PHOENIX -- If every good picnic has its skunk, Louis Blumberg doesn't mind telling you he's one of them. At least he is at this particular picnic, also known as the Environmental Summit on the West, being hosted by the Western Governors Association on Friday and Saturday in Phoenix.
Blumberg, the regional director of the Wilderness Society, was one of but a handful of environmentalists causing somewhat of a stink at the Enlibra summit, attended by about 500 people, most of them business and industry representatives, state officials and federal environmental regulators, including dozens from Utah.Most everyone from the chairman of the President's Council on Environmental Quality to the heads of seemingly every federal and state agency charged with protecting the environment was in Phoenix singing the praises ofEnlibra, a set of environmental principles developed by Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt and Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber to better resolve conflict over environmental issues.
The doctrine, adopted by the Western Governors Association as official policy, is based on basic principles that the federal government should set national environmental standards, but solutions to problems should be developed and implemented locally.
It is a philosophy rooted in the idea that negotiation among all stakeholders, including environmentalists, will generate resolution to the environmental stalemates that have vexed the West for generations.
If both industry and government like the concept, then it must be good environmental policy, the prevalent reasoning goes.
Environmentalists aren't so sure.
"It is very clear from the discussions today that the train has left the station," Blumberg told the Deseret News, referring to what seems to be near-unanimous support for the Enlibra doctrine across local, state and federal jurisdictions and by a plethora of business interests.
"Where that train is going is unclear, and that's what has us very, very concerned. The devil is in the detail, and we haven't seen any details."
The Wilderness Society and other mainstream environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club, say they will actively participate in the "negotiate, not litigate" atmosphere at the heart of Enlibra, a word created by the governors to mean "balance and stewardship." In fact, conservationists welcome what they see as a "kinder, gentler environmental rhetoric" coming out of Western statehouses.
But they also raised serious concerns Friday about what they say are ambiguous and poorly defined principles that could lead to an erosion of federal environmental laws. And there is more than a little suspicion that the kinder, gentler rhetoric is but a facade for the same old anti-environment, anti-federal government policies of the past.
Blumberg cautioned that federal environmental laws were developed through great compromise that "strikes a delicate balance ensuring that the public's resources are not managed for short-term, locally directed economic gain at the expense of long-term environmental values deemed important to the nation as a whole." And there is nothing in Enlibra to change his mind that short-term economic interests aren't behind this new approach.
Kim Graber of the National Wildlife Federation asked Leavitt why the states should be trusted to develop and implement their own solutions to environmental problems when history has shown that states cannot be trusted.
For the past 25 years, states did nothing to clean up their air and water until they were compelled by the federal government to do so.
"I wonder if anything would happen if we left it to voluntary compliance," she said, referring to an Enlibra principle that emphasizes voluntary compliance with environmental law through economic incentives rather than federal enforcement.
Leavitt acknowledged there must be a fundamental change of heart among everyone involved -- state, local and federal governments, citizens and businesses -- for the doctrine to work. "Maybe we have matured as a nation to the point we no longer must be compelled," Leavitt suggested, while not offering an answer to the question.
The Sierra Club issued a statement applauding the fact Western governors recognize there is a problem in how environmental problems are addressed, but they added the caveat "we are frankly skeptical" that Enlibra is anything more than "lofty rhetoric."
"When they say they want balance, I hope that means they want more environmental protection, not less," said Sandy Bahr of the Grand Canyon chapter of the Sierra Club. The groans could be heard throughout an audience dominated by pro-industry interests who openly believe that Enlibra will lead to less-onerous government regulation.
But to borrow Blumberg's analogy, the environmental groups may be grumbling long and hard, but the Enlibra train has left the station. And conservationists are watching it pull out loaded with every side of the environmental debate but their own. Representatives of several environmental groups swallowed their pride and actively participated in roundtable discussions about how the Enlibra doctrine could be fine-tuned.
Prompting any change in the Enlibra doctrine was and will be a tough sell for environmentalists. The new head of the Bureau of Land Management, which oversees most lands in Utah, was in Phoenix to pledge his support. The head of the U.S. Forest Service conveyed his unequivocal support. Several regional supervisors of the Environmental Protection Agency were there unified in support. In fact, one EPA administrator, Felicia Marcus, called Enlibra a "historic and generational opportunity."
That's all pretty remarkable given the fact that Enlibra has grown from casual conversation between Leavitt and Kitzhaber into a movement that now has the attention of the Clinton administration.
Leavitt is not surprised. The momentum, he said, is the result of years and years of frustration on all sides that problems cannot be resolved. People don't want conflict, they want resolution.
"This is not about eliminating conflict," Leavitt said. "It is about giving better problem-solving a chance. It's about creating the energy to move forward."
Kitzhaber, who was actively involved in environmental causes before being elected governor, added that Enlibra needs conflict to be a healthy catalyst for change. But conflict should not be the driving force behind environmental problem-solving.
He noted the traditional tools for addressing environmental problems are government regulations and litigation. "Those tools will still be in the toolbox," he said. "But they don't have to be the first tools we reach for."