Scott Walker Is as Bad as Michigan Gov in Abandoning Water Protection

"There are approximately 160,000 public
drinking water systems and more than
16,000 publicly owned wastewater treatment
systems in the United States, (DHS)." In
Michigan and Wisconsin, clean water
is under siege by Republican governors
as desperate citizens look to the federal
government for relief and protection.

Republican Gov. Rick Snyder (R-Michigan) is getting huge amount of lurid publicity for ignoring (indeed causing) the water crises in Flint, Michigan in which toxic lead was effectively vectored into the children and families of Flint, (Lederman, In These Times).

The coverage is spot-on, as Snyder now pushes back against the EPA efforts to mitigate a disaster.

Republican Gov. Scott Walker has ignored (indeed caused) the water problem in Kewaunee, Juneau, Adams, Wood counties, inflicting the same polluter-friendly, anti-family health agenda he has pursued since he was elected.

But the national U.S. media is giving Walker a pass though Walker and his policies vacating his responsibility ensuring clean and safe water has already resulted in tragedy, (Mal Contends), including the poisoning of children, as Walker has circumvented the law to carry the toxic water of special interests.

We are in crisis mode in Wisconsin and Michigan as the level of health and environmental toxins vectored into Wisconsin's waters often exceeds safe levels, yet Scott Walker moves boldly for less protection against the polluters, and the abandonment of our state Constitution's Public Trust Doctrine.

This comes as the Walker adminstration changes the language in the DNR and Legislative Reference Bureau's (LRB) public explanations of the state's water protection roles and responsibilities.

The London Guardian notes: Flint water crisis: governor's brand of corporate politics set stage for disaster. Snyder and Walker's anti-water policies and "imperial manner" are clear and present dangers to America's lifeblood, water.

Notes the Guardian's Joanna Walters: Both Snyder and Walker's virtually handing over state governance to the "American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) ... supported by the like-minded, Michigan-based Mackinac Center for Public Policy, and backed by the ultra-conservative Koch brothers," have resulted in environmental disaster. The Wisconsin-based Bradley Foundation, big tobacco companies like Altria/Phillip Morris and the State Policy Network have inflicted the same crimes against families through politicians, and policymakers are legally immune, (Fischer, PRWatch).

Appeals to the EPA are a last resort, and Wisconsin families remain alarmed calling for a Sanders or Clinton adminstration to vow to protect families, and reel in the polluters' anti-social industries, (Walton, Circle of Blue), (Ikerd, Ethics, Not Economics, Key to Climate Change Fight).

Water is a national security issue, consider the U.S. Dept of Homeland Security: "Water and Wastewater Systems Sector-Specific Plan (PDF, 88 pages – 1.39 MB) details how the National Infrastructure Protection Plan risk management framework is implemented within the context of the unique characteristics and risk landscape of the [Water] sector. ... The Environmental Protection Agency is designated as the Sector-Specific Agency for the Water and Wastewater Systems Sector."

As with natural disaster planning and emergency preparedness, Scott Walker is asleep at the switch.

Concludes the Guardian's Walters:

A Snyder candidacy could not have survived the Flint water catastrophe, which developed under his brand of corporate-culture politics while, at best, he stood by.

Whether Snyder will survive as governor remains to be seen.

Walker's political fate appears more certain, as he remains mired in the 30s-level approval rating.

More significantly, citizen groups have sprouted around the state, as a desperate Walker moves to destroy local control of municipal and county government and renew furtive efforts to destroy the Wisconsin Idea, transparency in government and independent government watchdog agencies.
---
Bizarrely, the Walker adminstration has gone so far as to include a copyright warning included in the LRB's public webpage on the Constitution Article IX, Section 1: Public trust doctrine page stating:

WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS: The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specific conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research." If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use" that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.

Never noticed this before in a public document.

The LRB's website includes a link to Robin Kite's—a former LRB staff atty—disquisition on the Public Access Doctrine.

Big Ag Pressures Wood County Board to Drop Groundwater Protection Initiative

Dairy Business Association fights local efforts
protecting against toxic, liquidized cow manure. DBA
members are the worst polluters of Wisconsin waters.

Protect groundwater and we'll pollute more, says Dairy Business Association

Update: See also this morning's Farms, environmentalists spar over manure measure (Jonathan Anderson, Gannett Co. Newspapers); and rebuttal letter to the Board by Midwestern Environmental Advocates, dated August 12, 2015.
 ---
As residents of Wood and Adams counties fight to protect groundwater, Big Ag in Wisconsin as embodied in the Dairy Business Association, is arguing for the right to pollute.

The Dairy Business Association (DBA) in a letter dated August 6, 2015 to the Chair of the Wood County Board of Supervisors (and Cced to Board members) calls a proposed groundwater protection ordinance "unnecessary and potentially counterproductive."

The proposed ordinance will be considered in a County Board meeting on August 18th.

The DBA's members are among the worst polluters in Wisconsin, and DBA lobbyists still disingenuously cloak its operations in the image of the small farmer as industrialized factory farming corporations take over the production of agriculture in the Dairy State in the model of the huge Concentrated (Confined) Agricultural Feeding Operation (CAFO).

The text of the August 6 DBA letter by John Holevoet, Director of Government Affairs for the DBA, is reproduced below.

The DBA is politically aligned with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and local State Rep. Scott Krug (R-Nekoosa) both of whom worked to decimate the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources water protection division, with Walker now calling for dismantling the federal EPA to whom clean water advocates have appealed for water protection from DBA members.

The DBA's Holevoet admits clean water advocates' point on groundwater and pollution and argues in a ludicrous line of reasoning that protecting groundwater by law will "discourage investments in new technologies and facilities that would better prevent the possibility of groundwater contamination."

Protecting groundwater by law will only hurt you, argues the DBA in its letter reading more like a threat.

Blue Baby syndrome (aka methemoglobinemia now prevalent in Yakima Valley in Washington state, caused by too many nitrates in surface waters and aquifers) will come to Wisconsin, and the DBA will keep on its pursuit for money over people.
---
August 6, 2015

Mr. Lance Pliml

Wood County Board of Supervisors, Chairman
4030 Woodhaven Court
Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54494

Dear Chairman Pliml:

This letter is written on behalf of the Dairy Business Association (DBA) and its Wood County members, regarding the proposed Animal Waste Storage, Nutrient Management and Groundwater Protection Ordinance. DBA urges you to vote against this proposed ordinance, which has a questionable legal basis. This type of regulation is unnecessary and potentially counterproductive.

When the County Board previously discussed the proposed ordinance, Corporation Counsel Peter Kastenholz was clear that he did not believe the county has the authority to impose its own groundwater standards. The authority to produce such regulations has been granted to Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR); it has not been delegated to the counties. This is no doubt why the most recent ordinance draft avoids direct groundwater regulation and attempts to address this issue through manure storage standards and the implementation of nutrient management plans (NMPs). These are areas over which counties have had some limited authority.

The ordinance's attempt to walk the fine line between legality and illegality calls its enforceability into question. At a minimum, concerns over the legality of certain provisions will likely produce legal challenges if enforcement attempts are made. For example, the ordinance has the potential to require NMPs for some very small farming operations. Any farmer who builds or alters a manure storage facility is subject to the requirements of the new ordinance, which includes the preparation of an NMP.

Nutrient management planning is worthwhile and should be encouraged, but it is doubtful the county can require it for non-CAFO farms unless the county provides cost sharing. (See ATCP 50.54(2).) Large farms that fit the legal definition of CAFO already have to prepare NMPs. This ordinance would impose additional requirements on such farms. This could create an issue if/when the requirements in a county manure storage permit conflict with the state requirements these farms must follow. This ordinance sets the stage for a situation where the county would deny a permit to a farm seeking to make an alteration to their manure storage that is required of them by WDNR.

This ordinance is meant to safeguard groundwater quality, but it will likely discourage investments in new technologies and facilities that would better prevent the possibility of groundwater contamination. Existing manure storage facilities are not generally subject to regulation under the proposed ordinance, unless they are altered in some way. This would discourage farmers from adding additional storage or updating existing facilities because that would subject them to all of the requirements associated with an animal waste storage plan. Discouraging investment and improvements on farms is not good public policy.

Farmers that only stack manure but might be considering constructing a more secure manure storage facility could be discouraged by the ordinance requirements. This could prevent them from growing their herd size and leave them stacking manure even if the runoff risk from their stacking location is far greater than it would be from a new manure storage facility. We want to encourage farmers to grow, invest, and innovate. This ordinance does the opposite.

Agriculture plays a vital role in Wood County economies. Our farmers are valuable members of our community. They are our neighbors and we know them to be good stewards of the land. This ordinance is a solution in search of a problem. There is no reason to believe that groundwater quality is significant concern in Wood County, nor that it is likely to become one. DBA asks you to seriously consider whether this ordinance is worth the added costs to farmers and all the taxpayers of Wood County, especially considering that portions of it may be unenforceable.

Unfortunately, this ordinance appears to be an example of legislating rules for the entire county based upon unfounded concerns regarding one proposed farm in one small section of the county. Wood County is home to a handful of geographic regions, two radically different types of soil, nearly three dozen municipalities, and approximately 1,000 farms ranging from cranberries to dairy. It is a diverse place. Even if the proposed ordinance was a sensible approach for southern Wood County, which it is not, it would make absolutely no sense for the clay fields found in the northern portion of the county. To dictate policy for the entire county based upon incorrect perceptions that only relate to a small corner of the county anyway is foolish. It would be bad governance, and we ask that you reject it.

Regards,

John Holevoet
Director of Government Affairs

cc: Wood County Board of Supervisors