Historical South Dakota environmental information, 1954-2016

---

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 South Dakota, 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, South Dakota spans 48.8 million acres. Of that total, 5.41 percent, or 2.6 million acres, belonged to the federal government as of 2012. More than 46 million acres in South Dakota are not owned by the federal government, or 54.7 non-federal acres per capita. From 1990 to 2010, the federal government's land ownership in South Dakota increased by 19,647 acres.

The table below shows federal land ownership in South Dakota compared to neighboring states Minnesota and North Dakota, as a comparison.

Federal land ownership in South Dakota and other states by agency
State
Agency	South Dakota		Minnesota		North Dakota
	Acres owned	Percentage owned	Acres owned	Percentage owned	Acres owned	Percentage owned
U.S. Forest Service	2,017,435	76.24%	2,841,630	81.91%	1,106,034	63.72%
U.S. National Park Service	141,312	5.34%	139,570	4.02%	71,250	4.10%
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service	205,128	7.75%	483,787	13.95%	484,681	27.92%
U.S. Bureau of Land Management	274,437	10.37%	1,447	0.04%	58,841	3.39%
U.S. Department of Defense	7,929	0.30%	2,777	0.08%	14,950	0.86%
Total federal land	2,646,241	100%	3,469,211	100%	1,735,756	100.00%
Source: Congressional Research Service, "Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data"

Land usage

Federal lands and Indian reservations in the state of South Dakota by government agency (click on the image to enlarge)

Recreation

National parks in South Dakota

South Dakota has six National Park Service units, one national monument, four national forests, two wilderness areas, one national historic site and one national historic trail. A study by the U.S. National Park Service found that 3.9 million visitors attended South Dakota's national parks and monuments and generated $239.3 million in visitor spending in 2013.

State recreation lands

The table below contains a list of all state parks in South Dakota.

State parks in South Dakota
State park name
Custer State Park
Custer State Park - Norbeck Wildelife Preserve
Fort Sisseton State Park
Hartford Beach State Park
Lake Herman State Park
Lake Hiddenwood State Park
Newton Hills State Park
Oakwood Lakes State Park
Pickerel Lake State Park
Roy Lake State Park Number 1
Roy Lake State Park Number 2
Sandy Shore State Park
Sieche Hollow State Park
Union County State Park
Source: South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks Department, "State parks directory"

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, 303 leases (0.64 percent of all leases), covering 162,902 acres (0.45 percent of all leased land in 2013), were in South Dakota. In 2013, out of 3,770 new drilling leases approved nationwide by the BLM for oil and gas exploration, two leases were in South Dakota.

The table below shows how South Dakota compared to neighboring states in oil and gas permits on BLM-managed lands in 2013.

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
South Dakota	303	162,902	0.64%	0.45%
Montana	3,488	2,728,738	7.35%	7.56%
Nebraska	30	11,428	0.06%	0.03%
North Dakota	2,061	1,024,007	4.35%	2.84%
Total United States	47,427 permits	36,092,482 acres	-	-
Source: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Oil and Gas Statistics"

Grazing permits

See also: Grazing permits on federal land

Sheep grazing on BLM lands in Worland, Wyoming in 1940

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages livestock grazing on 155 million acres of its public lands. Nationally, the BLM oversees about 18,000 permits and leases that allow ranchers to graze their livestock, mostly sheep and cows, on BLM-managed lands. The permits and leases overseen by the BLM are valid for 10 years and the fees are based on the number of animals the rancher has on the land. To track these animals the BLM created what are called Animal Unit Months (AUMs), or "the amount of forage needed to sustain one cow, five sheep, or five goats for a month." Since 1954, grazing on public lands has declined, from 18.2 million AUMs to 7.9 million AUMs in 2013. Holding a grazing permit requires the applicant to own or control the property used for grazing. The applicant may also offer other privately owned property used for grazing by submitting a separate application. The terms and conditions in a grazing permit control how livestock must be used on BLM lands.

The table below compares the grazing permits in the 10 states where permits are issued.

Grazing on BLM lands (March 2011)
State	BLM land (acres)	Grazing allotments	Grazing permits	Animal unit months (AUMs) of livestock use
South Dakota	274,437	504	N/A	73,800
Alaska	72,958,757	15	N/A	N/A
Arizona	12,203,495	824	759	659,990
California	15,306,243	699	572	525,000
Colorado	8,332,001	2,500	1,500	N/A
Idaho	11,610,111	N/A	199	832,000
Nevada	47,805,923	745	635	1,100,000
Oregon	16,134,191	N/A	753	960,288
Utah	22,854,937	1,410	1,462	1,300,000
Washington	429,156	N/A	266	32,976
Source: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Fact Sheet on the BLM’s Management of Livestock Grazing"

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 South Dakota compared to neighboring states between 2011 and 2013.

Total PILTs for South Dakota and neighboring states
State	FY 2011	FY 2012	FY 2013	State's percentage of 2013 total
South Dakota	$4,995,110	$5,363,811	$5,669,767	1.41%
Montana	$24,717,269	$26,151,999	$26,497,071	6.60%
Nebraska	$996,651	$1,131,384	$1,120,561	0.28%
North Dakota	$1,452,758	$1,418,453	$1,374,438	0.34%
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, South Dakota had 378 facilities that were regulated annually by the Clean Water Act. An average of 146.4 facilities violated the act annually from 2004 to 2007 in South Dakota, and the EPA enforced the act an average of 2.7 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 South Dakota 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.

The New York Times Clean Water Act study (2004-2007)
State	Number of facilities regulated	Facility violations	Annual average enforcement actions
South Dakota	378	146.4	2.7
Montana	195.30	127.70	1.30
Nebraska	674	264.4	63.2
North Dakota	126.5	25.9	0
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 South Dakota

There were 15 endangered and threatened animal and plant species believed to or known to occur in South Dakota as of July 2015.

The table below lists the 13 endangered and threatened animal species believed to or known to occur in the state. When an animal species has the word "Entire" after its name, that species will be found all throughout the state.

Endangered animal species in South Dakota
Status	Species
Threatened	Bat, Northern long-eared (Myotis septentrionalis)
Endangered	Beetle, American burying (Nicrophorus americanus)
Endangered	Crane, whooping (Grus americana)
Endangered	Ferret, black-footed (Mustela nigripes)
Endangered	Higgins eye (pearlymussel) (Lampsilis higginsii)
Threatened	Knot, red (Calidris canutus rufa)
Endangered	Mussel, scaleshell (Leptodea leptodon)
Threatened	Plover, piping except Great Lakes watershed (Charadrius melodus)
Endangered	Shiner, Topeka (Notropis topeka (=tristis))
Threatened	Skipper, Dakota (Hesperia dacotae)
Endangered	skipperling, Poweshiek (Oarisma poweshiek)
Endangered	Sturgeon, pallid (Scaphirhynchus albus)
Endangered	Tern, least (Sterna antillarum)
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in South Dakota"

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

Endangered plant species in South Dakota
Status	Species
Threatened	Orchid, western prairie fringed (Platanthera praeclara)
Threatened	roseroot, Leedy's (Rhodiola integrifolia ssp. leedyi)
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, "Endangered and threatened species in South Dakota"

State-listed species in South Dakota

Under South Dakota law, the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks manages the state's list of endangered and threatened species. As of August 2015, 17 endangered and threatened species appeared on the South Dakota list and not the federal list. The complete list of species as of August 2015 can be found here.

Enforcement

See also: Enforcement at the EPA

South Dakota is part of the EPA's Region 8, which includes Colorado, North Dakota, Montana, Utah and Wyoming.

The EPA enforces federal standards on air, water and hazardous chemicals. The EPA takes administrative action against violators of environmental laws, or brings civil and/or criminal lawsuits, often with the goal of collecting penalties/fines and demanding compliance with laws like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act. In 2013, the EPA estimated that 9.2 million pounds of pollution, which includes air pollution, water contaminants, and hazardous chemicals, were "reduced, treated or eliminated" and 7.04 million cubic yards of soil and water were cleaned in Region 8. Additionally, 152 enforcement cases were initiated, and 161 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 27 premature deaths in South Dakota while creating up to $230 million 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 estimated between $37 billion and $90 billion in "improved air quality benefits" annually. For the rule's cost, the EPA estimated that annual compliance costs will reach $9.6 billion from coal and oil-fired power plants.

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 54 Superfund sites reside in Region 8, with an average of nine sites per state. There were two Superfund sites in South Dakota 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 became 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, South Dakota ranked 47th nationwide in carbon emissions. Emissions in the state rose steadily between 1990 and 2011, peaking in 2008-2010 at 15 million metric tons of CO₂. The state has never been a strong emitter of greenhouse gases. The transportation sector was responsible for 43.5 percent of the state's emissions in 2011 followed by the industrial sector, which emitted around 25 percent of the state's emissions in 2011. The residential, electric power and commercial sectors accounted for the remainder.

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

Carbon dioxide emissions in South Dakota by sector

Pollution from energy use

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 rapidly with oxygen and releases exhaust; the majority of national CO emissions come from mobile sources like automobiles. 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 prohibits 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 in the Northern Rockies/Plains and Northwestern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. States with consistent climates and weather patterns are 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 Northwest, there were three monitoring sites throughout three states, compared to one monitoring site for five states in the Northern Rockies/Plains. In 2000, the average concentration of carbon monoxide was 3.93 ppm in the Northwest, compared to 5.5 ppm in the Northern Rockies/Plains. In 2014, the average concentration of carbon monoxide was 1.73 ppm in the Northwest, a decrease of 55.9 percent from 2000, compared to 2.6 ppm in the Northern Rockies/Plains, a decrease of 52.7 percent from 2000.

Nitrogen dioxide (NO₂)

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

Nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) is one of a group of gasses known as nitrogen oxides (NO_x). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) measures NO₂ as a representative for the larger group of nitrogen oxides. NO₂ forms from the emissions of cars, buses, trucks, power plants, and off-road equipment. It helps form ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution, and has been linked to respiratory problems. Since 1971, federal law prohibits NO₂ concentrations from exceeding a daily one-hour average of 100 parts per billion (ppb) and an annual average of 53 parts per billion (ppb).

The chart below compares the annual one-hour average concentration of nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) in the Northern Rockies/Plains and Southwestern regions of the United States between 2000 and 2014. In the Northern Rockies/Plains, there were five monitoring sites throughout five states, compared to 10 monitoring sites throughout four states in the Southwest. In 2000, the one-hour daily average concentration of NO₂ was 28.2 ppb in the Northern Rockies/Plains, compared to 71.5 ppb in the Southwest. In 2014, the one-hour daily average concentration of NO₂ was 23.56 ppb in the Northern Rockies/Plains, a decrease of 16.4 percent from 2000, compared to 49.35 ppb in the Southwest, a decrease of 30.9 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 Northern Rockies/Plains and Northwestern 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 Northern Rockies/Plains, there were 12 monitoring sites throughout five states, compared to 17 monitoring sites throughout three states in the Northwest. In 2000, the daily eight-hour average concentration of ozone was 0.0598 ppm, or 59.8 ppb in the Northern Rockies/Plains, compared to 0.0599 ppm, or 59.9 ppb in the Northwest. In 2014, the daily eight-hour average concentration of ozone was 0.0578 ppm, or 57.8 ppb in the Northern Rockies/Plains, a decrease of 3.3 percent from 2000, compared to 0.059 ppm, or 56.9 ppb in the Northwest, a decrease of 5 percent from 2000.

State laws

Article 74 of the South Dakota Codified Laws contain the laws and regulations covering environmental protection in the state. Specific chapters cover air pollution control, solid waste management, water pollution control, oil and gas conservation and more. The full text of these laws and regulations can be found here.

Enforcement

The South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources regulates the state's air, water, mining and waste management and several major environmental divisons:

• The Air Quality Program monitors air quality and issues permits for major industrial sources of air pollutants.

• The Drinking Water Program enforces the state's drinking water regulations for public water systems in South Dakota.

• The Surface Water Quality Program monitors the discharge of wastewater into surface waters throughout the state.

• The Minerals and Mining Program regulates mineral exploration, mining, and oil and natural gas production in the state.

• The Waste Management Program regulates the disposal and use of hazardous and solid wastes like municipal garbage, used oil, contaminated soil and sludge, and other waste materials.

State environmental policy act

See also: State environmental policy acts

The South Dakota Environmental Policy Act was passed in 1974. It requires an environmental impact statement (EIS) for all major state actions. The EIS must contain detailed information on the environmental effects of a proposed action, list the ways in which an adverse environmental effect can be minimized, and suggest alternative actions. All state agencies, departments, offices, boards and commissions are required under the law to prepare these statements for major projects or activities.

The major state actions that are subject to the environmental policy act include all new and continuing activities or projects undertaken directly by a state agency or supported through state contracts, grants, subsidies, loans or other state funding. These activities can include state leases, permits, certificates or licenses. Before an environmental impact statement is prepared, the state agency must hold public meetings in the county where the action is going to take place. The meetings serve as a forum for public input on what should be included in the environmental impact statement. Once a draft of the statement is completed, it must be distributed to federal and state agencies as well as the public. All comments to the draft must be incorporated into the statement and made available for public comments for at least 30 days before any further action can be taken.

The environmental impact statement is required to have the following elements:

• a description of the proposed action and its environmental setting
• the environmental impact of the proposed action including short-term and long-term effects
• any adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the proposal is implemented
• alternatives to the proposed action
• any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that would be involved in the proposed action if it is implemented
• mitigation measures proposed to minimize the environmental impact
• the growth-inducing aspects of the proposed action, such as its economic value

Historical budget information

The table below shows state budget figures for South Dakota'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
South Dakota	Environment and Natural Resources	$21,983,105	$33,645,260	$33,742,880
Montana	Environmental Quality	$58,222,952	$58,226,820	$59,201,557
Nebraska	Environmental Quality; Natural Resources	$21,923,650	$22,976,202	$24,163,364
North Dakota*	Environmental Health	-	$50,524,632*	$52,993,754*
Sources: South Dakota Bureau of Management and Finance, Montana Office of Budget and Program Planning, Nebraska State Budget Division, North Dakota Office of Management of Budget *This denotes a biennium state budget.

Major groups

Below is a list of environmental advocacy organizations in South Dakota.

• Nature Conservancy - South Dakota
• Northern Prairies Land Trust
• South Dakota Sierra Club

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 South Dakota.

• Union County Oil Refinery Initiative, Ordinance 2008-001 (2008)

• South Dakota Amendment D, Special Assessment on River Drainage Lands Measure (1922)
• South Dakota Initiated Measure 1, Nuclear Waste Disposal Measure (1984)

• South Dakota Assessments for Agricultural Drainage Amendment (1906)
• South Dakota Initiative 1, Repeal of 1969 Law Requiring Fluoridation of Water Supplies Measure (1970)

Recent news

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

Historical South Dakota environmental information, 1954-2016 - 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 South Dakota
• Energy policy in South Dakota
• Federal land ownership by state
• BLM oil and gas leases by state
• Payments in lieu of taxes

External links

• South Dakota Department of Environment and 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