Tag: resource

Beach Combers vs. Beach Owners

  • A recent Michigan Supreme Court decision intended to solve controversy between lake shore property owners and beach walkers has stirred up yet more controversy. (Photo courtesy of the NOAA)

Many people enjoy strolling the beaches of the Great Lakes, and believe it’s as much their shoreline as anyone else’s. But there are a lot of lakefront property owners who believe that beach strolling amounts to trespassing. And in at least two states in the region, that dispute has wound up in the courts. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta has
more:

Transcript

Many people enjoy strolling the beaches of the Great Lakes, and believe it’s as much their shoreline as anyone else’s. But there are a lot of lakefront property owners who believe that beach strolling amounts to trespassing, and in at least two states in the region, that dispute has wound up in the courts. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rick Pluta has more:


In Michigan, the state Supreme Court recently declared the entire 3,200 miles of Great Lakes coast is public property. But a group of lakefront property owners says the decision has created a host of problems.


They’re complaining that it appears to leave them with no recourse for dealing with people who cross the line of considerate behavior, such as loud picnickers, and careless dog-walkers. Ernie Krygier is with one of the most active property owners’ groups, Save Our Shoreline.


“There’s a lot of other instances that we’re concerned with, and it all goes back to ownership and control to the water’s edge. If you don’t own it, it’s going to be very difficult to control it.”


The Michigan property owners now want the state Supreme Court to issue a more-detailed ruling on what’s allowed and not allowed on the Great Lakes beaches. Krygier says they’re also hoping to win back at least some of the shoreline.


If not, he says, the property owners could file a lawsuit claiming the court’s action amounts to a seizure of their property, and they’re entitled to perhaps billions of dollars in compensation.


(Sound of beach)


A sign posted here on a Lake Michigan beach by a property owners’ association warns people who might wander past that they’re about to tread upon private property, but many people walk right past it anyway to enjoy a stroll on the shoreline. Jim Wright lives nearby, and says he’s walked this stretch of beach for twenty years.


“They, they put out little signs and that. But the signs, you know, are not anything official. It’s just something they got from a signmaker. And so we just kind of ignore them, and they accept them being ignored.”


The recent Michigan Supreme Court said it’s okay for Wright and everyone else to ignore the sign. The ruling said Great Lakes beaches are a unique resource, held in trust by the state for the public to use and enjoy.


The court said public access in Michigan extends from the water to the high water line. That line meanders from beach to beach, from lake to lake, and from season to season. It’s generally indicated by debris deposits, or the absence of beach grass and other vegetation, and Jim Wright says the court made the right decision.


“I’ve always felt that the whole shoreline belongs to the state and no one person, so that was a good ruling that they made and I think most people will be very happy with it.”


It’s a controversy that’s playing out in other Great Lakes states. In Ohio, officials are saying the Michigan decision supports their position that the Lake Erie coast belongs to the public. Shoreline property owners there are suing the state, asking a federal court to declare they own the beaches adjacent to their property.


Noah Hall is a Wayne State University environmental law professor who’s filed briefs on behalf of conservation organizations supporting public access to the entire Great Lakes shoreline. He says the Michigan decision will have a regional impact.


“I think that it would be completely reasonable and expected for another state to look very hard at Michigan’s reasoning and analysis in this case and probably adopt a similar line.”


He says the Michigan decision is a boost to those arguing the entire Great Lakes shoreline belongs to the public, and not to any private interest.


For the GLRC, I’m Rick Pluta.

Related Links

Report Projects Future Water Demands

  • A new report warns of a strain on water resources due to increased usage. (Photo by Annette Gulick)

Water use in six Great Lakes states is likely to go up. That’s according to a new study by researchers at Southern Illinois University. They say, by the year 2025, demand could outstrip supply in some areas. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee has more:

Transcript

Water use in six Great Lakes states is likely to go up. That’s according to
a news study by researchers at Southern Illinois University. They say, by
the year 2025, demand could outstrip supply in some areas. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee has more:


The report predicts that in twenty years, the region will use roughly seven
percent more water than it does today. That’s not enough to endanger the Great Lakes or most groundwater sources, but it is enough to strain water resources in some parts of the region.


Water use will grow fastest in Illinois and Ohio, mostly because they are
likely to see the most economic growth. Researcher Ben Dziegielewski says there’s a connection
between wealth and water.


“People with higher income tend to use more water, because they tend to have
swimming pools, and sprinklers for flower beds, and maybe even green lawns.”


The report predicts that states with slower economic growth, like Indiana
and Michigan, will use less water in the next two decades. Wisconsin and Minnesota are expected to use about the same amount of water.


For the GLRC, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Rekindling Corn Stoves

Fuel prices are higher this winter… but corn prices are down. That’s kindling a demand for corn stoves in some parts of the country. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shamane Mills reports:

Transcript

Fuel prices are higher this winter, but corn prices are down. That’s kindling a demand for corn
stoves in some parts of the country. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shamane Mills reports:


I always thought corn was something you ate. But I’m watching as my brother-in-law is stoking
his stove with golden kernels…


“In my case I use five gallon pails of corn, then just pour in slowly…”


(sound of kernels spilling into hopper)


I’d never seen a corn stove and my brother-in-law, Steve Springer, says he never thought he’d use
one. Once he did, he was hooked.


“Well, one thing about it is, it’s a renewable resource. Being a farmer myself, it’s something we
grow ourselves. This was in our home when we purchased the home – never had any exposure to
it. Since then, I like it immensely. Kicks out lot of heat.”


Corn stoves first became popular in the 1970’s when corn prices plummeted. There were
problems with the early stoves. Hardened clumps of burned corn, called clinkers, had to be
cleaned up and the corn didn’t burn efficiently.


Today, the stoves are making a resurgence because corn prices are down. New corn stoves are
better than the ones back in the 70’s. The stoves now have an agitator to stir the corn for a more
even burn and fewer clinkers.


Ed Bossert sells corn stoves at a store near where the Springers live. He says business is brisk.


“A lot of people come in to save money, a lot of people come in because it’s a renewable
resource, a lot of people come in because the pollution factor is basically nothing.”


Corn stoves produce less carbon dioxide and soot than burning wood or coal, so they seem more
environmentally friendly. But critics point out that the farm machinery used to grow the corn
burns fuel and generates pollution, so any gain from a cleaner burning fuel may be lost during
planting and harvesting.


While the environmental argument simmers, sales of corn stoves continue to heat up. Bossert says
he now sells as many corn stoves as he does wood stoves.


In larger cities such as Madison, Wisconsin the corn stoves don’t sell as well. At Top
Hat Fireplace & Chimney, only three customers have purchased corn stoves despite the best
efforts of sales staff like Mark Gilligan. Showing off the store’s one and only corn stove model,
he says it’s easy to maintain….


“They actually locate down below an ash drawer. That actually sits down below. There isn’t a
whole lot of ash from these pellet and corn stoves because it uses most of it up.”


Most corn stove dealers say a bushel or two a day will keep the cold away. With corn about two
dollars a bushel, that can seem like a bargain compared to natural gas prices, which are 20%
higher this year. But the initial cost of residential corn stoves can be steep.


Craig Tawlowicz owns Countryside Heating in north-central Wisconsin. He says new corn
stoves can cost two thousand… on up to six thousand dollars.


“So this is a long term investment. Most of the time, turn around savings, usually five to six
years pays off your investment.”


Wood stoves are not only more traditional, but they’re generally cheaper. So, wood stoves are
more popular. At Hearth and Home Fireplaces, Claire Barton says despite that… more customers
are considering corn stoves.


“It certainly makes sense for someone who has grain available to them and many of them will
burn corn as well as oats, wheat, barley, cherry pits. Things like that.”


The National Corn Growers Association promotes a lot of corn products. You’d think corn stoves
might be one of them – but spokeswoman Mimi Ricketts says it’s not one of the 600 items the
group touts.


“The National Corn Growers Association determines its issues based on priorities of member
states. Corn stoves is not one that’s been put on our radar screen. We are aware of them but we
have not actively promoted corn stoves.”


That’s probably because compared to other buyers of corn, such as livestock farms, corn syrup
processors and ethanol makers, corn stoves just don’t use a lot of corn. It’s not considered a big
market for farmers.


Instead, the big sales are going to those who make or sell the corn stoves. And because farmers’
harvest was so large this fall, corn stove retailers have found their cash crop this winter.


For the GLRC, I’m Shamane Mills.

Related Links

Province Seeks to Recycle E-Waste

  • Ontario has proposed a new recycling plan for electronic waste in an effort to conserve materials and reduce pollution. (Photo by Eylem Culculoglu)

Old computers, televisions and stereos may soon be
found in recycling bins across Ontario. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:

Transcript

Old computers, televisions and stereos might soon be found in recycling
bins across Ontario. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:


Last year, 157 thousand tonnes of electronic waste ended up in Canadian
landfills.


The Ontario government plans to send that waste to recycling plants instead.
It will require electronics manufacturers to devise a recycling plan for their
own products – things like CD players, microwaves and even power tools – and then
help pay for it. John Steele is a spokesman for the Ontario environment ministry.


“Our goal is to reduce the amount of electronic waste that enters a landfill site.
Once something enters a landfill site, for all intents and purposes, it can not be
recycled or reused. It’s a waste of a resource as far as the Ministry of the Environment
is concerned.”


It’s also a source of pollution. Many electronics contain toxins like lead and mercury.
Steele says the plan will be modelled after recycling agreements the province already has
with newspaper, soft drink and pizza box manufacturers.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.

Related Links

Vice Presidential Profile: Dick Cheney

  • Opinions vary on Cheney's environmental policy. Some say he's done well, some say he hasn't done enough. (Photo courtesy of georgewbush.com)

The political campaigns have been preoccupied with war, jobs, and health care. There’s been little mention of another issue that some Americans also find very important: the environment. As part of a series of profiles on the presidential and vice presidential candidates’ records on the environment, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham looks at Vice President Dick Cheney:

Transcript

The political campaigns have been preoccupied with war, jobs, and health care. There’s been
little mention of another issue that some Americans also find very important: the environment.
As part of a series of profiles on the presidential and vice presidential candidates’ records
on the environment, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham looks at Vice President
Dick Cheney:


This fall, during a campaign stop, Vice President Cheney was asked about his concerns and
philosophy on the preservation, conservation, and sustainability of water and natural resources.
The Vice President told his audience that he shared their concerns about the environment.


“Anybody who spends any time on waters, fishing, as I do – steelhead in northern British Columbia
when I get a chance and for trout in Wyoming and various places – it’s a fantastic resource. And
we really have an obligation to try to improve it and pass it on to the next generation in better
shape than we found it. I think we’re doing, as a general proposition, we’re doing pretty well.
Better than we used to.”


But most environmental groups are concerned Vice President Cheney is leading the effort to roll
back many environmental protections. Group after group is critical of the Vice President’s
actions.


“Cheney’s role has really been to be the front guy to fight for the industry’s agenda.”


Greg Wetstone directs the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Action Fund. Wetstone says Cheney
has become an easy target for criticism by the environmental movement. Wetstone says it’s clear
that Dick Cheney has wielded more power than most vice presidents have in the past.


“Well, the Vice President has clearly played a huge role in shaping this administration’s
policies on the environment and especially energy policy. It was Vice President Cheney who
led the Energy Task Force that met secretly with top industry lobbyists and shaped the policies
that were proposed by this administration while shutting out the advocates for a cleaner
environment. The polluters basically all but held the pen in crafting this administration’s
energy policy.”


The Natural Resources Defense Council sued the Bush White House, calling for the release of
documents related to the secret meetings. The courts ordered some documents to be released.
And the environmentalists say those papers confirmed the role of gas and oil industry lobbyists
in drafting the Bush energy policy.


Chris Horner says he took part in some of those meetings. Horner is a Senior Fellow at the
free-market think tank, the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He says the Vice President
worked hard to include environmentally friendly approaches when drafting the policy for energy.


“He pushed heavily in his energy plan for windmills, solar panel, transition to gas even more.
He didn’t just consult with free-market groups like ours. The reportage notwithstanding, I went
in several times to meet with these people and I passed very hard left-leaning groups on the way,
in the waiting room on the way out. The administration met with greens. They met with
free-marketers. They met with everyone.”


But the environmental groups argue the gas and oil industry had too much influence on the plan
that is supposed to regulate them.


The League of Conservation Voters has given the Bush administration failing marks for its
handling of environmental issues. Betsey Loyless is the group’s vice president of policy. She
says the energy task force is a good example of how Vice President Cheney contributed to what
her group sees as failure.


“We have an energy bill that wants to open sensitive public lands to drilling. That’s part of
the Cheney philosophy. We have a secret energy task force that wants to subsidize, at the
taxpayers’ expense, the coal, oil, and gas industry. That’s at Cheney’s behest. I mean,
Cheney has been the real leader.”


Vice President Cheney’s defenders say he’s only being realistic and practical. They say the
nation’s energy security should not be put at risk because of a few environmental extremists.
While Cheney is villified by the environmentalists, it doesn’t appear that all voters view him
in quite the same terms.


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

Related Links

Counterpoint: Agreements Will Invite More Diversions

  • 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)

Officials from the eight states and two provinces in the region have proposed two agreements that would regulate the use of Great Lakes water. They’re known as the Annex 2001 Implementing Agreements. Response to the proposed agreements has generally been positive. But for some in the region, they’re seen as a slippery slope. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne Elston is worried that the proposed agreements will lead to unlimited diversions in the future:

Transcript

Officials from the eight states and two provinces in the region have proposed two agreements
that would regulate the use of Great Lakes water. They’re known as the Annex 2001 Implementing
Agreements. Response to the proposed agreements has generally been positive. But for some in
the region, they’re seen as a slippery slope. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Suzanne
Elston is worried that the proposed agreements will lead to unlimited diversions in the future:


In theory, the proposed Agreements are supposed to provide a framework for using the water of the
Great Lakes. In reality, they’re about as leaky as a sunken lake freighter. The framework’s
there, but they fail to impose an overall limit on the volume of water that can be diverted,
or who can take it.


Not only that, but proposals to take less than a million gallons per day out of the basin won’t
require a region-wide review, several of these smaller withdrawals could eventually add up to a
whole lot of water. And whether it’s one large pipe or a lot of tiny ones, the end result is the
same.


Given that the Great Lakes basin contains 20% of all the fresh water on the planet, diverting
some of it shouldn’t be a problem. Unfortunately, only 1% of that water is renewed each year.
It would be a good idea to first figure out how much water can be taken without disrupting the
ecological balance of the Lakes. Only once that’s been done should we be looking at allowing
large-scale withdrawals.


And then there’s the threat of trade challenges. Each state or province that approves a water
taking permit won’t be paid directly for the water. Instead they’ll recieve a funding to upgrade
sewage treatment plants or to improve local habitats for example. Recently, a Canadian non-profit
asked for legal opinion about the Agreements. The response was that linking the approval process
to funding for public works basically means that the water is being sold, and under the terms of
NAFTA, once you’ve identified something as a commodity, you can’t restrict its sale.


Canadians should be particularly concerned about these Agreements. The Council of Great Lakes
Governors drafted them. And although the premiers of Ontario and Quebec have signed off on them,
in the end, neither province has the right to veto the decisions made by the Council. In my book,
that’s a lot like being invited to dinner and then being asked to leave before the main course.
And the reverse is true too. If Ontario or Quebec approves a withdrawal, states in the U.S.
wouldn’t have the ability to veto the decision. We share these lakes. If we are all called on
to protect the Great Lakes, then we all need to have an equal voice. That’s why our federal
representatives in Washington D.C. and Ottawa need to draw up a binding international agreement
on water withdrawals.


If nothing else, the proposed Agreements have made it clear that the Great Lakes must be
protected. And with 40 million users already relying on this irreplaceable resource, we clearly
need something better than these Agreements currently have to offer.


Host Tag: Suzanne Elston is a syndicated columnist living in Courtice, Ontario.

Related Links

Anglers Competing With Cormorants

  • The cormorant population is booming in the region, and some anglers say they're competing too hard with the birds for fish. (Photo courtesy of Steve Mortensen, Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe)

Anglers around the Great Lakes are eager for a summer of fishing. Everyone wants to catch the big one. But they’re getting some competition. It comes in the form of the double-crested cormorant. The big black birds with long necks are fish eaters. Cormorants were nearly wiped out by the now-banned pesticide, DDT, in the 1970’s. But now cormorants are back in big numbers. Some anglers feel there are too many cormorants now. And they say the birds are eating too many fish. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports on one experimental effort to control cormorants:

Transcript

Anglers around the Great Lakes are eager for a summer of fishing. Everyone wants to
catch the big one, but they’re getting some competition. It comes in the form of the
double-crested cormorant. The big black birds with long necks are fish eaters.
Cormorants were nearly wiped out by the now-banned pesticide, DDT, in the 1970’s. But
now cormorants are back in big numbers. Some anglers feel there are too many
cormorants now, and they say the birds are eating too many fish. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports on one experimental effort to control
cormorants:


(sound of waves)


Robin Whaley often fishes here on Knife River. It’s the biggest spawning ground for
rainbow trout on the north shore of Lake Superior. But today she’s watching the
cormorants on Knife Island, a quarter-mile offshore.


The cormorant population is booming. About a hundred cormorants lived on the island
last year.


“I guess they’re just coming up into this area in the last few years and becoming a
problem, for degrading habitat and for eating little fish.”


Cormorants are native to this area, but they haven’t been around much in the last few
decades, because of poisoning from the pesticide DDT.


The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources stocks rainbow trout here. This year
they put 40,000 young fish into the river. Anglers like Robin Whaley hope the little fish
will grow big enough for them to catch someday.


The little fish face a lot of predators and hazards and the cormorants are one more threat.
Some people would like to reduce that threat. It’s illegal to kill cormorants. They’re
protected by law because they’re a migratory bird.


But a new federal rule says if they’re threatening a resource, people can fight back in a
different way.


Bill Paul runs the Agriculture Department’s Wildlife Services Program in Minnesota. He
sent workers onto Knife Island to try to keep the cormorants from nesting. Their methods
are experimental – but they’re pretty basic.


“We put up some flapping tarps in wind, a couple of yellow raincoat scarecrows, we also
put up ten flashing highway barricade lights, we also have a light siren device out there
that goes during the night.”


The workers also used special firecrackers shot by guns at passing birds to scare them
away.


They did this for two weeks during the cormorants’ nesting season. Bill Paul says even
with all that noise and commotion it wasn’t easy to scare them away.


“They seem to be fairly smart birds and real persistent at coming back to Knife Island.
So we’re uncertain yet whether our activities are actually going to keep them off there
long-term.”


As part of their study, researchers had permission to kill 25 cormorants to find out what
they’d been eating. They wanted to see how much of a threat the birds were to game fish
like the rainbow trout.


They found fish in the cormorants’ stomachs all right. But not the kind most people like
to catch and eat.


Don Schreiner supervises the Lake Superior fishery for the Minnesota DNR. He says
he’d need more than just a few samples to really know what the birds are eating.


“My guess is that cormorants are opportunists and if there’s a small silver fish out there
and he’s just hanging out and the cormorant has that available to eat, he’ll eat it. The
question becomes, is this a significant part of the population that they’re consuming, or
isn’t it?”


Despite the concerns of some anglers, researchers have been studying cormorants for
years, and so far they haven’t been able to prove the birds are harming wild fish
populations.


John Pastor is an ecologist at the University of Minnesota Duluth. He says the study at
Knife River won’t prove anything useful either.


He says it ignores the bigger picture. Pastor says you can’t just look at one predator and
come to any firm conclusions. There could be lots of reasons why there aren’t many
steelhead, or rainbow trout.


“Changes in land use. All the adult steelhead out there eating the young of the year
steelhead. Maybe it’s some pollutant in the lake. You never know. But it’s easy to fix on
the predator as the problem, because people see a cormorant dive down and come up with
a fish, and they say to themselves, I could have caught that fish.”


Pastor says even if the cormorants are eating lots of young rainbow trout, it doesn’t
necessarily mean the birds are hurting the overall trout population.


And even for an angler like Robin Whaley, the concern about the trout is mixed with a
feeling of respect for the cormorant.


“I admire the bird very much, but human beings, we’re in the business of controlling
habitats and populations, and this is just another case of that.”


For many anglers, the ultimate question in this competition between predators is simple.
It’s about who gets the trout – cormorants or humans.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Stephanie Hemphill.

Related Links

Scientists Alarmed Over Eel Disappearance

Scientists are sounding the alarm about what they call a catastrophic decline of the American Eel in the Great Lakes. They say the eel’s fate is a warning sign of overall climate change. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

Scientists are sounding the alarm about what they call a catastrophic decline of the American Eel
in the Great Lakes. They say the eel’s fate is a warning sign of overall climate change. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein reports:


John Casselman is a researcher with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. He says
American Eels used to be to Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River what salmon is to the
Northwest.


“Inshore eels represented half of the total weight of fish inshore, so they were massively abundant
and the Onondaga of the Iroquois Confederacy actually had an eel clan.”


Today there’s only about one eel for every 10 acres in Lake Ontario. The eel spawns in the
Sargasso Sea and migrates into the Great Lakes. While commercial fishing, pollution, and dams
have contributed to the eel’s dramatic decline, Casselman says oceanic climate change may be a
culprit.


“And if we’re not concerned about it, or trying to do something about it, it is at our peril. Maybe
the loss of this eel resource is telling us something that’s a lot bigger and that I think we should be
paying a lot more attention to.”


Concerned scientists and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission have issued emergency
declarations urging the U.S. and Canada to take immediate action.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m David Sommerstein.

Related Links