Conservation Advocate

Just another WordPress site

Donate | Updates | Contact   

PALTA and Several Environmental Organizations Submit Comments Re: HB1565

Posted on September 19, 2014

The Pennsylvania Land Trust Association urged members of the state senate to oppose HB 1565 stating that “enactment of this legislation would cause irreversible harm to Pennsylvania’s water quality and increase the destruction wrought by flooding.”: The bill cannot be fixed because its central feature—the neutering of buffer requirements—is fundamentally wrong. 

Comments Regarding HB1565

  • Pennsylvania Land Trust Association (10/8/2014)
  • CBF statement (10/7/2014)
  • Pennsylvania Land Trust Association (10/6/2014)
  • Chesapeake Bay Foundation Letter to Senators (10/1/2014)
  • Former DEP Secretary David Hess (9/30/2014)
  • PA League of Women Voters (9/22/2014)
  • Trout Unlimited and Pennsylvania Council of Trout Unlimited (9/22/2014)
  • Joint Letter of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Pennsylvania Environmental Council, The Nature Conservancy and The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy (9/14/2014)
  • Chesapeake Bay Foundation Testimony Re: HB1565 (1/29/2014)

Background

  • HB1565
  • More on Riparian Buffers

Filed Under: Advocacy Tagged With: legislation, riparian buffer, water quality

Stroud Water Research Center: Science, not politics, should guide Clean Water Act clarification

Posted on September 12, 2014

This piece was published Bernard Sweeney, Ph.D.,  director and president of Stroud Water Research Center, on September 14, 2014. The SWRC is a nonprofit organization based in Avondale, Pennsylvania focused on freshwater research, environmental public education and watershed restoration. The website address is www.StroudCenter.org.

Fresh water is our most precious natural resource, as essential to life as the air we breathe. Fortunately, most of us in the United States don’t have to give it much thought. But news of several water emergencies this year should shake us out of complacency.
On August 2, nearly a half-million people in Toledo, Ohio woke up to learn their tap water was contaminated with microcystin, a neurotoxin produced by a massive bloom of the algae Cyanobacteria, in Lake Erie. It’s thought that nutrient overload, from farm runoff and sewage treatment effluent, contributed to the algae bloom.

In January, the drinking water for more than 300,000 West Virginians was poisoned when a Freedom Industries storage tank leaked, spewing 7,500 gallons of 4-methylcyclohexane into the Elk River, just upstream from a water treatment plant.

On February 2, an estimated 140,000 tons of toxic waste polluted the Dan River when a stormwater pipe burst beneath a coal ash impoundment at Duke Energy’s retired Dan River Power Station near Eden, North Carolina.

This year, more than half of California is suffering through a record-breaking drought. Soon, Californians may be forced to get over the yuck factor in “toilet to tap” technology and drink recycled waste water.

Why has this not evoked greater public concern about the vulnerability of our freshwater resources? Why hasn’t this sparked a national outcry, urging the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enforce the Clean Water Act more rigorously?

Why has the public not demanded that the federal agency be given the necessary authority to enforce appropriate safeguards, so that our fresh water resources will not be subject to the vagaries of state and local authorities, or to the whims of private landowners?

Instead, the EPA is being barraged by an army of opponents. Developers, property rights groups, the American Farm Bureau, the fertilizer industry and a number of politicians are attacking its proposed clarification — not an expansion—of which “waters of the United States” are covered by the Clean Water Act.

The need for clarification arose from two Supreme Court cases, in 2001 and in 2006. The clarification would enable the EPA to better protect our wetlands, small streams and other important watershed features without being dragged into court every time someone wanted to avoid compliance by exploiting an ambiguity.

But this July, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed two bills which could limit the EPA’s authority. One of the bills would give states more authority over water pollution permits, while the other would block the agency’s ability to redefine which waters fall under its jurisdiction. These bills followmeasures passed by the House Appropriations Subcommittee for Interior, Environment and Related Agencies on July 9, which would significantly cut EPA funding and remove the agency’s authority to implement the proposed “Waters of the U.S.” rule.

Opponents are using inflammatory language like “overreach,” and “land grab.” Some are even telling farmers that the EPA would be regulating puddles, farm ponds and upland ditches that don’t flow into a stream–none of which is true.

Their arguments seem to ignore that the EPA’s proposed clarification is informed by decades of scientific research about freshwater ecosystems, such as the work our scientists have been doing since 1967. TheRiver Continuum Concept, published in 1980 by a team of scientists led by Stroud Water Research Center, is a foundational concept in freshwater ecology. It states that a river system represents a physical, chemical, and biological continuum from the smallest headwater streams to the main stem river at its confluence with the estuary. Subsequent research around the world has not only supported this concept but demonstrated that, in fact, small headwater streams are the most critical and most vulnerable parts of a river.

Our scientists were part of the scientific advisory panel that helped the EPA’s Office of Research and Development conduct a comprehensive review of more than 1,000 peer-reviewed publications in the scientific literature. This report (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Connectivity of Streams and Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review and Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence, Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013) concludes:

“The scientific literature clearly demonstrates that streams, regardless of their size or how frequently they flow, strongly influence how downstream waters function. Streams supply most of the water in rivers, transport sediment and organic matter, provide habitat for many species, and take up or change nutrients that could otherwise impair downstream waters.”

Moreover, more than 85 percent of the nation’s stream miles are small enough to jump across and many—if not most—of these flow through private property. So, while opponents may object to the EPA having jurisdiction over streams on private land, landowners should not have the right to pollute streams running through their property as they please.

I’d like to point out that many farmers are responsible land stewards who want to do the right thing. Such landowners are currently working with the Stroud Center’s Watershed Restoration Team, as well as other conservation groups, to reduce barnyard runoff, exclude livestock from streams and plant streamside forest buffers. An important part of our watershed team’s effort is to help these landowners obtain state and federal grant money to offset the costs of these voluntary improvements. Such incentive programs should be continued and expanded so that implementing best management practices will not cause farmers to suffer a financial loss.

The science tells us that watersheds with protected wetlands, streamside forest buffers and other best management practices can support both humans and wildlife in a sustainable way. They trap and store sediments; filter out contaminants; reduce the frequency and severity of flooding by slowing the release of storm water; mitigate thermal pollution caused by deforestation, industrial inputs and water diversions; and replenish underground aquifers.

For decades, science has demonstrated the necessity of a holistic approach to understanding, protecting and restoring freshwater ecosystems. This requires a nationwide effort. Water, like air, transcends state, legislative and private property boundaries. Whatever happens upstream affects us all.

What we need is the intestinal fortitude to enforce the legislation currently available to us, restore aspects that have been lost and resist diluting what remains.

The alarm has sounded. We hit the snooze button at our peril. If you care about having clean, safe fresh water, contact your U.S. congressman and tell him or her to support the EPA’s waters of the United States clarification. The proposed rule is open for public comment until Oct. 20, 2014.

by Bernard Sweeney, Ph.D.

Filed Under: Advocacy Tagged With: water quality

Memo to Joint Conservation Committee Re: Instrastate Pipelines

Posted on June 30, 2014 Leave a Comment

In April 2014, the Joint Legislative Air and Water Pollution Control and Conservation Committee held a hearing on several proposed bills that would impact the pipeline approval and oversight process of intrastate pipelines. The Pipeline Safety Coalition, along with several local land trusts, drafted a memo (download below) to the committee with specific recommendations regarding the siting process and specifically Senate Bills 504 and 506.

Download Memo to Joint Legislative Air & Water Pollution Control & Conservation Committee RE: Intrastate Pipelines (6/30/2014) 

Filed Under: Public Policy Tagged With: legislation, water quality

Stormwater Bill Signed into Law

Posted on July 25, 2013 Leave a Comment

Governor Corbett signed into law Act 68 on July 9, 2013 which enables Pennsylvania municipalities to address storm water issues with the option of creating storm water authorities.

Municipal authorities are independent agencies authorized by municipalities to manage public works services.  Local and county government entities have utilized authorities to address a wide variety of public services – from sewer and water to park and recreation. However, prior to the signage of Act 68, many municipalities believed they lacked the legal ability to create authorities specifically to address storm water issues.

Background

On June 12, 2013, the House Local Government Committee approved bills to help Pennsylvania communities address storm water issues. The identical bills,  SB 351 (sponsored by Senator Ted Erickson), which passed the Senate (49-1) on April 16, and HB 821 (sponsored by Representative Kate Harper), specifically grant municipal authorities the power to engage in storm water management. While this power may be inferred to already exist under current law, there is disagreement as to whether this is actually the case. The bills make the General Assembly’s authorization for authorities to manage stormwater clear.

The bills also allow municipalities to create a joint authority with neighboring municipalities to work together on stormwater issues.

The bills are supported by several local government and environmental organizations including the Pennsylvania State Association of Boroughs, the Pennsylvania Municipal Authorities Association and PennFuture.

Filed Under: Public Policy Tagged With: governor, legislation, water quality

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2

Land Trusts, Trail Groups, Local Governments, and Other Landowners Get New Liability Protection

October 25, 2018

On October 24, 2018, Governor Wolf signed Act 98 into law. Act 98 amends the Pennsylvania Recreation Use of Land and Water Act (RULWA) to better protect from liability those who open their properties to the public for recreation without charge. Improvements to the law include: Explicitly listing paths, paved and unpaved trails, fishing and […]

Governor Signs HB 2468

June 25, 2018

Governor Wolf quietly signed HB 2468 (and several other bills) into law on Sunday, June 24. The bill is now Act 45 of 2018. A correction to the previous PALTA communication: Act 45 should apply retroactively to McCormick Farm, so, hopefully, the Cumberland Valley School District will cease its pursuit of the farm. The district […]

HB 2468 Is on Governor’s Desk

June 25, 2018

Friday evening, after the Senate passed HB 2468 (37-12), the House voted to concur (177-15) with the Senate’s changes to the bill. The governor is expected to sign the bill. This is a thrilling victory for conservation! This landmark, bipartisan legislation provides a crucial safeguard for conservation easements from the unnecessary exercise of eminent domain […]

Issues

  • Public Investments in Conservation
  • Protection of Public Parks & Open Space
  • Conservation Incentives
  • State Budget
  • PA Constitution and the Environment
  • PA Conservation-Related Laws

Advocacy Resources

  • Find Your Legislator
  • Get Out the Vote
  • Become a Conservation Advocate
  • Legislative Outreach Tutorial
  • Rules for Nonprofits
  • Advocacy Links
About Us | Archive
ConservationAdvocate.org is administered by the Pennsylvania Land Trust Association.