Fwd #1: EM:/ Release: State House plan would protect states wetlands, waters
TJ Patrick
From: Hugh McDiarmid <hu...@environmentalcouncil.org>
Date: Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:46 AM
Subject: EM:/ Release: State House plan would protect states wetlands, waters
To: me...@mienv.org, envir...@great-lakes.net
September 28, 2009
Contact:
James Clift, Michigan Environmental Council: 517-256-0553
Dr. Grenetta Thomassey, Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council: 231-838-5193
House plan lets Michigan protect Great Lakes and state’s wetlands
LANSING, MI – Michigan’s environmental community today applauded
efforts in the Michigan House Great Lakes and the Environment
committee to preserve state-based protection of Michigan’s wetlands
and Great Lakes waters.
A competing State Senate plan – which would keep the program here, but
would cede authority to the federal government – is unacceptable
because of the giveaway of authority to the federal government, the
state’s leading environmental organizations agree.
“We are encouraged by recent efforts of the House Great Lakes and the
Environment Committee, which passed legislation Friday to keep
Michigan's landmark wetland protection law run by the state,” said
James Clift of the Michigan Environmental Council. “The environmental
community believes having the state continue administration of the
program is the best way to protect the Great Lakes and eliminates
barriers to the recovery of Michigan's economy.”
“The Senate would lock Michigan into the same wetland protection rules
that would apply in Nevada,” said Anne Woiwode of the Sierra Club
Michigan Chapter. “As stewards of the world’s greatest freshwater
resource – the Great Lakes – the folly of begging Washington, D.C.
bureaucrats to swoop in and regulate our greatest natural asset is an
outrage and an embarrassment.”
Saving the state’s wetland program is still a key question being
considered under the broader context of the budget crisis. Because
returning this program to the federal government would bring serious
economic consequences to home builders, homeowners and others who need
permits to work in wetlands, the debate about saving it is still front
and center.
Wetlands are considered nature’s kidneys, protecting neighborhoods
from flooding, cleansing water before it reaches lakes and streams,
safeguarding the purity of well water and providing vital habitat for
fish and other water-dependent wildlife.
It is essential that Michigan have the freedom to regulate its vital
wetlands without federal restrictions that would be applied by the
Senate bill. Such flexibility proved its value when the state
restricted discharges of ballast water to prevent invasive species
from entering the Great Lakes. Michigan, tired of foot dragging at
the federal level, passed a law requiring oceangoing ships to install
pollution control mechanisms to ensure any invasive species are
eliminated. This requirement is more restrictive than federal law –
and exercises the authority granted the State under the Clean Water
Act.
“During negotiations to save the wetlands program there were numerous
attempts to completely dismantle one of the fundamental principles of
Michigan’s wetland law; that is, the ability to make decisions that
are Michigan-specific,” said Dr. Grenetta Thomassey, policy director
at Tip of the Mitt Watershed Council. In the end, provisions in the
Senate bill significantly weakened the state’s ability to administer
these kinds of analyses, which are critical to avoiding and minimizing
adverse impacts to Michigan’s wetlands.
The House bill includes provisions of the Senate bill that streamline
the permitting program, especially as it pertains to smaller projects.
Many business groups support keeping Michigan wetlands under Michigan
control, including Michigan Homebuilders Association.
###
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
enviro-mich is hosted by the Great Lakes Information Network (GLIN):
http://www.great-lakes.net
To search the archive: http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/
All views and opinions presented above are solely those of the author
or attributed source and do not necessarily reflect those of GLIN or
the Great Lakes Commission.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *