Announcements dec 1 2006
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 33

Announcements – Dec. 1, 2006 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 70 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Announcements – Dec. 1, 2006. Final exam, Monday, Dec. 11, 8am. (taking the final cannot hurt your grade). New York Times Interior Official and Federal Biologists Clash on Danger to Bird December 5, 2004

Download Presentation

Announcements – Dec. 1, 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Announcements dec 1 2006

Announcements – Dec. 1, 2006

  • Final exam, Monday, Dec. 11, 8am.

    • (taking the final cannot hurt your grade)


Announcements dec 1 2006

New York Times

Interior Official and Federal Biologists

Clash on Danger to Bird

December 5, 2004

The scientific opinions of a Bush administration appointee at the Interior Department with no background in wildlife biology were provided as part of the source material for the panel of Fish and Wildlife Service biologists and managers who recommended against giving the greater sage grouse protection under the endangered species act. The appointee, Julie MacDonald, a senior policymaker, criticized studies showing widespread loss of grouse territory and sporadic declines in grouse populations. The sage grouse, whose habitat overlaps areas of likely oil and gas deposits across states like Wyoming and Montana, would likely become an economic headache to the energy and cattle industries if it were listed. Ms. MacDonald's critique of sage grouse biology and the biologists who work for an agency she oversees showed flashes of her strong property-rights background and her deference to industry views.


Announcements dec 1 2006

Los Angeles Times

Battle lines drawn on protection of species

Julie Cart and Kenneth R. Weiss, December 05, 2004

SAN DIEGO — Western governors gathered last week to plan with the Bush administration and Congress how to change the Endangered Species Act, the 31-year-old law they say has cost developers, loggers and ranchers too much money and hassle for the few animals brought back from the brink of extinction. "Just about everybody agrees the Endangered Species Act is broken," said Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., a cattleman turned chairman of the House Resources Committee. "The only way you are going fix it is with legislative change."


Environmental policy

Environmental Policy

Lecture Objectives:

  • What is the history of environmental policy in the U.S.?

  • What role did Kepone play in environmental policy?

  • What does the Endangered Species Act do?


Development of policy

Development of Policy

  • Policy -general principles by which the branches of government guide management of public affairs

  • Congress passes legislation in form of acts and statutes to guide or regulate behavior


Development of policy1

Development of Policy

  • Types of regulatory approaches:

    • Prevention: ban production/activity, limit output, technology requirement

    • Discourage: taxes on undesirable products, liability for products/services, public disclosure

    • Encourage: subsidies for alternatives, tradeable permits

http://thomas.loc.gov/


History of environmental policy

History of Environmental Policy

  • Prior to 1960’s, no set Environmental Policy in U.S.

    • Federal agencies, industries, businesses, and individuals did not have to consider the environmental impacts of their actions


Rachel carson

Rachel Carson

  • Published Silent Spring in 1962

  • Warned about the environmental consequences of DDT use

  • Considered to spark the beginning of the modern environmental movement

    • Public Awareness

    • Governmental research on pollution


Problems of the 1960s

Problems of the 1960s

  • Air Pollution

  • Water Pollution

  • Chemicals

Agent Orange


National environmental policy act nepa 1969

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 1969

  • Requires

    • federal agencies to consider environmental consequences of actions

    • produces publicly reviewable document on this analysis: Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

  • Created Council on Environmental Quality

    • advises president, can issue regulations for federal agency compliance with NEPA


Announcements dec 1 2006

NEPA

  • NEPA’s strength: EIS requirement

  • Revolutionary “stop and think” strategy

    • prevents tunnel vision by agencies

  • Emulated by 25 states and 80 countries


Announcements dec 1 2006

April 22th, 1970 – First Earth Day

Organized by Gaylord Nelson

  • 20 million people marched to demand improved environmental quality


Problems of the 1970s

Problems of the 1970s

  • Water Pollution

  • Air Pollution

  • Oil embargo – energy crisis (’73-’74)

    • Environmental concerns faded when energy crisis threatened the economy

  • Love Canal (1978)

  • Three Mile Island (1979)


Announcements dec 1 2006

Environmental Legislation in the 1970s:

Clean Water Act

Clean Air Act

Safe Drinking Water Act

Endangered Species Act

Establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency


Announcements dec 1 2006

Improvement in Air Quality

4/5 primary air pollutants decreased since 1970

Nitrogen oxides per vehicle down, but overall emissions increased due to larger number of cars

Lead emissions way down after switch to unleaded gasoline


Early environmental law kepone

Early Environmental Law: Kepone

  • Illustrates many of reasons why environmental law is necessary

    • workplace health, air and water quality, consumer exposure to hazardous chemicals

  • 1958 - Allied Chemical plants produced pesticide known as Kepone

  • Company tested for toxicity – highly toxic to both rats and mice

    • caused cancer, liver damage, reproductive failure, inhibition of growth and muscle coordination


Kepone

Kepone

  • Started commercial production in VA anyway

  • More negative toxicity tests, increased production

  • From 1966 to 1973 wastes were discharged directly into the James River

    • Later, into municipal sewer system


Kepone1

Kepone

  • Numerous Health impacts on humans

    • causes tremors, liver dysfunction, affects reproductive system

    • 1975 - Doctor in Hopewell, VA made connection, reported

    • 75 cases of acute Kepone poisoning

  • Led to findings of serious contamination in nearby land, water

    • one hundred miles of James River, portions of Chesapeake Bay closed to fishing in 1975


Kepone2

Kepone

  • Variety of lawsuits against Allied

    • plant workers, EPA, fishermen, etc.

    • 10,500 plaintiffs suing for $85 billion

    • Actual settlements unknown

      • stipulation for out of court settlement was not to divulge settlement amount

      • estimates are around $30 million

  • Why did they get away with it for so long?

    • Lack of enforcement mechanisms

    • Plant located in poor area

  • Case led to Clean Water Act of 1977


Endangered species act

Endangered Species Act

  • 1973, 1982, 1895, 1988, 1995

  • Example of “roadblock” statute

    • very clear, unambiguous prohibition

  • Revolutionary

    • 1st piece of legislation anywhere to seriously protect endangered species

  • A number of striking success stories

    • bald eagle, American alligator, etc.


Announcements dec 1 2006

ESA

  • Three pronged approach:

    • 1. Bans import and sale of endangered species or products

    • 2. Prohibits “taking” of any endangered species

      • Cannot kill or capture endangered species

      • Includes habitat modification and degradation

    • 3. Prohibits federal agency programs and projects that harm endangered species


Announcements dec 1 2006

ESA

  • Why protect species?

    • Canaries in coal mine

    • Morally right

    • Potential resources

      • “They are keys to puzzles which we cannot yet solve, and may provide answers to questions we have not yet learned to ask.” - House Resolution

  • Considerable backlash against ESA

    • Interferes with land development, no obvious human importance


Tellico dam case

Tellico Dam Case

  • Tennessee Valley Authority & business groups vs. citizens group including:

    • farmers

    • archaeologists

    • Cherokee Indians

  • Battle over construction of dam on Little Tennessee River

  • 1960s-1980s


Cost benefit analysis 1968

Conducted by the TVA

Cost Benefit Analysis (1968)

  • Benefits

    • Electrical Power$0.9 million

    • Navigation Benefits$0.9 million

    • Flood Control$1.1 million

    • Recreation Benefits$3.7 million

    • Water Supply (agric.)$0.2 million

    • Employment Created$8.1 million

    • Enhanced Land Value$1.6 million

  • Costs

    • Annualized Dam Cost$5 million

    • Annualized Land Costs$0.0 million

  • Net Benefits$11.5 million


Tellico dam

Tellico Dam

  • TVA argued dam would provide recreation, promote industrial development

  • Citizens groups: 300 farm families in valley, used by fishermen and canoeists, sacred to Cherokees

  • Found endangered fish: snail darter

  • Project stopped by ESA’s roadblock statute


Tellico

Tellico

  • Supreme Court halts construction, reaction led to creation of “God Squad”

    • Committee that can declare exceptions to ESA in favor of economics

  • Had hearings on Tellico

    • Developed own plan for development, showed existing plan for dam seriously flawed

  • Request for exemption unanimously declined

    • “I hate to see the snail darter get the credit for stopping a project that was ill-conceived and uneconomic in the first place.”


Cost benefit analysis 1978

Cost Benefit Analysis (1978)

Conducted by the Endangered Species Committee

(“God Squad”)

  • Benefits

    • Electrical Power$2.7 million

    • Navigation Benefits$2.7 million

    • Flood Control$1.0 million

    • Recreation Benefits$2.5 million

    • Water Supply (agric.)$0.15 million

    • Employment Created$0.0 million

    • Enhanced Land Value$0.0 million

  • Costs

    • Annualized Dam Cost$3.2 million

    • Annualized Land Costs$4.0 million

  • Net Benefits$-0.75 million


Tellico1

Tellico

  • Tennessee Senator - slipped rider on appropriations bill

    • Done at last minute, bill never read aloud

    • Made Tellico Dam Project exempt from ESA

  • Cherokees filed new lawsuit, was denied

  • Dam completed

  • No more snail darter in valley

    • Later, other small populations found

  • No industrial, little economic development


Tellico2

Tellico

Ecological Health Indicators atTellico Reservoir, 2001

  • Dissolved oxygenPoor

  • ChlorophyllPoor

  • FishFair

  • Bottom lifePoor

  • SedimentFair


Points to know dec 6

Points to Know – Dec. 6

  • What does it mean to have a governmental policy? What 3 approaches can the government use to regulate behavior?

  • What book is considered to have sparked the modern environmental movement? Who wrote it and what is it about?

  • What does the National Environmental Policy Act do? What is it’s major strength?

  • What is Kepone? Why did it lead to the Clean Water Act of 1977?

  • Why was/is the Endangered Species Act considered revolutionary and controversial?

  • What is the “God Squad,” how did they rule in the Tellico Dam case, and what was the final outcome?


  • Login