Tag: bush administration

Muddy Waters Around Wetlands Ruling

  • Federal protections for isolated wetlands like this one are in question after a 2001 Supreme Court ruling. Experts say it's not just wetlands that are at risk. They say lakes or streams that have been deemed "isolated" are losing protections as well. (Photo by Mark Brush)

Around the country, there are small, isolated swampy areas that are home to a lot of plants and animals. You can often hear frogs singing, or see ducks dabbling for food in these murky waters. Some experts say the government has weakened regulations that once protected these smaller wetlands. Now, they say, many of these wetlands are being drained, filled in and lost. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:

Transcript

Around the country there are small, isolated swampy areas that are home
to a lot of plants and animals. You can often hear frogs singing, or
see ducks dabbling for food in these murky waters. Some experts say
the government has weakened regulations that once protected these
smaller wetlands. Now, they say, many of these wetlands are being
drained, filled in and lost. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark
Brush has more:


This small wetland is nestled in the middle of a woodlot. Mud is
squishing under our feet as we walk around it. The water is still, and
dark… filled with last year’s rotting leaves.


This is no place for humans to live. But for wildlife, this is home.


(sound of chorus and wood frogs)


“That looks like what was left of a whirligig beetle – that’s a real
common insect in these types of habitats.”


We’re out here with Dave Brakhage. He’s a conservationist with Ducks
Unlimited. He says these small wetlands are where ducks take their
ducklings for food.


Brakhage brought us here to show us an example of a wetland that was
once protected by federal regulations:


“These wetlands are isolated because there’s not a direct water
connection from them to a lake or stream or other water body in the
area. They’re geographically isolated.”


Being isolated puts these wetlands into a sort of regulatory limbo. To
dredge or fill a wetland like this 4 years ago – you needed to apply
for a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers.


Now – in many parts of the country – you don’t need that permit.


That’s because in 2001 the Supreme Court ruled on a case from the
Chicago area that changed everything. The court’s decision opened up a
lot debate about whether isolated wetlands should be protected by the
federal government.


Dave Brakhage says the ruling gave the Bush Administration an
opportunity to issue a guidance to government agencies.


“The Supreme Court ruling certainly threw into question a lot of the
protections that were in place there. And that opened the door to the
guidance. And depending on how the guidance came down and the
interpretations associated with it. It could certainly make things a
whole lot worse.”


The Bush administration issued these instructions to the federal
agencies in January of 2003.


But conservation officials and environmentalists believe the
administration went too far with these instructions, going beyond what
the Supreme Court ruling required.

The instructions were issued prior to drafting a final, formal rule.


But before it finalized the rule – the Bush Administration got an
earful.


“There was a lot of concern expressed on the part of a pretty broad
swath of the American Public.”


Scott Yaich is the Director of Conservation Programs with Ducks
Unlimited. He says the Administration heard protests from those they
considered friendly:


“We were talking about people who were concerned about the environment,
and in this case there were a lot of hunters and a other sporting
groups and angling groups that went into him, and those are a pretty
core part of the Republican and the President’s base.”


So President Bush stopped the rule-making process that would lift the
protections.


But… the original instructions to the agencies still stand.


And the Administration has no plans to change them.


Julie Sibbing is wetlands policy specialist with the National Wildlife
Federation. She says getting the President to back away from finalizing
the rule was a small victory, but there’s still a lot to be done:


“It was a right decision at we do recognize that and we praise the
administration for taking the right step, but they’ve got a long way to
go yet. We still have a long way to go – and there’s a lot at risk.
In fact the EPA’s own estimates are that the guidance has put about 20
million acres, or about 20% of what we have left in the lower 48 states
of wetlands at risk.”


But the risk is not the same for wetlands in different areas of the
country. So today, when developers and landowners go to the Army Corps
of Engineers to apply for a permit, they get different responses
depending on where they are.


Some Corps districts have turned their back on the isolated wetlands,
telling developers no permits are needed.


Other Corps districts are waiting for clearer direction.


Mitch Isoe is the Chief of the Regulatory Branch for the Corps’ Chicago
District. He says he just wants to know what he’s supposed to do.


“We would like to have revised rules on the definitions for our
jurisdiction. We’d just like to have the critical terms that are
causing all of these difficulties defined in a way that two people in
two parts of the country can read the same sentence, go out on the
ground and end up at the same point. And, you know, right now the
field is helpless to do that, because the decision on not to pursue
rulemaking was made in Washington.”

With mixed messages coming from the White House, the Corps of Engineers
and the Environmental Protection Agency are struggling with how and
whether to regulate these wetlands.


In the meantime, it’s generally left up to the states to pass laws to
protect these areas.


Some states have laws that do that, others don’t.


(sound of frogs)


Ducks Unlimited and other conservation and environmental groups are
working with the Administration to protect these wetlands. Dave
Brakhage says doing so will benefit more than just ducks:


“And it’s not just the wildlife – you know wetlands are important in
terms of storing floodwaters, an important site for restoring ground
water recharge, and also have a big role to play in improving our water
quality.”


The Bush Administration says it’s committed to preserving wetlands, and
it even says it plans to increase the amount of wetlands in the U.S.


Environmentalists and hunting groups say they don’t see that happening
right now. But they’re pushing the Administration to make good on that
promise.


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


(frogs fade)

Related Links

Senators Rally for More Efficient Air Conditioners

More than half of the U.S. Senators are urging the Bush White House to allow more energy-efficient air conditioners. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

More than half of the U.S. Senators are urging the Bush White House to allow more energy
efficient air conditioners. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


The Bush administration proposed reducing the minimum energy efficiency standard for central
air conditioners and heat pumps. It would roll-back a Clinton-era requirement that home air
conditioners be 30 percent more energy efficient starting in 2006. The Bush administration didn’t
want to force the air conditioning industry make the more efficient air conditioners. A federal
court stopped the roll-back to the Clinton rule. The air conditioner industry has dropped its
efforts to overturn the more efficient standard. Now 51 Senators have signed a letter urging
President Bush not to appeal the court’s ruling to the next level. The letter says in part that
making air conditioners as efficient as possible will quote “begin to reduce the stress on the
electricity generation and transmission network and decrease the likelihood of blackouts…” The
Senators indicate that more energy efficient air conditioners is an idea that should be embraced
and encouraged, not appealed.


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

Budget Calls for Cleaner School Buses

The Bush administration has proposed a funding increase for a nationwide program to reduce pollution from diesel school buses. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Erika Johnson reports:

Transcript

The Bush administration has proposed a funding increase for a nationwide
program to reduce pollution from diesel school buses. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Erika Johnson reports:


The Environmental Protection Agency launched a program last year to cut
emissions from diesel school buses. Five million dollars was divided among
a handful of school districts nationwide. The money was used to replace or
retrofit diesel school buses with pollution control devices and to provide
cleaner burning diesel fuels. Now, the Bush administration has proposed
that an additional 65-million dollars be added to the program next year.


Tom Skinner is EPA’s Region 5 Administrator.


“The reason for the big jump is that we’ve seen the kind of success, the
kind of results that can be created by the program, and what we’ve found is
it’s tremendously effective. We started with a relatively small pilot
program with limited funding, and now is really when we’re going to kick it off, and
expand it dramatically and really reach across the country.”


Skinner says EPA hopes to replace or retrofit all diesel school bus engines
by 2010.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Erika Johnson.

Related Links

Farm to Wetlands Program to Be Scaled Back?

A popular federal program that pays farmers to restore wetlands on their property is underfunded in President Bush’s budget proposal. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein has more:

Transcript

A popular federal program that pays farmers to restore wetlands on their property is underfunded
in President Bush’s budget proposal. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Sommerstein
has more:


The 2002 Farm Bill called for turning 250,000 acres a year of marginal farmland into wetlands.
Wetlands on farms help control pesticide run-off, replenish aquifers, and provide wildlife habitat.
And the effort gives farmers some extra cash in lean times. The Bush Administration wants to
downsize the program by 50,000 acres a year. But critics say it’s too popular to reduce.


“For every acre that gets enrolled, there are five acres waiting to get enrolled.”


Julie Sibbing is the wetlands policy specialist for the National Wildlife Federation. She says millions
of acres of wetlands nationwide are under threat from development. And farm conservation
programs are a crucial way to preserve them.


“There’s been a lot of talk about how the farm programs have expanded under the Bush
Administration. It’s really not been the great expansion that we would have liked to have seen.”


Last year, the program helped convert 213,000 acres of unused farmland into wetlands, short of the
250,000 acre goal.


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

Related Links

Epa Punishes Fewer Polluters

The Environmental Protection Agency under President Bush is punishing fewer polluters than under previous administrations. That’s according to analysis done by the Knight Ridder news service. More from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush:

Transcript

The Environmental Protection Agency under President Bush is punishing fewer
polluters than under previous administrations. That’s according to analysis
done by the Knight Ridder news service. More from the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Mark Brush:


Investigators looked at environmental enforcement records dating back to
1989. They found that under the current Bush administration – enforcement
has dropped significantly when compared to the Clinton and the first Bush
administration. The EPA averaged close to 200 citations a month under Bush
Senior. And now, that average has dropped to 77 citations a month under
George W. Bush.


Joel Mintz is the author of a book on the history of EPA enforcement. He
says enforcement is crucial to the agency.


“I think it’s critical really. It’s at the heart of what any regulatory
agency does. Without enforcement, environmental laws would have no teeth.
They just would not be taken seriously.”


EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt says the numbers are lower because they’re
practicing what he calls “smart enforcement.” He says they’re working with
businesses – developing incentives for companies not to pollute – instead of
focusing on punishment.


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

Related Links

Scientists to Issue Opinion on Missouri River

  • A day marker for barge traffic on the Missouri River. Environmentalists say there's not enough barge traffic on the Missouri to warrant the millions spent on maintaining the lock and dam system. Barge operators disagree. (photo courtesy of USGS)

A team of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists is putting the final touches on its latest recommendation for the management of the Missouri River. The document, known as the Biological Opinion, will guide the Army Corps of Engineers in deciding how to control the river in a way that best protects endangered birds and fish. It’s the latest turn in a contentious battle that for years has pitted environmentalism against economics. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Kevin Lavery reports:

Transcript

A team of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists is putting the final
touches on its latest recommendation for the management of the Missouri
River. The document, known as the Biological Opinion, will guide the Army
Corps of Engineers in deciding how to control the river in a way that best
protects endangered birds and fish. It’s the latest turn in a contentious
battle that for years has pitted environmentalism against economics. The
Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Kevin Lavery reports:


The new Biological Opinion will be the second such document in three years.
The 2000 Bi Op – as it’s often called – advocated high water releases on the
Missouri each spring to cue the spawning season of the pallid sturgeon.
Reducing the flows in the summer, the Bi Op explained, would expose sandbars
to provide nesting grounds for two endangered birds, the interior least tern
and the piping plover.


That philosophy had been the view of many in the Fish and Wildlife Service,
who have studied the Missouri for more than a decade. But in early
November, the Department of the Interior announced it was replacing the
original scientific team to expedite the process of crafting a new outlook
for the river.


The decision unsettles environmentalist Chad Smith with the group American
Rivers. He feels the switch was an attempt by the Bush Administration to
silence those who offered a politically unpopular opinion.


“It seems to us like there’s an effort being made to try to find
someone to give the administration the answer that they want; that they don’t want to make flow
changes even though the science is crystal clear.”


The Fish and Wildlife Service team leaders deny that politics played a role
in rebuilding the scientific staff. The 15-member team in fact includes
seven who either worked on the 2000 Bi Op or have specific research
experience on the Missouri.


Commercial shippers that do business on the river are hopeful that new
thinking may lead to more growth for their industry. Navigation on the
Missouri has always been negligible, but industry officials say the past
summer was nothing short of devastating. A series of court decisions and
overturns led to a three-day drop in flow levels in August that ground barge
traffic to a halt.


Chris Brescia is President of the Midwest Area River Coalition 2000, which
represents barge operators. He says that incident punctuated their position
that unpredictable flow levels make the Missouri an unreliable
transportation mode:


“The conflicting court orders literally brought everything to a
standstill because it was unsafe for operators to quote freight rates and to
presume that they could navigate on the river when they didn’t know at what
point in time the court was going to reverse a decision to support
navigation.”


Central to the debate over how to manage the Missouri is the issue of
whether the economic value of river commerce is worth the cost of keeping
the river navigable. For the past decade, the Corps of Engineers has spent
just three million dollars a year on navigation. The Corps’ own data
indicates that navigation is worth about three times that amount each year.


One fully loaded 15-barge tow can carry more than 22-thousand tons, about as
much as 870 large semi trucks. Barge operators say having the river as a
viable transportation route keeps the cost of other shipping modes down.
But American Rivers argues that the two million tons of fertilizer, grain
and similar products barges carry each year on the Missouri fall far short
of what the Corps projected decades ago would be carried on the river.


For its part, the Corps of Engineers says whatever the cost-benefit ratio,
navigation is a congressionally mandated purpose it’s obliged to continue
paying for.


The draft of the Corps’ 2004 operating plan does not include the flow
changes environmentalists have demanded. Corps spokesman Paul Johnston says
his agency recognizes that those measures will not provide the biological
conditions the listed species need to survive. Instead, Johnston says the
Corps plans to spend more than 40-million dollars next year to accelerate
its habitat creation program:


“We’ll be looking for opportunities to acquire appropriate land
from willing sellers, and we’ll be looking at building tern and plover
habitat as well. So I’m really convinced we will reach a point where we can
have a much richer river than we have now and still enjoy the economic
benefits.”


The scientific team has until December 15 to complete its Biological
Opinion. The Army Corps of Engineers hopes to have its final operating plan
for the Missouri in place by March 1.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Kevin Lavery.

Related Links

Debate Over Superfund’s Future

For the first time in the Midwest, an old Superfund site has been declared ready for re-use. But funding questions continue to cloud the future of the toxic waste clean-up program. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

For the first time in the Midwest, an old Superfund site has been declared ready for re-use. But
funding questions continue to cloud the future of the toxic waste clean-up program. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:


The Environmental Protection Agency says a former landfill in Antioch, Illinois is now clean
enough to be used as community athletic fields. The private sector paid most of the clean-up
cost. That’s a typical scenario, as nationally, private polluters pay 70-percent of the Superfund
bill.


But Congress refuses to bring back a corporate tax that paid the rest of the cost, meaning
the EPA has to set aside public dollars for restoration work. Tom Skinner is the EPA’s Midwest
Administrator. He says the Bush administration is still committed to clean-ups, but is dealing
with several large sites.


“The question is how much money can the country afford to devote to those clean-ups and how
quickly can we get them done as a result.”


But environmental groups say the job would be easier if the White House and GOP leaders on
Capitol Hill would bring back the Superfund tax.


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

Related Links

Researchers Help Develop Co2 Trading Market

One of the gases that figures prominently in the global climate debate is carbon dioxide. Scientists believe CO2 emissions can be reduced if carbon in the atmosphere is “stored.” Economists want to incorporate carbon storage into a market-driven solution to regulate emissions. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Ann Murray has this story about climate change, forests, and the emergence of a carbon trading market:

Transcript

One of the gases that figures prominently in the global climate debate is carbon
dioxide.
Scientists believe CO2 emissions can be reduced if carbon in the atmosphere is
“stored.”
Economists want to incorporate carbon storage into a market driven solution to
regulate
emissions. The Great Lakes
Radio Consortium’s Ann Murray has this story about climate change, forests, and the
emergence of a
carbon trading market:


Climate experts say the earth’s temperature started to change about 150 years ago.
That’s when
people began to burn coal and gas and oil to run factories and generate electricity.
These fossil
fuels release carbon dioxide into the air. CO2, a “greenhouse gas,” traps the
sun’s heat.
Climatologists warn that unless carbon dioxide emissions are curbed, the planet will
continue to
heat up. Scientists are now looking to nature to counteract this human influx of
carbon.


Coeli Hoover with the U.S. Forest Service is among these scientists.


“There’s a plot over there.”


For the past three summers, Hoover and technicians from the Forestry Sciences Lab in
Warren
County, Pennsylvania have traveled to hardwood forests in the northeastern United
States.


“What we’re doing is trying to get a basic handle on how much carbon is stored in
these different
forests and how management might change that.”


Today, Hoover is in the Monongahela National Forest in West Virginia. She and her
team gather
their equipment from their van. As they head to a stand of cherry, maple and beech
trees, Hoover
explains some basic biology about carbon storage and trees.


“They pull carbon dioxide out of the air to make sugars, carbohydrates for trees to
live on. And in
the process that carbon gets stored as wood. And carbon also get stored in the soil.”


Hoover’s study is the first to examine carbon stored in forest floors and soils.
The regional study
looks at uncut forests and those that have been thinned. Hoover wants to see if
different forest
management practices affect the amount and type of stored carbon.


(knife cutting around forest floor)


This morning, Hoover and a technician use a knife and template to cut small sections
of the forest
floor, the layer of organic material above the soil. After the forest floor samples
are labeled and
bagged, the crew takes samples of the soil.


(sound of slide hammer core)


They dig 12 holes per plot with a slide hammer core. That’s a metal cylinder with a
cutting tip on
the edge and brass core sleeves inside.


“This method allows us to get these really nice depths without having any doubt of
what we’re
getting.”


Hoover says the whole point of her study is to eliminate the carbon guessing game.
Because
there’s little information about belowground carbon, it’s been hard to establish
how much carbon
is stored in forests. Scientists call this a “carbon budget.” The big picture,
says Hoover, is
important because of the emergence of a domestic carbon trading market. A market
where
foresters can grow trees, store carbon and make money.


“Right now carbon dioxide isn’t regulated as a pollutant. There are people who
think that it
probably will be. There’s voluntary reporting where companies can report their C02
emissions
and their uptake for different projects. So there’s a lot of experimental work
going on.”


An experimental program in Chicago is working to give industry a reason to reduce
carbon
dioxide output. The Chicago Climate Exchange will begin trading carbon credits. If
a company
reduces its CO2 output by installing new technologies, that difference can be sold
on the
exchange. Companies will buy credits that represent storage of carbon in either
trees or soil. Dr.
Richard Sandor is the founder of the Climate Exchange.


“We are going to have projects which would have to be monitored and verified and
approved by
our offset and forestry committees where people would agree to reforest. If a
particular project
that absorbs 100,000 tons of carbon in the aboveground biomass can be measured, then
people
sell those on the exchange.


Sandor says this isn’t the first time that pollution credits have been traded in the
United States.
He points to the success of the sulfur dioxide market. Sulfur dioxide is the main
component in
acid rain. The U.S. EPA estimates that this market driven program has cut sulfur
dioxide output in
half and saved $50 billion a year in health and environmental costs.


Not everyone sees such a sunny future for carbon trading. Some critics believe that
CO2
emissions must be regulated by the government or through the international
greenhouse gas
agreement called the Kyoto Protocol.


Others worry that foresters or landowners will resort to single age, single species
tree plantations
to quickly fulfill contracts.


(forest sounds)


Back in the Monongahela National
Forest, Coeli
Hoover says biodiversity need not suffer.


“I don’t think that you have to manage for carbon or sustainable timber production.
I think you
can do both and manage for wildlife. I don’t think there are a lot of tradeoffs
there.”


We probably won’t know the success of carbon trading in the United States for
another five or ten
years. The Bush administration has refused federal regulation of carbon dioxide and
for now, has
left the solution to the markets.


For The Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Ann Murray.

Related Links

Pollution Breaks for Factory Farms?

Environmental groups allege the Bush administration might want to give large, so-called “factory farms” a break under the Clean Air Act and Superfund laws. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

Environmental groups allege the Bush administration might want to give large, so-called “factory
farms” a break under the Clean Air Act and Superfund laws. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:


Environmental groups contend that the livestock industries have asked the EPA not to require
they comply with the Clean Air Act and Superfund hazardous waste laws.


Andrew Hanson is an attorney with Midwest Environmental Advocates. He says the big farms
pump out large amounts of air pollutants like ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, volatile organic
compounds and particles.


“Those four categories of air pollution can be very harmful to people who live near these
operations, live near these manure pits and live near those free-stall barns that house thousands of
cows.”


A coalition of environmental groups has filed a Freedom of Information lawsuit, asking the Bush
administration to disclose any negotiations with the meat industry. But the White House says it is
not cutting any deals with the owners of large farms.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Chuck Quirmbach, reporting.

Related Links

State Agencies Concerned About Power Plant Upgrades

Recently, the Bush administration announced it will allow factories and power plants to make large upgrades without having to install anti-pollution technology. But that business incentive has state Environmental Protection Agencies worried about air quality. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jenny Lawton has this report:

Transcript

Recently, the Bush administration announced it will allow factories and power plants to make
large upgrades without having to install anti-pollution technology. But that business incentive
has state Environmental Protection Agencies worried about air quality. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Jenny Lawton has this report:


For the last 30 years, under the Clean Air Act, power plants and factories have been required to
install pollution control devices whenever they made major improvements to their infrastructure.


Under the new federal rule, a plant can make improvements worth up to 20-percent of its value
without installing smoke-stack scrubbers. The U.S. EPA says the Bush administration’s rule
means plants will be able to modernize.


But Illinois state EPA director Renee Cipriano says modernizing a plant doesn’t necessarily mean
it will be cleaner.


“The cost of a modification does not necessarily equal the impact to the environment. The two do
not equal each other.”


Cipriano says the change jeopardizes the standards set by the Clean Air Act. The Illinois EPA
and the state’s attorney general will file a petition to block the change. Twelve other states have
filed similar petitions.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jenny Lawton.

Related Links