KLAMATH RIVERKEEPER TO SUE WARREN BUFFETT'S PACIFICORP FOR POLLUTING KLAMATH
RIVER
Lawsuit is the first step in Riverkeeper’s
effort to restore the Klamath
YREKA, CA- Klamath Riverkeeper sent a 60 day notice of intent to file a lawsuit today against Warren Buffett’s PacifiCorp for polluting one of the nation’s most important and controversial salmon rivers, the Klamath. Klamath Riverkeeper’s lawsuit asserts that operation of the Iron Gate Dam hatchery has resulted in repeated violations of the Clean Water Act and is just one of the ways that PacifiCorp, as the owner of the four dams along the Klamath River, is destroying the River, its salmon runs, and the coastal fishing economies of the California and Oregon Coastline.
Thousands of adult salmon have died because of low flows and poor water quality. Since the dams were built, Klamath Salmon numbers have dropped from more than a million to less then 8% of that with one of the worst runs ever occurring last year, according to the Klamath Riverkeeper. Record-setting levels of a highly toxic algae have been found behind the dams during the last two years, and last year, low runs of wild Klamath salmon caused severe restrictions on commercial salmon fishing on over 700 miles of coastline in Oregon and California. These conditions have resulted in federal disaster declarations and have fueled the movement by the states, fishermen, tribes, and environmental groups to take down PacifiCorp’s outdated dams along the Klamath River.
“First PacifiCorp dammed the Klamath River cutting off hundreds of miles of salmon habitat and degrading water quality,” stated Regina Chichizola, the Klamath Riverkeeper. “Now, the hatchery that was supposed to fulfill PacifiCorp’s promise to keep the Klamath salmon from facing extinction is polluting the river and further jeopardizing the survival of the salmon it is best known for.”
Chichizola went on to say that the dams do not provide for flood control or irrigation, and represent less than one-half a percent of PacifiCorp’s energy supply. Klamath Riverkeeper has documented repeated discharges of wastewater containing pollutants in violation of the hatchery’s permit and tracked the hatchery’s failure to comply with monitoring and reporting requirements of the permit, which will be the basis for the lawsuit. Riverkeeper is also looking into ways to hold PacifiCorp responsible for the creation and release of toxic algae in their dams.
PacifiCorp, a Portland, Oregon company, was recently acquired by MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, which is owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, Inc.
Chichizola called upon Buffett to reconcile his philanthropic concern for low-income and health-challenged communities around the world with PacifiCorp’s practices here in California. In 2006, Buffet committed roughly 85% of his $40 billion fortune to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Two of the charities run by Buffet’s children – also beneficiaries of his fortune – include a focus on the environment, species protection and clean water.
“The second richest man in the world owns PacifiCorp, yet the company is not being held responsible for its role in the deepening crisis on the Klamath. We implore Mr. Buffett to review the practices of PacifiCorp and its devastating impact on the Klamath and coastal economies. We can still save the Klamath and its wild salmon but urgent action is needed now. The Klamath’s future, and the future of the salmon industry, is in Warren Buffett’s hands,” said Chichizola.
California officials propose California Endangered Species Act Exemption for Klamath River Basin Irrigators
by Felice Pace
In the Klamath River Basin these days environmental news is dominated by talk about dam removal and, occasionally, new restrictions on fishing. But now another issue is poised to compete for the headlines. The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) announced late last month that it plans to give a hundred or so farmers and alfalfa ranchers in Siskiyou County just south of the Oregon border an exemption from the California Endangered Species Act. Released without fanfare, the announcement caused barely a ripple in the regional media. But below the surface a virtual tsunami may be forming.
The Scott and Shasta Rivers are major Klamath tributaries. While salmon runs in these rivers have been depressed for many years, fisheries scientists and restorationists agree that the broad valleys and forested streams of the Scott and Shasta have the greatest potential among all Klamath tributaries to produce salmon. Furthermore, the Scott River in particular could be the key to recovery of Klamath River Coho salmon. While all Klamath Basin salmon stocks are “at risk of extinction” according to the American Fisheries Society, only Coho are listed as “threatened with extinction” under provision of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA).
Ever since Klamath River Coho were listed as “threatened”, Fish and Game officials have been meeting behind closed doors with Scott and Shasta River irrigation interests. The irrigators are concerned because their dams, diversions and irrigation pumps have regularly killed thousands of salmon and steelhead. They want to be protected from prosecution for killing Coho while continuing irrigation practices which virtually dry up Scott and Shasta rivers and streams in drought years. An example is 2001, a year in which the San Francisco Chronicle quoted the local CDFG warden: “ ‘Everything has died,’ said Fish and Game Captain Chuck Konvalin of the Scott River. ‘The system has been dried up’.”
Klamath River Basin Tribes, conservation and fishing groups have been nervous about the closed door meetings. As downstream interests, they asked to be included in the talks only to be rebuffed by CDFG and the irrigators. Now the reasons for the secret meetings are beginning to come to light. While the actual Endangered Species Act exemption – technical known as an “Take Permit” - has not been released pending review by irrigator and state lawyers, preliminary environmental documents indicate that, while ranchers and growers will exclude fish from irrigation ditches, they will be allowed to continue dewatering the Scott and Shasta Rivers. If fish need water, the environmental documents indicate, the irrigators will consider renting water to CDFG on an annual basis. In return the CDFG will continue to have access to river sections that pass through private ranches and alfalfa fields – something that some ranchers have denied to CDFG since the Coho were listed as threatened.
There is every indication that the Take Permit CDFG has negotiated with the irrigators will not adequately address the critical issue of river flows. Flows in the Scott River have become so low that many salmon can not reach prime spawning grounds in dry years. According to the California Department of Water Resources 54% or irrigation in the Scott River Valley is now done with water pumped from groundwater. The pumping – which began in earnest in the 1970s and has grown ever since - is unregulated. The proposed Endangered Species Act exemption will do nothing to bring irrigation pumping under control. Under these circumstances, experts expect the dewatering of these rivers to continue.
Because it is one of the prime tools Fish and Game officials have to protect fish, one would think that Fish and Game Code 5937 would be a central feature of the Take Permit proposed for Scott and Shasta irrigators. Code 5937 states that irrigators and other dam owners must allow enough water to pass their dams and diversions to maintain fish habitat below “in good condition.” But those who know these valleys also know that this law has never been enforced in the Shasta and Scott Valleys. The non-enforcement of Fish & Game Code 5937 was made public by San Francisco Chronicle veteran reports Glen Martin and Tom Stienstra during the drought in 2001. They quoted local CDFG warden Renie Cleland: “ ‘This has gone all the way to Sacramento,’ said Cleland. ‘It's extremely politically sensitive. I was told to take no enforcement action on it. These fish are dying. We've got five or six thousand steelhead trout dead on the Scott, and (dead juvenile steelhead) everywhere on the Shasta’.”
What warden Cleland didn’t say is that Coho salmon were among the fish that died when irrigators dried up the river that year and that the practice of looking the other way was not new but had been the rule for as long as anyone could remember.
The failure of state and local officials to enforce basic California laws designed to protect fish in the Shasta and Scott River Basins is but one of the secrets which one can discover below the surface of Klamath Basin water politics. But this one is likely to attract more attention than the California Department of Fish and Game would like. That’s because not only have these state officials negotiated in secret with private parties, they also propose turning over their responsibility to oversee enforcement of the California Endangered Species Act to a local non-elected board made up of the very ranchers and farmers who would be the beneficiaries of the California ESA exemption. Under the terms of the proposed Take Permit, the Siskiyou Resource Conservation District would be in charge not only of “monitoring irrigator compliance” with provisions of the Take Permit but also with reporting non-compliance to Fish and Game officials. In effect, the very people who are the beneficiaries of the permit would be in charge of monitoring their own compliance and of reporting violations.
Turing over California Endangered Species Act compliance to a locally-appointed board made up of farmers and ranchers would set an important precedent and one with great potential to negatively impact California’s rarest and most at risk species. That is why the proposed Take Permit is likely to attract opposition from conservation, wildlife and fishing groups that until now have not been involved in the Klamath River Basin.
Involvement of new players is what it may take to stop the dangerous CESA precedent in its tracks. It is rumored that state officials have approached other Basin interests suggesting that the proposed Scott and Shasta California Endangered Species Act exemption be part of a broader Klamath River deal that includes dam removal. The usual defenders of Klamath River salmon want CDFG’s support for Klamath dam removal and may be willing to look the other way on the Take Permit in order to solidify support for dam removal.
Meanwhile Coho salmon remain at risk. As I write this article, Coho are holed-up in the Scott River canyon waiting for rain to restore flows in the dewatered Scott River so that they can reach their spawning grounds. Coho in the Scott and Shasta remain at high risk; in two years out of three the spawning populations are well below the 200-300 spawners scientists tell us are the minimum numbers needed to maintain a salmon run over time. And year by year – as unrestrained and unregulated groundwater pumping continues to expand - flows in these rivers are less and less for a given amount of rainfall.
No one knows how long these conditions can continue before Coho go extinct in the Scott and Shasta – the Klamath tributaries where they once were most abundant. One thing, however, is certain: If the hundred or so ranchers and alfalfa growers and their political supporters get the Take Permit they seek, the demise of Scott and Shasta River Coho salmon will be one giant step closer to becoming reality.
The author has resided in the Klamath River Basin since 1975 and has been involved in salmon restoration and salmon politics since 1986.
The Special Tax on Your Retirement Savings
by Joe Cobb
A special income tax is hidden among the instructions on your federal form 1040. If you are younger than retirement age, you would have no reason to notice it at all. It is found on line 20 of the long federal tax form, identified as "Social Security benefits."
You don't get Social Security benefits yet? Learn about this tax now, before it hits you—hard. Every dollar you put away into tax-sheltered savings (except Roth IRA contributions) will one day pay this tax. This tax is a classic of political stealth and deception.
Line 20 does not tax Social Security benefits, since these benefits are not taxable. Instead, this special tax falls on other income you receive after you begin receiving Social Security benefits. This tax changes your gross income, and that is what changes your tax rate when you receive money from a retirement account.
The tax increase is not small. It jumps up your marginal tax rate by 50 percent. So if you are in the 15 percent tax bracket, your marginal tax rate becomes 22.5 percent. And if you are already in the 25 percent tax bracket, it can raise your marginal tax rate by 85 percent: instead of paying 25 percent tax to the IRS for what you get from an IRA or 401(k) plan, you will pay 46.25 percent on this money.
Imagine two twins, both with identical jobs and incomes. But let's say one twin saves lots of money and the second twin spends everything. Assume that each twin receives identical Social Security benefits, but the first also receives distributions from a 401(k) plan he contributed to, and never paid taxes for, his entire life. Taxes will be due when the retirement distributions begin. If the second twin keeps on working, because he has no savings, his marginal tax rate will be perhaps 15 percent. But the retirement distributions from the first twin will have a tax rate of 22.5 percent on every dollar. If the twins were in the 25 percent tax bracket, the frugal, prudent twin would pay 46.25 percent on every dollar.
Only professional income tax preparers, and members of Congress, are aware of how this tax works (only a few Congressional staff understand it). For a chilling look at how it is calculated, check out the instructions and the worksheets that come along with Line 20. You'll find a masterpiece of confusion.
This tax was first passed in 1983. In those days, Social Security was headed for bankruptcy by 1990, so a tax increase was the solution Senator Bob Dole and Alan Greenspan, not yet chairman of the Federal Reserve, decided to give us. They knew it would be political dynamite to change anything about Social Security, so they crafted this sneaky idea. Social Security would not be touched! Instead, other income you get in retirement would be taxed at a higher rate.
To delay any visible effects of this tax for at least 10 years, a large $25,000 exemption was granted ($32,000 for married couples filing joint tax returns). But the exemption was not indexed for inflation. Congress did that on purpose, so eventually everyone would come under this special tax—but not until the culprit members of Congress had retired. A quarter century has passed and this tax now affects the savings of almost every retired American. In a few years all but the poorest retired people will pay this extra tax.
Last year, Congress passed amendments to the 401(k) law to enroll all American workers automatically. The retirement savings credit has been part of the tax code for the past four years. It is as if Congress knows raising taxes directly is unpopular, so they design schemes to collect more revenue indirectly from people's tax-sheltered retirement savings. Young people who are encouraged to save for retirement are being suckered (only the Roth IRA escapes this tax).
Is your plan for retirement to give the federal tax collector half of what you've saved? The only good news in this story is that California state income tax does not have this higher rate feature. The tax systems in Arizona and about 40 other states do include this extra tax, automatically incorporating it in your "adjusted gross income."
The lesson to be learned from this sneaky tax on retirement savings should be to toss out the entire tax code and replace it with a simple flat tax. It is treacherously undemocratic for any tax system to be as incomprehensible as the one in the United States today.
# # #
Joe Cobb was chief economist for the United States Senate, prior to holding the prestigious John M. Olin Senior Fellowship at the Heritage Foundation (1993-96). Cobb is a past president of the National Association of Business Economists, National Capital Chapter.
Exclusive survey findings: Many Americans long to visit Cuba; few would use a male birth control pill
Zogby Poll on MSN: Americans would give up cable TV, but keep pets, if poverty loomed
Posted Friday March 23, 2007 -------- Financial fears plague all income brackets, a Zogby Interactive poll on MSN finds. Fifty-three percent of Americans with household incomes over $100,000 say they can see themselves falling into poverty. If financial hard times hit, cable TV would be the first thing to go, say 50% of Americans. Giving up the car would be the last resort for most Americans (67%). Only 17% said they would give up their pets.
The interactive survey of 10,258 adults nationwide was conducted Feb. 9-12, 2007, and carries a margin of error of +/- 1 percentage point.
Two other highlights from this exclusive poll find that a good number of Americans would like to travel to Cuba, and only a small contingent would try a male birth control poll. The results from this survey, as well as previous polls conducted by Zogby and MSN, are posted across relevant MSN sites at http://www.msn.com. Every month MSN and Zogby team up to conduct surveys aimed at discovering what Americans really think, on topics ranging from current events to technology and all stops in between.
Overall, 61% of Americans say they could imagine going poor. And, if faced with tough decisions about how to save money, 22% say their cell phone would be the first thing to go, while 7% say their Internet service is the first thing they‚d give up. To see the complete poverty poll results, visit MSN Money at: articles.moneycentral.msn.com/SavingandDebt/LearnToBudget/EvenWellOffCanImagineBecomingPoor.aspx
Abalone pest meets its match -------- and
Obituary of Joel Hedgpeth --------and
Bodega Bay Fire finds a surplus --------
click
| Photo Gallery | Go to page -- 1 2 3 4 | West Marin Front Page |
 |
|
