Proposed by Washington Senator Henry Jackson, the National Environmental Policy Act resulted from growing ecological concern through the 1950s and 1960s.
Smog had caused car accidents in Los Angeles. DDT had entered soil and water, endangering entire species including the American Bald Eagle. Industrial waste burning in the Cayuhoga River had blazed Cleveland’s waterfront.
Without the guidance of environmental standards, federal projects often had conflicted, as in Florida, where the Department of Interior had pursued Everglades preservation near where the Department of Transportation lobbied for an airport. Furthermore, planning for agency projects required little analysis of predictable adverse consequences, and provided few opportunities for public participation.
This became evident when Interstate Highway construction sparked dissent as it threatened neighborhoods coast to coast. Calling for a moratorium in Hartford, historian Lewis Mumford lamented that research for the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, “jammed through Congress so blithely and lightly,” had not involved “study of the real problems.”
In Boston, where neighborhoods had been razed with little notice for a 12 lane Southwest Expressway, citizens protested what they dubbed the “Chinese Wall,” and stalled its construction.
Reflecting Aldo Leopold’s view of the world as “one humming community of cooperations and competitions,” and President Kennedy’s notice of “Americans seizing, using, squandering and belatedly protecting their natural heritage,” the National Environmental Policy Act was signed by President Nixon in 1970 to “prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere.”
NEPA codified environmental policies for federal agencies, and required Environmental Impact Statements — including consideration of alternatives and “No Action” — for projects likely to cause ecological or cultural harm. Though unpopular with many industrialists, and weak-kneed to many conservationists, NEPA was revolutionary for recognizing that natural resource protection yields both cultural and economic benefits.
Comprehensive compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act for border barrier construction would have required a San Diego-to-Brownsville Environmental Impact Statement, along with site-specific assessments for particular actions in discrete ecosystems along the border.
Despite adverse impacts anticipated by DHS, and protests from border residents that echo Mr. Mumford’s lament, all National Environmental Policy Act requirements are now waived.
Nat Stone
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hi,
I am writing a report on the harmful ecological effects of the increased border militarization, and I would love to quote some of what you have written here. Could you share your sources?
Thanks
elenamor13@yahoo.com
Post a Comment