Recently in advocacy Category

Timely opportunity! Work out a little of your outrage over Makar Properties' treatment of Charles O'Dell, constructively. Show up at the TCEQ hearing Tuesday and declare your opposition to permitting this development to discharge wastewater into Bear Creek.

Our friend Charles O'Dell, active in almost all of the regional issues that affect us here on HPR, was found guilty today in Dripping Springs, of violating their ordinance against erecting signs in the right of way. See, Charles has been actively protesting at the Belterra development, where the developers are seeking a permit that would allow them to discharge wastewater (in "emergencies") into Bear Creek. So the developers, Makar Properties, bugged the City to issue Charles a citation. Today he was found guilty on one count and fined $500. About 10 supporters, including Hays County Commisioner Karen Ford, showed up as he was read his penalty. His lawyer indicated he believes they have grounds for a retrial, and failing that, they will appeal.

But that was Charles, making trouble. The signs below, are from nice companies that are the bedrock of the D.S. economy, and their kind of free speech is OK:

Honestly, if you know Charles, you know he's a gentle, persistent advocate for water quality. His lawyer wasn't admitting Charles erected any sign; but to single out any sign Charles might have put out with his sensible message calling attention to a topic of public interest, while ignoring the signs of the real estate developers that run things out here, used to be called "selective enforcement."

[Updated: mis-attributed roadside sign photos to Hanlon Skillman -- he says they are really by Charles]
[Update 2: changed photo ]

Hamilton Market -- you listening? This article from the New Yorker remarks that turning off the lights can actually reduce crime (via Bruce Schneier):

Much so-called security lighting is designed with little thought for how eyes -- or criminals -- operate. Marcus Felson, a professor at the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University, has concluded that lighting is effective in preventing crime mainly if it enables people to notice criminal activity as it's taking place, and if it doesn't help criminals to see what they're doing. Bright, unshielded floodlights -- one of the most common types of outdoor security lighting in the country -- often fail on both counts, as do all-night lights installed on isolated structures or on parts of buildings that can't be observed by passersby (such as back doors). A burglar who is forced to use a flashlight, or whose movement triggers a security light controlled by an infrared motion sensor, is much more likely to be spotted than one whose presence is masked by the blinding glare of a poorly placed metal halide "wall pack." In the early seventies, the public-school system in San Antonio, Texas, began leaving many of its school buildings, parking lots, and other property dark at night and found that the no-lights policy not only reduced energy costs but also dramatically cut vandalism.

Received this email yesterday:

From: grace@...

To: grace@...

Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 6:52 PM

Subject: Election Fraud in Lakeway?

May 8, 2007

Dear Friends,

Something truly disgusting happened today involving the LTISD Board Elections. Whoever you plan to vote for, you should be horrified. Our right to vote is meaningless when it is stolen by underhanded campaign tactics. Here is what happened.

One of the employees at The Summit assisted living facility on Lohmans Crossing Road has been actively encouraging the residents to vote for the Tolles/Buddin/Williams school board slate. If I were the owner of that business, I would wonder why my employees were spending their work time on such things. They are paid to take care of the retirees, not to tell them how to vote.

This employee went so far as to schedule a “Meet The Candidates” event at the Summit this morning. Again, such an event is a fine idea so that people can be informed before they vote. Not coincidentally, the mobile voting machines were scheduled to visit the Summit at noon so the residents could vote.

The strange part, however, is that the only candidates invited to this event were Susan Tolles, Jason Buddin and Alan Williams. Summit residents were NOT allowed to meet the opponents – Bob Weest, David Lovelace, Carol Johnson and Paul Hendricks. This was clearly not intended to be an “educational” event at all. It was a blatant effort to round up votes for the Tolles/Buddin/Williams slate.

We all know how elderly people can be. Many of the Summit residents are perfectly capable of grasping the issues and deciding who they wish to support. Some are not, and can be easily persuaded to vote for whichever candidate smiles and shakes their hand. Such shameless, cynical manipulation of vulnerable people should NOT happen here - or anywhere. Fortunately, at the last minute Summit management was informed of the improper electioneering and cancelled the event.

There is more. One Summit resident left Weest and Lovelace campaign flyers on a counter where residents are allowed to place free literature. A Summit staff member removed the flyers and hid them in an office. The person who works in that office was seen going from table to table in the cafeteria telling people to vote for Susan Tolles.

Again, whatever you think about the candidates, we can all agree this was wrong. We don't know whether it was legal or not; that is for the courts to decide. At a minimum it is unethical, shady political pandering. Tolles, Buddin, and Williams should publicly denounce what happened at the Summit. They should insist that all of their supporters refrain from any more such tactics from now until election day. If they aren’t willing to condemn this dirty campaigning, they certainly do not deserve to hold any kind of public office in our community.

Please forward this information to all Lake Travis voters you can before the election this Saturday. We have to stop the dirty politics now. Thank you for your kind support.

Patrick & Grace Watson

A few links to outdoor lighting. The main principle is simple, don't use lighting when it's not necessary, let the light go only where it is needed, generally down and certainly out or your neighbors eyes. It's a little harder to do in practice. For instance our workshop has a clerestory and there are no interior walls so turning on a single interior light illuminates all 75 feet of clerestory.

Idaho Wood
http://www.idahowood.com/darkskies.htm

Starry Nights
http://store.starrynightlights.com/index.html

On sale:
http://store.starrynightlights.com/gb-1000.html

ludicrously overlit
http://www.kwastronomy.com/Local_Bad_Lighting.htm

Overseas:
http://www.astro.cz/darksky/

A couple of articles, both via Germany.

"It was meant to counter urban sprawl - an offer for families not to move out to the suburbs and give them the same, if better quality of life. And it is very successful."

... Rather than handing the area to a real estate developer, the city let small homeowner cooperatives design and build their homes from scratch.

Ok, I forgot what the second article was, but go to Google Earth and float around the countryside of Germany or France.

Do I think this could work here? I don't know, has it ever been tried?

From Australia, comes this compact rainwater storage tank called the "Eco Sac"
LINK:
http://www.gotoreviews.com/archives/rain-water-harvesting/the-eco-sac-a-compact-rainwater-tank.html

Opening July 28th at Barton Creek Square 14.

Here is the homepage

Also a Wiki entry

Not many reviews out yet, but a few here

Just a cut and paste here.

Water Wars: Drought, Flood, Folly and the Politics of Thirst Diane Rainses Ward

Lurking in the background of the last great wars over oil is a likely
series of battles over a resource without which we literally cannot live:
water.

That is why corporations have already begin working toward the privatization
of water rights and the distribution of water throughout the globe. It is a
relatively quiet profit-making encroachment on our most basic free
commodity -- at least up until now.

Water Wars sets the stage for the developing political and real wars over
something we always believed to be a free, elemental resource. In short,
it's an extremely fascinating and well-written primer into how historically
we have gotten to this point. It focuses on specific issues and initiatives
relating to water -- and reveals their impact on the global problem.

Along the way, Diane Raines Ward, the author, provides us with historical
background on the role of water in the development of civilization. After
all, it's the ultimate resource we take for granted and is inextricably
intertwined with life itself.

Yet, after reading this book, you will never take water for granted again.

Consider some of these facts:

"Six thousand children die daily from water-related maladies."

"In Onitsha, Nigeria, poorer householders spend almost twenty percent of
their income on water."

"1.4 billion people, almost twenty percent of those living on the planet,
don't have access to an adequate supply of clean water."

Currently, "a third of all countries suffer water stress."

"In Bombay, local mafias chain water taps and charge residents by the
bucket."

Our fear is that it won't be long before water distribution becomes a
private, not a public, utility. Imagine Exxon/Mobil in charge of our water
supplies. Trust us, they are already thinking about it. Water is the new oil
to big business, because oil is running out.

In "Water Wars: Drought, Flood, Folly, and the Politics of Thirst," Diane
Raines Ward makes a compassionate, detailed and compelling argument that we
need to adopt an international strategic approach to water use, because
demand is outstripping supply.

It's a plea we should heed, ignoring it at our peril. She leaves it to
another author to explore the corporate plans to turn water into a
profitable commodity (although bottled water already does that on a
small-scale), but she persuasviely sets the stage.

We may be reaching the tipping point where water will no longer be free, and
the poor may literally die of thirst on a regular basis.

Diane Raines Ward warns us.

We should be listening.

With shipping included, BuzzFlash is able to offer "Water Wars" for less
than the original price due to a special purchase.***
http://www.buzzflash.com/store/reviews/276

Also info on water in the ME

HISTORY OF CONFLICT

The allocation of the Jordan's headwaters began to be taken seriously in the
1930s when increased Jewish immigration into Palestine created a need for
sustained water management for agricultural development and drinking. Five
separate plans for managing the Jordan's waters were proposed between 1939
and 1953 alone. Lebanon initially based its right to draw water from the
Hasbani on a 1920 treaty between Britain and France covering aspects of
their mandates over Syria (including Lebanon) and Palestine. Article 8 of
the treaty permitted Palestine to make use as it saw fit of the Jordan's
headwaters passing through its territory "after satisfaction of the needs of
the territories under the French mandate ." The Lebanese argued that Article
8 allows Lebanon unrestricted use of water from the Hasbani; Israel is
entitled to whatever is left.

The most comprehensive arrangement on sharing the waters of the Jordan was
the 1953 Main Plan, more commonly known after Eric Johnston, an American
ambassador who negotiated the agreement during four trips to the region
between 1953 and 1955. Johnston persuaded Lebanon, Syria and Jordan to
permit Israel to channel some of the Jordan's waters to the Negev Desert in
the south, technically an illegal out-of-basin transfer. Israel agreed to
drop its demand that the Litani river -- which flows wholly in Lebanon --
should be incorporated into a final water sharing agreement. In the final
arrangement, Lebanon was granted 35 million cubic meters (mcm) a year to
irrigate 8,700 acres in the district of Hasbaya. Syria gained 132 mcm and
Jordan 480 mcm. Israel won 400 mcm, or 40 percent of the total, which,
according to Johnston, represented a "radical concession by the Arabs."

Perhaps too radical, as the plan was never ratified by the governments of
the four countries. Instead, Israel embarked in 1959 on a unilateral scheme
to channel water from the Jordan to the Negev. In response, the Arab League
decided to implement a ten year-old plan to divert the Jordan's headwaters,
including the Hasbani, away from Israel. The Arab diversion project began in
1965. Israel bombed the works, setting in motion a chain of cross-border
skirmishes that culminated two years later in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

Israel destroyed Lebanon's original pumping station and eight-inch pipe
located beside the Wazzani springs during the 1967 war, denying Lebanon the
use of the spring water for 34 years. In 1978, Israel invaded Lebanon,
securing a strip of territory along the border which included the Wazzani
springs. In the early 1980s, Israel attempted to annex a corner of southeast
Lebanon east of the Israeli town of Metulla which would have included the
Wazzani. The scheme was dropped after objections from Saad Haddad, commander
of the Israeli-allied Army of Free Lebanon. However, the Israelis were able
to make use of the Wazzani by pumping drinking water from the springs via a
four-inch pipe to supply Ghajar, a village populated by Syrian Alawites
which was occupied by Israel in 1967 and is located on the east bank of the
Hasbani.

OF PUMPS AND PIPES

Following the Israeli withdrawal in May 2000, the Lebanese government began
assessing the water needs of the area. In March 2001, the state-run Council
of the South installed a pump and four-inch pipe beside the Wazzani springs
to supply drinking water to several impoverished villages in the immediate
vicinity. Israel's reaction was out of proportion to the scale of the
scheme.

Uri Saguy, head of the Israeli Mekorot water company and former head of
Israeli military intelligence, warned of a "war or forceful confrontation"
if understandings were not reached on water allocation. For two weeks, the
specter of a Middle East water war was invoked in the Lebanese and Israeli
media. The fuss only died down when United Nations peacekeepers in south
Lebanon pointed out that the pipe was only four inches in diameter, and that
the Israeli authorities had been informed of the project several weeks in
advance.

http://www.merip.org/mero/mero093002.html

I. CASE BACKGROUND

1. Abstract
In the Middle East, the supply of water is much less than its demand,
thereby resulting in conflict over it. This is true for Israel and Lebanon,
where there have been struggles, although not always armed, for the waters
of the Litani River. At this point, Israel occupies southern Lebanon. Part
of the Litani is located in this region. There are conflicting reports and
conclusions over whether or not Israel is using the Litani. There is also a
verbal struggle over which country needs the Litani more, could make best
use of it, and who, therefore, should develop their use of the Litani.
Although there is not an armed struggle over it now, it has been involved in
armed struggles in the past (in the 1967 war, and in 1982) and it is
conceivable that in the future the struggles over it may become armed.

2. Description
The themes of this section are the environment and the Litani River,
conflict over this, and the solution.

A. Environment
Some "8% of the world's freshwater supplies are used for . We need adequate
supplies of water to feed ourselves. Agriculture accounts for some 63
percent of the world's use of freshwater."(1) No where is the need for water
more evident than where water is scarce, as in the Middle East. In fact,
there has been an armed conflict over water, in particular, the Litani
River, between Lebanon and Israel.

The entire basin of the Litani River is located within the borders of
Lebanon. The river rises in the central part of the northern Biqa'a Valley,
a short distance west of Baalbek and flows between the Lebanon mountain to
the west and the anti-Lebanon mountains to the east, running south and
southwestardly at its own pace. The river enters a gorge at Qarun, flows
through it about 30 kilometers and, near Nabatiya and the Beaufort Castle,
abruptly turns right (to the west), to break through the mountain range to
the right, and continues to flow through the hilly terrain of the al-Amal
region. North of Tyre, it empties into the Mediterranean.

The Litani River flows not far from Israel. The nearest part of the Litani
to Israel is where the river turns by Nabatiya, four kilometers from
Israel's border. The river's proximity to Israel may make it even more
tempting for Israel to exploit. The Litani River is 170 kilometers long,
with a basin of 2,290 square kilometers. A narrow ridge about 5 kilometers
wide separates the Litani from the Hasbani River, a tributary of the Jordan
River.

http://www.american.edu/ted/ice/litani.htm

http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/news/news.php?article=11379

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0926-08.htm

http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/80859e/80859E0a.htm

http://english.people.com.cn/english/200007/22/eng20000722_46168.html

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Middle_East/Lebanon_water_war.html

I am so sick of the commercial "Keep Austin Weird" crap. But I had not realized there is a richer, sadder, story behind it:

The folks at Absolutely Austin (a.k.a. Nobonz, Outhouse Design, Udamon, etc.), who make most of the T-shirts, hats, and some of the bumperstickers you see, got the trademark for "Keep Austin Weird" in October 2003. We realize most people don't care, and for good reasons. We invented the phrase, did the original bumperstickers, and put up this website before they were out of their diapers, so forgive us for being a touch defensive and probably egotistic.

The real problem with this turn of events is that it points out the boring irony of the entire "movement" (to use a grandiose term). It was a small attempt to counter Austin's descent into rampant commercialism and over-development. Absolutely Austin getting the trademark rather than letting this chicken run free is a sad proof that commercialism is winning. Most people probably think of Keep Austin Weird as a marketing slogan rather than our original attempt to highlight those aspects of our town that are really weird. Making money isn't high on that list. And they are enforcing the trademark, getting desist orders to folks who were making T-shirts.