Our mission is to protect the habitat of Puget Sound tidelands from the underregulated expansion of new and intensive shellfish aquaculture methods. These methods were never anticipated when the Shoreline Management Act was passed. They are transforming the natural tideland ecosystems in Puget Sound and are resulting in a fractured shoreline habitat. In South Puget Sound much of this has been done with few if any meaningful shoreline permits and with limited public input. It is exactly what the Shoreline Management Act was intended to prevent.

Get involved and contact your elected officials to let them you do not support aquaculture's industrial transformation of Puget Sound's tidelands.

Governor Inslee:
http://www.governor.wa.gov/contact/contact/send-gov-inslee-e-message
Legislative and Congressional contacts:
http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/

Additional information
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/protectourshore
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ProtectOurShoreline



Monday, February 16, 2015

Enviromental Politics: HB 1587 - Environmental law is not a one way street.

What's good for the goose 
should be good for the gander.
"I think we're going to need a bigger gun."
 
Find your Legislator here: http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/
 
House Bill 1587, currently referred to the Committee on Environment, creates a one way street to weaken the ability of citizens to challenge environmental permit approvals made by agencies. This bill, if approved, would allow a company or individual who believes they are "adversely affected" by a challenge to an approval of an environmental decision, to recover legal costs and potentially an additional $50,000, if that challenge is lost in a "judicial review." A company or individual need only show their project was delayed by the appeal of an approval .
 
Politics is messy and environmental law does not go one way
Not included in the bill is the equalizing side, which is that an individual or individuals may recover their legal fees, and potentially an additional $50,000 from a corporation or individual, if the decision to approve a project which is challenged, is overturned and the permit denied in a judicial decision. Or, if a denial of a permit on environmental grounds is challenged by a company or individual, and a judicial review affirms that denial, a citizen or citizens who support that denial are also are allowed to recover their legal fees, plus an additional $50,000.
 
It's not rocket science
To believe that corporations do not use the judicial system to establish precedent, delay implementation of tighter regulatory oversight, use the increase of legal expenses for agencies or individuals as intimidation, or lay the groundwork for weaker mitigation requirements is naïve. This bill should not launch from the pad.
 
 
 
 
 

No comments:

Post a Comment