Table of Contents
- Environmental Deregulation:
Serious Attacks Are Underway
Billboard Laws Threatened
Environmental Economics
Mining Legislation Needs Attention
Environmental Deregulation: Serious Attacks Are Underway
At the same time, proposed fossil fuel power plants will only increase the smog and soot that trigger respiratory problems, polluters are illegally dumping hazardous chemicals into our lakes and rivers without penalty, and sprawling development is worsening the quality of our air and water and destroying open spaces.
For many years, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce (WMC), an industry coalition representing some of the state’s biggest polluters, has pushed to weaken the core environmental protections that keep our families safe and protect the special natural places we enjoy.
WMC’s attacks on the environment and public health have escalated in recent months, and include proposals that are cleverly disguised as “economic development” and “regulatory reform” but would actually result in more toxins released into our air and water, more pristine lands irreparably destroyed and fewer protections for our children’s health.
This year, the Wisconsin Paper Council has joined in with a very successful media
Our Legislators, the Governor and citizens need to see the fine print of these proposals and oppose the big business anti-environmental agenda, yet many reforms are being pushed through before the public has had time to discuss the proposals.
At the same time, the Bush Administration is launching unprecedented attacks on federal environmental laws, agencies, programs and enforcement.
At this critical time, we all needto make extra efforts to defend our air, water, land and wildlife from these threats. Not only do we need to defend the imperfect protections we already have, but we need to demand improvements.We must reverse this downhill avalanche. Please attend our public hearing and send a letter to your state legislators.
Weakening Enforcement
The enforcement of laws is one of the most important ways to deter would-be polluters from threatening public health and our natural resources.Our environmental health standards are meaningless without enforcement.
Even now, Wisconsin’s environmental law enforcement is weak.There is no citation or fine system for violators.Mulitple violations must pile up before the DNR considers a case worthy of reporting to the Wisconsin Dept. of Justice for a full-scale enforcement action.Our local Procter & Gamble paper mill had over 900 violations before the state cracked down on them (after our legal push).This kind of delay is common.
In addition, under current regulations, the DNR generally conducts compliance checks on permitted facilities only once or twice a year, often after giving advance notice of their visit. And most emission or discharge monitoring data is self-monitored and self-reported by business permittees.This is hardly “oppressive regulation.”
Some of the most aggressive WMC attacks are focussed on further eroding enforcement of core environmental laws.
• Enforcement Immunity
In 2001 and 2002, industry groups worked to add what they called a “safe harbor” provision to Wisconsin’s air toxics law (NR445). In 2003, the “safe harbor” concept was broadened and written as legislation that would create a loophole from enforcement for all small businesses in Wisconsin. The bill (SB100) would give small businesses immunity from enforcement action as long as they admitted to breaking the law within 45 days of the violation.
This bill is so sweeping that it would erode far more than just environmental regulations - it will affect consumer protections, financial laws and labor laws as well.
• Permit to Pollute
It is the responsibility of state agencies in Wisconsin to thoroughly review permit applications in order to protect health and the environment. Facilities need permits when they are emitting toxins that threaten human health, building in potentially sensitive areas that cannot be regained once destroyed, or otherwise having a great impact on public health or the environment. A WMC proposal to allow permits to be automatically issued if DNR doesn’t meet their abbreviated deadlines (SB246/AB486) could lead to increased exposure to toxic chemicals or the loss of our natural places. The sweeping proposal covers everything from water pollution permits to construction site erosion control plans to business mergers.
At the same time, the DNR and other state agencies are reeling from multiple large budget cuts over the past 8 years, with several hundred staff lost, including many technical permit reviewers. In that time, the DNR has also suffered through two disastrous forced reorganizations which caused chaos in the agency.
How can permit quality and safeguards be maintained if the permitting is speeded up, with fewer trained people available to do the reviews?Last spring, legislators called for a Legislative Audit Bureau review of the DNR's air management program, which is due out in November. They were asked to make recommendations for improving the speed of permitting. But legislators aren’t waiting for their own analysis to be completed. The state senate already voted to support automatic approvals.
• Polluters Playground
For the past several years, the DNR has been working to create a“Green Tier” program that would reward industries that voluntarily reduce their impact on the environment. During that same time, polluting industries were working to pass legislation that would grant them special exemptions from environmental laws. SB 61/AB 228 is a proposal that combines both of those efforts. The result: a bill that, if passed, would severely weaken the compliance and enforcement of the laws protecting Wisconsin’s air and water. Under this law, industries that are regulated under Wisconsin’s air and water laws in order to protect human health and the environment would have the opportunity to enter into contracts with the DNR.These contracts would eliminate or severely limit the ability of the DNR to inspect the facility for illegal pollution and grant immunity from enforcement actions if the facility does pollute illegally.
Wisconsin is one of the nation’s most water-rich states, with over 15,000 lakes, 55,000 miles of inland rivers and Lake Michigan, Lake Superior and the Mississippi River bordering the state.
Despite the importance of water to Wisconsin’s way of life and economy, a recent survey by WISPIRG gave Wisconsin’s water laws a failing grade. In addition to an already flawed system for protecting lakes, rivers and groundwater, proposals in the Legislature and DNR would lead to more pollution and weaker regulation for Wisconsin’s waters.
A recent proposal, if passed, would limit or eliminate protections for many Wisconsin rivers and streams, including: parts of the Wolf River in Langlade County, significant portions and the tributaries of the Pine, Pike and Popple Rivers, all State Wild Rivers, eighty-five to ninety percent of the streams in Door County, the headwaters and significant portions of virtually all of Wisconsin’s valuable trout streams and nearly all the streams in Southeastern Wisconsin. Wisconsin’s definition of what waterways are “navigable” is a cornerstone for determining protections for some of Wisconsin’s most valuable waterways.
AB506, recently introduced into the Legislature, would overturn 130 years of Wisconsin Supreme Court decisions by changing the definition of what is a navigable stream, resulting in the removal of state water protection for thousands of miles of some of the most valuable waterways in Wisconsin.
Local Democracy and the Environment
Large-scale factory farms often lead to increased lake and river pollution, contamination of drinking water wells, air contamination and other problems.
In Wisconsin, where we have about 115 of these facilities, local governments can make their own land use siting decisions for factory farms. A recent proposal by two state legislators would give the state full authority to allow farms to expand or build potentially dangerous facilities in local communities, without the local government playing any role in the review of the planned facility. With a decision that has the potential to lower property values, contaminate drinking water, and force neighbors to shut their windows due to excessive odors and flies, it is important that the state does not take away local review and decision-making over decisions regarding the location and impacts of factory farms.
Weakening Land Protections
Over the past 13 years, the Wisconsin Stewardship Fund has helped to acquire and protect more than 225,000 acres of some of Wisconsin’s most pristine and ecologically important lands and waters.
Thanks to the Stewardship Fund, Wisconsin citizens will now be able to enjoy those areas for years to come. However, recent attacks by the Legislature not only would hamper the ability of the program to protect more lands, but would also threaten currently protected land.
In June, 2003, the powerful Legislative Joint Finance Committee voted to not only gut funding for the Stewardship Fund, but also to require the state to sell off the equivalent of 27,000 acres of currently protected land. Governor Doyle vetoed the budget provision, but a recently proposed bill (AB480) reintroduces the cuts.
• Political Games
Because the Stewardship Fund is about preserving pristine and ecologically important lands, it’s important that land-buying decisions are made based on science, not politics.
A recently proposed bill, SB252, would require the Legislative Joint Finance Committee to review all Stewardship land purchases before the DNR can go forward with the purchase. This procedural change would turn land acquisitions into a political decision rather than a natural resources decision.• Banning Easements
Another attack on land stewardship is a proposal (AB303) that would ban permanent conservation easements, one of the best tools for protecting land while minimizing costs to the state.
The majority of energy produced in Wisconsin comes from dirty, coal burning power plants and expensive, dangerous nuclear plants. Less than two percent comes from clean, renewable sources of power. Wisconsin’s dirty power generation contaminates our air with smog and soot which cause and aggravate asthma attacks, heart disease, chronic bronchitis and lung disease. Nuclear power is expensive, a security risk and creates radioactive waste that stays in the environment forever.
Nuclear power plants are dangerous and expensive. In fact, nuclear power is so expensive that no new nuclear plants have been built in the United States since 1973, and plants have been closed early because they are too expensive to run. Despite the serious problems with nuclear power, a proposal in the Legislature would lift Wisconsin’s 10 year-old ban on the construction of new nuclear plants, costing ratepayers and taxpayers money and creating more dangerous radioactive waste.
• Revision of Clean Air Act Implementation
In Spring, 2003, Governor Doyle joined 13 other states and Washington, D.C. in suing the Environmental Protection Agency over rollbacks of the New Source Review (NSR) provision of the federal Clean Air Act. NSR ensures that power companies install modern pollution controls when making modifications at their aging power plants.While that decision was a good one to protect Wisconsinites health, the DNR went on to create a committee to make revisions to the state’s NSR implementation process based on the federal rollbacks and in conflict with the states’ lawsuit. Given that Gov. Doyle controls the DNR, this is odd behavior.
What You Can Do
Please attend the public hearing on October 15th
Write to your Governor and elected representatives in the state legislature and tell them what you think about each of the legislative proposals listed above.
Governor Jim Doyle
Room 115 East, State Capitol
Madison, WI53702
Senator,
P.O. Box 7882
Madison, WI53707
Rep.(Last Name, A thru
L)
P.O. Box 8952
Madison, WI53708
Rep. (Last Name, Mc thru
Z)
P.O. Box 8953
Madison, WI53708
(If you don’t know who your representatives are,call the toll-free Legislative Hotline at 1-800-362-9472on weekdays, between 8 & 5.
Public Forum and Citizen Hearing
Wednesday, October 156:30
p.m.
DePere Public Library, 333 N. Broadway
Please attend this event to help raise public awareness and let legislators know that citizens are concerned about the many recent proposals to weaken Wisconsin’s environmental laws.
For many months, business lobbyists and the news media have been painting a one-sided picture of “bureaucratic red tape” and the “need” for regulatory reform in order to hold and attract jobs.
No one is hearing the other side of the story, and legislation is being proposed and signed with little public input.
The public must be heard!
This forum will begin with an explanation of the various legislative bills and rule changes now being proposed, with their possible consequences.
A question and answer discussion will follow.
Then we will open to a PUBLIC HEARING, and invite audience members to present their own testimony and thoughts on the changes.This segment will be videotaped, with the tapes sent to the Governor’s office (who must ultimately sign or veto the bills, or approve new rules).
Sponsored by Clean Water Action Council
Non-conforming billboards are billboards existing on farmland and rural (scenic) lands that would not be allowed under current law, which was enacted March 18, 1972, following federal guidelines.The law says non-conforming signs “shall be removed by the end of the fifth year of said date.” That is, by March 1977. But most non-conforming billboards were never taken down due to lack of funding. Now the outdoor advertising industry wants to re-build these billboards, negating the law’s intent.
Wisconsin’s natural beauty has been disappearing due to excessive billboards, spoiling the scenery that is key to the tourism industry.
Billboard Concerns from Citizens for a Scenic Wisconsin
Signs provide valuable information, but like telemarketing, and email spam, billboards are taken to excess. It is unnecessary and inappropriate that 2/3 of outdoor ads are for products and services of no immediate use to a traveler or tourist (such as sneakers, beverages, bank cards or insurance).
There are about 17,000 billboards in Wisconsin, 14,500 under DOT jurisdiction and the rest under “certified” cities.
Industry spokesmen often say they are taking a lot of billboards down, implying that the number of billboards is not increasing. But in reality we’re seeing a lot more signs on main roads and they are bigger, taller and placed on curves to be visible for longer periods of time.
People don’t like billboards. In a Missouri survey responses ran from 58 to 75% against billboards.
The purpose of roadways is transportation, not viewing advertisements. People have paid for the roadways and should not be subjected to unavoidable viewing of undesired advertising.
People should be protected from billboards, just like telemarketing.
The main beneficiaries of billboards are billboard operators, yetWisconsin’s beautiful landscapes are the foundation of the tourism industry. which employs far more people than the outdoor advertising industry.Each billboard blots out or damages our scenery and weakens tourism.
If billboards are restricted, businesses will reallocate their advertising to other conventional means, so over-all jobs will essentially be preserved.
Cluttering of highways with signs is making the state unattractive to tourists. The drive from Green Bay to Fond du Lac on Hwy 41 is downright hideous. New highways, such as Hwy 43 & 29 are rapidly getting trashy. This is happening everywhere.
Regulation of billboards is needed to prevent degradation of our surroundings.You can’t put up a factory in a residential area, and you shouldn’t put up a billboard in a beautiful landscape.
Regulating billboards is not difficult or costly.The DOT is already staffed to regulate billboards.
A property owner can erect signs on his/her property that not only advertise his/her business, but the signs can present any other non-commercial message. In contrast, putting up signs advertising business at distant locations is not a basic property right.
Billboard prohibitions are not a radical new idea. Six states have billboard limitations:
Alaska , Hawaii, Maine, Vermont, Oregon and Rhode Island.The first four have taken them all down. All these states are major tourist destinations. A study in Vermont showed tourism has grown since the billboards have come down.
Most European countries don’t allow billboards, among them Great Britain, Germany, France, Ireland & Austria.It’s one of the reasons they are so charming to tourists.
Many American cities have prohibitions on new billboards: Houston and Dallas for many years, Los Angeles and San Francisco last year.
Many tourist destinations disallow billboards: Williamsburg VA, Martha’s Vineyard MA, Reno NV, Key West FL, Aspen CO, and many more.
There are alternatives
to billboards including a system of Tourist Oriented Directional
Signs, small inexpensive signs allowed along all roads including county
roads. This system levels the playing field for small business. Logo Signs,
usually several on one signboard, seen at freeway exits is another excellent
system available to tourist-oriented businesses.
Environmental Economics
Our economy is based on natural resources, yet many “conservatives” are unwilling to conserve these resources to ensure a steady economy for our children and grandchildren.They fail to see the obvious economic threat created by the rapid depletion of fuel, water, soil, forests, fisheries, land and minerals.They also fail to understand the economic value of genetic diversity in wild plants and animals. These attitudes must change, to encourage planning for a sustainable future.
In addition, it’s important to remember that recreation is not a frivolous past-time - it's good business in Wisconsin. Residents and tourists enjoy the waters, woods and wildlife, and our special environmental qualities also help to attract and keep talented business leaders and investment in our state.“Quality of Life” is a major selling point to entrepreneurs considering a move to Wisconsin.
According to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, outdoor recreation activities have an enormous impact on Wisconsin’s economy:
• These activities support 110,300 jobs and generate $262 million in General Purpose Revenues to the state.
• An estimated 400,000 people come to our state each year to watch wildlife.
• Great lakes fishing generates $200 million for local economies.
• Horicon Marsh goose watching generates $11 million to local communities — 33 times that invested in the annual management of the National Wildlife Refuge.
• Boaters spend $450 million a year related to boating excursions.
• Wisconsin’s hunters and anglers spend $69 million in annual license fees and tax dollars.
• A much higher proportion of Wisconsinites participate in outdoor recreation activities than the national average.
• More Wisconsin adults participate in fish and wildlife related recreation than any of the ball sports, including golf.
• Hiking increased 94%, while golfing increased only 29%.
• Camping increased 25%.
• Hunting decreased 12% and fishing decreased 4% nationally.
• Between 2000 and 2040, wildlife observation and photography are expected to increase 50%; backpacking and day hiking are expected to increase 90% and 124% respectively, and canoeing and kayaking are expected to increase 50%.
•50% of Wisconsin adults participate in fish and wildlife related recreation.
• 74% of 6 to 15-year-olds participate in fish and wildlife related recreation.
• Statewide boater uses of lakes and rivers include fishing (58%), cruising/sailing (20%), skiing (6%), swimming (1%), and other uses (15%).
• Surveys on five wildlife areas show hunting accounted for only 6% to 58% of the total use.
The report ranks states on each indicator, and the sum of ranks produces a state’s final score. Comparing the two lists reveals correlations:
For more information, visit Subsidizing the Destruction of the Commons
According to the EPA, pollution control costs run a modest 1 to 3 percent of sales in most industries. And, a focus on reducing waste costs has led industrial leaders to adopt new manufacturing processes that are increasingly efficient, thereby reducing waste and increasing profits.
Clearly, when an industry announces it is shutting down a local mill, it’s not due to pollution control costs. In Wisconsin, the paper industry has allowed its mills, many of which are more than 50 years old, to gradually degrade without capital investments in new, modern equipment.They’ve simply repaired the old machines to keep them running. The corporations took their profits elsewhere, to other countries and regions, and are now of the verge of closing several Wisconsin mills.
When paper companies move production to the southern U.S. several factors are influencing this shift. Trees grow faster down south. The U.S. population has shifted to the south and west, causing the industry to move closer to its markets. Southern ocean-going ports can receive much larger ships directly from South America, where many pulp operations have relocated, making pulp imports more direct. Some states are in bidding wars, offering huge incentives to lure investments. In some cases, southern workers are willing to accept lower wages and benefits, or work without union representation.
When paper companies move overseas, labor and benefit costs drop drastically. Employee wages and benefits are a major percentage of total production costs, making it very difficult for American workers to compete. Environmental regulations have little influence over this choice.
Regulation Benefits
Clean air, clean water and the safe use and disposal of hazardous chemicals produce enormous economic, as well as environmental, benefits, according to the EPA:
• Assembly Bill 91 —- Introduced by Rep. Spencer Black (D-Madison), would ban the use of cyanide in Wisconsin mines.
• Assembly Bill 420 —- Introduced by Rep. Terry McCormick (R-Appleton) and Judy Krawczyk (R-Green Bay), would mandate that mining operations receive no special treatment when compared with other Wisconsin industries.In other words, mines would not be exempted from regulations which are imposed on other activities in the state.
• Senate Bill 157 —- Introduced by Sen. Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay), would be the Senate version to match Assembly Bill 420.
• Assembly Bill 506 --- Would change the definition of a “navigable stream,” resulting in removal of state water protection for thousands of miles ofwaterways in Wisconsin, including the Wolf River downstream of the mine. (see page 2 for more)
Except for the last, these are the same bills which were blocked last year in the Assembly Natural Resources Committee.The new chair of this committee is Rep. DuWayne Johnsrud (R-Eastman).
P.O. Box 8952
Madison, WI 53708
Phone: (608) 266-3534
Fax: (608) 282-3696
Call Tollfree: (888) 534-0096
E-mail: Rep.Johnsrud@legis.state.wi.us
|
|
|
|
|