foxes, for the benefit of local cattle farmers. That's just the start of the chain of problems. The coyote's main food source are cottontails and hares, so when we kill off the coyotes, farmers have to fill their niche as predator. "What's the problem with that?" many people will ask. The problem is that we are not the best replacement. We use lead bullets to squelch the overpopulation of rabbits and hares and most farmers don't dispose of the carcasses left behind. What happens to these lead filled carcasses? For the most part they get scavenged by birds of prey. Many farmers in this valley think that they are doing the birds a service, by helping them get a meal, but they aren't. The lead is building up in their systems, and they are no longer creating viable offspring at a sustainable rate; egg shells are weaker, so the egg gets crushed, lead interferes with bodily functions leading to organ failure in birds of prey. Many of the same symptoms that occur in human lead poisoning are occurring in many avian species. It is our responsibility to help them. The chain of Destruction doesn't end there. With the birds of prey population dwindling, there has been a spike in a few completely different species that are even more destructive than the cottontails and hares to local farmers. The animals are the ground squirrel, known as the chisler where I'm from, Voles, and Gophers, they are the main food source for birds of prey. It is nearly impossible to keep them under control without the help of our flying friends. Most farmers I know shoot these rodents, trying to keep them under control, "with what?" you ask, more lead bullets! The the cycle repeats itself, only to leave more and more lead deposited across the valley, eventually leaching into the soil and causing more problems with soil fertility and plant viability. What can we do about the problem? Farmers aren't going to want the government to stop killing natural predators, so the least we can do is ban lead ammunition, and make non-lead ammunition more affordable and accessible. Please sign this petition and help save our flying friends, that includes the symbol of our great nation, the bald eagle!

A developer wants to build 160 homes on the pristine 117 acres of Oswit Canyon. This canyon offers magnificent hiking for Palm Springs residents and visitors. It is also home to wildlife such as birds, rabbits, bobcats, coyotes, big horn sheep and more! We must save it!

The town recycling hauler has been fined for having plastic bags in our our curbside bins and due to the lightweight nature of the bags they blow around when animals dig in trash. These windblown items become dangerous for wildlife and create mosquito breeding vectors along with other litter. Very few people return bags to store recycling bins. Big corporate petro chemical corporations are spending millions to defeat any bag bans and the current two bills on the Boston State house floor are likely to die in committee, like the expanded bottle bill which took 20 years before environmentalist presented to voters in a state wide ballot.

Volkswagen installed "defeat devices" on some 567,000 "clean" diesel cars in the U.S. to avoid emission control laws. These devices are elaborate software that turn on emission controls during testing, and turn them off during regular driving. As a result, these cars can emit as much as 40 times the legal limit of NOx, a major smog-forming pollutant. The Justice Department has been seen as the only agency that might hold executives personally accountable for this wrongdoing. While they have filed a civil suit to levy penalties against the company, they haven't pressed individual criminal charges yet -- so they need to hear from you.

Changing Walton Dune’s Neighborhood Beach Access to Regional Beach Access will have a significant negative environmental impact, destroying dunes and a critical habitat area as designated by the US Fish & Wildlife Service. It will also increase safety and traffic concerns, as this area has neither outlet nor turnaround for public or emergency vehicles, and the added congestion created will exacerbate the already present overcrowding issues on the narrow road and small beach. More information can be found at 30abeachside.com. ---------------------------------------- 6/4/16 - Some confusion has surfaced by combining the issue of changing the Walton Dunes (NBA) into a Regional Beach Access an (RBA) and the issue of private landowner/customary land use. These are completely separate and distinct topics. The Walton Dunes Neighborhood Beach Access (NBA) has been a public access point not only for the neighborhood but the general community for decades. I hear no one suggesting that this access should or could be private. Opposition to the RBA is largely based on preventing the escalation of unsafe traffic conditions and preserving a pristine area for residents and visitors alike. The area in question is pristine. The dunes, which were decimated by Hurricanes Ivan and Dennis, are making a comeback. The Walton Dunes NBA was scraped clean when used by the county to remove debris from the beach area. The dunes now are several feet tall and growing each year. The area is home to nesting turtles, flora and fauna. Words from a song "They paved paradise to put up a parking lot" come to mind. The Walton Dunes NBA is located 1/2 mile from County Highway 30A off of Lakewood Drive. This area is congested; with no other outlet or turn around, narrow streets, blind corners and no continuous sidewalk to the beach. The area consists of hundreds of residential and multi-unit complexes, with construction at an all-time high. This area provides over 1,000 rental opportunities for individuals a day, not to mention the full time residents - most of which use the Walton Dunes NBA. When combined with pedestrian, bicycle, construction, service and local vehicular traffic, the traffic and safety concerns only escalate. The placement of a parking lot on Beachfront Trail will only magnify already dangerous conditions and will require several homeowner associations to drive through said parking lot to access their residences. If the goal is to provide additional access/parking to tourist and locals outside of the neighborhood (1/2 mile radius of the location in question), we must deal with reality. Changing the Walton Dunes Neighborhood Beach Access (NBA) into a Regional Beach Access (RBA) changes nothing except increasing traffic tension and paving a portion of this pristine area. The neighborhood who has learned to use the NBA "as is" will quickly park in the parking places and compete for what little beach is left after construction. This will bring us full circle, leaving those tourist and locals outside the neighborhood still frustrated with no access/parking and heavily used beach.

The proposed Pescadito dump will be bringing industrial, demolition and special wastes that are toxic into Webb County by rail and truck, from industries within an 800 mile radius. This includes materials like coal ash, which carries significant health risks for humans, livestock and most importantly, our air and water. Pescadito will also accept maquiladora and other industrial waste by rail from Mexico, which will not even be inspected until it has already crossed the Rio Grande. The proposed site is within the floodplain, on the Pescadito creek, which empties into the Rio Grande. Local landfills have more than 100 years of life remaining. We don't need this dump. Read more at http://NoLaredoDump.com. Sign this petition, or sign a paper petition when you see our volunteers in public. Just stand with us and CALL them out!

We applaud reforms outlined in Senator Sanders' plans for combating detriment to our ecosystem; however, there is one immensely destructive industry not addressed. Animal-agriculture is a major cause of climate-change pollution, water pollution, drought, water shortage, deforestation, land degradation, species extinction, and contributes to world hunger. We are calling to end animal-agriculture subsidies. The U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) found animal-agriculture responsible for 14.5% - 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions - more than the entire transportation sector. Climate scientists published a report detailing missing data from the FAO's calculations, and pegged the real figure at a whopping 51%. In the 2000 National Water Quality Inventory conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency, agricultural activity was identified as a source of pollution for 48% of stream and river water, and for 41% of lake water. The top source of this pollution is the storage and disposal of animal waste. First, storage tanks often leak, rupture, or overflow. Second, the way the industry disposes of the waste is by spraying it onto farms as fertilizer; however, the farms produce far more waste than is needed for this application, so the (excessive) excess runs off into surrounding water systems. High levels of nitrogen and phosphorous, an effect of fertilizer runoff, is the most common form of water pollution in the United States. In addition, there are toxic substances in the animals’ excretions, such as pharmaceuticals and bacteria, which cause damage to the environment, wildlife, and human health. The amount of water used to raise animals for human consumption dwarfs the amount used for growing plants for us to consume. A hundred billion gallons of water is being exported from California each year - in the form of alfalfa, to feed livestock. That’s enough to provide for the yearly water usage of a million families. The UN estimates that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world's population could be living under water stressed conditions. Occupying over half of Earth’s arable land; animal-agriculture is behind the majority of deforestation, land degradation, and species extinction. Despite these intensive impacts, it has been estimated that one in eight people still suffer from food scarcity - and it's only getting worse. According to the FAO, "the number of hungry is currently climbing at the rate of some four million a year." Animal-agriculture is in fact a contributor to world hunger. For example they use land in Africa to grow soybeans to feed to cattle in the United States instead of feeding soybeans to starving people in Africa. Even those still consuming products of animal-agriculture ought to end taxpayer money propping up this destructive industry, as many in the scientific and health communities have warned us of the need to curb consumption. Also, there are no two ways about it: animal-agriculture is unconscionably cruel to the individuals who are its commodities. In contrast; fruits, vegetables, legumes, grains, nuts, and seeds build health and prevent and reverse disease affordably with healthy carbohydrates, proteins, fats, vitamins, minerals, enzymes, antioxidants, and phytonutrients. Fruit trees and plants actually sequester carbon in the soil where it belongs. In light of all we know about industrialized animal-agriculture's devastating impacts on the health of the planet and people, as well as its inherently inhumane exploitation of sentient beings, it does not make sense for us to be subsidizing it. This is a case of the profits of a few taking precedence over the benefit of the many. Bringing an end to all funding, both direct and indirect, of animal-agriculture by the U.S. government would be a huge step with many positive effects, not the least of which is helping to reverse catastrophic environmental deterioration.