Shortly after the war, the company sought to get rid of the waste that was the byproduct of manufacturing these chemicals, and it had the toxic waste transported in over 25,000 fifty-five gallon drums to Alkali Lake in Lake County just north of Christmas Valley.   According to news reports at the time, the drums were leaking when Oregon DEQ took over the site in 1976, and it was estimated that about 50% of the Agent Orange and residues had evaporated into the air and leaked out onto the desert floor.  DEQ took over the illegal waste site because the company had done nothing to ensure the toxic waste was properly maintained.  In 1976, the DEQ crushed and buried the drums onsite as KOIN news documented in this historic footage from its news broadcast.

Now decades later, the company that made the waste and profited from its sale demands to be let off the hook by Oregon for a mere $700,000 in monitoring and maintenance costs along with a permanent cap on its future liability – capping the overall liability for monitoring only at a paltry 20%.  The company is demanding that DEQ let it off the hook for about 50 cents per gallon for the poisons it made which were dumped in Oregon’s high desert – just to cover the cost of monitoring and maintaining the site to date.  The company is refusing to take any responsibility for an actual clean up of the illegal dump site.

DEQ floated this “offer” to the public and it was rejected.  On behalf of local residents and the Oregon Natural Desert Association, the Crag Law Center objected to the settlement, and DEQ recently announced publicly that it would not go forward with the deal.   The EPA’s recent review of the site underscored the limitations of the monitoring conducted to date.   The EPA’s report identified the risks that the toxic dump poses to the threatened Western Snowy Plovers, Greater Sage Grouse,  backcountry visitors to the nearby Juniper Mountain proposed Wilderness area, adjacent cattle operations and nearby spring water sources.  The EPA did not explain how the site scores on being designated for clean up on the National Priority List (the Superfund list), and ONDA may petition the EPA to designate the area for clean up.

While Bayer Cropscience reports billions in sales every year, its attorneys have said they would fight Oregon in court unless the DEQ agreed to just monitor and maintain the site – and not perform any clean up.   If a third party opens the case, Bayer Cropscience has demanded that DEQ accept the lion’s share of the responsibility and make Oregon taxpayers responsible for 80% of the estimated future costs.

An EPA technical team visited the site last year and documented that these highly toxic chemicals are migrating from the dump site – underground and on the surface in rain water.    While the DEQ has put a perimeter fence up around part of the most toxic parts of the dump, the fence does nothing to prevent the migration of the chemicals in the ground and surface water.  The area where the toxic chemicals were applied to land – as part of failed experiments – has not been fenced off or cleaned up.  The DEQ has not proposed any options to clean up the site – as cleaning even part of it up the site could cost tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars.  To date, DEQ has taken a “maintain and monitor approach” – and Bayer only offered to pay based on the limited site characterization performed by DEQ.

Local citizens do not believe that the Oregon DEQ or its attorneys with the Oregon Department of Justice have done an adequate job holding Bayer accountable nor have they done an adequate job characterizing the risks that the toxic dump poses to human health and the environment.  DEQ appears to be conflicted and unable to advocate for the public interest.  Bayer Cropscience appears to be exploiting the conflict by offering DEQ a little something towards its cost to date, while foisting the burden for any clean up onto Oregon taxpayers.  On behalf of our clients, the Crag Law Center has asked DEQ to exercise its authority and work with EPA to declare the site a Superfund site and initiate a clean-up action with EPA’s help.  DEQ has yet to explore feasible clean-up options – including digging up the most contaminated soils and ridding them of dioxin.  DEQ needs to take a fresh look at the facts and pursue a meaningful settlement with the polluter.

The material at this site is highly toxic, poisonous to life – and it is actively migrating off the site.  There is no clean up planned.  On behalf of local citizens and the Oregon Natural Desert Association, the Crag Law Center will continue to press the EPA and the DEQ to make the polluter pay for the toxic mess it left in the desert.   Bayer Cropscience records billions of dollars in sales every year, and Oregon can do much better than to let the company off the hook for a pittance of just the costs to monitor.   The polluter who made the profits should pay the bulk of the costs to clean this toxic mess up.

Relevant Documents:

Proposed Settlement (Consent Judgment) with Bayer Cropscience

Oregon Natural Desert Association – Comments on Alkali Lake Settlement with Bayer

Letter to EPA from ONDA regarding Threats from Alkali Lake – December 22, 2009

Report to EPA – March 2011 re Alkali Lake Risks to Environmental Health

Maps:

Alkali Lake Vicinity Map

Aerial Map with Location of Dump Site

Map Showing Location of Arroyo

I’ve often wondered why some people in the U.S. are willing to listen to climate scientists and believe them without actually feeling or seeing the effects of climate change, and others are not. I know that scientists are sometimes hard to understand and that climate change is difficult to grasp. Nevertheless, the climate crisis is about our future and the livability of our planet, so I wonder why more people aren’t swayed by the scientific consensus around climate change.

It would seem that the weather may have a more profound impact than volumes and volumes of peer reviewed climate science. Recent polling is showing that the U.S. public is connecting our recent extreme weather events with climate change. Seventy percent of those polled linked record high summer temperatures in the U.S. in 2011 to climate change. As the NY Times summed up “a large majority of Americans believe that this year’s unusually warm winter, last year’s blistering summer and some other weather disasters were probably made worse by global warming.”

While a thirteen-year-old from Iowa does not need to see climate change to believe it and fight against it, apparently most of the public does need to see it to believe it. Which begs the question, how many more tornadoes, hurricanes, and record-breaking temperature months are necessary before the public starts fighting against the climate crisis like Glori?

Our clients Bark and Food & Water Watch are members of the Keep Nestlé Out of the Gorge Coalition.  We are always looking for ways to build partnerships beyond the environmental community, and this coalition brings together non-traditional allies.  The group includes Oregon’s public employees union AFSCME, Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, and Oregon Mission Centres of Sisters of the Holy Names, together with Sierra Club, Environment Oregon, and Alliance for Democracy.

The Nestlé issue transcends the environmental movement because of the range of problems it presents.  Nestlé has a poor track record as an employer, casting doubt on its promises of good-paying jobs.  For many, the idea of privatizing our shared public resource—water—for private gain resonates as a violation of the public trust and the state’s duty to protect our natural resources for present and future Oregonians.  Building on these common interests, the coalition has broadened its reach by including groups whose values resonate with a variety of communities and perspectives.

The proposal also raises the larger question of Oregon’s economic future.  Will we continue to attempt to drive our economy through extraction and privatization of our natural resources?  Or will we progress to an economic future driven by innovation and recognizing the value of protecting ecosystem services?

Currently, the rezone has been approved by the Klickitat County Planning Department and it is now awaiting approval by the County Board of Commissioners.  If the County Commissioners approve it, local citizens and conservation groups may appeal the matter to Washington Superior Court.

In October of 2011, the County planning department issued a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (“MDNS”) and found as a threshold matter that the proposed rezone determination was not likely to have a significant effect on the water quality, water quantity, wildlife and other natural resources enjoyed by the public and private landowners under the State Environmental Policy Act.

The affected lands and waters found in the White Salmon River valley are remarkable.  The water is enjoyed by tens of thousands of people annually and relied upon by local residents for their drinking water.  The area boasts the Wild & Scenic White Salmon River and its “outstandingly remarkable values” include wild fish, world class white water boating, a rich heritage of Native American cultural sites and unique hydrogeology of cold water springs that feed the river.  The planning area contains prime and unique farmlands that are of statewide significance and numerous Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (“WDFW”) designated “priority habitats.”

This map shows in red the lands along the river which are proposed to be rezoned to 2-acre density, which is 10 times the density of what current zoning allows on this rural resource land.

According to a top expert in the field, Mark Yinger, the water in the White Salmon River, in its tributaries, and in the leaky, inter-connected aquifers are vulnerable to increased levels of uncoordinated new development which will rely heavily on new groundwater wells spread out across the landscape.  Download Mark Yinger Technical Memorandum to Department of Ecology

For some time now the Klickitat County planning department has tried to amend the Sub-Area Plan and zoning code to allow a significant increase in the nature and location of development which responsible agencies and individual property owners have opposed because of the significant impact on the natural resources and livability of the lands in the White Salmon River valley.

Back in 2007, the Klickitat County Planning Department issued a Determination of Non-significance for a significant rezone of over one thousand acres of land to 2-acre lots through the Husum/BZ Corner Sub-Area Plan Update (County File No. SEP2007-12, the “2007 Update”).  The Planning Commission approved the proposed update and rezone.  The County received numerous comments from multiple agencies, the public, and conservation groups.  Subsequently the County issued a DNS for a proposal by SDS Lumber Co. to rezone over 100 acres of the same Sub-Area from Resource Land to 1-acre minimum lot sizes.

The County received substantial comments from the public and state agencies and the decision of the Planning Commission was appealed by the Friends of the White Salmon River and the Yakama Nation.

The County’s 2010 MDNS relies heavily on a report produced by Aspect Consulting (the “Aspect report”) which presents an analysis of possible water quality and water quantity impacts of the Sub-Area Plan and mitigation.  The Aspect report contrasts forecasts of a hypothetical full build-out under existing zoning and under the proposed zoning. Based on its hypothetical projections, the Aspect report attempts an analysis of the impact on water quality and quantity and suggests it will be about the same because the total number of residential dwellings under the existing zoning and the proposed zoning.

The County received substantial comments from agencies, the public, and conservation groups which pointed out problems with the County’s MDNS.  For example, the County’s MDNS did not address the impacts of the rezoning on wildlife, as required by the County Commissioners, or the specific criticisms or recommendations submitted by the WDFW or the United States Forest Service in extensive comments dating back several years.

The County never obtained a peer review of the Aspect report or addressed the significant criticisms of the report identified by the Forest Service.  While the County identified the future removal of Condit Dam as being foreseeable, it did address the significant change in the existing condition caused by the removal of Condit Dam and Northwestern Lake.  The removal of Condit Dam is significant for a number of reasons. First, the lower section of the river is now full of sediments and the long process of recovery is just beginning. Second, numerous threatened and endangered fish species now have access to the White Salmon River and its tributaries within the planning area.  Third, the removal of Northwestern Lake has dramatically changed the water table and is having a significant effect on groundwater on adjacent lands.

Mark Yinger’s report underscores what the County has not disclosed, considered or analyzed in terms of the direct, indirect and cumulatively significant changes that will result in terms of new wells, new septic drainfields on the tributaries, seeps and springs along the White Salmon River.

Today, BLM announced that it will conduct a public scoping process, publish an environmental analysis and take public comment before making any final decision on access to Trout Creek.  BLM also revised its earlier order and implemented a voluntary closure during the nesting season for this year.  Thank you to everyone that emailed BLM with your concerns – your input made a big difference!

Trout Creek is still closed! It is more important than ever to respect the closure and the need to protect habitat for golden eagles.

Today’s announcement followed a recent three-hour meeting involving Eric Sorenson of the Access Fund, John Connor of the American Alpine Club and Chris Winter from the Crag Law Center.  They met with officials from the Prineville District BLM office, who expressed a strong interest in working with the public and involving climbers in the future of Trout Creek.

This is an important gesture of good faith from BLM, as they responded to our concerns and invited the climbing community to work with them to manage Trout Creek and implement an appropriate closure.  It is critical that the climbing community now take advantage of this opportunity to establish a good working relationship with BLM moving forward.  Please respect the closure.

For more information, check back here for updates and or stop by Friends of Trout Creek on Facebook.  You can also read the letter that was sent to BLM following the recent meeting.  We’re also awaiting a response to a Freedom of Information Act request, and we’ll post more information once its available.

When the scoping process opens, we’ll post information on how to participate.  In the meantime, feel free to contact us or leave a comment here if you have any questions or want to provide input.

Marine reserves can help increase the abundance, size, and diversity of marine life, including commercially important fish stocks, by restricting fishing and other resource extraction activities within the protected areas.  Studies show that marine reserves and protected areas have the greatest benefit when part of a network. The three marine reserves at issue in this bill would add to the existing pilot sites at Otter Rock on the central coast near Lincoln City and Redfish Rocks on the southern coast near Port Orford.  The addition of Marine Reserves at Cape Falcon north of Manzanita on the north coast, Cascade Head north of Lincoln City, and Cape Perpetua between Newport and Lincoln City, is a critical step to making the marine reserves network a success.

Oregon’s marine reserves process has been largely stakeholder-driven, with the recent recommendations for the three new marine reserves resulting from many, many hours of volunteer work by stakeholders to study, consider, debate and discuss the location of marine reserves large enough to be ecologically significant but small enough to avoid harmful social or economic impacts.  When the Senate passed this bill, it affirmed trust in that process and in the community members who worked tirelessly to achieve the compromise that allowed these marine reserves to move forward.  Here’s hoping the members of Oregon’s House of Representatives will see the same value and act to validate the work of these stakeholder groups to protect Oregon’s coastal waters and marine life for the next generation.

The incredible climbing at Trout Creek

The Trout Creek climbing area in Central Oregon – one of Oregon’s truly unique and treasured recreational resources – was closed by the Bureau of Land Management on February 1, 2012.  Rock climbers from around the country have traveled to Central Oregon to experience the incredible “traditional” crack climbing of Trout Creek, which is situated on a scenic butte overlooking the world-famous Deschutes River just outside of Madras.

BLM has been considering a seasonal closure of the Trout Creek area for several months because of potential issues related to Golden Eagles.  A dedicated group of local climbers had been making every effort to talk to the BLM to ensure that Golden Eagles are protected while also preserving reasonable public access.  Local climbers have been trying to obtain from BLM information on whether and to what extent Golden Eagles have used the area in order to develop a plan to manage human access for the benefit of wildlife.  Golden Eagles are not listed as either threatened or endangered, but they are protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Act.

Despite the efforts of the local climbing community, BLM first refused to disclose for several months information on Golden Eagle use of the area.  Although the agency was slow to produce relevant data, it had assured the local climbing community that it would conduct a public environmental assessment process before closing the area.

Despite those earlier promises, BLM suddenly made the decision to close Trout Creek without any advance notice, without any public comment process, and without any environmental analysis.  BLM decided to close Trout Creek from February 1st – August 31st, and the closure could be lifted in May or June if Golden Eagles have chosen a nest besides the one on the main wall or if no nesting has occurred.

The scenic views of the Cascades from Trout Creek

The climbing community and especially the Trout Creek locals have been excellent stewards of the environment and respect the importance of preserving wildlife habitat.  At the same time, there are many open questions as to whether BLM’s heavy-handed tactics are necessary in this situation, including: 1) to what extent do Golden Eagles use the nests near the climbing area; 2) what buffer is necessary to protect Golden Eagles; and 3) how long must the area remain closed before it is determined whether the birds will nest in an particular season.  These issues should have been answered as part of a public process instead of being made by BLM behind closed doors without any public involvement.

Please contact the following people to let your voice be heard.  BLM personnel are good, hard-working people, so please be respectful.  The Crag Law Center will be providing additional information as it becomes available.

Recommended Talking Points:

• Trout Creek is an irreplaceable, world-class recreational resource for Oregon, and it helps to support the local recreation-based economy in Madras and Central Oregon;
• Climbers care about Golden Eagles and are committed to protecting their habitat while preserving climbing access to the extent possible;
• The current closure of Trout Creek was a closed-door decision made without any advance public notice or public input; and
• BLM must conduct a public environmental assessment, disclose all relevant information, and take input from the interested public on Trout Creek access and wildlife management issues.

Resources:

• The Access Fund
• Trout Creek Guidebook
• Mountainproject Info on Trout Creek
• Friends of Trout Creek Facebook Page
• Information on the Golden Eagle
• The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act

A coal train passes through Montana

Yesterday, the Port of St. Helens approved agreements with two companies to export coal to Asia — potentially as much as 38 tons per year.  Other ports including Portland, Vancouver, Tacoma, and Kalama have all recently rejected similar bids to export coal from their facilities.  St. Helens (located on the Columbia River about 48 miles downstream of Portland), Longview, the Port of Morrow, and the Port of Coos Bay are three west coast ports still considering export proposals.

Coal has a terrible track record, as Crag Development Coordinator Suzanne Savell well knows from her time spent growing up in the Appalachian mountains.  ”It’s a dirty business.  From the safety of coal workers, to the way it’s transported, to the pollution created when it’s burned, coal is just dirty,” says Suzanne.

Coal exported from Oregon would begin in strip mines in Wyoming and Montana, crossing the west on slow moving, several-mile-long trains, which can obstruct a rail crossing for up to 18 minutes at a time.  Several of these trains, coming and going from the port facility, would block traffic each day in the communities of St. Helens, Rainer, Scappoose, and Portland, disrupting business in each community.  In addition, coal dust from the trains would pollute the air in all the communities through which the coal train travels.  Coal dust causes health problems, including increased rates of asthma in children and exposure to toxic heavy metals like mercury.

The U.S. is not the only country facing coal export. This image shows a rally against coal export in Melbourne, Australia.

As the U.S. moves away from coal as an energy source due to its harmful health and environmental effects, coal companies are looking to China as a market for coal from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and Montana.  Oregon’s coal-fired power plant at Boardman will be entirely phased out by 2020.  The irony is that coal burned in China returns to the west coast as air pollution and acid rain, dumping mercury and other toxics into our waters, poisoning our air, water, fish and food supply.

In the end, it’s not enough to simply see Oregon as a transit point for coal.  We need to consider where it starts and where it ends up in order to fully understand the implications of a proposal like this for our community and our environment.  For more information, check out long-time client Columbia Riverkeeper’s webpage and fact sheet on coal export in Oregon, and Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign.

Whether it is a proposal for drilling in the Arctic, fracking, or building yet another pipeline, a favorite argument of the oil and gas industry is that the project must move forward to ensure the U.S.’s energy independence.  2012 is the time to dispel this farce.

Recent events in the State of Oregon show why.  Amid the hubbub of the winter holidays you may have missed the news that the proponents of the Pacific-Connector pipeline and Jordan Cove LNG terminal (slated to cross Oregon and myriad streams, rivers, and unique and sensitive ecosystems and create a massive facility in Coos Bay) applied for and obtained an export permit.  That’s right, the idea is to export natural gas out of Oregon.

For many of you this probably comes as no surprise. The executive director of Crag’s client Columbia River Keeper Brett VandenHeuvel has long maintained that export is the end game for the proposed LNG terminals in Oregon. It turns out he was right.

But why export?  Because the U.S. is already producing an abundance of natural gas and gas prices are low.  As a member of the Oregon Attorney General’s office explained:  “Exporting liquefied natural gas will actually lead to increased prices for natural gas for industrial as well as residential users.”

That means more profits for the industry but it does not bode well for the U.S. public or our economy.  Moreover, if you read in between the lines you realize that the reason the industry wants to export natural gas is because of its wide spread availability.  And there you have it – the reason the industry wants more natural gas is to make more money from foreign markets, not to increase the U.S.’s energy independence.  Drilling in the Arctic, fracking, building pipelines and LNG terminals will actually not increase our energy independence.  Instead, the oil and gas industry is playing off the fears of the U.S. public to try to change their minds and, perhaps more importantly, their votes so the industry can make more money.

If you don’t believe that, check out the America Petroleum Industry’s Energy Citizen’s latest ad campaign.  In the ad, supposedly every day people tell you to vote for energy.  But when an environmentalist auditioned for the ad, he was shown the door after decrying the industry’s lies to the public.   Not to worry, the activist told Greenpeace about the ad campaign, and Greenpeace launched a spoof on the industry’s ad.

The Greenpeace ad is worth watching and a good reminder to us to think for ourselves and not accept all the tales we are told, even those that have been told for a long time.  Especially in an election year, when the ads get glossier and the truth is harder to find it is critical that we think for ourselves.  Happy 2012 may you find the truth this year wherever it is buried.

2011 topped the records for the number of extreme weather events costing more than 1 billion dollars – we had 12 such events in 2011 totaling almost $200 billion. NASA’s two latest climate reports contain mind boggling conclusions.  The first report uses conservative temperature data from the IPCC, and predicts that by 2100 around 40 percent of our major ecological communities – places like forests, tundra, and grasslands – will be dominated by a different ecological community.  In other words, if you live near a forest, it could become a desert by 2100, or if you live near tundra, it could be transformed into a grassland by 2100.  The second report, relying on paleoclimate data analyzed by top climate scientist Dr. Jim Hansen, paints a harsh reality of what even a two-degree average increase in temperature will mean for our planet. Closer to home and more specific to Oregon, a senior Department of Interior official warned a Congressional subcommittee about the impacts from climate change on the water supplies of western states that rely upon snowpack to provide fresh water.

So, that’s enough about the darkness – where’s the light?  It seems to be stemming from the next generation.  Youth leaders are stepping up all around our country, and the world, to express their concerns over climate change.  A young U.S. woman interrupted the latest climate change negotiations out of fear for her future putting the U.S. Congress and Administration on the spot for not moving the negotiations forward.  Youth in Canada danced in protest of their government’s decision to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol.

Of course, youth here in Oregon and around the U.S. and the world took the courts last May to demand that the government protect their future from the harmful impacts of climate change. Led by Alec Loorz of Kids versus Global warming and Our Children’s Trust, these members of the next generation are also an amazing inspiration.

Nelson Kanuk on the Kuskokwim River, Kipnuk, Alaska. Photo by Christi Cooper-Kuhn and Kelly Matheson, courtesy of iMatter.org

Our Children’s Trust, the iMatter Campaign, and Witness just released the most recent video of one such climate leader who is involved in a legal case launched last May.  Trust Alaska documents the life and struggles of Nelson Kanuk and native subsistence people along Alaska’s rapidly eroding coastline.  Nelson’s dedication to his family, their traditional way of life, and to sustaining the planet and his home is a true inspiration. Please share it with your friends and family, and may it help light the seasons to come.