Turning Brownfields Into Greenfields

  • A former industrial site is being redeveloped with parks, wetlands and homes. Residents have high hopes the new development will boost the local economy. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

As the American economy shifts away from heavy industry, each closed factory risks becoming a brownfield. That’s a site that contains potentially hazardous materials. For the past decade, the federal government has provided help in assessing and cleaning these properties. It has proved to be one of the most popular environmental programs. It’s giving hope to small towns that need help in remaking their landscapes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee reports:

Transcript

As the American economy shifts away from heavy industry, each closed factory
risks becoming a brownfield. That’s a site that contains potentially
hazardous materials. For the past decade, the federal government has provided help in assessing and
cleaning these properties. It has proved to be one of the most popular environmental programs. It’s
giving hope to small towns that need help in remaking their landscapes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Shawn Allee reports:


When a Rust Belt city loses another factory, the townspeople don’t suffer
just from the loss of jobs. They’re often stuck with crumbling buildings or even polluted land. Not to mention, the local economy isn’t strong enough to fix them up.


It’s a dilemma familiar to East Moline, a small Illinois town that sits
along the banks of the Mississippi River. Since the early 80s, the town’s lost thousands of jobs in the farm machinery
industry. Rich Keehner is the City of East Moline’s assistant administrator. He says
there is a plan for the industrial riverfront.


“Right now there’s a movement to relocate or pull industrial uses from the
river. And then of course turn that riverfront property into bike paths or some
recreational activities to improve our quality of life. And that’s exactly
what we’re doing here.”


It’s a simple idea: move industry away from the river and work with
developers to make it an attractive place to play or even live. But it’s just not that easy. Keehner says developers won’t build on these sites until it’s clear what kind
of pollution, if any, might be there.


Testing the area’s soil and water can get expensive, so sites can remain
empty for years. Meanwhile, developers look for greener pastures. Really, they can just build on farmland instead.


During the past decade, the U.S. EPA’s paid for pollution testing at hundreds
of sites. The agency also funds some cleanup and other costs. East Moline’s used several grants to develop eighty acres of riverfront donated
by the John Deere Company.


With the Mississippi riverbank at his back, Keehner points out some new
houses developed on the site.


“It’s got some great amenitities, located next to the bike path. You
can just wake up any time night or day and look out at the river. And your
neighbors are very limited; it’s very peaceful.”


The district also boasts a small light house, a lot of park space, and some
wetlands areas. Keehner says brownfields grants funded about six percent of the project’s
total cost. That doesn’t sound like much, but the money’s played a key role. He says private money couldn’t be secured until there was progress on the
environmental front.


A lot of environmentalists and civic groups applaud the program even though
a lot of credit goes to someone they often criticize. Namely, President
George Bush. His critics admit the brownfields program is one of the brighter spots of
his environmental policy.


In 2002, President Bush signed legislation that expanded the program’s
funding and breadth. Alan Front is the vice president of the Trust for Public Land, a
conservation group.


“The administration, ever since signing that bill, has budgeted about 200
million dollars a year to make this program really vibrant and so not only
have they created the wallet, but they’ve filled it in a way that really
benefits communities around the country.”


Front says the expansion’s brought a tighter focus on the environmental
needs of smaller towns. Apart from the grants, there’s another reason for the program’s popularity. The EPA trains city administrators to use federal brownfield money to
leverage private dollars.


Charles Bartsch has been teaching such courses for ten years.
He says, to compete with larger cities, smaller towns need to show they
understand their local economies.


“I suggest to towns what they should do first of all is to decide what their
competitive economic niche is.”


That means, developing around a community asset, like East Moline’s tried
with its attractive riverfront. Bartsch says, for all the progress small town administrators have made, they’re still pretty isolated. He says they need to cast a wide social net, so
they can find the best advice.


“The key thing is less knowing how to do it yourself, but more knowing who to
reliably call to walk through ideas and walk through options.”


The brownfields program does have its critics. They say it’s tilted in favor
of land development over open space and they worry about how much oversight
there is of environmental testing.


Back at the East Moline site, it’s easy to see why small towns are
participating. Residents there now have more access to the river, bike paths, parks, and,
for some people, new homes. East Moline, and a lot of other small towns like it, are seeking even more brownfields money.


They’ve got a lot of other sites that want a chance at a new life.


For the GLRC, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Tough Wetlands Law Falling Short

  • While there are now state and federal laws in place to preserve wetlands, these habitats are still on the decline. (Photo by Lester Graham)

Data suggest that this region continues to lose wetlands despite pledges from politicians to the contrary. The latest evidence comes from one state in the region that has some of the toughest laws on the books. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:

Transcript

Data suggest that this region continues to lose wetlands despite pledges
from politicians to the contrary. The latest evidence comes from one state
in the region that has some of the toughest laws on the books. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:


After looking at wetlands data from 1994 to 2003, the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources found that overall the state has lost close to 5,000 acres
of wetlands. This despite the fact that the state has a policy of “no net
loss of wetlands.”


Julie Sibbing is with the environmental group the National Wildlife
Federation. She says states like Minnesota need more than strong laws to
stop wetland destruction:


“You can pass really good state laws to protect wetlands, but if you don’t
adequately fund those programs and if you don’t have the political will to
get the people on the ground and give them the mandate to enforce the law,
you’re really not going to get anywhere.”


Sibbing says to effectively enforce their laws, states need to invest more
in monitoring programs that closely track what’s actually happening on the
ground.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Presidential Profile: John Kerry

  • As Kerry and Bush battle it out, different groups examine the candidates' views on the environment. (Photo by Sharon Farmer courtesy of johnkerry.com)

The candidates for president and vice president have spent a lot of time talking about security, the economy, and health care. They have not spent much time talking about the environment. As part of a series on the records of the presidential and vice presidential candidates, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry:

Transcript

The candidates for president and vice president have spent a lot of time talking about security, the economy, and health care. They have not spent much time talking about the environment. As part of a series on the records of the presidential and vice presidential candidates, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry:


Senator Kerry considers himself an environmentalist. Kerry’s Senate office website indicates that
30 years ago, he spoke at his home state of Massachusetts’ first Earth Day. The Senator says he
called for “fundamental protections that became the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking
Water Act, Endangered Species Act and Superfund.” However, he doesn’t often talk about how he
would handle the environment. Early in the campaign in this speech in Minnesota, he promised to
be a guardian of the environment and he briefly outlined his energy plan…


“I will set a goal as president that 20 percent of all of our electricity will be provided from
alternatives and renewables by the year 2020. And I will set this country on the course by creating a hydrogen institute, by putting a billion dollars into the effort of conversion of our autos, by moving to a 20 billion dollar support for the conversion of our industry, we are going to guarantee that never will young American men and women in uniform be held hostage to our dependency on Mideast oil. We’re going to give our children the independence they deserve.”


When the topic of the environment came up during the second presidential candidates’ debate,
Senator Kerry didn’t outline his own plans, but instead responded to President George Bush’s
claims that the environment was cleaner and better under the Bush administration.


“They’re going backwards on the definition for wetlands. They’re going backwards on water
quality. They pulled out of the global warming. They declared it ‘dead.’ Didn’t even accept the
science. I’m going to be a president who believes in science.”


During the negotiations on the Kyoto global warming treaty Senator Kerry went to Kyoto and
worked to craft a plan to reduce greenhouse gases that could pass political hurdles in the U.S. He
was a leader in the effort to stop a Bush proposal to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.


Environmental groups like what they see and have been enthusiastic about their support for the
candidate. Betsey Loyless is with the League of Conservation Voters…


“Senator Kerry, who has, by the way, a 92 percent lifetime LCV score, has quite a remarkable
overall consistent record of voting to protect clean air, clean water and protect our natural
resources.”


But while the environmentalists like John Kerry, some business and industry groups that feel the
federal government’s environmental protection efforts have become burdensome and ineffective
aren’t that impressed…


“Well, John Kerry – yeah, he got a stronger LCV rating than even Al Gore. Now, pause and think
about that, okay?”


Chris Horner is a Senior Fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a free-market think tank. Horner says he doesn’t like many of Kerry’s positions, but adds he doesn’t think Senator Kerry’s environmental record is as strong as the support from environmental groups might indicate…


“Let’s just say that a lot of the support that comes for Kerry is not through leadership he’s shown in the Congress because he really hasn’t. It’s that he says the right things and that his wife certainly puts the money in the right place.”


Horner suggests that Teresa Heinz Kerry has given large sums of money to environmental
groups… and Horner thinks that’s helped her husband’s political career. Whether you give
credence to those kind of conspiracy theories or not… it’s clear that the environmental groups
prefer Kerry over Bush. The Kerry campaign’s Environmental and Energy Policy Director,
Heather Zichal, says the environmentalists like him… because of his record.


“He’s been called an environmental – dubbed an “environmental champion” and has received the
endorsements of everybody from the Sierra Club to Friends of the Earth. And for him, you know,
environmental protection is not only a matter of what’s in the best interest of public health, but it also is what’s in the best interest of our economy going forward. George Bush has given us the
wrong choices when he says you have to have either the environment or a strong economy. John Kerry believes we can have both.”


But the environment has not been a major issue in the campaign. Conventional wisdom seems to
indicate those who are prone to support pro-environment candidates are already on-board with
Kerry… and the undecided voters have weightier issues on their minds.


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

Related Links

Duck Decline Blamed on Fragmented Habitat

  • A mallard duck hen sitting on her eggs in a strip mall tree planter in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Ducks Unlimited researchers have found that recent declines in duck populations are partly due to a lack of corridors between grasslands where ducks nest and wetlands where they thrive. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)

Researchers with the hunters’ conservation group Ducks Unlimited are reporting they’ve found some of the reasons the duck reproduction rate is falling in the Great Lakes region. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Researchers with the hunters’ conservation group Ducks Unlimited are reporting they’ve
found some of the reasons the duck reproduction rate is falling. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


(sound of birds, a duck quacking and a truck door slamming)


YERKES: “Load in.”


Two years ago, we went out in the field with biologist Tina Yerkes and other Ducks
Unlimited researchers.


YERKES: “Every day these guys go out and they track the birds and that’s basically how
we figure out what they’re doing. ”


(sound of newly hatched ducklings peeping with hen hissing)


At the time, they were tracking mallard hens, watching them nest, and watching them as
they moved their ducklings from the nests in the grass to nearby wetlands and lakes.
After three years of study, they found some of the reasons duck reproduction rates are
down. We recently had a chance to sit down and talk with Tina Yerkes about the study.
She says, surprisingly, they found that egg production and nesting are good, despite nests
being destroyed by mowers and predators eating the eggs.


TY: “The problem is duckling survival. We have very poor duckling survival in this
area. And, that leads us to believe that we need to alter habitat programs to actually start
doing more wetlands work.”


LG: “So, what’s happening is the ducks are able to nest, they’re able to hatch out the
ducklings, but then when they move from the grasslands where the nesting is to the
wetlands where the ducks feed, they grow, they’re not surviving. What’s killing them?”


TY: “What we’re seeing is that hens, once they hatch their young, they move right after
the first day into the first wetland and it’s a dangerous journey. Basically, because our
habitat is so fragmented that they’re moving these ducklings through non-grassed areas,
across parking lots, roads. It’s dangerous. And, a lot of the ducklings either die from
exhaustion or predators kill them on the way. A lot of avian predators get them at that
point.”


LG: “So, we’re talking about hawks and not so much domestic animals like cats and
dogs.”


TY: “Ah, cats are a problem, yeah. It’s hard to document exactly what is getting them,
but feral cats and domestic cats are a problem. Hawks and jays, sometimes…”


LG: “Blue jays?”


TY: “Blue jays can be mean, yeah. But, it’s interesting to note that if you put those
corridors back between nesting sites and wetlands, it’ll be a much safer journey for
them.”


LG: “So, what are you proposing?”


TY: “I would look more away from urban areas where those infrastructures are already
intact. We would not certainly expect anybody to tear that type of stuff up. But, outside
the cities and urban areas there are lots of opportunities to look at areas where there is
grass existing or wetlands existing and then piece the habitat back together where we
can.”


LG: “There are places, for instance in Chicago, where they’re working to do exactly that.
Do you see that kind of effort in most of the states you studied?”


TY: “Yes, actually we do. Some states like – Chicago’s a very good example. A very
strong park system not only throughout the city, but out in the suburbs as well and we do
see that in a lot of different places. That’s a positive thing.”


LG: “Where are the worst places for duckling survival?”


TY: “The worst duckling survival was the site that you were at two years ago in Port
Clinton, Ohio. And, if you think about what that habitat looks like, what you have is a
few patches of grass and an area that’s heavily agriculturally based, but all the wetlands
have been ditched and drained so that when a bird has to move from an area where it
nested to get to a nice, safe wetland habitat, they have to make a substantial move across
a lot of open fields that don’t have a lot of cover on them. So, here you’re looking at
maybe piecing cover back between the wetland areas and still being able to maintain farm
operations at the same time.”


LG: “What can farmers do to help duck survival?”


TY: “Oh, let’s see. Leave some patches of grass along the fields, especially if they have
wetlands in their fields. Leave a nice margin around the wetland, a nice vegetative
margin around the wetland because the ducks will nest right in that edge as well. Then
they don’t have to move very far to take the ducklings to a nice food source and a nice
wetland.”


LG: “Now, this is not just about making sure that mallard ducks reproduce. What’s this
going to mean for the ecosystem as a whole?”


TY: “Every time we replace a wetland or replace grass on the landscape, we’re
improving the water quality because those types of habitats remove nutrients and
sedimentation from runoff. So, there’s all kinds of benefits. There are benefits to any
other species that depends on grasslands to nest in or wetlands to either nest in or even
for migratory birds. So there’s just a suite of benefits beyond ducks.”


Tina Yerkes is a biologist with Ducks Unlimited. She says the group will be working
with states to develop programs to encourage development of corridors between the
grasslands where the ducks nest and the wetlands where they thrive.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Epa Responds to Disparate Water Quality Standards

The Environmental Protection Agency says it’s trying to get states around the Great Lakes to use uniform standards to monitor water quality. But the EPA says the fact that different states use different methods doesn’t put anyone at risk. We have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill:

Transcript

The Environmental Protection Agency says it’s trying to get states around the Great Lakes to use
uniform standards to monitor water quality. But the EPA says the fact that different states use
different methods doesn’t put anyone at risk. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie
Hemphill reports:


The agency is responding to a report from the Environmental Integrity Project. That group says
different states have different standards, and that means no one has a clear idea of how clean – or
dirty – our rivers and lakes really are.


Thomas Skinner is administrator of EPA’s Region Five. He says the Clean Water Act allows
each state to design its own program.


“It may be that some states are being overly protective or over protective of their citizens, and
that’s their right to do it. But if that’s the case, then that could explain some of the
inconsistencies. It doesn’t mean the states that have a different set of fish advisories are not
protecting their citizens; they’ve just chosen to go about it in a slightly different way.”


Skinner says the EPA asked the states seven years ago to use the same standards. He says the
states are gradually moving toward that goal.


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

Related Links

States Tackle Wetlands Protection

In response to a 2001 Supreme Court ruling, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers say they will remove Federal Clean Water Act protection for small wetlands that are considered “isolated” from larger waterways. That leaves it up to the states to decide whether or not to protect them. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Corie Wright has more:

Transcript

In response to a 2001 Supreme Court ruling, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers say they will remove Federal Clean Water Act protection for small wetlands that are considered “isolated” from larger waterways. That leaves it up to the states to decide whether or not to protect them. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Corie Wright has more:


Environmentalists say small, isolated wetlands are crucial to local ecosystems. They filter soil
pollutants, prevent erosion, and provide a habitat for fish and wildlife. But the Bush
administration’s plan to redefine wetlands protection could leave twenty percent of the nation’s
wetlands unguarded.


Critics say the move would benefit homebuilders and other developers, who have long
complained that federal agencies have over-extended the Clean Water Act.


Julie Sibbing is a wetlands policy specialist with the National Wildlife Federation. She says if
states try to protect these wetlands themselves, they’ll meet opposition from the same interests
that lobbied to limit federal wetlands protection.


“Even if state wetlands were protected all along for the last 30 years under the Clean Water Act, it’s still
very politically difficult for states to change their own laws – that will bring a lot of opponents of
regulation out of the woodwork.”


Despite those difficulties, legislators in Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Minnesota have all
pushed for tighter wetlands protection. So far, Wisconsin is the only Great Lakes state to pass a
bill protecting areas no longer covered by the Clean Water Act.


Michigan is one Great Lakes state in the process of trying to preserve wetlands that fall through
the regulatory gap. Under Michigan law, isolated wetlands smaller than five acres don’t qualify for state
protection.


State Senator Paul Condino is championing a bill to preserve those areas. He says it’s
up to the state to protect Michigan’s public wetlands.


“I don’t think President Bush and the folks in office on the federal level have any sense that
they’re going to go out to create further safeguards. Michigan has lost an estimated 5.5 million acres
of wetlands, or almost 50% of its original wetland heritage. That’s significant.”


But the National Wildlife Federation’s Julie Sibbing says it will be an uphill battle for any state to
pass regulation.


“They’re being left with pretty large gaping holes in their own state water quality statutes, and at
a time that couldn’t be worse. Many state governments are really reeling from budget deficits, so
right now is just a really hard time for them to step into that breach.”


Sibbing says her group is pushing for a congressional bill that would slightly modify the Clean
Water Act so the EPA can once again protect smaller isolated waterways.


But she says the bill is certain to meet stiff opposition from House Republicans. Sibbing says if
the bill doesn’t pass, it’s unlikely states can shoulder wetlands protection on their own.


And that means that small, isolated wetlands could be left out to dry.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Corie Wright.

Interview: Red-Winged Blackbirds Heralds of Spring

  • A male Red-winged Blackbird (Photo courtesy of the USFWS)

Many people in the Great Lakes region are told to watch for the robin as a sign that Spring has come. But that bird may not be the best indicator, even after this especially cold winter. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jim Blum decided to venture out beyond his backyard to find a better sign:

Transcript

Many people in the (Midwest/Great Lakes region) are told to watch for the Robin as a sign that
Spring has come. But that bird may not be the best indicator, even after this especially cold
winter. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jim Blum decided to venture out beyond his
backyard to find a better sign:


Blum: You might think of a robin or a bluebird as harbingers of spring but that may not be
correct. I’m Jim Blum with naturalist Dan Best, we’re at the edge of a marsh on a soggy
afternoon.


Best: Well Jim, it’s true that the greater numbers of bluebirds and robins arrive back in these
parts in March, but bluebirds and robins – they’re frequent enough in winter to ruin their
reputations as the heralds of spring.


Blum: Well, I’m thinking you have another bird in mind.


Best: Well, yeah, I was thinking of the blackbirds actually. The grackles and red-winged
blackbirds. They usually hit town in February.


Blum: I’ve always associated red-winged black birds with cattails. Aren’t they birds of the
wetlands?


Best: Well, yes. Marshes are their traditional habitat and remain their preferred habitat. They
weave a basket-like nest among the stems of the cattails, the rushes or other tall plants at the
waters edge. And while marshes are their favorite still, they’ve branched out.


Blum: You mean they’re starting to use other habitats?


Best: Why yes, as you know Jim, in a trend that unfortunately continues today marshes and other
shallow water wetlands – as they have been for decades – have been drained or filled for
agriculture and building.


Blum: Which would explain why so many of our rare and endangered plants and animals are
wetland species.


Best: Yes, indeed. However, as many forms of wetland wildlife have declined with the loss of
their habitat, red wing black birds, apparently more adaptable, have made a successful transition
into upland habitats, such as meadows and grassy interstate margins, hay fields, clover, alfalfa
fields.


Blum: Well there’s no wonder why there’s so many of them. I can recall those huge flocks that
we saw in the fall strung out across the sky almost like a plume of smoke.


(sound of huge flocks of birds)


Best: Yeah, and every night for several weeks they gather by the hundreds to roost in trees near
somebody’s house.


(red-wing blackbird song)


Blum: Well, red-wing blackbirds at almost any time of the year are pretty noisy birds. Their
song, if you can call it that, certainly doesn’t rival the cardinal or any other songbird for that
matter.


Best: No, you’re right about that, Jim. Can’t argue that point.


Blum: What does the bird look like? Can you describe it?


Best: Well, as the name implies they’re overall black. The males, they have a yellowish wing
bar and they also have a red shoulder patch or epaulet that they display while they are
establishing their territory or engaging in courtship.


Blum: What about the females?


Best: Well, they’re different looking. They actually look like big sparrows. That is, they’re
kind of a dark brown and very streaky.


Blum: Describe this display that the male is putting on.


Best: Well, they find a prominent perch and then from here they fan out their wings and tail
feathers and let out a real boisterous kon-kor-eeeee.


Blum: So this is to establish territory and they’ll keep doing this even before the females have
arrived?


(walking in grass)


Best: That’s right. They’re staking their claim but once the once the girls arrive well then this
display really kicks into high gear.


Blum: What’s the best way to see the antics of the red wing?


Best: Well, since these birds are pretty common, chances are you’re not going to have to go too
far from home. A little patch of cattails or reeds alongside the road. I mean, invariably they’ll be
perched on a wire or on a tree nearby will be a male red-wing displaying.


Blum: While other birds get more poetic respect, I have a sense you feel this bird is special.


Best: Well, yeah, as spring proceeds we’ll see more musical songsters come our way, but
doggone it, you know, when I hear that quirky song of the red-winged blackbird in late winter
when there is still snow on the ground, to me, that’s one of the first sure signs of spring.


Blum: That’s naturalist Dan Best. I’m Jim Blum for the Great Lakes Radio Consortium. Let’s
check out that cattail stand, do you think we’re going to get one?


Best: Oh, I’ll betcha there’ll be one there.


(sound of walking in marsh, fades out)

U.S. Army Corps Seeks Neighbor’s Support

  • A freighter navigates the American Narrows in the St. Lawrence River. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wants to embark on a $20 million study to look at expanding the St. Lawrence Seaway's locks and channels, but they first need Canada's support. Photo by David Sommerstein.

The St. Lawrence Seaway is a major economic engine for the communities of the Great Lakes. Shippers and ports say a deeper channel for bigger freighters will add billions of dollars in trade and create new jobs. Environmentalists say replumbing the Seaway would devastate the region’s ecology. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wants to move ahead on a 20 million dollar study of Seaway expansion. But it’s waiting for support and money from Canada. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein reports:

Transcript

The St. Lawrence Seaway is a major economic engine for the communities of the Great Lakes.
Shippers and ports say a deeper channel for bigger freighters will add billions of dollars in trade and
create new jobs. Environmentalists say replumbing the Seaway would devastate the region’s
ecology. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wants to move ahead on a 20 million dollar study of
Seaway expansion. But it’s waiting for support and money from Canada. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s David Sommerstein reports:


The Army Corps of Engineers’ study will set the Seaway’s agenda for years to come. That’s why
ports on both sides of the border say it’s important to update a system that’s almost fifty years old.
Keith Robson is president and CEO of the port of Hamilton, Ontario.


“You know, when it was first built, it was probably the right size and now the world has moved
on, so we need to take a look at what we need to do for the future.”


The world of shipping has moved on to so-called “Panamax” size. That’s the term used for huge
freighters that carry cargo containers to coastal ports and through the Panama Canal. A preliminary
study says if those Panamax ships could squeeze into the Seaway, a billion and a half dollars more a
year could float into ports such as Hamilton, Duluth, Toledo, Chicago, and Detroit.


But while bigger may be better in the Corps’ projections, shippers first want to make sure the old
locks keep working as is. Reg Lanteigne of the Canadian Shipowners Association says Canadian
shippers rely on the Seaway to handle 70 million tons of cargo a year.


“None of our economy could sustain a catastrophic failure of that waterway. The only issue here
is not how deep, how wide, how long the ditch should be, but the most important issue is how
long the current ditch can last.”


For the 20 million dollar study to proceed at all, Canada must fund half of it. Canada owns 13 of
the Seaway’s 15 locks. And the shipping channel is partially in Canadian waters. But even though
a decision was expected months ago, Canada has yet to sign on. Critics believe that’s because
Canada sees problems in the Corps’ approach.


Dozens of environmental groups across the Great Lakes have slammed the study. They say it’s
cooked in the shipping industry’s favor. They say it’s predestined to support expansion with dire
environmental consequences.


Expansion foes gathered recently at a meeting organized by the New York-based group ‘Save The
River.’ Their ears perked up when Mary Muter took the floor. She’s vice-president of the
Georgian Bay Association, an Ontario-based environmental group. She says Canada is wary of
expansion. The first time the Seaway was dug, water levels dropped more than a foot. With even
lower levels today, Muter says places like Lake Huron’s Georgian Bay can’t afford to lose more
water.


“Wetlands have literally dried up, converted into grass meadows in some locations. Another
concern is access for shoreline property owners to get to their cottages that are on islands.”


There are also concerns of invasive species depleting fisheries and channel dredging stirring up toxic
sediment.


But Muter says Canada is also wary of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which has developed a
reputation of skewing studies to justify more work. Muter says Canada’s Transport Minister has
assured her one thing. He’s not interested in an expansion study that leaves environmental issues as
an afterthought.


“If the U.S. transport department wants to involve the Army Corps, that’s fine. But Canada is not
giving money directly to the U.S. Army Corps to replumb the Great Lakes.”


Both transportation departments have remained tight-lipped through months of negotiations, leaving
interest groups on both sides of the debate to speculate.


Stephanie Weiss directs Save The River. She says Canada’s delay may mean a chance to broaden
the scope of the study beyond shipping.


“Y’know, is this an opportunity to change the shape of the study into something that more interest
groups and more citizens around the Great Lakes can buy into?”


Reg Lanteigne of the Canadian Shipowners Association says the delay is just a bureaucratic one.


“The mandate has been agreed, the scope and governance has all been agreed. All we’re looking
for now is a suitable location and time and date to sign this off.”


On the U.S. side of the border, Congress has allocated 1.5 million dollars for the first year of the
study. That’s less than the Corps had asked for. And the legislation includes a special warning. It
directs the Corps to pay more attention to the environmental and recreational impacts of building a
bigger Seaway channel.


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

Species Diversity Remains in Remnant Wetlands

While wetlands have disappeared in great numbers over the last century in the Midwest, it seems that most of the wildlife relying on them have survived. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bill Wheelhouse reports:

Transcript

While wetlands have disappeared in great numbers over the last century in the Midwest, it seems
that most of the wildlife relying on them have survived. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Bill Wheelhouse reports:


Nearly 90 percent of the wetlands in the Midwest are gone. They have been replaced by farm
fields and development. A study in the February issue of Conservation Biology says despite the
change. Most of the native species have survived in the remaining wetlands. Co-author David
Jenkins is a biologist at the University of Illinois. He says the study of crustaceons shows more
than 90-percent of those species are surviving in isolated shallow ponds and puddles. Jenkins
says the wetlands range in size from an office cubicle to a football field. He says there is far
more biodiversity tucked away in the Midwest than previously thought, but says the remaining
wetlands must be protected.


“It’s kind of a catch 22, in that the species that have been still hanging on are less likely to be able
to hang on if we were to lose more wetlands.”


Some state legislatures are considering measures that might help protect these types of wetlands,
although discussions are still in the early stages. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bill
Wheelhouse.

Wetlands Policy Leaves Some High and Dry?

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers recently announced plans to change their policies on enforcing the Clean Water Act on some wetlands. The move is in response to a Supreme Court decision that puts limits on the federal government’s jurisdiction over wetlands. Some environmental advocates are concerned the move will put millions of acres of wetlands in jeopardy. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:

Transcript

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers recently announced
plans to change their policies on enforcing the Clean Water Act on some wetlands. The move is
in response to a Supreme Court decision that puts limits on the federal government’s jurisdiction
over wetlands. Some environmental advocates are concerned the move will put millions of acres
of wetlands in jeopardy. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:


More than ten years ago, 23 suburbs in the Chicago area wanted to convert an old stone quarry
into a landfill to combat a shortage of space to put trash. But in the 25 years since the quarry was
abandoned, it filled with water and became home to birds, fish and plants.


The federal government called the site a
wetland and blocked the landfill project citing the Clean Water Act. The Corps said the old
quarry was now an important part of the environment because it provided plant and wildlife
habitats and protected the surrounding area from floods. The communities sued the Army Corps
of Engineers over the issue.


The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that the federal government
can’t enforce the Clean Water Act on bodies of water that were isolated and not part of a larger
water system. The five to four decision of the court put that responsibility in the hands of the
states. The U.S. EPA and Army Corps of Engineers recently released plans to abide by those
rules.


Cameron Davis is with the Lake Michigan Federation, an advocacy group focusing on
environmental issues in the Great Lakes region. He says the federal government is backing
down too quickly:


“Well, I think what we’re seeing is another example of the administration scaling back the federal
environmental protections. Especially at the time when the states simply are not well equipped to
be able to pick up where those federal protections leave off. In an ideal world, the type of
proposal we are seeing would have been done in coordination with the states. It would
have been done in a way that will not leave wetlands out to dry.”


Davis says the Supreme Court decision only specifically relates to one case, and the federal
government was too quick to expand those thoughts to other wetlands. Davis says a longer
review process of exactly which wetlands the federal government can regulate would provide
better policy and more clarity on the issue. But the EPA says it is not sidestepping its
responsibility. Ben Grumbles is with the EPA’s Office of Water. He says the agency is doing
what it feels it has to do to comply with the Supreme Court decision.


“It’s our intent to take the interpretation that is the most reasonable and the most defensible one
that is also consistent with our mission of protecting wetlands and watersheds. We are fully
committed to protecting wetlands and watersheds to the full extent under the Clean Water Act
and the Supreme Court decision.”


Grumbles says while the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers are planning to abide by the high
court ruling, it will also be working with states to help them protect wetlands that fall outside of
the federal governments newly-defined jurisdiction. Grumbles also says the EPA is taking public
comment so it can better define what makes a body of water an isolated wetland. While the EPA
and advocacy groups have differing opinions of how to interpret the Supreme Court decision, the
legal debate might not be over.


Chris Shafer is a law professor at the Thomas Cooley Law
School in Lansing, Michigan. He says the high court made a mistake by
assuming isolated wetlands are not the responsibility of the federal government:


“I think the court also made a giant leap of logic by saying that, ‘Well, it’s not really a major issue
in terms of wetland protection because the states will take over this responsibility.’ That’s just
laughable because the states are not likely to take over wetland protection. It’s very
controversial, it’s very difficult, it’s very expensive.”


Shafer says the Supreme Court decision is so narrowly focused on such a small area of the law,
that clarification from Congress would remove any doubt as to where the federal government
could assert its authority in wetland issues. Right now there are no plans for such legislation, and
observers say it’s doubtful that a Republican-controlled Congress and the current administration
would address the issue. Environmental activists say in the mean time, they will turn their focus
to state legislatures to encourage them to pass laws to preserve these wetlands no longer protected
by the federal government.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.