A group of stakeholders convened by the Michigan DEQ is trying to come up with a consensus statement that all interests can buy as a starting point for negotiations on state water conservation policy or legislation. The text of the first draft follows. It's the kind of statement every Michigan citizen should be allowed to read -- especially since the draft has huge gaps having to do with the spiritual, public health and aesthetic values of water. These are all critical to Michigan's identity as the Great Lakes state.
***************
Michigan Water Policy Stakeholder Committee
Proposed Consensus Problem Statement
-August 9, draft-
Background: With four of the five Great Lakes, 36,000 miles of rivers and streams, five million acres of wetlands, 11,000 inland lakes and ponds, and vast ground water resources, Michigan is truly the water wonderland. These resources serve as the basis for thriving manufacturing, agricultural, and recreational uses, as well as providing critical habitat for fish and wildlife. Simply put, water is essential to Michigan’s current economy and quality of life. Continued economic, environmental, and social health hinges on sound water management, especially as other regions of the country reach the limits of their water supplies.
There are numerous concerns regarding water policy in Michigan. The following areas are offered as consensus problem issue areas that should be addressed by Michigan law.
While related, both statements stand on their own.
1) Diversion of Great Lakes water outside the Basin is an issue that must be addressed. It is a real threat to the long-term environmental and economic health of the state.
Michigan has the most to gain in developing a regulatory mechanism to ensure that Great Lakes water is not diverted out of the Great Lakes watershed...and the most to lose if such a regulatory framework is not developed and implemented. The existing authority to veto diversions was delegated by Congress under WRDA. Congress could rescind or modify that authority for a variety of reasons, one of which is the perceived degree of fairness the Great Lakes states use to make decisions on diversions. That was the driving force behind creation of Annex 2001. When fully implemented, it will provide a Basin-wide framework that will be used by each of the Great Lakes states. Michigan, by developing a regulatory program to regulate water withdrawals now, will be better positioned to both influence the outcomes of Annex 2001 policy development and create leverage to ensure that other Great Lakes states will implement measures to address diversion threats.
2) There is a lack of standards to guide decisions on water withdrawal in Michigan. That lack of standards creates threatens both the environment and future economic development in the state.
Most of Michigan’s high-quality rivers, lakes, and streams rely on inputs of ground water. Depending on the nature of the aquifer and the nature of the surface water system, withdrawals from aquifers with a direct surface water connection can have an adverse ecological impact. At the same time, surface water withdrawals have a direct impact on the hydrology of lakes, rivers, and wetlands.
At the same time, current statutory and case law in Michigan creates a climate of regulatory uncertainty for industry, municipal water suppliers, and the public at large. Water is a resource that is held in trust by the State of Michigan. The people of the state of Michigan have an obligation to ensure that current water withdrawal is considered in the context of opportunities of future water users, and that future water users do not deplete water supplies in a way that adversely impacts existing users. In addition to achieving this balance, water resource regulation in Michigan should help set reasonable expectations to guide private and public investments.
Absent policy in state statute, decision-making will be incremental, ad-hoc, possibly inconsistent, and often emerging from adversarial litigation. Put another way, policy will either be made in state statute or by the courts filling the void as cases are filed, litigated and decided.
Posted by Dave at August 16, 2004 09:13 AM