What part of ‘protection’ don’t they get?

Despite recent editorials in which we have compared the state and federal government unfavorably to our local government officials, we don’t think there’s anything wrong with the higher levels of government per se. There are things we need done that simply can’t be done by local government, from building highways to regulating the financial system. One can question how well these functions have been carried out recently, but not the need for centralized authority to take care of some parts of the system on which we depend.

But there are other areas that work better when certain powers gravitate to the locality, and we believe that stewardship of the natural environment in which citizens live and work is one of them. So did Pennsylvania, once upon a time, which is why it created county conservation districts back in 1945.

Locals are ideal stewards because they have the ability to see problems as they are occurring—like excessive silt in runoff from gas drilling pad sites. That firsthand knowledge becomes rapidly attenuated when reports need to be sent to some distant office. Locals are also the ones who have the most at stake. If the environment is damaged, it is locals who will suffer the health, economic and aesthetic impact. They can be relied upon to care and, therefore, to be vigilant and effective.

But recently the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has stripped county conservation districts of responsibility for protecting the environment at natural gas drilling sites, with DEP regional offices now in charge of matters such as erosion, sedimentation and storm-water runoff related to gas drilling. And if the conservation districts receive local complaints about gas drilling, they will have to forward them to the regional DEP.

This is especially disconcerting given several recent actions by Pennsylvania’s governor and state environmental agencies that suggest that they regard the natural environment, and Marcellus Shale residents, as pawns in the game of state finance. First was the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources’ decision to lease to drillers half a million acres of public land, land that could be despoiled for the indefinite future. To add insult to injury, Governor Ed Rendell then proposed taking the revenues from those leases and diverting them into the general treasury, rather than reserving them for conservation. Most lately, John Hanger, the nominee for secretary of the DEP, was reported as saying that drilling would inevitably damage water resources but that the economic benefits were worth it.

Against this background, one can’t help but suspect that the DEP’s usurpation of conservation district powers is a move to expedite commercial interests—and fill the state treasury—at the expense of the environment and the people whose lives will be most severely affected by its exploitation. Indeed, some conservation district officials appear to harbor just such suspicions (see story on page 4).

Hanger also says he understands the difference between being an advocate for the environment and being a public official who has to see all sides of things, implying that as secretary of the DEP, he should no longer be a wholehearted advocate for the environment. Wrong. Something named “Department of Environmental Protection” should figure as an advocate for the environment—period. It’s not its mission to defend or promote business. That’s not because business interests should not be represented, but because our current system of lobbying and campaign finance ensures that business is represented in government to the virtual exclusion of all other sectors. That’s why it was necessary to set up environmental regulatory agencies in the first place. Let business, its lobbyists and the lawmakers in its pockets, advocate for business, and let the DEP advocate for the environment; that’s the only way to get balance in any resulting compromise.

The DEP mission statement says: “It is our mission to protect Pennsylvania’s air, land, and water from pollution and to provide for the health and safety of its citizens through a cleaner environment. We will work as partners with individuals, organizations, governments and businesses to prevent pollution and restore our natural resources.” There’s nothing in there about promoting industry or balancing the budget. We would have more faith in the DEP’s dedication to that mission if it were to hand power over the environmental impact of gas drilling back to the local conservation districts.

Also in this issue:

• Hiatt responds to Sager

Dr. Punnybone

Muscle Bound