Flushing Out Unwanted Stowaways

  • A ship shown emptying its ballast tanks. (Photo courtesy of the United States Geological Survey)

Invasive species like the zebra mussel
have spread into lakes and rivers across
the country. But scientists are cautiously
optimistic they’re on the right track
to closing the front door to new invaders.
David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

Invasive species like the zebra mussel
have spread into lakes and rivers across
the country. But scientists are cautiously
optimistic they’re on the right track
to closing the front door to new invaders.
David Sommerstein reports:

Most invasive species have snuck into American waters by hitchhiking in the ballast water of foreign ships. They cause billions of dollars of damage to economies and ecosystems.

Researcher David Reid keeps the official list of invasive species in the Great Lakes. He’s with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. He says a new invader hasn’t been found there since 2006, a period of three years.

“The last time that occurred in our records was in the 1950s.”

Reid has his fingers crossed.

A new rule requires ships to flush their ballast out in the ocean before entering American waters. Reid says it seems to be working.

“We’ve found that saltwater is really quite effective against most of types of organisms that are likely to survive fresh water.”

The invasive species problem is far from over. Researchers are testing out technology to kill critters that can live in saltwater, too.

For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Recycling on the Farm

  • Steve Mohoney (left), of the Clinton County Soil & Water Conservation District, gives dairy farmer Dale Tetreault his first look at "Bigfoot". (Photo by David Sommerstein)

Over the last 30 years, plastics
have become indispensable on America’s
farms. They save farmers time and money.
The problem is agricultural plastics are
filling up landfills. In some places,
farmers actually burn the plastic. That
releases dangerous chemicals into the air.
David Sommerstein reports
on a new effort to bale plastics and recycle
them:

Transcript

Over the last 30 years, plastics
have become indispensable on America’s
farms. They save farmers time and money.
The problem is agricultural plastics are
filling up landfills. In some places,
farmers actually burn the plastic. That
releases dangerous chemicals into the air.
David Sommerstein reports
on a new effort to bale plastics and recycle
them:

Farmers must have been paying attention when Dustin Hoffman got that
famous piece of advice in ‘The Graduate’.

“I just want to say one word to you, just one word.”

“Yes, sir?”

“ Are you listening?”

“Yes, sir, I am.”

“Plastics.”

Plastics are all over the farm today. Plastic greenhouse covers. White sheets
to wrap hay bales. Black plastic feed troughs.

(sound of moving troughs)

Dale Tetreault shakes a tall pile of the feed troughs on his dairy farm in
northern New York State.

“They’re a hard plastic and they hold molasses and minerals.”

Tetreault says the plastics are handy – essential, really – to keep feed fresh
for his 500 cows. But the material’s hard to re-use because it gets dirty and
tears easily.

So Tetreault’s left with a decision – spend a thousand dollars a year to truck
them to the landfill. Or burn them, polluting the air and water.

“Yeah, exactly, I mean, we’re not talking about some light piece of plastic
here. We’re talking about heavy duty plastic.”

A new machine is giving Tetrault a third alternative. It goes by the name of
Bigfoot.

(sound of motor starting up)

Bigfoot is a portable hydraulic press. It crushes used plastic and ties it up
in bales.

“Quite an interesting contraption, that’s for sure.”

Tetreault’s been saving up used farm plastics for a couple months for this
test run.

“Alright, we ready to try this?”

That’s Steve Mahoney, a farm educator with the local soil and water
conservation district. He bought Bigfoot with a $35,000 state grant.

(sound of engine running)

Mahoney and some farmhands stuff dirty plastic sheets into the baler, then
Bigfoot crushes it down. That makes room for more.

(crushing sound)

“Okay, so go on back up.”

Mahoney teaches the farmhands how to run Bigfoot. With the help of the
local farm extension office, he’s baled plastics at nine farms so far. He
wants all of the area’s farmers to share Bigfoot, to keep plastics out of the
landfill or burn pile.

“It’s an obvious problem on the farms. It’s necessary, but the disposal of it
is a problem.”

The big plan is to recycle the plastic. Mahoney’s coordinating with a
recycling firm in Minnesota to pick up 40,000 pounds of plastic bales. They
could be made into plastic lumber or shingles or road filler.

The thing is, there isn’t much of a market for low-grade, dirty plastic right
now. Lois Levitan directs New York’s Ag Plastics Recycling Project at
Cornell University. She says as fuel costs rise and more farmers bale their
plastic, that might change.

“Markets want to know that there’s a certain quantity of product at a
certain level of quantity and they’re going to become increasingly interested
when they know there’s a steady stream.”

(sound of Bigfoot machine popping out a bale)

“Ok, that’s it, that’s the finished product.”

Steve Mahoney presses a button and out pops a thousand pound bale of
plastic. Farmhand Lennie Merculdi brushes his hands.

“Put it this way, trying to put it in a dumpster, to the barn, and never having
enough room for the garbage, that’s not good either. What’s a few minutes?
You get rid of the plastic, it’s convenient, you tie it up and away it goes.”

For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Ballast Tanks: Rinse and Repeat

  • Crew chief Mohammed Sangare tests the "Federal Kivalina"'s ballast tanks for invasive species. (Photo by David Sommerstein)

The United States and Canada are trying to
figure out how to keep new invasive species out of
the Great Lakes. 185 have already snuck in, costing
the region billions of dollars a year. Many
hitchhiked in the ballast tanks of foreign cargo ships.
Both countries want the public to know they’re doing
something about the problem. So they invited journalists
to the port of Montreal to see how ballast tanks are
tested for invasive species. David Sommerstein
reports:

Transcript

The United States and Canada are trying to
figure out how to keep new invasive species out of
the Great Lakes. 185 have already snuck in, costing
the region billions of dollars a year. Many
hitchhiked in the ballast tanks of foreign cargo ships.
Both countries want the public to know they’re doing
something about the problem. So they invited journalists
to the port of Montreal to see how ballast tanks are
tested for invasive species. David Sommerstein
reports:

A couple dozen reporters crowd the deck of the cargo ship Federal Kivalina.
Cameras click, pencils scribble, and tape rolls as a man in a bright orange
uniform steps forward to test for invasive species.

“My name is Mohammed Sanare.”

(sound of tape measure sliding down)

Sangare is the bosun, the crew chief. He slides what looks like a metal tape
measure down a tube. It’s the opening of one of the Kivalina’s 16 ballast
tanks.

“Down to the bottom now. The bob’s down to the bottom.”

The tape hits the tank bottom, and Sangare reels it back up.

Terry Jordan, a St. Lawrence Seaway official, is waiting with a handheld
gizmo. It’s a refractometer that tests water salinity. He carefully places a
drop of ballast water on it.

“All it takes is one drop of water on the refractive lens, OK.”

Jordan peers through the refractometer’s lens. It reads 38 parts salt per 1000
parts water.

Recent scientific studies show that concentration of salt water kills up to
99% of the organisms hidden in these ballast tanks. That’s important
because those critters can compete with native species and damage whole
ecosystems.

David Reid is a researcher with the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.

“Salinity was very effective at killing many of the organisms that we would
expect to be able to survive in the Great lakes.”

So for the first time this year, all ships voyaging into the Great Lakes have to
do something that sounds like a mouthwash ad.

“Swish and spit.”

Yeah, “swish and spit”. Terry Jordan says on its way across the ocean, the
ship flushes its ballast tanks with salt water, and presumably, kills potential
invasive species. The refractometer test is proof of the swish and spit. If the
ship fails, its ballast tank is sealed and its owner is fined up to 36,000
dollars.

“Swish & spit” has been voluntary for years. Environmentalists say the new
mandatory rules are a step in the right direction, but too little and way too
late.

“Some would argue that the dam has already burst.”

Hugh MacIsaac specializes in invasive species at the Great Lakes Institute
for Environmental Research in Windsor, Ontario. He says if ships were
“swishing and spitting” from the beginning, we might have been able to
prevent the zebra mussel, round goby, and other invasions.

But, MacIsaac warns there are other species lurking on the horizon, like
one in Germany, ominously called the killer shrimp.

“And so any protective measures that we put in place today that would
prevent or retard their ability to get in, I would welcome.”

Scientists doubt anything can be fool-proof. Invasive species still can hide
other places on the ship. And the new rules do nothing to stop salt-water
invaders like the mitten crab from attacking ports on the East and West
Coasts.

Terry Johnson is the St. Lawrence Seaway’s U.S. Administrator. He says
“swish & spit” is a huge step forward for the Great Lakes.

“So does that mean that it is absolutely, definately 100% positively assured that there
won’t be invasives coming in with these new regulations? No, it’s doesn’t.
But it dramatically reduces the risk.”

Congress is considering even tougher rules that would force shippers to
install cutting-edge ballast cleansing systems. The proposal could cost up to
a million dollars per vessel. The Bush Administration has threatened a veto.

For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Local Blowback From Wind Farms

  • Two cranes lift wind turbine blades off the ground at the Noble Environmental Power wind farm in Ellenburg, NY. (Photo by David Sommerstein)

America’s hunger for new, greener sources of electricity, and a generous
federal tax credit, are fueling a wind power boom. According to the
industry, almost 6,000 megawatts of new wind energy are under construction
nationwide. That’s 40% of all existing wind power in the U.S. The federal
government doesn’t regulate many aspects of wind power. Neither do many
states. That puts a lot of pressure on local town councils to decide if a wind
farm will be a good neighbor. David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

America’s hunger for new, greener sources of electricity, and a generous
federal tax credit, are fueling a wind power boom. According to the
industry, almost 6,000 megawatts of new wind energy are under construction
nationwide. That’s 40% of all existing wind power in the U.S. The federal
government doesn’t regulate many aspects of wind power. Neither do many
states. That puts a lot of pressure on local town councils to decide if a wind
farm will be a good neighbor. David Sommerstein reports:


It’s 7:30 in the morning on a crystal clear day in northern New York State.
A dozen ironworkers huddle between two monstrous red cranes and one
gleaming white tower, rising 22 stories tall:


“Everybody know their tasks? Anybody got any questions? Got a beautiful
day to fly this thing. No wind.”


Today the crew’s going to lift the thing you see spinning on a wind turbine –
three blades twice the length of semi trucks – to the top of the tower and
attach it. Dave Talley’s the supervisor. He’s from Petersburg, Tennessee:


“I live 20 miles from the Jack Daniels distillery.”


Talley’s helped build some of the wonders of the modern world: the
monorail at Disney World, the world’s largest furnace, the largest stamping
press.


“Yeah, we got a saying in our business. My work is my play, my play is my
work. I work harder than I play, and I play hard. If it ain’t hard, I ain’t
playin’. If it ain’t fun, I ain’t sayin’. And that’s all I’m sayin’.”


The cranes ease the blades into the air. Talley’s crew will do this 122 times
to erect Noble Environmental Power’s wind farm here. Noble’s owned by JP
Morgan Partners. The company spent millions of dollars and years of
permitting and negotiating to get to this point.


The wind farm touched off a fiery debate in town. Local board meetings
erupted in yelling. Neighbors and families became estranged:


“I think there’s a lot of people who have family members who totally fight
over it. I mean my sister and I don’t. We just don’t discuss it.”


Julie Ribot can see the turbines from her porch. Her sister works for the
wind power company. Ribot, however, is dead set against them:


“I don’t want to live here. There’s supposed to be 27 going up across the
street alone. Somebody said, ‘oh, it’s just like a ceiling fan.’ Well, would
you want 27 ceiling fans going off in your living room? No.”


Just next door to Ribot, Richard Widalski thinks they’re great:


“We do have to find an alternative source of energy. The price of oil and
everything, it’s getting ridiculous. I was told it’ll put up 1.5 megawatts of
power, which will, y’know, supply power for quite a few homes.”


Wind developers pay landowners thousands of dollars a year for hosting
turbines on their land. But neighbors have to live with the windmills, too,
and they don’t get paid. Planner John Tenbush says money pits haves
against have-nots in a small town:


“One guy’s gonna get a lot of money and the guy right next door, who’s
going to suffer from the noise or the blinking effect or some other adverse
impact, gets nothing.”


Across the country, industrial-scale wind project are forcing small, mostly
rural town councils to make big decisions. The federal government and
most states offer little guidance on a blizzard of complicated issues: how far
should the turbines be from a house or a road? How loud can they be? Do
they boost or blemish property values? Do they kill too many birds?


David Duff is on the planning board in nearby St. Lawrence County. He
says it’s easy for town councils to get in over their heads:


“Maybe they buy snowplows and they put out contracts for salt. They are
not in the same league in terms of negotiating as a multinational company
who has done this before.”


Until regulation catches up, the burden falls on local town councils when
wind power moves in.


For the Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Virus Killing Great Lakes Giants

  • Fishing guide Rich Clarke of Clayton, NY, is famous for muskie hunts. He's worried so many adult muskies are falling victim to VHS. (Photo courtesy of Rich Clarke)

Fall is when avid anglers flock to the Great Lakes for one of the most
challenging freshwater catches: the muskellunge, or muskie. Some call it
“the fish of 10,000 casts.” This year’s muskie season is clouded by bad news
of a new fish disease and invasive species crowding muskie habitat. David
Sommerstein reports scientists are watching this top-of-the-food-chain
species carefully:

Transcript

Fall is when avid anglers flock to the Great Lakes for one of the most
challenging freshwater catches: the muskellunge, or muskie. Some call it
“the fish of 10,000 casts.” This year’s muskie season is clouded by bad news
of a new fish disease and invasive species crowding muskie habitat. David
Sommerstein reports scientists are watching this top-of-the-food-chain
species carefully:




It’s a cool afternoon as fishing guide Rich Clarke fillets the day’s catch:


“Went out, caught some northerns, a few bass, some jack perch. Had a
pretty good morning.”


Clarke’s specialty is hunting for muskies, 60 pound fish with a lot of fight:


“I mean, the rod screams, they yank, yank, and yank. It doesn’t come all that
often, but when it comes, it’s one of the most exciting things you’ll see when
you fish in fresh water.”


Clarke worries that magical hit might become even more rare. Since 2005,
several hundred of those prized muskies were found belly-up dead, victims
of viral hemorrhagic septicimia, or VHS.


(Sound of hose)


Clarke washes down his fillet table. He mutters VHS is just another non-
native organism threatening the muskie. There are already more than 180
invasive species in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River system:


“Everything from the goby to the , y’know, and weed species and all
sorts of stuff, spiny water fleas, you name it, all sorts of stuff that are not native to this
waterway that we have to deal with, and it changes the whole ecology.”


A new invasive species is found every six to nine months. Scientists can
barely keep up in understanding the impact on the native environment.




In a nearby bay of the St. Lawrence River in northern New York State,
Roger Klindt, John Farrell, and a crew drag a huge net through the water:


“We’ve got two people pulling it slowly through the vegetation just trying
to basically corral fish.”


This is called seining, getting a sample of all the fish that live here. Klindt
and Farrell have been doing this in the same marshy shallows for more than
20 years. And Farrell says what they’ve found this year is disturbing:


“Muskellunge numbers in the index are at their lowest levels on record since
we’ve been collecting data.”


Down from almost 50 in the spring spawning run of 2003 to just 4 this year.
Farrell’s a researcher with the State University of New York Environmental
Science and Forestry. He says this could be the result of VHS killing so
many adult muskies in their reproductive prime.




Yet another invasive species is also troubling, the round goby. It’s an ugly
little fish from Eastern Europe that breeds like crazy. Farrell and Klindt
count minnows flipping and fluttering in the seining net:


“15 black gins, 8 blunt nose, 5 spot tail.”


“I didn’t actually count things, I was just picking gobies.”


Farrell says they’ve found more round gobies in these marshes than ever
before:


“Which is a bit of a surprise to us.”


Now the muskie young have to compete with round gobies for food:


“How these species are going to respond to the presence of gobies is
unknown at this time, but they have high predation rates, they’re very
prolific, becoming extremely abundant, so the food web in this system is
shifting.”


This is what frustrates people who study invasive species. Once researchers
train their focus on one, like the fish disease VHS, another emerges to
confound the equation. Roger Klindt is with New York’s Department of
Environmental Conservation
:


“Change happens, y’know, nothing stays the same forever. But when we
have invasive species and exotic species come in, the change is often so
rapid that native species can’t adapt to it.”


That talk makes anglers nervous. Peter Emerson’s been fishing around here
for years. In fact, he participated in a catch and release program that brought
muskie populations back to health in the 1980s:


“There was a real bonanza, til this virus showed up. I’m hopeful they don’t
go extinct.”


Biologists expect adult muskies that survived VHS will develop resistance to
the disease. But they fear the next generation won’t inherit the immunity,
causing more die-offs of one of America’s most prized freshwater fish.


For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Co2 Crops Not Tops

  • Theories that crops, such as the corn in Illinois, will benefit from increases in CO2 might not be as good as predicted. (Photo by Scott Bauer, courtesy of the USDA Agricultural Research Service)

Carbon dioxide emissions from our cars and factories are the number one
cause of global warming. Scientists have long theorized that more of
the gas in the atmosphere could actually help farmers grow bigger
plants. But new research from America’s Breadbasket is challenging
that assumption. David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

Carbon dioxide emissions from our cars and factories are the number one
cause of global warming. Scientists have long theorized that more of
the gas in the atmosphere could actually help farmers grow bigger
plants. But new research from America’s Breadbasket is challenging
that assumption. David Sommerstein reports:


Lin Warfel’s a fourth generation farmer in east-central Illinois. His
fields are flat and endless, the soil chunky and black and just about
the best in the world. An Interstate highway groans on one side of his
cornfield:


“In my career, early on, there was no Interstate past my farm.”


As traffic increased over the years, Warfel noticed a strange
phenomenon. The crops closer to the Interstate grew bigger than those
further away:


“They respond to the carbon dioxide. They can stay greener longer than
plants out into the field.”


OK… so, here’s a high school biology reminder: carbon dioxide, along
with water and sun, is an ingredient in photosynthesis, which makes
plants grow.


Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is also the biggest cause
of global warming. So scientists thought, huh, more carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere, bigger crops. They even coined a term: the “carbon
dioxide fertilization effect:”


“The effects of CO2 on crop yields are fairly well-understood.”


The Department of Energy’s Jeff Amthor has studied this stuff since the
1980s:


“We would expect that by the year 2050, that the increase in CO2 alone
would probably increase yields by about 10 to 15% in soybean, wheat and
rice relative to today’s yield, with nothing else changing.”


Other things are changing, like hotter temperatures and more drought.
But the predominant thinking has been that the increased carbon dioxide
will moderate those negative factors, maybe even outweigh them. A
recent study by the American Economic Review concluded U.S. agriculture
profits will grow by more than a billion dollars over the next century,
due to global warming. Most of this is based on experiments done in
controlled, greenhouse conditions, but new research done in real fields
is challenging the assumptions:


“Where you’re standing is what we refer to as our global change
research facility on the south farms of the University of Illinois.”


That’s biologist Steve Long. He runs what’s called the SoyFACE project
at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana. Here, Long can
actually pipe carbon dioxide gas out to the fields, and grow real crops
in an atmosphere of the future.


Long strolls out to one of 16 test plots and stop at a white pipe
sticking out of the ground:


“This is one of the pipes where the carbon dioxide actually comes up
and then it will go out into the field here.”


The carbon dioxide pipes circle a plot about the size of a tennis
court. They release the gas over the crops. Computers monitor the air
to keep the concentrations steady:


“And the current atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide is about
380 parts per million. We’re raising that to the level which is
expected for the year 2050, which is about 550 parts per million.”


Long has grown the crops of 2050 for 5 years now. His results
shocked him. The plants did grow bigger. They survived longer
into the fall, but the yields were 50% lower than expected. And
pests thrived. The Western corn rootworm, for example, laid
twice as many eggs:


“Japanese beetle, which eats quite a lot of the leaves of soybeans, do
twice as well under these elevated CO2 conditions. They live longer. They
produce many more young. The yield increases we’ve seen could start to be
counteracted by those increased pest problems.”


Long’s results found supporters and critics when published in
Science magazine last summer. Some researchers say extra CO2
could hurt agriculture more than it helps because weeds become more
aggressive.


The Department of Energy’s Jeff Amthor co-wrote a paper challenging the
interpretation of Long’s data. But he agrees more work needs to be
done in real-life conditions:


“The bigger questions that are now before us are the interactions of CO2 with
warming and change in precip, changes in weed communities, changes in
insect communities, changes in disease outbreak. There are a lot more
questions there than there are answers.”


Amthor says what’s at stake is our future food supply.


For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Call to Close Foreign Shipping

  • Some environmentalists are calling for a moratorium on foreign ships entering the Great Lakes. Foreign ships are believed to be responsible for many of the invasive species causing billions of dollars of damage to the Great Lakes economy and ecosystems. (Photo by Lester Graham)

Environmentalists are trying to ratchet up pressure on the shipping
industry over invasive species. They’re calling for a moratorium on
allowing ocean-going ships into the Great Lakes. David Sommerstein
reports:

Transcript

Environmentalists are trying to ratchet up pressure on the shipping
industry over invasive species. They’re calling for a moratorium on
allowing ocean-going ships into the Great Lakes. David Sommerstein
reports:


Foreign freighters account for about 25% of overall tonnage on the
Great Lakes.


Jennifer Caddick says those ships’ ballast water bring a new invasive
species into the region, on average, every six months. Caddick’s
group, Save The River, has joined Great Lakes United in a petition
campaign for a moratorium:


“There is continuous talk, you know over the past 10 or 15 years, about having new, stronger ballast regulations
to stem the flow of invasive species, and unfortunately, nothing has
happened. Frankly, we have said enough is enough.”


Caddick admits a moratorium is unlikely. The agency that runs the
shipping lanes says it would violate a 1909 treaty with Canada.


Invasive species do billions of dollars of damage in the Great Lakes.
There are five bills in Congress to address the problem, but none has made
it out of committee.


For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Saving the American Eel

Biologists in Canada are taking extreme measures to prevent
the disappearance of a mysterious fish. For the first time ever, they’ve stocked one of the Great Lakes with American eels. David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

Biologists in Canada are taking extreme measures to prevent the disappearance of a mysterious fish. For the first time ever, they’ve stocked one of the Great Lakes with American eels. David Sommerstein reports:


Eels spawn in the Sargasso Sea. They swim thousands of miles up the Atlantic Coast, up the St. Lawrence River, and into Lake Ontario.


Once the most populous fish in the lake, eel numbers have been plummeting since the 1980s. In a desperate move, the province of Ontario captured 144,000 baby eels from the Atlantic, nursed them, and then released them into Lake Ontario to see if they’ll live.


“It’s a grand experiment. What we need to do urgently is get eels back into the system.”


Rob McGregor is with Ontario’s Ministry of Natural Resources. He says Lake Ontario eels are among the biggest and most productive of the species in North America.


“Losing them is a big concern.”


McGregor says it’ll take a decade or more before he knows if the eels reproduce and the experiment can be declared a success.


For The Environment Report, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

Looking Back on the “Slick of ’76”

  • Officials placed containment booms around the barge. Most of them failed to prevent the oil from floating downriver, contaminating dozens of miles of pristine shoreline. (Courtesy of the NY State Dept. of Conservation)

30 years ago, an oil barge ran aground in the St. Lawrence River. Hundreds of thousands of gallons of thick crude oil coated the shoreline of northern New York state. The accident remains one of the largest inland oil spills in the United States. It’s a reminder that freighters haul millions of gallons of toxic liquids across the Great Lakes. And many people worry about another spill. The GLRC’s David Sommerstein talked to witnesses of the 1976 spill:

Transcript

30 years ago, an oil barge ran aground in the St. Lawrence River. Hundreds
of thousands of gallons of thick crude oil coated the shoreline of northern New
York State. The accident remains one of the largest inland oil spills in the
United States. It’s a reminder that freighters haul millions of gallons of toxic
liquids across the Great Lakes. And many people worry about another spill.
The GLRC’s David Sommerstein talked to witnesses of the 1976 spill:


It was really foggy that morning. Bob Smith awoke to two sounds:


“You could hear the anchor chains going down, and next thing we know
there was a young Coast Guard guy knocking on the front door.”


The Coast Guard guy had driven up, asking around for a missing barge.
Smith remembered the anchor chains echoing across the water that woke
him up. He went outside to look.


(Sound of walking outside)


Thirty years later, Smith lives amidst cozy cottages on manicured lawns in
the heart of the touristy Thousand Islands.


“Just right about straight out there. See where that boat’s coming up there
now?”


That’s where a barge carrying oil from Venezuela had dropped anchor after
running aground. That morning Smith watched crude as thick as mud drift
out of sight downriver:


“If you’re born and raised here on the river, you don’t like to see anything go
in the river that doesn’t belong there.”


The Coast Guard placed booms in the water, but the oil quickly spilled over.
It carried 50 miles downstream. It oozed as far as 15 feet into the river’s
marshes. Tom Brown was the point man for New York’s Department of
Environmental Conservation. He says the spill couldn’t have come at a
worse time for wildlife:


“All the young fish, waterfowl, shorebirds, furbearers, were coming off the
nests and were being born.”


Thousands of birds and fish suffocated in black goo. As images of
devastation flashed on national TV, the spill killed the tourism season, too.
It was a summer with no swimming, no fishing, no dipping your feet in the
water at sunset. Really, it was a summer with no river.


(Sound of river at Chalk’s dock)


30 years later, everyone still remembers the acrid smell:


“When I woke up in the middle of the night and I could smell oil, I was
afraid I had an oil leak in my house.”


Dwayne Chalk’s family has owned a marina on the St. Lawrence for
generations. Chalk points to a black stripe of oil on his docks, still there
three decades later, and he’s still bitter:


“The Seaway has done this area, well, I shouldn’t say that, it hasn’t done any
good. To me it hasn’t.”


The St. Lawrence Seaway opened the ports of the Great Lakes to Atlantic
Ocean freighters carrying cargoes of steel, ore, and liquid chemicals. It
generates billions of dollars a year in commerce, but it’s also brought
pollution and invasive species.


Anthropologist John Omohundro studied the social effects of the 1976 oil
spill. He says it helped awaken environmentalism in the Great Lakes:


“The spill actually raised people’s consciousness that the river could be a
problem in a number of areas, not just oil.”


Groups like Save the River and Great Lakes United began lobbying for
cleaner water and safer navigation in the years after the spill:


“If a vessel carrying oil or oil products were in that same type of ship today,
it would not be allowed in.”


Albert Jacquez is the outgoing administrator for the US side of the St. Lawrence
Seaway. The 1976 barge had one hull and gushed oil when it hit the rocks.
Today’s barges are mostly double-hulled and use computerized navigation.
Jacquez says a lot has changed to prevent spills:


“The ships themselves are different, the regulations that they have to follow are
different, and the inspections are different. Now does that guarantee? Well,
there are no guarantees, period.”


So if there is a spill, the government requires response plans for every part of
the Great Lakes. Ralph Kring leads training simulations of those plans for
the Coast Guard in Buffalo. Still, he says the real thing is different:


“You really can’t control the weather and the currents and all that. It’s definitely going to be a
challenge, especially when you’re dealing with a real live incident where
everyone’s trying to move as fast as they can and also as efficient as they
can.”


Critics question the ability to get responders to remote areas in time. They
also worry about spills in icy conditions and chemical spills that oil booms
wouldn’t contain.


(Sound of river water)


Back on the St. Lawrence River, Dwayne Chalk says the oil spill of 1976
has taught him it’s not if, it’s when, the next big spill occurs:


“You think about it all the time. Everytime a ship comes up through here,
you think what’s going to happen if that ship hits something.”


Chalk and everyone else who relies on the Great Lakes hope they’ll never
have to find out.


For the GLRC, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links

New Fish Virus Becoming Long-Term Threat?

Biologists are concerned a new fish virus may become an ongoing threat in the Great Lakes. The virus caused a fish die-off in Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River last month. The GLRC’s David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

Biologists are concerned a new fish virus may become an ongoing threat in the Great Lakes.
The virus caused a fish die-off in Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River last month.
The GLRC’s David Sommerstein reports:


Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia is common in saltwater fish in the Pacific Northwest,
but somehow the virus hopped into the freshwater fish of Lake St. Clair and Lake Ontario
last year. Then, last month, the virus killed hundreds of fish in the St. Lawrence River.
Scientists are trying to determine if the virus is a long-term threat to the Great Lakes
fishery:


“You know, that’s kind of the million dollar question.”


John Farrell directs the Thousand Islands Biological Station. He says many
fish species may become infected with the virus but not show symptoms:


“They may serve as a reservior for the virus. There’s a potential
that the virus could cycle over time, but may be with us for a long time to come.”


Conservation officials are most worried about muskies, trout and salmon – native
fish that anglers love to catch.


For the GLRC, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links