The USDA approved Monsanto’s new genetically engineered cotton and soybeans that are resistant to dicamba, an herbicide that has been known to cause reproductive and developmental harm. Herbicides like this are poisoning our soil and water and pose a threat to the health of our families, environment, and wildlife. We need less toxic herbicides and pesticides in our food system, not more. But now that these herbicide-resistant seeds have been approved, more toxic chemicals on the food we eat every day could be imminent. We need to push back and tell the USDA that their approval of these seeds is unacceptable.

The USDA approved Monsanto’s new genetically engineered cotton and soybeans that are resistant to dicamba, an herbicide that has been known to cause reproductive and developmental harm. Herbicides like this are poisoning our soil and water and pose a threat to the health of our families, environment, and wildlife. We need less toxic herbicides and pesticides in our food system, not more. But now that these herbicide-resistant seeds have been approved, more toxic chemicals on the food we eat every day could be imminent. We need to push back and tell the USDA that their approval of these seeds is unacceptable.

For 8 years, the community has demanded the removal of this disaster. After spending 3 million dollars over three years, only 60,000 tires were removed! Now the latest proposal is to spend 2 million dollars over two years to remove 100,000 tires, leaving 600,000 tires with their tie straps deteriorating. This is unacceptable! The local salvage community believes with use of proper equipment, a tub grinder, all of these tires could be removed at the same cost in the same time frame. Enough is enough. Time is of the essence: Stop this disaster before it becomes a major marine environmental disaster. Sign this petition demanding more for your dollar. Efficiency is the key to this project. Save our Oceans.

OC Parks and the Irvine Ranch Conservancy use hundreds of thousands of your tax dollars to purchase toxic herbicides, which are regularly applied to wild and manicured landscapes. Roundup, Aquamaster and Transline are made by Monsanto and Dow Chemical for "weed control." Their active ingredients are glyphosate and clopyralid, which are known to disrupt the biology of our environment by causing health problems in humans and wildlife. There is a wide variety of environmentally-friendly alternatives for landscape management. Please urge OC Parks Director Stacy Blackwood and Irvine Ranch Conservancy Executive Director Mike O'Connell to stop using these harmful petrochemicals and utilize environmentally friendly alternatives. The health of future generations is at stake. Thank you!

1. SB 44 calls for a reduction in clean energy source power generation by 50 percent for large utilities and 25 percent for rural cooperatives . 2. 76 percent of Coloradans indicate that they are more likely to support candidates who promote the use of clean energy sources. The same survey found that 59 percent are less likely to vote for a candidate who votes to stop taxpayer support of wind and solar energy production. 3. According to the Pew Charitable Trust, when Ohio passes a similar law, it lost millions of dollars in investments, which led to the loss of thousands of clean energy jobs. 4. According to the Beacon Hill Institute, SB 44 would cost consumers approximately $8.6 billion between 2016 and 2025 due to the use of less efficient energy generation sources.

PennEast commissioned Drexel University to co-author an economic impact analysis of its proposed pipeline. Not one economic downside was taken into consideration in the report. Instead, the analysts provided only wildly exaggerated job creation numbers and vastly overstated economic benefits to Pennsylvania and New Jersey. When questioned by the press, PennEast refused to disclose the amount they paid for the analysis. Suffice it to say, however, that they got the best economic impact analysis money can buy. Deliberate attempts to mislead the public may be how PennEast does business, but should not be the way a university does.

CURRENT UPDATE (2/23/2015 7 PM): Per Mayor Tom Theodores: We have put a total stop to the spraying indefinitely. I will meet with staff tomorrow to get fully briefed on the issue and the options; we will then decide when and how to proceed with getting input from the public and bringing it to council. I will let you know what and when the process will be. Rest assured that no spraying will take place without the review of the city council with the opportunity for public input. *** Sausalito's Martin Luther King Park is scheduled to be sprayed with herbicides Roundup and Surflan on Tuesday, February 24. This multi-use lawn is frequented by children and dogs and both substances have been found to have serious adverse effects on health and the environment. Glyphosate, the active ingredient of Roundup, has been linked to cancers, reproductive harm, genetic damage, thyroid disorders, respiratory illnesses and other ailments. There is also active concern about a specific inert ingredient, polyethoxylated tallowamine (POEA), which may cause more cellular damage than even glyphosate. Oryzalin, the active ingredient of Surflan, is linked to reproductive harm, central nervous system depression and is a possible human carcinogen according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Both substances are at least moderately mobile in soil and have the potential to contaminate connected or nearby water sources. Articles in Scientific American and Reuters noting the dangers of Roundup: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weed-whacking-herbicide-p/ http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/25/roundup-health-study-idUSL2N0DC22F20130425 UPDATE 2/23/2015 (4:50 PM): Thank you to everyone for spreading the word! The spraying has been delayed for the time being. Here is the response from the mayor and my response to him. I will update with any details on a public hearing, and please continue to spread the word in opposing the use of Roundup in our public spaces. From the mayor: Tanya, Thanks for your concern. We are not spraying tomorrow and will delay spraying until staff has had a chance to brief council and assure us that spraying will be safe. Tom My response: Thank you for your response. Can you confirm a time and date on the public hearing of this matter? My ongoing concern is that we will get the same canned response from the Department of Public Works that justifies the use of Roundup while disregarding the strong research and ongoing findings proving the health and environmental risks of these herbicides. There have been great alternative suggestions from the public including a volunteer gardening task force or use of a safe and effective herbicide such as Scythe. We are currently up to 122 signatures on the petition. It goes without saying that nobody on that petition thinks any amount of Roundup is safe or acceptable to use and will be content with simply a delayed use of Roundup. Tanya

Over 75% of monarch butterflies essential to pollinate our food supply have disappeared, along with the milkweed they need for their own survival, due to the widespread use of toxic agricultural chemicals. Nobody seems to have put forward the idea that state highway departments, at little extra cost, could plant milkweed instead of grasses, providing the little beasties with nourishment along their entire incredible migration route. It's not rocket science, folks. --- I am a member of the Conservation Commission for the City of East Providence, Rhode Island and we are looking into doing just that on some public properties along our waterfront, and I am sure that in addition to state highways there are many cities, towns, and counties that could replace weeds and grasses on a variety of public properties with milkweed and an admixture of native plants

The fossil fuel industry's campaign to promote climate denial, led by the Koch brothers, has corrupted Harvard University and the Smithsonian, two of the most trusted scientific institutions in the world. The Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, a joint program of the Smithsonian Institution and Harvard University, is harboring a polluter-funded climate denier. Documents uncovered by Greenpeace reveal that Dr. Wei-Hock "Willie" Soon has taken money from the Kochs, Exxon Mobil, coal giant Southern Company, and others to produce "deliverables" that push the long-debunked claim that solar activity, not fossil fuel pollution, drives global warming. The New York Times reports: "He has accepted more than $1.2 million in money from the fossil-fuel industry over the last decade while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his scientific papers. At least 11 papers he has published since 2008 omitted such a disclosure, and in at least eight of those cases, he appears to have violated ethical guidelines of the journals that published his work." Coal giant Southern Company was one of Soon's biggest funders: "The newly disclosed documents, plus additional documents compiled by Greenpeace over the last four years, show that at least $409,000 of Dr. Soon’s funding in the past decade came from Southern Company Services, a subsidiary of the Southern Company, based in Atlanta. Southern is one of the largest utility holding companies in the country, with huge investments in coal-burning power plants." Smithsonian-Harvard's contract with Southern Company forbade disclosure of Willie Soon's funding, a clear violation of scientific integrity and ethics. The Guardian reports: "ExxonMobil gave $335,000 but stopped funding Soon in 2010, according to the documents. The astrophysicist reportedly received $274,000 from the main oil lobby, the American Petroleum Institute, and $230,000 from the Charles G Koch Foundation. He received an additional $324,000 in anonymous donations through a trust used by the Kochs and other conservative donors, the documents showed." Some of the Exxon Mobil money was used to directly fund Harvard-Smithsonian general expenses. Harvard-Smithsonian has no funding-disclosure requirements, nor does it have a conflict-of-interest policy that prevents funding from fossil-fuel companies of climate science research. Is Harvard-Smithsonian a scientific institution or a fossil-fuel climate-denial public-relations firm? To restore public trust in the institution, Harvard-Smithsonian director Charles Alcock must: 1) sever his institution's ties with Dr. Wei-Hock Soon 2) end all financial relationships with the fossil fuel industry 3) establish strong financial public disclosure rules for all institute scientists that prevent anonymous or secret funding of research Harvard University and the Smithsonian Institution are two of the most prominent and trusted scientific institutions in the world. They are taking money from Koch and Exxon to promote climate denial. This must end today. Sources: "Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Researcher," The New York Times, February 21, 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/us/ties-to-corporate-cash-for-climate-change-researcher-Wei-Hock-Soon.html "Work of prominent climate change denier was funded by energy industry", The Guardian, February 21, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/21/climate-change-denier-willie-soon-funded-energy-industry "Documents Reveal Fossil Fuel Fingerprints on Contrarian Climate Research", Inside Climate News, February 21, 2015 http://insideclimatenews.org/news/21022015/documents-reveal-fossil-fuel-fingerprints-contrarian-climate-research-willie-soon-harvard-smithsonian-koch-exxon-southern-company

The Utter Folly of the Keystone XL Pipeline Project and Tar Sand Petroleum Production By John M. Bachar, Jr. Emeritus Professor of Mathematics California State University Long Beach [email protected] The Congress, the Media, and an overwhelming majority of the US population are abysmally ignorant of Facts 1 and 2 just below (estimate: 99% do not know them). If these two Facts were known by these bodies, it would easily lead to killing the Keystone project forever. Fact 1. The Energy Information Agency (EIA) published a table that shows the U.S. daily petroleum consumption (in millions of barrels of petroleum per day – MBD) by sectors from 1950-2013. The three sectors covered are: Residential/Industrial, Electric and Transportation. In 2013, the Transportation sector consumed 13.2 MBD (= 4,818 million barrels per year), and all three sectors consumed 18.9 MBD.(= 6,898.5 million barrels per year). If the Keystone XL Pipeline is built and 830,000 barrels of Tar Sands crude (the dirtiest oil on Earth) flows daily from Alberta to the Texas refineries on the Gulf Coast, it will take 15.9 YEARS to accumulate enough fuel to fulfill the US Transportation sector needs for JUST ONE DAY! To meet the ONE DAY needs of all three US Sectors it will take 22.8 YEARS! Fact 2. In 2013, there were over 253 million vehicles on US roads, and they consumed 134 billion gallons of gasoline and diesel. Thus, the average annual consumption per vehicle was 530 gallons. When a 42 gallon barrel of crude is refined, 19 gallons of fuel is produced. Thus, if the Keystone XL pipeline is ever completed, then the 830,000 barrels daily would produce 365 x 19/42 x 830,000 = 137.049 million gallons of fuel per year. This is only 1.02% of the annual requirement of 134 BILLION gallons that is needed! Thus, the Keystone supply would only meet the annual needs of one vehicle out of every thousand vehicles! Total US benefit to US petroleum needs: ZILCH! Over a period of over six years, a vast number of scientifically based articles have been written by experts about Tar Sand Oil and its production, the effect on all of society, the horrendous record of the rapacious destruction and toxic poisoning of gigantic regions of pristine wilderness and land (by 2030, the area of the disemboweled Boreal forests will equal the area of Florida and exceed the area of England as well as the Amazon Basin), the huge infestation of pollutants into the atmosphere, the massively damaging effects on the environment and climate change, and the deleterious health effects on human, animal and biological life. All of this dictates that the project should be squelched immediately. The project is utter folly. If passed, the engorged, rapacious Big Oil vultures will accelerate the disembowelment of our pristine environment. Allowing Keystone to be completed is akin to aiding and abetting vicious criminals. For much, much more, click on: http://www.absentlinks.com/-environmental-disembowelment-tar-sands-and-keystone-pipeline.html

Badgerwood LLC submitted an application to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to operate a 26,000 hog factory farm in Eileen Township. The proposed factory farm is sited in the Fish Creek Watershed, a watershed that contains outstanding, exceptional resource waters and is less than 8 miles upstream from Lake Superior. The Ashland Municipal Water Utility, tasked with providing clean drinking water to City of Ashland residents, is 3 nautical miles from the junction of Fish Creek and Lake Superior. Given the quantity of manure that the proposed CAFO will produce and the self-regulating nature of the CAFO industry, it's likely that Fish Creek, the Chequamegon Bay and Lake Superior will see increased nutrients, pathogens and agricultural run-off in the water. A complete EIS will include the following information: NR 150 (2) EIS Content (a) A description of the proposed project that includes all the following: 1. Project location. 2. Type of facilities. 3. Time schedules. 4. Maps and diagrams. 5. Other information that the department deems necessary. (b) A description of the purpose and need of the proposed project. (c) A list of known state, federal, tribal, and local approvals required for the proposed project. (d) A summary of the process used to identify major issues and the issues identified for detailed analysis. (e) A list of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, particularly those that might avoid all or some of the adverse environmental effects of the project, including a description of proposed preventive and mitigating measures and an explanation of the criteria used to discard certain alternatives from additional study. (f) A description of the human environment that will likely be affected by the proposed project and alternatives to the proposed project. (g) An evaluation of the probable positive and negative direct, secondary and cumulative effects of the proposed project, and alternatives to the proposed project, on the human environment, including all the following: 1. Effects on scarce resources such as: archeological, historic or cultural resources, scenic and recreational resources, prime farm lands, threatened or endangered species, and ecologically critical areas. 2. A summary of the adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided. 3. Consistency with plans or policies of local, state, federal, or tribal governments. 4. The relationship between short-term uses of the environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources. 5. The potential to establish a precedent for future actions or to foreclose future options. 6. The degree of risk or uncertainty in predicting environmental effects or effectively controlling potential deleterious environmental impacts, including those relating to public health or safety. 7. The degree of controversy over the effects on the quality of the human environment. (h) Identification of information that is incomplete or unavailable and a description of the relevance of such information. (i) Sources of information or verbiage.

We live next to Olympic National Park, home to many protected and endangered species; this unique ecosystem became a UNESCO World Heritage Site and an International Biosphere Reserve decades ago. Now its ancient temperate rain forests, snow-capped mountains, rugged and pristine beaches could be assaulted by at least 112 of the world's loudest jets flying thousands of training exercises year-round, at altitudes as low as treetop level. War games would also test new electromagnetic weaponry, triggering significant concerns about the potential health impacts and migratory patterns of birds, amphibians and sea creatures, as well as plants, micro-fauna and human beings. Several indigenous tribes call these lands home. Waters of the Pacific Coast Marine Sanctuary would be assaulted by surface-to-air gunnery, missiles, underwater explosions, and mid-frequency sonar. Sonar can spell death to endangered whales and marine mammals, disrupting whale migration, breeding, nursing, breathing, and feeding—and sometimes causing ruptured eardrums and fatal internal hemorrhaging. While military training is important to our national security, it can -- and should -- be conducted in suitable locations and ways that do no harm to endangered wildlife. We owe it to future generations to continue to protect these irreplaceable biological treasures.