WolfeNotes.com

The Bergen Record ran a story today on the weed problems at Greenwood Lake:

An answer for lake weed woes

Tuesday, September 8, 2009
BY JAMES M. O’NEILL

An aquatic weed that snags fishing lines, ensnares kayakers’ paddles and jams boat propellers has become the bane of many North Jersey lake users. Eurasian milfoil, a stringy, invasive plant, grows like kudzu in Greenwood Lake, Pompton Lake and many other area lakes.

“It’s here big time and it’s a big problem,” said Randall FitzGerald, a Montclair State environmental studies professor. “An alien species like this has no natural predators here, so there are no checks on its spreading.”

Strategies to control it, from herbicides to cutting and dredging, each have drawbacks. Now, researchers are looking at the impact of another device used to attack the plant” the hydrorake, a floating machine that pulls the weeds out of the water.

Unfortunately, the article is another whitewash and ignores major aspects of the problem and solutions. The article focuses on local, voluntary, state grant funded, technical fixes to control the symptoms, not the underlying causes of the disease or the larger statewide management failures.

It ignores major issues, like this USGS study: Water Quality and Occurrence of Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) and Other Fuel-Related Compounds in Lakes and Ground Water at Lakeside Communities in Sussex and Morris Counties, New Jersey, 1998-1999

Let me explain: First off, our lakes are a magnificent public resource that provide tremendous recreational, wildlife, and ecological benefits. Legally, under the federal (and State) Clean Water Act, DEP is responsible for managing the water quality and ecological health of New Jersey’s 1,100+ lakes.

Secondly, all that sediment choking the lake and nutrient pollutant loads fueling explosive plant growth and killing other aquatic life come from overdvelopment in the watershed.

Without addressing these pollutant loads and preventing even more pollution, technical fixes – more herbicides, cutting, dredging – are a rube goldberg operation. It is a waste of taxpayer money to put a band aid on a gaping wound. We need to fund a tourniquet.

Ten YEARS ago, an EPA Inspector General Audit Report found major deficiencies in DEP Lakes Management Programs, as well as failed EPA oversight of NJDEP’s compliance with Clean Water Act requirements.

An entire Chapter of that EPA IG Report was titled “Lakes Need More Attention“. The EPA IG Audit made scathingly negative criticisms of DEP and found:

New Jersey has inadequate monitoring and assessment of lake conditions in the State. More than two-thirds of the public lakes have not been tested and more than 97 percent of those tested were found to be eutrophic. The limited attention to lakes has occurred for several reasons: (1) the State has concentrated many of itsmonitoring and assessment resources on coastal waters and rivers; (2) EPA has provided less funds; and (3) EPA guidance has been less intensive for lakes. As a result, New Jersey lakes were found to be in poor condition and there was no assurance that lake water quality issues will be adequately addressed. NJDEP needs to develop and implement a plan to assess and report the status and trends of all publicly owned lakes.

Region (2) needs to periodically review and monitor the State’s 10-year total maximum daily load schedule to assure that planned actions are being met and commitments are being achieved.

While the State’s shell fishing and beach monitoring activities improved, other water bodies including lakes and ponds, have suffered. Chapter 4 provides more detail on how the assignment of a lower priority has affected the State’s lakes.

Ten years later, NONE of those EPA and DEP problems have been fully corrected.

Why is there no accountability for this failure by EPA and NJ DEP?

Polluted, dying lakes are a statewide problem that requires state level solutions. DEP used to have a lakes management program, but funding cuts eliminated it. To their credit, DEP did partially restore portions of the lakes water quality monitoring program. See this link for details.  

But this small bore water quality monitoring effort is deficient even just in terms on monitoring, and does not even attempt to address larger lake management program needs.

We need stable funding – boat fees, stormwater fees, development impact fees, septic fees etc could pay for needed statewide science, monitoring, and management programs.

DEP still has lots of big regulatory sticks that they can use to improve conditions under the Clean Water Act, but they refuse to do so and instead rely on ineffective voluntary local solutions (like those presented in the Bergen Record article above). Enforcement of the Clean Water Act and more stringent land use and development restrictions are needed.

People need to light a fire in Trenton about this.

Where are the environmental advocates? Here’s your ammo:

CWA section 101 requires Federal and state governments to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.”

40 CFR part 130.4 requires states to establish monitoring methods and procedures (including biological monitoring) necessary to compile and analyze data on the quality of waters.

40 CFR part 130.7(b)(4) requires states to identify the pollutants causing or expected to cause violations of the applicable water quality standards.

40 CFR Part 130.7(b)(5) requires each state to actively solicit, assemble and evaluate all existing and readily available water quality related data and information. Potential sources of data and information listed include local, state and Federal agencies, members of the public, and academic institutions.

40 CFR Part 130.8(b)(5) indicates that the state’s 305(b) report must include a water quality assessment of all publicly owned lakes, including water quality status and trends.

40 CFR 31.40 requires recipients of Federal funds to monitor activities to assure compliance with applicable Federal requirements and that performance goals are being achieved. Grantee monitoring must cover each program, function or activity.

In February 1998, EPA issued the “Clean Water Action Plan”, as mandated by Vice President Gore. The Plan requires states to make a “Unified Watershed Assessment” by October 1998. According to Region 2’s Lakes Coordinator, lakes are part of watersheds, and should not be overlooked.

If you need an example, here’s the “TMDL Report” documents for Pompton Lake

Click on and read the final chapter “Next Steps” –  as you can see, there is no enforceable implementation plan (a plan with funding and teeth) to meet the water quality standards as required under the Clean Water Act and TMDL regulations.

This is totally deficient legally and technically and does not satisfy or comply with State NJDEP regulations (NJAC 7:15-6 et seq.) or federal TMDL requirements. 

EPA warned DEP to fix this 10 YEARS AGO!

[Update below]

[Scroll down for photos of NJ “Town Hell”]

From the manufacturers of the 1950’s communist witch hunts, the 1960’s Nixon “Southern Strategy”, and more recently “intelligent design”, global warming deniers, Swiftboat Vets, Teabaggers, Birthers, Town Hellers, and know nothing parents opposed to President Obama’s “socialist indoctrination” of  their children, comes a new McCarthyite and racist witch hunt against “green commie ecoterrorists“.

From the classic “The Paranoid Style in America Politics“ (1964), “The Power of Nightmares” (2004), to “In America, Crazy is a Preexisting Condition” (2009) – we’ve come a long way baby!

Van Jones, Obama advisor (Ethan Miller/Getty Images)

The most recent manifestation of crazy paranoia is the orchestrated right wing and Glenn Beck/Fox media attack that forced the resignation of Obama advisor Van Jones. Jones, a black community, labor, civil rights, and environmental activist, was the real deal, a true grassroots progressive.

But, putting expediency above principle, Obama caved in to a concerted right wing smear campaign and threw Jones under the bus. See: Taking the Movement Out of the Obama White House

For those who think it can’t happen here in liberal blue state New Jersey, check out the below NJ photo’s and consider this paranoid rant August 11, 2009 press release by the NJ Outdoor Alliance

DHS Reveals NJ Based Groups Provide Cover for Ecoterrorists
Tuesday, August 11th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
New Jersey Outdoor Alliance

Belmar, NJ -(AmmoLand.com)- NJOA E Action Alert – members continue to ask that we keep them apprised of the animal extremism in New Jersey, since the movement targets fishing, hunting, trapping and conservation practices.

Yesterday I was forwarded an unclassified  “For Official Use Only” document. It is apparently from The Department of Homeland Security alleging national groups (that also have operations in NJ), and a local New Jersey group, are providing cover for “ecoterrorists” I have read similar reporting from two premiere civil rights organizations; Anti-Defamation League and Southern Poverty Law Center.

Contents from the document follow:

The term “ecological terrorists, or ecoterrorists,” refers to those individuals who independently and/or in concert with others engage in acts of violence and employ tactics commonly associated with terrorism to further their sociopolitical agenda aimed at animal and/or environmental protection.

From a security standpoint, the activities of the ecoterrorist movement are significant for several reasons and should be of interest to domestic security and law enforcement officials. First, Ecoterrorists have perpetrated more illegal acts commonly associated with terrorism on U.S. soil than any other known group, including al-Qaeda and radical Islamic militants.

In addition, various groups that constitute the ecoterrorist movement [Animal Liberation Front aka “ALF”] are also believed to interact, to one degree or another, with mainstream environmental and animal-rights organizations and/or individuals. Although none of the mainstream organizations officially endorses or participates in the illegal and violent activities championed by ecomilitants, some prominent members of mainstream groups are known to sympathize with the ecoterrorist movement.

Mainstream organizations with known or possible links to ecoterrorism include the following:

• Greens
• People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)
• The Sierra Club
• National Wildlife Federation
• Audubon Society
• Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
• Friends of the Earth
• Greenpeace
• Earth First!
• Coalition to Save the Preserve (CSP)
• Environmental Task Force
• The Frogs
• In Defense of Animals
• New Jersey Animal Rights Alliance
• Fund for Animals

[this is the End of the NJOA alert]

Here is the national context:

Green is the New Red site here

Here are photos from a Tea Party “Town Hell”at Congressman Holt district constituent meeting in Middletown NJ:

Middletown, NJ – Congressman Holt’s Town Hell (all photos taken on 8/25/09)

Middletown, NJ

Middletown, NJ

Middletown NJ – on the same the day Ted Kennedy died.

The “ladies” are holding LaRuche “Obama is a Nazi” literature

[Update: 3/2/17: this is the last straw – I take back the praise of “veal pen” Van Jones below:

• Van Jones: Trump ‘Became President’ in Moment Honoring Fallen Navy SEAL

Lobbyists sign in at DEP – who were they visiting and what were they discussing?

If the White House can release visitors logs, why can’t the NJ Department of Environmental Protection release them?

According to CNN breaking news:

WASHINGTON (CNN) – President Obama plans to announce Friday that the White House will release its future visitor logs on a regular basis, two administration officials said.

The announcement follows a legal settlement with the group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which had sued the administration for release of visitor logs, the group announced on its Web site.

Since taking office, the president has been criticized for refusing to release some of the logs, including those relating to health care and coal company executives.

The new policy will apply to visitor logs created after September 15  not to previous visitor logs, according to an administration statement outlining the policy that CREW posted on its Web site. The future logs will be released 90 to 120 days after the meetings, and there are some exceptions.”

Last year, NJ DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson denied a legal petition to bring transparency to DEP by disclosing who senior DEP managers meet with. Ironically, after leaving NJ to become EPA Administrator, Jackson reversed her NJ position and agreed to post her daily calendar and those of senior EPA managers on the EPA website.

In the wake of recent corruption scandals involving access to and political influence on DEP, that petition  was refiled and is again before current DEP Commissioner Mark Mauriello.  How Mauriello handles that request will be a test of the Corzine administration’s alleged commitment to transparency, open government and ethics reform.

Will press hold the Governor accountable on this issue and ask him about Lisa Jackson’s previous denial?

Will good government reformer Independent Chris Daggett engage the issue in the campaign?

Will corruption buster Republican Chris Christie take a stand on transparency at DEP?

We’ll keep you posted.

[Update: The Union of Concerned Scientists has very similar reaction – read the UCS press release here]

The Bush administration was widely known – and denounced – for manipulation of science. Examples abound:

• The Union of Concerned Scientists issued a major report “Scientific Integrity in Policymaking – An Investigation into the Bush Administration’s Misuse of Science“,
• numerous examples were documented and criticized by major political figures, and
• entire books were written on the topic, like NY Times bestseller “The Republican War on Science“.

Perhaps the most visible and egregious example was Bush White House PR flacks rewriting EPA global warming reports and suppressing the work of Jim Hansen of NOAA, one of the world’s leading global warming scientists – so over the top, it got a CBS TV “60 Minutes” expose.

The NJ press corps press must think that such evil deeds occur only in Washington DC under a conservative Republican administration, because virtually the same thing goes on unreported right here in NJ under liberal democratic administrations.

NJ’s politicization of science is in some ways worse than the Bush administration’s. 

The Bush people were at least smart enough to do their dirty work under cover and behind the scenes. They were implemented by low level and very expendable flacks. They required whistleblowers, or leaks, or investigative journalism to discover them.

But here in NJ, high level State officials – not flacks – act with impunity. They openly act brazenly  and are stupid enough to put in writing exactly the same perverse Bush practices into formal DEP policy!

I have issued numerous press releases that document both the policies and specific examples of abuse (see links below), so the intrepid NJ press corps doesn’t even have to pick up the phone or crack a file over at DEP to document the abuses.

Let me repeat the text of these policies in one spot here:

1. Press Office Review and control over science

Under DEP regulations (NJAC 7:1-1 et seq; 37 NJR 3336), the DEP press office is the “single point of contact” with “all media“.

Scientists can not talk to media before clearance with the press office, including press office control over the content of what they say. A press office flack is in the room during any press interview or on the phone line to make sure the scientist tows the company line.

Under DEP regulations, the Press Office’s role is not to provide factual, objective, complete, responsive, and scientifically sound information. Instead, DEP regulations define the role of the press, which is to provide information  that ensures “that all Department communications with the press reflect the current policies and priorities of the commissioner“.

Any communication with media or release of any science or fact that conflicts with the views of the Commissioner are verboten (DEP employeees have been fired for this). Information and science are spun as a matter of policy – could it be any clearer?  See this link for details and all documents:

2. Policy Review and control over science

DEP has an internal review policy that governs public release of all science and data. The procedure requires:

• The material has undergone a seven-stage review process, including approval by DEP political appointees and press officers. The DEP Commissioner must also be notified in advance of any scientific report on an undefined “Hot Issue”;
• Even completed studies may not be “available for public distribution via print or online sources (i.e., journal and magazine articles)” until okayed by DEP management; and
• Technical updates of the “online Environmental Trends Report” will also require management sign-off including the personal approval of Ms. Herb.

DEP political appointees, the press office, the Commissioner, and perhaps the Governor’s Office must review and approve all science before it becomes public. We have documented cases where the science has been manipulated by these reviews. How could overt politicization of science get any worse?

3. Gag Orders on scientists

Stung by a string of embarrassing disclosures and breakdowns in toxic protections that prompted Legislative oversight hearings, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection ordered its employees to keep any “potentially sensitive information confidential” and to refrain from disclosing agency data to any outside parties”until it is ready for public distribution” according to an Agency email released by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).

4. Retaliation against whistleblowers or independent scientists

I was forced out of DEP as a whislelblower in 1995 for disclosing widespread mercury contamination of freshwater fish and a plan by Govneror Whitman to supress that science.

Since then, I’ve known of several retaliations by DEP managers.

DEP demoted and transferred its Chief Nuclear Engineer for raising concerns about industry influence on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission during the relicensing process for Oyster Creek nuclear plant, the oldest in the nation. According to a National Public Radio interview:

YOUNG: Ruch points to the case of whistleblower Dennis Zannoni. Zannoni was the agency’s top nuclear energy official. When he raised concerns about the safety of the Oyster Creek facility ”the oldest nuclear power plant in the country”he soon found himself off the nuclear beat.

ZANNONI: One day, January 30, 2007, I was removed without reason from my position as chief nuclear engineer and pretty much put in a broom closet in the department. And it’s been like that for two years. [link]

DEP retaliated against chemical engineer Zoe Kelman for writing and publicly releasing a dissenting report on the health risks of toxic chromium in Jersey City. 

A comprehensive PEER survey of over 3,500 DEP employees found (read survey & responses here):

*More than half agree that “scientific evaluations are influenced by political considerations at DEP.”

*One quarter of employees reported that they have received direct orders “to ignore an environmental rule or regulation” during the past three years.

*Sixty percent of employees fear “job-related retaliation for disclosing improper activity within DEP.”

5. Secrecy and lack of Transparency

The conduct of science requires openess and tranparency. Yet DEP prohibits public release of scientific data and communications within the Department.

DEP  claims that these data and communications are “deliberative” and exempt from public  records laws.

DEP also meets with industry scientists in secret, and allows those industry scientists  and lawyers and DEP political appointees to impact their scientific work  and to eliminate findings and recommendations opposed by industry.

There is a wealth of documented abuse and manipulation of science. Yet, none of it has been reported by the anemic NJ press corps. The public – the victim of this fraud and abuse – is left in the dark by NJ media.

6. Scientific Fraud

Let me close by noting it has gotten so bad that even the  Wall Street Journal – in  December 23, 2005 page one story “Study Tied Pollutant to Cancer; Then Consultants Got Hold of It” – quoted a polluters’ consultant (you know, the guys that  DEP takes “”at their word“) bragging that his scientific fraud had saved polluters “hundreds of millions of dollars” in NJ on reduced cleanup costs.

The fraudulent research was retracted by the journal that published it (but not the DEP regulatory standard that considered it). The people of NJ are paying for that fraud with our health and environmental integrity.

Read this letter to DEP Commissioner Jackson putting her on notice of this scientific fraud – Jackson ignored the science and this letter.

As my grandfather used to say – how about them apples?

Hey, maybe this is why Lisa Jackson eliminated the DEP Division of Science and Research and replaced it with a private external Science Advisory Board. More to follow on that soon.

DEP documents were leaked which show that DEP opposes a proposed massive wind project in Delaware Bay. This leak forced DEP to take a public position. Read: “Political Arm Twisting for Massive Delaware Bay Wind Farm – NJ Under Political Pressure to Lift Ban on Wind Turbines in Migratory Bird Flyway”

Now the question becomes: can DEP defend this decision from the political onslaught of project supporters, including powerful south jersey Senator Sweeney and inside player former DEP Commissioner Brad Campbell? Where are the voices and opposition of the Bay’s advocates?

For the inside story, and to learn how this story was broken to the media, see: Political Pressure on DEP – How the Game is Played”

Here’s today’s press coverage – page one in Atlantic City Press:

DEP opposes wind farm in Delaware Bay [link]

By DANIEL WALSH Staff Writer

With PDFs of DEP’s letter to Delsea Energy, and e-mail correspondence between the two entities

State environmental officials oppose wind turbines anywhere in the Delaware Bay, a position that could jeopardize an Ocean County firm’s plans for a wind park there.

The Department of Environmental Protection cited potential threats to migratory birds, oyster seed beds and other resources, in an Aug. 20 letter to Delsea Energy of Toms River. Scott Brubaker, the DEP’s assistant commissioner for land use management, wrote “the Delaware Bay is not an appropriate area for development of wind energy.”  …

Campbell and Sweeney’s roles drew criticism Tuesday when the whistleblowers support group, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, accused them of pressuring DEP leaders to overrule their scientists’ opposition to the wind park. PEER obtained several documents showing the DEP’s opposition to wind power in the bay, as well as an Aug. 25 e-mail from Campbell to Brubaker’s boss, Mauriello. …

Bill Wolfe, a former DEP adviser to Campbell who now runs PEER’s New Jersey chapter, said the private meetings were antithetical to the premises of open government.

“Sweeney has a committee,” Wolfe said. “He could hold a hearing. He doesn’t need to do it behind closed doors. It’s an inherently strong-armed tactic.”