Click Here for the cleanup liability waiver. A big goal for this big holiday weekend is to prevent litter at our local beaches and bays. Avoid single use items like styrofoam coolers and plastic water bottles. Bring reusable items to the beach and be sure to recycle or bin anything you have to throw away.

---

More Oil Drilling is NOT THE ANSWER! Visit www.NotTheAnswer.org for more info.

---

Know Your H2O in the driveway.

Know Your H2O in the shower.

---

Click here to view an article on how desal can be harmful.
For more specific info on desal, please click HERE and HERE
Current Status: May 13th: Environmental Groups Decry Water Board Approval of Mitigation Plan for Carlsbad Desal Plant. Surfrider & Coastkeeper Cite Agency Disagreement and Flawed Analysis as Reasons for Concern After three hearings, hundreds of pages of last minute revisions to documents, and admonitions from other state agencies, the Regional Board voted today to give final approval of the Flow, Entrainment and Impingement Minimization Plan for Poseidon Resources proposed Carlsbad Desalination Project. Under State law, this plan is supposed to result in the “use [of] the best available site, design, technology, and mitigation measures feasible to minimize the intake and mortality of all forms of marine life” from power plants and other facilities that have water intakes.
The Regional Board originally approved a permit for the desalination plant in August 2006 to co-locate with an existing power plant, the Encina Power Station. The permit contained a requirement for Poseidon to develop a plan to assess and respond to impacts at times when the power plant flows are insufficient to meet the desalination plant’s needs. Despite state law and the permit language itself, the Regional Board largely relied on mitigation rather than design or technology to meet these requirements.
It is estimated that the facility might kill up to 5,781 pounds of fish per year, which is nearly seven times Poseidon’s initial estimates. A ‘math error’ by Poseidon was cited as the reason for the previous undercounting.
The California Coastal Commission reviewed the plant in 2007 and 2008, and required wetland mitigation for the plant’s marine life impacts, but deferred to the Regional Board for further state law compliance. The Coastal Commission’s Executive Director Peter Douglas issued a letter warning the Regional Board that its approval today would contradict action taken by the Commission.
“The Regional Board disregarded the Coastal Commission’s concerns because its Executive Director did not testify in person,” stated Marco Gonzalez of Coast Law Group, representing the Surfrider Foundation. “The Board didn’t seem to have any problem giving great weight to the Governor’s and other politicians’ statements even though they never attended Regional Board hearings either.”
Environmental groups Surfrider Foundation and San Diego Coastkeeper pointed to extensive scientific and expert testimony highlighting Poseidon’s data gaps and flawed analysis. Members of the Regional Board commented that it would have been helpful to have the principal independent expert who reviewed mitigation plans during both the Coastal Commission and Regional Board’s review at the hearings, but he was unable to attend as no funding was available.
“When hundreds of pages of relevant material are put into the record hours before the Regional Board makes a decision, while principal environmental concerns are not even mentioned, it’s hard to see how the public interest is being represented,” noted San Diego Coastkeeper attorney, Livia Borak.
San Diego Coastkeeper and Surfrider Foundation have already filed lawsuits against the Regional Board’s conditional approval of the plan last year. Today’s Regional Board approval can be appealed to State Water Board in the next 30 days.

January 2008: Surfrider Sues Coastal Commission over illegial desalination plant approval. Surfrider filed suit against the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for inappropriately granting a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) to Poseidon Resources for its proposed Carlsbad desalination facility. The lawsuit alleges the CCC acted prematurely, without fully understanding the environmental impacts of the project or how such impacts would ultimately be mitigated.

The California Coastal Act requires Poseidon to minimize marine life impacts through the use of the "best technology available" for producing potable water from seawater. Surfrider and lawsuit partner Planning and Conservation League contend Poseidon's analysis of alternatives to the project's current design have either not been sufficiently vetted, or simply have not been made public. Because Poseidon seeks to take advantage of highly damaging seawater intake infrastructure currently being used by the Encina Power Plant, and the power plant is in the process of abandoning the intake technology altogether, Surfrider's suit seeks to force Poseidon to assess the impacts of its facility as a "stand-alone" project.

Unless and until the public and decisionmakers are fully aware of the devastating marine life mortality likely to occur from long term operation of the proposed project, the true cost of Poseidon's proposal cannot be determined. The lawsuit rejects the notion that production of water can only be had at the expense of invaluable coastal resources.

Surfrider readily admits the San Diego region is in the midst of a serious water crisis, and development of a local drought-proof water supply is of utmost importance. However, Surfrider advocates for an integrated water management plan, one which appropriately considers environmental impacts, and does not solve one problem by creating another. In addition to marine life concerns, the current design of the desalination plant is extremely energy-intensive and will release huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, thus contributing to Global Warming and further exacerbating our water shortages. With consequences such as these, ocean desalination is not the "endless supply of water" as Poseidon claims.

While Surfrider does not oppose desalination technology in general and believes it may one day serve as an important part of our water supply, its time has not yet come. San Diego should first exhaust conservation efforts – specifically outdoor irrigation conservation -- and water recycling. Both options are much less energy intensive and will result in discharge of far fewer greenhouse gas emissions. Once environmentally superior options are implemented, only then should desalination be considered viable, and then only if coupled with an appropriate seawater intake system. Numerous proposals for desalination plants collocated with existing power plants are making their ways through the regulatory process. Because Poseidon's is the first to be considered, it must set a high bar for environmental sustainability.

November 2007: On Thursday, November 15 2007, after hours of confusing debate and a list of unanswered questions, the California Coastal Commission approved a “conditional” Coastal Development Permit for the Poseidon desalination facility in Carlsbad . This decision happened despite the fact that several Commissioners and staff noted their opposition to approve the CDP at the time because the application by Poseidon was lacking so much critical information that an informed decision was impossible. Nonetheless, through a series of “on the spot” negotiations between Poseidon and a majority on the Commission, led by Ben Hueso, the permit was granted with conditions that are, as yet, a confusing and likely illegal application of the Coastal Act and other important laws protecting our coast and ocean.

This decision does not finalize all the permits Poseidon needs to move forward. In fact, a complete permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the destructive intake for the facility is not final and the State Lands Commission is currently reviewing whether the facility, as proposed, is in compliance with their duty to protect public resources – in particular, the impacts of this massive and poorly designed facility on global warming and efforts to recover healthy marine life populations and ecological processes.

We will keep our members informed as this precedent-setting proposal moves through the maze of permits. As we have said before, we are not opposed to properly designed desalination facilities that employ proven technologies to protect our coast and ocean. But, as noted by Joe Geever, Surfrider’s California Policy Coordinator, “All the Commission did on Friday was allow the continued destruction of healthy marine ecosystems with conditions on the permit that didn’t address the problems. It’s like putting lipstick on a pig and calling it eloquent.”

---

---

The Department of Commerce announced on December 18th 2008 that it would uphold the California Coastal Commission's decision! The egregious project to build a toll road through San Onofre State Beach is officially illegal under state and Federal law! In a release issued from the Department of Commerce, they "determined that there is at least one reasonable alternative to the project and that the project is not necessary in the interest of national security.

While the decision is a fatal blow to the project, the fight to build the toll road is not over. We still need opponents of the toll road to continue writing letters and communicating with their local elected officials to let them know we are happy with the results and we stand behind the Department of Commerce's decision.

In the coming days, we will have specific action items, but in the meantime, take some time to CELEBRATE this wonderful victory! Of course, Surfrider and our Coalition members will be planning a great celebration party, so stay tuned for that.

This victory would not have been possible if it was not for the activists who showed up by the thousands at the California Coastal Commission and Secretary of Commerce hearings or wrote letters to voice their opposition to the toll road.

Without a doubt, this victory belongs to the all dedicated individuals who have followed this campaign for several years. The ruling proves decision-makers listen when thousands of people speak out against ill-conceived projects.

Surfrider is calling upon the TCA and Orange County elected officials to embrace alternative transportation strategies that will better address the county's traffic issues without jeopardizing our environmental, recreational and economic resources.

We challenge the TCA to stop wasting money on lawyers and lobbying and to work with regional stakeholders to find better traffic solutions. Should the TCA choose to appeal the Department of Commerce's decision, the Surfrider Foundation and its coalition partners are prepared to fight that battle as well.

On behalf of the Surfrider Foundation thank you for your continuing support! This would not be possible without your help!

---

Special Update, Good News: The Natural Resources & Culture Committee voted on December 3rd 2008 to move a plastic bag ban ordinance to the full San Diego City Council after a review by the City Attorney. If you live in the City of San Diego, please continue to contact your local Councilmember to let them know that this is imprtant to you.

Click Here for a petition that you can print out to help gather signatures and Click Here to view the plastic bag fact sheet.

Rise Above Plastics (RAP) is a starting point for raising awareness of the problems that plastic brings to our oceans. Every bit of plastic that was ever produced still exists today, and much of it ends up in the ocean - as evidenced by the infamous flotilla in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. RAP endeavors to spur you to action - at home, at the store, at city hall. Each of us depends on plastic in some form every day, but much of it is a convenience choice, a decision that can easily be swayed toward the proper environmental path, requiring no more effort on your part.

Central to our campaign is an attempt to kill the demand for non-necessary plastics at the source, by encouraging the development and use of 'alternatives' and reduction of packaging. We aim to transcend (rise above!) the knee-jerk acceptance of single-use plastic bottles or ubiquitous plastic shopping bags (or other 'do-dad' plastic junk created for new, introduced 'needs') when better robust, reusable and sustainable options exist.

Here are some numbers:
- Californians are issued 600 plastic bags EVERY SECOND. Most are used only one time and then discarded.
- The amount of petroleum required to produce single use water bottles, filter the water, transport and dispose of these UN-necessities could be represented with each bottle being quarter-filled with petroleum.

The easy targets are the bottles and bags - we are attempting to find ways to shift the general public away from use of these items through awareness and education, legislation and other innovative methods to be developed by our members. This is where we hope to activate and energize you – bring on your ideas, initiatives and impetus! Join the Surfrider Foundation's RAP campaign and make a difference on our essential marine environment.

Plastic may not be so fantastic for kids. Click here to read the recent LA Times Article that talks about growing unease among parents and experts about the potential effects of plastic chemicals on the young.

For more information on plastic pollution please visit our Rise Above Plastics blog , cawrecycles.org and algalita.org

---

We did it AGAIN--we made a huge impression on decision makers! Close to 3,000 people attended the hearing in September (we distributed over 2,700 tee shirts and food tickets--AND we didn't even catch everyone as you walked into the hearing).

Check out this great video of the day from Chris Cantore.

---

On Wednesday, February 6th 2008, The California Coastal Commission voted 8-2 to reject the planned 241 Toll Road and to protect Trestles and San Onofre State Beach. Thousands turned out for this historic meeting in Del Mar, making it clear to the commissioners that the destruction of state parks and coastal resources is unacceptable.

The record-breaking crowd was comprised of a diverse cross-section of beach users including surfers, students, families, seniors, fishermen as well as a large number of Native American tribal representatives. Also on hand was a massive contingent from the surf industry, including various manufacturers, shapers, media representatives and pro athletes.

Many of you sent letters to the Commission and to the Governor asking that this road be blocked. Many of you told the Commission on YouTube to protect our state park and beach. And many of you showed up to the meeting prepared to demonstrate to the commission and the world that our parks and coasts are not to be destroyed.

Of course Surfrider Foundation didn't do this alone. We want to thank our partners with the Sierra Club, CA State Parks Foundation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Endangered Habitats League, Sea and Sage Audubon Society, Defenders of Wildlife, Wildcoast and countless others.

While this decision is likely not the death knell for the toll road we would like, there will be a major uphill battle for them to overcome. We will be there at every step to trip them up and we will need your continuing support.

As expected, the Federal Register printed the notice for the TCA's appeal of the CA Coastal Commission's decision. The CCC's jurisdiction is provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which resides in the US Dep't of Commerce. This means that the ultimate decision on whether to honor the CCC's decision or over-ride it lies with the Secretary of Commerce.

NOAA pulled together a really nice FAQ on the process. Of particular importance is this:

"What does the Secretary consider on appeal from a state's objection? The Secretary may override a state's objection if the proposed activity is either:

1)Consistent with the objectives of the CZMA. Projects consistent with the objectives of the CZMA are those where: a) the project furthers the national interest in the CZMA objectives in a significant or substantial manner; b) this national interest outweighs any adverse coastal effects (both separately and cumulatively); and c) there is no reasonable alternative available that would allow the activity to proceed consistent with the state program; or 2)Necessary in the interest of national security."

---

HUI300.com is live, so get your Hui signed up now!
The HUI 300 Challenge is Surfrider SD's newest effort to protect our ocean, waves, and beaches in 2008. Getting rid of beach and watershed debris makes the ocean healthier and safer surfers and sea life too, like turtles, birds, and dolphins.

Lead a Hui of 3 or more people in eco-service by each picking up 3 pieces of litter per day from a beach or watershed for 100 days during the calendar year. Get your Hui* going by following the HUI 300 steps below:

The First Steps: Name your Hui: Hui Jones, Hui Encinitas, Hui Solana Wahines…; Find two others to commit meet the Hui 300 Challenge; Track and self-report days of each member. Note: The HUI300.org website is under construction. An email alert will go out as soon as it is ready. Go ahead and form your Hui and report when your Hui is formed online.

The Qualifiers: A Hui qualifies when 3 members each complete 100 days of eco-service during the calendar year. The members' days may be different and need not be consecutive.

The Reward: An improved quality of ocean, waves, and beaches; Recognition of your Hui and members on our website and eblast; Invitation to a special year-end Hui 300 gathering with induction into the SURFRIDER SD HUI 300!

*A ‘Hui' is Hawaiian for a group or club: the Hui He'enalu is a famous Surf Club.

---