Monthly Archive for December, 2009

Stealing Water from the Future: California’s Massive Groundwater Overdraft Newly Revealed

By Peter Gleick, Pacific Institute.
Posted December 18, 2009.

California is heading for a catastrophe of huge proportions if the overdraft of groundwater continues at the same rate as the last few years.

California Ground Water Trends

A NASA report summarizing data collected from new satellites confirms what most water observers have known for a long time. Massive amounts of groundwater are being sucked out of California’s Central Valley groundwater aquifers — unreported, unmonitored, and unregulated.

Water Number: Between October 2003 and March 2009, more than 24 million acre-feet (30 cubic kilometers) of groundwater were pumped out of California’s Central Valley. This is overdraft of groundwater — the pumping of groundwater faster than nature recharges it. Most of the overdraft is occurring in the San Joaquin Valley and it is occurring at a rate far faster than previously reported by the California Department of Water Resources.

This rate of over pumping is more than 4.4 million acre-feet per year — more than three times above DWR’s previous estimates. DWR estimates are grossly unreliable because, as I have discussed many times in this column before, no one actually measures, monitors, or reports groundwater use. Whoever can pump it can have it, to the detriment of everyone else, our wetlands, and runoff into our rivers and streams. As one of the scientists on the project, Jay Famiglietti said, “GRACE data reveal groundwater in these basins is being pumped for irrigation at rates that are not sustainable if current trends continue.” Groundwater storage changes in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basins from GRACE and supplementary data, October, 2003 to March, 2009

Groundwater storage changes in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basins from GRACE and supplementary data, October, 2003 to March, 2009

The pumping has been so extreme that NASA’s twin GRACE satellites can detect the changes in local gravity caused by the massive loss of water. The two satellites are so sensitive to gravity that they are affected by changes in mass on earth’s surface — and water is very heavy. Ironically, a few months ago this same research group at NASA reported a massive loss of groundwater in India over approximately the same period of time, but the California loss is nearly twice as large.

The rapid loss of groundwater is largely the result of a vast increase in agricultural pumping because of drought and a reduction in recharge due to the last several dry years. The recent water legislation passed in Sacramento calls for some limited groundwater level measurements, but it does not provide for comprehensive monitoring of groundwater use or regulation of that use. California is heading for a catastrophe of huge proportions if the overdraft of groundwater continues at the same rate as the last few years. Groundwater levels will drop, the economic and energy cost of pumping will go up, and agricultural production will falter.

It is long past time to monitor and regulate all groundwater in California so that farmers and cities can use it as efficiently and sustainably as possible. The legislature must go back to work immediately and fix this oversight — we are the last state in the country without reasonable groundwater management and the state that needs it the most.

From: www.jpl.nasa.gov

California Losing Groundwater Rapidly

December 14, 2009 · Posted By Lauren Sommer · Filed Under Agriculture, Water

Nearly lost amid the three-ring circus of Copenhagen coverage is the annual gathering in San Francisco of the American Geophysical Union. We’re doing our best to staff selected sessions there. Climate Watch contributor Lauren Sommer was there for some grim new research on groundwater in the Central Valley.

California’s Central Valley has lost nearly enough water in the past six years to fill Lake Mead, according to NASA scientists presenting at the American Geophysical Union Conference in San Francisco this week. Nearly two-thirds of that loss 20.3 cubic kilometers of water is from groundwater depletion.

With the recent drought, groundwater has been an important water source for California’s Central Valley agriculture, but getting a picture of that water use hasn’t been easy. Water districts haven’t been required to report groundwater pumping in their areas. That’s something the recent Delta overhaul package of legislation now requires, but according to Jay Famiglietti of UC Irvine, the records to date aren’t very complete. Wells are sparse and the measurements have been sporadic.

The majority of the water loss since 2003 has been focused in the San Joaquin Basin at the southern end of the Central Valley, which is losing 3.5 cubic kilometers of water each year. The bulk of that loss is the result of groundwater depletion.

Famiglietti says this is due to a “triple threat” in California. First came the drought, then decreased water allocation and more groundwater pumping. Finally, with less surface water, the groundwater aquifers have a reduced opportunity to recharge. Famiglietti says it’s clear that California is using groundwater at an unsustainable rate, which “poses significant threats to food production in US and the California economy.”

Groundwater basins in the Central Valley. Image: NASA

This large-scale picture of California’s groundwater comes from NASA’s Grace project. Twin satellites orbiting the Earth detect changes in the gravitational field, caused by the movement of water. Those satellite measurements act like a³scale at the bottom of the ocean weighing how much water is in each of these spots,” according to NASA’s Michael Watkins. They also detect changes in snow, surface water and soil moisture.

The Grace project, though, is becoming a “senior citizen,” according to Watkins and is reaching the end of its technological life. He says quality of their water research, which has included other spots around the globe, speaks to the need for another generation of the project. Famiglietti says, though this data can’t replace ground measurements, he hopes it will be taken into account by state agencies faced with making the tough choices about California’s aquifers.

From: blogs.kqed.org

Integrated Regional Water Management Final Recommendations

To All,

Regional Acceptance Process The Director of the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has approved the Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Program Region Acceptance Process (RAP) final recommendations.  DWR received 46 RAP proposals, approved 36 regions, and conditionally approved 10 regions.  Please see the attached announcement. The region acceptance process is a component of the Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Program Guidelines and will be used to evaluate and accept an IRWM region into the IRWM grant program.  It is not a grant funding application, however, acceptance and approval of the composition of an IRWM region into the IRWM grant program will be required before any region can submit an application for IRWM grant funds.  DWR has not previously reviewed and accepted any region, therefore, this process applies to all IRWM regions, both existing and developing. The final RAP recommendations and associated materials (review summaries, individual RAP documents,and maps) are posted on the following DWR IRWM Program website:http://www.water.ca.gov/irwm/integregio_rap2.cfm If you have questions about the IRWMP grant program and the RAP, please contact: Trevor Joseph

Senior Engineering Geologist

California Department of Water Resources

Online survey at Petaluma 360.com

Online survey at Petaluma 360.com <http://360.com>…

http://www.petaluma360.com/section/community0104

This is a new survey by the Argus about the so-called “revised” Dutra 
Asphalt factory at Shollenberger Park and the River.
It’s no doubt intended for print next week, if not tomorrow.
*Click on the link and vote!!! NOW!*
Tell your friends and neighbors too!
Dutra will try to make it look like all of Petaluma likes their ‘new’ 
plant – unless we speak up.

Even if they reduce their hot asphalt silos to 62′ height, promise to 
not crush old asphalt rubble on site, and have a slightly smaller daily 
production capacity, this is still a toxic, polluting, noisy, dusty and 
obnoxious factory right at Petaluma and Sonoma County’s Gateway, right 
across the River from the Shollenberger trails, homes and offices, birds 
and wildlife, and regularly blocking boats on the river with a barge 
that gets moored across half of the river’s width! Oh yes, in case you 
should miss it, it will be brightly lit up at night too. This factory 
in this location will make people sick, and will cause Petaluma to lose 
millions of dollars every year in tourism and visitors, as well as to 
lose new and existing tenants and owners of businesses and homes who 
located on the edge of the park because it’s such a great place.

*Also, PLEASE write to the Supervisors, and tell them that even if the 
asphalt silos are reduced to 62′, and they’ve promised to eliminate 
on-site crushing of old asphalt rubble, the Dutra Haystack Landing 
Asphalt Factory is still the wrong plant in the wrong place. The last 
public hearing for this is next Tuesday, 12/8, at 1.45pm
for the Supervisors’ contact information and way way more, please go to: 
www.saveshollenberger.com and www.momsforcleanair.net*

Thank you
David Keller
Petaluma River Council
Petaluma, CA 94952

Monitoring Pollutants in Storm Drains–Ocean Report

Dear Ocean and Coastal Community,

Pollutants that get carried off buildings, streets, and yards when it
rains is the primary cause of ocean pollution in California. In this
Thank You Ocean Report, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary’s Bridget
Hoover discusses the First Flush program which monitors pollutants in
storm drains after the first big rain of the season.

To listen to the podcast, please visit
www.thankyouocean.org/news/podcasts
<http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ThankYouOcean.org/285f71af2f/34c1d78adf/ffcc7f4487>

A new Thank You Ocean Report podcast will be posted approximately every
two weeks. You can subscribe to the podcast by visiting
www.thankyouocean.org/news/podcasts
<http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ThankYouOcean.org/285f71af2f/34c1d78adf/d33768a419>
and clicking on the podcast feed of your choice (iTunes, Yahoo, Google,
etc.).

Many thanks to the Ernest F. Hollings Ocean Awareness Trust Fund and
the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation for their support of the Thank
You Ocean Report podcasts.

Sincerely,

Brian Baird
Assistant Secretary for Ocean and Coastal Policy, California Natural
Resources Agency

Co-Chair, California Thank You Ocean Campaign

Matt Stout
Chief of Staff/Communications Director, NOAA Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries

Co-Chair, California Thank You Ocean Campaign

NOVEMBER 2009
info@thankyouocean.org thankyouocean.org
<http://cts.vresp.com/c/?ThankYouOcean.org/285f71af2f/34c1d78adf/4b3e996684>

Online Interactive Water Quality Violations Map!

California Coastkeeper Alliance Releases Online Interactive Water Quality Violations Map! Inbox X
Reply
Tom Lyons show details Dec 10 (5 days ago) California Coastkeeper Alliance (CCKA) has developed an online interactive map to help the public and state agencies track and improve compliance with water quality laws. This tool maps all dischargers within California’s six coastal Regional Water Boards that have been issued mandatory minimum penalties (MMPs) since 2000, when the laws setting these minimum penalties took effect. MMPs are issued for “serious” and “multiple chronic” water quality violations. Using the interactive map, you can select your Regional Water Board and click on facilities to learn more about their violation records since 2000. The map also highlights facilities that have not violated in recent years. The MMP Map complements CCKA’s regular work to improve the level, targeting, and transparency of state law enforcement activities. Firm, equitable enforcement both improves water quality and ensures fairness to businesses that follow the law. Violations related to sewage releases, industrial wastes, and contaminated groundwater most frequently caused the issuance of MMPs statewide.
Please feel free to forward this email widely and to share this tool with your colleagues.  Your feedback is welcome and always appreciated.
Best Regards,
Tom
Tom Lyons Program Coordinator Cartographic Analyst California Coastkeeper Alliance (415) 810-2960

California Coastkeeper Alliance Releases Online Interactive Water Quality Violations Map!

California Coastkeeper Alliance (CCKA) has developed an online interactive map to help the public and state agencies track and improve compliance with water quality laws.

This tool maps all dischargers within California’s six coastal Regional Water Boards that have been issued mandatory minimum penalties (MMPs) since 2000, when the laws setting these minimum penalties took effect.

MMPs are issued for “serious” and “multiple chronic” water quality violations.

Using the interactive map, you can select your Regional Water Board and click on facilities to learn more about their violation records since 2000.

The map also highlights facilities that have not violated in recent years. The MMP Map complements CCKA’s regular work to improve the level, targeting, and transparency of state law enforcement activities.

Firm, equitable enforcement both improves water quality and ensures fairness to businesses that follow the law. Violations related to sewage releases, industrial wastes, and contaminated groundwater most frequently caused the issuance of MMPs statewide.

Please feel free to forward this email widely and to share this tool with your colleagues.  Your feedback is welcome and always appreciated.

Best Regards,

Tom

Tom Lyons Program Coordinator Cartographic Analyst California Coastkeeper Alliance (415) 810-2960

Boondogle Water Project Will Waste Water, Energy

I have a copy of the 1-1/2 inch thick Final EIR/EIS that was sent to SCWC. I read it yesterday and concluded that responses to comments are skimpy.
If anyone would like to read it next (to save downloading), you may pick it up from me at 3746 Spring Creek Drive in Santa Rosa. Call first: 544-8109.
Stephen
In a message dated 11/28/2009 10:48:14 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, dkeller@eelriver.org writes:
Got water? Got enough water in the Russian and Eel Rivers? Got treated wastewater to sell to Napa Valley and Sonoma Valley grape growers who’ve overdrafted their local groundwater and surface supplies, and want more cheap water?
The North Bay Water Reuse Authority members – composed of SCWA, Novato Sanitary District, Las Gallinas Sanitary District, Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District (Bd. of Supes), and the Napa Sanitary District – apparently haven’t been reading the stories and State and Federal mandates over the past few years about the lack of predictability of expanding future potable water supplies, and how best to use the recyclable treated water for the primary objective of offsetting current and future scarce potable water supplies.
Instead, they’ve they’ve put together a massive Bureau of Reclamation water transfer and pumping project to find new customers for this precious water, now incarnated as treated wastewater.  This federal/local project, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, proposes to ship treated waste water that originated from our Russian and Eel Rivers and Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater that was originally sold and delivered by SCWA to the North Marin Water District (serving Novato), MMWD (serving northern San Rafael), Valley of the Moon and the City of Sonoma. (Napa gets its water from local surface supplies and the State Water Project.) After those contractors’ customers use the water, the wastewater is treated by the members of the NBWRA.  While there is a very valuable use of a small fraction of this water for flushing out the old Cargill Salt Ponds (San Pablo Bay Marsh Restoration Project) to hasten restoration of functioning salt marsh habitat, this is a very small component of this huge water transfer, and doesn’t merit the intentional and unintentional consequences of this massive US Bureau of Reclamation Project. While SCWA has proclaimed that they want to be ‘carbon neutral’ and the most “green” water agency in the state or the country, they’ve not included any significant carbon or GHG offsets for this massive pumping and plumbing project.
Despite several years of talking, pleading, educating and presenting alternatives that would demand local reuse to offset potable water demands on the beleagured Russian and Eel River systems, NBWRA has just released the Final EIR, full steam ahead.
Your review is essential.  Your comments are critical. Do you think that the Russian River System should be used to support overdrafted supplies for grape growers in southern Sonoma and Napa Valleys?  Do we really have water to spare originating from the Russian River and Eel Rivers? Or should SCWA be demanding that its co-participants do a much better job of using this valuable water in concert with NMWD, MMWD, Sonoma and Valley of the Moon Water District to supply their existing customers with treated wastewater and getting more reuse out of their residential, commercial, industrial and institutional customers?  With the NBWRA in place, there will be very little incentive to spend the time and money to implement these strategies necessary for our water futures.  In fact, with NBWRA in place, there will be huge income stream incentives to sell the treated wastewater to new customers instead. Alternative 1 is the closest they’ve allowed to a smaller, more localized program, but even that is huge, and expands water usage to thousands of acres of new agricultural customers.
The timeline for your comments is very short:
SCWA Board of Directors will hold their public hearing on certifying the FEIR on Dec. 8th! Additional participating agencies will hold their hearings between 12/10 and 12/16 (see below). Send your written comments to:
Marc Bautista SCWA PO Box 11628 Santa Rosa 95406-1628 (707) 547-1923 Marc.Bautista@scwa.ca.gov

I have a copy of the 1-1/2 inch thick Final EIR/EIS that was sent to SCWC. I read it yesterday and concluded that responses to comments are skimpy.

If anyone would like to read it next (to save downloading), you may pick it up from me at 3746 Spring Creek Drive in Santa Rosa. Call first: 544-8109.

Stephen

Got water? Got enough water in the Russian and Eel Rivers? Got treated wastewater to sell to Napa Valley and Sonoma Valley grape growers who’ve overdrafted their local groundwater and surface supplies, and want more cheap water?

The North Bay Water Reuse Authority members – composed of SCWA, Novato Sanitary District, Las Gallinas Sanitary District, Sonoma Valley County Sanitation District (Bd. of Supes), and the Napa Sanitary District – apparently haven’t been reading the stories and State and Federal mandates over the past few years about the lack of predictability of expanding future potable water supplies, and how best to use the recyclable treated water for the primary objective of offsetting current and future scarce potable water supplies.

Instead, they’ve they’ve put together a massive Bureau of Reclamation water transfer and pumping project to find new customers for this precious water, now incarnated as treated wastewater.

This federal/local project, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, proposes to ship treated waste water that originated from our Russian and Eel Rivers and Santa Rosa Plain Groundwater that was originally sold and delivered by SCWA to the North Marin Water District (serving Novato), MMWD (serving northern San Rafael), Valley of the Moon and the City of Sonoma. (Napa gets its water from local surface supplies and the State Water Project.) After those contractors’ customers use the water, the wastewater is treated by the members of the NBWRA.

While there is a very valuable use of a small fraction of this water for flushing out the old Cargill Salt Ponds (San Pablo Bay Marsh Restoration Project) to hasten restoration of functioning salt marsh habitat, this is a very small component of this huge water transfer, and doesn’t merit the intentional and unintentional consequences of this massive US Bureau of Reclamation Project. While SCWA has proclaimed that they want to be ‘carbon neutral’ and the most “green” water agency in the state or the country, they’ve not included any significant carbon or GHG offsets for this massive pumping and plumbing project.

Despite several years of talking, pleading, educating and presenting alternatives that would demand local reuse to offset potable water demands on the beleagured Russian and Eel River systems, NBWRA has just released the Final EIR, full steam ahead.

Your review is essential.  Your comments are critical. Do you think that the Russian River System should be used to support overdrafted supplies for grape growers in southern Sonoma and Napa Valleys?

Do we really have water to spare originating from the Russian River and Eel Rivers?

Or should SCWA be demanding that its co-participants do a much better job of using this valuable water in concert with NMWD, MMWD, Sonoma and Valley of the Moon Water District to supply their existing customers with treated wastewater and getting more reuse out of their residential, commercial, industrial and institutional customers?

With the NBWRA in place, there will be very little incentive to spend the time and money to implement these strategies necessary for our water futures.  In fact, with NBWRA in place, there will be huge income stream incentives to sell the treated wastewater to new customers instead. Alternative 1 is the closest they’ve allowed to a smaller, more localized program, but even that is huge, and expands water usage to thousands of acres of new agricultural customers.

The timeline for your comments is very short:

SCWA Board of Directors will hold their public hearing on certifying the FEIR on Dec. 8th! Additional participating agencies will hold their hearings between 12/10 and 12/16 (see below). Send your written comments to:

Marc Bautista SCWA PO Box 11628 Santa Rosa 95406-1628 (707) 547-1923 Marc.Bautista@scwa.ca.gov

Forests Attract Rain: An Examination of a New Hypothesis

Douglas Sheil and Daniel Murdiyarso

California Redwoods

A new hypothesis suggests that forest cover plays a much greater role in determining rainfall than previously recognized. It explains how forested regions generate large-scale flows in atmospheric water vapor. Under this hypothesis, high rainfall occurs in continental interiors such as the Amazon and Congo river basins only because of near-continuous forest cover from interior to coast. The underlying mechanism emphasizes the role of evaporation and condensation in generating atmospheric pressure differences, and accounts for several phenomena neglected by existing models. It suggests that even localized forest loss can sometimes flip a wet continent to arid conditions. If it survives scrutiny, this hypothesis will transform how we view forest loss, climate change, hydrology, and environmental services. It offers new lines of investigation in macroecology and landscape ecology, hydrology, forest restoration, and paleoclimates. It also provides a compelling new motivation for forest conservation.

Keywords: climate change, environmental services, macroecology, transpiration, paleoclimate.

Life depends on Earth’s hydrologlcal cycle, especially the processes that carry moisture from oceans to land. The role of vegetation remains controversial. Local people in many partially forested regions believe that forests “attract” rain, whereas most modern climate experts would disagree. But a new hypothesis suggests that local people may be correct.

The world’s hydrological systems are changing rapidly. Food security in many regions is heavily threatened by changing rainfall patterns (Lobell et al. 2008). Meanwhile, deforestation has already reduced vapor flows derived from forests by almost five percent (an estimated 3000 cubic kilometers [km3] per year of a global terrestrial derived total of 67,000 km3), with little sign of slowing (Gordon et al. 2005). The need for understanding how vegetation cover influences climate has never been more urgent.

Continue reading ‘Forests Attract Rain: An Examination of a New Hypothesis’

We’ve got great trees …. Let’s keep them!

Christopher Joyce,
November 27, 2009

There’s an experiment going on in the redwood forests of northern California: people are trying to turn trees into “carbon banks.”

The idea is to manage forests so they absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and slow down global warming. Carbon banking will be a hot topic at next month’s big climate conference in Copenhagen, especially if negotiators can’t agree on how to get industrialized countries to lower their own emissions. Carbon banking could be a way to cut those emissions by paying poor countries to save their forests and manage them better.

But to do this, climate scientists need to become climate accountants — to put hard numbers on how much carbon trees breathe in and out. That’s what the California experiment is all about.

Carbon Banking In The Redwoods

Some of those accountants can be found in the Big River forest, a mountainous swath of oak, Douglas fir and redwood in Mendocino County. The Conservation Fund, an environmental group, has bought 16,000 acres of this forest and put it aside for an experiment.

A walk along a muddy trail with the fund’s Chris Kelly takes us through thick undergrowth and small trees — the kind of forest that comes up after heavy logging.

“It’s as if you just cast out seeds on the ground in your garden and then didn’t come back and weed it,” Kelly says. “As a result, what you get is a choked garden with skinny carrots and underripe fruit.”

But that’s just the kind of forest the fund is banking on … literally.

“What we’re trying to do is come in and thin the forest, and leave the bigger trees to grow, and as a consequence of that thinning, they will grow bigger, faster,” Kelly says.

The accounting is tricky. If you cut down a tree, its carbon eventually goes up into the atmosphere. Foresters have to prove their “weeding” will produce a net gain — meaning more carbon will be stored in the trees that remain and grow than is released when the foresters weed.

Calculating What’s In The Carbon Bank

Foresters have to do measuring. Lots of measuring, from fallen trees to big branches on the ground. When the wood eventually rots, it emits carbon, making it a liability on the balance sheet.

But the big redwoods are the assets, like the bank vault, where the big carbon gets stashed away, year by year.

Forester Jordan Golinkoff is also a fund mathematician. He keeps the carbon balance sheet for this forest.

“Redwoods are kind of amazing,” Golinkoff says. “They can grow hundreds and hundreds of years and still be measurably increasing in size and growing.”

That makes them the ideal trees for carbon banking. A typical 25-inch-diameter redwood can store about a ton of carbon.

“Carbon is roughly 50 percent of the mass of most trees,” says Golinkoff.

The Conservation Fund calculates that over two years, its forest has soaked up an extra 350,000 tons of carbon. That’s roughly equivalent to taking 80,000 cars off the road for a year.

And Golinkoff says there are other benefits.

“By managing for carbon, we’re not going to be harvesting as much, and harvest disturbs the soil, harvest reduces the size of trees, and so in general when we have bigger trees and less disturbance, you have creeks … that are shaded. They stay cooler. Fish like that.”

Selling Carbon Credits

But once you’ve banked your carbon, what’s it worth? The fund is actually making money by selling carbon credits to people trying to “green up” their image or who want to offset their carbon footprint. Every ton of carbon is worth one credit.

It’s a small market now, mostly in California. But it’s growing, and negotiators in Copenhagen next month want to do the same thing around the world.

Gary Gero runs the Climate Action Reserve, which sets standards for carbon trading. He says once you legally limit carbon emissions, carbon banking starts to make business sense. “Businesses in California said, ‘We know you are going to regulate this someday, so give us the ability to start now reducing greenhouse gas emissions and ensure we are recognized for those reductions.’”

And Gero says that gives people who own forests a new option — to either cut for timber, or grow a carbon bank instead. Or, as the fund is doing, a little of both. Copyright 2009 National Public Radio

Saggio Hills Case Victorious in Healdsburg

Hello my Friends,
Some local folks in Healdsburg have won a court case for Nature’s sake. Good Fun.
The following message was received this morning and it has some interesting news about how EIRs can be fought in Sonoma County. Trees can be saved and water supply is a real issue.
Anyway, please give me your thoughts, especially in regards to Burbank Ave. projects such as Roseland School and Burbank Housing. Also my friends the Salamanders. Thanks,
Duane De Witt,
On Nov 30, 2009, at 4:09 PM, warren watkins <owlwo@sonic.net> wrote:
Interested citizens BULLETIN:  HCSS low budget all female legal team has just received notice from the Superior Court of a BIG victory in the legal challenge of the Saggio Hills EIR!  Judge Robert Boyd agreed with the HCSS arguments that:  1) no range of viable feasible alternatives were studied,  2) no study was done on the consequences to vistas at the city’s Fox Pond Park,  and 3)water demand numbers for the project tree and scrub mitigations were omitted. The court victory for citizens justifies our efforts.  The impacts of the mega homes on the oak ridgeline need to be reduced, which was the focus of our challenge.  And, only time will tell whether residents of Healdsburg and throughout Sonoma County will be able to conserve enough water in the future to allow projects the scale of Saggio Hills to move forward. Thanks to supporters and contributors who can share in the victory of our petition(attached)  and the press release(attached) Warren Watkins HCSS supporter <HCSS decision.pdf>

Hello my Friends,

Some local folks in Healdsburg have won a court case for Nature’s sake. Good Fun.

The following message was received this morning and it has some interesting news about how EIRs can be fought in Sonoma County. Trees can be saved and water supply is a real issue.

Anyway, please give me your thoughts, especially in regards to Burbank Ave. projects such as Roseland School and Burbank Housing. Also my friends the Salamanders. Thanks,

Duane De Witt,

Interested citizens BULLETIN:  HCSS low budget all female legal team has just received notice from the Superior Court of a BIG victory in the legal challenge of the Saggio Hills EIR!  Judge Robert Boyd agreed with the HCSS arguments that:

1) no range of viable feasible alternatives were studied,

2) no study was done on the consequences to vistas at the city’s Fox Pond Park,  and

3)water demand numbers for the project tree and scrub mitigations were omitted.

The court victory for citizens justifies our efforts.  The impacts of the mega homes on the oak ridgeline need to be reduced, which was the focus of our challenge.  And, only time will tell whether residents of Healdsburg and throughout Sonoma County will be able to conserve enough water in the future to allow projects the scale of Saggio Hills to move forward.

Thanks to supporters and contributors who can share in the victory of our petition

Warren Watkins, HCSS supporter