|
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Environmental Groups, Wildlife Enthusiasts Deplore Water Compact
|
| LANSING - Environmental groups and fishing enthusiasts argued Wednesday that a package of bills to implement the Great Lakes Water Compact, at least as currently structured, could mean damage to rivers and streams around the state.
But Sen. Patricia Birkholz (R-Saugatuck Twp.), sponsor of some of the bills and chair of the Senate Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee that is considering them, said the groups are still looking at old language and overstating the potential effects.
Essentially, the Senate package relies on a tool that measures potential loss of fish population to determine how much water can be removed from a watershed.
"We think those fish species reduction numbers are too large and those lead to too much water being available," said James Clift, policy director for the Michigan Environmental Council, a member of the Great Lakes Great Michigan Coalition.
Under the standards in the water withdrawal assessment tool, flows in parts of the Betsie River could be reduced 42 percent and in parts of the Boardman, Jordan and Sturgeon rivers by 25 percent before fish population reductions would be considered excessive, the groups said.
"Any loss of fish is not acceptable," said Rusty Gates, president of Anglers of the AuSable and another member of the coalition. "Anything more than 3-5 percent withdrawal from a stream would be devastating."
But Birkholz said the coalition's analysis overstates what the bills would allow, for the Betsie River by some 80 percent.
"I am very disappointed to learn of the Michigan Environmental Council's reaction to the groundwater assessment tool, especially as they were key participants in its development," she said.
The two sides also disagreed on the effect of the coalition's announcement Wednesday. While Clift and other coalition members praised Birkholz for her workgroups and her willingness to work with both sides, they said they needed to raise public awareness of their concerns about the bills. "We decided now was the time to raise the alarm on what the senate package would allow," Clift said.
But Birkholz argued the press event raised questions about coalition members' willingness to work toward compromise. "I am committed to working with all parties in Michigan in drafting legislation that will protect our natural resources for every Michigan citizen," she said. "This attempt at grand-standing does nothing but erode the confidence of those who are diligently crafting legislation for our next generations."
HOUSE BILLS: Meanwhile, the same House bills the environmental groups praised on Wednesday were excoriated by the Michigan Farm Bureau in a statement. The bills, HB 50675 , HB 5066 , HB 5067 , HB 5068 , HB 5069 , HB 5070 , HB 5071 , HB 5072 and HB 5073 , would "break the back of the already suffering Michigan economy."
A number of business groups have already criticized the package, and Wednesday the Farm Bureau said the bills would create burdensome regulations that would harm agriculture and were unnecessary to protect the Great Lakes.
The legislation would hurt farming in the state by requiring farms to get permits for large water withdrawals, the organization said.
|
Author: Staff Writer
Source:
Gongwer News Service
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
