Month: May 2004

Packrats Hooked on Freecycling

  • Aaron and Claire Liepman with an old faucet and garden owl they're hoping to give away on the Freecycle Network. Aaron Liepman moderates two freecycle groups in Michigan. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)

We all have things that we no longer use hidden in our closets, or stuffed away in the attic, or crammed into the garage. It’s not that we’ll ever use them, but we can’t bear to just throw them away. They’re still good. Now, a new service is matching up people who want to get rid of things with people who want those things. In part of an ongoing series called ‘Your Choice; Your Planet,’ the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams explores freecycling:

Transcript

We all have things that we no longer use hidden in our closets, or stuffed away
in the attic, or crammed into the garage. It’s not that we’ll ever use them, but we
can’t bear to just throw them away. They’re still good. Now, a new service is
matching up people who want to get rid of things with people who want those
things. In part of an ongoing series called ‘Your Choice; Your Planet,’ the Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Rebecca Williams explores freecycling:


I’m a packrat. I just wanted to make that clear right from the beginning. If you’re honest with yourself, you’ll probably confess you’re a packrat too.


But even I know when there’s something taking up space in my house that HAS to go. In the back of my closet, there’s a large, heavy, men’s wetsuit.


You know, a SCUBA diving suit. A relative gave it to me when he moved away. Now, I’m not a diver. I’m not even really a snorkeler. But I’ve kept it for two years. You know, just in case.


I need a little help getting rid of things. So, when I heard about freecycling… I thought, “This is it. This will help me face my inner packrat.”


Freecycling uses email groups to connect people in their hometowns. It brings together one person with their broken telescope… and that one person who needs – or just wants it.


The only rule – everything has to be free. No money, no trading. And also, you meet the giver or taker in person.


It’s Deron Beal’s idea. He manages recycling crews for businesses in Tuscon, Arizona. One day a year ago, he found himself with a warehouse full of stuff.


“We had a lot of the businesses we recycle with
downtown giving us old desks or computers, saying, can you do something with this. I’ll be darned if we got so much stuff in, I figured, let’s open this up to the public and set up the freecycle network.”


Beal emailed some friends and nonprofits. At first, he says it was just he and his friends giving each other stuff. But in just a few months, freecycle turned into a verb. Beal set up a website, freecycle-dot-org. And put instructions up so people could start freecycling in their own cities. Now, more than 90-thousand people all around the world are doing it.


So… I went to see the freecycling guy in my area, Aaron Liepman. He moderates two freecycle groups. He makes sure everything stays free, and steps in if people start arguing. He also helps packrats like me freecycle.


(sound in, typing)


Aaron sets me up on his computer.


“So, let me sign out and you sign in. (clicking) So now you type in your subject, just like an email message.


RW: “Offer: wetsuit. What else?”


“Wetsuit, SCUBA wetsuit. (crinkles, zipper noise) Looks like it’s a size large, that’ll be useful information. It has a little hat to keep you warm in the water (laughs).”


(typing out)


We look over my post, and I click Send.


So, I’ve started cleaning out my closet. But I’m not totally converted to this freecycling idea. I mean, really, aren’t we just moving our stuff from one house to the next? That doesn’t really cut down on consumption, does it?


I turned to University of Michigan professor Raymond DeYoung. He studies people’s buying and recycling habits. He thinks freecycling probably won’t change our buying habits all that much.


“Because we’re never going to be able with freecycling to get the new, get the novel, get the big, because by definition it’s already been bought, it’s already old, it’s the smaller. So it can’t impact our entire consumption behavior.”


DeYoung says, for freecycling to really succeed, we’d have to stop getting bigger houses. And stop filling them up with more and more things. But it’s hard, even for people who want to try to get by with less stuff.


I guess a wetsuit is a good first step.


It’s been a couple days, and I’ve gotten four messages. The first came five hours after my posting. From Shawn… he wrote: “I’ll take the wetsuit.” But he didn’t sound that excited.


In freecycling, you can use “first come, first serve” to decide who gets your item. But you don’t always have to. And I kind of wanted my wetsuit to be appreciated… you know, actually get to see the water. So I waited a couple days. Then, I got Kelly’s message. She wrote: “WOW!” in all capital letters and said her son would love the wetsuit… for snorkeling.


So I emailed Kelly. And we set up a place to meet in downtown Ann Arbor.


(street sound up)


“Wetsuit!” (Oh, are you Kelly?) “yeah, I’m Kelly.. (Hi, I’m Rebecca. This is the wetsuit.) Great!”


Kelly’s been freecycling for a month. And she says she’s hooked.


And judging from the postings, a lot of people are. They seem to like getting other people’s beer can collections and turtle sandboxes.


But some on the list worry it’s getting to be too much of a good thing. People have started to ask for laptops, and houses… and a time machine, any condition.


“I think because it’s so new, some people are asking for funny things, like don’t we all want cash, and a Lamborghini (laughs). I just laugh at those and go on.”


Kelly says she thinks the network will probably get past that after awhile, leaving behind just the really devoted freecyclers.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Green Conscience vs. Green Consumerism

  • This first report in the "Your Choice; Your Planet" series looks at the difficulties of being a "green" consumer.

Most of us are conflicted when it comes to the environment. Polls show the majority of us consider ourselves to be environmentally-friendly. But, our day-to-day decisions often don’t measure up to an earth-friendly lifestyle. Part of the reason is that there’s lots of confusion about what’s best for the environment. Another reason is that being earth-friendly is pretty darned inconvenient. In the first report of an ongoing series we’re calling ‘Your Choice; Your Planet,’ the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham explores the dilemmas we face when we attempt to do right by the environment:

Transcript

Most of us are conflicted when it comes to the environment. Polls show the majority of
us consider ourselves to be environmentally friendly. But, our day-to-day decisions often
don’t measure up to an earth-friendly lifestyle. Part of the reason is that there’s lots of
confusion about what’s best for the environment… Another reason is that being earth-friendly is pretty darned inconvenient. In the first report of an ongoing series we’re
calling ‘Your Choice; Your Planet,’ the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
explores the dilemmas we face when we attempt to do right by the environment:


It’s tough, trying to be green, or earth-friendly or whatever you want to call it. I mean…
most of us aren’t interested in always trying to find the eco-friendly clothes or trying to
figure out the differences between the “all natural” and the “100-percent real” juice. And
then there’s stuff. There’s all kinds of stuff we need… alright… maybe we don’t NEED
it… but – hey – everybody else has one. Why shouldn’t ?


There’s a gap between being a flower-sniffing, hemp-wearing, tree hugger… and a
regular person trying to be a bit more environmentally friendly. The Executive Director
of the Sierra Club, Carl Pope, says if you’re struggling with that gap… you’re not
alone…


“We haven’t solved the problem of linking up our values and our consumption. Most of
us consume out of habit and convenience. We don’t consume out of our deepest values.”


So… we BELIEVE that we ought to save the earth for future generations. And most of
us have a few habits that make us feel a little better about ourselves. Maybe we bring a
coffee mug to work instead of using Styrofoam cups. Or we might take the bus or the
commuter train once in a while, you know, to save the earth from our bit of car exhaust.


But the real challenge comes when we start buying stuff. You know… like groceries,
and cars, and appliances. Stuff. Joel Makower is the founder of GreenBiz-dot-com. It’s
website that bills itself as a “The Resource Center on Business, the Environment and the
Bottom Line.” He says the big impact on the environment takes place in how we spend
our money…


“I think consumers know intuitively that every time they open their wallet they cast a
vote for or against the environment. But, doing that’s a very complicated matter.”


(grocery store sound up)


It’s complicated because even if you walk into a store determined to buy only the
products that are the most environmentally friendly… you’re bombarded with conflicting
claims. Say you’re looking for trash bags. Are the bags claiming to be made of 80-
percent recycled plastic any better than the ones over here called ‘enviro-bags?’ I don’t
know. And that’s the problem. Most of the time we really don’t know which products
are the safest for the environment. And don’t even get me started on the whole paper or
plastic grocery bag question.


Joel Makower says we care, but we’re confused.


“There’s a huge gap between green concern and green consumerism. And that’s
everybody’s fault.”


Makower says companies don’t know how to market their products’ environmental
attributes and when they do try, he says, they often do it poorly or misleadingly. And
we’re afraid to try new things… not knowing if we’re being suckered into a poorly
performing product that SAYS it’s more environmentally friendly.


So, often, rather than deal with all that confusion… or instead of spending hours and
hours researching everything we buy…. we figure… “Well, it can’t be that bad; can it?”


Charles Ballard is an economist at Michigan State University. He says, really, there’s
only so much you can ask of us…


“Keep in mind that people can’t be expected to become saints just because they’re
interested in the environment.”


He says most of us see being environmentally friendly something like extra credit… or
something we do when we’re better off financially… kind of like a luxury item that we
can feel good about. Ballard says most of the time we’re more distracted by the glitz and
glamour we see on TV or read about in magazines and want just a little bit of that good
life for ourselves…


“What we have is a situation where immediate gratification, where grabbing for all the
gusto you can right now is the thing that’s driving our decisions.”


And when you’re going for the gusto… you tend to forget about the environmental cost
of your lifestyle. We buy the wrong things… and we buy too many things. We just plain
consume too much. But, then… sometimes our conscience starts eating at us… and
before you know it, we’re being a little more careful about recycling at work… or some
other little contribution to the earth’s well being.


The Sierra Club’s Carl Pope says environmentalists… or those of us who like to think of
ourselves that way… keep trying to do better…


“The American people’s values and ideals are ahead of their own habits. That’s actually
why we have religions, is because people want to be better than they are. And one of the
reasons we have an environmental movement, I think, is because Americans want to be
better than we are.”


And so… we sin in all of our consumption… and then make restitution by trying to be
better, more earth-friendly consumers. The problem is… as one writer put it… you can’t
really buy your way out of consumption. When you get right down to it…. you really
just have to buy less. That’s a tough one.


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

Related Links

Tracking Money Trail of Dirtiest Power Plants

A study by two environmental groups finds close ties between the Bush campaign and some of the top polluters in the power plant industry. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

A study by two environmental groups finds close ties between the Bush campaign and some of
the top polluters in the power plant industry. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester
Graham reports:


Public Citizen and the Environmental Integrity Project looked at political contributions made by
the owners of the top polluting power plants. Since 1999, the Bush campaign and its supporters
received $6.6 million from them. The director of the Environmental Integrity Project, Eric
Schaeffer, concedes it’s not a complete surprise.


“It’s true that we’ve always seen power companies make political contributions. We’re pointing
out that the amount of money that’s flowing to the Bush campaign from these industries has
broken all the previous records and they’re getting a lot of favors from the administration in
return for the money that they’re giving. Specifically, they’re getting pollution laws rolled back.”


Schaeffer says this is one part of a wholesale assault on the Clean Air Act. The Bush
administration says its policies encourage companies to do better rather than just punish them
when they don’t meet pollution reduction goals.


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

Related Links

Doctors’ Group Issues Pesticide Warning

A Canadian doctors’ association has released a report warning patients to stay away from pesticides. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:

Transcript

A Canadian doctors’ association has released a report warning patients to stay away from
pesticides. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:


The Ontario College of Family Physicians considered 250 scientific studies of humans
between 1990 and 2003. The group found consistent links between exposure to pesticides
and a number of illnesses, including brain tumors, prostate cancer and leukemia.


Dr. Rinna Bray chairs the college’s environmental health committee. She recommends
people limit pesticide exposure on what they eat, what they put on their lawns and what
they use in their homes.


“The writing’s on the wall. And it is our obligation to let the public know and warn
people that pesticides are dangerous at chronic low doses that you find in your home and
your garden.”


Bray says children are the most vulnerable, in part because their bodies have more
difficulty excreting the chemicals. The study comes as many communities, including
Toronto and the province of Quebec, ban the cosmetic use of pesticides.


Pesticide manufacturers maintain that exposure to the chemicals does not pose an
unacceptable risk to people’s health.


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

Related Links

Pollutants Feminizing Male Snapping Turtles

Canadian researchers say male snapping turtles in the Great Lakes and the Detroit River have developed sexual abnormalities. As the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Celeste Headlee reports, the abnormalities could prevent the animals from reproducing:

Transcript

Canadian researchers say male snapping turtles in the Great Lakes
and the Detroit River have developed sexual abnormalities. As the Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Celeste Headlee reports, the abnormalities could
prevent the animals from reproducing:


Researchers with the Canadian Wildlife Service say male snapping
turtles with abnormally small genitalia have been found in waters near
Detroit. The turtles are also producing a protein that is normally found
only in females.


Scientists tested the water where the turtles lived and more than 50
chemicals that can affect hormone systems in wildlife were discovered.
Biologist Chip Weseloh says no sexual abnormalities were found in
turtles from less polluted areas. He says this means the pollutants in the
Great Lakes might actually be affecting the animals’ genders.


“It indicates that there’s been a feminization of some kind and to
some extent in the turtles themselves. So instead of being pure males,
they’re showing characteristics of females.”


Weseloh says this condition is not yet interfering with the turtles’
ability to reproduce, but that could become a problem in the future. The
Canadian Wildlife Service plans to continue testing, but scientists have not
yet determined which pollutants are responsible or where they may be coming
from.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Celeste Headlee.

Related Links

Governor Considers Lake Water Withdrawals

The next chairperson of the Council of Great Lakes Governors says he might support some limited diversion of water from the Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

The next chairperson of the Council of Great Lakes Governors says he might support
some limited diversion of water from the Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Chuck Quirmbach reports:


Wisconsin governor Jim Doyle says he’ll take over the council in July, as it’s
completing a major report on water diversions. Doyle is critical of
sending lake water to western states. But he says there may be a way
to approve some diversions to Midwest cities that are just outside
the lakes’ basin.


“Depending on how that is all structured, if there’s a way for water to
actually be restored to the Great Lakes basin, that’s a very different
situation.”


Doyle says one point of debate is the restoration ratio… whether
communities would return one gallon of treated wastewater for every
gallon of drinking water they remove from the lakes. Environmental
groups generally frown on diversion projects… but acknowledge a lot of
thirsty inland communities are trying to tap into the world’s largest
source of surface fresh water.


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

Related Links

Babysitting Spawning Sturgeon

  • The lake sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens. (Photo courtesy of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada)

Each spring, several hundred people volunteer to babysit fish. In spawning season, masses of the large lake sturgeon float near the surface of the water, making them vulnerable to poachers. A program called “Sturgeon Watch” is credited with helping to preserve the ancient fish. It’s become a model for sturgeon management and has been copied by other fisheries around the world. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Patty Murray visited “sturgeon camp” and has this report:

Transcript

Each spring several hundred people volunteer to babysit fish. In spawning
season masses of the large lake sturgeon float near the surface of the water
making them vulnerable to poachers. A program called “sturgeon watch” is
credited with helping to preserve the ancient fish. It’s become a model for
sturgeon management and has been copied by other fisheries around the world.
Patty Murray visited “sturgeon camp” and has this report:


It’s a foggy, rainy day, perfect for sitting inside with a cup of coffee.


But instead we’re outside in the drizzle with Ron Reindahl, darting along
the high muddy banks of the Wolf River in Central Wisconsin. He’s looking
for sturgeon.


“There’s some big ones in there.
But there was one this morning, I’m not kidding, it was as big as I am.”


While the sturgeon are spawning, they swarm in large groups near the surface, close to
shore. It would be easy to reach out and grab one of them.


That’s the problem. The fish are tasty and their eggs rival Russian
Beluga caviar.


Concern over the vulnerable fish brought Ron Reindahl out in the elements.
He’s wearing a blue cap with “sturgeon guard” written on it.


He got it from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.
It shows that he’s here to babysit the fish while they’re breeding.


DNR wardens say guards like Reindahl have helped stabilize
the numbers of lake sturgeon.


Poaching used to be a big problem. That’s what retired Warden Dale Morey
remembers. Morey is jokingly nicknamed the “sturgeon general.”


From his post in a cabin at “fish camp,” it’s his job to assign
volunteers to sites where the fish are active.


Back in the 1940’s and 50’s, Morey says poaching was seen as a birthright.


“The general public attitude around here was if you could take them, fine.
The wardens were the bad guys. The locals felt they had a right to those
fish and they just took them any way they could.”


Legally, sturgeon can only be killed during the winter spearing season on
the ice of Lake Winnebago.


But some unethical people still try to take them during spawning.


That’s where the volunteers come in.


Retired teacher Mary Ann Eltink is in the basement of the cabin at fish camp. She’s eating a
hot breakfast after a rainy 12-hour overnight shift on guard.


“To be visible there is a definite deterrent. And should any incident
occur, we get as much information as we can and then radio it to the wardens to
follow up on it.


PM: ‘Did you see anything suspicious last night?’


“I wouldn’t say it was suspicious but we were very visible on the bank at twilight, and there was a
motorcraft that came up the river and he was slow at first and speeded up as he
rounded the bend where we were. So we can only surmise.”


Anyone caught with an illegal sturgeon will get a $3,000 fine.


And they won’t be able to fish or hunt in Wisconsin for three years.


Wardens take poaching seriously because sturgeon are a very delicate
resource.


Sturgeon don’t spawn until they’re 20 or 25 years old. So if too many fish are caught
now… the impact won’t show up for a couple of decades.


Back in the rainy woods, Ron Reindahl says that inspired him to volunteer. Like many of
the guards, he says he speared a sturgeon one winter. He’d like future generations to have
a chance at one too.


“Somebody’s got to protect
them. If you don’t do this I can imagine what’d happen. Our grandchildren won’t be able to appreciate
it like I did.”


Reindahl knows he’s doing something good for the sturgeon. And he says they’re doing
something for him, giving him an excuse to get up close and personal to one of nature’s
oldest species.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Patty Murray.

Related Links

“Got Milk?” Campaign Provokes Lawsuit

  • Joe and Brenda Cochran stand on their 213 acre farm in Northern Pennsylvania. The couple is suing the government over the national "Got Milk?" advertising campaign that they are required to pay into. (Photo by Brad Linder)

Dairy farmers across the country contribute part of their paychecks into a government program which pays for a national advertising campaign. Supporters say the “Got Milk?” and “3-A-Day” messages have helped keep the price of milk strong. But one small dairy farm is taking on the U.S. government. The farmers say their milk is different – and they don’t want to pay to advertise their competitors’ product. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Brad Linder reports:

Transcript

Dairy farmers across the country contribute part of their paychecks
into a government program which pays for a national advertising campaign. Supporters say the “Got Milk?” and “3-A-Day” messages have helped keep the price of milk strong. But one small dairy farm is taking on the U.S. government. The farmers
say their milk is different — and they don’t want to pay to advertise
their competitors’ product. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Brad
Linder reports:


Joe and Brenda Cochran wake up early every morning to milk the cows at 5:30. Joe says the 200 acre farm in Pennsylvania isn’t much, but it’s been home for him and his wife, Brenda and their 14 children since 1993.


“This farm here is just a basic dairy production facility. It’s nothing fancy whatsoever. It’s like most other farms in the country. But we do do things a little bit different. And we think that makes our milk a little bit different.”


Cochran says what distinguishes his milk from most of what winds up on
supermarket shelves is simple. His farm is what he calls “traditional.” No growth hormones for the cows. And when it’s warm out, they aren’t kept in a feedlot. They graze.


“It’s not organic, okay? But I think it is a better product. My family drinks milk out of that bulk tank straight. We don’t pasteurize it or touch it. We go up and get it and drink. And I’d like to think anybody could do that. I wouldn’t want to drink any milk that has this bovine growth hormone or a lot of the ways other people treat their cows
and treat their product.”


Like all dairy farmers, the Cochrans pay into the dairy checkoff program. For every hundred pounds of milk they sell, they pay 15 cents to a federal program. That amounts to about ten-percent of their profits. That money pays for dairy promotions, including the “Got Milk?” campaign, which made the milk-moustache famous.


The group that administers the advertising program and research into health benefits of milk is Dairy Management. Paul Rovey is the chairman. Rovey says the dairy checkoff was created in 1983 to raise demand for dairy products in response to falling milk prices.


“Each individual dairy farmer would not have that kind of opportunity to do the research, the advertising, and so by collectively together having this checkoff, where everybody contributes, and everybody benefits is how we can then afford to do the fantastic research we’ve done, to do the advertising.”


Rovey calls the program a success. Since Congress created the checkoff in
1983, the average person’s milk consumption has gone up by 12 percent.


But Joe and Brenda Cochran say the checkoff program hasn’t made any difference for their farm. Brenda says she doesn’t understand why they’re being forced to pay into a federal program which pays to advertise everybody’s milk, and not just their own.


“The government is forcing us to contribute materially to a program that gives consumers the message that food, in this case dairy products, are generic. And we’re saying that no food is generic. Especially our dairy products are not generic.”


The Cochrans says the dairy checkoff violates their freedom of speech, by
requiring them to pay for advertising that treats milk from their farm just like everybody else’s.


But Dairy Management’s Paul Rovey says that’s exactly how it should be
promoted.


“Generic promotion benefits and raises the demand for all dairy, including the Cochrans. Milk is milk, and when we help increase demand for dairy and milk, it does it for everybody, and they benefit, we all benefit from the generic programs.”


Rovey says most farmers he talks to are very supportive of the program. But Joe Cochran asks if they’re so supportive, why can’t the program just be voluntary?


The Cochrans recently won their case against the checkoff at the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals. An appeal is pending. But as long as a group of libertarian think tanks are willing to pay the legal costs, Joe Cochran says he’ll take the fight all the way to the Supreme Court.


Joe Cochran is a third generation farmer, but he says with milk prices
still low and the forced payments to the checkoff program, he wouldn’t be
surprised if this is the last generation of Cochran farmers. His kids
can’t make money staying on the farm.


“I’d love to see them go into dairy farming. As a matter of fact, my oldest son farmed with us here up until last March, a year ago. And the reason why he had to leave is because of the financial problems. He was getting married, and he had to have an income, and we could not provide it for him.”


If Cochran succeeds in ending the checkoff program, then the true trial
begins. That will be when farmers discover whether it costs more to
contribute to the federal advertising program – or if it costs more not
to.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Brad Linder.

Related Links

Summer Battle Plans for Aquatic Plant

Now that spring is here, aquatic plants are beginning to flourish. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Ashley McGovern has an update on the battle against the Eurasian watermilfoil:

Transcript

Now that spring is here, aquatic plants are beginning to flourish. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Ashley McGovern has an update on the battle against the
Eurasian watermilfoil:


The Eurasian watermilfoil originated in Europe and Asia and has been found in the US for more
than 80 years. Watermilfoil can be transferred from lake to lake by boaters. The plant can hinder
recreational activities, like swimming and fishing, and can harm native ecosystems.


Lake associations and ecologists are trying to find ways to stop the spread of this invasive plant.
Bernd Blossey is an ecologist with Cornell University. He says people use different tactics to try to
get rid of watermilfoil.


“Some people promote using aquatic herbicides but that’s never a long-term solution—the plant
simply comes back.”


Another technique used is called biological control. That’s introducing natural enemies, such as
insects, that feed on the plant.


“Biological control doesn’t try to eradicate a plant, it just tries to reduce it’s population level.”


Blossey says it’s important to increase awareness of invasive species like watermilfoil and to keep
in mind that using herbicides is just a temporary solution to a tough problem.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Ashley McGovern.

Related Links

Crackdown on Giant Snails

Snails that can grow up to seven inches long have federal health officials cracking down on schools, pet shops and “pet swap meets” across the Midwest. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

Snails that can grow up to seven inches long have federal
health officials cracking down on schools, pet shops and ‘pet swap meets’
across the Midwest. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:


Giant African Land Snails are a non-native species known to rapidly eat plants and
possibly spread disease. It’s illegal to possess the snails in the U.S. Federal and state
officials have seized more than 1000 of the snails from schools, pet shops and homes
in Wisconsin over the last few months.


Now, the warnings are going out across the region. David Robinson studies mollusks for
the U.S. Department of Agriculture. He says the snails are not likely to survive an upper
Midwest winter. But Robinson doesn’t want the snails getting into warmer states and
their farm fields.


“There is always a possibility of someone taking a snail down south… very often when
people get tired of a pet…and this applies to any kind of pet… very often the temptation is
to release it to the environment.”


So far, government officials are not levying fines against anyone for
possessing the giant snails, contending most people don’t know about
the potential risk.


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

Related Links