Help make history with the Center when we join in launching Californians Against Fracking, a statewide coalition working to ban fracking in California.

Fracking poses a direct and immediate threat to California’s drinking water, air, food, health, wildlife, climate and economy. While the state prides itself on being a leader in the fight against climate change, oil companies are gearing up to frack the estimated 15 billion barrels of oil in the Monterey Shale. This area is home to some of the state’s most productive farmland, critical water sources, important wildlife habitat and communities from the Salinas Valley to the Los Angeles Basin.

More than 60 labor groups, farmers, public health professionals, environmental and environmental justice organizations and local residents will come together to call for a ban in California on the dirty and dangerous practice of fracking.

We’ll take our message directly to Governor Jerry Brown as we deliver tens of thousands of signatures on petitions to ban fracking at rallies in front of the his offices in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

RSVP using the form below.

Event location: San Francisco

Governor Jerry Brown’s Office
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102

Register for this event at:

http://action.biologicaldiversity.org/p/salsa/event/common/public/?event_KEY=80287

Dr Eva Sirinathsinghji
Institute of Science in Society, May 7, 2013
Source: i-sis.org.uk

Genetically Modified (GM) crops are widely recognised for their potential to damage both human health and the environment. Evidence is now accumulating of the contamination of streams, rivers, rain, as well as groundwater with GM-associated chemicals including Monsanto’s glyphosate-based herbicide, while genetic elements such as antibiotic resistant genes are emerging in water-borne microbes. Further, GM crops have been shown to be less water efficient, corroborating farmer’s reports of failing GM crops during droughts. Industrial farming in general has been shown to be ill-adapted to extreme weather events such as hurricanes as well as droughts; and GM crops are not expected to do any better.

Cultivation of GM crops is a serious threat to food security particularly as global water supply is depleting (see [1] World Water Supply in Jeopardy, SiS 56) and already heavily polluted; with elicit and licit drugs (see [2] Pharmaceutical Cocktails Anyone?, SiS 56, [3] Illicit Drugs in Drinking Water ), in addition to pathogens, arsenic, fluoride, chemical fertilizers, pesticides, industrial waste products, landfill leaks, and gasoline etc. [4] Water Not Fit to Drink, SiS 57).

Glyphosate in groundwater, surface water and rainfall

Glyphosate, the active ingredient of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, is one of the most commonly used herbicides in the world, owing to the widespread planting of glyphosate-tolerant (GT) crops. It has been associated with a host of human and livestock health issues including birth defects, reproductive problems, carcinogenicity, endocrine disruption, neurotoxicity and internal organ toxicity, as well as lethality to frogs and harm to soil and aquatic ecosystems (see [5] Why Glyphosate Should be Banned, SiS 56). With all this in mind, the contamination of water supplies with glyphosate, a highly water soluble herbicide, has wide-ranging implications.

Groundwater has recently been shown to be contaminated with glyphosate. Groundwater is water located under the Earth’s surface and supplies wells, aquifers and streams and makes up approximately 70 % of the world’s fresh water supply. As rivers and lakes tend to be supported by groundwater, much of the water we use for agriculture, industry and drinking water is either groundwater or has been groundwater at some point in the water cycle. An important study published in 2011 found that of 140 groundwater samples taken from Catalonia, Spain, 41 % of them had glyphosate levels above the limit of detection [6]; contrary to the claim by Monsanto that the herbicide biodegrades rapidly in the environment. Moreover, the highest detected level reached 2.5 mg/L, which is above the already controversially high 0.1mg/L and 0.7mg/L drinking water limits in place in the EU and US respectively. Catalonia is a region that does not even grow glyphosate-tolerant GM crops that have been directly linked to increased glyphosate use in the US (see [7] GM Crops Increase Pesticide Use, SiS 56).

Thorough studies of groundwater contamination in abundant GT crop growing areas are unfortunately lacking. Smaller regional studies in the US and Canada however show widespread contamination of rivers, streams and atmospheric deposition. Two studies were conducted by The US Geological Survey in 2002, the first tested 51 streams in nine Midwestern states, during three runoff events: after the application of pre-emergence herbicides, after the application of post-emergence herbicides, and during harvest season. Glyphosate was detected at or above 0.1 mg/L in 35 % of pre-emergence, 40 % of post-emergence, and 31 % of harvest season samples, with a maximum concentration of 8.7 mg/L [8]. The second study found that over a third of streams in the Midwest US state of Kansas, over a third of 53 streams were contaminated with glyphosate, while two-thirds were contaminated with a glyphosate metabolite AMPA (2-amino-3-(3-hydroxy-5-methyl-isoxazol-4-yl)propanoic acid) [9]. A study of urban streams in King County, Washington, US found all tested streams had glyphosate [10]. Also documented was glyphosate contamination in 60-100% of air and rain samples tested; suggesting that glyphosate exposure is omnipresent in the US [11]. The concentrations detected ranged from <0.1 to 2.5µg/L in air and rain samples, respectively.

Similar results were obtained in Canada; a study in Alberta found that atmospheric water deposited glyphosate at <0.001 to 1.51 μg/m2/day, while samples from surface water (3 wetlands and 1o streams) had up to 6.079μg/L, which was likely to be lower than normal due to severe drought in 2002 when the samples were collected. The study also highlighted the transport and persistence of glyphosate in soil sediments [12]. Glyphosate use has increased widely since 2002 when these studies were conducted.

Bt toxin present in aquifers and streams

There are no legal standards in place anywhere in the world on safe levels of Bt toxins in drinking water, although the US EPA acknowledges that humans may well be exposed to the toxin via food or drinking water [13]. They conclude that as Bt toxins pose no health problems to humans, ingestion of the toxin is therefore of no concern. However, our review of the literature showed otherwise [14] Bt Crop Hazards and Failures (SiS 53). Bt toxins are implicated human health complications including allergenicity and other immune reactions, skin and eye problems, as well as internal organ toxicity in feeding trials on animals and in vitro studies of toxicity and lethality to human kidney cells at low doses (see [15] Bt Toxin Kills Human Kidney Cells, SiS 52). Environmental concerns include effects on soil microorganisms and off-target beneficial insects such as bees, caddis flies and Daphnia magna(see[16] Bt Toxin Threatens Aquatic Ecosystems, SiS 36).

Analysis of the streams and water columns in Midwestern US, where an estimated 91 % of streams are located within 500 meters of maize fields, found that 23 % of water column sites and 13 % of stream sites had detectable levels of the Bt Cry1Ab protein 6 months after harvest. Furthermore, 86 % of stream sites contained Bt maize detritus (organic matter from the plants) [17]. A similar study conducted in Canada found cry1Ab DNA as far away as 82 kilometers from the nearest Bt maize field, suggesting that it travels long distances through the water column [18]. Looking at the presence of the cry1Ab DNA, they found it persisted for 21 and 40 days in surface water and sediment, respectively. Sediment-associated cry1Ab gene from Bt maize tended to decrease with distance from the Bt maize field. The ability of DNA to bind to clay substances increases its half-life and thus, as the authors of the study state, increases the risk of horizontal gene transfer (see [19] Horizontal Gene Transfer from GMOs Does Happen, SiS 38). Horizontal gene transfer and recombination is the main route for generating new pathogens and spreading antibiotic and drug resistance, and genetic engineering is nothing if not greatly facilitated horizontal gene transfer and recombination. Persistence of Bt toxin DNA in our water systems is therefore a real concern.

Antibiotic resistance genes contaminate rivers

Antibiotic resistance is becoming a real threat to the therapeutic use antiobiotics.Contributing to this problem is the common inclusion of antibiotic resistance genes in DNA constructs destined for GM organisms. A study conducted in China now shows widespread contamination of 6 out of 6 urban rivers with bacteria carrying a synthetic version of the blá antibiotic resistance gene [20] (see [21] GM Antibiotic Resistance in China’s Rivers,SiS 57). The blá gene confers resistance to the most common class of antibiotics called β-lactams, which include penicillin derivatives (penams), cephalosporins (cephems), monobactams, and carbapenems. Sequencing of the bacterial DNA revealed that the sequence was derived from the lab as it does not exist naturally, confirming it as a contaminant from human activities. The rivers sampled are in highly industrial areas and, the Pearl River in particular, has previously been reported to be the most polluted with antibiotics. Though authors do not speculate on which particular industry is responsible for the pollution, it is clear that synthetic plasmid vectors are a source of antibiotic resistance. Contamination from GM crop cultivation is indeed entirely possible. The majority of GM crops already released commercially or field trialled in the open environment carry antibiotic resistant genes derived from the synthetic plasmids that were used for genetic modification. China both grows and imports GM foods and trees, many of which harbour the blá gene including: Syngenta’s Bt11 Yieldgard Maize and Bt176 NaturGard Knockout Maize, Monsanto’s Mon21 Roundup Ready Maize and Bayer’s ZM003 Liberty Link Maize. China has also been developing many GM crops, including rice. Bt ‘Shanyou’63, was already the subject of controversy since 2005; the unapproved variety (both in China and other countries) illegally sold and planted in Hubei province, contaminated Chinese rice products exported to Europe and Japan, and has been detected in China and various countries since then. Bt63 was developed in Huazhong Agriculture University in Wuhan, Hubei Province. Perhaps it is not a coincidence that the Yangtze River, one of those tested in the study, runs through the Hubei province. Horizontal gene transfer from genetically engineered plasmids to microbes in the soil or from lactic acid bacteria to human and animal gut microbes is a likely consequence of such pollution, and may well underlie the rise in resistance in animals as well as humans.

GM Crops are less water-efficient

In 2012 the US suffered from the worst drought in 50 years. As a result, crop yields were severely affected as well as cereal food prices. The overwhelming majority of corn and soybean crops grown in the US are GM but evidence from Howard Vlieger, a farmer who grew both GM and non-GM varieties of corn and soybean showed that his GM varieties suffered more than the conventional varieties. In fact, he reported that his conventional varieties were not only surviving the drought, but flourishing (see [22] GM Crops Destroyed by US Drought but non-GM Varieties Flourish, SiS 56). For his corn crops, he harvested 100-120 and 8-50bushels/acre for non-GM crops GM respectively.

This report from the farmer can be corroborated by scientific studies that show GM GT soybean absorbs less water and requires more water than conventional varieties (see figure 1). Previous studies by the same researchers found that GT soybean had reduced lignin content as well as reduced photosynthesis rates, both of which may be contributory underlying mechanisms for reduced water efficiency and absorption.

Water use efficiency and water absorption of GM glyphosate-tolerant following glyphosate application

Glyphosate-tolerant plants required 14-20 percent more water per gram of dry biomass (left) following a single application of recommended levels of glyphosate (600-1200 g a.e. ha-1). At highest exposure there is a 1.5-2-fold difference. Water absorption (right) was reduced in GM soybeans, with GM plants requiring 6 litres more water following a single high exposure.

GM Crops, Industrial farming and extreme weather events

To date, there have been no studies assessing the ability of GM crops to adapt and cope with extreme weather conditions such as hurricanes, flooding and extreme drought.

However, GM crop cultivation can be considered an extreme form of industrial agriculture, which was found in studies to suffer more damage than organic agriculture following extreme weather events. In contrast, organic fields retained more top soil, which helps to retain water during drought and minimises landslides and runoff during flooding. Organic soils were found to have increased soil microorganisms such as mycorrhizae, which help maintain soil structure and retain water. Two studies, one in Central America and the other in Japan have confirmed this, with organic crops out-yielding industrially produced crops following hurricanes [23, 24]. Independent studies directly assessing GM crops and climate change have yet to be done.

To conclude

Available studies have exposed GM agriculture’s contribution to the pollution of our finite water supplies with toxic herbicides, insecticidal proteins and genetically modified DNA, including antibiotic resistance marker genes in pathogenic bacteria. GM crops are also likely contributing to the depletion of this essential resource, as they require more water to grow. Thorough national and international studies are needed to define the extent of the problem.

Winegrape growers within the Russian River watershed came through the first night of freezing temperatures with flying colors last week, as their sprinkler diversions for frost protection of vulnerable spring vine growth resulted in very little drop in river flow levels.

The issue involves farmers in Mendocino and Sonoma counties, who occasionally use sprinkler systems to protect grapes and pears from frost, and state and federal regulators who say the frost-protection measures pull too much water from the Russian River and its tributaries, thereby endangering protected salmon and steelhead.

“We had our first real frost event so far this year, and while it was not a large-magnitude event, it was an awesome first opportunity for us to really check everything that we put in place. I was super thrilled with the outcome,” said Sean White, manager of the Russian River Flood Control District in Mendocino County.

Farmers in the watershed have taken a number of steps in response to concerns about river levels, such as installing wind machines and creating offstream ponds to use for frost protection, rather than drawing water directly from the river during a frost.

White said frost-protection activities last week created what amounted to an insignificant change in river flows on the Russian River, even though an estimated 70 percent of winegrape growers had turned on their sprinklers to protect vines from freezing temperatures.

The practice of using sprinklers to provide a protective covering to new vine shoots has been at the center of a dispute that began following a series of unusually frigid nights in the spring of 2008. Government biologists said water diversions by farmers resulted in two instances of stranding young salmon that are protected under the Endangered Species Act.

Based upon these two instances, the biologists argued that water diversions reduced flows in the river and its tributaries, and extrapolated that a larger number of young salmon had also been stranded. Those arguments led the State Water Resources Control Board to adopt a regulation in 2011 that would have severely restricted water use for frost protection between March 15 and May 15, the months in which grapevines emerge from winter dormancy and are most vulnerable to frost damage.

The regulations would have gone into effect in March 2012, but were stalled when Mendocino County Superior Court Judge Ann Moorman issued a preliminary injunction delaying implementation, pending the result of a combined trial that involved two challenges to the regulation filed by farmers.

Since that time, Judge Moorman has issued two rulings that favored the farmers. In her first ruling, handed down last fall, the judge determined that the new frost-protection regulations imposed by the State Water Resources Control Board were unconstitutional.

Then, this March, she rejected the environmental impact report that served as the foundation for the proposed regulation. Moorman said the EIR failed to take into account the impact on stream levels of other Russian River water users, such as the Sonoma County Water Agency.

Devon Jones, executive director of the Mendocino County Farm Bureau, described the two rulings as encouraging for growers in the two counties.

“This has been very positive for us to this point, but the State Water Resources Control Board has just filed an appeal of the Superior Court decisions,” Jones said. “Now, we have to get together and figure out our next steps in this process.”

Jones noted there was a February meeting involving winegrape growers in the two counties to discuss the upcoming frost season. The purpose of the meeting was to remind farmers that water use restrictions remain in place despite Moorman’s two rulings, and that it is important to use water wisely.

“We want to make sure everyone understands their water use requirements and that they keep good records and documentation, because they still have to report it. We still have the Endangered Species Act, so if there is a significant issue, there is still the hammer in the toolbox to go after folks,” she said.

Sonoma County winegrape grower Al Cadd, president of the Russian River Property Owners Association, said grapevines came through the winter in great shape, and if the weather holds, it looks like there will be a fair crop again this year.

“Growers are using much less water now than we did years ago when we used to overhead irrigate. When I grew apples here on the ranch, we used a lot more water than growing winegrapes. It costs money to pump the water and we don’t do it unless we have to,” he said.

Sonoma County winegrape grower Pete Opatz noted that farmers in both counties have been actively upgrading their irrigation systems, creating offstream water storage ponds and installing wind machines to address the concerns.

“The activities that have taken place since 2008—multiple wells and wind machines, additional storage ponds and reservoirs—have resulted in millions of dollars’ worth of frost infrastructure upgrades having been spent by the growers. All of this is focusing on river levels,” he said.

“And there has been monitoring of water levels since 2009, so not only do we have our experiences to draw on, we have ongoing monitoring. So we are pretty keen on what areas could be impacted with frost-protection systems,” Opatz said.

Reflecting back on all that has happened since those freezing nights in the spring of 2008, Jones stressed that, “We want to be able to continue to farm, but we want to sustain the fisheries as well.”

White agreed, commenting that “the legal fight was never what we wanted. What we wanted to do was fix the problem, not litigate it.”

WASHINGTON, DC – Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today released a report to Congress on the progress of the National Water Census, which is being developed at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to help the nation address its critical water needs.

“This update to the National Water Census—the first since 1978—will give the nation critical new information about the availability and use of America’s freshwater resources,” said Salazar. “Development of the new state-of-the-art National Water Census forms a vital component of the Department of the Interior’s overall strategy to help ensure sustainable water resources for the United States. Similar to the need for the U.S. population census to make informed societal decisions, resource managers need the water census to support wise policy and decision-making on water matters.”

As competition for water grows—for irrigation of crops, for use by cities and communities, for energy production, and for the environment—the need for the National Water Census and related information and tools to aid water resource managers also grows. The Water Census will assist water and resource managers in understanding and quantifying water supply and demand, and will support more sustainable management of water resources.

“It’s true in other fields and no less so for water: you can’t manage what you don’t measure,” said Anne Castle, Interior’s Assistant Secretary for Water and Science. “The Water Census will quantify water supply and demand consistently across the entire country, fill in gaps in existing data, and make that information available to anyone who needs it—and that represents a huge step forward on the path toward water sustainability.”

The report released today describes the “water budget” approach being taken to assess water availability for the nation. Water budgets account for the inputs to, outputs from, and changes in the amount of water in the various components of the water cycle. They are the hydrologic equivalent of the deposits to, withdrawals from, and changes in the balance in a checking account and provide the hydrologic foundation for analysis of water availability.

USGS is initially focusing production of the Water Census on areas with significant competition for water availability and existing or emerging conflicts over water supply, such as the Delaware, Colorado, and Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basins. Increasing populations, more volatile stream flows, energy development and municipal demands, and the uncertain effects of a changing climate amplify the need for an improved understanding of water use and water availability in these crucial watersheds. The Water Census (like our national population Census) is an ongoing effort that will provide information for current and future decision makers. USGS will continually be updating it, adding to it, and improving the accuracy of the various water budget components.

The Water Census is a component of the Department of the Interior’s WaterSMART initiative (Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for Tomorrow), and fulfills a requirement under the Secure Water Act, part of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009. Through WaterSMART, the Department is working to secure and stretch water supplies for use by existing and future generations to benefit people, the economy, and the environment, and to identify adaptive measures needed to address climate change and future demands. The report, Progress Toward Establishing a National Assessment of Water Availability and Use, is available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/circular/1384.

A few other resources you may be interested in -

http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/california_fracking/

http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/take-action/in-your-community/pacific-region/california/

(Both groups are doing great work on this … their action alerts, petitions, and signing up for their mailing lists are always good ways to help.)

(Reuters) – A court ruling that the U.S. government must consider the environmental impact of “fracking” on federal lands leased to oil companies offers opponents of the technique a useful weapon in the fierce public debate in California and other parts of the country.

In a regulatory setback for hydraulic fracturing on public lands, a federal magistrate judge in San Jose, California, on Monday ruled that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) failed to analyze its impact on 2,500 acres in Monterey County.

While energy lawyers were skeptical about the ruling’s long-term impact, it was hailed as a victory for environmentalists trying to stop fracking in the state due to concerns about its groundwater impact and the potential for increased fossil fuels output contributing to climate change.

The ruling could even inspire environmental groups to sue the BLM in other states as oil companies accelerate their leasing of federal lands for fracking, said Brendan Cummings, a lawyer for the Center for Biological Diversity.

“While the ruling has most direct impact on public lands in California, it also sets an important legal and policy precedent that federal and state agencies around the country would be wise to heed,” said Cummings, whose group brought the suit with the Sierra Club.

Celia Boddington, a spokeswoman for the BLM, said: “We are evaluating the ruling.”

Monterey county captures just part of the vast Monterey shale formation, estimated by the U.S. Energy Information Administration to hold 15 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil, or four times that of the Bakken formation centered on North Dakota.

Most of that oil is not economically retrievable except by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a production-boosting technique in which large amounts of water, sand and chemicals are injected into shale formations to force hydrocarbon fuels to the surface.

Cummings believed the San Jose ruling would likely have implications for a more recent and much larger lease sale of 18,000 acres for oil and gas development in the same general region.

Judge Paul Grewal did not hand down a remedy, instead asking the BLM and the environmental groups to confer and submit an agreed upon path forward by next week.

Jack Luellen, a Denver-based managing partner at energy law firm Burleson LLP, said the potential for a time-consuming BLM environmental impact statement would put the burden on the BLM to “prove a negative,” or that fracking would not cause damage.

“If you’re anti-fracking, delaying is almost as good as barring it,” Luellen said.

But James Pardo, a partner at the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP, believed a full separate study of the Monterey shale was unlikely to be necessary even though the geology is different from other U.S. shale plays. But a “harder look” at the issue would be necessary.

“The court’s telling them to square those corners,” he said. “Note this judge did not void the leases … This judge is looking at a reasonable solution.”

Bill Allayaud, California director of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group, said the court decision could cause the BLM to rethink how it leases land.

Oil and gas drilling on BLM lands has shot up in recent years as advances in horizontal drilling and fracking have made hard-to-reach deposits recoverable.

As a share of overall U.S. production, oil from federal onshore land accounted for about 5 percent of the total last year, and 12 percent for natural gas, according to federal data.

About 98 percent of the land under BLM control is in the western United States, including Alaska. California accounts for 6 percent of the 247 million acres under BLM control, according to the most recent statistics available on the agency’s website.

California regulators are in the process of devising rules for fracking.

It is already the subject of a state-level court battle. That lawsuit, brought by the Center for Biological Diversity, Earthworks, Environmental Working Group and Sierra Club, accuses the state regulator with failing to evaluate the risks.

The state case is Center for Biological Diversity et al v California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, Case no. RG12652054, in Alameda County Superior Court, Oakland, CA.

The federal case is Center for Biological Diversity and Sierra Club v Bureau of Land Management, Case no. 11-06174 PSG in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Jose, CA.

This article was published in partnership withGlobalPossibilities.org [3].

A Pennsylvania judge in the heart of the Keystone State’s fracking belt has issued a forceful and precedent-setting decision holding that there is no corporate right to privacy under that state’s constitution, giving citizens and journalists a powerful tool to understand the health and environmental impacts of natural gas drilling in their communities.

“Whether a right of privacy for businesses exists within the prenumbral rights of Pennsylvania’s constitution is a matter of first impression,” wrote Washington County Court of Common Pleas Judge Debbie O’Dell Seneca late last month. “It does not.”

Judge O’Dell Seneca’s ruling comes in an ongoing case where several newspapers sued to unseal a confidential settlement where major fracking corporations paid $750,000 to a family that claimed the gas drilling had contaminated their water and harmed their health. The Court ordered that settlement unsealed, enabling the papers, environmentalists and community rights advocates to examine the health issues and causes.

“The ruling represents the first crack in the judicial armor that has been so meticulously welded together by major corporations,” said Thomas Linzey, executive director of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund [4], which has helped 150 communities in eight states adopt Community Bill of Rights to limit corporate powers. “It affirms what many communities already know, that change only occurs when people begin to openly question and challenge legal doctrines that have been treated as sacred by most lawyers and judges.”

The Court’s ruling is significant because the fracking companies have relied on secrecy agreements with landowners to hide the environmental and health impacts of gas drilling. Corporate lawyers even filed briefs in this case claiming that environmental and public health groups such as Earthjustice, Philadelphia Physicians for Social Responsibility and others were barred from submitting ‘friend of the court’ briefs, which they recanted in a hearing, the ruling noted, “because no such rule of exclusion exists.”

But where the ruling is likely to make the biggest waves is in the so-called corporate personhood debate. The Judge spent more than a third of her 32-page decision saying why corporations and business entities were not the same as people under Pennsylvania’s constitution, and why, for the purposes of doing business in the state, that federal court rulings that blur the rights of people and businesses do not apply.

“This court ruling is a significant development for the growing movement to restore democracy to the people,” said John Bonifaz, the co-founder and executive director of Free Speech For People [5], a national campaign launched on the day of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC. “The ruling is the newest example of dissent within the judiciary to the fabricated doctrine of corporate constitutional rights. It will be held up for years to come as a powerful defense of the promise of American self-government: of, by, and for the people.”

Judge O’Dell Seneca cited the text of the 1776 Pennsylvania constitution, the history of its various provisions, related recent case law from other states and policy considerations, and rejected the various claims by corporate lawyers that “made no attempt to parse those texts and construe them in light of the full document.” The Court wrote, “Nothing in that jurisprudence indicates that that right [of privacy] is available to business entities.”

“There are no men or woman defendants in the instant case; they are various business entities,” it wrote, saying business entities are created by the state and subject to laws, unlike people with natural rights. “In the absence of state law, business entities are nothing.” If businesses had natural rights like people, “the chattel would become the co-equal to its owners, the servant on par with its masters, the agent the peer of its principles, and the legal fabrication superior to the law that created and sustains it.”

The judge said the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment “use of the word ‘person’ that makes its protections applicable to business entities” does not apply to Pennsylvania’s constitution. “The exact opposite is derived from plan language of Article X of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.”

“Not only did our framers know how to employ the names of business entities when and where they wanted them… they used those words to subjugate business entities to the constitution,” the Court held. “The framers permitted the Commonwealth to revoke, amend, and repeal ‘[a]ll charters of private corporations’ and any ‘powers, duties or liabilities’ of corpoeations… If the framers had intended this section [Article 1, Section 8] to shield corporations, limited-liability corporations, or partnerships, the Court presumes that they could and would have used those words. The plain meaning of ‘people’ is the living, breathing humans in this Commonwealth.”

The Court held that businesses do have legal rights protecting them from unreasonable searches and siezure of property, but that’s not the same as a right to personal privacy. “Our Commonwealth’s case law has not established a constitutional right of privacy to shield them from out laws.”

And looking at case law and rulings from other states, it held, “This Court found no case establishing a constitutional right of privacy for businesses, and it uncovered only one case that allowed a corporation to assert a state-based right to be free from unreasonable searches and siezures in a criminal matter.”

Summing up, the Court said “it is axiomatic that corporations, companies, and partnerships have ‘no spiritual nature,’ ‘feelings,’ ‘intellect,’ ‘beliefs,’ ‘thoughts,’ ‘emotions,’ or ‘sensations,’ because they do not exist in the manner that humankind exists… They cannot be ‘let alone’ by government, because businesses are like grapes, ripe upon the vine of the law, that the people of this Commonwealth raise, tendm prune and their pleasure and need.”

The Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund’s Linzey said that this ruling will affect other anti-fracking litigation in state court, but more importantly is a landmark in the ongoing community rights movement to elevate public values over private profits.

“It is that disobedience, of entire communities sitting at lunch counters demanding to be served, that is our only hope of salvation in a world increasingly commandeered by a small handful of corporate decisionmakers intent on remaking the world as their own,” he said. “A revolution that subordinates the powers and rights of corporations to the rights of people and nature now waits in the wings.”

“Judge O’Dell Seneca is on the right side of history,” said Bonifaz. “She has clearly articulated what millions of people across this country understand: that people, not corporations, shall govern in America. Judge O’Dell Seneca’s ruling provides further legal support for the national movement for a constitutional amendment to reclaim our democracy and to make clear that corporations are not people with constitutional rights.”

November 2012

On November 13, 2012, the California Roundtable on Water and Food Supply released its latest report, From Storage to Retention: Expanding California’s Options for Meeting Its Water Needs. The report builds on earlier work focused on agricultural water stewardship, and argues for an expansion of approaches to storing water that increase supply reliability for specialty crop agricultural production and other beneficial uses while protecting ecosystem health. Management approaches must support a broad range of options, including ecologically sound large-scale reservoirs, a patchwork of on-farm ponds, expanded soil capacity to retain water, and improvements in groundwater recharge, among others. The report highlights both a conceptual shift in water management that it argues is a necessary underpinning of effective water storage, and recommends a set of priority actions that constitute high-leverage opportunities to improve California’s water storage capacity and management. The Roundtable is grateful to the USDA Specialty Crop Block Grant Program, administered by the California Department of Food and Agriculture, and Gaia Fund for their support.

For full report click here. PDF (1.8 MB)

WASHINGTON, DC – Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today released a report to Congress on the progress of the National Water Census, which is being developed at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to help the nation address its critical water needs.

“This update to the National Water Census—the first since 1978—will give the nation critical new information about the availability and use of America’s freshwater resources,” said Salazar. “Development of the new state-of-the-art National Water Census forms a vital component of the Department of the Interior’s overall strategy to help ensure sustainable water resources for the United States. Similar to the need for the U.S. population census to make informed societal decisions, resource managers need the water census to support wise policy and decision-making on water matters.”

As competition for water grows—for irrigation of crops, for use by cities and communities, for energy production, and for the environment—the need for the National Water Census and related information and tools to aid water resource managers also grows. The Water Census will assist water and resource managers in understanding and quantifying water supply and demand, and will support more sustainable management of water resources.

“It’s true in other fields and no less so for water: you can’t manage what you don’t measure,” said Anne Castle, Interior’s Assistant Secretary for Water and Science. “The Water Census will quantify water supply and demand consistently across the entire country, fill in gaps in existing data, and make that information available to anyone who needs it—and that represents a huge step forward on the path toward water sustainability.”

The report released today describes the “water budget” approach being taken to assess water availability for the nation. Water budgets account for the inputs to, outputs from, and changes in the amount of water in the various components of the water cycle. They are the hydrologic equivalent of the deposits to, withdrawals from, and changes in the balance in a checking account and provide the hydrologic foundation for analysis of water availability.

USGS is initially focusing production of the Water Census on areas with significant competition for water availability and existing or emerging conflicts over water supply, such as the Delaware, Colorado, and Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basins. Increasing populations, more volatile stream flows, energy development and municipal demands, and the uncertain effects of a changing climate amplify the need for an improved understanding of water use and water availability in these crucial watersheds. The Water Census (like our national population Census) is an ongoing effort that will provide information for current and future decision makers. USGS will continually be updating it, adding to it, and improving the accuracy of the various water budget components.

The Water Census is a component of the Department of the Interior’s WaterSMART initiative (Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for Tomorrow), and fulfills a requirement under the Secure Water Act, part of the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009. Through WaterSMART, the Department is working to secure and stretch water supplies for use by existing and future generations to benefit people, the economy, and the environment, and to identify adaptive measures needed to address climate change and future demands. The report, Progress Toward Establishing a National Assessment of Water Availability and Use, is available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/circular/1384.

Contact: Jessica Kershaw (DOI), 202-208-6416
Jon Campbell (USGS), 703-648-4180

The California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) has shared their available hydraulic fracturing production well information with us.  The data are co-located on a Google maps interface with available groundwater information from over 200,000 water wells.   To access this information, select the check box as shown in the graphic to the right.

When available, the system has also integrated data from FracFocus.  FracFocus is the website created to provide public access to reported chemicals used for hydraulic fracturing and other pertinent information.

Groundwater quality data in California provided by the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) is now available on GeoTracker GAMA.  Select “USGS-NWIS” in the dataset box for the ability to query all wells sampled or query for a specific chemical.  Data is displayed on the Google Maps interface or can be exported to Excel.  All native data for any groundwater well in the NWIS system is also available for export.

The primary objectives of the GAMA Program are to improve comprehensive groundwater quality monitoring and to increase public availability of groundwater quality information.  GAMA compiles program analyses with existing groundwater quality data from several sources into the publicly-accessible GeoTracker GAMAgroundwater information system.