As Earth Day approaches, many activists fear Wisconsin’s famous richness of natural resources is beginning to wane in the face of faltering environmental protections.
During an especially busy legislative session, the state government approved a series of measures that could have a significant influence on the environmental regulatory landscape.
“It’s no secret that the decision-makers have rolled back a number of core environmental protections in the last few years, and this session was no exception,” Amber Meyer Smith of Clean Wisconsin said, referencing recent changes to mining rules, water oversight and wetlands protections. “There does seem to be maybe a greater voice by industry that does prevail now versus in the past.”
Last year, the Legislature approved the repeal of a longstanding “mining moratorium,” which formerly required any mining company to first prove it could operate for over a decade without polluting local water sources.
The Natural Resource Development Association, a Republican-backed development group, said the new law "can create a new generation of mining jobs that will help employ thousands of people across Wisconsin through not only mining, but other industries that contribute to mining operations, like construction.”
Environmental advocates challenged the bill, arguing that sulfide mining poses a fundamental risk to the bodies of water and groundwater sources around it.
“It was an anti-pollution law, and Republicans in the legislature repealed it this session,” said state Rep. Gary Hebl, D-Sun Prairie. “It appears that allowing companies to pollute in Wisconsin is more important to Republicans than clean air and drinking water.”
The state’s ability to oversee so-called high-capacity wells also took a hit during the last session. Under the new law, farmers, who use such wells in irrigation, would no longer need the approval of the Department of Natural Resources for many well operations.
Conservationists opposed the legislation, arguing that widespread usage of high-capacity wells could be detrimental to the state’s natural resources.
“What these wells are doing is sucking up a hundred thousand gallons of water a day at a minimum. They are knocking the water table over, really,” Matthew Rothschild, the executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, said. “As a result, some of the streams, the great trout streams of Wisconsin, are vanishing.”
Agriculture groups heavily backed the bill, asserting its importance to the stability of the relationship between the state and its farmers.
Many of the last year’s environmental debates have revolved around the scope, power and effectiveness of the DNR. A state audit found the agency did not enforce its own clean water regulations in 94 percent of reported violations over the last decade.
This has led to catastrophic conditions for some; one-third of all water wells in Kewaunee County in northeast Wisconsin were found to be unsafe for consumption due to unmanaged manure spread by large farms in the area.
“These aren’t garden variety stomach illnesses where you’re sick for a couple of days; these can be life-threatening pathogens. It’s a big deal,” said Scott Laeser, the water program director for Clean Wisconsin.
Another hotly contested piece of legislation from the last session was the controversial wetlands bill.
Signed into law earlier this year, the proposal removed longstanding protections on many of the state’s wetlands, allowing further drainage and development on the unique ecosystems.
Due to their unique ecological properties, wetlands provide key services like flood control, water purification and habitat management.
“While policy makers debate trillion-dollar infrastructure spending proposals, these wetlands provide the same services for free,” the Nature Conservancy said in a statement.
Many advocates have raised concerns about the climatological impacts of wetland removal beyond their role in an ecosystem.
Wetlands are the most potent natural storage centers in the world for methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. When drained, methane is released into the atmosphere and contributes to the acceleration of the Earth’s warming.
While proponents of the legislation argued the existing regulations hindered economic growth, conservationists fear the price paid for environmental degradation is often lost in the debate.
“It’s really important not to lose sight of the fact that it isn't just the tradeoff between a clean environment and a healthy economy, and besides the fact that you can have both of those, it is absolutely the case that when we have issues with water and air that there are costs to all of us,” Laeser said.
