Your feedback ensures we stay focused on the facts that matter to you most—take our survey.

Major environmental policy issues by state

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

BP-Initials-UPDATED.pngThis page is outside of Ballotpedia's current coverage scope and does not receive scheduled updates. If you would like to help our coverage grow, please consider donating to Ballotpedia. Pages covering environmental policy terms, panels, or organizations were last updated between 2015 and 2017.

Environmental Policy Logo on Ballotpedia.png
State environmental policy
U.S. environmental policy
Endangered species policy
State endangered species
Federal land policy
Environmental terms
Public Policy Logo-one line.png

Environmental policy in the United States involves governmental actions at the federal, state, and local level to protect the environment and conserve natural resources. Environmental protection is balanced with other public policy concerns, such as economic growth, affordable energy, and the rights of businesses and individuals. Debates over environmental policies often involve discussions of the trade-offs associated with environmental laws.

The major issues below were selected for how they illustrate the way in which environmental policy is implemented and how policies pertain to each state. Environmental policy issues include water and air pollution, chemical and oil spills, smog, drinking water quality, land conservation and management, and wildlife protection, including the protection of endangered species.






Major issues by state

The notable events and issues below were selected because they illustrate how environmental policy is implemented in concrete ways in each state.

Alaska

Alaska

Drilling in ANWR

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is a wildlife refuge managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It covers approximately 19.64 million acres of water and land in northeastern Alaska. The area is managed for fish and wildlife conservation, water quality, use by local residents for subsistence, and fulfillment of international fish and wildlife treaty obligations. Potential oil and natural gas development in ANWR has been a point of contention in environmental and energy policy debates. In January 2015, President Barack Obama (D) asked Congress to designate 1.4 million acres of the Coastal Plain and other areas in northern ANWR as wilderness under the Wilderness Act. Additionally, the Obama administration barred oil and gas drilling on 12 million acres of ANWR managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior as of January 2015.[1][2]

The Coastal Plain of ANWR, labelled Area 1002 above, has been considered for oil and gas drilling (click to enlarge).

Proponents of designating these areas as wilderness have argued that these areas contain species worthy of federal preservation, such as polar bears, gray wolves, Porcupine caribou, and several bird species that migrate to and from the lower 48 states. Further, these proponents argue that energy production could produce irreversible environmental harm in the form of damaged habitats and could harm Alaska Native communities that rely on caribou and fish species for subsistence. Environmental groups such as the Sierra Club, the Wilderness Society, and the Audubon Society have supported wilderness designations in ANWR, arguing that these areas are too environmentally important to use for energy development, which they argue would produce few economic benefits given the environmental costs.[3][4]

Opponents of designating these areas have argued that some energy development in ANWR would produce economic benefits with limited damage to the environment. These opponents cite the U.S. Energy Information Administration, which estimated that the expected amount of oil in the coastal plain of ANWR totals approximately 10.3 billion barrels. According to these proponents of energy development, a greater supply of oil would result in lower energy prices for consumers and royalties for the federal government. In addition, proponents of development have argued that advances in drilling technology, particularly directional drilling techniques, allow the extraction of oil and natural gas with few negative impacts to the environment.[5][6][7]

Arizona

Arizona

Solar energy zones

Map of the solar energy zones in Arizona

In 2012, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) finalized a program intended to increase solar energy development by designating solar energy zones in six Southwestern states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah. The goal of the program is to promote utility-scale solar energy developments that generate at least 20 megawatts of electricity that can be transferred to the electricity grid.[8][9]

Across the six states mentioned above, the BLM managed 99 million acres as of 2012. Of this land, the BLM identified 677,400 acres (0.68 percent) that were suited for development. In order for lands to be considered suitable, they meet the following criteria (read the BLM's report to see all 25 exclusions):

  • Have a slope of less than 5 percent
  • Not include critical habitat areas for endangered species
  • Not have wilderness characteristics
  • Have necessary right of way designations
  • Not be national recreation trails, national historic landmarks, or national back country byways
  • Not contain old growth forests

In 2010, the BLM identified three areas in Arizona that were considered suitable for utility-scale solar power: Agua Caliente, Brenda and Gillespie. These zones in Arizona represented 13,735 acres or 0.11 percent of the land managed by the BLM in Arizona as of 2010.[10]

California

California

Climate change policies

California Governor Jerry Brown and China's National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) Vice Chairman Xie Zhenhua signed a climate change agreement in 2013.

In July 2014, California Governor Jerry Brown signed an agreement with the Mexican government to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in an effort mitigate potentially human-caused climate change. The agreement was signed by Brown, Mexico's Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Undersecretary Rodolfo Lacy, and Mexican National Forestry Commission Director General Jorge Rescala Pérez. According to Brown, "California can't do it alone and with this new partnership with Mexico we can make real progress on reducing dangerous greenhouse gases." The agreement was meant to increase cooperation between the two governments for the following actions:[11]

“
  • Aligning greenhouse gas reduction programs and strategies;
  • Collaborating on fire emergency response along the border and other climate change adaption strategies;
  • Improving air quality, including reducing pollution and expanding markets for clean energy technologies; and
  • Strengthening fuel and truck efficiency standards and supporting green freight initiatives.[12]
 ”
—California Governor's Office[11]

The agreement followed previous agreements made by the California state government with British Columbia and the states of Oregon and Washington as well as China's National Development and Reform Commission; the two agreements were signed in 2013. The British Columbia agreement outlined a plan to reconcile carbon dioxide reduction plans between California, British Columbia, Oregon and Washington and to expand the use of zero-emission vehicles. The California-China agreement required both China and California to share information on carbon dioxide reduction plans, conduct research on alternative energy technologies, and design and implement carbon dioxide emissions trading systems.[13][14]

In addition, Brown called for a series of policies aimed at reducing potentially human-caused climate change in his January 2015 inaugural. His proposals included requiring 50 percent of California's electricity to come from renewable sources by 2030, decreasing the use of gasoline by California drivers, and requiring older buildings fitted with technologies to reduce energy use by 2030. In February 2015 California Senate Democrats submitted proposals similar Brown's proposed initiatives. According to State Senate Leader Kevin de León in February 2015, "We want the same goal. ...We're on the same page."[15]

The proposed bills would require more standards for greenhouse gas emissions and an expansion of renewable energy generation. The bills would also require less gasoline use on state roads by the year 2030. Other proposals would restrict California's pension funds from investing in coal companies. One of the proposed bills would require an 80 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050.[15][16]

Oil companies opposed the proposal for reducing gasoline use, arguing that the proposal was not feasible. According to an official statement from the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, "Legislative mandates designed to constrain the availability of conventional energy supplies are not a smart or effective way to encourage development of available or affordable alternatives."[15]

Florida

Florida

Florida Water and Land Conservation Initiative

In the November 4, 2014, general election, voters approved the Florida Water and Land Conservation Initiative, also known as Amendment 1. The plan would require $18 billion in net revenues from the state's excise tax to go toward land and water protection programs over a 20-year period. Half of the revenue for the plan would go toward new conservation projects. The amendment also prohibited the state from redirecting funds for the plan to other state budget priorities.[17][18][19]

Hawaii

Hawaii

Invasive species

See also: Endangered species in Hawaii
The Jackson chameleon is considered to be "injurious wildlife" by the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources because of its negative impact on native species.

The Hawaii Invasive Species Council is a partnership among various Hawaii agencies, including the Hawaii Departments of Land and Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Health. The council is responsible for providing policy direction and planning to control and eradicate invasive species throughout the state. Invasive species are considered to have negative economic, health or environmental impacts because of their disruption of natural ecosystems and food chains. The state manages invasive species through several programs and branches:[20]

  • The Plant Quarantine Branch: The branch regulates the importation of any non-native plant or non-domestic animals. The branch is responsible for approving, restricting or prohibiting the importation of certain species.
  • The Plant Pest Control Branch: This branch eradicates, contains or controls plant pests that could cause economic damage to agriculture, health or the state's economy. The branch is also responsible for researching new biological control agents to control certain pests.[20]
  • Injurious wildlife: The Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) regulates any animal species that could be harmful to agriculture, indigenous wildlife or water resources. Injurious wildlife cannot be released, transported or exported without permission from the Hawaii DLNR.[20]
  • Alien aquatic organisms: The Hawaii DLNR prevents the introduction and spread of alien aquatic organisms.[20]

Maryland

Maryland

Zero Waste Plan

In December 2014, then-Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley (D) introduced the Zero Waste Plan meant to encourage more recycling and eliminate waste in state landfills by 2040. In January 2015, O'Malley issued an executive order to implement the plan.[21][22][23]

The plan called for the reuse of wastewater for beneficial purposes and a reduction in potential trash by encouraging residents purchase fewer products. Product manufacturers were restricted under the plan from using certain amounts of packaging. The plan was meant to divert around 85 percent of the state's trash and waste to recycling or reuse by 2040. State officials also set a goal of reducing the amount of methane, a colorless, odorless gas that is the main component of natural gas, in Maryland landfills.[24]

"We owe it to our children and future generations of Marylanders to take steps now to ensure that our communities are environmentally sustainable, prosperous and healthy. ... This Zero Waste Plan is an ambitious policy framework to create green jobs and business opportunities while virtually doing away with the inefficient waste disposal practices that threaten our future" O'Malley said of the plan."[24]

Michigan

Michigan

Flint, Michigan, drinking water crisis

2013-2014 Events
March 2013: Flint City Council votes to stop buying Detroit water and to start getting water from Lake Huron to save money.
April 2014: Detroit stops selling water to Flint before new water system is ready. City quickly switches to Flint River for water.
August 2014: Flint discovers fecal coliform bacteria contamination and advises residents to boil water.
October 2014: General Motors stops using city water over fear of corrosion.

In March 2013, the Flint, Michigan, city council voted to change the city's water source from Detroit to a new pipeline that would be part of the Karegnondi Water Authority. The city switched water supplies in April 2014, moving from the Detroit water system to the Flint River. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality gave final approval of the switch in 2014, after 50 years of the city's reliance upon Detroit for treated water. The switch, led by an emergency manager appointed by Michigan Governor Rick Snyder (R), was viewed as a cost-saving measure for the city until a pipeline joining Lake Huron to Genesee County, Michigan, where Flint is located, could be completed sometime in 2016.

Initial testing of the Flint River in the months following the switch found that the water met state water quality standards, though the water was found to be 70 percent harder than lake water. The city began adding extra lime in the water to treat the water's hardness after some residents noticed a difference in taste and smell. Around four months after the switch, the city recommended that residents boil their water after fecal coliform bacteria was found in water in the city's west side. The city also added chlorine to the water to remove the bacteria from the water supply. Later on, Flint residents complained of the water's taste, color and smell, and some residents reported adverse health effects. In January 2015, the EPA notified the city that the treated water drawn from the Flint River violated the Safe Drinking Water Act due to elevated levels of trihalomethanes. The city then reduced levels of trihalomethanes to meet the EPA's guidelines. At a January 2015 meeting with then-Flint Mayor Dayne Walling and the city council, residents said that the city water had been causing skin problems for some children. At the time, the city said the water was safe, according to the Detroit Free Press.[25][26][27][28][29]

It was found that corrosive water from the Flint River caused lead from old pipes to contaminate the city's water supply. According to the United Way of Genesee County, somewhere between 6,000 and 12,000 city residents were exposed to high amounts of lead. Between June 2014 and November 2015, at least 87 people developed Legionnaires' disease—a respiratory infection that can cause pneumonia—resulting in 10 deaths, according to the director of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. Though the connection between the contaminated water and the outbreak of Legionnaires' disease was unclear at the time, Michigan Health and Human Services Department officials acknowledged that the contaminated water may have contributed in some way to the outbreak. A September 2015 report by Virginia Tech University researchers found that Flint's drinking water was corrosive and caused lead contamination in homes According to the report, the researchers tested the water from 300 sample kits given to the city's residents. About 42 percent of 120 samples found lead levels to be greater than 5 parts per billion (ppb) while 20 percent of the samples had lead levels greater than 15 ppb. In October 2015, the state government found toxic levels of lead in water at three Flint schools, including a school with lead levels over six times the federal limit. Also in October 2015, Flint switched back to the Detroit water system after county officials declared a public health emergency on October 1, 2015.[25][30][31][32]

A November 2015 investigation by The Flint Journal-MLive found that the city of Flint "disregarded federal rules requiring it to seek out homes with lead plumbing for testing," according to city documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act. Although city water officials stated that they tested tap water in homes most at risk for lead poisoning, city documents showed that the water samples sent to state regulators "almost always came from homes at less risk of lead leaching."[33]

In January 2016, the governor announced he would seek federal help for the city's water problems. The same month, the U.S. attorney's office announced an investigation into the incident.[34][35][36]

Great Lakes gray 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 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.[37]

A decision by the Michigan state government to establish wolf hunting seasons was overturned by voters in a November 2014 referendum.[37]

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 January 2015 to reverse the agency's decision and keep the Great Lakes wolves off the federal list of endangered species.[38]

Invasive species

Feral swine in Michigan

Invasive species in Michigan have negative economic, health and environmental effects, according to the Michigan state government. Invasive species sometimes survive longer than native species by out-competing them for food and habitats, according to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR). In addition, the DNR stated that invasive species can damage existing habitats, resulting in negative impacts on waterways, wilderness areas, and rural and urban communities. The DNR manages invasive species by preventing new invasions, limiting the spread of invasive species, and lessening their negative impacts. Invasive species that have been dealt with by Michigan DNR have included aquatic species in the Great Lakes, such as Asian carp, and feral swine.[39]

Parrot feather, an invasive aquatic species, was considered by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources 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. According to the Michigan DNR, several aquatic invasive species (AIS) threaten the quality of freshwater resources in the state. In 1991, the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species, a group composed of government and private officials, began research and initiatives meant to prevent new invasions and control existing invasive species.[40]
  • Asian carp: Asian carp are fish species responsible for negative ecological, health and economic effects, according to the Michigan DNR. The department identified five specific species native to Asia that pose 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, which can disrupt the Great Lakes food chain. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers established electrical barriers connecting the Great Lakes to rivers in order to prevent Asian carp from entering the Great Lakes Basin.[41]
  • Feral swine: In 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 given 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.[42]

The Michigan Departments of Natural Resources, Environmental Quality and Agriculture and Rural Development oversee the Michigan Invasive Species Grants Program (MISGP) for the prevention, detection, and eradication of invasive species.[43]

Wisconsin

Wisconsin

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 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.[37]

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 January 2015 to reverse the agency's decision and keep the Great Lakes wolves off the federal list of endangered species.[44]


See also

Footnotes

  1. ↑ The Independent, "ANWR debate will be revisited by Congress," November 30, 2014
  2. ↑ The Hill, "Republicans renew push for drilling in Alaska wildlife refuge," November 23, 2014
  3. ↑ The White House, "President Obama Calls on Congress to Protect Arctic Refuge as Wilderness," January 25, 2015
  4. ↑ Sierra Club, "Conservation Groups, Native Organizations Celebrate Wilderness Recommendation for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge," January 25, 2016
  5. ↑ Property and Environment Research Center, "What would environmentalists do if they owned ANWR?" February 15, 2015
  6. ↑ The Daily Signal, "This Federal Government Land Grab Would Permanently Lock Up Millions of Alaska Acres With Energy Potential," January 26, 2015
  7. ↑ U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Potential Oil Production from the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Updated Assessment," accessed December 8, 2016
  8. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Solar Energy Program," accessed November 19, 2014
  9. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Solar Energy Zones," accessed November 19, 2014
  10. ↑ U.S. Bureau of Land Management, "Draft Solar PEIS," December 2010
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 California Governor's Office, "Governor Brown Signs Agreement with Mexico to Reduce Dangerous Greenhouse Gases," July 28, 2014
  12. ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  13. ↑ California Governor's Office, "Governor Brown Joins Oregon, Washington, British Columbia Leaders to Combat Climate Change," December 28, 2013
  14. ↑ California Governor's Office, "Governor Brown Joins Oregon, Washington, British Columbia Leaders to Combat Climate Change," October 28, 2013
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 Los Angeles Times, "Lawmakers take step toward fulfilling state climate change goals," February 7, 2015
  16. ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Sides square off over climate change proposals by California Democrats," February 10, 2015
  17. ↑ MNN.com, "Florida approves $18 billion for nature preservation," November 6, 2014
  18. ↑ Florida Today, "Election recap: Florida voters embrace land legacy," November 8, 2014
  19. ↑ Florida Secretary of State, "Water and Land Conservation," accessed January 15, 2014
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 20.3 Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, "Current Regulations Regarding Harmful Species," accessed December 23, 2014
  21. ↑ Baltimore Sun, "'Ambitious' zero-waste plan draws fire," December 15, 2014
  22. ↑ Baltimore Sun, "State aims for 'zero' waste, but goal is far off," January 2, 2015
  23. ↑ WMDT News, "O'Malley Executive Order for zero waste," January 13, 2015
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Maryland Governor's Office, "Maryland releases Zero Waste Plan, discussion forum," December 15, 2014
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 MLive, "How Flint Water Crisis Emerged," accessed January 13, 2016
  26. ↑ Mlive.com, "City switch to Flint River water slated to happen Friday," April 24, 2014
  27. ↑ Detroit Free Press, "Flint city councilman: 'We got bad water,'" January 14, 2015
  28. ↑ Mlive.com, "State says Flint River water meets all standards but more than twice the hardness of lake water," May 23, 2014
  29. ↑ Mlive.com, "Flint River water complicating city's efforts to battle contamination, boil advisories," September 18, 2014
  30. ↑ WNEM.com, "United Way estimates cost of helping children $100M," January 18, 2016
  31. ↑ Mlive.com, "Lead leaches into 'very corrosive' Flint drinking water, researchers say," September 2, 2015
  32. ↑ Mlive.com, "87 cases, 10 fatal, of Legionella bacteria found in Flint area; connection to water crisis unclear," January 13, 2016
  33. ↑ Mlive.com, "Documents show Flint filed false reports about testing for lead in water," November 12, 2015
  34. ↑ MLive, "How Flint Water Crisis Emerged," accessed January 13, 2016
  35. ↑ CNN, "Water crisis in Flint, Michigan, draws federal investigation," January 9, 2016
  36. ↑ NBC News, "Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder Turns to Feds for Help With Flint Water Crisis," January 12, 2015
  37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 37.2 Minnesota Public Radio, "Great Lakes wolves ordered returned to endangered list," December 19, 2014
  38. ↑ Associated Press, "Bill would remove federal protections for wolves in 4 states," January 12, 2015
  39. ↑ Michigan Department of Natural Resources, "Invasive Species," accessed December 23, 2014
  40. ↑ Great Lakes Commission, "Invasive Species," accessed December 23, 2014
  41. ↑ Michigan Department of Natural Resources, "Asian carp FAQ," accessed December 23, 2014
  42. ↑ Michigan Department of Natural Resources, "Feral Swine," accessed December 23, 2014
  43. ↑ Michigan Department of Natural Resources, "About MISGP," accessed December 23, 2014
  44. ↑ Associated Press, "Bill would remove federal protections for wolves in 4 states," January 12, 2015
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Major_environmental_policy_issues_by_state&oldid=10507659"