See our right-hand column for announcements and news briefs. Scroll down the right-hand column to access the Archives -- links to articles posted in the main column since 2007. See details about our site, including a way to comment, in the yellow text above the Archives.
Showing posts with label Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. Show all posts

Saturday, August 16, 2014

Michigan Court of Appeals affirms Eagle Mine’s permits

From: Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve
Posted on their Web site Aug. 15, 2014
Reprinted here with permission

Aerial photo of Lundin Eagle Mine on July 31, 2014. (Photo © and courtesy Jeremiah Eagle Eye. Reprinted with permission.)

MARQUETTE -- On Aug. 13, 2014, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s decision to continue the Lundin Eagle Project, the only mine in the U.S. where nickel is the primary targeted material in addition to copper. The original co-petitioners against the permitting of the mine include: Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve (YDWP), National Wildlife Federation (NWF), Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC), and the Huron Mountain Club (HMC). The operation has been in development since 2003 and in litigation since 2006.

The Michigan Court of Appeals agreed in 2012 to hear the case regarding the 2007 decision to issue the mining and discharge permits to Kennecott Minerals. The date for oral arguments was set for June 3, 2014. Over 500 tribal members traveled from the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community to attend the hearing in Lansing and staged a demonstration on the steps of the courthouse in opposition to the project. The portal to the mine enters through Eagle Rock, a sacred native place of worship in ceded territory, facts which have been disregarded by the state justice system. Now that the ruling has been settled, the Lundin Eagle Mine is permitted to move forward into production sometime during fall 2014.

"If only judges were required to pay a visit to the location in legal debate, then they might have seen a different picture," said Mindy Otto, Executive Director of the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve. "The project lacks a complete Environmental Impact Statement required by law, and now we are seeing a pattern of activities that are illegal and detrimental and are caused by the rapid development of a haul road for this mine project which should have been included in that document."

Otto is referring to the recent violation of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act when an unlawful quantity of turbid water and suspended sediment was deposited in a wetland, tributary, and the East Branch of the Salmon Trout River dated Aug. 4, 2014.

The Michigan Court of Appeals ruling is a disgrace to tribal nations and the environmental justice system designed to protect what we value most in this Great Lakes state. Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve will continue preserving and protecting the Yellow Dog Watershed, identifying threats, and holding natural resource agencies accountable to their position with a slew of honest scientists and concerned citizens while we consider more legal options.

Monday, April 01, 2013

Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve: SB 78 removes “Conservation of Biodiversity” from state forest management goals

From Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve
Posted on their Web site Mar. 27, 2013
Reprinted with permission


The Senate Bill 78 recently passed through the Michigan Senate (26-11) on March 5, 2013, and will soon be headed for a vote in the House of Representatives. Michigan
legislators have decided to change the long-standing legal and scientifically supported definition of conservation in the bill which is called "Removes Biodiversity and
Restoration as Forest Management Goals for Department of Natural Resources." This bill will also revise state forest management goals, which will result in needless destruction of natural native communities and damage species diversity. Here are some key points about SB78 provided by the Michigan Environmental Council analysis:

The bill amends the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act 451 of 1994, specifically amending part 355 and part 525. It prohibits the DNR or Natural Resources
Commission from promulgating or enforcing a rule or an order that designates or classifies an area of land specifically for the purpose of achieving or maintaining biological diversity, and provides that no other state agency would be required to do so either -- the only portion specifically targeting the proposed Biodiversity Stewardship Area program (BSA). The definition of conservation will be revised, removing clauses on the topics of restoration, distribution and the "continued existence" of native species and communities. It will remove the conservation of biological diversity from the DNR’s duties regarding forest management, and requires the Department to balance its management activities with economic values. It eliminates the requirement that the DNR manage forests in a manner that promotes restoration. Additionally, the bill deletes the legislative finding that human activity causes most losses of biological diversity.

Proponents of the bill fear that including land in a stewardship area to protect its natural biodiversity will allow the DNR to restrict land uses for recreation. Sen. Tom Casperson is particularly interested in terminating the DNR’s "Living Legacies" Program (aka Biodiversity Stewardship Areas Program). In his article published Feb 28, 2013, in the Detroit Free Press, Casperson said, "This bill simply aims to stop the DNR from implementing the Biodiversity Stewardship Area Program, which would severely limit or preclude human activity on the land."

However, that is simply not what it will do. The DNR website Q and A on Living Legacies states, "It is anticipated that existing outdoor recreational uses that are already in place within Biodiversity Stewardship Areas will meet the guidelines for acceptability and will continue. If there are any situations where it is determined that the existing recreational uses are not compatible with BSA designation and the use in the place is ended, the DNR will ensure that an alternative opportunity is made available. […] The designation does not change public access to public lands. If there was public access before the designation, it remains the same. We encourage the public to visit some of these biologically diverse areas." Furthermore, the ecological repercussions caused by these legislative changes are much bigger than simply eliminating the BSA program, which is a great program anyway.

The Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve is opposed to SB 78 because maintaining biodiversity is a fundamental component of good forest management. Managing lands for biodiversity encourages ecosystem health and genetic resilience to new invasive species, such as the emerald ash borer, the spruce budworm and tent caterpillars.

A petition has formed to help stop SB78!

Click here to view and sign the petition to oppose Michigan Senate Bill 78 and keep biodiversity as an important factor in natural resource management. It will be delivered to: The Michigan State House, The Michigan State Senate, and Governor Rick Snyder!

The bill is being considered in the House Natural Resources Committee. Please contact committee members to express your concern:

Andrea LaFontaine (R) Committee Chair, 32nd District: (517) 373-8931, AndreaLaFontaine@house.mi.gov

Bruce Rendon (R) Majority Vice-Chair, 103rd District: (517) 373-3817, BruceRendon@house.mi.gov

Ken Goike (R) 33rd District: (517) 373-0820, KenGoike@house.mi.gov

Joel Johnson (R) 97th District:(517) 373-8962, JoelJohnson@house.mi.gov

Ed McBroom (R) 108th District: (517) 373-0156, EdMcBroom@house.mi.gov

Roger Victory (R) 88th District: (517) 373-1830, RogerVictory@house.mi.gov

Charles Smiley (D) Minority Vice-Chair, 50th District: (517) 373-3906, charlessmiley@house.mi.gov

Scott Dianda (D) 110th District: (517) 373-0850, scottdianda@house.mi.gov

John Kivela (D) 109th District: (517) 373-0498, johnkivela@house.mi.gov

Visit the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve Web site to learn more about their work.
  
Editor's Note: The Michigan League of Conservation Voters (MLCV) also opposes SB 78. On March 11, 2013, they stated in their Political Week in Review (PWIR), "The 'Anti-Biodiversity Act' prevents the DNR from acting under the Endangered Species Act or a number of other laws to promote and restore biodiversity on public lands. It jeopardizes almost $22 million in federal funding for forest management and puts Michigan’s sustainable forestry certificates that cover 3.9 million acres across the state at risk. This decision is a short-sighted approach that rejects science and sustainability. It makes it harder to ensure our forests, native plants and wildlife will be here for future generations."
Click here to read the rest of this MLCV article.