A proposed national clean water trust fund will be debated in Congress over the next year, with help from a leading House Republican. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach has the story:
Transcript
A proposed national clean water trust fund will be debated in Congress
over the next year, with help from a leading House Republican. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach has the story:
Sewage treatment agencies and some environmental groups have been
pushing for a dedicated national fund to help control sewer overflows
and protect regional waters like the Great Lakes.
Recently, House Water Resources Sub-Committee Chair John Duncan,
Junior introduced the Clean Water Trust Act. The Tennessee Republican
says the nation’s water infrastructure needs more federal money, but it
isn’t clear where Congress would find the 38 billion dollars over five
years.
Ken Kirk of National Association of Clean Water Agencies says he
doesn’t know yet who would pay.
“But I think if you would poll the American people, I think you would
find at least two things. One, clean water is a high priority, and
two, they are willing to pay more.”
Kirk contends a clean water trust fund would be similar to programs
financing highways and airports.
Some bottling companies, such as Besco, sell water, but keep it in the Great Lakes basin. Some others bottle it and ship it out of the region in great quantities. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Experts say one of the Ten Threats to the Great Lakes is water withdrawal. Water is taken from the Great Lakes for agriculture, industry, and public drinking supplies. Lester Graham reports there are many ways that water is used and shipped out of the Great Lakes basin, but few are more controversial than bottled water:
Transcript
Experts say one of the Ten Threats to the Great Lakes is water
withdrawal. Water is taken from the Great Lakes for agriculture,
industry, and public drinking supplies. Lester Graham reports there are
many ways that water is used and shipped out of the Great Lakes basin,
but few are more controversial than bottled water:
(Sound of bottling plant)
I’m watching big clear-blue water bottles, the kind you see on water coolers, are
bouncing along on a conveyer to be washed and then filled with water.
Chuck Swartzle is the President of Besco Water Treatment…
“Uh, we treat it – it’s well water – we treat it, purify it with reverse
osmosis, sanitize it, filter it and bottle it.”
Besco also bottles water in smaller containers, the kind you might buy at
the convenience store.
All of Besco’s customers are within the Great Lakes basin, so the water
will eventually make its way back to the lakes, but some bottlers
distribute water far outside the basin.
One of Pepsico’s Aquafina bottled water plants gets its water from the
Detroit River, which connects the upper Great Lakes to the lower lakes.
Aquafina’s bottled water is distributed inside and outside the basin. That
means Great Lakes water is being trucked away. It’s a net loss of water to the
basin.
That’s not anything new. Water from the Great Lakes basin in the form
of beer from Milwaukee or milk from Minnesota or any of the other
products you can think of that are mostly water are shipped far and wide
and have been for a long time, but some environmentalists say trucking bottled water
away is different. They argue it’s a lot like a recent attempt to take tanker ships
of Lake Superior water to Asia. It’s not like a value-added product that’s made
from water, it’s just water.
Bill Lobenherz is a lobbyist for the Michigan Soft Drink Association.
He says bottled water is a value-added product, just like the many others.
“Indeed, there’s a lot more water in lumber, for example, Christmas
trees, and sometimes a lot less value added to it too. You don’t have to
do that much to cut it and ship it. Cherries, baby food and other non-
consumable products like paint. What about the water we have to put in
the automobile radiators? I really don’t know that there is a distinction
there. It seems to be more of a misplaced perception than it is any kind
of environmental reality.”
“I guess I’m having a hard time getting my head around the difference
shipping water out in a truck-load of bottles and shipping it out by
tanker. What’s the real difference there?”
“I think the difference is that there’s the fear that if it’s by tanker in those
quantities, that it could be abused. If it’s in bottles, it’s really quite
controllable, because there’s so much more value added to put it in small
bottles.”
Not everyone is buying that argument.
Dave Dempsey is the Great Lakes advisor for the environmental group Clean Water Action.
He says the most recent debates about water withdrawals started when that shipping company
planned to take about 156-million gallons a year to Asia. Dempsey says a single new bottled
water plant trucks away even more than that.
“The Nestle’ project, a single project in Michigan that has been sited and
is operating takes 168-million gallons per year. So, the volumes can be
greater in bottles than in tankers.”
But that’s still not that much water compared to other uses.
According to figures in a report by the Great Lakes Commission, the
cities and industries around the Great Lakes withdraw more than 43
billion gallons a day. Much of it is used and returned to the lakes, but
nearly two billion gallons a day is lost. It’s not returned to the lakes
because it evaporates or it’s incorporated into products. Two billion
gallons a day makes the Nestle’ bottled water plant’s 168-million gallons
a year seem minor.
But Dave Dempsey argues there’s a more sinister concern. He believes
if water is treated like any other commodity, large corporations that can
profit from it will begin to horde it, and control it.
“You will hear bottled water companies say that they’re just another user
like a farmer or a manufacturer or even a city water supply, but they’re
not because they’re asserting private ownership of a public resource and
if we essentially allow that by not putting controls on the water-for-sale
industry now, I’m afraid the Great Lakes may become the world’s largest
privately owned reservoir.”
A recent agreement between the states and provinces around the Great
Lakes allows bottled water to be shipped out in bottles as large as five-
gallons, but some environmentalists say that’s a slippery slope. They say
corporations will soon be asking why just five gallons? Why not 55-
gallon barrels? And then, tankers.
The bottling industry says the environmentalists are making a big deal
out of nothing, and would do better spending their time teaching
everyone to conserve water better instead of complaining about someone
in another state quenching their thirst with a bottle of water from the
Great Lakes.
Construction along the shorelines can put a strain on natural systems. (Photo by Carole Swinehart/Michigan Sea Grant Extension)
One of the more subtle but relentless threats to the Great Lakes is
coastal development. Condos, ever larger and nicer beach homes
and buildings and parking lots in the watershed all have an
impact on the Lakes. As the population grows and the suburban
lifestyle keeps spreading, the health of the lakes is compromised
in countless tiny ways. Reporter Peter Payette finds those tiny
ways all add up:
Transcript
We’re continuing our look at ‘Ten Threats to the Great Lakes.’
Lester Graham is our guide through the series. He says the
experts who were surveyed to determine the threats say rapid
development is among the problems affecting the lakes:
One of the more subtle but relentless threats to the Great Lakes is
coastal development. Condos, ever larger and nicer beach homes
and buildings and parking lots in the watershed all have an
impact on the Lakes. As the population grows and the suburban
lifestyle keeps spreading, the health of the lakes is compromised
in countless tiny ways. Reporter Peter Payette finds those tiny
ways all add up:
Greg Reisig is standing at the edge of a 20-acre construction site
just down the street from the shore Lake Michigan.
Below him is a man-made pond a few hundred feet long. It was a
dry summer around here, but the pond is full.
In fact, Reisig says the water level is always the same.
“And that indicates there’s a lot of ground water flowing
here…there’s a lot of water in this pond and you can see what
was a whole big wetland complex…there’s a lot of cedar and red
osier dogwood…all the wetland plants.”
There are no wetlands here now.
The site in northern Michigan was excavated for homes a few
years ago.
But now the Army Corps of Engineers says the wetlands that
were here need to be restored. A few acres likely will be
restored. But Reisig says almost the whole site was wetlands
once. He expects it will soon be a subdivision with not much
more than a drainage ditch connecting it to Lake Michigan.
“What will that do to the amount of flow of water going into the
bay? Because of hard road surfaces, hard driveways, roofs,
buildings and supposedly fertilized lawns. What will happen to
the water and how will that increase the flow to the bay?”
The developer’s attorney says this is nonsense. Matt Vermetten
says this land was heavily farmed and mined for clay.
“There are pockets of quote unquote wetland and those are there
because of excavation for clay. So is this a wetland complex of
the nature we speak of when we typically speak of such a thing? I
think not.”
Disputes like this are becoming more common around the Great
Lakes. John Nelson is the baykeeper with the Grand Traverse
Bay Watershed Center. The bay off Lake Michigan and attracts a
lot of people. But Nelson says development doesn’t have to be a
problem.
He says the problem is people don’t think about the ecology of
the lakes. For example, east of Traverse City, Michigan, resorts
dominate the coastline. Along the beach, thick stands of sedges
and rushes extend out a few hundred feet. But the sections of
dark green marsh alternate with stretches of clean sand and white
lawn chairs.
(birds calling on beach)
Nelson grew up here and says this part of the lake was never a
sugar sand beach.
“They’ve located in a coastal marsh. Instead of celebrating and
dealing with that they’ve chosen to see it as they would like to
have it and then change it.”
The impacts of the changes are cumulative. Fish and wildlife
habitat is fragmented. The natural filtering properties of the
wetlands are gone.
So every time the city gets a rain shower all the dust and grime
and pollution are washed right into the lake.
Census data show people are leaving many of the Great Lakes
coastal cities and spreading out along the coastline. But it’s not
clear how local governments should plan for the growth.
Mike Klepinger studies land use planning for the Michigan Sea
Grant program. He says it’s hard to make direct connections
between a healthy lake and particular land uses.
“We are getting more planning along the shoreline than we had
thirty years ago in the state. The number of counties and number
of townships that have a plan has gone up, for example. But we
don’t know whether those plans are really doing any good.”
And it’s hard to implement good planning on a broad basis. In
any area, dozens of different local governments might have
independent control over development.
Multiply that by the number cities, townships and counties along
the coasts of the Great Lakes… and it’s hard to see how it all can
be managed so that enough coastline habitat is preserved.
A recent Michigan Supreme Court decision intended to solve controversy between lake shore property owners and beach walkers has stirred up yet more controversy. (Photo courtesy of the NOAA)
Many people enjoy strolling the beaches of the Great Lakes, and believe it’s as much their shoreline as anyone else’s. But there are a lot of lakefront property owners who believe that beach strolling amounts to trespassing. And in at least two states in the region, that dispute has wound up in the courts. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta has
more:
Transcript
Many people enjoy strolling the beaches of the Great Lakes, and believe it’s as much their shoreline as anyone else’s. But there are a lot of lakefront property owners who believe that beach strolling amounts to trespassing, and in at least two states in the region, that dispute has wound up in the courts. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta has more:
In Michigan, the state Supreme Court recently declared the entire 3,200 miles of Great Lakes coast is public property. But a group of lakefront property owners says the decision has created a host of problems.
They’re complaining that it appears to leave them with no recourse for dealing with people who cross the line of considerate behavior, such as loud picnickers, and careless dog-walkers. Ernie Krygier is with one of the most active property owners’ groups, Save Our Shoreline.
“There’s a lot of other instances that we’re concerned with, and it all goes back to ownership and control to the water’s edge. If you don’t own it, it’s going to be very difficult to control it.”
The Michigan property owners now want the state Supreme Court to issue a more-detailed ruling on what’s allowed and not allowed on the Great Lakes beaches. Krygier says they’re also hoping to win back at least some of the shoreline.
If not, he says, the property owners could file a lawsuit claiming the court’s action amounts to a seizure of their property, and they’re entitled to perhaps billions of dollars in compensation.
(Sound of beach)
A sign posted here on a Lake Michigan beach by a property owners’ association warns people who might wander past that they’re about to tread upon private property, but many people walk right past it anyway to enjoy a stroll on the shoreline. Jim Wright lives nearby, and says he’s walked this stretch of beach for twenty years.
“They, they put out little signs and that. But the signs, you know, are not anything official. It’s just something they got from a signmaker. And so we just kind of ignore them, and they accept them being ignored.”
The recent Michigan Supreme Court said it’s okay for Wright and everyone else to ignore the sign. The ruling said Great Lakes beaches are a unique resource, held in trust by the state for the public to use and enjoy.
The court said public access in Michigan extends from the water to the high water line. That line meanders from beach to beach, from lake to lake, and from season to season. It’s generally indicated by debris deposits, or the absence of beach grass and other vegetation, and Jim Wright says the court made the right decision.
“I’ve always felt that the whole shoreline belongs to the state and no one person, so that was a good ruling that they made and I think most people will be very happy with it.”
It’s a controversy that’s playing out in other Great Lakes states. In Ohio, officials are saying the Michigan decision supports their position that the Lake Erie coast belongs to the public. Shoreline property owners there are suing the state, asking a federal court to declare they own the beaches adjacent to their property.
Noah Hall is a Wayne State University environmental law professor who’s filed briefs on behalf of conservation organizations supporting public access to the entire Great Lakes shoreline. He says the Michigan decision will have a regional impact.
“I think that it would be completely reasonable and expected for another state to look very hard at Michigan’s reasoning and analysis in this case and probably adopt a similar line.”
He says the Michigan decision is a boost to those arguing the entire Great Lakes shoreline belongs to the public, and not to any private interest.
Republican Congressman Mike Rogers. (Photo courtesy of house.gov)
Some environmentalists say they’re outraged that a Michigan Member of Congress blocked a bill to permanently ban oil and gas drilling in the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Some environmentalists are outraged that a Michigan Member of Congress blocked a bill to permanently ban oil and gas drilling in the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Republican Congressman Mike Rogers blocked a bi-partisan federal effort to ban drilling in the Great Lakes. Rogers’ office says taking state control away on drilling could lead to taking state control away on other issues such as water withdrawal. He doesn’t want the more politically powerful arid Southwest states using it as a precedent to take federal control of the Great Lakes.
Cyndi Roper is with the environmental group, Clean Water Action. Her group and others say under the guise of protecting the Great Lakes, Rogers is actually exposing the Lakes to new risks.
“By putting a ban on oil and gas drilling in the Great Lakes, this isn’t an issue of control of the Great Lakes, it’s an issue of protecting the Great Lakes.”
There is a moratorium on new drilling on the Lakes that expires in 2007. It will then be up to each individual state to decide whether to allow new drilling.
Many power plants like this one emit a large volume of polluting gases. Unlike those power plants, Ohio Edison decided to settle the lawsuit filed against the Sammis Plant by installing equipment to reduce pollution. (Photo by Lynne Lancaster)
More than five years ago, several eastern states filed suit against Midwest power companies. They claimed the power companies were violating the Clean Air Act, and their residents were suffering from air pollution that drifts eastward. Now, one of the power companies named in the lawsuit has settled. And as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jo Ingles reports, environmentalists think this agreement might prompt other utilities to follow suit:
Transcript
More than five years ago several eastern states filed suit against Midwest power companies. They claimed the power companies were violating the clean air act, and their residents were suffering from air pollution that drifts eastward. Now, one of the power companies named in the lawsuit has settled. And as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jo Ingles reports, environmentalists think this agreement might prompt other utilities to follow suit:
Ohio Edison has agreed to pay more than a billion dollars over the next seven years to install pollution control equipment that will reduce the amount of pollution emitted into the air from the Sammis Plant near Steubenville, Ohio.
In addition, the company will spend ten million dollars over the next five years for alternative energy projects in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. Plus Thomas Sansonetti with the U.S. Justice department says the company will pay a huge fine.
“In fact, it’s the second largest civil penalty ever obtained in this field….it’s 8.5 million dollars.”
Environmentalists are cheering the settlement, saying it will prompt other power companies that have polluted in the past to pay up.
First Energy, the parent company of Ohio Edison, says it’s happy to settle this lawsuit because it can now plan for its future.
Feral pigs have become a nuisance in Wisconsin, and DNR officials fear that if their numbers do not decrease, they will do a significant amount of damage. (Photo courtesy of the Wisconsin DNR)
Ag officials are tracking a big pig problem across Wisconsin. Since 1999, growing numbers of feral swine have appeared across the state. And as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Brian Bull reports, officials now fear the spread of the wild pigs:
Transcript
Ag officials are tracking a big pig problem across Wisconsin. Since 1999, growing numbers of feral swine have appeared across the state. And as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Brian Bull reports, officials now fear the spread of the wild pigs:
The woolly porkers have appeared in 23 of Wisconsin’s 72 counties. They’re damaging crops, digging out ground-nesting birds, and killing small deer. They may also cary pseudorabies and swine brucellosis, threatening domestic pigs.
Wayne Edgerton is agricultural policy director of Minnesota’s DNR. He says the problem could easily spread into his territory.
“They can certainly walk across the ice, so this time of the year they can come across to Minnesota. And I’ve heard they’re actually good swimmers. So even in summertime, they could get their way over to northern Minnesota.”
Some people have speculated that Minnesota’s intense winters would kill off any feral swine crossing the border. But Tim DeVeau, a veterinary medical officer of the USDA, says that’s unlikely.
“As long as they’ve got food, and they’re gonna put fat on, they’ll be well-insulated.”
DeVeau adds that in order to keep wild pigs’ numbers under control, at least 75% of the population has to be destroyed every year. He says that’s not happening.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Brian Bull.
Starting January first, the U.S. will let farms and certain
other businesses use more of the pesticide methyl bromide. But
environmentalists may go to court over the issue. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
Starting January 1st, the U.S. will let farms and certain other businesses use more
of the pesticide
methyl bromide. But environmentalists may go to court on the issue. The Great
Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Methyl bromide is used to sterilize soil before planting and to fight invasive
insects that come
into the U.S. on wooden pallets. But scientists say emissions of methyl bromide
harm the ozone
layer. In the 1980s, the U.S. agreed to phase out use of the compound, except for
critical cases
where there are no feasible alternatives.
Methyl bromide use is only a third of what it was in 1991. But the Bush
administration wants to
let that figure rise to 37 percent this coming year. David Doniger is with the
Natural Resources
Defense Council. He says he doubts whether more methyl bromide is needed.
“The problem is the critical use exemptions have mushroomed… way out of control.
So we’re
going backwards.”
The U.S. has agreed to reduce use of methyl bromide in 2006… but critics say that
promise may not be kept. The NRDC says it’s likely to challenge the 2005 plan in
court. An
Indiana company is one of the nation’s largest suppliers of methyl bromide.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.
Life in the suburbs is idyllic to some people... (Photo by Bon Searle)
...and many rats, now that the sewers have been flooded. (Photo by Tamara Bauer)
Unusually heavy rains this summer are partly to blame
for rats pouring out of the sewers in droves all over the country, and the nasty vermin are relocating to some of the most pristine
neighborhoods. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Joyce
Kryszak explains what caused the rat invasion and
what’s being done to evict them:
Transcript
Unusually heavy rains this summer are partly to blame for rats pouring out of the sewers
in droves all over the country. And the nasty vermin are relocating to some of the most
pristine neighborhoods. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Joyce Kryszak explains what
caused the rat invasion and what’s being done to evict them:
Piercing blue autumn skies and billowing white clouds drift across the chimneys of this modest,
but perfectly manicured suburb. There aren’t even many leaves crunching under foot. Town workers
have already come and vacuumed them all away. But there’s a nasty little secret scurrying under
the porches and behind the garden sheds in this Western New York town. County Sanitation Chief
Peter Tripi takes us for a peek.
“Can you see the teeth marks here? That’s actually rat gnaw marks. And there’s the garbage bag.
And that’s what we found when we went to this property.”
Now, you might be thinking that we trudged through derelict grass and scattered debris to find
these rat clues. Nope. This is a gorgeous, manicured yard – with not a blade of grass out of
place. But Tripi says rats aren’t choosy.
“You would never think by looking side to side that there would be a rat problem in this yard.
Doesn’t matter what neighborhood you live in, or how much money you’ve got. There’s no difference.
They just like your food.”
And you’d be surprised where rats can find food. A garbage can left even briefly uncovered, a
neglected bird feeder, uhhh… dog feces… and even a compost pile.
“Absolutely. This is a rat condo. It’s a grass-clipping compost pile that basically housed rats
to go a hundred yard radius all the way around to the different houses.”
Tripi says rats had to get creative with their housing. A summer of extremely heavy rains drove
the out of the sewers and into some previously rat-free neighborhoods. And with the West Nile
virus killing off millions of birds, the rats have less competition for the food they’re finding
above ground. The consequence is a virtual rat infestation all the way from New York and Illinois
to Virginia, Michigan and L.A. In Kenmore, there have been four thousand rat complaints – nearly
double last year.
(Sound of garbage truck)
Of course, none of this is news to the garbage collectors. They see the problem up close and
personal. Twenty-year veteran Louie Tadaro says this past summer is the worst he’s ever seen.
“Across the street there’s an alleyway and there had to be like ten of them in there, And we
started chasing them with garbage cans trying to kill them, but we couldn’t. By the time we
got there they just split.”
The problem is, they don’t split for long. Vector Control Chief Tripi says now that the rats
have relocated from the sewers to upscale accommodations, they kind of like it.
“And what that means is that they want to live with us. They want to be near our garbage and
our bird feeders. The problem with that is that rats carry diseases.”
We all know about stuff like typhus and the bubonic plague. But there are emerging diseases,
such as a pet-killer called Leptospiroris. It’s killing dogs all across the country. Tripi
says they need to get rid of the rats before the disease starts spreading to humans. So, his
team is taking the rats on, one yard at a time.
Tripi and his Vector control team set rat traps, they fill bait boxes with poison, and – when
they have to – they issue citations to residents who don’t heed the town’s new “rat control rules.” Covered garbage cans only. Clear away all brush. Clean up scattered bird seed and dog feces. Slowly, the rules seem to be working.
(sound of Tripi looking into rat trap)
Still Tripi says it’s mostly educational warfare. And he says now – heading into winter – is the
best time to nip the problem. If the rats get cozy, not only will they stay, they will multiply.
Fully nourished, one adult rat can breed up to sixty baby rats a year.
“The adult rat can live on a little bit of food, but he can’t procreate unless he has a lot of
food source. And they can’t live through the winter unless they’re warm and fattened up.”
So now is the time to – quite literally – put a lid on it. Keep those garbage cans covered, unless
you want some uninvited furry guests this winter, and many, many more come spring.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Joyce Kryszak.
The Environmental Protection Agency is getting some criticism from environmental groups for their partnership with the American Chemistry Council. (Photo courtesy of epa.gov)
The Environmental Protection Agency is drawing fire from some environmental groups for accepting money from the chemical industry for a study on children’s exposure to pesticides. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams has more:
Transcript
The Environmental Protection Agency is drawing fire from some environmental
groups for accepting money from the chemical industry for a study on
children’s exposure to pesticides. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Rebecca Williams has more:
The EPA has accepted a two million dollar contribution from the American
Chemistry Council to help fund the exposure study.
Some environmental groups are saying the partnership is a conflict of
interest for the agency. Tim Kropp is a senior scientist with the
Environmental Working Group.
“It doesn’t make sense for them to say that there’s no influence, and that it’s
all right for the regulated industries to be involved in a study that’s
going to affect policy, or may affect policy.”
EPA officials counter that the study design has been independently reviewed.
And that the American Chemistry Council won’t be able to affect the outcome
of the study. Linda Sheldon is with the EPA’s human exposure and
atmospheric sciences division.
“The American Chemistry Council is independent of the individual companies
that produced these particular chemicals. We feel that we have complete
control over the study and control over the research findings.”
Sheldon says the information from the study will be used for future EPA risk
assessments of chemicals.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Rebecca Williams.
