By Tracey Flower
Special to South Valley Newspapers
While morality and war took center stage during the presidential
election, concerns about the environment lurked in the wings.
And now with President Bush’s reelection, environmentalists are
worried that environmental protections themselves will be
endangered.
By Tracey Flower
Special to South Valley Newspapers
While morality and war took center stage during the presidential election, concerns about the environment lurked in the wings.
And now with President Bush’s reelection, environmentalists are worried that environmental protections themselves will be endangered.
From global warming to local preservation of habitat for endangered species, some are concerned there is not enough money or will to commit to protecting the environment.
But Bush supporters point to the president’s last four years.
Bush has signed legislation he hopes will restore the health of forests and cut down on catastrophic wildfires; he has signed legislation accelerating the cleanup of brownfields, or land that has been so polluted that it can’t be used for anything; and he has signed legislation reauthorizing the CALFED Bay-Delta program, which provides $395 million to provide California with a reliable, clean water supply.
But some environmentalists say it’s not enough.
“There has been an overall lack of concern and funding for the environment in the Bush Administration in the last four years,” said Craig Breon, executive director of the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, “A continuation of this could mean devastating things for land and water conservation in this area.”
Breon stressed the importance of land conservation, particularly in habitat protection for endangered species.
One example, said Breon, are the recently acquired Cargill salt ponds at the southern end of the San Fransisco Bay. The years-long project to convert the area from its previous use as a salt production facility to its original wetland state needs almost $200 million for completion, he said. So far only $8 million has come from the federal government.
Breon says this lack of commitment extends to other, more wide-spread environmental problems.
“No one’s claiming this administration could or should be responsible for solving the problem of global warming, but inactivity could hurt us long term,” he said.
Melissa Hippard, chapter director of the Loma Prieta Chapter of the Sierra Club, shares Breon’s concerns regarding global warming. “Without the environment’s ability to regulate global temperatures we would most likely find ourselves without a comfortable place to live,” she said.
She said global warming could affect local residents because as temperatures increase, less snow falls in the mountains, depleting the water supply more and more each year.
While the Bush Administration has not signed the Kyoto Protocol, a document most recently ratified by Russia in which the 55 member nations pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions significantly by 2012, the administration has set in motion the Clear Skies Initiative. That legislation creates a mandatory program that would reduce power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury by setting a national cap on each pollutant.
The administration plans an 18 percent cut in greenhouse gases by 2012, tax incentives for renewable energy and hybrid and fuel-cell vehicles and a 42 percent increase in climate change research funding.
“President Bush strongly opposes any treaty or policy that would cause the loss of a single American job, let alone the nearly 5 million jobs Kyoto would have cost,” James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said last week in response to a report on a four-year study of global warming.
Mike Leavitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, said that the administration was not dismissing the issue of global warming, but that “Kyoto was a bad treaty for the United States.”
But Hippard, Breon and other environmentalists worry that the Clear Skies Initiative is a weakening of the Clean Air Act – air pollution legislation passed in 1990 – especially with respect to mercury.
Mercury contamination is a particular concern in this area in particular because more than a century of mining has released mercury into the areas waterways and bays, and mercury in the air also finds its way into water, contaminating the fish we eat.
For Hippard and Breon the lists of concerns for the fate of the environment under the Bush administration is long, Hippard laments that there has been no refunding of Superfund, which provides money to clean up toxic waste spills, in the last four years. She points out that this is especially disconcerting for residents in Santa Clara County as the area has had some very large toxic waste spill, including the seeping of perchlorate into groundwater in Morgan Hill.
So, for the next four years, the groups plan to take their case to the people.
“We rely on the environment for breathable air, drinkable water and consumable food. For many people the environment provides recreational opportunities and feeds their spiritual needs. We should also pay attention to government policies because the government has great power over how we interact with our environment,” Hippard said. “We’re not expecting a change in direction in the next four years in terms of government policy and the environment. The Sierra Club plans to continue to do what we can, however, to educate people about the environment.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
