San Diego Fireworks require Enivonmental Assessment Study

[JeanFromBNA]

From the San Diego Union-Tribune: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/may/27/fireworks-shows-need-environmental-review/

In brief: A California Superior Court judge has decided that an environmental assessment study is now required for fireworks displays. This ruling is likely to be interpreted as also requiring environmental assessment studies for most of the approximately 20,000 other events for which the city issues permits. It is also likely not to be limited to San Diego.

An Environmental Assessment Study is not a one-page letter from an expert giving an opinion on the matter. It is a multi-page study that can take several months to complete, and can cost thousands of dollars. My company does this type of work (not in California). I can't understand why what is clearly a very temporary impact would require a study.

I think that the comments of the plaintiffs' (Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation) attorney sums up the reasoning behind this. "It’s vindication for the environment ... and it’s vindication for my client because of the amount of disparaging comments and general negativity that was thrown our way when we were told that our lawsuit was frivolous,” Apparently, we are supposed to agree with whatever anyone using the banner of "the environment" wants. Even "general negativity" is not acceptable.

 

[WildCat]

Mindless stupidity run amok.

 

[bookitty]

We don't really know what was in the report. It might be more than just "OMG! fireworks are dirty."

Here is a list of seabirds found in San Diego county. Many of them are either nesting or have fledglings in the nest in early July. http://www.sdnhm.org/research/birdatlas/species-accounts.html

This may also be related to la Jolla's other environmental battle. A large group of harbor seals has taken over a beach, live their year round and use it as a rookery where pups are born. It is the only harbor seal colony in Southern California. Proponents want them protected, opponents want them driven away. Harbor seals are very timid creatures. There may concerns that the noise will affect them.

 

[WildCat]

We don't really know what was in the report. It might be more than just "OMG! fireworks are dirty."

Here is a list of seabirds found in San Diego county. Many of them are either nesting or have fledglings in the nest in early July. http://www.sdnhm.org/research/birdatlas/species-accounts.html

This in't just about fireworks. According to this ruling anything that requires a permit requires an environmental assesment - such as having a wedding in a park.

 

[bookitty]

This in't just about fireworks. According to this ruling anything that requires a permit requires an environmental assesment - such as having a wedding in a park.

Yeah, that makes sense. California has these weird little ecological niches all up and down the coast and many of them have been destroyed by tourism or over development. So we try to protect the ones that are left, even in populated areas.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I'd prefer we just ban the damned things, but I guess I am "un-American" .

“According to the strictest interpretation of this...

Is this another way of saying the most hyperbolic interpretation? Honestly, the defense is calling names, and whinging about expenses, but that does not address the issue of whether State environmental laws apply to permits. Even if we assume the worst case scenario laid out is accurate, are those valid reasons for ignoring State laws?

 

[Tricky]

Why would anyone think that filling the sky with loud, acrid, fiery, flashing lights would have any affect on local wildlife? Goddam Commies!

 

[Esperdome]

If the drought keeps up, there's not much of a chance we'll have any fireworks around here this Fourth. Damn commie judges not wanting to let us burn the county down.

 

[Puppycow]

My first reaction was, this is dumb.

But if it's done the right way and reaches the right conclusions, it shouldn't be too bad.

I assume that the environmental impact assessment only need be done once, not every time.

 

[JeanFromBNA]

There is no report. The judge has ruled that a 20-minute fireworks display requires an environmental study. And that every time another group wants a fireworks display, or any other activity that requires a city permit, an environmental study be undertaken. I could understand this if fireworks were held every weekend, or even once per month, but this is infrequent at best. I could understand requiring a one-time study to be updated every few years to comprehend and adjust to the ecology of the area in question, but frankly, this sounds like a power grab.

 

[JeanFromBNA]

I'd prefer we just ban the damned things, but I guess I am "un-American" .

Is this another way of saying the most hyperbolic interpretation? Honestly, the defense is calling names, and whinging about expenses, but that does not address the issue of whether State environmental laws apply to permits. Even if we assume the worst case scenario laid out is accurate, are those valid reasons for ignoring State laws?

There were no state laws until the judge just made them up interpreted them to apply to every permit.

I'm not a fan of fireworks either, especially as my neighborhood hasn't found a holiday that can't be celebrated with them.

 

[Beerina]

Yeah, that makes sense. California has these weird little ecological niches all up and down the coast and many of them have been destroyed by tourism or over development. So we try to protect the ones that are left, even in populated areas.

I hear your state hasn't gotten a new congressman in 10 years.

 

[marplots]

I've made and shot fireworks and I'd say this has been our "dirty little secret" for years. In fact, although I haven't participated in a decade, I'm still stuck with stuff I can't easily get rid of -- other than putting it in the sky and raining it down on people's heads.

I did get rid of some stuff to the local high school chem lab, but what do you do with barium chlorate, barium and strontium nitrate, powdered metals, a multitude of copper compounds, antimony and lead compounds...? This isn't the sort of stuff a landfill wants.

Then there's a list of alleged combustion compounds that hasn't been tested for -- that I know of. All the great chlorinated stuff you get when you burn PVC for instance. Does a cool go-getter shell with an awesome purple create dioxin? Don't know. I do know I want monatomic chlorine in the flame envelope for the color enhancing properties.

I like fireworks, but the whole industry is vulnerable to the type of close examination and regulation common in other areas. Someday, the "grandfathered in" exception is going to be noticed and slammed hard. There will still be fireworks, just not the pretty colors so much as the effects (noise, light, motion).

 

[Dancing David]

I see a lot of hyperbole here, without looking at the actual ruling it is hard to say what exactly the parameters of the impact will be.

I note that it is specific in some details 'La Jolla Cove' for example and is based upon existing CA law.

So it could be that it is rational, it could be that it is not, it could be many things. The city is appealing at any rate.

And we should remember that sometimes things that we are used to doing may have impacts, they can be considered and sometimes they are. I doubt that this is the final ruling.

Even some of the reports admit that 'if taken in the broadest sense' is an interpretation of the ruling in the press.

I am not saying that this is a good ruling, just that we don't know much right now, so the hyperbolic reaction is likely unjustified.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

I've made and shot fireworks and I'd say this has been our "dirty little secret" for years. In fact, although I haven't participated in a decade, I'm still stuck with stuff I can't easily get rid of -- other than putting it in the sky and raining it down on people's heads.

I did get rid of some stuff to the local high school chem lab, but what do you do with barium chlorate, barium and strontium nitrate, powdered metals, a multitude of copper compounds, antimony and lead compounds...? This isn't the sort of stuff a landfill wants.

Then there's a list of alleged combustion compounds that hasn't been tested for -- that I know of. All the great chlorinated stuff you get when you burn PVC for instance. Does a cool go-getter shell with an awesome purple create dioxin? Don't know. I do know I want monatomic chlorine in the flame envelope for the color enhancing properties.

I like fireworks, but the whole industry is vulnerable to the type of close examination and regulation common in other areas. Someday, the "grandfathered in" exception is going to be noticed and slammed hard. There will still be fireworks, just not the pretty colors so much as the effects (noise, light, motion).

So, YOU guys are responsible for chemtrials?

 

[marplots]

Sometimes.

There was a chemist/pyro in Indiana who enjoyed putting a pound or two of black powder in a 55 gallon metal drum (open topped) and setting that off. After a nice twangy-boom, it made a wonderful, accelerate and then float, type of smoke ring. It would shoot up and then (with perspective changes) just hesitate and slowly expand -- lasting some 3 minutes or more until it dissolved.

When conditions were right (dusk just coming on) the ring would be in a sunlit area high above while the audience was mostly in twilight. That sucker glowed with sunset pinkish orange and white and hovered like a mysterious spinning saucer.

Really neat and creative people in hobby pyro. I miss them.

[note to mods: These are perfectly legal activities done with proper insurance and licensing through registered pyrotechnic organizations.]

 

[Cleon]

Sooo...Why is it "stupid" to require a environmental assessment when people throw a bunch of explosives into the air?

 

[leftysergeant]

Bear in mind, people, that fireworks are just a dressed-up version of an old military weapon. They can cause damage if they go astray.

They can start wildfires, and California has had a lot of trouble with that lately.

You might have noticed that they leave a lot of non-biodegradable residues on the ground and in waterways.

Trash in the water sometimes winds up killing sea critters. I think that is a valid concern for government. I would, however, limit it to each promoter and rigging company to developing a plan and docuimenting that it is the same for subsequent performances.

 

[Bjorn]

Sooo...Why is it "stupid" to require a environmental assessment when people throw a bunch of explosives into the air?

It isn't and it has been done.

In August 2007 Sea World San Diego stopped its fireworks for a while (after pressure from San Diego Coastkeepers) and applied for a permit, although they said "to date, monitoring efforts have detected absolutely no adverse impact to Mission Bay".

They got the permit a year later, and

"The permit requires SeaWorld officials to collect and analyze water, sediment and marine life in Mission Bay three times a year for the next three years, said SeaWorld spokesperson David Koontz.​

Koontz said park officials have already been monitoring the fireworks discharges into the bay for the past five years under a similar program."​

"We've monitored a number of metals and elements and constituents to see if there [were] any elevations in the bay," he said. "It was shown that there was no negative impact on the quality of the bay as a result of our fireworks."​

Maybe it isn't so dangerous?​

 

[WildCat]

Sooo...Why is it "stupid" to require a environmental assessment when people throw a bunch of explosives into the air?

Because we've been doing it for hundreds of years without any noticeable effect on the environment?