"Moscow City still waiting for EPA decision"

If Moscow, which is upstream from Pullman, is not required to implement the Phase II stormwater regulations when Pullman has already been forced to do so, it will prove the whole process is just a sham and a farce.

From yesterday's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

The city of Moscow should hear from the Environmental Protection Agency regarding its Stormwater Phase II status in the next four to six weeks, EPA officials say.

The City Council sent the EPA a letter in August asking not to be subject to Phase II stormwater regulations. It anticipated receiving a reply in the fall.

"They (the EPA) just haven't made their decision yet," Moscow Public Works Director Les MacDonald said.

If Moscow is listed as a regulated small municipal separate storm system under Phase II, it will be required to develop a comprehensive stormwater management program and obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit, according to a letter sent by an EPA Region 10 official in June.

The regulations are designed to manage the quality and quantity of runoff from development and to control stormwater discharge. The requirements are intended to reduce downstream pollution and contamination.

The council members who voted to send the August letter said Moscow should be self-guided as it improves stormwater management.

EPA spokesman Jeff Philip said the EPA has delayed its decision because it still is looking at the data.

"It's taking a while to go through the data and really make a solid determination on whether (Moscow) should be included or not," Philip said.

Philip said there is no firm deadline for the decision, "but we want to get it done as soon as possible so they're not waiting and we're not waiting."

Hope for the future

Hans Rosling's 2006 and 2007 20 minute videos describe (with amazing graphics) how there will soon be NO ‘third world.’ I highly recommend them.

Improved health and wealth are taking over the planet and we hardly noticed. Rosling's presentaions are to me the most interesting analysis of the world’s population since the idiot Paul Erlick wrote “The Population Bomb”. Erlick, whose book I read while I was in high school in the 70’s, predicted that all was lost. We’ll soon run out of food, and we’ll all die - if we don’t force people to stop reproducing. That sort of short sightedness has always affected my politics. The correct answer to Erlick’s 'dilemma' was of course staring him in the face: free market economies and the green revolution would totally transform the planet. Though Rosling is from socialist Sweden you’ll see he can’t help but come to the same conclusion.

You can run Rosling’s software at http://www.gapminder.org/ but check out his talks first.

"Water dominates Pullman meeting of public officials; Council, legislators discuss effects on growth"

We have an excellent legislative team for Pullman. They all understand that environmental regulatory overkill causes the lack of affordable housing for working people and stifles economic development in Pullman. From today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

Water issues dominated much of the discussion in a town hall meeting between the Pullman City Council and Washington's 9th District legislators Tuesday.

Council members were joined by Sen. Mark Schoesler, Rep. Steve Hailey and new Rep. Joe Schmick to discuss state issues of concern to Pullman leaders. Other topics of conversation included funding for infrastructure, support for Washington State University projects and affordable housing.

Hailey said the solution to many of the concerns relates to water.

"It's a very high priority for me," he said. "If you run out of water, you've got nothing."

Hailey said water issues often slow the construction of new homes - especially those considered affordable housing. Water rights and environmental studies are expensive, and questions regarding recharge of the Palouse's two aquifers are seen as a roadblock by some developers.

He said research efforts must be increased to determine how to maintain water levels and support growth.

Legislators will convene for their 2008 session Jan. 14. Much of the agenda will revolve around the state's supplemental budget, but Hailey said he plans to push the need for more water research in the coming months.

"You have to have sufficient water to support more housing," he said. "I see that as a hurdle that has to be crossed in relatively short order ... In my mind, if we can solve the water issue, we can tackle the affordable housing issue."

Hailey also said a multimillion dollar water reclamation project - a joint effort between the city and WSU - could be funded in 2009-2011. The project would treat citywide wastewater for irritation.

"It's very doable," he said.

Schmick said he plans to defend the city's needs for funding in order to meet what he considers obscenely high requirements pertaining to stormwater management.

Earlier this year, the Washington State Department of Ecology issued statewide permits designed to manage the quality and quantity of runoff from development and to control stormwater discharges into sewer systems. Implementation of the requirements are expected to cost more than $4 million for Pullman. The city has received a grant for $75,000 and may be issued an additional $50,000 to jump-start the five-year permit program.

"There has to be a balance between environmental concerns and those of the cities and towns," Schmick said. "Our side of the aisle is very sympathetic to that."

Hailey agreed that the Department of Ecology has set unrealistically high standards for cities like Pullman.

"We'll try to get you some relief," he said. "I don't know what the answer is, but we'll keep pecking away at it."

Schmick, who was recently appointed to his position, said the meeting with Pullman leaders was helpful.

"We're here to represent the 9th District," he said. "We take this information back to Olympia."

QUICKREAD

WHAT HAPPENED: The Pullman City Council met with Washington's 9th District legislators Sen. Mark Schoesler, Rep. Steve Hailey and Rep. Joe Schmick for a meeting Tuesday. Water issues dominated much of the conversation which also inlcuded affordable housing and Washington State Department of Ecology requirements.

WHAT IT MEANS: Legislators and the council agree that water is a major issue of concern in Pullman and Whitman County.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT: Legislators will convene for their 2008 session Jan. 14 in Olympia. Schoesler, Hailey and Schmick said they will pass along their constituents' concerns to other state leaders.

Ignore the Man Behind the Curtain

Kudos to the Daily Evergreen editorial staff for using their intellect to question what they refer to as "banalities" surrounding the Cougar Green Fund in today's issue. The staff want a "more concrete plan" to go with the "sustainability, environmentalism and reusability buzzwords."

Good luck with that.

Left wing causes such as social justice and environmentalism have become the new religion. People mindlessly parrot phrases they have heard in the media or in the classroom without having one iota of a clue what they really mean.

Once, man turned inward and sought comfort in spirituality. But now that the New York Times has officially proclaimed God as being dead, people have turned outwards to seek meaning and validation in their lives. Instead of perfecting themselves, they now try to perfect others. The perfect religion for the Age of Narcissism. People pontificate about the causes of the day, be it sweatshops, sustainability, Darfur, global warming, etc., telling us how we need to change to assuage the pangs of guilt they feel for their affluence and safe, sheltered, comfortable suburban existence. And then they go right back to living their selfish, self-involved lives. Nothing ever changes. As Michael has said many times before, when self-proclaimed "environmentalists" start taking these issues seriously, so will I.

The EPA Wants Your Comments on Moscow's Water Pollution

As we in Pullman and Whitman County live downstream from all of Moscow's numerous water pollution violations, I think we all should file a comment with the Environmental Protection Agency, especially since the City of Moscow and Mark Solomon have filed complaints against water rights transfers for the Hawkins Companies development in Whitman County.

The full EPA notice follows:

EPA proposes Penalty Against City of Moscow, Idaho for Clean Water Act Violations

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 10 (ORC-158)
1200 SIXTH AVENUE
SEATTLE, WA 98101

Date of Notice: April 30, 2007

Comment Period Open Until: May 30, 2007

Action: Proposed Penalty Assessment under the Clean Water Act

Description of Violation and Relief Sought: Pursuant to Section 309(g)(4) of the Clean Water Act (“Act”), the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 (“EPA”) is providing public notice of the proposed penalty described below. In order to provide opportunity for public comment, EPA will not take final action in this proceeding prior to 40 days after publication of this notice.

EPA proposes to commence an administrative penalty action against the City of Moscow, Idaho (“Respondent”) for violation of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). EPA alleges that the Respondent is in violation of its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) individual permit authorized under Section 402 of CWA. Violations include: Phosphorus, Dissolved Oxygen (“DO”), Total Residual Chlorine (“TRC”) and Fecal Coliform Bacteria. EPA proposes to assess a penalty in the amount of $134,000.

Persons wishing to comment on EPA’s proposed action or to become participants in this action may do so by submitting their address and telephone number, along with written comments, to the Regional Hearing Clerk at the address above within 30 days of the date of this notice. This is a Class II administrative penalty proceeding, governed by Section 309(g)(2)(B) of the CWA and the procedural rules found at 40 C.F.R. Part 22. The requirements that apply to public comment and participation are set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 22.45.

Name of Case: City of Moscow Wastewater Treatment Facility

Docket Number of the Complaint: CWA-10-2007-0114

Name and address of Complainant:
Michael A. Bussell, Director
Office of Compliance and Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10 (OCE-164)
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101

Name and address of Respondent:
City of Moscow
P.O. Box 9203
Moscow, Idaho 83843

Name, address, and telephone number of Regional Hearing Clerk:
Carol Kennedy, Regional Hearing Clerk
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10 (ORC-158)
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
(206) 553-0242

Location of Facility: Moscow, Idaho

Applicable Permit No.: ID-002149-1

Business/activity of Respondents: wastewater treatment facility

Comments Accepted: In accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 22.45, any person wishing to comment on or participate in this proceeding must notify the Regional Hearing Clerk within 30 days of this notice. The person must provide a name, complete mailing address, and any comments the person has on this action.

A copy of the administrative complaint is available for review and copying between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, at EPA’s Seattle Office (see address listed above).

For any additional information on this action, please contact Jamie Sikorski at (206) 553-5153.

BREAKING NEWS: Whitman County May Sue Moscow Over Water Pollution

I have received unconfirmed reports that Whitman County officials are contemplating legal action to recover monetary damages from the City of Moscow created by that city's numerous water quality violations that have flowed down Paradise Creek and into the South Fork of the Palouse River.

If you will remember, Moscow recently admitted fault and settled with the EPA for $134,000. The 950 violations of standards for total residual chlorine, fecal coliform, phosphorous and dissolved oxygen between March 2002 and June 2006 could have forced the city to pay as much as $2.5 million in fines.

A story in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News reported that the Washington Department of Ecology wants to expand the study of the South Fork of the Palouse River to determine the sources of the water pollution (I can tell them right where to start looking):

Department of Ecology to expand Palouse River study

Study intended to identify sources of water pollution

The Washington State Department of Ecology hopes sound science will tell the story of what's polluting the Palouse River.

However, many ranchers worry that answers already have been found, and the study won't provide them with a happy ending.

Ecology researchers Jim Carroll and Elaine Snouwaert made a presentation and fielded questions from landowners Wednesday night on the river's temperature, pH, fecal coliform bacteria and dissolved oxygen. All are at higher levels in the Palouse drainage than currently permitted by state standards.

The upcoming studies will assess the total maximum daily load of each of the pollutants allowed in the stream, with the intent of keeping the river within water-quality limits. Ecology is addressing 700 waterways in the state that are in violation of the Clean Water Act.

Carroll said his studies are designed to be a general screening of the river. More specific diagnostics can be made in the future once points of pollution are specifically identified.

The state has set specific standards for waterways to meet in regard to temperature, pH and dissolved oxygen. Carroll said those goals may not be attainable for the Palouse waterways due to the area's hydrogeologic structure.

Most of the people in attendance came to talk about bacteria levels. The tests will identify where the pollution is coming from, but will not specifically single out the producer. One solution several people mentioned was DNA testing of the fecal coliform to find out where it came from, be it cows, humans or mice.

Carroll said DNA testing would take more time and a lot more money. Several people said Ecology might find that wildlife and dysfunctional septic systems might be the major cause of pollutants, but cattle are easy to identify and ranchers may be forced to change their grazing practices along streams.

Carroll said the river's condition could be a product of land use. The Palouse region used to include marshes and sub-irrigated pasture in lowlands that are now farmed. During the Cold War, the United States grew as much food as possible and the wetlands were drained and plowed.

As a result, Carroll said the land was made to shed water instead of retain it, and the drainage systems could be major contributors to higher temperatures, pH levels and dissolved oxygen.

Carroll said regulations to make the Palouse River drainage fit specific criteria might not be realistic. It is hoped the studies will help determine what pollutant levels are acceptable and what can be achieved.

The total maximum daily load studies are among several ongoing studies and policy discussions in the Palouse drainage, also known as Water Resource Inventory Area 34. Carroll said decisions on each process will be made separately, although a determination of how much water needs to be in the streams could help the river meet its water quality standards. Pollutants can be diluted with more water and therefore meet waste quality standards.

QUICKREAD

WHAT HAPPENED: Washington State Department of Ecology researchers provided an overview of a new set of studies they will begin this year on the Palouse River.

WHAT IT MEANS: The watershed contains several areas that are considered to be contaminated. The study is intended to identify sources of pollution so they can be removed.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT: Ecology will begin its study and compile data.

WHY YOU SHOULD CARE: Potential solutions could influence land and water use.

Crow Can't Spare a Square

We've all heard of the "courtesy flush." But now enviro-wacko singer Sheryl Crow informs us on her blog that we can help stop global warming by "putting a limitation on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting.... I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required."

By the way, Crow and environmentalist Laurie David have been traveling across America on a biodiesel-powered bus conducting a two-week Stop Global Warming College Tour. Whew! After two weeks on a bus with everyone using one square per toilet visit, every day is a winding road.

Always Low Carbon Emissions. Always.

Yesterday, in a column in the Moscow-Pullman Daily News, Chuck Pezeshki advocated local grass-roots action to stop global warming:

Besides organizing for the next elections, we can start now at the grass-roots level. After getting our own houses literally in order (fluorescent light bulbs, insulation, and high-mileage vehicles) we can move up. The Cool Cities program has been something that has been put in front of the Moscow City Council. It sits there, unadopted. To my knowledge, nothing has even been put in front of the Pullman City Council regarding the problem.

Okay, if we are going to play that game, here's my suggestion.

Two studies have shown that Pullman shoppers spend nearly $100 million annually outside of town, primarily in Moscow, Lewiston, Clarkston, and Spokane.

Based on data derived from the Sightline Institute, the average car with a solo driver produces 1.1 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per mile traveled.

Therefore, the average round trip between Pullman and an outside shopping destination produces the following carbon dioxide emissions:

Moscow - 20.9 pounds (think about that the next time you drive to the Co-Op for your organic tofu and seitan)
Lewiston - 70.73 pounds
Clarkston - 73.898 pounds (and union-friendly Costco)
Spokane - 164.46 pounds

That one-stop shopping "behemoth" known as a Wal-Mart Supercenter could put an end to unnecessary driving and make Pullman a "Cool City." In fact, as the new Wal-Mart would be well-served by bus lines and bike and pedestrian paths, shoppers theoretically wouldn't have to drive at all!!! We could reduce our "carbon footprint" by hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of pounds annually!!

Since Professor "Civil Discourse" has previously referred to me as the "avid Wal-Mart groupie," I don't think that my plan would meet with his "intellectually superior" approval. As Paul has pointed out, you can see how easy it is to make a liberal short-circuit.

Technorati Tags: wal-mart walmart

Speaking of "Level Playing Fields"

From a story in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

The city of Moscow likely will be fined $134,000 for its wastewater treatment violations.

The Administrative and Public Works/Finance committees authorized Mayor Nancy Chaney to sign a consent agreement to reach a settlement with the Environmental Protection Agency.

The city of Moscow's wastewater treatment plant has violated four National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit standards regarding water quality over the past four years.

The Environmental Protection Agency found that Moscow was in violation of standards for total residual chlorine, fecal coliform, phosphorous and dissolved oxygen.

Moscow City Attorney Randy Fife said there were 950 violations between March 2002 and June 2006 and the city could have been forced to pay as much as $2.5 million.

"The city has in fact violated parts of the NPDES that were required," he said. "I'm here to suggest the city is in fact responsible for these violations."

...

Fife said the EPA is aware of the city's efforts to upgrade its wastewater treatment plant.

"I am under the impression that after this settles out, the EPA will likely go on to other entities in other cities and not pay particular attention to us," Fife said.

...

"I say we pay and move on," Lambert said. "I don't think any fine is a good deal."

Pall said she wasn't thrilled with the way the federal government was negotiating in this situation.

THE SAME MOSCOW GOVERNMENT THAT IS ACTIVELY BLOCKING GROWTH IN WHITMAN COUNTY BASED ON WATER ISSUES IS CHAFING AT THE FACT THEY HAVE TO PAY ANY FINES AT ALL FOR POLLUTING WHITMAN COUNTY'S WATER??????? MY GOD, THE HYPOCRISY. HELLO, MARK SOLOMON AND THE AQUINUTS. TAKE CARE OF MOSCOW FIRST BEFORE YOU INTERFERE WITH THE HAWKINS DEVELOPMENT. Water isn't even the issue anyway. These characters are either anti-business or anti-Whitman County. Water is just the excuse.

950 violations over four years for residual chlorine, fecal coliform, phosphorous and dissolved oxygen. Guess where all those violations go? Downstream to Pullman. Unfortunately for us, the Washington Department of Ecology is not going to move on to other entities and allow us to slip under their radar again. No, Pullman is being saddled with incredibly unfair and expensive stormwater regulations in large part due to Moscow's serial environmental violations. $134,000 is a slap on the hand compared with what the city government, WSU, and Pullman residents are going to have to fork over in the next few years. Not to mention the fact that these DOE stormwater regulations will drive development over to Moscow.

Our local libs love to talk about creating a "level playing field" in the economy. Here's a good place to start. Any room for that under your big tent, Chuck?

Nancy Chaney Not Channeling Neville Chamberlain

Some thought the city of Moscow's failure to appeal the SEPA checklist for the proposed Hawkins Companies development in the corridor earlier this year meant "peace in our time." Nope.

According to Saturday's Moscow-Pullman Daily News, Queen Nancy and King Solomon will be making a waterborne, not land, assault on Whitman County's sovereignty.

Conservation group, Moscow protest transfer of water rights

Entities claim water rights in question do not apply to Hawkins Companies' proposed development site

The city of Moscow and the Palouse Water Conservation Group have filed protests against a Boise-based development company's application to transfer water rights to its proposed development outside of Moscow and the city of Colton.

Moscow and Mark Solomon, representing the conservation group, said in their written protests that the proposed transfers violate Washington law by trying to take water from one basin and apply it to another, and that the transfers would put the Palouse Basin's water supply at risk.

In March, Hawkins Companies applied to transfer 120 acre feet, or 40 million gallons, of water to its proposed development in Whitman County, just across the border from Idaho and Moscow city limits. The proposed transfers would come from around Pullman, LaCrosse and from the South Fork of the Palouse River near Colfax.

The water would allow Hawkins to construct a 700,000-square-foot shopping center along the Pullman-Moscow Highway.

The company also applied to transfer 100 acre feet of a 700-acre-feet water right to Colton in exchange for 23 acre feet of water the city was seeking for municipal needs before reaching the deal with Hawkins.

The water-right transfers are all that is keeping Hawkins from purchasing the property and breaking ground on the shopping center.

Hawkins received a conditional use permit for its development from the Whitman County Board of Adjustment on Feb. 15.

The proposed water-right transfers are being reviewed by the Whitman County Water Conservancy Board, which has met twice to consider the company's applications.

Water conservancy board member Dave Stickle said the amount of information and complexity of the applications is daunting.

The protests will be considered by the water conservancy board and the Washington State Department of Ecology.

Solomon said he hopes the water conservancy board weighs the protests and denies or passes the case on to the Department of Ecology.

"We tried to lay out very clearly that these transfers do not meet Washington law and the transfers are not in the same body of water," he said.

Stickle said the board could ask Ecology for assistance with the applications but did not indicate whether the board has decided to request help before making its recommendations.

"It has been a consideration," he said.

The water conservancy board can either deny Hawkins' applications, ask Ecology for technical assistance, or approve the request and send its recommendation on to Ecology.

Ecology has 45 days to review an application once it has a recommendation from the water conservancy board, although it can extend that period for an additional 30 days if necessary. Any interested party can appeal the department's decision to the Water Rights Pollutions Control Hearing Board.

Solomon said the hydrogeologic charts Ecology has used to allocate water in the past are not accurate.

Since the 1970s and even the mid-1990s the knowledge of the Palouse Basin has grown considerably, Solomon said. Recent research through the Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee shows that Colton, LaCrosse and Pullman are not directly connected from a hydrogeologic standpoint.

Solomon said research defies Hawkins' belief that water rights can be transferred from LaCrosse to Colton, which are 40 miles apart and differ in elevation by more than 1,000 feet.

In its letter of protest, Moscow indicated that the water that would be drawn from Hawkins' two wells would compromise water flow for the city. It also believes Hawkins' wells could cripple the city's ability to pump water from a well it plans to drill near to the proposed development site in the next three to five years.

Commercial water use should be controlled through a municipal provider, Moscow's letter stated. It also stated that Hawkins' contractors have failed to provide evidence that surface water rights the company plans to transfer to its project site actually filter into the area's aquifer systems.

Solomon claims Hawkins has changed its request from only wanting to withdraw water from the area's shallow aquifer to pumping water from both the shallow and the deep aquifers.

"It is important to recognize that the transfer of water rights from one extreme end of the basin to another is likely to result in unforeseen consequences on water supply, particularly when there is a lack of research data to indicate the presence or absence of aquitards or other forms of hydraulic barriers within the aquifer systems," Solomon's letter stated.

Representatives for Hawkins were not available for comment. Hawkins Project Manager Jeff Devoe said at a water board meeting in March that the company plans to keep a low profile until all the necessary permits are acquired and construction begins.

The water conservancy board will meet at 7:30 p.m. April 25 at the Public Service Building in Colfax to continue its review of the applications.

The Palouse Water Conservation Nutwork site can be found here. The article did not mention that the Moscow Civic Association and the Palouse Group of the Sierra Club are also parties to the complaint.

Clever picking a method that ensures the matter goes before the Washington Deparment of Ecology. According to last Thursday's Whitman County Gazette, DOE's has already proposed standards on how much water flows through the creeks and rivers of Whitman County could limit development on the Palouse. If the legislature decides to abide by DOE's recommendations, southern Whitman County would only be allowed one well a year for the next 20 years.

Bureaucrats on one side and moonbats on the other. Luckily for Moscow and Latah County, they have had no such restrictions on growth. Last person out of Whitman County, please turn out the lights.

A Brand for the Palouse?

According to today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News:

"A group of representatives from throughout the Palouse are looking to create a branding image for the so-called "Knowledge Corridor."
...
[Moscow Chamber of Commerce Interim Director Janice] McMillan said through the Knowledge Corridor concept she hopes to attract businesses that can help the area grow.

Considering Nancy Chaney, Mark Solomon, PARD, No Super WalMart, stalking herons, frolicking cute bunnies, viewsheds, used $40 bikes, charming valleys, tiny brooks, European cities, sweatshop forums, Main Street, unique rural character, a thousand other places, etc. ad nauseum, here is my entry for the "knowledge corridor" branding contest:


Why not? My brand would accomplish the same thing as what we read in the newspaper every day and save both paper and ink.

Why bother encouraging growth at all when there are people in the community doing everything they can to stop it?

Stalking Heron, Hidden Agenda

No sooner do I mention the theme park mentality that I have observed on the Palouse, than two writers submit letters to the Daily News amply illustrating that attitude.

Here's an excerpt from one:

Pullman and Moscow have individual identities along with unique businesses and restaurants. Why do we want them to become just any small town U.S.A., complete with sprawl, strip, and low quality of life? Let's put a stop to these sprawling developments that spring up overnight. Let's maintain our autonomy by saying "no" to the big box find-them-anywhere businesses. Let's keep the Palouse a distinctive place, one that we can be proud of.

We have the opportunity now to plan our towns in such a way that could mimic the charm of European cities. These are on the whole unique and vibrant, with downtowns that provide good shopping choices, year-round markets, public transportation, green parks, and walking and biking areas. Our opportunity to align with them is now. Let's not destroy it with business as usual decisions about growth and development.

So in addition to "Frontierland" and "Main Street USA," we can add "Busch Gardens Europe" to the list of theme parks that our local elitists want Pullman and Moscow to emulate.

One small point, that I have made before: Pullman and Moscow ALREADY HAVE dozens of "local" national chain stores and restaurants, including two Safeways, two Rite Aids, Macy's, Wal-Mart, Staples, Office Depot, Hastings, Michael's Jo-Ann Fabrics, ShopKo, Barnes & Noble, Radio Shack, Blockbuster and numerous Starbucks and McDonalds. It is topography, flora and fauna, climate, language, accents, culture, etc. that make regions "distinctive," not stores. Why do people get so hung up on that?. If you crave a place with no chain stores so badly, then move to Anatone. Studies have shown that college students want chain stores and restaurants and a more urban environment, and that's what Pullman and Moscow have to provide as the home of two major universities.

Then there was this letter that really made me laugh out loud:

Pullman needs creative planning

I would like to join Lennis Boyer in applauding the column by Katherine Meier, (Town Crier, Feb. 28). Meier decries the loss of beautiful natural areas in our neighborhoods with little or no advance notice, as building projects mushroom throughout Pullman. The partially filled wetland she mentions had previously created a charming view from the Aquatic Center weight room, from which I once watched as a stately heron stalked along the tiny brook, and rabbits played in the meadow. Such amenities are few and far between in Pullman, and we should do more to treasure and save them. We can hope the finished housing development will maximize the effectiveness of the remaining wetland.

Meier also mentions the new strip mall on Bishop Boulevard. It is replacing a calm, tree-filled riverside meadow with small businesses. These may well be desirable additions to our tax rolls and consumer options, but they also reduce the natural beauty around us, replacing the extraordinary with the ordinary. We need both. Affordable housing and a vital economy for a growing population are necessities, but can't we be more creative in our planning and provide both roofs over our heads and sustenance for our spirits?

Mary Carloye, Moscow

So let's now add "Disney's Animal Kingdom" to the list.

"A stately heron stalked along the tiny brook, and rabbits played in the meadow?" "A calm, tree-filled riverside meadow?" "Sustenance for our spirits?" Bwwhahahahahahahahhahahha! My side hurts!! This is too over-the-top, even for the treehugging liberals. The only thing "creative" about this letter is Carloye's writing.

First of all, the view out of the weight room at the Pullman Aquatics Center is mostly of Jim Logan's house, yard, and garden. Impressive, but hardly "charming." And no wetland is being filled in, God forbid. Wurgler Marsh is untouched by this development. In any case, the owners of the land being developed are not obligated to preserve Carloye's view while she works out, unless of course Carloye is willing to buy the land herself and then pay property taxes on it each year. She fails to mention that the development is adding desperately needed family housing to Pullman. What is more desirable? A place where one can hear the laughter of children playing in their own backyard or watching rabbits play? Remember, the place Carloye is talking about was just a run-of the-mill, weed-infested field, not a wildlife preserve. Don't worry the cute little bunnies will still roam freely, as will the moose, the deer, the cougars, and the packs of coyotes on Military Hill.

As far as Crimson Village goes, how "calm" was that area to begin with, as it is directly adjacent to traffic on Bishop Blvd? The trees in the "riverside meadow" were planted by the city, not Johnny Appleseed. And it's not Moscow's tax rolls and consumer options, it's Pullman's, thank you very much. Go complain about the new Goodwill building next to the mall. It would be just as applicable and infinitely more appropriate for a Moscow resident.

Carolye's comments clearly demonstrate the fraud that is our local "smart growth" movement. If they are against development in small vacant lots in ALREADY DEVELOPED AREAS, i.e. "urban infill," the mantra of true "smart growth," then they are really against ALL growth. Neither project she cites represents "sprawl" in any way. This kind of highly romanticized and poetic moonbattery is also what gives environmentalists and conservationists a bad name. No one is going to take objections like Carloye's seriously.

On a side note, The FON (Friends of Nancy) have now submitted one Town Crier column and two letters to the editor in defense of the embattled Mayor of Moscow. Nice try, but it's not going to help any with the Whitman County Commissioners.

"The 'Church of Global Warming' revisited"

Another great column from Michael O'Neal in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News, guaranteed to drive the liberals nuts:

Two weeks ago, "Hypocrisy and the Church of Global Warming" appeared on this page. The reaction was predictable: To set me straight, earnest readers sent me scientific stuff. But science wasn't my subject. With tongue in cheek, I took as my subject the sociology and politics of the debate.

Allow me to retract my tongue.

Science and religion seek different sorts of truths in different ways. Scientists propose theories. The "willfully ignorant" raise doubts, question those theories, and offer possible alternatives. New data comes in. Theories get tested and modified. Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman put it best: Scientists must "be willing to question and doubt their own theories and their own results, and investigate possible flaws in a theory."

But when all doubts, questions and alternatives about global warming are silenced, or when dilettantes launch cowardly personal attacks or make babblescent threats to cancel their subscription to the newspaper because it provides a forum for alternative views, that's religion, not science, and religion in its least attractive guise, so feeble that it can't - or won't - withstand scrutiny. At best it's science by press conference. Not all that long ago, leading scientists fervently believed that criminal propensities could be predicted through cranial measurements. At the same time, they wrongly dismissed plate tectonics as pseudoscience. I say, thank heaven for the doubters and questioners.

Further, I don't like to be told not to drive an SUV by someone with a private jet. Far from being a "distraction," the lives of the rich and famous, many living off the fruits of industrialization, are at the dead center of the debate. The issue is not simply whether global warming is a real problem. I'll grant that it is. The real question is, what do we do now? Every one of us consumes far more than we need. Our cars are too powerful, our houses too palatial, our appetites too piggish. So how are you going to sell the concept of "cutting back" and treading lightly over Mother Earth when the nation's most conspicuous people, including Al Gore himself, or John Edwards and his 28,000-square-foot, $6 million mansion, leave behind Sasquatch-size carbon footprints? So they buy carbon credits. How nice. I can't, so I nibble at the edges of global warming by shivering in my house or driving a tin can death trap, but my actions will accomplish nothing if everyone doesn't play, including the nations that cynically violate the Kyoto agreement they signed with great self-congratulation. And do you think your hybrid Prius and its components were manufactured in plants powered by solar panels?

This raises the issue of alternative energy. Every form of energy, alternative or otherwise, has its downside, but many people don't want to confront global warming in their own backyard. Lord help me, I plead guilty. I might be a proponent of nuclear power - it's clean, and the plants have smaller footprints than conventional power plants - but I don't want one frying my figgins from across the street.

But if a proposal is made for a hydroelectric dam, or a tidal or wave-energy or ocean-current facility, or a wind farm, or the conversion of farmland to cultivation of biomass fuels, trust-fund environmentalists rise as one to oppose it. Back in the 1970s, when the Alaskan oil pipeline was being built, dilettantes who wouldn't know a caribou from a cockatoo waxed hysterical that the pipeline would destroy Alaska's caribou herds. But according to the state's Fish and Game Department, when the oil started to flow in 1977 Alaska's caribou population was about 6,000. Today it's more than 27,000. And the sky did not fall.

Whatever energy source we use, it has to be produced somewhere. If preening "environmentalists" along Cape Cod and elsewhere really believe in global warming, they should be willing to make compromises. Instead, they try to grab the turd by the clean end with cant like "environmentally sensitive area." Yet they heat their homes with oil and coal burned in power plants located in someone else's environmentally sensitive area - in most places, poor neighborhoods - then have the gall to whine if their playground is threatened.

We can fix the problem or be dilettantes. But dilettantes can't make the hard choices, except when they're making them for others.

Amen, Mike.

Sustainable Pullman

Why worry about sustainability in Pullman?

Why should Pullman worry about sustainability and what is sustainability, anyway?

Let’s explore the second question, first. What is sustainability? It’s a look at present activities through the lens of the future. When implemented properly, it is a systematic business approach to ensure the well being of the corporation, community, institution or individual to ensure future viability.

That means it has to make business sense beyond near term bottom line concerns. In the case of the City of Pullman, it means looking at more than just revenues and expenditures. It means taking actions which provide for the benefit of the maximum number of citizens today, tomorrow and 100 years from now. The concepts of sustainable operations include economic viability, social benefit and environmental protection. It involves prudent management of capital and natural resources.

How does this benefit Pullman and its citizens? A functional sustainability program does things like examine the various departments and operations of the city to see if economies of scale can be achieved through coordination of material uses, purchasing practices, sharing of resources and appropriate personnel assignments.

It looks at material and resource management by examining demands on water production, distribution, treatment and discharge to ensure adequate supply and plant capacities. It examines treatment methods and materials to see if effective, economically viable (i.e. same or lower cost to deliver the same level of service) alternative exist. It examines pumping and reservoir operations to influence operating times which may consume less electricity or consume it at a lower cost.

It examines planning and zoning to provide for adequate streets, services, and recreation facilities are planned for to accommodate growth. It looks at the appropriate mix of commercial and residential zones. It examines building codes and resource use policies such as low flow fixtures to maximize availability of resources to the maximum number of users.

Is it green? You bet! It encourages conservation where it makes sense. It encourages recycling. It encourages waste minimization. It encourages use of low impact materials. It definitely incorporates the concept of reducing non-renewable resources.

What is it not? It isn’t Moscow. It isn’t anti growth. It isn’t “smart growth” and it isn’t anti business….of any size or type. It isn’t the exclusive province of the lunatic fringe environmentalists.

To be sustainable, something must make business sense. It must serve the public interest and it must not irreparably harm the environment. Think of it this way; if it’s the best environmental solution in the world but it isn’t affordable, it’s useless. Similarly, if nobody wants it, it’s a dead end. If everybody wants it but nobody can afford it, it’s not sustainable. If it significantly harms the environment, it won’t fly. If it makes perfect financial sense but people don’t want it or it significantly harms the environment, it’s not going to work. All three elements must work to some reasonable level or it won’t work at all. In the end, sustainability is just good business sense. That’s why Wal Mart has a sustainability program.

An Open Letter to Al Gore: I Will Be Your Ultimate Carbon Offset

In recent days, Al Gore's carbon offsets have gotten lots of attention from many quarters, and much hilarity has ensued. While much of the joking comes from the fact that Gore's so-called carbon offsets are... well, they are a joke, we should not overlook the possibility that Gore's blunder here is not one of concept, but of focus. By that, I mean to say that Gore's idea is not without merit, it's just that he has addressed symptoms and not causes.

That is where I come in.

That human activities are releasing large amounts of so-called "greenhouse gases" into the atmosphere - carbon dioxide being one of them - is undeniable. Gore's move to popularize his carbon offsets as a legitimate solution to that condition fail simply because they do not stop the claimed damage before it happens, merely slapping on a band aid in a different spot instead. Really, does it make a difference to put up solar panels in one place if acid rain has already destroyed an entire forest in a different place? Adding a few hybrid cars to the gridlock on our highways doesn't change the fact that Gore's jet spews out tens of thousands of pounds of carbon dioxide while whisking him off to another screening of An Inconvenient Truth.

The problem is that cures are not effective if the disease they are meant to combat is not simultaneously put into check, and though global warming is not a problem of bacteria or viruses, the basic principal still applies. Therefore, for Gore's carbon offsets to really mean something, they must reduce human industry - the true cause of the atmospheric carbon issue - which necessarily means reducing the productivity of individual human beings.

(Perhaps in time we could replace all of our machinery with green versions, thus allowing our present prosperity to remain and to continue growing, but that will take a very long time and WE MUST ACT NOW! RIGHT NOW! NO DELAYS! DON'T QUESTION THAT! THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED!)

Therefore, I volunteer myself to become Al Gore's greatest carbon offset ever. Since at the root of all of the things Gore fears lies the industrious individual, which is what I happen to be, it is obvious that halting my productivity will eliminate a great deal of carbon emissions.

To put this plan into effect, I hereby offer my services to you, Mr. Gore, which shall entail me doing absolutely nothing. For a princely sum of cash, renewable annually as per the contract I am hereby offering, I will cease being productive. For as much money as it takes to a) keep me comfortable, b) buy out my ambitions in an amount equal to what my ambitions were leading me toward earning (which is a lot, by the way, Mr. Gore), and c) pay for a large enough solar panel array to power my Energy Star compliant PC so I can play World of Warcraft all of my waking hours, I agree to sleep at least 8 hours a day, nap up to 12 hours a day in addition, and stop badmouthing your terrible film for the other 4 hours of the day. As a bonus, I will have an entire week's worth of pizza delivered to my house every Monday so as to save the fuel the delivery driver would have otherwise burned bringing single orders to me each day of the week, billable to you. I will accept payment in cash, check (with two forms of picture ID), wire transfer, or PayPal (extra fees will be applied to cover transaction charges). In exchange, the amount of carbon I personally generate will be all but eliminated, which will truly address the carbon issue rather than just sweeping it under a solar panel.

So there you have it, Mr. Gore. I will be your ultimate carbon offset, and unlike your other attempts, this one will actually make a difference. I look forward to hearing from you, and I do urge you to hurry, as any delay will force me to continue being productive, which will only add more carbon to the atmosphere.

Moscow's water use washes away your arguments

Mark Solomon, who observes the Palouse from his homestead on top of Moscow Mountain and is hopefully not ruining the views for other people said:

Big boxes and car dealerships or knowledge-based industries? Are you listening Whitman County? There's only so much water to go around.

Sure, we are listening. Why does it have to be an either/or situation? No one is trying to stop "knowledge-based industries" from locating on SR270. But that is because there is no one to stop! No one is lining up to do it. Stop with this PARD like tactic. PARD uses Target to try to stop WalMart. Moscowites (who love our tax dollars) try to stop retail development in Whitman County by using "knowledge-based industries" as a distraction.

Oh, yeah, about that water comment...

Since 1992 Moscow has exceeded their targeted water use by 763 million gallons. While during the same period Pullman has come in below their target by 644 million gallons.

Maybe if Moscow didn't hog all the water in the aquifer, we would have some for the Hawkins development.

Seattle Elitism on Display

There was a great entry in yesterday's Seattle Times "Postman on Politics" blog that shows what many snooty Seattleites think about the choice of outdoor recreation for many Washingtonians.

In responding to an e-mail from someone asking [Seattle Democratic State Senator Adam] Kline why he was backing a bill that would crack down on loud off-road vehicles, the senator sent this e-mail:

Dear Mr. Helgeson,

I signed on because I have been annoyed, endangered, and angered one too many times by people riding motorized dirt-bikes and other off-road vehicles that have no damn business anywhere. To me, this bill is narrow — it doesn't include those "personal watercraft," seemingly jet-powered little missiles whose only apparent purpose is to risk death and dismemberment for boaters and swimmers, for the amusement of spoiled drunk teenagers.

Yes, I am sure there is the occasional responsible person who rides one of these machines on land or water. And yes, like every human being I have been pleasantly surprised to find my stereotypes broken. But why, why, why, do folks insist on motorized "sports"? Those two words are an oxymoron.

There is nothing sporting — athletic, physically demanding — about riding any machine anywhere. And it's a damned annoyance to folks who see the outdoors as a place to go for quiet and solitude and self-exploration. I would be happy to ban the use of the internal combustion engine off-road, by anyone without a handicapped sticker, subject to a stiff fine. Maybe we could call this an anti-obesity measure.

Please circulate this to all motorized sports enthusiasts, so they can remember never to vote for me.

Adam Kline

Kline told Times reporter Elliott Wilson that snowmobilers have ruined ski trips for him and his daughter, they make noise and pollute.

If you're a handicapped person and that's the only way to get to see the beach, I got that.

Why can't they get onto their own two feet? ... Polluting for recreation. It's polluting. It's noise. It's physical danger....

I get the impression that a lot of them are 30 or 40-year-old teenagers.
...

It's a fuel-drugged rush. Fuel is their drug. I get my rush out of physical exertion.

I guess Senator Kline won't be buying a cabin in Elk River anytime soon.

The Cult of Miserablism

"If God didn't exist, it would be necessary to invent him." - Voltaire

Indur Goklany has a new book titled The Improving State of the World: Why We’re Living Longer, Healthier, More Comfortable Lives on a Cleaner Planet. In a story about Goklany's book, Daniel Ben-Ami writes:

...the whole of humanity, including the developing world, has benefited as a result of rising prosperity...There are exceptions to this improving trend but these confirm rather than contradict the close connection between economic growth and quality of life...the combination of economic growth and technological development is not just beneficial to human well-being in a narrow sense. Goklany also argues strongly that the environment becomes better fit for human beings as a result of progress.

A key question is: What is it about contemporary society that pre-disposes so many people to be fearful of risks and blind to the benefits of progress?

My theory is that since modern-day humanism killed off God, liberals have developed their own religion, for as Voltaire said, man requires some sort of faith. To quote from Ann Coulter:

Under the guise of not favoring religion, liberals favor one cosmology over another and demand total indoctrination into theirs. The state religion of liberalism demands obeisance (to the National Organization for Women), tithing (to teachers' unions), reverence (for abortion), and formulaic imprecations ('Bush lied, kids died!'' 'Keep your laws off my body!' 'Arms for hostages!'). Everyone is taxed to support indoctrination into the state religion through public schools where innocent children are taught a specific belief system, rather than, say, math.

Now, global warming is becoming the state religion. Big corporations are the devil. Big government the savior. Al Gore the prophet. Melted ice caps the apocalypse. The minarets of the media broadcast the daily commandments that must be obeyed while local mullahs judge our behavior. Infidels are publicly stoned.

Actually, liberalism has many such sects (anti-sprawl, anti-Wal-Mart, anti-growth, anti-war, etc, etc.) The one unifying credo is that the world is going to hell and its all man's fault. We've taken a bite form the forbidden apple of capitalism and we are doomed as a result.

Why does the cult require such miserablism? Simple. It's the only way the faithful liberals can justify their existence. Their reward? Not eternal life, but earthly power of an unprecedented nature. The gloomerati now control the halls of Congress, the studios of Hollywood, the ivy-covered halls of academe, and the schoolhouses of America.

The Pullman NIMBY Manifesto

WSU Professor Kathryn Meier's Town Crier column in today's Moscow-Pullman Daily News is a Pullman NIMBY Manifesto for the ages.

The Palouse is an incredibly beautiful place. While traveling elsewhere, I have pointed to the ubiquitous Microsoft screensaver with the rolling green hills and said with pride, "That is where I live."

I fear that we may be taking this natural beauty for granted. In the course of discussions about public policy in Whitman County, I cannot recall seeing anything that specifically addresses issues concerning landscape, terrain and green space.

A couple of ongoing construction projects serve to illustrate the point. On Military Hill in Pullman, a development called "Meadow Creek" is being built opposite the high school. The name itself is ironic. In order to create access to the new housing development, a charming little valley has been partially filled in with massive amounts of soil to generate a roadway. The fill has obliterated a large section of the meadow, along with part of the creek (which now flows through a culvert). This is a rather major reworking of the local landscape, but I do not recall seeing any discussion of public hearings in the local press. It is possible the finished project will be gentle on the eye, and it will certainly provide much-needed housing, but I find the apparent lack of discussion about the larger issue disturbing.

Another interesting development is the small retail mall nearing completion along Bishop Boulevard. The building is attractive enough, and the retail space should be a great addition to Pullman. Again, what concerns me is a lack of debate about the location and design of the project. The new building sits along the bank of the river. Trees that had once been planted for public beautification were torn out along the riverfront, although some trees remain. The windowless back of the building faces the river. Aside from flood concerns, which certainly must have been addressed, the building seems to make poor use of a potentially scenic site in order to maximize frontage along Bishop Boulevard. I would have expected such a project to be scrutinized in a public hearing.

I have been saddened to read some recent letters to the Daily News stating landowners should be able to do whatever they want with their property, without any public oversight. Such an attitude seems to fly in the face of the concept of "civilization."

Some cities, such as Houston, have been notorious for laxity of building or zoning codes. This can result in an unfortunate hodgepodge in which liquor stores are situated next to day-care centers (as an example). In a city with geographical features as varied as ours, lack of public oversight can potentially result in significant remodeling of the landscape, or in buildings that disrupt their surroundings. While such developments may temporarily increase tax revenue, it is not in the long-term interest of a community to lose the very features that make it unique.

Since I am not serving as an investigative reporter, I have not scrutinized the local and state regulations that apply to the examples cited above. I can only comment that the level of public input in Pullman is much lower than what I have seen elsewhere. The idea that there can be only one public hearing on land-use issues is foreign to me. In our previous community (on the East Coast), such issues were subject to three hearings before the zoning and land-use board. The first hearing served to get people involved, as the local newspaper would report on the discussion that occurred. For a high-impact issue, more residents would then attend the subsequent meetings, bringing more data to support their viewpoints. Numerous residents were able to speak out at the meetings, and their opinions definitely made a difference. Participants in the meetings were able to hear both sides of the issue, and to see firsthand how consensus and compromise were reached by their officials. In Whitman County, petitions and letters to the editor appear to be a major means of public input, but I do not find them as effective as live public debate. If current policy actually prohibits more than one public hearing on issues that significantly affect our future, then perhaps it is time to change the policy.

I, for one don't live in a "screensaver." In the real world, as opposed to Ms. Meier's academic world, we live in a living, breathing, working community that has needs like affordable family housing, adequate retail, and a thriving tax base to keep the schools open, the fire and police departments staffed, the streets paved, and the water flowing. Wealthy professors like Meier and Jim Krueger move here from somewhere back East and expect Pullman to be like DisneyWorld I guess, beautiful scenery with no visible support or infrastructure so as not to disturb their little corner of paradise.

PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE THE BASIS FOR CIVILIZATION!!! What is Meier thinking?

I can tell you that I drive (and walk) past the proposed Meadow Creek subdivison every day and it was not a "charming valley." It was just a weed-covered depression between two hills as you see in hundreds of thousands of other places on the Palouse. Give me a break.

So Ms. Meier wants her personal aesthetic tastes to trump private property rights, affordable family housing, adequate retail, and a thriving tax base? Washington's regulations are already perfect for Ms. Meier and the NIMBYers. All it takes is a few people to get a burr under their saddle and a developer's project is either cancelled or held up for years. Pullman like Houston? Please. If only we could be as prosperous as a city like Houston, but we never will because of selfish snobs like Meier and the outrageous environmental laws in Washington.

I am going to wrap up by quoting from a Mesquite [NM] Local News editorial I used a while back. It utterly destroys Ms. Meier's arguments and those of her ilk:

It’s ironic that residents of this gated community have started a petition to stop development of a new housing project because of their claim that the construction will “destroy the beautiful mountain ridges, bluffs and natural desert areas adjacent to Copper Bluffs.”

The irony is that they are living in a neighborhood that was only made possible after the land where their houses are now sitting was similarly carved and shaped to accommodate the construction.

It’s become a common cry in Mesquite for people whose homes often sit atop regal perches that were once deemed beautiful landscape features to now rail against the same kind of desecration that might mar their views.
...

More importantly, it’s un-American to tell a legitimate land-owner that he cannot use his land as he sees fit because it might “mess up somebody’s view.”

As has been pointed out before, you can’t buy a view, even when you’ve paid a half a million dollars for your house.

The only way is to get together with other like-minded neighbors and purchase the land, then apply deed restrictions to keep it pristine and untouched.

But the truth is that most homeowners aren’t willing to “put up or shut up” and tie up their own money to protect their surroundings.

Instead, they insist that their governments use tax dollars paid by all of us to buy the land to preserve their high-dollar views.

Or coerce their government officials to use building permit restrictions and zoning filibusters to accomplish the same goals, shutting out new residents hoping to taste that which has drawn the current homeowners to this desert delight.

Meanwhile, "W" Lives Green

While Al Gore talks the talk, President Bush walks the walk.

Check out the date on this article April 29, 2001.

Geothermal heat pumps located in a central closet circulate water through pipes buried 300 feet deep in the ground where the temperature is a constant 67 degrees; the water heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. Systems such as the one in this "eco-friendly" dwelling use about 25% of the electricity that traditional heating and cooling systems utilize.

A 25,000-gallon underground cistern collects rainwater gathered from roof runs; wastewater from sinks, toilets and showers goes into underground purifying tanks and is also funneled into the cistern. The water from the cistern is used to irrigate the landscaping surrounding the four-bedroom home. Plants and flowers native to the high prairie area blend the structure into the surrounding ecosystem.

No, this is not the home of some eccentrically wealthy eco-freak trying to shame his fellow citizens into following the pristineness of his self-righteous example. And no, it is not the wilderness retreat of the Sierra Club or the Natural Resources Defense Council, a haven where tree-huggers plot political strategy.

This is President George W. Bush's "Texas White House" outside the small town of Crawford.

For 6 years now, the press has known that Al Gore is a hypocrite while George W. Bush actually lives closer to the lifestyle Gore advocates that does Gore or any of his Hollywood buds.