Revealing the relationship between the natural world and the everyday lives of people
Category: Ten Threats to the Great Lakes
In an effort to rank, in the order of importance, the ten major environmental issues facing the Great Lakes, the staff at the GLRC asked 28 stakeholders in the Great Lakes basin to rank the major issues affecting the Great Lakes. The Environment Report then sent out a team of reporters throughout the region to explore these issues in-depth. The result of their efforts will be broadcast on public radio stations beginning on October 10th, 2005. This series is made possible in part by the Joyce Foundation and the Healing Our Waters Campaign .
Air pollution deposition comes from various sources, including smokestacks, fires, pesticides, and automobile emissions. Chemicals and compounds that are sent into the air from these sources fall back down to earth directly or via precipitation.
The Great Lakes are linked to the world's ports through a system of channels, locks and dams stretching from Duluth, MN to the Gulf of St. Lawrence, a 2,340 mile journey. The system is a big source of environmental damage in the Lakes.
Species that are indigenous to the region are disappearing due to habitat loss and competition from invasive species, causing biodiversity to decline. When biodiversity declines, the entire ecosystem can be thrown off balance causing disruptions that have yet to be fully understood.
Invasive species are organisms that are found in ecosystems from which they did not originate. Many of them often out-compete, eat, or otherwise harm other native organisms (see disappearing native species).
Nonpoint source pollution is created when water from rain or melting snow carries pollutants as runoff into waterways and groundwater. The pollution is usually a mix of chemicals, including those coming from agricultural and urban sources.
Point source pollution comes directly from an identifiable source, like a wastewater discharge pipe from a factory. Much of the time, there are regulations on discharge that goes directly into lakes and rivers, but sometimes, harmful chemicals can still accumulate or are accidentally spilled.
Going to the beach is a popular pastime for many, but polluted beaches can affect both human and ecosystem health. Oftentimes, the pollution comes from wastewater drains when heavy rains overwhelm sewer systems and wastewater treatment plants.
In this day and age, just about everything has been touched by pollution. However, there are certain areas that have extraordinarily high concentrations of things like PCBs, and heavy metals. Such high concentrations of pollutants can cause problems for generations to come.
Wetlands are often called the kidneys of the earth because they filter and extract pollutants from the water that passes through them. They also alleviate flooding and control erosion. Development of wetlands disrupts this whole system, and replacement wetlands don't work as well.
The demand for fresh water is high, and the Great Lakes are a tempting and ready source. Many people and organizations outside the Great Lakes basin are seeking to make withdrawals from the Lakes, but some worry the ecosystem can't handle it.
A popular federal program that pays farmers to restore wetlands on their property is underfunded in President Bush’s budget proposal. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein has more:
Transcript
A popular federal program that pays farmers to restore wetlands on their property is underfunded
in President Bush’s budget proposal. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein
has more:
The 2002 Farm Bill called for turning 250,000 acres a year of marginal farmland into wetlands.
Wetlands on farms help control pesticide run-off, replenish aquifers, and provide wildlife habitat.
And the effort gives farmers some extra cash in lean times. The Bush Administration wants to
downsize the program by 50,000 acres a year. But critics say it’s too popular to reduce.
“For every acre that gets enrolled, there are five acres waiting to get enrolled.”
Julie Sibbing is the wetlands policy specialist for the National Wildlife Federation. She says millions
of acres of wetlands nationwide are under threat from development. And farm conservation
programs are a crucial way to preserve them.
“There’s been a lot of talk about how the farm programs have expanded under the Bush
Administration. It’s really not been the great expansion that we would have liked to have seen.”
Last year, the program helped convert 213,000 acres of unused farmland into wetlands, short of the
250,000 acre goal.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m David Sommerstein.
Although government programs offer incentives for farmers to plant grassy buffers between farm fields and waterways, many farmers don't bother with the voluntary efforts to reduce nitrogen. A new push to reduce nitrogen runoff is in the works in an effort to reduce the size of a 'Dead Zone' in the Gulf of Mexico believed to be caused by excess nitrogen runoff from Midwest farms. (Photo by Lester Graham)
The government is looking at programs to reduce the amount of fertilizer runoff from farms that ends up in streams and rivers. It’s necessary because 41 percent of the continental U.S. drains into the Mississippi River and all that runoff is dumped into the Gulf of Mexico. There, it’s causing a ‘dead zone’ where fish and other aquatic life can’t live. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
The government is looking at programs to reduce the amount of fertilizer runoff from farms that
ends up in streams and rivers. It’s necessary because 41-percent of the continental U.S. drains
into the Mississippi River and all that runoff is dumped into the Gulf of Mexico. There it’s
causing a ‘dead zone’ where fish and other aquatic life can’t live. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Each year about one-and-a-half million metric tons of nitrogen is dumped into the Gulf of
Mexico. Plants feed on nitrogen, so there are huge algae blooms, far more than the tiny aquatic
animals that feed on algae can eat. The algae eventually dies and begins to decompose. That process
depletes oxygen from the water. Fish and other marine life need oxygen to live. So they leave
the oxygen-depleted area or die. It’s called a ‘dead zone.’ In recent years that ‘dead zone’ in the
Gulf of Mexico has been as large as the state of New Jersey.
Don Scavia is Chief Scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s
National Ocean Service. He says it looks as though much of that nitrogen comes from farms in
the Mississippi basin.
“The most significant change in the nitrogen load into the basin is actually coming from
agricultural application of fertilizer. That application rate has more than tripled since the 1950’s,
corresponding to almost a tripling of nitrogen loss from that system into the Gulf.”
Farms that are hundreds of miles from the Mississippi River drain into the Mississippi River
basin. The basin stretches from Montana to the southwest tip of New York. It includes all or
parts of 31 states.
Nitrogen exists naturally in the environment. But growing corn and some other crops on the
same land year after year depletes nitrogen. So farmers fertilize the land to bolster nitrogen
levels. Sometimes they use animal manure, but often they use man-made fertilizers such as
anhydrous ammonia.
David Salmonsen is with the American Farm Bureau.
“Well, for several crops, especially out into the upper parts of the Mississippi River basin, the
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, southern Minnesota, the great Corn Belt, you need nitrogen as a basic
additive and basic element to grow, to grow these crops.”
But often farmers use more nitrogen than they really need to use. It’s called an “insurance”
application. Farmers gamble that using an extra 10 to 20 pounds of nitrogen fertilizer per acre
will pay off in better crop yields – more corn. A lot of times, that gamble doesn’t pay off because
rain washes the extra nitrogen off the field. Salmonsen says slowly farmers are moving toward
more precise nitrogen application.
“Try and get away from what, you know, for years has been a practice among some people, they
say ‘Well, we’ll do what they call insurance fertilization. We got to have the crop. It may be a
little more than what we need, but we’ll know we have enough,’ because they just didn’t have the
management tools there to get this so precisely refined down to have just the right amount of
fertilizer.”
Salmonsen says with global satellite positioning tools, computers, and better monitoring farmers
will soon just be using the nitrogen they need. But, it’s not clear that farmers will give up the
insurance applications of nitrogen even with better measurements.
The government is getting involved in the nitrogen-loading problem. A task force has been
meeting to determine ways to reduce the amount of nitrogen that reaches the Gulf of Mexico.
Among the strategies being considered are applying nitrogen fertilizer at lower rates, getting
farmers to switch from row crops to perennial crops so they don’t have to fertilize every year,
planting cover crops during fall and winter to absorb nitrogen, establishing artificial wetlands in drainage areas to absorb nitrogen and getting
farmers to plant buffer strips of grass between farm fields and nearby waterways to filter out nitrogen.
Tom Christiansen is with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. He says while the government task
force is considering recommending some specific basin-wide reductions in nitrogen use the
USDA is only looking at the problem farm-by-farm.
“We get good conservation on the land, good water quality in the local streams and that will
benefit the Gulf. So, we’re working on a site-specific basis. We haven’t established any kind of
nation-wide goal for nutrient reduction.”
Unlike other industries, the government is reluctant to mandate pollution reduction. Instead of
regulations and fines used to enforce pollutions restrictions with manufacturing, agriculture is
most often encouraged to volunteer to clean up and offered financial incentives to do that. But in
the past farmers have complained that there wasn’t enough money in the programs. Christiansen
says the new farm bill has more money for conservation efforts and that should make it more
appealing for farmers to reduce nitrogen pollution.
“It falls back to good conservation planning, using the correct programs and then providing the
right kind of incentives and benefits to producers because they are taking land out of production
in many cases.”
The government is assuming the voluntary programs will be enough to reduce the nitrogen flow
into the Gulf of Mexico. No one expects the ‘dead zone’ will be eliminated. The best that
they’re hoping for is that it will be significantly reduced.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
Commercial shrimpers and fishers in the Gulf of Mexico cannot find anything alive in the 'dead zone.' Research indicates fertilizer runoff from Midwest farms causes the 'dead zone.' (Photo by Lester Graham)
Farmers and lawn care companies in the Midwest use fertilizer to grow better crops and greener lawns. But excess fertilizer is washed downstream by rain, eventually reaching the Gulf of Mexico. Scientists say once in the Gulf, it triggers a process that causes a so-called ‘Dead Zone.’ The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Farmers and lawn care companies in the Midwest use fertilizer to grow better crops and greener
lawns. But excess fertilizer is washed downstream by rain, eventually reaching the Gulf of
Mexico. Scientists say once in the Gulf, it triggers a process that causes a so-called ‘Dead Zone.’
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
To get better crop production farmers use anhydrous ammonia to increase nitrogen levels in the
soil. To get greener lawns, homeowners use fertilizers that also can increase nitrogen and other
nutrient levels. But excess nitrogen gets carried away by rainstorms. For all or parts of 31 states,
that nitrogen is washed into ditches and creeks and rivers that are all part of the Mississippi River
basin. All of that land drains into the Mississippi and the Mississippi drains into the Gulf of
Mexico.
Tracy Mehan was the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Assistant Administrator for
Water. Mehan points out that’s a lot of runoff that ends up in one place…
“It affects most of the inland drainage of the United States from Minnesota, from Ohio, from
Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa, Illinois all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico. So, we’re dealing
with a tremendously broad system here and with tremendous challenges to protect the Gulf of
Mexico.”
Challenges because the nitrogen and other nutrients cause a problem.
Nancy Rabalais is a professor with the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium. She says the
nitrogen causes a huge bloom of algae…
“Well, the nutrients stimulate the growth of plants just like fertilizers stimulate the growth of a
corn plant. But the plants in the Gulf are microscopic algae.”
Some of the algae is eaten by tiny aquatic animals and fish. But, with a huge algal bloom… some
of it just dies and sinks to the bottom. Those algae cells are consumed by bacteria that also
consume oxygen. Rabalais says that depletes the oxygen in the surrounding water…
“So what basically happens is that the production of algae is just too much for the system to
handle.”
This oxygen starvation is called hypoxia. Marine life can’t live in a hypoxic area. Fish avoid it if
they can by swimming away. Other life that can’t move that fast dies. The size of the hypoxic
zone varies from year to year. Weather across the nation affects the amount of runoff that ends
up in the Gulf, but the trend has been a dead zone that’s gotten bigger over the past twenty
years… and according to Rabalais’ research it has doubled in size since the 1950’s when nitrogen
started being used extensively in agriculture.
(sound of boat engine starting up)
In Louisiana, the commercial fishers and shrimpers are concerned about the ‘dead zone.’ Some of
the smaller operations find it difficult to travel the longer distances to find fish outside the ‘dead
zone.’
Nelwyin McInnis is with the environmental organization, the Nature Conservancy. Walking in a
marsh area in Louisiana, she talked how important it was to that region that farmers and
homeowners in the Midwest do something to try to cut back on the amount of fertilizer that ends
up in the Gulf of Mexico.
“Certainly any ways that you can reduce the fertilizer runoff would certainly be of value. And I
know each farmer can’t imagine their impact hundreds of miles away in the Gulf of Mexico, but
each one adds up and has an effect.”
But powerful agricultural interests say the ‘dead zone’ in the Gulf of Mexico is not caused by
nitrogen fertilizers in the farm belt. The American Farm Bureau has kept up a steady campaign
of denial of responsibility. Reports and essays published by the Farm Bureau question researcher
Nancy Rabalais’ findings. Rabalais says the Farm Bureau can question her all it wants. Her
published work has been reviewed by other scientists in close to a dozen major scientific journals.
“We don’t believe in collecting data and putting it on a shelf. We get it to the scientific public and
we also try to translate it so that the public, including the agricultural community can understand
what it’s saying.”
Whether the agriculture community wants to hear what those data are saying is another question.
However, the government is taking it seriously and is looking at ways to reduce the amount of
nutrients being washed into the Gulf of Mexico.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
The Bush administration is making it easier for coal-burning power plants to avoid upgrading to modern pollution prevention equipment. But in some cases the power companies are bowing to public pressure to reduce pollution anyway. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Ann Alquist reports:
Transcript
The Bush administration is making it easier for coal-burning power plants to avoid upgrading to
modern pollution prevention equipment. But in some cases the power companies are bowing to
public pressure to reduce pollution anyway. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Ann Alquist
reports:
Elizabeth Dickinson didn’t get any kind of warning about air quality in her neighborhood. She
really didn’t need one. She says couldn’t avoid noticing the pollution in the air.
“A couple years ago, there was almost a week where the air quality in my neighborhood was so
bad that you literally couldn’t sleep. There was a burning back in my throat.”
Dickinson lives in Saint Paul, Minnesota, not too far from one of the oldest coal burning plants
operated by Minnesota’s leading supplier of electricity, Xcel Energy.
She and many other people have been actively working to pressure the company to address the air
quality problems they believe are caused by Xcel’s older plants.
And in a rare move among power companies, Xcel Energy is doing something. In May 2002, the
company put forth a voluntary proposal to convert its two oldest coal burning plants to natural
gas. The oldest plant, Riverside, lies in northeast Minneapolis.
(sound of power plant)
Since it opened in 1911, the Riverside plant has changed very little when it comes to emitting
pollutants. It was grandfathered in under the Clean Air Act of 1970 – which means the plant isn’t
subject to federal environmental mandates.
It didn’t have to install modern pollution control devices unless it upgraded the plant. And now,
under the Bush administration’s new rules, even upgrading it might not trigger the threshold that
would require it to reduce emissions.
“For a little bit over two years, one of the first things I was charged with was to look at all the
emissions in and around southeast Minneapolis and Riverside plant came back as a sore thumb
because of the glaring emissions.”
Justin Eibenholtz is the environmental coordinator for a Minneapolis neighborhood improvement
group. He says that’s why Excel’s decision to convert Riverside to natural gas is such a big deal.
Once it’s converted, the old plant will cut air pollutants by 99 percent. Mercury emissions will be
completely eliminated.
Neighborhood groups such as Eibenhotz’s and big environmental groups alike are praising
Excel’s decision. The Great Lakes Program Coordinator for the Sierra Club, Emily Green, says
the reduction in emissions will mean a better quality of life for residents who live in the Great
Lakes region. That’s because the mercury and other pollutants that were emitted from the plant
often ended up in the Great Lakes through a process called air deposition. That meant pollutants
got into the food chain and contaminated fish.
“The Great Lakes are like a giant bathtub with a very, very slow drain, so that what we put into
the Great Lakes stays there.”
Green says the pollutants don’t go away. They just end up contaminating the air and the water.
“We swim in them, we drink them, you know, the fish swim around in them, and so it’s very,
very important that we recognize, despite their size, how fragile the Great Lakes are.”
Besides polluting the lakes, the air pollution drifted for hundreds of miles, causing health
problems. The effects are already apparent. An independent report commissioned from the
Environmental Protection Agency says pollution from the oldest and dirtiest power plants kills
more than thirty thousand Americans each year – almost twice the number of people killed by
drunk driving and homicide combined.
While the natural gas conversion won’t reduce the level of mercury in the Great Lakes
immediately, it will mean it won’t add to the problem. It also means a more efficient use of a
fossil fuel.
Ron Ellsner is the project manager for Xcel’s proposal.
“The new combined cycles that we’re going to install are on the order of 30 percent more
efficient than what our current coal cycle is. They do that much better a job converting that
energy into fuel into electricity.”
It comes at a cost, though. Xcel estimates converting its Minneapolis and Saint Paul plants will
amount to one billion dollars. By Xcel’s estimate, it’ll be the most expensive power plant
conversion in the history of the United States, and the cost of the conversion will be passed on to
its customers.
That’s fine by Elizabeth Dickinson. She says she, and her neighbors, were paying for it in other
ways already, such as additional healthcare costs. Dickinson says the estimated extra 15 cents a
day for her power bill will be worth it.
“You know, these are the hidden costs of coal burning and they’re huge, and you know, they’re
usually left out of these equations and we’re saying they can’t be left out any longer, they just
can’t be, because it’s too high a cost for us as a society.”
Government regulators still have to approve the plan. Minnesota’s utilities commission is
holding a final round of public hearings before voting for or against Xcel’s proposal to convert to
natural gas.
If the conversion is approved, it will likely put pressure on other power companies in the Great
Lakes region to do the same.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Ann Alquist.
Purple loosestrife's looks are deceiving. It's a beautiful plant, but researchers say it has caused enormous damage in many parts of the country. An imported beetle has now shown significant signs of controlling the plant.
Galerucella calmariensis is a species of beetle being reared and released throughout the region to control purple loosestrife. The bug was imported from Europe and Asia. (Photo courtesy of L.T. Kok)
Purple loosestrife is a beautiful plant. It’s tall… and each cone-shaped stem produces hundreds of flowers. When the plants bloom in mid-summer they can create a sea of purple in wetlands throughout the region, but the ability of the plant to spread and reproduce in great numbers is what concerns scientists and land managers. Over the years they have been working to control it. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush says one way they’re trying to control it is by releasing a bug to eat the plant:
Transcript
Purple Loosestrife is a beautiful plant. It’s tall… and each cone-shaped
stem produces hundreds of flowers. When the plants bloom
in mid-summer they can create a sea of purple in wetlands
throughout the region… but the ability of the plant to spread and
reproduce in great numbers is what concerns scientists and land
managers. Over the years, they have been working to control it.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush says one way
they’re trying to control it is by releasing a bug to eat the plant:
Roger Sutherland has lived next to this wetland for more than 35
years.
He helped build a boardwalk over the soggy marsh so that he can
get a close-up view of some of his favorite plants:
“You see that plant with the big green flower? Yep. That… and
there’s more along here… that’s a pitcher plant. These are insect
eating plants and there’s another one called sundew here… here’s
some right in here…”
(sound under)
But like many wetlands throughout the country, this wetland has
been invaded by a plant originally found in Europe and Asia.
Purple Loosestrife was introduced as an ornamental plant.
It was a
beautiful addition to gardens, but once it took
hold in the environment,
it out-competed native plants.
Frogs, birds, and insects have relied on these native plants for
thousands of years. Purple Loosestrife is crowding out their habitat.
“We’re going to get a lot more shade with this loosestrife.. and so
these plants that are on these hummocks here…
these little insect
eating plants and so on… just can’t tolerate that shade, so we’ll
probably lose ’em unless I can keep it open here… and I am trying
to keep some of it open.”
The plant spreads quickly… that’s because one plant can produce
more than two million seeds that spread with the wind, like dust.
So when it moves into an area, it often takes over creating a thicket
of purple with a dense root system.
Land managers have seen populations of ducks, and turtles
disappear when loosestrife takes over…
And research has shown that the plant can reduce some frog and
salamander populations by as much as half.
So land managers wondered what to do to stop the spread of this
weed.
They initially tried to control the plant by digging it up… or by
applying herbicide to each plant.
Trying to kill the plants one by one is hard work… especially
considering how abundant purple loosestrife is.
But researchers have hope because of a bug.
(Sound of volunteers planting loosestrife)
Volunteers have gathered here in Ann Arbor, Michigan to plant
purple loosestrife.
They’re putting dormant loosestrife roots into potting containers and
adding fertilizer.
(more sound)
When the plants leaf out they’ll be covered with a fine mesh net and
become home to a leaf-eating beetle known as galerucella.
And galerucella loves to munch on purple loosestrife.
The volunteers are creating a nursery to raise more beetles.
Once they’ve got a bunch of beetles growing on the plant… they’ll
take it to a nearby wetland… and the bugs will be released into the
wild…
(sound up)
Linda Coughenour is a member of the Audubon Society.
Her group is working with state and local agencies to raise and
release these beetles.
She says tackling purple loosestrife invasions is a big task – and
governments need help from volunteers to deal with the problem:
“This is a serious problem throughout the entire Great Lakes
wetlands… it has migrated from the East Coast to the Midwest…
so, uh.. the problem’s just too big – so they thought up doing this
volunteer project and they’ve enlisted people all over the state… and
we’re just one of those.”
Volunteers have have been releasing their beetles into this wetland
for few years now and they’re beginning to see progress:
“It’s going really well… for a while we got off to a slow start, but for two
years now we’ve found evidence that the beetles are reproducing on their
own. We see little egg masses, we see larva that are starting to eat
the plants, we see adult beetles on the plants that have wintered
over. And that’s the thing, to get them to do it on their own.”
But releasing a foreign species into the wild is always a concern.
There are a number of examples of bugs released into the wild to
eliminate a pest, but ended up causing a problem themselves.
But before importing a bug that will prey on plants – the federal
government requires testing to make sure it won’t eat other plants.
The tests have been done.
And researchers feel that this is an extremely finicky bug…
Berndt Blossey is a specialist on invasive plants and ways to control
them.
He says the beetles were tested on native plants before they were
allowed to import the bugs:
“And it was shown there that they will not be able to feed and
develop on the plants. They will occasionally nibble on them, but
they will not be able to develop on them and they usually move off
after they have taken a bite, and they move off to other plants.”
The leaf beetle is not the only bug researchers are importing.
They’re also importing two other beetles known as “weevils.”
One that feeds on loosestrife flowers, and one that feeds on its root
system.
Blossey says more than one bug is needed to keep the plant from
growing back:
“Loosestrife will rebound from resources in the root stock. If you
have the root feeder in the system as well, these fluctuations will be
dampened, so loosestrife will not be allowed to comeback to higher
levels.”
(sound of wetland up)
People who admire the diversity of plants and animals in wetlands
like the idea of keeping purple loosestrife in check.
Roger Sutherland welcomes the bugs.
He believes they’ll help him keep this wetland open for the plants,
birds, and insects he’s come to know over the years:
“We know that the purple loosestrife will probably always be here.
But if we can bring it down to a manageable level, where you’re going
to have a pocket here and a pocket there… and you can kind of
maintain the integrity of this wetland system… then you can’t ask for
anything more than that.”
And researchers say that’s the goal.
To help these wetlands reach a balance… so that plants and animals
that have evolved to rely on these wetlands for thousands of years…
can continue to do so.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mark Brush.
Members of the Amphibian Conservation Club show the frogs being transferred to their protected habitat from a pond that will become a parking lot later this summer.
Every summer, thousands of people wander through swamps and ditches in search of frogs. They’re frogwatchers— volunteers across North America, who help scientists track the health and movement of amphibians. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly caught up with one group and found they’re no longer just watching frogs, but rescuing them:
Transcript
Every summer, thousands of people wander through swamps and ditches in search of frogs.
they’re frogwatchers – volunteers across North America, who help
scientists track the health and movement of amphibians. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Karen Kelly caught up with one group and found they’re no longer just watching frogs, but
rescuing them:
(sound of frog, “I think this one’s talking now…”)
11-year-old Tyler Degroot shows off two bullfrogs in the plastic
terrarium he’s carrying. He struggles to keep the lid on as they try to escape.
He’s spent all morning combing for frogs in this swampy ditch on
Petrie Island. Not far from Ottawa, Canada’s capital.
It’s pouring rain. But he and his friends have no time for jackets or umbrellas. They run from log
to log dipping their nets in the water.
(“Holy smokes! Look at them all!”)
It might sound like fun, but they’re here on serious business.
The bulldozers in the distance are a constant reminder. Soon, this ditch – the frogs’ home – will be
turned into a parking lot.
11-year-old Ingrid Weinhold says they’re here to save as many
frogs as they can.
“We want to make sure the frogs stay on Petrie Island
and we want to make sure that people can see frogs later and so
that they don’t all die when the ditch gets filled with sand.”
Weinhold is a member of the Amphibian Conservation Club. It’s a group of homeschoolers who
meet once a month to study and discuss amphibians. They started visiting Petrie Island last year
to conduct frog watches.
It’s part of an annual census of frogs led by Environment Canada,
a government agency. The students count the number and species of frogs to find out how
many are in a given area. And that’s when they discovered that some of the resident
amphibians were in danger.
(“I just saw a whole bunch of frogs over here, okay? They went in all different directions.”)
11-year-old Gabrielle Felio is the club’s founder.
She hesitates to leave the ditch until every frog has been picked
up.
As she talks about them, her eyes look worried behind her
rain-splattered glasses.
“It’s just that they help the environment a lot. That’s
probably why we like them a lot and we want to help them. Because
it’s going to help the area and it’s going to help a lot of other
animals if we help the frogs.”
(walking)
With their terrariums full, the frogwatchers hike through the woods to a pond that they’ve
adopted. They’ve saved more than 30 frogs today. There are green frogs, bull frogs and leopard
frogs.
When they reach the pond, the rescuers open their terrariums.
(“There they go!”)
Some reach in and pull the frogs out one by one. Others just tip the terrariums upside down.
(“Woo! He’s a slippery one. I’ll get him. You did a cannonball!”)
Tyler DeGroot watches his bullfrog kick away from the shore.
He looks satisfied.
“I feel good…I think the frogs feel good, too, cause
they’ll probably have a nice little happy pond that’s not polluted
so they can just swim around and have fun.”
Each student carries a notebook to keep track of how many frogs
they moved from the ditch to the pond. Then, at the end of the summer, the group will compile
all their observations. They’ll send them to Environment Canada’s Frogwatch.
Elizabeth Kilvert is the director of the program. She says the reports from these amateur
scientists are invaluable.
“When we have people out there observing in their backyards
at different locations, we’re getting really good geographical
coverage that Environment Canada could never provide by going and
working out in the fields.”
Kilvert says it’s important to track frogs. That’s because they’re sensitive to changes in the
environment. And researchers see them as an early warning system.
Frogwatcher Ingrid Weinhold says she’s happy to help.
“I feel pretty good cause then they can figure out stuff with
the information… like if there’s too much pollution in one spot
and if the frogs have too many legs or something they can figure
out if there’s something wrong with the water.”
Before long, the frogwatchers are catching frogs again – in the
same pond where they just released them.
(“Let me see him!”)
This time, it’s just for fun.
Soon, they’ll head back to a classroom to compare notes… and make plans for their next rescue
effort – before the bulldozers move in.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
Canada lynx are rare in the U.S. Their populations fluctuate following the population cycles of snowshoe hare, their main prey. Photo courtesy of the Gov't of NW Territories.
University of Minnesota researcher Chris Burdette monitors the cat's movements in the region.
A lynx trap used by researchers to help monitor the population.
Some areas of the Great Lakes are again home to an elusive wild cat. Canada Lynx disappeared from the region about twenty years ago. Now, considered threatened, lynx are turning up in the Superior National Forest for the first time in decades. Biologists are trying to figure out why they’ve come back, and whether they’ll stay. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher reports:
Transcript
Some areas of the Great Lakes are again home to an elusive wild cat. Canada Lynx disappeared
from Minnesota about twenty years ago. Now, considered threatened lynx are turning up in the
Superior National Forest for the first time in decades. Biologists are trying to figure out why
they’ve come back, and whether they’ll stay. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bob Kelleher
reports:
Lynx have tufted ears, a stubby tail, and big snowshoe feet. They’re a northern forest cat,
about the size of a cocker spaniel. Lynx range across much of Canada and Alaska, but
historically they were found in the Great Lakes region as well. Lynx are loners and range a huge
territory. They seem to follow their favorite prey, snowshoe hare, and recently, Minnesota’s
Superior National Forest has been jumping with hares.
“It doesn’t matter where snowshoe hares are. If they’re there, that’s where cats are going to be.”
University of Minnesota Researcher, Chris Burdette, has one possible explanation for the return
of Canada Lynx.
“There’s a lot of snowshoe hares in this part of the area, and up to 90% of a lynx’s diet is
snowshoe hares.”
Hare populations boom and bust in about seven-year cycles. But in recent population booms, the
lynx were missing. By the mid-1990s, lynx were considered gone from Minnesota, until now.
Three years ago, the cats were spotted again in the region.
Burdette has just begun to count and track northeast Minnesota’s lynx. Two cats have been fitted
with radio collars. It’s not yet clear how many others are wandering the forest. And Burdette
says, lynx do wander.
“It’s very likely that the majority of these animals migrated from Canada. These animals innately
want to disperse long distances.”
Burdette was checking his traps recently, marching through dense balsam fir and the last
remnants of spring snow.
(walking through snow)
His lynx traps are chicken wire boxes, the size of a big dog house, with a bit of hare or beaver in
the back and a door on the front poised to slap shut. But on this day, there were no lynx to be
found.
“It seems like it’s been in there. We cover it up with some balsam, spruce, pine
boughs – whatever we have to sort of make it look more natural. So this one looks clear.”
Lynx were added to the list of threatened species three years ago. An environmental group sued
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service, saying the agency’s recovery plans overlooked lynx
populations in the Western Great Lakes, Maine and the Southern Rockies.
Mike Leahy, Counsel for Defenders of Wildlife, says it’s clear there are lynx in the Great Lakes
Region.
“The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources had for a long time vehemently denied that
there could possibly be more than one or two lynx in the entire state, and, they found indeed,
there’s a resident population of lynx in Minnesota.”
Lynx aren’t entirely welcomed. Some residents worry that rules protecting the threatened species
might stop timber sales, or close roads and recreation trails. They remember the Pacific
Northwest, where logging was stopped for spotted owls. But that won’t happen for lynx,
according to Superior National Forest Biologist, Ed Lindquist.
“It’s certainly not a four-legged spotted owl. It really likes regenerating forest – dense
regenerating forest – that provides good snowshoe hare habitat.”
And regenerating forest is what you get after harvesting timber. New aspen growth attracts hares.
Lynx also need older growth nearby for shelter.
Chris Burdette’s study will help create a lynx recovery plan. But he says recovery – actually
getting the cat off federal protection – isn’t even on the horizon.
“No where near it. Very preliminary stages. We’re just in the data collection stage right now, so we
can put some kind of scientific thoughts into the process of managing this species.
There’s little known about the elusive cat or it’s prey. Understanding snowshoe hares will help
researchers understand the lynx.
“Are they going to be here in three years? Are they going to be here in five years, or whatever?
That’s a very open question.”
Burdette will trap lynx until bears begin raiding the bait in his box traps. Then he’ll radio track
collared lynx and monitor hare feeding areas for signs of lynx. The lynx study is funded for three
years, but it might take ten to begin understanding this rare cat.
For The Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bob Kelleher.
An Illinois Natural History Survey intern shows off her catch (a bighead carp). Officials are concerned that human behavior may help the invasive fish get around the barrier on the Chicago River. (Photo by Mark Pegg, INHS)
From the backwater of the Illinois River near Havana, IL. Three asian carp species
on a measuring board. From top to bottom - Silver carp, Grass carp, and Bighead carp. (Photo by Kevin Irons, INHS)
Over time, invasive species have upset the natural balance of the Great Lakes. Now, officials are working frantically to stop a new threat, the Asian carp. The carp lives in tributaries connected to the Great Lakes. But there may be another route into the water system – through Asian food stores. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports, live carp can be purchased in many cities throughout the region:
Transcript
Over time, invasive species have upset the natural balance of the Great Lakes. Now, officials are
working frantically to stop a new threat, the Asian carp. The carp lives in tributaries connected to
the Great Lakes. But there may be another route into the water system – through Asian food
stores. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports, live carp can be purchased
in many cities throughout the region:
“This one in Chinese, layoo. This one in Chinese…”
York Alooah stands in front of a crowded fish tank at the 168 Market in Ottawa, Canada’s capital.
He points to the fat, foot and a half-long bighead carp swimming behind the glass.
The fish are brought to his store by truck from Toronto. They originate at farms in the southern
U.S.
Speaking through an interpreter, Alooah says it’s unlikely that a carp could escape during
delivery.
“They use a big truck and have the fish tank inside.”
Alooah says the fish can’t jump out because the tanks are covered. Still, the live sale of these fish
has many people worried. That’s why states like Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota and Ohio have
banned the possession of live Asian carp.
Several states are also asking the federal government to add these carp to a list of invasive species
considered harmful. That listing would make it illegal to possess them alive.
In Canada, there aren’t laws like that on the looks. But officials say they’re considering action.
Nick Mandrack is a research scientist with the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans. He
says Canadian researchers are keeping an eye on an Asian carp population that’s moving north up
the Mississippi River. They worry that the fish will migrate through a manmade canal into the
Great Lakes.
“If they were to become established, either through dispersal up from the Mississippi or
unauthorized release as a result of the live food trade, they could have enormous impacts on the
Great Lakes ecosystem, which would likely result in a dramatic decline in the biomass of game
fishes.”
That’s because two species of Asian carp eat the same food as small forage fishes. And those
forage fishes are what the larger gamefish rely on. The Asian carp are too big for the gamefish to
eat.
Researchers are also worried about two other species. The black carp could wipe out endangered
mussels that live in the lakes. And the grass carp destroys aquatic plants where native fishes live.
Mandrack has seen both the bighead and the grass carp sold live in Asian food stores. He and
others say that poses one of the greatest threats to the Great Lakes fish population.
(sound of fish scaling)
Back at the 168 market in Ottawa, York Alooah uses a long knife to butcher and scale a fish he’s
pulled out of a tank. He laughs when an interpreter asks if people ever leave his store with live
carp.
“When people buy, it’s not alive. He clean and kill and clean everything.” Is it never alive?”
“Never.”
In fact, the city of Chicago is hoping to guarantee that doesn’t happen. Officials want stores that
sell live carp to operate under permits. And the fish would have to be killed before it left the
store.
But not all fish is bought for consumption. There’s also concern about a Buddhist practice in
which captive animals are released into the wild.
Tookdun Chudrin is a nun with the MidAmerica Buddhist Association. She says the carp sold in
food stores are not likely candidates for release.
“I think that people would not buy such a large fish for liberation because they tend to get very
small animals and very often will put them in a pond at a temple.
And Chudrin says, Buddhists would want to know if the religious practice was harming other
animals.
“I think definitely if there were a sign saying that said putting these fish in the lakes could be
detrimental to other species, I think people for sure would heed that if this was going to endanger
others and the people knew it, I don’t think they’d do that.”
So far, only two Asian carp have been found – in the Canadian waters of the Great Lakes.
Another was released in a fountain in Toronto, just a few blocks from Lake Ontario.
Whether from pranks, or acts of kindness, some fear it’s only a matter of time before more carp
get into the water. They say the Great Lakes could become a giant carp pond, and many of the
species we’ve come to know would disappear.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
While wetlands have disappeared in great numbers over the last century in the Midwest, it seems that most of the wildlife relying on them have survived. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Wheelhouse reports:
Transcript
While wetlands have disappeared in great numbers over the last century in the Midwest, it seems
that most of the wildlife relying on them have survived. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Bill Wheelhouse reports:
Nearly 90 percent of the wetlands in the Midwest are gone. They have been replaced by farm
fields and development. A study in the February issue of Conservation Biology says despite the
change. Most of the native species have survived in the remaining wetlands. Co-author David
Jenkins is a biologist at the University of Illinois. He says the study of crustaceons shows more
than 90-percent of those species are surviving in isolated shallow ponds and puddles. Jenkins
says the wetlands range in size from an office cubicle to a football field. He says there is far
more biodiversity tucked away in the Midwest than previously thought, but says the remaining
wetlands must be protected.
“It’s kind of a catch 22, in that the species that have been still hanging on are less likely to be able
to hang on if we were to lose more wetlands.”
Some state legislatures are considering measures that might help protect these types of wetlands,
although discussions are still in the early stages. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bill
Wheelhouse.
Some people, because of culture or because of necessity, rely on fishing as a way to supply an important part of their family’s diet. While fish is healthful food, experts warn that fish from lakes and rivers can be contaminated by pollutants. In the first of a two-part series on communicating the risks of eating contaminated fish to ethnic groups… the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports… conveying that warning to some cultures is especially difficult:
Transcript
Some people, because of culture or because of necessity, rely on fishing as a
way to supply an important part of their family’s diet. While fish is healthful food,
experts warn that fish from lakes and rivers can be contaminated by pollutants.
In the first of a two-part series on communicating the risks of eating
contaminated fish to ethnic groups… the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham reports… conveying that warning to some
cultures is especially difficult:
As the United States pulled out of Southeast Asia during the Viet Nam war, many people who
had been allies from Laos, Cambodia, and South Viet Nam found their way to the U.S. Some of
these people have always relied on fish for a large part of their diet.
After settling in the United States, they naturally turned to public lakes and rivers and began
fishing. They ran into a couple of problems. First, U.S. conservations laws put limits on the size
and how many fish they could catch, something they were not used to. Second, health officials
and conservation officials began to warn them about contamination. They told them chemical
pollutants could harm development in children and fetuses.
Josee Cung is with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. She says many of the
Southeast Asian immigrants were skeptical. They thought the government was conspiring to get
them to buy ocean fish from stores rather than take free fish from the lakes and rivers. Cung says
the immigrants had never heard of such a thing as contaminants you couldn’t see.
“PCB, mercury, they don’t understand that. So, that’s the big challenge. So, there are real
cultural, but there are also real educational barriers.”
As she distributed fish advisories suggesting that certain fish had higher levels of contamination,
Cung found the Southeast Asian immigrants were astonished. She says they are a practical
people. They feel if that can’t see something wrong with the fish, it must be okay to eat.
“‘But they’re fat! They’re shiny! They are big!’ You know, ‘But they are good to eat!’ So, that’s
the kind of thing. It’s more prevalent than relying on the advisory to change behavior.”
The State of Minnesota had pamphlets of the advisories printed up in the various languages of the
immigrants and handed them out at every opportunity.
Pat McCann is a research scientist with the Department of Health. She’s worked closely with
Josee Cung to try to explain the fish contaminants issue.
“But we found, with the Southeast Asian populations, the written translations aren’t that effective
because that group seems to communicate more verbally. So, in order to do outreach with those
groups, we try to do presentations and reach community groups in that way.”
And so Minnesota took a more hands-on approach. Josee Cung says instead of handing out
pamphlets alone, they started meeting with leaders in the various Southeast Asian communities in
Minnesota. For example, the Hmong, who helped retrieve downed U.S. pilots during the war are
a people of clans. Cung found if they could demonstrate to clan leaders ways to trim away the fat
of fish where contaminants such as PCBs concentrate and show which fish have lower levels of
contaminants, the word would spread throughout the community. Cung also found that it was
important not just to talk to the anglers who got the fishing license – usually men.
“And we go in homes doing cooking. And really check out their kitchen and say ‘Oh, this is how
you should do.’ And it’s most effective because it’s the women that prepare. He hasn’t got a
clue. He bring the fish home and leave it to the women. And the women decide how to cook it.”
Minnesota’s outreach program with Southeast Asian cultures is pretty advanced. Not every
government in the Great Lakes basin is as active. In recent years, the International Joint
Commission, the body that monitors the U.S. and Canadian boundary waters treaties and
agreements, has been admonishing the states and provinces to do more.
Alan Hayton is with the Ontario Ministry of Environment. He says the governments have taken
the message to heart, but finding the money to do the job is always a problem.
“We do have some communications with some groups such as in Ontario, such as the Chinese
community, which is well-organized and receptive to the information that’s in the guide. But, it’s
difficult. We don’t. We do the best job we can given the resources that we have.”
The International Joint Commission warns that it’s important that the states and provinces work
harder to reach cultures, such as those from Southeast Asia, that rely heavily on fish for protein.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
