There is a concern that pharma-crops may contaminate food crops
(Photo courtesy of the USDA)
The Bush Administration wants to
put new rules in place before its term
ends. Rebecca Williams reports one group
is worried about a proposed rule they say
could leave doors open for drugs in our food:
Transcript
The Bush Administration wants to
put new rules in place before its term
ends. Rebecca Williams reports one group
is worried about a proposed rule they say
could leave doors open for drugs in our food:
The US Department of Agriculture recently proposed new rules about
genetically engineered crops. That includes crops grown to produce drugs.
It might be something like a human gene grown in rice, or a vaccine grown
in corn.
They’re being tested in the field now, and they’re often grown near regular
food crops.
Doug Gurian-Sherman is with the Union of Concerned Scientists. He says
there’s not enough oversight in the new rules.
“If it does take off and these things are grown year after year and widely, I
think under these kind of regulations the chances for contamination will be
you know, very good.”
He says a couple years ago, a grain grown for pig vaccine got mixed into
normal grain. It was caught just before going to market.
But Gurian-Sherman says these genetically engineered crops should be
grown indoors to prevent contamination of food crops.
Produce section of a supermarket in VA.
(Photo by Ken Hammond, courtesy of USDA)
More companies are importing organic
products from China and other countries. But
contaminated pet food, tainted toothpaste,
and unauthorized antibiotics in fish have been
imported to the U.S. from China. Now, some people are
concerned about organic foods from China. Julie
Grant reports:
Transcript
More companies are importing organic
products from China and other countries. But
contaminated pet food, tainted toothpaste,
and unauthorized antibiotics in fish have been
imported to the U.S. from China. Now, some people are
concerned about organic foods from China. Julie
Grant reports:
When you see that round USDA organic seal on a carton of
milk, boxed foods, or bananas , it means that on some farm,
somewhere, something like this happened:
(farm inspection sound)
Inspector: “All righty. Anything under the box on the far
right.”
Farmer: “That’s the burnout. Which I haven’t used for 3 or 4
years.”
An inspector walks around looking at the greenhouse, the
barn and the fields, in the greenhouse, and in the barn. He
works for an agency that’s accredited by the USDA to certify
farms as organic. He’s making sure nothing is happening on
the farm that’s prohibited by the National Organic Standards.
But small farms like this one are no longer the norm in
organics. Organic products have become a big business all
around the world.
So people are wondering… who inspects those farms?
(store sound)
Sheila Rombach is a buyer for a small natural foods store.
Like a lot of people, she’s a little nervous about the safety of
food coming from China. Last year’s pet food scare and
poisonous toothpaste are still fresh in many people’s minds.
Rombach’s customers pay a premium for ‘organic’ foods.
She wonders how the USDA can certify that farms all the
way in China are following organic rules.
“I guess it crossed mind because of all the negative publicity
about things manufactured in China. I want to be sure that
the items grown under the organic label are truly organic.”
It’s such a concern that one large health food chain, Trader
Joe’s, is taking all Chinese imports off its shelves. Trader
Joe’s plans to have Chinese garlic, ginger, and all other
single-ingredient foods out of its 300 stores this spring.
But the U.S. Department of Agriculture maintains if it says
organic, it’s truly organic. Barbara Robinson is chief
administrator of the USDA’s National Organic Program. She
says foreign products go through the same process as those
grown here.
“So, if the product is coming from India, or the product is
coming from Australia, and you want to market in the United States – then
you need a certifying agent who is accredited by us.”
Robinson says all certifying agents accredited by the USDA
should be enforcing the same organic rules. If a product has
that little round seal, Robinson says consumers can trust it
meets the U.S.’s National Organic Standards.
But enforcing the rules isn’t always that easy. The USDA is
having difficulty making sure those rules are consistently
applied on U.S. farms. So how can the agency be so
confident about farms in other countries?
One expert on Chinese agriculture and politics says that’s a
good question. Paul Thiers is a political science professor at
Washington State University who’s been visiting farms in
China since the early 1990s.
“There is some difficulty, I think, in expecting people from
outside of China to really get far enough in and understand
what’s going on in political and economic conditions of rural
China.”
Thiers says many Chinese farms are run by the local
government. Others are run by private managers with
peasant farmers working the land.
“In some places, peasant farmers who were purported to be
part of organic production, who were on land that was
certified, couldn’t tell me what organic was, had no
conception of different production standards. And all they
said was, ‘we just sell our product to the government’.”
Thiers says at that time, five or ten years ago, farmers were
probably using chemicals, even though they were selling
food labeled organic.
Thiers expects that China’s organic farming practices are
improving, though. He says people in Chinese cities are becoming
concerned about food safety and want to buy organics. But
the USDA has to rely on organic certifiers in China. And with
the rapid growth of organic farms, no one is sure they’re
actually meeting U.S. standards.
Thiers says there is one consolation. At least organic farms
are inspected by someone. Conventional farms don’t get
those kinds of visits from inspectors.
Some groups are looking for ways to reduce the damage to natural areas done by off-road vehicles. An organization representing off-road riders agrees that there should be rules for off-roading… but not complete bans on the recreational vehicles. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
reports:
Transcript
Some groups are looking for ways to reduce the damage to natural areas
done by off-road vehicles. An organization representing off-road riders
agrees that there should be rules for off-roading… but not complete bans
on the recreational vehicles. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester
Graham reports:
Off-road riding is a lot of fun for a lot of people, but some environmental
groups want off-road vehicles banned in many state and national parks.
For example, one study is looking at banning off-road vehicles from
some sand dunes on Lake Michigan because they damage rare plants.
Russ Ehnes is with the riders’ group the National Off-Highway Vehicle
Conservation Council.
“We all need to be sensitive when it comes to threatened and endangered
species and habitat, but we need to also find ways to provide
opportunities instead of just eliminating opportunities.”
Ehnes concedes as the number of off-road riders has increased, damage
to natural areas has worsened. He says it’s up to the park managers,
though, to find a way for everyone, including riders, to enjoy the parks
and preserve the important habitat.
Environmentalists say the Bush administration is ignoring the government’s own scientists in new proposed air pollution rules. The rules reject advice to further restrict soot and other fine particle pollution. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Environmentalists say the Bush administration is ignoring the
government’s own scientists in new proposed air pollution rules. The
rules reject advice to further restrict soot and other fine particle pollution.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Environmental Protection Agency’s own staff scientists and the
independent Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee both found the
EPA needed to issue more restrictive rules regarding fine particulate
matter, that’s soot emitted from sources such as diesel trucks and coal-
burning power plants.
After reviewing 2000 studies linking particulate matter to asthma, heart
attacks, and early death for people with heart and lung disease, the
scientists concluded that standards set by the Clinton administration in
1997 did not go far enough to help reduce health risks. Despite that, the
Bush EPA appointees basically plan to keep restrictions where they are.
The power plant industry indicates further restrictions would be a
financial burden to it, and provide only marginal public health benefits.
Environmentalists say the Bush administration’s proposed rules ignore
mountains of medical research showing this kind of air pollution causes
serious health problems.
A proposed change to an air pollution control rule has electric utilities applauding and environmentalists crying foul. The proposal comes from the Environmental Protection Agency and will make changes to the so-called “New Source Review” rules. The rules cover utility companies that make improvements to their coal-fired power plants. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Fred Kight has the story:
Transcript
A proposed change to an air pollution control rule has electric
utilities applauding and environmentalists crying foul. The proposal
comes from the Environmental Protection Agency and will make changes to
the so-called ‘New Source Review’ rules. The rules covers utility
companies that make improvements to their coal-fired power plants.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Fred Kight has the story:
The provision in question requires the utilities to install new and
expensive controls if the improvements result in increased air
pollution. The question is – how do you determine if there’s more
pollution?
Should it be measured as an annual total? – the current method – or by
the hour? – the proposed method.
Melissa McHenry is a spokeswoman for American Electric Power, one of
the biggest power producers in the nation…
“We support the EPA’s proposal because it provides clarity. It also
makes the rule consistent with the emissions test for other Clean Air
Act rules.”
But environmentalists claim the draft regulation would make it easier
for plants to avoid installing pollution controls.
One clean air advocate says the proposed EPA rule would lead to tens of
thousands of premature deaths by 2025.
The EPA says tighter controls are coming for hundreds
of companies that burn hazardous waste. But the changes didn’t come without a fight. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
The EPA says tighter controls are coming for hundreds of companies that burn hazardous waste, but the changes didn’t come without a fight. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
The new regulations apply to large boilers, incinerators, cement kilns, and other devices that burn hazardous waste. The EPA says it’s trying to reduce emissions of several toxic pollutants.
A few years ago, environmentalists won a legal fight to force tougher controls than the Clinton Administration had originally proposed. Earthjustice attorney Jim Pew says the EPA was told to do its job right.
“Now EPA really hasn’t done it right this time, but it’s done it better, and as the result of the work of environmental groups, we’re seeing less toxic pollution going into peoples’ homes and schools and communities.”
A group representing cement kiln owners says it’s generally satisfied with the new EPA rules, but warns that some kilns may have trouble reaching the tougher targets. The case could wind up back in court.
A new report says that sewage systems respond inadequately to sewage spills. (Photo by M. Vasquez)
According to a new report, from an environmental advocacy group, city sewer systems around the Great Lakes are failing to meet federal Clean Water Act standards. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Steve Carmody
reports:
Transcript
According to a new report, from an environmental advocacy group,
city sewer systems around the Great Lakes are failing to meet federal
Clean Water Act standards. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Steve
Carmody reports:
The Environmental Integrity Project analyzed data from federal, state and
other sources to compile its review of municipal waste water systems in the
region.
EIP’s Michelle Merkel says researchers found most municipal waste
water sewage systems failed to meet standards to prevent untreated sewage
spills; failed to adequately report the spills when they occurred; or had
inadequate plans to prevent such spills in the future.
Merkel adds, due to a lack of state and federal oversight, the problem may
actually be worse:
“The true extent of the problem is really unknown because the states just aren’t doing a good job of tracking it and making the cities track it.”
To address the problem, The EIP wants the EPA and state regulators to
enforce combined sewer overflow rules, require public notification of spills
within 24 hours and arrange for more federal-state financing for future
sewer improvement projects.
Shelley Miller stands by one of the markers in her backyard that shows where a pipeline is located. Miller has two pipelines in her backyard and two others just beyond her property line in the neighbor's yard. (Photo by Tom Weber)
A pipeline marker in Miller’s backyard. (Photo by Tom Weber)
Shelley Miller’s backyard in St. Peters, Missouri. Miller has been told she'll need to remove her shed to make way for emergency access to the fuel pipeline running underneath her yard. (Photo by Tom Weber)
There are thousands of miles of pipelines in the U.S. constantly shuttling gas, oil, and other fuels from state to state. And although you might not realize the pipes might be under your property, the companies that own them have to keep the land above the pipes clear in case of an emergency. And over the past year, residents in some communities have been told they need to dig up trees and remove sheds to keep the path clear. In some cases, it’s more than just an inconvenience. It’s costly. But the homeowners aren’t all mad at the pipeline companies. They’re mad at the people who built their houses. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tom Weber reports:
Transcript
There are thousands of miles of pipelines in the U.S., constantly shuttling gas, oil, and other fuels
from state to state. And although you might not realize the pipes might be under your property,
the companies that own them have to keep the land above the pipes clear in case of an
emergency. And over the past year, residents in some communities have been told they need to
dig up trees and remove sheds to keep the path clear. In some cases, it’s more than just an
inconvenience. It’s costly. But the homeowners aren’t all mad at the pipeline companies. They’re
mad at the people who built their houses. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Tom Weber
reports:
Pipelines are a crucial link in the trip gasoline makes from the refinery to your car. They
crisscross the country, but most people don’t notice them.
Shelley Miller didn’t notice for years, even though she sleeps less than 30 feet from four of them
under her and her neighbors’ yard.
They carry gasoline, natural gas, heating oil and jet fuel.
In fact, more than 20-thousand gallons of fuel will race under Miller’s yard in St. Louis suburb of
St. Peters, Missouri by the time this story is over. She and her husband knew the pipes were there
when they bought the house… but they thought they were used for water or sewage.
The Millers didn’t realize they were wrong until last year… when Explorer Pipeline Company
came to make sure the land above its pipe was easily accessible.
For Miller, that meant two trees had to be removed, along with a shed that had become her
backyard’s equivalent of a kitchen junk drawer.
“We had planned to re-side our home. So we have siding we purchased one bit at a time to get to
that point. We don’t know where we’re going to put that. The lawn tractors, where we going to
put that? Where you going to move all this stuff?”
But that’s a small price to pay to make sure pipeline crews can get in fast if there’s an emergency.
Fred Low is a lawyer for Explorer Pipeline. He says companies like his have made an extra effort
in recent years to clear more urban or developed areas that have pipelines…
“In our industry, there have been some accidents in the past. There’s been national attention and
we want to do a better job. And to do a better job of running our pipeline we have to do a better
job maintaining our pipeline.”
And Miller understands that. She’s not mad at the companies because the pipelines were there
first. What upsets her is that 35 years ago, the city allowed the homes to be built so close to the
pipes.
More than 160 homes in St. Peters, Missouri have at least one pipeline in their backyard. But
Alderman Jerry Hollingsworth says it’s hard to blame the city.
“There were no guidelines for a city on how close to build a home next to a pipeline 35 years
ago. So somebody came in and said, ‘I’m going to build some houses in here’ and the city said
‘okay!'”
And many towns across the country did the same thing. Todd Swanstrom teaches Public Policy
at Saint Louis University. He says more and more suburbs might have to deal with pipelines as
they keep growing. Adding a subdivision or even a strip mall sounds nice if it adds to tax
revenue. But there’s also safety to think about…
“If there were an explosion and people lost their lives from a pipeline, I think it would be a very
different situation. As it is, it seems to be one of those issues that has largely gone under the
radar.”
But even if every growing suburb in the U.S. had rules for building on pipelines, there could still
be accidents… or deaths.
Ivel, Kentucky, San Jose, California and Whitehall, Pennsylvania are among communities where
pipelines have exploded in the past few years.
But Explorer Pipelines’ Fred Low says overall, pipeline companies have had an impressive safety
record.
“Being next to a pipeline isn’t necessarily that bad. There are literally millions of people who live
by pipelines. And we will not let structures be built on our easements, so that’s why we want to
keep them visible so we can find out if we’re being encroached upon.”
Since the St. Peters pipelines were laid in 1971, the city’s population has exploded and expanded
along the pipelines.
For Shelley Miller… her efforts now focus on raising awareness for others. She and her neighbors
have organized a group that pushes cities and towns to enact better rules for how land around the
pipes is developed, and how people are told of the lines before they buy a house.
St. Peters now has a law restricting development around pipelines. But that only does so much
for Miller as she goes to bed every night just a few feet from all that gasoline.
“When we hear a loud boom, yeah, we sit up in bed. We think about it. There’s a risk with
everything you do in life, but when you have to live with it on a 24/7 basis and you don’t know
what the next minute’s gonna bring, it stays on your mind.”
The common practice of throwing the little ones back could be harming future fish populations. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Christina Shockley reports:
Transcript
The common practice of throwing the little ones back could be harming future fish populations. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Christina Shockley reports:
Anglers and commercial fisheries are often only allowed to take fish that are larger than a certain size. So the smaller fish are left to reproduce. And researchers say that means their offspring will also be smaller, and not as healthy.
David Conover is a marine scientist at Stony Brook University. He says the larger fish are vital to the overall health of their species.
“The eggs that these big, old females produce tend to be of higher quality. The egg diameters may be a little larger, the yolk that is supplied to the eggs seems to be more rich, the larvae hatch at a larger size, they have a higher survival.”
Conover says fish populations can be harmed in as little as three or four generations. And it can take much longer for a population to rebound – if it can at all.
He says possible solutions could include different rules that protect larger fish, and new limits on where fish can be harvested.
Life in the suburbs is idyllic to some people... (Photo by Bon Searle)
...and many rats, now that the sewers have been flooded. (Photo by Tamara Bauer)
Unusually heavy rains this summer are partly to blame
for rats pouring out of the sewers in droves all over the country, and the nasty vermin are relocating to some of the most pristine
neighborhoods. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Joyce
Kryszak explains what caused the rat invasion and
what’s being done to evict them:
Transcript
Unusually heavy rains this summer are partly to blame for rats pouring out of the sewers
in droves all over the country. And the nasty vermin are relocating to some of the most
pristine neighborhoods. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Joyce Kryszak explains what
caused the rat invasion and what’s being done to evict them:
Piercing blue autumn skies and billowing white clouds drift across the chimneys of this modest,
but perfectly manicured suburb. There aren’t even many leaves crunching under foot. Town workers
have already come and vacuumed them all away. But there’s a nasty little secret scurrying under
the porches and behind the garden sheds in this Western New York town. County Sanitation Chief
Peter Tripi takes us for a peek.
“Can you see the teeth marks here? That’s actually rat gnaw marks. And there’s the garbage bag.
And that’s what we found when we went to this property.”
Now, you might be thinking that we trudged through derelict grass and scattered debris to find
these rat clues. Nope. This is a gorgeous, manicured yard – with not a blade of grass out of
place. But Tripi says rats aren’t choosy.
“You would never think by looking side to side that there would be a rat problem in this yard.
Doesn’t matter what neighborhood you live in, or how much money you’ve got. There’s no difference.
They just like your food.”
And you’d be surprised where rats can find food. A garbage can left even briefly uncovered, a
neglected bird feeder, uhhh… dog feces… and even a compost pile.
“Absolutely. This is a rat condo. It’s a grass-clipping compost pile that basically housed rats
to go a hundred yard radius all the way around to the different houses.”
Tripi says rats had to get creative with their housing. A summer of extremely heavy rains drove
the out of the sewers and into some previously rat-free neighborhoods. And with the West Nile
virus killing off millions of birds, the rats have less competition for the food they’re finding
above ground. The consequence is a virtual rat infestation all the way from New York and Illinois
to Virginia, Michigan and L.A. In Kenmore, there have been four thousand rat complaints – nearly
double last year.
(Sound of garbage truck)
Of course, none of this is news to the garbage collectors. They see the problem up close and
personal. Twenty-year veteran Louie Tadaro says this past summer is the worst he’s ever seen.
“Across the street there’s an alleyway and there had to be like ten of them in there, And we
started chasing them with garbage cans trying to kill them, but we couldn’t. By the time we
got there they just split.”
The problem is, they don’t split for long. Vector Control Chief Tripi says now that the rats
have relocated from the sewers to upscale accommodations, they kind of like it.
“And what that means is that they want to live with us. They want to be near our garbage and
our bird feeders. The problem with that is that rats carry diseases.”
We all know about stuff like typhus and the bubonic plague. But there are emerging diseases,
such as a pet-killer called Leptospiroris. It’s killing dogs all across the country. Tripi
says they need to get rid of the rats before the disease starts spreading to humans. So, his
team is taking the rats on, one yard at a time.
Tripi and his Vector control team set rat traps, they fill bait boxes with poison, and – when
they have to – they issue citations to residents who don’t heed the town’s new “rat control rules.” Covered garbage cans only. Clear away all brush. Clean up scattered bird seed and dog feces. Slowly, the rules seem to be working.
(sound of Tripi looking into rat trap)
Still Tripi says it’s mostly educational warfare. And he says now – heading into winter – is the
best time to nip the problem. If the rats get cozy, not only will they stay, they will multiply.
Fully nourished, one adult rat can breed up to sixty baby rats a year.
“The adult rat can live on a little bit of food, but he can’t procreate unless he has a lot of
food source. And they can’t live through the winter unless they’re warm and fattened up.”
So now is the time to – quite literally – put a lid on it. Keep those garbage cans covered, unless
you want some uninvited furry guests this winter, and many, many more come spring.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Joyce Kryszak.
There is a concern that pharma-crops may contaminate food crops (Photo courtesy of the USDA)
