Drum Roll Please

We are so close to having a national ballast law, we can smell it, taste it and the aroma is so appetizing. Yesterday, the US House passed the first ever national bill that will protect our fresh waters from ballast discharges when it voted 395 to 7 in favor of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007.

The last year has seen Great Lakes States initiating their own ad hoc ballast bills in a desperate attempt to stop an impending “invasional meltdown” that would put the lakes on an irreversible trek toward ecological disaster, but now an answer is so near, so tantalizing, so taunting.

“This bill contains the strong, national protections that people, businesses and cities have been seeking for years,” said Cameron Davis, president of the Alliance for the Great Lakes and co-chair of the Healing our Waters Coalition.

When Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.) became chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure he promised to get us strong ballast water legislation. At our HOW conference last September, we heard loud and clear from the leadership to the grassroots that we need a national ballast water law and we need it yesterday to halt the evil zebra and quagga mussels and the progress of 185 other invasive species dedicated to destroying the lakes.

“It has been touch and go throughout the process as we worked out several issues to make the bill as strong as possible, and it isn’t perfect but it is a giant step forward,” said Jeff Skelding,national campaign director for HOW, “Illinois Congressman Mark Kirk was really helpful on the floor yesterday – bringing up an amendment that will address the spread of viruses affecting the fish in the Lakes.”

Another Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) and fellow democrat from Wisconsin, Ron Kind, joined forces to offer amendments requiring public disclosure of ballast water management reports each month and require NOBOB ships to treat ballast water.

“Our amendments will put a big ‘Do Not Enter’ sign up for invasive species. It’s time to end the
threat of invaders like Asian carp, VHS, and sea lampreys for good,” stated Emanuel.

“By including our amendments in the bill, we have been able to strengthen our defenses against invasives, as well as the public’s ability to monitor the shipping industry’s actions,” stated Kind.

Ships use ballast water to steady them on surface water, but ocean going vessels harbor species that are not native to fresh water and when they discharge their salty ballast water they also infect the lakes with dangerous microorganisms. But this House approved bill would mitigate the effects by:

-Establishing a ballast water treatment standard;
-Requiring treatment technology on board commercial vessels in 2009 using an interim standard that grows more aggressive by 2012.
-Setting a national goal that ballast water discharged into all US waters will contain no living organisms by 2015.

All eyes are now on the U.S. Senate to pass the Coast Guard Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (S.1892). The two bills must then be reconciled in conference before heading to President Bush’s desk to be signed into law.

“We need the Senate and President to complete what the House started and finally shut the door on invasive species introduced through ballast water discharge,” said Andy Buchsbaum, regional executive director of the National Wildlife Federation’s Great Lakes office. “If this effort sinks, all of our nation’s great waters will suffer devastating and irreversible damage.”

The185 invasive species in the Great Lakes cost citizens, businesses and cities hundreds of millions of dollars per year. A new invasive species is discovered, on average, every 28 weeks.

The No. 1 pathway for invasive species like the zebra mussel to enter the Great Lakes is through ballast water discharge from ocean-going vessels. Such ships have introduced more than 70 percent of the non-native invaders since the St. Lawrence Seaway opened in 1959.

“Scientists say that invasive species are the worst problem for the Great Lakes, our national parks, and many of our nation’s waters, and that ballast water discharges are the biggest source,” said Tom Kiernan, president of the National Parks Conservation Association and co-chair of the Coalition.

Thank you to the Great Lakes lawmakers who made this happen and thank you to the entire US House. What a triumph! Now the onus is on the US Senate and President to return this nation’s waters to a healthy state.

(2 votes, average: 4.5 out of 5)

 Loading ...

Coalition Applauds U.S. House for Passing Strong Invasive Species Bill

ANN ARBOR, MICH. (April 24, 2008)—The Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition today applauded Congress for passing a bill to prevent aquatic invasive species from entering the Great Lakes and other U.S. waters.

“We applaud the U.S. House of Representatives for passing a strong invasive species bill that protects our lakes, our national parks, our economy, our public health and our way of life,” said Tom Kiernan, president of the National Parks Conservation Association and co-chair of the Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition. “We urge the Senate to pass its bill and President Bush to sign into law these strong protections from invasive species, because the longer we wait, the problem will only get worse and more costly.”

The U.S. House of Representatives today passed the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2007 (H.R. 2830) by a vote of 395 to 7.

Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.) followed through on a commitment he made when he became chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to pass strong ballast water legislation. Reps. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), Ron Kind (D-Wisc.), and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) were instrumental in adding key amendments to the bill.

All eyes are now on the U.S. Senate to pass the Coast Guard Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (S.1892). The two bills must then be reconciled in conference before heading to President Bush’s desk to be signed into law.

“We need the Senate and President to complete what the House started and finally shut the door on invasive species introduced through ballast water discharge,” said Andy Buchsbaum, regional executive director of the National Wildlife Federation’s Great Lakes office. “If this effort sinks, all of our nation’s great waters will suffer devastating and irreversible damage.”

The Coast Guard bill contains provisions to stop the introduction of invasive species via ballast water discharge. The bill:

• Establishes for the first time strong ballast water treatment standards;
• Requires ballast water treatment technology on board commercial vessels in 2009 using an interim standard;
• Establishes an aggressive time line for new, stronger U.S. treatment standard starting in 2012; and
• Sets a national goal that ballast water discharged into U.S. waters contains no living organisms by 2015.

“This bill contains the strong, national protections that people, businesses and cities have been seeking for years,” said Cameron Davis, president of the Alliance for the Great Lakes and co-chair of the Coalition. “It’s time that Congress and the President seal the deal, sign this bill into law, and provide the millions of people who rely on the Great Lakes and our nation’s other great waters with the security of knowing that we have finally slammed the door on invasive species introduced by ballast water.”

The 185 invasive species in the Great Lakes cost citizens, businesses and cities hundreds of millions of dollars per year. A new invasive species is discovered, on average, every 28 weeks.

The No. 1 pathway for invasive species like the zebra mussel to enter the Great Lakes is through ballast water discharge from ocean-going vessels. Such ships have introduced more than 70 percent of the non-native invaders since the St. Lawrence Seaway opened in 1959.

For more information: http://www.healthylakes.org/

For Immediate Release:
April 24, 2008

Contact:
Andy Buchsbaum, National Wildlife Federation, (734) 717-3665, buchsbaum@nwf.org
Jordan Lubetkin, National Wildlife Federation, (734) 887-7109, lubetkin@nwf.org
Tracey McIntyre, National Parks Conservation Association, (202) 454-3311, tmcintire@npca.org
Joel Brammeier, Alliance for the Great Lakes, (773) 590-6494, jbrammeier@greatlakes.org

(1 votes, average: 4 out of 5)

 Loading ...

Never Forget Those Who Think We Are Awash In Water

The Great Lakes State of Pennsylvania gave Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain resounding victories in the contest to determine who will run for US President this fall. While Great Lakes states share a concern over our fresh water and the next president’s intentions for it, water, is increasingly becoming a national and international issue.

“We need to have a president who will take seriously the problem with water,” Sen. Hillary Clinton said at an early April campaign stop in Oregon. “Water has always been a local and state issue. I think that is probably all to the good but I think we need to take a good look at our entire country.”

This sounds eerily familiar to the statement that got democratic presidential hopeful Bill Richardson in trouble last summer when he suggested we need a national water policy. But then, he implied diversion of Great Lakes water to thirsty drought stricken states in the south and west.

It isn’t surprising that this issue keeps bubbling up to the surface. The world, not just our nation, is quickly hurdeling towards a food and water shortage. After six years of drought, Australian rice farmers have given up the ghost, many selling their water-rites to grape harvesters. China doesn’t have enough unpolluted water to sustain its population and India keeps growing while their aquifer continues to dry up.

“Water is going to be one of our most contentious issues in the 21st century,” said Sen. Clinton. Climatologists suggest the snow covered Rockies will slowly bald leaving the main source to the Colorado River unfed. Meanwhile, hotter, dryer summers promise to plague the South. Fresh water fuels everything from the food we eat to our industries and it is vital to our survival.

“We need to preserve nature’s water. We need to be smart about it, how we recover it. It’s the kind of over-the-horizon issue that if we deal with it now we will have a better chance,” Sen. Clinton added. And if that is the case, those of us responsible for preserving the lakes, need to consistently ask candidates what they intend to do about the lakes once they are in office. We need to nag them to the point of distraction to make them understand that we care and we want someone who shares our vision in the White House.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Making the Case for the Great Lakes Collaboration Strategy

The Brookings Institution published a report last year that analyzed the economic impact that restoring the Great Lakes would have on the eight states surrounding the lakes. The authors found that by investing $26 billion the region would reap more jobs, higher property values, a better quality of life and a $80 billion profit. Not a bad return, right? The next obvious question by localities was, how much will our city benefit?A new analysis finds that major Great Lakes cities will see economic gains between $200 million to $13.3 billion if the Great Lakes are restored.

So, the researchers went back to their results and figured out an approximate dollar figure for the rise in property values in the biggest cities around the lakes. This is only one element, however, of the overall economic impact that full investment would bring - it doesn’t include the increase in jobs, new industries and reverse migration that could result. Still, the findings are exciting as they estimate property values to increase between $29 billion and $41 billion. To be more specific, Buffalo, N.Y., would see an increase between $600 million and $1.1 billion; Milwaukee, Wisc., between $1.5 billion and $2.3 billion; Detroit, Mich., between $3 billion and $7 billion; Chicago between $7.4 billion and $13.3 billion; and Cleveland, Ohio, between $2.1 and $3.7 billion.

“This new report confirms that our region’s cities and millions of people living on or near the Great Lakes will benefit from Great Lakes restoration,” said Robert Litan, a Brookings Senior Fellow and vice president for research and policy at the Kauffman Foundation, who led the team of researchers who conducted the study. “Cleaning up our nation’s largest source of fresh water will bring billions to the region by way of increased economic development, tourism, fishing and recreation. This analysis provides yet another compelling case for Congress to act now to pass federal funding of Great Lakes restoration.”

Now, we have one more slide to add to our power point presentations when we are making the case for restoring the Great Lakes. This region was once the manufacturing hub of the nation; it can again attract businesses in the new economy in the alternative energy, nanotechnology and information sectors. We still have some of the best colleges and universities in the nation; our public education is stronger than that of states with sunnier climes (according to national test scores), and now the region’s fresh water resources promise to bring higher property values as well.

In order for this to happen, we need Congress to pass and fund current legislation to modernize wastewater infrastructure, clean-up toxic pollution, stop invasive species and restore wetlands and wildlife habitat. Funding these restoration programs is critical to make the economic gains cited in the Brookings report possible. This new information about the sweeping economic benefits to this struggling region makes investing in the Great Lakes a policy slam dunk!

(1 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

 Loading ...

New Analysis: Restoring Great Lakes Will Bring Major Lakeside Cities Each $200 Million to $13.3 Billion in Economic Gains

Passage of federal, state, and local legislation to fund restoration needed to realize potential gains

Ann Arbor, MI (April 16, 2008)—A new analysis finds that major Great Lakes cities will see economic gains between $200 million to $13.3 billion if the Great Lakes are restored. This report is a supplement to The Brookings Institution’s “Healthy Waters, Strong Economy” report released in November 2007 that found that Great Lakes restoration would bring the region approximately $80 to $100 billion in both short-term and long-term economic gains. This analysis shows that a significant portion of those gains would go directly to major population centers on the shores of the Lakes.

The cost-benefit analysis breaks down the economic benefit to Buffalo, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Duluth, Erie, Gary and Milwaukee if the Great Lakes are restored.

“This new report confirms that our region’s cities and millions of people living on or near the Great Lakes will benefit from Great Lakes restoration,” said Robert Litan, a Brookings Senior Fellow and vice president for research and policy at the Kauffman Foundation, who led the team of researchers who conducted the study. “Cleaning up our nation’s largest source of fresh water will bring billions to the region by way of increased economic development, tourism, fishing and recreation. This analysis provides yet another compelling case for Congress to act now to pass federal funding of Great Lakes restoration.”

Estimated economic gains in Great Lakes cities are:

Buffalo, New York $600 million to $1.1 billion
Chicago, Illinois $7.4 to $13.3 billion
Cleveland, Ohio $2.1 to $3.7 billion
Detroit, Michigan $3.7 to $7 billion
Duluth, Minnesota $200 to $300 million
Erie, Pennsylvania $400 to $500 million
Gary, Indiana $200 to $300 million
Milwaukee, Wisconsin $1.5 to $2.3 billion

“This analysis underscores the importance of Great Lakes restoration to our region,” said co-author John C. Austin, non-resident Senior Fellow, Metropolitan Policy Program at The Brookings Institution. “But we need to get started on cleaning up the lakes today. The longer we wait, the higher the price tag will be and the smaller the return on our investment. The health of the Great Lakes is critical to the prosperity of our region.”

This analysis, using property values as a measurement tool, focuses on eight specific coastal cities, but the November 2007 report showed that Great Lakes restoration will positively impact tourism, business, and other aspects of the economy across the region.

“This is a conservative estimate for eight specific cities with the largest populations on the Great Lakes shores,” says Austin. “We know that these economic gains will be felt by everyone in the region, including people outside of the cities we targeted. We expect to see positive economic impacts in other Great Lakes cities as well.”

This analysis and the prior comprehensive report analyzed the cost of restoring the lakes and the economic benefit to the region of implementing the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) Strategy, a comprehensive restoration plan that was crafted by civic, business, environmental, government and Tribal representatives after President Bush signed an executive order in 2004.

The GLRC Strategy will be implemented through federal legislation moving through Congress, which includes sewage infrastructure bills, The Great Lakes Legacy Act, carp barrier funding and other funding to stop invasive species, and the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act.
Funding of these restoration programs and others is critical to make the economic gains cited in the Brookings report possible.

Restoration activities that need federal, state, and local funding include:

• Modernizing wastewater treatment systems to reduce sewage and other contamination that will mean fewer beach closings and improved water quality
• Stopping invasive species and increasing the fish populations in the Great Lakes to avoid the dislocation of sport-fishery workers and assets
• Restoring and protecting wildlife habitat for birds and waterfowl for naturalists and hunters to enjoy
• Removing contaminated sediment in areas of high concern to reclaim communities and increase property values

To identify economic benefits for each specific city, researchers look at how property values in each city will increase once the problems facing the lakes are addressed and the region begins to see increased economic development, tourism, fishing and other benefits due to restoration. Property values become a tool to measure all of the economic activity that will take place once the lakes are clean.

“We have made a strong pitch for federal investment in our region, which shows a significant return,” said George Kuper, president and chief executive officer of the Council of Great Lakes Industries. “This supplemental study helps bring home the message that there is economic benefit to investing in Great Lakes restoration.”

“Millions of people depend on the Great Lakes for their drinking water, recreation and way of life,” said Andy Buchsbaum, co-chair of the Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition. “This analysis shows us that restoring the Great Lakes isn’t just the right thing to do, it’s the smart thing to do. Cleaner lakes mean a healthier regional economy and a healthier place to call home. The time to act is now.”

Funding for the report was provided by the Joyce Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Consumers Energy Foundation and Dow Chemical Foundation. The views expressed in the report do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsoring foundations.

For a copy of the report, click here:
Place-Specific Benefits of Great Lakes Restoration

For more information, visit:
http://www.brookings.edu/projects/great-lakes.aspx
http://www.healthylakes.org/

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 16, 2008

CONTACT:
Michelle Daniels, Brookings Institution, 202-797-6270, mdaniels@brookings.edu
Evelyn Strader, Council of Great Lakes Industries, 248-340-7062, StraderCo@aol.com
Nora Ferrell, Valerie Denney Communications, 312-408-2580 x 24, nora@vdcom.com
Hugh McMullen, Valerie Denney Communications, 312-408-2580 x 15, hugh@vdcom.com
Jordan Lubetkin, National Wildlife Federation, 734-887-7109, lubetkin@nwf.org

The Brookings Institution is a private nonprofit organization devoted to independent research and innovative policy solutions. For more than 90 years, Brookings has analyzed current and emerging issues and produced new ideas that matter—for the nation and the world.

Council of Great Lakes Industries is a non-profit organization representing the common interests of U.S. and Canadian industrial organizations from the manufacturing, utilities, transportation, communications, financial services and trade sectors that have investments in the Great Lakes Basin. The Council works to ensure that industry is a substantive partner in the Great Lakes region’s public policy development process.

The Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition, co-led by the National Wildlife Federation and the National Parks Conservation Association, consists of more than 90 zoos, aquariums, museums, and hunting, fishing, and environmental organizations representing millions of people, whose common goal is to restore and protect the Great Lakes.

The Great Lakes and Saint Lawrence Cities Initiative is a binational coalition of mayors and other local officials that works actively with federal, state, and provincial governments to advance the protection and restoration of the Great Lakes.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Dishing up a Quagmire

While needed Federal ballast legislation spins and sputters in a political quagmire on Capitol Hill, invasive species continue to erode the Great Lakes ecosystem and affect everything from power plants to drinking water.

We have talked a lot about the dangerous and quickly replicating zebra mussels that arrived in the Great Lakes after hitching a ride in the ballast water of ocean going ships. But the zebra mussels’ nefarious reputation is being threatened by the quagga mussel. The quagga, that also booked passage from Europe in ballast water, is a more sophisticated breed and can live on almost any surface as well as in hot or cold water. The mussels are two of the 185 exotic or invasive species that live in the Great Lakes, the majority of which travelled to our fresh water in salty ballast tanks.

“Quagga mussels are probably the most ecologically significant perturbation that has ever been documented in Lake Michigan,” Gary Fahnenstiel, a senior ecologist at the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, told the Muskegon Chronicle.

The mussels are now working as allies and have been able to conquer the middle of the food chain causing much damage to the ecosystem of the Great Lakes. So, in an attempt to reign in this terror, and in the absence of federal ballast legislation, HOW is issuing a challenge to leading Chefs in the Great Lakes cities of the US and Canada. Let’s have a great big summer cook off – your challenge is to dish up quagga and zebra mussels in iron chef fashion. By the end of the summer of 2008, we hope to make it into the pages of Bon Appetite and Cooks Illustrated using the bounty of invasive species from our precious Great Lakes.

The current culinary delight is to eat local what better way for us to use our local resources than to eat the obnoxious little invaders. Just look to the Yellow Perch – a decade ago, these fish would not consider eating the quagga, but recently they have found the prolific invaders more palatable. Heck, let’s create a recipe book of the best picks and send it to every member of Congress. Dishing up the quagga might be our only way to reduce the harmful effects of this invasive species. When life throws you lemons…

(2 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

 Loading ...

Location, Location, Location

Unfortunately, the dating term geographically undesirable (GU) also appears to apply to Congress Members attitude toward the Great Lakes and the issues we have fervently been working on. Usually an explanation of why a budding romantic relationship failed to flower, GU also defines a lack of leadership and perhaps interest in the Great Lakes for lawmakers representing the more far flung districts in our eight states.

After reviewing comments made by those who took part in Great Lakes Day 2008, it becomes clear rather quickly that geography had a lot to do with the kind of experience HOW members had when they visited their congressional representatives in Washington. Those from states most entwined with the Great Lakes tended to feel understood by their representatives and staff while those who hail from farther reaches found the response to the issues they raised more tepid.

HOW members who visited Illinois Congressmen left feeling recharged. “I’ve never seen members of Congress so anxious to demonstrate leadership on Great Lakes issues. From education to appropriations, legislators want a piece of the action and know that restoration is going to pay dividends for the Great Lakes,” Joel Bremmer from the Alliance for the Great Lakes, told Great Lakes United. Of course, last year’s British Petroleum debacle energized Illinois lawmakers when they saw how quickly constituents responded to Indiana’s OK to plans to expand the Whiting Facility that would result in increased pollution into Lake Michigan. Congressmen from Illinois, such as Mark Kirk, Rahm Emanuel and Dick Durbin have been on a roll, leading the charge to save the lakes ever since.

But Minnesota folks had a different experience during their day on the Hill. As Jill Crafton points out, it seems many Minnesota lawmakers are suffering a bout of apathy, but then they also don’t share the same lake front acreage as states such as Michigan, “I felt there was a big lack of motivation within the Minnesota political legislators to be strong advocates with Oberstar and Ellison being the exceptions,” she responded.

“We pushed for an early ballast water treatment deadline, measurable standards, and enforcement and the need for restoration. Often it seemed like talking to a wall; there just wasn’t much reaching out to us that I felt had any substance to it. There were lots of nods and a lot of silence. I left most meetings feeling in limbo,” she added.

Ohio’s Matt Misicka from the League of Ohio Sportsmen and Central Ohio’s Anglers and Huntsmen Club picked up on the geographical tension. “Representatives (Mary) Kaptur, (Stephanie) Tubbs Jones, (Betty) Sutton and (Steven) LaTourette are all on board. Some other officials from outside the basin are iffy this year – some are locked in tough reelection campaigns and they don’t have it near the top of their lists,” he said. This is where HOW’s grassroots can really make a difference – members from the outer reaches of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Minnesota should go to campaign events and let their congressmen know that even though they don’t live on the lake, they care all the same about its future and its potential impact on the state economy.

“Hit them over the head with the Brooking’s Institute findings that suggest a 4 to 1 return on investment. Funding the Great Lakes Legacy Act and State Revolving Loan Fund will help create jobs and increase property values. If they are not interested in the environment, interest them in the economics,” Misicka advised.

An important message as the economy was evidently on the minds of lawmakers during this year’s lobby day. On the cold February day, financial markets were in ruins, a costly war in Iraq was forcing us into further debt and a looming world food crisis hung like bloated storm clouds above, while HOW members urged their representatives to consider investing billions in the Lakes.

“Everyone seemed more concerned with other issues. However, no one dismissed the issues I brought forward as unimportant,” said Nicholas Hade who hails from Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Meanwhile, Dereth Glance, Executive Program Director from Citizens Campaign for the Environment, found the New York delegation very responsive. “Key legislators and staff were familiar and passionate about halting Aquatic Invasive species hitching a ride in ballast water, reauthorizing and improving the Great Lakes Legacy Act to remediate toxic mud that persists along our shorelines, and increasing funding for communities to deal with sewage fouling beaches. We recognize the competing interests for a small amount of money, but it was clear that NY delegation has a sophisticated understanding of the threats facing the Great Lakes, our upstate economy, and our recreational assets,” he said.

The bottom line is that they care if you care. So, if you happen to be from Southern Ohio or Eastern Pennsylvania, tell your representatives that come Election Day, the Great Lakes issues will weigh on your conscience and affect your vote -then they are more likely to address the issues. Now is the time, get out there and let them know that we care!

(1 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

 Loading ...

Where were you?

Yesterday, the US Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee held a hearing on the Clean Water Restoration Act and not a single Great Lakes Senator attended the hearing. Noticeably absent were the three Great Lakes Senators that sit on the Committee: Hillary R. Clinton (D-NY), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and George Voinovich (R-OH). Way to go Senators.

If any of the Great Lakes Senators have an excuse for not attending the hearing, it is probably Sen. Clinton who is busy campaigning for the democratic nomination for President. Having said that, this bill certainly jives with Clinton’s policy goals, she is representing New York in the Senate and she has pledged to help restore the Great Lakes if she is elected President, so why not co-sponsor CWRA? You don’t’ have to be on location to do that and it would show our states- some of which supported you in your Presidential bid – that you are serious about seeing the Great Lakes Collaboration Strategy implemented.

Where were you Amy Klobuchar? After listening to you wax loquacious about the need to do all we can for the Great Lakes at the Canadian Embassy on Great Lakes Day it was shocking to see you didn’t attend the hearing. While you hopefully have a good reason for the no show, what good reason is there for not signing CWRA and becoming a co-sponsor?

George Voinovich (R-OH) was a member of the Ohio House of Representatives the year Time magazine published the article about the flaming Cuyahoga River that “oozes rather than flows.” The River that spawned the environmental movement in America, inspired the Clean Water Act (the original that covered all waters) and inspired the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. You know this issue like no other and it is frustrating to those who support the Great Lakes to find you absent not just from this hearing but from co-sponsoring the bill as well – we need your insight and support on this one.

“It would have been extremely valuable to have the Great Lakes Senators, especially republicans, who we know understand the importance of the Clean Water Act to show up and speak up for clean water,” National Wildlife Federation’s Jan Goldman-Carter said.

So, all in all, a disappointing moment for the Great Lakes states, we can only hope that our representatives in the US House will show more ambition and leadership when they hold their hearing next week.

(1 votes, average: 4 out of 5)

 Loading ...

HOW is Naming Names

How many times have we heard our Washington politicians wax on about the Great Lakes being a “national treasure” that must be protected for future generations? Countless. That is why it is mindboggling that there are still a significant number of Great Lakes Members of Congress who have yet to co-sponsor the Clean Water Restoration Act.

Michigan’s Candice Miller has oft cited the need for sustained federal action to deal with the challenges the lakes face – challenges that in her words hamper the protection and preservation of “our precious Great Lakes” and “our magnificent Great Lakes.” So why has she failed to co-sponsor CWRA, which would clear up confusion over federal protection of our waters spawned by US Supreme Court rulings that have left nearly half our waters unprotected by the Clean Water Act of 1972. The Bush Administration’s narrow interpretation of the Court’s rulings have resulted in cutting off EPA and Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction over many sensitive waters that flow into the Great Lakes.

“We can get all the federal funding we want for the Great Lakes but if we do not close this major loophole in the way the Supreme Court and Bush Administration has interpreted the Clean Water Act, we may never achieve clean water anywhere. Waterways are connected,” said Pam Goddard, grassroots organizer for the National Wildlife Federation.

A short time ago, Ohio Senator George Voinovich championed the Great Lakes during a hearing on the President’s lackluster budget proposals. As recently as Great Lakes Day, Voinovich appeared before the Healing Our Waters Coalition and extolled the virtues of the lakes. This makes it all the more confusing as to why he hasn’t leant support to the much needed CWRA. Without CWRA tributaries and wetlands connected to the Great Lakes will be unprotected – drinking water in some places will be in danger of being exposed to pollution – we need Voinovich to support CWRA.

Wisconsin’s Thomas Petri published a newsletter last April that stated “Protecting the Great Lakes: The Great Lakes are a national treasure, containing 90 percent of the United States’ fresh water. They provide resources to support millions of jobs, especially in the fishery and boating industries” yet his signature is not on CWRA. Also last Spring, New York’s Randy Kuhl worked tirelessly to get Congress to make up for the President’s budget cuts for a clean-up effort in West Valley – he feared that a delay could cause groundwater to be contaminated with radioactive waste. According to Kuhl, that groundwater is part of a “network of creeks and rivers that ultimately leads to Lake Erie and the Great Lakes.” Kuhl obviously understands that all waters are connected, why is he holding back his support of CWRA?

Most disturbing of all, two presidential candidates from Great Lakes states have shirked their responsibilities to their Great Lake constituents by failing to support CWRA: Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not only have both candidates praised the Great Lakes for their beauty and majesty but both have also promised to make restoring them a priority of their Administration if elected. Obama has said he will provide “real support, real financial resources and real leadership” for the Great Lakes. Clinton’s campaign has described her as a “longtime advocate for the protection and restoration of the Great Lakes.” Well, we hope their lack of support on CWRA is not a reflection of how dear they hold their pledge.

There are eleven other lawmakers from Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio and Pennsylvania that should also sponsor the bill and show their support by attending and speaking out at the House Committee hearing on April 16 and the Senate Committee hearing on April 9 – then, of course, please vote for it. We don’t want to go back to the days of rivers of fire. HOW will be watching to see when: Jerry Costello and Tim Johnson of Illinois, Tim Walz of Minnesota, Zack Space and Steve LaTourette of Ohio, and Pennsylvania’s Tim Holden, Jason Altmire, Chris Carney, Arlen Specter and Robert Casey, will lend their support.

(3 votes, average: 3.67 out of 5)

 Loading ...

Our Lakes and Rivers are Becoming Toxic: Vote For CWRA

This month both the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will hold hearings on the Clean Water Restoration Act. Thirty-five years after the landmark Clean Water Act was put into motion our water quality has improved somewhat but our goals continue to elude us. This isn’t helped by the fact that too many industrial and municipal facilities surrounding the Great Lakes and lining the rivers that flow into the lakes have violated EPA permit limits. Records show them dumping way more sewage, E.coli, mercury, PCBs, cancer-causing chemicals such as benzo(a)pyrene, suspended solids, and other pollutants into the waters than they are allowed. Everything from fish and wildlife habitats to drinking water and human health is impacted.

By the way, these permit violations reflect only the pollution being sent directly into the water and do not consider the air pollution that further affects water quality – such as the coal plants that release around 1400 pounds of mercury annually into the air - some of that mercury makes its way into the lakes and waterways. In fact, a recent federal study found that each year these plants are responsible for raining down about 880 pounds of mercury into Lake Michigan alone.

Currently, under CWA companies are required to get permits that limit the level of pollutants they can send into the waterways. The original plan was to tighten those limits over time, but state and federal regulators have not been consistent in lowering permit limits. In fact, outrageous though it may be, municipalities and companies are in massive violation of those permits and 40 percent of the waters that the violations have happened on are waters that are not protected by the EPA or the Corps due to recent Supreme Court decisions limiting the CWA protections to only navigable waters.

Last fall, the US Public Interest Research Group released a report explaining that in 2005, more than half (57 percent) of this nation’s major industrial and municipal facilities discharged more pollution into our waterways than allowed. Even worse, the average facility exceeded its pollution permit by discharging close to four times the legal limit.

The water pollution violations that sewer plants, power plants, mills and industry reported to the EPA in 2005 for the eight states surrounding the Great Lakes show that there is a real danger to the acres of wetlands, Great Lakes tributaries, rivers and streams as well as the Lakes themselves. Some examples follow:

-One Michigan municipality reported exceeding their permit limits of .002 pounds of mercury per day by 25 percent – sending the excess into the Detroit River. This was during one reporting period that lasts for one month. The federal government limits mercury discharges to .08 pounds annually.

-Another Michigan municipality exceeded their pounds per day permit limit for PCBs by 2,799 percent during the 11/30/05 reporting period. The monthly average limit is .0000069 lbs/day.

-During just one reporting period, an Indiana company admitted to dumping cyanide in excess of their daily maximum pounds per day by 29 percent.

-Gary Works Indiana is responsible for increasing the amount of toxic chromium it put into the Grand Calumet River that empties into Lake Michigan. The EPA is currently investigating Indiana’s Department of Environmental Management for poor decision making as it failed to limit the amount of mercury, lead, cyanide, ammonia and benzo(a)pyrene going into Indiana’s waters, according to reports in the Chicago Tribune.

Still, after reading the US PIRG report, I’d think twice about drinking the water in Indy – that same year, a lot of municipalities reported exceeding the amount of colony forming units of E. coli allowed under current law. A recent Chicago Tribune analysis of EPA data found that Lake County ranks third in the nation for health risks related to water pollution.

Raw sewage, chemicals, and poisons have been vexing the lakes and tributaries for years, in fact, they attracted national attention that helped get the Clean Water Act of 1972 enacted. Now, the law is less effective and the Bush administration is weakening it further by interpreting the Supreme Court decisions narrowly and aggressively cutting off the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction over too many sensitive waters.

The bottom line is that the Great Lakes and major tributaries are being polluted well beyond what is allowable under current law. A US Senate panel has been discussing expanding those protections. An amendment to CWA being offered by US Reps. Jim Oberstar, D- Minn. Russ Feingold , D-Wisc. would reestablish protection over all bodies of water whether or not a boat can float on them. If enacted, the words “waters of the United States” would replace “navigable waters” and protections would extend to wetlands and tributaries essential to providing clean drinking water and a healthy ecosystem – the source of life for us as well as a multibillion dollar hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation economy in our region. The approval of this legislation would go a long way toward the realization of the Great Lakes Collaboration Strategy.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...