Welcome Audio

Authors
- Meet Amy our Northwest river expert
- Meet Betsy our national water policy extraordinaire
- Meet Chas our social media and technology evangelist
- Meet Darcy our Washington state water policy expert
- Meet David our wild & scenic river guru
- Meet Gary our video and stormwater guru
- Meet Jamie our blue trails expert
- Meet Jenny our Southeast water efficiency expert
- Meet John our Hydropower Reform Coalition director
- Meet Katie our Great Lakes stormwater management expert
- Meet Katherine our river advocacy director
- Meet Lindsay our daily river quotes and web editor
- Meet Matt our our Southeast blue trail & hydro guy
- Meet Rebecca president of American Rivers
- Meet Serena our dam removal expert
Categories
Stay Informed via RSS
Archives
River Photos
Blogroll

Sewage and Rivers Don’t Mix

Posted on February 28, 2007 | Filed Under Clean Water, Healthy Waters, Sewage

Rob Perks, Senior Director of Outreach & Communications
Act for Healthy Rivers

The Santa Cruz River, which flows northward toward Tucson, Arizona, is like so many streams in the arid Southwest: lacking in water.

People who care about the Santa Cruz celebrate even the lowest of flows, but therein lies the problem. While the wide, silt-choked channels can quickly be covered in a torrent of storm-fed runoff following a summer thunderstorm, usually the shallow river maintains a gentle yet steady current. And always the odor persists.

You see, the riverbed would remain dry most of the time if not for the wastewater feeding it. An aging treatment plant ten miles upstream pours as much as 15 million gallons a day of barely treated sewage into the Santa Cruz. Local conservationists are worried sick over the polluted water - and the few fish that swim in it, the animals that drink it and the people who recreate in it - but they don’t want to the river to lose its precious flow.

For those who put up with the smell to enjoy the river, signs warn against wading or swimming, and few even bother fishing anyway. But apparently bird-watchers flock to this river.

As a founder of Friends of the Santa Cruz River, Roberta “Birdie” Stable has spent the past 14 years guarding the river as best she can. She’s encouraged by the ongoing $62 million upgrade of the Nogales wastewater treatment plant. But raw sewage that bypasses the treatment plant still dumps into the river.

The group is working to raise awareness of the sewage pollution, but Birdie worries that too few people will know what’s happening since the Santa Cruz flows far from larger metropolitan areas. But at least now, with Act for Healthy Rivers, Birdie and her fellow river lovers are not alone in fighting their good fight.

River Policy Week in Review

Posted on February 27, 2007 | Filed Under Policy Review

Eileen Fretz, Government Affairs Assistant
Government Affairs Week in Review

On February 15^th, Representative John Salazar (D-CO) introduced H.R. 1098, The Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act of 2007. If enacted this bill would establish a program within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to provide grant assistance to states in order to repair, replace, reconstruct, or remove publicly owned dams that do not meet the safety standards of the state. A similar bill was introduced in the 109^th Congress by former Rep. Sue Kelly (R-NY), who lost her bid for reelection in the fall. Rep. Kelly’s bill would have authorized $250 million for the program over 4 years, while H.R. 1098 would authorize $200 million over a period of 5 years. H.R. 1098 was referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

Taking Chances

Posted on February 21, 2007 | Filed Under Healthy Waters

Will Hewes, Conservation Associate
Act for Healthy Rivers

Like it or not, residents in some states can expect to be notified when sewage flows in their local streams, while in other states people take their chances.

Consider a couple of states with the public’s interest in mind - according to U.S. Public Interest Research Group:

Michigan - Awarded an A- by U.S. PIRG for having the best sewage notification law in the Great Lakes region. Wastewater system operators in Michigan must report spills to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), regional health departments and downstream communities within 24 hours. Health departments issue a public health advisory when there is danger to residents, and DEQ posts all spills on their website.

Maryland - In the great Bay state, wastewater system operators must contact the Department of the Environment and health departments within 24 hours. Any time there is a threat to public health, operators must place a paid advertisement or public service announcement in the local media, post signs at affected waterways and notify downstream establishments with vulnerable populations.

Some states on the flip side:

Ohio - Given a D- by U.S. PIRG because some facilities are only required to report their spills to Ohio EPA once a year. There is no statewide requirement for public notification and residents have no way of knowing when they are in danger of coming in contact with contaminated waterways.

Tennessee and South Carolina - neither requires any notification at all.

This highly variable patchwork of notification and reporting requirements across the country highlights the need for a federal minimum standard. States like Maryland can stick with their higher standard while others would finally have to inform their citizens of sewage pollution.

Surely, all communities - around the nation - have the right-to-know when sewage flows in local rivers and streams. That’s what this campaign is about.

So do you know when sewage pollutes your river?

River Policy Week in Review

Posted on February 20, 2007 | Filed Under Policy Review

Eileen Fretz, Government Affairs Assistant
Government Affairs Week in Review

Wild and Scenic River Bills
Last week, several river related bills were introduced in Congress. Representative Joe Courtney (D-CT) and Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) introduced H.R. 986/ S. 553, The Eightmile Wild and Scenic River Act. This bill would designate 25.3 miles of the Eightmile River in Connecticut as a National Wild and Scenic River and is strongly supported by state and local officials. The bills were sent to the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

Also last week, Senators Gordon Smith (R-OR) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) introduced S. 647, “The Lewis and Clark Mount Hood Wilderness Act of 2007,” which would protect almost 80 miles of rivers in Mount Hood National Forest through Wild and Scenic River designations. Included in the proposed designation are portions of the East Fork Hood River, Middle Fork Hood River, Zig Zag River, Eagle Creek, Fifteen Mile Creek, South Fork Roaring River, South Fork Clackamas River, and Collowash River and Fish Creek.

Army Corps of Engineers Reform
Also introduced last week by Senators Russ Feingold (D-WI) and John McCain (R-AZ) was S. 564, The Water Resources Planning and Modernization Act of 2007. The bill would address the flawed planning process the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) uses to carryout the nation’s water projects. The Corps modernization provisions, which are supported by conservationists and taxpayer groups, include requiring independent peer review of any Corps projects costing more than $40 million dollars, revisions to the outdated principles and guidelines that dictate how the Corps operates, and mitigation of unavoidable impacts to rivers and wetlands.

Environmental Funding
Also on Wednesday, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee held a hearing to address the Bush Administration’s fiscal year 2008 budget requests for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers, which were released on February 5^th. Members of the Committee criticized the Administration for proposing cuts to the Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund and for insufficient funding for Army Corps projects.

The budget request for the Environmental Protection Agency is $7.2 billion, with $688 million requested for clean water funding, nearly $400 million less than the fiscal 2007 level of $1.08 billion. The Administration’s budget request for the Army Corps is $4.9 billion, a 3% increase over last year’s request, but $470 million less than the amount appropriated in fiscal 2006.

Who’s meeting the 40 x 40 challenge? Oregon!

Posted on February 15, 2007 | Filed Under Government Affairs, Northwest, River Heritage, Wild and Scenic

Quinn McKew, Director of River Heritage
River Heritage, Go Wild!

American Rivers’ own David Moryc, river protector extraordinaire, has accomplished a truly amazing feat. Today, thanks to David’s dogged persistence, Senators Wyden and Smith from Oregon introduced legislation that would, among other things, designate nine new Wild and Scenic Rivers on Mt. Hood. This was not a cake-walk. He employed amazing powers of persuasion to get people on the ground excited and on board with potential Wild and Scenic designations on some streams that were considered politically impossible a year ago.

These rivers of Mount Hood provide clean drinking water and offer fantastic river recreation opportunity including rugged hiking, whitewater boating, hunting, and fishing. They also provide some of the last, best habitat for threatened and endangered plant and animal species in western Oregon including salmon and steelhead. In fact, we think even more of these rivers should be protected under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Check out our Oregon campaign and let us know what you think. Are there other great rivers out there we should be working to protect?

No Valentine for EPA

Posted on February 14, 2007 | Filed Under Healthy Waters

Rob Perks, Senior Director of Outreach & Communications
Act for Healthy Rivers

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is breaking our hearts. Time and time again, the agency has blown off deadlines for pollution cleanup, not by days, weeks or months -but by decades.

A scathing story in yesterday’s Washington Post vilifies EPA as the ultimate scofflaw for its record of delays and lax enforcement.

The article notes a report by the General Accountability Office in 2005, which found that EPA had met only 37 of 338 Clean Air Act deadlines. The agency’s record on water is just as bad.

Consider that EPA blew off its 1979 deadline under the Clean Water Act for states to submit their “pollution budgets” (TMDLs), showing how much cleanup of unhealthy rivers was needed. In a pattern repeated over and over, it took 19 years and several lawsuits from environmental groups before that happened - yet no locality was penalized for missing the original deadline.

The WashPost noted two local cases that typify EPA’s lack of resolve regarding deadlines:

Blue Plains Sewage Plant - The largest single source of nitrogen pollution in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The EPA wants to drastically cut its nitrogen output. Deadline not yet set.
Anacostia River - Reduce raw sewage flowing from the District’s sewer system into the river. Deadline not yet set.

Consider that environmentalists won a lawsuit last month forcing the EPA to impose stricter, daily caps on river pollution. But the agency says it may need a year before taking action.

Environmentalists justifiably have criticized the agency and their state counterparts for sending a mixed message, one that says pollution is wrong but noncompliance is okay.

That charge is certainly supported by a PIRG report, “Troubled Waters,” which found that 62% of all major industrial and municipal facilities discharged more pollution into U.S. waterways than their permits allowed during an 18-month period. On average, those illegal discharges exceeded EPA permit limits by more than 275% — or almost four times the legal limit. Neither EPA nor the states are making polluters follow the rules. It’s no wonder, says the WashPost, that a federal judge assailed EPA for its “unblemished record of nonperformance” - that’s an understatement.

Making matters worse are EPA’s perpetual budget cuts by the Bush administration, which have undermined environmental enforcement for several years. Congress has stepped in to restore that funding but that’s tantamount to plugging leaks in a crumbling foundation. Enforcing existing laws and ensuring permit compliance should be a no-brainer, not an annual fight.

Something certainly smells at EPA, and it’s not just the sewage floating by in our rivers.

River Policy Week in Review

Posted on February 13, 2007 | Filed Under Policy Review

Eileen Fretz, Government Affairs Assistant
Government Affairs Week in Review

Water Bills Pass in the House
Last week the House passed several water-related bills under a suspension of the rules, which requires a two-thirds majority to gain approval. After passing the House, the following bills were received in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources:

H.R. 482: The American River Pump Station Project Transfer Act of 2007. This bill, which was sponsored by Rep. John Doolittle (D-CA), directs the secretary of the Interior Department to transfer ownership of the American River Pump Station Project in Auburn, California to the Placer County Water Agency.

H.R. 386: The Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Conveyancy Act of 2007. This bill, sponsored by Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA), authorizes the secretary of the Interior to convey certain buildings and lands of the Yakima Project in Washington to the Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District.

H.R. 235: This bill, sponsored by Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA), would allow for the renegotiation of the payment schedule of contracts between the secretary of the Interior and the Redwood Valley County Water District.

H.R. 356: This bill, sponsored by Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon (R-CA), would remove certain restrictions on the Mammoth Community Water District’s ability to use certain property acquired by that district from the United States.

Wastewater Infrastructure Bills
On Wednesday, February 7^th, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee marked up and passed three water quality and supply bills by voice-vote. The first, H.R. 720, the Water Quality Financing Act, sponsored by Committee Chairman, Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), reauthorizes the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund at $20 billion through Fiscal Year 2012. While the bill would help close the existing gap between wastewater infrastructure needs and current spending levels, conservationists hope the bill can be improved when it comes to the House floor by increasing the use of green infrastructure, enhancing public participation and discouraging urban sprawl.

The Committee also approved H.R. 569, the Water Quality Investment Act of 2007 and H.R. 700, the Healthy Communities Water Supply Act. H.R. 569, sponsored by Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-NJ), seeks to authorize $3 billion in grants over six years to address the nation’s sewer overflow problem. H.R. 700, sponsored by Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-CA), extends the pilot program for alternative water source projects.

Wild and Scenic River Designation Bill
Also last week, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Representative Hilda Solis (D-CA) each introduced the California Wild Heritage Act of 2007, S. 493 and H.R. 860 respectively. The legislation seeks to protect over 2.4 million acres of California public lands and watershed through Wilderness land designations and Wild and Scenic River designations. The pair of California lawmakers introduced similar legislation last Congress.

Three Cheers for Sanitation

Posted on February 7, 2007 | Filed Under Healthy Waters

Will Hewes, Conservation Associate
Act for Healthy Rivers

If you’ve been wondering lately what the most important medical discovery of the past 167 years is, you’re not alone. The British Medical Journal asked its readers to vote on the most important medical milestone since the first issue of the journal was published in 1840. The nominations were narrowed down to 15, with experts writing supporting articles for each discovery. Worthy candidates ranged from antibiotics to the birth control pill. When all 11,000 votes were counted, the most important medical advance of modern times proved to be… Sanitation!

Of course, sanitation (both sewage treatment and water supply) has had amazing impacts on human health. As the Industrial Revolution spurred urbanization throughout Europe in the late 18^th century, close living quarters, lack of sewage disposal and inadequate access to safe drinking water led to outbreaks of infectious disease. Waves of tuberculosis, cholera, typhoid and other diseases took a heavy human toll. As cities began to adopt sanitation systems, deaths from infectious disease plummeted.

This prestigious award notwithstanding, sanitation has yet to reach the promise it holds for improving human health in large part because of a lack of funding and a failure to update treatment methods to combat emerging contaminants.

Millions of Americans become ill from contact with untreated sewage every year as we fail to reinvest in sewage treatment systems. There is no credible excuse for this lack of funding. As Representative Baird (D-WA) stated at a recent congressional hearing on sanitation funding, federal investment in wastewater infrastructure over seven years is less than the amount we spend on the Iraq war in a month. For the sake of our health - and, heck, the sanity of sanitation! - our elected leaders should provide the government funds necessary to modernize the country’s aging wastewater infrastructure.

For sanitation live up to its Oscar-worthy performance as the greatest medical breakthrough in recent history, we must commit to fully funding good treatment systems that are going bad.

River Policy Week in Review

Posted on February 6, 2007 | Filed Under Policy Review

Eileen Fretz, Government Affairs Assistant
Government Affairs Week in Review

On Wednesday, January 31 the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a meeting to mark up a number of bills, which were then reported out of committee. Included in the mark-up were the following pieces of legislation which concern water or dam safety legislation:

S. 200 Alaska Water Resources Act of 2007

S. 220 Southern Idaho Bureau of Reclamation Repayment Act of 2007

S. 232 Watershed Restoration and Enhancement Agreements Act of 2007

S. 235 Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District Conveyance Act of 2007

S. 255 New Mexico Water Planning Assistance Act

S. 263 Deschutes River Conservancy Reauthorization Act of 2007

S. 264 Wallowa Lake Dam Rehabilitation and Water Management Act of 2007

S. 265 Little Butte/Bear Creek Subbasins Water Feasibility Act

S. 266 North Unit Irrigation District Act of 2007

The Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee met on Wednesday, January 31, and marked up three pieces of legislation addressing water infrastructure. H.R. 720, The Water Quality Financing Act of 2007, which was introduced Tuesday by Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), would reauthorize the State Revolving Fund (SRF) that supports infrastructure financing under the Clean Water Act. The authorization for the SRF expired at the end of 1992; although the SRF has continued to receive annual appropriations without an official authorization, the level of funding has dropped dramatically over the last five years.

H.R. 700, the Healthy Communities Water Supply Act, was also marked up by the subcommittee. The bill would amend the Clean Water Act to authorize grants for the repair and replacement of combined sewer overflows and sanitary sewer overflows and would extend the pilot program for alternative water source projects.

The third bill, H.R. 569, The Water Quality Investment Act of 2007, would reauthorize appropriations to municipalities to control combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs). All three were approved by voice vote and were referred to the full committee.

This is how our government funds river protection? Really?

Posted on February 5, 2007 | Filed Under Government Affairs

Peter Raabe, Policy Director for Budget and Appropriations
Government Affairs

Today was the day that the administration rolled out its budget request for fiscal year 2008.

I have found that over the past several years ‘budget day’ means a lot of hustling between various agency briefings and listening to department secretaries and agency heads saying that cutting their budgets is actually really good for the environment, how they say it with a straight face amazes me.

The overall federal budget this year is close to $3 trillion, so you’d expect that within that amount of money we could fund some river protection funding, right? To be honest with you, this year there is a little… but not as much as we need to be spending.

First, the good news, American Rivers has been working with this administration to deal with the more than 2.5 million dams that litter our rivers many of which no longer serve any purpose; the President proposed this year that $12 million be spent on removing some of these useless hulks that have become community liabilities.

The funding is split between the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)- $6 million each. This is the second year that NOAA has gotten this funding request but the first for FWS. Also, NOAA is jumping whole heartedly into restoring the Penobscot River in Maine. They requested $10 million this year for the effort and have committed that same amount for the next three year- to a total sum of $40 million!

Now that is some great budget news if there ever was. But, of course this is offset by major cuts to clean water funding… only $688 million was requested when the feds should be spending close to $4 billion (that is a ‘b’) per year. And the management of our Wild and Scenic Rivers is still and after thought, it is amazing that they would let treasures like our 168 rivers slip through their fingers.

The battle now begins for our tiny portion of the pie- about $32 billion out of the $3 trillion total. The up side to this is that most of Congress, Republican and Democrat alike, understand that a small investment in out natural resources pays huge dividends in community benefits.

And the River Budget is a good guide on how to invest tax payer money for the benefit of our rivers and streams.

Welcome Audio

Authors

Categories

Stay Informed via RSS

Archives

River Photos

Blogroll