Technologies can keep the effects of a contaminated, polluted, toxic, and depleted environment away from us only for a limited time. Eventually, we will realize that some of this technology is only accelerating the problem. Because our society is rapidly changing, we cannot wait for scientific certainty before we take reasonable actions to protect the environment from further destruction.
We believe that it is the birthright-- indeed a constitutional right--of everyone to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and eat healthy, uncontaminated food that comes from soils that are free from chemical and other contamination. We must appropriately change production and consumption, create or enhance the necessary institutions, and pass the needed laws and regulations and enforce them so as to achieve and maintain ecological health in this state.
We must have a socially and ecologically designed and responsible political-economic system to protect the environment. An economy that is out of control or desperate will put aside legal and other protections that we have established.
Our resources are now being squandered by the military- industrial complex to make the world safe for exploitation by global corporations. We support massive immediate cuts in military spending and the transfer of these resources to building a sustainable, socially and ecologically responsible economy.
Missouri has a great wealth of native biological diversity in glades, savannas, prairies, and forests. In southern Missouri, "the great age and physiographic diversity of the Ozarks make it ... one of the most significant centers of biodiversity in North America." (Missouri Biodiversity Task Force Report, 1991) We will do whatever is necessary to maintain and increase biological diversity in our state. Although we already recognize that other living things deserve to exist in their own right, we are beginning to understand how much we depend on a healthy "web of life" that includes the full range of birds, animals, plants, insects, forests, wetlands, and grasslands and so forth. When they begin to diminish, our future prospects also diminish. We will do whatever we can to protect threatened and endangered species, not only because it is the right thing to do, but because whatever threatens another species threatens us and our children. We advocate increased and sustained efforts to protect the full biological diversity in our state, which includes maintaining adequate natural habitats.
Currently, corporations, public institutions, and individuals can pollute or exploit the environment until they are "proven wrong." The "burden of proof" is on those who are trying to prove that they or the environment are being harmed. It is very difficult to prove the cause of harm and to get legal redress for damages.
Through official policy and the establishment of legal precedent, Missouri could change this situation. We could presume that the status quo is a clean and unpolluted environment and that this is the correct and normal state of being. Consequently, anyone wishing to change this status quo would have to prove that any proposed actions (for example, the building of a chemical plant) would not harm the environment. Therefore, the "burden of proof" is on the entity initiating changes in the environment.
If we end our dependence on non- renewable and foreign- controlled sources of energy, we will strengthen our economy and enhance our environment in Missouri. We can achieve this by reevaluating our technology and energy systems and restructuring these systems to both decrease energy usage and increase usage of renewable sources of energy. Efficiency, innovation, and conservation must become priorities.
A fair tax on all fossil fuels could serve as an incentive to conserve and increase efficiency of fuel use. These taxes could be used to fund the development of renewable energy resources and to restructure systems that are ecologically sustainable.
Inefficient transportation choices waste our resources. Transportation policies must be based on long-term considerations rather than short-term solutions.
We recommend major reforms of the management policies and practices for Missouri's public lands, particularly those managed by the Missouri Department of Conservation and the U.S. Forest Service. Currently, forest management favors commodity production with overt and hidden subsidies that encourage over-exploitation to support the short-term profits of companies. The result is waste and environmental degradation. Conservation rather than short-term advantages to forest product and mining industries must be the highest priority in land management. We recommend an end to all subsidies to private entities who use public lands for profit.
The Missouri Department of Conservation and the U.S. Forest Service are practicing extensive "clearcutting" and other forms of "even age management" (EAM). An example is Mark Twain National Forest. EAM means cutting down most or all trees in an area, often regardless of age, species, size, or quality. The purpose is to cut down as much timber as possible in the shortest amount of time, and eventually to create a forest with patches of trees of mostly the same age and size for the next quick harvest. Clearcutting devastates and fragments the forests. It results in a high- volume, low-quality timber harvest. It also tends to increase certain high-demand game species, such as deer and turkey, to the detriment of many other species. As a result- -encouraged by subsidies of millions of our taxpayer's dollars--our unique hardwood forests are being cut to produce wood for expendable pallets, charcoal, and firewood and to encourage already high populations of deer and turkeys.
The alternative to EAM is uneven- age management that emphasizes selection harvest. This method leaves many high- quality trees that can be used for more high- value applications. The money used to subsidize bad management techniques and industry profits could be applied to developing a forest products industry that adds more manufactured value to the raw material and brings more and higher-paying jobs.
The right to do whatever a person wants to do on their own land is strongly defended in Missouri. However, the ecological damage that can result affects everyone and is often not limited by property lines. We encourage public forums and discussions on the limits of what can be done on private land. These forums held all over the state of Missouri could result in a consensus regarding what is harmful to the well-being of the environment. The goal is to develop precedents and guidelines for private landholders that would result in the enactment of laws and regulations that would address clearly excessive actions. Ecological land management not only benefits the state as a whole but provides long-term economic benefits to the landowners, and the timber and agricultural industries as well.
In the U.S., Missouri ranks high in the production of air pollution, including toxic and hazardous emissions. The worst offenders are automobiles and trucks, electric power generation, and chemical plants. In southern Missouri, "Missouri-type" charcoal kilns, which are exempt from any air emissions standards, cause serious air pollution. Lax air standards put Missouri citizens and the rest of the world population at risk. Missouri's contribution to the world's greenhouse gases and ozone depletion is far too high. Missouri and the earth need and deserve clean air.
Missouri's precious waters are often used wastefully and Missouri's waters and streams are being seriously polluted and degraded by:
Industrial wastewater pretreatment laws are inadequately enforced, allowing large quantities of toxic substances to enter our major river systems. In general, our state water protection system is inadequate, and the Department of Natural Resources Water Pollution Control Program seldom takes enforcement actions against violations. We call for an end to these abuses. All business or industrial wastewater containing any polluting, hazardous, or toxic substance must be treated at the point of production by and at the expense of the producer. We encourage closed-loop systems for the use and reuse of water by industrial or commercial facilities.
Missouri, along with most other states, is being overwhelmed with solid waste. Landfills have been used for disposal but landfills cause pollution and toxification of the land, water, and air. They also waste vast amounts of otherwise reusable materials. Existing landfills are reaching capacity and suitable sites for new landfills are less and less available.
We endorse the three R's: Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle. This is a hierarchy and while recycling is important, it is the last on the list. Recycling alone cannot solve or even effectively deal with the problem by itself. We must first reduce the amount of waste generated, reuse everything possible in its original form, and then recycle as much of the rest as we can.
We approve of the enactment of Senate Bill 530, which sets out to reduce the amount of waste going to landfills by 40% and prohibits certain problem materials from going into the landfills at all. However, the eventual goal must go beyond this. Waste volume can and should be cut by 90% or more.
Increasingly, national and multinational corporations are taking control of waste management. This situation disempowers the local community, reduces opportunities for new businesses and jobs, takes money and valuable resources out of the area, and results in higher waste handling costs. To prevent this, we must encourage local reuse and recycling programs.
We live in a web of life and when we injury any part, we weaken the whole web. We value all life and believe that animals, plants, the living soil, and the earth as a whole have value apart from their usefulness to human beings. Attitudes that demean living things and ecosystems are immoral and diminish ourown spiritual integrity. We strive to eliminate any exploitation, cruelty, and wanton destruction of non-human species. We support an attitude of respect and deep appreciation for the non-human life that is necessary for our own survival and our physical and spiritual health. We are all part of a greater community and we all have certain reasonable rights to exist and thrive. This is not just an ethical consideration, but a matter of survival.
We support: