A big federal land-planning effort to save a small bird

The little Sage Grouse vs. Big Oil and Agriculture. Who do you think wins this one?

CHEYENNE, Wyo. — Interior Secretary Sally
Jewell has revealed plans to preserve habitat in 10 Western states for an
imperiled ground-dwelling bird, the federal government’s biggest land-planning
effort to date for conservation of a single specie, Mead Gruver reports for the 
Associated Press

“The proposal would affect energy development. The regulations would require
oil and gas wells to be clustered in groups of a half-dozen or more to avoid
scattering them across habitat of the greater sage grouse. Drilling near
breeding areas would be prohibited during mating season, and power lines would
be moved away from prime habitat to avoid serving as perches for raptors that
eat sage grouse.

“Some will say the plans don’t go far enough to protect the bird, Jewell
said. “But I would say these plans are grounded in sound science — the best
available science,” she said at a news conference Thursday on a ranch near
Cheyenne.

“Sage grouse are chicken-size birds that inhabit grass and sagebrush
ecosystems in 11 states from California to the Dakotas. The rules would not
apply to a relatively small area of habitat in Washington state. The bird’s
numbers have declined sharply in recent decades, and some environmentalists warn
they are at risk of extinction.

“The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service faces a court-ordered deadline of Sept.
30 to decide whether the greater sage grouse needs protection as a threatened or
endangered species. Many Western lawmakers and representatives of the
oil-and-gas and agriculture industries say a threatened or endangered listing
would devastate the region’s economy.”

Read the full story here

     

Was this of value to you? Click here for free updates 
The social media icons below make it easy to share this. 



Recent Blog Posts: 
NJ energy, environment bills in committee-June 4, 2015
All 3 parts in NJ Spotlight/WHYY series on gas pipelines  
Is Christie’s Exxon enviro-settlement Paulsboro’s loss?   
Remember when EPA regs did not trigger Olympian rage?   
No fracking in NJ but pipelines are changing its landscape

A big federal land-planning effort to save a small bird Read More »

NJ energy, environment bills in committee-June 4, 2015


Here is the lineup of energy and environment bills scheduled for Assembly
committee consideration on Thursday, June 4, in Trenton.

A-1779  –  McKeon, John (D-27); Spencer, L. (D-29); Giblin, Thomas
(D-34); Caride, Marlene (D-36); O’Donnell, Jason (D-31) Clarifies
that certain types of sewage and sewage sludge do not constitute hazardous
substances under “Spill Compensation and Control Act.”
Jun 4,
2015 –
Posted: Assembly Environment and Solid Waste

A-2304  –  DeAngelo, Wayne (D-14)
Requires
construction of new buildings, facilities, and structures using State, EDA, or
NJ Schools Development Authority funds to include green or blue roofs.

Tracked
In: ENVIROPOLITICS, FARM BUREAU
Jun 4,
2015 –
Posted: Assembly Environment and Solid Waste

A-2510  –  McKeon, John (D-27)
Requires
water purveyors to develop and implement a drought interconnection
system.
Jun 4, 2015 – Posted: Assembly Environment and Solid
Waste

A-2574  –  Mukherji, Raj (D-33)
Establishes
de minimis levels for regulation of air contaminants and hazardous air
pollutants, and directs DEP to establish de minimus levels for regulation of
hazardous substances.
Jun 4, 2015 – Posted: Assembly Environment and Solid
Waste

A-3540  –  Cryan, Joseph (D-20); Singleton, Troy (D-7)

Requires
annual report on costs of projects funded by NJ Environmental Infrastructure
Trust
Jun 4,
2015 –
Posted: Assembly Environment and Solid Waste

A-4283  –  Johnson, Gordon (D-37); Eustace, Tim (D-38);
Caride, Marlene (D-36); Muoio, Elizabeth (D-15); Vainieri Huttle, Valerie
(D-37); Lagana, Joseph (D-38)
Requires
owner or operator of certain trains to have discharge response, cleanup, and
contingency plans to transport certain hazardous materials by rail.
Jun 4, 2015 – Posted: Assembly Transportation and
Independent Authorities

A-4340  –  Andrzejczak, Bob (D-1)
Directs
DEP to establish three-year pilot program to permit for-hire vessels to fish for
summer flounder in Delaware waters pursuant to Delaware regulations.
Jun 4,
2015 –
Posted: Assembly Agriculture and Natural Resources

ACR-227  –  Mazzeo, Vincent (D-2); Eustace, Tim (D-38);
Andrzejczak, Bob (D-1)
Urges
President to withdraw proposal to open portions of Atlantic Coast for oil and
natural gas drilling.
Jun 4, 2015 – Posted: Assembly Environment and Solid
Waste

SCR-162  –  Sweeney, Stephen (D-3); Van Drew, Jeff (D-1);
Whelan, Jim (D-2)
Urges
President to withdraw proposal to open portions of Atlantic Coast for oil and
natural gas drilling. Jun 4, 2015 – Posted: Assembly Environment and Solid
Waste


     

Was this of value to you? Click here for free updates 
The social media icons below make it easy to share this. Please do.






Recent Blog
Posts:
All 3 parts in NJ Spotlight/WHYY series on gas
pipelines 
Is Christie’s Exxon enviro-settlement
Paulsboro’s loss?  
Remember when EPA regs did not trigger
Olympian rage?  
No fracking in NJ but pipelines are
changing its landscape

NJ energy, environment bills in committee-June 4, 2015 Read More »

All 3 parts in NJ Spotlight/WHYY series on gas pipelines

Existing natural gas and petroleum pipelines in the Northeast





















































NJ Spotlight and WHYY
public radio of Philadelphia conclude a three-part series today with
Are New Jersey’s Protected Open Spaces Safe From
Natural-Gas Pipelines?

Katie Colaneri‘s written and audio
report explores whether natural-gas pipelines can cut through protected open
spaces, which have been set aside with public funds to remain undeveloped.


In yesterday’s installment, Tom Johnson
reports that there are at least a dozen pipeline proposals have been either put
on the table or approved — most of which are aimed at taking advantage of cheap
natural gas supplies discovered in neighboring Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale
formations. He asks: Is New Jersey Becoming the Pipeline Capital of
the Northeast?

At the start of the
series, Susan Phillips provided an overview of the gas industry’s
pressing desire to expedite the movement of Marcellus Shale gas to market and
how its pipeline capacity problem has run up against opposition in small towns
and rural areas where environmentalists and residents are pushing back. Catch
the story and audio at: Pipelines and Fracking Are Radically Altering the Landscape of
NJ’s Neighbors


Was this of value to you? Click here for free updates

Recent Blog Posts: 
Is Christie’s Exxon enviro-settlement
Paulsboro’s loss? 
Remember when EPA regs did not trigger Olympian
rage? 
No fracking in NJ but pipelines are changing its
landscape 

  

All 3 parts in NJ Spotlight/WHYY series on gas pipelines Read More »

Is Christie’s Exxon enviro-settlement Paulsboro’s loss?

Paulsboro resident Natasha Lavard  fears that the Exxon settlement
will leave her town with a polluted site and insufficient cleanup funds

Environmentalists have been pounding hard for
weeks on NJ Gov Chris Christie’s settlement with Exxon/Mobil over the costs of
environmental resource damages incurred over decades of pollution at the Bayway
Refinery in Linden and other petroleum installations in northern New Jersey.

The Christie settlement is for only a fraction of what the state DEP was
seeking during years of negotiations with the energy giant under previous
governors.

Recently it was discovered that the state had lumped into the settlement
(currently under a judge’s review) other contaminated sites, including a former
Exxon site in Paulsboro.

BlueJersey covered a protest yesterday over Paulsboro’s inclusion in
the pending settlement and posted six videos with environmentalists and local
residents. You can view them here


Related:NJ panel takes its anti-Exxon settlement show on the
road 
Assembly
passes resolution condemning Exxon settlement 
New
Jersey Exxon Settlement Faces New Criticism 
New
Jersey’s Incredible Shrinking $225 Million Exxon Mobil 
Christie
Aide Took Political Trips Before Exxon Settlement 

 

Was
this of value to you? Click here for free updates 

Recent Blog Posts:
Remember when EPA regs did not trigger Olympian rage?
No fracking in NJ but pipelines are changing its landscape  
Matt Mowers – Gov.
Christie’s man in New Hampshire  


Is Christie’s Exxon enviro-settlement Paulsboro’s loss? Read More »

NJ panel takes its anti-Exxon settlement show on the road

New Jersey Assembly Judiciary Chairman John
McKeon today announced the committee will meet Wednesday in Bayonne to hear
public comment on the proposed $225 million settlement between the
Christie administration and ExxonMobil for the environmental damage caused by
Exxon’s refinery operations in Bayonne and Linden.
The
meeting is scheduled to begin at 10:30 a.m., June 3, in the City of Bayonne
Municipal Council Chambers at 630 Avenue C.

“The
Assembly has made its voice clear in opposing this settlement, but I also want
to make sure those directly impacted by this environmental damage get a chance
to make their voices heard,” said McKeon (D-Essex/Morris). “This settlement is a
slap in the face, especially those who live in the areas affected by the
contamination, yet it’s barely a slap on the wrist for Exxon. The public
deserves the chance to express their opinion and be heard loud and clear.”


The
committee has held several hearings on the proposed settlement, and on May 14
the Assembly approved a McKeon-sponsored resolution (AR-242) opposing the
proposed settlement. The resolution respectfully urged the court presiding over
the proposed settlement to reject it because it “shocks the conscience in light
of undisputed evidence of significant damage to, and loss of, the state’s
natural resources caused by pollution at the Bayway and Bayonne oil refinery
sites and at certain other ExxonMobil sites in New Jersey.”


The
Assembly resolution noted that the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection’s own experts estimated that restoration of former wetlands, meadows,
forests and intertidal habitat, and compensation for decades of contamination,
at the Bayway and Bayonne sites would cost $8.9 billion, including $2.6 billion
for primary restoration and $6.3 billion for compensatory damages, and $1.2
million for assessment costs.

Instead,
the Christie administration and Exxon agreed to a $225 million settlement, which
not only exempts Exxon Mobil from all natural resource damages claims and
liability from the Bayway and Bayonne facilities, but 16 other different
facilities owned or operated by Exxon.


Related news:
Assembly passes resolution
condemning Exxon settlement
New Jersey Exxon Settlement Faces
New Criticism
New Jersey’s Incredible Shrinking
$225 Million Exxon Mobil
Christie Aide Took Political Trips
Before Exxon Settlement
Congresspeople Urge Rejection of
Proposed Exxon 



Was this post of value to you?
Click here for free updates




Recent Blog Posts:
Remember when EPA regs did not trigger Olympian rage?
No fracking in NJ but pipelines are changing its landscape  
Matt Mowers – Gov. Christie’s man in New Hampshire 
Memorial Day Photos 2015 
Gov. nominates four to NJ Water Supply Advisory Council


NJ panel takes its anti-Exxon settlement show on the road Read More »

Remember when EPA regs did not trigger Olympian rage?

Nathanael Johnson writes in Grist:

The Environmental Protection Agency Wednesday released a long-awaited and long-debated rule for interpreting the Clean Water Act. The EPA has regulated rivers since the Clean Water Act was passed in 1972, but Supreme Court decisions in 2001 and 2006 reduced the scope of government authority to protect water against pollution. Since that time, it has been unclear what the government is allowed to regulate. A New York Times article in 2010 suggested that this rollback was allowing pollution that previously would have been illegal:
“This is a huge deal,” James M. Tierney, the New York State assistant commissioner for water resources, said of the new constraints. “There are whole watersheds that feed into New York’s drinking water supply that are, as of now, unprotected”…
“Cases now are lost because the company is discharging into a stream that flows into a river, rather than the river itself,” said David M. Uhlmann, a law professor at the University of Michigan who led the environmental crimes section of the Justice Department during the last administration.
The new EPA rule doesn’t give the agency as much authority as it previously wielded under the Clean Water Act. But it says the EPA will regulate tributaries of navigable rivers, wetlands, and a few other environmentally important bodies of water, like prairie potholes and vernal pools in California.

If you haven’t been following this, you may wonder why it’s controversial. That’s a fair question. As Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) pointed out in an op-ed, these regulations used to seem like common sense to both Republicans and Democrats:

The draft rule relies on more than 1,200 pieces of peer-reviewed scientific literature that evaluate the critical functions that various types of water bodies perform. It restores protections that the administrations of presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush championed.
Still, the EPA’s critics were outraged by the rule. House Speaker John Boehner called it “a raw and tyrannical power grab.”

Remember when EPA regs did not trigger Olympian rage? Read More »