Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Fayetteville's proposed streamside-protection ordinance to be discussed as Tuesday, January 24, 2011, City Council: Passing and enforcing it on future projects near streams can prevent many problems

Streamside Protection Ordinance

The Nutrient Reduction Plan, completed in April 2009 by Geosyntec Consultants as part of an Agreement with the Beaver Water District and the City of Fayetteville, recommends the development and implementation of a riparian buffer ordinance. This ordinance is part of a series of recommendations designed to reduce non-point source loadings of total phosphorus in the Beaver Lake Watershed and would ultimately reduce the non-point source loadings of total phosphorus in all the City’s waterways.

The City of Fayetteville hosted two public education and input sessions on streamside protection in early March, as well as an online survey during March and April, in order to get citizen input in the development of the ordinance.  Questions asked of participants included input into which streams should have buffer protection and what activities should be allowed or prohibited in the protected areas.   

A question and answer session for property owners who might be affected was held on October 12 at the City Administration building.  The question and answer slide show from this meeting can be found HERE.

The Planning Commission forwarded the Streamside Protection Ordinance to the City Council with a recommendation for approval on November 8, 2010 with a vote of 7-2-0. The ordinance will go to City Council on February 1, 2011.

View a draft of the current proposed Streamside Protection Ordinance that goes before the City Council for review on 2_01_11.
View a draft of the City's Streamside Protection Best Practices Manual.
View a draft of the City's Streamside Protection Zone Map.
View a draft of the City's Streamside Protection Ordinance that was forwarded by the Planning Commission on 11_08_10.

The Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service published a Streamside Protection Ordinance Fact Sheet which also offers information on protecting riparian zones.

Images from March 6 Input Session and field trip to College Branch at Martin Luther King Boulevard
(March 6 Images courtesy of Aubrey Shepherd)


Images from March 10 Input Session and field trip to College Branch 


Thursday, January 20, 2011

Friday, January 7, 2011

Please speak up now: Full disclosure of chemicals used in fracking is open for comment to the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission

To those interested in the natural gas development in Arkansas:

Pittsburgh stands first in the country to have banned the fracking process from their city.  Attending the rally before the vote was Josh Fox giving a spirited speech.  I thought you would be interested to hear the passion he displays even after the long involvement he has had with this project.

Update on Arkansas activity:

Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission - 

Jan. 10th is the cutoff date to make comment requesting full disclosure of all fracking chemicals by CAS identification.  While there have been improvements made to the Oil & Gas Commissions rule on disclosure, it is incomplete by failing to incorporate the Federal standards for proprietary secrecy.  A simple request that they finish to the job of disclosing chemicals for public safety and land owner consideration is in order.  Request that all comments be extended to the commissioners as well.  Use the following information to make comment:

Copy to:  Commissioners - Chad White, Chairman, W. Frank Morledge, Charles Wohlford, Bill Poynter, Mike Davis, Kenneth Williams, William L. Dawkins, Jr., Jerry Langley, and Chris Weiser

Mr. Lawrence C. Bengal, Director
Production and Conservation
Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission
301 Natural Resources Drive, Suite 102
Little Rock, Arkansas 72205

Subject:  Full disclosure of chemical constituents used in natural gas fracking

Issue:  The current B-19 ruling is incomplete in providing limited claims for proprietary formulas.  The best approach would be full disclosure of every constituent by CAS identification, but at minimum the Federal guidelines for trade secrets should be included in the rule in their entirety.  The current wording is incomplete and does not provide how secrecy would be granted or what percentage would be allowed.

Thank you for assisting with this important comment, if you are able to help.  Pass the word.