Wisconsin conservationists are accusing the Republican-controlled state legislature of trying to weaken environmental protections with several recently proposed changes in state air and water regulations.

Environmental groups say laws that protect the state’s waterways and air quality are under attack. One of their major concerns is Assembly Bill 506, which would remove regulatory protection for many streams by specifically redefining the word “navigable.”

Currently, all waterways in Wisconsin that are considered navigable are in the public domain and subject to governmental supervision.

The word “navigable” is applied to any waterway on which one can float a watercraft, such as a log, at least one day a year.

The currently proposed bill would change this law to consider a waterway navigable and subject to regulation only if it has water in it six months out of the year.

Scott Loomans, spokesperson for state Rep. DuWayne Johnsrud, R-Eastman, who is in favor of the proposals, said the state Department of Natural Resources currently bases its laws and regulations on court decisions. This process makes the laws too broad, he said.

“Changing the definition … would make things easier for Wisconsin residents,” Loomans said.

He added that complaints have been made by residents who want to clean dried-out ditches on their property but cannot because, at some point in the year, the ditch holds enough water to be “navigable.”

However, some say the changes will jeopardize the state’s traditionally good environmental management.

“The Republican proposals would weaken our laws and do away with regulations that make Wisconsin beautiful,” State Rep. Spencer Black, D-Madison, said.

Black also said that regulatory reform is always an option, but the Republican approach would remove important protections, especially for the state’s rivers.

“Wisconsin has good reform,” Black said. “If the Republican proposals become law, we will have dirtier air and dirtier water. Wisconsin’s quality of life is dependent on these regulations.”

Another argument against the proposals is the process Republicans are taking to pass the bills. Black argued that discussion of the issue is being done largely in committees and with little public awareness.

Conservationists also say the bill violates the state’s Public Trust Doctrine, which was designed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court 150 years ago to protect the state’s lakes and streams.

Johnsrud previously argued that the intent of the proposals is to balance environmental protection with economic development. He said they are trying to bring some sense to a regulatory process that he says is discouraging new businesses from coming to Wisconsin.

“Overall, the regulations are too much,” Black said.

Critics are also against other proposals, such as Assembly Bill 514, which they say would weaken the state’s power to issue pollution permits or permits for other environmental activities. The addition of proposal AB 516 allowed legislative committees to recently withdraw rules from the state DNR that would have regulated mercury in Wisconsin as well as hazardous air pollutants.