MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters 
Monday, July 14, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 58.0° F  Partly Cloudy
Collapse Photo Bar

The new DNR priorities

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby Henry Vilas » Mon Jan 16, 2012 9:42 am

More changes proposed:

The state Senate is poised to consider a bill that would create new prerequisites for Natural Resources Board members.

Under the Republican measure, starting in 2017 at least one board member must have a background in agriculture and at least three members must have held a hunting, fishing or trapping license in at least seven of the 10 years before they were nominated to the board.


channel3000.com
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19529
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby green union terrace chair » Mon Jan 16, 2012 2:49 pm

bdog wrote:So Henry, you think our exploitation of our natural resources is about right where it's at now?

Or do you think it needs to be less than where it's at now?

How are you contributing to that?

Do you own and drive a gas powered vehicle?

I just want to get a sense of what you think is the correct level of exploitation, thanks.

This is an old comment but I just read this thread now.

The mining industry isn't a simple slider bar with varying levels of exploitation and standardized levels of pollution. There are plenty of measures industry can take to reduce their pollution and environmental footprint. Of course that increases costs and decreases efficiency, but there is a happy medium to be found.

As an example from another industry, you can install scrubbers on the smokestacks of coal power plants. It will never reduce emissions to zero, but makes a big difference.

Like it or not, we will be reliant on fossil fuels for a long time. Domestic production is better than imports. We just need to take measures to do it in a responsible manner.
green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby fisticuffs » Mon Jan 16, 2012 2:56 pm

We just need to take measures to do it in a responsible manner.


That's just radical leftist job-killing commie talk.
fisticuffs
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7778
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 2:49 pm
Location: Slightly outside of Madison

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby jimoo » Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:32 pm

green union terrace chair wrote:
Domestic production is better than imports. We just need to take measures to do it in a responsible manner.



I hate how that is taken as a given. There are some things better about domestic production, but lots of things are not.
jimoo
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:47 pm

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby Henry Vilas » Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:59 pm

The Assembly jobs committee has approved a Republican bill that would streamline Wisconsin's iron mining permit process.

The bill is designed to help Florida-based Gogebic Taconite open an iron mine just south of Lake Superior. The company insists the mine would create hundreds of jobs. Environmentalists fear the mine would pollute one the most pristine regions.


madison.com

Image
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19529
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby green union terrace chair » Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:11 pm

jimoo wrote:
green union terrace chair wrote:
Domestic production is better than imports. We just need to take measures to do it in a responsible manner.



I hate how that is taken as a given. There are some things better about domestic production, but lots of things are not.

Such as?
green union terrace chair
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Memorial Union

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby snoqueen » Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:30 pm

I think the number of jobs created was supposed to be around 700, though I'll happily accept credible corrections. Why doesn't the state just pick 700 people who might work in the mines at say $10 per hour and pay them? Make it $25K or even $30K a year to be generous. We can think up necessary things for them to do, too: maintenance of parks, roadsides and roads, schools, help in government offices, work up to the potential of the worker.

Then we'll get the same social benefits of employment and none of the environmental degradation we can expect with this mine, since no mine like it has ever successfully not harmed the environment. Cleaning up the environment after environmental harm is tremendously expensive, far moreso than the hiring of a few workers. Just ask the Fox River Valley. And it's all on the state or fed to do the cleanup, since the proposed law is written to indemnify the mining company.

Someone tell us why this is not a better idea than that horrible mine.
snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 11269
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby jimoo » Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:56 pm

green union terrace chair wrote:
jimoo wrote:
green union terrace chair wrote:
Domestic production is better than imports. We just need to take measures to do it in a responsible manner.



I hate how that is taken as a given. There are some things better about domestic production, but lots of things are not.

Such as?



Just to focus on two:

1) Value. As natural resources become more scarce, and demand continues to increase, the value of these resources in the ground will only increase. If we can hold off harvesting what we have under our control, and purchase what we need from the international market, it makes sense to do so. We're increasing the value of our resources by doing so.

2) National Security. Right now we can purchase any of the needed energies sources on the international market. As their availability declines and conflicts continue/expand/are generated, that may not be the case in the future. By keeping our fossil fuels intact we provide ourselves with a very important strategic resource while the rest of the world utilizes theirs (and we utilize theirs).

There are of course counter arguments.
jimoo
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:47 pm

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby Detritus » Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:28 pm

jimoo wrote:1) Value. As natural resources become more scarce, and demand continues to increase, the value of these resources in the ground will only increase. If we can hold off harvesting what we have under our control, and purchase what we need from the international market, it makes sense to do so. We're increasing the value of our resources by doing so.

2) National Security. Right now we can purchase any of the needed energies sources on the international market. As their availability declines and conflicts continue/expand/are generated, that may not be the case in the future. By keeping our fossil fuels intact we provide ourselves with a very important strategic resource while the rest of the world utilizes theirs (and we utilize theirs).

3) Environment and pollution. Like it or not, it is better for our environment if the strip mining happens in some other country's national parks, and better for our lungs if someone else is breathing in coal dust. Yes, this is the global equivalent to privatizing wealth while socializing risk, but it is certainly a reason that resource exploitation tends to favor colonial relations.
Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2352
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby jimoo » Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:39 pm

There are a number of pros and cons.

I wanted to focus on the most traditionally conservative ones. It is interesting to me, how conservatism once meant to have a tendency to conserve, but we've gotten away from that.

Not that either side is great on these issues. Actually, they both stink.
jimoo
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:47 pm

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:01 pm

FEMA says mining bill could cut federal flood insurance

A provision in the Assembly mine permitting bill being considered in the state Legislature Thursday could jeopardize the state's access to federal flood insurance, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

...It also relaxes a number of environmental protections for lakes, rivers and wetlands.

One of those provisions would allow a mining company to dispose of mining waste in a floodplain.

But the letter from David Stearrett, chief of FEMA's floodplain management branch, said mining is specifically mentioned in a list of floodplain activities that would jeopardize communities' ability to qualify for federal flood insurance.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19529
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby Detritus » Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:17 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:But the letter from David Stearrett, chief of FEMA's floodplain management branch, said mining is specifically mentioned in a list of floodplain activities that would jeopardize communities' ability to qualify for federal flood insurance.

Damn flood "victims," lazily sucking off the government teat. Why didn't they build higher off the water, like in Maple Bluff?
Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2352
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby Henry Vilas » Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:36 pm

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19529
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby Henry Vilas » Fri Mar 23, 2012 1:29 pm

Gov. Scott Walker has signed a bill that creates new requirements for Natural Resources Board members.

Under the Republican measure, at least one board member would have to have a background in agriculture and at least three members would have to have held a hunting, fishing or trapping license in Wisconsin or another state in at least seven of the 10 years before they were nominated to the board.


Wisconsin State Journal
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19529
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: The new DNR priorities

Postby Henry Vilas » Mon Apr 02, 2012 7:42 pm

Let's see how any new board members deal with this hunting issue:

CWD found in deer in northwest Wisconsin
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19529
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


FacebookcommentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar