In a 3-2 vote Tuesday, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors adopted regulations aimed at reducing light pollution.The rules limit lighting that can be used outdoors in the unincorporated county in an attempt to halt light from beaming into neighboring homes and polluting the night sky.During a presentation, county planner Reanne Meighan said the ordinance is not attempting to prohibit outdoor lighting — rather, it aims to minimize unnecessary lighting and reduce light pollution, which inhibits the observation of stars and harms the circadian rhythm of humans and creatures alike.To do so, the regulations require outdoor lighting to be directed downward. Fixtures must be fully shielded, though there’s an exception if they contain a warmer lightbulb.The maximum lumens for outdoor bulbs are 1,100 for residential and 3,200 for commercial/industrial property, a slight tweak from an early draft.A central piece of the ordinance is adding a way to address light pollution from neighbors. It adds to the code a method to prevent light trespass, and requires lights to only be illuminated when they’re actively being used or for safety purposes. The ordinance has a number of exemptions for certain lights.Dark sky enjoyers spoke in support.Mark Wilson, vice president of the Astronomers of Humboldt, said, “It’s going to put Humboldt County in the forefront protecting the night skies, not only in the state, but nationally and internationally,” and called for the county to adopt a plan to gradually transform the government’s own bulbs to meet the requirements.Environmental organizations also applauded the effort.“The warm color temperature is really critical for migrating birds, in particular, which our region is so famous for,” said Jen Kalt, director of Humboldt Waterkeeper, during public comment. Humboldt Waterkeeper called for a few tweaks, like not allowing translucent shields on the warmer bulbs.The ordinance, which is relatively concise, can be found at: https://tinyurl.com/26ny66ndKeep Reading
Press release from the Yurok Tribe:The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently approved the Yurok Tribe Environmental Department’s application for Treatment as a State (TAS), granting the tribal agency the authority to establish and enforce water quality standards on the Yurok Reservation.“Treatment as a state significantly increases our capacity to protect and restore the lower Klamath River, which serves as the spiritual, cultural, and ecological foundation of our existence. We extend our sincere gratitude to the US EPA for its formal recognition of our sovereign authority and demonstrated ability to effectively regulate water quality within our homeland,” said Joseph L. James, the Chairman of the Yurok Tribe. “I also want to acknowledge our highly professional environmental and legal teams for completing the rigorous application process.”Based on a 1987 amendment to the Clean Water Act, TAS empowers the Yurok Tribe Environmental Department to assume the same authority as state governments in setting and enforcing environmental standards that apply to tribal lands and waters. The TAS designation enables the department to enforce the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Safe Drinking Water Act as well as other federal environmental laws. It strengthens the Tribe’s ability to improve the health of 44 miles of the Klamath River and several tributaries that flow through the Yurok Reservation.“We now have the authority to determine beneficial uses of water based on our cultural values, environmental priorities, and community needs,” said Yurok Tribe Environmental Department Director Louisa McCovey. “This achievement is the result of a multigenerational effort to regain our sovereign right to govern the natural resources of our homelands.”The EPA’s approval follows a rigorous review process of the Tribe’s capacity to manage environmental programs at a level equivalent to or better than states.Keep reading
On June 17, Canary Media reported that several anti-offshore wind groups—some with known ties to the fossil fuel industry—asked the U.S. Department of Transportation to cancel the $426 million federal INFRA grant for the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District’s (District) offshore wind heavy lift marine terminal project. The money, which can only be received once the District has completed environmental permitting and secured matching funds, would be used to construct the West Coast’s first offshore wind staging and integration terminal. While individual turbine components would be manufactured in many different locations, a staging and integration terminal acts as their final destination before they are all put together and the turbine is towed out to sea. The grant would also pay for community benefits such as remediation of the existing contaminated site, a new trail, and a community benefit program. According to analyses by the state and federal governments, Humboldt Bay is particularly well suited for a staging and integration terminal because there is no manmade obstruction blocking the mouth of the Bay.In their letter, the groups—none of which are based in Humboldt—falsely stated that the project was ineligible for the grant and argued that it was not in the public interest. Legacy environmental nonprofits like the Sierra Club, Audubon, NRDC, SLO Chapter of the Surfrider Foundation, Environment California, Nature Conservancy, and others believe that responsibly developing the offshore wind industry is in the public interest because it is essential to decarbonizing our electricity supply and fighting climate change. Local environmental and community groups have successfully advocated for the terminal to use state-of-the-art technology to reduce emissions and protect the Bay and nearby communities. So, who are these out-of-the-area, anti-offshore wind groups who disagree?Keep reading
Die-off has affected the health of kelp forests and sparked years of scientific detective work
For years, it has been one of the biggest mysteries in marine biology: What is killing the starfish?Since 2013, billions of sea stars, an elegant ocean species commonly known as starfish that are a key part of the environment along the coast of California and other states, have been dying. The animals have suffered from a disease that causes parts of them to shrivel and melt away.In some places 90% of the sea stars died from the gruesome ailment, which is known as “wasting disease.” It has affected more than 20 species of sea stars found in the northeast Pacific Ocean from Alaska to the Baja California peninsula in Mexico, including Monterey Bay, the Sonoma Coast and other parts of the California shoreline, including the most susceptible sunflower sea stars.On Monday researchers at the University of British Columbia and the University of Washington said they have found the culprit: A strain of bacteria called Vibrio pectenicida.The bacteria, a distant cousin of the bacteria that can cause cholera in humans, has been known to harm coral and shellfish. In four years of research, which the scientists published in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution, the researchers found it causes otherwise healthy sunflower sea stars to melt and die.“It’s just heartbreaking to watch them die,” said co-author Drew Harvell, a University of Washington affiliate professor in the School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, and an adjunct faculty member at Stanford University’s Oceans Department. “Sunflower sea stars are enchanting creatures and they’re quite interactive. At feeding time, they will come toward you. If you throw clams to the stars, they can catch them. It’s so gratifying to finally have an answer.”
OPINION – If there is one thing the new Trump Administration has proven it’s that our precious democracy can go through great fluctuations depending on who resides in the White House. And thanks to President Trump’s deep reach into the current makeup of the US Supreme Court, sudden shifts in our regulatory environment are creating shockwaves on a wide range of topics that have left state leaders scrambling to retain our safety nets.For example, federal policy changes are forcing California leaders to get creative to protect our shared natural resources and public health. The Supreme Court’s now-infamous Sackett v. EPA decision dramatically reduced the reach of the Clean Water Act, leaving many formerly protected waterways and wetlands much harder to protect from pollution, especially in the West.Fortunately, we have leadership in California to ensure this seismic disruption in policy is muted by a response that could expedite how state law will capture the same protections that federal clean water permits once did. SB 601 (Allen), also known as The Right to Clean Water Act, attempts to piece back together the regulatory system established under the federal Clean Water Act over the past five decades. The Clean Water Act was intended to ensure the waters of the United States are “fishable, swimmable, and drinkable” for every American. But recent decisions by the US Supreme Court and related forthcoming regulatory changes made by Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency have severely narrowed the reach of this landmark law. GIS maps developed by the NRDC estimate more than 600,000 miles of California’s streams and up to 96% of our wetlands could lose federal Clean Water Act protections based on changes due to Sackett and further impending moves under Trump’s EPA.That’s where SB 601 comes in. The bill aims to restore and streamline the permitting process that ensures water pollution is well monitored and controlled in California under the authority of California’s Porter-Cologne Act. With those protections now severely weakened, everything from our coastlines to our drinking water sources lack the protections we’ve all come to expect. SB 601 allows for the retention of a regulatory framework for managing water pollution in the state by expediting the replacement of the now-absent federal regulation with state authority.SB 601 would strengthen state enforcement options and make it possible to increase penalties on polluters so that state penalties can align with the type of enforcement that was previously possible under federal law. With environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act now narrowed for many types of projects, protecting clean water under SB 601 is even more essential.Keep Reading
