Public participation in Michigan mining policy : the Kennecott Eagle Project case

Public participation is an important component of Michigan’s Part 632 Nonferrous Mining law and is identified by researchers as important to decision-making processes. The Kennecott Eagle Project, which is located near Marquette, Michigan, is the first mine permitted under Michigan’s new mining regulation, and this research examines how public participation is structured in regulations, how the permitting process occurred during the permitting of the Eagle Project, and how participants in the permitting process perceived their participation. To understand these issues, this research implemented a review of existing mining policy and public participation policy literature, examination of documents related to the Kennecott Eagle Project and completion of semi-structured, ethnographic interviews with participants in the decision-making process. Interviewees identified issues with the structure of participation, the technical nature of the permitting process, concerns about the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality’s (DEQ) handling of mine permitting, and trust among participants. This research found that the permitting of the Kennecott Eagle Mine progressed as structured by regulation and collected technical input on the mine permit application, but did not meet the expectations of some participants who opposed the project. Findings from this research indicated that current mining regulation in Michigan is resilient to public opposition, there is need for more transparency from the Michigan DEQ during the permitting process, and current participatory structures limit the opportunities for some stakeholder groups to influence decision-making.

EPA's Council for Regulatory Environmental Modeling : a case study of science policy implementation

As environmental problems became more complex, policy and regulatory decisions become far more difficult to make. The use of science has become an important practice in the decision making process of many federal agencies. Many different types of scientific information are used to make decisions within the EPA, with computer models becoming especially important. Environmental models are used throughout the EPA in a variety of contexts and their predictive capacity has become highly valued in decision making. The main focus of this research is to examine the EPA’s Council for Regulatory Modeling (CREM) as a case study in addressing science issues, particularly models, in government agencies. Specifically, the goal was to answer the following questions: What is the history of the CREM and how can this information shed light on the process of science policy implementation? What were the goals of implementing the CREM? Were these goals reached and how have they changed? What have been the impediments that the CREM has faced and why did these impediments occur? The three main sources of information for this research came from observations during summer employment with the CREM, document review and supplemental interviews with CREM participants and other members of the modeling community. Examining a history of modeling at the EPA, as well as a history of the CREM, provides insight into the many challenges that are faced when implementing science policy and science policy programs. After examining the many impediments that the CREM has faced in implementing modeling policies, it was clear that the impediments fall into two separate categories, classic and paradoxical. The classic impediments include the more standard impediments to science policy implementation that might be found in any regulatory environment, such as lack of resources and changes in administration. Paradoxical impediments are cyclical in nature, with no clear solution, such as balancing top-down versus bottom-up initiatives and coping with differing perceptions. These impediments, when not properly addressed, severely hinder the ability for organizations to successfully implement science policy.

Federal and state policy influence on woody biomass utilization

A considerable portion of public lands in the United States is at risk of uncharacteristically severe wildfires due to a history of fire suppression. Wildfires already have detrimental impacts on the landscape and on communities in the wildland-urban interface (WUI) due to unnatural and overstocked forests. Strategies to mitigate wildfire risk include mechanical thinning and prescribed burning in areas with high wildfire risk. The material removed is often of little or no economic value. Woody biomass utilization (WBU) could offset the costs of hazardous fuel treatments if removed material could be used for wood products, heat, or electricity production. However, barriers due to transportation costs, removal costs, and physical constraints (such as steep slopes) hinder woody biomass utilization. Various federal and state policies attempt to overcome these barriers. WBU has the potential to aid in wildfire mitigation and meet growing state mandates for renewable energy. This research utilizes interview data from individuals involved with on-the-ground woody biomass removal and utilization to determine how federal and state policies influence woody biomass utilization. Results suggest that there is not one over-arching policy that hinders or promotes woody biomass utilization, but rather woody biomass utilization is hindered by organizational constraints related to time, cost, and quality of land management agencies’ actions. However, the use of stewardship contracting (a hybrid timber sale and service contract) shows promise for increased WBU, especially in states with favorable tax policies and renewable energy mandates. Policy recommendations to promote WBU include renewal of stewardship contracting legislations and a re-evaluation of land cover types suited for WBU. Potential future policies to consider include the indirect role of carbon dioxide emission reduction activities to promote wood energy and future impacts of air quality regulations.

Fish contaminants through the tribal perspective : an ethnography of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community's tribal fish harvest

It has been well documented that many tribal populations and minority groups across the nation have been identified as being at high risk of the adverse health effects created by consuming fish that have been contaminated with mercury, PCBs, DDT, dioxins, and other chemicals. Although fish consumption advisories are intended to inform fish consumers of risks associated with specific species and water bodies, advisories have been the subject of both environmental injustices and treaty rights’ injustices. This means that understanding fish contaminants, through community perspectives is essential to good environmental policy. This study examined the fish contaminant knowledge, impacts on fishing and fish consumption, and the factors that contribute to harvesting decisions and behaviors in one tribal nation in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community. Using ethnographic methods, participant observation and semi-structured interviewing, fieldnotes were kept and all interviews were fully transcribed for data analysis. Among seventeen fishermen and women, contaminants are poorly understood, have had a limited impact on subsistence fishing but have had a substantial impact on commercial fishing activity. But ultimately, all decisions and behaviors are based on their own criteria and within a larger context of knowledge and understanding: the historical and cultural context. The historical context revealed that advisories are viewed as another attack on tribal fishing. The cultural context revealed that it is the fundamental guidance and essential framework associated with all harvesting beliefs, values, and traditional lifeways. These results have implications for advisories. ‘Fish’ and ‘contaminants’ appear differently based on the perceptions and priorities of those who encounter them.