April 20, 2014

Bay-Delta peripheral-tunnel plan could dry up north-state reservoirs

Dawn breaking at duck blind in the Delta. Photos by Roger Mammon.

Dawn breaking at duck blind in the Delta. Photos by Roger Mammon.

Population growth and climate change create huge challenges to California water supplies. The state Department of Water Resources (DWR) has been pushing solutions from the last century, which include huge tunnels in the Delta (see October-November Yodeler, page 3) and new or raised dams for Sacramento River water.

The DWR has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on computer modeling in an attempt to get around a fundamental fact—that we are currently diverting more water from the state’s rivers and the Sacramento Delta than the ecosystems can sustain.

To promise more water to water-export agencies funding the proposed projects, DWR has had to relax current operating limits on north-state reservoirs. The computer models for the proposed operations of the Delta tunnels assume that Shasta, Trinity, and Folsom Reservoirs will be drained to minimum pool in the third year of a multi-year drought, and that Trinity River will be dried up completely. DWR is also assuming that water-quality standards in the Delta will be relaxed, allowing salty Bay water to be drawn even deeper into the estuary (this is a plan that purports to give equal weight to protection of the Delta environment!) These proposed operations would be disastrous for fish and for Sacramento Valley and Delta water users. Nonetheless the water agencies that would supposedly benefit have not yet agreed to pay for the project.

To get around the conflict, DWR is joining with the federal Bureau of Reclamation to propose raising Shasta Dam to store more water—but the raised dam would simply be a dry wall of concrete in nine out of 10 years, and the projected yield for the remaining very wet year double-counts the water that would be stored behind the dam and diverted downstream by the Delta tunnels.


DWR will be releasing the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan on Dec. 13. The public will have until April 14 to comment on the plan; see the next Yodeler for more about the EIR and the Club’s comments on it.

The Chapter Water Committee is working with the League of Women Voters-Eden Area Group to present a forum on the Bay Delta Conservation Plan in early 2014. We will post further information at theYodeler.org  and on the Chapter Calendar when available.

To work with the Chapter Water Committee on in the campaign to oppose the Bay Delta Plan, contact committee co-chair Sonia Diermayer at (510)336-1102 or sodier@mindspring.com.

The Sierra Club’s California/Nevada Water Committee is also working to develop sound alternative solutions. For more information, contact Deirdre Des Jardins at campaign@mbaysav.org.

Deirdre Des Jardins

Marin Supervisors pass toothless streamside ordinance–will our salmon survive politics?

Spawning salmon. Photo by Todd Steiner.

Spawning salmon. Photo by Todd Steiner.

On Oct. 29 the Marin County Board of Supervisors passed an interim 29-month “Stream Conservation Area Ordinance” that does little to protect the three iconic species of salmonids that struggle to survive in our streams.

Their hope is that after this period, the supervisors will have enough information and community input to inform and codify a permanent countywide ordinance.

Because of potential conflicts of interest, only three of the five supervisors were allowed to vote. Supervisors Susan Adams, Kathrin Sears, and Judy Arnold all voted in favor of the ordinance. Supervisor Kinsey,  who had taken the lead promoting it, and Supervisor Katie Rice were disqualified from voting by the state Fair Political Practices Commission, which cited economic conflicts of interest because they own homes near creeks.

Because of a 2011 lawsuit brought by the Salmon Protection and Watershed Network (SPAWN) against Marin County, the court issued an injunction placing the unincorporated areas of the County in San Geronimo Valley under a development moratorium until the County adopted a streamside ordinance as required by the 2007 Marin Countywide Plan. However, the ordinance’s protections for salmon are weaker than those in the Countywide Plan, despite Endangered Species Act listings. Further, the ordinance contains a “poison pill” provision that stipulates it will be nullified by any legal challenge, and one environmentalist testified on Oct. 29 that if the ordinance was passed with the poison pill, he would file a lawsuit before the ordinance goes into effect.

The Sierra Club will consider possible legal actions in support of other groups. If a lawsuit is filed, there is some uncertainty whether the moratorium will remain in effect, but ultimately it will be up to the courts.

Other communities, such as Santa Cruz County, have had strong stream and sensitive-habitat protection ordinances for over 30 years.

A letter signed by 140 scientific experts recommended a setback of 100 feet for all streamside development. The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Central Coast Coho Recovery Plan 2012 states that “urban development” is the number-one threat to coho in Marin’s Lagunitas watershed. The Sierra Club and 29 other environmental organizations signed a letter and took out a full-page ad in the Marin Independent Journal in support of the scientist’s recommendations and opposing the ordinance.

The details of the ordinance are complex, but we fear that it will lead to diminished habitat and degradation of water quality for all aquatic species. The ordinance fails to implement a core principal of the Countywide Plan: that development near streams should be avoided whenever possible. It does not require mitigation for smaller projects, and thus will result in a net loss of critical habitat and in cumulative impacts throughout our watersheds. Its plethora of exceptions will allow sheds, impermeable patios, paths, structures, pesticides and herbicides, and home-remodeling in the stream conservation areas. The ordinance is inconsistent with the Countywide Plan’s calls for “no net loss of riparian acreage” and for a “watershed approach” to planning that considers the connections of streams throughout the system and the impact of development on the entire system. The science-based recommendation for 100-foot setbacks from all streams is ignored.

Why is protection needed now?

The federal government lists coho as endangered and steelhead as threatened. Chinook are not listed. Once in most of the eastside Bay-flowing streams, coho are now extirpated from those streams. They are only in a handful of Marin’s ocean-flowing streams. The Lagunitas Creek watershed is one of the last strongholds for coho in California. Steelhead are still in many streams, and chinook are occasionally found in some of the larger stream channels, but all Marin salmonids are down to only 5 – 10% of historic populations.

NMFS warns of an “extinction spiral” with too few salmon left for the species to remain viable, leading to extirpation in our area. These fish are keystone species that many other species rely on for their survival. Salmon fishing was once a mainstay of northern California’s economy.


Contact the Marin County Board of Supervisors at:

3501 Civic Center Dr.
San Rafael, CA 94903

Tell them to create stronger protections for streams and fish, based on the scientists’ recommendation, by creating a “Sensitive Habitat” ordinance quickly.

You can send an automated e-mail to the Board at www.savemarinsalmon.org.

To keep updated on the county’s process, see www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/CD/main/comdev/advance/SCA.cfm.

To see salmon spawning in Lagunitas Creek, go on the Muir Woods salmon search 2B hike on Sat., Jan. 11 (see Chapter Calendar).

Laura Chariton, Executive Committee, Sierra Club Marin Group

“How Can the California Delta Survive?”

Dawn breaking at duck blind in the Delta. Photos by Roger Mammon.

Dawn breaking at duck blind in the Delta. Photos by Roger Mammon.

Tuesday, November 12, 7 pm, Fort Mason Center, Building A, 2 Marina Boulevard, San Francisco (entrance off Marina Boulevard at Buchanan Street–see map here; $10 parking maximum).

Zócalo Public Square, a not-for-profit daily Ideas Exchange that blends live events and humanities journalism, is hosting a free program on the California Delta, followed by a reception where guests can chat with speakers and one another over a glass of wine.

Moderator will be Lois Kazakoff, deputy editorial-page editor for the San Francisco Chronicle.

The California Delta is one of the world’s great estuaries, providing water to most Californians and supporting hundreds of plant and animal species. But for decades, it has also been the place where grand plans and compromise go to die, thanks to its many conflicting interests and overlapping jurisdictions. The latest proposal for restoring the Delta, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan—which is supposed to provide the state with a more reliable water supply while protecting and improving the Delta ecosystem—faces political opposition and legal challenges that at best could delay it for years. Is the Delta doomed to decline? Or is there a way to restore habitats, fix levees, and guarantee water supply all at once? Delta Conservancy executive officer Campbell Ingram, Public Policy Institute of California co-director of research Ellen Hanak, and Delta farmer Russell van Loben Sels visit Zócalo to discuss whether the Delta can survive and even thrive.

For more details, see http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/event/how-can-the-california-delta-survive/.

Support the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary

960x640_montana-de-oro-state-parkThe 14 national marine sanctuaries in the United States celebrate and safeguard the nation’s richest underwater treasures. The National Marine Sanctuary Program is essentially the offshore version of our National Park System: a way to designate marine environments notable for their biodiversity and cultural history, and to ensure proper management for their ecological integrity.

In 1992 Congress pondered the creation of both a Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and a Central Coast National Marine Sanctuary off the coast of California. Congress opted for half a loaf, drawing an arbitrary line in the ocean just south of San Simeon, decreeing 5,300 square miles north of that line as a national marine sanctuary, and the waters to the south as out of luck.

The Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary was designated in 1980. That leaves the coast of San Luis Obispo and part of Santa Barbara from Point Conception to Cambria — as the hole in the doughnut. This area will be in the cross-hairs when next the cry “drill, baby, drill!” is heard.

Hence the need for the Chumash Cultural Heritage National Marine Sanctuary. The Chumash people were the first inhabitants of California’s central and southern coastal regions, and among the few ocean-going First Peoples of the hemisphere. Their ancient submerged sacred sites extend 13 miles offshore. More than a dozen coastal sites have been continuously occupied for more than 9,000 years.

This cultural heritage, along with the most significant wetland system on the central coast, rocky intertidal zones, coral communities, the highest coastal dunes in the state, magnificent kelp forests, marine mammal haul-out areas, a major sea-otter population, and three whale and porpoise feeding areas, combine to form a clear message, one that we need your help to send to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries: the waters of the Central Coast deserve marine sanctuary status!

As oil supplies get tighter and fracking spreads offshore, this is the only way to permanently protect these waters and their priceless cultural and biological treasures.

We are pleased to support the Northern Chumash Tribal Council in this initiative, and are collecting names in support of this designation. Please sign our petition, and you will be listed as an official supporter.


Sign Up


Andrew Christie, director, Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club

reprinted from http://action.sierraclub.org/site/PageServer?pagename=chp_santalucia_ChumashNMS&autologin=true&s_src=313Z2500S1

Volunteer Chris Thorsen loves water, fire, and baseball

Chris Thorsen in his element.

Chris Thorsen in his element.

It’s with water that Chris Thorsen serves the Sierra Club—foaming, fast-moving water, usually in the South Fork of the American River. Since 2007, Chris has volunteered in the Bay Chapter’s Inner City Outings (ICO) Rafting Section, which provides an introduction to (wet) wilderness for urban youth and adults who ordinarily have little opportunity to savor and understand nature.

Chris’s relationship with the Sierra Club came about through ICO, and he connected with ICO through his love of rafting. In 2003, his friend Lance Chuck took Chris on a river trip, and Chris was hooked. Lance not only led private trips, but also volunteered with ICO, and in a few years Chris began volunteering too—first as equipment manager and assistant trip leader, and eventually as trip leader and a member of the ICO Rafting Section Steering Committee.

The work is a bit rough—but it is enormously rewarding. After first running rivers with Lance, Chris wanted to become a private river guide himself. His experiences with the ICO, however, have taught him much about people as well as rivers. Most of the ICO student rafters are from San Francisco and Oakland, though he has worked with a group from Los Angeles and with residents of a halfway house/school in Marin. A modified trip for a class of second-graders helped him see the river through their eyes. An adult group from Alcoholics Anonymous changed his perspective again. One youth group runs a river with ICO every summer, and Chris has seen the same kids grow up year after year.

Before bouncing down the river on a raft, herding a flotilla of other rafts filled with shrieking amateur paddlers, trip leaders must plan and organize the adventure. They also train assistant leaders. Maybe Chris is just a big kid—he has been able to work well with young people and to help his assistants get along with them too.

Fellow ICO Rafting trip leader Ryan Clark says, “ICO is full of people who put in a tremendous amount of work with little fanfare and thanks, but Chris really stands out. He’s the ultimate team player. He will always do what’s best for ICO, even at great personal inconvenience, and he will never rock the boat [or even the raft!] or call attention to himself.”

Growing up in San Francisco and Concord, Chris went camping a few times with his parents and brother, but most of his outdoor activities involved Little League. After graduating from Clayton Valley High School, he started at Los Medanos Community College because of its firefighting program. Before enrolling in that program, though, he transferred to a trade school and became an electrician, which is still his occupation. His desire, however, is to attend Los Medanos’ Fire Fighter One Academy, which would prepare him to use fire equipment of all kinds, to fight urban and wildland fires, and to perform a wide variety of rescue operations.

Though he would like to incorporate fire into his profession, water in many forms dominates Chris’s leisure activities. He has run rivers as far away as the Shotover in New Zealand. He has surfed at Aptos and scubaed at Monterey.

A favorite dry pastime is following baseball. A committed Giants fan, he plans to travel to New York this fall to watch his team play the Yankees. At least once a year, he tries to visit a Major League ballpark and buy a cap for a souvenir. It may take a while, but he hopes eventually to get a complete collection.

Meanwhile, he’s collecting memories—fervid, fiery ones—of wild rivers and ecstatic river-runners.

Karen Rosenbaum

ICO 2013 Rafting Fundraiser–weekend of September 28 – 29

ICO photoUpdate (Sep. 25, 2013): sad news: due to low sign-ups, our 2013 rafting fundraiser has been cancelled. We’ll try again next year.


ICO 2013 Rafting Fundraiser

Saturday, September 28–class II-III South Fork of the American River (“The Gorge”)–$150.

Sunday, September 29–Class II-III South Fork of the American River (“Chili Bar”)–$150.

Both daysriverside camping and sunset gourmet dinner along the South Fork of the American River–$50. People who sign up for both days of rafting get dinner and camping for free.

Come to the 2013 ICO Fall Rafting Fundraiser. Experience the delights of whitewater rafting in a beautiful river canyon, while supporting the Sierra Club’s Inner City Outings (ICO) rafting program.

20% discount is available for groups of four or larger!

Guests will explore a class III river rich with history and exciting whitewater. Trips are all-inclusive and feature a great riverside lunch and shuttle between the river and our meeting place. The minimum age is eight.

The meeting spot is in Lotus, CA, about 2.5 – 3 hours from the Bay Area.

Make a weekend of it and raft both days while joining us in a riverside camp! Enjoy a gourmet dinner and spend the evening relaxing next to the campfire along a pristine river in Gold Rush country. Sunday breakfast is included. Shower and bathroom amenities are available.

Non-rafters are welcome! Nearby activities include wine tasting, cycling, hiking, fishing, and Gold Rush tourist attractions.

Inner City Outings is an all-volunteer outreach program of the Sierra Club that provides wilderness experiences for groups of youth and adults from urban communities that have little or no access to nature due to lack of income, awareness, or skills. All proceeds will directly support ICO’s outreach activities.

These trips fill up fast; reserve your space today by signing up online at http://icorafting.org/fundraiser.

For questions, e-mail fundraiser@icorafting.org.

reprinted from http://icorafting.blogspot.com/

Delta Group program meeting: “Over Troubled Waters” — Tuesday, November 12

Dawn breaking at duck blind in the Delta. Photos by Roger Mammon.

Dawn breaking at duck blind in the Delta. Photos by Roger Mammon.

Tuesday, November 12, 7:15 pm, Antioch Library, 501 West 18th Street, Antioch.

All through history, California’s water development has been controversial and complicated. Limited supply, increased demand, legal disputes, and environmental concerns, especially in the Delta, make California’s water future a challenging problem. California’s latest proposed water management plan, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), focuses on building two massive water tunnels to divert additional Sacramento River water to the Central Valley and Southern California–depriving our Delta of adequate freshwater flows for a healthy ecosystem (see “Peripheral tunnels not good idea”).

“Over Troubled Waters” is a 45-minute documentary brought to us by Restore the Delta, a local grassroots organization committed to making the Delta fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable to benefit all of California. It is a coalition of Delta residents, business leaders, civic organizations, community groups, union locals, farmers, hunters, fishers, and environmentalists, working together to strengthen the health of the estuary and the well-being of Delta communities. Restore the Delta works in the areas of public education and outreach so that all Californians will recognize the Delta as part of California’s natural heritage, deserving of restoration.

The Oakley Kid's Derby is sponsored by the City of Oakley and takes place at the Oakley/Antioch fishing pier at the foot of the Antioch Bridge. In East County, residents' leisure time is almost exclusively involved with water activities.

The Oakley Kid’s Derby is sponsored by the City of Oakley and takes place at the Oakley/Antioch fishing pier at the foot of the Antioch Bridge. In East County, residents’ leisure time is almost exclusively involved with water activities.

Introducing the video will be Oakley resident Roger Mammon, president of the Lower Sherman Duck Hunters Association, president of the West Delta Chapter of the California Striped Bass Fishing Association, and a boardmember and secretary for Restore the Delta.

This will be a chance to hear Delta residents talk of their problems and concerns about how state water-management decisions will affect their future.

Before the program, we’ll socialize, munch goodies, and briefly discuss other current environmental issues and upcoming activities and events.

Delta Group program meetings are usually held in February, May, September, and November. A newsletter listing Delta Group programs, outings, and activities is available by sending a check for $5, payable to “Sierra Club, Delta Group”, to:

Janess Hanson
431 Levee Road
Bay Point, CA 94565.

For information about Delta Group activities, call Janess Hanson at (925)458-0860. For information about Delta area environmental concerns, call Tim Donahue at (925)754-8801.

Upcoming hikes and activities

For more information about these activities, see the Chapter Calendar.

Sat., Oct. 19, Mount Tamalpais State Park, 1B hike

Sun., Nov. 17, Carquinez Strait Regional Shoreline, Crockett, 1A hike.

Peripheral tunnels not good idea

General aerial photo of Delta patterns, July 15, 2004. Photo by Paul J. Hames.

General aerial photo of Delta patterns, July 15, 2004. Photo by Paul J. Hames.

Something strange happened recently during the state’s march to build a pair of peripheral tunnels around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The tunnel proponents moved the tunnels (see “Governor’s tunnel vision leaves out Delta protection”).

With a certain amount of fanfare and a press-only press conference, secretary of resources John Laird announced that the administration now proposes to move the pathway for the big tunnels that will draw river water from above the Delta and deliver it to south of the Delta.

The move would push the tunnels eastward and away from at least one farm still in production. Instead the tunnels would run through Stanton Island—active feeding and resting space for sandhill cranes.

That crane space happens to be owned by the Nature Conservancy, which had been the first environmental group to embrace the peripheral tunnels as a grand solution for the Delta–years ago, long before any details, including the environmental assessment of the proposed tunnels, were available.

Stanton Island will be a crane resort no more if the digging begins for the twin tunnels. Those tunnels are to be four stories high and together capable of moving 9,000 cubic feet of water per second.

People, including the administration’s water experts, have assumed for quite some time that Sierra Club has been officially opposed to the Delta tunnels. Make no mistake, we want something to be done to stop the Delta’s ecosystem crash. It’s the largest estuary along the west coast of North and South America. It’s a key link to environmental health in our state and beyond. But until very recently, despite our open criticism of the proposed project, we hadn’t taken a position.

We delayed taking a position because we wanted to see the details of the proposal for the tunnels and hoped for the best. More than a year ago, we listed seven key questions involving costs, timing, impacts, and operations that need to be answered. In May of this year, most—but not all—of those questions were addressed in some form in volumes of documents that will ultimately make up the draft Environmental Impact Report for the proposal.

The Club’s process for policymaking is notoriously deliberate and often slow. But that’s a good thing. Our volunteers take seriously the notion that every viewpoint needs to be considered. In July, after many, many months of conversation and debate—in person, on conference calls and via long e-mail chains—the policymaking body of Sierra Club California, which includes representatives from every part of the state, voted to oppose the peripheral-tunnels proposal.

There you have it. We are officially opposed to the proposal to build two giant tunnels that will move water from the Sacramento River system, around the Delta, and to the south. We are taking this position because there is too much certainty that the tunnels will further degrade the Delta environment. There is too little certainty that it will solve the essential water-supply problems all Californians face as we grapple with climate change.

That’s right–all Californians. Too often, California’s water-supply issue has been framed as one of northern versus southern California. That framing is a devious way to distract Californians from our key problem: what do we need to do to help everyone in the state conserve a precious resource while enhancing the economy and protecting the environment?

There are a lot of answers to this question, and none of them include becoming more dependent on exports through or around the Delta.

For instance, we need to devote more resources to water conservation. That means going beyond low-flush toilets. We need industrial-scale improvements in water conservation, new investment in fixing the old leaking infrastructure in our cities, and more and better recycling.

We need to make better, wiser use of farmlands. There are parts of the state where farmers ought to have a chance to farm solar energy in exchange for reducing their water demand for conventional crops.

We need to stop polluting the clean water we have. We need to clean up the groundwater supplies around the state that are not potable because of past pollution. And we need to seriously consider water impacts when we decide as a society which industries we want to grow. For example, why is California allowing fracking, when that activity is so heavily dependent on sucking up massive amounts of clean water, polluting it, and then casting it aside as waste?

These are just a few answers, but you get the idea.

As long as everyone in the water world stays focused on that old standby, the notion of creating a new way to move water around or through the Delta, Californians will be shortchanged. It’s time for the state’s water leaders to take a new tack. Abandon the costly peripheral tunnels and invest in answers that we can all live with, to make every region more sustainable and support all Californians.

In addition to moving the tunnels, the latest proposal also calls for reducing their length from 35 to 30 miles. That’s a good trend. Keep cutting, and we’ll be rid of crazy peripheral tunnels for good.

Kathryn Phillips, director, Sierra Club California

Tell Assembly to vote ‘No’: don’t turn Tahoe over to developers

Tahoe_CollageNevada wants to roll back 25 years of regulations that helped protect Lake Tahoe’s famous blue waters and stunning mountain scenery. That state’s legislature wants to turn Tahoe over to developers.

They are doing it with the help of the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) and, now, the California legislature. Incredibly, California Senate Bill 630 says Californians are on board with abandoning Lake Tahoe protections.

Tell your legislator you aren’t on board and demand a NO vote on SB 630!

SB 630 would ratify an agreement between California and Nevada to implement TRPA’s new development plan for Tahoe, the Regional Plan Update. That plan was written by and for developers.

This bill would set a precedent of making new, additional development surrounding the lake equal in priority to protecting Tahoe’s environment. SB 630 would also have California cave in to Nevada’s demand to shift most land-use planning authority from TRPA to the counties bordering the lake, despite their past history of reckless development at Tahoe.


SB 630 has already been approved by the California Senate. There is still time to stop it in the Assembly. Please please contact your assemblymember today and urge a “No” vote on SB 630.

Help save the beauty of Tahoe for future generations to enjoy.

Laurel Ames, conservation chair, Tahoe Area Sierra Club

Terry Davis, director, Mother Lode Chapter Sierra Club

Lake Tahoe needs your help–now!

Tahoe National Forest in spring.

Tahoe National Forest in spring.

Last December TRPA (Tahoe Regional Planning Agency) approved a new plan that upended two and a half decades of carefully-restrained growth and strong environmental protections for Tahoe. Instead it adopted the innocently named Regional Plan Update, written by developers and for developers, rolling back TRPA’s regulations and giving more land use authority to the counties. Nevada demanded these concessions as its price to remain in the Bi-State Compact, the agreement between the states to jointly govern land use at Tahoe.

As part of the deal with Nevada, the California Senate hastily passed SB 630, which endorses the pro-development Regional Plan Update and agrees to Nevada’s demands. The bill begins making its way through the Assembly next week, and we need to stop it.

Please call your assemblymember right away and ask them to vote NO on SB 630. Here are some talking points:

  • SB 630 supports a radical new development plan for Tahoe. The Regional Plan Update will seriously erode protections for Lake Tahoe by undermining the goals of the Bi-State Compact between California and Nevada. The agreement was designed to save Lake Tahoe’s famous clarity and scenic beauty – the shoreline, mountains and forests that make the Tahoe a national treasure. For the first time, this plan would establish economic development as an equal priority.
  • We want Tahoe to remain a beautiful place to visit with our families. But the new plan would bring massive new urban development and traffic congestion. Dense urban villages with tall buildings would block views of the lake, the forests, and the mountains.
  • TRPA must not cede its authority to plan future growth to the same local governments which failed to protect Tahoe in the past. SB 630 would support TRPA in abandoning its responsibility to protect Tahoe’s famous water clarity and scenery. The agency must require that any new development fits with Tahoe’s character and does not further degrade this scenic wonder that we all enjoy.

Please call your Assembly member right away. They will begin taking up SB 630 when they come back from recess next week. If you know your representative, find your Assembly member’s phone number in the attached list. If you’re not sure who your representative is, find out here: http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/.

Laurel Ames, conservation chair, Sierra Club Tahoe Group, laurel@watershednetwork.org

Terry Davis, director, Sierra Club Mother Lode Chapter, terry.davis@sierraclub.org.