A VOTE FOR RIVERS

My favourite places on earth are the wild waterways where the forest opens its arms and a silver curve of river folds the traveller into its embrace. --- Rory MacLean

Election 2020

 "Elections are like rivers, framed by what has happened in the past and full of possibility for the future. This year’s election is no exception," wrote American Rivers' President Bob Irvin on the nonprofit organization's website this week. He was being hopeful for the country and its rivers that he pledged to protect.
We certainly see his point in comparing the 2020 election to a river. A wild river at that, fill with its share waterfalls, rapids, whirlpools, and rocks. And even now that it appears that Joe Biden is our president-elect it is still not a smooth ride. President Donald Trump is doing everything he can to obstruct and delay the transition of power. However, the voters have spoken, and their message was clear. The Trump presidency will end on Jan. 20, 2021.

Expect the Biden administration to restore scientific integrity and take action on climate change, environmental justice, biodiversity, and other pressing concerns. That's goods news, advocates say for our rivers and waterways after four years of substantial damage to rivers and clean water done by the Trump administration and their policies.
Irvin says that the election of Joe Biden presents a historic opportunity to protect and restore the nation’s rivers and ensure clean water for all.
"By uniting around healthy rivers, we can improve public health and safety, create jobs, and improve lives in communities nationwide,” wrote Irvin.

Rivers Win!

The presidential election grabbed all the headlines, however a few waterways came away as winners during this election as voters in Florida, Colorado, and California endorsed new protections for waterways or property taxes that will fund water projects.
Residents of Orange County, Florida, voted overwhelmingly in favor of changing the county charter to give legal protection to rivers. Passed with 89 percent of the vote, the amendment applies to the Wekiva and Econlockhatchee Rivers and other county waterways. It grants the waterways the right to be free from pollution and the right to exist. It allows citizens to file lawsuits on behalf of the waterways to enforce those rights.
Similar to the Lake Erie bill of rights that Toledo, Ohio, that voters approved in 2019 and a federal judge threw out for being “unconstitutionally vague.” The Orange County amendment will also face challenges after Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill in July that prohibits local governments from recognizing the legal rights of the environment. 

In Colorado, residents of the state's 15-county Western Slope region approved a property tax increase proposed by the Colorado River District by nearly 73 percent of the vote. The property tax increase will provide nearly $5 million annually for protecting water supplies for farmers and ranchers, drinking water for Western Slope communities, and rivers for fish, wildlife, and recreation.
“This is a big win for the Colorado River, the two River Districts, and the future of Colorado’s water supplies," Matt Rice, American Rivers Colorado Basin Director, told American Rivers, "The overwhelming support for these measures shows that Coloradans value healthy rivers for our environment, economy, and our future. In a polarized election season, we proved that water, and rivers, connect us.”
According to American Rivers, the Colorado River drives a 3.8 billion dollar recreation economy, generates over 26,000 recreation-related jobs, and irrigates thousands of acres of farmland.
While in Santa Clara County, California, preliminary results show that voters have renewed a property tax that funds watershed projects. Measure S had 75 percent support as of Wednesday morning, needing a two-thirds majority to pass. The tax, which does not have an expiration date, provides about $45.5 million annually for Santa Clara Valley Water District’s flood protection, wildlife habitat restoration, and pollution prevention. It will also assist with repairs to Anderson Dam, which is at risk of failure in an earthquake.

Let's Howl

Along with those victories came one for wolves, too. Colorado voters narrowly approved a ballot initiative, Proposition 114, which will require the state's parks and wildlife department to develop a restoration and management plan for the reintroduction of gray wolves that were hunted to extinction by the1940s.

“Reintroducing wolves will restore Colorado's natural balance,” Jonathan Proctor, a conservationist with the group Defenders of Wildlife, which assisted the Rocky Mountain Wolf Action Fund in passing the measure, told  National Geographic.
The Colorado Parks and Wildlife Department will lead the effort to establish a sustainable population of the animals in the western part of the state beginning in 2022 or 2023. It is the first time a state has voted to reintroduce an animal to the ecosystem. It comes less than a week after the Trump administration removed federal protections from gray wolves across the country.

Do You Have The Correct Time?

California voters determined to participate in our democracy and make their voices heard showed up at the polls this year in record numbers. But as the old saying goes, the wheels of government turn slowly but grind exceedingly fine. Case in point, California voters did pass Proposition 7 in 2018 by 62% to change daylight saving time. We'd stay on the spring-forward schedule year-round and paddle later in the light of day.

But keep your headlamp handy, because even though Californians did vote to end the clock switching, the California State Senate needs to pass this by a two-thirds vote and they haven't yet. And even if it did get passed in California, the federal government then needs to approve it. This year, we switched back to standard on Nov. 1  and will once again spring forward on March 14, 2021.

Keep up with Outside Adventure to the Max, on our Facebook page and Instagram and now on Youtube.

WATER FIGHT: Last Week's Highs and Lows of the Clean Water Act

The wars of the twenty-first century will be fought over water. ---- Ismail Serageldin

It was famed humorist Mark Twain who was given the credit for the incisively well-known phrase that "Whiskey is for drinking; water is for fighting."
For environmentalists concerned about protecting water, last week's 50th anniversary of Earth Day celebration offered a wild waterpark ride of slips and slides in interpreting the 1970's Clean Water Act.

The week began with water advocates crying foul has the Environmental Protection Agency under the guidance of the Trump Administration issued rulings that strip Clean Water Act protections for more than half of the nation’s wetlands and millions of miles of streams. The new Navigable Waters Protection Rule, “waters of the U.S.” (WOTUS), dramatically narrows the definition of what waters are and the scope of which they are subject to federal regulations under the Clean Water Act. The rule would effectively roll back Obama-era regulations and re-define navigable waterways, potentially threatening ecosystems and drinking water supplies.

American Rivers President Bob Irvin says that the new rule is a matter of law and not science stating that ephemeral streams (one in five streams nationally) and isolated wetlands (51 percent of all wetlands) do not qualify as waters under WOTUS.
"We believe that science is the best guide to protecting our rivers and streams," wrote on the American River webpage, "Now, the Trump administration is dismantling clean water protections that are essential to public health and safety."

The EPA said the changes are the results of two executive orders Trump signed last year aimed at preventing delays of federal projects such as pipelines, dams, and mines that have been limited by states and tribes' abilities to study the project's effect on water quality.
“The EPA’s existing certification rules have not been updated in nearly 50 years and are inconsistent...." the agency said in a statement to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, "Leading to confusion and unnecessary delays for federally licensed or permitted projects."
The proposed changes would set a one-year time limit for local reviews while allowing federal agencies to demand a quick turnaround. They would also allow federal agencies to veto what states or local entities decide, raising concerns with environmentalists.
"In the midst of this pandemic," Sierra Club Deputy Legislative DirectorDalal Aboulhosn, issued this statement. "The Trump administration has just given polluters another free pass-- this time to contaminate groundwater, destroy streams and wetlands and put our water at risk. The need for clean water cannot be ignored, nor can the consequences of doing so."

The (WOTUS) rule could take effect later this summer, but will surely face potential legal challenges that might delay it. The Trump administration has hopes that a case challenging the rule will end up before the Supreme Court and, with the current conservative majority, it will be upheld by the majority.

However, in the same week, the U.S. Supreme Court sent a loud and clear message to the Trump administration and the EPA, stating: Don’t go too far in cutting clean water protections.
In a 6-3 ruling, the court said that the landmark Clean Water Act forbids polluters from spewing waste into navigable waters like oceans and streams without a permit even if the pollution travels indirectly through groundwater.
“This is unquestionably a win for people who are concerned about protecting clean water in the United States,” said David Henkin, a lawyer for the environmental group Earthjustice who argued the case in the high court told the Associated Press.

In the most high-profile environmental dispute of the Supreme Court’s term, the decision could certainly weaken the defense to the Trump administration’s future (WOTUS) court challenges. Environmentalists will now argue “If groundwater can be the connection to permitting in Maui, then why can’t groundwater be the connection for extending jurisdiction over isolated wetlands and seasonal waters?"
"The administration may be less sure of its strategy now," wrote American River's Ivrin in an email, "After the Supreme Court’s recent 6-3 decision in the Maui case. In rejecting the administration’s argument that only a direct discharge could be a violation, the majority recognized a broader scope of waters of the U.S."

Much more litigation is sure to follow as environmental groups continue their pledge to block the administration’s moves to undermine the protection of rivers and wetlands while industry and agriculture will be lobbying the EPA and Congress to simplified standards and to loosen what they say is government overreach brought by the Obama administration.

"Ultimately, the scope of waters of the U.S. will likely be decided politically," wrote Irvin in an email, "If the Trump administration is limited to one term, a Biden administration would likely revoke the dirty water rule and restore the Obama-Biden administration’s Clean Water Rule. A Democratic-controlled Congress could clarify the broad scope of waters of the U.S. Or a future Supreme Court case could resolve the issue."

Want to see more about Outside Adventure to the Max. Follow us on Facebook and Instagram