Refugio Spill 5-20-15 Report

Refugio_Spill_by_Marc_Chytilo_5-20-15.png

As the second day of the Refugio Oil Spill winds down, more questions arise as more information becomes available. Why wasn’t the leak detected immediately, and why has it taken so long for containment and cleanup efforts to engage? Why has a distant firm been retained to lead the cleanup effort when local firms have the equipment and resources to start the cleanup? How could this section of pipeline be inspected two weeks ago and presumably cleared for use, yet then fail so catastrophically? During permitting and in a subsequent lawsuit, the operator successfully argued against local oversight in favor of the State Fire Marshall – the only pipeline in the County without local oversight. Was the State as vigilant as it needed to be? Why did the County’s Emergency Operations Manager initially say this was an abandoned pipeline?

The spill has grown to 105,000 gallons from 21,000, and from four miles wide to nine. Calm winds have been replaced this evening by strong offshores, which will likely blow the now two oil slicks off shore and away from the coast. Air pollution from the oil slick is a health hazard, prompting public safety advisories to warn humans to stay away – but marine critters won’t get the memo. The number of oiled birds and animals is expected to rise dramatically in coming days. Both Refugio and El Capitan Campgrounds have been closed to the public as the slick moves easterly, towards Santa Barbara. Representatives of local Chumash tribes have been notified and are providing monitors to ensure consideration of sensitive resources. 

The Los Angeles Times reports that the pipeline operator, Plains Pipeline, has a rate of incidents per mile three times greater than the national average. Plains is number five in incidents nationally, among 1,700 pipeline operators. They have repeatedly stated their “deep regret that the release happened.” This pipeline carried up to 6,300,000 gallons of oil daily. 

Due to the hazards and the nature of current cleanup activities, volunteers are not desired at the site at this time. See https://calspillwatch.dfg.ca.gov/Spill-Archive/Refugio-Incident/Volunteer to learn when and how you can help out.

Local groups are planning a "Stand in the Sand" event at Noon on Sunday, May 31, on State Street in Santa Barbara. 

Print Friendly and PDF Add your reaction Share

Refugio Spill, 5-19-15

Refugio_Cove_Oil_Spill_5-19-15.jpg


The pipeline rupture near Refugio State Beach on the Gaviota Coast confirms the fact that oil production and transportation are not secure and threaten the environment that the Santa Barbara community has worked so hard to preserve. The Gaviota Coast is a world class environment and deserves to be treated with the utmost respect and not degraded by extractive oil industries. Oil production, processing, and transportation facilities should be removed from the Santa Barbara Channel and the Gaviota Coast as soon as possible.

 

Phil_signature.jpg

Print Friendly and PDF Add your reaction Share

Las Varas Update, May 2015

naples_aerial_05lasvaras.jpg

The County Planning Commission denied the subdivision and lot line adjustment of the iconic Las Varas Ranch on Wednesday, April 29. The 1,700 acre ranch straddles 101, just to the west of Dos Pueblos Canyon, and includes the sweeping views of ocean pastures, historic barns, orchards, and eucalyptus windrows. The owners attempted to create additional lots on the ocean side of 101, and to gain approval to build upward of 14 house on 7 lots. The project would have significantly fragmented this working ranch, imperiling its agricultural viability. The owners refused to provide conservation or agricultural easements for the protection of the environment and agricultural productivity. As one commissioner said, “approval of this project could set an unwelcome precedent for the Gaviota Coast.” By a 3:2 majority, they voted to recommend that the Board of Supervisors deny this ill-conceived project.

The Gaviota Coast Conservancy has consistently opposed this project since 2007, at every level of the permitting process. Our sincere thanks to Commissioners Hartmann, Brown, and Cooney, for their strong statements supporting denial of this project, and their clear understanding of the importance of protecting the Gaviota Coast. One of the Commissioners cited the thousand letters that the Commission received over the course of the permit process as a strong influence on her decision to deny the project; your participation did make a difference!

A battle was won, but the war continues. The Las Varas project will now proceed to the County Supervisors for their final decision within 2 to 3 months. We will update you on this process, and will need your continued help to seal the denial of this project.

Phil McKenna, President, GCC

Print Friendly and PDF 3 reactions Share