This is the Environment Show. It's about our stewardship of the Earth and the beauty
and mystery of life in all its forms. I'm Peter Burling.
Coming up, Big Horn sheep in California are caught in a squeeze between developers
and want their habitat and the Fish and Wildlife Service which is not listed the most endangered
even though they're disappearing fast. Mike Dombak, Chief of the United States Forest Service,
explains the moratorium on road building and national forests. The trustees of reservations
is the oldest preservation organization in the country. They've been at it for 100 years.
And on the Earth calendar, great whales are headed for calving in the warm waters of
Baja, California. These stories and more coming up on the Environment Show.
In the desert lands of Southern California, there's a biological and political battle that's
ongoing. At the center of the struggle is the peninsula Big Horn sheep. Environmentalists
are trying to get the animal listed as an endangered species. Meanwhile, developers want more
of the animals habitat. And the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is trying to determine whether
the Big Horn deserves an endangered species listing. The Environment Show Stephen Westcott
explains how the plight of the peninsula Big Horn is an example of a man-made obstacles
many species face.
The most notable thing about the peninsula Big Horn sheep is its curved horns. They
have the stereotypical ram look with a skull and horns that can weigh up to 30 pounds.
The Big Horns are gray with some white markings. The males usually weigh about 225 pounds and
stand three feet tall at the shoulders. The females are smaller at about 120 to 160 pounds.
That's about twice the size of a domestic sheep. Visually, Big Horn sheep are hard to
miss. Yet fewer are being seen in Southern California's desert area, extending from just
below Palm Springs south to the Mexican border. Disease from domestic livestock killed many
of the sheep when European settlers came west 200 years ago. Today, Big Horn's face
much larger threats. Mark Jorgensen is a resource ecologist at the Anza Barrego Desert State
Park.
We instituted a large-scale study of the Big Horn population here in Anza Barrego in
1992. We placed about 100 radio collars on Big Horn throughout the park. Any and about
a three to four-year period now we have seen about 42 of those radio-colored animals have
been killed by mountain lions.
Another 10 animals are very suspected to have been killed by mountain lions. We didn't
find the amount of evidence that we did on the other 42, but it reflects a very high
incidence of kill by these large predators.
It is believed that urban sprawl is reducing habitats for both the mountain lion and peninsula
Big Horns and with nowhere to run the sheep are on the losing end of this battle. Mark Jorgensen
says Big Horn lambs are especially vulnerable.
As long as, say, 20 or 25 percent of the lambs survived each year, that would provide an adequate
number of new animals to replace. Animals have been killed by predators or disease or old age.
In good years, possibly 40 or 50 percent of the lambs might survive, but what we have
seen here at least in Southern California in the deserts is reduced habitat conflicts with
sensitive areas such as lamin areas and water holes, which are very critical during the summertime.
Until about 20 years ago, there were 1200 Big Horns and in around the Anza Barrego Desert
State Park. Today, their numbers are below 300. Fearful that Peninsula Big Horn sheep
were in danger of extinction, environmentalists filed a proposal to list the animal as an
endangered species in 1992. By law, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must act on the
proposal within a year. To date, the service has not made a decision.
Susan Saul, public affairs specialist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service says, the
biggest problem with this proposed listing was that scientists disagreed over whether
the peninsula Big Horn was a subspecies. Some people argue that these are just the same
as all the other desert Big Horn sheep in the mountains of California and Nevada, other
desert states in the southwest, and that there's no difference and they shouldn't be considered
any differently. While other scientists say that no, there are distinct genetic and physical,
morphological differences between these Big Horn sheep and the peninsula ranges and other
Big Horn sheep in California. As a taxonomy argument went on, the Republican
controlled Congress implemented a one-year moratorium in 1995 on any further endangered species
listing. By the end of 1996, only six species had been listed in the Pacific region. Last
year, 128 species had been listed, but the peninsula Big Horn was not among them. When
the moratorium ended, scientists had to pick up where they left off, deciding whether
peninsula Big Horn is a subspecies. This meant collecting new data because some of the
figures would have been outdated. Susan Saul says scientists have finally determined
that it is a distinct population. She believes a final decision on an endangered species
listing for the peninsula Big Horn will be made in the next few months. As the political
wrangling and scientific studies went on, development of Southern California's desert area
continued, which means more lost habitat. Again, Susan Saul.
The urban development is detrimental, although it's providing food and water. It's really
detrimental because these animals adapted. I've evolved in a dry desert environment. When
they get on moist ground like irrigated lawns or golf courses, they pick up a lot of parasites
and diseases. Also coming into the urban environment, it makes them more susceptible to
being hit by cars and predation on lambs and used by dogs, urban predators.
More development is planned for the area, consuming more Big Horn habitat, which means the endangered
species listing for the peninsula Big Horn sheep could be too little, too late. For the
Environment Show, I'm Stephen Westgond.
America's national forests are crisscrossed by roads, 380,000 miles of them. For the most
part, they've been constructed for the purpose of cutting timber and moving logs to market.
In recent years, the Forest Service Road Building Program has come under increasing attack.
The costs, whether born directly by the government or paid by giving logging companies free
trees in exchange for the construction, has led many critics to charge that the Forest
Service has incurred net losses on its timber sales for years. Environmentalist charge
roads are destroying wilderness. Last year, legislation to stop road building in National
Forests entirely failed passage in the U.S. Senate by a single vote. Last week, chief
of the U.S. Forest Service might Dumback initiated an 18-month moratorium on road building
at a review of the entire Forest Service Program. We spoke with him in Washington.
In the 191 million acres of National Forest System lands, we presently have about 380,000
miles of roads. Many of these roads were built decades ago associated with logging. In fact,
most of them were associated with logging. They were built to standards that are not adequate
today. Many of them are causing sedimentation problems and things like that. Habitat fragmentation,
the sediment running into the streams, the course influences and impacts the fish-pawning
habitat and other things in a negative way.
Dumback says that today, in many areas, the Forest Service Road System is more than just
a means of moving sautembrant to the mill. It's time to redefine the program. In the
eyes of some people of Forest Service roads equal logging, equal environmental problems,
because we don't have the funding to maintain the roads that we have in an adequate way,
and therefore all this equals bad. My first and foremost objective is to redefine
the underpinning policies of the Forest Service Road Program, based on the best science and technology
that we have available to date. There's lots of new science and a lot of new technology that need
to be applied. Then we have to blend that with the needs of local communities. When we're talking
about roads, Forest Service roads, we're talking about a transportation network for parts of rural
America that are very important to local citizens, to people that vacation there. These 380,000
miles of roads are far more than roads that just provide a place for logging trucks to go. You're
talking about hunters and fishermen, families on vacation. We need to determine of the 380,000
miles of roads that we have. What roads do we really need as part of a transportation network in rural
America? Then we've got to take care of those roads appropriately. Number 2, the roads that we
don't need, we need to be decommissioned to get them off the roads. They're not only bleeding
sediments in the streams, but also not costing us money. Dumback acknowledges that it is the
penetration of roadless areas that has caused most of the controversy. What we have done is
proposed a temporary suspension of road building into roadless areas. This has been the most
contentious part of the road's debate. The road building in roadless areas, we typically, the
projects, the timber sales that are proposed in roadless areas have been contentious. They've
been appealed, they've been litigated, and the fact is the forest services spending a lot of money
attempting to enter these roadless areas. In many cases, not getting a lot out of it. It's not
an economically sound investment of taxpayers' money. Although I want to say that in some areas,
they may be needed. This is why we need to step back and look at a policy as to
and a decision-making process based upon science. Do we need these new roads? Are there other
ways to get in there and do the work? You know, helicopter logging is much more prevalent today than
it was some years ago. Under the current plan, the moratorium on new roads would apply to roadless
areas of 5,000 acres or more, and 1,000 acre roadless parcels adjacent to national parks.
It would not apply in the Tongas Forest in Alaska or in parts of the northwest where new forest
plans are in place. The largest roadless areas left are in the rugged places of Idaho, where access
has been difficult. Dumbit points out that the issue is far more complicated than simply deciding
not to build roads in untouched forests. He says there's a $10 billion backlog of maintenance
needed for existing roads, and much of this is necessary to stop damage to streams at fish habitat
from road-induced erosion. Up to now, road-building budgets have been based on timber sales,
and as logging diminishes in national forests, a mechanism other than giving free trees to timber
companies will have to be found. I'm Peter Burley.
You're listening to the Environment Show. It's a national production as made possible by the
W. Alton Jones Foundation, the JM Kaplan Fund, the Oliver S. and Jenny R. Donaldson Charitable Trust,
the William Bingham Foundation and Hemings Motor News, the monthly Bible of the collector
Carhovy, 1-800-CA-R-H-E-R-E.
The Environment Show would like to hear from you. Give us a call. Our number is 1-888-49-Green.
That's 1-888-49-Green. Our email address is green at wamc.org. That's green at wamc.org.
You're listening to the Environment Show. I'm Peter Burley and ear to the ground is next.
I'm Linda Anderson and this is ear to the ground with stories about people affecting change
in the environment. This week, saving the treasures of the Massachusetts landscape.
From the Berkshire Mountains to Martha's Vineyard, the trustees of reservations
protects over 20,000 acres in Massachusetts. From historic sites to natural preserves,
these parcels, according to Wesley Ward, director of land conservation for the organization,
represent all the different geological and ecological features of the state.
We have several waterfalls. We have some farms. We have some mountain tops. We have extensive
freshwater wetlands, marshes, bogs and swamps. We have saltwater marshes.
Founded in 1891 by Charles Elliott, Ward says the trustees of reservations is one of the
oldest conservation organizations in the world. A prodigy of Frederick Law, Olmsted,
the designer of New York City's Central Park, Elliott began the organization out of a growing
concern about the loss of open space near Boston. At that time, Boston was developing very,
very rapidly and the large holdings around Boston were being eaten up by development.
He put together a group of his friends and peers and influential Boston folks, men and women,
and described his idea, which was to form an organization which would be like the museum of fine arts.
But instead of protecting paintings and sculpture would protect land and historic properties
that people were generous enough to give. Described as a living museum of the Massachusetts
landscape, the trustees protect such jewels as Manemcha Hills on Martha's Vineyard with its
spectacular views of the Elizabeth Islands, there's notch view in the Berkshire hill town of Windsor,
Rocky Narrows in Sherburn, known as the Gateway to the Child's River, plenty of coastline and
barrier beaches and a number of historic houses. What's unique about the land held by the
trustees' ward says is their accessibility to people. Our mission right from the first was to
provide public access and in the old terminology was public use and enjoyment of all of our properties.
So we have no property that's entirely off limits. Of course we have areas of property
which are so sensitive and so fragile that we limit access to those areas. Every one of our
properties is accessible to the public. Ward says over one million people visit the
reservations each year to picnic, hike, ski, swim, boat or just plain sight sea. Hundreds of
volunteers he adds offer their services as guides to the many donated or bought properties.
A non-profit organization the trustees are supported by membership dues, contributions,
grants and endowments. They also work closely with other organizations who share their mission
like the nature conservancy and the trust for public land. The trustees of reservations has
served as inspiration for a number of land trusts. Most notably the English National Trust.
The British Commonwealth countries, most of them, have national trust based on the English model.
Many developing countries now have trust based upon the English model.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation in this country is very closely parallel with
our organization and then many smaller land trusts throughout the country. More than a thousand
smaller land trusts throughout the country are basically modeled on the trustees of reservations,
on the concept of the trustees of reservations. Ward believes in the face of ever increasing
development pressure and rapidly rising land values throughout Massachusetts, efforts by the
trustees of reservations are as necessary as ever. 100 years of effort continues to ensure
that future generations can enjoy natural beauty throughout the state. With ear to the ground,
I'm Linda Anderson.
In now it's time for the Earth Calendar. As we speak, grey whales are migrating south along the
California coast. They're heading to the warm waters of Baja where they will give birth in the
lagoon. The grey whale migration begins in the bearing and chuk-chi seas where the females feed
heavily on crustaceans prior to making the 6,000-mile trip to the calving grounds.
Dr. Stephen Webster is the marine science advisor for moderate Bay Aquarium in moderate California.
Grey whales are highly migratory. They're very predictable. They're actually passing
here in central California right now on their way from the bearing sea and the Gulf of Alaska
down to the warmer calm lagoon on the west coast of Baja California. That's about 6,000 miles in
each direction. So this is the longest migration of any mammal on the globe. They typically start
passing here in mid to late December and the rush is on right now. Most of them will have gone by
by early to mid February. Typically it's the pregnant mothers who are the first to head south
because they're in a hurry to get down there and bear the calves and then have about three
months nursing the calf in the lagoon getting them ready for the northward migration again next
spring. The typical female gives birth every other year with a gestation period being about 12
months. Females mate every other year. The males mate every year. When the baby whale is born,
the mother nudges the calf to the surface for the first breath of air. Mother and calf are then
inseparable from that point until the calf is weaned eight months later. Dr. Webster says grey whales are
a middle sized whale compared to the giant blue whale which is the largest of the baline whales
at about 100 feet in length and 150 tons in weight. Full size grey whale female may be 45 to 50 feet in
length probably weighs about that many tons. When the calf is born it's about 16 feet long and by the
time they pass here the following March or April the calf is already 22 or 23 feet long and probably
weighs two or three tons at that point. The calf is nursed all the way back north during that
northward migration on a very fatty rich milk that as with other whales and dolphins is about
the consistency of cottage cheese so that it's literally injected into the mouth of the calf
when they're nursing underwater. Grey whale populations have made a comeback in recent years.
They were taken off the endangered species list about two years ago. Their numbers today are
estimated at 20 to 23 thousand but life can still be a struggle especially for the calves. We have had
sightings of a small pot of orcas feeding on grey whale calves in and around Monterey Bay.
Each of the last two or three years now. One of the repercussions of the expanding population
appears to be that more and more frequently a few of the pregnant females are giving birth here
rather than waiting until they get clear down to the lagoon and when they give birth on the outer
coast rather than in the lagoon they're in much more jeopardy of attack by killer whales.
Dr. Webster adds that killer whales are a greater threat to the grey whales than sharks.
By mid-April the mothers and calves are now padded with blubber from the winter stay a long
boha and ready to make the two and a half month trip back to the Arctic. While childbirth may be
difficult for us a 6,000-mile trip to the delivery room would be a whale of a problem.
Thanks for listening this is the Environment Show and I'm Peter Burley.
This is the Environment Show and I'm Peter Burley. Still ahead. A new treaty protecting the
Antarctic has just gone into effect. Professor Elizabeth Lawrence, a veterinarian and
anthropologist talks about hunting rams, an ancient ritual stemming from a spiritual relationship
between humans and the songbird. We talk green about factory hog farms and what to do with a
byproduct that's not bacon. And Daniel Dwayne presents a portrait of a cove on the California coast
where sharks, surfers and kelp are found together. Stay with us.
You're listening to the Environment Show. I'm Peter Burley. An international treaty recently
went into effect which protects the Antarctic from oil drilling and other human activities.
While the treaty isn't flawless some environmentalists say it's a starting point.
The Environment Show Stephen Westcott has more. The Antarctic Environmental Protocol or
Madrid Treaty is some call it went into effect last month. Among the 26 nations that sign the
treaty are the US. Most European countries, Russia, Canada, Japan and a number of countries in
South America. The treaty bans all oil drilling and mineral exploitation for a minimum of 50 years
on Antarctica. It also establishes a permit procedure for all visits including both tourist and
government sponsored expeditions. Susan Sibella, director of the biodiversity campaign for Greenpeace says
the treaty is a product of about 10 years of work. It was negotiated in 90 and 91 and was finally
adopted by the Antarctic Treaty parties in the fall of 1991. It followed several years of debate
and discussions about whether or not to open the continent to mining and oil development.
At one point there was another agreement that was on the table and in fact had been adopted
and that was an agreement that would permit regulated mining in Antarctica.
Sibella says a number of petroleum and mining companies were pushing to go to the Antarctic.
Technological advances were making it easier for them to drill in such areas. She says environmental
groups heard of the plans and lobbied for the protection of Antarctica's resources. Something
this treaty helps to do. There is a spectacular reserve of wildlife in the Antarctic,
you know, whales and seals and penguins and fish galore in the Antarctic. It's really a spectacular
place but it also has great importance in terms of its ability to function as a global laboratory.
It's probably the most pristine environment left on the planet where you can detect things
like the ozone hole or drill through the ice and see climate patterns and pollution and things
kind of trapped in the ice in a core of ice for decades and decades and decades.
But the treaty is imperfect. Sibella says it allows for the incineration of waste at scientific
stations. She also believes large-scale fishing could eventually hurt the marine ecosystem.
There's a growing problem globally with the depletion of fish stocks and one area that a number
of countries and a number of companies are eyeing right now is the international waters around
the Antarctic and fishing has been increasing there. There is a convention that regulates commercial
fishing activities but doesn't have any teeth. It has no enforcement and illegal fishing in the
region has increased dramatically over the past I would even say five years. Greenpeace officials say
longliners nets that are strung for miles with hundreds of hooks are one of the biggest threats
to marine wildlife. In the Antarctic waters fishermen seek such lucrative fish as the southern
bluefin tuna and the Patagonian toothfish. But hundreds of other species are often caught in the
process which means that while the Madrid protocol is a step in the right direction more still needs
to be done. For the Environment Show, I'm Stephen Westcott.
The relationship between human beings and animals is as old as the human race. Beyond being a food
source, animals have been part of our religions, our myths and our spirituality. A scholar and author
who has thought a lot about our relations with wildlife is Dr. Elizabeth Atwood Lawrence.
Both a veterinarian and an anthropologist, she is professor of environmental studies that the
Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine. She discusses her latest book which is entitled
Hunting the Rem transformation of Bird to Symbol. What is the Rem Hunt?
Well, it's a very ancient tradition that is no longer carried out at least with the
live bird. It hasn't been since probably the middle of the 1800s but the Rem was a very tiny bird.
It is a very tiny bird that people in certain parts of the Celtic world hunted.
We think because of a sacrificial ritual. In other words, in those days people believed that we had
to do something to make the sun return that people were so dependent on nature that if the
sun didn't return around the time of the Celtic world would be in trouble and people would die
and there would be no more vegetation and no more of the world as we know it. So they were very
anxious to do that and to do rituals that would bring that about. And one of these rituals
as far as what we can construct about the ancient past had to do with killing the ran about the
time of the Celtic and order to make the sun return. What were some of the elements of these
ritualized ranhunts? Well, men and boys would get together in the morning of a certain day
usually around the solstice or Christmas or Christmas Eve or sometimes in some places the
1st of January but almost always about the time of the solstice and they would go out and
beat the bushes and try to kill a little ran and once they had done that they displayed the body
in certain very ritualized ways sometimes without stretched wings or on a bow of holly or ivy
or the end of a long pole and they would parade it around that way and go to people's homes
asking for money or contributions of food or drink or whatever.
One of the things that you also point out is that the ranh seems in these traditions to have
taken on a dual role one that represented perhaps hope and goodness and the other that represented
evil in the battle. How did that come about? Well that came about because people over the century
didn't have the same belief systems that they had when this ritual was invented or grew up
but the people kept doing this procedure out of tradition and because it became fun
on the Isle of Man for instance there's a very deeply entrenched legend about a beautiful fairy
that led men into the sea with a beautiful voice and caused them to drown and they couldn't
someone they just couldn't seem to fight this happening and the population of men was going down
so somebody came up with an idea to get rid of this fairy but she and the nick of time transformed
into a rin and so every that's their justification every year to hunt the rin because it would be
some it would be another form of this wicked fairy that had lured men into the sea.
One of the things that you say that really got me thinking was and I'm going to read just a
sentence from the book you say the run hunt like other rituals that's once connected humankind
with the earth and its inhabitants represents much of what the modern industrialized world have lost.
Could you reflect on that for a moment? Yes I think that's the important point that comes out of all
this is that before the pre-industrialized people felt so attached to nature and natural
processes that they felt they could influence it. They were not masters of nature. They had to go
along with it and work with nature so that they did these rituals and directed their lives in certain
ways so that they could work with nature and be part of nature and influence nature. We have become
detached from that being very arrogant and think in their idea that we're masters of nature
and that's the this studying this ritual shows the difference between the pre-industrialized people
and how far we've come in thinking that we are the lords of the earth and that everything has to
go the way we want it. That was Dr. Elizabeth Atwood Lawrence. Her new book is entitled Hunting the
Rim, Transformation of Bird to Symbol. It's published by the University of Tennessee Press.
We're talking green and I'm Peter Burley. Today we're going to talk about factory farming and
handling of animal waste. Last summer you'll remember that a outbreak of Physdaria,
Piscocita, killed a lot of fish in Chesapeake Bay and it also posed a threat to human health
and scientists thought that one cause could be run off from factory farms. And in the last 15 years
meat production has become increasingly concentrated. The number of hog farms is dropped by two
thres but we still produce the same number of pigs. Two percent of our feedlot operations produce
40 percent of a cattle that is sold and chicken production has tripled while the number of farms
with with broiler houses has decreased by 35 percent. And so right now it seems that five
tons of animal waste is produced each year for every person in the United States and that's in
contrast to 80 pounds of human waste. So it seems that factory farming is generating a more manure
that can be spread on surrounding fields and Senator Tom Harkin is proposing federal legislation
that would require treatment of excess animal waste the same way that we treat sewage from cities
and towns. Is this a good idea? Give us a call. Our number is 1-888-49-green. My guest today are
two experts. Robin Marks. She's senior policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council which
is a national environmental group. She's in Washington and Andy Bumert who is director of
Environmental Services for the National Park Producers Council and he joins us from Iowa.
Andy Bumert let's start with you. Is federal legislation dealing with animal waste a good idea?
We've been very active feeder in working with on a bipartisan basis and with regulatory agencies
particularly EPA and taking a look at the need for national standards and national guidance on
environmental regulations for livestock operators. We were involved just in the past year with EPA,
USDA and with state regulatory agencies in a national dialogue on environmental regulatory aspects
related to pork production and that process developed what I think is a very good comprehensive
framework of example legislation or model legislation that could be used by regulators at any level
state or federal level or by other folks interested in the topic as well. I would take issue
Peter with a couple of things or perhaps maybe add some perspective to some of the information that
you mentioned in your introduction. I think it's important to understand where all the sources of
nutrients are in our streams. We're very concerned about the enrichment of streams with excess
nutrients that some folks have linked to things like fisteria. Our industry, the pork industry is
concerned about our share. We produce about 12 percent of the menorah that's produced in the
country. That's not a very large percent. We're committed very strongly to doing the best job
possible and providing the information and the management skills to our producers so that they
can do the best job possible in managing that. Okay, well let's give Robin Marks' chance.
We're not suggesting that pork producers are responsible for all the indirect sources. The
real issue here is how we deal with what is a somewhat new phenomenon of factory farm situation,
new in terms of the last couple of decades. Robin, where do you come out on how we manage
the factory farm from an environmental standpoint? Well, I think what we're looking at is a
major pollution problem and generally one that's until now been pretty much kind of unregulated,
even where regulations occur or exist. There's very little enforcement, very little control. We've
got a situation here where there's a lot of controls put on human waste but this massive quantity
of animal waste that we're producing is kind of allowed to pollute without a lot of consequences
or attention given to it. What we're starting to see is some real pollution problems.
We're seeing spills and leakages from lagoons used by factory farms and improper land application
of manure just from June through September of 1995 over 50 million gallons of manure and urine
killed millions of fish in 13 separate spills in North Carolina, Iowa, Minnesota, and Missouri.
Possible human health impacts linked to feedlots include rashes, breathing difficulties,
memory loss. All right, well let's I think let's recognize that factory farms produce a lot of
manure that there have been problems in some places. The question then is how to deal with this.
And Andy, you are talking about some kind of framework legislation. Does that mean ultimately the
construction of sewage treatment plants in some places to deal with this issue? I don't know the
sewage treatment plants are the answer Peter. Frankly, historically the way animal manure has been
has been handled has been to use it as a crop nutrient and for the long term and for the future
of the industry that obviously is the way that needs to occur. This manure has really tremendous
value as a fertilizer. Well of course and isn't the issue here not that it's not but that given the
concentration of the factory farm you simply get more in one place than can be absorbed by the
soil and spread it away that doesn't cause runoff. I mean isn't that a new circumstance that we
have to deal with? Our position is that a concentrated animal feeding operation needs to comply with
the law that is there and that essentially is this. They have to totally contain all that manure
at the site and land apply that material in a way that does not cause surface or groundwater
pollution. Now when we talk about a municipal waste treatment structure those facilities are
required to treat that manure but then they are allowed to discharge the effluent and in fact
in one year and this is an estimate from the US Geologic Survey 3.2 billion pounds of nitrogen
were legally discharged from municipal facilities in the United States. Now that I think is a
significant cause of concern for nutrient enrichment of the treatment plants for factory farms
isn't going to get us there. Robin how do you think that? Well I think there's definitely some
problems with the way that human waste is treated also but what we don't need is the situation
that we're in right now where when you can visualize the size of the lagoon and the underground
storage pits that these waste is kept and they're literally acres and acres large. They're just
waiting for a disaster strike and I think what we don't need are sort of slightly better, a little
bit better at lagoon. What we need is a different kind of system because as you point out,
what was that anticipated? What was this? What was this?
Trading the industry like this and anyway and now we've got this lagoon technology which was
maybe appropriate for smaller operations has now been taken to kind of outrageous proportions
where we're just the lagoon the manure is just sitting out there waiting for problems to
run. So what is the approach? What is the approach that you would recommend to deal with this?
I think what we've got to do is move to systems where we don't have such a wet product where it's
not just waiting out there in a wet form to cause surface and groundwater problems. We've got to
move to drier systems, less concentrated systems. We've got to move to systems which are not so
risky. No one would think it was a good idea to just put a lot of human waste out there waiting
for a rainstorm. If I could interject something here Peter, I agree that there's no excuse for
situations where spills occur. I think the evidence points out that livestock
lagoons are much less likely to have those kind of catastrophic spills than municipal facilities.
In fact during the hurricane season in North Carolina in 1996, 68% of the municipal
treatment facilities discharged raw sewage and that's 122 facilities at the same time during
the same hurricane season, less than 1% of the livestock lagoons. Only about 22 facilities
had a similar discharge. I mean I think we need to say that. Hold on just a minute.
Wait a minute, Robin. I just want to clarify this first. Andy, are you saying that from your
perspective then the lagoon is viable technology. In some circumstances, the lagoon is the proper
technology. It's not the only technology. In fact in many areas of the country, it's not commonly
used. It's our view that the technology needs to be matched to the production system and that
technology needs to achieve the same goal. We've got about 20 seconds left. 10 seconds from each of
you. Does federal legislation make sense here or not? Robin? I think we need to have a strong
national standard, state standards and local standards. Okay. And Andy, where do you come out of
that one? Peter, we thank National Guidelines for very appropriate and the state regulatory agencies
are very well equipped to carry those out. Okay. Well, I want to thank you both and I'm sorry our time
is up because we just begun this issue, but we've been talking about animal waste, water pollution
and factory farming. I guess it's been Robin Marx from the National Resources Defense Council and
Andy Bamert from the National Port Producer's Council. We want to know what you think about this
issue. Our number is 1-888-49-Green. We've been talking green and I'm Peter Burley.
You can hear the environment show anytime on your personal computer. Visit our website
it's www.enn.com slash ENVSHOW or you can send us an email message at green at wamc.org
.
We all have places that are special to us.
For some it's a city street, for others it's deep in the wilderness.
For author Daniel Dwayne it's a cove off the California coast, where kelp grows and sharks appear.
In this portrait of place, Dwayne reads from his book titled,
Caught Inside, a surfers year on the California coast.
As I walked out to the beach with my surfboard under my arm, a storm was just clearing,
another dark cloud reaching into the sky from behind the hills, a new finger of whether the
clouds occasional raindrops hit yesterday's puddles and rippled a reflection of clear sky.
New yellow mustard had popped up between storms and painted the hills with a smattering of
cheer among all the hard, arid green, and even the marsh hawks stayed low over the sodden remnants
of the hemlock. Squalows chirped a bit in the muddy fields, not as thrilled as they'd be in a
month or two, just talking and bouncing over a run-alive water along the trail.
Little thistles and ferns newly green and alive smelled of exuberance amid rot, of two messants and blooming as the very grass swelled.
Out in the water I rode a few small disorganized waves, a pod of dolphins swam by,
and then the waves stopped coming. It became very quiet with just the cove of a gul,
the slosh of a surfacing loon, strange after the waves dined.
A big hunk of kelp seemed humanoid and green succulents hung like moss off the cliffs,
seaweed smell, clouds smearing in spirals and sheets, so strange not to see a single otter seal or
sealion. The dolphins were long gone and I was loitering in the food chain. When a big shark
surfaces, they say, one sees first a footprint of surging displaced water, much like the
boils whelling up all around me. My bladder began to complain as I remembered the great white's
tremendous sense of smell, discerning mammalian urine at one part per 10 million. How often is peeing
a genuine surrender to fate? Shark thoughts led my eye back to the land, where a stand of slate-gray
monoray pines towered on the bluff. Thick and breeze-worn trunks with spare broad limbs,
no fluttering leaves, no undignified capillary branches. Death entirely forgotten.
I watched them not watch the water, they had not watched for twice my lifetime,
and wondered how this somber cops of trees bent from decades of prevailing winds. Could assert
daily to me here in the water a palpable peace, an anchor of stately sameness, because it did,
lately, the way a certain temple's aspect toward an urban river might let a native ignore
a year after year, the changing mix of street garbage, and even the clergy's lamentable choice
of new stained glass windows. The way those trees leaned south eastward, without any visible shove,
conjured now, a quiet, and properly paced passage of time, as if to say you've found what you needed,
waves will continue to break below these trees, and over this reef, and will continue to give whatever
it is you imagine they give you. Much, I suppose, as would another man's fly fishing stream, or ski
trail, a place whose geometry has been imprinted enough times in his eyes to keep him ever at its imaginary
center. Funny too that just walking up here for a look each day would never have brought me to
accepting this one cove as my lawfully wedded life. That came only in drifting hard enough
in the very wind warping those branches that I needed a kelp mooring wrapped around my thigh.
That was author Daniel Dwayne. His book is Caught Inside, a surfer's year on the California coast.
It's published by North Point Press.
And just a final thought. On the second day of this month, a ground hog named Phil made his
annual trip out of his hole. Punxitani, Pennsylvania's weather forecasting furry friend saw his shadow,
indicating another six weeks of winter. Reports say Phil has seen his shadow 100 out of the last
112 years, which leaves us to wonder, with a ground hog being that old, how can he be expected to see
anything let alone make long-term weather forecasts. Thanks for being with us on this week's
environment show. I'm Peter Burley. Do not invest in a hog farm and Antarctica without
getting a copy of the tape of his show, called 1-800-49-Green in order show number 423.
The environment show is a national production, which is solely responsible for its content.
Alan Shartock is executive producer, Steven Westcut is producer, and Steve Wattley is audio engineer.
The environment show is made possible by the W. Alton Jones Foundation, the Packard Foundation,
the Turner Foundation, the Oliver S. and Jenny R. Donaldson Charitable Trust,
the William Bingham Foundation and Heming's Motor News, the monthly Bible of the collector
Carholy, 1-800-CAR-HRE. Be good to the earth and join us next week for the environment show.
