Rural Voters Want Clean Water

  • Polls show that farmers do support the Clean Water Act and other government regulations to prevent water pollution. (Photo by Mark Brush)

A new survey finds a majority of rural voters believe the federal
government has not done enough to protect water quality. Rebecca
Williams reports:

Transcript

A new survey finds a majority of rural voters believe the federal
government has not done enough to protect water quality. Rebecca
Williams reports:


The survey found 55% of voters – more than half – said the government
has not done enough to stop water pollution. About a quarter of the
people polled thought regulations had gone too far.


Joan Mulhern is an attorney with Earthjustice. The environmental group
commissioned the survey:


“And the purpose of that was to test this notion of whether or not it
was true that farmers and other voters in rural, agriculturally-
dependent communities do not support the Clean Water Act… and it
turned out that the exact opposite is true.”


The Republican polling firm Bellwether Research & Consulting surveyed
900 rural voters in Ohio, Illinois and Tennessee.


Joan Mulhern with Earthjustice says the poll found farmers were just as
likely as non-farmers to say that stronger laws were needed.


For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Green Goo Finds New Home

  • Sandy Binh works for the Waterkeeper Alliance. She's kept a close eye on water quality problems in western Lake Erie. She and her neighbors are worried about the emergence of a new algae in the Lake - Lyngbya wollei. (Photo by Mark Brush)

Life along the water can be pretty nice – sunsets, strolls along the
beach, and boating. It’s no wonder more Americans are moving closer to
big lakes. But it’s not all fun at the beach these days. Mark Brush
brings us the story of one lake shore community that seems to be stuck
with a green gooey invader:

Transcript

Life along the water can be pretty nice – sunsets, strolls along the
beach, and boating. It’s no wonder more Americans are moving closer to
big lakes. But it’s not all fun at the beach these days. Mark Brush
brings us the story of one lake shore community that seems to be stuck
with a green gooey invader:


For many people living along the western edge of Lake Erie, seeing
algae is nothing new. Lake Erie is the shallowest and warmest of the
five Great Lakes. Algae like to grow here. But the cold winter months
usually kill off what grows over the summer.


(Sound of lake)


That’s not the case for a new type of algae that has spread through
this area in the last year. Jerry Brown has lived and paddled his
boats along these shores for years. We’re standing next to a beach
that is piled with mounds of dried green and brown algae three feet
high:


“It’s like a carpeting that grows on top of itself and becomes matted –
and it appears to dry but it doesn’t deteriorate. What used to be my
wonderful seafront, and waves lapping up against my seawall, is now
what I call my lower forty because it’s a field.”


The algae are known as Lyngbya wollei. Residents have been
warned not to touch it because it might cause skin rashes.
Lyngbya algae are common in Florida and some other southern
states. It probably hitched a ride up here from a pleasure boat.


(Sound of tractor)


Just down the road Brown’s neighbor is John Pastorek. He’s using his
tractor to lift a water pump out of the Lake. He uses the pump to water
the lawns around his house. Recently, his pump stopped working. It’s completely
covered by the dark green goop:


“And so the pump can’t suck through that. So now I’ve gotta clean
that off of here so that the filter can once again work. But it’s a short
term solution because it’s going to fill back up again.”


Pastorek says he’d love to find a way to get rid of the algae. What
he’s not aware of is that he might be contributing to the problem.
His house is surrounded by green lawns:


“You know my wife and daughter just returned from Ireland and yesterday
they said, ‘Boy, this looks just like Ireland. It’s so green.'”


It’s that green because it gets treated with fertilizers by a lawn care
company. The invasive algae feed on fertilizers that are washed off
the land by rain. I’m here with Sandy Binh of the environmental group
the Waterkeeper Alliance. She’s also Pastorek’s neighbor.
And she tries to convince him to tell his lawn company to stop using
phosphorus as a fertilizer:


“It will be just as green. It will not change it a bit. In fact
Lowe’s now on their Scott’s products that they sell – there’s no
phosphorus. I checked this year. A lot of companies are adopting it because they know it’s not needed. It can actually have less cost because they don’t have to put that in it. It doesn’t have any effect on your
lawn – there’s no reason to have it.”


Binh says to stop the invasive algae – one of the most important things
people can do – is to stop giving it nutrients such as phosphorus.
These nutrients come from a lot of places. They leak from septic
systems. They come from sewage treatment plants. And they wash off
farm fields and lawns:


“We really need to get it out of dishwasher detergent, to get it out
of lawn fertilizers, to work with the agricultural community to reduce
it. We need to find out what’s causing it quickly because we don’t
want to become the old poster child where Lake Erie is really having major
problems.”


Researchers say phosphorus isn’t the only problem. They say people
need to cut back on on another of the algae’s favorite food – nitrogen.
Hans Paerl is with the Institute of Marine Sciences in North Carolina.
He says once these mats of algae get started – it can be tough to stop
them, because they can start to make their own nutrients:


“In many ways – once that bloom gets going it becomes a sort of self-
fulfilling prophecy. The bottom line is we need to think about
nitrogen as well as phosphorus as far as ultimately controlling and managing these blooms.”


(Sound of lake)


Back at the lakefront, boater Jerry Brown says he hopes they can solve
the problem soon:


“You now, I’m seventy years old. I’ve been here 40 years. I love
living on the lake and I no longer have any use for the lake. I’m very fearful that this won’t be corrected and
that I’ll end my days not being to use the lake that I love so much.”


To stop the spread of these kinds of algae it will take cooperation
from farmers, cities… pretty much everyone. Anything we put on the
land or in our pipes flows into the water. But at the moment, most
people don’t seem to know that they’re a part of the problem and
nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen continue to pollute the
water.


For the Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Study: Corn Ethanol Leads to More Pollution

A new report warns growing more corn for ethanol production carries some risks
for clean water. Chuck Quirmbach has details:

Transcript

A new report warns growing more corn for ethanol production carries some risks
for clean water. Chuck Quirmbach has details:


A lot more corn is going toward making ethanol, but a study by the National Research
Council says in areas with limited water supplies, adding acres of corn, or
launching water-using ethanol production plants is a major concern. The report also says increased use of fertilizers and pesticides on corn fields
could trigger more water pollution.


Study committee chairman Jerald Schnoor urges more research to help
extract energy from lower-impact perennial crops such as grasses:


“There needs to be a technology breakthrough so that enzymes and organisms
can break down the cellulose, the hemi-cellulose and lignin from plants like
switchgrass, woody biomass plants like poplar and willow.”


Schnoor says more research dollars could come from reducing federal subsidies
for corn-based ethanol.


For the Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Fertilizer Makers Cut Back on Phosphorus

Two major manufacturers of fertilizer are cutting the amount of phosphorus in their products by half. Fred Kight reports the move should help reduce water pollution:

Transcript

Two major manufacturers of fertilizer are cutting the amount of phosphorus in their products by half. Fred Kight reports the move should help reduce water pollution:


Phosphorus is a major source of water pollution in many parts of the country. It can create algae blooms. When these blooms die off they rob the water of oxygen, often killing underwater plants and animals.


Scotts Miracle Gro is one of the companies cutting back on phosphorus. Rich Martinez is the chief environmental officer for Scotts. He says the problem occurs when the product doesn’t go where it’s intended:


“We did it as our part of contribution to a reduction in phosphorus losses – material moving off target that might end up in the water.”


Officials from Lebanon Seaboard say they’ll also reduce the amount of phosphorus in their fertilizers. Martinez says gardeners will probably see the new, lower phosphorus products on shelves by next spring.


For the Environment Report, I’m Fred Kight.

Related Links

New Sulfide Mining Rules Good Enough?

Environmentalists disagree over whether new mining rules will do enough to protect the waters of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Linda Stephan reports:

Transcript

Environmentalists disagree over whether new mining rules will do
enough to protect the waters of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Linda Stephan reports:


A type of mining called deep-shaft sulfide mining is controversial. That’s
because it can cause sulfuric acid to get into the waterways.


Under new rules in Michigan, companies that want to open mines will
have to prove absolutely no toxins will escape the mine and pollute soil,
ground water, or surface waters. That’s even once the mine’s been shut
down.


Marvin Roberson is a Sierra Club representative who helped shape the
regulations.


“That’s an extremely high standard. The fact of the matter is, I think it’s
going to be very, very difficult for most applicants to meet the standards
that are set in this, and those that do will be pretty clearly opening
facilities that won’t be causing environmental harm.”


But an attorney for the National Wildlife Federation says there are some
areas where erosion, landslides, or water pollution can’t be prevented,
and the new rules don’t restrict where a mine can be built.


For the GLRC, I’m Linda Stephan.

Related Links

Farmland Increasing Worldwide

The amount of farmland is decreasing throughout the Midwest. But scientists say the amount of agricultural land is increasing worldwide… bringing additional challenges to U.S. farmers. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

Farmland is disappearing throughout the Midwest, but scientists
say the amount of agricultural land is increasing worldwide… bringing
additional challenges to U.S. farmers. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:


Researchers have used satellite data and statistics from
government agencies to determine that more than one-third of the
earth’s land is used for agricultural activity.


Scientist Navin Ramankutty is at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
He says urban sprawl may be gobbling up farmland in the Midwest,
but in places like South America, farms are replacing the rainforest.
Ramankutty says the change concerns U.S. soybean farmers.


“The U.S. still continues to be the largest soybean exporter in the world,
but Brazil’s catching up really fast. So, soybean farmers here in the
Midwest are concerned about whether/how their markets will change
in the future.”


But while the global growth in agriculture is feeding more people,
Ramankutty says there are downsides for the environment in terms of
more water pollution and loss of forests. So, he says his research
team is trying to weigh the tradeoffs, and make recommendations on
what might be the best locations for new farms.


For the GLRC, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

Interview: Great Lakes Need Citizen Input

A recent report indicates many of the problems troubling the Great Lakes are due to poor governance of the lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham talked with the chief author of the report, Restoring Greatness to Government: Protecting the Great Lakes in the 21st Century. Dave Dempsey is a policy advisor with the Michigan Environmental Council, which published the report:

Transcript

A recent report indicates many of the problems troubling the Great Lakes are due to poor
governance of the lakes. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham talked with the
chief author of the report Restoring Greatness to Government: Protecting the Great Lakes in
the 21st Century
. Dave Dempsey is a policy advisor with the Michigan Environmental
Council, which published the report:


Dave Dempsey: “Well, we have sick Great Lakes in part because we have a sick governance
system. We have an array of 21st century problems facing the lakes from climate change to
continued degradation of some of our waters with toxic chemicals, but we have a 19th century
system of government that’s trying to protect them and failing.”


Lester Graham: “Now, the International Joint Commission, which is a body made up of
appointees by the Canadian government and the U.S. government, is to watch over the water
quality agreement and the treaty between the U.S. and Canada as to how we treat the Great Lakes.
And the Great Lakes Commission is another group that’s made up of representatives from the
eight Great Lakes states and the two provinces in Canada that surround the Great Lakes. And
these are all 21st century people, I know some of them, and they’re bright folks, they’re doing an
earnest and fairly decent job. What’s holding them back? They’re not 19th century people.”


DD: “No, but the structures and the systems they use are 19th century. There’s two problems: with
several of the commissions, they’ve become very politicized. The International Joint Commission
used to have a tradition of independence from political pressures and looking at the long-term
health of the Great Lakes. That’s been compromised since the ’90’s. But maybe more
importantly, with all these institutions, they’re relying on the old fashioned way of dealing with
public input. We think, in the environmental community, that the way to restore healthy Great
Lakes is to make sure the citizen voice is heard. These institutions cover a Great Lakes basin
that’s hundreds of thousands of square miles, and they’re expecting people to show up at public
hearings, perhaps traveling hundreds of miles to get there. Today, what we need to do is take
advantage in governance of the Internet, and other ways of involving people that don’t require
that kind of commitment or sacrifice because people frankly don’t have the time.”


LG: “How would increased participation of the public help the health of the Great Lakes?”


DD: “Well, looking at the history of the Great Lakes, every time the public voice is heard
strongly in the halls of government, the Great Lakes recover. Every time the voices of special
interests are drowning out the public voice, the lakes begin to deteriorate and that’s what we see
happening now.”


LG: “The Great Lakes Commission has had some success recently in getting more money from
the government for the Great Lakes recovery, the IJC has done a good job recently of working
with the media to bring public awareness to invasive species because of the Asian black carp. So,
are those moves the kind of thing you’d like to see to solve this problem?”


DD: “I think it’s helpful. Both of these commissions can use their bully pulpit to publicize
problems and call attention. But if you took a poll of the average Great Lakes residents, very few
of them would ever have heard of these commissions. We need bodies that look out for the Great
Lakes that are really plugged into individual communities, and that doesn’t exist right now. The
Great Lakes Commission specifically was set up to promote commercial navigation in the Great
Lakes, and while it has broadened its agenda to look at ecosystem issues, it has been an advocate,
for example, for the Great Lakes review of navigation that could result in more invasive species
coming into the Great Lakes by allowing more ocean-going vessels. We need an institution that’s
looking at the health of the Lakes first, not at the health of the industries that sometimes exploit
them.”


LG: “Bottom line, what would you like to see done?”


DD: “I’d like to see a Great Lakes citizens’ commission building on the existing institutions that
plugs into the individual states and provinces around the Great Lakes and brings people and their
voices together so that their vision of healthy Great Lakes can be carried out by government.”


Host Tag: Dave Dempsey is chief author of a report on governance of the Great Lakes issued by
the Michigan Environmental Council. He spoke with the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester
Graham.

Related Links

Essay: Tuning in to Urban Frogs

  • Ed Herrmann tries to hear some frogs through the traffic near the Rouge River. (Photo by Ed Herrmann)

Each Spring, thousands of people spend their evenings listening to frogs and toads. It’s not just for fun. They’re helping assess the water quality of rivers and wetlands around the country. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Ed Herrmann joined the search for amphibians, and has this essay:

Transcript

Each Spring, thousands of people spend their evenings listening to frogs and toads. It’s
not just for fun. They’re helping assess the water quality of rivers and wetlands around
the country. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Ed Herrmann joined the search for
amphibians, and has this essay:


I’ve always enjoyed being outside and listening to nature. Recording nature sounds is a
hobby of mine. So when I saw an ad asking for people to listen for frogs and toads, I
thought, “All right. Beats watching campaign commercials.”


I called up Friends of the Rouge…(that’s a local group dedicated to helping out the Rouge
River watershed) and a few days later I got a package in the mail. It was full of maps and
information, and had a CD with the songs of the local frogs and toads. I studied my area,
and found some good looking wet spots where I thought they might live.


I memorized the sound of the Wood Frog (sound), Chorus Frog (sound), Spring Peeper
(sound), and American Toad. Then, on the first night when the temperature and wind
conditions were just right, I headed out to hear some frogs.


(sound of traffic roaring by)


I don’t know what I was thinking. This is suburban Detroit, not exactly a wildlife refuge.
In fact, the only animal I see is a rabbit dodging traffic. And the only thing I hear is…
(more traffic sound)


The Rouge River flows into the Detroit River and then Lake Erie. It used to be one of the
dirtiest rivers around, mainly from all the industry down by the mouth. That problem is
more or less under control but now there’s a larger one.


If you look at a map from the 1970s, you see miles of wetlands, small farms and
orchards. Today you see nonstop subdivisions and shopping malls. It might seem like
progress to you, but for the river, the constant barrage of fertilizers, pesticides, soap and
other chemicals that everybody uses to keep their suburbs looking pretty is a lot worse
than an occasional dose of battery acid from a factory. Also having acres of concrete
instead of wetlands means there’s nothing to soak up and filter the water, which means
after a big rain, it floods. It’s obvious this river needs some help.


(sound of river)


In 1998, volunteers began surveying the frogs and toads in the Rouge watershed. These
creatures were chosen because they sing, so they’re easy to track. The reason they’re
good indicators is that, like other amphibians, they absorb water through their skin. That
means they get poisoned by everything that we in the civilized world pour into the water.
Plus, their eggs hatch in water and their larvae (the tadpoles) live in water. It’s pretty
simple: if the water is good, there’s plenty of frogs and toads. If not, they disappear.


So, night after night, I’m out there listening. Listening in the dark. Listening hard.


Not a peep.


I’m beginning to think that the price of all these well-manicured lawns is a silent spring.
Then finally one night, (sound of American toads) the good old American toad! All
right, it is the most common species around, but at least it’s a start.


(sound of chorus frogs and green frogs)


A few weeks later, I join a group at a “mitigated” wetland. That means that when a
developer decided that a real wetland would be the perfect place to build condos and a
golf course, the government said, “Sure, go ahead. Drain it. Just be sure to dig a hole
over here and fill it with water.” Now, five years later, some frogs have moved in and
seem to be fine.


But they still have a little problem…


(jet roars overhead, followed by a few green frogs)


Ah, location, location. This new wetland is right
next to the airport.


Now, the reason these frogs sing is to attract a mate. So if nobody hears them, there are
not going to be any tadpoles to make next year’s frogs. In order to survive, they need not
only to sing, but to be heard.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Ed Herrmann.


(frogs fade out)

Related Links

Epa Administrator to Lead Great Lakes Task Force

President Bush says he wants the federal government to help coordinate clean-up of the Great Lakes. The Environmental Protection Agency will spearhead the so-called Great Lakes Interagency Task Force. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bettina Kozlowski has more:

Transcript

President Bush says he wants the federal government to help coordinate
clean-up of the Great Lakes. The Environmental Protection Agency will
spearhead the so-called Great Lakes Interagency Task Force. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Bettina Kozlowski has more:


The Task Force is charged with coordinating existing federal, state and
local programs and presenting a unified plan to the President next
spring.


EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt will head the task force.


He says the central body will coordinate strategies to attract more
federal funding.


“We can do a better job at managing the 140 programs we already have
and bring a better payload to the Great Lakes. The role of the federal
government is to simply join with the cities, with the other states and
to become a convener and then to step back into our place as a full
participant.”


Leavitt hopes the partnership will tackle the problems with
contaminated water, fish and wildlife, and curb the spread of invasive
species such as the Asian carp.


U.S. Congressman Rahm Emanuel and environmentalists say the plan is a
smoke screen.


They say the Administration is trying to distract voters from its poor
record on the environment. Illinois Democrat Emanuel says the Great
Lakes need funding, not another study.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Bettina Kozlowski.

Related Links

Interview: Carl Pope Criticizes Bush Administration

  • Carl Pope is the Executive Director of the Sierra Club. (Photo courtesy of the Sierra Club)

As the political campaigns get into full swing this presidential election year, the environmental record of George W. Bush is being scrutinized. The big environmental groups are very critical of the Bush administration. In the first of two interviews about the Bush White House approach to environmental protection, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham talks with the Executive Director of the Sierra Club, Carl Pope. Pope and the Sierra Club are critical of the Bush administration’s record on environmental protection:

Transcript

As the political campaigns get into full swing this presidential election year, the
environmental record of George W. Bush is being scrutinized. The big environmental
groups are very critical of the Bush administration. In the first of two interviews about
the Bush White House approach to environmental protection, the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Lester Graham talks with the Executive Director of the Sierra Club, Carl Pope.
Pope and the Sierra Club are critical of the Bush administration’s record on environmental
protection:


POPE: “The biggest environmental problem this country faces right now is the policies of this
administration. It’s kind of stunning too, when you add it all up, just how much damage they
have quietly managed to set in motion in only three years.”


LG: “Now, we’ve listened to folks in the Bush administration who indicate that what they’re
really doing is bringing some balance to dealing with the economic issues the nation faces and
how it relates to the environmental issues that we face.”


POPE: “Well, let’s look at three trends. In 1980, when Ronald Reagan was President, we began
cleaning up toxic wastes dumps in this country with the Superfund. In 2003, for the first time
because the Bush administration both allowed the Superfund to run out of money and allowed
companies to start dumping new kinds of toxins on the landscape, the American landscape
became more polluted. We started going backwards after 20 years of progress.


1972, under Richard Nixon, another Republican, we made a national commitment under the
Clean Water Act to clean up our rivers and lakes. In 2003, because the Bush administration cut
funding for clean water clean-up and because they exempted large factory feedlots from clean
water regulation, EPA had to report for the first time in 30 years America’s waterways had gotten
dirtier.


And finally, in 1902, Theodore Roosevelt, a third Republican, created Grand Canyon National
Monument. And every president since Theodore Roosevelt left us with more of the American
landscape protected than he found it. And in only three years uniquely, singularly and in the
violation of the entire trend of the entire 20th century, this President Bush has stripped
environmental protection from 235 million acres. It’s an area as big as Texas and Oklahoma that
is now open to development which was protected when George Bush became President. I don’t
think that’s balance.”


LG: “I assume that you’re not all that chummy with everyone in the White House these days….


POPE: “That’s a safe assumption.”


LG: …but I’m trying to get an insight into what you think the thinking might be behind some of
the decisions that the Bush administration makes.”


POPE: “Well, in 1970 we made a national compact in this country. It was a national
environmental compact which was: we were environmental optimists and we believed that as a
nation that we could clean up every waterway, we could modernize every power plant and we
could remedy every toxic waste dump. We said as a nation ‘You know, everybody in this country
is going to have water that’s safe to drink. Everybody is going to live in a community where the
air doesn’t give their kids asthma. And we’re going to take time to do it. The federal government
is going to help everybody. And we’re all going to do it as a community.’ I think the fundamental
problem with that compact from the point of view of this administration is the ‘everyone’ part of
it. They really don’t believe that the community should do very much. They believe individuals
should take care of themselves. If you want to have safe drinking water, get yourself your own
supply; buy bottled water. If you want to breathe clean air, move somewhere where the air is
cleaner. They really don’t believe in the idea that every American ought to enjoy certain basic
environmental amenities simply as a consequence of being an American.


And, I think what motivates them is their concern that if it’s the federal government that
is cleaning up our toxic waste sites, then people will have faith in the federal government. And
they don’t have faith in the federal government. In fact, one of their chief advisors says he wants
to shrink the federal government down to a size where he can drown it in a bathtub. And I think
it’s the fact that the environmental compact in this country was based on the idea of an
environmental safety net for everyone that they find antithetical to their view that we all ought to
be tough, we all ought to be competitive, we all ought to be self-reliant and on our own. And
they don’t like the fact that the environmental compact says wait a minute, we’re all in this
together and we’re going to solve it together.”


HOST TAG: Carl Pope is the Executive Director of the Sierra Club.

Related Links