WolfeNotes.com

DEP Rejection of Forest Stewardship Council Certification Guts Essential Safeguards Used To Garner Support

• One of the key principles that allowed many [conservation] groups to throw our support behind the bill was the concept of forest stewardship certification by the independent Forest Stewardship Council. So that remains the key component that assures us that some of the issues that have been brought up today [are addressed].  ~~~ Emile Devito, PhD, NJ Conservation Foundation (and Trustee of the Pinelands Preservation Alliance)

• We have a Natural Heritage Committee …comprised of some of the most preeminent wildlife biologists, naturalists, forest ecologists in the state … and they debated this bill for over a year. And what they came up with is a position paper. What it required to support this bill was really one thing: and that is that a forest stewardship plan for State owned land be certified by the independent Forest Stewardship Council. ~~~  Testimony of Eliott Ruga, Highlands Coalition, to the Assembly Ag. & Natural Resources Cmte. 6/10/13 (listen)

Readers know that DEP recently rejected the Forest Stewardship Council certification process contained as an essential safeguard in the controversial  proposed “Forest Stewardship” bill.

The FSC standards and certification process were the only reasons many in the NJ Conservation community agreed to support the bill.

FSC certification was viewed as an essential safeguard to prevent damaging commercial logging of NJ forests. The sponsors of the bill repeatedly assured critics that FSC would prevent abuses.

Because DEP has opposed FSC certification and will not enforce FSC standards and nothing in the bill requires DEP to do so, I am urging my colleagues to take emergency action and publicly withdraw their support for the bill.

This would include contacting the bill’s sponsors and issuing a public statement. Now!

Such a move is extremely important and must happen immediately, because the bill is scheduled for Assembly floor vote on Monday.

The bill already has cleared the Senate and this is the bill’s last stop before the Governor.

Here is my letter to the Highlands Coalition, who reluctantly  backed the bill only due to the FSC certification provision:

Julia and Eliot – as you may know, in a June 10 letter, DEP rejected FSC certification – given this position, would the bill pass, they will not enforce FSC standards or participate in the FSC certification process.

Nothing in the pending Forest Stewardship bill requires them to do so or provides for mandatory compliance with FSC standards (which are voluntary, and only implemented via the non-binding FSC certification process).

DEP Letter Rejects Primary Safeguards of FSC Standards and Certification Process

Should Doom Bill As Unworkable

According to a June 10, 2013 DEP letter to Assembly Natural Resources Committee Chairman Albano, DEP strongly opposes the standards and external review and certification process by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). DEP wrote:

While we respect the FSC and recommended incorporating FSC standards into the legislation, this mandatory certification is an un-nececessary and costly requirement. The DEP is the steward of NJ’s environment. We do not need our work validated by somebody else. Moreover, this un-necessary requirement adds a significant financial cost to the program

The DEP’s last minute letter amounts to an arrogant U-Turn in prior support of the bill.

There is no other way to put it: DEP has sandbagged Smith and McKeon.

The sponsors of the bill, Senator Smith and Assemblyman McKeon, have assured the public numerous times that the FSC standards and certification process in the bill would provide effective safeguards to protect our forests, and assure that any commercial logging is done in a sustainable fashion that is protective of the environment.

The DEP’s flat out opposition to FSC certification is a dramatic U-Turn on the proposed legislation, which DEP has supported for a long time.

The DEP’s clear rejection and refusal to abide by FSC standards and certification completely destroys the logic of the bill and pulls the rug out from under the sponsors.

This could be a face saving measure for Smith and McKeon to abandon the flawed “forest stewardship”  legislation, which is scheduled for final legislative approval by the Assembly on Monday.

See the DEP letter and my letter to Smith and McKeon below.

Senator Smith and Assemblyman McKeon:

I just received and reviewed the DEP letter of June 10, 2013 to Chairman Albano regarding your bill (attached).

I am very concerned about the implications of this letter with respect to any implementation of the current version of your bill, should it be approved by the Assembly and the Governor signs it into law.

You both have relied upon – and given the public numerous assurances – that the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) standards, certification process, and audit provisions of your bill will provide safeguards to assure that our forests are not commercially logged to maximize timber values and DEP revenues, but instead managed by sustainable and stewardship principles.

Reversing prior DEP support, the DEP has now flat out rejected rejected the FSC or the need for the FSC in DEP’s forest management program. Clearly, DEP will not implement or abide by any FSC certification reviews, recommendations, or audits.

That means the FSC process is fatally flawed and can not provide any safeguards.

As the bill does not mandate that DEP promulgate FSC standards as regulations,  the FSC standards – in addition to being resisted and ignored by DEP – will have no legal enforceability by the public or impacted stakeholders.

In light of this new development, I strongly urge that you both abandon the current version of your bill as unworkable and stop the proposed Assembly vote on Monday, the final legislative step in the bill’s review by the Legislature.

Bill Wolfe, Director NJ PEER

DEP letter to Chairman Albano:

In a Shocking Move, Obama EPA Bows to Political Pressure

EPA Abandons Wyoming Study That Showed Fracking Polluted Groundwater

Fracktivists march on Trenton Capitol (6/20/13)

Hundreds of fracktivists converged on Trenton yesterday to urge legislators to over-ride Governor Christie’s veto of legislation that would ban the processing and disposal in NJ of toxic residuals from the fracking process (photos below).

Prior to that veto, last year the Governor also vetoed a bill that would have banned fracking well drilling in NJ. The Gov.’s conditional veto of that drilling ban bill resulted in a 1 year moratorium, which expired earlier this year. There is no economically recoverable gas in NJ, so fracking well drilling in NJ is very unlikely.

But NJ is highly vulnerable to huge quantities of imports of toxic fracking wastewater and sludge residuals.

The Gov.’s veto message of the treatment & disposal ban bill fabricated a false justification that the bill unconstitutionally restricted inter-state commerce.  But the Gov.’s assertion was not backed by any credible analysis or formal legal opinion by the Attorney General or the Office of Legislative Services (OLS), the two entities that are tasked with exactly that function.

Fracking is a water intensive and dirty operation.

Five million gallons of freshwater water, laced with a chemical cocktail, are injected a mile underground and consumed for each well. Thousands of wells consume billions of gallons of water. As much as 1/3 or more of that toxic drilling fluid water returns to the surface, leaching naturally occurring radioactive compounds from rocks and soil along the way, resulting in an extremely hazardous and toxic wastewater sludge stew.

There is no treatment technology currently available that can remove these toxic contaminants, so NJ waterways – like the Delaware and Raritan Rivers, which provide drinking water for millions of NJ residents – would be polluted and drinking water put increasingly at risk from partially treated toxic tracking wastewater.

Facking has triggered protests in nearby states of NY and Pennsylvania, which overlay the gas rich Marcellus shale formation. Fracking is now occurring and will increase significantly as drilling expands, are generating huge volumes of this fracking waste. They are  having trouble finding places to dispose of hundreds of millions of gallons of toxic fracking wastewater and tons of sludge residuals.

Those states and the gas industry are looking to export their toxic mess to other states, including NJ.

Ironically, after decades of fighting – successfully – to block imports of garbage from New York City and  Philadelphia, NJ now faces a far more toxic threat from tracking waste imports.

Shockingly, some in the business community, including the Chamber of Commerce and Business and Industry Association, along with Governor Christie, would turn the clock back 50 years and actually SUPPORT importation of this toxic waste that puts your drinking water at risk. They claim imports will produce jobs and tax revenues.

Surely, it is insane to put NJ’s drinking water at risk for a handful of jobs in the toxic waste industry!

Meanwhile, as protest mount nationally, at the federal level, the whitewash continues.

Under the Bush Administration, Vice-President Cheney’s Energy Task Force pressured EPA and Congress to exempt fracking from various federal environmental laws, the so called “Halliburton Loophole”.

As public outrage grew over this loophole, at the urging of Congress, the Obama Administration, whose energy policy strongly supports fracking, was forced to respond.

The Obama EPA initially expressed an interest in conducting scientific studies of the true impacts and risks of fracking. Those EPA studies have been long delayed.

Yesterday, we learned that EPA science has again been compromised by the gas  industry and politics.

In a shocking move, EPA abandoned a study of fracking in Wyoming that documented pollution of groundwater and drinking water wells.

EPA will hand the study off to the State of Wyoming. Like neighboring Pennsylvania, Wyoming politicians and regulators support fracking and have criticized the EPA study. The Wyoming state study will be funded by the gas industry. As reported by Bloomberg (red the whole article here):

Fracking Pollution Probe in Wyoming Cast in Doubt by EPA

The only finding by U.S. regulators of water contamination from fracking was thrown into doubt yesterday when the federal government halted its investigation and handed the probe over to the State of Wyoming.

State officials will now investigate the integrity of gas wells owned by Encana Corp. (ECA) near 14 domestic water wells in Pavillion, Wyoming, while the Environmental Protection Agency stops further work on its draft report from 2011, which linked groundwater woes to hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, for natural gas. While EPA said it stands by its data, that preliminary finding is now effectively abandoned.

Frack that shit!

Shamefully, EPA is in the tank for the gas industry.

EPA again has confirmed what Tim DeChristopher (AKA “Bidder 70”) has said, the game is rigged, it’s time to take the field.

The way the environmental movement has been for the past thirty years, it’s like a football game. And there are some players on the field that are fighting it out, but most of the people in the stadium are up in the stands. Most of them just paid their money at the door, and now they’re just yelling and screaming, and it’s not working. Our team is getting slaughtered. The refs have been paid off, and the other side is playing with dirty tricks. And so it’s no longer acceptable for us to stay in the stands. It’s time to rush the field, and it’s time to stop the game

Why we fight - the future of our kids. Let's hear it for the stroller brigades!

"No Fracking Waste in the Garden State" was the demand

taking it to the State House steps. Senator Gordon speaks to crowd in support of override.

Assemblywoman Spencer, Chair of the Environment Committee, speaks to crowd in support of over-ride

Senator Gordon (speaking) - Jim Walsh, Food & Water Watch (R), Jeff Tittel Sierra Club (L), Tracy Carlucchio, Delaware Riverkeeper Network (between Tittel and Gordon)

clear message

Good question

oil and gas lobbyists gawk out the windows and hide behind their desks in State Street offices, as protesters take to the capitol steps

Assembly Balks – Deadline Approaches

“Keep It Green” Coalition Doesn’t Understand Why

NJ Keep it Green, a coalition of park and conservation advocates, called on leadership to move on the bill next week, before the Legislature’s summer recess.

“There’s overwhelming support in the Assembly,” said the group’s chairman, Tom Gilbert, who noted the resolution has 20 sponsors in that house. “Quite frankly, we don’t understand why they won’t schedule a vote on this.”  ~~~ Star Ledger, 6/20/13

[Update: 7/12/13 – the Paterson situation is exactly what I’m talking about and it is a huge political and policy problem that KIG just utterly fails even acknowledge, never mind address:

Paterson council looks to leave county open space program 

During the first 12 years of the county’s program, Paterson property owners have paid a total of $7.9 million in taxes for the open space fund, but gotten back about $2.3 million in projects, according to a report compiled by the municipal finance department. – end update]

Get a fucking clue, Tom – If I were Assembly Speaker, no way you’d get a vote.

Warning, I’m winding up for a full throated rant here, but I’m getting ahead of myself.

Today the Senate approved a Resolution to divert $17 billion to fund open space over the next 30 years, by a lopsided vote of 36-2 (see SCR 138) (read the Star Ledger coverage, which is not bad for a change).

Senator Jennifer Beck (R-Monmouth) was 1 of just 2 Senators with the courage to question the wisdom of the proposed diversion.

Good for her.

The Assembly has yet to post the Resolution for a vote, and the head of the “Keep it Green” Coalition just can’t seem to understand why.

So, along with Senator Beck, as I oppose the measure, let me suggest a few reasons to Mr. Gilbert perhaps why Assembly Speaker Oliver has not posted the Resolution for a vote, and it seems to lack consensus support of the  Assembly Democratic Caucus.

Maybe it’s because NJ has a severe, chronic, structural budget deficit and there seems to be no money to fund anything, while essential services and social safety net programs are being slashed.

Maybe it’s because they’ve studied public finance, and think its bad public policy to fund capital investment from current revenues – maybe they understand that pay as you go is not a financial formula for necessary capital investments and infrastructure.

Maybe, with 9% “official” unemployment (far higher depression level actual real unemployment and underemployment), it’s because open space funding has perhaps the lowest jobs/investment ratio of all public investment?

Maybe it’s because diversion of $17 billion from the State budget plays right into a “starve the beast” and “make government small enough to drown in the bathtub” strategy of right wing zealots like Grover Norquist?

Maybe it’s because they realize that NJ has multi-billion deficits in infrastructure that require new sources of revenue, and that if we keep on going down the “austerity” and “no new taxes” road that the sales tax diversion reflects, then we are doomed.

Maybe it’s because legislators recognize that if we can’t marshall political courage to tell the truth and raise new revenues for a motherhood and apple pie issue like open space funding, then we’re doomed?

Maybe it’s because Legislators realize that land preservation requires not just acquisition money, but rests on a 3 legged stool, and that the planning and regulatory leg of that stool has been cut out by this Governor, as he rolls back land use and environmental regulation, refuses to support coastal land use reforms,  and cripples regional land use protection bodies like the Highlands Council? (all while most KIG coalition members either applaud or are silent)?

Maybe it’s due to a principled belief in fundamental fairness – because poor, middle class, urban, elderly, children, immigrant, disadvantaged, special needs, and countless other people and social groups are being starved – under a false claim of austerity that only serves to avoid tax increases – and are having their budgets slashed, which will be made worse by diversion of $17 billion of sales tax revenues for open space?

Maybe it’s because those same people and groups that are getting hammered by faux austerity pay the lion’s share of the regressive sales tax that would be diverted away from programs that help them and into the pockets of the wealthy and corporations?

Maybe it’s because minimum wage is not a living wage? And we can’t seem to afford an increase in minimum wage? Or food stamps, or women and poor people’s health care, or affordable housing, or libraries and schools and even school lunch programs all are being slashed?

Maybe it’s because income and wealth disparities are increasing dramatically – while this Governor rewards the rich and corporations with tax cuts and subsidies?

Maybe it’s because the regressive nature of the sales tax, compounded by the disproportionate share of the benefits of open space funding going to suburban wealthy landowners and corporations, is grossly unfair and amounts to reverse Robin Hood – eee gads, its class warfare!

Maybe it’s because Democrats can’t stomach the hypocrisy of the fact that while Governor Christie has dismantled environmental programs, the KIG coalition has said nothing about any of that, but instead praised the governor and provided political cover for him?

Maybe it’s because democratic urban districts always have had to fight for scraps of their fair share of the pot of  open space money and that this Gov. has made this historic unfairness far worse by grossly underinvesting in urban NJ, urban parks, and overall urban related open space funding?

Maybe the Democrats are growing a spine and have had enough already?

Maybe, Tom, – just maybe – some of this has occurred to you and your fellow elitist and selfish colleagues in the “KIG” coalition (who seem only to seek the support of urban democrats with your hand out for money, and never show up to protect the public health or environment their constituents live in and shed crocodile tears over “environmental justice”).

(PS – Or maybe they just resent being given no option by the Senate, and know that there are far better options available, like continuing NJ’s 40 year history of Green Acres revenue backed bond funding, or even a small water tax as the revenue source to finance borrowing.)

Which Side Are You On?

Guns or Trees?

Sometimes, it’s helpful to know who is opposing and supporting various legislation and why they are doing so.

That often helps to get a sense of exactly what is going on.

So we thought we would inform the public of exactly who is supporting the “Forest Stewardship” bill and why.

That bill is sponsored by Democrats and supported by some so called “conservation groups”, one of which, NJ Audubon, has a gross undisclosed conflict of interest and is acting more like a lobbyist for a consulting firm than a conservation group.

(there will but much more to come on NJ Audubon later. But make no mistake, the fact that NJ Audubon has a monopoly in NJ in Forest Stewardship Council Certification makes them a consultant, and is a huge ethical and political problem).

The below message is brought to you by right wing gun nuts (and KIG members) over at AMMO LAND – who are backing “Forest Stewardship”.

Why would guns and ammo types be supporting a  bill to promote forest health? Are they closet tree huggers over at AMMO LAND?

Or could it be that the “Forest Stewardship” bill has nothing to do with forest health and will be used as an excuse to log forests in order to to increase habitat for game species for the AMMO LAND types to slaughter?

I hope the Democratic sponsors of the Forest Stewardship bill and NJ Audubon are proud of their coalition and their supporters.

My mom alway said, judge a man by the company he keeps.

Take a look at who they are: