The United Nation’s Environment Program says the Great Lakes are cleaner. But a new report says the U.S. and Canada need to do more to prevent problems due to urban growth, agricultural runoff and invasions of exotic species. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
The United Nation’s Environment Program says the Great Lakes are cleaner.
But a new report says the U.S. and Canada need to do more to prevent
problems due to urban growth, agricultural runoff and invasions of exotic
species. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
The U.N. report looks at what’s happened to the environment in the U.S. and
Canada for the last 30 years. It finds that there’s been significant progress
in protecting the ozone layer, reducing smokestack and auto emissions, and
slowing the loss of wetlands and other wildlife habitat.
The report in particular notes the progress made in cleaning up the Great Lakes. It
states that since 1972, the use, generation and release of several toxic
chemicals into the Great Lakes has been reduced by 71 percent. But, it also
finds that the two countries have not done a good job of stopping exotic
species such as the zebra mussel from damaging the environment of the lakes,
and it ticks off a list of toxic pollution problems from urban areas and
farms. The report concludes that North America’s global impact is disproportionately large compared to other countries in the world.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
A Findlay, Ohio-based oil company says it needs a new petroleum pipeline to help get gasoline and jet fuel products to market in the Great Lakes states. But Marathon-Ashland’s proposal has sparked opposition from environmentalists and some small business owners in Southeast Ohio who fear possible contamination of waterways and disruption of some pristine areas. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tom Borgerding has the story:
Transcript
A Findlay, Ohio based Oil Company says it needs a new petroleum pipeline to help get gasoline and jet fuel products to market in the Great Lakes states. But, Marathon-Ashland’s proposal has sparked opposition from environmentalists and some small business owners in Southeast Ohio who fear possible contamination of waterways and disruption of some pristine areas. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tom Borgerding reports.
The proposed 149-mile long pipeline will cross the Ohio River from Kenova, West Virginia and snake through parts of the Wayne National Forest and scenic Hocking Hills in Southeastern Ohio and South Central Ohio. Company spokesman Tim Aydt says the project will help stabilize gasoline prices in a region stretching from eastern Illinois to western New York.
“The existing pipeline infrastructure that serves us today is decades old and it was designed when there was only one grade of gasoline and one grade of diesel fuel. And it was designed to serve a population about half the size it is today. Over time, with the growth we’ve had in the Midwest we’ve outgrown that pipeline capacity and as a result we’ve witnessed the last two summers where we’ve had constrained supply that’s resulted in price spikes.”
The pipeline might help stabilize gasoline prices in the region by adding a second source of supply for refined petroleum products. Currently, The Great Lakes region is dependent solely on pipelines running out of refineries in the Gulf Coast states such as Louisiana and Texas. But, Marathon-Ashland’s proposal also presents a potential environmental risk. The pipeline will cross 363 streams, 55 wetlands, and parts of three watersheds. For some, the prospect of a pipeline carrying gasoline and jet fuel through environmentally sensitive areas has sparked fears. Jane Ann Ellis is a founder and trustee of Crane Hollow…. a privately owned, dedicated state nature preserve in the path of the pipeline.
“If this pipeline would be built and if there was any kind of leak this would decimate the clean water that we have. It is easier to keep your drinking water clean than it is to clean it up afterwards. And it’s cheaper in the long run for the general public.”
Michael Daniels also opposes Marathon-Ashland’s project. He owns a country inn that attracts tourists from Ohio and surrounding states. He says many of his customers come to the region to hear chirping birds, babbling brooks, and to see the fall foliage. Daniels says both construction and operation of the pipeline will have a negative effect on his business.
“Certainly! Who would want to come as a tourist and be exposed to that kind of noise and intrusion into their experience? So, there’s no question that it will impact my business.”
But company spokesman Tim Aydt says the pipeline route through parts of a national forest and other environmentally sensitive areas is the best possible route.
“We wanted to avoid population centers. We wanted to avoid residential or commercial developments and we wanted to avoid flood plains where we could. So, when all of that was put into the mix we came up with the best route overall. Obviously it’s not the cheapest route because it’s not a straight line between two points. But, about 80 percent of the route follows existing utility corridors or those areas that are less prone to development.”
Marathon-Ashland says without the pipeline the Great Lakes could soon face shortages of gasoline, lines at the pump and greater fluctuations in gas prices. The tension between the company and pipeline opponents turns on the question of whether Marathon-Ashland will be required to submit an “environmental impact statement.” The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is expected to make that decision early this year following a recommendation from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Corps spokesman Steve Wright says there’s no question such a requirement will delay the project.
“That will take longer. You know they take varying lengths of time but certainly they can’t be done very quickly.”
Marathon-Ashland contends an environmental impact statement (EIS) is unnecessary. But, opponents of the plan say the EIS is critical since the pipeline puts so many streams and wetlands at risk for potential pollution.
For the Great Lakes radio Consortium I’m Tom Borgerding
Some environmental groups are calling the Army Corps of Engineers “arrogant” for a policy change that the environmentalists say will make it easier for developers to destroy wetland habitat. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham has the details:
Transcript
Some environmental groups are calling the Army Corps of Engineers “arrogant” for a policy change that the environmentalists say will make it easier for developers to destroy wetland habitat. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports.
Since the first Bush administration, federal agencies have tried to make sure that if a development destroyed wetlands, the developer had to create an equal amount of wetlands somewhere else. The goal was ‘no net loss of wetlands.’ Now, the Army Corps of Engineers has changed its policy through a newly issued guidance letter. Developers will only have to preserve existing wetlands somewhere else. or establish buffer strips along a waterway instead of creating replacement wetlands. Robin Mann is with the Sierra Club.
“Despite the fact that the Corps is denying it, we see this guidance letter as really, basically abandoning that national goal, that policy of ‘no net loss.’
Even with the ‘no net loss’ policy in place, an average of 58-thousand acres of wetland was lost each year. The environmental groups say a lot more wetlands will disappear because of the Army Corps of Engineers new policy. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Lester Graham.
Canada Geese take flight.
Photo by Wyman Meinzer, courtesy of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Canada Geese are about as common as the green lawns they like to hang out on. But at one time they’d almost disappeared from the region. Thanks to successful wildlife management efforts, the goose is back, and now the question is how best to manage a success story that some say has been too successful. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Dan Gunderson has more:
Transcript
Canada Geese are about as common as the green lawns they like to hang out on. But at one time they’d almost disappeared from the region. Thanks to successful wildlife management efforts, the goose is back, and now the question is how best to manage a success story that some say has been too successful. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Dan Gunderson has more.
In 30 years, the giant Canada goose was on the verge of extinction, but the species has made a comeback that amazes biologists. There were just about enough for a gaggle when humans stepped in to help in the late 1960’s, now numbering in the millions today, the goose is a wildlife management success story that won’t stop.
“We’ve spent millions and millions of dollars to bring the population back.
Now it’s high and it’s eating everything in sight.”
Standing on the edge of a waist high soybean field on his Minnesota farm, Chad Jetvig points to a slough about a quarter mile away. It’s obvious where geese feasted on tender young soybean plants early this summer, leaving large bare spots in the field.
Jetvig says he’s always accepted some crop loss from geese as a part of farming among the prairie potholes of western Minnesota, but he says the amount damage is no longer acceptable.
“I would say in the past two years in particular, but it’s been getting worse each year, we’ve started to see huge areas. Just on this one single farm at two hundred acres that’s over 40 thousand dollars right just out of our pocket. That’s a lot of money.”
And thousands of farmers in the Midwest and Northeast U.S. have similar stories.
This year and last, Chad Jetvig has gotten a permit to shoot geese eating his crops, but he says it’s an exercise in futility.
“We came out here and shot one time and the next time you even drive by they’re gone. They’d even know the color of the pickup. If this one blue pickup we’re using came around, they seen that thing, whoosh, they’re gone.”
Only to return as soon as the coast is clear. Those keen survival instincts are one reason for the goose population explosion. There’s also plentiful food provided by farmers like Chad Jetvig, and lots of wetland nesting sites.
There are an estimated 2 million giant Canada geese in the upper Midwest and Northeast that’s far more than biologists like Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, goose expert, Steve Maxson think is ideal.
“I think a lot of biologists are wondering just how high this population can go. It’s already exceeded their wildest dreams I think and it seems even in the face of intense hunting pressure to be increasing in most areas. I guess the bottom line is we just don’t know how high this population can get.”
Biologists rely on hunting to keep many wildlife populations in check, and the Canada goose harvest has steadily increased along with the population. But Maxson says simply allowing hunters to shoot more birds is not the answer. The birds quickly learn how to avoid hunters. Then there’s the eastern prairie goose that nests in northern Canada and migrates through many states in the region. The eastern prairie goose population is much smaller and less robust than the giant Canada, and biologists fear expanded hunting could destroy the species.
The U-S Fish and Wildlife Service draft environmental impact statement due out this fall will offer several population control alternatives. They range from no action, to targeted hunting in areas where geese are in conflict with humans, to extreme measures such as, destroying nests and eggs. Steve Wilds is the Fish and Wildlife Service regional migratory bird and Chief. He says it’s critical a workable plan come out of this process. If not, he fears future management decisions will be political, not biological.
Wilds says the future of the giant Canada goose is at stake.
“So that they’ll continue to be recognized as a tremendous, beautiful part of our natural landscape and yet not something that’s going to be doing so much damage people start thinking of them as vermin rather than really neat critters.”
The Fish and Wildlife plans to take a public input on its goose management plan early next year. Steve Wild says it will be at least a year before any final decision is made on how the Canada goose populations will be managed in the future. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Dan Gunderson.
A combine harvests soybeans in Minnesota.
Photo by Don Breneman.
Although it has been delayed by the terrorist attacks of September 11th, Congressional debate is still scheduled to begin this fall on legislation that will shape the nation’s farm policy for the next 5 to 10 years. Right now, the vast majority of subsidies go to farmers who grow commodity crops like corn and soybeans. That leaves out many small dairy and vegetable farmers throughout the Midwest. Environmentalists say a shift in farm program priorities would help those farmers and be a boon to the environment. In the first of a two-part series, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Losure visits a place that’s considered to be a success story in the nation’s conservation reserve program:
Transcript
Although it has been delayed by the terrorist attacks of September 11th, Congressional debate is still scheduled to begin this fall on legislation that will shape the nation’s farm policy for the next 5 to 10 years. Right now, the vast majority of subsidies go to farmers who grow commodity crops like corn and soybeans. That leaves out many small dairy and vegetable farmers throughout the Midwest. Environmentalists say a shift in farm program priorities would help those farmers and be a boon to the environment. In the first of a two-part
series, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Losure visits a place that’s considered to be a success story in the nation’s conservation reserve program:
When cattle buyer Del Wehrspann was growing up on an Iowa farm in the 1950’s and 60’s, he saw the floodplain of the Des Moines River plowed up and planted in crops. Wehrspann is a lifelong conservationist and avid fisherman. He watched, dismayed, as the rivers fish and wildlife languished. So in 1968 he moved north to the Minnesota River valley, where the bottomland was still unplowed.
“But then we lived here not very long and I seen the exact same things taking place that had taken place in Iowa for me when I was a boy. That was draining every last wetland, tearing out every last fence, plowing everything that could be plowed for agricultural production.”
But these days as Wehrspann drives along the Minnesota River, he sees something he never expected in his lifetime – the river’s bottomland is being restored. It’s happening because Wehrspann and other citizens in the valley helped convince the state and federal government to begin what’s known as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program. The program pays farmers an annual fee to take environmentally sensitive land out of cultivation. Now cattails, willows, and young cottonwoods grow on bottomland that just a few years ago was rows of corn and soybeans.
(sound of pontoon boat)
Already, Wehrspann has noticed changes on the river, where he often fishes from his pontoon boat. This spring when he floated past a field his neighbor has restored to a cattail marsh, the water running into the river was clear, not muddy with soil washing off a plowed field.
“This spring, the walleyes, they spawned. There was quite a few of them, the fish were here, nice fish. And for years, the Department of Natural Resources told us that we couldn’t have production, natural walleye production in this area because the water was too dirty.”
(Wahlspann putters downstream, past wood ducks, great blue herons,
Kingfishers, a black crowned night heron, and a soaring bald eagle.)
At a bend in the river, he beaches the boat and walks through land that was once diked and drained and is now a wetland. The mud is littered with freshwater mussel shells and crisscrossed with animal tracks.
“Like I say, this land is in production. It may not be in agricultural production, but as far as the deer, the other wildlife, the water quality, the aesthetics, it’s producing something. (Killdeer cry) that’s a killdeer.”
Under conservation programs similar to the one in the Minnesota River Valley, farmers nationwide have retired more than 33 million acres of environmentally sensitive land since 1985.
A farm bill amendment sponsored by Representatives Ron Kind of Wisconsin, Sherry Boehlert of New York and others would substantially increase spending for such programs to more than one quarter of the farm bill’s budget.
It’s not clear how well such proposals will fare…. but Tim Searchinger, senior attorney for the Washington DC based Environmental Defense, believes the time is right for a shift.
“It’s become increasingly obvious to people that these traditional farm programs leave out a large number of farmers. Nationwide, two-thirds of all the farmers don’t get any farm payments, and of the payments that are provided, two-thirds goes to the top largest ten percent.”
Searchinger says members of Congress from states like Wisconsin and New York where farmers receive relatively little in farm subsidies are starting to wake up to the inequities – especially as farm bill spending balloons.
He says congressmen from those states are increasingly supporting conservation programs. And in a recent boost for conservationists, a new report by the Bush administration proposes a similar shift from transitional subsidies to conservation programs.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mary Losure.
A Michigan Department of Natural Resources proposal to lease Great Lakes bottomlands for oil and gas development has prompted a lot of discussion regarding the risks and benefits of drilling near the Great Lakes. As Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Michael Barratt explains, those resources can be developed now in an environmentally safe manner:
Transcript
A Michigan Department of Natural Resources proposal to lease Great Lakes bottomlands for oil and gas development has prompted a lot of discussion regarding the risks and benefits of drilling near the Great Lakes. As commentator Michael Barratt reveals, those resources can be developed now in an environmentally safe manner.
People around the Great Lakes have seen quantum jumps in the price of energy within the last few months. Gasoline prices in Michigan for example are approaching $2.00/ gallon, natural gas prices have increased 40-60%, and propane prices have increased markedly.
Since Michigan only produces 4% of its crude oil demand and 30% of its natural gas demand, we need to find ways to both conserve and maintain our energy supply.
The Michigan Department of Natural Resources has proposed to lease land under the Great Lakes for the purpose of drilling wells from onshore locations. The proposed procedures require new wells to be located at least 1,500′ from the shoreline. They also require that sites be screened, and no drilling is to be permitted in dune areas, floodplains, or environmentally sensitive areas.
Additional wells drilled under Great Lakes waters may encounter significant reserves to help Michigan have a secure energy supply. Using a safe and proven technology known as directional drilling, it is possible to reach and produce these reserves with little to no effect on the surrounding areas. There have been 13 wells drilled under Great Lakes waters from onshore locations since 1979. Seven of those wells, which are still producing, have produced 439,000 barrels of oil and more than 17 billion cubic feet of gas. There have been no spills, accidents, or incidents associated with the wells since they have been drilled.
New wells drilled under Great Lakes waters, if drilling is allowed , could produce an additional 90 billion cubic feet of gas, and 2 million barrels of oil; enough to heat more than 1 million homes and fuel 157,500 cars for a year. We now have a window of opportunity to use existing infrastructure associated with the currently producing wells to develop some of the additional reserves under the Great Lakes. Drilling pads, roads, pipelines, and production facilities are in place that can be used to drill new wells under the Great Lakes.
Besides energy security, the people of Michigan benefit from royalties paid to the State of Michigan. That money is put into the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund to develop and extend parks, and to purchase wetlands and other environmentally sensitive areas. The seven wells currently producing have contributed more than $16,000,000 to the Fund. Additional wells drilled under the Great Lakes could contribute another $85,000,000-$100,000,000
Let’s develop the State’s Bottomland resources now in a safe and environmentally friendly way to ensure that Great Lakes waters and shorelines can be enjoyed by future generations and also to make sure we have the energy supplies here to maintain our quality of life.
This levy currently separates the biggest farm in
Illinois (on the left) from the floodwaters of the Illinois River (on the
right). The Nature Conservancy is planning to turn the 7,600 acre
farm into one of the biggest Midwest wetland restoration projects ever.
Lost wetlands are restored for a number of reasons. Sometimes, they replace a wetlands area lost because of construction or farming. Typically those projects are small in scope. Now a conservation group is looking to create an entire ecosystem in the Midwest through a massive wetland restoration program. The plan is garnering attention from scientists as a new model for how to return land to its natural state. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:
Transcript
Lost wetlands are restored for a number of reasons. Sometimes they replace a wetlands area lost somewhere else because of construction or agriculture. But typically these projects are small in scope. Now a conservation group is looking to create an entire ecosystem in the Midwest through a massive wetland restoration program. The plan is garnering attention from scientists as a new model for how to return land to its natural state. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports.
(Ambient sound – the farm)
Tractors are rolling across the Wilder farm in Central Illinois, tending to fields lined with rows of corn and soybeans. This plot of land is 76-hundrd acres, or nearly twelve square miles. It’s the biggest farm in the entire state. But it won’t be a farm for much longer. The Nature Conservancy has purchased the land, and hopes to make the area one of the biggest Midwest wetland restoration projects ever. The group hopes the Emiquon Wildlife Refuge will make improvements to the land ranging from creating a new stop for migrating birds, to improving the quality of the Illinois River that is the source of drinking water for hundreds of thousands of people. Joy Zedler is an Ecology Professor at the University of Wisconsin. She says the size of this project creates a unique opportunity to reintroduce extinct plants once native to the area.
“If you have a wetland the size of this table, and you want to restore an endangered species, very likely you wont be able to find the right conditions to support it. But if you have 7600 acres, somewhere in that site may well be the combination of conditions that can support that species.”
Zedler says bringing native plants back to the area can provide food and habitat for a variety of animals and insects that were once native to that region, and improve the health of the region’s ecosystem for miles in every. One major advantage Emiquon has is the entire farm is surrounded by a levy. That means one hole in the levy could allow the area to be a contained flood plain for the river. Rip Sparks is a professor at the University of Illinois. He says allowing that to happen has the potential to bring a wide variety of plants and animals back to the river area. That’s because it would create a seasonal flood plain.
“The spring flood lasts long enough that the organisms have adapted to utilize it for spawning and feeding areas. And the birds have used it as feeding areas as they make their migrations. So it seems very important that river be connected to the flood plain.”
But not everyone is excited about the plans to turn Emiquon into a wetland. Tom Edwards is an activist who has studied the Illinois River region for decades. He is one of several environmentalists that say all of the excitement about the project is mis-founded. Edwards says the waters of the nearby Illinois River are so polluted, that if one drop becomes part of the Emiquon site, all the talk of reintroducing native plant and animal species will become moot.
“Nothing on the Illinois River has any vegetation on it. It’s a toxic waste. The fish can hardly survive. If they let the river water in, it will create another mud hole. It’s not a way to cleanse the river, and we would lose a valuable asset for the future.”
Edwards says Emiquon can be a separate, stand alone lake that protects some wildlife and plants. But he says it will never be the grand experiment in wetland restoration that some claim it will be. Many scientists counter Edward’s argument by pointing out that wetlands can be excellent filters for pollutants, and improve the quality of nearby bodies of water. And the Nature Conservancy says it is aware of the challenges of creating a wetland so close to a less than healthy river. And that, says the Conservancy’s Michael Rueter, is what makes this site ideal. Because it’s enclosed by levies, whatever is done here can be reversed. If opening the site to the river causes problems, the levy can simply be closed up again, and something else can be tried.
“Any action that we take will be reversible. So we’re not taking down levies or lowering the heights of levies. Because we want to be able to reverse this and adapt as we learn more information.”
Rueter says one option would be to install a gate in the levy, so they could control the amount of water that comes into Emiquon. Scientists could than closely monitor the effect of adding River water to the site. Reuter says the Nature Conservancy hasn’t decided how it will approach restoring the site just yet. The group has time to think about it. Part of the purchase agreement gives the former owners the right to continue to farm the land for up to five more years. But when it does become a restoration project, it will likely have the attention of activists and researchers around all of the Midwest. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.
This levy currently separates the biggest farm in
Illinois (on the left) from the floodwaters of the Illinois River (on the
right). The Nature Conservancy is planning to turn the 7,600 acre
farm into one of the biggest Midwest wetland restoration projects ever.
A conservation group is planning a wetland restoration project that will be one of the biggest ever in the Midwest. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl has more:
Transcript
A conservation group is planning a wetland restoration project that will be one of the biggest ever in the Midwest. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Jonathan Ahl reports:
The Nature Conservancy has purchased the biggest farm in Illinois, and is planning to convert the land into a wetland. The seventy six hundred acre plot of land in Central Illinois is attracting attention from researchers from around the region. Joy Zedler is an Ecology professor at the University of Wisconsin. She says the project will be significant.
“That fact that it is large already puts it on the map. And the fact that we could experiement with reintroducing rare species and finding the conditions that facilitate their growth is exciting.”
The Nature Conservancy is facing some challenges with the project that is less than a half a mile from the Illinois River. Critics say the polluted waters of the river will make it nearly impossible to recreate a natural wetland. For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Jonathan Ahl.
Much of the industry in the nation’s mid-section relies on
shipments of raw materials on the Great Lakes. Great Lakes ports in the
U-S and Canada handle more than 200-million tons of material annually.
The Lakes are also a source of water and recreation for nearly a third
of
the nation’s population. But, during the last two years, water levels
have
been falling at a record breaking pace. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
A European plant called purple loosestrife is increasingly making
itself at home near lakes, wetlands, and meadows throughout the Great
Lakes region. That’s bad news for native plants that are pushed out by
the aggressive newcomer. But help could be on the way. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tracy Samilton reports on a program to
introduce a loosestrife-munching beetle:
