This morning at 9 a.m. at the State House in Boston, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation will hold a field hearing on the first year of implementation of Amendment 16 to the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery Management Plan.

Amendment 16, as readers of the CLF Scoop may know, has been in effect since May 2010. While some predicted dire revenue losses under the new sector system implemented by Amendment 16, the National Marine Fisheries Service recently reported that all-species gross revenues for the groundfish fleet in the 2010 fishing year–$297.7 million–were $26.6 million more than gross revenues in the 2009 fishing year. Groundfish permit sales, an important indicator of consolidation at an organization level, were extremely low.

In a statement issued today, Peter Shelley, CLF Senior Counsel, said the following: “These outcomes show a healthy, adaptive fleet that has diversified to target multiple species beyond groundfish, and that has begun to take advantage of the added flexibility that the sector system in New England provides even in the challenging start-up year. Amendment 16 is an important step in the right direction for New England and New England’s fishermen. It should be supported in Washington, D.C., and efforts to improve the system should be spearheaded in New England as intended by Congress.”

To read the full CLF statement, click here.

Boston, MA – September 8, 2011- Conservation Law Foundation (CLF) issued the following statement in defense of the Cape Wind power purchase agreement, currently being disputed by opponents of the project. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court heard oral arguments on the case today.

Seth Kaplan, Vice President for Policy and Climate Advocacy at Conservation Law Foundation, said, “The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (DPU) left no stone unturned when it reviewed and approved the contract between National Grid and Cape Wind. The DPU’s conclusion, based on extensive testimony and other evidence presented by both Cape Wind supporters and opponents, was that Cape Wind’s long-term power purchase agreement is ‘cost-effective’ and reasonable, and will deliver net economic benefits for electric ratepayers and the Commonwealth. Opponents have thrown up every possible obstacle to Cape Wind’s progress and this obstruction has had delayed the day when residents of the Commonwealth can reap considerable economic and environmental benefits of the project. The public’s patience is, appropriately, wearing thin. These stall tactics are draining public resources while keeping Massachusetts from benefiting from the clean energy and green jobs that Cape Wind will provide.”

Conservation Law Foundation, represented by CLF Massachusetts Director Susan Reid, intervened with the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Clean Power Now in the case of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound vs. The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities, filing a full brief in the case in July.

To read the full statement, click here.

The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s (“MBTA”) spider-map has been praised and replicated in countries around the world, but it only takes one short look at the transit map to realize one obvious missing link: the Red Line and the Blue Line are the only two of Boston’s rapid transit lines that do not intersect. Six governors, over more than two decades, have legally committed the Commonwealth to fix this obvious problem. Earlier this week, however, the Patrick Administration decided to buck this trend by seeking permission to permanently and completely remove the legal obligation to finish the final design of the Red/Blue Line Connector, without proposing to substitute any other project for it.

The Red/Blue Line Connector was originally supposed to be completed by December 31 of this year. Less than five years ago, the Commonwealth had reaffirmed that it would at least design the connector by the same date. Part way through the design, the Commonwealth is throwing in the towel, stating that it is unrealistic to expect that construction of this project will be funded, although it has never really asked the state legislature or the federal government to fund this critical transit project and has not considered any more affordable options to accomplish the same goal. This is a symptom of the chronic underfunding of our transportation system. Instead of pushing forward and advocating for increased revenue, the State is now entering a dangerous trajectory of just giving up on beneficial projects.

As a result of this missing link, transit riders traveling from points along the Blue Line to the Red Line, or the other way round, must transfer twice by using either the Green or Orange Line, reducing ridership and unnecessarily increasing congestion at downtown Boston stations including Government Center, Park Street, State and Downtown Crossing. The need to transfer twice restricts access to jobs, such as those at the academic and medical institutions along the Red Line, particularly for residents of East Boston, Revere, Winthrop and Lynn, for whom the Blue Line is the only accessible subway route. The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) projected that the Red/Blue Line Connector would more than double daily boardings, from 10,050 to 22,390, at the Charles/MGH Station alone.

The absence of a direct connection between the Red and Blue Lines makes travel far more difficult than necessary and often discourages the use of public transit. For example, coming home from Cambridge, an East Boston resident has to wait on three different platforms for three trains. This can take particularly long for people who work at night, as many do, since the MBTA Rapid Transit lines’ arrival and departure times at Park Street, Government Center, Downtown Crossing and State Street are not coordinated and the trains are frequently delayed.  Even if on schedule, at 9:00 p.m. on a weekday, a trip from Harvard Square to Maverick Station involves 28 minutes of waiting time alone. By contrast, the route can be driven in only 16 minutes, resulting in a clear disincentive to use public transportation and contravening the State’s policy, articulated in the Global Warming Solutions Act and elsewhere, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector.

Many people, however, do not have the choice between driving and taking public transportation. The Blue Line, more than any other MBTA rapid transit line, serves almost exclusively communities where a large percentage of residents depend on mass transit. At the same time, residents of these communities are also in need of greater access to jobs. Likewise, many Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) patients need to travel from Revere, where MGH has a satellite clinic, to the hospital’s main campus in Boston’s West End. Taking public transportation under the current circumstances is not a simple trek for the infirm.

The Department of Environmental Protection now gets to decide whether the Commonwealth can proceed to request a revision of the State Implementation Plan under the Clean Air Act from the federal Environmental Protection Agency. Let’s hope that someone in the process that lies ahead has the vision to create not only a praiseworthy map but a good underlying public transportation system.

Cynthia Liebman is a staff attorney at CLF Massachusetts. (Photo credit: Leslie Boudreau)

The most expensive stormwater runoff problem to fix is the one that’s not addressed. That’s the first point CLF Massachusetts Staff Attorney Cynthia Liebman makes in this smart letter to the editor published yesterday in the MetroWest Daily News. The letter is in response to the paper’s July 26 article stating that officials in the town of Milford, MA are considering suing EPA over the costs of EPA’s proposed regulations to clean up toxic stormwater runoff.

“Toxic algae blooms and other symptoms of pollution from paved areas undermine the clean water and recreational opportunities that make our towns desirable places to live, visit, and do business,” she writes. “EPA’s new pollution control program in the communities that discharge into the Charles River and its feeder streams provides more equitable cost sharing than the status quo.” More >

Great white sharks off the coast of Massachusetts. (Photo credit: Green Massachusetts)

Let’s be honest. When we talk about great white sharks, we are usually talking about their appetites. White sharks have been found with a number of thought-provoking objects in their stomachs, including a partial suit of armor and an engine block. But what they really like is large, fatty ocean going animals: tuna, seals and sea lions, rays, whale carcasses. These are not always easy to catch, so sharks employ a number of hunting strategies, including a sneak attack from behind (shudder) and rushing up from the depths (double shudder). So, while their feeding style can be quite lively, and more than a little intimidating, scientists believe it is usually a case of “mistaken identity” when a shark bites a human, not mindless, malicious predation. White sharks are visual predators, and sometimes we humans do a fairly good seal impersonation. Often, once the shark realizes there has been a misunderstanding, it will move on to something tastier. Don’t get me wrong; I am not recommending anyone take their chances in the water with these big fish. If there is a shark sighting at your favorite beach, please stay out until you hear it’s safe again. I know they’re out there, but it gives me a bit of comfort to think that if they REALLY wanted to eat us then we’d know about it by now.

Shark survival, and hopefully I’ve convinced you by now that this is a good thing, is dependent on a robust, thriving food chain. Overfishing, coastal pollution (especially nutrient pollution), and the byproducts of power generation are severely impairing our near shore and blue water ecosystems. Coastal areas function as nurseries for ocean going fish, birds, and other marine life. So a small area of degradation can have a big effect out to sea. Protecting sensitive coastal ecosystems is protecting the bottom of the food chain. The things at the bottom feeds the things we like to eat (shellfish, cod, striped bass), the things we like to see (seals, whales), and things we maybe don’t want around, but are good anyway (sharks). CLF is working to protect these important ecosystems. From supporting our National Ocean Policy, to fighting dirty emissions that create unhealthy acidic water, to promoting healthy estuaries, CLF is on the forefront of efforts to protect our oceans and keep their waters clean and productive for generations to come.

Photo credit: Stephanie Chappe

As budget woes continue to strain the Commonwealth’s ability to maintain its aging transportation system and constrain its vision for the system’s future, more than twenty Bay State organizations have formed Transportation for Massachusetts (T4MA) to advocate for alternative financing and improved accountability in pursuit of a modern transportation system that works for Massachusetts. T4MA brings together a broad cross-section of historically disconnected organizations in the areas of transportation, regional planning, affordable housing development, public health, environmental advocacy, environmental justice and smart growth that will use their diverse experience and collective influence to bring about a safe, convenient, reliable and affordable transportation system for the people of Massachusetts.

John Walkey, field organizer of T4MA, explained, “On behalf T4MA, we thank Mr. Mullan for his dedicated service and welcome Mr. Davey to his new position. We look forward to working with him to ensure that the Commonwealth will create and maintain a 21^st century transportation system that is at the heart of a thriving economy. The jobs and economic prosperity the State hopes to sustain cannot be built on top of an underfinanced and crumbling transportation system.” More >

Comedian Will Rogers once joked, “Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there.” He might have been advising the Commonwealth about the cost of inaction on the state’s much-needed public transportation projects. The Commonwealth announced yesterday that the Green Line Extension will be delayed yet again. MassDOT now is projecting that the earliest the Green Line Extension will go into service is in the Fall of 2018, but the moment the residents of Somerville and Medford have been waiting for could be as far away as 2020. That would be six years after the federally mandated deadline and fourteen years since the Big Dig was completed—a long delay considering that the extension of the Green Line was a firm commitment made to counter the air pollution from the Central Artery Project. The year 2020 happens to also be a benchmark year for the Commonwealth’s greenhouse gas reductions goal (25 percent of 1990 levels), which will be hard to reach without the help of transit projects like the Green Line Extension.

Sadly, less than five years after it reaffirmed the promise, MassDOT yesterday also announced that it is seeking permission from the Department of Environmental Protection to abandon its obligation to design another highly beneficial transit project, the connector of the Red Line and Blue Line, citing its increased cost estimate. Part of the reason the costs of the Red/Blue Connector have increased, however, is the Commonwealth’s own repeated delay of this important transit project. Construction projects get more expensive over time.  Likewise, the cost of the Green Line Extension can only be expected to increase as a result of the delay.

Fortunately, the Commonwealth will be required to put in place interim offset projects or measures to achieve the same air quality benefits the Green Line Extension would have during the time period of the delay starting on December 31, 2014. We hope those projects will be located in the areas the Green Line Extension is intended to serve. Although MassDOT has known for more than a year that the Green Line Extension will be delayed, we still do not know what these projects will be. We do know that they will not be free. That points to the fact that it would be a lot cheaper to build the extension than to keep delaying it. And that’s no laughing matter, especially these days.

 It’s July 4^th – as you head out to your favorite swimming spot, consider this…

While New England is home to many clean, scenic beaches, the sad truth is that hundreds of beach closures occurred in 2010 across the New England states.  Check out NRDC’s new report, Testing the Waters to see where your state ranked, and how clean your favorite beach was last year. (Spoiler alert: if you’re in Maine, Massachusetts, or Rhode Island, there’s room for improvement).

Why are these problems so pervasive?  Polluted stormwater runoff and sewage overflows are the major culprits – making beach closures more likely after it rains.  In Massachusetts, 79% percent of ocean beach standards violations happened within 24 hours after a rainstorm, according to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.  

The solutions are not cheap – to tackle this set of problems problem will require a sustained commitment to fixing and improving underground sewer pipes, enlarging wastewater treatment plants, and installing green stormwater treatment to capture and clean runoff from roads and parking lots.  

The cost of doing nothing is also significant.  The US EPA estimated that in one year, 86,000 people lost a chance to swim because of beach closures in areas affected by stormwater pollution.

Clean water is essential to a thriving New England.  That is why CLF is applying legal leverage to improve management of sewage and stormwater runoff across the region.  We’re working toward a day when the pollution that causes beach closures will be a thing of the past, and swimmers will have their pick of beautiful New England beaches – whether or not it’s recently rained.

Peter Shelley, CLF senior counsel. Photo credit: Evgenia Eliseeva

Twenty-eight years ago, we at CLF said we were going to take Boston Harbor back from the state polluters for the benefit of the children at the beach, the economic opportunities around a clean harbor and the future of Massachusetts. No one at CLF even suspected that this was to be a $4.5 billion, generational effort, let alone that billions more would be needed to rebuild metropolitan Boston’s water distribution system. Last week, the final major capital project from the original litigation to create that cleaner harbor was completed, producing feelings of great satisfaction as well as nostalgia. It was the light at the end of the tunnel that CLF entered on behalf of our members so long ago. Our supporters have been patient beyond recognition.

It is safe to say that it was worth the wait and the investment. Today, Boston Harbor is swimmable and fishable. Boston now has a world-class water and sewer authority and a new National Park celebrating the Boston Harbor Islands. Billions of dollars were invested in real estate, producing thousands of jobs around the harbor in the process, and Boston Harbor now also has its own watchdog—Save The Harbor/Save The Bay, a group CLF helped form to carry our vigilance forward. While CLF was just the point of the spear that made all this happen, there is no question that we were the point of that spear.

So many of the people who made this a success story are now gone. At the top of that list would have to be Massachusetts Superior Court Justice Paul G. Garrity and Federal Judge A. David Mazzone, neither of whom lived to see the final realization of their judicial efforts. Judge Garrity singlehandedly faced down the Massachusetts Legislature and refused to budge until they released their control of the sewer and water system by creating the Massachusetts Water Resource Authority (MWRA). In the process, he may have issued the only city-wide building ban in Boston history. Judge Mazzone was the harbor cleanup program. He loved this harbor and threw his keen intellect, his brilliant strategic skills and his wonderful sense of humor—not to mention a couple of unbelievably good law clerks—into the challenge that was thrown before his court. Also in that list has to be Sam Hoar, a long time friend of CLF’s who died in 2004. Sam selflessly volunteered himself and some of the best lawyers at Goodwin, Procter & Hoar to help CLF survive the relentless legal briefing of the early days.

Among those who have moved on to other things are Doug Foy, Paul Levy, Doug MacDonald and Dick Fox. Doug Foy is gone only in the sense that he is no longer CEO of CLF. He needs no special introduction to the CLF family. His vision never faltered when he had made up his mind that something had to happen with Boston Harbor. Paul Levy and Doug MacDonald both performed project management miracles to bring one of the biggest and most complicated public works projects in Massachusetts history online both on schedule and on budget.  They, of course, were just the tip of the iceberg of the extraordinary staff at the MWRA. As for Dick Fox, lead engineer for CDM, the project design and construction lead, I’ll never forget the moment in open court when Judge Mazzone leaned his long frame forward, fixed Dick Fox in his eyes and said: “I’m going to hold you to your promises here.” Dick not only didn’t flinch; he responded “I expect you to.” This may have been a court-supervised cleanup, but make no mistake—it was a cleanup that happened because of the personal integrity commitment of lots of folks like Dick Fox.

Great credit also has to be extended to Diane Dumanowski, one of the finest reporters ever at the Boston Globe and one of the best environmental reporters in the country. Her series in the Globe on the collapse of the Metropolitan District Commission sewerage system, backed up by strong editorials from Globe columnist Ian Menzies, was the spark that ignited Doug Foy into action. Finally, no story about the Boston Harbor cleanup would be complete without mentioning Bill Golden, then solicitor for the City of Quincy, whose fateful jog on the feces-strewn Wollaston Beach in 1982 made him mad as hell and got the whole ball rolling.

CLF is not done with Boston Harbor, however. All the tributaries coming into Boston Harbor still suffer from significant pollution discharges from multiple public and private sources. These discharges expose Massachusetts residents to disease, damage the environment, and frustrate new economic opportunities. With the same energy we brought to the battle for Boston Harbor, we are hard at work fighting those upstream pollution sources with a terrific coalition of community groups and partner conservation non-profits. We look forward to similar moments of great accomplishment and satisfaction in the future when we can finally say that this great harbor’s entire watershed has a clean bill of health.