Adult emerald ash borer (Photo by David Cappaert, Michigan State University, courtesy of the Michigan Department of Agriculture)
There might be a new weapon to use against a
destructive pest. Rebecca Williams reports the emerald
ash borer has killed more than 30 million ash trees in
eight states and Ontario:
Transcript
There might be a new weapon to use against a
destructive pest. Rebecca Williams reports the emerald
ash borer has killed more than 30 million ash trees in
eight states and Ontario:
No one’s been able to stop the tiny green beetle from killing trees. But
officials are hoping a new insecticide will help.
Researchers at Michigan State University ran trials for one year with a
chemical called Tree-age. In those tests, the insecticide killed all of the
beetles. The state of Michigan has approved the insecticide for use on ash
trees. Indiana, Ohio and West Virginia are also considering it.
Jim Bowes is with the Michigan Department of Agriculture. He says the
emerald ash borer probably can’t be stopped, but the insecticide might
slow the beetle’s spread.
“Nobody here and I don’t think anybody in the federal government at this
point is talking about eradication. I think everybody is talking about how
are we going to coexist?”
Bowes says the insecticide might be able to save trees in your yard, if
the infestation is caught early enough.
Power plants take in a lot of cooling water. Fish and other aquatic life are sucked into intake pipes and die. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Politicians extended Daylight Saving Time to save energy, but critics say it’s not worked other places. (Photo by Lester Graham)
Hundreds of electric power plants might have to find alternate
methods of cooling in the future. As Tracy Samilton reports, a federal
appeals court judge says the plants are killing too many fish:
Transcript
Hundreds of electric power plants might have to find alternate
methods of cooling in the future. As Tracy Samilton reports, a federal
appeals court judge says the plants are killing too many fish:
For electric power plants located near water, it’s cheap and efficient
to run lots of water through the plants for cooling. But untold
numbers of fish and other aquatic life are killed in the process.
Eddie Scher is a spokesman for the environmental group Waterkeeper
Alliance. He says overall, the industry might kill a trillion fish or
more each year.
“It’s funny that we sit around and talk about other
problems with our fisheries – there are other problems with our
fisheries – but – this is big one!”
A federal appeals court recently ordered the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to change its rules regarding cooling systems, and to
place fish first and costs to the industry second. The electric power
industry says new cooling systems could cost millions per plant, and
instead, they should be allowed to restock fish to replace the ones
they’ve killed.
A single wind turbine can change air currents, creating dangerous winds for birds and other airborne wildlife. (Photo by Michael Tyas)
Monitoring radar and thermal imaging for signs of migrating birds or putting sensors on turbines are some ways to lessen a turbine's impact on birds.
(Photo by David Orsborne)
Wind energy is one of the fastest growing sources of new electricity in the United States. For some environmentalists, that’s
good news. Wind turbines don’t spew smoke into the air. There’s no nuclear by-product. But there is an environmental risk. To see it, you have to view the wind turbines through the eyes of a bird.
The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer has more:
Transcript
Wind energy is one of the fastest growing sources of new electricity in the United States.
For some environmentalists, that’s good news. Wind turbines don’t spew smoke into the
air. There’s no nuclear byproduct. But there is an environmental risk. To see it, you
have to view the wind turbines through the eyes of a bird. The GLRC’s Dustin Dwyer
has more:
Chandler Robbins has spent a lot of time studying how birds kill themselves. He says he
would go out on windy nights to the Washington Monument in Washington, D.C. He’d
stand at the bottom of the 555 foot tall obelisk and watch the birds at the top:
“Just as they get to the tower, they just go around the edge of it and bang, the turbulence
from the winds going around the tower, sweeps those birds against the tower, and they’re
killed.”
Speaking at a conference, Robbins tells the crowd he once watched more than 500 birds
slam into the monument in one night, and that monument is standing still. Now imagine
wind turbines, some of them about as tall as the Washington Monument, with spinning
blades that reach nearly a football field in diameter.
Alex Hoar is with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. He says a single turbine can now
change air currents for three acres around the turbine itself:
“So, if you put up a hundred turbines, the blades are sweeping 300 acres. So, that’s a large
space. And what we don’t know is when are birds and bats at risk.”
We don’t know because no one has really studied it. Both Alex Hoar and Chandler
Robbins say scientists know a lot about where birds take off and where they land. They
know about migration patterns, but they don’t know about what birds do, or where they
go while they’re in the air.
So, with more wind farms being built across the country, it’s not clear what affect they
might have on bird populations, but some suspect it won’t be good. Peter Kailing works
with an environmental consulting company. He recently did an environmental impact
study for a new 47 hundred acre commercial wind farm in Michigan. He says scientists
can learn a lot from the wind farms that have already been built. He says the ones that
have done the most damage to wildlife have a few things in common:
“The turbine was in a narrow valley, or a mountain-pass, or on the edge of a large
water body with steep wooded cover that was used by migrating songbirds, there’s almost
always a topographical association.”
Weather also plays a role. Peter Kailing and others say that birds tend to avoid cloud
banks by flying under them. That could put them in the path of turbine blades. So, one
way to limit damage would be to shut the turbines down on cloudy days.
Chandler Robbins says better technology could also limit damage. He says turbine blades
could be equipped with sensors:
“If a bird or a bat collided with that blade, it would set up enough vibration so that the
blade could be feathered temporarily to avoid other birds striking until the immediate
problem is over.”
Feathering essentially means that you twist the angle of the blade so that wind passes
over it, rather than pushing the blade into a spin. That way, birds aren’t sucked into it.
It’s basically the turbine’s braking system. Some say you don’t even need a sensor on the
turbine. They say engineers could monitor radar and thermal imaging. That would tell
them if any migrating birds are in the area, and if they are, feather the blades.
Of course, the absolute safest solution in the short term might be just to stop building
wind farms, but you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who thinks that’s a good idea.
Most seem to realize that any way of making electricity will have some impact on the
environment. The question is what can be done with each of them to minimize the risk.
With wind energy, that work is just getting started.
Some states and Native American tribes in the Upper Midwest
say they’re looking forward to taking over management of their gray wolf population. That’s if a new federal plan to de-list the wolf as an endangered or threatened species becomes law. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
Some states and Native American tribes in the Upper Midwest say they’re
looking forward to taking over management of their gray wolf
population. That’s if a new federal plan to de-list the wolf as an
endangered or threatened species becomes law. The GLRC’s Chuck
Quirmbach reports:
The federal government says the grey wolf population in Minnesota,
Michigan and Wisconsin combined is roughly 4,000. That’s large enough
for the Interior Department to recommend letting the states take over management
of the wolves. State or tribal officials could eventually allow
individuals to get permits to shoot wolves that are killing livestock.
Or, the states could even propose wolf hunting seasons. But a group
that has worked to increase the number of gray wolves across the U.S.
wants no hunting allowed.
Nina Fascione is with Defenders of Wildlife.
“This is a population that’s still fragile, even if it is technically
recovered under the auspices of the Endangered Species Act.”
The Interior Department says it would take a close look at wolf kill
projections before going along with any hunting plan. Public hearings
on the proposal to de-list the gray wolf as endangered or threatened
will take place this spring.
Some populations of gray wolves could be taken off the endangered species list. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is expected to issue proposed new rules for gray wolves in the upper Great Lakes region in the next week or so. We have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tracy Samilton:
Transcript
Some populations of grey wolves could be taken off the endangered
species list. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is expected to issue
proposed new rules for gray wolves in the upper Great Lakes region in
the next week or so. We have more from the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Tracy Samilton:
The growth of the grey wolf population in the Great Lakes area is good
or bad, depending on who you talk to. Wolves help control deer herds,
but they also prey on livestock.
Adrien Wydeven is with the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources. He says in extreme cases, states might want to let farmers
who’ve had problems shoot wolves they catch in the act of killing
livestock.
“And we could consider the possibility of a public harvest of members of
general public applying for permits to trap or hunt wolves in limited
areas.”
There will be a 90-day public comment period before the delisting of
Great Lakes wolves is adopted. It will apply mainly to wolves in
Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. Each state will also have to adopt
its own wolf management plan.
Gray wolves are listed as endangered in most states. (Photo courtesy of the Wisconsin Fish and Wildlife Service)
The Humane Society has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the permits two states use to kill problem wolves. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
The Humane Society has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the permits two states use to kill problem wolves. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Wisconsin and Michigan have had programs to euthanize gray wolves
that are destroying livestock. But in January, a federal court returned
the wolves to endangered status and halted the two states from
killing problem wolves.
A couple months later, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued new permits for Wisconsin and Michigan. But Humane Society attorney Patricia Lane says federal officials didn’t allow enough public input.
“They basically issued these permits under the table without any notice.”
Lane says the lack of public debate sets a bad precedent.
But the Fish and Wildlife Service says Wisconsin and Michigan were
told they could resume killing problem wolves, because the new
permits were similar to ones issued in the past.
A new study states that it may take longer than previously thought for a lake to recover from phosphorus buildup. (Photo by Jere Kibler)
A new study suggests the build-up of phosphorus in lakes may cause problems for hundreds of years. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach
reports:
Transcript
A new study suggests the build-up of phosphorus in lakes may cause problems
for hundreds of years. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach
reports:
Many farmers and other landowners use phosphorus-rich fertilizers on their property, but when the chemical runs off into lakes and streams, it can lead to algae blooms, depletion of oxygen, and fish
kills.
New research says it can take decades or hundreds of years for phosphorus to cycle out of a watershed. University of Wisconsin – Madison Professor Stephen Carpenter did the study. He says the effects won’t be as long-lasting if more phosphorus controls are put in place.
“For example we could develop more buffer strips, restore more wetlands, move point sources away from streams and lakes and maybe even innovate new technologies for keeping phosphorus on the
land.”
Farm groups say many of their members are trying to reduce soil erosion and chemical runoff. Carpenter says that’s true, but he says in some watersheds, much stronger action is needed.
Cormorant populations have risen exponentially from their previously dismal numbers. (Photo courtesy of the NOAA)
Across the Great Lakes region, the recovery of the cormorant
is booming. But some anglers and resort owners think the cormorants are eating too many of the fish that people like to eat. In some areas, wildlife managers have resorted to killing cormorants on popular fishing lakes. In one case, critics say there’s not enough evidence to justify the killing. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:
Transcript
Across the Great Lakes region the recovery of the cormorant is booming. But some anglers and resort owners think the cormorants are eating too many of the fish that people like to eat. In some areas, wildlife managers have resorted to killing cormorants on popular fishing lakes. In one case, critics say there’s not enough evidence to justify the killing. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:
Larry Jacobson is the third generation in his family to run the Hiawatha Beach Resort on Leech Lake, about two hundred miles north of Minneapolis. Three years ago, on fishing opener weekend, all of his twenty-one cabins were full. This year, he had no guests. Jacobson says the word has spread that fishing is down on Leech Lake. He blames the cormorants. The birds nest on a small island in the south end of the lake. Eight years ago, there were fifty nests; last year, there were two thousand five hundred.
“The cormorants eat about a pound fish a day. The way the population was just exploding out there, you could see writing was on the wall, that this was really going to make dramatic impact.”
Jacobson says his guests are still catching big walleye, but the smaller, pan-sized walleye are getting hard to find.
There are several reasons why the walleye population might be down, but Jacobson and other business owners blame it on the cormorants, and they’ve asked the Department of Natural Resources to do something about the birds.
“Leech needs to be maintained as high quality fishery. There’s such an economic impact to the area from walleyes, that if you don’t maintain it that way, everyone’s going to be suffering.”
(Sound of boat motor)
Resource officials are responding to the resort owners’ concerns. The Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe owns the island. John Ringle is wildlife manager for the tribe.
“Okay we’re headed right at Little Pelican Island right now.”
Little Pelican Island is about three acres of sand and scruffy shrubs. Hundreds of cormorants cover the shore. Ringle says they fish out here in the open waters of Leech Lake.
“They’re omnivorous so they’re eating all sorts of different varieties of fish. Right now they’re probably eating large numbers of perch.”
Ringle is working with state and federal agencies to reduce the number of cormorants nesting here, eating fish, and crowding out other birds, such as the endangered common tern.
Normally, cormorants are a federally protected bird, just like eagles. That’s because they were almost wiped out by the insecticide DDT before it was banned in 1973. But a new rule allows resource officials to harass and even kill cormorants where they’re damaging other wildlife.
This summer, workers are sitting in hunting blinds on Little Pelican Island, shooting cormorants. They use air rifles to make as little noise as possible, so the other cormorants aren’t spooked away.
So far, they’ve killed more than two thousand birds. They plan to leave about five hundred nesting pairs alive. Ringle says nobody’s happy about shooting cormorants, but he says he thinks it’s necessary.
RINGLE: “My philosophy is that as mankind utilizes the resource, we have to manage them, we’re not in finite supply.”
HEMPHILL: “Do you think we know enough to manage them?”
RINGLE: “Not really. I think the public is demanding action prior to any conclusive study being conducted.”
And that’s a big problem for Francie Cuthbert. She’s a professor and cormorant researcher at the University of Minnesota. Cuthbert says the agencies that want to cut down the cormorant population skipped an important part of the management process: finding out what’s actually happening on Leech Lake.
“They’re really being driven by complaints from citizens and resort owners who are concerned about local economics, and who just don’t like the birds; they’re afraid of the numbers. If we responded to all natural resources conflicts this way, we’d be in a state of chaos.”
Cuthbert says even with the cormorants’ dramatic comeback since the days of DDT, there still aren’t as many as there were a hundred years ago. She says rather than kill cormorants, wildlife officials should try to boost the number of fish.
The state of Minnesota is working on that. It’s stocking Leech Lake with walleye for the first time this year. Conservation officials are studying some of the birds they killed to find out what they’re eating. And the state is also limiting what size of walleye anglers can catch so the fish can recover.
That makes resort owners like Larry Jacobson nervous, because he says a lot of anglers don’t like the limits. But at least he’s glad someone’s doing something.
“The fishery is a business, there’s no question about that. If you want to sustain our economy in this area, you’ve got to manage the lake.”
Workers will continue shooting cormorants occasionally through the summer. And the control effort could continue. Experts say it’ll take several years for the fish to recover enough to draw anglers back to the lake.
Beech bark disease often causes the tree's bark to become scaly. (Photo courtesy of Michigan DNR)
Researchers might have a partial solution to the problem of beech bark disease. The disease has killed millions of beeches in the northeast and is advancing on the woodlands of the Midwest. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tracy Samilton has this report:
Transcript
Researchers might have a partial solution to the problem
of beech bark disease. The disease has killed millions of beeches
in the Northeast and is advancing on the woodlands of the Midwest.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tracy Samilton has this report:
Beech bark disease happens when an insect infests beech trees. Then the
trees are killed or crippled by an opportunistic fungus. Where the
disease has struck, researchers found one to five percent of the trees had
natural resistance to the insect.
Jennifer Cook is a USDA Forest Service researcher.Her experiments found that seeds from two resistant parent trees produced progeny that are also resistant. That could set the stage
for reforestation and even pro-active plantings.
“People can plant them before the disease gets there and
therefore lessen the impact on their forest lands.”
Cook says if you’ve got a big beautiful beech tree you want to save, you
can scrub the tree’s bark with insecticidal soap once a year. Of course
it would be impossible to scrub every beech tree in the forests.
As wolf populations are increasing, an old question arises: whether or not to allow wolf hunting. (Photo courtesy of the USGS)
In 2003, federal protections for the gray wolf in many parts of the country were downgraded. But last January, a federal district court in Oregon struck down that decision. In this region, the court ruling meant that wildlife officials lost the legal authority to kill problem wolves. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Bob Butz thinks these courtroom battles are delaying the inevitable… and that hunters should have a hand in managing wolves:
Transcript
In 2003, federal protections for the gray wolf in many parts
of the country were downgraded. But last January, a federal district
court in Oregon struck down that decision. In this region, the court
ruling meant that wildlife officials lost the legal authority to kill
problem wolves. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Bob Butz thinks these courtroom battles are delaying the inevitable… and that hunters should have a hand in managing wolves:
Today over half the entire wolf population of the continental United States can be found right here in the Upper Midwest. Around 3,000 in Minnesota. Roughly 800 more split evenly between Michigan and Wisconsin.
Some biologists think that Michigan’s wolf population might actually double within the next decade.
So why are so many people acting as if wolves in these parts are still teetering on the brink of extinction? Why this push for stronger federal protection when is seems what we really should start thinking about is how we plan to keep wolf populations responsibly in check?
With every new courtroom delay, I’m beginning to understand that for some people no amount of wolves will ever be enough. But very soon some judge is also going to figure that out, and finally wolves will be taken completely off the federal list of endangered animals. Then it will be up to the states to manage them.
Yet right now no one is talking about how we’re going to do that. Or where the money to sustain a healthy management program will come from – all because of a dirty little word – hunting.
Wolves… hunting. Remember in public to duck and cover when you say that.
But for the sake of the wolf, somebody needs to start talking about managing them as a big game species. Up until the latest court ruling, some government trappers had a fulltime job killing an increasingly number of nuisance wolves.
Minnesota officials are killing an average of a hundred and fifty wolves every year. In Wisconsin and Michigan each they kill a couple dozen more. Why are these wolves dying for nothing? If biologists used hunters to control the population, each wolf taken out of the system could result in money,lots of it, necessary for managing the species.
While most state biologists sit on the sidelines apparently without a plan, some people are taking matters into their own hands… killing the wolves illegally. In the Upper Midwest, poaching has reached levels unheard of a decade ago.
The reasons for this are simple: As one biologist told me, when an animal becomes too prolific it becomes devalued. As wolves make more and more trouble for farmers, ranchers, and locals, people are starting to wonder where all this is headed.
If brought into the management loop, hunters could easily outshine courtroom environmentalists as the wolf’s biggest hero and financial benefactor. Think of the giant Canada goose, believed to be extinct in North America until their rediscovery in 1965.
And how about all those shrub-eating, bumper bending whitetail deer? Call it tough love, but if anything when hunters get behind an animal recent history proves that the species will flourish.
But first biologists need to come up with a plan that gives the public a stake in helping with the long-term survival of the wolf. Wolves might be endangered elsewhere in the U.S., but not here. It’s time for leadership, time for a vision. Time for game managers to actually get out there and manage. It’s time for biologists to stop playing wait-and-see and, in the spirit of the wolf—for the sake of the wolf—get out in front of this issue and start leading the pack.
Host tag: Bob Butz is a hunter and author of the book “Beast of Never, Cat
of God: The Search for the Eastern Puma.” He lives in northern Michigan.
Adult emerald ash borer (Photo by David Cappaert, Michigan State University, courtesy of the Michigan Department of Agriculture)
