Month: May 2002

The Upper Mississippi River system shares many of the physical characteristics of the Upper Paraguay River in Brazil. The Nature Conservancy has been working for more than four years to get people from both countries to share information on problems including pollution, siltation, and invasive species. After a visit last year, some Brazilian scientists are back in the U.S. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports on how the two countries are helping each other to help their rivers:

Transcript

The Upper Mississippi River system shares many of the physical characteristics of the Upper Paraguay River in Brazil. The Nature Conservancy has been working for more than four years to get people from both countries to share information on problems including pollution, siltation, and invasive species. After a visit last year, some Brazilian scientists are back in the U.S. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports on how the two countries are helping each other to help their rivers:

(ambient sound)

A group of scientists are standing on the banks of the Illinois River. The unseasonably warm day has many of them rolling up the sleeves on their denim shirts or fanning themselves with their sweat-soaked ballcaps. They’re watching different ways
researchers use to count the variety and number of fish in the river.

(more ambient sound)

The group includes researchers from Illinois’ Department of Natural Resources and area universities. The other half of the group is a delegation from Brazil – scientists and
government representatives from the Pantanal region. This trip is one stop on a week-long tour through the Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois. Michael Reuter is the Director of the Illinois Chapter of the Nature Conservancy – the group that is hosting the Brazilians during their tour of the Midwest. He says environmentalists have long talked about taking a global perspective to problems. He says this exchange helps put that idea into action:

“We’re trying to shift some of our thinking here to a larger level perspective, a more comprehensive approach. My sense is that we are making too many decisions based on a narrow view… too many decisions where we are looking at one piece of the river, only one piece of the problem.”

The major difference between the Pantanal region that includes the Upper Paraguay River and the Upper Mississippi River valley is that Brazil has not yet done the damage to its
rivers that has happened in the U.S. Pierre Girard is a scientist with the Pantanal Research Institute. He says his country has much to learn from the U.S.’ mistakes. Girard says there’s one important lesson he’s already learned from the Americans. That is for scientists to work with land managers to set up programs to stop problems before they begin.

“We must get managers and the science people together right at the beginning. We must talk and really try to understand each other and see what the objectives are and define them. We have broad objectives, but we do not have specifics yet.”

Girard says Midwest scientists are already providing practical advice on how they can convince developers and farmers to take better care of the land near their rivers. They are already looking at the Midwest’s use of buffer strips to separate farmland from the flood plain. While the Pantanal in many ways looks like the Upper Midwest of 150 years ago, local scientists say there is still a lot they can learn from Brazil.

(ambient sound – on the boat)

Rip Sparks is riding on a small boat through the Illinois River backwaters with some of his Brazilian counterparts. The University of Illinois scientist says the Pantanal is kind of like a 150-year-old photograph of the Mississippi River valley. He says having access to
their research can help efforts to clean up and protect Midwest rivers:

“Their soils haven’t been disturbed in the flood plain. They haven’t had the application of fertilizer that we have had here. So we get the chance to see how the soils function in terms of taking up nutrients and cleaning the water.”

Sparks says being able to share information with the Brazilians is a big deal. That’s because there are no large, undisturbed river systems in the U.S. to serve as a model. But even with the free flow of knowledge, scientists from both countries say there is only so much they can do to protect their respective rivers. Mario Dentes is with the Nature Conservancy’s Chapter in Brazil. He says, ultimately, any effort to protect or restore a river will take money:

“Who is going to pay the bills? The people who made the intervention in our highland? The government? Who? We don’t know yet.”

But Dentes and his American counterparts say that will be an ongoing process. For now, they are setting up ways to share information via the Internet, creating joint research
projects, and planning many more trips to visit each other’s countries, and the rivers they are trying to protect. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.

After several reports that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been playing fast and loose with the numbers to justify big water projects, the Corps has suspended about 150 projects to conduct limited reviews. It’s unclear whether this is a tactical public relations move by the Corps or a genuine attempt to better determine whether the projects are truly needed. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

After several reports that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been playing fast and loose with the numbers to justify big water projects, the Corps has suspended about 150 projects to conduct limited reviews. It’s unclear whether this is a tactical public relations move by the Corps or a genuine attempt to better determine whether the projects are truly
needed. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

For well over a century, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has kept the nation’s waterways clear and open for transportation and has protected cities and farmland from flooding. It has taken on nature and tried to tame it at a cost of billions of dollars a year.

But lately, the Corps of Engineers has become an embattled agency… its fighting whistle-blowers, government reports critical of the Corps’ methods, and environmental groups that blame the Corps for much of the habitat damage on the nation’s waterways.

This most recent round of criticism began two years ago when a senior economist within
the Corps came up with a peer-reviewed method to better indicate whether a water
control project would benefit the economy enough to justify the cost. Through the group
“Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility” -known as PEER- the economist
revealed that Corps of Engineers commanders had rejected the use of that method because its results didn’t say what they wanted it to say. The economist charged that
the Corps then cooked-the-books to try to justify the projects it wanted.

This spring, the Corps troubles were magnified. The President wanted the Corps of Engineers projects scaled back. But the civilian the President appointed to head the Corps asked Congress to pile on projects. So, the President dismissed him. For a time, it was believed that the White House might also remove or reassign the military head of the
Corps, Lieutenant General Robert B. Flowers.

Jeff Ruch is the Executive Director at PEER. He says the Army Corps of Engineers has a crisis of leadership and Flowers’ actions have not been helping the Corps because he’s not been addressing the criticisms squarely.

“General Flowers has many fine qualities, but this is an agency that needed a coach and instead got a cheerleader. During his tenure, the Corps’ credibility among its partners, both in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere, is steadily on the decline. But, he continues to
take the position that everyone should not worry and be happy.”

The agency’s problems led one environmental group to issue a special report on the Corps of Engineers. Each year, the group, American Rivers, publishes an annual report on the nation’s most endangered rivers. This year, it included an additional chapter on the Corps, looking at how many rivers were impacted by Corps project. Eric Eckl is a spokesperson for American Rivers.

“Our look back through the history of the Endangered Rivers report revealed that they have been directly responsible or have contributed in some way to about 60-percent of the Endangered Rivers listings since 1986. And, we felt it was time to take a broader look at why that happens and what causes this agency to keep putting America’s rivers in
danger.”

American Rivers says the Corps frequently pursues construction projects without looking at alternatives that would cost less and be less destructive to rivers. The report also says the Corps’ justifications for projects are often self-serving, claim economic benefit from environmental damage, and result in many projects that aren’t really necessary and fail to produce the promised benefits.

The Corps of Engineers Commander is indignant over the Endangered Rivers report.

“I think American Rivers blaming the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the condition of the rivers is a cheap shot and absolutely not true.”

Lieutenant General Robert Flowers. General Flowers argues that the Corps, at the instruction of Congress for many decades, made the river systems in the U.S. a model of reliable waterway transportation. The Congress wanted it and the Corps built it. Today, Flowers says, the Corps is working to correct the environmental damage of those past decisions made by Congress.

“And so, I think the Corps is contributing to the solution and is not the cause of the problem. And, to state that the Corps of Engineers today is responsible for 60-percent of the problems with rivers in America is a real stretch.”

American Rivers says it’s not a stretch at all. Eric Eckl says the Corps is still doing damage to the environment in many of its current projects including projects that it proposed to Congress.

But when asked if American Rivers thinks the Corps is without any redeeming value. And the environmental group backs off. Again, Eric Eckl…

“America needs the Army Corps of Engineers. It’s the only agency that has the expertise to be a force for restoring our damaged rivers and streams. What we’re looking to bring about is a culture shift within the organization so that that expertise is applied towards doing the right thing more often and avoiding the types of projects that have traditionally defined the agency’s work.”

And so, American Rivers is calling for reforms such as independent review of costly or controversial Corps projects. a better, faster job of repairing or replacing areas where the environment is harmed. require the Corps to maximize both economic development and environmental protection in its projects.

It will take an act of Congress – or several acts – to see those kinds of reforms. That’s a problem because some members of Congress use the Corps of Engineers as a big cookie jar, doling out construction contracts and jobs to constituents.

It leaves some environmentalists skeptical that any real reform will be passed.

Even the Corps’ decision to suspend the 150 projects already funded but still on the drawing board leaves the Corps of Engineers’ critics uncertain. They’re waiting to see if the Corps really reviews the projects properly. Or gives them the green light as soon as critical voices quiet a bit in the media and in Washington, D.C.

For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.

The Midwest is home to some of the nation’s worst polluters – power plants. Some of those plants are old, and have never put in the newer control devices that would help limit their emissions… and perhaps one of the worst emissions is mercury. But now, in a move being watched by states throughout the Midwest, Wisconsin could become the first state in the country to force electric utilities to reduce the amount of mercury their plants put into the air. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:

Transcript

The Midwest is home to some of the nation’s worst
polluters — power plants. Some of those plants are old, and have never
put in the newer control devices that would help limit their emissions…
and perhaps one of the worst emissions is mercury. But now, in a move
being watched by states throughout the Great Lakes, Wisconsin could become
the first state in the country to force electric utilities to reduce the
amount of mercury their plants put into the air. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:

Mercury is a major health concern for humans. If too much is ingested,
it can cause severe neurological damage, especially in children. While
much has been done to reduce mercury use in consumer products, little has
been done to stop the biggest source of mercury — coal-fired power
plants. Much of the coal burned to produce electricity contains elemental
mercury… and right now that mercury is simply released into the air when
the coal is burned. The mercury eventually settles onto the land or the
water. There, it makes its way into the food chain, and ultimately into
humans. The federal government doesn’t currently restrict mercury
emissions from power plants, but now Wisconsin is developing rules that
would force utilities in the state to cut down.

The Department of Natural Resources has proposed a plan by which power plants would reduce their emissions in three stages. The final limit would take place 15 years after the rule goes into effect, and would require a 90% emissions reduction. Utility companies are responding to the state, saying they can probably manage a 40% reduction. Now, two committees are trying to hash out a compromise. They include representatives of environmental groups and utilities. Wisconsin Electric’s Kathleen Standen says her company is actively researching ways to control mercury emissions.

“Environmental objectives and regulations do force technology development, and we would rather be involved at the front end of technology development so that we can meet our own objectives at our own facilities.”

Standen and other utility executives are proposing an alternative to the state’s plan. They want to design individual pollution reduction plans for each power plant. They say that would help them get the best economic — and environmental — return on their investment. Wisconsin Electric recently tested a system in which activated carbon is injected into the plant’s exhaust. The mercury sticks to the carbon, and the carbon and mercury are removed from the exhaust together. According to the company’s tests, the system reduced mercury emissions by as much as 70%, but the new technology is not problem-free. Wisconsin Electric sells its ash to companies that use it to make cement. Adding the carbon changed the ash enough to make it impossible for the companies to use.

Lloyd Eagan oversees the mercury reduction plan
for the Wisconsin DNR. She says the industry proposal for custom-designed
limits on each plant might work. It could encourage companies to come up
with solutions for several pollution problems at the same time. For
example, there is a way to use activated carbon without ruining the ash,
but that method would require the company to build an addition to the
plant called a baghouse.

“If they were going to use one of those baghouses because they were
going to do some other pollution controls, then it makes sense for them to
put that investment in, and that’s what makes this complicated, is to try
to look at this in terms of all the pollutants that they’re trying to
capture, and do it in a very cost-effective manner.”

Scientists think roughly half the mercury in a plant’s exhaust falls close to the plant, and the other half can be transported great distances. So power plants in Minnesota pollute lakes in Wisconsin, and midwestern plants pollute New England waters.
Utilities in Wisconsin say even if they clean up their emissions, Wisconsin lakes will still have too much mercury.

But environmentalists say it’s still Wisconsin’s
responsibility to cut down on its mercury pollution. Russ Ruland is
president of the Wisconsin Muskelunge Club, and he says the state’s
premiere sport fish, the musky, is having trouble reproducing — possibly
because of mercury contamination.

“I don’t see how we either as a state or as the United States can say,
well, we’re not going to do anything until somebody else does it.”

Meanwhile, the Environmental Protection Agency has been working for
more than a year on rules to regulate mercury emissions from utilities
nationwide. In March, the Bush administration announced its Clear Skies
initiative. It includes a cap-and-trade program for mercury and other
hazardous pollutants. That would allow utilities to cut pollution at some
plants but not others.

For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Stephanie Hemphill.

The Great Lakes have long been important for trade. As the United States expanded westward, goods and people often got there by boat. Thunder Bay in Lake Huron was a place where ships found shelter from the Lake’s legendary storms. But the Bay is filled with rocky shoals that caused more than 100 ships to crash. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tamar Charney reports, these shipwrecks are the foundation of a recently created National Marine Sanctuary:

Transcript

The Great Lakes have long been important for trade. As the United States expanded westward, goods and people often got there by boat. Thunder Bay in Lake Huron was a place where ships found shelter from the Lake’s legendary storms, but the Bay is filled with rocky shoals that caused more than 100 ships to crash. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tamar Charney reports, these shipwrecks are the foundation of a recently created National Marine Sanctuary:

Kate Kauffman, from the Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary and Underwater Preserve, is an avid diver. She’s been fascinated with shipwrecks since she saw a 1985 National Geographic Magazine with the Titanic wreck on its cover.

“It’s almost like walking on a Civil War battle site. You get that feeling, that kind of shiver, you feel the history seep through you and the people that worked on those vessels, and I think it’s very important to teach people who aren’t divers how important it is and that’s why I’m here today.”

Recently she’s been spending a lot of time indoors trying to get other people excited about the wrecks in Thunder Bay and the stories they tell about Great Lakes shipping. Today she’s talking to a group of senior citizens in Alpena, Michigan, and showing them pictures of the watery graveyard under the bay their hometown overlooks.

“And this is me…(laughs) hanging upside down, looking at some of the parts of the side wheel steamer which we had done an archeological study site plan of.”

During the 19th and early 20th centuries, trade and supply boats routinely stopped in Alpena on their way to Sault Saint Marie, Green Bay, and Chicago. They carried iron ore, lumber, grain, and all the things needed in the Midwest’s growing cities. But according to historical records at least 115 of these ships sank in Alpena’s Thunder Bay between 1845 and 1966. 42 of them are identified…including an 1830’s double masted schooner, a side-wheel steamer and a modern German freighter. They illustrate the evolution of construction methods and ship design. Some are basically intact and some rest close to the surface just 12 feet down. A year and a half ago, Congress designated this collection of shipwrecks a National Marine Sanctuary. It’s the first one in the Great Lakes region.

Ellen Brody works for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration as the acting manager of the Sanctuary. She says this is only the second sanctuary dedicated to preserving historic artifacts.

“I mean it’s in the National Marine Sanctuary Act that NOAA will protect both cultural and natural, but the focus of the program has been natural with Florida Keys, humpback whales in the Hawaiian Island sanctuary.”

National Marine Sanctuaries are also tourist attractions and Brody expects this sanctuary will become a major draw for divers. That’s partially because there will be displays about Thunder Bay at other sanctuaries around the U.S.

“An underwater sanctuary appeals to divers, but most of us are not divers, so we believe for this to be a success we need to reach out to the people who will never go underwater.”

So far there’s not much to see on the surface, but Brody says in the coming years they’ll create a hi-tech visitors center.

“We’ve been working very closely with the Institute for Exploration which was founded by Dr. Robert Ballard and his image of the sanctuary system is what he calls ring road technology where you actually install a track on the bottom of the sanctuary and have underwater cameras, and people in a visitor’s center or a classroom can operate those cameras and see first-hand what’s down there.”

She says such a system is still far in the future. Meanwhile, the sanctuary wants to find out exactly what is sitting on the bottom of Thunder Bay. This summer a remote-controlled underwater vehicle will be dispatched to take a look around. And teams of volunteer divers are learning how to help out in the search for undiscovered wrecks in Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary and Underwater Preserve.

For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Tamar Charney.