Lack of Trust

For the last two years, state legislators in Michigan have been bickering over rules to govern large scale groundwater withdrawals. It appears that the state house and senate have ironed out differences between versions of the bill passed through each house. As near as I can tell, most sportsmens' and environmental groups are satisfied with the outcome. Of particular importance are protections for coldwater stream levels, provisions for public input on proposed withdrawals, and a system for precise, real-time measurements for water levels in affected areas.

What the bill didn't address decisively was the idea that water resources are held by the state in trust for its people, a notion deriving from common law that has been invoked for protection of the great lakes. Advocates of strong protection of groundwater resources argued that public trust doctrine should govern their use. Those favoring weaker protections viewed water as a commodity to be regulated like others, and whose exploitation should be encouraged. The agreement lent no special support to either view.

I'm glad to see this agreement in place, and it's certainly better than some of the proposals that were considered. But is it asking too much for our officials to commit to managing resources to sustain a broad quality of life in the state, as opposed to not saying outright that they're selling them to the highest bidder?

I suspect what many of them most wish to conserve is their wiggle room.