Feds Say No to Private Developers

For most of the last century, the federal
government has engaged in a practice known as “land
swapping.” That’s where the federal government sells
or trades land with private property owners. In recent
years, land swapping has become increasingly controversial
as developers build neighborhoods on previously undeveloped
public land. But one federal agency has put an end to the
practice. Some conservationists hope this recent development
represents a new era for the protection of federally-owned
land. Matt Shafer Powell reports:

Transcript

For most of the last century, the federal
government has engaged in a practice known as “land
swapping.” That’s where the federal government sells
or trades land with private property owners. In recent
years, land swapping has become increasingly controversial
as developers build neighborhoods on previously undeveloped
public land. But one federal agency has put an end to the
practice. Some conservationists hope this recent development
represents a new era for the protection of federally-owned
land. Matt Shafer Powell reports:


In the 1930s and 40s the federal government used eminent domain, or the threat of it, to
seize land all over the country. It bought up the land to build dams to make electricity.
One of the biggest projects took place in the Southeastern US. That’s where the federal
government created the Tennessee Valley Authority and flooded much of the Tennessee
River Valley. What was once deep gullies and hillsides became lakes and reservoirs
surrounded by forests. The TVA still owns about 300,000 acres of undeveloped land
throughout the region. For most of the last seventy years, the public has used this land
for recreation and conservation. Billy Minser is a wildlife biologist. He says the public
is very protective of that land:


“It provides outstanding public resource for recreation and beauty, it gives people a place to
rekindle the human spirit, a place to relax, hunt, fish, camp, bird watch or maybe to sit
home and think about how pretty the lakes are.”


In 2003, the TVA angered conservationists like Minser when it traded some of that land
to a residential developer, who built an upscale subdivision on it, and it happened again
last year with another swatch of pristine lakeshore property. Minser claims those deals
betrayed the public, but they also betrayed those families who lost their land to the
government years ago:


“If the government takes your house and bulldozes it down because it’s not enough value
and then sells it to me so I can build another house on it in the same place. Is that right?
That’s wrong. That is absolutely wrong and the public’s done with it.”


Land exchanges are nothing new. Federal agencies like the US Forest Service and the
Bureau of Land Management have been swapping land with private property owners and
state and local governments for decades. The practice is often used to fill in holes in
national forests or get rid of land that the government can’t use. Glenn Collins is with the
Public Lands Foundation. In some cases, he says the feds end up with more and better
land, but that means a lot of previously untouched land ends up in the hands of
developers:


“The federal lands that are placed into private ownership invariably go into development.
Either the land, the large blocks are subdivided into smaller blocks on paper, there may
be roads, improvements, it’ll be put up for sale.”


Over the years, the public has become increasingly wary of these land swaps. In the
Tennessee Valley, public outcry about the deals eventually forced a change in the TVA’s
philosophy. The agency’s Board of Directors recently voted to approve a new policy that
bans the sale or trade of TVA land to private residential developers:


“All those in favor of the committee’s policy on land, say aye.”


“Aye.”


“Opposed?”


“No.”
That one dissenting vote came from board member Bill Baxter, demonstrating the fact
that not everyone is wild about the ban. In explaining his “no” vote, Baxter echoed the
sentiments of economic development officials who worry that an all-out ban on
residential development will compromise their chances of attracting people and money to
the region. Baxter used the example of rural communities that would normally have a
hard time attracting industry:


“Perhaps their best hope for doing some economic development and increasing the tax
base so they can improve the schools for their kids and their roads and their health care is
to have some high-end residential development. It’s a beautiful part of the country and
we’re fortunate that a lot of people want to retire here.”


In the end, Baxter’s claims that residential development is economic development failed
to resonate with either the public or his colleagues on the board. After the vote at the
TVA’s board meeting, Michael Butler of the Tennessee Wildlife Federation called the
new policy a “monumental accomplishment.”


“I think it’s also part of a sound quality-of-life and tax policy into the future to look at
how we use conservation lands to really develop a sustainable way to have a growing
economy, which has got to be part of the equation, and to have a place where these
people can go enjoy themselves that isn’t in front of a television set all the time.”


The fact that the government used eminent domain to acquire a lot of the TVA’s land
means the people in the region are passionately vigilant about what happens to it, but the
public’s passion for land isn’t exclusive to the Tennessee Valley. And so the decisions
made here could have a long-term effect on the way the government approaches future
land exchanges throughout the country.


For the Environment Report, I’m Matt Shafer Powell.

Related Links

Boat Nerds: The New Tourists

  • Ship-watchers gather at places such as the Welland Canal which allows cargo ships to go around Niagara Falls. (Photo by Lester Graham)

They look like birdwatchers. They stand with binoculars and notebooks and write down names. Or they travel to good spots for up-close viewing. But it’s not birds they’re looking for. They’re looking for ships. And they’re passionate about the huge boats that pass through the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Melissa Ingells has a look at the pastime of
ship-watching:

Transcript

They look like birdwatchers. They stand with binoculars and notebooks and write down names. Or they travel to good spots for up-close viewing. But it’s not birds they’re looking for. They’re looking for ships. And they’re passionate about the huge boats that pass through the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Melissa Ingells has a look at the pastime of ship-watching:


(Sound of sing-song shouting)


If you’ve ever been to the shores of the Great Lakes, or to the canals connecting some of the lakes, you’ve probably seen ship watchers. They’re the people with binoculars, trying to spot the name on a freighter’s hull.


It could be the romance of the sea, or a fascination with the storms or shipwrecks; something grabs people about it. Maybe it’s just because some Great Lakes ships are so huge. These kids on the St. Mary’s river near Sault Ste. Marie are trying to get the captain of a Great Lakes freighter to blow his whistle for them.


(Sound of horn, cheering)


Now, that’s big.


Sault Ste Marie isn’t the only seaway people visit to see the ships up close. At the other end of the lakes, in Thorald, Ontario, Ross McGimpsey watches the freighters. He’s come all the way from Northern Ireland to Lock Seven of the Welland Canal. He’s interested in the locks’ engineering, and in the size of the ships.


“I just came to see how they went up and down the locks, and to see how big it is and what it was like. You don’t really see this stuff when you go to Scotland, there sort of really small, just taking up, like little speedboats, but over here it’s full-sized ships, so it’s really different.”


McGimpsey’s one of the many people who travel for good ship-watching. Around the lakes, a cottage tourism industry has sprung up to serve the watchers. Terry Dow sees a lot of the tourists that come to the Welland Canal. She works at the locks viewing area in Thorald. Dow loves to talk to visitors about the ships.


“I love the ships. My office window is just, looks out here at lock 7, and you know, you can be typing away and there’s nothing in the lock and within ten minutes you have this huge ship in front of your window and I really enjoy them. My favorite is the John B. Aird from Algoma, she’s a great ship and I love watching her come through the locks, she’s also one of the largest ships that can come through, the biggest can come through is 740 feet, and I just like watching her come through. I love it here.”


Dow is a lucky ship-watcher; she works close to her hobby. She says some folks have actually moved to the area just to watch the ships. They call themselves the “boat nerds.”


“We have a lot of people here that live in Thorald that have retired from other areas, Toronto for instance, and they come because they love the ships so much, they buy a house along the canal and they are proud to be the “boat nerds” and they volunteer for me every day here in Thorald at the locks viewing complex.”


So, where do people like Dow and the boat nerds get their passion for the ships? Part of it is that people are just plain fascinated by the size of the vessels.


Lou Ann Kozma thinks many people first get interested in ship-watching because they hear some of the popular songs and stories about Great Lakes ships. Kozma organizes festivals in mid-Michigan that celebrate Great Lakes lore.


She brings in people who sing songs of life on the Lakes, tell stories of shipwrecks, and even make wooden models of the big boats people like to watch. Kozma says once a good ship story gets a person’s interest, they usually want to know the real facts behind the tales.


“In general, things like popular culture does romanticize it quite a bit like the Edmund Fitzgerald song, and perhaps shipwrecks, in particular hold that mystique, because ,there’s such a dramatic story, usually, behind each one, and then there’s the lure of just finding out about what happened, and people can discover that in so many different ways.”


Kozma says people find that ship-watching is another way to feel the adventure and romance of the lakes. Back at the Welland Canal, Terry Dow says even though she sees the ships every day, she and people like her never get tired of watching them.


“There’s a lot of people who love these ships. They love the magnitude of them. I’ve named them the “Quiet Giants of the Waterway,” because you can’t even hear them coming into the lock, and they’re so big that you just can’t believe that something of that magnitude you can hardly hear coming into the locks. So, there’s a lot of people, yes, who truly enjoy these ships.”


It seems like the romance of the Lakes and the marvel of engineering are what draw “boat nerds” to the water. And the number of ship watchers might be growing. Earlier in the day, Terry Dow spent time with a whole busload of folks who scheduled their stop just in time to see one of her Quiet Giants glide by right in front of them.


For the GLRC, I’m Melissa Ingells.

Related Links

Socially Responsible Investing Catches On

The amount of money invested in so-called socially responsible mutual funds continues to grow. But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Poorman reports, they’re still a small part of the big picture:

Transcript

The amount of money invested in so-called socially responsible mutual funds continues to grow.
But as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Poorman reports, they’re still a small part of the
big picture:


A report from the trade group the Social Investment Forum says holdings in socially responsible
mutual funds grew by eleven percent over the last couple of years. The amount now stands at
151 billion dollars. Todd Larsen is a spokesperson for the Forum. He says the industry has
grown dramatically since the group first added up the investments eight years ago.


“In our first report, we found there were 12 billion dollars in assets in socially responsible mutual
funds.”


Larsen says socially responsible funds have a variety of approaches. Some screen out entire
sectors of the economy.


“For example, perhaps, the oil industry might be screened out. In other funds, they’re doing a
best of class approach. So they’ll look at each industry and see which companies are the best within
that particular industry, and they’ll hold those companies.”


Even with the growth, socially responsible mutual funds are still only a tiny percentage of the
trillions of dollars invested in all funds.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bill Poorman.

Related Links

Lake Shoreline Preserved From Development

  • The Coho site, a 540-acre tract of undeveloped land along Lake Erie, was intended to be used for power plant development. When those plans fell through, conservation groups rallied to buy the land. They're now celebrating a successful purchase. (Photo by Cathy Pedler)

In an ongoing study on the health of the Great Lakes, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified shoreline development as one of the biggest threats to the health of the five Lakes. Conservation groups have continually worked to slow the spread of shoreline development. And now along a stretch of Lake Erie, they’ve scored a major success. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Ann Murray has more:

Transcript

In an ongoing study on the health of the Great Lakes, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
has identified shoreline development as one of the biggest threats to the health of the five Lakes.
Conservation groups have continually worked to slow the spread of shoreline development. And
now along a stretch of Lake Erie, they’ve scored a major success. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Ann Murray has more:


Tom Furhman and Cathy Pedler with the Lake Erie Region Conservancy have come to what’s
called the Coho site to celebrate.


(champaign bottle cork pops)


(laughs) “Coho ho ho ho!”


This 540-acre tract was named after Coho salmon. It’s the largest undeveloped and unprotected
parcel of land left along Pennsylvania’s Lake Erie shoreline. There were plans to build a power
plant here. Those plans were abandoned and the conservation groups have been trying to get a
hold of it. It’s taken five long years to buy the land.


“We organized a group in ’98 to try to get the utility company to sell it and really there was no
interest to sell that parcel so we partnered with the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy and most
recently with the Conservation Fund to buy it. And when we thought about the best use we got a
hold of the state and said this could be a great state park.”


After finishing their Champaign, Furhman and Pedler hike down to the western front of the Coho
parcel. Here, the property’s 90-foot cliffs loom over the water’s edge for more than a mile. Pedler
says most of Pennsylvania’s 43-mile long Lake Erie shoreline is privately owned. And
development has contributed to erosion and damage to bluffs. She stands on the property’s
narrow rock strewn beach and admires the unfettered view.


(sound of water)


“You can see just how magnificent this is with the water running over the slate and the high cliffs
and the bare magenta trees and an eagle. Yeah, I think we kind of want to keep that! Laughs.


(sound of waves fade under)


“It is a very significant site.”


Charles Bier is a conservation biologist with the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy.


“It’s really that narrow band of land that’s sometimes less than a half a mile wide. That’s this very
unique interface between Lake Erie and the mainland of Pennsylvania.”


As part of a larger project, the Conservancy performed a natural history inventory of the Coho
property. The site has high bluffs, wetlands and old growth forests. Inland dunes formed 15,000
years ago when glacial movement made the lake elevation higher.


“All of these habitats come together for 11 species of plants that are considered to be very rare
and unusual.”


Back on site, Cathy Pedler points out that this parcel of land is also historically important. Pedler
and her husband, Dave, are archeologists. This afternoon, they trudge up a thickly wooded hill
above an access area to Elk Creek, one of the state’s best fishing spots.


“Oh, we’ll go this way.”


At the top of the hill, the trees give way to a large plowed field. The farmer who has leased this
land has unearthed fragments of stone tools and pottery. The Pedlers believe that an ancient
village was located here.


This is really a special property archeologically. It’s not just a site. We think it’s a pretty
significant complex of them.


Six archeological sites on the Coho property have already been inventoried. Some are at least
10,000 years old. The Pedlers think the best way to protect these historic locations and sensitive
natural areas will be to make the land a state park. In the next few months, the Conservancies
plan to transfer the parcel to the state of Pennsylvania.


But some local government officials have raised questions about making the lake front site public
land. They say the stretch of land could be developed and property taxes collected. If it’s put into
parkland, the local government loses that tax money. Gretchen Leslie is spokesperson for the
Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. Leslie says despite the loss of
property taxes, she sees the acquisition of this parcel as a smart move for the region.


“We believe this property has economic value and that you can locate industrial developments or
business parks in many, many different locations throughout the region. But there are only a few
locations that have such special natural qualities to them that they will serve an important tourism
role. And this is one of them.


(sound of waves)


And the cliffs above Lake Erie are unique. Pennsylvania is a large state, but only a small piece of
the state sits on the Great Lake. And many think that the one-mile stretch of shoreline that Coho
covers is worth preserving.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Ann Murray.

Related Links

The Right to Sprawl

Governments are trying to figure out the best way to deal with urban sprawl. Legislators and planners are considering all kinds of approaches to manage the growth of cities, but some say government really has no business trying to stop the market forces that are driving the rapid growth. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on the deeper debate between property rights and land use protection:

Transcript

Governments are trying to figure out the best way to deal with urban sprawl. Legislators and
planners are considering all kinds of approaches to manage the growth of cities. But, some say
government really has no business trying to stop the market forces that are driving the rapid
growth. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on the deeper debate
between property rights and land use protection:


Through the public process, states that are grappling with urban sprawl end up hearing from everyone involved. While the media and environmental groups tend to look at the
problems of congestion and loss of green space and farmland due to the rapid growth at the edges
of cities, others see the growth as driven by what people want – it’s natural growth, even organic. In
fact, many property owners, builders and developers, see government interference as “un-
American,” as testimony from this public hearing in Michigan shows.


“As an American, I strongly believe in our citizens’ rights to pursue life, liberty and property.”
“Centralized planning did not work in Russia, Cuba, North Korea or anywhere else they’ve
attempted it.” “Are we gonna mandate where they’re going to live? Is this gonna be America?”
“The land should be controlled by the individual who has paid for the land and pays the taxes on the land and should be able to do with that property what he wants to do.” “Our Constitution tells
us about the preservation of private property rights.”


There’s something deeply rooted in the American cultural ethic that bonds people to the land – or
more precisely – to their land. It might be leftovers of the concept of Manifest Destiny where,
in the words of one essayist, land ownership was associated with wealth and tied to self-
sufficiency, political power, and independent “self-rule.” This seems to be especially true of
people who live in rural areas, or are only a generation or two removed from the farm.


Amy Liu is with the think-tank, the ‘Brookings Institution.’ She says when states start looking at
growth management techniques, commonly called “Smart Growth,” landowners and builders
become suspicious.


“There is a belief that the government needs to get out of the way of the market. And so the idea
of having government intervene in the real estate market and consumer choice is considered un-
American.”


And property rights advocates quickly become dogmatic about their beliefs and resist any kind of
restrictions on use of land.


In the same way, some environmentalists consider sprawl to merely be a matter of greedy
developers and builders wanting to make money no matter what the cost to the environment,
green space, or farmland. They sometimes ignore the fact that consumer demand for larger lots
and larger houses, as well as convenient shopping, is much of the driving force behind urban
sprawl.


Liu says many on each side of the urban sprawl debate are inflexible.


“You know, I think that there are definitely reasons why the environmentalists can be extreme
and why the property rights advocates can be extreme.”


And generally, the two sides are talking right past each other.


Ann Woiwode is with the environmental group, the Sierra Club. She says the opponents of
“Smart Growth” say they don’t want government interference, but she says they don’t talk that
way when they’re in need of roads, fire protection, good schools, and other government services.
Woiwode says “Smart Growth” doesn’t mean unreasonable restrictions.


“I’m not trying to take anybody’s rights away and I don’t think that’s the appropriate approach.
What in any society part of being a society is that we collectively decide how we’re going to
make decisions that affect the entirety of the community.”


And while Woiwode and other environmentalists are in favor of making sure green space is
preserved, most of them acknowledge that growth is inevitable. They say they just want to make
sure it’s the right kind of growth.


Amy Liu at the Brookings Institution says not every growth management plan makes sense.
Some of them only look at benefiting the environment and ignore market forces, the desire that
many people have for a bit of land and a home to call their own.


“There are certainly growth management policies that don’t work, that strictly limit development-
growth boundaries and are therefore anti-growth. I think the growth management policies, the
Smart Growth policies that do work are those that really do try to anticipate and accommodate
growth in a metropolitan area in a way that is going to promote economic development, that is
fiscally sustainable, that is environmentally sustainable, and that actually allows low-income
working families and middle-class and upper-income families to enjoy that growth.”


And finding that balance in a world where politics and competing interests sometimes muddy the
best intentions will be the real trick, as states try to define what “Smart Growth” will mean for
people pursuing the American dream of owning their own home.


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

Green Technology Can Defeat Terrorism

Small-scale on-site power generation technologies help protect the environment. Will they also help to protect us against terrorism? Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Byron Kennard argues that they can:

Transcript

Small-scale on-site power generation technologies help protect the environment. Will they also help to protect us against terrorism? Our commentator Byron Kennard argues that they do.


Like every American, I am mourning the tragic losses that terrorists have inflicted on our nation. But I mourn too because I fear that in the aftermath of these attacks, environmental protection efforts will be sacrificed to the awful necessities of war. I am reminded of a remark Tolstoy once made to a young friend, “You may not be interested in war,” Tolstoy warned,” but war is interested in you.” War’s interest in the young is fully matched by its interest in the environment.


Apart from what the US does to go after bin Laden, we must also pursue peaceful solutions to this challenge. The best of these options is to vastly increase economic opportunity for the world’s poor. After all, it’s their desperation that provides the breeding grounds for fanaticism. As Jessica Stern, author of The Ultimate Terrorists, observes: “Force is not nearly enough. We need to drain the swamps where these young men thrive. We need to devote a much higher priority to health, education, and economic development or new Osamas will continue to arise.”


Economic development will be hard to achieve and will take much time. But in it environmentalists can find some solace. There are environmental ways to develop economies and often these make the most sense for the world’s poor. For example, two billion people in the world have no access to electricity. Providing them electricity for lighting, clean water, refrigeration and health care, and radio and television is perhaps the best single way “to drain the swamps.” The best way to make electricity available to the world’s poor is through on-site generating technologies that are the environment friendly.


These “micro power” devices generate electric power on a small scale close to where it is actually used. They include fuel cells, photovoltaics, micro generators, small wind turbines, and modular biomass systems. For instance, a micro generator the size of a refrigerator can generate 25 kilowatts of electricity, enough to power a village in the developing world.


The environmental approach toward energy sufficiency in developing nations has been to utilize micro credit. That means providing poor people with affordable mini-loans to purchase on-site energy generators, or micro generation. Currently the US leads the world in exporting solar electric, small wind, fuel cells, and modular biomass systems to the developing world. Such exports of energy generation have become a $5 billion per year market, so this environmentally benign strategy is also economically productive. In short, electrifying the poor regions of the world will benefit our people, our planet and the cause of peace.