From Ashland in the north to Zenda in the south, the voices of Wisconsin farmers, native people, homeowners and other landowners are critical in safeguarding public lands. But their voices aimed at protecting our health, air, water and wild places are diminished through President Trump’s Executive Order 14154.
I’m not a billionaire or politician. I’m a recently retired USDA Forest Service and National Park Service employee who believes in protecting our public land.
For decades, the National Environmental Policy Act, has provided a democratic process for public input when the federal government analyzes environmental and other consequences of federally funded projects – like replacing a bridge, creating bike pathways or installing a petroleum pipeline.
Public input on projects can make all the difference
When a proposed highway project impacts your town, you can suggest an alternative route. A good example in Wisconsin is the Highway 26 bypass. The proposed route would have crossed dairy farms, but based on public input the route was moved to minimize the impact to farmland.
Without the act, the needs of the community would not have been heard. The act requires that analyses adequately consider the consequences of any project on air and water quality, rivers and lakes, wildlife and their habitats, and historic sites.
It also requires that the federal government give the public time to read about a proposed project and the environmental analyses on the plan as well as to allow comments or questions on any part of the project or analyses.
During my career I experienced several examples where local people had more information than the government, and their suggestions made the projects better, such as:
The act is the public’s opportunity to influence federal projects, ensuring that environmental impacts are thoughtfully evaluated and all reasonable alternatives considered.
Trump seeks to short-cut project review process
The Trump administration would like to shorten the review process and potentially short-cut the more in-depth reviews for projects that have high environmental consequences.
The government could improve the efficiency of these environmental studies by hiring more experts whose sole function is these reviews, but the target of the Executive Order is less review and fewer public comments. And with the recent reductions in federal agencies like the National Park Service or Forest Service, there will be fewer people to analyze these projects.
Speeding up the approval process risks reducing environmental protection and public participation. If you didn’t already know about this new rule, it’s because the review and comment period were shortened to limit your input. See, it’s already working! Tell your representatives that you support NEPA so we can have input on federal projects that impact our environment.
Gus Smith is a recently retired USDA Forest Service and National Park Service employee, former Northland College professor and longtime Wisconsin resident.
This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Environmental reviews protect lakes and forests from political chainsaws | Opinion
Reporting by Gus Smith / Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
