6-10-09

 
6-10-09
Modesto Bee
Government needs to put our farmers ahead of the fish...Editorial
http://www.modbee.com/opinion/v-print/story/736322.html
The biological opinion issued last week by the National Marine Fisheries Service is troubling for the many things that it does not say.
The rushed opinion will have a huge impact on San Joaquin Valley agriculture, yet the Fisheries Service did not take the time to consider all the factors that are jeopardizing fish populations. That's shoddy work.
This decision plays into the arguments of those who claim the federal government would rather protect fish than humans. We believe endangered species must be protected, but we also think there should be a balance struck when issuing opinions that will cause economic turmoil.
The federal opinion says salmon, sturgeon, killer whale and steelhead are jeopardized by the federal and state water projects. The practical effect of that conclusion would limit water pumped to valley farmers and Southern California residents. Farmers on the west side already are enduring significantly decreased water deliveries because of previous rulings. Some fields are not being farmed at all; some orchards will barely get enough water to keep the trees alive, but not enough to produce this year.
Both Democratic and Republicans members of the valley congressional delegation have condemned the latest opinion -- for good reason.
While the Fisheries Service is blaming the federal and state water pumping for the decline in the fish populations, the agency does not take into account documented factors such as sewage dumping from Sacramento and Stockton, the private pumps that divert water without screens, other pollution from nearby urban areas and the impact of striped bass and other invasive species on the protected species.
It appears this opinion was targeted at agricultural uses only, and that is wrong.
The Obama administration must reconsider this ill-conceived action. One way is to convene the so-called "God Squad."
The Endangered Species Act has a provision that would allow a panel of seven Cabinet officials to intervene. They could rule that the economic hardship from reduced water flows overrides protecting the threatened species.
The panel, which is informally called the "God Squad," was added to the ESA in 1978. It has only been used sparingly, but we believe this is exactly the occasion that the provision was intended for.
In late May, U.S. District Court Judge Oliver W. Wanger issued a ruling saying officials must focus not just on protecting the endangered delta smelt when discussing the water pumping, but also must take into account "the harm being visited upon humans, the community and the environment." Wanger is exactly right.
The opinion issued last week by the fisheries service is narrowly drawn to focus on fish, not farmers. We hope the Obama administration realizes how devastating it will be to the individuals and to the communities that rely on farm water to survive. The president should not ignore the impact that his administration is having on some of the nation's poorest people.
Sacramento Bee
Army Corps orders thousands of trees chopped down...CAIN BURDEAU, Associated Press Writer
http://www.sacbee.com/827/v-print/story/1932529.html
COLUMBIA, La. -- The Army Corps of Engineers is on a mission to chop down every tree in the country that grows within 15 feet of a levee - including oaks and sycamores in Louisiana, willows in Oklahoma and cottonwoods in California.
The corps is concerned that the trees' roots could undermine barriers meant to protect low-lying communities from catastrophic floods like the ones caused by Hurricane Katrina.
An Associated Press survey of levee projects nationwide shows that the agency wants to eliminate all trees along more than 100,000 miles of levees. But environmentalists and some civil engineers insist the trees pose little or no risk and actually help stabilize levee soil.
Thousands of trees have been felled already, though corps officials did not have a precise number of how many will be cut.
The corps has "this body of decades of experience that says you shouldn't have trees on your levees," said Eric Halpin, the agency's special assistant for dam and levee safety.
The saws are buzzing despite the outcry from people who say the trees are an essential part of fragile river and wetland ecosystems.
"The literature on the presence of vegetation indicates that it may actually strengthen a levee," said Andrew Levesque, senior engineer for King County, Wash., where the corps wants trees removed on the six rivers considered vital to salmon populations.
The anti-tree policy arose from criticism directed at the corps after Katrina breached levees in New Orleans in 2005. The agency promised to get tough on levee managers and improve flood protection.
In 2006, the corps began sending hundreds of letters to levee districts across the nation, ordering them to cut down "unwanted woody vegetation," a prospect that could cost many of the districts millions of dollars each in timber-clearing expenses.
Inspectors began an inventory of the levee system and told districts to fill in animal burrows, repair culverts and patch up erosion.
If they fail to comply, the agencies risk higher flood insurance premiums and a loss of federal funding.
"The corps' new edict was regarded as a major change in policy," said Ronald Stork, senior policy expert with California Friends of the River in Sacramento. "Something that is cheap and inexpensive is a chain saw. It was something to do that didn't cost a lot of money that made you feel better."
Last summer, the cutting crews came to Columbia, La., on the wooded Ouachita River levee at Breston Plantation, an 18th-century French colonial estate.
The plantation is surrounded by sycamores, live oaks, elms, pines, cedars, magnolias and crepe myrtles. Hundreds of trees grow within 15 feet of the levee. In theory, they would all have to go.
But after months of negotiations with landowners and the Tensas Basin Levee District, the corps agreed to let the district chop down only a few dozen trees on the levee.
"We don't know how long the trees have been here, but they've never caused any problem up until now," said Hugh Youngblood, 61, whose ancestors came to Breston in the 1800s.
On a recent afternoon, his son, who is also named Breston, was upset as he walked the levee, pointing to a heap of limbs.
"They didn't even find a buyer for the wood or the pulp," the son said.
In 2007, the corps sought to clear oaks, cottonwoods, willows and other vegetation from 1,600 miles of levees in California's Central Valley. But state wildlife officials complained that the policy would destroy habitat, and residents in Sacramento and elsewhere objected that it would have turned rivers into little more than barren culverts.
The corps eventually dropped the idea.
In a neighborhood north of Sacramento, the corps plans to rebuild the levees surrounding a basin that is home to 70,000 people and has determined that 900 trees, mostly native valley oaks, must be cut down.
Experts outside the corps say a tree has never caused a U.S. levee failure.
"If trees are a problem, why aren't we having problems with them?" said George Sills, who formerly worked for the corps' Engineer Research and Development Center in Vicksburg, Miss. "There's never been a documented problem with a tree."
In a March 2008 e-mail, Sills told the corps to remove his name from an updated vegetation policy paper he worked on for the corps. He said he ran analyses for the corps "that looked at the possibility that the trees caused any of the (levee) failures in New Orleans" and "it was determined that trees did not lead to any of these failures."
Corps officials see it differently.
Halpin, the corps' dam and levee expert, said the agency does not know whether a tree has ever directly caused a levee failure. But he noted that dam failures have been linked to trees, including a 1970s collapse in Georgia that claimed 39 lives.
The corps also wants to get rid of trees for safety reasons. A treeless levee is easier to inspect and repair during a flood.
But none of that washes with local authorities whose levees are being targeted by the corps.
"This is something they've dreamed up. It's like they're hell-bent to write up some negative reports," said Frank Keith, levee commissioner of the Tulsa County Drainage District in Oklahoma, where levees contain the Arkansas River.
Some 230 miles of levees in Keith's district got an "unacceptable rating" in December 2007, and the district faced losing its federal accreditation in part because of tree growth. The district is working with landowners to cut trees and fix other problems the corps found with its levees.
The carping frustrates Larry Larson, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers, a group based in Madison, Wis., that represents interests such as insurers and engineers.
"If you're going to have a levee, you have to be able to maintain a levee and make it safe," Larson said.
Others are skeptical.
In Portland, Ore., residents of the Bridgeton neighborhood on the Columbia River lost a legal fight in 2007 to retain cottonwoods and poplars. About 90 trees were cut down at a cost of $268,000, though the corps planted 255 others nearby.
"They don't care if that's good science," resident Walter Valenta said. "It is their policy."
San Francisco Chronicle
Pollution experts: Save fish from drugs in water...JEFF DONN, AP National Writer
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/06/09/national/a103939D40.DTL&type=printable
Pollution experts on Tuesday pressed a congressional panel for stronger action to keep pharmaceuticals and other contaminants out of the water, saying they are hurting fish and may threaten human health.
Thomas P. Fote, a New Jersey conservationist who sits on the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, said the pollutants are damaging commercial fisheries. He told congressmen not to "study a problem to death and never do anything."
Fote appeared in a lineup of witnesses Tuesday before the subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife of the House Natural Resources Committee. The witnesses pointed to research showing damage to fish and other aquatic species from pharmaceuticals, pesticides and other industrial chemicals, especially those that alter growth-regulating endocrine systems. Some scientists worry about the potential of similar harm to humans.
"Hundreds of peer-reviewed publications ... demonstrate that numerous ubiquitous chemicals in the environment can interfere with development via the endocrine system, but there appears to be no will or authority to remove those chemicals from the supply chain," said zoologist Theo Colborn, a professor emeritus at the University of Florida, who founded the nonprofit Endocrine Disruption Exchange.
The witnesses appealed for Congress to promote consumer take-back programs for unused drugs, to encourage industry financing of disposal, and to do more to keep discards from waterways and landfills.
The hearing comes on the heels of an Associated Press investigation that reported pharmaceutical traces in drinking water supplies of at least 51 million Americans and in many waterways. The drugs range from antibiotics to psychiatric drugs to endocrine-disrupting sex hormones.
One witness, pharmacist Fred Massoomi from Nebraska Methodist Hospital in Omaha, broke his collarbone in a recent fall and sat stiffly during his testimony. Asked by a panel member if he was in pain, he said, "Not right now." Then he lifted a plastic bottle and smiled. "If I need any pain medication, I'll just drink some water," he said.
Most cities and water providers don't test for pharmaceutical contaminants. The biggest source is considered to be human excretion, but manufacturers and health care facilities also send millions of tons of unused drugs into rivers and streams every year.
Utilities say their drinking water is safe, and no human risks are confirmed from pharmaceutical pollution. However, research shows that the pharmaceuticals sometimes harm fish, frogs and other aquatic species. Also, researchers report that human cells fail to grow normally in the laboratory when exposed to trace concentrations of certain drugs.
The House has already passed legislation to study the problem and find solutions, and the Senate is considering such a bill. Delegate Madeleine Z. Bordallo, D-Guam, who chaired the hearing, said she has talked to colleagues about the need for more legislation.
The AP National Investigative Team can be reached at investigate(at)ap.org
CNN Money
Mortgage applications at lowest since November
Demand for refinancing sends applications down 7.2%, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/10/real_estate/loan_applications.
reut/index.htm?postversion=2009061007
NEW YORK (Reuters) -- A spike in U.S. mortgage rates drove down total home loan applications last week as demand for refinancing shriveled to the lowest level since November, the Mortgage Bankers Association said on Wednesday.
Borrowing costs have soared as bond yields have risen, even as the Federal Reserve has sopped up hundreds of billions of dollars in bonds to keep rates low and stimulate the housing market.
The average 30-year fixed mortgage rate jumped 0.32 percentage point in the June 5 week to 5.57%. That was nearly a full point above the record low rate of 4.61% in March, the trade group said.
The vast majority of mortgage activity this year has been from homeowners cutting costs with new loans at rock-bottom rates.
The Mortgage Bankers Association's seasonally adjusted index of total applications dropped 7.2% to a four-month low of 611.0 in the latest week.
The refinancing index slumped 11.8% to a nearly seven-month low of 2,605.7 last week, and refinancing accounted for about 59% of all applications, the lowest share since November. As recently as April, refinancings accounted for almost 80% of all home loan applications.
Purchasers have been slower to act in the current housing market, with some waiting in hopes that prices will fall further and others paralyzed by unemployment or wage cuts.
Demand for loans to buy homes was little changed last week, rising 1.1% to 270.7, having basically been stuck in neutral throughout the important spring sales season.
"I'm not optimistic for 2009 or 2010," Mark Goldman, real estate lecturer at San Diego State University and mortgage broker, said on Tuesday.
The swift percentage point rise in mortgage rates cuts the purchasing power of a borrower by about 10%, he estimated.
"Employment is still bad, wages are still low, interest rates are up. That's going to hurt the housing market," said Goldman.
The number of U.S. jobs cut in May was the lowest level since September, but the unemployment rate rose to 9.4%, the highest since July 1983.
First-time buyers taking advantage of new tax credits and investors snapping up foreclosed properties at distressed levels have in recent months buttressed the hardest-hit housing market since the Great Depression.
But borrowers will foreclose in record numbers at least for another year, several industry sources, including the Mortgage Bankers Association, predict. Those homes will add to the already large supply of unsold properties and will keep pressuring prices.
Home prices on a national level have tumbled more than 32% from the peak three years ago, according to Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller indexes.
"Prices continue to erode on a national level, and with the rest of the economy not doing well either and the jobless rate constantly increasing, we don't see a recovery in housing on a national level coming soon," Kevin Marshall, president of Clear Capital, based in Truckee, Calif., said this week.
"That doesn't mean there aren't values to be had out there," he added.