Historical Michigan environmental information, 1973-2016

---

This article does not contain the most recently published data on this subject. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.

---

State environmental policy
U.S. environmental policy
Endangered species policy
State endangered species
Federal land policy
Environmental terms

The historical environmental information below applies to prior years. For more current information regarding environmental policy in Michigan, see this article.

Land ownership

See also: Federal land policy and Federal land ownership by state

The federal government owned between 635 million and 640 million acres of land in 2012 (about 28 percent) of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United States. Around 52 percent of federally owned acres were in 12 Western states—including Alaska, 61 percent of which was federally owned. In contrast, the federal government owned 4 percent of land in the other 38 states. Federal land policy is designed to manage minerals, oil and gas resources, timber, wildlife and fish, and other natural resources found on federal land. Land management policies are highly debated for their economic, environmental and social impacts. Additionally, the size of the federal estate and the acquisition of more federal land are major issues.

According to the Congressional Research Service, Michigan spans 36.5 million acres. Of that total, 9.97 percent, or 3.6 million acres, belonged to the federal government as of 2012. More than 32 million acres in Michigan are not owned by the federal government (3.32 non-federal acres per capita). From 1990 to 2010, the federal government's land ownership in Michigan decreased by 11,293 acres.

The table below shows federal land ownership in Michigan compared to a neighboring state, Indiana, and a Western state, Utah. The U.S. Forest Service owned more than 2.8 million acres in Michigan, compared to 202,832 acres in Indiana and more than 8.2 million acres in Utah. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which manages endangered species, owned 115,217 acres in Michigan, compared to 14,871 acres in Indiana and 107,885 acres in Utah.

Federal land ownership in Michigan and other states by agency
State
Agency	Michigan		Indiana		Utah
	Acres owned	Percentage owned	Acres owned	Percentage owned	Acres owned	Percentage owned
U.S. Forest Service	2,875,957	79.05%	202,832	59.53%	8,207,415	23.43%
U.S. National Park Service	631,718	17.36%	10,596	3.11%	2,097,106	5.99%
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service	115,217	3.17%	14,871	4.36%	107,885	0.31%
U.S. Bureau of Land Management	0	0.00%	0	0.00%	22,854,937	65.24%
U.S. Department of Defense	15,073	0.41%	112,397	32.99%	1,766,260	5.04%
Total federal land	3,637,965	100%	340,696	100%	35,033,603	100%
Source: Congressional Research Service, "Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data"

Land usage

Recreation

National parks in Michigan

Federal lands and Indian reservations in Michigan by government agency (click on the image to enlarge)

Michigan has five National Park Service units, three national forests and 16 wilderness areas. A study by the U.S. National Park Service found that nearly 2 million visitors attended Michigan's national parks and monuments, generating $166.4 million in visitor spending in 2013.

State recreation lands

Michigan's state parks are managed by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR). To access a complete list of public access properties operated by the Michigan DNR, click here.

Economic activity on federal lands

Oil and gas activity

See also: BLM oil and gas leases by state

Private mining companies, including oil and natural gas companies, can apply for leases from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to explore and produce energy on federal land. The company seeking a lease must nominate the land for oil and gas exploration to the BLM, which evaluates and approves the lease. The BLM state offices make leasing decisions based on their land use plans, which contain information on the land's resources and the potential environmental impact of oil or gas exploration. If federal lands are approved for leasing, the BLM requires an application from the company containing information on how the exploration, drilling and production will be conducted. Afterward, the BLM will produce an environmental analysis and a list of requirements before work on the land can begin. The agency also inspects the companies' drilling and producing on the leased lands.

In 2013, there were 47,427 active leases covering 36.09 million acres of federal land nationwide. Of that total, 170 leases (0.36 percent of all leases), covering 99,722 acres (0.28 percent of all leased land in 2013), were in Michigan. In 2013, out of 3,770 new drilling leases approved nationwide by the BLM for oil and gas exploration, one lease was in Michigan.

The table below shows how Michigan compared to neighboring states in oil and gas permits on BLM-managed lands in 2013. Michigan had the most active leases and acres under lease compared to neighboring states.

Oil and gas leasing on BLM lands by state
State	Active permits on BLM lands (FY 2013)	Total acres under lease (FY 2013)	State percentage of total permits	State percentage of total acres
Michigan	170	99,722	0.36%	0.28%
Illinois	9	1,651	0.02%	0.00%
Indiana	9	11,842	0.02%	0.03%
Wisconsin	0	0	0.00%	0.00%
Total United States	47,427 permits	36,092,482 acres	-	-
Source: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Oil and Gas Statistics"

Payments in lieu of taxes

See also: Payments in lieu of taxes

Since local governments cannot collect taxes on federally owned property, the U.S. Department of the Interior issues payments to local governments to replace lost property tax revenue from federal land. The payments, known as "Payments in Lieu of Taxes" (PILTs), are typically used for funding services such as fire departments, police protection, school construction and roads.

The table below shows PILTs for Michigan compared to neighboring states between 2011 and 2013. Michigan received the most PILTs in 2013 compared to neighboring states.

Total PILTs for Michigan and neighboring states
State	FY 2011	FY 2012	FY 2013	State's percentage of 2013 total
Michigan	$3,988,603	$4,150,498	$4,187,945	1.04%
Illinois	$1,111,152	$1,140,801	$1,119,970	0.28%
Indiana	$434,637	$465,777	$489,606	0.12%
Wisconsin	$907,936	$1,087,158	$1,304,986	0.32%
Source: U.S. Department of the Interior, "PILT"

Legislation and regulation

Federal laws

Clean Air Act

The federal Clean Air Act requires each state to meet federal standards for air pollution. Under the act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency oversees national air quality standards aimed at limiting pollutants from chemical plants, steel mills, utilities, and industrial factories. Individual states can enact stricter air standards if they choose, though each state must adhere to the EPA's minimum pollution standards. States implement federal air standards through a state implementation plan (SIP), which must be approved by the EPA.

Clean Water Act

The federal Clean Water Act is meant to address and maintain the physical, chemical, and biological status of the waters of the United States. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates water pollution sources and provides financial assistance to states and municipalities for water quality programs.

According to research done by The New York Times using annual averages from 2004 to 2007, Michigan had 604.80 facilities that were regulated annually by the Clean Water Act. An average of 362 facilities violated the act annually from 2004 to 2007 in Michigan, and the EPA enforced the act an average of 40.70 times a year in the state. This information, published by the Times in 2009, was the most recent information on the subject as of October 2014.

The table below shows how Michigan compared to neighboring states in The New York Times study, including the number of regulated facilities, facility violations, and the annual average of enforcement actions against regulated facilities between 2004 and 2007. Michigan had the fewest regulated facilities compared to neighboring states. Michigan had more facility violations than Wisconsin but fewer than Illinois and Indiana.

The New York Times Clean Water Act study (2004-2007)
State	Number of facilities regulated	Facility violations	Annual average enforcement actions
Michigan	604.80	362	40.7
Illinois	1,814.5	1,140.50	83
Indiana	1,438.3	899.3	35.9
Wisconsin	653.50	251.90	83.3
Source: The New York Times, "Clean Water Act Violations: The Enforcement Record"

Endangered Species Act

The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 provides for the identification, listing, and protection of both threatened and endangered species and their habitats. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the law was designed to prevent the extinction of vulnerable plant and animal species through the development of recovery plans and the protection of critical habitats. ESA administration and enforcement are the responsibility of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Federally listed species in Michigan

There were 25 endangered and threatened animal and plant species believed to or known to occur in Michigan as of July 2015.

The table below lists the 17 endangered and threatened animal species believed to or known to occur in the state.

Endangered animal species in Michigan
Status	Species
Endangered	Bat, Indiana Entire (Myotis sodalis)
Threatened	Bat, Northern long-eared (Myotis septentrionalis)
Endangered	Bean, rayed (Villosa fabalis)
Endangered	Beetle, Hungerford's crawling water Entire (Brychius hungerfordi)
Endangered	Butterfly, Karner blue Entire (Lycaeides melissa samuelis)
Endangered	Butterfly, Mitchell's satyr Entire (Neonympha mitchellii mitchellii)
Endangered	Clubshell Entire Range; Except where listed as Experimental Populations (Pleurobema clava)
Endangered	Dragonfly, Hine's emerald (Somatochlora hineana)
Threatened	Knot, red (Calidris canutus rufa)
Threatened	Lynx, Canada (Contiguous U.S. DPS) (Lynx canadensis)
Endangered	Mussel, snuffbox (Epioblasma triquetra)
Endangered	Plover, piping Great Lakes watershed (Charadrius melodus)
Endangered	Riffleshell, northern Entire (Epioblasma torulosa rangiana)
Endangered	skipperling, Poweshiek (Oarisma poweshiek)
Threatened	Snake, copperbelly water Indiana north of 40 degrees north latitude, Michigan, Ohio (Nerodia erythrogaster neglecta)
Endangered	Warbler, Kirtland's Entire (Setophaga kirtlandii (= Dendroica kirtlandii))
Endangered	Wolf, gray
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in Michigan"

The table below lists the eight endangered and threatened plant species believed to or known to occur in the state.

Endangered plant species in Michigan
Status	Species
Threatened	Daisy, Lakeside (Hymenoxys herbacea)
Threatened	Fern, American hart's-tongue (Asplenium scolopendrium var. americanum)
Threatened	Goldenrod, Houghton's (Solidago houghtonii)
Threatened	Iris, dwarf lake (Iris lacustris)
Endangered	monkey-flower, Michigan (Mimulus michiganensis)
Threatened	Orchid, eastern prairie fringed (Platanthera leucophaea)
Threatened	Pogonia, small whorled (Isotria medeoloides)
Threatened	Thistle, Pitcher's (Cirsium pitcheri)
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in Michigan"

Invasive species

Feral swine in Michigan

Invasive species in Michigan have negative economic, health and environmental effects. Invasive species often survive longer than native species by out-competing them for food and habitats. Invasive species can damage existing habitats, resulting in negative impacts on waterways, wilderness areas, and rural and urban communities. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for managing invasive species by preventing new invasions, limiting the spread of invasive species, and lessening their negative impacts. Several invasive species that have been the focus of the Michigan DNR include aquatic species in the Great Lakes (such as Asian carp) and feral swine.

Parrot feather, an invasive aquatic species, has been found to threaten freshwater resources.

Below are brief descriptions of the Michigan DNR's enforcement actions against invasive species:

• Aquatic species: The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region contains freshwater resources that have been threatened by several aquatic invasive species (AIS). The species threaten the quality of freshwater resources in Michigan. Since 1991, the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species, a group composed of government and private officials, has performed research and initiatives for preventing new invasions and controlling current invasive species.
• Asian carp: Asian carp are an invasive fish species responsible for negative ecological, health and economic effects. The Michigan DNR identifies five specific species native to Asia that are a threat in Michigan, including bighead carp, black carp, grass carp, silver carp and large-scale silver carp. The species consume microscopic plants and animals and disrupt the Great Lakes food chain. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was responsible for establishing electrical barriers connecting the Great Lakes to rivers in order to prevent Asian carp from entering the Great Lakes Basin.
• Feral swine: By the end of 2011, more than 340 feral (wild) swine were found in 72 of 83 Michigan counties. Estimates of wild swine in Michigan ranged between 1,000 and 3,000 due to their prolific breeding. Feral swine can carry parasites and diseases that are harmful to people, domestic livestock and wildlife and can cause damage to forests, agriculture and water resources. Possession of feral swine has been prohibited by the Michigan DNR. The Michigan DNR works with the USDA-Wildlife Services division and the Michigan Department of Agriculture to trap feral swine throughout the state.

The Michigan Departments of Natural Resources, Environmental Quality and Agriculture and Rural Development are responsible for the Michigan Invasive Species Grants Program (MISGP) for the prevention, detection and eradication of invasive species. The program is responsible for educational outreach, the monitoring of new invasive species, and the eradication of invasive species.

Great Lakes wolves

See also: Delisting a species

In December 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reinstated Endangered Species Act protection for gray wolves in the Great Lakes region, including Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan. Federal protection prohibits the taking of a species on the federal list of endangered and threatened species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had decided to remove federal protection from wolves in the region (an act known as delisting) in 2013. In February 2014, the Humane Society and other environmental organizations filed a lawsuit against the service to reverse its delisting of the wolves. The court sided with the Humane Society against the service; the federal government resumed management of the wolves as a result. As of December 2014, gray wolves were considered a threatened species in Minnesota and an endangered species in Wisconsin and Michigan. An endangered species receives stronger federal protections than a threatened species. Under the Endangered Species Act, individuals may kill a threatened species in self-defense but cannot kill it to protect their private property, such as livestock, barns or pets.

In response to the court's decision, several members of Congress—including Representatives Reid Ribble of Wisconsin, Collin Peterson of Minnesota, Dan Benishek of Michigan, and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming—introduced legislation in 2015 to reverse the decision and keep the Great Lakes wolves off the federal list of endangered species.

Enforcement

See also: Enforcement at the EPA

Michigan is part of the EPA's Region 5, which also includes Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin.

The EPA enforces federal standards on air, water and hazardous chemicals. The EPA can engage in its own administrative action against private industries, or it can bring civil and/or criminal lawsuits against them. The goal of environmental law enforcement is usually the collection of penalties and fines for violations of laws like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act.

In 2013, the EPA estimated that 408.4 million pounds of pollution (which includes air pollution, water contaminants and hazardous chemicals) were "reduced, treated or eliminated," and 5.07 million cubic yards of soil and water were cleaned in Region 5. Additionally, 298 enforcement cases were initiated, and 310 enforcement cases were concluded in fiscal year 2013. In fiscal year 2012, the EPA collected $252 million in criminal fines and civil penalties from the private sector nationwide. In fiscal year 2013, the EPA collected $1.1 billion in criminal fines and civil penalties from the private sector nationwide, primarily due to the $1 billion settlement from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill along the Gulf Coast in 2010. The EPA only publishes nationwide data and does not provide state- or region-specific information on the amount of fines and penalties it collects during a fiscal year.

Mercury and air toxics standards

See also: Mercury and air toxics standards

The EPA on mercury capture systems

The EPA enforces mercury and air toxics standards (MATS), which are national limits on mercury, chromium, nickel, arsenic and acidic gases from coal- and oil-fired power plants. Power plants are required to have certain technologies to limit these pollutants. In December 2011, the EPA issued greater restrictions on the amount of mercury and other toxic pollutants produced by power plants. As of 2014, approximately 580 power plants, including 1,400 oil- and coal-fired electric-generating units, fell under the federal rule. The EPA has claimed that power plants account for 50 percent of mercury emissions, 75 percent of acidic gases and around 20 to 60 percent of toxic metal emissions in the United States. All coal- and oil-fired power plants with a capacity of 25 megawatts or greater are subject to the standards. The EPA has claimed that the standards will "prevent up to 410 premature deaths in Michigan while creating up to $3.4 billion in health benefits in 2016."

In 2014, the EPA released a study examining the economic, environmental, and health impacts of the MATS standards nationwide. Other organizations have released their own analyses about the effects of the MATS standards. Below is a summary of the studies on MATS and their effects as of November 2014.

EPA study
In 2014, the EPA argued that its MATS rule would prevent roughly 11,000 premature deaths and 130,000 asthma attacks nationwide. The agency also anticipated between $37 billion and $90 billion in "improved air quality benefits" annually. For the rule's cost, the EPA estimated that annual compliance fees for coal- and oil-fired power plants would reach $9.6 billion.

NERA study
A 2012 study published by NERA Economic Consulting, a global consultancy group, reported that annual compliance costs in the electricity sector would total $10 billion in 2015 and nearly $100 billion cumulatively up through 2034. The same study found that the net impact of the MATS rule in 2015 would be the income equivalent of 180,000 fewer jobs. This net impact took into account the job gains associated with the building and refitting of power plants with new technology.

Superfund sites

The EPA established the Superfund program as part of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980.The Superfund program focuses on uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites nationwide. The EPA inspects waste sites and establishes cleanup plans for them. The federal government can compel the private entities responsible for a waste site to clean the site or face penalties. If the federal government cleans a waste site, it can force the responsible party to reimburse the EPA or other federal agencies for the cleanup's cost. Superfund sites include oil refineries, smelting facilities, mines and other industrial areas. As of October 2014, there were 1,322 Superfund sites nationwide. A total of 245 Superfund sites reside in Region 5, with an average of 40.8 sites per state. There were 65 Superfund sites in Michigan as of October 2014.

Economic impact

EPA studies
The Environmental Protection Agency publishes studies to evaluate the impact and benefits of its policies. Other studies may dispute the agency's findings or state the costs of its policies.

According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), an independent federal agency, the Superfund program received an average of almost $1.2 billion annually in appropriated funds between the years 1981 and 2009, adjusted for inflation. The GAO estimated that the trust fund of the Superfund program decreased from $5 billion in 1997 to $137 million in 2009. The Superfund program received an additional $600 million in federal funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, also known as the stimulus bill.

In March 2011, the EPA claimed that the agency's Superfund program produced economic benefits nationwide. Because Superfund sites are added and removed from a prioritized list on a regular basis, the total number of Superfund sites since the program's inception in 1980 is unknown. Based on a selective study of 373 Superfund sites cleaned up since the program's inception, the EPA estimated these economic benefits include the creation of 2,240 private businesses, $32.6 billion in annual sales from new businesses, 70,144 jobs and $4.9 billion in annual employment income.

Other studies were published detailing the costs associated with the Superfund program. According to the Property and Environment Research Center, a free market-oriented policy group based in Montana, the EPA spent over $35 billion on the Superfund program between 1980 and 2005.

Environmental impact

In March 2011, the EPA claimed that the Superfund program resulted in healthier environments surrounding former waste sites. An agency study analyzed the program's health and ecological benefits and focused on former landfills, mining areas, and abandoned dumps that were cleaned up and renovated. As of January 2009, out of the approximately 500 former Superfund sites used for the study, roughly 10 percent became recreational or commercial sites. Other former Superfund sites in the study are now used as wetlands, meadows, streams, scenic trails, parks, and habitats for plants and animals.

Carbon emissions

See also: Climate change, Greenhouse gas and Greenhouse gas emissions by state

In 2011, Michigan was ranked 10th highest nationwide in total carbon emissions, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Carbon emissions in Michigan decreased from 179 million metric tons in 1990 to 157 million metric tons in 2011. Emissions peaked in Michigan at 197 million metric tons in 1999. In 2011, the electric power sector accounted for 41.3 percent of all CO₂ emissions in Michigan.

Carbon dioxide emissions in Michigan (in million metric tons). Data was compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Carbon dioxide emissions in Michigan by sector

Pollution from energy use

Note: Annual data on nitrogen dioxide levels in the Upper Midwest between 2000 and 2014 are unavailable.

Pollution from energy use includes three common air pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and ozone. These and other pollutants are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, which are federal standards limiting pollutants that can harm human health in significant concentrations. Carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, is also regulated by the EPA, but it is excluded here since it is not one of the pollutants originally regulated under the Clean Air Act for its harm to human health.

Industries and motor vehicles emit carbon monoxide directly when they use energy. Nitrogen dioxide forms from the emissions of automobiles, power plants and other sources. Ground level ozone (also known as tropospheric ozone) is not emitted but is the product of chemical reactions between nitrogen dioxide and volatile organic chemicals. The EPA tracks these and other pollutants from monitoring sites across the United States. The data below shows nationwide and regional trends for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and ozone between 2000 and 2014. States with consistent climates and weather patterns were grouped together by the EPA to make up each region.

Carbon monoxide (CO)

Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas produced from combustion processes (e.g., when gasoline reacts with oxygen to give off heat and releases exhaust). The majority of national CO emissions come from mobile sources like automobiles. When inhaled, CO can reduce the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood and at very high levels can cause death. CO concentrations are measured in parts per million (ppm). Since 1994, federal law has prohibited CO concentrations from exceeding 9 ppm during an eight-hour period more than once per year.

The chart below compares the annual average concentration of carbon monoxide (CO) in the Central and Upper Midwestern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. States with consistent climates and weather patterns were grouped together by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which collects these data, to make up each region. Each line represents the annual average of all the data collected from pollution monitoring sites in each region. In the Central region, there were 25 monitoring sites throughout the seven states. In the Upper Midwest, there were seven monitoring sites throughout the four states. In 2000, the average concentration of carbon monoxide was 3.5 ppm in the Central region, compared to 2.67 ppm in the Upper Midwest. In 2014, the average concentration of carbon monoxide was 1.34 ppm in the Central region, a decrease of 61.6 percent from 2000, compared to 0.96 ppm in the Upper Midwest, a decrease of 64.1 percent from 2000.

Ground-level ozone

Ground-level ozone is created by chemical reactions between nitrogen oxides (NO_x) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in sunlight. Major sources of NO_x and VOCs include industrial facilities, electric utilities, automobiles, gasoline vapors, and chemical solvents. Ground-level ozone can produce health problems for children, the elderly, and asthmatics. Since 2008, federal law has prohibited ozone concentrations from exceeding a daily eight-hour average of 75 parts per billion (ppb). Beginning in 2025, federal law will prohibit ground-level ozone concentrations from exceeding a daily eight-hour average of 70 ppb.

The chart below compares the daily eight-hour average concentration of ground-level ozone in the Central and Upper Midwestern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. In the chart below, ozone concentrations are measured in parts per million (ppm), which can be converted to parts per billion (ppb). In the Central region, there were 159 monitoring sites throughout seven states, compared to 61 monitoring sites throughout four states in the Upper Midwest. In 2000, the daily eight-hour average concentration of ozone was 0.0821 ppm (82.1 ppb) in the Central region, compared to 0.0752 ppm (75.2 ppb) in the Upper Midwest. In 2014, the daily eight-hour average concentration of ozone was 0.0651 ppm (65.1 ppb) in the Central region, a decrease of 20.6 percent since 2000, compared to 0.0667 ppm (66.7 ppb) in the Upper Midwest, a decrease of 11.2 percent since 2000.

State laws

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality logo

Michigan's environmental laws were consolidated into the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (1994). The law was intended to accomplish the following:

“

To codify, revise, consolidate, and classify laws relating to the environment and natural resources of the state; To regulate the discharge of certain substances into the environment; To regulate the use of certain lands, waters, and other natural resources of the state; To protect the people's right to hunt and fish; To prescribe the powers and duties of certain state and local agencies and officials; To provide for certain charges, fees, assessments, and donations.

”

The full contents of the law can be found on the Michigan Legislative Website here.

Enforcement

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality is composed of five major divisions:

• The Air Quality Division maintains air quality and regulates sources of air pollutants such as industrial facilities and motor vehicles.
• The Office of Environmental Assistance provides information and assistance for pollution prevention, public infrastructure improvements and environmental restoration projects.
• The Office of the Great Lakes oversees policy development and programs involving the Great Lakes. The office implements environmental quality and protection programs and collaborates with local governments to address water quality and quantity, invasive species, and coastal areas.
• The Office of Drinking Water and Municipal Assistance oversees drinking water quality and public water systems. The office enforces water quality standards, investigates and monitors water quality, and funds the construction of wastewater treatment facilities.
• The Office of Waste Management and Radiological Protection manages programs on solid and hazardous wastes and regulates industries and businesses that use or handle radiation-producing materials.

Historical budget information

The table below shows state budget figures for Michigan's environmental and natural resource departments compared to neighboring states.

Total state natural resource expenditures by state
State	Departments/Divisions	FY 2013	FY 2012	FY 2011
Michigan	Environmental Quality	$425,979,000	$422,987,100	$395,655,700
Illinois	Environmental Protection Agency; Natural Resources	$368,553,000	$463,668,300	$568,183,100
Indiana*	Environmental Management; Natural Resources	$308,615,963*	$298,098,256*
Wisconsin	Natural Resources	$561,677,000	$467,043,600	$564,717,100
Sources: Michigan State Budget Office, Illinois Office of Management and Budget, Indiana State Budget Agency, Wisconsin State Budget Office *Biennium budget

Major groups

Below is a list of environmental advocacy organizations in Michigan.

• Environment Michigan
• Michigan Environmental Council
• Greening Detroit
• West Michigan Environmental Action Council
• Ecology Center

Ballot measures

Voting on the Environment
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local environment Local GMO Local fracking

Below is a list of ballot measures relating to environmental issues in Michigan.

Natural resources

Ballotpedia staff have tracked no ballot measures relating to natural resources in Michigan.

Environment

Ballotpedia staff have tracked no ballot measures relating to environment in Michigan.

Water

Ballotpedia staff have tracked no ballot measures relating to water resources in Michigan.

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Michigan environmental policy. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Historical Michigan environmental information, 1973-2016 - Google News

See also

• 

  Environmental policy in the U.S.

• 

  Energy policy in the U.S.

• 

  Endangered species policy in the U.S.

• Endangered species in Michigan
• Energy policy in Michigan
• Federal land policy
• Federal land ownership by state
• BLM oil and gas leases by state
• Payments in lieu of taxes

External links

• Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
• Michigan Department of Natural Resources
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Footnotes

Ballotpedia

About

Overview • What people are saying • Support Ballotpedia • Contact • Contribute • Job opportunities

---

Executive: Leslie Graves, Founder and CEO • Gwen Beattie, Chief Operating Officer

Communications: Alison Graves, Director of Communications • Carley Allensworth • Abigail Campbell • Frank Festa • Sarah Groat • Nathaniel Harwood • Dillon Redmond • Erica Shumaker
External Relations: Geoff Pallay, Director of External Relations • Ken Carbullido, Vice President of Election Product and Technology Strategy • Ashley Fleming • Thomas Mardik • Hannah Nelson
Operations: Meghann Olshefski, Director of Operations • Amanda Herbert • Mandy Morris • Caroline Presnell • Kelly Rindfleisch
Tech: Matt Latourelle, Director of Technology Operations • Ryan Burch • Kirsten Corrao • Beth Dellea • Travis Eden • Tate Kamish • Margaret Kearney • Eric Lotto • Joseph Sanchez • Mary Susmitha

Contributors: Scott Rasmussen

---

Editorial Content

Josh Altic, Director of Content • Daniel Anderson, Associate Director of Elections & Data • Cory Eucalitto, Associate Director of Features • Ryan Byrne, Managing Editor of Ballot Measures • Mandy McConnell, Managing Editor of News • Doug Kronaizl, Managing Editor of Local Expansion • Abbey Smith, Managing Editor of Elections • Janie Valentine, Managing Editor of Law • Joel Williams. Managing Editor of Events • Andrew Bahl • Jaclyn Beran • Marielle Bricker • Joseph Brusgard • Emma Burlingame • Kelly Coyle • Jon Dunn • Thomas Ellis • Nicole Fisher • Joseph Greaney • Thomas Grobben • Brianna Hosea • Molly Kehoe • Tyler King • Glorie Martinez • Norm Leahy, Senior Editor • Nathan Maxwell • Jimmy McAllister • Brandon McCauley • Ellie Mikus • Ellen Morrissey • Mackenzie Murphy • Kaley Platek • Samantha Post • Adam Powell • Annelise Reinwald • Ethan Rice • Spencer Richardson • Victoria Rose • Briana Ryan • Myj Saintyl • Maddy Salucka • Emma Soukup • Alexis Thacker • Mina Vogel • Samuel Wonacott • Trenton Woodcox