LAKEPORT, Calif. — A large fight that erupted at the Lake County Fairgrounds on Sunday night left one person with serious injuries, and authorities are asking for the community’s help in identifying the individuals responsible for the assault.
The brawl occurred during the second night of the Memorial Weekend Opener for the Lakeport Speedway, which is now under the management of a new promoter, Blair Aiken of B.A.D Racing.
Because the incident occurred on the fairgrounds, which is considered state property, the California Highway Patrol’s Clear Lake Area office is leading the investigation into the fight.
Lakeport Police Chief Brad Rasmussen told Lake County News that his agency, along with California State Parks law enforcement officers and Lake County Sheriff’s deputies, responded with the CHP to the fight, which he said was “pretty much dispersed when we arrived.”
The CHP said its officers and the allied agencies responded to the fairgrounds at 9:46 p.m. Sunday on the report of a large fight occurring during the boat races.
When officers arrived, they identified one victim with serious injuries “stemming from a physical altercation involving several unknown assailants,” the report said.
The CHP identified the victim in the fight as Joseph Simpson Nelson, 58, of Ukiah.
Nelson was treated by emergency medical personnel on scene and then airlifted to Kaiser Hospital in Vacaville for further treatment, the CHP said.
Sgt. Josh Dye said Monday evening that the CHP had spoken to Nelson’s family and was working to get additional updates on his condition.
Based on the statements and evidence the CHP has obtained so far, officers determined that Nelson had been beaten about the head and face by several unknown assailants, resulting in serious bodily injury, according to the report.
Lake County Fair Chief Executive Officer Sheli Wright told Lake County News on Monday evening that, by that point, she had only gotten small pieces of information on the incident, and hadn’t yet received a report from CHP.
“I have lots of questions but do not have the answers yet,” Wright said.
“I can tell you the turnout was not something expected,” said Wright, adding that last year, under the former race promoter, they were lucky if there were 200 people in the stands.
Wright said the District Agricultural Association, the fair’s official name, hopes that Nelson is OK.
The CHP said Officer Johnson is investigating the felony battery incident.
The agency is asking for assistance from witnesses, as well as any available video of the incident.
Anyone who believes they have useful information or video associated with the incident is asked to call the CHP’s Clear Lake Area office at 707-279-0103.
Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The National Weather Service’s forecast of a thunderstorm on Sunday afternoon proved accurate, with the storm bringing with it numerous lightning strikes and steady, and heavy, rain.
Widespread rain was reported across Lake County on Sunday afternoon.
On the Northshore, the storm began around 3:30 p.m. with heavy rain.
A short time later, loud thunder claps could be heard as strikes began occurring.
Online lightning strike maps showed dozens of strikes around Lake County.
One was reported to have sparked a fire in a tree along Elk Mountain Road in Upper Lake.
Lake County News’ weather observation station showed that about half an inch of rain fell on the Northshore over the course of a few hours, before the rain stopped early Sunday evening.
The National Weather Services said conditions are expected to be clear for the rest of this week.
However, an incoming weather system expected to arrive later this week will increase the potential for more showers and thunderstorms across northwest California, the forecast said.
Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The National Weather Service said there is a chance of thunderstorms in Lake County on Sunday.
The forecast said low pressure is expected to bring widespread shower activity throughout the North Coast region on Sunday, along with possible short-lived thunderstorms.
The potential storms are expected on Sunday afternoon, the forecast said.
Conditions are expected to remain warm and mostly cloudy on Sunday evening before clearing the way for a sunny Memorial Day, with daytime highs in the mid 70s and nighttime conditions in the low 50s.
Light winds of up to 9 miles per hour also are in the forecast.
For much of the rest of the week, temperatures are expected to hover in the mid to high 70s, topping out just over 80 degrees by the weekend.
Nighttime conditions will remain in the low 50s, according to the forecast.
Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The East Region Town Hall, or ERTH, will meet on Wednesday, June 7 .
The meeting will begin at 4 p.m. at the Moose Lodge, located at 15900 Moose Lodge Lane in Clearlake Oaks.
The meeting will be available via Zoom. The meeting ID is 986 3245 2684, pass code is 666827.
On June 7, ERTH will host a meeting with the new sheriff, Rob Howe.
Sheriff Howe will discuss the status of his department, share his goals and answer questions.
The meeting also will feature a discussion of Lake County’s 10-year road rehabilitation plan and the roads that are not included.
There also will be an update on the annual Catfish Derby front he Clearlake Oaks/Glenhaven Business Association.
Other ongoing agenda items include commercial cannabis cultivation projects and a cannabis ordinance task force update, updates on Spring Valley, the Northshore Fire Protection District, a report from Supervisor EJ Crandell, new business and announcements.
The group’s next meeting will take place on July 5.
ERTH’s members are Denise Loustalot, Jim Burton, Tony Morris and Pamela Kicenski.
For more information visit the group’s Facebook page.
COBB, Calif. — Cal Fire Sonoma-Lake-Napa Unit announced that the Boggs Mountain Demonstration State Forest Calso Camp campground will be closed for the 2023 season.
State Forest staff will be focused on repairing winter storm damage to roads and facilities throughout the State Forests in the Sonoma-Lake-Napa Unit.
Day use will continue to be permitted from sunrise to sunset.
Seasonal road closures will also be lifted, allowing routine access to State Forest mapped and numbered roads only. Off-roading and off-highway vehicles are not permitted. Please observe posted road closures.
Firewood and rock gathering permits are on sale by appointment only. Permits are $20 for up to 3 cords and are valid for one year after the date of issue.
Forest staff asks the public to plan ahead by checking on forest conditions and weather before arriving.
A federal court has ruled in favor of the U.S. Forest Service in a suit trying to stop the use of aerial fire retardants.
Last week, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana issued a ruling in a case brought by Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics against the U.S. Forest Service seeking to enjoin the USFS’ use of aerial fire retardants during firefighting activities.
Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, or FSEEE, filed the suit over what it said were repeated violations by the USFS of the Clean Water Act.
The court ruled that USFS may continue using aerial fire retardants while pursuing a Clean Water Act permit.
Ahead of the ruling, a broad coalition of communities and landholders affected by wildfires filed an amicus brief and participated in oral arguments supporting USFS’ ability to use aerial fire retardants.
Ken Pimlott, former director of Cal Fire, said the decision, handed down on Friday, will save lives.
“The aerial application of fire retardant is a critical part of the U.S. Forest Service’s firefighting strategy, and it unquestionably reduces a fire’s rate of spread, intensity, and danger to firefighters and the public,” said Pimlott. “Taking this tool away would undermine the health and safety of our communities and cause significant economic harm to businesses navigating the constant threat of wildfire. Because the court rightfully chose to prioritize public safety, Americans across the West can breathe a sigh of relief.”
On March 9, the California Forestry Association joined the Town of Paradise, California, which was devastated in the 2018 Camp Fire; Butte and Plumas counties, California; Rural County Representatives of California; American Forest Resource Council; National Alliance of Forest Owners; Federal Forest Resource Coalition; Montana Wood Products Association; Oregon Forest Industry Council; Washington Forest Protection Association; California Farm Bureau Federation; National Wildfire Suppression Association; and California Women for Agriculture in petitioning the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana to join the case brought in October 2022 by Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics.
On March 31, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana granted the coalition the right to file an amicus brief and participate in the upcoming oral arguments on the summary judgment motion.
On April 14, the coalition filed an amicus brief in opposition to the motion by the Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, or FSEEE, for summary judgment, which included a declaration in support of the putative intervenors’ opposition to the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment from Ken Pimlott, former director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
On April 24, the Court heard oral arguments from FSEEE, USFS and the coalition of amici curiae.
Matt Dias, president and CEO of the California Forestry Association, said the decision is a victory for communities and industry stakeholders whose livelihoods depend on the Forest Service’s ability to successfully fight catastrophic wildfires.
“Fire retardant is one of the most important tools we have in our toolbox, and the court’s decision to safeguard this tool was ultimately a decision to prioritize lives, land, businesses, and forested environments. I am grateful to the court for considering how truly important this decision was to California forests and the American West as a whole,” Dias said.
“No one knows the damage that these fires can cause more so than communities like mine. We lost our town to one of the biggest fires in California history, so this case was very personal for us. Our brave firefighters need every tool in the toolbox to protect human lives and property against wildfires, and today’s ruling ensures we have a fighting chance this fire season,” said Paradise Mayor Greg Bolin.
“Our farmers and ranchers face severe threats from wildfires that can occur in national forests and spread to agricultural lands, and they rely on state and federal agencies to use every tool possible to fight these fires,” said Jamie Johansson, president of California Farm Bureau. “Continuing the use of aerial fire retardants will save the lives of livestock, preserve grazing operations, and protect our rural agricultural communities from peril.”
“Catastrophic wildfires can endanger fish and wildlife species, compromise air quality, and threaten the safety of Washington’s communities,” said Jason Spadaro, executive director of the Washington Forest Protection Association. “The greatest threat of catastrophic wildfire today is in U.S. National Forests, and because fire ignores ownership boundaries, private forest landowners rely on U.S. Forest Service to deploy aerial fire retardants to suppress these wildfires. This decision will protect healthy, sustainable forests across Washington State, benefiting our air and water quality as well as the flourishing wildlife habitats in and around our forests.”
Bryan Keogh, The Conversation and Matt Williams, The Conversation
President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on May 27, 2023, agreed in principle to a tentative deal that would raise the debt ceiling while capping some federal spending at current levels.
The accord, if approved by both houses of Congress, would avert an unprecedented default that threatens to derail the economy and put hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work. Negotiators agreed to lift the ceiling for two years – past the 2024 presidential election – while putting a temporary cap on most nondefense spending at 2023 levels. It would also reduce planned funding for the IRS, impose new work requirements on some people who receive benefits from the federal program known as SNAP and claw back billions of unspent funds from pandemic relief programs.
The Conversation has been covering the debt ceiling drama since January, when Republicans took over the House, raising fears that brinkmanship would lead to an economic catastrophe. Here are five articles from our archive to help you make sense of a couple key aspects of the tentative deal and provide context on the debt ceiling fight.
1. What is the debt ceiling
First some basics. The debt ceiling was established by the U.S. Congress in 1917. It limits the total national debt by setting out a maximum amount that the government can borrow.
Steven Pressman, an economist at The New School, explained the original aim was “to let then-President Woodrow Wilson spend the money he deemed necessary to fight World War I without waiting for often-absent lawmakers to act. Congress, however, did not want to write the president a blank check, so it limited borrowing to US$11.5 billion and required legislation for any increase.”
Since then, the debt ceiling has been increased dozens of times. It currently stands at $31.4 trillion – a figure reached in January. The Treasury has taken “extraordinary measures” to enable the government to keep borrowing without breaching the ceiling. Such measures, however, can only be temporary – meaning at one point Congress will have to act to lift the ceiling or default on its debt obligations, which is expected to happen by June 5, according to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, if the deal isn’t approved in time.
2. The trouble with work requirements
One of the biggest sticking points toward the end of negotiations was work requirements for recipients of government aid. The tentative deal would raise the age for existing work requirements from 49 to 54 years on able-bodied adults who have no children. This is less than what Republicans had earlier sought. There are exceptions for veterans and the homeless.
But if the goal is to help people find jobs and make more money, work requirements don’t actually do the job, wrote Kelsey Pukelis, a doctoral student in public policy at Harvard Kennedy School who has studied the issue. Rather, they make it much harder for people who need food aid to get it.
“Our findings do suggest that work requirements restrain federal spending by reducing the number of people getting SNAP benefits,” she explained. “But our work also indicates that in today’s context, these savings would be at the expense of already vulnerable people facing additional economic hardship at a time when a new recession could be around the corner.”
3. IRS funding takes a hit
The deal also takes aim at a big boost in spending Congress gave the Internal Revenue Service beginning in 2022 to crack down on tax cheats and upgrade its software. Democrats agreed to a Republican demand to cut the extra IRS funding from $80 billion to $70 billion.
Back in August 2022, Nirupama Rao, an economist at the University of Michigan, explained why Democrats included all that funding in their Inflation Reduction Act and how it would help the IRS collect more tax revenue, since the agency does not fully collect all the taxes that are owed.
“The main target of this spending is the so-called tax gap, which is currently estimated at about $600 billion a year,” she wrote. “While an $80 billion investment that returns $204 billion already sounds pretty impressive, it may be possible that it’s a conservative estimate.”
4. The hard road to compromise
It took a long time for Republicans and Democrats to get the current agreement.
Yellen warned in January that the government was about to hit the debt limit and would be unable to pay all its bills by May or June. McCarthy and House Republicans, who hold a razor-thin majority, appeared unwilling to raise the debt ceiling unless they could extract deep spending cuts. Meanwhile, Biden refused to negotiate, insisting on a clean debt ceiling bill. Both of those positions were dropped during negotiations.
Why did it take so long for them to reach a compromise?
Blame political trends that have been accelerating for decades, explained Laurel Harbridge-Yong, a specialist in partisan conflict and the lack of bipartisan agreement in American politics at Northwestern University. Many Republicans come from very safe districts, which means their primary against other conservatives is more important than the general election. This makes it more important to stand firm and fight until the bitter end.
“So you now have many Republicans who are more willing to fight quite hard against the Democrats because they don’t want to give a win to Biden,” she wrote. “Democrats are also resistant to compromising, both because they don’t want to gut programs that they put in place and also because they don’t want to make this look like a win for Republicans, who were able to play chicken and get what they wanted.”
5. Latest in a long line of fiscal crises
This was hardly the first fiscal crisis the U.S. government has faced. In fact, there have been many – including 22 government shutdowns since just 1976.
Raymond Scheppach, a professor of public policy at University of Virginia, offered a brief history of recent crises and the damage they’ve caused – and why a default would be far more consequential than past crises.
“While these were very disruptive and damaged the economy and employment, they pale in comparison to the potential effects of failing to lift the debt ceiling, which could be catastrophic,” he wrote. “It could bring down the entire international financial system. This in turn could devastate the world gross domestic product and create mass unemployment.”
Editor’s note: This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives. Portions of this article originally appeared in a previous article published on May 2, 2023.
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — Lake County Animal Care and Control has many dogs waiting to start the summer in new homes.
Dogs available for adoption this week include mixes of American bulldog, Anatolian shepherd, Catahoula leopard dog, German shepherd, Labrador retriever, mastiff, pit bull, plott hound, pointer and wirehaired terrier.
Dogs that are adopted from Lake County Animal Care and Control are either neutered or spayed, microchipped and, if old enough, given a rabies shot and county license before being released to their new owner. License fees do not apply to residents of the cities of Lakeport or Clearlake.
The following dogs at the Lake County Animal Care and Control shelter have been cleared for adoption.
Call Lake County Animal Care and Control at 707-263-0278 or visit the shelter online for information on visiting or adopting.
Male pit bull
This 1-year-old male pit bull has a short tan and white coat.
He is in kennel No. 2, ID No. LCAC-A-5269.
Female German shepherd
This 1 and a half year old female German shepherd has a black and tan coat.
She is in kennel No. 3, ID No. LCAC-A-5296.
Female pit bull
This 2-year-old female pit bull has a short black and white coat.
She is in kennel No. 4, ID No. LCAC-A-5301.
Anatolian shepherd-mastiff mix
This 3-year-old male Anatolian shepherd-mastiff mix has a short fawn coat.
He is in kennel No. 5, ID No. LCAC-A-5276.
Male pit bull puppy
This 3-month-old male pit bull puppy has a short brindle coat.
He is in kennel No. 6, ID No. LCAC-A-5266.
Male pit bull terrier
This 3-month-old male pit bull terrier has a short brindle coat.
He is in kennel No. 7, ID No. LCAC-A-5265.
‘Sky’
“Sky” is a 1 and a half year old female German shepherd with an all-white coat.
She is in kennel No. 8, ID No. LCAC-A-4297.
Male wirehaired terrier
This 1-year-old male wirehaired terrier has a brown coat.
He is in kennel No. 9, ID No. LCAC-A-5261.
Female pit bull terrier-hound mix
This 2-year-old female pit bull terrier-hound mix has a short black and tan coat.
She is in kennel No. 10, ID No. LCAC-A-5259.
Male pit bull
This 1-year-old male pit bull terrier has a short black coat.
He is in kennel No. 11, ID No. LCAC-A-5258.
Male Catahoula leopard dog puppy
This 2-month-old male Catahoula leopard dog puppy has a short brindle coat with white markings.
He is in kennel No. 12b, ID No. LCAC-A-5245.
Female Catahoula leopard dog puppy
This 2-month-old female Catahoula leopard dog puppy has a short brindle coat with white markings.
She is in kennel No. 12c, ID No. LCAC-A-5246.
Female pit bull-pointer mix
This 8-month-old female pit bull-pointer mix has a brown brindle and white coat.
She is in kennel No. 14, ID No. LCAC-A-5230.
Male Catahoula leopard dog puppy
This 2-month-old male Catahoula leopard dog puppy has a short brown brindle coat with white markings.
He is in kennel No. 16a, ID No. LCAC-A-5244.
Male Catahoula leopard dog puppy
This 2-month-old male Catahoula leopard dog puppy has a short white coat with black markings.
He is in kennel No. 16b, ID No. LCAC-A-5247.
Female Catahoula leopard dog puppy
This 2-month-old female Catahoula leopard dog puppy has a short white coat with black markings.
She is in kennel No. 16d, ID No. LCAC-A-5249.
Male plott hound
This 2-year-old male plott hound has a short brown coat.
He is in kennel No. 18, ID No. LCAC-A-5143.
Male American bulldog
This 4-year-old male American bulldog has a gray and white coat.
He is in kennel No. 19, ID No. LCAC-A-5204.
Male pit bull terrier
This 3-year-old male pit bull terrier has a short black and white coat.
He is in kennel No. 21, ID No. LCAC-A-5076.
Male shepherd
This 2-year-old male shepherd has a tan and white coat.
He is in kennel No. 22, ID No. LCAC-A-5223.
Male terrier
This 1-year-old male terrier mix has a short brown coat.
He is in kennel No. 23, ID No. LCAC-A-5110.
Male terrier
This 1-year-old male terrier has a short tan coat.
He is in kennel No. 24, ID No. LCAC-A-5111.
Male shepherd
This 1-year-old male shepherd has a tan coat.
He is in kennel No. 25, ID No. LCAC-A-5303.
Male pit bull terrier
This 1-year-old male pit bull terrier has a black coat with white markings.
He is in kennel No. 27, ID No. LCAC-A-5203.
American bulldog
This 3-year-old female American bulldog has a short white coat.
She is in kennel No. 28, ID No. LCAC-A-5307.
Male German shepherd
This 3-year-old male German shepherd has a black and tan coat.
He is in kennel No. 29, ID No. LCAC-A-5308.
Pit bull terrier-pointer mix
This 1 and a half year old female pit bull-pointer mix has a white coat.
She is in kennel No. 31, ID No. LCAC-A-5231.
Female pit bull-shepherd puppy
This 5-month-old female pit bull-shepherd puppy has a short tricolor coat.
She is in kennel No. 32, ID No. LCAC-A-5072.
Senior male Labrador retriever
This 9-year-old male Labrador retriever has a black coat with white markings.
He is in kennel No. 34, ID No. LCAC-A-5306.
Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Sackett v. EPA that federal protection of wetlands encompasses only those wetlands that directly adjoin rivers, lakes and other bodies of water. This is an extremely narrow interpretation of the Clean Water Act that could expose many wetlands across the U.S. to filling and development.
Under this keystone environmental law, federal agencies take the lead in regulating water pollution, while state and local governments regulate land use. Wetlands are areas where land is wet for all or part of the year, so they straddle this division of authority.
Swamps, bogs, marshes and other wetlands provide valuable ecological services, such as filtering pollutants and soaking up floodwaters. Landowners must obtain permits to discharge dredged or fill material, such as dirt, sand or rock, in a protected wetland.
This can be time-consuming and expensive, which is why the Supreme Court’s ruling on May 25, 2023, will be of keen interest to developers, farmers and ranchers, along with conservationists and the agencies that administer the Clean Water Act – namely, the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
For the last 45 years – and under eight different presidential administrations – the EPA and the Corps have required discharge permits in wetlands “adjacent” to water bodies, even if a dune, levee or other barrier separated the two. The Sackett decision upends that approach, leaving tens of millions of acres of wetlands at risk.
The Sackett case
Idaho residents Chantell and Mike Sackett own a parcel of land located 300 feet from Priest Lake, one of the state’s largest lakes. The parcel once was part of a large wetland complex. Today, even after the Sacketts cleared the lot, it still has some wetland characteristics, such as saturation and ponding in areas where soil was removed. Indeed, it is still hydrologically connected to the lake and neighboring wetlands by water that flows at a shallow depth underground.
In preparation to build a house, the Sacketts had fill material placed on the site without obtaining a Clean Water Act permit. The EPA issued an order in 2007 stating that the land contained wetlands subject to the law and requiring the Sacketts to restore the site. The Sacketts sued, arguing that their property was not a wetland.
In 2012, the Supreme Court held that the Sacketts had the right to challenge EPA’s order and sent the case back to the lower courts. After losing below on the merits, they returned to the Supreme Court with a suit asserting that their property was not federally protected. This claim in turn raised a broader question: What is the scope of federal regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act?
The Supreme Court has previously recognized that the “waters of the United States” include not only navigable rivers and lakes, but also wetlands and waterways that are connected to navigable bodies of water. But many wetlands are not wet year-round, or are not connected at the surface to larger water systems. Still, they can have important ecological connections to larger water bodies.
In 2006, when the court last took up this issue, no majority was able to agree on how to define “waters of the United States.” Writing for a plurality of four justices in U.S. v. Rapanos, Justice Antonin Scalia defined the term narrowly to include only relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water such as streams, oceans, rivers and lakes. Waters of the U.S., he contended, should not include “ordinarily dry channels through which water occasionally or intermittently flows.”
Acknowledging that wetlands present a tricky line-drawing problem, Scalia proposed that the Clean Water Act should reach “only those wetlands with a continuous surface connection to bodies that are waters of the United States in their own right.”
In a concurring opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy took a very different approach. “Waters of the U.S.,” he wrote, should be interpreted in light of the Clean Water Act’s objective of “restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.”
Accordingly, Kennedy argued, the Clean Water Act should cover wetlands that have a “significant nexus” with navigable waters – “if the wetlands, either alone or in combination with similarly situated lands in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of other covered waters more readily understood as ‘navigable.’”
Neither Scalia’s nor Kennedy’s opinion attracted a majority, so lower courts were left to sort out which approach to follow. Most applied Kennedy’s significant nexus standard, while a few held that the Clean Water Act applies if either Kennedy’s standard or Scalia’s is satisfied.
The Biden administration responded with its own rule defining waters of the United States in terms of the presence of either a significant nexus or continuous surface connection. However, this rule was promptly embroiled in litigation and will require reconsideration in light of Sackett v. EPA.
The Sackett decision and its ramifications
The Sackett decision adopts Scalia’s approach from the 2006 Rapanos case. Writing for a five-justice majority, Justice Samuel Alito declared that “waters of the United States” includes only relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water, such as streams, oceans, rivers, lakes – and wetlands that have a continuous surface connection with and are indistinguishably part of such water bodies.
None of the nine justices adopted Kennedy’s 2006 “significant nexus” standard. However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the three liberal justices disagreed with the majority’s “continuous surface connection” test. That test, Kavanaugh wrote in a concurrence, is inconsistent with the text of the Clean Water Act, which extends coverage to “adjacent” wetlands – including those that are near or close to larger water bodies.
“Natural barriers such as berms and dunes do not block all water flow and are in fact evidence of a regular connection between a water and a wetland,” Kavanaugh explained. “By narrowing the Act’s coverage of wetlands to only adjoining wetlands, the Court’s new test will leave some long-regulated adjacent wetlands no longer covered by the Clean Water Act, with significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States.”
The majority’s ruling leaves little room for the EPA or the Army Corps of Engineers to issue new regulations that could protect wetlands more broadly.
The court’s requirement of a continuous surface connection means that federal protection may no longer apply to many areas that critically affect the water quality of U.S. rivers, lakes and oceans – including seasonal streams and wetlands that are near or intermittently connected to larger water bodies. It might also mean that construction of a road, levee or other barrier separating a wetland from other nearby waters could remove an area from federal protection.
Congress could amend the Clean Water Act to expressly provide that “waters of the United States” includes wetlands that the court has now stripped of federal protection. However, past efforts to legislate a definition have fizzled, and today’s closely divided Congress is unlikely to fare any better.
Whether states will fill the breach is questionable. Many states have not adopted regulatory protections for waters that are outside the scope of “waters of the United States.” In many instances, new legislation – and perhaps entirely new regulatory programs – will be needed.
Finally, a concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas hints at potential future targets for the court’s conservative supermajority. Joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, Thomas suggested that the Clean Water Act, as well as other federal environmental statutes, lies beyond Congress’ authority to regulate activities that affect interstate commerce, and could be vulnerable to constitutional challenges. In my view, Sackett v. EPA might be just one step toward the teardown of federal environmental law.
This is an update of an article originally published on Sept. 26, 2022.
Scientists used ground-based telescopes to get unprecedented views, thanks to the giant planet’s position in its long orbit around the Sun.
For the first time, NASA scientists have strong evidence of a polar cyclone on Uranus. By examining radio waves emitted from the ice giant, they detected the phenomenon at the planet’s north pole.
The findings confirm a broad truth about all planets with substantial atmospheres in our solar system: Whether the planets are composed mainly of rock or gas, their atmospheres show signs of a swirling vortex at the poles.
Scientists have long known that Uranus’ south pole has a swirling feature. NASA’s Voyager 2 imaging of methane cloud tops there showed winds at the polar center spinning faster than over the rest of the pole. Voyager’s infrared measurements observed no temperature changes, but the new findings, published in Geophysical Research Letters, do.
Using huge radio antenna dishes of the Very Large Array in New Mexico, they peered below the ice giant’s clouds, determining that the circulating air at the north pole seems to be warmer and drier – the hallmarks of a strong cyclone. Collected in 2015, 2021, and 2022, the observations went deeper into Uranus’ atmosphere than any before.
“These observations tell us a lot more about the story of Uranus. It’s a much more dynamic world than you might think,” said lead author Alex Akins of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California. “It isn’t just a plain blue ball of gas. There’s a lot happening under the hood.”
Uranus is showing off more these days, thanks to the planet’s position in orbit. It’s a long haul around the solar system for this outer planet, taking 84 years to complete a full lap, and for the last few decades the poles weren’t pointed toward Earth. Since about 2015, scientists have had a better view and have been able to look deeper into the polar atmosphere.
Ingredients for a cyclone
The cyclone on Uranus, compactly shaped with warm and dry air at its core, is much like those spotted by NASA’s Cassini at Saturn. With the new findings, cyclones (which rotate in the same direction their planet rotates) or anti-cyclones (which rotate in the opposite direction) have now been identified at the poles on every planet in our solar system except for Mercury, which has no substantial atmosphere.
But unlike hurricanes on Earth, cyclones on Uranus and Saturn aren’t formed over water (neither planet is known to have liquid water), and they don’t drift; they’re locked at the poles. Researchers will be watching closely to see how this newly discovered Uranus cyclone evolves in the coming years.
“Does the warm core we observed represent the same high-speed circulation seen by Voyager?” Akins asked. “Or are there stacked cyclones in Uranus’ atmosphere? The fact that we’re still finding out such simple things about how Uranus’ atmosphere works really gets me excited to find out more about this mysterious planet.”
The National Academies’ 2023 Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey prioritized exploring Uranus. In preparation for such a mission, planetary scientists are focused on bolstering their knowledge about the mysterious ice giant’s system.
Smoke from more than 200 wildfires burning across Canada has been turning skies hazy in North American cities far from the flames. We asked Chris Migliaccio, a toxicologist at the University of Montana who studies the impact of wildfire smoke on human health, about the health risks people can face when smoke blows in from distant wildfires.
What’s in wildfire smoke that’s a problem?
When we talk about air quality, we often talk about PM2.5. That’s particulate matter 2.5 microns or smaller – small enough that it can travel deep into the lungs.
Exposure to PM2.5 from smoke or other air pollution, such as vehicle emissions, can exacerbate health conditions like asthma and reduce lung function in ways that can worsen existing respiratory problems and even heart disease.
But the term PM2.5 only tells you about size, not composition – what is burning can make a significant difference in the chemistry.
In the northern Rockies, where I live, most fires are fueled by vegetation, but not all vegetation is the same. If the fire is in the wildland urban interface, manufactured fuels from homes and vehicles may also be burning, and that’s going to create its own toxic chemistry, as well. Chemists often talk about volatile organic compounds, (VOCs), carbon monoxide and PAHs, or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons produced when biomass and other matter burns having the potential to harm human health.
How does inhaling wildfire smoke harm human health?
If you have ever been around a campfire and got a blast of smoke in your face, you probably had some irritation. With exposure to wildfire smoke, you might get some irritation in the nose and throat and maybe some inflammation. If you’re healthy, your body for the most part will be able to handle it.
As with a lot of things, the dose makes the poison – almost anything can be harmful at a certain dose.
Generally, cells in the lungs called alveolar macrophages will pick up the particulates and clear them out – at reasonable doses. It’s when the system gets overwhelmed that you can have a problem.
The stress of an inflammatory response can also exacerbate existing health problems. Being exposed to wood smoke won’t independently cause someone to have a heart attack, but if they have underlying risk factors, such as significant plaque buildup, the added stress can increase the risk.
When smoke blows over long distances, does its toxicity change?
We know that the chemistry of wildfire smoke changes. The longer it’s in the atmosphere, the more the chemistry will be altered by ultraviolet light, but we still have a lot to learn.
Researchers have found that there seems to be a higher level of oxidation, so oxidants and free radicals are being generated the longer smoke is in the air. The specific health effects aren’t yet clear, but there’s some indication that more exposure leads to greater health effects.
The supposition is that more free radicals are generated the longer smoke is exposed to UV light, so there’s a greater potential for health harm. A lot of that, again, comes down to dose.
Chances are, if you’re a healthy individual, going for a bike ride or a hike in light haze won’t be a big deal, and your body will be able to recover.
If you’re doing that every day for a month in wildfire smoke, however, that raises more concerns. I’ve worked on studies with residents at Seeley Lake in Montana who were exposed to hazardous levels of PM2.5 from wildfire smoke for 49 days in 2017. We found a decrease in lung function a year later. No one was on oxygen, but there was a significant drop.
This is a relatively new area of research, and there’s still a lot we’re learning, especially with the increase in wildfire activity as the planet warms.
What precautions can people take to reduce their risk from wildfire smoke?
If there is smoke in the air, you want to decrease your exposure.
Can you completely avoid the smoke? Not unless you’re in a hermetically sealed home. The PM levels aren’t much different indoors and out unless you have a really good HVAC system, such as those with MERV 15 or better filters. But going inside decreases your activity, so your breathing rate is slower and the amount of smoke you’re inhaling is likely lower.
We also tend to advise people that if you’re in a susceptible group, such as those with asthma, create a safe space at home and in the office with a high-level stand-alone air filtration system to create a space with cleaner air.
Some masks can help. It doesn’t hurt to have a high-quality N95 mask. Just wearing a cloth mask won’t do much, though.
Most states have air quality monitors that can give you a sense of how bad the air quality is, so check those sites and act accordingly.
This article was updated May 22, 2023, with the morning’s updated wildfire smoke map.