12-22-08

 12-22-08 Merced Sun-StarMerced County government looks forward to 2009Not many officials, elected or not, will miss the economic and political woes of 2008...CORINNE REILLYhttp://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/605708.htmlMerced County Supervisor John Pedrozo admits there's not much about 2008 he hopes to repeat in '09. "I'll be honest," he said. "It was a lot of doom and gloom this year."With budgets dropping, unemployment rising and businesses across Merced closing, it's hard to look back fondly, he said. "For a lot of folks, I think it was a frustrating year," Pedrozo said.His colleagues agree. "This whole last year was kind of a slow reckoning," Supervisor Deidre Kelsey said. "The economic realities really started to sink in this year, and it overshadowed everything."Like 'em or not, there were plenty of big headlines for Merced County this year -- and they weren't all bad. Here's what we ranked among the biggest.Supervisor elections: Crookham retires, Walsh beats Sanders, Kelsey wins another termThough 2009 will usher in only one new county supervisor, three of the board's five seats were up for grabs in 2008, and some were harder won than others.In June voters overwhelmingly re-elected District 4 Supervisor Deidre Kelsey, who garnered 68 percent of votes to beat political newcomer Claudine Sherron.District 1 Supervisor John Pedrozo also won another term. He ran unopposed. The only real contest of the year was for the board's District 2 seat. Kathleen Crookham, who first won the slot in 1996, announced in March she wouldn't run for a fourth term, opening the field to a range of hopefuls. Five candidates ultimately vied for the seat in June. Two advanced to a November run-off, former Merced Mayor Hub Walsh and current city councilman Jim Sanders. After a hard-fought campaign, Walsh won with 57 percent of the votes. He starts in January. RMP appears dead2008 was another rough year for the Riverside Motorsports Park, and it now appears the quarter-billion-dollar attraction may never be built. Approved by the Board of Supervisors in 2006, the RMP project seemed like a sure thing early on -- at least judging by what the folks behind it were spouting. But 2008 brought a number of unhappy revelations for those eagerly awaiting RMP's first race day. In February, the company lost a lawsuit aimed at stopping the project on environmental grounds. That effectively stripped RMP of building approvals that took years to win. In March the Sun-Star reported that a group of investors that provided some of the earliest capital to launch RMP had become embroiled in a bitter dispute with John Condren, the company's CEO, alleging that he has badly mismanaged the project and betrayed their trust.But the biggest blow came in September, when RMP put up for sale the 1,200 acres of land where it planned to build its motorsports complex. RMP officials deny they're giving up on the project, but as recently as this month they have acknowledged that they're out of cash and still looking for investors.Supervisors OK the largest housing development ever proposed in Merced countyNearly two decades after they were first floated, plans for the biggest housing development ever proposed in the Merced County won approval from the Board of Supervisors this September.Dubbed the Villages of Laguna San Luis, the development effectively would create a new town on the county's Westside. A group of dozens of landowners and developers is behind the project. If it's built as they envision it, Laguna San Luis will add 16,000 homes and 45,000 people over the next three decades to the area just west of Los Banos and south of Santa Nella.The project's win came in spite of public concern. In public hearings, some said they worried about the Westside's dwindling water supply, lamenting that farmers in the largely agricultural region are already fighting for water to irrigate their land and continue their way of life. They questioned why the county would consider building more houses when countless homes already stand empty here, and dozens of subdivisions sit half-built and basically abandoned in the wake of an unprecedented market meltdown.Others said Laguna San Luis won't bring in jobs to support the people who would live there, catering instead to commuters working in the Bay Area. And officials in Los Banos have raised concerns about how Laguna San Luis would affect traffic, the city's job market and the area's water supply.The Board of Supervisors voted 4 to 1, with Deidre Kelsey casting the lone nay.Though the OK is a major step forward for the project, it still must secure several more approvals to break ground.Supervisors vote to lay off dozens in face of budget shortfallThough Merced County fared far better than many California counties in 2008, it hasn't been immune to the worldwide economic downturn. The biggest hit to the county came in November, when the Board of Supervisors voted to lay off 39 workers in the county's Human Services Agency and Workforce Investment Department. The affected employees will officially be out of jobs June 1.The county has projected a $1.65 million budget shortfall this fiscal year and another $4.85 million next year.County CEO Tatum announces retirement, then reneges, then faces calls for resignation2008 was a tumultuous year for the county's chief executive, Dee Tatum. In late '07, Tatum announced plans to retire at the end of this year. But those plans didn't last. In July the Board of Supervisors asked Tatum to postpone his departure. The supes argued that the county would be left unprepared to handle the tough budgetary times ahead without Tatum's expertise and experience. The 62-year-old has served as CEO since 2001. Tatum agreed in July to stay on, but that wasn't the end of the discussion about his place at the county. Last month the Sun-Star reported that the Board of Supervisors approved a 10 percent raise for Tatum's wife, a manager at the county's mental health department. The trouble was, the supervisors apparently didn't know they'd done so. The pay hike was buried so deep as part of a budget amendment that none of the supervisors were aware of it, they each have said. The raise was later rescinded. Tatum says he had nothing to do with the proposal, but it originated in his office. Regardless of how the raise came about, it looked bad to some local residents. A few showed up at supervisor meetings to call for Tatum's resignation. He has declined to leave his post. Melting Yosemite glacier an omen of climate changeMore water runs off Mt. Lyell than can be replaced by snow...Tom Knudson, The Sacramento Beehttp://www.mercedsunstar.com/167/v-print/story/605699.htmlYOSEMITE -- As melting water gushed off the ice in a tinseled maze of rivulets and tumbled through a gaping chasm, the hikers watched, wondered and worried.Unlike most backcountry travelers who pitch their tents along the John Muir Trail in the upper reaches of the Lyell Fork of the Tuolumne River, these visitors had not pushed on to scale the summit of Mount Lyell -- Yosemite's highest peak.Instead, they scrambled up a ridge of rose-tinted granite and over a mound of dark, unstable boulders to tromp across this less well-known corner of the national park, a silvery-white sheet of ice fast becoming one of the first California landmarks to succumb to climate change.Later in the September day, Pete Devine, a veteran glacier observer who manages educational programs for the nonprofit Yosemite Association, sat on a log and opened a notebook. "Gaunt remnant of what I saw 10, 20 years ago," he wrote in his journal. "Lots of large boulders dot the surface. Lots of melt- water flow."As signals of climate change begin to come into focus in the Sierra Nevada, its melting glaciers spell trouble. Not only are they in-your-face barometers of global warming, they also reflect what scientists are beginning to uncover: that the Sierra snowpack -- the source of 65 percent of California's water -- is dwindling, too.More of the Sierra's precipitation is falling as rain instead of snow, studies show, and the snow that blankets the range in winter is running off earlier in the spring. And snow in the Sierra touches everything. Take it away and droughts deepen, ski areas go bust and fire seasons rage longer.Some glaciers already have melted away, including the first Sierra glacier discovered in Yosemite by John Muir in 1871. Today, the remaining 100 or so are withering, including Lyell, the second-largest, which could be gone inside a century."All across the Sierra, glaciers are transitioning into ice patches. Ice patches are transitioning to snow fields. And snow fields are transitioning into bedrock," said Greg Stock, a geologist with Yosemite National Park who joined Devine this fall on an annual survey of the Lyell glacier.While this is not the first time glaciers have receded across the Sierra Nevada -- they last did so about 20,000 years ago -- this meltdown is more ominous, Stock said, because scientists increasingly believe it is sparked not by natural forces but by rising carbon dioxide levels from the burning of fossil fuels."We have entered new terrain with what's going on in the atmosphere," he said. "We haven't seen anything like this in tens of millions of years."Witnesses to warming planetStock and Devine were accompanied by four tourists who came to see the signature of climate change firsthand, to pay their respects to a Sierra sentinel before it slips away. The trip, organized through the Yosemite Association, cost $360 -- and the melting glacier put on quite a show.Amid the whoosh of rushing water and the wind's freight train roar, they looked up at boulders riding on the surface of the ice that not long ago were entombed in the glacier."You don't have to be Al Gore to realize something is changing and we need to do something," said Jerel Steckling, a safety officer at Hilmar Cheese Co., who was on the trip. "This is a bigger deal than most of us want to believe."The four tourists were not the only ones to make the pilgrimage. A few days later, 81-year-old Hal Klieforth inched himself up a pale pink ridge below the glacier on a return visit to an ice sheet he last set foot on 58 years ago.On Aug. 20, 1950, Klieforth crossed the glacier on a youthful scramble to the summit of Mount Lyell with four friends. Now, at The Bee's urging, he had come back to see how global warming had altered it.As he crested a towering wall of rocks at the foot of the glacier and gazed across it, a boyish smile spread across his face. "Oh, my goodness, this takes me back," he said.His joy was tempered by reality, for the ice sheet was a shrunken remnant of the one he'd known nearly six decades ago. Gone was the massive, furrowed brow of ice and snow that curved around a ridge of rock, linking the glacier into a mile-wide seamless wall of white. Gone were the scalloped waves of thigh-deep snow that covered much of the glacier in 1950 and made hiking difficult.Critics of global warming say glaciers have been retreating for more than a century and climate change is caused by natural forces, such as increased sun spot activity. But Stock cites scientific studies that point to a new culprit: rising carbon dioxide levels.Much of that knowledge comes from drilling into Antarctic and Greenland glaciers and extracting ice formed hundreds of thousands of years ago. Bubbles trapped inside can be analyzed for carbon dioxide."As far back as we can see in time, we don't see anything like what's happening today," Stock said.As he tromped around the west lobe of the Lyell glacier, Stock saw signs of warming everywhere. One of the most vivid examples, he pointed out, was the daunting perch at the west end of a "transect line" -- a fixed route anchored by two stationary points on bedrock on each side of the glacier -- that geologists walk each year to chart changes."In the 1930s, you could step right off the bedrock and onto the glacier," Stock said. "Now we have to step off a rock shelf, climb down a series of cliffs for 100 feet. It's not often you see that much change in nature."In his daypack, Devine carried historical photos of Lyell glacier, including one taken just four years ago. Even in that short span, the ice sheet has changed. No longer is its icy surface so marshmallow white. Today, parts of it are speckled with rocks. Boulders the size of cars, kayaks and kitchen tables litter the surface of the west lobe -- and most are melting out of the shrinking ice sheet, not tumbling down from the cliffs above.The melting is so swift that even U.S. Geological Survey maps no longer reflect reality."All this is gone," Devine said as he kneeled down to look at a 1985 topographical map that one member of the tour group -- Chicago artist Bonnie Peterson -- had pulled from her pack.The highly detailed Mount Lyell Quadrangle map showed the glacier in the right place -- tucked into a gigantic spoon-shaped cirque on the north-facing side of the mountain. But the ice sheet was too large. "Just eyeballing this, a third of it" has vanished, Devine said."Maybe 40 percent," Peterson said.The most dramatic spectacle was not on the map or in the historic photos, though. It was the sight and sound of the water gushing off the glacier. "I don't think I've ever seen that much meltwater before," Stock said.All glaciers melt naturally. But to remain stable or grow, they must replace meltwater with snowfall. And that's not happening at Lyell or elsewhere. Today, scientists are finding that not only is more precipitation across the region arriving as rain, but less snow overall is falling. The current drought -- now heading into a possible third year -- could be catastrophic for California, state officials say."With a healthy glacier, we expect to see the upper half covered in snow and the lower half bare ice," Stock said in base camp one morning. "Instead, virtually all of the glacier is bare ice. It's losing a lot more than it's gaining. It's definitely deteriorating."That lack of snowfall worries many observers the most. "The most valuable resource in the Sierra Nevada is not the timber or gold or recreation or second homes -- it's the snowpack," Devine said."The Central Valley of California wouldn't be the richest valley in the world without the snowpack that's above it."Carrying experience backFew people are better acquainted with the Sierra snowpack than Klieforth, the meteorologist from Bishop, who has spent much of his life studying the range's climate, vegetation and weather patterns.Willow-thin and wiry, Klieforth had begun this journey at the Tuolumne Meadows trailhead 13 miles down the canyon with an old World War II Army surplus sleeping bag stuffed inside a plastic grocery bag. His pack included plastic dinnerware he has carried on camping trips for half a century.On this journey to the Lyell glacier, Klieforth logged another 30 miles and spent a part of each day looking at grainy, black-and-white photographs he had taken of the glacier back in 1950 -- pictures of a much bigger ice sheet than the one he was seeing today.No global warming skeptic, Klieforth is nonetheless a cautious man, careful about jumping to conclusions. He was moved by his trip to the glacier, calling it a watershed event."Climate change is sneaking up on us," he said. "And the rate of the sneaking is going from a slow walk to a sprint."He wanted to share the visit with some special friends: his old climbing buddies -- now in their 80s -- who had joined him on the original 1950 trip."I'm going to tell them that they can believe in global warming," Klieforth said. They can "take it to the bank." Our View: Accept delta's limitsRegions can't take endless amounts of water, and environmentalists can't save every fish.http://www.mercedsunstar.com/181/v-print/story/605701.htmlCalifornia is on the cusp of crucial decisions about its water future. Plans for new reservoirs and canals are gaining traction, pushed by interests that have the most to lose from court decisions and possible droughts.Before the state plunges feet-first into a new generation of water works, though, it must recognize the limits of its hydrological heart -- the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.For far too long, California has treated the delta and its vast watershed as a resource to be tapped and exploited.Excessive pumping and diversions, from all parts of the vast watershed, have hurt fish and other wildlife. Excessive conversion of wetlands has turned the delta into a mono-culture of sinking islands, vulnerable to floods and earthquakes. Excessive pollution has made the delta a filthy place to draw drinking water.There's no need to demonize past acts. Water agencies built water pumps, farmers converted wetlands and cities built sewage plants long before anyone recognized the delta as a fragile ecosystem -- our version of the Everglades.But we know better now -- or at least we should.How can we judge if California is taking more water from the delta and its watershed than they can handle?Consider the evidence: Smelt are at the brink of extinction. Other species, such as salmon, are in serious peril. Federal courts are using the hammer of the Endangered Species Act to deliver a blunt message about the entire ecosystem.Dry years, when cities and farms suck more from the delta than they do during more rainy times, are especially tough for these species. During wet years, 87 percent of the water entering the delta makes it out to the San Francisco Bay. During dry years, the figure drops to 51 percent.If California is to have any hope of restoring the delta and avoiding clashes with federal judges, it must develop a water plan that reduces its dependence on this estuary and strives for greater reliability.What would this plan look like?To begin with, it must be grounded in reality. Water contracts based on dated premises must be renegotiated, and efficiency should be the law of the land.Each region of the state -- including Sacramento and the San Joaquin Valley -- must find ways to reduce what it takes from the delta and its watershed. And environmental groups must recognize that not every species will be restored to its population predating the Gold Rush.Once all the shareholders have agreed to sacrifice, discussions over a canal -- or some other option for the delta -- will go more smoothly. Without such a commitment, it's hard to imagine that environmental advocates and Northern Californians would agree to a canal that would be the vehicle for increased exports.While we won't render judgment on a canal until a specific project has been proposed, the status quo is clearly unsustainable.A canal holds the potential of reducing environmental conflicts and allowing the state to siphon off big flows during peak years, while safeguarding the state against natural disasters.But any canal project must be premised on a recognition of limits. Promising everything to everyone is how the delta ended up in its current mess. Modesto BeeNev. Republicans tour Yucca despite political risk...Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.comhttp://www.modbee.com/state_wire/v-print/story/540933.htmlMembers of the Nevada Republican Party's Central Committee are being asked to reconsider their positions on Yucca Mountain, a nuclear waste dump that politicians representing the state have widely opposed.The committee toured the controversial project site some 100 miles from Las Vegas earlier this month, hosted by Ward Sproat, the Bush administration official in charge of the project and Robert List, a former Nevada governor who has lobbied for Yucca Mountain on behalf of the nuclear industry.Nevada Republican Party Chairwoman Sue Lowden, who helped arrange the tour, said she wanted to give committee members an opportunity to get all the facts on the project."I realize there are people who criticize even us taking this trip," Lowden said. "But why wouldn't you experience this for yourself before making up your mind?""Clearly, a lot of thought, a lot of years of research have gone into this," she said. "It's not a fly-by-night operation. It's something that's taken decades to come to this point."But Republican Sen. John Ensign says he was surprised and a bit dismayed to hear about the trip, saying the project is bad for the country and should not be supported.Politicians in Nevada have overwhelmingly expressed opposition to the project no matter which political party they are affiliated with. Gov. Jim Gibbons opposes it, as does Democratic Sen. Harry Reid and Republican Rep. Dean Heller."Good policy usually makes good politics - not all of the time - but most of the time," Ensign said. "In this case they do coincide."Sproat, who has directed the Yucca Mountain program for three years, asked the committee members who made the trip to consider the issue as a U.S. citizen, not as a Nevada representative."If we as a country can't put our spent nuclear waste here, where the hell can we put it?" he said.Nye County Commissioner Gary Hollis, one of the Republicans who made the trip, told the group that while his local board is neutral on Yucca Mountain, he is for it."I think it is the only place to do this," he said. "All these myths you hear, we're just going to put them in a hole and cover them with six inches of gravel."List urged the committee to carry a message of support for Yucca Mountain to elected officials who have been put "into a corner" on the issue."You have got to tell them that you will give them political cover," he said. "Tell them you will give them the support they need to open their eyes."Ny County Republican Party Chairwoman Fely Quitevis said the tour changed her thinking."Before I was against it, but now I am for it," she said.Debate over Yucca Mountain could become irrelevent during the next administration if the project is squashed, as Ensign says it will be."It's just a question of whether it dies a real slow death or a faster death," Ensign said. "The bottom line is Yucca Mountain is literally on a ventilator and the writing is on the wall. It's in hospice care right now."The Energy Department and nuclear industry disagree with that, and Sproat says the project has momentum to keep going because it is in the regulatory pipeline.San Francisco ChronicleDelta dilemma...Editorialhttp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/22/ED2514RE9O.DTL&type=printableStepping in where the state of California has feared to tread, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released a new set of rules designed to protect the endangered delta smelt in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The new rules represent the fish's last chance for survival, and a last-ditch chance at preserving the Delta's collapsing water quality. But they will come at a high cost - the ruling will result in reduced water pumping out of the delta, and that means less water for the farmers and urban areas that have come to depend on it.No one should be surprised by this. It's old news that the delta smelt are on the verge of extinction, and that the fragile delta cannot continue to serve as a trough for eternity. The ruling is the result of three years worth of lawsuits and negotiations between environmentalists, fishermen, and the state and federal water agencies that do the pumping. Last year, a federal judge ordered cuts in an attempt to save the fish, and the ruling caused a reduction of nearly a third in water exports this year. Despite warnings of Armageddon, the state appears to have survived this reduction just fine. That doesn't mean the next several years won't be painful: A mandate that more fresh water be sent downriver means that the cutbacks will have more of an impact in dry years. And California is in the midst of a drought. Urban areas will have to get used to even more water rationing. Farmers may have to consider planting less-thirsty crops. The state is going to have to keep a close eye on how water is being bought and sold, in order to prevent the possibility of pricing shenanigans. These adjustments may be difficult, but they're certainly possible. Eventually, these adjustments would have become necessary anyway, even if officials had allowed the pumping to continue without reductions. The smelt may be just a fish, but it's a crucial indicator of the health of the delta's ecosystem and water quality. If it went extinct, the entire delta wouldn't be far behind. The impact of the delta's collapse on our water supply would be far more catastrophic than mere reductions - how in the world would California handle such disruption?Still, last week's ruling - and the inevitable fighting that remains to take place - points, once again, to the abject failure of the state of California to handle its own business. Whether it's water or prisons, federal officials should not have to force the state to stop doing things that are unaffordable and unsustainable. Comprehensive solutions for our uncertain water supply do exist. But it's impossible to find any coming out of Sacramento.New wetlands plan worries S.F. Bay fishermen...Brian Hoffmanhttp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/22/MN4914Q1I0.DTL&type=printableWhen it's complete, it will be one of the largest wetlands restorations in U.S. history, a sprawling complex of critical habitat in the North Bay that scientists believe will benefit threatened and endangered species, provide a nursery for fish and even help ease the effects of global warming.Many within the San Francisco Bay's fishing industry and some environmentalists, however, see the ambitious plan as a potential threat to fisheries, bird species and the very health of the bay.Work on the Hamilton Wetlands Restoration Project began in 2001 after receiving congressional approval. The goal is to rebuild nearly 2,600 acres of wetlands in Novato at the site of a former army airfield and an adjoining parcel of land at Bel Marin Keys.To restore the wetlands, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and state Coastal Conservancy are building up land using millions of cubic yards of sand and mud from dredging scheduled around the bay, with most of the initial material gathered from Port of Oakland deepening projects.The agencies started to fill in the land with dredge material in 2006, but at the current build rate - with each barge of material towed in, tediously offloaded and pumped to Hamilton - project leaders estimate it will take another 18 years to complete the project.Aquatic Transfer FacilityTo speed things along, they have proposed an alternate way of storing the material and delivering it to the work sites. The agencies say the project time will be cut by eight to 10 years, saving as much as $300 million, if the changes are approved by a host of federal and state agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Bay Conservation and Development Commission."It would be a far, far more efficient way of getting the material to the Hamilton sites," said Peter Mull, an ocean engineer and project manager for what is being called the Aquatic Transfer Facility. "The way it works now, we only get a third of the amount of material that we are hoping for every year."What the Army Corps of Engineers and Coastal Conservancy have proposed is to dig a 36-acre hole on the west side of San Pablo Bay just above China Camp, in a relatively shallow area prized for its sturgeon and striped-bass fishing.Material from bay dredging projects would be delivered by barge on a steady basis, between June and November, and dumped directly over the massive ditch, where engineers believe the sediment quickly will settle. The collected material would then be pumped to the work sites, 24 hours a day.Fishing industry oppositionNot everyone likes the plan. Bay Area fishermen say the increased turbidity - the suspension of sediment - in the bay is a sure way of ruining what's left of bay and regional fisheries."No one is opposed to restoring wetlands," said John Beuttler, conservation director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. "But the way we go about it is absolutely vital. We all remember the years where dredge spoils were wiping out the sportfishing on the bays. We simply cannot sustain that again."In the 1980s, after a series of poor fishing seasons, anglers protested the wholesale dumping of dredge material around Alcatraz, where sediment mixed with the tide, clouded the bay and, fishermen believe, severely harmed fisheries and the entire food chain."Those were very bad years," said Jim Smith, a party-boat captain who has fished the bay since 1967. "You'd see them dump at Alcatraz, and there would be a brown cloud on the bay, going back and forth with the tide. There was mud all over the rocks. It ruined the fishing."Mull agrees that turbidity represents a serious detriment to the bay's health. By studying computer models and working on the environmental impact report, he believes the Aquatic Transfer Facility project actually will reduce the amount of suspended sediment in the bay."I know it seems counterintuitive," he said about letting dredge spoils settle into a hole in the bay, "but we estimate that we'll lose less than 3 percent of the material this way."Rebuilding wetlands fasterMull said some 4 million cubic yards of dredge material is taken from the bay each year to reduce sediment deposits and deepen ports. Much of that material is dumped back into bay waters at Mare Island, at a site in the San Pablo Bay shipping channel and at Alcatraz, with some taken out past the Farallon Islands, to the edge of the continental shelf.Only about 1.2 million cubic yards annually has been gathered for the wetlands restoration project at Hamilton using the current method, which has been limited by the slow process of working with off-loader equipment and further hampered by scheduling conflicts and mechanical breakdowns."With the transfer facility, potentially we can more than double the amount of material that can be used for wetlands creation," Mull said, "bringing the amount of material available closer to 3 million cubic yards. We can speed the restoration along that much quicker."Mull also stressed that the dredge material used in the restoration project is clean and rigorously tested to ensure that it is safe to use.David Lewis, executive director of the conservation group Save the Bay, supports the proposed transfer facility. "We're waiting to see the final environmental impact report, but there will be some big advantages to this facility," he said."Looking at whether there would be enough turbidity to affect the fish, studies seem to show that there would not be a big impact from that," Lewis said. "The place they want to put this doesn't have a very fast current, and it's a little bit sheltered."1980s problem revisitedKeith Fraser, who has been selling bait from his shop at Loch Lomond Marina in San Rafael for 39 years and regularly fishes the waters off China Camp, strongly disagrees with talk that the project would not harm fish populations."The pit plan has the potential to be an even bigger problem for the ecosystem of the bay than the problems we faced in the early 1980s," Fraser said. "Like we found out with the Alcatraz fiasco, most marine life will vacate any area where the turbidity is high. We're talking about drastic effects to striped bass, sturgeon, halibut, salmon - all of our fish."The Marin Audubon Society also sees potential problems with the project."We don't have a position; we have a lot of concerns," said Barbara Salzman, the group's president. The proposed site "is pretty close to Gallinas and Miller creeks, and they have endangered species. That was not even addressed" in the environmental impact report."It also didn't properly address impacts on the middle of the bay, where there are diving ducks and other birds. I would say they have a lot of homework to do."Lewis sees the restoration projects at Hamilton Field and Redwood City's Bair Island, where another 2,600 acres are being restored, as a net gain for the overall health of the bay, which has lost 90 percent of its original wetlands to farming and urbanization.In addition to habitat and water-quality benefits, Lewis said the wetlands help to lessen global warming by sequestering carbon emissions. The wetlands also soak up tidal events and release them slowly."They really are one of the best assets in the fight against global warming and the coastal impact of rising sea levels," he said.But to attain the beneficial aspects of the wetlands at Hamilton Field, the area first needs to be restored, which means figuring out a way to safely and effectively bring in dredge material. Mull maintains that the Aquatic Transfer Facility is the answer."There will be less suspended material in the bay, and the wetlands will be completed faster," he said. "The idea here is simply to accelerate the process."If approved, Mull said, the Aquatic Transfer Facility could be in operation in early 2010. Public comment-- The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be taking public comments on the project through today at spnetpa@ usace.army.mil.-- Additional information: hamiltonwet lands.org.Santa Cruz SentinelWildlife corridor study in Highway 17 Santa Cruz Mountains...CASSANDRA BROOKShttp://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_11286454De Anza College researchers and students are working to make sure that wildlife and people can coexist in the Santa Cruz Mountains.The Kirsch Center for Environmental Studies at De Anza College will launch a new study on Jan. 1 to assess the best location for a wildlife corridor near the Highway 17 summit. The project runs in parallel with wildlife movement studies in Coyote Valley, a wilderness area that connects the Santa Cruz Mountains with the Diablo Range."Our worry is that the Santa Cruz Mountains will become isolated," said Julie Phillips, project manager for the wildlife stewardship team.When highways are built through wilderness areas like the Santa Cruz Mountains, they can act as barriers to wildlife movement. The wilderness areas then become fragmented into smaller patches of land that can no longer support large mammals that need wide expanses of land for foraging and breeding.Many of the animals that live in the Santa Cruz Mountains, like mountain lions, black tail deer and bobcats, need wide spaces, Phillips said. Building a corridor would provide a bridge between wilderness areas and helps prevent fragmentation.Corridors are important not only for the large mammals, but also for small animals like rabbits and salamanders, said David Johnston with the California Department of Fish and Game."It takes them multiple generations to move long distances, but you still need broad connectivity and enough habitat to support those animals," he said.Highway 17 has particularly tall crash barriers, to keep cars from careening over the edge or crashing head-on while they travel the steep and curvy roadway, and this may prove to be a problem for wildlife movement, said Johnson."Whether Highway 17 is a barrier to movement or whether the wildlife are dealing with it is the issue," Johnson said.While the crash barriers might cause problems, Johnson also believes that wildlife movement is possible in the narrow patches of the highway. Animals may also cross at night when the highway is not heavily traveled, he said. The new Highway 17 project is based largely on wildlife corridor work in the Coyote Valley region, a 7,000 acre parcel of land in the southern San Jose region. The De Anza College wildlife stewardship team has been tracking animals in the Coyote Valley region for 18 months, investigating fragmentation caused by Highway 101.The valley has been deemed a biodiversity hotspot, according to Phillips, with 160 species of birds, including hawks, golden and bald eagles and short eared owls that hadn't been seen in the area for years. The team has also spotted elk herds, coyotes, mountain lions, badgers, bobcats and deer.Phillips believes all the animals the team sees in Coyote Valley are also found in the Santa Cruz Mountains.To track animals movements, the students use infrared cameras, GPS units and other wildlife tracking techniques.They've found that Coyote Valley animals are using culverts to get past the highways, Phillips said. But their long-term vision is to build a bridge modeled after the one at Banff National Park in Canada that allows wildlife to cross over the roadway unharmed.The Highway 17 study is part of a five-year effort and a greater 50-year project investigating wildlife corridors in the area.Los Angeles TimesO.C. traffic planners left wondering where to turnNow that the federal government has rejected a proposed toll road extension through south Orange County, it's back to square one...Susannah Rosenblatthttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tollroad22-2008dec22,0,4258883,print.storyOnce the dust settled from the U.S. Commerce Department's refusal last week to back a proposed toll road extension through south Orange County, one thing became clear: Traffic planners have a problem.Environmentalists who had railed against the proposed Foothill South route because of its potential effect on wetlands and San Onofre State Beach are clamoring for Interstate 5 to be widened instead. But no funding exists for that, and it would require bulldozing homes and businesses.The Transportation Corridor Agencies, the group that wants to build the 16-mile turnpike to connect the existing 241 toll road to Interstate 5 in north San Diego County, said a group of federal and state agencies studied dozens of alternate routes, but the best one was shot down."It would really be nice if someone would actually come up with something that worked for everyone," said Tom E. Margro, chief executive of the Transportation Corridor Agencies, adding that he's willing to meet with anti-road advocates.The group is keeping its options wide open, Margro said, including not discarding its preferred route despite federal officials having upheld its veto by the Coastal Commission.The agency could sue the Commerce Department, reconvene federal and state agencies to choose a new route or do nothing. Deciding whether to pursue litigation, however, is the top priority, Margro said."Nothing's off the table at this point," he said.Opponents of the turnpike, eager to see what the toll road board decides at its meeting next month, are urging the agency to abandon its preferred route and join them in finding a new solution."At some point, the elected officials need to read the writing on the wall and shift gears into doing something constructive," said Dan Silver, executive director of the Endangered Habitats League, part of the Save San Onofre Coalition that fought the road.The route in question was selected by a group of federal and state agencies, including the Federal Highway Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and Caltrans. The elimination process stretched over three decades, began with roughly 30 possible routes and cost about $180 million for engineering and research. Some choices were rejected because they dipped too far into the Camp Pendleton Marine base; others were tossed because they would have destroyed hundreds of homes or wildlife habitat."Once built, [the toll road] would probably be the most-studied piece of infrastructure in the United States," said Tustin Councilman Jerry Amante, chairman of the board of the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Corridor Agency.In a report earlier this year, however, the Coastal Commission cited half a dozen rejected routes -- some of which would have used San Clemente surface streets -- as viable possibilities, an opinion echoed by Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez.The rejected routes might not be preferred by the Transportation Corridor Agencies, but they "avoid the adverse impact on coastal resources," said Peter Douglas, state Coastal Commission executive director. The commission, he said, does not endorse a particular route."They've been working on this for, gosh, over 10 years and we've been telling them for over 10 years that this isn't going to work," he said. "They finally, I hope, got it."For its part, the Save San Onofre Coalition advocates widening Interstate 5. Silver said the inclusion of special high occupancy toll lanes -- which single drivers could use for a fee -- could help generate money to pay for extra lanes, in addition to some funds from Measure M, which uses sales tax money for Orange County transportation improvements. Silver also points out that widening parts of I-5 is part of a recent Orange County Transportation Authority planning study for the region.The widening proposition is not without its own detractors: Toll road planners, with the support of Caltrans, blasted the idea, saying a larger freeway would mow down 1,200 homes and businesses in its path, and that there was no state funding for the project.Toll road opponents then commissioned a report that said the freeway could be improved with less harm to San Clemente, a conclusion disputed by federal highway officials. If the freeway improvements don't happen, Silver said, the coalition isn't against other, environmentally sensitive paths. Fixing I-5, however, is the focus.Some south Orange County and north San Diego County residents are disappointed that the toll road plan apparently has been shelved.Beverly Schula travels from her Encinitas home to visit her elderly aunt and uncle in Costa Mesa several times a month and often uses the 73 toll road to get there."I love to drive it," said Schula, 72. "It makes driving very pleasurable, instead of sitting in traffic."She was hoping that the Foothill South would help her avoid I-5 gridlock as well as speed up her children's commutes."It seems like there's enough room for everything," she said."Since we have so many people and more coming in all the time, we need to look to the future."Japanese exports drop a record 26.7%...Associated Presshttp://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-japanexport22-2008dec22,0,3191979,print.storyReporting from Tokyo — Japanese exports plunged a record 26.7% in November from a year earlier on falling demand amid a deepening global recession, the finance ministry said today.Japan's trade deficit totaled 223.4 billion yen ($2.5 billion) as exports dropped to 5.3 trillion yen ($60 billion), the ministry said.This was the biggest drop in exports since the current system of statistics took effect in 1980."The plunge in exports in November clearly reflected a severe global downturn. Demand for Japanese goods, especially cars and electronics products, is falling sharply everywhere," ministry official Yu Oki said.Exports to the United States, the world's largest economy, nose-dived a record 33.8% in November, marking the 15th consecutive year-on-year fall.Among U.S.-bound shipments, vehicle exports plummeted 44% in the month, while exports of auto parts fell 40% and those of audio equipment were down 48.2%.Japan's exports to the European Union tumbled 30.8%, with vehicle shipments to the region falling 37.2%, the ministry said.Asia-bound exports fell 26.7% as semiconductor shipments dropped 30.2%. Japan's exports to China alone plunged 24.5%.Hit by weakening global demand and a strong yen, Japan's top exporters such as Toyota Motor Corp. and Sony Corp. have announced job cuts and lower profit projections.San Diego Union-TribuneColorado River may face fight of its life Increased toxins likely as energy companies seek oil, gas, uranium...Abrahm Lustgarten (PROPUBLICA) and David Hasemyer (STAFF WRITER)http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2008/dec/21/1n21colorado211057-colorado-river-may-face-fight-i/?zIndex=25801The Colorado River has endured drought, large-scale climate changes, pollution, ecological damage from dams and battles by seven states to draw more water. Now the life vein of the Southwest faces another threat: Energy companies are sucking up the Colorado's water to support increased development of oil, natural gas and uranium deposits along the river's basin. The mining and drilling will likely send more toxins into the waterway, which provides drinking water for one out of 12 Americans and nourishes 15 percent of the nation's crops along its journey from Wyoming and Colorado to Mexico. Tapping the watershed is enticing because its resources could help reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil. The region could contain more oil than Alaska's National Arctic Wildlife Refuge. It has the richest natural gas fields in the country and plenty of uranium deposits. But scientists and water managers warn that in the rush to develop more domestic energy, the government is failing to understand that the river's economic and ecological value is as vital to U.S. interests as anything extracted around it. The river is so beleaguered by drought and past pollution that one environmental study called it the nation's most endangered waterway. Researchers from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla said the river's reservoirs could dry up in 13 years, depriving regions such as San Diego County of their main source of water. In the eight years President Bush has been in office, the Colorado River watershed has seen more oil and gas drilling than at any time since 1984, when the government began keeping such statistics. Uranium claims have reached a 10-year high. Last week, the administration auctioned off 359,000 acres of federal land for natural gas projects within range of two national parks near Moab, Utah. And a last-minute change in federal rules has paved the way for water-intensive oil shale mining in the watershed. As Bush tries to complete his agenda for development, water managers and politicians focusing on the Colorado River are asking which is more valuable: energy or water? The question will continue to be debated during the presidency of Barack Obama, who has said he will work to balance energy exploration with environmental protection. “The decisions we are making today will be dictating how we will be living the rest of our lives,” said Jim Pokrandt, a spokesman for the Colorado River Conservation District, a state-run policy agency. “We may have reached mutually exclusive demands on our water supply.” Management divide Determining the best uses for the Colorado is complicated because there's no unified management. The Interior Department, which includes the Bureau of Land Management, oversees where the water goes but not what's needed to keep it clean. The Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for maintaining water quality, but it can't control who uses the river and doesn't conduct its own research. EPA officials also delegate much of their authority to the seven states that the river runs through. “I don't know that there is, quite honestly, anyone that looks at an entire overview impact statement of the Colorado River,” said Robert Walsh, a spokesman for the Bureau of Reclamation, which governs the allocation and flow of the southern part of the waterway. Oil and natural-gas drilling in Colorado requires so much water that if its annual demand were satisfied all at once, it would be the equivalent of shutting off most of Southern California's water for five days. Concerns also are being raised about contaminants the energy industry leaves behind. Company representatives say they adhere to environmental laws, but natural gas drilling has caused contamination across the West. Mining has a similar history of pollution. Industry officials and the Bush administration said America's reliance on foreign oil makes using all available energy resources at home a priority. “I believe this country needs to offer domestic resources to be energy-independent,” said Tim Spisak, a senior official who heads the BLM's oil and gas development group. “The way to do that is to responsibly develop public resources on our lands.” The U.S. House and Senate are considering bills that would require better management of the nation's water assets. But some water managers said that's not enough. They want the president to create a national water authority – or a Cabinet-level water czar. “If you are really going to deal with water, the nation needs to deal with it in a far more comprehensive manner,” said Brad Udall, a federal water researcher based at the University of Colorado and son of the late Mo Udall, a congressman from Arizona who championed environmental causes. During Bush's presidency, the Southern Nevada Water Authority, the state of Arizona and the Metropolitan Water District – the wholesale provider for Southern California – have asked the Interior Department to proceed with caution as it approves record numbers of claims and leases for mining and drilling near the river. “We have other sources of (energy),” said Jeffrey Kightlinger, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District. “We don't have other sources of water.” Threat of pollution New uranium-mining claims within five miles of the river have more than tripled – to 1,195 from 395 – in the past six years, according to a review of BLM records by the Environmental Working Group, a national organization that conducts research on a wide variety of health and ecological issues. The region already suffers from a decades-long record of contamination. The Metropolitan Water District points to a 16 million-ton pile of radioactive waste near a mill in Moab as a warning of what can happen when mining isn't carefully controlled. The mill closed in 1984, but the Grand Canyon Trust estimates that 110,000 gallons of radioactive groundwater still seep into the river each day. The first loads of waste aren't scheduled to be hauled off until next year. Industry officials say the Moab case is an outdated blight from the past. “What gets my ire up is when we get compared to stuff that happened in the '60s. There is no argument from us now about being careful – with an eye to preserving the environment,” said Peter Farmer, CEO of Denison Mines, a Canadian company that operates seven U.S. uranium mines and a uranium mill in Blanding, Utah. Denison recently spent more than $5 million to triple-line a waste pit and outfit it with leak-detection sensors. Roger Haskins, a specialist in mining law at the BLM, said landmark environmental regulations in the 1970s prepared the industry for the 21st century. While it's still easy to stake a mining claim, projects now must undergo extensive environmental review before they can operate as mines. “Whatever happens out there is thoroughly manageable in today's regulatory environment,” Haskins said. Scientists say some degree of pollution is inevitable. Drilling for uranium creates pathways where raw, radioactive material can migrate into underground aquifers that drain into the river. Surface water can seep into the drill holes and mine shafts, picking up traces of uranium and then percolating into underground water sources. “There has to be some impact to downstream water,” said David Naftz, a hydrologist at the U.S. Geological Survey in Salt Lake City who studies uranium mining. A recent study found contaminated surface water at 15 of 25 mines that the EPA approved starting in 1969. Those sites used techniques the EPA had said would prevent pollution, according to the Environmental Working Group. Danger from drilling In the past decade, a pattern of contamination also has emerged where natural-gas drilling has intensified. If drilling increases substantially across Colorado, Wyoming and Utah, it could imperil the river. Most wells rely on a process called hydraulic fracturing, which requires as much as 2 million gallons of water plus small amounts of often-toxic chemicals for a single well. In February, a waste pit on a mesa overlooking the town of Parachute, Colo., leaked and allowed about 1.6 million gallons of fluid to soak into the ground. The spill eventually reached the Colorado River. Colorado state records show that of about 1,500 spills in drilling areas since 2003, more than 300 have seeped into water. Doug Hock, a spokesman for Canadian gas company Encana, which drills in Colorado and Wyoming, said the fears of pollution are exaggerated. He said Encana installs steel and concrete casing around its drill pipes, lines its waste pits and increasingly reuses its treated wastewater. “We have put in place safeguards to protect the water,” Hock said. “There is always a balance – this country has a great demand for energy.” Because the energy industry has been exempted from certain environmental rules during the Bush administration, it's difficult to gauge what the industry has done to the river. The mix of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing is now proprietary. Without knowing the ingredients, EPA officials and scientists can't determine which compounds to test for after a spill. A September report from the University of Colorado Denver predicted that in 15 years, Garfield County, a drilling area bisected by the river, will have 23,000 wells, six times what it has now. Getting oil from rock No project poses a greater threat to the Colorado River – or better represents the choice between water and energy – than mining for oil shale. In mid-November, the BLM approved a rule change that paved the way for extracting oil from rock deposits in Colorado and Utah. If the vast deposits are mined to their potential – and it could be a decade before any of the projects move forward – the reserves could help the United States make a significant leap toward energy independence. Getting oil from the shale would be astronomically expensive. It also might require more water than the Colorado River can provide. A recent study for the state of Colorado found that energy projects in the waterway's upper basin would stop the river's flow for nearly six weeks if all the water they required were tapped at the same time. “It just comes down to how needy the nation is for energy,” said Scott Ruppe, general manager of the Uintah Water Conservancy District in northeastern Utah. “If energy is short, then some of the other concerns might get pushed aside.” In a few weeks, it will be up to Obama to set the priorities for managing the Colorado River. He could limit mining claims in ecologically sensitive areas and rigorously enforce existing environmental regulations. Once a lease is signed, though, it's nearly impossible to reverse. Obama also could try to undo some of the Bush administration's rules, but any changes wouldn't take effect for several years. His greatest opportunity to address the conflict between water and energy may lie not in undoing policies from the past, but in looking to the future. “The (new) administration has an opportunity to start thinking about water as a national resource,” said Patricia Mulroy, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority in Las Vegas. “We have no rearview mirrors anymore.” Washington PostTrade Barriers Toughen With Global SlumpDespite Free-Market Pledge, Many Nations Adopt Restrictive Policies...Anthony Faiola and Glenn Kesslerhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/21/AR2008122102171_pf.htmlOnly a few weeks after world leaders vowed at a Washington summit to reject trade protectionism and adhere to free-market principles as they combat the global financial crisis, a host of nations are already breaking that promise.Moving to shield battered domestic manufacturers from foreign imports, Indonesia is slapping restrictions on at least 500 products this month, demanding special licenses and new fees on imports. Russia is hiking tariffs on imported cars, poultry and pork. France is launching a state fund to protect French companies from foreign takeovers. Officials in Argentina and Brazil are seeking to raise tariffs on products from imported wine and textiles to leather goods and peaches, according to the World Trade Organization.The list of countries making access to their markets harder potentially includes the United States, where critics are calling the White House's $17.4 billion bailout of the U.S. auto industry an unfair government subsidy that would put foreign competitors at a disadvantage.Though still relatively narrow in scope, the moves, observers warn, in the coming months may grow into a broader wave of protectionism. That could worsen the global financial crisis by further choking world trade, which is already facing its first decline since 1982 as the world economy sharply slows and demand dries up.In hard times, analysts say, nations are more inclined to take steps that inhibit trade, often with dire consequences. Trade restrictions imposed by countries trying to protect domestic industries in the 1930s, for instance, escalated into a global trade war that deepened and prolonged the Great Depression."Exporting firms tend to be innovative, dynamic and capable of generating good job growth," said Eswar S. Prasad, a professor of trade policy at Cornell University and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "If trade restrictions caused by trade wars shut them down, their suppliers shut down, job losses get worse, and you can quickly have a spiraling downward effect on the entire economy."To be sure, most of the measures taken to date appear to be within the limits of current international trade treaties, which grant countries some room to raise tariffs and contain loopholes that can be exploited to protect domestic industries.But the general trend toward protectionism could undermine what has been the steady march of free trade during the era of globalization, with export-dependent countries such as China standing to lose the most.Seeking to avoid such a reversal, leaders from 20 major and emerging economies gathered in Washington on Nov. 15 for a global economic summit, issuing a pledge to refrain from protectionist measures for at least 12 months. They also vowed to reach a breakthrough this year on a stalled global trade deal that would bring down tariffs on a wide variety of exports, injecting as much as $100 billion into the global economy.But nations have failed to comply with both of those promises, with many not waiting for the ink to dry on the summit agreement before reversing course.For example, on Nov. 18 -- just three days after the summit -- India levied a new 20 percent duty on imports of some soybean oils to protect domestic farmers as international prices have dropped during the global economic slump. Experts in India think the government may soon raise taxes on other types of foreign-made cooking oils.Increasingly, nations are rolling out support for battered domestic industries that critics are decrying as trade-distorting government subsidies. The United States, under fire for bailing out General Motors and Chrysler, on Friday announced that it was taking legal action against China at the WTO for allegedly offering unfair support of its export industry -- including the award of cash grants, rebates and preferential loans to exporters.Russia is the largest car market in Europe, but with the crisis dramatically slowing sales there, Moscow increased taxes on imported foreign cars by as much as 35 percent on Dec. 10. The measure is aimed at protecting the struggling Russian auto industry, including the makers of the boxy Lada. The move provoked protests early last week by 3,000 workers in the Pacific port city of Vladivostok, whose jobs depend on foreign car sales, and on Saturday police broke up another protest and reportedly arrested at least 15 people. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has also proposed a 15 percent duty on agricultural equipment.To protect farmers, the Kremlin on Dec. 11 significantly increased duties on pork and poultry imports in a move likely to reverberate in the United States. Russia is the single largest market for U.S. poultry producers, which this year have exported $740 million worth to Russian shores."This is dangerous for several reasons, not the least because it is a move that could spread to other nations that are under pressure now to keep imports out to help domestic producers," said Franklin J. Vargo, vice president of international economic affairs at the National Association of Manufacturers.Perhaps the biggest blow against trade, however, came this month when Pascal Lamy, director-general of the World Trade Organization in Geneva, conceded that there was not enough consensus among major countries to reach the pledged breakthrough on global trade talks before year's end.The fate of the Doha Round of trade talks -- so named because a group of nations gathered in Qatar's capital, Doha, and agreed to work toward dramatic new cuts in subsidies and trade tariffs -- is now more uncertain than ever. The talks have been stalled since 2001, with analysts seeing support for a global deal waning as countries try to contain job losses at home in 2009.Lamy voiced his concern about creeping protectionism this week, suggesting the WTO begin monitoring and issuing reports on the new anti-trade measures being taken by nations worldwide."The WTO has a particular responsibility to follow up on the trade measures which have been taken in the wake of the financial crisis," Lamy told a commission trade committee in Geneva last week.The march of free trade is also facing a possible course correction from the change in leadership in the United States. President-elect Barack Obama has signaled a much more skeptical attitude toward unfettered free-trade deals than President Bush or even former President Bill Clinton.Obama on Friday named former Dallas mayor Ron Kirk as U.S. trade representative. The city's first black mayor, Kirk, 54, is viewed as generally pro-trade, having voiced support for the North American Free Trade Agreement and touted its benefits during and after his time in office from 1995 to 2001. But in accepting the post, Kirk suggested he would champion Obama's vision on trade.During the campaign, Obama said he generally supports free-trade policies, but also said he would seek more-enforceable labor and environmental standards. Obama has said he would "amend" NAFTA, approved in 1993 under Clinton, to reflect those concerns."Trade can help us create jobs at home and encourage development abroad," Kirk said, adding that he believes "a values-driven agenda that stays true to our commitment to America's workers and environmental sustainability is not only consistent with a pro-trade agenda, but it's also necessary for its success."As a senator, Obama voted for a free-trade agreement with Oman but opposed a deal with Central American and Caribbean countries because he said it had weak labor and environmental provisions. He also has been critical of free-trade agreements the Bush administration reached with South Korea and Colombia, which have stalled in Congress.There are reasons to believe trade will not be high on Obama's agenda. Rep. Xavier Becerra, (D-Calif.), an early favorite to be picked by Obama for the top trade job, signaled as much in a recent interview."My concern is how much weight this position would have had, and I reached the conclusion that it would not be a top priority, or even second or third priority," Becerra told the editorial board of La Opinion, a Spanish-language newspaper in his home town of Los Angeles.CNN Money10 worst real-estate markets for 2009The housing market hasn't bottomed out yet. For the third quarter, the closely-watched S&P Case-Shiller national home-price index fell 16.6%, and experts are predicting further declines. Of the top 100 markets, here are 10 with the worst forecasts.http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fortune/0812/gallery.worst_markets.fortune/index.html1.       Los AngelesThe median home price in the L.A.-Long Beach-Glendale  metro area is projected to fall nearly 25% in 2009 - the  biggest drop in the country. 2.  Stockton, Calif. 3.  Riverside, Calif. 4.  Miami-Miami Beach      Miami will be nursing the hangover from its epic building      boom for years to come. After falling 22% in 2008, prices      are predicted to plunge another 23% next year. 5.  Sacramento 6.  Santa Ana-Anaheim 7.  Fresno 8.  San Diego 9.  Bakersfield, Calif.10. Washington, D.C.Banking on another bad year in '09Rising loan losses, the threat of more regulation and tougher competition adds up to another year of poor profits for banks...David Ellishttp://money.cnn.com/2008/12/22/news/companies/banks_2009/index.htm?postversion=2008122210NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Bankers are counting down the days until they officially close the book on a terrible 2008. Too bad the outlook for 2009 is just as dismal.It may seem hard to imagine how 2009 can be worse than this year for the industry. Governments around the globe were forced to institute massive bailout programs. Citigroup (C, Fortune 500) lost more and more money as the credit crisis gained momentum and needed a more than $300 billion backstop from the government to keep it afloat. IndyMac and Washington Mutual both failed. Investment bank Lehman Brothers went bankrupt.And investors lost tons of money in bank stocks. Through late December, the Standard & Poor's banking index and the regional bank-focused KBW Bank Index had both lost more than half their value in 2008.Credit remains the big storyBanks this year suffered largely due to troubles with mortgages. With few signs of an imminent turnaround in housing, bad home loans are likely to remain front and center for the industry in 2009. But they're likely to face more problems with other types of loans as well.Many banks have already experienced a significant deterioration in the health of their credit cards and home equity loan portfolios, and are bracing for those troubles to become even worse. In addition, problems in commercial real estate and business loans are starting to surface as well."There is loan quality deterioration across a number of sectors," said Tanya Azarchs, veteran industry analyst and managing director for Standard & Poor's. "It is not just the consumer anymore."Barclays Capital analyst Jason Goldberg warned clients in a research note earlier this month that he expected large-cap banks to record close to $130 billion in net charge offs, or uncollectible loan losses, in 2009 - almost twice what the group is expected to experience in 2008.Banks have tried to prepare for such a scenario by setting aside cash in recent quarters. Capital injections from the Treasury Department as part of the bank bailout program are also expected to help to cushion the blow..To date, Treasury has either invested, or pledged more than $207 billion to over 200 banks across the country, according to analysts at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods.Analysts are expecting an increase in earnings next year, but much of that is due to the fact that 2008 was so bad. Few are expecting the industry's profits in 2009 to return to the level prior to the crisis.Earnings per share for all financial services firms in the S&P 500 are expected to be a third lower than 2007 levels, according to Thomson Baseline. For regional banks, profits are expected to be down nearly two-thirds from where they were in 2007.The regulatory threatBut bankers' problems don't end with weak earnings outlooks.Lawmakers will probably be looking for ways to extract the proverbial pound of flesh from banks now that they've extended $700 billion to them, said Seamus McMahon, vice president in the financial services group at consulting firm Booz & Company.Members of Congress could push banks to restructure mortgages or limit foreclosures and push banks harder on making loans to small businesses, much in the same way that Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) was pressured to extend credit to a Chicago window and door maker earlier this month."You are not going to have a Congress that is even remotely sympathetic to big banks," McMahon said.Some veteran bankers worry that the industry could revert to the highly regulated era of the 1980s, where banks were required to impose rate caps on interest-bearing savings accounts, for example. No such regulatory threat has emerged yet. And according to McMahon, it could be at least several more months before one does. But the industry is bracing for stricter rules."A lot of bankers are saying, 'We are living in a new world - we better come to grips with it,' " he said.Winners in '09?Another challenge looming in the year ahead is good old-fashioned competition, especially for deposits. Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) and Morgan Stanley (MS, Fortune 500), for example, are now classified as bank holding companies, which will allow them to compete more directly with the likes of Citigroup, Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) for traditional banking customers.At the same time, plenty of banks still face issues related to liquidity, including being able to meet the needs of customers wanting to withdraw funds and borrowers who need credit.But from among this troubled group, analysts think some winners will emerge in 2009.One favorite is US Bancorp (USB, Fortune 500), which has won praise for showing restraint in the years leading up to the crisis while its peers doubled down on the U.S. housing market. There has been plenty of speculation that the Minneapolis-based bank could soon try and expand its footprint, possibly by acquiring some of its harder-hit Midwestern peers such as KeyCorp (KEY, Fortune 500) or Fifth Third (FITB, Fortune 500).Analysts also cite PNC (PNC, Fortune 500) as one bank that should emerge from 2009 in relatively good health. Fresh off its acquisition of National City in late October, the Pittsburgh-based bank didn't overextend itself in the housing market, notes Jennifer Thompson, regional banking analyst at the New York-based financial services research firm Portales Partners."They are facing the same issue every other bank is, but they have a cleaner balance sheet and are good operators," said Thompson.Further consolidation among banks does seem inevitable in 2009 given how drastically valuations have fallen across the sector over the past year. But analysts are doubtful that the industry will experience the same high-profile mergers that defined 2008, such as Bank of America's acquisition of Merrill Lynch, Wells Fargo's (WFC, Fortune 500) move to purchase Wachovia and JPMorgan Chase's deals for investment bank Bear Stearns and failed savings and loan WaMu.Financial Times (UK)Promise of Opec cuts fails to stop oil price slide...Chris Flood in London...12-21-08http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1330fbcc-cf95-11dd-abf9-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1Investors delivered a vote of no confidence in Opec last week when oil prices fell by their most in almost two decades even though the cartel decided to curb production.Oil prices fell 26.8 per cent last week to $33.87 a barrel, down 77 per cent from the record peak in July, the steepest decline in history. Since the $100-a-barrel level was reached for the first time on January 2, crude has dropped 65 per cent, on track for a record annual decline.Warning on price volatility of oil - Dec-19Opec chief blames PM for fuel price - Dec-19Opec hopes that the supply cuts agreed last week will stabilise the oil market, but has already said more reductions could be considered.Speaking at a meeting of oil consumers and producers held in London on Friday, Chakib Khelil, Opec president and Algeria’s oil minister, said he did not expect oil prices to fall further. “I don’t believe there is any reason for it to fall any further, I don’t see it going lower,” Mr Khelil said.Last week’s price fall was exacerbated by the expiry on Friday of the January US futures contract, but oil for delivery in February still fell 13.8 per cent over the week.The continuing decline in crude prices following Opec’s announcement on Wednesday of the largest single production cut in the cartel’s history has already led to pressure for more action from the oil producer’s group.Abdalla El-Badri, Opec secretary general, said additional supply cuts would be considered early next year. He said: “If we have to cut in March, we will cut”.However, the challenges Opec faces in enforcing its members’ commitment to big production cuts were becoming increasingly evident last week.Mr El-Badri said: “Everybody will comply”. He said compliance with the 1.5m barrels a day cut agreed in November was about 60 per cent. He added that “100 per cent implementation [of the agreed cuts] is technically not possible, but 85-95 per cent is a good percentage”.Lawrence Eagles, head of commodities research at JPMorgan, said the onus was firmly on Opec. “If it does not manage to get output down to at least 30m b/d in January, the dire downside predictions [of oil falling to $25 a barrel] could be realised.”Opec plans to publish details of how the burden of cutting production, announced as a 4.2m b/d cut from September’s output levels, will be shared among its members.Saudi Arabia has said it had implemented its share of Opec’s 4.2m b/d cut from September’s output levels, requiring rigorous compliance by other members to bring the market into balance.Mr Eagles said: “Quite frankly, that is a tough ask”.He estimates that to ensure full compliance with the new quotas, Iran would have cut production by 464,000 b/d while Venezuela and Kuwait need reductions of about 330,000 b/d.Output cuts will put a strain on the public finances of Opec’s members, many of which require oil prices well above current levels to balance their budgets.Analysts expect a fall in global oil demand in 2008, the first annual contraction for 25 years, but the outlook for consumption next year remains dependent on the global economy’s recovery from recession and the credit crunch.Deutsche Bank, which is forecasting a fall of 1m b/d in oil demand next year, warns “additional supply cuts will be required throughout next year”and says oil prices might not recover until the first quarter of 2010.The extreme weakness in the short-term prospects for demand is also reflected in the steepness of the futures curve with oil companies able to earn a gross profit of $12.80 a barrel (excluding storage costs) simply by being prepared to put crude into storage until the end of the year.Christmas shut-down in Silicon Valley...Richard Waters and Chris Nuttall in San Francisco...12-21-08http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4b8139ba-cf8b-11dd-abf9-000077b07658.htmlWorkers at some of Silicon Valley’s biggest companies will find themselves spending an uncommonly long time with their families this Christmas as the technology industry responds to the downturn with office and factory closures and enforced holidays.Usually limited to traditional manufacturing industries such as the ailing carmakers, the year-end shut-down is this year sweeping through the office suites and research and development labs of information-age companies.1Hewlett-Packard, Cisco Systems, Advanced Micro Devices, Texas Instruments, Dell, Adobe and CSC are among the tech industry heavyweights to be taking a break, with some closed from December 22 until January 5.HP said: “The only workers left to keep the lights on will be those involved in “critical customer support”.The shut-down has been forced by belt-tightening across the sector as corporate and individual customers cut back on spending.The wider cost-cutting has hit even Google, the latest emblem of Silicon Valley prosperity. The internet seach engine has trimmed spending on its famed perks with steps such as cutting the number of restaurants on its campus open in the evening.In spite of the enforced leisure, workers will be hit directly by the closures, with most required to use up part of their holiday entitlement or, if they do not have the days to spare, take unpaid leave.Given that many US workers receive only 10 days of vacation a year, the effect will be biggest there, although most of the companies to close say they will be halting operations worldwide.HP said six days of its two-week shutdown would count against workers’ annual vacation entitlement, while technology services company CSC said employees would be docked seven days’ holiday. One Valley executive said: “Man, is it ugly out there”.He said the pain had spread from the wider economy in recent weeks. “It was nice to see record earnings for high-tech companies in the first three quarters during a so-called recession, and then the wheels fell off in October.”Chip companies and other component makers have taken the brunt of the initial downturn in tech demand, as makers of hardware such as computers and routers have reduced orders in anticipation of deeper problems next year.The iSuppli research company warned last week that excess semiconductor stockpiles in the global electronics supply chain were likely to nearly triple in the fourth quarter.Advanced Micro Devices, the microprocessor maker based in Silicon Valley, said its workforce had been told to take five days’ mandatory vacation in the fourth quarter.Elsewhere, Texas Instruments is temporarily closing many of its factories to run down its inventories. With its manufacturing operation running at only about 45 per cent of capacity, the Dallas-based company says such levels had not been seen since the second half of 2001.Obama expands goals of stimulus...Andrew Ward in Washington...12-21-08http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1c09f080-cfa1-11dd-abf9-000077b07658.htmlBarack Obama has expanded the goals of his proposed economic stimulus, with a plan to create or save an additional 500,000 jobs. The president-elect raised his jobs target over the next two years to 3m – up from the 2.5m goal set last month – after US unemployment hit its highest level for 15 years in November. Transition officials said Mr Obama had agreed the outlines of a $675bn-$775bn two-year recovery plan last week. But the price tag is likely to rise above $800bn (€575bn, £535bn) as Congress makes its own demands during the legislative process.The moves come amid a warning on Sunday, from the International Monetary Fund, that governments must act more aggressively to prevent a deeper slump.Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF managing director, told BBC radio that inadequate stimulus measures risked making the slowdown worse than expected next year. “I’m specially concerned by the fact that our forecast, already very dark . . . will be even darker if not enough fiscal stimulus is implemented,” he said.The IMF has called for combined stimulus measures in 2009 of $1,200bn – or 2 per cent of global annual economic output – amid fears of the deepest slump since the Great Depression. Mr Strauss-Kahn’s remarks echoed Joe Biden, US vice-president-elect, who told ABC’s This Week on Sunday that the American economy was in danger of “absolutely tanking” without “bold” action.“The economy is in much worse shape than we thought it was in,” he said. “There is going to be real significant investment, whether it’s $600bn or more, or $700bn, the clear notion is, it’s a number no one would have thought about a year ago.” Under Mr Obama’s proposals, most of the cash would be spent on tax cuts for the middle class, aid to cash-strapped state governments and investments in infrastructure, “green” energy and other policy priorities.=Detailed talks have been under way with congressional leaders for the past few days, with a view to legislation being ready for Mr Obama to sign soon after taking office on January 20. Mr Obama’s stimulus package represents a sharp increase from the $175bn stimulus plan he proposed during the election campaign. It would be by far the biggest intervention of its kind in the US economy for decades, on top of the $700bn bail-out already committed to the financial and automotive industries.Many of the 3m jobs that Mr Obama aims to save or create will come in the construction industry as his administration pours billions of dollars into infrastructure projects, including road and bridge building, mass transit systems and modernisation of schools and other government buildings.