If he signs it, the spirit and intentions of the Great Lakes Compact are weakened, because the agreement is a water management and conservation document, and if a state like Ohio jumps out to take water with relative ease - - making Wisconsin and its lakefront cities perhaps less attractive to business relocation- - others states will follow.
The New York Times has taken note.
Environmental groups point to Wisconsin as having come closest so far to meeting the compact's requirements and deadlines. The state was the first to develop its conservation goals. It created a public advisory committee and attached permitting fees to water usage.
"Wisconsin really pushed itself to pass a policy that would ensure Wisconsin's waters for many generations to come," said Joel Brammeier, president and CEO of the Alliance for the Great Lakes...
All eyes are currently on the governor's desk in Ohio, where a bill that sets permitting requirements and water-withdrawal limits awaits Republican Gov. John Kasich's signature after spending two weeks in the General Assembly.No word if Gov. Walker will join bi-partisan objections to Ohio's move already voiced by Andrew Cuomo, (D), New York, Rick Snyder, (R) Michigan, and leading Ohio politicians, including former Republican governors.
Whatever happens in Ohio will both test the strength of the eight-state compact and set the tone until 2013, environmentalists say.
Under the proposed law, water users would be required to seek a state permit for withdrawals over 5 million gallons a day from Lake Erie, 2 million gallons a day from rivers or groundwater, or 300,000 a day from designated "high quality" streams.
In contrast, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin require permits for operations that use more than 100,000 gallons of water per day, while Minnesota's standard is 10,000 gallons, according to the Ohio Environmental Council.
Kasich is something of a mentor to Walker, while are both one-note on "jobs, jobs, jobs" - - with pro-growth Ohioans saying that more water for them equals employment growth - - but Walker should object on behalf of Wisconsin and the region because Great Lakes watershed resources are 'owned' in trust equally and in perpetuity by the people of all eight Great Lakes states and two Canadian provinces.
Another reason why Walker should object:
The state Department of Natural Resources has begun to review the City of Waukesha's first-ever request under the Compact to divert Great Lakes water to a community entirely outside the Great Lakes Basin.
If the DNR were to approve the application, it would then forward it to all the other Great Lakes states, which would have to approve it in order for the diversion to begin.
Though diverting water out of the basin is a different type of withdrawal that what Ohio might allow its large users, the DNR's sales pitch to the other states would be stronger on behalf of Waukesha if Wisconsin could point to a position by Walker on behalf of conservation and judicious water management anchored in an objection to the Ohio move.
In other words - - establish a history of conservation and respect for the Compact now, prior to Waukesha's application moving forward to the Great Lakes regional review.
I'll say it again: find a Governor you can count on. Get him in a room. Find out what it takes to veto Compact Violations that divert Great Lakes Water. Deliver for him &/or twist arms until s/he commits and he can be relied on without fail for a veto.
ReplyDeleteBecause Rick Snyder is not going to veto water diversions because of some dim memory of historical bipartisan conservation culture. He's just not. Nor is Kasich.
You've got Dayton, and nobody else.
Pennsylvania can't be counted on at all. And there's no way you can depend on New York to do any vetoing -- sometimes they will, sometimes they wont' go the right direction. But mostly NY exercises power for their own means and ends, and that has nothing to do with our interests or the best policy for the Great Lakes. And the last thing we / Wisconsin should do is enter into a dependency relationship with the Empire State. That kind of thing got us Scott Walker, and clearcutting near Eau Claire that paid for Cornell University's endowment.
I wouldn't discount the bipartisan conservation drive in Michigan. Its still there in many places - heck, the Great Lakes person in the MI DEQ is a Republican who would be branded as a Madison eco-nut by the right if she were based here in Wisconsin.
ReplyDeleteIts hard to say how the lakes stack up in the jobs vs. environment debate, but there are plenty of folks on the Michigan side that should respond to public pressure.
I think there is strong bi-partisan/non-partisan approach to water conservation in MI.
ReplyDeleteThis sounds like big big business wanting to rape the Great Lakes. Walker can't display his conservation colors as they just don't exist. It's not in his political sociopath's DNA.
ReplyDelete