Archive for the 'human rights' Category

Direct Action Halts SnowBowl Construction on the San Francisco Peaks

Tuesday, June 28th, 2011

It was an especially beautiful morning on June 16, when at least 15 people participated in a direct action on the San Francisco Peaks that temporarily halted construction of a pipeline on the mountain. Six mostly indigenous youth were arrested during the coordinated action and another was cited for third degree trespassing and released.

On December 1, 2010, Federal Judge Mary Murguia ruled in favor of Arizona Snowbowl Limited Partnership, approving the construction of a 14.8-mile reclaimed wastewater pipeline from Flagstaff to the ski resort, among other developments. The water is to be used at Snowbowl to make artificial snow. While many ski resorts around the world use a percentage of reclaimed wastewater to make snow, many who oppose the plan regard it as an “experiment,” as the resort would be the only one in the world that would use a 100% mixture of wastewater in this way. Prompted by concerns from the scientific community and others who assert the likelihood of health risks associated with the use of reclaimed wastewater, the Environmental Protection Agency is currently conducting a national multi-year study of the water to be completed in 2013.

The case itself, brought on by the Save the Peaks Coalition and nine concerned citizens, is currently under appeal in the Ninth Circuit. Those who engaged in the demonstration are not members of the coalition, nor are they involved in the ongoing lawsuit. The Hopi Tribe has filed their own separate lawsuit citing a first amendment violation of their religious freedoms in association with further development.

The San Francisco Peaks are held sacred to at least 13 regional Native American tribes and the impact of construction has been emotional. A prayer gathering was held at the base of the San Francisco Peaks a few days after construction began. Navajo Nation President Ben Shelly addressed the crowd, “We’ve got to stop the construction.” Kelvin Long, director of ECHOES stated, “We’re going to protect our mountain, we’re not going to allow snowmaking to happen.” Steve Darden of the Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission and former Flagstaff City Council member added a specific message to youth. “In our Hogans and sweat lodges we are offering our prayers, we’re relying on you young ones to step up.”

And so they did.

On the morning of the action, as the full moon faded and the sun rose, two demonstrators chained themselves to the wheel well of a large excavator while two pairs of women sat back-to-back deep inside the six-foot-trench, bound to each other by the neck with U-locks. The action occurred a few miles up Snowbowl Road where construction had been in progress since May 25.

The first to respond to the scene was Snowbowl. The security vehicle, a blue Mercedes, screamed up and down Snowbowl Road apparently trying to locate those involved in the action. By 6 AM more than 15 armed agents arrived on the scene, as well as the Coconino County Sheriff’s Department, City of Flagstaff Police, and the FBI.

At the same time a group of at least eight demonstrators gathered at the bottom of Snowbowl road, blocking access. Five demonstrators wore white hazmat suites in a symbolic “quarantine” of the resort, stretching banners across the road that read, “Protect Sacred Sites” and “Danger! Health Hazard – Snowbowl.” Caution tape was stretched across the width of the road along with other objects, forming a makeshift blockade.

The demonstrators engaged in a multi-varied approach to what is very much considered a multi-layered issue. The complexity of the controversy was illustrated in the diversity of demonstrator’s chants, echoing from the base of the mountain, from those locked to construction equipment, and from voices deep from within the trenches. “Protect Sacred Sites, Defend Human Rights!” “No desecration for recreation!” “Stop the cultural genocide! Protect the Peaks!” “Human health over corporate wealth!” “Dook’o’osliid, we’ve got your back!”

One of the women in the trench, bound to another by the neck described some of the conversation that took place as the police concentrated their efforts on the men chained to the excavator. One said to the other, “Don’t you feel kinda small in this deep trench?” To which one of the women paused, then responded, “Not when I’m doing big things.”

By 7:30, assisted by county Sheriffs, the Flagstaff Fire Department began aggressively cutting demonstrators from their various lockdown devices. “The police’s use of excessive force was in complete disregard for my safety. They pulled at my arms and forced my body and head further into the machine, all the while using heavy duty power saws within inches of my hand,” said Evan Hawbaker, one of the demonstrators chained to the excavator.

Rather than negotiate, as the demonstrators were cut, it was clear that the police and fireman preferred to use scare tactics. “We don’t want to cut your arm off,” repeated one of the fireman several times to which Hawbaker finally responded, “I don’t want you to cut my arm off either.” Hawbaker said the fireman looked dead serious when he said, “well, we will if we have to.”

Hawbaker and Kristopher Barney were chained to the same excavator. The device that bound them to the machine is referred to as a “lock box.” Both arms go through a PVC pipe and from the outside, that’s all anybody can see. Inside, however, their hands gripped a metal rod; a chain around their wrists was also connected to the rod with a strong karabiner. There are many variations of this lockbox, which is commonly seen in nonviolent direct actions around the world.

Hawbaker said after holding on to the rod for a while that his hand became numb. The firefighters used a Sawzall to cut the PVC pipe lengthwise. When the blade hit the metal rod, it rattled the chain violently and Hawbaker described the warm feeling that trickled down his arm. “I thought it was blood; I thought they cut my fingers, “ he said. Those who cut us out endangered our well being ignoring the screams to stop. They treated our bodies the way they’re treating this holy mountain.”

“I’ve done this quite a bit and never have I feared for my safety like this before,” said Nadia Del Callejo, one of the women locked down in the trench. “The whole thing was disorganized and dangerous. There was no communication.”

One of the underage women in the trench described an action taken in which one police officer would attempt to stand them up while another officer moved the other demonstrator another way. Because U-locks bound the women by the neck, they were choked. “Nobody even bothered to ask what it would take to get us out voluntarily. Finally they just started hurting us,” said Ms. Del Callejo. “I’m here to protect the mountain, I said, and you’re hurting me. You’re choking me.” The police responded in a way that did not sugar coat their lack of experience in dealing with nonviolent demonstrators. “That’s your own fault.”

“Our safety was prioritized second to Snowbowl’s demands. I was not aggressive. My lock was sawed through, inches away from both of our heads, secured solely and recklessly by the hands of a deputy. During the process, we were repeatedly asked to chant to reaffirm our consciousness. The police’s response was hasty, taking about ten minutes in total—it was dehumanizing,” said Hailey Sherwood, one of the last demonstrators to be cut out.

One at a time, as demonstrators were removed from their locking devices, they were treated by paramedics, and arrested for trespassing. Those two demonstrators that were bound to minors were also charged with “contributing to the delinquency of a minor,” and another charged for “endangerment.”

On the Monday after the lockdown, the Arizona Daily Sun published an editorial reaction entitled, “Monkey-wrenchers Marginalize Cause of Native America.” Besides the fact that the term, “monkeywrenching,” is entirely misrepresented in the editorial, as it is well documented that demonstrators took great care not to damage any machinery, the editorial itself reads more like an attempt by the paper to, in fact, marginalize the history of social and environmental movements.

The editorial explained that demonstrators’ comparison of their actions to Rosa Parks is a false analogy on the grounds that when Ms. Parks refused to move to the back of the bus, segregation was already illegal. Said the editorial, “civil rights activists were seeking to uphold the law.” Here it sounds like the writers of the editorial would not have found the actions of Ms. Park to be meaningful, courageous, or ethically sound if she had acted before segregation laws existed. It would be a curious task for the writers to name one social movement in the history of the world that did not result in illegal actions and arrests. “Throughout history, acts of resistance and civil disobedience have been taken by young and old against injustices such as this. This action is not isolated but part of a continued resistance to human rights violations, to colonialism, to corporate greed, and destruction of Mother Earth,” added Del Callejo.

The editorial goes on, “The Snowbowl protesters are focusing on a religious dispute and don’t have the law on their side.” If the last 40 years of lawsuits have revealed anything, it should be clear that confronting a Eurocentric court system that is structurally incapable of making connections between environmental and human rights concerns has been a challenge for native people since the controversy started. If the Daily Sun thinks the only issue here is “a religious dispute” that has nothing to do with the environmental integrity of the mountain and is not connected to the cultural survival of our native neighbors, they have truly exposed how out of touch they are on this issue. “The Holy San Francisco Peaks is home, tradition, culture, and a sanctuary to me, and all this is being desecrated by the Arizona Snowbowl Ski Resort,” said one of the underage demonstrators.

And this ill informed paragraph in the Daily Sun concludes. “It’s no wonder the public in general has failed to rally to their cause.” As much as it is clear that the authors of the editorial would prefer that those against further development and desecration on the San Francisco Peaks are part of some lunatic minority fringe group, it is simply not true. Even in the city council meetings related to choosing a water source for Snowbowl last summer, at least ¾ of those hundreds of people in attendance submitted pubic comments in opposition to development, most of which urged the council to cancel the water contract with Snowbowl all together. On the day of the demonstrations, furthermore, if the community did not support the actions of those arrested on June 16, they would still be in jail.

One of the demonstrators who temporarily blocked access to Snowbowl Road that morning reflected on the severity of a jail bond neither he nor anyone he knew could afford. “Oh man, I thought, Ned’s going to jail and I don’t have any money and I don’t know any body that has any money.” Within an hour of sending out a few simple text messages, they raised over $3,000, which was more than enough to pay for all six to be released. And the donations poured in the rest of the day. The extra money was given back, and the money used was paid back.

Also, a Facebook page, originally set up to let people know what was going on with the arrests, became a forum for support. It got over 300 members in less than 24 hours.

Furthermore, early in the morning of the demonstrations, as soon as word got out on KNAU about what was happening, folks from all over Flagstaff came by and offered their support. One demonstrator remarked, “One woman came by with her daughter. She gave us all a bunch of Gatorade and offered to cook us all meals if it went on throughout the day. Many other folks grabbed signs and joined in the rally at the bottom of the mountain.” Furthermore, activists began to call from all over the country, as far away as Hawaii. Specifically, a group from New Mexico said they were on their way to Flagstaff. Inspired by the demonstrations; they wanted to help.

“How can we be trespassers on our Holy Site?” questioned Barney. “I do not agree with these and the other charges; we will continue our resistance.”

For more updates visit Indigenousaction.org.
And here is a direct link to more pictures. I took a lot more photos that aren’t online, so let me know if you would like them for any reason.

150 Rally & March for Protection of Holy San Francisco Peaks

Saturday, April 23rd, 2011

*PRESS RELEASE*
On Saturday April 16th, more than 150 people rallied outside of Flagstaff City Hall and held a march for protection of the holy San Francisco Peaks.

The protest was called to address the imminent threat of environmental and cultural destruction by owners of the Arizona Snowbowl Ski resort.

On April 1st the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied an emergency motion by the Save the Peaks Coalition to stop Snowbowl ski area and the U.S. Department of Agriculture from cutting down thousands of trees on the San Francisco Peaks, outside of Flagstaff, Arizona.

With no injunction in place bulldozers could be moving any day. The Save the Peaks Coalition estimates approximately 30,000 trees, including old growth, are threatened to be clear-cut.

At Saturday’s protest a cardboard bulldozer with a toilet bowl on top, Forest Service and City of Flagstaff logos, attempted to run down young people holding signs painted like trees. The theatrical bulldozer was stopped by a group in bio-hazard suits who linked arms and chanted, “Protect the Peaks!”

At about 4:00 p.m. the protest shifted to a march and headed into downtown Flagstaff. When the march reached San Francisco street, someone yelled, “Save the San Francisco Peaks, Take the Streets!” and the crowd flooded the road. The crowd later returned to City Hall and rallied with speakers calling for further action to protect the Peaks.

At the end of the rally the American Indian Movement song was sung in support of a direct action occupation currently stopping desecration of a sacred burial site in Glen Cove, California near the Bay Area.

The demonstration was held during the City of Flagstaff’s Earth Day event to draw attention to their role in the development.

Since 1997 Arizona Snowbowl has been attempting to expand current
development on the San Francisco Peaks by clearcutting 74 acres of rare alpine habitat that is home to threatened species, making new runs and lifts, adding more parking lots and building a 14.8 mile buried pipeline to transport up to 180 million gallons (per season) of wastewater to make artificial snow on 205 acres. And since 1997 there has been such fierce community resistance to expansion plans that Snowbowl has been held off until now.

The slopes of the Peaks are central to the ways of life of more than 13
Indigenous Nations. For 5 decades development on the Holy Mountain has been consistently resisted through litigation, direct action and prayer.

In 2002, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, with no real
public process, quietly decided to allow wastewater to be used for
snowmaking purposes. Later that year the Flagstaff Mayor and City Council signed a contract to allow the sale of sewage effluent for snowmaking on the holy mountain. The contract has since been renewed administratively, behind closed doors without any public input.

The sewage effluent has been proven by biologists to contain harmful contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and hormones, yet the Forest Service didn’t consider what the impacts would be if anyone were to consume the fake snow. This point is the basis of the Save the Peaks Coalition’s current lawsuit which is currently appealing a negative District Court decision.

Snowbowl would be the only ski area in the world that would be using 100% wastewater for snowmaking purposes.

In 2010 Flagstaff City Manager Kevin Burke revealed a plan, secretly
negotiated with the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), for use of
Flagstaff’s drinking water instead of the sewage effluent. Snowbowl was offered 11 million tax payer’s dollars to subsidize the increased costs of using potable water. Stating that the US government believed drinking water snowmaking to be “less offensive” to Indigenous Nations the plan was pushed, although no consultation with Indigenous Nations had previously occurred.

Needless to say, the Tribes were in consensus in opposing the proposal. More than 700 people, including official Indigenous representatives, showed up to a City Council meeting for consideration of the sale. The majority stated opposition to the plan.

Although the decision by the USDA to subsidize drinking water as a “less offensive” option for snowmaking appeared to be an admission that the wastewater plan was a bad idea, the USDA continues to aggressively battle the Save the Peaks Coalition in court.

Early this year the USDA began listening sessions to hear Indigenous Peoples concerns on the of sacred places. The sessions were initiated, in part, due to the Peaks controversy.

The USDA currently has the power to revoke the Special Use Permit for Arizona Snowbowl for greater public interest.

TAKE ACTION NOW!

Contact Flagstaff City Officials and urge them to RESPECT the environment, Indigenous culture, and protect public health by finding a way out of their contract to sell Snowbowl wastewater!
PHONE: (928) 779-7600
EMAIL: council@flagstaffaz.gov

Contact Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and express concern that there was no meaningful public process when the agency approved wastewater for snowmaking. File a complaint and demand full public review!

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
1110 West Washington Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
(800) 234-5677 – Toll Free

Northern Regional Office
1801 West Route 66, Suite 117
Flagstaff, Arizona 86001
(877) 602-3675 – Toll Free

www.azdeq.gov/function/compliance/complaint.html

Contact the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), which heads the Forest Service, and urge them to revoke the Special Use Permit for Arizona Snowbowl for greater public interest.
The USDA has been holding hearings on protection of sacred places due to the Peaks controversy. Urge the USDA to immediately place an administrative hold on all development on the San Francisco Peaks!

Tom Vilsack
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, DC 20250

Phone: 202-720-3631

Email: TribalSacredSites@fs.fed.us

For Additional Information:
www.fs.fed.us/spf/tribalrelations/sacredsites.shtml

Send Letters to the Editor of your local papers.
Arizona Daily Sun: rwilson@azdailysun.com

Our Water Systems, Our Future: Inconvenient Truths Revealed in Snowbowl Talks

Sunday, December 5th, 2010

The Forest Service has been accused of not complying with the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) Process when it drafted it’s Environmental Impact Statement, leading to their approval of using the City’s reclaimed wastewater to make artificial snow on the San Francisco Peaks (or Dook’o'oosłííd, or Nuva’tukiyaov; it depends on who you ask). It is likely that before this paper blackens the fingertips of any northern Arizona reader, a District Court judge has already made a ruling on the case.

On July 20th, at the Arizona District Court in Phoenix, lawyers representing the Arizona Snowbowl and the Department of Agriculture, as well as other constituents–literally 6 or 7 people—teamed up against attorney Howard Shanker, representing the Save the Peaks Coalition and 9 concerned citizens. According to the Save the Peaks Coalition, in a press release announcing the case in the summer of 2009, “The use of reclaimed sewer water to make snow, however, was not only repulsive to people who hold the San Francisco Peaks sacred, it raised concerns from skiers and the community over the safety of being immersed in, and even eating, snow made from non-potable treated sewage effluent.”

While many ski resorts make use of a percentage of reclaimed wastewater to make artificial snow, the Arizona Snowbowl would be the only resort in the world to use 100% of this sewage effluent to make snow. It is this kind of exposure that has prompted specific concerns, regarding the impact to human health.

At the Oral Arguments in Phoenix, lawyers defending the Forest Service’s compliance with NEPA in approving Snowbowl’s proposal to use reclaimed water on the Peaks, said that while the filtration process does not test for all compounds, they maintained that because the State graded the water as “A+,” that it is more than safe to be used.

However, as congress delays amendments to the outdated Toxic Substances Control Act from 1976, many scientists are increasingly regarding the standards used to treat and grade reclaimed wastewater as inadequate. “According to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality regulations, treated sewer water can be graded A+ even when it contains fecal matter in three out of every ten samples,” stated Dr. Abraham Springer, Northern Arizona Professor and director of the School of Earth Science and Environmental Sustainability.

More specifically, there is an increasingly large body of scientific data that suggests there are many compounds in wastewater that are either not tested for regularly, or not tested for at all. Both in Flagstaff and around the world, studies of wastewater have revealed compelling evidence of pharmaceuticals, hormones, endocrine disrupters, industrial pollutants, and narcotics.

Across the country and around the world, there has been a lot of recent enthusiasm regarding the affects that pharmaceuticals and personal care products have on the level of toxicity in wastewater. In these studies, scientists have found oral contraceptives and other hormones, human and veterinary antibiotics, anti-seizure medication, antihistamines, caffeine, codeine, steroids, fragrances, and bio-accumulating compounds often found in antibacterial products, namely triclosan and triclocarbans.

When Shanker pushed the lawyers to respond to the fact that many potentially dangerous compounds are simply not tested for, they reiterated that there was not only a filtration process, but the water was also exposed to UV rays and chlorine bleach to purify the water further.

Dr. Catherine Propper, professor of Biological Sciences at Northern Arizona University, is internationally known for her extensive research on the effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals. She explained how the UV treatment can backfire, depending on what compounds are present. “When you spray it and expose it to UV, sometimes those products break down. Sometimes the breakdown products are better than their original products, sometimes they’re worse.”

Dr. Paul Torrence, former Northern Arizona University Professor and renowned expert in the field of bio-organic and medicinal chemistry, helped me understand one of these compounds, which is increasingly present in wastewater. Triclosan, and triclocarbans in particular, have received a lot of attention in the media lately. Chances are readers have at least one product that contains this compound. It is found in a score of products ranging from anti-bacterial soaps, toothpaste, deodorants, and face washes.

When triclosan reacts with ultra-violet rays, it forms different, mega-carcinogens, in the form of poisonous dioxins. When it reacts with chloride, it becomes chloroform, which is a carcinogen. This means that some compounds have actually been proven to become even more dangerous, not in spite of adequate filtration, but because of the filtration process itself.

If exposure to a chemical quickly and directly causes cancer, or tumors, or death, we will hear about it in the news. Effects of these chemicals on the endocrine system, as outlined in the book, Our Stolen Future: Are we Threatening our Fertility, Intelligence, and Survival?, are, however, more subtle but equally disturbing. “You’re not going to see folks dropping dead because of endocrine disruption,” says Dr. Propper, “but you do see, the way I put it is, you see ‘quality of life outcomes.’”

As explained in Nena Baker’s The Body Toxic: How the Hazardous Chemistry of Everyday Things Threatens Our Health and Well-being, the endocrine system refers to the “complex physiology that controls basic systems of the body from fetal development through adulthood,” regulating such things as “organ function, sexual development, behavioral cues, intelligence, and reproductive systems.” Dr. Propper has demonstrated some troubling effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals in nonhuman animals.

“When we expose animals to individual compounds, we look at genes that are involved in say how you get testes or ovaries. We see a shift in those genes, which suggests that you’re not going to get a properly functioning gonad–but in order to do that study you need to grow the animal up and look at those fertility and fecundity outcomes.” Dr. Propper reiterated the importance of healthy gonads, especially in development. “Your brain function as an adult is a function of how your gonads develop in-utero.”

While those long-term studies have not been done her research has illuminated compelling evidence of skewed sex ratios, whereby 100% or nearly 100% of a given population of animals is female. She has also observed dramatic increases of newborn species in testing areas born hermaphroditic, that is, male fish with evidence of eggs developing in their testicular tissue or male fish that produce female yolk protein. However because scientists obviously cannot test on humans, we can only rely on animal data and the correlations in human exposure.

At a recent forum in Prescott titled, “Recharge of Treated Wastewater to Groundwater: What are the Risks?” Dr. Bruce Blumberg of the University of California at Irvine recently addressed the Citizens Water Advocacy Group and The Verde Watershed Association about the human effects of endocrine disrupters in water. He mentioned an increasingly large body of research indicating a lot of correlative human data, where things like higher levels of a certain compound are associated with different potential endocrine disrupting compounds in humans. “There are now several of those studies out there that show these correlative effects,” says Dr. Propper. “The problem is correlation doesn’t necessarily mean causation.”

“So when you go to look for a causative relationship between an exposure and an outcome, there are several steps you have to do. One of them is demonstrate a correlation, but that alone does not give you a causative outcome.”

So essentially, while we have data that demonstrates that exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals in nonhuman animals is causing disruption to their hormone systems, Dr. Propper continues, we “cannot do the experiments on humans to demonstrate causation; it’s just unethical. All you can do is look at correlative date. When they look at correlative data for several different outcomes, they do see effects. Some of these are declining sperm counts, increases in development of fat cells, increases in testicular cancers and reproductive anomalies in men. All of these are correlated with increased exposure to certain compounds.”

These national concerns have grown so large that the EPA is currently entrenched in a multi-year study of endocrine disrupting compounds found in this water across the country. The nation-wide study, which will not be completed until 2013, will attempt to answer many scientific questions such as “What effects are occurring in exposed human and wildlife populations?” The comprehensive study will also look at individual compounds, their potencies, dose-levels in different regions, and how can “unreasonable risks be managed?”

When asked what would happen if the courts rule in Shanker’s favor, he responded, “If [the Forest Service] failed to adequately consider the impacts on people who eat snow made from reclaimed sewer water, in their EIS, they [Snowbowl] would either scrap snowmaking using reclaimed sewer water or they would go back and do an adequate analysis of the potential impacts.”

If the decision does not go in Shanker’s favor, he is prepared to file an appeal accordingly. If the judge rules in favor of the Forest Service, Snowbowl owner Eric Borowsky is prepared to start construction of the pipe line and retention ponds immediately, regardless of the EPA’s conclusions in 2013. “If you were a reasonable human being,” said Shanker, “and you’re a federal agency and the US EPA is saying ‘wait a minute, we don’t even know what’s in this effluent. It may be dangerous. We know it has endocrine disrupters.’ If you were reasonable, you’d wait for them to figure out what’s in it before you expose large swaths of the population to it directly, especially children, who are going to be eating it and rolling around in it.”

“Borowsky seems to ignore the fact that the science and the facts don’t support his position and culturally, it offends the sensibilities of 13 of the tribes in the southwestern United States.” Shanker continues, “The regulations say that it’s not suitable for full body immersion or any kind of activity that would get it into your nose or mouth. If you read the regulations accurately, it says you shouldn’t be skiing or falling down in this stuff. They (ADEQ) approved it for snowmaking; they didn’t approve it for skiing.”

Borowsky and others have asserted that the wastewater is safe enough to drink; that in places like Scottsdale and Orange County, CA, residents are actually drinking this water. However, this assumes that wastewater treatment and standards are the same everywhere. “Reclaimed water is not just one homogenous thing,” says Shanker. “It’s a state standard. A+ water in Arizona would be completely different from A+ water in another state, generally. And the uses for it would be different. So if you hear that they drink reclaimed water in LA, that really doesn’t mean anything.” A quick call to Scottsdale confirmed that in fact, because people drink this water, however, it goes through reverse osmosis, which is not required by law, and certainly not in Flagstaff’s water treatment budget.

The concerns surrounding exposure to endocrine disrupters and other chemical compounds do not just stop at wastewater, however, but call into question the long-term safety of our drinking water. During the recent talks with the Flagstaff City Council and the Water Commission regarding the possible sale of potable water to Snowbowl (which was defeated), many people were surprised to learn that reclaimed wastewater is already percolating into our aquifers, and mixing with our drinking water (the mixture that would be taken out was referred to as “recovered-reclaimed water”).

“I think that’s an extremely dangerous precedent,” said Shanker. “I think that’s going to result, over the long term, the degradation of the drinking water quality.” At a Coconino Plateau Water Advisory Meeting several months ago, Jim McCarthy from the Planning and Zoning Commission and a nonvoting member of the Water Commission for Flagstaff asked Dr. Propper if any tests have been done on well water in the vicinity of wastewater. She said yes, that actually they performed tests on the Continental Well here in Flagstaff, and though the numbers were not as high as the tests done on straight reclaimed water, many endocrine disrupting compounds exist.

Dr. Propper sees exposure to reclaimed water as just one of the many places we are exposed to endocrine disruptors. We also absorb these compounds from the food we eat and the air we breathe. “And physical contact,” says Dr. Propper, “your couches, your carpets, your computers that say, have flame retardants in them. There are a lot of different places people pick up these containments….And what most folks are carrying in their body burden, if we look at the animal data, almost certainly has some effect on their endocrine physiology, whether it’s always a negative effect remains to be seen.”

As a scientist, Dr. Propper is only in a position to present her findings to those who make policy. “This is when policy makers have to come in to play and say when is the body of evidence enough that it suggests the stuff in the environment is nasty. The EPA is trying to do that at this point, but it becomes a big policy argument in which a lot of stakeholders have a say.”

Dr. Propper, instead, is a proponent of reducing our “chemical footprint.” “We should be reducing our chemical footprint just as we want to reduce our carbon footprint. We’re not going to stop using fossil fuels or chemicals completely any time soon, but we got to at least really start thinking seriously which ones we use and how much of them we use.”

“Chemicals have, no doubt, caused an improvement in our quality of life in a number of areas. But there is also a push by market forces to use chemicals when we don’t really need them. There might be a place and a rule for tricosan, for example, in hospital settings that could be important.”

“Can we build better plastics that don’t leech chemicals when they break down? Can we do better green chemistry by making chemicals that aren’t going to impact endocrine function? In general can we reduce our chemical footprint in ways that that still allow chemicals to be effective for the good things they do, but not allow for some of the environmental and human health damage that they’re doing?

Save the Peaks supporters confront Borowsky

Thursday, July 22nd, 2010

July 20, 2010. Phx, AZ – This is Eric Borowsky, majority owner of Arizona Snowbowl and Phx water baron, being interviewed by a conservative Christian radio station. This was during a rally that took place in front of the courthouse immidiatly following oral arguments between the save the peaks coalition and Arizona Snowbowl teamed up with the USFS. I wish I had enough space on my camera to continue filming as the crowd continued to swarm. Follow the case, there is a lot coming up: www.truesnow.org

DN! on the story of cosmetics. “Lead in Lipstick? Coal Tar in Shampoo? As New Bill Calls for Stricter Rules on Beauty Products, a Debate Between Campaign for Safe Cosmetics Founder and Cosmetics Industry Spokesperson”

Thursday, July 22nd, 2010