Valley Women's Club | Environmental News

Environmental Committee

The Environmental Committee works to protect the watershed and to educate the public on forestry issues, erosion control, hazardous waste, recycling and other issues. We also monitor government policies and procedures.

Events

River & Road Cleanup with Save Our Shores: September 25, AM
Watershed Festival of Events: On-going

ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS

Summer 2010

VWC Participates in SLV High’s Earth Week Activities

SLV High senior, Kelly Chesus, is a member of the new Ecology Club at the High School. The Club has done a lot this school year. The group worked with People Power in Santa Cruz on the 350 Rally that took place in the Fall; started a school garden (some garlic is growing!); met with a man name Flavio from Ecuador who spoke about his program 300 Acres; went to the Green Festival in San Francisco; and, had some locals come speak to us about the Arana Gulch bike path controversy. During Earth Week they planned to launch the program Terracycle at the school. Through this program, they set out bins to collect non-recyclable goods (like Capri sun packets, Oreo packets, etc) and send them to a company that makes products out of the school’s trash. Kelly contacted the Environmental Committee to see if the VWC would like to have an information table during Earth Week and Chair Nancy Macy brought an exhibit that caught the eye of some of the students, and had great time-sharing ideas with Kelly and other members of the Ecology Club. Kudos to this group of remarkable students!

VWC Environmental Committee Has Provocative Speakers

Climate Summit

The Environmental Committee has had a series of remarkable speakers at their regular Saturday meetings this year. In February, Margaret Bruce discussed her experiences at the UN Convention on Climate in Copenhagen. Margaret (Boulder Creek resident) is Director of the Center for Climate Action.

She discussed what her organization does, and that one of her first tasks when she became Director was to organize the trip for 100 California government and business leaders (including Governor Schwarznegger) to the Convention in Copenhagen. Then through a few photos, and vivid description, she discussed what happened there, what wasn’t accomplished and why little COULD be accomplished, and the very exciting, enlightening and intense things that were going on outside of the Official Delegates’ meetings – including the 450 displays by hundreds of organizations from every part of the world, and the exciting programs and speeches going on. She stated that the diversity of the needs and cultures and problems and desires and priorities of the 169 countries represented at the closed sessions is just too disparate for there to be 100% CONSENSUS on the wording of any agreement, or any part of an agreement, which was the requirement.

Margaret concluded her presentation with a passionate discussion of the current effort to sidetrack AB32 by initiative for the November election. She praised California’s farsighted effort to reduce energy consumption and CO2 emissions and more. She pointed out that hundreds of California companies have invested many millions of dollars already, creating thousands of jobs and more into the future, because of this great legislation. Those seeking to sideline it, claiming it will slow down the economic recovery, are mired in their selfish old ways and must NOT be allowed to prevail. (For more information on the report, click here).

Water Supply and Desalinization

Our April meeting featured Bill Kocher, Director of the Santa Cruz Water Department, who began the discussion of the desalinization plant with an extensive report on the Santa Cruz water system, its capacity and weaknesses. It was absolutely fascinating. Every person there learned something new about the City’s water supply, where it comes from, and how it is taken from the River and delivered into homes and businesses. There was a lot of unfamiliar detail, which made a very interesting presentation. Kocher continued his discussion by focusing on the prospect of using desalinization to help solve water supply problems during drought in Santa Cruz, and to help the Soquel Water District on a regular basis because they are over drafting their aquifer in spite of increased conservation requirements.

A year ago, a $4 million experimental desalinization plant completed its trial run – successfully according the Kocher. Kocher covered the reasons WHY desal has been chosen to be the Department’s back up supply source and touched on the problems this alternative presents. New dams have been rejected; new wells may not provide enough and aquifers are being depleted; climate warming threatens longer droughts. We are well aware that water supply problems along the coast affect the SLV because there is a water-supply dam for the City of Santa Cruz (Loch Lomond Reservoir) on Newell Creek, and dams have been proposed on several San Lorenzo River tributaries in the past. In addition, the City removes water from the River in Felton and pumps it up to Loch Lomond for dry season needs, and removes the greatest percentage of its regular supply from the River just inside Santa Cruz, all of which cause significant water flow problems in the dry season for the River.

There are enormous problems with desalinization, which we continued to discuss at the May meeting. One of the biggest is that it takes enormous amounts of energy to operate, and this will be extremely expensive and difficult to provide. The costs of construction and maintenance are a severe problem, especially with the economy only recovering slowly. The requirement of removing huge amounts of sea water (and avoiding sucking animals in with it), and what to do with the highly salted brine that results from the process may be technically feasible, but there will be problems and the Bay could suffer.

Many are skeptical of the claim that the increased water supply availability will not induce growth. One of the problems the City of Santa Cruz must deal with is the requirement to provide UCSC with water, as they expand their campus and bring several thousand more students there.

While the Cities of Soquel and Santa Cruz state that they will only use the desal water to restore their aquifer (Soquel) or provide water in times of drought (Santa Cruz), running the plant way under capacity is not economical, and the water will be available when (not if) the philosophies of the City Councils change so that growth will be encouraged – a real drain on local resources and increased impacts to the watershed, the Bay and the community.

There are profound concerns about turning to this water supply, and debates will continue as the Cities decide whether to go ahead with the full-size plant, but, unless the Cities are convinced there is a better solution, it is a real possibility it will happen, so it is up to all of us to make sure the problems are addressed, and to compel the City to find environmentally sound sources of energy for the plant, if those alternative water sources cannot be found and developed.

SLV Water District—Water Supply and Watershed Protection

Betsy Herbert is the Watershed Environmental Analyst for the SLV Water District, and she has accomplished an enormous amount in the past few years. She came to the March meeting of the Environmental Committee, and brought an update on the Watershed Management Plan (Part II is now available for public comment), and described the interconnections and difficulties among the regional water districts.

Her report was just fascinating. She discussed the Watershed Management Plan that is online at the Water District website, and the remarkably thorough information it contains. It has clear, comprehensive maps, and Part I has an excellent overview of the Watershed, its Resources (Biotic, Cultureal, Historic, Recreational and Educational). There is even a Local Climate Change Assessment! Part II builds on Part I, expands it and discusses the Regulatory Framework the District must operate within.

She then discussed the various systems within the water district and where they get their water (wells and surface creeks), and what the problems and benefits are with each one. She had data on the amount of water SLV residents need and use, and the importance of curtailing exterior watering and installing water conservation toilets, shower heads, etc. Of great interest was the fact that the water district is not only aware of global warming and its potential impacts, but it is taking steps to deal with it. They expect longer dry periods, with heavier storms when they come, increased fires, more runoff. Their goal is to promote healthy ecosystems so that they are more resilient.

You are encouraged to review the Watershed Management Plan since it has enormous impact on you, your home, you livelihood, and the well-being of the SLV.

Effort to Reduce the Number of Phone Books

Hilary Stanley’s Ongoing Campaign

For several years, Boulder Creek resident and active VWC member (past Board member), Hilary Stanley, has picked up hundreds of ignored phone books from heaps at the side of the road, often in plastic bags, and gotten them to the recycling center. The on-going problem of too many phone books being delivered to people who don’t want them – causing many environmental problems – led her to write (and have the VWC Board write) to our legislators, encouraging them to take steps to discourage multiple editions in a year and to enable individuals and businesses to opt out of receiving phonebooks they do not wish to receive. You may have seen Hilary’s letter to the Editor in recent newspapers, passing on the phone numbers that currently allow people to control the phone books they receive, as follows:

• AT&T, delivered in April: 866-329-7118

• Verizon (Los Gatos), delivered in June: 800-888-8448

• Santa Cruz Yellow Book, delivered in July: 800-929-3556

• Santa Cruz Yellow Pages, delivered in September: 800-350-8887

Coincidentally, Jeffrey Smedberg, Recycling Coordinator for the County of Santa Cruz, had been on a similar campaign.

Finally, earlier this year, SB 920 was introduced into the State Senate by Senator Leland Y. Yee, and received quick support from our State Senator, Joe Simitian. After a series of amendments, the bill would mandate that telephone corporations and 3rd party vendors (such as the Valley Yellow Pages) allow its customers to opt-out of receiving white and/or yellow pages books, either by phone or online.

It will be interesting to see if this can pass the current Legislature in this strong form but in the meantime, you can make those phone calls.

Update on the County Single Use Bag Ordinance

By 5th District Supervisor Mark Stone

In April, the Board of Supervisors made a significant first step in addressing an area of major environmental concern when we initiated the process to enact a County ordinance banning single use plastic carry out bags and reducing use of paper carry out bags. The action taken by the Board is only a first step in what will be a lengthy process. I thought it would be a good time to update the 5th District on where we are in enacting a final ordinance.

Last year I was contacted by local environmental groups that provided information about other jurisdictions in California that have taken action to reduce the litter and pollution caused by plastic and paper single use bags. Plastic bags are a petroleum product, which not only consume enormous resources during their production, but tend to be casually discarded, causing significant damage to the environment. Statewide, only 5% of these plastic bags are recycled. The production of paper bags adds to deforestation and uses large amounts of energy and water.

I felt it was time for Santa Cruz County to get moving on this issue, and in November 2009, I initiated a Board of Supervisors request to County Public Works to study the actions taken in other jurisdictions and recommend an ordinance that could be enacted locally. The result was the proposal that was supported unanimously by the Board at the April 13, 2010 meeting. It is actually a proposed County ordinance, which still requires a lengthy environmental review process and does not have a specific timeline. It offers a set of specific recommendations from which we are working, and public discussion and comment will be essential to the final outcome.

The proposed ordinance addresses point of purchase single use plastic and paper bags at all retailers in the unincorporated areas of the County. Because State law prohibits placing fees on plastic bags, in order to exert control over plastic bag pollution, jurisdictions are left only with the option of banning them outright. This ordinance would do so. There are no restrictions under State law regarding regulation of paper bags. This ordinance proposes a fee of ten cents per single use paper bag, starting one year after the ordinance is enacted. After another year, the fee would increase to twenty-five cents, subject to periodic review by the Board of Supervisors. Any fees collected would be retained by the retailer, offsetting the cost of providing bags. The fees on paper bags would not apply to customers who participate in government subsidized food programs for low income residents, including the WIC Special Supplemental Food Program and the Food Stamp program. Additionally, all single use paper bags would be required to contain a minimum of 40% post consumer recycled fiber. The ordinance also encourages retailers to offer low cost, permanent bags that can be reused over a long period of time.

There is litigation taking place at the State level that could affect aspects of our final ordinance. In several decisions, California courts have struck down anti-plastic bag ordinances, ruling that because the ordinances may have environmental consequences, a full Environmental Impact Report is required under the California Environmental Quality Act. The California Supreme Court is currently reviewing the decision by a lower court in one of these cases, Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach. Hopefully, because it complies with State law and because we plan to conduct a full Environmental Impact Report, our ordinance will avoid litigation.

This ordinance would serve to remind people of their role in reducing negative environmental impacts, and would encourage recycling and reuse. As the County is moves forward with this proposal, we hope we will be joined by the four cities in Santa Cruz County, as well as jurisdictions statewide. There are also environmental groups working with large retailers to enact voluntary restrictions statewide. While there is movement on this issue, it is still slow and incremental. At least locally we are taking the initiative.

Home | Back To Top