Lawmakers, pass legislation to save Illinois wetlands, waterways

Pat Nabong/Sun-Times

Look up to the sky, and you’ll probably notice a few more feathered friends than usual in Chicago. It’s spring migration, a time when millions of birds will come flocking through our city. We have lost nearly 3 billion birds across North America since 1970, and spring migration is a dangerous time for those that remain. Birds improve our quality of life and are important to our environment, providing benefits such as pollination and insect reduction.

We can protect birds, and other wildlife, by protecting our Illinois wetlands, which includes the South Side's Washington Park. It's in these wetlands that birds, like the state-threatened least bittern, find the habitat they need to thrive. This small heron is just one of more than 100 bird species and countless other wildlife that depend on Illinois' wetlands.

Wetlands are also important for our communities. They help keep our water clean and store an incredible amount of water to help protect our homes and businesses from flooding. But these important natural areas are at risk.

A 2023 Supreme Court decision rolled back the federal Clean Water Act and overturned decades of protection for Illinois wetlands, leaving them vulnerable to destruction. New legislation would protect our state’s wetlands for the wildlife and communities that depend on them.

Illinois has already lost 90% of its historic wetlands. There has never been a more important time for our state to pass legislation to protect wetlands. I urge my state Rep. Kam Buckner and other elected leaders to vote "yes" for the Wetlands and Small Streams Protection Act, which would enact state-level protections for wetlands and waterways across Illinois. Our wildlife and communities depend on it.

Clare Connor, member, Chicago Bird Alliance

What can Bears do without public funding?

The Bears' ownership has unveiled new plans for a stunning new stadium, with an enviable location and amenities second to none. The renderings are very pretty, except the plan requires $1.5 billion in public financing.

The Bears, instead, should show us what they can do without public investment. It might not be as pretty, but that's the stadium I want to see built.

Benjamin Recchie, Little Italy

Instead of tax money for the Bears, how about tax breaks for the environment?

That the planet is overheating is no longer a matter of debate. Maddeningly, one of the most practical solutions has not been widely used. While Chicago politicians swoon over the Bears' proposed plan for yet another needless "improvement" to the lakefront, white and light-colored roofs have been proven to mitigate the punishing roasting of our citizens by the sun. Still, as of now, there’s no Chicago law nor resolution requiring anyone to give up dark shingles, tar and their ilk. Why not?

Instead of more money out of our pockets for playgrounds for rich and famous athletes and their team owners, I propose reducing taxes for any and every property where the owners do the right thing for their communities and themselves or their tenants by installing a new heat-reflective roof or painting the existing ones. We also have to acknowledge that not all green space is created equal. The Bears' breathless plans, so far, look to have some playing fields, but too much real green, of park and schools, has already been smothered by artificial turf, which is plastic.

Instead of another stadium, the steps of planting true greenery and painting roofs white, taken by thousands of ordinary and conscientious Chicagoans, must be chosen, to make the best long-term difference to our health and environmental safety.

Maja Ramírez, OpenLands’ TreeKeeper, Avondale