Many of the last-minute Bush rules are already in effect
(Photo courtesy of the Obama transition team)
The Obama administration would like to stop some new Bush regulations from going into effect. Lester Graham reports some can be stopped, but many more cannot:
Transcript
The Obama administration would like to stop some new Bush regulations from going into effect. Lester Graham reports some can be stopped, but many more cannot:
A memo from Obama’s chief of staff stopped several rules.
But, a lot more of these last-minute Bush rules are already in effect.
Patti Goldman is with the environmental group Earthjustice. She says the Obama team can avoid enforcing the new rules if the new administration thinks they’re not lawful.
“That they are legally doubtful. That’s the language. And that in court the may need to confess error rather than defend the rule.”
But many of the rules passed by the Bush White House are legally solid, and Goldman says there’s not a thing the Obama administration can do about that.
“Because we live in a country that has the rule of law you can’t just undo everything as soon as there’s a change of administration.”
But groups such as Goldman’s can challenge them in court. And they are.
Fishing laws in Canada and US states often protect small fish and are less restrictive with big ones.
(Photo courtesy of the US Fish and Wildlife Service)
People who love to fish spend plenty of money on gear, license fees and even gas for their boats. It’s enough to make anglers think, maybe they’re entitled to keeping the biggest fish for trophies or the frying pan, right? Shawn Allee met a researcher who wants you to throw back your biggest catch:
Transcript
People who love to fish spend plenty of money on gear, license fees and even gas for their boats. It’s enough to make anglers think, maybe they’re entitled to keeping the biggest fish for trophies or the frying pan, right? Shawn Allee met a researcher who wants you to throw back your biggest catch:
This is the guy who wants to change how a lot of people fish.
“My name is Paul Venturelli and I study fisheries biology at the University of Toronto.”
Venturelli’s disturbed by how many fish species are on the brink of collapse – either in oceans or in fresh water.
He hopes to grow fish stocks – with this fishing advice.
Toss the big ones back.
And what’s he got to back that up?
“I’ve got about ten pages of notes here. Nah, I’m kidding. I’m kidding.”
Actually, he says the idea is pretty simple.
“A ton of big, old fish will produce more new fish than a ton of smaller, younger fish. And this is because the bigger, older fish tend to produce offspring that have a higher chance of survival.”
Venturelli studies mostly ocean-species, but he says the principal should apply to North American freshwater fish like pike and walleye, too.
But Venturelli’s got a problem spreading this idea around.
Fishing laws in Canada and a lot of US states often protect small fish and are less restrictive with big ones.
I asked one of the head guys in Illinois fisheries, Joe Ferencak, why that is.
“Essentially what you’re doing with that minimum size limit is protecting one or two year classes of reproductive age fish so they can successfully spawn or reproduce.”
Ferencak says, fisheries science has stood behind the ‘protect the small fish’ theory for decades – with some exceptions.
He says to change laws, Venturelli would need to do more studies.
Plus, Ferencak says no state would want to completely keep people from big fish – that’s just not much fun.
“We want to maintain and enhance these fisheries for the benefit of the fishing public, the angler. And it’s kind of counter-intuitive to not allow them to take these larger fish.”
Well, I figure it wouldn’t be fair to talk about big fish without talking to outdoorsmen, so I spent some time in Griffith, Indiana.
It’s about ten miles from Lake Michigan.
Fishing and hunting outlets are all around – and there’s this place.
Allee: “So what’s the establishment.”
Leap: “American Natural Resources.”
Edward Leap Senior runs American Natural Resources – it’s a taxidermy shop – with stuffed deer, fox, and fish filling every nook and cranny.
I figure Leap would rush to the defense of catching big fish, but, you know what? He doesn’t bite.
Allee: “If you get a whole bunch of fish in your boat, I mean, you want to show off the big one. Most people do, right?”
Leap: “Yes and no, though. When you get talking about the conscientious outdoorsman, no, he’s not going to be thinking this way. He’s going to say, ‘I got this fifteen pound walleye, a super-trophy fish. It took a lot of years to grow this fish, I’m going to take a picture of it and I’m going to release it.'”
And, to prove the point, he reaches back and pulls a fish trophy off the shelf.
“For the trophy part of it, we’ll do a reproduction of it that you can’t tell from the real thing. And the fish now is out there spawning, and making eggs, and continuing its species.”
Leap says more and more fishermen are having him make fake fish – or, reproductions, as he calls them.
So, from his vantage, scientists like Paul Venturelli won’t have too much trouble with the advice to ‘throw back the big ones.’
Leap says you don’t have to keep fish you catch, and in his experience, smaller fish make better eating anyway.
program will only increase the cost of everything.
Dan Lashoff is with the Natural Resources Defense
Council, one of the US CAP members.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham asked him
why the companies in US CAP would want Congress
to come up with a cap-and-trade program now?
Transcript
We can expect Congress will take up a carbon
cap-and-trade bill soon. That would make
greenhouse gases a commodity. The United
States Climate Action Partnership wants to
know the rules of the carbon trading game
sooner rather than later. US CAP is made
up of businesses such as GE, automakers,
some power companies and environmental groups.
Other business leaders say a carbon cap-and-trade
program will only increase the cost of everything.
Dan Lashoff is with the Natural Resources Defense
Council, one of the US CAP members.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham asked him
why the companies in US CAP would want Congress
to come up with a cap-and-trade program now?
Dan Lashoff: The opportunity that we have, right now, is to, first of all, invest
billions of dollars in the economic stimulus package – which the Congress will be
taking up in the next couple of weeks, that President Obama has made clear he
wants to see a substantial portion of that investment go into clean energy
technologies: insulating homes, building a smart grid to carry renewable energy
around the country. So, there’s an immediate step that needs to take place to
get investment flowing, to jump-start the green energy economy that we need.
That should be quickly followed with the type of comprehensive climate policy
that US CAP has called for, because that will guide longer-term investments, it
will mobilize private capital that is needed to build the clean energy future that we
need to have. And that will put people to work installing wind turbines, installing
solar systems, insulating homes, insulating schools. And keep the investment
flowing, and actually create an export opportunity for companies that are making
clean and efficient energy systems that the world is going to increasingly
demand.
Lester Graham: President Obama has talked a lot about the green economy and
green-collar jobs that you just mentioned, but will those jobs actually offset the
economic pain that a cap-and-trade program is expected to cause?
Lashoff: Well, first of all, you have to realize, if we passed a cap-and-trade bill
tomorrow, the actual limits would not kick in until 2012 at the earliest, and, by that
time, hopefully, the economy is really moving forward. So, what the value of
passing the legislation now is that it sets the long-term agenda, it sets the
strategic agenda that’s going to reduce our emissions, and it mobilizes
investment flows. The actual price signal that is needed to discourage global
warming pollution actually wouldn’t kick in for a couple of years, and that actually
works quite well with the timing, that is appropriate given the current economic
crisis.
Graham: The 80% emissions reduction below 2005 levels by 2050 is exactly
what President Obama has suggested we do, but there still are enough
Republicans who hold enough seats in the Senate to block cap-and-trade if they
wanted to. What are the chances of having legislation like this passed?
Lashoff: Well, I’m very optimistic that with the momentum that the US CAP
proposal delivers, the strong business support from at least a significant portion
of the business community, certainly not universal, that we can move forward. It
certainly will require a bi-partisan effort. There will need to be Republicans
joining the Democratic majority in the Senate as well as in the House to enact
legislation. I think we can do that. I think that this proposal provides a lot of
insight into the types of provisions, in addition to the cap itself. Things like
energy efficiency investments that will hold down the costs for consumers,
approaches to dealing with concerns of the economic impact – that chose a
pathway to get legislation enacted, hopefully in 2009.
President Barack Obama wove refences about the environment throughout his inaugural address. Lester Graham reports that approach differs from the typical political view of the issue:
Transcript
President Barack Obama wove references about the environment throughout his inaugural address. Lester Graham reports that approach differs from the typical political view of the issue:
During the inaugural address, President Obama indicated the environment is not an issue, it’s part of all issues.
For example, when he addressed the world, he talked about wealthy nations’ consuming natural resources at a cost to poor nations. He seemed to make reversing global warming as urgent as preventing nuclear winter.
“We will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet.”
And talking about the economy, Mr. Obama talked about new energy.
“We will harness the sun and the wind and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.”
Wayne Fields is an expert on presidential speeches at Washington University. He says Obama doesn’t separate the issues.
“All these are bound together and we take them on all at once.”
He says Obama didn’t compartmentalize issues such as foreign oil and terrorism, or climate change and the economy.
A lot of people who drive gas-electric hybrid cars love how quiet they are. But others say hybrids are so quiet they’re hazardous. People in the blind community say they can’t hear hybrid cars coming… and they’d like to have sound added back into the cars. Rebecca Williams has the story:
Transcript
A lot of people who drive gas-electric hybrid cars love how quiet they are. But others say hybrids are so quiet they’re hazardous. People in the blind community say they can’t hear hybrid cars coming… and they’d like to have sound added back into the cars. Rebecca Williams has the story:
(tap tap tap of white cane)
Fred Wurtzel has excellent hearing but he can’t see.
He can tell by the echo from his white cane when he’s gotten to the edge of a building or the corner of a city block. And he knows cars by their engines.
(sound of car rumbling past)
“That car has a tweety bird under its hood, a loose belt or whatever it was. Now, there was a car going the other direction. (sound of truck going past) That’s probably a UPS truck.”
But he can’t hear hybrid cars – at least not until they’re right at his feet. That’s because the electric motor is very quiet. And when a hybrid comes to a stop, the engine shuts off.
“If you don’t know there’s a hybrid car there waiting, it may start turning and you may step into its path and not even be aware that there’s a car coming around.”
Wurtzel is president of the Michigan chapter of the National Federation of the Blind. He says the blind community wants some sound added back into hybrid vehicles.
“’Course I grew up in the 60’s so a nice Mustang or something like that would be good (laughs)… just a sound that would let me know that the car’s accelerating or the car’s decelerating – whatever a normal vehicle would sound like.”
Well that’s one idea.
Patrick Nyeste has several ideas. He’s a researcher at North Carolina State University. He tried out 18 different sounds on his test subjects.
Everything from sirens (sound of siren)… to whistles (sound of whistle) … to engine sounds (sound of engine).
“I had a horn from a Beetle – so it’s, ‘meep meep,’ and I would just get giggles from that.”
But, he says to make a quiet car safer, the sound needs to be continuous – like a traditional car. That means some sounds can get annoying really fast.
(sound of continuous beeping)
Yeah that’s enough of that.
Nyeste says that engine noise we heard earlier was one of people’s favorites. They also liked white noise (sound of white noise), and the hum sound (sound of humming). He says that’s because we’re used to hearing those kinds of sounds when a car goes by.
He says a sound added to a hybrid also has to be loud enough to be heard above lawn mowers and garbage trucks.
“You want to make sure that the noise is heard, especially by the blind around corners, around objects, I mean some of these sounds can get masked and that’s important information to know where an object or a vehicle is.”
But some people are worried about adding sound to our cities and suburbs, they say they’re already so noisy.
Lotus Engineering says it has a solution for that. They added a four cylinder engine sound to a Toyota Prius. But the volume’s adjustable.
Colin Peachey is an engineer with Lotus.
“You could set the sound to be higher in certain circumstances or quieter in other circumstances. We could actually make the sound to be whatever level we fancied.”
And you don’t have to hear the sound inside the car.
There’s also a startup company in California – Enhanced Vehicle Acoustics. It’s designing a similar system for hybrids.
But it’s not clear how soon quiet cars might start making noise.
Spokespeople for Toyota and the Big Three say their companies are working on solutions. And some states and members of Congress have been talking about requiring hybrids to make some minimum level of sound.
Then, automakers will have to figure out exactly what a hybrid sounds like.
Those at the inauguration are hopeful for change with the Obama administration
(Photo courtesy of the Obama transition team)
People from across the nation and around the world are gathering in the U.S. capital for the inaguration of President Barack Obama. Among them are people who are hopeful an Obama presidency will be better for the environment. Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
People from across the nation and around the world are gathering in the U.S. capital for the inaguration of President Barack Obama. Among them are people who are hopeful an Obama presidency will be better for the environment. Lester Graham reports:
The inauguration of Barack Obama finds people who’ve traveled to Washington DC hopeful.
On the mall, between the capitol building and the Lincoln Memorial, people we interviewed mentioned they’re hopeful for the economy, they’re hopeful for peace.
Jeff Dickson of Finland, Minnesota was an environmental scientist for 25 years. He’s hopeful for the environment.
“I finally found a president who I think is capable of taking this country into a period of environmental responsibility instead of degradation.”
And many people are hoping President Obama finds a way to pursue environmentally friendly alternative energy and conservation in a way that will get us out of the recession and into, what many are calling, the green economy.
The Government Accountability Office identified food safety as one of the major issues for the new administration to address
(Photo by Ken Hammond, courtesy of the USDA)
As President Obama starts looking at
priorities, he or his staff will
have to take a look at the “Urgent
Issues” identified by the Government
Accountability Office. There’s a list
of 13 Urgent Issues, ranging from the
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the
oversight of financial institutions and
markets. Food safety is also on that list.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham
spoke with Lisa Shames. She’s with the
GAO. She says food safety issues such
as the current recall of peanut butter
contaminated by salmonella are becoming
a real concern:
Transcript
As President Obama starts looking at
priorities, he or his staff will
have to take a look at the “Urgent
Issues” identified by the Government
Accountability Office. There’s a list
of 13 Urgent Issues, ranging from the
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the
oversight of financial institutions and
markets. Food safety is also on that list.
The Environment Report’s Lester Graham
spoke with Lisa Shames. She’s with the
GAO. She says food safety issues such
as the current recall of peanut butter
contaminated by salmonella are becoming
a real concern:
Lisa Shames: I think we’re all becoming more aware of how globalized our food
supply is. More and more is being imported. And, we’re also keenly aware of
the publicity that the recent outbreaks have had. Two and a half years ago, it
started with spinach, and, most recently with peanut butter. And, in between,
we’ve become aware of ingredients that may have become part of the food
supply, such as the melamine in pet food, and, most recently, in milk products.
And, we’re also facing the risk that federal dollars are not being spent as
efficiently and effectively as possible.
Lester Graham: Well, I guess I understand that, but I’m more concerned about
whether I can buy food at the supermarket or at other places and be sure that it’s
safe.
Shames: Well, let me say at the outset that, overall, our food supply is generally
safe. But there are challenges, because the demographics are such that we’re
going to be more susceptible to food-borne outbreaks. The population is getting
older, pregnant women are more vulnerable to these food-borne outbreaks, as
well as those who have immune deficiencies.
Graham: Now, a GAO report that I read indicated there are a lot of government
agencies duplicating efforts, and, in some cases, there are gaps in food
inspection. How did we end up with such a hodge-podge of efforts on something
as important as food safety?
Shames: The food safety structure has evolved piece-meal. And, what has
happened is that the Department of Agriculture is responsible for meat, and
poultry, and processed eggs, and the Food and Drug Administration is
responsible for seafood and fresh produce. Even that now has become a little
more fragmented, in that the oversight of catfish is now the responsibility of the
Agriculture Department. So, it’s a system that has many players involved, and
there really is no formal mechanism for them to work in a more coordinated and
efficient manner.
Graham: We also get some conflicting messages from agencies. Recently, the
Food and Drug Administration proposed that women who are pregnant or could
become pregnant eat more fish, while the Environmental Protection Agency
advises that those same women eat less fish because of contaminates such as
mercury. Why is there so much confusion?
Shames: Well, part of it is that there’s no convening mechanism for these
agencies to talk with each other. For example, a number of years ago, there was
a food safety council that was in place. We’ve also found that a government-
wide plan could also ensure that the goals of these agencies are complementary,
as well as the data that they collect, and the information they disseminate is
consistent and minimizes any confusion on the public’s part.
Graham: Are we talking about a sort of food czar?
Shames: Well, that is a possibility. We feel that agencies at least have to sit
around the table. And that really is one of our key recommendations to the
Congress and to the new administration. We’ve also asked for re-examination of
the food laws to make sure that they are consistent and uniform, as well as risk-
based. And that way we can target the scarce federal dollars where they’re
needed the most.
The partnering states want to reduce the amount greenhouse gases coming from car tailpipes. (Photo by Ben VonWaggoner)
Eleven Northeastern states are working together to create a new fuel standard that will mean lower greenhouse gases.
Julie Grant reports that means, when you fill up your car in those states, the gas won’t be quite as bad for the environment:
Transcript
Eleven Northeastern states are working together to create a new fuel standard that will mean lower greenhouse gases.
Julie Grant reports that means, when you fill up your car in those states, the gas won’t be quite as bad for the environment:
The partnering states want to reduce the amount greenhouse gases coming from car tailpipes.
Ian Bowles is Secretary of Energy with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.
He says the states would prefer that the federal government take the lead on this issue, but they’re doing what they can to limit carbon emissions from cars and trucks as soon as possible.
“If everyone waits and sits on their hands until there’s a global agreement, it’s going to take a long time to get anything done.”
Bowles expects the eleven-state agreement to spur investment into new types of ethanol and biofuels. And he says that will mean new jobs in science, engineering, and at fuel refineries.
“We’ll be creating a much bigger market for biofuels. Jobs will get created and greenhouse gasses will be cut.”
The states expect to have a legally binding agreement on the low carbon fuel standard by the end of the year.
Dragonflies are one of the insects tricked by false light (Photo courtesy of the EPA)
Bugs are getting confused by the
reflections from manmade structures.
Rebecca Williams reports on a new study:
Transcript
Bugs are getting confused by the
reflections from manmade structures.
Rebecca Williams reports on a new study:
If you’ve ever noticed swarms of insects hovering over your car, there’s a
good chance they’re mistaking it for water.
Smooth, dark surfaces like cars and asphalt reflect polarized light. That’s
what bugs see – and that tricks insects such as dragonflies.
Bruce Robertson is an author of the study in the journal Frontiers in Ecology
and the Environment.
“Asphalt actually reflects polarized light more strongly than water and so it
looks more like water than water! And so these organisms are thinking
they’re finding a place to breed and hunt and lay eggs and mate when in fact
they’re finding a place that’s very dangerous.”
Robertson says these bugs swarm over buildings and roads in huge numbers,
and can die of exhaustion.
But he says it might be possible to stop tricking the bugs. Things like
adding white curtains to dark windows or adding a little bit of gravel to
asphalt to make the surfaces reflect less polarized light.
Mother-calf pair of "Type C" orcas in the Ross Sea. (Photo by Robert Pitman, NOAA)
Environmentalists have wanted to
“Save the Whales” for decades. But experts
say that can’t happen until the people
realize whales don’t know if they’re in
American waters, Mexican waters or Japanese
waters. Nancy Greenleese reports whales
cannot be saved until all countries protect
them:
Transcript
Environmentalists have wanted to
“Save the Whales” for decades. But experts
say that can’t happen until the people
realize whales don’t know if they’re in
American waters, Mexican waters or Japanese
waters. Nancy Greenleese reports whales
cannot be saved until all countries protect
them:
Whales travel off many countries’ coasts and different countries have different laws
about protecting the animals. Chris Butler Stroud is with the Whale and Dolphin
Conservation Society. He told a United Nation’s conference for the Convention on
Migratory Species that international cooperation is key.
“When countries try to take political action to conserve an animal, they often think of
their own borders. Not remembering that animals are able to move beyond those because
they don’t see the lines in the sand or lines in the water.”
(sound of Gray Whales splashing)
Gray whales swarm around fishing boats off Mexico’s Baja California peninsula.
They’ve traveled -without passports – from the Bering Strait in Russia, into U.S. waters,
through Canada, and back into the U.S. before arriving in Mexico. Here they’re
breeding, and providing a water show to rival Sea World for ecotourists.
“Oh…it’s the baby. Right there! Right next to us. And here comes mom! (Splash) Hey,
wow, right at us.”
There’s an international agreement that bans commercial hunting for gray whales. And
the whales draw tourists. That’s pretty important for a poor country such as Mexico.
The whales are safe here, but not everywhere.
And everywhere the whales travel and threat looms: climate change. Many whale species
migrate to the poles where the ice is disappearing. The World Wildlife Fund predicts
30% of the ice will melt away in the next 30 years unless action is taken.
Wendy Elliot says that means the whales will have to travel even farther to get to the ice
and the food they find there.
“So they’re already hungry, tired, they’ve traveled a long, long way and now they are
going to have 500 km extra to go. So how these species are going to adapt is very
unclear and it’s very concerning.”
Another worry is the growing acidity of sea water. Greenhouse gases from burning fossil
fuels mix with the water and make carbonic acid in the ocean. Monterey Bay Aquarium
Research Institute chemists have determined that the altered chemistry will increase the
distances that underwater sounds travel. That disturbs the communications of marine
mammals. The oceans and seas are becoming a headbangers’ ball from rumbling ships,
air guns used for oil and gas exploration and military sonars.
Nicolas Entrup, managing director for the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society,
lobbied at the UN meeting for an international resolution on marine noise pollution.
“Look, we stressed to the governments that underwater noise is a key threat to whales and
dolphins in the ocean. These animals are acoustic animals.”
The Whale and Dolphin Conservation society says research shows loud underwater
noises causes some whales to beach themselves.
At the UN conference, nations passed watered-down resolution to reduce ship sounds.
They did nothing about the noises made by oil and gas industry and the military. Entrup
is furious.
What we’ve passed is absolutely not enough. And I have to say it’s giving in to the
interests of the military and the industries in that occasion. That’s really bad.”
Officials admit that industrial noise can be reduced but the military, that’s another matter.
The 85 governments at the U.N. conference did agree to provide addition protection for
some small whales. But putting any initiatives into effect will be difficult. The global
financial crisis has drastically limited countries’ contributions to field research on whales
and other migratory species. Entrup with the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society
says the nations of the world cannot ignore the problems.
“If you care, then start now and do not wait until it’s too late. That’s expensive, that’s
irrational, that’s stupid.”
Wildlife groups say rich countries have to reach across borders and give a hand to poorer
countries if we’re going to save the whales.
Many of the last-minute Bush rules are already in effect (Photo courtesy of the Obama transition team)
