Sunday, January 13, 2008
Valuing the night sky
We can still see the stars, planets, star clusters, constellations, meteor showers and the occasional comet. That night view is as valuable to me as anything I see during the day.
But in many parts of the country, people are losing their night sky because of the glare from homes and commercial development. It doesn't have to be that way. Planners need to learn that it's where and how lights are installed, not more of them, that makes people safe. And homeowners need to consider how many lights they really need, and think about how their lights affect the dark sky we all share.
The latest Sierra town to confront the issue of light pollution is Truckee. Several articles about how Truckee is proposing to preserve its dark night sky are found on the Skykeepers website. They're interesting reading. That website includes a great deal of related information, including a page on how you can help keep our night sky dark.
One basic thing you can do is speak up for the dark night sky when new projects are proposed. Lights can be strategically placed and properly shielded.
As Skykeeper Jack Sales says about losing the dark night sky, "The night sky is a cultural resource that transcends time and place."
For more, see the website of the International Dark-Sky Association.
And if you'd like to receive e-mail alerts about what's up in the sky at night, see the spaceweather.com website.
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
Around the county on New Year's Day

At Middle Bar: New picnic tables under the trees, overlooking the river. Gordon Miller would be so pleased. One man was fishing from the bridge, briefly. A couple on a motorcycle paused for a birthday portrait.
At Pardee Reservoir: Resident Canada geese, some ducks, two red-tailed hawks, and reservoir levels low enough you could wade (carefully) across the river upstream of the Middle Bar Bridge (in waders following all EBMUD rules, of course).
Above Gwin Mine Road: A new section of the Coast-to-Crest Trail under construction.
In Pine Grove, on the sign by the park: "Have a Joyous Kwanzaa" along with "Merry Christmas." First mention of Kwanzaa I've ever seen on anything official in Amador.
On Pine Grove-Volcano Road: A llama guarding a herd of sheep.
It was a lovely Amador County New Year's Day: Scenic beauty, history, nature, culture and agriculture, all in an outing of less than three hours. We are blessed, indeed.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
A foggy day
It was drizzly at times. It was mysterious at times. But mostly it was just damp, and gray.
Sometimes I could see across the meadow. Sometimes I could see only 50 feet.
We don't have many days like this. Fog is a more of an occasional and fleeting visitor. But not today.
I ditched my plans to take a good long walk with the dog. Too gray, too wet.
Maybe we'll get in that walk in tomorrow, celebrating a sunnier day, the end of the year, and longer days to come.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
A gift that lasts
You can help leave a lasting legacy by endorsing National Wild and Scenic River designation for our local Mokelumne River. Foothill Conservancy's website has a simple online form that takes less than a minute to complete.
By taking a few seconds to fill out that form, you can help ensure that the National Wild and Scenic River designation for the Mokelumne will come to pass. It's a gift that really lasts.
Sunday, December 9, 2007
Local global warming naysayers at odds with world business leaders
That puts them at odds with 150 global business leaders including PG&E, Swiss Re (a huge insurance firm), Sun Microsystems, Shell Oil, DuPont, Hewlett Packard, Nokia, Johnson & Johnson, Volkswagen and others who recently signed the Bali Communique. That document asks the U.N. to adopt legally binding greenhouse gas emission limits.
Here's a quote from the communique:
The scientific evidence is now overwhelming. Climate change presents very serious global social, environmental and economic risks and it demands an urgent global response.I may be wrong now, but I would guess that the combined scientific expertise of the 150 signatories to the document is probably a little greater than that of the local group.
Meanwhile, the California Attorney General's office has published a new website on global warming. It includes a nice section debunking the allegations of global warming naysayers. Check it out.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Calaveras Supervisors move to limit sprawl
A few weeks ago, the Calaveras Board of Supervisors held a visioning session to establish a policy framework for the county's general plan update. It was most promising, with all five supervisors -- even Libertarian Tom Tryon -- agreeing that new development should occur in existing communities rather than sprawling all over the countryside. They even talked about incorporating the Ahwahnee Principles or the Land Use and Development Principles adopted by several Calaveras communities.
Then last week, the supervisors lifted the year-old subdivision moratorium put in place at the beginning of the plan update. But they didn't return to the bad old days of virtually unfettered growth.
Instead, they unanimously adopted policies to shape new development. The policies aren't binding -- the board will still look at each subdivision proposal -- but the clear message is "if you want us to approve your project, this is what it needs to be." The resolution even suggests to staff that they bring noncompliant applications to the board for an early decision rather than putting everyone through the time and expense of California Environmental Quality Act review.
The policies are intended to focus development in existing communities and limit sprawl. They express a clear preference for projects that
- Create new parcels only in areas where public water and sewer are available (except for single parcels and parcels over 40 acres)
- Protect onsite open space and habitat
- Provide roads built to county standards
- Promote affordable housing
And in the resolution language adopting the policies, the supervisors made clear they expect similar policies to be part of their general plan:
WHEREAS, during the October 23, 2007 workshop, the Board unanimously stated that the General Plan update, and in particular the Land Use Element of the General Plan, should include goals, policies and implementation measures regarding criteria for future development within the unincorporated area of Calaveras County that limits the use of groundwater and onsite septic systems to serve that development and should instead encourage high density development served by public surface water and public sewer with preservation of onsite open space as well as other associated infrastructure to serve the development such as roads built to county road standards;
Meanwhile, despite a moratorium on general plan and zoning changes, every month new well-and septic-dependent parcels are being created in rural Amador County, many in high fire zones. How smart is that?
Putting the dam before the plans
Abercrombie has come to this conclusion before the county or any of its cities have concluded their general plan updates -- and before the feasibility studies on Bear are even done. Last time I checked, the general plans -- not Water Agency estimates -- will determine our county's eventual population.
At the same time, Abercrombie is admitting that the Foothill Conservancy has been right about local water supply for more than 17 years: the county can more than double its population on existing water supply. And that doesn't even take into account growth in rural areas not served by the Water Agency, which includes vast parts of the county.
At last week's Regional Planning Committee meeting, AWA engineer Gene Mancebo said the Water Agency has enough water to supply another 16,000 Amador households.
Sixteen-thousand new homes is a lot. In comparison, the largest proposed new subdivision in Amador County is Gold Rush, outside Sutter Creek. It's a proposal for about 1,300 homes.
Sixteen-thousand homes would house a lot of people, too. Based on an average population of about 2.3 people per household, that's 36,800 more people than live in the county today.
Mancebo also said the agency hopes to provide 20 percent of total water supply from recycled water in the future. Since I wasn't in the room, I'm not sure whether he meant "add 20 percent to existing supply," but if he did -- or if an additional 20 percent could be developed through recycling plus efficiency -- that would free up enough potable water to add nearly 14,000 more people without building an expensive dam (15,0000 acre feet existing supply x 20% = 3,000 acre feet. 3,000 af x 2 HH per acre foot x 2.3 people per HH = 13,800 people).
Adding those two population figures results in a startling total: 50,600 people. So what the Water Agency is saying, in effect, is this: we expect Amador County to add more than 50,000 new residents by 2030. That's more people than live in fast-growing Calaveras County today.
Let's take a minute and think about that from a total planning perspective. If Amador County were to grow by more than 50,000 people, where would they live? How would we move them around our already gridlocked roads, many of which cannot be expanded due to lack of funds and the limits of topography or existing buildings?
How would we serve them with underfunded volunteer fire departments? Where would the children go to school, when the cost of new schools far exceeds developer fees? How many new libraries would we need? Would we need a new hospital? New parks and recreational facilities? How many new police officers and sheriff's deputies would have to be hired? Where will the adults work, considering that the price of oil is going to make commuting an increasingly uneconomic activity? They can't all be retired.
Not to mention this question -- the one that probably matters most of all to local residents: what would happen to our cherished rural character?
We need to plan our county based on what local people want to protect and what they want to change. I have yet to hear anyone say publicly that 50,600 additional county residents by 2030, or even nearly 37,000 new residents, is part of their vision for our county's future.
It's clear to me that Abercrombie has put the proverbial cart before the horse. While it is the Water Agency's job to supply water for the county, it's not their job to decide how fast or how much we're going to grow before our general plans are complete.
So when you hear and read those "we're going to need more water" stories, remember what that means -- more than doubling the county's population in the next 22 years. If you think that's a bad idea, be sure to let local officials know.