Passage of the Mining Moratorium Bill

This year, the Monumental Mining Moratorium Bill passed.  This was a David and Goliath type of win, even in the face of 1 million dollar mining company public relations and lobbying campaign.

Background:

Throughout the United States 22,000 miles of river have been contaminated by sulfuric acid mine drainage.  This acid mine drainage is the kind of pollution that the Crandon mine threatens Wisconsin with.  Thanks to a strong citizen's coalition, this year the Wisconsin Legislature took steps to prevent this dangerous scenario from happening.

Mining operations, open pit or deep shaft, have many impacts on the environment.  Wastewater from the operation pumped into nearby rivers or streams can negatively affect fish and other aquatic populations.  Mine shafts draw the surrounding water table down lowering local water bodies and wells.  Large amounts of dust are released into the air, adversely affecting air quality.  Mine tailing ponds, for discarding unused rock, can produce sulfuric acid and heavy metals that then percolate into the groundwater.

The proposed tailing pond is the greatest threat of the Exxon/Rio Algom mine (The mine is now solely owned by Rio Algom.  Exxon pulled out of the project in February 1998.  The name of the mining affiliate has changed from the Crandon Mining Company to the Nicolet Mining Company).

The proposed mining tailing system would have a liner over the top and beneath it to hold more than 22 million tons of sulfide waste rock.  When this sulfide waste rock is exposed to air and water it forms sulfuric acid (acid mine drainage).  All of the  waste rock from the Crandon Mining project will have a high acid generating potential.  The concern is the liner will eventually leak and the acid mine drainage will percolate into the ground water just 15 feet below.  The leachate would remain highly acidic for centuries.

The risk involves the potential ruin of the Wolf River, the headwater on which the containment system is located.  As of now the Wolf River is designated an Outstanding Resource Water laying claim as a high quality trout stream and one of the cleanest rivers left in Wisconsin.

Another potential environmental disaster is the dumping of wastewater into the Wisconsin River.  This wastewater would enter the river at 200 gallons a minute via a 38 mile pipeline that would cross 4 counties.  Pollutants contained in the wastewater  are likely to include phosphorous, potassium, suspended solids, chlorine and of course heavy metals such as copper, iron, magnesium, and mercury.  While the DNR would have to deny a permit for the mine’s wastewater if they thought it would significantly water quality standards, many residents do not feel this assures protection of the river.

Violations are commonplace along the river where from April 1995 to May 1996 the five existing discharges to the river had an average of 9 violations.  These violations were usually do to discharges of suspended solids or biological oxygen demand (BOD), the amount of oxygen depleting bacteria in the system.

What Happened in the Last Year?

This year the Wisconsin Legislature passed the Mining Moratorium, SB3, which states that before a company can create a sulfide mine in Wisconsin they must show proof of an existing metallic sulfide mine that has operated for 10 years and a mine that has been closed for 10 years without significantly polluting the surface water and ground water.  This gives the our environment an extra layer of protection against sulfide mining, a process that has never been done without some negative environmental impacts.

Along with SB3 many other bills were introduced in both the Senate and Assembly that would toughen the existing state mining laws.  Not all of these bills have had committee hearings.  Some of these bills are:

• AB123, proposed by Rep. Reynolds.  This bill would take away the exemption that mining companies have to Wisconsin groundwater standards.

• AB834, proposed by Rep. Black and Sen. Clausing.  This bill would prohibit mining on all state land that is under the jurisdiction of the DNR.  It would also prohibit the Natural Resource Board form selling land for mining.

• AB822, proposed by Rep. Black.  This bill would prohibit the DNR from making exemptions for mining companies of the rules regulating mining and the storage and disposal of mining waste.

• AB22 and SB435, proposed by Rep. Hahn and Sen. Shultz.  These bills would prohibit the discharge of mining waste water into the Wisconsin River.

• AB488, proposed by Rep. Ourada.  This bill would help ensure that companies pay adequate and timely fees to cover the cost of DNR’s permitting and regulation process.

The success of the Mining Moratorium Bill is due to a broad based coalition that has come together to act out against the mine.  The Wisconsin Stewardship Network was an important part of this coalition, consisting of Sporting groups, Environmental groups, Native American groups, Northern Wisconsin Businesses, lake front property owners, and the general public.  The coalition was responsible for garnishing over 40,000 signatures in support of the Mining Moratorium.  Legislators were reported as saying that this is more citizen support than has been shown for any one piece of legislation in the past.

In the past it seemed the mining industry had a lucrative advantage in our state government.  For example, twice now Gov. Thompson has vetoed legislation to ban mining in state parks, state forests and state natural areas, which make up less then 3 percent of all land in the state.  The Governor also eliminated the Public Intervenors Office.  This office had an attorney that would intervene on the behalf of the public, providing legal expertise and calling educated technical experts to question mining practices.

Hopefully, with the success of the Wisconsin Stewardship Network and the Mining Moratorium, the advantage of mining companies in the state government will be overshadowed by citizen’s interests.  Governor Thompson has said he will sign the Mining Moratorium on Earth Day 1998.

Challenges Ahead

The Mining Moratorium still requires rule making by the DNR.  The rules applied to the bill may actually weaken the environmental protection the bill is designed for.  To make sure this is not the case the process can not go on without oversight.  Key players in the Wisconsin Stewardship Network intend to stay informed on the progress of the Mining Moratorium now that it is out of the hands of the legislative branch.

The proposed mine is no longer owned by Exxon but Rio Algom still plans to mine the area.   The mine should not go through without strict examinations of all proposals affecting air quality, water table drawdown, hazardous waste transportation, etc.  Any mine started in the area sets a precedent for a new mining district up north.  Since the discovery in 1968, by Kennecott, of sulfide deposit rich copper, 32 mining companies have leased or purchased over 400,000 acres in Northern Wisconsin.

More mines mean more acres of land used for construction of tailing ponds, more roads for access to sites, increase loss of wetlands, and more transportation  of toxic wastes on the highways.  All of this amounts to a net loss of natural areas and a net gain in potential environmental hazards.
 

  The State’s First Wind Farm - Renewable Energy Advances

Background

There is probably no set of  environmental issues undergoing as much change as those associated with electric utilities.   Virtually every state in the nation and the federal government are either considering, or actually making, policy changes to restructure and deregulate electric utilities.  The potential impacts of this deregulation on public health and natural resources is staggering; and interestingly, those impacts could be very negative or very positive.

Electric utility deregulation could have major impacts on the amount of air emissions released from power plants including those that cause smog, acid rain, global warming and mercury contamination.  It will also impact  the many land use issues that relate to the siting of transmission lines.

Currently, electric utilities account for 64 percent of all regulated air emissions in Wisconsin.   That amount could increase significantly due to deregulation if care is not taken to mitigate certain "side-affects" such as the loss of energy efficiency programs.  At the same time, deregulation could open some doors such as the marketing of green power (renewable resources) which could reduce what emission levels would otherwise be.
 
What Happened Last Year?

There have been several major utility industry actions taken in the past year which impact the environment - two of them in a positive way, one to the environment's detriment.  There was also a major electric reliability bill passed in the legislature which contained environmental tradeoffs, but which we supported overall.  First we’ll take a look at the industry actions:
 

• The Madison Gas & Electric (MG&E)  wind farm.   Last fall, MG&E announced that they would be constructing a 17-turbine (11 megawatts of generating capacity) wind farm - that’s enough energy to supply about 4,000 homes - by June of next year.  The cost of constructing the wind farm will be offset through a voluntary "green rate" (increase) which customers will be offered later this year.   The company deserves a great deal of credit as this will be the largest wind farm east of the Mississippi River, and offset air pollution from existing coal-fired power plants.

• Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO) wind investments.  WEPCO had begun a green pricing program - voluntary rate increases to offset the use of renewable power - two years ago.   However, due to a lack of any public participation, the program only offered Canadian hydro-power and wood waste burned in northern Minnesota as renewable alternatives.  While these are very cheap sources of renewable energy - keeping the premium rate lower - they do little to foster the development of new renewable resources in Wisconsin.

The Environmental Decade and RENEW Wisconsin had originally filed a lawsuit over the program over the lack of any public hearing for the higher rates.  Only a month ago, however, the environmental groups and WEPCO reached and signed an agreement whereby WEPCO would invest in environmentally preferred sources, such as wind power, within the state; and in return the groups dropped the lawsuit and now publicly support the program.  WEPCO has recently solicited bids for constructing its first wind turbines.

• Utilities Drop the Ball on Energy Conservation.   In preparation for a deregulated industry, many of the largest utilities in the state have systematically dramatically reduced their commitment to energy conservation and efficiency.  According to Public Service Commission statistics, the utilities statewide have reduced their energy efficiency achievement by more than 40 percent over the past 4 years (since deregulation discussions began) and have reduced their investment in energy efficiency by more than 50 percent.   This directly translates into increased air emissions due the need to burn more coal for energy production which could have could have been avoided through conservation and efficiency programs.

• Lastly, there was one major energy bill passed by the legislature which reduced the amount of long range planning done by utilities for power plant and transmission line construction; but also required utilities in the state to construct 50 megawatts of renewable energy capacity.   Overall, this bill, sponsored by the Governor, will have a very positive impact on jump starting renewable energy production in Wisconsin.

To address the loss of energy efficiency investments and achievements, the Public Service Commission made recommendations last year for creating a "public benefits" fund in the state to reinvest in energy conservation, low-income assistance, environmental research & development and renewable energy.  A number of groups (including environmental, consumer, labor, low-income and many utilities) in a coalition called Customers First! took the idea one step further and have drafted legislation to create the Public Benefits fund.

This coalition was largely responsible for writing and pushing the electric reliability bill, described above, which was recently passed.  The challenge for the coalition, and concerned public, in the next session will be to again work in a very bipartisan manner to pass the public benefits bill, but also to prevent any radical deregulation of the utility industry in Wisconsin.
 

  Wisconsin Stewardship Network Shows Muscle

Background

Wisconsin has historically been a national leader in protecting and managing natural resources.  However, recently there has been a decline in conservation programs and cutbacks in environmental protection.  Through partisan politics and corporate irresponsibility, Wisconsin’s natural resource protection has come under fire.

From the politicization of our Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to the proposed Crandon mine at the headwaters of the Wolf River and to the elimination of the Wisconsin citizen’s environmental watchdog agency, the Public Intervenor’s Office, our quality of life is endangered.  The 1995-96 state legislative session and budget changes were responsible for many of the cutbacks.  Fed up with these changes, citizens formed the Wisconsin Stewardship Network (WSN).

WSN is a grassroots network of over 100 sporting and environmental organizations.  It’s mission is to "build a cooperative network that recaptures and strengthens Wisconsin’s stewardship ethic for the betterment of its people and its natural resources."

Its three priorities include stopping the Crandon Mine, restoring the Public Intervenor’s Office and the independence of the DNR, and working towards sustainable land-use policies.  Network participants range from the Sierra Club to the Twin City Rod and Gun Club.

What Happened in the Last Year?

WSN  established an electronic network in Wisconsin, linking eight grassroots groups up with computers and setting up a home page.  This allowed activists to share information immediately with perhaps thousands or people, with the click of a button.  Passing information statewide quickly allowed grassroots groups to get their word out at a lower cost than the traditional bulk mail action alerts.

But, as important as electronics, WSN fostered cooperation and teamwork among diverse groups.  The simple idea that  cooperation among diverse groups is possible seems to have sparked a firestorm of activity in the last year.  The best example of cooperation among different groups arose just before the state legislature acted on the mining moratorium bill (SB3).

An unprecedented coalition prompted thousands of calls to encourage Wisconsin residents to write, call, or email their Representatives and demand a yes vote on SB3.  Several fishing and hunting groups became involved also as they called their members to get citizens involved state-wide.  As a result, State Legislators heard from their constituents loud and clear.

The phoning effort brought together 250 sportsmen and environmentalists to a fairly impromptu meeting in support of SB3 in Menasha on February 2nd, one day before the senate vote.  The meeting was organized within a matter of days by Emily Hofmann of the Environmental Decade and Bill Kordus of the Twin City (Neenah-Menasha) Rod and Gun Club through word-of-mouth, leafleting, and phoning.  Area Representatives who had previously supported several amendments to SB3 in the State Assembly which would have allowed numerous loopholes to weaken the bill attended the evening in Menasha and got an earful.

In northern Wisconsin, Jim Wise, one of WSN’s eight regional representatives helped organize opposition to the proposed pipeline designed to divert wastewater away from the Crandon mine.  If constructed, the 35 mile pipeline would have transferred over a million gallons of treated wastewater daily to the Rhinelander region of the Wisconsin River.

Wise has worked with hunters, anglers, Native Americans, and farmers to build a coalition up North that has shown, again, that people of different  backgrounds will work together to protect their natural resources.

Why did these Changes Happen?

The 1995-96 anti-conservation budget actions, including the loss of the Public Intervenor’s Office and the political appointment of  DNR Secretary, were the real catalysts for the Wisconsin Stewardship Network.   Sporting groups and environmental groups alike took a big hit in that budget and, because of it, gained a greater awareness of their common interests.

Challenges Ahead

With the passage of the mining moratorium bill, WSN will turn its attention next to its next priority, the restoration of the Public Intervenor’s Office and the Independence to the DNR.  DNR documents show that cutbacks in funding have lead directly to serious reductions in enforcement.  Records show that in one year, the number of legal cases against polluters by nearly 50%.  Reports from within the DNR point to a growing sense of apathy with DNR employees to even process such cases because they know that there will be no follow through.

Solving the Land Use problem is also a critical issue for WSN. There are several current trends which will hasten the destruction of priceless natural habitats and valuable farmland.  A proposed rule change by the Department of Commerce (COM 83) would change septic system designs and allow development in ecologically sensitive areas. The new rules would open up 8.8 million  acres of Wisconsin’s land base to development for the first time as well as pose a serious threat to water quality, public health, and safety.

WSN has supported the 1000 Friends of Wisconsin, a new organization which is advocating responsible land-use policies.  At the same time, many are loving northern Wisconsin to death by buying second homes in pristine areas and on picturesque waterways.  The loss of natural shoreline to new development has many scientists concerned as they record the tremendous impact on aquatic life and waterfowl.  As people and governmental bodies argue over personal rights and ownership of land and water, we are witnessing the destruction of our precious environment.
 
 
  Public Opposed Weakening the State’s Pesticide Law

Background

Pesticides, especially agricultural pesticides,  have long been recognized as a threat to wildlife and water quality.  Wisconsin was the first state in the U.S. to ban DDT, primarily an agricultural pesticide was also widely used in urban areas to control mosquitos and other insects.  In the early 1980’s aldicarb, a pesticide used on potatoes,  was widely found in drinking water of the Central Sands.  This extensive contamination led to passage of the 1984 Groundwater Law which effectively banned aldicarb.

Despite some legal and policy advances toward groundwater protection,  pesticide use  is still on the increase. For example, atrazine, a commonly used corn herbicide and possible carcinogen, has been widely found in drinking water throughout the state.  It has even been found in rain water in urban areas.  Contamination has led to the prohibition of atrazine in areas where drinking wells are above the federal safety standard, now more than 1.2 million acres within Wisconsin.

Although agriculture has been implicated as the leading cause of water quality deterioration in the Great Lakes, serious concerns are now emerging about the use of urban pesticides, both to water quality and human health.  Monitoring of stormwater by the Wisconsin DNR within Milwaukee, Madison and Duluth/Superior found insecticides and other pesticides at levels scientists consider toxic (WDNR,1997).  Diazinon was found in more than 83% of samples; 2,4-D was found in 69% of the samples.

There is new data linking pesticides to health problems.  Researchers have discovered that many pesticides can mimic or interfere with sex hormones, which play an important role in immunity and reproductive function. Many cancers, once only seen among farm workers, appear to be increasing in the general population and in children.

For example, new studies have linked pesticides with elevated risks of breast cancer and reproductive cancers.  According to the U.S. Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER), although the mortality has decreased, the incidence of brain and nervous system cancers among children has increased by 32% and acute lymphocytic leukemia by 28% between 1973 and 1990.

Exposure of pesticides is not limited to outdoor use.  For many, especially those living in urban and suburban areas, the principal exposure pathway for both children and adults, is through indoor pesticide use. Studies show that 90% of all U.S. households use pesticides.  Today, individuals spend up to 90% of their time indoors, providing the opportunity for significant contact with pesticides used in the home.

A study, published in 1998 of indoor pesticide use (homes), showed that chloropyrifios, an insecticide used to control cockroaches, flea collars etc., accumulates on surfaces inside residences including children’s toys and other plush objects at levels scientists consider dangerous to children.

What Happened  Last Year?

In 1997, pressured by large agribusiness and chemical companies, the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) proposed revisions to the state’s primary pesticide law (ATCP 29) that effectively weakened public health and safety.  For example, they proposed to gutting  the state’s pesticide registry which allows families to be notified by commercial pesticide applicator companies prior to spraying and to change the deadline for people to notify the department that they would like advance notification from March 15 to January 15.

The Decade, together with Citizens for A Better Environment, worked to build a broad coalition opposed to these changes.  DATCP received over 1500 written comments opposed to these rule changes and had the support of over 40 organizations including: Wisconsin Parent Teacher Association, Wisconsin Breast Cancer Coalition and the Wisconsin Medical Society.

We opposed the efforts to weaken the law and called for prohibitions of pesticide use for children who may be exposed to toxic pesticides in schools, parks, playgrounds and daycare centers.

Unwilling to prohibit pesticides, DATCP instead developed a survey of pesticide use in schools.  The results are due this summer.

Why did these changes happen?

Our broad, health based coalition had an impact.  Members from organizations sent letters, made phone calls and participated in news conferences.  This grass roots response generated considerable unfavorable press for the DATCP proposal.  This had am impact on the DATCP board, who voted to protect the registry.  The new Secretary, Ben Brancel seemed willing to work with us to address our concerns over pesticide use and directed his staff to develop a pesticide use survey.
 
Challenges Ahead
 
We anxiously await the results of DATCP’s school survey.  If, as we expect,  the survey shows significant pesticide use in schools, we will renew our call for a prohibition of pesticide use and/or 72 hour prior notification of pesticide use for teachers, parents and children.

We will be launching a pesticide use reporting and reduction campaign.  We will seek mandatory reporting of all private and commercial applicators.  This type of reporting will allow citizens access to pesticides that may be used near schools or daycare centers, or provide wildlife  biologists more data to study impacts to frogs and other wildlife or epidemiologists studying breast cancer.

Such a database is essential to push Wisconsin toward significant reduction in pesticide use.
 

  Victory Over Kidney Island Expansion 
Judge Overturns DNR decision to expand PCB Dump in Green Bay

Background

For more than a century the industries in the Fox Valley have been discharging pollutants of just about every imaginable kind into the Fox River watershed.  Much of that contamination has settled to the bottom sediment of the Fox River creating toxic hot spots of PCBs and other hazardous substances.  Although in some areas the sediments are not contaminated to the degree necessary to qualify hazardous or toxic, it doesn’t mean these areas are harmless.

When the sediments are dredged up in order to deepen the waterway and maintain the shipping channel, contaminants are suspended in the water and water circulation changes.  Furthermore those dredged, contaminated spoils are concentrated into one area creating a huge manmade island  only a few hundred feet off shore from a popular  park and beach, Bay Beach Amusement Park.

This manmade island or Kidney Island is named for its shape.  It was constructed in the early 1980s to hold dumpings dredged from the bottom of Green Bay and the Fox River, and it was part of the Army Corps of Engineer’s efforts to preserve a shipping channel.  The original containment facility is now full, and the Corp and the DNR have proposed to triple its size, adding over 1300 acres to the dredge dump.  Contaminated sediments, altered water circulation patterns, and the proposal to triple the waste facility have created serious water problems  for the bay of Green Bay and Bay Beach Amusement Park.

What Happened Last Year?

In August of 1997 Wisconsin’s Environmental Decade assisted the Clean Water Action Council in suing the Corps and the DNR to stop the expansion of the dump.  We gathered depositions of expert witnesses and other evidence to dispute the Corps’ claim that water quality and wildlife would not be harmed.  In December of 1997 the Administrative Law Judge ruled in our favor – preventing the expansion of Kidney Island.

Why Did These Policy Changes Happen?

The two primary keys to victory were our evidence showing how reproductive rates of terns would be negatively impacted by the expansion, and that the data used by the corps was insufficient.  First, we submitted scientific testimony that a particular species of tern on the Endangered Species List loses a significant portion of its young because chicks fall into large cracks formed by the sludge.

Second, we submitted scientific testimony that the data the Corps was using to predict water quality outcomes was old and incomplete.  Furthermore, the judge concluded that the mathematical  model the Corps used was simply not predictive of water quality impacts.

The waters of Green Bay will not be further degraded by possible PCB and heavy metal contamination  from the expansion of waste water dump.  Also the circulation  patterns of Green Bay will  not be altered, and wildlife, especially the endangered tern, will not be further impacted by additional dredge dumping.  The Bay Beach Amusement Park will stay safe for families to enjoy.

Challenges Ahead

The challenges ahead are looking to solve a extremely serious environmental and health threat.