Point: Agreements Will Help Protect Great Lakes

  • The proposed Annex 2001 agreement is the subject of lively debate as to whether it will help or hinder the conservation of the Great Lakes (Photo by Jeremy Lounds)

In 1998, an Ontario company wanted to sell Lake Superior water overseas. Their proposal raised fears that Great Lakes water could be diverted with little oversight. Now, officials from the eight states and two provinces in the region have come up with two proposed agreements that would regulate new water diversion requests. The proposed agreements are known as the Annex 2001 Implementing Agreements. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Cameron Davis says the agreements are a good first step in protecting a cherished resource:

Transcript

In 1998 an Ontario company wanted to sell Lake Superior water overseas. Their
proposal raised fears that Great Lakes water could be diverted with little oversight.
Now, officials from the eight states and two provinces in the region have come up with
two proposed agreements that would regulate new water diversion requests. The proposed
agreements are known as the Annex 2001 Implementing Agreements. Great Lakes Radio Consortium
commentator Cameron Davis says the agreements are a good first step in protecting a cherished
resource:


When I was growing up, my family and I used to go to the beach every Sunday. As I stood
looking out over Lake Michigan, I was awed at how it seemed to go on forever. Today I know
better. The Great Lakes are a gift left from the glaciers thousands of years ago. That’s
because less than 1% of Great Lakes water is renewed every year from rainfall, snowmelt,
and groundwater recharge.


Two proposed agreements by the states and provinces would make diversions of Great Lakes water
to places outside of the Great Lakes a virtual impossibility.


The agreements look to be a vast improvement over current laws. First, federal law in the U.S.
allows a diversion only if every Great Lakes Governor approves. That seems like a tough standard
to meet, but in fact, it’s already allowed two diversions of Great Lakes water to take place. In
the 1990’s, diversions were approved to Pleasant Prairie in Wisconsin and another one to Akron,
Ohio. The water was used for municipal supplies.


Second, the proposed agreements are an improvement over the Boundary Waters Treaty – a pact
signed between the U.S. and Canada almost 100 years ago. The treaty doesn’t cover one very
important Great Lake: Lake Michigan. Because Lake Michigan is solely within the U.S. and not
shared with Canada, the treaty leaves the lake unprotected. This is a problem because Lake
Michigan is directly connected to Lake Huron. So water diverted out of Lake Michigan means
water diverted out of Lake Huron.


The agreements are a good first step, but they need to be stronger. For example, they require
regional approval for diversions of water that go outside of the basin of more than one million
gallons per day, but they don’t require regional approval for withdrawals of up to 5 million
gallons per day that stay in the Great Lakes. In addition, the draft agreements need to do a
better job at requiring water conservation before potential water withdrawals can be considered.


We have a choice. We can be against the agreements and keep the status quo or work to make
them even stronger. We need to work to protect our region’s water so that our kids can continue
to look out over the Great Lakes and see them for what they are: vast, magnificent, but fragile
natural treasures.


Host Tag: Cameron Davis is the executive director of the Lake Michigan Federation.

Related Links

Candidates Play on Water Diversion Issue

Great Lakes water has become an issue in this year’s presidential campaign as both candidates try to pick up valuable votes in the swing states. Both of the major party candidates say they’re against diverting the water to other states, and both say their opponent has been inconsistent on the issue. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Michael Leland has more:

Transcript

Great Lakes water has become an issue in this year’s presidential campaign as
both candidates try to pick up valuable votes in the swing states. Both of the
major party candidates say they’re against diverting the water to other states,
and both say their opponent has been inconsistent on the issue. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Michael Leland has more:


President Bush says he favors keeping Great Lakes water in the Great Lakes.
He said so this summer during a campaign stop in Traverse City, Michigan.


“My position is clear. We’re never going to allow diversion of Great
Lakes water.”


And John Kerry says he is against diverting Great Lakes water. It’s one of six
points included in his recently-released plan to clean up and preserve the lakes.
Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm discussed that plan in a conference call
with reporters.


“They are adamantly opposed to diverting water from the Great Lakes
basin. They will institute a no diversions policy for the Great Lakes.
They will block any water diversion.”


And while both the Bush and Kerry campaigns are promising not to let other
states tap into the Great Lakes, they’re accusing each other of going back and
forth on the issue. Bush says back in February, Kerry referred to the diversion
issue as a “delicate balancing act.” The next day, Kerry’s campaign said the
Democrat was “absolutely opposed” to diversions. The Kerry campaign
says back in 2001, President Bush expressed support for diverting Great Lakes
water to the Southwestern United States. The president wasn’t that specific
about it, though he did say he’d be open to discussions about water with
Canada’s prime minister.


Michigan’s Governor Granholm says there’s no immediate threat that Great
Lakes water would be diverted, though she says it has to be a concern as the
dry, Southwestern part of the United States continues to add people, and
members of Congress who might one day vote on such an issue.


But some experts say diversion of Great Lakes water is much more likely to happen
in areas closer to the Lakes. They say diverting water to the arid Southwest
would cost too much.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Michael Leland.

Related Links

Proposed Water Diversion Plan Sparks Debate

  • Who gets water and who doesn’t?

Midwest states and Canadian provinces are conducting public forums this fall on a plan to control large-scale water withdrawals from the Great Lakes Basin. The plan is known as Annex 2001. And as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports… it’s already proving to be controversial:

Transcript

Midwest states and Canadian provinces are conducting public forums this
fall on a plan to control large-scale water withdrawals from the Great
Lakes Basin. The plan is known as Annex 2001. And as the Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports… it’s already proving to
be controversial:


The Great Lakes governors and Canadian provincial leaders have drafted
a plan setting standards for new water withdrawal requests. Thirsty
companies and communities outside the basin are expected to look at the
five lakes with increasing frequency. Environmental groups largely
like the proposal… though some want it made stronger.


But George Kuper of the Council of Great Lakes Industries says the plan
is too restrictive. At a regional hearing in Chicago, Kuper said
states and provinces that are competing to attract businesses could
block a diversion request.


“Regional review as now proposed would erode the ability of individual
governors and premiers to attract new jobs to their respective
jurisdictions. That’s a problem.”


In addition to the state meetings taking place, another regional
hearing is scheduled for September 20th in Toronto.


Many governments need to approve the Annex 2001 plan and the process is
expected to take a few years.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Ijc Asks States for Asian Carp Barrier Money

  • The Army Corps of Engineers' new barrier will be similar in design to the demonstration project in place now. (Diagram courtesy of USACE)

Officials from a joint U.S./Canada Commission that monitors the health of the Great Lakes is asking states and provinces in the region for help. The International Joint Commission wants the governments to chip in money to make sure that Asian carp don’t invade the Great Lakes and decimate the fishing industry. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Cohen reports:

Transcript

Officials from a joint U.S./Canada Commission that monitors the health
of the Great Lakes is asking states and provinces in the region for
help. The International Joint Commission wants the governments to chip
in money to make sure that Asian carp don’t invade the Great Lakes and
decimate the fishing industry. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill
Cohen reports:


A temporary experimental electronic barrier in the Chicago Ship and
Sanitary Canal is the only thing keeping Asian Carp from swimming into
Lake Michigan. That’s why the federal government and Illinois have
allocated 6.7 million dollars to build a new permanent fence.


But now, the builders say they need an extra 1.8 million dollars to complete
the work. That’s why the International Joint Commission is asking all the
states and provinces that have a stake in the dilemma to come up with
that cash. John Nevin is a policy advisor for the IJC. He says if the
older barrier fails or the new one doesn’t work right, the carp will
wreak havoc with the Great Lakes:


“What they do is they swim along with mouths wide open and they filter
feed. They eat all the plankton and all the little stuff that little fish eat,
so they would potentially rob all the other fish in the lake of their food.”


Ohio’s Governor Bob Taft heads the Council of Great Lakes Governors.
He’s seeking input from other governors so he can issue a response soon
to the plea for money.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bill Cohen in Columbus.

Related Links

Governor Calls for Uniform Water Standards

Some Great Lakes governors have agreed they should adopt a consistent set of rules for determining whether their water is clean and safe. We have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta:

Transcript

Some Great Lakes governors have agreed they should adopt a consistent
set of rules for determining whether their water is clean and safe. We
have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta:


Seven years ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency called on
Great Lakes states to develop uniform standards for monitoring water
quality. Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm says it’s time to end the
patchwork of water protection policies among the states that surround
the lakes.


“Every state has different standards with respect to the water quality.
For example, there may be eight different advisories in respect to fish
consumption in all of the different eight states.”


Granholm is asking the Great Lakes governors and the EPA to form a task
force to create a set of uniform standards. She says that would make it
easier for Great Lakes states to stand together to protect the
resource. And, she says, people would be assured their water is safe
for drinking, swimming and fishing, regardless of which state they are
in.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Rick Pluta.

Related Links

Council Looks for Land Use Consensus

Governors and legislatures across the nation have been trying to figure out the best way to manage land-use in areas where urban sprawl is gobbling up open space and leaving behind deteriorating city centers. But finding a way to manage land-use is controversial. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on one state’s attempt to tackle the problem:

Transcript

Governors and legislatures across the nation have been trying to figure out the best way to
manage land use in areas where urban sprawl is gobbling up open space and leaving behind
deteriorating city centers. But finding a way to manage land use is controversial. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on one state’s attempt to tackle the problem:


The Governor of Michigan made it clear while she was a candidate that she wanted to tackle the problem of urban sprawl. Shortly after her inauguration, Governor Jennifer Granholm established what she calls a Michigan Land Use Leadership Council. It’s made up of home-builders, developers, farmers, environmentalists and others. The council’s job is to find a consensus on the best ways to make the best use of land in Michigan so that the state doesn’t lose any more farmland and open space than necessary.


Hans Voss was appointed to the council. He’s with the Michigan Land Use Institute, a group
advocating the principles of Smart Growth… getting government to take a more active role in
preserving open space and redeveloping blighted urban areas. He says he expects the council to come up with recommendations that everyone can live with… and still adhere to Smart Growth principles…


“And it’s not a regulatory approach. But, if you put real, substantive
financial incentive on the table by reallocating our existing state dollars,
we will then put together the local coalition to
actually implement the recommendations. It’s all about incentives.”


Voss says local governments too often encourage urban sprawl by putting the
wrong incentives in place for builders and developers. He’s optimistic that the
various interests represented on the
governor’s new council will find common ground and solve some of the problems.


Keith Charters is also a member of the council. He currently serves as chair of
the state’s Natural Resource Commission. He agrees the council will
find consensus and make good recommendations to the Michigan legislature.
But he’s concerned that much of the agreement
will be lost in the legislative process.


“The recommendations are not going to get through the sausage grinder of
the legislature overnight. It’s not a 30-day process and some of the
recommendations may take two or three
years. That’s a lot of time for the special interests to reconsider
some of the consensus they may
have already approved at the council level, to rethink it and come back
with a different attack on it.”


Further complicating the matter is a political consideration. Rick Johnson
is the Speaker of the
Michigan House of Representatives. He says term limits will hurt the chances
of getting more
complicated land use legislation through the process.


“You know, you’re only around for six years in the House. It’s real hard
to – you know, an issue of land use isn’t going to get done in a year, two
years’ time. It’s a more lengthy discussion.”


On top of that, Johnson says legislators have a hard time keeping the best
interests of the state as
a whole in mind when so many local constituents are pressuring legislators to
think local first.


“When you have a bunch of townships, city, county people saying
‘We don’t want that,’ you know. Or ‘What’s good for Detroit, I don’t care.’
Or, what’s good for Marquette, the legislator
from Detroit don’t care.”


Beyond parochial biases, there are philosophical biases. Senator Liz Brater
also sits on the governor’s land use council. She says the political reality
is that the council’s recommendations
won’t carry that much weight with some legislators unless they fit within
their existing philosophy.


“There’s a certain group of legislators that just embrace the whole Smart Growth
principles and would go forward with it. There are others that are concerned that we’re taking away property rights and the rights of homebuilders and developers to have economic benefit from land that they control. So, there’s a whole gamut and what we need is to identify the common ground.”


But… even if the legislators see some common interests within the Michigan Land Use
Leadership Council’s recommendations… many of the public comments indicate there are a lot of people who are skeptical about land use management. It’s even been called un-American. Senator Brater says if more people knew the issue better… there wouldn’t be so much concern and opposition…


“But, I think we have a lot to overcome in terms of this perception
that we’re trying to do some
kind of centralized, top-down state planning, which I don’t think anybody
really is talking about,
but that is a fear out there that we have to address.”


The Michigan Land Use Leadership Council will make its recommendations for managing land
use in just a few weeks… but whether anything like Smart Growth principles
become part of Michigan law or policy will depend on finding some common ground
between the different interests
and overcoming political biases of the state’s people and their elected representatives.


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


EDITOR’S NOTE: Audio for the piece was gathered at a People and Land conference.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium receives funding from People and Land.

COUNCIL LOOKS FOR LAND USE CONSENSUS (Short Version)

States are concerned about the loss of farmland and open space to sprawling cities and suburbs… but it’s hard for legislatures to find practical political solutions. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

States are concerned about the loss of farmland and open space to sprawling cities and suburbs…
but it’s hard for legislatures to find practical political solutions. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


Land use management is not simple. In some areas it means preserving farmland… in other areas
it means urban renewal… and in others it means building higher density housing instead of big
houses on big lots.


In Michigan, for example, the Speaker of the House, Rick Johnson predicts conflict between
legislators from urban, suburban and rural areas. He says getting legislators up to speed on land
use management and in agreement will be more complicated than many of the other issues
legislators face.


“Land use is going to be extremely harder because the focus is so immense and different
from different areas.”


A council appointed by the Michigan governor is working to send land use
recommendations to the legislature. Meanwhile, even during these poor economic times… rapid
growth at the edges of metropolitan areas on what was once open land continues with little
restraint.


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

Governments Grapple With Regional Transport

Many large cities throughout the Midwest have been struggling with issues such as urban sprawl. Getting workers from one area to the jobs in another has become a transportation challenge. Building multi-lane highways only seems to encourage more sprawl, so many cities have worked with surrounding suburbs to build mass transit systems for the entire metropolitan region. For one major city, political leaders are just now getting around to making that happen and as the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jerome Vaughn reports… even now it’s not going to be easy:

Transcript

Many large cities throughout the Midwest have been struggling with
issues such as urban sprawl. Getting workers from one area to the jobs
in another has become a transportation challenge. Building multi-lane
highways only seems to encourage more sprawl. So many cities have worked
with surrounding suburbs to build mass transit systems for the entire
metropolitan region. For one major city, political leaders are just now
getting around to making that happen. And as the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Jerome Vaughn reports… even now it’s not
going to be easy:


Detroit is the 10th largest city in the country…and it’s had more than
its share of struggles over issues such as chronic unemployment, poverty,
and pollution.


Finding solutions to those intractable problems has long been a goal of
government leaders in the area. But over the past three decades…they’ve lacked
one tool… used by most other metropolitan areas
around the country…that can make a difference. A regional transportation
system.


But that’s about to change.


Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm has joined Detroit Mayor Kwame
Kilpatrick…and the heads of the three largest counties in Metro
Detroit…to announce the formation of the Detroit Area Regional
Transportation Authority…otherwise known as DARTA.


The new regional transportation authority is backed by local governments,
business interests ..and mass transit proponents. The government leaders have
signed an agreement to work towards the regional transportation
system. Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick says the new deal will benefit the
city AND suburbs.


“This is a real people thing today. It’s also an economic thing…and it’s
rare when these two things come together. This will drive the economic
engine of the state. To move people to jobs…leads to economic
independence.”


The agreement is the first step towards ending decades of debate over how
best to get workers from their homes to their jobs. With many Detroiters
living below the poverty level…owning a car is impossible. But that can
mean taking several buses over a span of three hours just to get to work
each day.


That type of commute is what DARTA proponents, like such as Attorney Richard
Bernstein hope to end. As a blind man…he’s unable to drive to get
where he needs to go. He says Detroit’s lack of coordinated mass
transportation pushed him to become a transit activist a couple of years
ago.


“As a disabled person who can’t drive…I struggle for my independence and I
struggle for my freedom. And DARTA is the only hope that someone like me
has in order to lead a quality of life here in Southeast Michigan.”


Bernstein says he’d like to have that extra measure of independence. But he
says…right now…it’s impossible for him to get around town on his
own…given the current state of mass transit in Metro Detroit.


“For me right now …it isn’t that regional transit is difficult to
use…it’s that it’s non existent …that is the issue. Ultimately, if I want
to get from my house …or my apartment to my office. There is no bus I can
take. There is no bus I can take from my office to court.”


But Bernstein’s passion for regional transportation isn’t uniformly shared.
The original measure creating DARTA was vetoed by former Governor John
Engler last year as one of his final acts in office. The state legislature
tried to resurrect the bill in January…but it has subsequently
stalled…pushing the new governor, Jennifer Granholm and Detroit Mayor Kwame
Kilpatrick and others to find alternate ways routes to create a working agreement.


The opponents say the regional transportation system is not fair. State
Representative Leon Drolet opposes DARTA because he says his more rural
constituents shouldn’t be taxed for a bus system they’ll never use. He wants a
provision that would let communities “opt-out” of the DARTA if they choose. The
Republican legislator says he also concerned because there’s no plan to pay for
DARTA yet. And he says no one’s convinced him that such a system is really
needed in Metro Detroit…home of the Big Three automakers..


“Macomb, Oakland suburban Wayne communities…those are built around the
car. Everywhere there’s a parking lot. Boston, Washington DC, New
York…those communities…mass transit is very viable in the inner areas
because it costs 30 bucks a day or 50 bucks a day to park your car. And
that’s what drives people to mass transit…the inconvenience of driving
your car.”


But automakers say they want the regional mass transit system. The
Southeastern Michigan Council of Government’s Transportation
Expert…Carmine Palombo…says many of the region’s businesses are having a
hard time getting workers from their homes to their jobs. And that includes
the Big Three automakers…who have come out in favor of DARTA.


“The auto company themselves employ people who need to have good transit in
order to get to their jobs…and so they’re feeling the pinch…just like
every other employer is who wants to get…make sure they get to the jobs
they have to offer in a stable environment. So the car companies aren’t the
problem.”


(sound up – bus)


While the Detroit Area Regional Transportation Authority agreement has been
signed….the work is just beginning for transit activists in
Metro-Detroit. The current agreement only provides for planning a
regional transportation system. There’s currently no money for
implementation of ANY plan.


And DARTA opponents such as Leon Drolet are still on the job, too. He’s
charging that the chairman of his county…had no authority to sign
the DARTA agreement…and is asking the State’s Attorney
General to investigate.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jerome Vaughn.

Power Shift for Great Lakes Governorships

The recent elections mean that there’s a power shift in the region. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports that a group made up of Great Lakes states governors will change dramatically:

Transcript

The recent elections mean that there’s a power shift in the region. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports that a group made up of Great Lakes states
governors will change dramatically:


Of the eight Great Lakes states, five of them have elected new governors. And most of
the new governors are from a different party than their predecessor.


“Actually, this is the largest turnover in one election cycle that the Council’s had in its
twenty-year history. ”


That’s Maggie Grant with the Council of Great Lakes Governors. The council deals with
issues surrounding the Great Lakes and trade in the region.


“We don’t see major policy shift, although, we look forward to the new energy and ideas
of our governors that they bring to the table.”


Coming to the table are a lot more Democrats. Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and
Pennsylvania all elected Democrats to replace their Republican governors. Grant says
party affiliation isn’t that important to the group – fighting for the Great Lakes region is.


For the Great Lakes Consortium, this is Lester Graham.

Federal Proposal May Drown Farmland

It doesn’t happen very often, but for the last year, a republican
governor, the farming community, and environmentalists have been working
together to protect endangered wetlands, by taking certain farmlands out
of production. But now, a new federal proposal could be separating the
groups. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl has the story: