Toxic Turmoil...

The town of Opportunity, MT was built in 1914 by the Anaconda Mining Company, which operated the Washoe copper smelter in Anaconda, MT. The byproducts of the smelter included lead, mercury and arsenic, which affected humans, animals and vegetation alike. As the town of Anaconda became less and less livable, the mining company decided to build a new town where mine workers could feel safe and happy. This town was appropriately named Opportunity. However, the town was also bordered by ponds fed partly by natural sources and also by smelter waste. These ponds eventually became a part of the Upper Clark Fork Superfund Site in 1983.

Another major part of the Superfund site is the Milltown Dam, which for years blocked toxic sediment from flowing down the Clark Fork River toward Missoula, a more populous and affluent community in Western Montana. In 1996, an ice jam caused a huge release of water and sediment over the Milltown Dam, causing a widespread fish kill and the need for major cleanup efforts. While implementing the cleanup, there was a disagreement about where the waste should be located. The residents of the East Missoula area vocally opposed the proposal to store waste in their community, and instead joined with other local stakeholders to suggest that the waste be shipped to Opportunity, since the land there was already contaminated.

The issues that Opportunity is facing clearly fall under the umbrella of environmental justice. University of Montana environmental studies professor Robin Saha points out that some of the people affected by this situation can be considered winners, such as the communities that are being cleaned up and the companies that have won major contracts to conduct the cleanup. However, the residents of Opportunity are definitely the "losers" in this situation, being left with all of the costs and none of the benefits.

The two major issues that are addressed in both the readings and in the case of Opportunity are the unfair treatment of a lower-income community and the lack of adequate political representation to prevent this mistreatment. First, the author quotes the following income figures: "Deer Lodge County, home to Opportunity, is one of Montana's poorer counties. In a state where the average income was $35,574 in 2004, Deer Lodge County residents made an average of $30,155 a year. In Missoula County, the figure was $37,172." This clearly shows the income disparity between Opportunity and Missoula, which coincides with Konisky: "areas with larger numbers of minority and lower-income populations are disproportionately subjected to environmental burdens." (p. 102-103) Additionally, the lack of a large minority population in Opportunity also supports Konisky's assertion that income levels may have a greater effect on environmental justice than race.

Finally, the issue that seems to have the most impact in Opportunity is the lack of organized representation by local government to protect against environmental injustices. Ringquist states that "Political power is a function of wealth, education, group organizational skills, frequent participation in the political process, and so forth. Certain citizens, particularly...the poor, have fewer of these resources." (Vig & Kraft, p. 249) According to University of Montana's Professor Saha, "Opportunity's income level, rural location and lack of local government all translate into less political power, and less ability to ward off what's being dumped on them." Saha eventually helped some residents of Opportunity to form the Opportunity Citizens Protection Association (OCPA) which has taken steps to distance the town from being associated with the waste storage decisions and to advocate for fair treatment of the town's citizens. Although the decision to store hazardous waste at Opportunity has already been made, OCPA hopes to ensure a safe and clean future for the community.

Weekly Assignment #5

The first issue that I think Contingent Valuation (CV) could adequately address is light pollution.  Light pollution is particularly aggravated when municipal lighting systems point upward, limiting both public enjoyment and scientific exploration of the night sky.  While light pollution is a widespread issue, it can be effectively addressed at the local level by implementing policies to reduce upward-facing lighting.  This is also an issue that could not be addressed using non-use values, since everyone has access to potentially viewing the night sky.

Another local issue that could be managed using CV is the effect that local dams have on rivers and streams in terms of sediment & pollution.  These are especially local issues that require support and action from the local communities in order to ensure clean-up of the area.  Although fewer citizens generally access rivers and streams than gaze upon the night sky, there are still issues of public health and safety involved in the pollution of waterways, making this an ideal issue for contingent valuation.

Issues that would not be appropriate for consideration under CV include irreplaceable natural features and resources such as endangered species and unique locales.  Many of these features are inaccessible to the general public, but the public is comforted in knowing that they are being protected and preserved.  For example, the Mariana Trench is the deepest known part of the world's oceans, and is a source of a multitude of research and scientific opportunities.  Although an extremely small number of people will visit the Mariana Trench personally, it is a natural environment that should be protected.  Asking the general public to indicate willingness-to-pay for its preservation, however, would not be productive, since the vast majority of citizens have no personal experience with the issue.  

Assignment #4 - General Question

It seems that the issue of public involvement on environmental issues should hinge on the feasibility of providing adequate information to the public from the outset of the project.  Slotterback (2008) suggests that the public should be educated about the environmental issues related to a project even before the scoping process begins.  If the public is made aware of the issue via websites, postcards and other media, they will be more likely to have a substantive effect on the process.  If this education can be carried out in a fiscally responsible manner, it should be included in scoping.  However, if the environmental issues at hand are too detailed or could give the public the ability to do harm, then minimal information should be provided, and the lessened results of public participation should also be noted in the final report.  One of the potential problems with minimizing public involvement is that other stakeholders may not be identified.  In short, it seems to be better to involve the public at some level than not at all.  The question of finding the right extent of public involvement depends on the issue at stake, the public management in charge of the issue, and the resources that are available to educate and interact with the public.

Assignment #3: My Op-Ed

As the U.S. emerged from the environmentally bleak years of the George W. Bush presidency, a new light was visible at the end of the tunnel.  When Barack Obama won the 2008 election and was subsequently sworn in as President, many environmentalists seized on this opportunity for new leadership and enthusiasm.  Indeed, the early days of President Obama's administration were filled with pledges and policy initatives ranging from reducing vehicle emissions to creating a new sector of green-collar jobs in the U.S. economy.  As has been the pattern with past administrations, however, the Obama administration has only made moderate progress toward these sweeping goals in the past four years.  Other issues such as the recovering economy, withdrawal of troops from Iraq and the continuing conflict in the Middle East have commanded much of the President's and Congress' energy.  As the next election rapidly approaches, President Obama is making a renewed bid to focus more heavily on environmental policy.  Touting his achievements, including an increase in use of renewable energy sources, particularly solar and wind power, President Obama hopes to build on the nation's environmental momentum, mirroring the policymaking productivity of the 1970s.

Beginning in the Nixon administration and continuing through Carter's presidency in the late 1970s, the cause of environmentalism enjoyed a period of huge growth and enthusiasm.  With the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970 (Kraft & Vig, 12) came a wave of awareness and action underlining the importance of preserving natural resources.  Existing agencies related to the environment, such as the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, began to take on a more environmentally friendly approach, while other agencies were specifically created with this purpose in mind, namely the Environmental Protection Agency.  These institutions provided support and the ground-level operations needed by both the President and Congress in order to fulfill the rapidly growing number of environmental policy initiatives.  The Clean Air Act (1970), Clean Water Act (1972), and the creation of the "Superfund" to clean up areas marred by toxic waste, among many others, were some of the major policy achievements of this era.  

The 1980s saw President Reagan take office, and with him, a drastic reduction in Federal responsibility for the environment.  At first, Congress seemed to go along with the new President's agenda, emphasizing the economy and state responsibilities for regulating environmental issues.  However, as the scope of environmental agencies was cut back, along with their budgets, Congress was able to use its own power and authority to continue policy decisions that would help conserve natural resources.  Above and beyond the effect the Congress, though, was the impact that President Reagan's actions had on the grassroots environmental movements in the U.S.  Support and activism grew as the environmentally-lax Reagan administration progressed, coming to a peak as President George H. W. Bush took office in 1988.

Moving forward into the 1990s, President Bush (Sr.) began showing his support for environmental issues by pushing for the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.  It became apparent very early in the administration, however, that while George H. W. Bush was clearly more supportive of the environment than Reagan had been, there was still a definite preference for economic support over environmentalism.  As the 1992 election approached, interest and emphasis on environmental issues was heightened once again.  President Bush seemingly reverted back to a more standard conservative stance, supporting the economic and business interests of the nation, while the Democrat's nominee, Bill Clinton, campaigned heavily for the environment.  In addition to Bill Clinton, the Vice Presidential nominee, Al Gore, was also a strong symbol for the importance of the environment in this campaign.  However, after winning the 1992 election, President Clinton had to rely almost solely on his executive authority to make advances for environmental policy, due to the opposition he faced in Congress.  While some important advances were made during President Clinton's administration, such as the increased protection of public lands, the overall perception was that Clinton's administration had been generally ineffective in terms of the environment.

Most recently, prior to the current Obama administration, George W. Bush took office in 2001, and began taking action to reduce Federal regulation of environmental issues.  Much like Reagan, Bush favored economic growth over  protection of the environment, and was seemingly in denial about the detrimental effects of climate change.  When the terrorist attacks on 9/11/01 occurred, general consideration of environmental policy issues seemed to evaporate.  The subsequent military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the deteriorating U.S. economy further distanced environmental policy agendas from the Bush administration's awareness. 

The first four years of the Obama administration have shown increased importance and support for environmental issues, particularly in the areas of sustainable energy and balancing economic concerns by creating new green jobs.  President Obama seems to be following the models set forth in the 1970s for utilizing a period of national enthusiasm to make real strides in environmental policymaking.