ICIE once again tackled a contentious topic, this time at its 2009 Annual Meeting, November 24th, in Boise, presenting Climate Change: Credible Science or Pure Politics?
In opening the meeting, ICIE President Trent Clark reminded the group of ICIE’s 2007 workshop on the potential impacts of climate change on the Pacific Northwest, which outlined changes, opportunities and threats. Rather than expanding upon the subject of that conference, today’s speakers would examine the science and the politics of the current climate change debate.
The Science:
Jim Sims is President and CEO of the Western Business Roundtable, a group of 60 members he says represents 60 different opinions on climate change issues and how to resolve them.
Sims said that when you talk about climate science, consensus is “not in the room.”
“The idea of consensus is foreign to the principles of science,” Sims said. “The concept of consensus belongs in the realm of political science.”
Sims outlined points upon which he says climate scientists can agree:
- CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and we are adding more of it to the atmosphere.
- More greenhouse gasses will cause a weak direct warming tendency in the lower atmosphere.
- There is no consensus on the magnitude of these warming trends. The positive feedback loops that are going to supposedly magnify the climate impacts are automatically built into climate models.
- The debate on climate change is starting to shift to the impact of natural climate cycles driving the change more than anthropogenic factors. There is strong, consistent agreement on this.
- Natural changes in cloud cover of only 1% to 2% could explain all periods of warming and cooling for the last 2,000 years.
Sims presented a graph of temperature data showing warming and cooling trends since the turn of the century. The graphs showed a cooling trend in the mid 1940’s, with a shift to a warming trend in 1977 - about the same time we started measuring temperatures by satellite
Sims outlined data he says shows that we are currently in a cooling trend that may last for the next ten to 20 years, and pointed out that NASA satellite measurements over the last nine years reveal natural cloud cover changes exert at least 5 times as much forcing as increasing CO2 does.
So, why is this science being ignored, he asked?
The UN International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Sims said, is made up of politicians and government bureaucrats, not climate scientists. Their charge is to make a scientific case for human-caused global warming. Billions of dollars have been spent on that effort so far.
“They (the IPCC) are not there to look at alternative explanations,” Sims said.
Sims said that peer reviewed studies show Mother Nature is causing more of an impact to the climate than humans and guessed that calling for more inquiry into that question would be embarrassing to this group.
Sims pointed to a recent analysis that used the scientific assumptions, science and formulas of the IPCC to calculate the reduction of average global temperature resulting from shutting off all fossil fuel power generation – coal, natural gas and diesel – and keeping these plants off for the next 100 years.
The “benefit,” he said, would be a change only .07 degrees Celsius.
This is not to say we shouldn’t do anything, Sims said, “but the benefit of only seven hundredths of one degree needs to be factored into policy discussions.”
After lining up the number of reasons to question IPCC findings and methodology, Sims pointed out that there is human caused global warming, and we should be doing something to mitigate that.
Perhaps, Sims said, it is time for applied science, or “taking the “Popular Mechanics” approach to climate change,” predicated on the following assumptions:
1. The public cares about fewer emissions
2. Cap and trade will take 8 to 10 years for final implementation because it goes through the regulatory process, including litigation
3. The public appetite for more tax and spend policies is dropping rapidly
4. This is a technology challenge, not a regulatory challenge
Sims said the question of the day is what can we do to encourage climate change technology development now, and outlined an applied science approach, including the following criteria:
1. Do no harm to economy
2. Ensure consumers buy into cost-benefit
3. Ensure a broad portfolio of fuels
4. Recognize that government micromanagement is highly inefficient
5. Let climate science continue to evolve as we progress down path to lower emissions of all kinds
6. Provide massive tax incentives for investment
7. Provide aggressive loan guarantees
8. Streamline regulations for deployment of alternative energy sources
9. Guarantee that credit is given in future regulatory regimes for work done now
10. Limit legal liability
11. Protect intellectual property, and
12. Keep the lights on in the meantime
“Newt Gingrich said ‘the morning you provide incentives for technology innovation, you’ll have 50,000 entrepreneurs figuring out how to get the money,’” Sims said, “but ‘the morning you try to do it by regulation there’ll be 50,000 hiring a lawyer to fight you. It’s a fundamentally different model,’”
The Politics
Senator Larry E. Craig (ret.) began the discussion of the political aspects of the climate debate pointing out that during the week prior to the annual meeting, on what he said was a pure partisan vote, the U.S. Senate voted on a bill that had not been reviewed and contains a massive shift of wealth.
“This was an anti-coal bill,” he said, “in a country where 60% of the energy is produced by coal.”
Craig says he has been following the science as well as the politics on the climate change issue, and has attended all the climate change conferences except the 2008 conference in Toronto. He says the debate has fostered a cottage industry.
“Billions of dollars have been poured into the science,” Craig said “as the level of politics continues to grow.”
Congress refused to accept the Kyoto Accords Craig said, because it felt the science was not there. The Bush administration, he said, chose to move more aggressively on the technology front.
According the Craig, the Waxman-Markey legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives is based on taxing and redistributing wealth, not on technology.
“It would tax your utility bill and use the money to save the rainforest in Brazil,” he said.
“Under the Senate version (of the legislation), cap and trade would allow some utilities and high-tech companies to make a fortune by playing the market, not by improving technology to limit emissions.”
Craig said he is working to stall these pieces of legislation to give us more time to think and debate their effectiveness in reducing emissions, giving us time to allow the science to mature.
His goal, he said, is to keep this cap and trade legislation from a vote.
“If you haven’t voted on it by February, 2010, you won’t,” he said, “because by then a third of the Senate and all the House members face re-election.”
In pushing climate change legislation and health care policy, Craig said the majority in Congress is moving away from what the public wants.
“There are indications of a reorientation of the American public to the center/right,” he said, “away from the center /left in Congress.”
Craig noted that Congress has prioritized the climate change issue over the national debt.
“(As of) a year ago, the world economy is in a free-fall,” He said. “Unemployment is over 10%, people are losing homes, retirement funds have tanked, but Congress seems focused on adding to the national debt. The $202 billion interest on today’s national debt will exceed the national defense budget by 2019.”
Craig noted that America produces about 25% of the world’s greenhouse gases, and is also 25% of the world economy. He also conceded that most Americans want to be environmentally responsible.
“But if we don’t approach it right,” he said, “we have a great capacity to make our country a secondary economic power.”
Craig cautioned against letting Congress legislate measures to impact climate change, citing what he considered an unacceptable tax implication. He said that the Obama administration is experiencing push back and is starting to step back from its environmental stance and the idea that they can push climate change legislation through.
“Local politics is going to make a difference this year as people look at getting reelected more than they look at Copenhagen,” he said.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Energy, Environment and Tech committee get Cap and Trade overview
Rich Walje, President of Rocky Mountain Power, spoke about the federal cap and trade issue before the interim joint legislative committee on Energy, Environment and technology.
- Rocky Mountain Power serves customers in southeast Idaho. It customer-base is about 50% industrial.
- Fifty percent of the power it produces comes from coal-based generation.
- It is also the 2nd largest owner and operator of wind power in America.
Walje said Rocky Mountain Power supports the need to reduce carbon emissions and other greenhouse gas emissions but does not support a cap and trade program like the Waxman-Markley legislation that passed the U.S. House of Representatives. The issue is not renewable versus non-renewable energy. It’s about the best way to reduce carbon emissions. Walje suggests giving Rocky Mountain Power a target for reduction and letting the company figure out the best way to get there.
Walje noted the federal legislation being discussed does not take into account the growth rate in the need for electricity. There is no need for the trading associated with capping carbon emissions. Under Waxman-Markey, a company is given an allocation to emit one ton of carbon. It requires an emission allowance for every ton of carbon, not just the amount that is above the carbon cap. Waxman-Markey would only allow Rocky Mountain Power 55% of the allocations it would need. The company would have to buy the other 45% on the market. Those costs would be billed to its customers. An estimated $25 per ton for carbon equates to an average 16% price increase to the customer. This is before any costs to make changes that would actually reduce carbon. The average Rocky Mountain Power residential customer pays $3.00 a day for power. Those supporting Waxman-Markey point out that the cost is only as a much as postage stamp ($.44). They avoid mentioning that that is a cost per day which equals $13.38 additional cost per month. Under the House legislation, allocations go to companies that do not need them because they have lower carbon emissions. They sell them on the market to companies like Rocky Mountain Power that don’t get enough allocations--essentially transferring money from Rocky Mountain Power customers to the sellers of the allocations. None of this reduces carbon emissions, Walje says, it is, rather, a transfer of wealth. The trading regime is not limited to those who produce electricity. Wall Street will be involved and taking a cut.
Walje pointed out that 25% of the votes for Waxman-Markey in the U.S. House of Representatives came from New York and California. Is it a coincidence, he asks, that these are two states that will benefit the most from moving money? We can cap carbon emissions but with a cap and trade scheme, the customers pay twice: once for the trading costs and then again for the cost to actually reduce levels of carbon emissions. There is no economic development without electricity. Walje stressed the need to balance economic development, environmental impacts, and affordable electricity.
A member of the committee asked Walje why cap and trade won’t work for carbon reduction when it seemed to work well in reducing sulfur dioxide and acid rain. Walje responded that that program did not involve Wall Street traders. It did not give allocations to those who did not produce sulfur dioxide. In closing, Walje said that we don’t need the trading part of cap and trade to reduce carbon emissions. He would like to set up a plan to reach carbon reductions and work with the state to accomplish that reduction.
Neil Colwell of Avista Corporation made brief comments following Walje’s presentation. Avista, he says, is one of those companies that might be termed a “winner” in the cap and trade system because it doesn’t have coal generation. There would be less impact on its customers but there would still be a cost impact. If the price of allowances goes too high, the U.S. economy could suffer. Therefore, a reasonable ceiling on the price of emission allowances is needed. An allowance price floor may also be necessary to encourage investments in emission reduction technology. Avista supports allocation of allowances based on electricity output or sales and opposes allocation based on historic emissions. Allowances should be allocated to load serving utilities with the benefits passed on to customers. The Edison Electric Institute allocation compromise that splits the difference between emission-based and load-based allocation is reasonable. Colwell also commented that there were more solutions available in dealing with sulfur dioxide and acid rain.
- Rocky Mountain Power serves customers in southeast Idaho. It customer-base is about 50% industrial.
- Fifty percent of the power it produces comes from coal-based generation.
- It is also the 2nd largest owner and operator of wind power in America.
Walje said Rocky Mountain Power supports the need to reduce carbon emissions and other greenhouse gas emissions but does not support a cap and trade program like the Waxman-Markley legislation that passed the U.S. House of Representatives. The issue is not renewable versus non-renewable energy. It’s about the best way to reduce carbon emissions. Walje suggests giving Rocky Mountain Power a target for reduction and letting the company figure out the best way to get there.
Walje noted the federal legislation being discussed does not take into account the growth rate in the need for electricity. There is no need for the trading associated with capping carbon emissions. Under Waxman-Markey, a company is given an allocation to emit one ton of carbon. It requires an emission allowance for every ton of carbon, not just the amount that is above the carbon cap. Waxman-Markey would only allow Rocky Mountain Power 55% of the allocations it would need. The company would have to buy the other 45% on the market. Those costs would be billed to its customers. An estimated $25 per ton for carbon equates to an average 16% price increase to the customer. This is before any costs to make changes that would actually reduce carbon. The average Rocky Mountain Power residential customer pays $3.00 a day for power. Those supporting Waxman-Markey point out that the cost is only as a much as postage stamp ($.44). They avoid mentioning that that is a cost per day which equals $13.38 additional cost per month. Under the House legislation, allocations go to companies that do not need them because they have lower carbon emissions. They sell them on the market to companies like Rocky Mountain Power that don’t get enough allocations--essentially transferring money from Rocky Mountain Power customers to the sellers of the allocations. None of this reduces carbon emissions, Walje says, it is, rather, a transfer of wealth. The trading regime is not limited to those who produce electricity. Wall Street will be involved and taking a cut.
Walje pointed out that 25% of the votes for Waxman-Markey in the U.S. House of Representatives came from New York and California. Is it a coincidence, he asks, that these are two states that will benefit the most from moving money? We can cap carbon emissions but with a cap and trade scheme, the customers pay twice: once for the trading costs and then again for the cost to actually reduce levels of carbon emissions. There is no economic development without electricity. Walje stressed the need to balance economic development, environmental impacts, and affordable electricity.
A member of the committee asked Walje why cap and trade won’t work for carbon reduction when it seemed to work well in reducing sulfur dioxide and acid rain. Walje responded that that program did not involve Wall Street traders. It did not give allocations to those who did not produce sulfur dioxide. In closing, Walje said that we don’t need the trading part of cap and trade to reduce carbon emissions. He would like to set up a plan to reach carbon reductions and work with the state to accomplish that reduction.
Neil Colwell of Avista Corporation made brief comments following Walje’s presentation. Avista, he says, is one of those companies that might be termed a “winner” in the cap and trade system because it doesn’t have coal generation. There would be less impact on its customers but there would still be a cost impact. If the price of allowances goes too high, the U.S. economy could suffer. Therefore, a reasonable ceiling on the price of emission allowances is needed. An allowance price floor may also be necessary to encourage investments in emission reduction technology. Avista supports allocation of allowances based on electricity output or sales and opposes allocation based on historic emissions. Allowances should be allocated to load serving utilities with the benefits passed on to customers. The Edison Electric Institute allocation compromise that splits the difference between emission-based and load-based allocation is reasonable. Colwell also commented that there were more solutions available in dealing with sulfur dioxide and acid rain.
Transmission Projects update to the Interim Committee on Energy, Environment and Technology, October 21, 2009
Paul Kjellander, Administrator of the Idaho Office of Energy Resources gave an update on transmission projects that cross the state. The Gateway West project by Idaho Power that crosses southern Idaho into Wyoming is the furthest along. The BLM is looking at the Environmental Impact Statement. Another Idaho Power transmission project, the Boardman-Hemingway project, has had some fits and starts but now there is good progress.
Another project has been permitted since 1996. Ellis Power took over the corridor before the internment camp at Minidoka became a National Historic Site. Ellis Power looked for an alternate route around the camp but there are efforts to add more land to the site. Objections to the route based on viewshed have been raised. The issue seems to be a way to stop the transmission line because the “viewshed” already includes a K-V line and distribution lines. It does, however, appear that there has been positive movement lately.
The Forest Service, BLM and the National Park Service have different approaches when it comes to transmission lines. Kjellander noted a need for a more unified and streamlined process for the utilities, stressing that transmission is vital to development of renewable energy.
With regard to transmission project, Kjellander noted that “bugs and bunnies, varmints and vermin" as protected by the ESA will be key issues.
He also noted that FERC backup authority is included in the Waxman-Markey bill but would only apply to the western states.
Kjellander pointed out that we cannot access a lot of federal land, but federal land will be a key piece in getting transmission built. There has been some work on mapping to guide developers on where the mitigation efforts would be least expensive on federal land. This must be coordinated among the states so that the gradation maps make sense. Right now federal policies are in conflict. The federal government supports renewable energy but has other policies that bar us from access to the land that is needed for transmission.
* * * * *
Another project has been permitted since 1996. Ellis Power took over the corridor before the internment camp at Minidoka became a National Historic Site. Ellis Power looked for an alternate route around the camp but there are efforts to add more land to the site. Objections to the route based on viewshed have been raised. The issue seems to be a way to stop the transmission line because the “viewshed” already includes a K-V line and distribution lines. It does, however, appear that there has been positive movement lately.
The Forest Service, BLM and the National Park Service have different approaches when it comes to transmission lines. Kjellander noted a need for a more unified and streamlined process for the utilities, stressing that transmission is vital to development of renewable energy.
With regard to transmission project, Kjellander noted that “bugs and bunnies, varmints and vermin" as protected by the ESA will be key issues.
He also noted that FERC backup authority is included in the Waxman-Markey bill but would only apply to the western states.
Kjellander pointed out that we cannot access a lot of federal land, but federal land will be a key piece in getting transmission built. There has been some work on mapping to guide developers on where the mitigation efforts would be least expensive on federal land. This must be coordinated among the states so that the gradation maps make sense. Right now federal policies are in conflict. The federal government supports renewable energy but has other policies that bar us from access to the land that is needed for transmission.
* * * * *
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Legislative Energy, Environment and Technology Interim Committee Updates
The Joint Energy, Environment and Technology Interim Committee met early this month for updates on transmission projects, a proposal for the establishment of Energy Independence Districts, how projects utilizing woody biomass are progressing (or aren’t), and how the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources is poised to utilize stimulus funding.
Transmission Project Siting
Ron Williams from LS Power updated the Committee on the progress of two transmission projects that will form a regional transmission hub through southern Idaho and that together represent more than 1,000 miles of transmission: The Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP) and the Overland Intertie Project (OIP). The SWIP will be the most advanced high voltage project in the west. Construction on this $1 billion capital investment project is slated to begin next year. It will provide a connection to areas southwest of Idaho where renewable energy generation is available. The OIP represents east/west transmission to and from points in eastern Wyoming.
LS Power is still engaged in siting both of these projects and is including public input in an alternate routing study currently underway. The preferred route is through the site established through right of way established through the Gateway West Transmission Plan.
Energy Independence Districts
Reporting on behalf of the Idaho Department of Commerce, Lane Packwood described a legislative initiative the department is developing for residences and small businesses to finance renewable energy projects. Their intention is to remove financial barriers to consumers – who want to retrofit their properties – by developing a framework for property secured municipal financing. Packwood noted that 12 other states have established laws allowing municipalities to establish local improvement districts. Such districts would be opt-in rather than geographically defined, and would allow for a tax assessment on the property to finance improvements at a much lower interest rate and longer term than traditional financing.
Senator Kate Kelly noted that her biggest concern is the constitutionality of the proposed legislation, although Packwood asserted that at least 4 other states had similar concerns regarding constitutionality and found ways to address them.
Senator Kelly remained skeptical. “What we have seen, time after time, is the legislature doing something creative with the constitution,” she said, “and seeing it challenged in court.”
Woody Biomass
If you have been tracking the developments of this committee for a while, you may be wondering about whether anything has developed with the utilization of woody biomass as a renewable resource. Examples of woody biomass projects in Council and Kellogg have been touted as successful: heating schools and other public buildings at a fraction of the cost and emissions of coal or fuel oil.
Experts note, when looking at all other sources of renewable energy combined, biomass is the only renewable energy source that can close the gap in the 25’x25’ initiative: a nonpartisan public policy initiative to get 25 percent of our energy from renewable resources like wind, solar and biofuels by the year 2025. Idaho is participating in the initiative as a part of the 2007 state Energy Plan.
Several members of the committee have expressed concern for the lack of development in this area. Who is coordinating efforts? Among the issues to be resolved is access to biomass material – which can be expensive to gather, bundle and haul. Jim Reilly of the Intermountain Forest Association noted that a lack of technology is not the impediment to this sector, and that there are small forests that could supply the market, plus substantial fiber available on federal lands. The problem is the gridlock that keeps those lands from contributing to this market. The best opportunities in the biomass industry come from improving the efficiencies in moving biomass from the forest to the power plant.
Representative Eric Anderson voiced extreme frustration with the red tape associated with accessing biomass material on federal lands.
“You should be paying people to take dead and dying material out of the forest, not charging them a permit fee,” he said to US Forest Service’s Andy Brunelle.
The committee elected to draft a letter to the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources, strongly encouraging it to take a lead on the woody biomass issue. They also voted to send a letter strongly encouraging the Idaho Department of Lands to grant stewardship grants for access to fuel sources for periods of ten years or more.
Stimulus Money to Fund Energy Audits for Schools
The committee heard from the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources about their plans to utilize $30 million in stimulus funding to conduct energy audits on each of the 700 schools in Idaho. The state has until 2015 to conduct the audits and make the repairs. The OER has recruited Maria Barratt from the Department of Financial Management to oversee the management of the stimulus funding. Thus far, the OER has contracted with licensed engineers from across the state to conduct the audits.
Is It a Resolution or isn’t it?
Senator Elliot Werk submitted draft copy for a concurrent resolution that would clarify responsibilities outlined in the 2007 Energy Plan and ask for a detailed report from the Office of Energy Resources every two years.
The 2007 Energy Plan was established before the OER, which has the responsibility for energy planning, policy and coordination in the state of Idaho and should, says Senator Werk, be held accountable for addressing the plan and how they’re spending stimulus funds.
Some discussion was held as to whether a concurrent resolution was the proper vehicle for this message, or if a letter outlining expectations would be more appropriate. Senator Patty Anne Lodge wondered if the committee should be asking the agencies to add to their already considerable workload.
Representative Wendy Jaquet pointed out that this committee has fallen short of its duties by not outlining specific accountabilities to the Public Utilities Commission as aligned with the Energy Plan.
Co-chair George Eskridge noted that Idaho could expect to receive federal mandates. “We’re in a far more serious position than we were two years ago,” he said. “All we’re asking for is a report.” The committee will invite the PUC to present at the next meeting on their alignment to the Energy Plan and on efforts to establish shareholder incentives to meet efficiency targets.
Who should pay for new growth?
House Bill 52 was introduced last year, which would allow the PUC to assign some of the costs of utility development to new growth. Upon its introduction, it was met with opposition from realtors and contractors who had no input in its development. Representative Bert Stevenson noted that they’re planning to reintroduce the bill, inviting opponents to submit their input. The Supreme Court has ruled that new growth can’t be responsible for paying all of the costs for new utilities. Legislation going forward needs to address how the partial costs of construction could be allocated to new growth.
Codification of the Office of Energy Resources
The Office of Energy Resources is currently a creature of the Governor’s executive order which has approximately the force of law but not quite, according to Senator Kelly. If the office is codified, it would be continued from one administration to another. Senator Kelly has met with Director Kjellander and David Hensley of the governor’s office and got a lot of input from them. Senator Kelly asked for input from the committee on her draft proposal to codify the Office of Energy Resources.
Renewable & Energy Conservation Tax Credit
John Watts made a presentation on a piece of legislation for one of his clients: Renewable & Energy Conservation Tax Credit. It has been through three drafts so far.
Thirty-nine other states have a renewable energy tax credit.
It’s a proposed 35% investment tax credit on facilities located in Idaho for con-generation facilities. Some with no taxable income could pass the credit along to someone else who can use the tax credit. This is not to exceed $20 million on overall project cost.
The program would reside within the Office of Energy Resources and be financed by taking 5% for administration. Investors could re- capture 7% per year.
Other Stimulus Projects
Ken Eckland for Office of Energy Resources outlined the projects that are being funded with stimulus funds:
- Energy tune-ups for energy efficiency: $17 million
- Pilot project on solar roofs for five schools. $2,750,000. A consultant will audit to make sure the most competitive projects are funded.
- Renewable Energy Enterprise Zones Project forming private-public partnerships for renewable energy projects: $1,500,000
- Micron Technology LED conversion to produce LED lighting at its existing Boise facility. The research and development is on track to convert the lines that have been shut down to produce light emitting diodes. DOE approached Micron for a proposal: $5 million.
- Competitive block grant for smaller cities and counties: $5.5 million. OER is encouraging cities and counties to team up for projects.
- Methane gas project: $1.15 million.
- Building code upgrades: $500,000.
- Biomass: $500,000.
- PV Solar: $300,000.
The next meeting of the Energy, Environment and Technology Interim Committee has been scheduled for October 21st and 22nd.
Transmission Project Siting
Ron Williams from LS Power updated the Committee on the progress of two transmission projects that will form a regional transmission hub through southern Idaho and that together represent more than 1,000 miles of transmission: The Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP) and the Overland Intertie Project (OIP). The SWIP will be the most advanced high voltage project in the west. Construction on this $1 billion capital investment project is slated to begin next year. It will provide a connection to areas southwest of Idaho where renewable energy generation is available. The OIP represents east/west transmission to and from points in eastern Wyoming.
LS Power is still engaged in siting both of these projects and is including public input in an alternate routing study currently underway. The preferred route is through the site established through right of way established through the Gateway West Transmission Plan.
Energy Independence Districts
Reporting on behalf of the Idaho Department of Commerce, Lane Packwood described a legislative initiative the department is developing for residences and small businesses to finance renewable energy projects. Their intention is to remove financial barriers to consumers – who want to retrofit their properties – by developing a framework for property secured municipal financing. Packwood noted that 12 other states have established laws allowing municipalities to establish local improvement districts. Such districts would be opt-in rather than geographically defined, and would allow for a tax assessment on the property to finance improvements at a much lower interest rate and longer term than traditional financing.
Senator Kate Kelly noted that her biggest concern is the constitutionality of the proposed legislation, although Packwood asserted that at least 4 other states had similar concerns regarding constitutionality and found ways to address them.
Senator Kelly remained skeptical. “What we have seen, time after time, is the legislature doing something creative with the constitution,” she said, “and seeing it challenged in court.”
Woody Biomass
If you have been tracking the developments of this committee for a while, you may be wondering about whether anything has developed with the utilization of woody biomass as a renewable resource. Examples of woody biomass projects in Council and Kellogg have been touted as successful: heating schools and other public buildings at a fraction of the cost and emissions of coal or fuel oil.
Experts note, when looking at all other sources of renewable energy combined, biomass is the only renewable energy source that can close the gap in the 25’x25’ initiative: a nonpartisan public policy initiative to get 25 percent of our energy from renewable resources like wind, solar and biofuels by the year 2025. Idaho is participating in the initiative as a part of the 2007 state Energy Plan.
Several members of the committee have expressed concern for the lack of development in this area. Who is coordinating efforts? Among the issues to be resolved is access to biomass material – which can be expensive to gather, bundle and haul. Jim Reilly of the Intermountain Forest Association noted that a lack of technology is not the impediment to this sector, and that there are small forests that could supply the market, plus substantial fiber available on federal lands. The problem is the gridlock that keeps those lands from contributing to this market. The best opportunities in the biomass industry come from improving the efficiencies in moving biomass from the forest to the power plant.
Representative Eric Anderson voiced extreme frustration with the red tape associated with accessing biomass material on federal lands.
“You should be paying people to take dead and dying material out of the forest, not charging them a permit fee,” he said to US Forest Service’s Andy Brunelle.
The committee elected to draft a letter to the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources, strongly encouraging it to take a lead on the woody biomass issue. They also voted to send a letter strongly encouraging the Idaho Department of Lands to grant stewardship grants for access to fuel sources for periods of ten years or more.
Stimulus Money to Fund Energy Audits for Schools
The committee heard from the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources about their plans to utilize $30 million in stimulus funding to conduct energy audits on each of the 700 schools in Idaho. The state has until 2015 to conduct the audits and make the repairs. The OER has recruited Maria Barratt from the Department of Financial Management to oversee the management of the stimulus funding. Thus far, the OER has contracted with licensed engineers from across the state to conduct the audits.
Is It a Resolution or isn’t it?
Senator Elliot Werk submitted draft copy for a concurrent resolution that would clarify responsibilities outlined in the 2007 Energy Plan and ask for a detailed report from the Office of Energy Resources every two years.
The 2007 Energy Plan was established before the OER, which has the responsibility for energy planning, policy and coordination in the state of Idaho and should, says Senator Werk, be held accountable for addressing the plan and how they’re spending stimulus funds.
Some discussion was held as to whether a concurrent resolution was the proper vehicle for this message, or if a letter outlining expectations would be more appropriate. Senator Patty Anne Lodge wondered if the committee should be asking the agencies to add to their already considerable workload.
Representative Wendy Jaquet pointed out that this committee has fallen short of its duties by not outlining specific accountabilities to the Public Utilities Commission as aligned with the Energy Plan.
Co-chair George Eskridge noted that Idaho could expect to receive federal mandates. “We’re in a far more serious position than we were two years ago,” he said. “All we’re asking for is a report.” The committee will invite the PUC to present at the next meeting on their alignment to the Energy Plan and on efforts to establish shareholder incentives to meet efficiency targets.
Who should pay for new growth?
House Bill 52 was introduced last year, which would allow the PUC to assign some of the costs of utility development to new growth. Upon its introduction, it was met with opposition from realtors and contractors who had no input in its development. Representative Bert Stevenson noted that they’re planning to reintroduce the bill, inviting opponents to submit their input. The Supreme Court has ruled that new growth can’t be responsible for paying all of the costs for new utilities. Legislation going forward needs to address how the partial costs of construction could be allocated to new growth.
Codification of the Office of Energy Resources
The Office of Energy Resources is currently a creature of the Governor’s executive order which has approximately the force of law but not quite, according to Senator Kelly. If the office is codified, it would be continued from one administration to another. Senator Kelly has met with Director Kjellander and David Hensley of the governor’s office and got a lot of input from them. Senator Kelly asked for input from the committee on her draft proposal to codify the Office of Energy Resources.
Renewable & Energy Conservation Tax Credit
John Watts made a presentation on a piece of legislation for one of his clients: Renewable & Energy Conservation Tax Credit. It has been through three drafts so far.
Thirty-nine other states have a renewable energy tax credit.
It’s a proposed 35% investment tax credit on facilities located in Idaho for con-generation facilities. Some with no taxable income could pass the credit along to someone else who can use the tax credit. This is not to exceed $20 million on overall project cost.
The program would reside within the Office of Energy Resources and be financed by taking 5% for administration. Investors could re- capture 7% per year.
Other Stimulus Projects
Ken Eckland for Office of Energy Resources outlined the projects that are being funded with stimulus funds:
- Energy tune-ups for energy efficiency: $17 million
- Pilot project on solar roofs for five schools. $2,750,000. A consultant will audit to make sure the most competitive projects are funded.
- Renewable Energy Enterprise Zones Project forming private-public partnerships for renewable energy projects: $1,500,000
- Micron Technology LED conversion to produce LED lighting at its existing Boise facility. The research and development is on track to convert the lines that have been shut down to produce light emitting diodes. DOE approached Micron for a proposal: $5 million.
- Competitive block grant for smaller cities and counties: $5.5 million. OER is encouraging cities and counties to team up for projects.
- Methane gas project: $1.15 million.
- Building code upgrades: $500,000.
- Biomass: $500,000.
- PV Solar: $300,000.
The next meeting of the Energy, Environment and Technology Interim Committee has been scheduled for October 21st and 22nd.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Working Lands Coalition provides multiple perspectives
At the July meeting of the Natural Resources interim committee, the Idaho Working Lands Coalition provided an overview of the changing landscape in Idaho and the importance of conserving Idaho’s ranches, farms and forests. The Idaho Tax Commission shows that 13.8 million acres in Idaho were taxed as private working lands in 2008. When considering Idaho’s population growth (projected to be 2 million by 2030), and the financial incentive landowners have to sell or develop working lands rather than preserve them, projections from three different land use studies show a sharp increase in the conversion and development of working lands to other uses.
Conversion of working lands can have a number of impact including changes to the economic contribution of the land, restricting access to public lands, a change in the demand for water, habitat, tax base and demand for support services.
The Coalition introduced representatives from rural north, central and eastern Idaho to share their perspectives on the importance of working lands in their respective areas. Items of particular concern for example in eastern Idaho include the dwindling resources for rangeland available for grazing to supply the beef industry. In northern Idaho, the conversion of forest lands adversely impact the timber industry. The committee discussed a Minnesota program for incentivizing the conservation of working lands as such. Those funds come from the state general fund.
Emma Atchley a Fremont County farmer supported conservation easements as a tool to maintain land in farming. She pointed out that there is a problem with developers going bankrupt. The farmers that sold land to them with the promise of a monetary return from the lots do not get any money. In some cases, infrastructure is developed so the land can no longer be farmed.
She also stated that while the state cannot commit to additional funds in the next legislative session with the downturn in the economy, we need to be looking at this as a long term issue and start preparing for better economic times.
Perspective from Federal and State Agencies
Jeff Burwell, representing the Natural Resources Conservation Service pointed out that the 2008 Farm Bill has a pretty substantial toolbox for conservation with about $38 million for use in Idaho. He distributed a chart and map showing land use changes in Idaho. Since 2003, Idaho has lost 278,000 acres of farm and ranch land. He discussed conservation programs to protect private working lands. These include:
ü The Farmland Protection Program which provides federal matching funds to help state, tribal
or local governments and NGO’s purchase easements to keep productive farm and ranchland in agricultural use.
ü The Wetlands Reserve Program which is a voluntary, non-regulatory, incentive-based program that may help landowners protect and restore wetlands on their property.
ü The Grassland Reserve Program which assists landowners to restore and protect grassland, rangeland, pastureland, shrub land and certain other lands, and provides assistance for restoration.
Sharon Kiefer, Idaho Department of Fish & Game discussed the importance of private working lands to the Department Private land ownership in Idaho is focused on those areas most productive for farms, ranches, and forests. These productive lands are also disproportionately important to fish and wildlife. The threat that IDFG sees is the fragmentation of fish and wildlife habitat from continued development and conversion of private working lands into smaller parcels.
Sharon described IDFG’s programs that help preserve private working lands including wildlife habitat improvements, the Access Yes program to provide voluntary access to private lands, the Mule Deer Initiative that brings department funding resource to private landowners to enhance the benefits from stewardship of wildlife habitat.
IDFG offers opportunities to reward stewardship, build capacity, capitalize on existing assets and promote partnership and collaboration.
The Idaho State Department of Agriculture’s Deputy Director, Brian Oakey, described Idaho’s Right to Farm Law and listed national trends in agriculture such as direct marketing of farm products, agritourism, and value added products processed on-stie.
In Idaho the number of farmer’s markets has doubled in three years. The number of Idaho wineries has doubled in the last five years. Eating locally gets more support than eating organic and more specialty items are being produced than ever before. Some traditional farmland protection tools are agricultural or large lot zoning, agricultural and forestry districts, conservation easements, purchase of development rights, use-value assessment for tax purposes and various forms of estate tax relief. Other tools might include smart growth, differential assessment programs, term easements, green payments of farm business succession planning.
Kathy Opp and David Groeschi of the Idaho Department of Lands discussed IDL programs such as the Statewide Assessments of Forest Resources (SAFR) and the Idaho Forest Legacy program. The SAFR helps to ensure wise investment of resources, identify critical forest issues and highest priority areas of impact in order to leverage resources through partnership to benefit forest management access across all ownerships.
Idaho’s Forest Legacy Program is meant to protect environmentally important forest areas that are threatened by conversion to non-forest uses. It was created in the 1990 Farm Bill and is a voluntary program with 75% federal funds and 25% non-federal match. There are not state funds used in the program Funds are used to purchase conservation easements on private forest land that might otherwise be developed or lost as working lands.
Nate Fisher, Idaho Office of Species Conservation (OSC), made the final presentation. Nate discussed the collaboration that has taken place through OSC to use federal salmon money to fund projects that benefit salmon restoration by restoring habitat while helping farmers and ranchers stay on their land.
Conversion of working lands can have a number of impact including changes to the economic contribution of the land, restricting access to public lands, a change in the demand for water, habitat, tax base and demand for support services.
The Coalition introduced representatives from rural north, central and eastern Idaho to share their perspectives on the importance of working lands in their respective areas. Items of particular concern for example in eastern Idaho include the dwindling resources for rangeland available for grazing to supply the beef industry. In northern Idaho, the conversion of forest lands adversely impact the timber industry. The committee discussed a Minnesota program for incentivizing the conservation of working lands as such. Those funds come from the state general fund.
Emma Atchley a Fremont County farmer supported conservation easements as a tool to maintain land in farming. She pointed out that there is a problem with developers going bankrupt. The farmers that sold land to them with the promise of a monetary return from the lots do not get any money. In some cases, infrastructure is developed so the land can no longer be farmed.
She also stated that while the state cannot commit to additional funds in the next legislative session with the downturn in the economy, we need to be looking at this as a long term issue and start preparing for better economic times.
Perspective from Federal and State Agencies
Jeff Burwell, representing the Natural Resources Conservation Service pointed out that the 2008 Farm Bill has a pretty substantial toolbox for conservation with about $38 million for use in Idaho. He distributed a chart and map showing land use changes in Idaho. Since 2003, Idaho has lost 278,000 acres of farm and ranch land. He discussed conservation programs to protect private working lands. These include:
ü The Farmland Protection Program which provides federal matching funds to help state, tribal
or local governments and NGO’s purchase easements to keep productive farm and ranchland in agricultural use.
ü The Wetlands Reserve Program which is a voluntary, non-regulatory, incentive-based program that may help landowners protect and restore wetlands on their property.
ü The Grassland Reserve Program which assists landowners to restore and protect grassland, rangeland, pastureland, shrub land and certain other lands, and provides assistance for restoration.
Sharon Kiefer, Idaho Department of Fish & Game discussed the importance of private working lands to the Department Private land ownership in Idaho is focused on those areas most productive for farms, ranches, and forests. These productive lands are also disproportionately important to fish and wildlife. The threat that IDFG sees is the fragmentation of fish and wildlife habitat from continued development and conversion of private working lands into smaller parcels.
Sharon described IDFG’s programs that help preserve private working lands including wildlife habitat improvements, the Access Yes program to provide voluntary access to private lands, the Mule Deer Initiative that brings department funding resource to private landowners to enhance the benefits from stewardship of wildlife habitat.
IDFG offers opportunities to reward stewardship, build capacity, capitalize on existing assets and promote partnership and collaboration.
The Idaho State Department of Agriculture’s Deputy Director, Brian Oakey, described Idaho’s Right to Farm Law and listed national trends in agriculture such as direct marketing of farm products, agritourism, and value added products processed on-stie.
In Idaho the number of farmer’s markets has doubled in three years. The number of Idaho wineries has doubled in the last five years. Eating locally gets more support than eating organic and more specialty items are being produced than ever before. Some traditional farmland protection tools are agricultural or large lot zoning, agricultural and forestry districts, conservation easements, purchase of development rights, use-value assessment for tax purposes and various forms of estate tax relief. Other tools might include smart growth, differential assessment programs, term easements, green payments of farm business succession planning.
Kathy Opp and David Groeschi of the Idaho Department of Lands discussed IDL programs such as the Statewide Assessments of Forest Resources (SAFR) and the Idaho Forest Legacy program. The SAFR helps to ensure wise investment of resources, identify critical forest issues and highest priority areas of impact in order to leverage resources through partnership to benefit forest management access across all ownerships.
Idaho’s Forest Legacy Program is meant to protect environmentally important forest areas that are threatened by conversion to non-forest uses. It was created in the 1990 Farm Bill and is a voluntary program with 75% federal funds and 25% non-federal match. There are not state funds used in the program Funds are used to purchase conservation easements on private forest land that might otherwise be developed or lost as working lands.
Nate Fisher, Idaho Office of Species Conservation (OSC), made the final presentation. Nate discussed the collaboration that has taken place through OSC to use federal salmon money to fund projects that benefit salmon restoration by restoring habitat while helping farmers and ranchers stay on their land.
Wild horse bill could impact local ecology
A bill being considered before the US Senate will restrict the authority of local agencies dealing with wild horses, and give a foothold to lawsuits, says Ron Kay with the Idaho State Department of Agriculture to the interim Natural Resources committee in late July.
The Restoration of the American Mustang Act aims to restore acreage available for wild and free-roaming horses and burros to at least that of 1971. Kay notes that wild horse populations double every four years. A federal wild horse adoption program returns any unadopted horses back to the rangeland – effectively postponing the problem. Among the tongue-in-cheek suggestions by committee members for dealing with expanding horse populations: opening up the National Mall in Washington DC as wild horse rangeland, or intermingling expanding horse and wolf populations.
The Restoration of the American Mustang Act aims to restore acreage available for wild and free-roaming horses and burros to at least that of 1971. Kay notes that wild horse populations double every four years. A federal wild horse adoption program returns any unadopted horses back to the rangeland – effectively postponing the problem. Among the tongue-in-cheek suggestions by committee members for dealing with expanding horse populations: opening up the National Mall in Washington DC as wild horse rangeland, or intermingling expanding horse and wolf populations.
Water rights curtailment order enforced in Southern Idaho
Chris Bromley of the Idaho Department of Water Resources gave the interim Natural Resources committee an update on three water calls which have been under review. The first two, dealing with the A&B Irrigation District and the Surface Water Coalition of 7 southern Idaho districts have been resolved, with the Department stating that they will strive to be as timely as possible in deciding such cases in the future.
The subject of the third call presented before the committee was the resolution of a 2005 suit brought by the Snake River Farm hatchery and Clear Springs Foods near Hagerman, Idaho. The question before the department is whether a senior water rights holder can be forced to accept cash in lieu of water and stems from a legal dispute over groundwater pumping. As a result of this call the Department has issued a curtailment order targeting water rights holders after 1981 in a 9,000 acre area. According to the Idaho Statesman this order “marks the first time the State has followed through on an edict requiring the closure of wells that irrigate crops and supply cheese factories, cities and golf courses with water.” http://www.idahostatesman.com/531/story/853051.html.
The subject of the third call presented before the committee was the resolution of a 2005 suit brought by the Snake River Farm hatchery and Clear Springs Foods near Hagerman, Idaho. The question before the department is whether a senior water rights holder can be forced to accept cash in lieu of water and stems from a legal dispute over groundwater pumping. As a result of this call the Department has issued a curtailment order targeting water rights holders after 1981 in a 9,000 acre area. According to the Idaho Statesman this order “marks the first time the State has followed through on an edict requiring the closure of wells that irrigate crops and supply cheese factories, cities and golf courses with water.” http://www.idahostatesman.com/531/story/853051.html.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Western states to lose control over transmission siting?
The Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNWER) is holding its 19th annual summit in Boise this week. The theme of the conference is Global Challenges, Northwest Imperatives for the Future. Following is an article published by NewWest.net about transmission siting in the West.
For further information about PNWER activities in Boise this week, go to: http://www.pnwer.org/2009summit/Home
Western States To Lose Control Over Transmission Siting?
'We don't know why or where it came from."
By Sharon Fisher, 7-13-09:
Newly added provisions to the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, next slated to be voted on by the U.S. Senate, give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission final say over the siting of electric transmission lines in Western states—but not in any other part of the country, attendees of the Pacific Northwest Economic Region conference in Boise learned today.
There is a “real threat” of the federal government taking over, said Paul Kjellander, administrator of Idaho’s office of energy resources, noting that seven transmission lines are currently slated to crisscross Idaho.
One of the biggest issues is Gateway West, the siting of which is being fought by Parma and Kuna, which found out at recent public meetings that towers up to 180 feet tall along a corridor up to 250 wide were slated to cross the cities’ impact areas.
“Everyone agrees it’s essential,” Kjellander said. “What they can’t agree on is where it goes,” especially since some alternative routes could add up to $1 billion more to the project.
Siting of transmission lines are a major issue in the West; a lawsuit was filed earlier this month regarding the designation of a number of “energy corridors” here.
The Fourth Circuit court overturned a legal decision earlier this year regarding FERC power over site selection. “FERC had argued that the 2005 Energy Policy Act permitted it to order “national interest” transmission projects to go forward, and that Congress’ mandate included implicit authority to overrule state decisions to the contrary,” according to the Marten Law Group. “The Fourth Circuit disagreed, finding that if states turn down transmission projects on reasonable grounds, they cannot be overruled by FERC.” The case may end up going to the U.S. Supreme Court, the law group said.
It was after that, in May, when amendments were added to the The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), H.R. 2454, commonly known as the Waxman-Markey bill, allowing FERC to pre-empt state decisions on siting, said Janice Adair, Washington liaison to the Western Climate Initiative, which is developing its own cap-and-trade plan.
“We don’t know why or where it came from,” Adair said, noting that the amendment came in a package about 3 am. “We’re going backwards to try to figure out how that happened. The Western states are very much opposed to that position,” she added.
“Under the newest draft, a “high-priority national transmission project"developer must first apply to a state to route transmission facilities,” the Marten Law Group said. “But if the state fails to approve the construction and routing within one year of application, rejects the application, or imposes “unreasonable” conditions on the project, FERC can step in and authorize the transmission line routing. The explicit authority to override a state’s rejection of a project is a direct response to the 4th Circuit decision.”
“The federal government isn’t likely to be as respectful of private lands” as the states are, Kjellander said. On the other hand, “Transmission is that key resource we need to be developing as quickly as we can,” he added. “Let’s not forget what happens if we don’t move forward.”
For further information about PNWER activities in Boise this week, go to: http://www.pnwer.org/2009summit/Home
Western States To Lose Control Over Transmission Siting?
'We don't know why or where it came from."
By Sharon Fisher, 7-13-09:
Newly added provisions to the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, next slated to be voted on by the U.S. Senate, give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission final say over the siting of electric transmission lines in Western states—but not in any other part of the country, attendees of the Pacific Northwest Economic Region conference in Boise learned today.
There is a “real threat” of the federal government taking over, said Paul Kjellander, administrator of Idaho’s office of energy resources, noting that seven transmission lines are currently slated to crisscross Idaho.
One of the biggest issues is Gateway West, the siting of which is being fought by Parma and Kuna, which found out at recent public meetings that towers up to 180 feet tall along a corridor up to 250 wide were slated to cross the cities’ impact areas.
“Everyone agrees it’s essential,” Kjellander said. “What they can’t agree on is where it goes,” especially since some alternative routes could add up to $1 billion more to the project.
Siting of transmission lines are a major issue in the West; a lawsuit was filed earlier this month regarding the designation of a number of “energy corridors” here.
The Fourth Circuit court overturned a legal decision earlier this year regarding FERC power over site selection. “FERC had argued that the 2005 Energy Policy Act permitted it to order “national interest” transmission projects to go forward, and that Congress’ mandate included implicit authority to overrule state decisions to the contrary,” according to the Marten Law Group. “The Fourth Circuit disagreed, finding that if states turn down transmission projects on reasonable grounds, they cannot be overruled by FERC.” The case may end up going to the U.S. Supreme Court, the law group said.
It was after that, in May, when amendments were added to the The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), H.R. 2454, commonly known as the Waxman-Markey bill, allowing FERC to pre-empt state decisions on siting, said Janice Adair, Washington liaison to the Western Climate Initiative, which is developing its own cap-and-trade plan.
“We don’t know why or where it came from,” Adair said, noting that the amendment came in a package about 3 am. “We’re going backwards to try to figure out how that happened. The Western states are very much opposed to that position,” she added.
“Under the newest draft, a “high-priority national transmission project"developer must first apply to a state to route transmission facilities,” the Marten Law Group said. “But if the state fails to approve the construction and routing within one year of application, rejects the application, or imposes “unreasonable” conditions on the project, FERC can step in and authorize the transmission line routing. The explicit authority to override a state’s rejection of a project is a direct response to the 4th Circuit decision.”
“The federal government isn’t likely to be as respectful of private lands” as the states are, Kjellander said. On the other hand, “Transmission is that key resource we need to be developing as quickly as we can,” he added. “Let’s not forget what happens if we don’t move forward.”
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
ICIE Update: Legislative Committee Looks at Alternate Funding Sources
The interim legislative task force charged with identifying alternative sources of funding for the Idaho State Police and the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation met last Tuesday. The funding in question was shifted away from the two departments this past legislative session to fund the transportation bill that goes into effect in July of 2010.
Co-Chair Senator Cameron opened the meeting by outlining the scope of the committee: primarily that the committee is not tasked with undoing the work of the 2009 legislature, nor in redefining the scope of the ISP or the IDPR. Finally, Senator Cameron said he will have considered this task force to have failed if the only option they can identify is to shift the responsibility of replacing these funds to the General Fund.
Interestingly enough, it was this point with which Representative Raul Labrador of Eagle took issue. Apparently, Senator Cameron’s statements narrowed the focus of the committee too much for the Representative.
For background, Paul Headlee of the Legislative Services Office provided an overview of how funds from the Highway Distribution Account are distributed. This revenue includes that from gas taxes, vehicle registration, licensing and other fees which are directed to the State Tax Commission administration, railroad crossings, bridge inspections and Parks and Recreation. Beyond that, funds are distribution to the Idaho State Police and ITD’s State Highway account. Subsequent to June 1st of this year, gas tax funds have been siphoned off to go to the ITD/State Highway Account, removing ISP and IDPR from the distribution. Over the past 25 years, the amount distributed to these two departments has increased steadily, until FY 2008, when distributions equaled $4.3 million to IDPR and $16.36 million to ISP. The forecast for 2011 for IDPR is $240,000 in distributions and $0 for ISP.
Jim Alcorn, the Director of the State Insurance Fund described the Idaho Petroleum Clean Water Trust Fund and the $.01 transfer fee required of fuel distributors. The fund was put in place to provide a low cost solution to those who need liability insurance for fuel storage tanks. The fund is strong now, with reserves in place to fund claims against it, but income from investments has declined, while actuaries predict that claims on the fund will increase. Currently, the fund has an unencumbered surplus of $22 million. This will be reduced to an estimated $12 million by 2018.
Sen. Cameron pointed out that at some point, we’re going to have to put money into the fund to keep it afloat, and asked for any commentary from the audience. Suzanne Budge complied. Budge represents the Idaho Petroleum Marketers and convenience store owners. She noted that most states implemented clean-up funds as a result of the EPA requirement. These were funded by a percentage of fuel tax. Budge noted the extraordinary efficiency of Idaho’s insurance fund, which has been a model for other states. Where other states have gone into the red, this fund has been well run.
Another industry expert testified, noting the number of schools, cities, counties and other entities required to have this insurance. There is also private insurance available, but with relatively high premiums. Furthermore, insurance companies tend to cherry-pick those they insure based upon the age of their units. Some private tank holders will go under if this fund ceases to exist.
Richard Burns, Budget & Policy Analyst with the Legislative Services Office gave an overview of Idaho State Police funding, specifically that the department projects a 2010 revenue shortfall of $2.87 million. Originally, ISP requested that General Fund money be used to replace these funds. The shortfall required that personnel costs be shifted onto the Project Choice fund. Project Choice is dedicated to helping ISP personnel develop career ladders – thereby reducing attrition in the department, and supporting recruitment efforts. Within the next year or two, Project Choice funds will no longer be available, forcing a choice between maintaining staff, or reducing a fund, which ultimately impacts the department’s retention.
Lt. Col. Kevin Johnson, Deputy Director of the Idaho State Police addressed how Highway Distribution Account funds are used by ISP. The Department requires a minimum of $18 million from the Highway Distribution Law Enforcement Account. Absorbing this reduction would ultimately mean a loss of more than 200 personnel, and the ability to patrol anything more than county roads. The department submitted a number of suggestions, including raising vehicle registration fees, increasing drivers license fees, implementing a surcharge or dedicated sales tax on transportation-related items, or fee on all new car sales, increase new, transfer and out-of-state title fees, or accessing the general fund.
Ray Houston, Budget & Policy Analyst with the Legislative Services Office presented an overview of Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation Funding, The trend for the past decade and earlier is that a larger and larger portion of IDPR budget is from sources other than the General Fund:
- General funds represent $6.8 million or 17.6% of the department’s total budget
- Dedicated funds represent 27.6 million or 71.7% of total
- Federal funds represent $4.1 or 10.7% of total
A tax on recreational fuels funds $5.3 million or 13.8% of the total fiscal years 2010 appropriation. Prior to 1963, Idahoans submitted vouchers on their gas receipts for a refund. In earlier testimony, recreationists (wearing nametags saying “Hello, my name is _______. We want our gas tax back,”), referred to a voucher system that was given up to fund recreation in Idaho. Recreationists apparently wanted to see gas tax collected on vehicles that didn’t use public roads used instead for trail, boat and snowmobile access. Representative Labrador, noted that he heard that it costs $100 per refund to process such refunds, although Houston could not confirm this.
Co-Chair Senator Cameron opened the meeting by outlining the scope of the committee: primarily that the committee is not tasked with undoing the work of the 2009 legislature, nor in redefining the scope of the ISP or the IDPR. Finally, Senator Cameron said he will have considered this task force to have failed if the only option they can identify is to shift the responsibility of replacing these funds to the General Fund.
Interestingly enough, it was this point with which Representative Raul Labrador of Eagle took issue. Apparently, Senator Cameron’s statements narrowed the focus of the committee too much for the Representative.
For background, Paul Headlee of the Legislative Services Office provided an overview of how funds from the Highway Distribution Account are distributed. This revenue includes that from gas taxes, vehicle registration, licensing and other fees which are directed to the State Tax Commission administration, railroad crossings, bridge inspections and Parks and Recreation. Beyond that, funds are distribution to the Idaho State Police and ITD’s State Highway account. Subsequent to June 1st of this year, gas tax funds have been siphoned off to go to the ITD/State Highway Account, removing ISP and IDPR from the distribution. Over the past 25 years, the amount distributed to these two departments has increased steadily, until FY 2008, when distributions equaled $4.3 million to IDPR and $16.36 million to ISP. The forecast for 2011 for IDPR is $240,000 in distributions and $0 for ISP.
Jim Alcorn, the Director of the State Insurance Fund described the Idaho Petroleum Clean Water Trust Fund and the $.01 transfer fee required of fuel distributors. The fund was put in place to provide a low cost solution to those who need liability insurance for fuel storage tanks. The fund is strong now, with reserves in place to fund claims against it, but income from investments has declined, while actuaries predict that claims on the fund will increase. Currently, the fund has an unencumbered surplus of $22 million. This will be reduced to an estimated $12 million by 2018.
Sen. Cameron pointed out that at some point, we’re going to have to put money into the fund to keep it afloat, and asked for any commentary from the audience. Suzanne Budge complied. Budge represents the Idaho Petroleum Marketers and convenience store owners. She noted that most states implemented clean-up funds as a result of the EPA requirement. These were funded by a percentage of fuel tax. Budge noted the extraordinary efficiency of Idaho’s insurance fund, which has been a model for other states. Where other states have gone into the red, this fund has been well run.
Another industry expert testified, noting the number of schools, cities, counties and other entities required to have this insurance. There is also private insurance available, but with relatively high premiums. Furthermore, insurance companies tend to cherry-pick those they insure based upon the age of their units. Some private tank holders will go under if this fund ceases to exist.
Richard Burns, Budget & Policy Analyst with the Legislative Services Office gave an overview of Idaho State Police funding, specifically that the department projects a 2010 revenue shortfall of $2.87 million. Originally, ISP requested that General Fund money be used to replace these funds. The shortfall required that personnel costs be shifted onto the Project Choice fund. Project Choice is dedicated to helping ISP personnel develop career ladders – thereby reducing attrition in the department, and supporting recruitment efforts. Within the next year or two, Project Choice funds will no longer be available, forcing a choice between maintaining staff, or reducing a fund, which ultimately impacts the department’s retention.
Lt. Col. Kevin Johnson, Deputy Director of the Idaho State Police addressed how Highway Distribution Account funds are used by ISP. The Department requires a minimum of $18 million from the Highway Distribution Law Enforcement Account. Absorbing this reduction would ultimately mean a loss of more than 200 personnel, and the ability to patrol anything more than county roads. The department submitted a number of suggestions, including raising vehicle registration fees, increasing drivers license fees, implementing a surcharge or dedicated sales tax on transportation-related items, or fee on all new car sales, increase new, transfer and out-of-state title fees, or accessing the general fund.
Ray Houston, Budget & Policy Analyst with the Legislative Services Office presented an overview of Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation Funding, The trend for the past decade and earlier is that a larger and larger portion of IDPR budget is from sources other than the General Fund:
- General funds represent $6.8 million or 17.6% of the department’s total budget
- Dedicated funds represent 27.6 million or 71.7% of total
- Federal funds represent $4.1 or 10.7% of total
A tax on recreational fuels funds $5.3 million or 13.8% of the total fiscal years 2010 appropriation. Prior to 1963, Idahoans submitted vouchers on their gas receipts for a refund. In earlier testimony, recreationists (wearing nametags saying “Hello, my name is _______. We want our gas tax back,”), referred to a voucher system that was given up to fund recreation in Idaho. Recreationists apparently wanted to see gas tax collected on vehicles that didn’t use public roads used instead for trail, boat and snowmobile access. Representative Labrador, noted that he heard that it costs $100 per refund to process such refunds, although Houston could not confirm this.
“At the risk of sounding callous,” Co-chair Cameron said “why were these recreationists entitled to a refund?”
Co-Chair Cameron added that a number of states are in dire financial situations currently, some even needing to close state parks and recreational facilities. He asked IDPR to gather information on how Idaho is doing compared to other states in this regard.
David Ricks, Acting Director of the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation, outlined specifically how gas taxes are used by his department:
- 28% to off road motor vehicle fund – the staff gives about $600k every year in grants to maintain trail access, develop mapping and signs, educate the public on proper use, and on grooming 5,600 miles of snowmobile trails every year.
- 28% Waterways improvement fund – this fund supports the use of 91,000 recreational motorboats including launch facilities, navigational aids and enforcement/education. This is a highly competitive program, with only one in five grants approved every year.
- Search and Rescue
- Capital Improvement Fund – this is allocated to state park maintenance and improvement such as to restrooms, playground equipment, roadways, bridge inspection and maintenance and infrastructure. Ricks noted that surveys show that families visiting a park with a shabby restroom facility are unlikely to visit again.
Ricks noted that most of the funds go to local government entities that make repairs and improvements to more than 30 state parks. Tourism is Idaho’s third largest industry, bringing in $3 billion into the state’s rural economies annually. Earlier in the day, during public testimony, Sandra Mitchell of the Idaho State Snowmobile Association emphasized the degree to which Idaho tourism supports the state economy.
“After they did away with the extraction industries, what was left was recreation.” She said, noting that recreationists “pay their own way” in this state.
The committee voted to meet again in mid August, to hear reports from the Tax Commission. Rep. Labrador noted that he would still like to see a broader scope for the committee, including the opportunity to revisit the laws passed during the recent legislative session, but Co-chair Cameron remained steadfast.
“It’s not that I am objectionable to un-ringing the bell,” he said. “I just don’t think it’s doable.”
Senator Patty Ann Lodge and others asked for more information that she said was based on suggestions from her constituents, such as increasing fees for nonresident recreationists, or increasing fines for infractions or DUIs.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Climate Change threat overblown?
Fortune magazine published an article that was posted to the CNNMoney.com website on May 14, 2009. It is an interview with John Christy, director of the Earth Science Center at the University of Alabama, written by Jon Birger, senior writer at Fortune. Christy is a veteran climatologist who was a lead author on the 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report and one of three authors of the American Geophysical Union's landmark 2003 statement on climate change.
This isn’t a story that got a lot of attention from the mainstream media; however, it is worth reading because of the credentials of John Cristy and his research on the issue of global warming.
In the interview, Christy says: “The problem is that the solutions being offered don't provide any detectable relief from this so-called catastrophe (global warming). Congress is now discussing an 80% reduction in U.S. greenhouse emissions by 2050. That's basically the equivalent of building 1,000 new nuclear power plants all operating by 2020. Now I'm all in favor of nuclear energy, but that would affect the global temperature by only seven-hundredths of a degree by 2050 and fifteen hundredths by 2100. We wouldn't even notice it.”
Follow this link to read his testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee on February 25, 2009, and read Birger's article at Fortune Magazine for more information.
This isn’t a story that got a lot of attention from the mainstream media; however, it is worth reading because of the credentials of John Cristy and his research on the issue of global warming.
In the interview, Christy says: “The problem is that the solutions being offered don't provide any detectable relief from this so-called catastrophe (global warming). Congress is now discussing an 80% reduction in U.S. greenhouse emissions by 2050. That's basically the equivalent of building 1,000 new nuclear power plants all operating by 2020. Now I'm all in favor of nuclear energy, but that would affect the global temperature by only seven-hundredths of a degree by 2050 and fifteen hundredths by 2100. We wouldn't even notice it.”
Follow this link to read his testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee on February 25, 2009, and read Birger's article at Fortune Magazine for more information.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Revised bighorn sheep bill passes Senate and House
S1232aa: Bighorn sheep bill revised: Passed the Senate and the House.
This bill rewrites the vetoed bighorn sheep bill and adds a section that requires IDFG to develop a state management plan to maintain a self-sustaining population of bighorn sheep. The plan is required to take into account the existing state and federal grazing allotments. The plan will outline best management practices which permittees must implement in order to make the risk of disease transmission between bighorn and domestic sheep acceptable.
This bill rewrites the vetoed bighorn sheep bill and adds a section that requires IDFG to develop a state management plan to maintain a self-sustaining population of bighorn sheep. The plan is required to take into account the existing state and federal grazing allotments. The plan will outline best management practices which permittees must implement in order to make the risk of disease transmission between bighorn and domestic sheep acceptable.
Bighorn Sheep bill vetoed
S1175aa: Care and control of bighorn sheep: Amended twice but still vetoed by the Governor.
This bill amends an existing law to provide that: Fish and Game take specified action relating to the relocation of bighorn sheep; provide for the relocation or control of certain bighorn sheep by the Director of the Department of Fish and Game and to delete reference to provisions relating to the employment of certain veterinarians by the Department of Agriculture.
The governor has established a collaborative effort to arrive at a solution and some of the members would have pulled out if the Governor had signed this bill. He is working with the sponsor, Sen. Jeff Siddoway, to craft another bill that will not jeopardize the negotiations.
This bill amends an existing law to provide that: Fish and Game take specified action relating to the relocation of bighorn sheep; provide for the relocation or control of certain bighorn sheep by the Director of the Department of Fish and Game and to delete reference to provisions relating to the employment of certain veterinarians by the Department of Agriculture.
The governor has established a collaborative effort to arrive at a solution and some of the members would have pulled out if the Governor had signed this bill. He is working with the sponsor, Sen. Jeff Siddoway, to craft another bill that will not jeopardize the negotiations.
Swan Falls agreement signed by gov
S1167, S1169, S1185: Swan Falls and recharge: All signed by the Governor on 4/24/09 and effective on 7/01/09
All of these bills deal with one of a previous session’s contentious issues: the Swan Falls agreement that led to the state adjudication process and the issue of recharge of the aquifer.
The first requires the Idaho Water Resource Board approve any managed recharge project in excess of 10,000 acre feet annually. It also provides a public process for evaluating and balancing the effects of managed recharge.
S1169 confirms the limitations on the Idaho Public Utilities Commission that were part of the 1984 Swan Falls Settlement between the State and Idaho Power Company.
The last clarifies that the Swan Falls Agreement does not preclude use of water for aquifer recharge. It affirms that ground water recharge rights will be issued in compliance with Idaho law and the state water plan. The director may regulate methods of recharge to prevent conditions that are adverse to the beneficial use of water under existing water rights.
All of these bills deal with one of a previous session’s contentious issues: the Swan Falls agreement that led to the state adjudication process and the issue of recharge of the aquifer.
The first requires the Idaho Water Resource Board approve any managed recharge project in excess of 10,000 acre feet annually. It also provides a public process for evaluating and balancing the effects of managed recharge.
S1169 confirms the limitations on the Idaho Public Utilities Commission that were part of the 1984 Swan Falls Settlement between the State and Idaho Power Company.
The last clarifies that the Swan Falls Agreement does not preclude use of water for aquifer recharge. It affirms that ground water recharge rights will be issued in compliance with Idaho law and the state water plan. The director may regulate methods of recharge to prevent conditions that are adverse to the beneficial use of water under existing water rights.
Resolution addresses pending invasive species
SCR 109: Here come the mussels: Adopted by both houses.
This resolution addresses the pending emergency confronting Idaho in the form of Zebra and Quagga mussels. Further, the Resolution declares that such an emergency exists and that deficiency warrants, as authorized by the Idaho Invasive Species Act of 2008, be used proactively by the Department of Agriculture. The resolution outlines limitations and scope in the use of emergency deficiency warrants.
The State of Idaho is on the verge of experiencing significant impacts across a wide spectrum of its natural and economic resources as a result of the accidental introduction of various aquatic nuisance species, primarily quagga and zebra mussels. The impacts across the state will be extreme, affecting the economic, social and recreational pursuits of all Idahoans who are influenced by hydro power and other dams, drinking water, agricultural diversions for irrigation, recreational pursuits such as boating, fishing, golf courses, hatcheries, and the aquaculture industry. The ecological impacts of introduction of these and other invasives are immeasurable and irreversible. There are approximately 90,000 registered motorized vessels in Idaho, plus an estimated 9,000 nonresident motorized vessels that recreate on our public waterways each year. Non-motorized boaters are estimated at between 90,000 and 120,000.
The resolution assesses the following fees to fund measures to fend off invasive aquatic species:
For motorized vessels:
Ten dollars ($10.00) per vessel registered in the state of Idaho prior to launch
into the public waters of the state;
Twenty dollars ($20.00) per vessel registered outside the state of Idaho prior
to launch into the public waters of the state.
For non-motorized vessels:
Five dollars ($5.00) per vessel prior to launch into the public
waters of the state.
Commercial outfitters with non-motorized fleets exceeding five (5) vessels shall be
afforded a prorated group rate of thirty dollars ($30.00) for six (6) to ten (10) vessels;
fiftyfive dollars ($55.00) for eleven (11) to twenty (20) vessels; and one hundred dollars
($100) for twenty one (21) or more vessels.
This resolution addresses the pending emergency confronting Idaho in the form of Zebra and Quagga mussels. Further, the Resolution declares that such an emergency exists and that deficiency warrants, as authorized by the Idaho Invasive Species Act of 2008, be used proactively by the Department of Agriculture. The resolution outlines limitations and scope in the use of emergency deficiency warrants.
The State of Idaho is on the verge of experiencing significant impacts across a wide spectrum of its natural and economic resources as a result of the accidental introduction of various aquatic nuisance species, primarily quagga and zebra mussels. The impacts across the state will be extreme, affecting the economic, social and recreational pursuits of all Idahoans who are influenced by hydro power and other dams, drinking water, agricultural diversions for irrigation, recreational pursuits such as boating, fishing, golf courses, hatcheries, and the aquaculture industry. The ecological impacts of introduction of these and other invasives are immeasurable and irreversible. There are approximately 90,000 registered motorized vessels in Idaho, plus an estimated 9,000 nonresident motorized vessels that recreate on our public waterways each year. Non-motorized boaters are estimated at between 90,000 and 120,000.
The resolution assesses the following fees to fund measures to fend off invasive aquatic species:
For motorized vessels:
Ten dollars ($10.00) per vessel registered in the state of Idaho prior to launch
into the public waters of the state;
Twenty dollars ($20.00) per vessel registered outside the state of Idaho prior
to launch into the public waters of the state.
For non-motorized vessels:
Five dollars ($5.00) per vessel prior to launch into the public
waters of the state.
Commercial outfitters with non-motorized fleets exceeding five (5) vessels shall be
afforded a prorated group rate of thirty dollars ($30.00) for six (6) to ten (10) vessels;
fiftyfive dollars ($55.00) for eleven (11) to twenty (20) vessels; and one hundred dollars
($100) for twenty one (21) or more vessels.
Resolution addresses the impacts of converting working lands to other uses
HCR 18: The cost of subdividing our working lands: Adopted by both houses.
This resolution requests the Natural Resources Interim Committee to study the impacts of converting working ranches, farms and forests to other uses. The resolution also asks for an examination of the need for new state policy initiatives to protect the values that such lands contribute to local economies, agricultural heritage, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities. The Natural Resources Interim Committee is encouraged to seek the views of interested groups and public on these issues.
This resolution requests the Natural Resources Interim Committee to study the impacts of converting working ranches, farms and forests to other uses. The resolution also asks for an examination of the need for new state policy initiatives to protect the values that such lands contribute to local economies, agricultural heritage, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities. The Natural Resources Interim Committee is encouraged to seek the views of interested groups and public on these issues.
Interim committees to continue work throughout the off season
HCR 13, HCR16, HCR25, HCR31: Interim committees
Interim committees adopted by both House and Senate include:
- Natural resources, to study resource issues (see HCR 18 below);
- A continuation of the energy, environment and technology interim committee;
- An interim committee to complete a study of statutory provisions of the Idaho Code and rules relating to the Soil Conservation Commission and soil conservation districts.
HCR 31 which establishes an interim committee to study Idaho’s transportation system and make recommendations passed the House on 4-29-09.
Interim committees adopted by both House and Senate include:
- Natural resources, to study resource issues (see HCR 18 below);
- A continuation of the energy, environment and technology interim committee;
- An interim committee to complete a study of statutory provisions of the Idaho Code and rules relating to the Soil Conservation Commission and soil conservation districts.
HCR 31 which establishes an interim committee to study Idaho’s transportation system and make recommendations passed the House on 4-29-09.
Wolf sharing bill signed into law
S1015: Share our wolves, please: Signed by the Governor and went into effect on 4-17-09.
This tongue in cheek legislation officially recognizes that Idaho has a surplus of wolves and
offers some of these surplus animals to other states. This legislation directs the Idaho Fish and Game Department to write to their counterparts in all other states, offering some of our surplus animals.
This tongue in cheek legislation officially recognizes that Idaho has a surplus of wolves and
offers some of these surplus animals to other states. This legislation directs the Idaho Fish and Game Department to write to their counterparts in all other states, offering some of our surplus animals.
Joint Memorial Encourages Wolf Delisting
HJM1: Wolf delisting: Adopted with only two nay votes.
This House Joint Memorial urges the United States to honor the commitment made to Idaho that wolves would be delisted upon fulfillment of the 1994 recovery standards, and that the President be urged to withdraw the directive suspending publication of the rule removing Northern Rocky Mountain gray wolves from the list of endangered and threatened species and that the President and his Administration be urged to allow that rule to take effect and defend the rule against any legal challenges.
This House Joint Memorial urges the United States to honor the commitment made to Idaho that wolves would be delisted upon fulfillment of the 1994 recovery standards, and that the President be urged to withdraw the directive suspending publication of the rule removing Northern Rocky Mountain gray wolves from the list of endangered and threatened species and that the President and his Administration be urged to allow that rule to take effect and defend the rule against any legal challenges.
Aquifer Management Plan to go into effect
H264: Aquifer management plan: signed by the Governor and effective 4-23-09
This legislation approves the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA) Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan (CAMP) as a component of the Comprehensive State Water Plan and provides that the Idaho Water Resource Board prepare and submit for approval to the legislature a funding mechanism needed to implement Phase One of the CAMP.
The CAMP establishes a long term program for managing water supply and demand in the ESPA it also establishes an incremental net change to the ESPA water budget of 600,000 acre feet. The Phase One water budget target is 200,000 to 300,000 acre feet over the next ten years. The CAMP calls for the establishment of an advisory committee to assist the Board in the development of an implementation plan, which will include establishing mechanisms to collect funds for implementation of Phase One from the various participants.
This legislation approves the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA) Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan (CAMP) as a component of the Comprehensive State Water Plan and provides that the Idaho Water Resource Board prepare and submit for approval to the legislature a funding mechanism needed to implement Phase One of the CAMP.
The CAMP establishes a long term program for managing water supply and demand in the ESPA it also establishes an incremental net change to the ESPA water budget of 600,000 acre feet. The Phase One water budget target is 200,000 to 300,000 acre feet over the next ten years. The CAMP calls for the establishment of an advisory committee to assist the Board in the development of an implementation plan, which will include establishing mechanisms to collect funds for implementation of Phase One from the various participants.
Renewable Energy Enterprize Zones: a concept for another time?
H122: Renewable Energy Enterprise Zones: A concept ahead of its time, it is still in committee
This legislation will stimulate economic growth by creating Renewable Energy Enterprise Zones (REEZ). A REEZ is a limited geographic region in which specific renewable energy resources are promoted for development. This legislation identifies appropriate incentives and tax benefits designed to stimulate development of resources and distribution systems necessary to bring the energy to market. A REEZ would only be created in areas where local officials and private investors are willing to offer financial, technical, and physical infrastructure support.
This legislation will stimulate economic growth by creating Renewable Energy Enterprise Zones (REEZ). A REEZ is a limited geographic region in which specific renewable energy resources are promoted for development. This legislation identifies appropriate incentives and tax benefits designed to stimulate development of resources and distribution systems necessary to bring the energy to market. A REEZ would only be created in areas where local officials and private investors are willing to offer financial, technical, and physical infrastructure support.
Land assessment rates to cover costs of wildfire protection
H31: Cost of wildfire protection: Introduced in the House, amended in the Senate: signed by the Governor, effective 7-1-09
The Department of Lands is responsible for wild land fire protection on about six million acres of state and private forest lands. Funds trained crews and equipment ready for fire season are partially covered by forest landowner assessments. Current assessments are at the maximums established in code, but not keeping pace with inflationary and other cost increases. The dedicated Forest Protection Fund established for these fees is poised to go negative in FY2010.
This legislation will raise the assessment caps which will allow the State Board of Land
Commissioners to set assessments at rates that cover expected costs. In addition, this legislation
will establish a "Wildfire Equipment Replacement Fund" to be used for the replacement of capital wildfire equipment, such as fire trucks, to help defray the costs of replacing this equipment, over time
The Department of Lands is responsible for wild land fire protection on about six million acres of state and private forest lands. Funds trained crews and equipment ready for fire season are partially covered by forest landowner assessments. Current assessments are at the maximums established in code, but not keeping pace with inflationary and other cost increases. The dedicated Forest Protection Fund established for these fees is poised to go negative in FY2010.
This legislation will raise the assessment caps which will allow the State Board of Land
Commissioners to set assessments at rates that cover expected costs. In addition, this legislation
will establish a "Wildfire Equipment Replacement Fund" to be used for the replacement of capital wildfire equipment, such as fire trucks, to help defray the costs of replacing this equipment, over time
Transmission facilities get priority status
H7: PUC and transmission facilities: signed by the Governor on 2-19-09, effective 7-1-09
This legislation recognizes Idaho’s critical need for transmission infrastructure as it relates to economic growth and sustainability, energy security, and the broader public interest. The PUC and the Office of Energy Resource both confirm that a “priority status” designation does not impact the decision-making role of local units of government as it relates to their current responsibilities associated with transmission siting. Rather, the purpose of this legislation is for the public utilities commission to determine whether the construction of electric transmission facilities should be designated to receive priority processing by state agencies, facilitating expedited processing by those agencies. The process of seeking priority status would be initiated by a transmission developer.
State agencies, at the direction of the Governor, will develop the functional role related to designating priority status at the state level.
This legislation recognizes Idaho’s critical need for transmission infrastructure as it relates to economic growth and sustainability, energy security, and the broader public interest. The PUC and the Office of Energy Resource both confirm that a “priority status” designation does not impact the decision-making role of local units of government as it relates to their current responsibilities associated with transmission siting. Rather, the purpose of this legislation is for the public utilities commission to determine whether the construction of electric transmission facilities should be designated to receive priority processing by state agencies, facilitating expedited processing by those agencies. The process of seeking priority status would be initiated by a transmission developer.
State agencies, at the direction of the Governor, will develop the functional role related to designating priority status at the state level.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Legislation addresses Big Horn Sheep management
This is from a regular roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at http://www.state.id.us/. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
On Friday, Senator Jeff Siddoway introduced draft legislation to the Senate Resources and Environment Committee that would stipulate that domestic sheep and livestock operators will be held harmless from adverse impacts of bighorn sheep mixing with domestic sheep by the State. His legislation provides for control of certain bighorn sheep by the Idaho Department of Fish & Game and its director; and removes the reference to the shared veterinarian program between ISDA and IDFG. This is the most recent in a series of legislation addressing further reintroduction of big horn sheep without adversely affecting domestic sheep grazing allotments on federal lands. The committee sent the bill to the 14th Order where it was amended. The amended version is on the Second Reading calendar.
For background on the bighorn sheep issue, see the 1/31/09 posting on bighorn sheep.
On Friday, Senator Jeff Siddoway introduced draft legislation to the Senate Resources and Environment Committee that would stipulate that domestic sheep and livestock operators will be held harmless from adverse impacts of bighorn sheep mixing with domestic sheep by the State. His legislation provides for control of certain bighorn sheep by the Idaho Department of Fish & Game and its director; and removes the reference to the shared veterinarian program between ISDA and IDFG. This is the most recent in a series of legislation addressing further reintroduction of big horn sheep without adversely affecting domestic sheep grazing allotments on federal lands. The committee sent the bill to the 14th Order where it was amended. The amended version is on the Second Reading calendar.
For background on the bighorn sheep issue, see the 1/31/09 posting on bighorn sheep.
Bills resolved litigation between Idaho Power Company and the State
This post is part of a regular roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at www.state.id.us. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
Three bills were approved by the Senate Resources and Environment Committee last week that resolve litigation between the Idaho Power Company and the State of Idaho. Idaho Power filed suit in the Snake River Basin Adjudication in 2007. At issue were certain points of a 1984 agreement concerning the Swan Falls hydroelectric facility on the Snake River, about 40 miles southwest of Boise.
Jim Tucker, attorney for Idaho Power Company, Clive Strong from the Attorney General’s office and David Hensley with the Governor’s office were on hand to present the framework for the bills to a joint meeting of the House Resource and Conservation Committee and the Senate Resources and Environment Committee last week. They noted that the proposed legislation clarifies and reaffirms the original Swan Falls Agreement to the satisfaction of everyone involved.
S1167 requires that the Idaho Water Resources Board approve any recharge project in excess of 10,000 acre-feet because it may have effects on surface flows similar to those of a storage reservoir. Such a recharge project would go through a public process to evaluate and balance the effects of managed recharge in accordance with state law and the state water plan.
S1168 was replaced by S1185 and clarifies that the Swan Falls Agreement does not preclude use of water for recharge. It also confirms that ground water recharge rights will be issued in compliance with state law and the state water plan. It gives the Director of the Department of Water Resources the authority to determine the amount of water diverted for recharge and to operate aquifer recharge projects.
Finally, S1169 confirms in code the limitations on the Idaho Public Utilities Commission that are part of the 1984 Swan Falls settlement.
Senator Eskridge and others on the committee noted that the framework presented and the bills themselves are true to the intent of the original Swan Falls Agreement and will benefit Idaho. He commended the task force on its collaborative efforts.
Three bills were approved by the Senate Resources and Environment Committee last week that resolve litigation between the Idaho Power Company and the State of Idaho. Idaho Power filed suit in the Snake River Basin Adjudication in 2007. At issue were certain points of a 1984 agreement concerning the Swan Falls hydroelectric facility on the Snake River, about 40 miles southwest of Boise.
Jim Tucker, attorney for Idaho Power Company, Clive Strong from the Attorney General’s office and David Hensley with the Governor’s office were on hand to present the framework for the bills to a joint meeting of the House Resource and Conservation Committee and the Senate Resources and Environment Committee last week. They noted that the proposed legislation clarifies and reaffirms the original Swan Falls Agreement to the satisfaction of everyone involved.
S1167 requires that the Idaho Water Resources Board approve any recharge project in excess of 10,000 acre-feet because it may have effects on surface flows similar to those of a storage reservoir. Such a recharge project would go through a public process to evaluate and balance the effects of managed recharge in accordance with state law and the state water plan.
S1168 was replaced by S1185 and clarifies that the Swan Falls Agreement does not preclude use of water for recharge. It also confirms that ground water recharge rights will be issued in compliance with state law and the state water plan. It gives the Director of the Department of Water Resources the authority to determine the amount of water diverted for recharge and to operate aquifer recharge projects.
Finally, S1169 confirms in code the limitations on the Idaho Public Utilities Commission that are part of the 1984 Swan Falls settlement.
Senator Eskridge and others on the committee noted that the framework presented and the bills themselves are true to the intent of the original Swan Falls Agreement and will benefit Idaho. He commended the task force on its collaborative efforts.
Invitation from the Idaho and BSU Student Chapters of the Air & Waste Management Association
Please join us for an informal discussion with Sue Richards, DEQ Air Quality Analyst, to learn about:
State of Idaho Green House Gas emission inventory
DEQ's Climate Registry membership
Proposed federal Green House Gas regulations
When: 8:00 a.m. - 9 a.m., April 22, 2009 (Earth Day)
Where: Boise State University Student Union Building, Alexander Room
Cost: free
Coffee and other refreshments available for purchase at Moxie Java on first floor of SUB (below Alexander Room).
Recommended parking in the Lincoln Garage, directly across University Drive from the SUB ($1/hour, remember your space number when exiting your vehicle and prepay at the machine near the stairs with cash or credit card).
This coffee hour presentation is organized by the Idaho and BSU Student Chapters of the Air & Waste Management Association.
State of Idaho Green House Gas emission inventory
DEQ's Climate Registry membership
Proposed federal Green House Gas regulations
When: 8:00 a.m. - 9 a.m., April 22, 2009 (Earth Day)
Where: Boise State University Student Union Building, Alexander Room
Cost: free
Coffee and other refreshments available for purchase at Moxie Java on first floor of SUB (below Alexander Room).
Recommended parking in the Lincoln Garage, directly across University Drive from the SUB ($1/hour, remember your space number when exiting your vehicle and prepay at the machine near the stairs with cash or credit card).
This coffee hour presentation is organized by the Idaho and BSU Student Chapters of the Air & Waste Management Association.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Governor Otter's Budget Proposal
Otter’s budget chief, Wayne Hammon, sent the following message to all legislators this morning. The text of the Governor's full proposal follows:
Members of the Senate and House,
Attached is a copy of the Governor’s proposal for the end of the year budget bill. This plan addresses many of the concerns that up until now have remained unresolved.
Specifically, the Governor’s plan:
· Eliminates cross-the-board salary reductions for all employees
· Decreases the statewide PC reduction from JFAC approved 5% to 3%
· Provides flexibility to agency directors in how to implement PC reduction
· Uses “rainy-day” funds for their intended purposes while maintaining healthy balances as a safeguard against continued economic decline
· Maximizes impact of federal stimulus dollars by helping communities across the entire state while putting Idahoans back to work in construction projects in both the private and public sectors
· Provides safeguards for possible end-of-year revenue shortfalls
*****
Governor’s Proposal – End of the Year Budget Bill
Section 1. Transfer from Budget Stabilization Fund In order to balance all spending authorized to date by JFAC, accommodate other pending legislative action (such as IRS conformity) and to allow the scheduled phase-in of the grocery tax credit expansion to take place, $30 million will be transferred from the Budget Stabilization Fund (BSF) to the General Fund.
Section 2. Revenue Short Fall Provision
In anticipation of the possibility of a revenue shortfall at the end of FY 2009 and notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Legislature authorizes the Governor to draw upon funds from BSF and the Public Education Stabilization Fund (PESF) in the amount required to meet the shortfall. The Governor is to draw upon both funds in a ratio consistent with current law and only if the shortfall exceeds the projected ending balance. The Governor’s authority will be capped at no more than 50% of either fund. Should the shortfall exceed this limit, it would be the Governor’s responsibility to call a special session of the Legislature to address the matter.
Section 3. Beginning Balance Provision
Should the FY 2009 General Fund ending balance equal less than the current projection of $50 million, the Governor would be authorized to transfer up to $50 million from BSF and PESF to the General Fund in a ratio consistent with current law to restore the projected FY 2010 beginning balance. Doing so would avoid the need to any additional holdbacks in FY 2010 until such time as the Legislature was convened in January.
Section 4. Agency Director Flexibility
All sections of intent language in each appropriation bill mandating a 3% across-the-board salary reduction and outlining legislative priorities shall be repealed and each agency director charged with meeting the reduction in a manner best suited for their individual agency. All such plans would require DFM approval prior to implementation.
Section 5. Decrease of PC Reduction
In order to reduce the FY 2010 PC reduction set from the 5% set by JFAC to 3%, $8 million will be transferred from either BSF or the federal stimulus to the General Fund. This provision does not apply to public education where the reduction is already less than 3% or higher education where federal stimulus funds have already been authorized to offset the PC reduction.
Section 6. Federal Stimulus Funds
The following appropriations will be made from the $44.8 million available in the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund of the federal stimulus bill (ARRA):
-- $3 million for the Idaho Education Network administered by the Dept of Administration
-- $5 million for drinking water projects administered by DEQ
-- $10 million for clean water projects administered by DEQ
-- The remaining funds for transportation infrastructure projects
Advantages
-- Eliminates cross-the-board salary reductions for all employees
-- Decreases the statewide PC reduction from JFAC approved 5% to 3%
-- Provides flexibility to agency directors in how to implement PC reduction
-- Uses “rainy-day” funds for their intended purposes while maintaining healthy balances as a safeguard against continued economic decline
-- Maximizes impact of federal stimulus dollars by helping communities across the entire state while putting Idahoans back to work in construction projects in both the private and public sectors
-- Provides safeguards for possible end-of-year revenue shortfalls
*****
Members of the Senate and House,
Attached is a copy of the Governor’s proposal for the end of the year budget bill. This plan addresses many of the concerns that up until now have remained unresolved.
Specifically, the Governor’s plan:
· Eliminates cross-the-board salary reductions for all employees
· Decreases the statewide PC reduction from JFAC approved 5% to 3%
· Provides flexibility to agency directors in how to implement PC reduction
· Uses “rainy-day” funds for their intended purposes while maintaining healthy balances as a safeguard against continued economic decline
· Maximizes impact of federal stimulus dollars by helping communities across the entire state while putting Idahoans back to work in construction projects in both the private and public sectors
· Provides safeguards for possible end-of-year revenue shortfalls
*****
Governor’s Proposal – End of the Year Budget Bill
Section 1. Transfer from Budget Stabilization Fund In order to balance all spending authorized to date by JFAC, accommodate other pending legislative action (such as IRS conformity) and to allow the scheduled phase-in of the grocery tax credit expansion to take place, $30 million will be transferred from the Budget Stabilization Fund (BSF) to the General Fund.
Section 2. Revenue Short Fall Provision
In anticipation of the possibility of a revenue shortfall at the end of FY 2009 and notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Legislature authorizes the Governor to draw upon funds from BSF and the Public Education Stabilization Fund (PESF) in the amount required to meet the shortfall. The Governor is to draw upon both funds in a ratio consistent with current law and only if the shortfall exceeds the projected ending balance. The Governor’s authority will be capped at no more than 50% of either fund. Should the shortfall exceed this limit, it would be the Governor’s responsibility to call a special session of the Legislature to address the matter.
Section 3. Beginning Balance Provision
Should the FY 2009 General Fund ending balance equal less than the current projection of $50 million, the Governor would be authorized to transfer up to $50 million from BSF and PESF to the General Fund in a ratio consistent with current law to restore the projected FY 2010 beginning balance. Doing so would avoid the need to any additional holdbacks in FY 2010 until such time as the Legislature was convened in January.
Section 4. Agency Director Flexibility
All sections of intent language in each appropriation bill mandating a 3% across-the-board salary reduction and outlining legislative priorities shall be repealed and each agency director charged with meeting the reduction in a manner best suited for their individual agency. All such plans would require DFM approval prior to implementation.
Section 5. Decrease of PC Reduction
In order to reduce the FY 2010 PC reduction set from the 5% set by JFAC to 3%, $8 million will be transferred from either BSF or the federal stimulus to the General Fund. This provision does not apply to public education where the reduction is already less than 3% or higher education where federal stimulus funds have already been authorized to offset the PC reduction.
Section 6. Federal Stimulus Funds
The following appropriations will be made from the $44.8 million available in the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund of the federal stimulus bill (ARRA):
-- $3 million for the Idaho Education Network administered by the Dept of Administration
-- $5 million for drinking water projects administered by DEQ
-- $10 million for clean water projects administered by DEQ
-- The remaining funds for transportation infrastructure projects
Advantages
-- Eliminates cross-the-board salary reductions for all employees
-- Decreases the statewide PC reduction from JFAC approved 5% to 3%
-- Provides flexibility to agency directors in how to implement PC reduction
-- Uses “rainy-day” funds for their intended purposes while maintaining healthy balances as a safeguard against continued economic decline
-- Maximizes impact of federal stimulus dollars by helping communities across the entire state while putting Idahoans back to work in construction projects in both the private and public sectors
-- Provides safeguards for possible end-of-year revenue shortfalls
*****
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Integration of Wind Energy into BPA Power Grid - ICIE's Saturday Summary 3/28/09
This is a weekly roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at www.state.id.us. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
Note from ICIE: Committee meetings are slowing down but I wanted to forward this report by John Williams to the Senate Resources & Environment Committee earlier this month. We had a brief discussion of it in an earlier Saturday Summary; however, alternate energy is such a hot topic, I thought you would like to see John’s entire report.
“Integration of Wind Energy Into BPA Power Grid”
John Williams, Idaho Constituent Account Executive, BPA
I. BPA strongly supports wind power: since the 2007 NW Wind Integration plan, BPA has been working with regional stakeholders on various solutions to integrate large amounts of wind power in a reliable and cost effective manner.
Within BPA’s balancing authority (BA)/Transmission control area, wind power has increase from 25 mw 10 years ago to more than 1,500 mw today. This may double by the end of 2009.
Several factors are driving the need to develop renewables in the NW: 1) increase demand for power, 2) state renewable portfolio standards, and 3) climate change concerns. There are challenges in meeting RPS and climate concerns.
II. Renewable Portfolio Standards: California, Oregon, and Washington have mandated a portion of their utilities resources to meet load must come from carbon free generation. Majority of the wind development is in BPA’s BA (Lower Columbia region). This is a supply demand for renewable resources.
III. Transmission/Generation: BPA has integrated over 1,500 mw of wind power. During the last few years, BPA have built five new substations and tap lines. BPA will continue to invest in transmission to integrate renewable resources. Also federal hydro have supplied reserves to back-up and support wind generation while maintaining system reliability.
However, wind development is moving so quickly that it’s out pacing BPA’s ability to integrate this resource with the Federal hydro-system (1,500 mw wind is about 15% of our 10,500 mw peak load). We are experiencing large ramping events – several hundred megawatts of unscheduled changes in wind output occurring within an hour!
Wind power requires generation inputs (reserves) to maintain balance between scheduled output and actual generation. BPA must increase or decrease it’s generation in like amounts immediately to maintain the constant balance of generation and load to keep the transmission system stable.
The hydro system’s limits are being reached. Excessive wind generation imbalance is beginning to impose real consequences on power system operation that could affect both system reliability and protection of Columbia and Snake River salmon listed under the Endangered Species Act.
IV. Wind Integration challenge: reliability and cost
BPA is working aggressively with the wind and utility communities to develop new wind forecasting tools and market mechanisms to better manage wind and other variable resources in the transmission grid.
Until these tools are sufficiently mature, BPA will have to rely on the federal hydropower system. For the last several weeks, BPA has worked intensively on a way to continue to add wind farms to its existing system without jeopardizing system reliability or fulfillment of its hydro operation requirements under the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act. We are sharing the resulting solutions with the wind and utility communities and interested parties.
Solutions: 1) Protocols will limit wind operation to stay within balancing reserves - shifts the responsibility for balancing for under-generation of wind to the transmission contract holder and its balancing authority (utility’s transmission control area) and to the wind power customers, 2) Interconnection Agreements that define the responsibilities of BPA and each generator that connects to BPA’s transmission system, 3) Balancing reserves (to back-up wind) will be forecast in rates. However, BPA cannot reduce hydro generation to compensate for wind over-generation if doing so would increase nitrogen saturation in the river above legal limits (Clean Water Act and ESA listed fish impact).
V. Summary
BPA will need additional power reserves, thus last November we sent out a Request for Information on potential sources (generation inputs and/or load interruption) to be used for load following and regulation capabilities. We received 18 responses that will be used to develop one or more pilot projects.
As mentioned earlier, BPA is working aggressively to help the industry develop new forecasting tools and market mechanisms to enable new supplies of integration services (system regulation, resource following, and generation imbalance – all in real time except the third point that is after the fact correction used in billing)
BPA is working with its customers, wind developers, regulators, and interested parties to find practical, equitable and viable ways to meet the technical requirements of integrating wind power in the NW.
Report by John Williams, Idaho Constituent Account Executive, BPA
Note from ICIE: Committee meetings are slowing down but I wanted to forward this report by John Williams to the Senate Resources & Environment Committee earlier this month. We had a brief discussion of it in an earlier Saturday Summary; however, alternate energy is such a hot topic, I thought you would like to see John’s entire report.
“Integration of Wind Energy Into BPA Power Grid”
John Williams, Idaho Constituent Account Executive, BPA
I. BPA strongly supports wind power: since the 2007 NW Wind Integration plan, BPA has been working with regional stakeholders on various solutions to integrate large amounts of wind power in a reliable and cost effective manner.
Within BPA’s balancing authority (BA)/Transmission control area, wind power has increase from 25 mw 10 years ago to more than 1,500 mw today. This may double by the end of 2009.
Several factors are driving the need to develop renewables in the NW: 1) increase demand for power, 2) state renewable portfolio standards, and 3) climate change concerns. There are challenges in meeting RPS and climate concerns.
II. Renewable Portfolio Standards: California, Oregon, and Washington have mandated a portion of their utilities resources to meet load must come from carbon free generation. Majority of the wind development is in BPA’s BA (Lower Columbia region). This is a supply demand for renewable resources.
III. Transmission/Generation: BPA has integrated over 1,500 mw of wind power. During the last few years, BPA have built five new substations and tap lines. BPA will continue to invest in transmission to integrate renewable resources. Also federal hydro have supplied reserves to back-up and support wind generation while maintaining system reliability.
However, wind development is moving so quickly that it’s out pacing BPA’s ability to integrate this resource with the Federal hydro-system (1,500 mw wind is about 15% of our 10,500 mw peak load). We are experiencing large ramping events – several hundred megawatts of unscheduled changes in wind output occurring within an hour!
Wind power requires generation inputs (reserves) to maintain balance between scheduled output and actual generation. BPA must increase or decrease it’s generation in like amounts immediately to maintain the constant balance of generation and load to keep the transmission system stable.
The hydro system’s limits are being reached. Excessive wind generation imbalance is beginning to impose real consequences on power system operation that could affect both system reliability and protection of Columbia and Snake River salmon listed under the Endangered Species Act.
IV. Wind Integration challenge: reliability and cost
BPA is working aggressively with the wind and utility communities to develop new wind forecasting tools and market mechanisms to better manage wind and other variable resources in the transmission grid.
Until these tools are sufficiently mature, BPA will have to rely on the federal hydropower system. For the last several weeks, BPA has worked intensively on a way to continue to add wind farms to its existing system without jeopardizing system reliability or fulfillment of its hydro operation requirements under the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act. We are sharing the resulting solutions with the wind and utility communities and interested parties.
Solutions: 1) Protocols will limit wind operation to stay within balancing reserves - shifts the responsibility for balancing for under-generation of wind to the transmission contract holder and its balancing authority (utility’s transmission control area) and to the wind power customers, 2) Interconnection Agreements that define the responsibilities of BPA and each generator that connects to BPA’s transmission system, 3) Balancing reserves (to back-up wind) will be forecast in rates. However, BPA cannot reduce hydro generation to compensate for wind over-generation if doing so would increase nitrogen saturation in the river above legal limits (Clean Water Act and ESA listed fish impact).
V. Summary
BPA will need additional power reserves, thus last November we sent out a Request for Information on potential sources (generation inputs and/or load interruption) to be used for load following and regulation capabilities. We received 18 responses that will be used to develop one or more pilot projects.
As mentioned earlier, BPA is working aggressively to help the industry develop new forecasting tools and market mechanisms to enable new supplies of integration services (system regulation, resource following, and generation imbalance – all in real time except the third point that is after the fact correction used in billing)
BPA is working with its customers, wind developers, regulators, and interested parties to find practical, equitable and viable ways to meet the technical requirements of integrating wind power in the NW.
Report by John Williams, Idaho Constituent Account Executive, BPA
Monday, March 9, 2009
Converting working Ranches, Farms, Forests to other uses - ICIE's Saturday Summary 3/7/09
Rep. Rich Wills presented HCR 18 to the committee asking for its support. This concurrent resolution requests the Natural Resources Interim Committee to study the impacts of conversion of working ranches, farms and forests to other uses. It also asks for an examination of the need for new state policy initiatives to protect the values that such landscontribute to local economies, agricultural heritage, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities. The Senate committee sent HCR 18 to the floor with a “do pass” recommendation.
Wolf Delisting Decision - ICIE Saturday Summary 3/7/09
Clive Strong, Idaho Attorney General’s office, reported to the Senate Resources and Environment Committee on the decision by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to delist the gray wolf in Idaho and Montana. The decision will be printed in the Federal Register and will final 30 days after printing. The state is expecting a lawsuit to be filed because the delisting does not include Wyoming. Idaho has over 800 wolves documented which are far in excess of what was required for delisting.
Carbon Sequestration - ICIE's Saturday Summary 3/7/09
Mike Hoffman with the Idaho Soil Conservation Commission (ISCC) reported to the House Agricultural Affairs Committeeon on Idaho’s carbon sequestration efforts. The Idaho Legislature established the Carbon Sequestration Advisory Committee in 2002 as part of the legislation asking the Soil Conservation Commission to prepare a report exploring the potential for carbon sequestration on agricultural and private, non-industrial forestlands. The 19-member Carbon Sequestration Advisory Committee is chaired by ISCC. Funds for the accompanying carbon sequestration assessment fund have never been appropriated.
Currently, Idaho has a very small carbon footprint but the ability to sequester carbon from other locations in forested and agricultural lands. Hoffman explained that the committee has an information outreach component as well as pilot projects and technical research. The report and other information can be accessed by going to the ISCC website (http://www.scc.idaho.gov/) and clicking on the carbon sequestration tab.
Currently, Idaho has a very small carbon footprint but the ability to sequester carbon from other locations in forested and agricultural lands. Hoffman explained that the committee has an information outreach component as well as pilot projects and technical research. The report and other information can be accessed by going to the ISCC website (http://www.scc.idaho.gov/) and clicking on the carbon sequestration tab.
25x25 and energy - ICIE's Saturday Summary 3/7/09
J. Read Smith, a farmer from St. John, Washington and Co-chairman of 25X’25 explained to the House Agricultural Affairs Committee recently what that organization hopes to accomplish. The organization’s goal is for America's farms, forests and ranches to provide 25 percent of the total energy consumed in the United States by 2025, while continuing to produce safe, abundant, and affordable food, feed and fiber.
Presently, six to seven percent of our power comes from renewables. About half of that amount is from hydropower. The other half is from biomass and other renewables. Increasing our energy from renewables could result in $700 billion in economic development and 5 million new jobs in rural America.
Smith pointed out that we need all the energy we can get. He discussed the option of community wind development that could be a smaller, decentralized compliment to larger projects.
For more information, check out the website at http://www.25x25.org/
Presently, six to seven percent of our power comes from renewables. About half of that amount is from hydropower. The other half is from biomass and other renewables. Increasing our energy from renewables could result in $700 billion in economic development and 5 million new jobs in rural America.
Smith pointed out that we need all the energy we can get. He discussed the option of community wind development that could be a smaller, decentralized compliment to larger projects.
For more information, check out the website at http://www.25x25.org/
Monday, March 2, 2009
Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility - ICIE's Saturday Summary 2/28/09
On Wednesday, Areva Enrichment Services presented an overview of the proposed Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility for Bonneville County to the House Energy, Environment and Technology Committee. Industry representatives say public input for this project has been “unanimously” positive. Of the more than 350 people who attended a recent public meeting on the project, all were supportive, although both Chairman Raybould and Areva have received letters of protest from the Snake River Alliance. The proposed site is a half mile east of the eastern border of the Idaho National Laboratory.
The license application will be up for public review and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will perform a level one environmental impact study, which will take 24 to 36 months, followed by a five year construction process for the complete facility, during which time the plant will be partially operational after the first two years.
Areva’s representative assured the committee that they are still pursuing this timeline despite the economy. During the construction phase of the project, the company projects 1,000 new jobs, with 400 new jobs related to the operation of the facility at an average salary of $66,000 per year.
Areva provides services, equipment and technology for the nuclear services industry. It is the number one reactor builder in the world and number three in electricity transmission and distribution. In addition to the Eagle Rock Facility, the company is looking into wind and biomass generator projects in Northern Idaho. The company presented a video outlining the development of the Goreges Besse enrichment plant in France. The Idaho Falls plant will provide enrichment services to US nuclear plant operators using what Areva representatives note is advanced centrifuge technology which has been successfully deployed in Europe for more than thirty years, and uses 50 times less electricity than a gaseous diffusion process.
The license application will be up for public review and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will perform a level one environmental impact study, which will take 24 to 36 months, followed by a five year construction process for the complete facility, during which time the plant will be partially operational after the first two years.
Areva’s representative assured the committee that they are still pursuing this timeline despite the economy. During the construction phase of the project, the company projects 1,000 new jobs, with 400 new jobs related to the operation of the facility at an average salary of $66,000 per year.
Areva provides services, equipment and technology for the nuclear services industry. It is the number one reactor builder in the world and number three in electricity transmission and distribution. In addition to the Eagle Rock Facility, the company is looking into wind and biomass generator projects in Northern Idaho. The company presented a video outlining the development of the Goreges Besse enrichment plant in France. The Idaho Falls plant will provide enrichment services to US nuclear plant operators using what Areva representatives note is advanced centrifuge technology which has been successfully deployed in Europe for more than thirty years, and uses 50 times less electricity than a gaseous diffusion process.
Eastern Snake River Aquifer Plan - ICIE's Saturday Summary 2/28/09
At a joint meeting of the House Resources and Conservation Committee and the Senate Resources and Environment Committee, the Idaho Water Resources Board presented a plan for the Eastern Snake River Aquifer (ESRA). The plan is the product of a 2007 House resolution (HCR28). Its long term objective is to address methods of incrementally increasing the ESRA water budget by 600 thousand acre feet annually by the year 2030. The ESRA area produces approximately 21 percent of all goods and services within the State of Idaho resulting in an estimated value of $10 billion annually. Supply of, and demands for, water are out of balance in the Eastern Snake River Plain (ESRP) and the connected Snake River. The plan is aimed at addressing the economic viability, social and environmental health of the ESRP “by adaptively managing a balance between water use and supplies.”
Phase one of the plan is estimated to cost between $70 and $100 million over the course of 10 years by utilizing a range of actions that target managing and increasing aquifer recharge, reducing demand and ground water to surface water conversion. Based upon hydrologic modeling provided by Idaho Power Company and others (which has been peer reviewed), the target for phase one is between 200 and 300 thousand acre feet, and will have the advantage of building institutional confidence. Members of the committee noted that, had phase one been implemented in 1980, the same models show the resulting annual recharge rate would be 327 thousand acre feet today.
The committee touted the utilization of public input throughout the process of developing the plan. Certainly, the committee itself represents a broad range of interests including ground and surface water users, spring water users, municipalities, developers, hydropower, domestic well users, business interests, state agencies, environmental, and conservation interests.
Committee members warned that the consequences of inaction will impact the continued viability of irrigated agriculture, aquaculture, industry, hydropower, municipalities, future development, domestic uses and environmental resources if current water supply trends continue. Continued uncertainty, they maintain, will result in instability for water users, increased vulnerability to changes in yearly supply, and less water for commercial and other expansion.
A full copy of the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan is available at http://www.espaplan.idaho.gov/
Phase one of the plan is estimated to cost between $70 and $100 million over the course of 10 years by utilizing a range of actions that target managing and increasing aquifer recharge, reducing demand and ground water to surface water conversion. Based upon hydrologic modeling provided by Idaho Power Company and others (which has been peer reviewed), the target for phase one is between 200 and 300 thousand acre feet, and will have the advantage of building institutional confidence. Members of the committee noted that, had phase one been implemented in 1980, the same models show the resulting annual recharge rate would be 327 thousand acre feet today.
The committee touted the utilization of public input throughout the process of developing the plan. Certainly, the committee itself represents a broad range of interests including ground and surface water users, spring water users, municipalities, developers, hydropower, domestic well users, business interests, state agencies, environmental, and conservation interests.
Committee members warned that the consequences of inaction will impact the continued viability of irrigated agriculture, aquaculture, industry, hydropower, municipalities, future development, domestic uses and environmental resources if current water supply trends continue. Continued uncertainty, they maintain, will result in instability for water users, increased vulnerability to changes in yearly supply, and less water for commercial and other expansion.
A full copy of the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan is available at http://www.espaplan.idaho.gov/
Monday, February 23, 2009
Nez Perce Agreement - ICIE's Saturday Summary 2/21/09
The Saturday Summary is a weekly roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at www.state.id.us. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
The House Resources and Conservation Committee met on Thursday to hear presentations on Idaho Forestry Program that is part of the Snake River Basin Adjudication settlement agreement and one on tracking Idaho wolves.
Steve Strack from the Idaho Attorney General’s office briefed the committee members on the settlement agreement which took six years of negotiation. The forestry program is part of the Nez Perce Agreement which was a settlement of the Nez Perce Tribe’s claims to water rights on the Snake River. It is a voluntary program which outlines forest management practices that protect salmonids while giving the forest landowner an incidental take permit under Section 6 of the Endangered Species. This approach is the first of its kind. The riparian protection measures outlined in the program provide 95% protection of a pristine area.
Implementation began in 2005. Following these practices has not much financial impact on the endowment funds produced by Idaho’s state forest lands. The program is designed to be profitable in addition to protecting salmonids.
A notice of intent to conduct public scoping has been published to allow the public an opportunity to comment on the provisions of the agreement which will lead to reasonable alternative. Under order to comply with Section 6, there has to be public scoping opportunities. The process will take two years. It will cover all aspects of industrial forestry practices.
The House Resources and Conservation Committee met on Thursday to hear presentations on Idaho Forestry Program that is part of the Snake River Basin Adjudication settlement agreement and one on tracking Idaho wolves.
Steve Strack from the Idaho Attorney General’s office briefed the committee members on the settlement agreement which took six years of negotiation. The forestry program is part of the Nez Perce Agreement which was a settlement of the Nez Perce Tribe’s claims to water rights on the Snake River. It is a voluntary program which outlines forest management practices that protect salmonids while giving the forest landowner an incidental take permit under Section 6 of the Endangered Species. This approach is the first of its kind. The riparian protection measures outlined in the program provide 95% protection of a pristine area.
Implementation began in 2005. Following these practices has not much financial impact on the endowment funds produced by Idaho’s state forest lands. The program is designed to be profitable in addition to protecting salmonids.
A notice of intent to conduct public scoping has been published to allow the public an opportunity to comment on the provisions of the agreement which will lead to reasonable alternative. Under order to comply with Section 6, there has to be public scoping opportunities. The process will take two years. It will cover all aspects of industrial forestry practices.
Wolf Impact - ICIE's Saturday Summary 2/21/09
The Saturday Summary is a weekly roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at www.state.id.us. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
The House Resources and Conservation Committee met on Thursday to hear a presentations on tracking Idaho wolves.
The department is collaring and tracking both wolves and elk to demonstrate the impact of wolves on Idaho elk herds.
Using GPS collars allows Fish & Game to get actual data to track individuals in the Lolo Zone and the Sawtooth Zone. The data from the collars are transferred through satellites to the Fish & game office to be analyzed. The committee was shown an example of the path of a particular elk calf and the path of the wolves that it eventually encountered.
Fish & Game reported that Idaho is way over the recovery levels for wolf numbers in the Lolo Zone. 91% of the hunter days in that area have been lost due to wolf depredation. There needs to be an aggressive effort to restore elk populations. The information about actual wolf-elk interaction will help with that effort.
The House Resources and Conservation Committee met on Thursday to hear a presentations on tracking Idaho wolves.
The department is collaring and tracking both wolves and elk to demonstrate the impact of wolves on Idaho elk herds.
Using GPS collars allows Fish & Game to get actual data to track individuals in the Lolo Zone and the Sawtooth Zone. The data from the collars are transferred through satellites to the Fish & game office to be analyzed. The committee was shown an example of the path of a particular elk calf and the path of the wolves that it eventually encountered.
Fish & Game reported that Idaho is way over the recovery levels for wolf numbers in the Lolo Zone. 91% of the hunter days in that area have been lost due to wolf depredation. There needs to be an aggressive effort to restore elk populations. The information about actual wolf-elk interaction will help with that effort.
Senator Mike Crapo Reports to the Food Producers of Idaho - ICIE's Saturday Summary 2/21/09
The Saturday Summary is a weekly roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at www.state.id.us. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
Senator Mike Crapo spent some time with members of Food Producers of Idaho at their Wednesday meeting. Following is a summary of the discussion:
He explained that he did not vote for President Obama’s stimulus package. It will cost $1.1 trillion when interest is added. This is more money than 30 years of the space program and double the amount spent on the entire New Deal. It is supposed to be targeted to stimulate the economy and is based on the premise that we can spend our way into prosperity.
According to the Senator, these are borrowed dollars and most economists agree that in the long term, this will restrict our future capital supply.
He has heard no specifics from the new administration yet on immigration. The Democrats in Congress are leaning toward a wide-open system of immigration that grants amnesty to all illegal aliens and allows for broader immigration. Senator Crapo does not believe in amnesty for illegal aliens. He would rather have a guest worker program in which they can apply for citizenship or transition back to their own countries.
There are kinks in the e-verify system for checking on legal status of workers. These need to be worked out before it is required and should be part of reworking the entire immigration system. The Democrats took it out of the stimulus package.
Sen. Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate banking committee, is interested in significant reform of the financial regulatory system.
EPA is getting more aggressive with a new enforcement mentality. Senator Crapo is a member of the Environment & Public Works Committee which has oversight over EPA; however, the chairman of the committee is Senator Barbara Boxer of California and supports these stepped up enforcement activities. The Senator summed it up by saying that big government is back and we can expect increase federal intervention and regulation.
Senator Mike Crapo spent some time with members of Food Producers of Idaho at their Wednesday meeting. Following is a summary of the discussion:
He explained that he did not vote for President Obama’s stimulus package. It will cost $1.1 trillion when interest is added. This is more money than 30 years of the space program and double the amount spent on the entire New Deal. It is supposed to be targeted to stimulate the economy and is based on the premise that we can spend our way into prosperity.
According to the Senator, these are borrowed dollars and most economists agree that in the long term, this will restrict our future capital supply.
He has heard no specifics from the new administration yet on immigration. The Democrats in Congress are leaning toward a wide-open system of immigration that grants amnesty to all illegal aliens and allows for broader immigration. Senator Crapo does not believe in amnesty for illegal aliens. He would rather have a guest worker program in which they can apply for citizenship or transition back to their own countries.
There are kinks in the e-verify system for checking on legal status of workers. These need to be worked out before it is required and should be part of reworking the entire immigration system. The Democrats took it out of the stimulus package.
Sen. Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate banking committee, is interested in significant reform of the financial regulatory system.
EPA is getting more aggressive with a new enforcement mentality. Senator Crapo is a member of the Environment & Public Works Committee which has oversight over EPA; however, the chairman of the committee is Senator Barbara Boxer of California and supports these stepped up enforcement activities. The Senator summed it up by saying that big government is back and we can expect increase federal intervention and regulation.
ICIE Legislative Activities - ICIE's Saturday Summary 2/21/09
The Saturday Summary is a weekly roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at www.state.id.us. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
Members of ICIE’s Environmental/Regulatory Affairs (E/RA) Committee gave a presentation to the House Environment, Energy & Technology Committee on Rules, Guidance and Stringency. This was fifth presentation to a legislative committee on the topic for this session. The same cast of characters were introduced by Norm Semanko, Chairman of the E/RA Committee —Roy Eiguren, Eiguren Public Law & Policy; Jack Lyman, Idaho Mining Association; Joan Cloonan, member of the Board of Environmental Quality and environmental consultant.
Members of ICIE’s Environmental/Regulatory Affairs (E/RA) Committee gave a presentation to the House Environment, Energy & Technology Committee on Rules, Guidance and Stringency. This was fifth presentation to a legislative committee on the topic for this session. The same cast of characters were introduced by Norm Semanko, Chairman of the E/RA Committee —Roy Eiguren, Eiguren Public Law & Policy; Jack Lyman, Idaho Mining Association; Joan Cloonan, member of the Board of Environmental Quality and environmental consultant.
Quagga Mussel Report - Saturday Summary 2/21/09
The Saturday Summary is a weekly roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at www.state.id.us. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
The invasive Quagga Mussel was the topic of a special meeting on Thursday of the Environment and Common Sense Task Force. Representative Eric Anderson, who co-chairs the committee with Senator Curt McKenzie, introduced a video produced by Oregon Public Television which traces the species from Lake Michigan to Lake Mead. Representatives from the Idaho State Department of Agriculture and private industry provided their insight. The information is alarming. The tiny shellfish destroys habitat and boats. A single female the size of a fingernail produces an estimated 1 million eggs each mating season. There are an estimated three trillion Quagga in Lake Michigan, with an estimated 700,000 per square meter. They are spreading to other bodies of water throughout the east. It has found its way west and is now present in lakes in California, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and Utah. The species was first recorded in Lake Mead in January of 2007 and is now clogging intake valves in Hoover Dam. Experts say it is not a matter of whether the mussel will be introduced to Idaho waters, but when.
The financial impact to Idaho, once the species is introduced, is projected at $91 million annually in increased maintenance. The estimate doesn’t include impacts to agriculture and recreation.
The number one method of transport of the Quaqqa Mussel is trailers and boats. Once the species is introduced, there is very little that can be done. An aggressive public education effort, the implementation of boat rinsing stations and strict regulation of recreational vehicles are required.
Private industry is looking at developing pesticides that are not toxic to other wildlife, with little success. Idaho is hosting a “Quagga drill” at the end of April in Lucky Peak reservoir, but the state plan focuses primarily on prevention, monitoring and education.
Industry experts recommend quarantining lakes where the species has been introduced, and installing wash stations at every boarder. The wash stations utilize high pressure water at 140 degrees. The mussel can also be killed by exposing it to air for five days. Bleach water and chemicals have limited success because the mussel’s ability to be self contained in its shell for long periods of time. An estimated 125 to 150 wash stations at every border crossing and at each body of water would have a significant effect at limiting the mussels’ access to Idaho waters. The stations cost an estimated $50,000 apiece.
The invasive Quagga Mussel was the topic of a special meeting on Thursday of the Environment and Common Sense Task Force. Representative Eric Anderson, who co-chairs the committee with Senator Curt McKenzie, introduced a video produced by Oregon Public Television which traces the species from Lake Michigan to Lake Mead. Representatives from the Idaho State Department of Agriculture and private industry provided their insight. The information is alarming. The tiny shellfish destroys habitat and boats. A single female the size of a fingernail produces an estimated 1 million eggs each mating season. There are an estimated three trillion Quagga in Lake Michigan, with an estimated 700,000 per square meter. They are spreading to other bodies of water throughout the east. It has found its way west and is now present in lakes in California, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and Utah. The species was first recorded in Lake Mead in January of 2007 and is now clogging intake valves in Hoover Dam. Experts say it is not a matter of whether the mussel will be introduced to Idaho waters, but when.
The financial impact to Idaho, once the species is introduced, is projected at $91 million annually in increased maintenance. The estimate doesn’t include impacts to agriculture and recreation.
The number one method of transport of the Quaqqa Mussel is trailers and boats. Once the species is introduced, there is very little that can be done. An aggressive public education effort, the implementation of boat rinsing stations and strict regulation of recreational vehicles are required.
Private industry is looking at developing pesticides that are not toxic to other wildlife, with little success. Idaho is hosting a “Quagga drill” at the end of April in Lucky Peak reservoir, but the state plan focuses primarily on prevention, monitoring and education.
Industry experts recommend quarantining lakes where the species has been introduced, and installing wash stations at every boarder. The wash stations utilize high pressure water at 140 degrees. The mussel can also be killed by exposing it to air for five days. Bleach water and chemicals have limited success because the mussel’s ability to be self contained in its shell for long periods of time. An estimated 125 to 150 wash stations at every border crossing and at each body of water would have a significant effect at limiting the mussels’ access to Idaho waters. The stations cost an estimated $50,000 apiece.
Friday, February 20, 2009
2009 Goldroom Workshop: Noxious Weeds - Are We Winning or Losing?
Notes from the 2009 ICIE Goldroom Workshop
February 9, 2009
The Workshop was opened by Rep. Bert Stevenson, Chairman of House Committee on Resources and Environment, and ICIE President Trent Clark, who noted that this is the 20th year of this workshop – the first topic of which was Global Warming.
John D. Cantlon: Government Resource Manager, E.I. DuPont DeNemours Company
Cantlon noted that noxious weeds cause losses from agricultural production, increase wildfire events, diminish water and air quality, threaten public health due to pest control issues, and reduce recreational opportunities.
There are roughly about 300 undesirable plants in all states, with about 57 of those in Idaho. The spread rate is increasing from between 10 and 24% per year. Noxious weeds are alarming in their ability to spread.
Cantlon outlined a six part structure to a solution to this problem:
The State is the core – if we make sure county and state efforts are robust in terms of funding and structure, we begin to approach a solution.
Third party science is critical – Millions and millions of dollars are going into researching this issue, whereas in the late 90’s there were no research dollars. The Federal agencies are multipliers – Funding that comes through US Forest Service, Department of Agriculture or BLM can help when the funding in the state does not occur. The specialized informants – a number of NGO’s are very involved in this issue in terms of looking at managing their own properties. The suppliers – fabricators, contractors, manufacturers, and industry are involved in developing materials to solve some of these problems.
Legislation and appropriation are the fabric – the Western Governors’ Association, advocates at the Federal level, and other groups are collaborating on solutions.
Cantlon noted a number of what he called premier states in the noxious weeds issue – those that have excellent funding and structure:
Wyoming has the luxury of using tax receipts to fund this issue. Wyoming targets leafy spurge. The state works closely with its Department of Transportation to curtail invasive weed spread. Wyoming has implemented a pesticide registration fee.
Montana is similar in how they approach cost share.
Key actions on invasive species have happened since the early 1990s with the Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act targeting the zebra mussel. The National Invasive Species Act was reauthorized in 1996.
All these components have come together for these states. Groups from a number of states came together recently to talk about the issue, and outlined their key findings:
Need One – Stable, more dependable funding for prevention, detection, eradication and control. Need to gain champions in the legislature, advocating and educating.
Need Two – Regional communication and coordination.
Need Three – Awareness of these issues’ importance and how noxious weeds can harm us.
George N. Gough: Director, State & Local Government Affairs, Monsanto Company
Gough discussed the topic from an agricultural perspective. He noted that a weed is “a plant that interferes with management objectives for a particular piece of property.”
Farm crops compete with weeds for space, water, fertilizer. Weeds interfere with the full objective capacity of a farm field and can be harbingers of pests that can be harmful.
Herbicides control weeds today, but early on weeds were controlled manually, then mechanically. Both systems have their drawbacks. In the early 1900’s, herbicides often included kerosene or diesel. In the 1940’s, 2-4D helped us enter into effective weed control.
What is the impact on agriculture of weeds and weed control? Nationally, farmers spend about 60% of all the volume of agricultural crop protection on combating weeds. In Idaho, according to the CropLife Foundation, there is about 2.35 million pounds of herbicide utilized at a cost of about $63.5 million dollars for product, application, and fees.
The value back to agriculture of weed control totals about $432 million.
Without herbicide, the impact to crop yield in corn would be 35%; in dry beans, 25%; in hops, 25%; in onions, 15%; in potatoes, 35%, and in sugar beets, 40%.
Biotech crop technology has been the biggest growth area in the history of agriculture. This includes herbicide-resistant crops. Benefits of this technology go beyond effective weed control including increased soil moisture, reduced erosion, decreased soil compaction, reduced carbon dioxide emissions, and reduced production costs.
In recent years, herbicide-tolerant corn in Idaho resulted in decreased weed management costs of $1.239 million. Round Up-ready alfalfa and sugar beets are being introduced into Idaho with phenomenal results.
Jeffrey Pettingill: Weed Control Manager, Bonneville County Weed Department
Mr. Pettingill noted and thanked legislators for helping to pass a state weed law two years ago which helps with early detection; rapid-response; control of weeds that are present, but are not an immediate threat; containment of noxious weeds which are present in large quantities and cannot be eradicated immediately.
Cost-share funding combines help from private and public funding sources.
The worst thing Pettingill says he hears is: “If we are winning this war, why do we need more money for weeds?” He says we are doing a poor job of communicating what we have been able to preserve. “We are out there hand targeting weeds in draws and steep canyons,” he said, and noted that additional funding is needed for education and outreach.
County weed programs include:
- Northern Idaho – which contracts weed control services through the landowners, but performs no roadside maintenance
- Western Idaho – Which addresses noxious weeds and pests (gophers, mosquitoes and rabbits), but not a lot of roadside maintenance
- Eastern Idaho (which is the area that Pettingill manages for Bonneville County) – Which manages all noxious weeds and roadside maintenance.
This is an educational issue. One example is the salt cedar tree. One tree will consume 200 gallons of water per day. The trees produce a sap that makes it impossible for anything to grow around it. When the county offered to cut down any such trees in the area, they were contacted about the Ririe Reservoir—which had 240 salt cedar trees around it.
Another example is policeman’s helmet which is listed as one of Britain’s top 10 noxious weeds but was brought into the county as an ornamental plant.
Roger Batt: Statewide Coordinator if the Idaho Weed Awareness Campaign
Batt noted that the campaign started in 2001 as a result of the Idaho Strategic Plan for Managing Noxious and Invasive Weeds. The organization will have accomplished the objectives in this plan within the next three years.
The goal of the campaign is to get weeds in the media. Batt noted that they have done several things using paid and earned media opportunities. He showed some PSAs on leafy spurge. One with Governor Butch Otter promotes the website (http://www.idahoweedawareness.org/) and the weed hotline to report noxious weeds in a specific area. The hotline generates about 11,000 calls and the website about 40,000 hits a month. It has most of the 57 species listed, and a virtual field guide.
War of the Weeds was an Outdoor Idaho spot filmed in conjunction with Idaho Public Television. A similar radio spot promoted a weed identification booklet.
Batt introduced Elwood the Elk, the campaign’s award-winning mascot. Batt showed the group a video featuring Elwood outlining the top noxious weeds and the need to control them. He also distributed copies of the video to the committee members.
#####
February 9, 2009
The Workshop was opened by Rep. Bert Stevenson, Chairman of House Committee on Resources and Environment, and ICIE President Trent Clark, who noted that this is the 20th year of this workshop – the first topic of which was Global Warming.
John D. Cantlon: Government Resource Manager, E.I. DuPont DeNemours Company
Cantlon noted that noxious weeds cause losses from agricultural production, increase wildfire events, diminish water and air quality, threaten public health due to pest control issues, and reduce recreational opportunities.
There are roughly about 300 undesirable plants in all states, with about 57 of those in Idaho. The spread rate is increasing from between 10 and 24% per year. Noxious weeds are alarming in their ability to spread.
Cantlon outlined a six part structure to a solution to this problem:
The State is the core – if we make sure county and state efforts are robust in terms of funding and structure, we begin to approach a solution.
Third party science is critical – Millions and millions of dollars are going into researching this issue, whereas in the late 90’s there were no research dollars. The Federal agencies are multipliers – Funding that comes through US Forest Service, Department of Agriculture or BLM can help when the funding in the state does not occur. The specialized informants – a number of NGO’s are very involved in this issue in terms of looking at managing their own properties. The suppliers – fabricators, contractors, manufacturers, and industry are involved in developing materials to solve some of these problems.
Legislation and appropriation are the fabric – the Western Governors’ Association, advocates at the Federal level, and other groups are collaborating on solutions.
Cantlon noted a number of what he called premier states in the noxious weeds issue – those that have excellent funding and structure:
Wyoming has the luxury of using tax receipts to fund this issue. Wyoming targets leafy spurge. The state works closely with its Department of Transportation to curtail invasive weed spread. Wyoming has implemented a pesticide registration fee.
Montana is similar in how they approach cost share.
Key actions on invasive species have happened since the early 1990s with the Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act targeting the zebra mussel. The National Invasive Species Act was reauthorized in 1996.
All these components have come together for these states. Groups from a number of states came together recently to talk about the issue, and outlined their key findings:
Need One – Stable, more dependable funding for prevention, detection, eradication and control. Need to gain champions in the legislature, advocating and educating.
Need Two – Regional communication and coordination.
Need Three – Awareness of these issues’ importance and how noxious weeds can harm us.
George N. Gough: Director, State & Local Government Affairs, Monsanto Company
Gough discussed the topic from an agricultural perspective. He noted that a weed is “a plant that interferes with management objectives for a particular piece of property.”
Farm crops compete with weeds for space, water, fertilizer. Weeds interfere with the full objective capacity of a farm field and can be harbingers of pests that can be harmful.
Herbicides control weeds today, but early on weeds were controlled manually, then mechanically. Both systems have their drawbacks. In the early 1900’s, herbicides often included kerosene or diesel. In the 1940’s, 2-4D helped us enter into effective weed control.
What is the impact on agriculture of weeds and weed control? Nationally, farmers spend about 60% of all the volume of agricultural crop protection on combating weeds. In Idaho, according to the CropLife Foundation, there is about 2.35 million pounds of herbicide utilized at a cost of about $63.5 million dollars for product, application, and fees.
The value back to agriculture of weed control totals about $432 million.
Without herbicide, the impact to crop yield in corn would be 35%; in dry beans, 25%; in hops, 25%; in onions, 15%; in potatoes, 35%, and in sugar beets, 40%.
Biotech crop technology has been the biggest growth area in the history of agriculture. This includes herbicide-resistant crops. Benefits of this technology go beyond effective weed control including increased soil moisture, reduced erosion, decreased soil compaction, reduced carbon dioxide emissions, and reduced production costs.
In recent years, herbicide-tolerant corn in Idaho resulted in decreased weed management costs of $1.239 million. Round Up-ready alfalfa and sugar beets are being introduced into Idaho with phenomenal results.
Jeffrey Pettingill: Weed Control Manager, Bonneville County Weed Department
Mr. Pettingill noted and thanked legislators for helping to pass a state weed law two years ago which helps with early detection; rapid-response; control of weeds that are present, but are not an immediate threat; containment of noxious weeds which are present in large quantities and cannot be eradicated immediately.
Cost-share funding combines help from private and public funding sources.
The worst thing Pettingill says he hears is: “If we are winning this war, why do we need more money for weeds?” He says we are doing a poor job of communicating what we have been able to preserve. “We are out there hand targeting weeds in draws and steep canyons,” he said, and noted that additional funding is needed for education and outreach.
County weed programs include:
- Northern Idaho – which contracts weed control services through the landowners, but performs no roadside maintenance
- Western Idaho – Which addresses noxious weeds and pests (gophers, mosquitoes and rabbits), but not a lot of roadside maintenance
- Eastern Idaho (which is the area that Pettingill manages for Bonneville County) – Which manages all noxious weeds and roadside maintenance.
This is an educational issue. One example is the salt cedar tree. One tree will consume 200 gallons of water per day. The trees produce a sap that makes it impossible for anything to grow around it. When the county offered to cut down any such trees in the area, they were contacted about the Ririe Reservoir—which had 240 salt cedar trees around it.
Another example is policeman’s helmet which is listed as one of Britain’s top 10 noxious weeds but was brought into the county as an ornamental plant.
Roger Batt: Statewide Coordinator if the Idaho Weed Awareness Campaign
Batt noted that the campaign started in 2001 as a result of the Idaho Strategic Plan for Managing Noxious and Invasive Weeds. The organization will have accomplished the objectives in this plan within the next three years.
The goal of the campaign is to get weeds in the media. Batt noted that they have done several things using paid and earned media opportunities. He showed some PSAs on leafy spurge. One with Governor Butch Otter promotes the website (http://www.idahoweedawareness.org/) and the weed hotline to report noxious weeds in a specific area. The hotline generates about 11,000 calls and the website about 40,000 hits a month. It has most of the 57 species listed, and a virtual field guide.
War of the Weeds was an Outdoor Idaho spot filmed in conjunction with Idaho Public Television. A similar radio spot promoted a weed identification booklet.
Batt introduced Elwood the Elk, the campaign’s award-winning mascot. Batt showed the group a video featuring Elwood outlining the top noxious weeds and the need to control them. He also distributed copies of the video to the committee members.
#####
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)