2011-12-30 "Wolf's entry into Calif. major environmental step" by Peter Fimrite from "San Francisco Chronicle"
[http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-12-30/news/30571700_1_gray-wolf-wolf-packs-male-wolf]
A lone gray wolf crossed the border into California and was on the move south of Klamath Falls on Thursday, becoming the first wild wolf in the state in almost a century.
The 2 1/2-year-old male wolf, known as OR7, was tracked using a GPS collar as it crossed the Oregon border, to the delight of conservationists and the horror of the many ranchers in the forested northern regions of California.
 "Whether one is for it or against it, the entry of this lone wolf into California is an historic event and the result of much work by the wildlife agencies in the West," said Charlton H. Bonham, director of the California Department of Fish and Game. "If the gray wolf does establish a population in California, there will be much more work to do here."
The presence of the mythic predator in California is a major event for environmentalists, who would like to see the state's native predators and wildlife returned. But it could also influence environmental and ranching policies and gun laws if the large, potentially dangerous canine carnivores become prevalent in populated regions.
 The young wolf, which left his pack in northeastern Oregon in September, was confirmed to be in Siskiyou County at about noon Wednesday. A signal from his radio collar at 6 a.m. Thursday showed that he was several miles south of the border.

Endangered species -
Wolves are listed in the state as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act.
 Nobody knows what OR7 will do next, but the presence of a wolf in California is alarming to ranchers, who are afraid recolonization could endanger their livestock.
"We do not welcome the wolf back in California," said Jack Hanson, a cattle rancher in Lassen County and the treasurer of the California Cattlemen's Association who hopes to work with game wardens to monitor and control the population. "We would like to put a big shield up and keep him out, no doubt. ... If there were no regulations, our family would shoot them on sight so that they did not multiply."
 Patrick Valentino, who is on the board of the California Wolf Center, which is dedicated to the preservation of wild wolves, has a different view. "We need to reduce the emotional component about wolves and focus on both the science and conservation of wolves," he said. "The return of wolves should not be seen as an anti-ranching event. In fact, we should find ways to bring stakeholders together whether they are pro- or anti-wolf."
Mike Fris, the assistant regional director of ecological services for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pacific Southwest region, said wolves are a concern regarding livestock only when they are in packs. Domestic dogs are virtually identical genetically to wolves.
 "A single wolf is more likely to be feeding on carcasses than livestock," he said. "He's the only wolf we know of in the state of California at the moment."
 Experts believe that will inevitably change.
 OR7 came from a pack in Wallowa County, Ore., one of four known wolf packs in the northeast corner of the state, bordering Idaho. The wolves would not be there at all if 66 Canadian wolves had not been released in Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in the mid-1990s.

Hunted down -
 The reintroduction campaign was necessary after bounty hunters and trappers - harboring largely erroneous myths about wolves as vicious man-eaters - drove them to extinction in the lower 48 states. The last wild wolf in California was trapped in Lassen County in 1924.
 There is no doubt that gray wolves are fearsome predators. They are smart and work efficiently in packs, and the males can reach up to 115 pounds. But they've never been known to hunt humans. Most attacks have been attributed to rabies or starvation.
 The gray wolf population has multiplied and spread out since being reintroduced. There are now more than 1,600 wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains. Congress delisted wolves in some areas this year, meaning ranchers can once again hunt the mysterious animals.
 A lone wolf crossed into Oregon in 1999, becoming the first of the predators seen in the state in 60 years. The first wolf pack was confirmed in 2008. There are now at least two dozen wolves in the four Oregon packs, and they, too, have created controversy.
Pack members have killed 20 cows and calves over the past two years. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife killed two of the culprits and were planning to cull two other wolves before conservation groups filed a lawsuit.

700-mile wildland trek -
The California wolf, a 90-pound subadult that was tranquilized and collared in February, was already a minor sensation before he crossed the border. As most young males do, he left his pack three months ago. Since then, he has wandered over mountains, across highways, through forests and meandered about 700 miles back and forth across Oregon's wildlands.
OR7 has been near the California border for several weeks now, leading to a great deal of speculation among wildlife officials, ranchers and conservation groups, one of which is holding a contest to change the wolf's decidedly un-sexy name.
His presence, however, doesn't mean he will stay in California. In fact, experts said, he will have to wait a long time before a female wolf also discovers the Golden State.
"He's looking for a pack or other mates," Fris said. "If he stays in California, that most likely won't be fruitful for him."

Keeping them wild -
More about how to avoid human-wildlife interactions can be found on Department of Fish and Game's website at www.dfg.ca.gov/keepmewild.

The mother of California's first wild wolf in almost a century is seen in Wallowa County, Ore., in 2009. Her son crossed the border into California on Wednesday.
Credit: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 2009

2011-12-29 "When Special Fishing Regulations Differ on the Same River"
[http://californiaoutdoors.wordpress.com/2011/12/29/when-special-fishing-regulations-differ-on-the-same-river/]
Even if regulations on various stretches of the same river differ, anglers may never exceed the daily bag or possession limit for the location where they are currently fishing, regardless of where the fish was caught:
Question: What are the bag limits for waters that have special regulations for trout? In some cases, specifically the middle fork of the Stanislaus River, the river is broken down into sections. For example, from the Beardsley Dam down to the Spring Gap Bridge there are certain restrictions and the bag limit is two fish of at least 14 inches. From the same bridge down to New Melones Lake there are no special restrictions and the bag limit is two fish.
If you fish on one side of the bridge following the special restrictions (only artificial lures and barbless hooks) and you keep two fish that are at least 14 inches, can you also be in possession of two fish from the other side of the bridge that allows any type of bait and hook? Meaning you would be in possession of four fish because they were caught essentially under the bag limit of the two different bodies of water based on the regulations. Also, how would you be able to prove to a game warden if they ask about the additional two fish that you caught up river beyond the bridge? (Larry G.)

Answer: You may not exceed the daily bag or possession limit for the location where you are currently fishing, regardless of where you caught the fish. In your example, the daily bag limit is two fish, and you cannot exceed that limit on the same day even if you fish multiple segments of the river.
For an alphabetical list of waters with special fishing regulations, see California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 7.50. In the current California Freshwater Sport Fishing Regulations booklet, they can be found beginning on page 30.

2011-12-21 "Lone Holdout's First Nuclear Winter Looms in Tohoku" by Christopher Johnson from "The Japan Times"
[http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20111218x2.html]
MIHARU VILLAGE, Fukushima Prefecture — As bitter winds blow around cesium and other radioactive particles spewed from the nearby Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant's reactors, Naoto Matsumura lights a cigarette, which he considers relatively good for his health.
"I would get sick if I stopped smoking; I have a lot to worry about," says Matsumura, 52, who reckons he is the only person still living within a 20-km radius of the world's worst atomic disaster since Chernobyl.
According to reports from Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency published in August, following the Great East Japan Earthquake on March 11, and subsequent explosions at three reactors about 13 km from Matsumura's door, the plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co. (Tepco) has released 168 times more radiation than the atomic bombs that razed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.
Living without electricity or enough money to fill his generators with gas, even as the mercury is already dipping below zero, Matsumura wonders if his neighbor's supply of charcoal will be enough to keep him warm through the frigid winter in his corner of the once-thriving town of Tomioka that used to be home to 16,000 people.
He's worried, too, that the hundreds of animals he's been feeding since the area's other residents were evacuated in haste on March 12 — some 400 cows, 60 pigs, 30 fowl, 10 dogs, more than 100 cats, and an ostrich — won't survive to see another spring.
"They need help from humans," he says while lighting another of the 20-odd cigarettes he admits to smoking a day. "My supplies to feed them will be gone by the end of December. They need food, and buildings for shelter from the winter. I'm the only one taking care of everything. The government should do it, but I'm doing it."
As we stand in a rice field outside the exclusion zone about 40 km due west of the ongoing meltdowns, Matsumura tells me that he comes from an ancestral line of samurai, and he was raised by a "spartan" father to work hard and think for himself.
A lifelong farmer, he's lived alone since separating from his wife 10 years ago. When his worried children, aged 23 and 21, called from their homes in distant Saitama Prefecture after the explosions in March, Matsumura says he told them: "Don't worry. If the whole world dies from this nuclear disaster, I'm still not going to die. I'm not going to leave here."
Indeed, this silver-haired, soft-spoken man of the land who has enjoyed playing golf in Saipan and the Philippines, says he now views himself as a lone maverick in a toxic desert — one hunted by an invisible enemy called "radioactivity" eating away at living things now and into the future. As the other animals perish around him, he wonders when it will be his turn.
All Matsumura's friends have left, and they no longer ask him to bring their stuff to them in the temporary shelters they must now inhabit. The automatic vending machines, which used to light up the country roads, no longer work.
After sunset, he is surrounded by miles of total darkness devoid of human movement. He has no television or Internet, only a cellphone that loses charge all too quickly. He stokes up a charcoal fire in his house, tucks himself into a futon, and goes to sleep by 7 p.m. — haunted by nightmares of what could be happening inside his body.
Waking with the rising sun, he eats another can of food, and takes his dogs for a 20-minute walk among barren fields. He spends daylight hours cleaning grave sites and tending to animals withering around him in their stalls, sheds and barns. Meanwhile, cows and pigs and other animals set free by their fleeing owners in March now fend for themselves in wild, radiation-contaminated nature.
Even nine months after everybody else fled on March 12, Matsumura says he is still shocked by the scenes of cruel death he encounters daily: the bones of cows that starved tied up or in confined spaces after they'd eaten all their fodder; a locked cage full of 20 shrivelled canaries denied by their keeper's panic even a chance to fly away free.
"People don't want to see dead animals. They would be shocked if they saw it for themselves. I see it every day," this animal-lover says quietly with real feeling.
His efforts to publicize the plight of the animals haven't worked, he says. He tells how he once showed a low-level government official around nearby Tomioka town — formerly famous for having one of the longest cherry-blossom tunnels in Japan — and told him they should at least take away carcasses. But even though Tepco brings in thousands of workers to stabilize the reactors, he says the official told him: "Sorry, Mr. Matsumura, we can't do anything inside the 20-km evacuation zone."
On April 21, more than a month after the ongoing disaster began, Matsumura joined a protest outside Tepco's headquarters in Tokyo. "I told them, 'Take care of the pets and farm animals, it's your responsibility.' But they only said, 'We are studying it.' They still haven't taken action," he reported.
In September, he showed two lower-level Tepco officials around Tomioka. During their conversation together, he says, "I told them to tell the top people about what they saw. Maybe they told them, but the top guys pretend they don't know anything," he said, pausing to light a cigarette. "They don't have human hearts. They only think about money."
Though he's not alone in lambasting Tepco, Matsumura's rage is more intense than most. He blames Tepco for "killing" his 100-year-old aunt, who he says died from exhaustion after being moved from several hospitals between Tomioka and finally Aizu-Wakamatsu in western Fukushima Prefecture.
"Many people died like that because of Tepco," he declares. "It's a terrible company. They have more power than the national parliament, because they control the supply of electricity, and they have power over the media through advertising."
He says Tepco, which will need massive taxpayer funding to stay afloat, has only paid nuclear refugees ¥1 million each in compensation (about $12,000).
Yet the company, which claims to be on schedule with its plan to achieve a cold shutdown of the damaged reactors by the new year, saw fit to present itself in a positive light when, on Nov. 12, it invited 35 journalists (including four from overseas) for a first media view of its wrecked nuclear plant.
"I think it's remarkable that we've come this far," Environment Minister Goshi Hosono told those on the tour. "The situation at the beginning was extremely severe. At least we can say we have overcome the worst."
Such hints of hubris, however, sit uneasily with the established facts.
In November, the esteemed journal Proceedings of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences carried the results of an international research study led by Teppei Yasunari of the Universities Space Research Association in Maryland. This found that radioactive cesium had "strongly contaminated" the soils in "large areas" of eastern and northeastern Japan, including Fukushima Prefecture, while western Japan had been relatively sheltered by mountain ranges. (To view this report, visit www.pnas.org/content/108/49/19530.)
Since the release of those findings, the Tokyo government has recently banned the sale of rice from large swaths of Fukushima Prefecture after high levels of cesium were found in crops from Onami, about 65 km northwest of the nuclear power plants.
Though Matsumura, who doesn't have a geiger counter, says he somehow thinks radiation levels are decreasing, he believes it's not safe for former residents to return to Tomioka. And he's adamant that children shouldn't eat rice from eastern Fukushima Prefecture, though he does himself.
Parking his white Suzuki truck near Koriyama City train station outside the evacuation zone, he says that his plight and that of the animals in his locality is not widely known in Japan — largely, he riles, because TV companies have ignored him or repeatedly canceled segments about him.
"It's now impossible for me to meet with Japan's mainstream media," he explains. "If I say bad things about Tepco, and the government, they won't run it because Tepco is their sponsor."
One tabloid magazine, Friday, did run a two-page feature on Matsumura, with bizarre photos of him feeding an ostrich — which it quipped in bad taste was "the official mascot of Tepco."
So, as he believes himself to have been ostracized in his native Japan, Matsumura has made a few trips to Tokyo to beg foreign journalists to tell the truth about Fukushima. To reach him inside the no-entry evacuation zone, one such from Italy walked along railway tracks for 20 km under cover of darkness to evade police patrols. Searching for him, as their meeting was prearranged, Matsumura says he could hear the man's footsteps in a pitch-black railway tunnel. "When he was about 10 meters away, I called out ghost noises — and he was dumbstruck with fear. He later told me he'd thought his heart was about to explode."
Another visit Matsumura received recently was on a Sunday afternoon in November. The farmer tells how an ambulance suddenly showed up at his door. "I was a bit unnerved that they'd come into my house, and I didn't know who'd sent them," he said, adding that "they checked my body and my health, but they didn't find anything bad in particular."
He gets most passionate talking about the abandoned animals and about nuclear energy. "The whole world should stop using this bad form of energy. Anything we build with our hands can break someday," he says. "Governments should stop lying to us. Everybody in Fukushima — everybody — doesn't believe the news about the nuclear situation."
As he prepares to leave me at the station and return to his home in the no-go zone before night falls, he says that Tomioka, like other towns in the evacuation zone, will disappear unless drastic action is taken immediately.
As he put it: "Only senior citizens are saying they want to move back, not the younger people. Eventually, in 20 years, all these elders will pass away, and there won't be any younger generation to maintain the circle of life. Nobody will be left."
But for now, he says, he's going to stay. "I am not bored or depressed, because I'm used to being alone. I know I am doing the right thing. My own doctor says I'm a 'champion of radiation.' "

 In the zone: Naoto Matsumura, who believes he is the only person still living in the evacuation zone around the Fukushima No.1 nuclear power plant. (Christopher Johnson Photo)

2011-12-20 "American Canyon High School lauded by Huffington Post for being green" by Rachel Raskin-Zrihen from "Vallejo Times-Herald"
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_19583942]
AMERICAN CANYON -- This city's first and only high school was recognized in a national publication as the nation's "greenest" -- an achievement the writer seemed to think all the more remarkable for its history and proximity to Vallejo.
Former Sierra Club Chairman Carl Pope's story in the Huffington Post on Friday notes that -- despite American Canyon's being "a far cry from the high-priced vineyards and estates to the north" -- its 3-year-old high school last month was the nation's first to be certified as a "green school" by the Collaborative for High Performance Schools.
The article describes the city as bordering "blue-collar Vallejo" and for years, the "low-income community" where facilities and problems "the rest of Napa County didn't want to deal with" were dumped.
Since its 1992 incorporation, however, American Canyon has "developed a remarkable culture of civic engagement and participation," of which the high school is one expression, Pope said Monday.
"I wasn't trying to make a comment on Vallejo, but (American Canyon) is not part of the (upscale) Napa Wine Country, and I think most people would have assumed the country's first green high school would be someplace like Mill Valley or Calistoga," he said. "Poor people don't typically get the best stuff, and this time they did, and that's what's exciting about it."
Before the high school was built, American Canyon students were bused to up-county schools. A bond measure was passed to build the school, and make it "a 22nd century investment," outgoing City Manager Rich Ramirez said.
While Pope writes that he hopes in five years American Canyon High will be just one of hundreds of ecologically friendly American schools, city officials are proud to be first.
"It's kind of cool," Ramirez said of the Huffington Post article. "It was a conscious decision by the school board to make an investment to save money in the long run."
The "clever" energy-saving efficiencies incorporated into the school's design are a source of pride for city leaders.
"There have been some minor bugs to work out, like some communications issues that have been resolved, but, that said, the design used every imaginable energy efficiency," Ramirez said.
Mayor Leon Garcia, too, said "the community is quite proud of that," noting "an awful lot of planning went into that."
Though John Stong of Quattrocchi Kwok Architects, the Santa Rosa-based firm that designed the school, had not heard it was named the nation's greenest, he said he wasn't surprised.
"We were asked to design a very sustainable school and we took that to heart," he said. "We are very proud it's been so well accepted by the community."
Most of the sustainable features could be incorporated into any building nearly anywhere, he said.
"For example, the use of (solar panels) is available anywhere the sun shines, as are ground source geo-thermal heating systems that take advantage of the constant temperature deep below ground for energy efficient heating and cooling," Stong said.
Pope attributes the American Canyon High School success in part to the community "pulling itself together in very interesting ways."
"I think it's remarkable that they have now got this achievement that's recognized as a wonderful thing nationally," he said. "I'm blown away and thrilled. I've driven past that location frequently and never knew there was something wonderful two blocks away."

2011-12-19 "Proposed plant at Potrero Hills would connect energy to PG&E grid" by Melissa Murphy from the "The Vacaville Reporter"
[http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_19577410]
Potrero Hills landfill in Suisun City is more than just huge mounds of trash. It sits on a renewable resource that has hardly been tapped -- yet.
Currently, 75 wells drilled deep into the heap of decomposing trash siphon off the gas produced by the rotting garbage, pulling it out like a vacuum, so it can be burned.
The process allows the dump to emit fewer greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but there is a better solution said Potrero Hills District Manager Jim Dunbar.
"We're doing the right thing by burning it," Dunbar said. "But we want to do the better thing and turn it into power."
The landfill is teaming up with DTE Biomass Energy Inc. to reuse the landfill gas. Instead of burning it as a flare, the plan is to send the gas through a pipeline to a power generation plant on site.
DTE is earning permits to build the plant which would connect the energy to the Pacific Gas & Electric grid.
The $20 million project, once approved, will sit on the landfill site and produce 9.6 megawatts of renewable power, enough to power 6,000 homes.
Just as important, DTE officials said, the project will create jobs and bring tax revenue to Solano County.
"It's a good addition to the area," said Lou Wilkinson, vice president of business development for DTE Biomass Energy Inc. "It's a win-win for everyone."
He said using the landfill gas is a "significant" advantage to using other popular renewable sources for energy.
Unlike solar or wind energy, gas produced from the landfill is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Wilkinson described the renewable resource produced at the landfill as a "use it or lose it" opportunity. Right now, Potrero Hills isn't taking advantage of the resource, he said.
The reason for picking Potrero Hills to start a new project, Wilkinson, is its established relationship with the corporate office of Waste Connections Inc. and Solano County.
"Solano County is a great place to do business," he said. "Potrero Hills is a good fit for a gas to energy project."
He added that the proposed project is very economical and very cost competitive with other options.
DTE Biomass Inc. has made a commitment to invest $1 billion in energy nationwide and has managed gas and electric utility businesses in more than 20 states for more than 25 years.
"We want people to know that they can trust us because we're a company that has the funds to do this," Wilkinson said.
Still, he said, the Potrero Hills project is a big one for the company.
DTE is obtaining an interconnect permit from PG&E and an air permit from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The interconnect permit will ensure that DTE is using the right equipment and that it is correctly installed and delivered in a safe way to PG&E and then to customers. Electricity moved to the PG&E grid will be sold by DTE. The company expects to be up and running at the end of 2013.

2011-12-18 "Endangered Species Act Neglecting Hundreds of Animals" by Alicia Graef
[http://www.care2.com/causes/endangered-species-act-missing-hundreds-proposed-changes-announced.html]
Last week the Obama administration proposed a new rule that would change the way plants and animals are classified under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in different states.
The new rule would grant endangered species protection across state lines, forcing states to adhere to federal regulations, which is expected to make it easier for the ESA to be enforced and help clarify which species are eligible for protection. However, it may make it more difficult to add new species or keep some species on the list under this proposed change.
“The new policy would clarify that a plant or animal could be listed as threatened or endangered if threats occur in a “significant portion of its range,” even if the threat crosses state lines and does not apply in the species’ entire range,” according to the AP [http://www.flatheadbeacon.com/articles/article/obama_no_more_listing_endangered_species_by_state/25733/].
This rule proposed by the two federal agencies responsible for administering the ESA, the Interior Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries), would essentially replace a Bush-era policy that allowed for animals to be classified differently in neighboring states and applied protection only to areas where they were struggling, a policy that was withdrawn after being rejected in federal courts earlier this year in the case of gray wolves.
“This proposed interpretation will provide consistency and clarity for the services and our partners, while making more effective use of our resources and improving our ability to protect and recover species before they are on the brink of extinction,” said Fish and Wildlife Service Director Dan Ashe [http://westernfarmpress.com/government/endangered-species-act-gets-clarification-upgrade?page=2]. “By taking action to protect imperiled native fish, wildlife and plants, we can ensure a healthy future for our communities and protect treasured landscapes for future generations.”
But not everyone agrees that this interpretation will be beneficial to species who need protection.
“The phrase “significant portion of range” is important, because it means that species need not be at risk of extinction globally to receive protection. The policy proposed today sharply limits interpretation of this phrase by both defining “significant” to mean only where the species currently exists, not its historic range and by defining significant to mean that loss of the species from that portion of range would threaten the survival of the species as a whole,” according to the Center for Biological Diversity.
“Under the policy proposed today, a species could be absolutely gone or close to vanishing almost everywhere it’s always lived — but not qualify for protection because it can still be called secure on one tiny patch of land,” said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director the Center [http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2011/endangered-species-act-12-08-2011.html]. “The policy absolutely undermines the spirit of the Endangered Species Act and will be a recipe for extinction of our native wildlife if it’s finalized — a loophole that’s really a black hole. It will allow for massive species decline and habitat destruction.”
The timing of the proposed change also coincides with a study published this month in the journal Conservation Letters, that compared the number of species listed under the ESA to the number listed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Red List [http://www.iucnredlist.org/], which is the mother list for threatened species worldwide, and found that nearly 75% of animals, or 531 species, in the U.S. that are globally classified as threatened or endangered have no protection under the ESA.
“Our study found that hundreds of imperiled animals are not receiving the protection they need to survive,” said Bert Harris, lead author of the study and a graduate student at the University of Adelaide in Australia [http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2011/endangered-species-act-12-15-2011.html]. “The Endangered Species Act is the world’s most effective law for saving species, but it can only work if species are protected as threatened or endangered.”
You can submit a comment about the proposed change at the Federal eRulemaking Portal by following the instructions for submitting comments to Docket No. [FWS–R9–ES–2011–0031] [http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FWS-R9-ES-2011-0031-0001].

2011-12-14 "Niles Canyon Road widening project on hold" by Carolyn Jones from "San Francisco Chronicle"
[http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/13/BAF61MC538.DTL]
Niles Canyon Road got a reprieve from the bulldozers Tuesday, at least for the time being.
Caltrans agreed to stop plans to widen the scenic, 8-mile route between Fremont and Sunol due to environmental concerns, according to a legal settlement reached with the Alameda Creek Alliance.
"We got to put a lump of coal in Caltrans' stocking," said Jeff Miller, head of the Alameda Creek Alliance. "I think it's clear Caltrans screwed this up on every level."
Miller's group sued Caltrans in June to stop the $80 million project, which called for widening the shoulders and adding retaining walls and a median to Highway 84, a twisty route through the East Bay foothills that Caltrans called one of the most dangerous in the region.
The improvements would have made the road safer by giving motorists more room to safely pull over or make turns, said Caltrans spokesman Bob Haus. From 1998 to 2008, Niles Canyon Road was the scene of 436 collisions, resulting in 13 deaths and 342 people injured.
The project would have been devastating for the sensitive habitat in Niles Canyon, though, Miller said. The canyon and creek are home to the endangered Alameda whipsnake and California red-legged frog, along with steelhead and dozens of other species.
Caltrans has already removed about 100 sycamores, willows and other trees in the canyon in preparation for the widening project. The agency will have to plant replacements in the canyon.
Caltrans had also started repaving the road before Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch issued a restraining order in June. Caltrans will now rip up the new pavement and replace the rumble strips it had removed, Haus said.
The settlement stops the first phase of the project, the portion of the road closest to Fremont. The next two phases are still under review.
Caltrans will probably start over with the first phase, putting forth an environmental impact report and essentially starting the process from scratch, Haus said.
"Caltrans' No. 1 priority is the safety of the motoring public," he said. "We're halting construction on Highway 84 as we continue to look for ways to address safety."
Hundreds of residents of Sunol and Fremont had opposed the project, saying it would encourage motorists to drive faster through the canyon and mar the scenic beauty of the area.
"This settlement is the best thing we could have hoped for," said Dorothy Bradley, 66, of Fremont. "Let's face it - we have bars at both ends of the canyon. Making it easier for people to drive fast was not a good idea."
Instead of widening the road, Caltrans should add stop signs and ask the California Highway Patrol to increase enforcement of speed laws, she said.
"I'm very happy they now have to do an EIR," she said. "At least now they can go back and do this properly."


2011-12-16 "Big Victory for Niles Canyon Protesters" from "Livermore Independent"
[http://www.independentnews.com/news/article_47ecacfe-274d-11e1-8445-0019bb2963f4.html]
A court settlement has stopped CalTrans from further work on the first phase of its Niles Canyon Road improvements. As a result, the first phase went back to square one.
The agency will be pulling up asphalt that it already had installed, re-striping the roadway to its original configuration, and putting rumble strips back, said Bob Haus, public information branch chief for CalTrans District 4.
The settlement comes six months after the Alameda Creek Alliance (ACA) filed suit against CalTrans over the project.
"This is a victory both for protecting Alameda Creek and forcing transparency in public agency decisions," declared ACA director Jeff Miller.
"CalTrans must mitigate for damaged trees along Alameda Creek, and cannot pursue a highway project in lower Niles Canyon without adequate environmental review and full public participation," added Miller.
"If CalTrans comes back with a revised project, we strongly suggest it not involve significant highway widening or unnecessary damage to trout habitat," said Miller.
CalTrans had planned to spend $80 million on three segments, including widening the roadway to provide two 12-foot lanes, a 2-foot median, and shoulders up to 8 feet wide. A CalTrans contractor cut down 99 trees to make room for the road widening in phase 1. In phase 2 of the project, CalTrans has plans to cut down more than 400 trees.
The sudden removal of trees along the road was the lightning bolt that shocked Sunol and Niles residents into impromptu action. They picketed along the roadway while the trees were being removed.
Once they found out about the overall project, the residents organized politically, and formed Save Niles Canyon. With the help of Senate Majority Leader Ellen Corbett and Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski, they held large public meetings with CalTrans officials.
The protests led to the lawsuit by ACA, whose main interest is to prevent a project that would damage fish habitat in Niles Creek, because of the increased muddy runoff and bank erosion that the ACA says the changes would cause.

CALTRANS PLEDGES ITS COOPERATION
Asked about CalTrans' future plans for phase 1, Haus replied, "We'll work with the Alameda Creek Alliance. We will work with our local partners and the community, while improving the safety of the scenic highway, and will continue to consider the canyon's natural resources and beauty."
CalTrans puts safety first, in view of the "high incidence of traffic accidents and the high fatality rate" on the road, said Haus.
Such statements were challenged at public meetings by residents. They referred to CalTrans' own data to show that traffic safety has actually improved toward the end of the period to which CalTrans was referring.
The ACA sued CalTrans in June. The suit contended that CalTrans made a unilateral decision internally to go ahead with the project, without providing proper public notice about the project during its environmental review phase. CalTrans said it did run small classified ads in two daily newspapers about the environmental review. There were a dozen comments, but no public hearings. There was a negative declaration issued for the project.
Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch agreed with ACA that public notice was insufficient, and directed that a settlement be reached.
Miller said that the ACA will ask to leave the enforcement of the settlement in Roesch's court, since he is familiar with the case.
According to the settlement, CalTrans must return all permits that it obtained for the project. The agency must go through the entire permitting process again for phase 1.
One condition of one of the permits, which was granted by the state water board, said that 68 trees must be planted as mitigation for the 99 that were cut down in phase 1. In addition, CalTrans must mitigate more trees on 5 acres of stream-side habitat along Alameda Creek. Those mitigation conditions in the permit will remain an obligation, although the permit itself would no longer be in effect.

PHASE 2 THREATENS MANY MORE TREES
There is potential for the removal of more than 400 more trees in phase 2 of the project, said Miller. That phase of the roadway, in the middle segment of the canyon, has been the subject of public hearings that were attended by as many as 200 people.
CalTrans is still researching its answers for phase 2. Miller said that the prepared response was expected to be issued next summer. CalTrans spokesman Haus was not able to confirm any estimated date.
Miller said, "ACA is monitoring any project approval for phase 2, since the environmental review for that project was also severely flawed."
Sunol resident Bob Foster, a former school board member there, said, "CalTrans has to be watched. They do not have a record of good transparency."
Commenting on the settlement, Foster said, "I'm thrilled that CalTrans seems to see the writing on the wall. They realize we won't go away." If they want to do something that impacts any of us, they will have to work with us.
"Those of us who live in Sunol can be worked with, but not ignored," added Foster.

WORK ON RESTORATION
CalTrans will be working on State Route 84 in Niles Canyon beginning Tuesday night, December 13 to restore the road to pre-Phase 1 conditions. Weather permitting, there will be one-way traffic control as necessary from the Rosewarnes Underpass to Alameda Creek/Richmond Bridge through Thursday night, December 15, from 9 p.m. to 5 a.m., and Friday night, December 16, from 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. Flaggers will be on location to assist with traffic flow.