Damon Nagami's Blog: Saving Wildlife and Wild Places

Another Agency Steps In To Protect San Luis Rey River From Proposed Garbage Dump

2010-02-18T18:25:25Z

The San Luis Rey River in northern San Diego County doesn’t flow year round, but a recent series of winter storms caused the river to swell, replenishing underground aquifers and nourishing the plants and animals that call this area home.

This is the normal pattern for “intermittent” rivers and streams like the San Luis Rey. When it rains, we see the river – but the river is always there. Despite irregular water flows, these rivers are just as important to the health of their watersheds as perennial rivers that maintain a constant flow all year. EPA said exactly this in a November 2008 report.

The importance of the San Luis Rey to this part of California cannot be understated. But if Gregory Canyon Ltd. has its way, a massive 300-acre garbage dump would be built right on the banks of the river. I’ve blogged before about this potentially disastrous project and our efforts to bring it to the attention of the agencies charged with protecting our natural resources. And over the past few months, the following agencies have taken these encouraging steps:

Last November, the San Diego Regional Water Board delayed approval of an access bridge over the river because it wanted to examine the impacts of the proposed landfill first.
Last December, EPA called for a comprehensive environmental review of the project, including an environmental impact statement (EIS).
And last month, the Army Corps of Engineers committed to using the more comprehensive “individual permit” process (rather than the less rigorous “nationwide permit” process) to evaluate the landfill for the federal Clean Water Act permit it needs in order to operate.

Now we can add a fourth agency. Yesterday, California’s State Water Resources Control Board dismissed Gregory Canyon Ltd.’s petition to reconsider and overrule the Regional Water Board’s November decision.

We are encouraged by these agencies’ actions so far. But this is just the beginning. Our next task is to make sure that both of the environmental review processes undertaken by the Army Corps – the individual permit and the EIS – are conducted properly and explore a range of alternatives.

The bottom line is that this project poses unacceptable risks to the San Luis Rey River and its watershed. We will continue to work with local community advocates, including the Pala Band of Mission Indians and San Diego County Supervisor Pam Slater-Price, to prevent the destruction of this valuable river ecosystem – both to ensure a pollution-free drinking water source for San Diego County and to preserve a healthy watershed for generations to come.

Good News: Army Corps Will Take a Close Look at Controversial San Diego Landfill Project

2010-01-15T03:08:15Z

The 300-acre riverfront garbage dump proposed for northern San Diego County that I wrote about earlier this week is raising eyebrows again -- this time in the halls of yet another federal agency that has the power to veto the project.

Yesterday, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers released a document known as a “jurisdictional determination” effectively requiring the proposed landfill to undergo a thorough and comprehensive environmental review before a federal Clean Water Act permit can be issued. This is exactly what needs to happen, and is exactly what EPA called for a little over two weeks ago in its Dec. 28 letter to the Corps.

In a Frequently Asked Questions document posted on its website, the Corps said that the project does not qualify for a so-called “nationwide permit” -- a fast-track process the landfill proponents have advocated for -- that would have ignored many critical environmental concerns and eliminated public participation completely.

Requiring a standard individual permit instead of a nationwide permit is a solid first step, but we’re only halfway there. This project requires -- and EPA has called for -- a full environmental impact statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act. Only a legally adequate EIS can properly address the significant impacts on ecological and cultural resources that this project poses -- impacts that simply cannot be fully mitigated and would result in irreparable damage if the landfill were to move forward unchecked.

Considering what’s at stake -- the possible desecration of sacred tribal lands and contamination of the San Luis Rey River and its watershed -- these steps are not only necessary and legally required, but are essential to ensuring the region’s natural resources remain the utmost priority well into the future.

It Turns Out Building a Landfill on Sacred Native Lands Next to a River Isn’t Easy

2010-01-11T19:32:20Z

I’ve blogged about the significance of the San Luis Rey River before -- it is the ecological backbone of one of the main watersheds in northern San Diego County. It turns out we weren’t the only ones concerned about the possible damage a mega-landfill could inflict on this critical drinking water source. Recently, NRDC learned that the EPA is calling for a full and comprehensive environmental review for the proposed Gregory Canyon Landfill, which is exactly what needs to take place before any progress is made to further the proposed garbage dump plan.

The proposed 300-acre landfill would be built on the banks of the San Luis Rey River and would desecrate lands considered sacred to the Luiseño people, who have lived and worshipped on the lands for hundreds of years. The project’s proponents pushed for a truncated review process that would forgo a careful examination of the dump’s environmental impacts, as well as depriving the public of its right to participate in the review process.

However, in a December 28, 2009 letter to the Army Corps of Engineers, EPA called for a full review of the project. This would include both an individual permit under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act because the project would affect ”waters of the United States,” and an environmental impact statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the proposal poses significant changes to the existing environment that need to be considered under federal law.

This is a hugely important determination by the federal agency charged with protecting our natural resources and ensuring that our environmental laws are obeyed.

And it comes on the heels of a November 2009 decision by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board -- a state agency with the power to veto the project entirely -- to delay approval of a bridge over the San Luis Rey River that would connect the proposed landfill to a nearby highway. The Board determined that it needed to examine the entirety of the proposed landfill, and not just the bridge to nowhere, as proponents would have liked.

This is a controversial project requiring strict environmental review. Landfills are permanent reminders of waste in our society and they must be approached in a smart and legally-recognized process. This project would have such enormous environmental and cultural impacts that it calls for nothing less.

A Bad Place For A Garbage Dump In Southern California

2009-09-11T22:33:35Z

A developer in San Diego County, California wants to build a 300-acre garbage dump in Gregory Canyon, one of the most ecologically sensitive and culturally important places in the region.

Gregory Canyon drains into the San Luis Rey River, which winds its way through woodlands and supports vast expanses of riparian (riverbank) habitat. The river and the aquifers that lie beneath it provide drinking water for tens of thousands of people throughout the northern part of this drought-stricken County. There's no guarantee the proposed dump's liner won't break, and allow toxic chemicals to run right into the river and poison these critical water sources.

The canyon's eastern wall rises steeply to form Gregory Mountain, a place the Pala Band of Mission Indians and other Luiseño people consider sacred. The mountain is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and has been used by the Pala and other Luiseños as a place to pray and hold sacred rituals for hundreds of years. Placing the garbage dump next to Gregory Mountain would desecrate these sacred grounds.

The canyon's coastal sage scrublands and woodlands are home to several endangered species and other wildlife, like the magnificent golden eagles that perch high up on the canyon's walls. Building the garbage dump here would destroy hundreds of acres of vital wildlife habitat.

My colleague Joel Reynolds and I toured the area recently with local officials and members of the Pala Tribe (I took the photo shown above), and all I could think the whole time was how anyone could think this was a good place for a garbage dump. I cannot even begin to imagine a worse location, and it turns out the County of San Diego agreed with me back in the late 1980s, when it ranked Gregory Canyon as one of the least appropriate spots in the region to put a landfill.

It wasn't even close. Gregory Canyon failed seven out of the eight landfill siting criteria set out by the County. The site is on top of drinking water sources. It's near important archaeological sites. It's near an earthquake fault. It's home to endangered species. You get the picture.

Game over, right? Wrong.

Facing certain defeat, the landfill company decided in 1994 to attempt an audacious end-run around the County's site selection process, and use a ballot initiative to authorize a dump in Gregory Canyon if the necessary permits could be obtained. Almost a million dollars later, the countywide initiative passed and Gregory Canyon was re-zoned for a garbage dump.

Now, fifteen years after their outrageous ballot-box maneuver, the proponents of this ill-advised project still don't have any of the permits they would need to build the dump. They're currently trying to get what's known as a "Section 404 permit" from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Army Corps is required to approve the placement of fill (construction) material into "waters of the United States" such as streams and wetlands. The landfill company has applied for a so-called "nationwide permit," which is only supposed to be used for activities with minimal adverse effects on the environment, such as minor maintenance.

A nationwide permit would improperly fast-track the environmental review process and prevent the public from participating in a decision that would have enormous local and regional environmental impacts. That approach is dead wrong. Yesterday, we sent a letter to the Army Corps strongly urging them to reject the landfill company's request for a nationwide permit. This project cries out for the most rigorous and comprehensive scrutiny our environmental laws will allow.

The proponents of this dump are using every trick in the book to keep this seriously flawed project afloat. But this is a no-brainer - the worst idea to hit San Diego County since a local transportation agency tried to pave over the state park at San Onofre State Beach with a six-lane highway. NRDC played a key role as part of a vigorous coalition effort that stopped that bad idea in its tracks, and we are hoping to do the same thing here.

California’s State Parks Generate $4.3 Billion Annually, Study Says

2009-06-10T22:10:46Z

Last week, I wrote about Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's dramatic proposal to close 80% of California's state parks to address the state's $24 billion budget deficit. I argued that this shortsighted plan defies logic from an economic perspective because parks are such a huge economic engine for local communities. A new study reveals just how enormous that engine actually is. On Monday, researchers at the California State University at Sacramento announced findings that state park visitors spend $4.32 billion a year in park-related expenditures. These new numbers are simply astounding. In other words, by investing $150 million a year in our state parks, California reaps a return of over 28 times its initial investment. There are numerous theories of which program cuts could balance California's budget, but it doesn't take a degree in economics to figure out that any program that repays its initial investment 28 times over is a program worth saving. California's parks belong to the people and should remain open to the people.

Budget Woes Place California’s State Parks in Jeopardy

2009-06-02T17:37:39Z

California's magnificent state park system is facing the most severe budget cutbacks in its 100-plus year history. Saddled with a $24.3 billion deficit, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has set forth a shortsighted proposal to slash funding for state parks by $70 million next year, and eliminate it entirely the following year. This means that about 80% of the parks will be shut down, starting as early as September. To put this in perspective, the public will soon be losing access to about 1.3 million acres of parkland - a vast expanse larger in area than the Grand Canyon and akin to closing down the entire state of Delaware.

The list of parks that will be closed is eye-opening. From the oldest state park (Big Basin Redwoods, 1902) to the largest park by acreage (Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, over 600,000 acres - about double the size of Los Angeles), every corner of the state will be affected. In southern California alone, we are on the verge of seeing forty parks close down indefinitely, including two sorely needed urban parks in the densely populated, racially and economically diverse neighborhoods of downtown L.A. - Los Angeles State Historic Park (aka the Cornfield) and Rio de Los Angeles State Park (aka Taylor Yard). The parks closure proposal also comes on the heels of an announcement that the Los Angeles Unified School District will cancel all summer school classes, a virtual one-two punch to L.A.'s youth.

Some parks can remain open because they are supported by boating or off-highway vehicle gas taxes, or are operated locally or by concessionaires. However, the vast majority of California's treasured state parks will be forced to close, putting millions of acres of spectacular landscapes and vistas, historical landmarks and cultural relics, and low-cost recreational facilities off-limits to Californians.

These are clearly trying times, and this year's unprecedented budget challenges are forcing the governor and Legislature to have to make some very difficult decisions. Education, healthcare and other essential public services are certain to experience painful cuts. But the massive scale of cutbacks proposed by the Governor is by far the worst the state park system has had to endure in its long history. The proposal fails even to make economic sense, as the general fund budget for state parks amounts to less than one-tenth of one percent of the state budget. Our state parks serve as an enormous economic engine, attracting 80 million visitors a year and generating revenues of $2.1 billion in direct expenditures and $4 billion more in indirect spending. In exchange for comparatively small savings, the state would lose these tremendous sources of revenue, as well as thousands of jobs statewide.

Our state parks provide inexpensive recreation opportunities, much-needed managed habitat for plants and wildlife, valuable open space for urban dwellers, and an enviable variety of natural landscapes and scenery. It would be a shame to lose these important benefits because of this profoundly shortsighted proposal. The California State Parks Foundation (CSPF) has mounted a campaign to reject the Governor's plan - you can click here to find out more and take action. There is also a budget hearing in Sacramento today, where CSPF, NRDC, and other groups will be sure to fight to keep our state parks open for all Californians to enjoy.

Tackling "Nature Deficit Disorder" in South L.A.

2009-04-21T00:07:32Z

On Saturday, California State Parks celebrated the grand opening of the Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook, a 65-acre park and trail system in the heart of South Los Angeles. Dignitaries and community activists raved about the state-of-the-art visitor center and the stunning 360-degree views of the L.A. basin. But Los Angeles County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas stole the show when he professed to suffering - like many Angelenos do - from "nature deficit disorder."

He was mostly joking, of course, but L.A.'s serious lack of parkland is no laughing matter. Urban Los Angeles is one of the most park-poor areas in the nation, with fewer acres of parkland per resident than any other major city. Without adequate green space, these often lower-income communities of color don't receive the many benefits that come with parks, like a healthier local environment, access to low-cost recreation, and the chance to experience and connect with nature up close.

The Baldwin Hills present a golden opportunity to provide the communities of South L.A. with the parkland they so desperately need. Many Angelenos only know the Baldwin Hills by the endless oil derricks and tanks that dot the hills along La Cienega on the way to LAX. But the community has had visions of a park in the Baldwin Hills for decades. In fact, the Baldwin Hills Conservancy has adopted a Park Master Plan that envisions a world-class, two-square-mile regional park - one that would rival New York City's Central Park and Orange County's Great Park in terms of sheer size and scale.

The unveiling of the Scenic Overlook on Saturday is a terrific achievement and shows that we're slowly making progress toward that goal. But we've still only protected a small fraction of the Baldwin Hills as parkland. There's a lot more work that needs to be done before South L.A. residents can claim victory over "nature deficit disorder," and NRDC will be there every step of the way.