The federal government could soon promise a lot more money to help clean up the Great Lakes. Lawmakers from several states in the region are proposing a multi-billion dollar cleanup fund. More from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Michael Leland:
Transcript
The federal government could soon promise a lot more money to help clean up
the Great Lakes. Lawmakers from several states in the region are proposing a
multi-billion dollar cleanup fund. More from the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Michael Leland:
Lawmakers from states bordering the Great Lakes say previous cleanup efforts have been
uncoordinated and under-funded. The region’s U.S. Senators are sponsoring
a bill that would give Great Lakes states six-billion dollars in grants during the
next ten years. A similar bill in the House offers four billion over five years.
Andy Buchsbaum heads the National Wildlife Federation office in Ann Arbor. He says the
proposals are groundbreaking.
“Until now, all too often the approach has been to slow or, if we are very lucky, to stop the
degradation of the Great Lakes. But these bills really break the mold. They give the lakes a
chance to improve, to heal, to recover.”
The Senate bill would create a regional advisory board to recommend which projects should
receive federal money. Buchsbaum predicts presidential candidates hoping to win support in the
region will back the bills. Both measures are only authorization bills. Lawmakers in future years
would have to vote to actually spend the money.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Michael Leland.
Some Great Lakes states are considering a ban on hunting fenced-in animals. Many of these hunting reserves stock their land with popular game such as elk. (Photo courtesy of the USFWS)
An animal rights group wants to ban so-called “canned hunts” in which animals are hunted in fenced-in areas. In one state… a proposed law might accomplish that… but critics say it goes too far. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Johnson reports:
Transcript
An animal rights group wants to ban so-called “canned hunts” in which animals are
hunted in fenced-in areas. In one state, a proposed law might accomplish that but
critics say it goes too far. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Johnson
reports:
(sound of truck driving over gravel roads)
At the bottom of steep hills covered by a tall canopy of trees, herds of elk gather
around feed troughs on the Pea Ridge Elk Ranch. In the distance, others forage over
dry winter grass in a clearing. Most glance up when the truck driven by ranch
manager Doug Pennock idles by. Pennock’s voice, along with the crackling of his tires
over chunks of gravel, stand out in an area that’s otherwise serene.
Pennock manages about 300 elk on this ranch 80 miles north of St. Louis. Some are
sent out west to rejuvenate elk populations. Others are slaughtered for meat. And each
year, about 10 to 15 are moved from this pasture to an adjacent deer and elk
preserve where they’re killed by hunters. An eight-foot tall fence surrounds that
300-acre preserve. Pennock says that although the animals are confined, their
environment is about as close to wilderness as you can get.
“We’ve had a lot of customers through who have hunted in different settings…
and certainly feel like ours is as challenging as any other.”
But under legislation being proposed in Illinois… preserves like Pennock’s
would be off limits to hunters. That’s because critics say there’s no sport in a
confined hunt… and that in some cases it’s essentially like shooting fish in a barrel.
The measure’s sponsor… Chicago Democratic Senator John Cullerton… says the
hunts also go after animals that are tame.
“What you see is that this is really not hunting. I mean this is these small relatively
confined areas for animals that have been raised by human beings.”
Cullerton’s proposal applies not only to elk but also to animals such as lions or
bears. Don Rolla is the Executive Director for the Illinois Humane Political
Action Committee. He says confined, or canned, hunts of exotic animals are a growing
problem in other Midwest states… including Indiana and Michigan.
But Rollah says eleven states, including Wisconsin and Minnesota, have already
banned confined hunts. He says that could mean the people who used to hunt there
will now come to Illinois for canned hunts. Rolla says that makes it all the more
important for Illinois to pass its own ban. He says everyone, even hunters, should
support this measure.
“It’s not an anti-hunting bill. It’s a bill that promotes ethics and takes a step
toward solving a problem that Illinois is going to have to deal with very shortly
if they’re going to continue to have a viable hunting activity in the
state.”
It’s difficult to determine which animals ought to be protected under a ban on canned
hunting. Rolla says he’d like it to cover all wildlife. But deer hunting is allowed on
about 500 confined hunting operations in Illinois alone. It’s unlikely that a ban on that
many game farms will pass in the state.
As it’s proposed right now, the measure would protect exotic species. but that means
as it’s written, you couldn’t slaughter livestock raised in a confined area. Tim
Schweizer is with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.
“Livestock certainly of some kinds… swine and cattle… are not animals that were
indigenous to Illinois. They were imported here many, many years ago. so they might fall
inappropriately under the definition as it was originally outlined in this bill.”
Other species further complicate the proposal. The elk on Doug Pennock’s ranch,
for example, are no longer found in the wild in Illinois… although they were at one
time indigenous. Also, because elk are considered livestock in Illinois, Pennock can
technically let paying hunters shoot them whenever… and wherever they want.
Pennock says his business never uses that freedom… voluntarily enforcing hunting
rules similar to Illinois deer hunting laws. And he says the fences around his property
serve only to help him manage an effective herd.
“I think that most folks like myself that come from a hunting background obviously want
everything to be as close to what we would term fair chase as possible.”
The question for lawmakers will be whether *close* to a fair chase is good enough.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Shawn Johnson.
Lawmakers in Michigan are working with Amtrak officials to keep passenger service on two major rail lines from being discontinued. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jerome Vaughn has details:
Transcript
Lawmakers in Michigan are working with Amtrak officials to keep passenger
service on two major rail lines from being discontinued. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jerome Vaughn has details:
(sound in – train)
Amtrak officials say they will have to end service on its Chicago to Grand
Rapids and Chicago to Toronto routes unless Michigan provides additional
funding.
The train system says it needs just over seven million dollars per year to
operate the two routes, but the state currently caps aid to Amtrak at
five point-seven million dollars.
State Representative Lauren Hagen has introduced a bill to increase
available funding. He says the routes are vital for residents throughout
the region.
“It’s a need for many people: for handicapped people, for senior
citizens, and people who want an alternative way to travel.”
Amtrak says about 150-thousand passengers traveled the routes last
year, but that’s still not enough riders to pay for the service through
fares alone.
Rail service in Missouri is also threatened because of reduced funding.
The Michigan legislature has found enough money to keep the service running
until mid-May, but additional funding may be hard to find with the state
facing a one-point-nine billion dollar budget deficit.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jerome Vaughn in Detroit.
This fall, Congress is expected to debate how much to spend on a new farm bill, and there may be sharp disagreement over what programs should be funded. Traditionally, the money has been used to supplement farmers’ income. But now, environmental groups are increasingly demanding, and getting more money for conservation programs. In the second of a two-part series, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Dan Gunderson reports that many farmers are concerned about organizations with no agricultural background shaping farm policy:
Transcript
This fall, Congress is expected to debate how much to spend on a new farm bill, and there may be sharp disagreement over what programs should be funded.
Traditionally, the money has been used to supplement farmers’ incomes. But now, environmental groups are increasingly demanding, and getting more money for conservation programs. In the second of a two-part series, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Dan Gunderson reports that many farmers are concerned
about organizations with no agricultural background shaping farm policy:
As the fall harvest winds down, Ken Lougheed has more time to catch up on the farm bill debate. He’s not happy about the possibility of more government imposed conservation programs.
“Farmers have been very good stewards of the land for years. We have to live in the same communities, we have to drink the same water, breathe the same air. We’re probably more aware of what’s going on than a lot of environmental groups are.”
Lougheed farms several hundred acres on the Minnesota North Dakota border near Fargo. He says he’s seen what happens when environmentalists help write farm legislation. He points to a wetland protection program known as “Swampbuster” as an example of well-intentioned but intrusive government. Lougheed says a bureaucrat who’s never set foot on his farm decides where wetlands are located. And with that decision, parts of his land are taken away from farming. Lougheed says that makes him feel helpless, and angry.
“We need to have more common sense in these issues. Because it’s nonsense, there’s no common sense involved in it and we need to have more common sense.”
Lougheed says he’s never actually talked to an environmentalist, but he’d welcome the chance to seek common ground on conservation issues. But if the current farm bill discussion is any indication, that common ground may be difficult to find. Environmental groups want to shift funding from traditional farm commodity programs to conservation. Most farm groups staunchly oppose that idea, arguing new conservation initiatives should have new funding. There’s also disagreement over which conservation programs to fund. The House favors expanding the Conservation Reserve Program that pays farmers to take environmentally sensitive land out of production. But in the Senate, Ag Committee Chair Tom Harkin of Iowa is pushing the Conservation Security Act. That legislation would pay farmers to incorporate as yet undefined stewardship practices into their farm operation. Farmers fear that would, as one put it, let the environmentalists run the farm. Minnesota Seventh District Congressman, Collin Peterson, sits on the House Ag Committee and knows the middle ground on this issue can be hazardous. He’s been criticized by some of his farm constituents for voting in favor of expanded conservation programs, and painted as anti-environment by some environmental groups.
“You get those two groups on the extremes, in a lot of cases clashing, and the people in the middle are just keeping their heads down.”
Peterson says the fear some farmers have of environmentalists is well founded. He says environmental groups have a variety of political viewpoints, ranging from moderate to extreme; but he believes most have little real understanding of agriculture.
“They sit in their ivory tower and say, well, you guys are getting all that money. We’re paying you all that money, then we’re gonna have our way. The biggest problem is these groups are based in the urban areas. It’s not their fault, they just don’t understand. ”
But Peterson says farm interests must learn to compromise with environmentalists. That’s because farm state lawmakers no longer have the political clout to pass a farm bill without votes from urban members. And those urban members often represent environmental positions. But Peterson says, like abortion and gun control, environmental discussions often can’t get past ideology.
“The problem I have is you’re not even debating what the real issue is. They’re out there on their ideological extremes and they’re raising money and getting people stirred up and we never have the debate about the middle where we could get something done and make things better for people.”
At least some farm organizations say they are willing to compromise.
Minnesota Farm Bureau President Al Christopherson says it’s clear the days of farm groups writing the farm bill are over. They need support from environmental interests to pass legislation. But he says most farmers would be happy just to have Congress decide on conservation priorities and stick to them.
“Farmers have a very difficult time adapting to them if A; they’re not understood, B; they don’t make sense, and C; there’s a whole lot of shouting in the wings about what we ought to be doing.”
Christopherson says the cacophony will only get louder and the confusion greater as a dwindling farm population continues to lose political clout in Washington, and other interests vie for a piece of the agriculture budget.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Dan Gunderson.
About half the states around the Midwest allow hunters to shoot mourning doves. But one state that had hoped to begin a hunt this fall won’t be doing so. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach has more:
Transcript
About half the states around the Midwest allow hunters to shoot mourning doves. But one state that had hoped to begin a hunt this fall won’t be doning so. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach Reports.
In Wisconsin, a record number of hunters turned out at public meetings last year and voted for a shooting season on mourning doves. The season was supposed to start this September, but a judge has issued a temporary injunction against the hunt.
He’s ruled that during the Vietnam War era, Wisconsin lawmakers may have taken the mourning dove off the list of regulated game birds, when they made the dove Wisconsin’s official symbol of peace. But Jim Weix of the Wisconsin Dove Hunters Association, says this year, lawmakers reversed themselves and checked over a proposed rule allowing the dove hunt.
“They decided to let it stand, so I do disagree with the judge of course.”
A final court ruling is not expected prior to October 30th, which is when this year’s mourning dove hunt was scheduled to end. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chuck Quirmbach in Milwaukee.
