an archive of comments on bigeastern.com from 2004 to 2008

bigeasternotes archive

31Oct2008 - Pre-election Tunes

So you've voted early and need something to occupy your mind while you wait to see if the good ole' USA will, maybe, start moving forward. Avoid the last minute wingnut vitriole by enjoying this excellent and oh-so-mellow Concert by Iron and Wine on Fabchannel. (Yes, you'll need a fast link).

8Oct2008 - Fact Check the Debate

I went up to SW Michigan this weekend to visit a couple of wineries. They have plenty of Obama/Biden signs up there; apparently my initial impression that they didn't send one to us because of our zip code was the correct one. So (thankfully) it doesn't appear there will be any changes in the Democratic ticket.

If you watched the debates, it's worthwhile to do a little fact checking afterwards -- some of what is said in a debate is simply misleading, but to be fair to the candidates, it really is difficult to distill a complex matter into a spiffy one minute blurb. Here's an excellent -- and to my view nonpartisan -- critical review of the representations by both candidates: Fact check: Obama, McCain twist records.

I always seem to watch the debates, but I'm not sure how great they really are. Perhaps it's my courtroom experience. I keep wanting to say: 'your honor, please instruct the witness to answer the question.'

Regardless of how you think the candidates preformed, here's what I see as the bottom line -- a McCain presidency would be very little differenct than the Bush presidency.

25Sep2008 - Letterman: 'Where's John McCain'

John McCain bails on David Letterman, and the host is not happy [LA Times] Senator McCain stood up David Letterman on last night's Late Show on CBS so he could go fix Washington. But, in fact Sen. McCain was still in New York, about five blocks away in makeup for a Katie Couric interview. Senator McCain (not known for his technical savvy) didn't realize the two CBS studios are linked by an internal video network. Hilarity ensues...sort of. Watch the video: Where's John McCain.

'

24Sep2008 - Keilor: 'Where is the Outrage?

Where is the outrage? - Garrison Keilor on the financial crisis -- 'John McCain decries greed on Wall Street and suggests a commission be formed to look into the problem. This is like Casanova coming out for chastity.'

23Sep2008

Visclosky demands river chief's resignation - After major floods from the remnants of Ike, Congressman Viscloskey looks for a major shakeup of the Little Calumet River Basin Development Commission.

Loan Titans Paid McCain Adviser Nearly $2 Million - 'Senator John McCain' s campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations...' [9.21.2008 - Kirkpatrick and Duhigg - NYTimes]

Sean Hannity's late-night intermercial of Rep. VP candidate Sarah Palin went beyond cozy -- but no need to watch it, you can catch the four or five talking points on this Countdown mashup viddy -- but it's just 60 seconds, so don't blink.

17Sep2008 - Links: Election, Community impacts of CAFOs

Check out Bootstrap Analysis: Election Linkfest 1 for some excellent Obama v. McCain links. I particularly liked the comparison between Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin in terms of education. Personally, I want smart people running the USA -- really smart people.

Here's a Purdue Extension paper showing that generally, CAFOs have a negative impact on neighboring property values: Community Impacts of CAFOs: Property Values. The Purdue extension, naturally attempts to --- shall we say --- put some lipstick on the pigs, but the conclusion is inescapable. A CAFO nearby trashes your property value. Kudos to Purdue for stating the facts even when it hurts.

An interdisciplinary group of academics from CAFO states published a 'mini-mongraph' in 2.2007: Community Health and Socioeconomic Issues Surrounding Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. The paper provides a quick overview of community, legal and policy issues raised by CAFOs, including a sensible set of proposals for action. I would add that more research needs to be done, especially on controlling the risk of groundwater contamination.

15Sep2008 - Tunes for the flood formerly known as Ike

Mercy, we had a lot of rain up here in NWIndiana over the weekend. Reports vary from a peak of 12" at the Bernacchi home in Union Mills, Laporte County, to 10.5" officially measured in Crown Point to about 7.5" here in North Judson. I say 'about' because that person reported their rain gauge overtopped, so who knows exactly.

Here's a classic video to clean up by: Stormy Weather by Lena Horne (1943). Perfection! She's still among us at age 91. There's been a little talk of a biopic about Lena Horne featuring Alicia Keyes in the title role.

Here's America's greatest flood song: Louisiana 1927 by Randy Newman.

Dylan's: Down in the Flood live in 1995

11Sep2008 - It's about those failed Republican policies

Now folks, let's get serious. The war in Iraq, the hideous explosion of federal debt, the failure of government regulators to adequately protect the public from gross financial misconduct and the resulting banking disaster, utter negligence in dealing with energy independence and climate change...oh did I mention the Katrina debacle. Oh yeah, the plummet of the once mighty dollar, the wasting of the resources of the military and utter destruction of America's image. And yes, the 9/11 attacks happened on their watch.

I could go on, but even if you put lipstick on it, that's one dead horse. The Republican administrations of the past 8 years have been an unmitigated disaster. A never-ending series of disasters, actually.

Now the Republicans are talking about 'change'. The fact is they are still pursuing yet more extreme right-wing policies, the very policies that have so seriously damaged the US, and almost everybody in it. Yes, almost everybody. It's been a pretty sweet ride for the ultra-rich 1% or so who are shamelessly manipulating the emotions of the American people.

But despite the efforts of the filthy-rich to keep control, we still have a choice. More of the same -- or one of the most brilliant and talented Americans in generations -- Barack Obama. Folks if you think things have gotten better under the Bush presidency, you should vote for McCain -- but first, please see you doctor. You may need an adjustment in your medication.

If, however, like me you see America in serious danger of slipping into the second tier of nations, I suggest you do what I plan to do. Vote straight Democratic.

Sure, you can correctly point out that some of the problems are partially the Democrats' fault too. But we really only have two choices: continue supporting the failed, obsolete policies of the Republicans, or break with the past and go Democratic.

America is so blessed to have a candidate of the intelligence, leadership skills, calmness and charm of Barack Obama, backed up by the experience of Joe Biden.

Here's a viddy of Senator Obama on last night's David Letterman Show.

4Sep2008

Yesterday I downloaded and installed Google's new Chrome browser to a couple of my machines - both run versions of MS-XP. Generally, I'm fond of Google's approach to software, especially their efforts to keep interfaces clean and not too commercialized. Chrome is no exception; it's clean and functional. My one major gripe so far is that it's impossible to turn off underlining, and that will probably keep me using Firefox most of the time. But Chrome offers some interesting functionality -- here's a link to DOWNLOAD CHROME. Right now it's for windows only. The install is extremely quick and easy and it's free, so there's really no reason not to try it.

I wouldn't watch the Republican convention on a bet. Here's a Rep-Con antidote - Bush Tours America from the Onion, America's finest news source.

3Sep2008

Generally I'm not much of a fan of Larry King Live -- his know-nothing stance just keeps reminding me of Sesame Street's Big Bird. But here's a YouTube viddy of a recent discussion of Sarah Palin on LKL that I found amusing.

Fans of genuine American Rock and Roll are directed to the FabChannel for a fine performance by the Drive-By Truckers live at the Paradiso in Amsterdam just a couple of weeks ago. BTW, they're appearing in Bloomington in November.

Evidence of an fairly extensive urbanized culture have been found in the Amazon rain forest at Xingu National Park. Here's SciAm's short piece: Ancient Amazon Actually Highly Urbanized.

Unemployment rate soars for manufacturing sector [8.15.2008 - WSBT] provides a glimpse of the shocking reality of the manufacturing downturn in northern Indiana, especially in the RV industry. There's no doubt that the workers displaced by the RV downturn are skilled and diligent, but who exactly thought building giant houses on wheels was a sustainable industry? And does this look like an 'economic hot streak"?

5Aug2008 - Photos of Coast to Coast of Indiana 2008

Last weekend saw the running of the 2008 edition of the Coast to Coast of Indiana, a benefit for Cystic Fibrosis research. The year the race ended at the Dunes station of the South Shore Line. The winners were perennial C2C master, 'Rotten Robbies' of Crawfordsville. Here are some photos of the finish.

24Jul2008 - Photos of North Judson - Monterey Trail Grant Ceremony

The growing bipartisan support for rail/trails in Indiana was in evidence yesterday as Gov. Mitch Daniels visited North Judson to celebrate a $450,000 IDNR grant to start construction of the North Judson - Monterey Trail on the former Erie J-K line right-of-way. The event was well attended by local dignitaries of both political parties, trail supporters (and a few who were less supportive). The weather was perfect.

I photographed the event and have posted a public Picasa Web Album:
POSTED HERE.

You can get hi-res versions of the photos with captions by following the link, but below is a smaller version slideshow as an embed.

21Jul2008 - Rail-Trail Action in North Judson

Indiana governor Mitch Daniels will appear at Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum at 507 Mulberry Street, North Judson at 10:00 am CDT Wednesday July 23, 2008 for a celebration of the kickoff to construction of the North Judson segment of a rail/trail on the former site of the Erie Railroad. The 17 mile former Erie JK line right-of-way between North Judson and Monterey (in Pulaski County) has been railbanked. During the first construction phase 2.77 miles from North Judson east will be paved, along with about half a mile from Monterey west.

The public is invited to attend the ceremony. You can DOWNLOAD THE OFFICIAL INVITATION POSTER HERE.

18Jun2008 - Elegy for the Winnebago

Worth reading: Garrison Keillor's Elegy for the Winnebago.

12Jun2008 - Hi-res photos - two wetland plants

The main reason, I suppose, that posts have been so scarce here in the past year or so, is that I've been unsure about how to use the Internet now that it's 2008 and all. It has changed so much since the early days when I was more actively involved in all things netty. But one excellent development is the drastic improvement in Internet speed for most users, and also the quality of display devices. And digi-cams have become much better too.

One of the first things I wanted to do when I started posting online over a decade ago was to try to make high quality images of natural areas more accessible. I'm going back to that well again, and will be posting large images of natural stuff here in downloadable format, in sizes that would have been impractical not too long ago. As always, I offer images of natural things for free use to students doing reports, and generally license them freely to anybody using them non-commercially to help protect natural areas or to educate the public about them. I offer them for reasonable fees for commercial use too: that's how I pay for my cameras. Of course, you can download them and use them any way you want on your own machine as long as you're not selling them, or otherwise using them commercially.

Here are three images from a jaunt into a prairie/savanna marsh at Lena Park, in Starke County on June 10, 2008. The images are all several meg, so you probably won't want to download these through a slow link.

Osmunda cinnamomea w/ fertile fronds - portrait

Osmunda cinnamomea w/ fertile fronds - landscape

Iris virginica flower

11Jun2008 - Some reading.

I ran across a piece by Ari J. Kaufman recently, Taking the Pulse of the Heartland. I always cringe a little with the 'heartland' thing. I think Indiana might be more like, say, kidneys, if you want to do some kind of internal organ metaphor. Or maybe a pancreas. And to coastal types, heartland is usually just the punch line to some kind of come on -- you know, 'Terror in the Heartland', 'Starving in the Heartland'. That sort of thing.

But Mr. Kaufman's piece, about his socio-political take on his stop off in Winamac is really quite amusing and insightful. I don't share his conservative viewpoint, but he doesn't allow his political leanings to color his observations excessively. It turns out Mr Kaufman is a recent transplant from LA (my least favorite US city, I would have to say). I've added a link to his series in PajamasMedia. I like reading the views from a range of political viewpoints, but it's become difficult to find decent right leaning writers.

On the other end of the spectrum, here's an interesting piece from In These Times: Does the E.U. Hate You?.

I plan to post more often. Really. I mean it. Thanks for dropping by.

24May2008 - Indiana Coast to Coast 2008 format announced

The format for the fifth annual Indiana Race Coast to Coast is announced here. This year the first leg will be from Evansville to Crawfordsville, the same as last year. The second segment, from Crawfordsville to the sandy shores of Lake Michigan will be a time trial this year, a new format for the Indiana C2C. In its 5th year, the C2C is becoming established as one of the premier cycling events in Indiana, and is certainly one of the most challenging team events in the Midwest region.

19Mar2008 - Tulsa case highlights Microbial Source Tracking evidence

People working to clean up rivers, streams and other waterways are, at times, stymied by the difficulty in proving the source of the contamination. It's widely recognized that high e-coli bacteria counts are linked to untreated fecal material in the water, but the source is not so obvious. Is it from manure spread on fields, from failing septic systems, from combined sewer overflows, or wildlife? It may seem intuitively obvious that the huge quantities of manure spread on fields from CAFOs and similar operations are the likely major culprit, but proving it is another thing. And, of course, sometimes the obvious answer turns out to be wrong.

The new field of microbial source tracking (MST) applies scientific methods to attempt to sleuth out the source of microbial contamination. The researchers look for variations in characteristics of microbial populations according to their source and attempt to draw conclusions about the source of contamination. MST remains controversial, but possibly there are people (and well funded companies) who don't want the problem of identifying the wrongdoers to be solved -- it's a bit like the global warming debate.

Recent litigation in the federal court in Tulsa Oklahoma revolves around MST evidence related to the huge poultry industry in Arkansas. The Oklahoma attorney-general contends that manure from the Arkansas poultry industry is polluting the Illinois River (not the same Illinois River that runs through Illinois) and causing damage in Oklahoma. The Oklahoma A-G is seeking an injunction in federal court. The articles linked below, mostly by Robert Smith of the Arkansas Democrat, give a chronological account of the case, and especially the arguments about the MST evidence.

Traced bacteria, scientist says - 'Harwood said she tracked a fecal bacteria biomarker, finding it in poultry houses, in fields where poultry litter was spread, in nearby ditches, in groundwater and in rivers. She analyzed 200 samples of water, soil and poultry litter to reach her conclusions.' [2.22.2008 - Smith - Ark. Democrat]

Science key to Oklahoma's poultry litter case - 'Oklahoma seeks a preliminary injunction in U. S. District Court at Tulsa to ban poultry litter spreading on farm fields in the watershed. A hearing on the matter ran from Feb. 19-22 and picks up again for another three days, starting today.' [3.3.2008 - Smith - Ark. Democrat]

Judge suggests he'll treat litter as 'solid waste' - 'A portion of the federal law defines solid waste as 'any garbage, refuse, sludge from a waste treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, semisolid or contained gaseous material resulting from agricultural and other types of operations.' [3.4.2008 - Smith - Ark. Democrat]

Expert disputes bacteria findings - Poultry company's expert disputes MST study linking poultry to river contamination; judge annoyed by repetitive evidenced. [3.11.2008 - Smith - Ark. Democrat]

Closing arguments made in poultry case - 'Bacteria from the waste of more than 140 million chickens raised each year in the Illinois River watershed has polluted the land and poses a serious health threat to thousands of people, Oklahoma's attorney general told a federal judge.' [3.13.2008 - Forbes]

Backgrounder: for those ready for deeper waters: Performance, Design, and Analysis in Microbial Source Tracking Studies - [2007 - Stoekel, Harwood - U of S.Fla]

5Mar2008 - Iraq war costs

It amazes me how little attention the US 'news' media is devoting to the debacle in Iraq. The costs continue to mount, and the US economy will be suffering for many years; it's possible the damage is permanent. Here's a little something to think about: The $2 Trillion Nightmare [3.4.2008 - Herbert - NYTimes].

A quote: 'Because the administration actually cut taxes as we went to war, when we were already running huge deficits, this war has, effectively, been entirely financed by deficits. The national debt has increased by some $2.5 trillion since the beginning of the war, and of this, almost $1 trillion is due directly to the war itself ... By 2017, we estimate that the national debt will have increased, just because of the war, by some $2 trillion.'

4Mar2008 - Pew commission warns on CAFOs; IndyStar going green?

On the CAFO front here's a report from the Pew Commission Expert Panel Highlights Threats to Public Health and Environment from Industrial Animal Agriculture Wastes [2.29.2008 - Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production]. 'As the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers lifting a requirement that industrial farming facilities report their toxic gas emissions, a panel of experts today told Congress that the vast amounts of animal waste and byproducts from such facilities pose significant risks to human health and the environment, requiring greater - not lesser - scrutiny.'

On Sunday, the IndyStar posted this Op/Ed: Indiana can't afford to ignore its environment [3.2.2008 - IndyStar] 'How bad is it? Even Forbes, a business publication not known for leaning to the political left, last fall ranked Indiana 49th in the nation among environmentally friendly states. Only West Virginia scored worse. Forbes based its comparisons on air and water quality, waste management, energy consumption and public policy.'

Of course, I applaud the piece. But seriously, if the environment is Indiana's forgotten issue, I would suggest the IndyStar might consider looking the mirror for a responsible party. Maybe they intend to begin viewing the administration's environmental policy a bit more critically. If so, good. We'll see.

6Feb2008 - floods, fields, and the zone of death

The snows and heavy rains of the last couple of days are not going to help conditions on the Kankakee and Tippecanoe Rivers. Yesterday I took a look at the creeks on Big Eastern; they were very high indeed. And the rain keeps coming. Wisely, not too many people live near the Kankakee, so it's mostly farmland that's currently flooded. At least there's no crop in the field now. Here's coverage: Levee breaks could be budget busters [2.5.2008 - Laasby - Gary P-T]. Incidently, props to the Gary P-T for their environmental issues coverage. Northwest Indiana is rich in environmental problems, but also in environmental resources (the resources attracted the problems, to some degree) so this is important stuff. And, alas, the Times of NWI tends to be the little sister of the IndyStar and we all know what that means.

On today's 'required reading' list, all midwesterners who care about the environment and want to stay truly informed on the issue should take a look at the USGS' study Differences in Phosphorus and Nitrogen Delivery to the Gulf of Mexico from the Mississippi River Basin [1.31.2008 - Alexander et al - USGS]. The study links excessive nutrients released into midwestern rivers to the large 'dead zone' in the Gulf of Mexico, and (naturally) shows Indiana to be one of the worst offenders. The study overview has excellent maps and graphics, making it easy to understand. [note -- I found this link on a newly revitalized Kemplog - great to see you posting again Thomas!]

The study conclusively shows that the predominant source of the problem is corn belt agriculture: '66% of nitrogen comes from cultivated crops, mostly corn and soybean'. Animal manure is the primary source of phosphorus. Large, free flowing rivers (i.e. ones without reservoirs) tend to deliver more nitrogen and phophorous. Reservoirs tend to impede nutrient delivery, at the cost of water quality in the reservoir.

Obviously, one thing that would help would be if more fertilizer stayed on the fields for crop uptake, and therefore out of the rivers. Chemical fertilizers cost money, so I don't think you'll find many farmers who disagree with that. But more will need to be done, and the obvious answer is that we need more wetlands, and that runoff from agricultural areas needs to go through those wetlands, not just speed by in a straight line ditch. Filter strips (buffer zones of perennial vegetation along streams) help too, but those that include hydric environments are bound to be more effective than a mowed strip of grass. And even when a filter strip is in place, if the water from the field is bypassing it through an underground drainage tile, the filter strip isn't in a position to do much filtering.

There's also plenty of room for debate about the wisdom of the whole corn/soybeans/meat system. But, truth is, I don't expect to see corn lose its crown in the corn belt anytime soon. There's some reason for optimism though. Not so many years ago, here in North Judson, skies darkened from wind erosion in an annual rite of spring. No-till agriculture has drastically reduced this problem. Now farmers are embracing filter strips, thanks to government subsidies. We still need more wetlands, especially riparian wetlands.

One more thing: the Legal Environmental Aid Foundation provides legal representation in cases involving public environmental issues in northwest Indiana. On the site attorney Kim Ferraro provides public access to some of the documents from current cases, and finds a little time after work to host the 'green drinks' get togethers in Valparaiso.

4Feb2008 - it's a dirty story of a dirty state

IDEM's list of 'impaired waterways' is quite a bit shorter this year, as a result in a change in criteria for listing. It appears likely that the move is intended to get Indiana off the hook with EPA regarding remediation efforts -- that's what critics are saying anyway. Here's an opinion piece by Deborah Chubb criticizing IDEM's new listing criteria: IDEM's latest failure to protect public needs more scrutiny [guest commentary, Chesterton Trib] -- here are couple of additional links: Conservation group angry at how Indiana now tracks polluted waterways [1.31.2008 - Handelman - Medill Reports] -- Indiana Seeks to De-List Contaminated Waters [Alliance for the Great Lakes] -- Toxic water cleanup lags [1.28.2008 - Laasby - Gary P-T]

In other dirty Indiana news, yet again the Indiana legislature, it appears, will fail to take any action to control environmental and neighborhood impacts by CAFOs and other industrial animal production facilities -- here a link:

CAFO slowdown is needed - Op-Ed by retired registered nurse Barbara Sha Cox. [Richmond Pal-Item - 2.3.2008]

Hog CAFOs and Sustainability, a study by the Iowa Policy Project, is 'must reading' for anybody trying to decide if industrial hog production would be a good thing for their community. The study looked at Iowa counties with expanding hog CAFOs and found, among other thing, an increase in adults without high school diplomas, a significant decline in home selling prices, more manure spills, more fish kills and more impaired waterways. The study concludes that the opportunity costs to rural areas may be substantial, and that in portions of Iowa, growth of hog CAFOs 'may have hampered rural tourism, recreartion and destination retirement development.

28Jan2008 - Death Valley pics; where the water goes

I posted a little commentary about current cover photo on vocalo: Zabriskie Point - Death Valley, including a link to a higher quality version of the photo. If you're bored with flooded flatlands, you can take a virtual tour of Death Valley National Park (mixed with the obligatory familial shots) on my Picasa Web Album for DeathValley.

Just one comment about the recent 'hundred year floods'. All those drainage projects in this region make matters much worse. The water will come, and yes, we live in a flat place. The water must have somewhere harmless to go or it will go somewhere harmful. A harmless place to flood: a lowland forest, a prairie, a marsh. A harmful place to flood: your home, your street, your school. It's really as simple as that.

25Jan2008 - San Pierre biofuel, C2C 2008, links...

Rural community challenges plans for a biofuel plant - Interesting coverage of dispute about proposed ethanol plant at San Pierre, in western Starke County. [Medill Reports - Kroh - 1.24.2008]

Plans for the C2C-2008 are underway - check here for details.

Three Oaks Michigan based Long Haul Productions have an extensive collection of audio programs available online likely to be of interest to bigeastern.com readers.

Benton County remains knee-deep in CAFO issues - [Lafayette C-J - Larson - 1.14.2008]

CAFO bill moves to House - [Richmond P-I - AP - 1.17.2008]

12Dec2007 - The Lesson from Iraq, ethanol glut, remember 'BioTown'?

The War in Iraq: it's a touchy subject. Here's an interesting and scholarly analysis -- Fighting Identity: Why We Are Losing Our Wars - A quote: 'The war remorselessly morphed into a political testament tied to a desperate vision of triumphant American religious nationalism.' [Military Review - Vlahos - 11.07]

IDEM levies fines in NE Indiana, but not all are collected: Area polluters amass $2 million in fines [Ft. Wayne J-G - Street - 12.9.07]

Road gets bumpy for ethanol plants 39 ethanol plants 'under consideration' likely to result in failures as margins drip precipitously [IBJ - O-Malley - 12.8.07]

BioTown stumbles but regains its footing Despite the Times/NWI's headline, there's little in the story to suggest any real progress in the much ballyhooed 'BioTown' project at Reynolds, Indiana. [Times/NWI (originally Lafayette CJ) - Larsen - 12.9.07]

Reward Offered In Endangered Bat Killings [Lexington 18]

ecology of christmas: christmas trees [Bootstrap Analysis - 12.1.2007]

21Nov2007 - Benton Harbor beach, Ethanol jitters

Should Benton Harbor's lakefront park be converted to a private golf course? Saving a Public Park [In These Times - Street - 11.19.07]

Rush to build ethanol plants loses its steam rising corn prices, dropping ethanol prices squeeze ethanol plant boom. [In These Times - Street - 11.19.07]

15Nov2007 - taxes, prosperity, climate sceptics and a pretty picture

Read Doug Masson's comments, and mine, on his always worthy blog: Counties: Let the State Raise Taxes [11.14.07]

The Daily Yonder has an interesting piece about rural economies: Rural America's Most Prosperous Counties - the DY lists 289 rural counties in the US found to support better than average prosperity, as measured by U of I prof Andrew Isserman. The study appears to confirm the link between family farm ownership and rural prosperity, a link I, for one, had wondered about. For deeper waters follow the link to the original study.

The BBC opened the floor to people claiming that the science community is biased against 'climate sceptics'- here's what they found: - Climate science: Sceptical about bias [BBC - Black - 11.14.07]

The best part of autumn is passing on now, if you didn't get a chance to get into the woods yourself, download a large image from last Saturday. I took it at Lena Park on the corporeal Big Eastern last Saturday around noon.

6Nov2007 - some reading

Weed It and Reap - Op-Ed on the Farm Bill [11.4.07 - Pollan - NYT]

Sixth Gives Green Light to Environmental Tort Suit - Sixth Circuit is allowing a group of Kentucky homeowners to proceed with their claims that a nearby uranium enrichment plant brought down their property values. [11.2.07 - Loblaw - eNotes]

19Oct2007 - US Steel Permit/New Invasive species

The public outcry over the IDEM permit for pollution discharges into Lake Michigan earlier this year may resulted in a higher level of scrutiny over IDEM permits for Lake Michigan discharges. EPA recently blocked a proposed IDEM permit that would have allowed the giant US Steel plant five more years to comply with discharge requirements; probably the environmental consequences for the lake are more significant from US Steel's discharges as compared with BP. However, it's unlikely that US Steel will be much swayed by public sentiment -- they don't sell steel to the public. Here are some links of interest on the US Steel permit issue:

Pressure mounts on U.S. Steel - [Oct. 18 2007 - Laasby - Gary P-T]

Alliance for the Great Lakes - press release requesting public hearing on the issues raised by the US Steel permit.

Media Advisory: EPA has additional objections to Indiana's draft permit for US Steel Gary Works [Oct. 18 2007 - USEPA]

EPA finds problems with mill permit [Oct. 19 2007 - Ingerson - IndyStar]

If we didn't have enough invasive species yet, here's another one:

Oriental Beetle Exomal orientalis [U. Minnesota entomology]

Oriental Beetle Discovered in Indiana - 'Purdue University entomologist Doug Richmond said a graduate student recently found an unusual beetle in Tippecanoe County and identified it at a Purdue lab as an Oriental beetle.' [October 16 2007 - AP - Newsvine]

3Oct2007 - interesting links

It's been altogether too long since I've posted here -- lately I've found it more interesting to post comments on other sites. There's so much excellent material going out on the web these days. Here are some tasty links:

Chris Jordan: Photographic Arts - visualizing the scale of the waste stream from current American consumerism.

I've been posting a few things at vocalo.org, discussed in the previous post. Here's a direct link to my :Vocalo page. So far, just some photos, but I'm planning some audio content. If you can't get :Vocalo on the air (their signal is still a bit weak where I live), try their online feed. It's an exciting project. So much so, one wonders if it will last. I hope so, but anyway, catch it now while it's fresh.

9/11 is Over, an NYT Op-Ed by Thomas Friedman is spot-on. We cannot afford to continue being this stupid.

Speaking of stupid, Indiana government has been making some puzzling moves lately. One of the worst is the 'tax rebate' dictated by the legislature, and discussed in Tax rebate checks cost 2 counties $240,000 [8.9.2007 - Byrne - Gary P-T]. These rebate checks are an insult to the intelligence of the voting public; the cost of sending them out is not trivial and it's just such a pathetically obvious effort to buy a few votes. If there really is extra money in the coffers (highly unlikely), reducing next year's taxes would be a great idea. Personally, I think it would be smarter to invest in fixing tired bridges, or better yet, investing in energy efficiency improvements for governmental buildings and equipment. The Byrne article indicates the average cost per parcel for this rebate is $1.30. What a waste.

16aug2007 - check out :Vocalo, quick links

The Chesterton Indiana public broadcasting channel, 89.5 FM, is now in a bold new format - check it out at Vocalo.org. :Vocalo (accent on the first sylable) is a grassroots, local content project. It's not a radio station with a web site, it's more the other way around, and they actively seek content from listeners, some of which they broadcast and some of which they host on the net. They have an excellent quality MP3 online 'radio' feed.

Other links of interest:

The BP permit issue is still very much in the news, with even the IndyStar and NWI-Times beginning to question the wisdom of allowing increasing pollution in the lake. Here's a link to Marcia Oddi's ILB entry: Environment - Petition filed to block BP permit from taking effect.

Another interesting case: DNR permit for Cedar Creek invalid - [Ft. Wayne Journal Gazette - 8.14.2007 - Mapes]. This 'cumulative effects' issue is the most significant part, in my opinion. Indiana's waterways are suffering death by a million pin pricks.

9aug2007 - 4th C2C Results Posted

The official results of the 2007 Race Coast to Coast of Indiana are now posted here. Kudos to the 'Rotten Robbie Underdogs' from Crawfordsville for their win and record setting time of 14:37:55.

8aug2007 - Travelin' Food

The food choices available to most Americans are improving, with even small supermarkets offering a much greater variety including world cuisine, vegetarian and organically grown items. Typically, many items are shipped in from long distances, sometimes absurdly so. In reaction perhaps, the local food movement espouses a diet composed exclusively of items produced locally and prepared simply. Sometimes local foods advocates place a specific distance beyond which they will not eat anything, say one hundred miles. Some only eat perishable foods in season, avoiding frozen foods.

Local foods advocates point out that local foods are fresher, that they are helping to support a vibrant food production economy in the region they reside, and that the long distance transport of foods contributes excessive carbon emissions. A desire to reduce environmental and social ills caused by large corporate agriculture operations is also cited, and 'locavores' argue that they are resisting the excesses of globalization. It seems that most local foods adherants are in urban areas, where there is little food production.

I've been thinking about the local food thing for the past couple of weeks, and I think it's a good concept but far too rigid. It's a diet and as such will prove to be a fad, not a sustainable lifestyle improvement. Our dinner plates, the environment, and the rural economy would all benefit if more people ate more high quality regionally produced foods. But there's no reason to get fanatical about it.

Rather than drawing an arbitrary circle on a map like some sort of blast zone diagram, I would suggest a simple cost/benefit analysis regarding the transportation of foods. On the cost side, one must consider the cost of purchase, the environmental impacts of transportation, and to the extent possible, the negative social and environmental costs of the production system. On the benefits side, consider how much enjoyment you get from the item, its nutritional value, and the social and environmental benefits of the production system.

Locally produced garden produce, in season, is all good. It's not expensive, the quality is the very best, it's highly nutritious, and the social and environmental impacts of your local (typically organic) producer are top notch. Freeze these items, and the cost goes up (more carbon emissions), and the quality drops a bit, but it still looks like a clear winner to me.

Spices from southeast Asia are shipped in from a very long distance, but your local grower cannot produce vanilla, or nutmeg, or even black pepper. These items have a high cost per unit weight, both from your pocketbook, and on the environment. However, most people use them in low quantities and they are tremendously beneficial in terms of the quality of the food on your table.

Consider beer; locally brewed beer is excellent. Dragging beer over here from Europe is one of the least justifiable trips. The beer does not improve on a slow boat. But how local is local beer? The water is local, and beer is mostly water. The grains may be local, you'd need to inquire to be sure, and one would think locally grown grains would be just fine. But good beer requires excellent hops as a bittering agent. Hops are a lot like a spice. Hops are grown in relatively limited areas, and the benefit of excellent hops in terms of the quality of the finished product seems to justify the transportation.

When do the costs of distant production and transportation outweigh the benefits? It's a personal decision, but seafood from Asia seems hard to accept, and its often not that good. Bad wine from Europe makes no sense to me -- a bottle of something special from France is another thing, but very pricey. Cheese from Europe is hard to justify, and beans from Africa?

Most of the hardcore locavores are urbanites. I can't help but feel that they are, subconciously perhaps, attempting to get a little of the 'thrill of the hunt' to the otherwise exceedingly easy task of getting food in a modern city. This reminds me that the ultimate in local food is what you grow, pick or collect yourself. It might be in your backyard garden, while hunting or fishing, or on a foray in the woods for wild foods. The foods you get personally, and share with friends and family, is not only of the highest quality, it is a deeply satisfying experience. It scratches an instinctual need that can never be fulfilled in a store. But I still want some pepper on my wild mushrooms. Just a little...

Here's a link that covers some of the same turf: Too Many Chefs: Eat Local, No Thanks.

Speaking of eating local, I've added a new blog to the list, Hungry Hoosier.

7aug2007 - Dust Bowl to BP

First, a hearty 'Happy Birthday' to my Mom! She grew up in eastern Kansas not too far from where the Dust Bowl was happening. She says, after it rained it would sometimes be necessary to 'sweep Texas off the front walk'; I think I picked up some of my appreciation for the need for conservation and environmental awareness from hearing about those experiences -- it is possible to mess things up really badly. So call me a tree-hugger if you like...these folks would, I'm sure, appreciate a few trees. [note: Eastern Kansas has quite a few trees, and wasn't too badly hit by the Dust Bowl]

This marks the 11th anniversery of bigeastern.com, which long predates 'blogging' [check out an early version of bigeastern.com courtesy of the WayBack Machine].

The web is a landscape totally transformed since August 1, 1996 -- in the early days bigeastern.com focused on resources about prairie plants, an area where much more professional resources are now available. As web publishing has become ever more accessible my enthusiasm for reading on the web has increased, and my enthusiasm for publishing has ebbed. Why write something when somebody else is doing it better? So instead of spending tons of time here, I've been learning to play the guitar, after a lifetime of piano playing. Sort of a low-budget midlife thing, perhaps.

The BP permit row continues to dominate local environmental news. I'm a little amused by the reaction of Chicago officials -- the City of Chicago is currently draining the big lake at a thoroughly irresponsible rate, around sixty-five million gallons per day [source - 'Great Lakes Water Wars: A Brief History of the Chicago Diversion'. Not that this fact excuses Indiana officials -- the problem with BP is that it's an increase in pollution, and there has been so much work to improve the lake that backsliding of any sort is unacceptable. One can't help but wonder why IDEM allows administrative extensions of permits of large industrial polluters to go on year after year -- but, alas, the problem spans more than one administration.

BP has been mounting a major PR campaign, inlcuding purchasing Google Ad links. You'll probably see one on the right side of this page. It's possible to ban links that are unacceptable, but I don't do it very often and anyway I encourage you to follow it -- if enough of you do, BP will help fund this website. For a full round-up of the BP and US Steel permit stories see Marcia Oddi's Indiana Law blog: Environment - More on the U.S. Steel Gary Works/Grand Calumet permit, and related issues. One thing I can't help commenting on is my disappointment with the Times of NWI: to me their coverage has bordered on BP cheerleading.

2aug2007 - links

Today, just some links of interest.

Yesterday, I posted a comment about why I voted against a motion proposed at Saturday's regional HEC meeting calling for ouster of IDEM Com'r Easterly. Counterpunch posted a piece by Thomas Healy making the opposite argument: The Toxic Career of Indiana's Environmental Commissioner. Did Healy's argument change my position? Not really, the bottom line is that we need to elect a governor who will view environmental protection as beneficial. One who doesn't feel compelled to hide in a gated community, perhaps.

The Gary Post Tribune has been providing good coverage of environmental issues in NWI's industrial core. Related to the well publicized BP permit controversy, but possibly a more significant story is: IDEM gets an earful at U.S. Steel open meeting. [8.2.2007 - Laasby - Gary P-T]

A reader recently wrote about a prior posting here, where I wondered what officially constitutes a BMP for drainage projects in Indiana. Here's a useful link for anyone interested in the subject -- download the Indiana Drainage Handbook [IN-DNR, Div/Water]. Here's a quote I found interesting:

'Vegetation is probably the single most component of wildlife habitat. Deep-rooted native plants (grasses, shrubs and trees) are usually the most economical means of bank stabilization and erosion control. Therefore, extensive use of debrushing should be reserved only where such activity is absolutely needed for maintaining access, maintaining the flow capacity and conveyance, or selectively controlling nuisance species.' [page 5.3-1, last paragraph]

Here's a link another reader sent, this one about CAFOs: A Factory Farm Near You - [7.31.2007 - Editorial - New York Times]. Be sure to check out the link to Food and Water Watch, Factory Farm Map, a detailed interactive map of where CAFOs are around the US.

2aug2007 - 4th C2C of Indiana photos posted

The fourth annual Race Coast to Coast of Indiana was the biggest and bestest yet. For 2007 the race started in Evansville and ended in Dunes State Park. We've posted some photos:

Photo Album of the 2007 C2C of Indiana. Feel free to download, print and share the photos.

1aug2007 - HEC NWI meeting

A rarity for me: I attended a meeting voluntarily -- HEC's NWI regional meeting in Chesterton. Like most practicing attorneys, I suspect, I get more than my fill of meetings at work, so going to one on a Saturday isn't something I relish. But it seems the time may be ripe for some sorely needed environmental progress here, and the concept of a regional meeting seemed sound. Plus, Chesterton is a pleasant destination. Its old downtown is quite cutsified since the days of my youth, but that's better than decay.

I was considering writing about the meeting here, but as it turns out I don't need to. Vicki Urbanik from the Chesterton Trib attended and wrote an excellent overview of the meeting, and also a piece focusing on the debate about the IDEM permit for the BP refinery. Here are the links:

Residents meet to help form statewide environmental strategy [7.30.2007 - Urbanik - Chesterton Trib] (small point: actually the meeting was about a regional environmental strategy)

Area residents debate calling for ouster of Daniels' IDEM chief [7.30.2007 - Urbanik - Chesterton Trib],

For the record, I was one of the seven 'nay' votes regarding the resolution for Com'r Easterly's ouster. I am definitely opposed to increases in pollution discharges in Lake Michigan, but I'm not opposed to upgrading the refinery, and I don't think it's productive to make these issues personal. Most things Gov. Daniels stands for I am utterly opposed to, but he is nonetheless the duly elected governor and is entitled to select IDEM's commissioner.

As for social context, we'll need to move 'beyond petroleum', but it's going to take awhile.

Speaking of BP, I mentioned in an earlier post that I sent an e-mail to BP's web site editor. I was somewhat surprised, but pleased, to get a response. Basically, they say (a) they are in compliance with all environmental regulations, (b) the permit set maximum effluent amounts, and they expect to do better than that, and (c) the silt is very fine non-toxic particulate matter that is both benign and exceedingly difficult to filter out. Even if all of that is true (and I wonder how they can be sure that some of the silt particles are not toxic materials) the fact remains that they intend to increase pollution into Lake Michigan. I, along with lots of other people, have a problem with that.

26jul2007 - ruminations on the BP permit row

The outcry over IDEM's permit allowing BP to increase pollutant discharges into Lake Michigan has (thankfully) largely bypassed Indianapolis; most notably a bipartisan resolution criticizing the permit passed the U.S. House of Representatives by a resounding 387-26 vote. Here's some good coverage of the current state of matters in the Post-Tribune: Congress votes to disapprove. I was pleased to see my Congressman, Joe Donnelly voting 'yea' alongside of Pete Visclosky.

For a survey of recent press accounts visit Marcia Oddi's Indiana Law Blog: Environment - Much more on: Protests grow over BP permit to increase dumping in Lake Michigan.

Looking at the press accounts and the related blog and online discussion posts, I had a few thoughts that aren't directly related to the merits of the permit. Here they are, in no particular order:

1. IDEM lacks credibility. Nobody believes they possess or exercise the highly skilled and independent judgment that is a requisite feature of establishing credibility. Unfortunately, the press also lacks credibility: the confusion as to whether the permit would result in 'silt' or 'sludge' going into the big lake is an obvious example, there were many other examples of confusion in the coverage. Also unfortunately, there are no environmental spokespeople with the credentials and position to have a lot of credibility either. So we're left more or less guessing who's right. It almost made me sympathize with the BP techs. Almost. Better information would make for a better debate; it's particularly difficult to understand (a) why BP feels the increased discharges are necessary, and (b) what exactly is the composition of the silty material. There is no question that more ammonia in the lake will result in eutrophication, and that's bad.

2. Indiana has a terrible reputation as a backwater of pollution, ignorance and bigotry. Like most stereotypes, it may be based to some degree in fact but it's nevertheless unfairly prejudicial. However, as long as our government is out there reinforcing the stereotype, we're unlikely to shake it.

3. The Great Lakes are very special places, shared with other states, and with Canada, and in some sense with the whole world. You don't dump junk in the Grand Canyon, even though it most certainly has the capacity to hold a lot of junk. You don't spray paint your name on the Washington Monument even though 'scientifically' it would not cause any structural damage. The debate is not strictly science based: to those of us who have a reverence for these, the crown jewels of the American heartland, no increase in harm is acceptable. The only acceptable course is to reverse the past and make them cleaner, year by year. Or, said another way, Lake Michigan is not the White River.

I continue to suggest avoiding buying BP products. I also sent their website editor a brief e-mail criticizing the plan to increase pollutant discharges into Lake Michigan.

18jul2007 - No BP for Me

BP's Whiting refinery has received approval from Indiana regulators to significantly increase ammonia and sludge dumping in Lake Michigan. The Whiting refinery is one of the oldest in the nation, and has been slated for a $3.8 billion expansion which will create about 80 new jobs. One of the purposes of the upgrades is to allow the facility to process oil from Canada.

Legislators from other Great Lakes states have protested and are asking the fed's to step in. No doubt we can rely on the Bush administration to save us from the excesses of the Daniels administration.

There doesn't seem to be much controversy about the need for the upgrades at the Whiting refinery, but it's difficult to understand why BP is unable to find the funds to control their pollution discharges into the big lake in their $3.8 billion budget. But then you can't see Lake Michigan from Indianapolis, or from London for that matter. BP claims there's no room for improved pollution control facilities at their 1400 acre site; apparently they found room for what they really wanted to do. I guess they've used up all their environmental funds buying ads telling us how they're all green and stuff.

My suggestion: don't buy fuel at BP.

Here are some links: Legislators blast waiver for BP plant near lake - [Chicago Tribune - Hawthorne - 7.18.2007]
BP to dump more toxins in Lake Michigan - [Money Times of Indiana]
Lawmaker wants answers on BP, Horseshoe - [NWI-Times - Guinane - 7.18.2007]

12jul2007 - updated C2C course

Luke Becknell has made a minor adjustment to the course for the 2007 running of the Coast to Coast of Indiana. Get details here and pay attention to the ending section in the dunes area.

12jun2007 - CWARA, and pouring pollution into loopholes

Recent court decisions have raised questions about the extent of federal regulatory jurisdiction over certain non-navigable waters. For legal purposes, the issue is expressed as whether a particular river, stream, wetland or whatever, constitutes 'waters of the United States.' If a particular body of water -- an 'isolated wetland' or an 'intrastate stream' -- is not a water of the United States, then the reach of federal jurisdiction does not extend to matters related to that body of water. In the absence of federal jurisdiction, federal regulatory agencies, including the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, lack authority to take action regarding pollutants, wetland drainage, and other potentially harmful activities.

The court decisions involved are sometimes referred to as the 'post-Rapanos' line of cases. I won't attempt to explain the precise state of the law on this subject; it's not easily done and I'd probably get it wrong. In light of these decisions the Army Corps of Engineers ('ACOE') recently announced they would henceforth limit their application of the Clean Water Act ('CWA') more narrowly than they had done in the past. [details here]

Some have decried the ACOE decision, some have decried the court decisions; personally, I think both are reasonable given the legislation that the jurisdiction is based on. Both ACOE and the courts are required to determine the scope of jurisdiction conferred by the CWA primarily on the language of the CWA, not on their opinion about what would be the best policy for the government to pursue. Generally, at least in this particular arena, the legislative branch has primary authority over policy making decisions.

Regardless of their policy viewpoints, most observers agree that uncertainty now exists as to the jurisdictional reach of federal regulatory agencies with respect to non-navigable intrastate waters. Some uncertainty almost always exists on these kinds of issues, but in this instance the uncertainty is impeding progress on dealing with pressing needs to address serious water issues including wetlands preservation and control on non-point water pollution, such as agricultural runoff.

One solution has been proposed in the form of the Clean Water Authority Restoration Act (CWARA). Jeff Kray and Laura Fandino at the Marten Law Group have posted an overview entitled: Democrats Introduce Controversial Legislation to Broaden EPA's Clean Water Act Authority.

Basically, CWARA solves the problem by specifying a broad definition of waters of the United States -- under CWARA surface waters in the US would presumably be waters of the US. That's logical, easy to understand, and consistent with achieving progress towards clean water, but it's not popular with those whose businesses benefit from pouring pollution into loopholes.

CWARA was first proposed a couple of years ago, but languished in the Republican controlled Congress. With Democrats now positioned better in Congress, CWARA is being considered again. Environmental organizations have universally expressed support for CWARA. An association of interests opposed to effective environmental regulation -- they call themselves the 'regulated community' -- called the 'Waters Action Coalition' ('WAC') has responded by a campaign opposing the passage of CWARA. Here are some links that outline the debate surrounding CWARA:

Clean Water Action's 'Myths and Fact' - Clean Water Action counters arguments posed by groups opposed to CWARA
Waters Advocacy Coalition letter opposing CWA - summarizes the opposition to CWARA by industry and agriculture, and provides a list of the organizations lobbying against passage of CWARA.
The Clean Water Restoration Act - A statement of the Sierra Club explaining their support for CWARA.
No boats needed: New clean water bill would make gutters 'waters of the U.S.' - by Julie Ufner, on the National Association of Counties web site argues that the CWARA is an unfunded mandate, and slow ACOE permitting would delay needed infrastructure projects without significant environmental benefits. NACo is a member of WAC.

My opinion: the waters of the United States are a single system, and are critical to the functioning of nature, commerce, and indeed all life on this fine chunk of planet Earth. Development and population have surpassed the point where piecemeal efforts to control pollution, waste, and environmental degradation will be effective, and a patchwork of regulation in a competition driven economy encourages localities to save a buck by trashing the folks downstream. 'Isolated wetlands' and 'intrastate waters' are mythological beasts created by corporate lawyers and previously unknown to hydrologists, and the fact that waterway is a dredged ditch is irrelevant to its functioning as part of the nation's vascular network. Waters in the United States are waters of the United States. Pass CWARA; if there are activities that deserve faster permitting promulgate rules to facilitate that end.

4jun2007 - Race Coast to Coast of Indiana Route now posted

The official course for the fourth annual running of the Race Coast to Coast of Indiana is now posted -- here's the link. This year the race will start in Evansville, with stage one going to Crawfordsville. The second stage on day two starts in Crawfordsville and ends at Indiana Dunes State Park near Chesterton.

The Race Coast to Coast of Indiana is a four person team relay, and a benefit for cystic fibrosis research. This year's race is July 28 and 29, so there's still time to get together a team.

8may2007 - tall fescue

Tall fescue. Bootstrap Analysis has a brief review of a scholarly paper Forest succession suppressed by an introduced plant-fungal symbiosis. [J. A. Rudgers, J. Holah, S. P. Orr, and K. Clay. 2007. Ecology 88: 18-25]. The study shows that a common agricultural grass, tall fescue, inoculated with an endophyte fungus, causes very serious disruption of ecological progression. Stated simply, once tall fescue is established on a piece of ground nothing else is likely to grow there. In particular, trees and other woody vegetation can't grow once a tall fescue monoculture is established.

Tall fescue is probably the most commonly planted agricultural grass for ditch banks, and it's often planted on roadsides. While many contracts specify 'low endophyte' fescue, I'm doubtful that anybody bothers with that. Ironically, many people would probably think it's great that nothing else can grow in a planting of tall fescue. To me, it's worse than wasting the land, it's like planting kudzu. Vast mileages of stream banks in northern Indiana are planted in this worse-than-worthless species every year, and it's a subtle and pervasive aspect of the environmental harm caused by wrongheaded governmental resource management policies.

There's a constant flow of accounts about how damaging exotic, aggresive invasive plants are to the environment and the economy. But these plants are often planted extensively, especially after an area is stripped of natural vegetation. That's partly because people like to see an area 'green up' very quickly, and they don't want it to get too 'weedy'. Aggressive plants like tall fescue will take hold quickly, suppress messy weeds, and they are certainly green, in color at least. It takes time, and therefore patience, to re-establish something with even a shadow of the complexity of a natural ecosystem.

3may2007 - Viscloskey promotes commuter rail expansion

Congressman Pete Viscloskey (Dem. Ind. Dist 1) has an op-ed in Insided Indiana Business: Invest in South Shore For Future of Northwest Indiana. In my opinion no investment would be more beneficial to NWI than extensions of the South Shore. Less traffic, easier access to Chicago from her -- and vice versa -- less pollution, more non-gasoline sucking travel options. Well I could go on. Here's a simple way to look at the future: train good, car bad.

1may2007 - Meat factory action goes local

I'm disappointed to see that the Indiana legislature made no progress in dealing with the CAFO issue this session. However, the issue is now 'up on the screen', and is ripe for action at the local level. I think citizen blogs like Kemplog and WAHMDiary have shown they can have an impact.

It's difficult to read the machinations of the legislature from afar, but it's tempting to conclude that CAFO promoters were working to achieve an impasse and managed to get the job done.

Here are some links:
CAFO regulations die over impasse on setbacks [5.1.2007 - Yencer - Muncie StarPress]
Animal farm setback rules receive setback [5.1.2007 - Tharp - Richmond PalItem]
Indiana Farm Bureau Disappointed that Livestock Bill Didn't Pass General Assembly [5.1.2007 - MuncieFreePress]
Senator Gard Calls Us Losers [4.30.2007 - Karen Myers - WAHMDiary]
Sen. Gard loses cool at CAFO meeting [4.25.2007 - Slabaugh - Muncie StarPress]

All-in-all it appears that the one mile setback was more than the meat producers would accept. They argue that planning and zoning should be done at the county level -- and that argument has merit, so I'm giving Senator Gard just a teeny bit of support on that point despite my dissappointment with the results. I would suggest that nuisance jurisdiction should also be at the local level, and the setbacks wouldn't be needed if meat factories didn't have a special exemption from nuisance liability.

I was never convinced that the proposed setbacks were the right answer anyway. The proposed system would have created privileged areas (incorporated towns, schools), and therefore, by default would have established disfavored zones. Does it make sense to say that it's okay to trash your neighbor's property, just so long as you do it in an unincorporated area? That's an environmental justice shortcoming, in my opinion. All lawfully established homes in Indiana deserve to be protected from ruination by irresponsible neighbors. If an offending neighbors' activities are so mission-critical to society that the impact is unavoidable, then there should be just compensation paid to the damaged party.

Incorporated communities generally have the power to extend their zoning jurisdiction beyond their corporate boundaries, so localities have the power to act. Some will, some won't.

All is most certainly not lost. Meat factory operators have heard the complaints. It appears there is some effort among them to clean house. My suggestion to the operators: cooperate with legitimate university research projects.

One area of clear progress - the legislature has ramped up funding for IDEM inspections. IDEM's jurisdiction is limited, but more inspections should help a little.

Now that the legislature is out of session, the hot arenas are your local county and municipal zoning boards. Opponents of the CAFO bill said they want local control -- so they're not in a position to argue against it now. It's a great, but brief, window of opportunity. Some localities will enact meaningful controls and they will be rewarded with residential, recreational and other upscale developments in the future. Others, sometimes where the meat factory operators are actually local elected officials, will let anything go, and their communities will also reap just what they sow.

27apr2007 - Arbor Day 2007

Arbor Day isn't necessarily one particular day, but today is a good one in our climate. I've personally planted thousands of trees, both with a shovel and by collecting and planting acorns, nuts, seeds. In fact, if you count all the seeds and acorns, I've planted over 100,000 trees (most didn't survive, but thousands did). So I'm not an armchair Arbor Day guy, tree planting is something I have some opinions about, and Arbor Day seems like a good time to share them. So here are some random thoughts about trees, and planting them, in no particular order.

Row planting is ugly. Machines plant trees in rows, and yes, we've planted lots of trees with machines at Big Eastern, but I'm never really happy with the results. The result looks like, well, a farm. If you're really growing trees purely as a crop, that makes sense, but if you're trying to reforest an area it looks a lot better if the trees are planted to simulate the natural distribution of species in the area, keeping in mind slopes, exposures, soil types and that sort of thing. Sometimes I hand plant through a machine plantation to try to disguise the lines, it helps a little. Of course, pro foresters use the rows for chemical treatments, and no doubt that improves the growth and survival rates of the trees. That's probably good business, but if your goal is forest restoration, such chemicals seem like an unnecessary expense and environmental burden.

Don't just plant native species, preserve them. If you buy trees from a nursery, mostly they're going to sell you trees that are (a) easy to grow in a nursery, and (b) easy to transplant, and to some extent (c) produce something people find useful. That all makes sense, but it leaves out some species that really deserve to be maintained as part of our forestry mix. Whether we're talking about a forest restoration on a landscape scale, or a few trees in a lawn and garden setting there are trees that you won't find at your nursersy, but are worth keeping around. The sassafras is a great example: they grow wild throughout Indiana, are attractive year around, have excellent autumn foliage color, and seem to be mostly pest-free. They rarely break off big limbs and fall on things, and even if they did most aren't massive enough to be dangerous. All-in-all they are excellent lawn and garden, and roadside trees. But because they are difficult to transplant they are slowly being pushed out of developed areas, and the only remedy is to preserve existing sassafras trees and allow them some degree of natural regeneration.

Don't just plant native species, foster natural regeneration. Oaks are the finest hardwoods in Indiana and most landowners prize a fine old oak. Many oak species, especially white oaks, have the potential to live for a long time, even centuries, but the truth is most don't live beyond 150 years. That's a long time from a human perspective, but in many Indiana communities the stock of ancient native oaks is declining. I have a big dead black oak in my front lawn. These trees are a legacy of native America, and the time has come to get serious about fostering a new generation. Sure, you can buy oak trees at the nursery, but those are probably not local native genotypes. Who knows where the seed came from? Every locality has unique genetic variants, and there's no substitute for preserving the truly local trees. You can collect acorns and plant a few. It's said that mighty oaks grow from tiny acorns, but in nature, about a zillion acorns come and go for every one that develops into a really fine tree. Perhaps most of the acorns possess the potential to develop, but then again, maybe not. So, eco-conscious gardeners, it's worth keeping an eye out for a promising young volunteer sapling that appears to be the progeny of a fine old oak. Give it a chance to grow, future generations will thank you. If we don't blow the place up first.

Never say 'debrushing'. There are ugly words that should never be said. Never say the 'n' word anywhere (unless you are actually Patti Smith). Never say the 'f' word in public discourse, or in front of children. Here's another one -- 'debrushing' -- this so-called word is used by tree-haters to make their heinous destructive actions sound like some sort of cleaning. Most commonly the 'd' word is used by developers or drainage boards in reference to a total bulldozing and denuding of the land. One doesn't refer to tree-planting as 'rebrushing'. One does not call today 'Brush Day'. There are forms of woody vegetation that are invasive or oppresive enough to deserve being called 'brush' but behind the 'd' word lurks a plan to destroy without even first determining what is there.

26apr2007 - pollution of Chinese farmland could be warning for US

In the Chesterton Trib: IDEM boss kicks off Porter County Earth Day, written by Vicki Urbanik. Easterly recounts the many areas of environmental progress in NWI over the past few decades. Easterly points out that economic progress is often hand-in-hand with environmental progress.

I'd suggest that this is not solely the product of the availability of funds for improving pollution controls in more affluent economies, but also that people with money leave environmentally degraded areas behind as soon as they can, prompting a sort of death spiral. It's also why communities need to be very careful about welcoming 'environmentally challenged' operations into their communities. The costs, and the loss of attractiveness in the community, can easily outweigh the benefits.

I got to the Urbanik piece from Marcia Oddi's Indiana Law Blog. Marcia also pointed out this interesting quote: 'Easterly said permit issues are not the same as land use decisions, which should be made by local officials, not the state. Just because IDEM determines that projects meet environmental standards, 'doesn't mean you should allow them,' he said.'

It reminded me of recent reports from China describing extensive soil pollution, see for example Soil survey to monitor pollution [2007.04.09 - Sun Xiaohua - China Daily]:

'The Yangtze River Delta region, the country's granary, has shown the results of soil degraded by heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants.

The weekly said that 2,000 tons of mercury, from more than 2 billion tons of coal burned every year, finds its ways into soil and poses a threat to human health.

Vegetables and fruits have also been polluted by excessive amount of nitrate in the soil.'

Once soil is polluted, fixing it isn't going to be easy, in fact it might not be feasible at all. The combination of causes behind the destruction of Chinese farmland -- heavy metals from airborne industrial sources, mercury from coal-fired plants, and nitrates from excessive manure applications -- ought to give Hoosiers pause. I hope folks at Indiana's new Dept. of Agriculture will keep the Chinese experience in mind.

3apr2007 - food burning revisited

More about food burning. I couldn't help but notice the Cuban 'president for life' Fidel Castro has recently criticized corn based ethanol production, here's a link: Castro ends 8-month silence to slam US ethanol plans [29.3.2007 - jurnalo]. Bigeastern readers will no doubt recall that I've questioned corn-based ethanol production over the past couple of years in part because there's not a large net gain in energy, and because I have doubts about 'food burning'. Castro's comments set me thinking about this again -- because, in truth, my thinking has changed a little.

First, I think if you've got a corn crop (just like if you have pertroleum) you have the right to sell it to the highest bidder. If corn production becomes more profitable, that's a good thing -- farmers make more, have more to spend, and maybe the government could cut back on subsidies.

The environmental costs of corn production are considerable, no doubt, but an improvement in profitability might mean more funds for controlling some of these problems. I've talked to some farmers about this, and I think most see corn-based ethanol as a transitory strategy and not a long-term solution. For now, we have the infrastructure in place to grow a lot of corn, and it'll take awhile to develop alternative systems on the huge scale required.

The environmental issues are not all one way either -- what's worse for the environment, ethanol, or CAFOs? Ethanol plants produce an odor, but the workers are relatively skilled and well-paid, and there's little risk of groundwater contamination. Ethanol production uses a lot of water, but so do CAFOs. If ethanol production demands push corn prices too high for CAFO operators, well, there are many of us in rural Indiana who wouldn't shed a tear about that. Here's a question: do you want a pork tenderloin, or do you want to be able to drive your car? Most Americans are too fat anyway, and eating less meat would be a good thing.

So I think Castro is simply stating the obvious when he says corn can't run everybody's car, and I do share his concern that every tree will be chopped down to grow another ear of corn, but I'm hopeful that landowners now understand the importance of conservation. I don't doubt that he has a sincere concern for low income people who will find it more difficult to buy staple foods (esp. tortillas), but I can't help but observe that his policies have a nasty way of keeping people poor -- maybe an improving price for farm commodities will help revitalize rural areas in Latinamerica, so folks won't have to leave home to get work. That would be good, wouldn't it?

Eventually, low-input agriculture for production of biomass for ethanol production will be developed. Perennial plants that require little in the way of fertilizer, pesticides or other attention will grow out in a field and be chopped down and hauled away on a train every couple of years. The residue will be dried and brought back to reduce nutrient loss. Food-burning will be a thing of the past.

23mar2007 - soundstreams

Broadband connections are becoming the norm these days, and one of the best uses of that bandwidth is bringing interesting music to your desktop. I've been paddling up and down the soundstreams of the Internet for awhile now. It takes a little tenacity to pick out the good channels among the many that are either unreliable, or simply lacking in interest. So I've added a new set of links on the left side of this page, called 'soundstreams' -- my suggestions for interesting Internet listening.

Of course you're going to need speakers (or headphones, if you can stand wearing them) and a broadband connection. You'll also need a player; I've tried most and find the freely available winamp player to my liking, and mostly I use the MP3 streams. The Windows Media player is okay, and Mac users swear by iTunes.

Internet 'radio' offers an amazing diversity of listening choices. Naturally it's under attack as the feds recently set out a plan to drastically raise royalties to such a degree as to send the entire medium into oblivion (at least the interesting indy channels). Just today, it seems there may be some progress on this though, here's a late breaking article: Feds Agree To Rethink Internet Radio Royalties.

Sure, the fate of Internet radio seems minor next to the Iraq war, global warming and the CAFO blitz, but for me, a little music in the office is an invaluable aid to maintaining a halfway positive attitude.

14mar2007 - Bill proposes permit-free dredging

HB 1762 proposes to make dredging of ditches flowing into Indiana's lakes free from any permit requirements, so long as the ditch continues to empty into the lake at the same location and 'best management practices' are observed. It appears the primary purpose is to yet further exclude the public from input on Indiana's other March Madness, i.e. the dozing and dredging of every creek, stream or river with little regard for the cost or environmental consequences.

The 'best management practices' sounds fine, but as is so often the case in Indiana, it's likely to be little more than lip service provided the lake being impacted can't be seen from a gated community Indianpolis. And what does it mean, exactly?

I'm pretty much categorically against any further erosion of the public's right to be involved in the collective traditiion of waste and despoilation that passes as Indiana's drainage law. The only hope for change will be for the public to see how ghastly and wasteful the process can become when there's no oversight, and little interest by the media.

Now maybe I missed something, but I'm a little concerned that 'best management practices' is a bit of a buzzword. I didn't find a definition for it in the Indiana Code using Westlaw. There is a sort of a definition in the Indiana Administrative Code in the NRC section for floodplain management. I doubt it would apply and it's quite nebulous, but I'll reprint it here in the interest of suggesting that merely mumbling the phrase 'best management practices' doesn't make everything all better:

'Best management practices' means those practices best suited to specific site conditions that will control soil erosion and the nonpoint source pollution associated with sediment run-off. The Indiana Handbook for Erosion Control in Developing Areas (October 1992) may be used as a reference in developing an erosion and sediment control plan that is consistent with best management practices. [312 IAC 10-2-7]

It looks like HB 1762 has a good chance of passing - maybe there is more to the 'best management practices' thing than I'm aware of -- if a reader knows of a solid definition and enforcement mechanism, I hope they'll enlighten me. But, from what I can see, I'm disappointed that the legislature seems to be going along with this; it's going to hurt some of Indiana's finest natural features, our beautiful, fragile, and much loved natural lakes. It can't do anything but help bad projects happen faster.

As is typical of this sort of legislation, I found no press accounts at all.

14mar2007 - ten ways to greener gov

Back in the 70s, when we thought of governmental action to improve the environment we thought of legislation to control pollution. Today, it's time to push for other kinds of governmental actions that could help. Here are ten things I thought of for Hoosierland in particular, without trying too hard, in no particular order

1. Phase out incandescent bulbs in government buildings, in favor of more efficient systems

2. Demand that most publications be made electronically, on the Internet, with printing at the user's expense. This would save trees, landfill space and money too; government prints too many documents at public expense that never are read anyway. To make it fair to those who don't have net access (a minority these days), we need to be sure public libraries have low cost (maybe coin-op) printers freely available...maybe kiosks in some other public areas too, in case some people don't feel comfortable going into a public library.

3. No more halfdays of school...it's a waste of time and fuel. Calling off early in an emergency is okay; otherwise a full day or not at all.

4. Curbside recycling in all reasonably densely populated areas. In the little town of North Judson, where I live, we still don't have curbside. Lots of people still recycle using the drop-off facility, but more would if it were easier.

5. More teleconference meetings - government officials could use their time more efficiently and conserve fuel by conducting more meetings by Internet teleconference rather than in person. This would require development of a well integrated set of facilities, but it's not that difficult these days. It wouldn't eliminate the need for all travel, of course -- sites need to be visited, and people need to 'do lunch' once in awhile. But, overall, it could improve access to government, especially for those of us who are relatively far from Indianapolis.

6. Less militarism -- all Americans are justly proud of the skills of the U.S. military, but wars are expensive, destructive, and lots of good folks are killed, maimed and traumatized. Let's wage peace for a change.

7. No Mow -- there's vastly too much mowing and spraying in America and especially here in the Midwest. It wastes fuel, money, is bad for the environment, and is just way out of hand. Mowers are dirty and inefficient machines. I like mowed areas, and visibility at intersections is important. But what's with the huge acreages of mowed lands? We need to phase this out slowly with careful mixes of groundcovers and native plants. Government could be a leader by phasing out at least 50% of their mowed areas on government property over the next five years.

8. Fuel efficient government vehicles -- Sure, a highway dumptruck needs to be huge, but there could be lots of savings elsewhere. All government cars should get at least thirty miles to the gallon. At least. Maybe a police need a big, brawny vehicles, but what about building inspector? Hint: they're going to start making Civics in Indiana.

9. Energy audits - all government buildings should get energy audits, and follow-up on the changes that need to be made. Sure, it might take a few years to get all the issues resolved, but as energy costs go up it would be worth it. Top of the list: schools and government office buildings. The results of the audit should be handed to the media, so we'd all know where the waste is.

10. 21st Century Water Management - Indiana is blessed with an abundance of water. It's time to abolish drainage boards, and replace them with water management districts based on modern thinking about the functioning of waterways, and dedicated to preserving this critical resource. Sure, ag drainage is important, but it's just one interest and it currently has too much clout.

Wow, that was easy.

6mar2007 - Banned in China...and kinda' proud of it

Bigeastern.com has been online for a long time, but it's always been a fairly low traffic affair. Obscurity hasn't been enough to keep me from getting banned in China, or so it appears. An intriguing project called The Great Firewall of China allows testing to see if a particular URL is filtered out in China. I was surprised to see bigeastern.com filtered, and so I googled 'bigeastern China'; sure enough there was a 'bigdumbhoosier' post referencing China from 2001 entitled Technology Transfer, and a link to a WorldNet article from 2003 entitled 'Smart bomb' technology moving to China. It reminds me of garage rock song Louie Louie -- it was supposedly banned from numerous radio stations, including all of them in Indiana by order of Gov. Welsh. (I don't recall this because we listened to Chicago stations where I grew up). The banning was the best publicity money couldn't buy -- it made Louie Louie by the Kingsmen seem rebellious, dangerous and exciting -- instead of merely sloppy and raucous.

If a couple of isolated mentions of China are really what got bigeastern.com banned there, it seems silly. On the other hand, maybe what they really are concerned about is that the Chinese people might start demanding environmental protections and improvements. The absurd slowness of US poliymakers to wake up to climate change issues may be changing -- that could be bad news for China as better behavior here in the USA would turn the world's attentions on Chinese contributions to world environmental problems. I visited the Asian rim in the 1980s, and one of my most vivid memories was the sickly brown color of the ocean off of seemingly vast areas of the Chinese coast. I imagine it's only gotten worse. Then there's the air pollution from largely unregulated east Asian industry.

One more (unrelated) thing: Here's a link to the Indiana Heritage Trust's Northwest Indiana Projects. If you click on the links a little window pops up with a photo and some info about the project. It appears that the web site is still under construction so it's a little buggy, but a nice idea.

26feb2007 -
Links

Word for today: those traditional Edison type lightbulbs -- start calling them 'obsolescent' bulbs.

CAFO beat. Jolinda Buchanan, the Farm Program Coordinator for the Citizen's Action Coalition of Indiana sent me a copy of the newly enacted CAFO ordinance for St. Joseph County, Indiana. (For you non-Hoosiers, that's the South Bend area) It seemed important to me, so I took the liberty of convertng it to .pdf and posting it HERE. Please feel free to circulate it. IMHO, every county ought to consider passing serious local CAFO controls. Here's a link to the Citizen's Action Coalition of Indiana website.

Karen Myers has made some interesting posts on WAHM diary of late, including one rather subtle, but quite interesting link: Organic will lead the food revolution, says Melchett wherein the head of the UK Soil Association predicts the passing of the heyday of industrial food production. When people tell you that resistance to the excesses of industrial food production is merely standing in the way of progress, point them to this article.

We Americans were, once upon a time, a fairly progressive people, but we've lost our mojo a bit of late, and it seems the Euros are a bit quicker on the uptake. So while it may take a little longer here, it's happening -- people are turning back to more wholesome, tastier and more fun foods. Personally, the CAFO view of the future (part of the whole 'hive society') is a rather bleak vision. I prefer to believe that we can make the future better instead of worse.

Organic is only part of the story; heirloom and locally produced foods, and where possible, wild foods too, are all part of the mix. Once people try eggs from organically fed, uncaged chickens, they'll taste the difference and the modest price difference will seem less critical - especially when they realize they don't end up throwing 25% of their eggs away due to a bad odor.

So I submit, for the consideration of the reading public, that the future of agriculture is quite the opposite of industrial CAFOs. It's more like the past: local gardens, orchards, vinyards and livestock farms. Yes, meat will be relatively more expensive, but most folks are way too fat anyway. You want to drop some pounds? Quit eating so much meat!

Rural communities that want to get ahead in the future might seriously consider working to encourage more organic growing, more community supported agriculture and more free range livestock in their area. That's where the smart people will want to live -- where there's clean air and water, pastures with fine stock and room for them to roam, apples in the autumn, fishes in the creeks and locally grown produce.

Events. The Kankakee Valley Historical Society will host a program on Cindy Deardorf discussing Native American gardening methods on February 27 at the Kouts library at 6:30 pm. Here's a synopsis.

20feb2007 -
River Links

Here are some watershed links I found interesting:

A river related environmental issue these days is dam removal. Many older dams are at the end of their useful life and, rather than repain the ageing structures, many are being removed. Scientific American has a good article about the subject this month; it's not available online, but discusses the trade-offs involved in dam removal. Hydro provides clean renewable power (but in many instances, not much) and reservoirs can store water for irrigation, domestic and recreational use. Dams also pile up sediment, sometimes laced with hazardous materials. For an account of dam removal in the arid southwest read Fossil Creek Unbound, and the Fossil Creek Watershed and Riparian Restoration page. In the midwest, Wisconsin has been a leader in the dam removal movement -- here is WDNR's Dam Removal information page. The River Alliance of Wisconsin hosts a Dam Removal FAQ.

Todd F. of San Francisco has a nice flicker slideshow mostly showing Indiana's Yellow River, apparently in the Marshall Co. area. I've been hearing some talk that yet another plan to dredge the Yellow River may be afoot - certainly there are some log jam issues, but I hope we're not going to see the mistakes of the past repeated yet again. It's 2007 folks, I'm pretty sure. You might want to check your calendars. Here's a link to a small project slated for the Yellow River sponsored by the Kankakee River Basin Commission; this one sounds reasonable. I didn't find any online resources about a proposal for a large project.

The Nature Conservancy's Tippecanoe River Project is offered at no cost to participants - explains TNC's project aimed at increasing conservation tillage in the Tippecanoe watershed. [2.20.07 - Howell - Herald Journal]

24jan2007 -
Grab bag

CAFOs - Check out State Rep. Ryan Dvorak's recent post: What is a CAFO and Why Should You Care? including a link to the recent Rolling Stone expose on CAFOs Boss Hog.

Two CAFO related bills have been introduced: House Bill 1197 'Prohibits construction of a confined feeding operation (CFO) within two miles of a school or a municipality. Permits application to land of manure generated by a CFO only by incorporation or injection. Requires certification of applicators of manure generated by a CFO.' My opinion: Well meaning, no doubt, but kind of an ad hoc approach to the problem; what about people who don't live within two miles of a municipality? Incorporation or injection of manure may reduce odor, but that probably doesn't solve the groundwater pollution problems, especially here in sand country where the aquifer is especially vulnerable. More to my liking is Senate Bill 0447 establishing a three year moratorium on CAFO permits.

Kemplog and others have already commented on the LaPorte Co. BZA rejection of a CAFO proposed there, but it's worth looking at the article in the LaPorte Herald Argus (by Derek Smith), Petition for CAFOs Denied to read the lively discussion.

Proposed Illiana Tollroad - Marcia Oddi published an opinion piece in the ILB: Governor's Illiana and Commerce Connector proposals under fire including lots of background links on the controversial proposal. The link from I-65 to I-57 has been discussed for many years, but the proposal also included a partial loop south of Valparaiso, then north to I-94 near Michigan City, considerably increasing the scope of the project. The need and route seem debatable propositions, but it's pretty stunning that the Governor plans to use money from tolls on this route to fund I-69's southern leg and keep it toll free.

The Essence of Cool - To see a couple of American masters at the height of their powers check out Miles Davis and John Coltrane performing 'So What' on YouTube.

11jan2007 -
Time to restore nuisance law property rights

The November election left Democrats in a considerably strengthened position in Indiana, as well as in the US national government. The excesses of the past Republican dominated years can't be corrected overnight, but it's not too early to start talking about specific changes that would bring some immediate relief.

A simple change I'd like to see is a roll-back of a key state statute on nuisance law to the pre-2005 language. For a good primer read Wikipedia's entry on Nuisance law.

Here's the current language in Ind. Code 32-30-6-9(d):

(d) An agricultural or industrial operation or any of its appurtenances is not and does not become a nuisance, private or public, by any changed conditions in the vicinity of the locality after the agricultural or industrial operation, as the case may be, has been in operation continuously on the locality for more than one (1) year if the following conditions exist: (1) There is no significant change in the type of operation. A significant change in the type of agricultural operation does not include the following:
(A) The conversion from one type of agricultural operation to another type of agricultural operation.
(B) A change in the ownership or size of the agricultural operation.
(C) The:
(i) enrollment; or
(ii) reduction or cessation of participation;
of the agricultural operation in a government program.
(D) Adoption of new technology by the agricultural operation.
(2) The operation would not have been a nuisance at the time the agricultural or industrial operation began on that locality.

Before 2005, this section read as follows:

An agricultural or industrial operation or any of its appurtenances is not and does not become a nuisance, private or public, by any changed conditions in the vicinity of the locality after the agricultural or industrial operation, as the case may be, has been in operation continuously on the locality for more than one (1) year if:
(1) there is no significant change in the hours of operation;
(2) there is no significant change in the type of operation; and
(3) the operation would not have been a nuisance at the time the agricultural or industrial operation began on that locality.

Both provisions are examples of 'right to farm' legislation, originally intended to remedy the problem of city folk moving out to the country and complaining about noise or dust from farming operation. Here's a backgrounder on the evolution of Right to Farm laws.

I've been practicing law for quite a number of years in an area where city people often build country homes. Nobody has ever asked me to sue a farmer for running his tractor too late at night. People expect and accept that, and more to the point, it's not overly intrusive on neighbors. While its purpose is veiled somewhat, the 2005 amendment of Indiana's right-to-farm statute is an example of the morphing of right-to-farm laws from shields for traditional farming operations into swords for CAFO operators. This shield to sword process is described in the article linked in paragraph above. By specifying that changes in size, ownership and technology cannot be considered a 'change' under the statute, the 2005 amendment created a blanket exemption from nuisance liability for CAFOs. Said another way, building a CAFO is defined as a continuation of existing agriculture regardless of any change in the 'size' and 'technology' of the operation. So when huge barns, manure pits and dead critter compost piles replace a bean field, nothing has changed within the eyes of the law. It's just more farming. Justice, in this case is not only blind; it also has a poorly developed sense of smell.

At common law, a homeowner or any neighboring landowner could seek redress for damage to their property by instituting a nuisance action. The key point is that the right to sue a neighbor under a nuisance theory is a property right, part of the bundle of rights one acquires by paying for a piece of the planet, and keeping all those taxes and assessments paid up to the govenrment. Legislative action eroding the right to file a nuisance action against an offensive neighbor constitutes the transfer of property rights from one group of property owners (homeowners) to another group (CAFO owners). That's good if you're a CAFO owner, but if you're an impacted homeowner your ox is getting gored.

I'm not opposed to 'right-to-farm' legislation that doesn't unduly erode common law property rights. The concept that one can't complain when one moves to a nuisance has long been recognized. Therefore codifying that concept to protect farmers engaged in conventional agriculture from nuisance lawsuits is reasonable. However, the 2005 change went beyond that, granting to CAFO operations an easement to damage their neighbors property. No reasonable person could honestly say a CAFO isn't a significant change from a bean field in terms of its impact on neighboring properties.

Ask IDEM officials whether they regulate odor. The answer is 'no'. In fact, there is no regulation of odor at all in Indiana. Ask IDEM whether they regulate activities likely to result in a plague of flies. I'm pretty sure the answer is 'no'. But I don't want to be dependent on IDEM anyway. Give us back our property rights -- in this case, the right to sue an operator who is unreasonably impacting his neighbors. Property rights are in the hands of citizens, and we need more grass-roots action to help rural communities grow and prosper. If the hog facility next door becomes a problem, you should have the right to seek redress -- and not in Indianapolis, but in a court in your own county where people actually might care about your community and your home.

Recently, CAFO operators have been quoted in numerous press accounts saying the concerns about their operations are not based in facts. They say they can control odors and be good neighbors. That would be great. If that's true and if the operators really believe that, then they shouldn't need legislation taking away their neighbors' rights. If CAFO operators want to prove they will be good neigbhors they should support amendment of Indiana's right to farm statute to remove the free ride for CAFOs. If they feel they need special protection from nuisance lawsuits, well, the conclusion is obvious.

If you're concerned about the impact of CAFOs on rural Indiana, please consider passing that concern along to your elected representatives. I feel Indiana's legislators have been slow to sense how widespread concern about this issue really is; I suppose most live in areas far from CAFOs. Democrats can demostrate they care about all the people, including rural homeowners, by restoring this important property right. The right-to-farm law as it existed before 2005 was adequate to protect farmers from unreasonable lawsuits. Better IDEM oversight would be a good idea, but the place to start is restoration of property owners' nuisance rights.

3jan2007 -
SciAm on corn-based ethanol

It's not available online (unless you pay for it) but the January 2007 edition of Scientific American has an article about ethanol as a fuel source. It concludes that ethanol may contribute to the long-term energy picture, but doubts that corn-based ethanol is practical; a view bigeastern readers are familiar with by now. Here's the link: Is Ethanol for the Long Haul?. The article is also in the print edition.

12dec2006 -
trees and carbon

Lately I've been wondering about the role of trees and forests in the global carbon cycle. Here are some links on the subject:

Carbon Storage and Accumulation in U.S. Forests - this study says about 58 billion tons of carbon are stored in US forests -- that's several decades worth of fossil fuel emissions at the current rate of 1.5 billion per year. US forests account for about 4% of the world's forests. Most forest carbon is in the soil, and generally more carbon accumulates in northern forests. Pacific coast forests have the most carbon per acre, a fact that won't surprise anybody who has taken a walk in a redwood grove. In general, more carbon is stored in older forests, not only in the trees but also in the soil.

Carbon Sequestration - A Georgia Factsheet [pdf] - This study estimates that from one to four metric tons of carbon per acre per year can be trapped in a loblolly pine plantation. It promotes the use of managed forestlands for carbon sequestration, saying that fast growing trees have the greatest carbon grabbing potential. Comparing it with the prior link, one can conclude that forests with low carbon rates may have the greatest capacity to absorb more carbon -- think of them as dry sponges. But the old growth northern forests have the greatest capacity to release carbon, so we need to also make sure activities in old growth don't wipe out any gains in new growth areas.

The complex dynamics of boreal forest growth and carbon sequestration are discussed in Fire Frequency Determines Forest Carbon Storage a Science Daily article from 2003. A study in Canada's northern forests indicated that forests in the 20 to 30 year range absorb the most carbon. Young trees are too small to grab much, and old forests reach an equilibrium state. The article doesn't mention whether the death of an old-growth forest by fire, for example, releases large quantities of carbon but that seems likely. Whether these studies would apply to a fire adapted woodland like our black oak savannas is another thing; my guess is probably not, because most fires in savannas do not result in significant reduction in biomass. Getting back to boreal forests (mainly in Canada and Russia) -- they matter a lot, being the largest forest in the world. According to the study 25% of the total carbon held by forests is in the frosty vastness of the taiga.

Okay, just one more, and this one is pretty nerdy, but worth a look if you're interested in ways to cut carbon using nature's toolbox: Biomass, Fuels, Energy, Carbon, and Global Climate Change.

4dec2006 -
tune break

Blues and R and B fans, check out Tad Robinson's new live performance videos hosted by YouTube.

While I'm on the topic of music, here are links to a couple of my favorite Internet 'radio' stations of the ShoutCast variety:

SOMA FM - 'Listener-supported, commercial-free, underground/alternative radio broadcasting from San Francisco.'

Radio Paradise - Also listener supported, featuring eclectic rock oriented music.

29nov2006 -
Benefit Sharing or Exploitation? - CAFO link

A reader tip: Bioprospecting: Mining Our National Parks One Gene at a Time [11.28.2006 - Parrish - AlterNet] - delves into a proposal to allow 'bioprospecting' in US national parks. Bioprospecting means investigating genetic and chemical material of organisms with the intent to produce a private patent based upon the properties of the substances that can be made using that material. The marvelous organisms in Yellowstone's thermal vents are obvious targets.

My take on this: research into natural processes and chemistry is generally a good thing. The problem is with patent law -- it's difficult to accept that a chemical produced by a wild organism can become private property of a corporation simply because a company employee found it -- a novel use for that material might be another matter.

Still, the research needs to be funded somehow, and that's where the profit motive kicks in. These kinds of rights are typically analyzed under patent law; maybe that's obsolete thinking. Patent law was originally intended to reward inventors of the tinkering mechanic sort one associates with the now quaint sounding phrase 'yankee ingenuity', but has recently been extended to concepts like software interface designs where it really seems a stretch.

Granting exclusive rights to a chemical of natural origin seems an inappropriate extension of patent law. We need new, preferably international, standards to help insure that this research gets done but without excessive privatization of the benefits. Basically, that means that the people who conduct the research should be funded and well rewarded personally and professionally for makind productive contributions to scientific knowledge, but that knowledge should pass to the public domain as quickly as possible.

Reading the comments on AlterNet one sees a virulent anti-corporation sentiment. I sometimes feel that way too, but I differ a bit as to the remedy. I really want to see this research get done, but I'd prefer to strengthen public interest oriented institutions and give them this turf. Done right, this would give publicly minded scientists and researchers some excellent career options so they can be financially successful themselves, while serving the public interest.

The proposal is open to public comment until December 15, 2006 -- here's a link to the typically euphemistically named proposal: Benefit-Sharing in the National Parks: Environmental Impact Statement - What is Bioprospecting?. Despite the tedious spin doctoring, the NPS materials are quite informative and well organized.

On the CAFO front, Kemplog recently posted a link to this LA Times piece: Foul state of affairs found in feedlots summarizing recent scienctific reviews of the growing impacts of CAFOs on the environmental health and social conditions in rural areas. Of particular interest to me was the recognition of the environmental justice issues raised by CAFO sitings. It's a worthwhile read. Here's a brief passage:

One of the new reports says a serious impact of feedlots "is their disruption of quality of life for neighboring residents," mostly in low-income and nonwhite communities.

'More than an unpleasant odor, the smell can have dramatic consequences for rural communities whose lives are rooted in enjoying the outdoors," says the report, compiled by researchers in Iowa, Illinois and North Carolina. "The highly cherished values of freedom and independence associated with life oriented toward the outdoors gives way to feelings of violation and infringement. Homes become a barrier against the outdoors that must be escaped.'

Here in Indiana (and no doubt in Iowa as well) the rural communities impacted are predominantly Euro (you know, white), but for social purposes they have achieved a sort of minority status. We are supposed to enjoy the smell of money. Sorry, no thanks, I prefer the smell of pines.

27nov2006 -
WAHM Diary, Hupfer resigns, Tree Farm Certification for Classified Forests

Karen Myers has been making some interesting posts lately, documenting what seems to be an awakening among rural people to their neighborhood issues -- CAFOs, landfills, the ethanol craze, and the like. Here's a recent post that serves as a good starting point: Black Friday Hangover.

In case you missed it: Indiana DNR boss Hupfer resigns. Hupfer will be replaced by two-time Clay County sheriff and current DNR law enforcement boss Robert Carter, Jr. of Brazil Indiana. I searched for additional information about Mr. Carter's c.v., but didn't find anything of substance. I can't help but think this is related to the results of the recent election, which seemed to reject much of Gov. Daniels' policies, particularly privatization of state owned assets -- it seems unlikely the state will be 'leasing' any more of its most valuable assets in the near future, and that means IDNR won't be in the dealmaking business.

While I recognize the need for good adminstration of large organizations like DNR, personally I believe the director should be a person whose 'career' demonstrates, above all else, committment to the ideal of preserving and enhancing our public spaces for the benefit of present and future generations of Hoosiers. I think some degree of science background is a plus too. Here's a crazy idea -- the director's 'career' ought to be less important than service to the public. And maybe, just maybe, a little love of nature of the all creatures great and small variety wouldn't hurt.

Not that I'm always opposed to what the Daniels administration does, and I'm certainly not against looking at some fresh ideas. Here's one that looks pretty good. Recently I received a newsletter that goes out to all owners of Classified Forest and Wild Lands explaining that the state is seeking American Tree Farm certification for all classified forest lands in Indiana. Certification includes an inspection process, and most lands that meet the specs for Indiana's classified forest program should be able to pass muster for the American Tree Farm certification. Timber produced from certified lands is becoming more sought after as consumers try to green up their purchases. By certifying Indiana classified forest acreage in bulk, the cost to individual landowners is reduced, and Indiana can vastly increase the stock of certified timber in the state. That, in turn, should help local furniture, cabinet and flooring manufacturers find a supply of certified hardwoods, all of which should help keep skilled wood based factories here in Indiana.

I like the idea of increasing timber production on private lands, and devoting more of Indiana's public forests to long-term reserves, allowing significant tracts return to old-growth conditions if at all possible. As long as landowners are constrained by the need to maintain certification, and as long as the certification process remains legitimate, I think private landowners are better equipped to make harvesting decisions. The more valuable the timber is, the more worthwhile it is to devote lands to timber production.

Landowners can opt-out of the bulk certification without penalty, but I doubt that many will. This is a new program, so my opinions here are just first impressions, but so far it looks like this should be a winner.

1nov2006 -
Two more links

Tim Roemer has a good OpEd piece on the IndyStar: Watch on Election Night for Indiana's political shift.

Development on the Dunes by Jeff Fleischer [Chicago Wilderness Magazine, Fall 2006} provides a thoughtful overview of the issues surrounding the proposal for a hotel at Indiana Dunes State Park. IDNR offered up an RFP for the project earlier this year, but for now at least, no proposals have been submitted. The article also references one of my favorite environmental books, Reading the Landscape by May Thielgaard Watts. I find the skills she describes to be not only interesting, but also useful in my law practice...for example, in a property line dispute the question may arise, 'how long has this fenceline been here?' In northern Indiana's sand country a long established fenceline may show a mounded effect, due to the accumulation of windblown sand during the mid 20th century before most farmers took steps to control wind erosion.

25oct2006 -
Two quick links

Here on bigeastern.com, Tad Robinson has posted a new Blues Journal piece: Soundtracking the Guardian.

Yesterday I guested on Kay Westhues' photoblog, fourteen places to eat with Electra-Glide at the Nick. I'm a big fan of Kay's photoblog; it so captures the authentic feel of small town life in northern Indiana in a way that is hard to describe, but I'll try anyway: quaint, funny, and with a 'little bit of love and affection'. I'm honored to be guest photographer there -- 'Electra-Glide at the Nick' was very much inspired by Kay's work.

Oh, and one more thing. If you're in North Judson, the Wooden Nickel is a great little tavern, with good food (esp. the pizza made in classic Chicago made ovens) and friendly folks.

18oct2006 -
Up from the ashes

On the night of September 28, 2006 our ISP, Nautilus Commercial Data of Iola Kansas, was utterly destroyed by fire. Bigeastern.com is now mostly restored, though there are no doubt some holes here and there.

Nautilus Commercial Data is operated by my cousin, Robin Boyer, a genuine pioneer of citizen based electronic communcation -- he started out as a ham operator in the 1960s, operated a BBS throughout the 80s and has run a successful independent ISP through the 90s and to the present.

The destruction of his entire (highly customized) facility was a terrible blow, but he's perservered and rebuilt his operation from the ground up. It's currently running on his kitchen table while a new building is created and he wrangles with the inevitable nonsense from his insurance company. Have you ever seen The World's Fastest Indian? Well -- Robin is a lot like Burt Munro, only a Midwesterner instead of a Kiwi and with electronics instead of motorcycles.

I'll begin publishing regular posts soon, but today I just want to thank Robin for his work in getting back online, and supporting bigeastern.com for lo, all these years. And thank all the bigeastern.com readers who asked about it when it was down.

We're up from the ashes, thanks for coming back!

18sep2006 -
London calling

Strange days indeed, when London comes calling on the Rochester Kiwanis Club - War puts the Republican heartland back into play - [9.8.2006 - Reid - London Times]

18sep2006 -
Bubble trouble

Some ethanol reading:

Aaron Pressman's somewhat tongue-in-cheek Top 10 signs of an inflating ethanol bubble [5.9.2006 - Business Week]

Not as much fun, but more evenhanded: In Perspective: is an ethanol bubble coming [6.2006 - Sherer - AgProfessional]

Some of the market factors that make ethanol look vulnerable are outlined in: Smart Investors Should Look at Ethanol Before They Catch Ethanol Fever [7.7.2006 - Hasan - altenews/Investorideas.com]

The role of multiple governmental subsidies in supporting the ethanol market is the prime subject of: Going Crazy for Ethanol [7.7.2006 - Pearlstein - WaPost]

A somewhat more optimistic view of the ethanol business is espoused in: Ethanol Skeptics [9.7.2006 - Kruse - Commstock Report]

13sep2006 -
Three things...

Thing #1. Corn based ethanol plants are sprouting all across Indiana, but is corn based ethanol a big part of the solution to America's energy problems? I remain unconvinced, and would go so far as to suggest that many of the plants being built today will be shut down within five years. Sure, the people who construct the plants will make money, and it may provide a temporary boost to corn prices, but corn production as it is currently practiced is so input intensive that ethanol isn't cheaper than gasoline and isn't likely to become so in the forseeable future. For a look at part of the problem check out this online overview of a current Consumer Reports article: The Ethanol Myth. Hoosiers need to view promotional 'information' more critically.

Not that plant produced ethanol might not be a real winner, but it's likely going to require designing a new production system from the ground up; mainly one with lower inputs. Corn agriculture as its currently practiced evolved in a cheap energy environment with the goal of maximizing edible carbohydrate output per unit of labor input. This equation is largely irrelevant for fuel production in an expensive energy environment.

Thing #2. I get e-mail and phone calls almost every day from the good folks around Indiana's verdant countryside horrified by the news that a monster CAFO is about to become their neighbor. They want to know what we can do about it. I don't have much of an answer. It's a fairly depressing scenario when one's dream home is rendered unlivable by an unceasing wave of hog manure, and simultaneously unmarketable. What I find particularly depressing is that not only is the current Republican administration actively promoting more CAFOs as 'economic development', but even more worrisome, I simply haven't seen Democrat candidate take a stand on this issue. My opinion: the best place to fight CAFOs is at the local level, and it is a largely political issue. Don't count on any kind of regulation at the state level to help you. If Democrats won't step up to the plate on this issue, then try the Republicans. They are, supposedly, all about property rights, and it really is a property rights issue.

As always, Kemplog is keeping me up-to-date on the CAFO issue. Thomas recently posted a link to a strongly worded editiorial in the Eugene Oregon Register-Guard:Unlovely lagoons arguing against exemptions from Superfund liability for CAFO operators. If CAFOs are not a problem, why do they need all these exemptions?

Thing #3. My least favorite trend in recent cinema (as bigeastern readers will know) is the 'skinny supermodel with a sword' school of martial arts films (e.g. Kill Bill). That's not exciting, it's just plain silly. A couple of days ago I watched a real martial arts film - Kurosawa's Tsubaki Sanjuro, the sequel to the better known Yojimbo. Toshiro Mifune, in peak form, stars with marvelous instensity, and his exploits are awesome, but not incredible. More importantly, his clever sense of strategy and love for life shine through the violence. The action is balanced with gentleness -- the best quote of the film comes, not from Mifune, but from a recently rescued lady: 'A good sword is left in its sheath.' Words America needs to contemplate these days, IMO.

8sep2006 -
A two-stage ditch?

In yesterday's posting penned by Chad Watts, project manager for TNC's Tippecanoe River Project, Chad mentioned a pilot project for construction of a two-stage ditch, a design concept that may help make agricultural ditches more self-maintaining and provide additional environmental benefits including better habitat, improved flood attenuation, and help reduce sediment and nutrient transport.

For those interested in this concept I've collected a few links:

Ohio Natural Design Project - a faily ambitious research project in Ohio's Lake Erie watershed, an area with many similarities to northern Indiana. [OSU]

Promoting Naturalized Drainage Channel Design - The Great Lakes Program for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control (grantee TNC) are studying a 'modified two-stage design' on Laird Creek in southern Michigan (in the St. Joseph River watershed).

A recent article in the Chesterton Trib: Tourism seeks budget increase to operate new visitor center mentions a two-stage ditch project underway in Porter County.

Dan Mecklenberg's A Brief Overview of 2-stage Ditch Characteristics gives a technical synopsis of two-stage ditch design including profiles and graphs illustrating the flow characteristics of two-stage ditches.

7sep2006 -
TNC's Chad Watts on sediment in the Tippecanoe

In response to my recent post sedimentary journey, The Nature Conservancy's Tippecanoe River Project manager, Chad Watts, writes sharing his knowledge about sediment problems in the Tippecanoe River, including Lakes Shafer and Freeman:

---

I appreciate your words about the sediment problems being experienced in Lake Shafer and Freeman. Your comments are on target in terms of looking at slack waters and their ability to become sediment traps. Also, I agree with you that placing dams in natural rivers interrupt the natural sediment transport systems that are inherent in our rivers and steams, as well as being barriers to the movement of aquatic organisms. Sediment transport in rivers is a natural phenomenon as all rivers have a certain bed load of sediment that comes naturally given the grade of the stream and the volume of water in each stream. Dredging and straightening streams is not the answer to arresting these sediment transport and deposition issues that are being faced by rivers across the country and certainly prevalent in the Midwest.

I would also add to your discussion that the altered hydrology within these rivers and streams is also a very large contributor to sediment delivery and transport in our streams. As you well know, altering the amount and timing of large water flows to our surface waters is a major contributor to sediment detachment and transport, both from within the streambed and from the stream banks. Loss of natural wetlands and natural vegetation on the land, manipulation of the drainage systems by dredging and straightening, the overall efficiency of our drainage systems, and loss of streamside perennial vegetation are all contributors to this phenomenon. When you look at dredged and deepened streams, you also see that these manipulated drains are disconnected from their natural flood plains, which serve natural streams as a means of slowing water down during high flows and allowing for some sediment deposition on flood plain lands. When disconnected from their flood plains, this sediment that would have been deposited on the flood plain is now being carried downstream and deposited in areas like Lake Shafer. Also, when straightened, streams tend to flow more rapidly than do natural, meandering streams, which exacerbates the erosion potential of these streams.

Every stream has a natural grade, width and depth at which it is most comfortable given the water volume that it must transport. Streams will continually work to attain this natural depth, width and flow speed that would put the stream at equilibrium within its environment. Streams will naturally meander to reduce flow speeds in areas that are higher gradient, often causing bank erosion. Straightening streams simply acts to turn back the clock on these streams and causes them to start over on their journey to reach that equilibrium. Unfortunately, it is difficult to get people to recognize altered hydrology as a major problem because it is insidious and not outwardly noticeable. We tend to rely on our technology to arrest these problems rather than allowing nature to take its course. Often times, our technology is not the right answer to these problems, as we are simply exaggerating the problems that are being experienced because of the misuse or misapplication of this technology.

Currently, The Nature Conservancy is piloting a new technology with drainage channels that will hopefully work to restore some hydrologic function of these streams and reconnect the stream with its flood plain. This new practice is called a two-staged ditch. Simply put, we are recreating flood plain "benches" on either side of the normal flow channel, and allowing the channel to meander within the confines of these flood plain benches to achieve its equilibrium. Just some experimental technology that we are trying out that may help with these types of problems, or at least be a building block that will help to build the sound foundation that will help alleviate these types of problems if applied across the landscape at the appropriate scale. We are doing some intensive monitoring of this project to determine its overall impacts and prove to the decision makers that the technology will work if all goes as planned. Our target date for construction will be fall of 2007, but we have initiated a monitoring program that will give us some good information pre and post construction. Stay tuned.

Chad Watts
Tippecanoe River Project Manager
436 Northwest Street
Winamac, IN 46996
tele/fax: 574.946.7491

5sep2006 -
Sedimentary journey

Kevin Howell of the Monticello Herald-Journal has written a piece Silt problems muddy the waters for residents recounting some of the problems caused by silt build-up at two impoundments on the Tippecanoe River, Lakes Freeman and Shafer.

Siltation is a major problem on many waterways in Indiana, but the cure can be somewhat elusive. Rivers impounded by dams are always subject to silt deposition. It's really a simple phenomenon. When it rains (especially when it rains hard) storm runoff picks up soil, leaf and dust particles and various flotsam, all which are held in suspension as the water rushes downstream. The faster the water moves, the more it can carry. A big flood can sweep up large objects.

As a stream approaches a slackwater area (one with little or no current), it slows and begins to drop the burden. First the biggest, heaviest particles fall to the bottom, then as the water slows more, smaller particles drop to the bottom. When the flow comes to a virtual halt, as it does upstream from a dam, even tiny silt particles drop ever so slowly to the bottom. It's not all bad, this process helps clean the water -- the Tippecanoe downstream from Lakes Freeman and Shafer is relatively free of sediment.

All rivers and streams have some silt and sand flowing along with them, so anytime a dam is placed across a river it has an effect on sediment transport. In the slack area upstream from the dam, more silt falls to the bottom and there is little current to introduce new silt. It piles up there until the reservoir eventually becomes a big mud flat. Conversely, at the tail of the dam, water runs fast gouging at the river bed. Not only that, its sediment has been removed during its passage through the reservoir, so the net is negative; areas immediately downstream from a dam are characterized by erosion. That's why there's usually a big hole in a river bed just downstream from a dam.

Of course, allowing tons of mud to wash carelessly into tributaries upstream from the reservoir results in a much larger input of sediment into the system, speeding up the filling of the reservoir. The most obvious solution is to periodically remove the silt from the reservoir. Obviously, that doesn't get the problem at its source.

'Cleaning' (that means 'dredging') of upstream ditches is mentioned in the Howell piece -- that's the universal Hoosier solution for all watershed problems. I'm skeptical that more old fashioned scorched earth dredging of the ditches upstream would reduce sediment transport to the reservoirs. The dredging process itself muddies the waters severely, and all that mud is going to end up in the reservoir. Worse, most such projects involve systematic defoliation of riparian corridors, making them more vulnerable to erosion. Most ditch projects are intended to speed drainage of the areas upstream, not to diminish sedimentation downstream. That means they are designed to increase the flow rate of the tributary streams by making them straighter, free of obstructions, and steeper. Faster flow rates mean increased sediment transport. Conventional dredging as we see in most of rural northern Indiana will probably make the problem worse.

Generally, natural streams with bends, wetlands, riffles and pools and all that other messiness will carry less sediment, so where possible, restoration of tributary streams to a more natural condition would reduce sediment inputs into the reservoir. Well vegetated riparian corridors -- on all streams, small and large -- will reduce the inputs of sediment into the system. In agricultural areas where stream restoration may not be feasible, 'filter strips' of perennial vegetation along watercourses curb erosion and therefore reduce sediment inputs to the reservoir, but their effect will be cancelled out if there are thousands of field tiles or drainage pumps in the same watershed without any sediment control whatsoever.

People love to blame developers for all the world's ills, though they are mostly responding to market demands. There's no doubt that a particularly irresponsible development can introduce huge quantities of mud into waterways. Once it's in there, it's headed to a new home in the bottom of the reservoir. Policing construction projects to ensure erosion control practices are implemented is a necessary component of a watershed wide sedimentation control strategy. Developers may be partly to blame, but I wouldn't count on finding a single bogeyman. There's plenty of blame to go around.

While I'm skeptical about the scorched earth school of ditch digging, there's little doubt that some engineering solutions are possible to help stem the inevitable flow of sediment. Along with filter strips, grade control structures and well designed sediment traps can help.

At the corporeal Big Eastern we have a small dam, and two channelized creeks, so I've been watching these processes in action for quite a long time. Located as we are in the heart of the Kankakee Sand Region, it's not so much silt here, as sand. In sand country, every stream of water carries below it a slower moving stream of wet sand. It's a dual problem really -- at its source is harmful erosion, and it's destination is harmful deposition.

Grade control structures (also called 'sediment control structures') are like micro-dams. They can be placed where excessive gradient (or 'fall') causes the water to move too fast, creating erosion. The Starke County Drainage Board recently installed a small one of these on our place. It's simplicity itself: an artificial riffle of glacial rock to help the transition between a high gradient stream and a low gradient stream. The little structure is just three or four inches high, but it's placed at a strategic location -- where erosion is a problem upstream, deposition is a problem downstream and there aren't any drainage problems. The glacial rocks resist erosion, and keep the channel of the faster stream from cutting into the natural substrate, easily eroded pure sand. If the sand doesn't get eroded in this fast stretch, then it won't get deposited downstream. Along with the sediment/erosion benefits, the grade control structure creates a little bit of whitewater, which helps add oxygen to the water. [Thanks to the Starke Co. DB for their support in testing this concept -- looks good so far]

A sediment trap is basically big hole dug along the channel of a stream. You've probably heard that 'still waters run deep' -- that's the concept behind a sediment trap. By digging a wide, deep section on a ditch or creek, an area of still water is created and sediment moving downstream falls into the hole. This is similar to traditional dredging, but it's more strategic. The sediment traps are placed where access to the stream is easy and cheap, and where impacts on forests and wetlands will be minimalized. They are maintained free of woody vegetation, so the costs of dipping the sediment periodically will be less than huge scorched earth 'reconstruction' projects. The holes also add some deep water habitat on smaller creeks and that helps fish and other aquatic organisms. So it's cheaper, and better environmentally at the same time.

Some designs place a small control structure at the downstream end of a sediment trap. That helps to create more slack water, allowing the silt to pile up where it can easily be removed. A system of well-designed and maintained sediment traps and sediment control structures on tributaries around a reservoir could drastically reduce inputs of sediment. If the trap fills up without being dipped out, it isn't going to trap anything.

30aug2006 -
failure, dirty truth, and cheap fun

Wow, it's been two weeks since my last posting. Sorry folks, I've been busy doing other things, mostly actual work. Here are a few quick links. Oh, btw, I've received a few suggestions for my list of movies that might be worth sitting through, and will post them when I get to it. If you have a couple for the list feel free to send me an e-mail.

Failure. For some cheap fun, pop over to Google and type in the word 'failure'. You may be amused or annoyed according to your political leanings (I'm guessing which way most bigeastern readers will lean). This result is most likely due to a practice that's been dubbed Googlebombing [wikipedia]. Basically, a whole bunch of people out on the net have posted a link like this one: failure. Hey, you do what you can.

Dirty truth. On the CAFO beat, Kemplog has a worthwhile post, The Dirty and Deadly Truth. Probably we should all seriously think about cutting meat consumption. Most Hoosiers are too fat anyway.

Cheap fun. Now, I must confess I haven't been working all the time. My wife and I bought 'his and hers' Coleman inflatable kayaks (the one person sport kayak model), and they are just about the most fun you can get for under $60.00 a piece. I don't try to sell a lot of product here, but in this case I'd heartily recommend a pair of these and you can help support bigeastern.com by buying them through this link to amazon.com.

They are cheap, lightweight, easy to learn, comfy, and you can enjoy tiny little creeks that wouldn't be accessible in a canoe. They were recommended to us by an avid outdoor couple who said they've had their's for three years without any maintenance problems. The kayaks have several chambers, so they won't sink if you poked a hole in one while out on the water. Did I mention they are CHEAP? They'll easily fit in the trunk of a little rice-burner, and they inflate in about 10 minutes with the (also thrifty) quick pump. We've been exploring the two creeks on the corporeal Big Eastern, which add up to a couple of miles of unspoiled, human powered water sports fun. We've found that it's easy to go upstream against a modest current. That means excursions can be from a single point -- paddle upstream until you get tired, and then float back down. There's something about a workout that involves contending with natural obstacles -- you use your whole body and have to think too. Now that's recreation! If we can just keep a few rivers and creeks clean enough to enjoy.

15aug2006 -
some interesting links

If somebody asked me to name my least favorite US Supreme Court decision, I'd have no difficulty whatsoever, and it's not just the result I don't like. It seems I'm not alone in my opinion: Adam Cohen has an opinion piece in the NYT today that stares this one right in the face, Has Bush v. Gore Become the Case That Must Not Be Named?

NRDC's overview of CAFOs in Indiana - interesting quote: 'In 1993, the LaGrange County Health Department identified a cluster of women living near a hog operation who experienced miscarriages (always in the eighth week of pregnancy) after drinking water with high levels of nitrates from their private wells. Nitrates were as high as 19 to 26 mg/l, well above the federal drinking water maximum of 10 mg/l. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia published this report in 1996.' [editor's note: I haven't checked out this report.]

A recent Kemplog entry mentions the contamination of the Walkerton Ontario municipal well water in May 2000, resulting in thousands of illnesses and seven deaths. Here's the clinically gruesome and thoroughly official account: WATERBORNE OUTBREAK OF GASTROENTERITIS ASSOCIATED WITH A CONTAMINATED MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY, WALKERTON, ONTARIO, MAY-JUNE 2000 [Public Health Agency of Canada]. So, yes, a nearby CAFO can in fact kill you. You see, that foul odor is nature's way of warning you of an unhealthful situation. What, you might ask, is IDEM doing to protect domestic wellheads in rural areas from this kind of contamination? Yeah, a good question.

10aug2006 -
the job in Iraq

You can read my comment about 'the job' in Iraq on Masson's Blog. As to those who say Ned Lamont is an 'extremist' apparently because he opposes the war in Iraq -- recent polls show about 60% of Americans now oppose the war.

1aug2006 -
bigeastern at ten

This month bigeastern celebrates its tenth year continuously online, throughout that run served up reliably by Robin Boyer's nautilus.net in Iola, Kansas.

Foolishly perhaps, I've resisted flow toward blogging software and continue to serve bigeastern up in standards compliant hand-coded html. I've been working with blogging software on the Starke County Democratic Party website, and I like it okay, but I just can't seem to get inspired about doing that here.

I know it makes it a little hard to use my website sometimes, and I thank those of you that still do. To those who can't quite wrap your brain around the idea of a handcoded website, or who think I'm a odd old curmudgeon for clinging to my old ways, I can only say, 'well, yes, that's partly true'.

27jul2006 -
fifty films that might be worth sitting through

So it's hot and humid outside, and the Cubs are awful. Here's a list of movies that you might find worth sitting through in alphabetical order, more or less.

• 1984 (1984 version)
• 2001: A Space Odyssey
• A Clockwork Orange
• Anatomy of a Murder
• Airplane
• Being John Malkovich
• Best in Show
• Blade Runner
• Blazing Saddles
• Brazil
• The Big Lebowski
• Casablanca
• Circle of Iron
• Citizen Kane
• Donny Darko
• Don't Look Back
• Double Indemnity
• Dr. Strangelove, or how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb.
• The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
• Fargo
• Ferris Bueller's Day Off
• The Four Hundred Blows
• Ghost World
• The Good Girl
• Hard Day's Night
• Hedwig and the Angry Inch
• High Noon
• Invasion of the Body Snatchers (either version)
• Jean de Florette
• El Jardin de las Delicias
• Life of Brian
• The Lion in Winter
• Midway
• Miller's Crossing
• Nosferatu (original silent version)
• Office Space
• Pulp Fiction
• Rashomon
• The Seven Samurai
• Shrek
• Sid and Nancy
• The Station Agent
• This is Spinal Tap
• Team America: World Police
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Vertigo
• Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
• Wild Strawberries
• The Wizard of Oz
• Young Frankenstein

Many are older films, but isn't it better to watch an excellent old movie than a second rate new release? In particular, I'm not impressed by the current crop of martial arts films -- you know where one undernourished super-model type defeats entire armies of sword wielding buffoons, and all that 'Crouching Tiger Hidden Wire' stuff. If you actually liked those movies, give 'Circle of Iron' a chance -- it's what Bruce Lee thought a martial arts movie should be like (alas, he didn't live long enough to appear in it).

19jul2006 -
Cedar Creek case decision and 'cumulative effects'

Those interested in the struggle to improve management practices on Indiana's rivers and streams will want to review a decision posted by the Court of Appeals yesterday and available on Access Indiana: Izaak Walton League of America, Inc. and Cedar Creek Wildlife Project, Inc. v. DeKalb County Surveyor's Office and Indiana Department of Natural Resources [link X ILB].

The case is a little convoluted, but interesting nonetheless. The decision turns on a relatively technical interpretation of what constitutes compliance with legal requirements for a record submitted for judicial review of an Natural Resources Commission (NRC) decision. In judicial review, a judge reviews the action of an administrative agency based solely upon a (typically written) record of the proceedings in the administrative agency; no new evidence or testimony can be submitted to the judicial review judge. Therefore, the exact contents of the record submitted to the judge for review are often the basis of some controversy.

The Court of Appeals interpretation favors substance over form, finding that relatively minor deviations in the record on judicial review cannot act as a jurisdictional bar to judicial review of this administrative decision. That's important, because the state had argued for a jurisdictional bar at the trial court and succeeded. I haven't studied the issue closely enough to have a firm opinion, but in general I'm concerned that the state seems to be seeking to curtail citizen's rights to seek judicial review of administrative actions. In environmental cases in particular, the significance of a resource like the scenic Cedar Creek area may be better understood in the community where it's located rather than (in this case) far away in Indianapolis.

Perhaps even more significance lies at a deeper layer. The case involves a permit to remove a log jam. The objectors before the NRC argued inter alia that the DNR shouldn't have issued the permit because DNR had failed to adequately consider the 'cumulative effects' of numerous such actions as required by IC 14-28-1-22(f):

'In deciding whether to issue a permit under this section, the director shall consider the cumulative effects of the structure, obstruction, deposit, or excavation. The director may incorporate in and make a part of an order of authorization conditions and restrictions that the director considers necessary for the purposes of this chapter.'

By the time the NRC administrative law judge (the 'ALJ') heard the case, the log jam had already been removed. The state argued that the issue was therefore moot, but the ALJ found it was an issue of great public importance and likely to recur so the hearing went on, even though the log jam was history. The NRC ALJ agreed with the objectors that DNR had failed to properly consider the cumulative effects, and the ALJ's decision was subsequently adopted by the NRC. However, the NRC decision didn't invalidate the permit.

The objectors complained that the NRC decision was arbitrary and capricious because it found the permit was improperly issued in violation of IC 14-28-1-22(f), but didn't apply any kind of sanction. It seems that this issue: whether a permit issued by DNR without proper consideration of cumulative effects must therefore be invalidated, will now be considered by the trial court on judicial review.

So, at long last, here's the bottom line. Cumulative effects are a big deal. Most of the environmental degradation issues facing Indiana's waterways are the product of a million little hurts, not one big disaster. I hope that DNR will begin to more seriously and systematically consider cumulative effects, and quit fighting against people who point out that they have a responsiblity to do this.

14jul2006 -
seventeen random thoughts

Seventeen random thoughts, points, predictions, bellyaches, quips and unsupported opinions:

• RT1 - Don't bet the farm on corn-based ethanol -- the problem is that there's no reason to think it'll be significantly cheaper than petroleum based fuel. With fuel, it's about the price, stupid. Anyway, can't we run our cars on something that isn't actually edible?
• RT2 - Global climate change is in the news a lot these days -- oddly, I remember the first time I read about it -- it was in 'My Weekly Reader' c. 1963 (maybe 1964). Seriously -- and I remember the name of the article too: 'Greenland getting greener'. Why, I wondered -- even then, it didn't seem good. It's strange, the childhood moments that stick in the memory.
• RT3 - Modest proposal dept: Soccer would be more popular in the US if it wasn't called football everywhere else. But how did Amercian football get that name anyway? The role of the foot is relatively modest in American football, while it's pretty much the whole deal in the international variety. Here's a plan: we should rename American football 'soccer' and call International football, well, football. Then, I'm pretty sure, soccer would be more popular.
• RT4 - Rockets red glare dept: I hate to be a killjoy, but all of these amateur fireworks displays are totally nuts. Governor Daniels suggests local regulation to deal with the problem. Have you noticed how 'local control' has become a way for state government to avoid responsibility for the problems they cause? Great, so that means localities can ban fireworks, but Crazy Dave will still be able to sell them by the boat load. Makes about as much sense as signing an affidavit promising not to blow them up in-state.
• RT5 - The most useful news source in Indiana is Marcia Oddi's the Indiana Law Blog -- news without the training wheels.
• RT6 - The crystal ball award: After George W. Bush was (ahem) elected the first time, my friend Dirk Shorter said, 'Well, the good news...we get to keep our guns. The bad news...looks like we'll need 'em.'
• RT7 - The 'big bucks make bad law award': The Toll Road lease won't have much effect on Indiana per se because it's on the fringe of the state anyway. However, the precedent it established -- that citizens' rights to object to government action can be foreclosed by a gigantic bond requirement -- will (indirectly) lead to corruption on a massive scale. You read it here first.
• RT8 - The high tech energy award dept: Couldn't somebody come up with a device that would capture the sun's heat in the summer chemically using only water and a few common chemicals readily at hand, in a way that would allow it to be released in the winter? Oh yeah, that's a tree.
• RT9 - The Times the are A'Changin' award dept: I like being on central time, but my darned cellphone can't figure it out. And neither can any Hoosier from the eastern zone, or so it seems. Not to mention the (otherwise lovely) folks in Pulaski County. Everytime there's a meeting here all the people from the eastern zone show up an hour early. It's getting very tedious.
• RT10 - The 'still life with remote' dept: Recent studies show that Americans are becoming less interested in the outdoors, and more interested in playing video games. That saves gas I suppose, but is kind of pathetic.
• RT11 - My favorite little known Indiana desitination: Hemlock Cliffs in Hoosier National Forest. Not available on the X-Box.
• RT12 - Oxymoron department: Ever since moveon.org ran its ads about Rep. Chocola and the energy industy he's been 'pumping out' all kinds of propaganda, err, I mean useful information, about how he's going to save America through energy independence. His lastest mailing has a picture of a solar panel! Even better was his 'poll' that included a question asking for the constituent's opinion of 'environmentally friendly drilling the ANWR.' Ummm, 'environmentally friendly drilling?' Sort of like a 'dentally friendly' punch in the jaw, isn't it.
• RT13 - For every summer, there's a 'summer song', though they usually aren't actually about summer, and rarely is the word summer in the song's title. But for me, this year it's 'Summer Skin' by Death Cab for Cutie; 'squeeky swings and tall grass, the longest shadows ever cast'.
• RT14 - My favorite summer ritual is picking berries, especially blackberries and black raspberries (aka blackcaps). I have a childish and thoroughly unsupportable belief that eating wild fruits and berries is 'good for what ails ya'. Sure, they have vitamins and anti-oxidants, but I'm talking about the magic they somehow capture. Even if the magic only exists in my imagination, they make wonderful jam.
• RT15 - My pet peeve: adverts for four-wheelers (aka 'quads') with tiny little print saying 'tread lightly' while they show a bunch of bubbas driving like maniacs through creeks, woods and wetlands, spraying mud and crushing everything in their path. Or, for that matter, adverts showing little kids riding motorcyles...they don't show them in wheelchairs a year later, for some reason. Blasted things ought to be illegal.
• RT16 - I used to love basketball, but find my love for it waning. At first I thought that was because I was getting old and out of touch with athletics -- but upon further review I think the sport is simply going downhill. Somehow, it all started with class basketball in Indiana high schools. Or maybe kids are playing video games instead of shooting hoops. Or maybe I miss the tube sox, short-shorts, mop-tops and sweat bands. Whatever the reason, b-ball just doesn't have the style it had 'back in the day'. The last team that got me excited was the gold medal Argentine Olympic squad. That's kind of sad.
• RT17 - Sorry folks, but hybrid cars don't turn me on. It's two cludgy, if you know what I mean. Heck, my Honda Civic get 38 mpg, and doesn't have all that weird technology to inevitably go wrong. Nope, I'm looking for an all new system, and I still like fuel cells. Check out this post about the Honda FCX [the worldchanging blog] - it's not 'a decade away', and it could actually work.

27jun2006 -
pigs and trucks

CAFOs, CAFOs, CAFOs I attended the HEC meeting in Frankfort weekend before last and the topic of discussion was, you guessed it, Indiana's new status as Mecca for massive livestock operations. William Weida from Grace Family Farm Project of 'Meatrix' fame was the keynote speaker and made lots of good points about the need for more cooperation among people opposed, or at least concerned, about the rapid influx of these operations.

Kemplog has a link to a worthwhile read from the Ft. Wayne J-G: Large farms face big fight by Jenni Glenn. The article points out (subtly) that the primary permitting authority is IDEM, and they don't consider odor to be an issue.

At the meeting I made my usual point that regulation can be helpful, but -- for example, if odor is not considered an issue -- a regulatory permit can also be a license to harm your neighbors. At common law, a landowner could protect his neighborhood by a nuisance action against a problem causing landuse. A recent amendment to Indiana law has stripped us of our rights to object to a factory farm for nuisance. [See Ind.Code 32-30-6]

If you're concerned about CAFOs, I strongly suggest you lobby your legislator to return to you your common law rights to object to nuisances from neighboring landowners. Right now there's not much of a viable option for people to object to a CAFO that's stinking them out of house and home. Until this becomes a political issue that results in individual rights to take real action, it's only going to get worse.

A key problem with the CAFO permitting process is that persons opposing the issuance of a permit can't really prove that the CAFO will harm them, because the harm hasn't happened yet. Once the CAFOs in operation, IDEM's not likely to revoke their permit, and the fact the property values are trashed by the odor is 'outside their jurisdiction'.

And yet, it's at least theoretically possible that a diligent operator might avoid deleterious effects on his neighbors. Right now, he simply has little incentive to care, and he's inevitably competing against other CAFO operators who are trying to cut costs too. But if there was the threat that odors, flies, groundwater and surfacewater contamination would result in a lawsuit from a neighbor -- and liability for the damage to the neighboring property or even a cease and desist order from the local court -- the CAFO operator would have more incentive to behave reasonably.

To put it bluntly, if CAFOs aren't a nuisance, then why do they need special protection from nuisance actions?

For local readers Daniel Przybyla's Intermodal details few and far between is an intriguing look at the rumor-rich environment surrounding a supposedly proposed rail/truck facility in LaPorte County. It's supposed to be sited somewhere near Union Mills, southwest of the city of LaPorte.

9jun2006 -
HEC 'Litigator of the Year'

Yesterday I received an e-mail from Indra Frank, MD, VP of the Hoosier Environmental Council, informing me that I'd been selected to receive HEC's 'Litigator of the Year Award for my efforts on behalf of Indiana's environment.' I want to publicly thank the HEC for this honor. Working for better environmental policy in the courts is truly challenging, and a practitioner in the field is dealt plenty of setbacks, so it's really nice to get some positive recognition.

While HEC hasn't said it specifically, I assume the award is primarily recognition for my efforts representing a non-partisan coalition of municipalities, private landowners and not-for-profits who challenged the Joint Noble-LaGrange Drainage Board's plan to convert the upper Elkhart River into a regulated drain. The Acres Land Trust Newsletter for Spring 2006 has a brief article about the case, Still a River. For the legal minds out there, here's a link to the Court of Appeals Opinion, Jnt. Noble-LaGrange Co. D.B. v. Acres, et al. The Attorney-General's office weighed in against the proposed project too; Deputy A-Gs Sierra Cutts and Frances Barrow deserve a share of the recognition for their able representation.

I plan to attend HEC's State Council Conference on Saturday June 17 to accept the award, but more importantly to meet some of the people I correspond with, for a little 'face-to-face.'

A little footnote -- I was impressed that HEC didn't hesitate to recognize the efforts of a lone-wolf storefront small-town guy, who doesn't 'go to work in some high-rise and vacation down at the Gulf of Mexico.' And I don't live in a pink house; that's next door. Really. It is.

1jun2006 -
Thanks to the north wind.

IDNR received no bids on their RFP for a privately operated hotel at Indiana Dunes S.P. Marcia Oddi's Indiana Law Blog has a thorough review of the coverage, including a link about progress on the Marquette plan. I think a lakefront hotel in Indiana is a fine idea, but not in Dunes State Park.

As one developer mentioned, it is indeed pretty quiet on the beach in winter. When I was teenager in the 1970s lake levels were high, and my friends and I used to (very cautiously) explore the massive and weirdly varied piles of ice that formed when a gale blew out of the north. As the sun dropped low late in the afternoon, the ice reflected shifting hues of orange, yellow and blue. Yes it was quiet. Long may it stay that way. You'd probably be arrested if you went out on the ice like that these days.

It seems possible that Dunes lovers' opposition to the project discouraged bids. If there are any developers out there reading this, I'll say it again. (1) Build on a brownfield lakefront site near the park or Nat'l Lakeshore, not in it, and (2) restore some dunes as part of the project, (3) make the hotel an architectural work worthy of its landscape, and (4) sensitive to the environmental isues (bird migrations and dark sky come to mind) and we dunes lovers will not only be comfortable with it, we'll be comfortable in it. To make it work, you'll need to rent rooms to us whacky treehuggers, especially in winter.

31may2006 -
Wading in Waste

The current edition of Scientific American has a good article about a recent study about coastal pollution. The study, headed by Dr. Michael A. Mallin, is titled Wading in Waste. Unfortunately (and understandably) the article isn't freely available online, but the primary conclusions are that coastal pollution is strongly correlated with the population of the coastal watershed. That's not surprising, but what may be is the strong correlation of pollution with the percentage of impervious surfaces (roofs, parking lots, roads) in the watershed. In rural areas, the use of copious quantities of manure on fields increases water contamination. Destruction of wetlands aggravate the problem. The Great Lakes are included as coastal areas -- definitely recommended reading. Dr. Mallin is a research professor at UNC Wilmington's Center for Marine Science, and the Aquatic Ecology Laboratory.

As insurance skyrockets in hurricane susceptible areas, development there may slow a bit. Even far from the coast, it seems likely that the same factors are at play in inland lakes and rivers. Communities naturally want to foster growth and new development to create jobs, economic activity, and ultimately wealth but it's pretty stupid to screw up the most valuable asset a property can have, that being an excellent water view.

Here's a suggestion: a property tax surcharge based on impervious surfaces. So, big parking lot owners would pay an extra tax and the funds would be dedicated to acquire downstream wetlands. Similarly, we need ways to keep livestock manure out of the waterways, and the current situation is not effective. No filter strips are required for manure applications adjacent to perennial watercourses. Hard to believe isn't it? Many farmers maintain filter strips voluntarily and receive a payment, but there's no stick, just a carrot.

16may2006 -
pave paradise, put up a parking lot

Lake Michigan is not only Indiana's only Great Lake, it's actually the US's only Great Lake too, the others all being shared with our fair neighbor to the north, Canada. For Indiana, in particular, the few miles of sandy beach complete with dunes, seabirds, and surf are a special thing indeed, and though the water is cold and sometimes less than pristine, at least it's reliably free of salt, sharks, jellyfish and tsunamis.

The big lake has been the scene of Indiana's quintessential natural resources dispute: the battle to save the dunes. Beach combers, free spirits, environmentalists, and people with a love of beauty have waged an endless campaign to limit development of the Indiana dune region since industrialists first cast their eyes upon the area.

The entire Central Dunes formation was leveled for the construction of Bethlehem Steel in the 1960s (see links below) -- the sand was hauled away and ended up as fill on the Northwestern University campus, and Chicago's North Beach. The total obliteration of the largest section of Indiana's dunes was a disaster to that still tastes bitter to environmentalists even as the photos of this lost wonderland turn yellow in forgotten library filing cabinets -- think of it as Indiana's Hetch Hetchy.

Although most local lawmakers favored development -- particularly powerful Republican Representative Charles Halek -- substantial portions of the dunes were set aside, first as Indiana Dunes State Park, near Chesterton and then in what was probably the greatest victory for the save the dunes movement, with the creation of Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, a series of tracts adjacent to and more or less near the state park. Acquisition of the national lakeshore happened mainly in the late 60s and into the 70s.

The industrial shoreline of Lake Michigan in Indiana produced lots of jobs, lots of grime, and lots of rust. Today, though NWI is still an industrial powerhouse, much of the industrial development along the shoreline is obsolete and large swaths of northwest Indiana have a particularly pernicious form of sprawl. Bethlehem Steel is gone, along with former worker's pensions.

On the other hand, the northwest Indiana area is at least trying to diversify, and is becoming ever-more tied to the city of Chicago, with its glittering skyline, blue-state politics, expansive parks, wealth and worldclass reputation. Indiana is less of a joke in Chicago than it was ten years ago, and Congressman Pete Visclokey's Marquette Plan suggests a new direction. NWI operates happily on central time. Indianapolis seems a far away, vaguely southern city.

I heard a report a while back that most Indiana legislators had never seen Lake Michigan -- not only does that mean they haven't been to the dunes, it means they haven't been to Chicago. Or if they were, they didn't know what that big blue thing was. Against this background add the tollroad lease, which may fairly be described as wildly unpopular in northern Indiana.

So, how does all this relate to the Daniels' administrations proposal to grant a long-term lease for operation of a private hotel on the beach in the heart of Indiana Dunes State Park? First, the Republican party has a long history with the dunes, and it's been about exploitation -- dunes lovers, and that's just about anybody who has spent any time there, can't help but think 'mercy, it's happening again!'

Big Eastern readers will know that I've refrained from forming an opinion about this subject up until now -- that's because I enjoy staying at state park inns, and agree with the Daniels administration that camping isn't for everyone. I've now formed an opinion. I'm against the inn, at least as its proposed now. In part I was persuaded by the thoughtful position paper posted by Save the Dunes (linked below). Partly I was convinced by reviewing the history of the dunes. What remains can't be compromised.

It might be okay to build an inn, but not a huge piece of commercial [bleep] right in the heart of the park. The proposed inn seems little different then some interstate highway sprawlville junkpile that one might find anywhere in the mostly defiled Hoosier state. This is holy ground, folks.

A small, ultra-modern tour-de-force of green architecture designed to mostly disappear into the landscape -- that might work at the proposed site. Skip the conference rooms, skip the pool, these are all available at the Holiday Inn. Park the cars outside the park and take a railpod to the inn. Create a small foredune over the top of the building, but put windows looking out over the beach. We're talking about the birthplace of ecology, oh ye' barbarians.

Now, I understand the desire to give the inn a lakeview, and am quite aware that it's often nice to be sheltered from the chill lake wind. Conference centers and pools are nice, and even nicer with a view of the big lake, but the heart of the park should be reserved for nature. So if a more commercial building is what's needed, expand the park and build the lodge in an area previously damaged by development. There are derelict factories in the area, why not take advantage of this opportunity for brownfields redevelopment? Why not restore a bit of the lost dunes? If it's going to be a privately operated hotel anyway, why put it in the crown jewel of Indiana's public lands?

Let me be clear about this: state park inns are great. I'm generally not even opposed to privately operated state park inns -- Potato Creek is a fine location for one. I'm not against IDNR seeking new ways to make more revenue from the state parks, and I'm not against them reviewing operations and making some changes. The dunes are special.

News Links:
Environment group joins hotel foes - HEC joins Save the Dunes in opposing inn proposed for Indiana Dunes SP [nwiTimes - Williams - 5.13.2006] - notes that 'Porter County Convention, Recreation and Visitors Commission endorsed the idea of lodging at the park, but has objected to the size and beachfront location'.

Indiana Dunes inn sparks dustup - The IndyStar spin on the dunes inn dispute ends with a fairly harsh quote. [IndyStar - Thomas - 5.15.2006].

Background Links:
The venerable Save the Dunes Organization opposes the proposed inn, and details their position in this position paper - definitely worth reading.

Ecology and the Preservation of the Indiana dunes: American Memory Project, Library of Congress.

Indiana Dunes NL administrative history - taking aim at the 1950s documents the historical position of the Republican party regarding the dunes -- in a word, pro-development.

Much to the chagrin of pro-dev Indiana Republicans, Democratic Illinois Senator Douglas supported the establishment of a national park in the Central Dunes -- here's his indignant letter upon learning that Bethlehem Steel would level the Central Dunes and build a factory there in 1962 -- he likened it to a stalkers attack and mutilation of a 'beautiful woman so that she may not belong to anyone else.'

For the adventurous -- hack your way into a lost world in this collection of photographs of botanical trips to Indiana (mostly the dunes) hosted at the University of Chicago.

14apr2006 -
Because there aren't any CAFOs in Carmel

Here's a particularly interesting CAFO story, by Seth Slabaugh: CAFOs dominate rural strategy session - Randolph County meeting promoting 'RISE' program centers instead on rural residents backlash against Gov. Daniels' goal of doubling hog production in the state through proliferation of CAFOs. [4.14.2006 - Slabaugh - StarPress - link X ILB] - It's worth noting that the administration is now publicly taking the position that local government zoning is the appropriate place to control the proliferation of these facilities.

Here's a direct link to the RISE program, on Purdue's server, including a schedule of meeting. Regionally, meetings are scheduled for Rochester on April 17, Rensselaer on April 19, and Delphi on May 1.

If you're interested in environmental issues, it's necessary to consider issues of rural development too. A poverty stricken countryside is not conducive to humans or other living things. Nor is a filthy one, and as I've mentioned here before, I think the CAFO situation has elements of environmental injustice. That means the haves foisting nasty stuff upon the have-nots, just as medical incinerators seem to end up being sited in minority neighborhoods. There aren't any CAFOs in Carmel.

I read much of the RISE document (posted on the website linked above), and it wasn't what I expected. It's mostly quite progressive, but it seems to dodge this pressing question. Is it possible to recreate Indiana's countryside as a place of revitalized leadership, learning and worldclass productivity while the air, land and water are constantly getting worse? Worse is the current trend; ask anybody who lives in the country.

If you want to sell your house, any realtor will tell you clean up the yard and give it a fresh coat of paint. You want educated, progressive people to choose to live and work in rural Indiana? Clean it up.

Given the RISE document's virtues, it's also ironic that the RISE meeting covered in Seth Slabaugh's article devolved into a venting of the community backlash against the CAFO influx. Ironic, because it's sad but also encouraging. If we really want to make progress out here in the country, the first thing we need to do is grab a little more control of our own destiny -- the RISE document calls for new leadership out in the country. Maybe that means new leadership in terms of planning and zoning.

Need to explain this problem to the 'haves'? Just say, 'There aren't any CAFOs in Carmel.' Repeat as needed.

16mar2006

It's not always easy bein' green in the Indiana legal system, but here's a win: Joint Noble-LaGrange County Drainage Board v. Acres, Inc., et al. - Ind. Ct. of Appeals per J. Baker affirms trial court (Judge Heuer) decision vacating Joint Noble - LaGrange Drainage Bd. decision converting upper Elkhart River system into a regulated drain [3.16.2006 - J. Baker - Ind. Ct. App].

I had the distinct honor of representing the coalition of organization, municipalities and private individuals who opposed conversion of the upper Elkhart into a ditch, including at the appellate level. The State of Indiana by the Atty.-General's office also opposed the ditching of the upper, one of the last mostly natural rivers systems in northern Indiana. If you're interested in nature preserves, rivers, and the limits of governmental authority under the Indiana Drainage Code you'll want to read this case.

I've been following changes in the Indiana Classified Forest and Wildlife Areas programs. The legislature enacted the changes after some modifications. Each year I fill out forms about the current status of the couple of hundred acres of Classified Forest and Wildlife Habitat at the corporeal Big Eastern. I received the forms for the classified forest a few days ago and their was an article called 'Classified Forest Program Improvements'. Whether they are improvements is debatable, but they are changes. I find the hard sell of calling it 'improvements' annoying; it's kind of like the current use of the word 'reform' where 'amendment' would be more appropriate. Similarly, I was constantly annoyed by the 'major moves' tagline. Can't we just call it the 'highway lease bill', or maybe the 'highway funding bill'.

According to the Div. of Forestry the highlights of the program changes are as follows:

• Classified Forest Program is merging with Classified Wildlife Program to creae the Classified Forest and Wildlands Program that will be administered by the Division of Forestry
• New withdrawal fees ($100 plus $50 per acre in addition to back taxes with interest) for parcels entereing the program after June 30, 2006. Parcels currently in the program and those classified before July 1, 2006 will remain with the withdrawal fee of back taxes with interest.
• When the boundaries of a classified parcel change (addition, partial withdrawal, division), a modified application with a new parcel description by a licensed surveyor will be required.

The amendment grandfathering current classified lands into the prior rules for declassification was a plus, in my opinion. Naturally I didn't like being faced with the prospect of being more or less forced to make a quick decision about taking land out before the new rules take effect, so there's some self-interest involved. But also, it didn't seem fair to people who had made the decision to enter the program under the prior rules to now make getting out the program significantly more difficult than what they had agreed to. I'm still concerned that the Division of Forestry may not be well equipped to make decisions about, say, the management of a prairie marsh, and here in NWI the change in the program will add significantly to the work burden on the Division of Forestry.

A couple of weeks ago I talked to a (quite charming) representative of the Division of Forestry about the program changes, suggesting among other things that an alternative withdrawal mechanism ought to be allowed -- mitigation. I first heard this concept suggested by pro forester Bruce Wakeland in a zoning context. A mitigation rule would allow removal of acreage without penalty if the owner added two new acres of approved mitigation land for every one removed. Some rules might control qualification for mitigation -- e.g. that the land be of equal quality and be in the same general watershed. This would help owners who are fully supportive of forest preservation and enhancement but have a legitimate reason for wanting to remove some land from the program.

For example, when we built the Cabin at Lena Park we declassified a couple of acres from a 75 acre woods for the cabin site. Prospects of preservation of the remaining 73 acres are enhanced by the cabin, because it serves as the landscape for the cabin. It's a non-consumptive way to use the woodlands -- and these are woodlands that are not especially productive or promising from a forestry standpoint. I certainly wouldn't have hesitated to enroll a few more acres in the program to avoid the penalty, especially since we're working on a re-forestation project over 50 acres in size. See, we like the woods, and so do our guests.

10mar2006

Some interesting links:

Forum set on Indiana Dunes State Park private hotel plan - [3.10.2006 - Urbanik - Chesterton Trib]. A proposal for a privately operated hotel and conference center at the Indiana Dunes S.P. is the subject of an open forum by Save the Dunes, who have opposed the plan. This is a tough call -- an upscale facility at Indiana Dunes State Park might be beneficial to the community and guests who mostly enjoy the view from inside may have less impact than those who go outside, and NWI needs opportunities for meetings somewhere other than next to a truck stop. On the other hand, the Indiana Dunes are one of Indiana's most precious assets, and one can't help but wonder whether a significant percentage of the people who would use the facility would have little or no interest in the unique, rich, and delicate ecosystem let alone the beautiful scenery. On the other hand, getting a few fat cats out and enjoying the Dunes could end up being a good thing (they might start to appreciate nature, even here in Hoosierland), and these sorts of folks aren't likely to pitch a tent -- even if the campground could be viewed as a gated community.

I looked for a copy of the prospectus online, but didn't find one

Here's a new online mag where green meets modern: Treehugger. Silly at times, but fun.

Karen Myers posted about her visit to the Belstra Milling Hog Farm Open House on WAHM diary.

Grist has a thought provoking interview with Lester Brown: You're a Good Man, Lester Brown by David Roberts.

Finally, and certainly not least, retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor spoke out about the need to preserve a strong and independent judiciary -- here's the NPR story, alas mainly an audio link: O'Connor Decries Republican Attacks on Courts - [3.10.2006 - Nina Totenberg]

3mar2006

The Union of Concerned Scientists has published an online summary of its projections for climate change in Indiana. As consensus grows that global warming is here, now, one of the key issues is how to cope with it. The report calls for considerably more midsummer heat as well as more heavy rainstorms. The growing season will be longer, but the frequent midsummer heat waves are likely to be harmful to crops. One of the most serious impacts is likely to be lower water levels in all lakes, especially the Great Lakes, as evaporation increases in summer heat waves and due to less frequent ice cover in winter.

27feb2006

Here's a link for my Starke County readership: SYSCO Selects Site in Hamlet, Indiana as Location For its Midwest Redistribution Center - [2.27.2006 - Chron.com] - The planned development of a large redistribution center in NE Starke Co. had previously been announced, but this is the first announcement I've seen of the company doing the project. While all development carries with it a certain environmental footprint, this kind of project is, IMO, preferable than becoming the 'land of a million CAFOs'. Hundreds of jobs are created, not a handful, the jobs leverage off of the area's strategic location related to transportation and nearby population centers and a variety of occupations -- managerial, mechanical, clerical, technical -- will be involved. Possibly the pending Toll Road lease pushed this project south, to avoid the toll hikes.

Here's some coverage of an appearance by Indiana State forester John Seifer: State forester lays out his vision for land use - [Perry Co. News - Luecke - 2.23.2006]. As is typical of these kinds of accounts, it's a little short on substance. I reviewed SB 354 in a bit more depth a couple of days ago; it has some positive aspects, but I still find myself questioning whether the fairly significant penalties for withdrawing forest land from the program will not prove to be counter-productive; the penalties may discourage enrollments. Trying to lock up the land forever doesn't seem to make sense to me; it's not an easement it's simply a tax break. Add to that the terms that allow the state to dictate management of the property and there's potential for abuse, or at least major differences of opinion in regards to how the property should be managed. The biggest thing that concerns me is that property owners will be pressured to conduct a harvest against their wishes. I'm checking up on this and will report here on what I find out.

23feb2006

I haven't been posting much lately because I've been putting together a blog-tool based web site for the Starke County Democratic Party. - it's out in embryonic form, but feel free to check it out and make comments. There's very little content now, but I hope to make it a useful resource for active party membership and the interested electorate as well.

Cycling fans will want to check out the official Coast to Coast of Indiana 2006 flyer and entry form. This year Indiana's most adventurous human powered racing event is scheduled for July 29 and 30, 2006 and will once again start on the sandy beaches of Lake Michigan in Michigan City, Indiana and end on the banks of the mighty Ohio River in Evansville.

Commissioners nix residential rezoning of agricultural land for subdivision - [ChesteronTrib - Urbanik - 2.22.2006] - Indeed, this is the classic zoning quandry -- landowner/farmer wants to cash-out, neighbors want to retain rural ambience.

Protecting public forests - [Editorial - Ft.Wayne J-G - 2.17.2006] - Another look at SB 354.

17feb2006

State Rep. Ryan Dvorak has an excellent post about the proposed Indiana Toll Rd. lease: Toll Road Lease Full of Holes - [Ryan Dvorak - 2.15.2006] - required reading for anybody interested in this issue.

The SoBndTrib ran a piece Critics of Dairy Operation Unswayed [SoBndTrib - Parrott - 2.16.2006] worth reading; Kemplog has an interesting commentary about it at CAFO Face Off in St. Joseph County - [Thomas Kemp - 2.16.2006]

Apparently the oral argument for Joint Noble-LaGrange Co. Drainage Bd. v. Acres et al. in the Indiana Court of Appeals on Wednesday was not posted on the web. Too bad, it would have been interesting to the river advocates among bigeastern.com readers.

I haven't been able to find any additional coverage on SB 354. The provisions apparently allowing clearcutting in state forests without the filing of an environmental impact statement are a little troublesome, and as I commented before the rules making classified lands withdrawals more painful are probably well intentioned, but may have unintended consequences. With regards to the clearcutting issue -- I realize there may be times when oak regeneration would be better after a clearcut, but this sort of change in management of a public resource ought to be done with care and plenty of public dialogue.

some links - 13feb2006

This morning I received a notice of a meeting about CAFOs upcoming in St. Joseph County:

We represent a large group citizens, neighbors and farmers in St. Joseph County, Indiana who are concerned about a proposed 3,500-head dairy operation for our community. The promoters of this project have not yet applied for a permit from IDEM, but already the community is very energized on this issue.

St. Joseph County Commissioners are very engaged on this dairy CAFO issue. They have organized a community meeting this Weds., Feb. 15th at 6:30pm at LaVille High School. (U.S. 31 South between Lakeville and LaPaz). The dairy proponents will present their project, IDEM officials will give a brief overview of the permitting process, and we as citizens and neighbors of the proposed facility, will present our concerns. We have invited our County Councilmen, County Health Department, and Area Plan Representatives. We would like to extend this invitation to all of the readers of bigeastern.com. Everyone who is involved in the CAFO discussion across Indiana is welcome to come.

Thank you.
Members of St. Joe County Quality of Life

 

In Daniels wants DNR to be above the law the Bloomington Alternative covers SB 354 a bill primarily intended to make some significant changes in the classified forest program. [2.12.2006 - Laird - Bloomington Alternative - both link from ILB] Most of the bill amends the classified lands program by eliminating the classified wildlife program and replacing it with a 'classified wildlands' program for non-forested natural areas. The bill will make it significantly more painful to withdraw a tract from classified forest, and appears to remove 'watershed protection' as one of the purposes behind the classified forest program. In keeping with the current administration's market orientation, it moves the focus of classified forests squarely to timber production. Laird's article focuses primarily on portions of the proposed changes that deal with state forests. The statute would exempt DNR from environmental impact statements and authorizes clearcutting.

If you own any classified forest that you might want to review this statute and consider whether you want to stay in the program before the new penalty provisions kick in. While I don't doubt that these provisions were set up to discourage developers from using the classified forest program as a way to bank real estate for future development, I fear the result will be to discourage the use of the program for the intended purpose, i.e. preseving forest land. Real estate practitioners will also want to note that it creates an obligation for sellers to notify buyers of the penalty provisions for withdrawal of classified forest.

Other odds and ends --

Blues artist Tad Robinson has posted a new journal entry here on bigeastern, 'Back to the Studio' about the recording sessions for his next CD on Severn Records.

Finally, here's an editorial regarding IDEM Com'r Easterly's position on CAFO regulation enforcement: Dumping on regulations? - [2.10.2006 - Ft. Wayne J-G]

IDEM Com'r Easterly clarifies CAFO enforcement status - 8feb2006

In my previous post I linked to a fairly cryptic story in Brownfield regarding IDEM's enforcement policy for CAFOs. Yesterday, Brownfield published a statement by IDEM Com'r Easterly explaining the current policy: IDEM Commissioner clarifies position on CAFO moratorium - [2.8.06 - Truitt - Brownfield ]

Refining the residential-agricultural interface - 3feb2006

Today, more ruminations on CAFOs and their effects on rural communities:

Big changes at IDEM - IDEM commissioner says that due to confusion about EPA's CAFO rules 'no enforcement action will be taken for at least the next 3 years'. [2.2.06 - Truitt - Brownfield - link X kemplog] - I'm not quite sure what this means, the article is quite short. Indiana has a statutory provision that largely exempts CAFOs from nuisance law actions, and therefore individuals have fairly limited options to take legal action against the owner of a problem CAFO in the absence of IDEM enforcement. Hopefully Com'r Easterly will clarify his position.

I searched Google News for any other coverage of this, but didn't find any. Perhaps one of the major news sources will follow-up.

It's interesting to compare: Second public hearing tonight on Plymouth hog operation - [2.2.2006 - Munson - SoBndTrib] and Panel tables vote on large feeding farms - [2.3.2006 - Staff - SoBndTrib].

In conservative, and generally prosperous Marshall County, local residents and officials are grappling with the balancing of the economic importance of the agricultural sector with the impacts CAFOs can have on the desirability of area properties. Local government's sole tool for managing these impacts is zoning. Major swaths of northern Indiana are zoned ag, and most areas zoned agriculture are also dotted by homes, some new, some not so new, and some downright antique. That's certainly the case in Marshall County where one might find a 21st century McMansion adjacent to a well-maintained federalist style brick house from the mid-19th century, and just a bit further on down the road pass the wireless farmhouse of an old-order Amish family.

In these SoBndTrib articles we see that the livestock producers point to IDEM's regulatory authority to allay neighbor's concerns about CAFOs coming into their neighborhoods. If indeed there's an official moratorium on enforcement, that would seem cold comfort. The ironic thing about this is that if IDEM doesn't take an active role in enforcement (or even is perceived as being soft on enforcement) that's likely to spur local communities to take action through zoning controls producing results that may not be to CAFO operators' liking.

One thing that seems missing from the debate is a comparison of the economics or residential development v. CAFO construction. People like having a house in the country and upscale homes and upscale homeowners can contribute much to a community -- their owners have money to shop, pay for services, property taxes, income taxes. Owners of upscale homes are often relatively well educated, may possess professional skills and even help spur the spirit of volunteerism as well. To determine the true economic and social impact of a CAFO in an area that has potential for residential development, the 'opportunity cost' of foregoing future upscale residential development needs to be considered.

Calling CAFOs 'agriculture' doesn't answer the question: corn fields do not pose a major impediment to residential development of area properties. Vinyards or orchards are agriculture that might even attract upscale development. Giant hog barns at least might reduce opportunities for upscale development. So 'agriculture' is just a word; what communities should care about is the future impacts of a particular agricultural operation. Rural areas that opt to limit CAFOs and instead cater to residential development may very well fare better economically in the future.

31jan2006 - some current links of interest, and a comment or two on the Toll Road, and privatization in general.

Swine could swarm ECI - 100k increase in hog population in the works for Jay, Randolph and Wayne Co's Ind. [1.29.06 - Slabaugh - Muncie S-P]

Toll Road Lease Info page - Summary of information about the proposed long-term lease of the Indiana Toll Road [SoBnd Trib, Times NWI, and Ft. Wayne J-G]

HB 1008 - The official text of the bill proposing a long-term lease of the Indiana Toll Road and other toll roads and establishes the 'Major Moves' construction fund. [Indiana government]

Toll Road Musings - Interesting comments by Doug Masson and his readers, including comments about the non-compete clause that would forbid improvements on any road that's within 10 miles of the Toll Road for more than 20 miles. [Masson's Blog - 1.31.2006]

my comments - A couple of observations: weren't most conservatives unhappy with the Kelo decision, allowing condemnation of private real estate for transfer to a private developer? Bigeastern readers will recall that, though I'm a liberal, I mostly shared their concerns [link]. It seems to me that consistency would require conservatives to cast a skeptical eye on privatization of the Toll Road.

Wasn't the right-of-way for the Toll Road acquired by use, or at least threat of, the condemnation power? So how is it that the conservatives who opposed the ruling in Kelo are in favor of a similar transaction with respect to property condemned years ago. I'm not arguing that the state can never divest itself of property acquired through the condemnation power; if the public use is now obsolete then it would seem appropriate. For example, if a roadway becomes obsolete because another one is built parallel nearby, then selling the property back to the public at fair market value would seem appropriate. But privatization of the same use (a tollroad) has the same effect as the transaction in the Kelo case.

Another thing that concerns me -- those non-compete clauses. Is it appropriate for a current government to bargain away future government's rights to provide necessary services to the public? And, if the current administration is pro-business, doesn't that entail promoting free competition? According to the lease proponents, the private operator should easily out-compete the government and the driving public will be clamoring to pay their tolls. If the private operators of the Toll Road are really better, more competitive, and more cost effective than Indiana government could ever hope to be, then why would they need a non-compete clause?

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not necessarily opposed to privatizing the Toll Road, if it's viewed as well on the way toward obsolesence. If the money were being moved from the Toll Road to a new generation of energy efficient transportation, I'd think that was pretty smart and truly forward thinking. In any event, the situation ought to the subject of a due diligence public discussion, including studies by independent economists.

Those pesky checks and balances - 25jan2006

UPDATE

Just a couple of hours after I posted the following entry hoping that one or more Republicans would question the impacts of HB 1419, that turned out to be the case -- see Lawmakers pass on judge changes. [1.25.2006 - Schneider - IndyStar - link X ILJ] According Mary Beth Schneider, House Speaker Bosma [R - Indianapolis] quashed the proposal, stating that he thinks changes need to be made, but that more thought needs to be attached to them. The original entry follows:

HB 1419:

Judges bill clears House Panel - [1.24.2006 - Ft. Wayne J-G]

Removal of the Judicial Branch? - [1.24.2006 - Ryan Dvorak]

HB 1419 - Judicial appointments - [1.24.2006 - Masson's Blog]

Legislative And Executive Branches Eye Judicial Branch: More Power! Now! - [1.24.2006 - Taking Down Words] - includes some interesting reader commentary.

I looked for a text of the bill but didn't find one. The purpose of the bill is, basically, to speed up the removal of judges appointed by Democrat administrations from the state's appellate courts. I won't cover the background here, it's well covered in the posts linked above.

It's understandable, I suppose, that Republicans find it annoying to deal with any vestige of Democrat influence in the state, but that's the whole concept of separation of powers and what's called the 'checks and balances' system. Partisanship on the courts is on a slow rotation; the legislature is on a fairly short rotation. If one branch is ameliorating the excesses of the other, then the system is working. As Lao-Tze said, 'if nothing is done, all will be well.'

The most amazing thing about the bill is that ballots would include the recommendation of a Republican controlled committee as to retention of appellate judges. Now folks, think about that for a minute. Some of the people on the committee are practicing attorneys, and others represent business or other special interests involved in litigation before these judges. How would you like to argue an appeal opposite an attorney on the committee that gets to decide whether the ballot ought to recommend retention or removal of a judge passing on the case? How would you like to be represented by an attorney faced with this predicament?

The fundamental purpose of the law is to ensure that the weaker in society are not unfairly abused or exploited by the powerful. That's why judges are partially shielded from the shifting winds of politics.

Even suggesting that a ballot could ever contain a 'recommendation' on how to vote in any election -- well it's shameful. I trust there are Republicans out there who care about democracy more than greed or a momentary grab for power. I guess we'll find out.

A CAFO comes to Bourbon - 20jan2006

On the CAFO front check out: Idea of confined animal feeding operation still stinks, residents say - [1.20.2006 - Nixon - PlyPilot] - This article is more interesting than most, I think, because it gets into the details of increasingly contentious issues of the proliferation of CAFOs in rural Indiana. The Bourbon area of Marshall County is a bastion of conservatism, and in this article we can see the kinds of people who have traditionally been less than supportive of environmental regulations now becoming concerned with environmental impacts in their own communities. People with considerable farming and livestock experience are beginning to question the scope and impacts of these large scale highly concentrated operations.

The farming roots of many persons concerned or downright opposed to the rapid proliferation of CAFOs in rural Indiana has sharpened the debate, in my opinion. It no longer works to simply say that the opponents are suburbanites who are interfering with farming, or PETA types for that matter. It's become a neighborhood issue. Yes, rural areas are neighborhoods, often rather nice neighborhoods if you like that sort of thing. I do.

I did some rough calculations on the manure handling issue: figuring 3 million gallons of manure spread out over 400 acres (that's about 17.4 million square feet) we end up with a bit over one half gallon of manure per square foot per year, or about 7500 gallons per acre per year (my numbers may be a little high, I've heard 5,000 gallons per acre per year as a typical figure). Whether this procedure is sustainable without causing nitrate or phosphate contamination of aquifers of surface waters is debatable. Those with a scientific bent will definitely want to read:

An Evaluation of the Movement of Potential Contaminants in Soils at a Confined Feeding Operation - a somewhat alarming look at shallow aquifer contamination in sandy soils in Daviess County. [Indiana Geological Survey - Sally Letsinger]. The study, though ongoing, suggests that 'gravity drainage' events -- periods, often outside the growing season, when heavy rains or snowmelt recharge the aquifer, are associated with spikes in shallow aquifer nitrate contamination originating from manure applications and to a lesser extent chemical fertilizers.

 

Far from Indiana, but interesting nonetheless: When Red Goes Green - A burgeoning Chinese environmental movement tries to stem the devastation wrought by the country's massive economic transformation. [1.18.2006 - Pocha - In These Times] - quotable: 'If we don't speak up, don't take responsibility, our country will be poisoned' - 'There is also little honesty from the government on environmental issues because they fear the truth might cause turmoil in society'

A major move would be away from roads - 18jan2006

I find it a little amusing that some people are upset that Peyton Manning blamed Sunday's loss to the Steelers, in part, on a failure of the offensive line to provide adequate pass protection. It's true, right? While sports may be overemphasized (though fun), the truth is not overemphasized. We may not need more sports here in Indiana, but we could use more truth. So I'm with Peyton on this one.

More truth, less propaganda, that's my plan for Indiana's future. For example, check out: ‘Major Moves’ is vital to blaze a trail to future prosperity for all Hoosiers - [Randy Borror - Ft. Wayne N-S].

Dumping the Toll Road might not, in itself, be such a bad idea. Isn't long distance auto travel in serious danger of obsolescence? If the administration wanted to pull a couple of billion from gasoline era infrastructure, and move these assets into aggressive development of a new generation of non-petrol dependent transport (or possibly telecom) infrastructure -- ideally one that would serve northern Indiana -- that would be a major move. Merely robbing Peter to pay Paul isn't a major move; robbing Peter to pay Paul to make buggy whips is worse.

Then there's the claim that slapping down more pavement around the state 'could create approximately 130,000 jobs for Hoosiers'. That's a pretty bold assertion, and nothing in the piece supports it. I'm not an economist, but I can read the numbers on the gas pump -- a good percentage of that is tax, which supposedly pays for the roads. The days of cheap motoring are over -- we can't afford to squander what little is left of the post WWII prosperity on more pavement.

 

Here's another entry about the proposal for an inn at Indiana Dunes State Park: DNR opposed by Save the Dunes over plan for State Park inn - [18jan2006 - Urbanik - Chesterton Trib]

 

A recent entry on Masson's blog indicates Starke and Pulaski County will be moving to central time; St. Joseph County will not. This is great for me -- North Judson, in western Starke County has always on the edge of one time zone or another. Either the line was the Kankakee River a few miles to the north or the Pulaski County line, a few miles to the south. At last, relief!

17jan2006

DNR eyes privatized hotel at Dunes State Park - DNR considering privately developed hotel at Indiana Dunes SP; would be built on 'disturbed' land, possibly near the historic pavilion. [16jan2006 - Urbanik - Chesterton Trib]

It takes a village to ensure safety of river. - survey looks at attitudes and info among public in St. Joe County re/ river and stream water quality issues. [15jan2006 - Lowe - SoBndTrib]

'Troubled waters' report addresses Lake Michigan supply, restrictions - Chicago suburbs begin to deal with limited water resources [12jan2006 - Ferrel - [Chi Suburban] Star]

Time to look at livestock laws - editorial supports stronger regulation of industrial meat production. [13jan2006 - Ft. Wayne J-G]

CAFOs and environmental justice - 10jan2006

Kemplog highlights a CAFO bill before the [Indiana] Senate - the bill, sponsored by Democrat Tim Lanane, would require revocation of a CAFO permit for an operation with three permit violations of specified types during a two year period [10jan2006 - Kemplog]. As Thomas points out, the bill might be a bit heavy-handed, and is unlikely to emerge from a Republican controlled committee. But at least the subject is starting to get some discussion.

I'm doubtful about a statute that is based upon permit revocations. Money talks in the halls of power -- the hog producers have lobbyists, and they would make a mighty howl if operations were actually being closed. Perhaps a couple of exceptionally awful operations might be sacrificed, but I'd be surprised if many profitable established operations were closed by a state regulator.

Rather than making it easier to shut down a facility, it should be harder to start one. Stricter scrutiny in siting the facilities, including serious consideration of the carrying capacity of a site, a region, and a watershed, needs to be incorporated into the initial permit application phase. Acreage buffers, and setbacks from property lines both for the facility and for waste disposals need to be increased. Monitoring of air quality, odor, water quality (both surface and subsurface) should be a routine permit requirement and the results should be published for easy access (preferably in a searchable, online format). Factory meat production should not receive any special protections from nuisance liability. If these operations are harmless, modern facilities, then they shouldn't mind proving it.

The CAFO problem has become one of 'environmental justice' as is explored in Black and White and Mad All Over - [5nov2005 - Grist] - Environmental justice has mostly been viewed as a race issue. A typical example is the odd way that facilities burning medical waste get sited in predominantly African-American neighborhoods. But really, environmental justice is about people with clout foisting the nasty, undesirable stuff on people without clout. Rural residents -- farmers and non-farmers alike -- have become cloutless in CAFO siting decisions, and the suburban attitude toward rural people (that they're a bunch of ignorant louts who enjoy the smell of hog manure and are lucky to get a minimum wage job, if any) plays into that. Okay, it's not a race issue -- but it's the same thing.

ADAPT! Three things that need to change: (1) Farmers aggrieved by CAFOs need to assert the issue at the next meetings of their county Farm Bureau, (2) the Democratic party needs to embrace this issue and talk it up -- not that CAFOs would be banned, but certainly slowed down a lot, with addition of the enhanced protections described above, (3) in solidly Republican areas, people who aren't happy with the vision of Indiana as the land of a million CAFOs need to run primary challenges against CAFO proponents. Personally, I think a wide and deep opposition to the rapid proliferation of CAFOs is brewing in rural Indiana.

 

In order to 'adapt and thrive' we all need to spend less time driving around in cars. A major step toward accomplishing this goal would be pervasive availability of CHEAP broadband, as is the case in Asia (remember when the US was actually at the forefront of adopting technological innovation?) Rep. Ryan Dvorak's latest post: What Broadband means for Indiana is a good primer to efforts to improve broadband access here in hoosierland. [9jan2006 - Dvorak]

 

Workshop Focuses On Lakes In The Tippecanoe River Watershed - 'We work to protect and preserve water quality in the lakes and streams of the watershed. This includes more than 50 lakes and 176,000 acres in Noble, Whitley and Kosciusko counties. Our mission is to promote the understanding and management of our lakes and watershed, fostering their preservation for today and for the future.' - workshop will be free, at the North Webster American Legion Post, Ind. 13, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Saturday 14 January, 2006. [9jan2006 - Smith - Warsaw T-U]

5jan2006 -

I've added a new entry to the 'worthy blog' list, WAHM diary by Karen Myers, in Wheatfield, just a few miles to the west of North Judson. It's great to see a new blogger, and a very good one at that, here in sand country south of the Kankakee.

 

The days of cheap fossil fuels are over and people are trying to adapt. In Indiana it's certainly tempting to look for ways to burn stuff that grew in the summer during the winter to stay warm. It makes sense, but raises issues of sustainability (do we really have enough firewood production capacity?) and environmental issues (what will the air quality impacts of 250,000 wood or corn burners be?)

An early example of this kind of issue -- one that we'll be seeing a lot more of -- is illustrated here: State environmental agency extends first comment period on outdoor wood boiler rules - IDEM press release extending the comment period as the agency considers regulation of these units due to air quality concerns - dated January 3, 2006, with the comment period extended to March 3, 2006. According to IDEM: 'Outdoor wood boilers are free-standing, shed-sized units that provide heat and hot water to one or more structures. Typically the boilers burn wood to heat a reservoir of water, which underground pipes carry to water heater and furnace units inside the structure.' Link from Marsha Oddi's ILB.

 

Patent law may seem a bit afield, but I think this is an important issue -- in Snap, Crackle ... Patents the strange case of business model patents is explored using the case of -- get this -- assertions of a patent for the concept of restaurants devoted to selling various breakfast cereals. [2jan2006 - Hayes - In These Times]

You're probably wondering why I would post this link here -- what's it got to do with environmental issues? Well, in a way it does at least in the 'adapt and thrive' perspective that I've adopted here. That's because the malignant spread of patent protection to the absurd extent that it would propertize the concept of selling breakfast cereal in a restuarant is a key part of the ongoing conversion of just about everything into property rights that will be dominated by corporations ultimately at the expense of individuals. As Hayes says in the article 'if the public doesn't start agitating for reform, Americans are going to find themselves increasingly at the whim of the large corporations who own the ideas that form the foundation of the American economy.'

Now don't misunderstand -- I have no problem with a franchise asserting property rights in their particular branding of this concept through trademark or copyright law. Nobody should have the right to infringe on their promotional efforts of their particular approach to selling breakfast cereal, but it's very difficult to understand how the public is benefitted by the grant of patent rights to something as trivial and obvious as selling cereal.

Backgrounder - Business method patent [Wikipedia].

Thinking of the NSA - 03jan2006

The recent 'revelation' that the administration has authorized monitoring of domestic communications by the NSA was the subject of an interesting discussion on NPR's Talk of the Nation today. I found it refreshing that the discussion eschewed legal analysis, and instead focused on what NSA does with the masses of communication it surveils. Before applying the law, it's a good idea to get a grip on the facts.

The NSA is engaged in an activity generally known as 'data mining', which involves statistical analysis of communications to find previously unknown information. This is the key concept -- it's a search for previously unknown, unsuspected linkages and patterns. To better understand this concept, read an article I wrote while editor of MappaMundi Magazine a few years ago: Mining in Textual Mountains: an interview with Marti Hearst.

In the paragraph at the top I put 'revelation' in quotes, because I've always assumed that the NSA monitored as many communications as possible. It's entirely devoted to communications and code intelligence gathering, and is reputed to be considerably larger than the CIA. So one assumes they are sifting through an immense quantity of data, and given that they maintain posts inside the USA it seems unreasonable to think they wouldn't monitor domestic communications. The legality of this activity is dubious -- data mining is inherently warrantless because it's a 'fishing expedition', so there's no probable cause until it actually finds some fish.

This kind of activity would have to be considered a search or seizure, but how unreasonable is it? It's often said that technology raises issues that weren't addressed by the founding fathers, or are so novel that traditional legal analysis doesn't work. Generally, these arguments are pretty thin, but data mining poses a new situation because it's only one in a million communications that makes the cut from the computer based data harvest all the way to the desk of a human analyst. So yes, big brother is watching, but mostly he's not much interested in what you do. At least so far.

I'll climb way out on a limb and suggest that most Americans wouldn't be too uncomfortable with these tools being used to identify violent and destructive enemies. The problem is, what assurances do we have they aren't being used for political purposes, for example to harass legitimate interest groups unpopular with a particular administration? Right now, we don't have any assurances at all. Some kind of trustworthy non-partisan judicial review is needed, even if it's of the process rather than a particular use of the technology.

Backgrounder - Wikipedia has an interesting entry describing the National Security Agency.

Re-separation of Great Lakes and Mississippi watersheds under discussion - 28dec2005

12.28.2005 - Groups to study separating Great Lakes, Mississippi basins briefly discusses proposals to re-separate the Great Lakes/St Lawrence and Mississippi River systems. [12.27.2005 - AP - IndyStar]

The two huge watersheds were first linked when the flow of the Chicago River was reversed [Chicago PubLib], so that the Chicago River, once a small tributary to the big lake, now runs out of it and south towards the Illinois River. The reversal was accomplished at the turn of the 20th century primarily to help reduce pollution in the lake so that Chicago's drinking water would be safe from Chicago's pollution, and secondarily as a shipping canal.

The primary reason sited in the article for restoring the natural hydraulic separation between the two watersheds is to reduce the flow of invasive alien organisms between the watersheds. Currently, the biggest concern is the spread of two species of asiatic carp considered a threat to the Great Lakes fishery.

Another problem with the current state of affairs is described here: Chicago Ranked Among Top U.S.Water Wasters - 2.4 billion gallons/day [9.29.2002 - Wisby - ChiSunTimes - Great Lakes Dir]. The Great Lakes are huge, but thinking of them as inexhaustable is an illusion; to a large extent they are a fossil of the ice age, and would probably slowly recede even without human activities speeding the process. The diversion to the Mississippi watershed at Chicago is the largest single non-natural source of depletion. Re-establishment of the natural separation between the watersheds would help reduce wasteful depletion of Great Lakes water.

CAFO promo article review - 21dec2005

12.21.2005 - Most of the time I'd simply wait for kemplog to take on this one, but it appears that Thomas is on a well-deserved holiday hiatus -- today's link is 'Corporate farms' have roots in Roman Empire by Brian Bergen, an 'agribusiness development specialist for the Eastern Indiana Development District'. [12.18.2005 - Bergen - Pal-Item].

Let's take a closer look at these arguments.

Mr. Bergen asserts that the 'many workers in the hog factory worked with great pride and earned a good paycheck'. He states that an 18,000 hog facility would likely employ seven workers and provide a payroll of $125,000.00 (per year, I assume). So -- divide $125,000.00 by seven. That suggests the average annual wage paid at the facility will be about $17,857.00. Assuming about 2000 hours per year (50 weeks at 40 hours per week), that means the average employee will be paid about $8.90 per hour. But let's assume the manager is paid $30,000.00 year. That leaves $95,000.00 in payroll among the other six workers. That leaves $15,833.00 per year for the typical worker, a payscale under $8.00/hour.

There are lower paying jobs, but these aren't exactly dream gigs and there's little room for advancement. So we've added six back-breaking, low wage, dead end jobs. Perhaps a few workers will go on to become managers, but most will not. How long will a worker stay at these jobs? What will the rates of injury, and disability be? What useful skills will a 45 year old former CAFO worker possess when his back can no longer hold up under the strain?

Mr. Bergen points out that the hogs don't use libraries, schools, or sewers. I'm relieved to hear that the hogs won't be attending school, but the families of those six $8.00 per hour employees will be attending school, and it's unlikely their parents will be able to contribute much to the tax base on their marginal wages.

The hogs will, however, be using the roads -- they'll be trucked in and out, as will their food, and ultimately their wastes.

While it's true that the hogs probably wouldn't benefit from using the public school system, perhaps they actually need a sewer. Each adult hog produces one to two gallons of manure each day. For the 18,000 hog facility, that adds up to about 10 million gallons of manure each year. As I discussed in the previous post, it's reasonable to believe that some of that can be used as fertilizer. But 10 million gallons is a lot of manure.

Mr. Bergen implies that George Washington's plantations offer a model for the modern CAFO. No doubt, President Washington operated a large plantation, but I doubt that a swine confinement facility was located on any of them. However, like Mr. Bergen's other model, the Romans, President Washington relied on an extensive pool of slave labor. Some contemporary critics noted that Washington's scientific approach to farming resulted in treatment of his slaves considered harsh even by the standards of the day -- as if being enslaved itself wasn't already about the most horrid fate that could befall anyone. Agricultural efficiency is a good thing, but it's not the only thing that matters. Nobody today would argue that agricultural efficiency justifies slavery.

The public decided that slavery was a bad thing and had to go, even if it generated cheap food. The public today continues to possess the right to decide when agricultural practices, or indeed, the practices in any sector of the economy, become an unacceptable nuisance or burden, or otherwise are contrary to the general welfare of the community.

What's an 'agronomic rate'? - 13dec2005

12.13.2005 - CAFOs produce manure and lots of it. Many of the issues about the environmental impacts of CAFOs involve the storage, transportation and disposal of the unending stream of manure the animals produce.

No doubt, manure has been used as a fertilizer to enrich the soil since the dawn of agriculture, and manure from wild animals has been part of the natural nutrient cycle for as long as herbivores have roamed the land. So the simplest and most obvious way for a CAFO to dispose of manure is to apply it to agricultural fields.

Most research supports the idea that modest quantities of manure can enhance the nutrient availability and tilth of soil, and probably the invertebrate biodiversity as well. However, research (and some painful experiences as well) also show that if the land is viewed as a disposal site, and manure is applied at an excessive rate for an extended period of time, the soil will become overloaded. A variety of serious problems can result, including leaching of nitrates and phosphates causing groundwater contamination, runoff of excessive levels of nutrients into rivers, streams and lakes, and even loss of biodiversity to weedy nitrogenphilic organisms.

Which brings us to the today's concept: 'the agronomic rate'. In general, the agronomic rate is a term that describes the amount of manure that can be used by plant life on a particular piece of land, most often a farmed field. Think of the agronomic rate as the number of units of manure per acre per year above which no additional crop yield would be achieved. See: 327 IAC 16-10-1, 2.

In theory, as long as the agronomic rate is not exceeded, the manure applications will be beneficial fertilizer for the crops. The growing plants will use the nutrients and therefore excess nutrients won't build up in the soil over time. If all this works as advertised, none of the nutrients will leach into the groundwater or escape into rivers, lakes and streams. [However, Indiana has traditionally calculated the agronomic rate solely with respect to the most important agronomic component in the manure, nitrogen. I can't help but suspect that this means the agronomic rate for phosphorus is routinely exceeded.] Determining the agronomic rate for a particular site involves some detailed analysis. No two tracts of land are the same, and manure isn't a uniform product either.

Application rates exceeding the agronomic rate can be described as a 'disposal rate' -- that means dumping more manure on the land than the plants can use. For a cautionary tale, consider the unfortunate and unwise history of chronic overloading of manure to sandy regions in the Netherlands. For an overview of the plethora of environmental problems this caused read: Nitrates from Agriculture in Europe: The EC Nitrates Directive and Its Implementation in England. [Grossman] - if it's more than you have time for today, consider a couple of noteworth quotes:

'In the Netherlands, for example, in areas of sandy soils, nitrate concentration thirty meters underground was 106 mg/liter (l). The result is that much water in the central Netherlands exceeds drinking water standards for nitrates, and water closer to the surface is unfit even for cattle in some areas.'

'In the Netherlands, for example, with its dense populations of humans, livestock, and industry, high nitrogen deposition has resulted in conversion of species-rich heathlands to species-poor grasslands and forest. Not only the species richness of the heath but also the biological diversity of the landscape has been reduced because the modified plant communities now resemble the composition of communities occupying more fertile soils. The unique species assemblage adapted to sandy, nitrogen-poor soils is being lost from the region.'

Monon and off - 9dec2005

12.09.2005 - Bigeastern.com readers will be among the few familiar with the proposed Monon 'reconstruction' in Starke, Pulaski and White counties. The Monon is a tributary of the Tippecanoe, probably Indiana's most important river in terms of biodiversity. While the potential for negative environmental consequences is debatable, and seemed to be of little interest to the public, the project carried a hefty price tag (probably over $8m) resulting in some pricey assessments. If you're interested in the background start here.

The Monon runs through some of northern Indiana's most sparsely populated areas, in a sort of black space between media markets, and the project has received sparse press coverage. However, according to Knox radio station WKVI, the project has been put on the backburner until next year, and may not happen at all. Residents in the North Judson, where I live, will be happy to see they've been removed from the watershed. More aptly, perhaps, it's been recognized that they are too remote from the proposed project for it to be justifiable that they be billed.

Remediation for environmental crimes - 9dec2005

State Rep. Ryan Dvorak has an interesting post today: Environmental Crimes Task Force – Second Meeting. The part where remediation and disgorgement are proposed as the sole penalties for what are currently, at least potentially, environmental crimes reminded me of a recent CLE I attended where attorneys for persons under investigation for environmental crimes were complaining to regulators that their clients shouldn't be treated like criminals.

My opinion: remediation is no more a cure for a criminal environmental offense than it is for a bank robber, and often less so. If a bank robber pays the money back (after getting caught, of course) everybody is pretty much squared up. When an industry releases carcinogenic chemicals, how do you 'remediate' the people who've been exposed? Environmental crimes are intended to act as deterents, especially for wrongful acts that might be highly profitable and difficult to detect. I would suggest that environmental crimes are no different than any other. The mere fact the person responsible -- the criminal -- may have a nice home, wear a fashionable suit, and play golf at the right country club doesn't change a thing any more than it does for any other 'white-collar' crime.

Odds and ends - 8dec2005

12.08.2005 - For some unknown reason I feel compelled to wander off point today with these entirely unrelated stories:

[1] Here's an interesting piece for history buffs: Was William Henry Harrison Assassinated? - suggesting a pro-slavery, anti-industrial development conspiracy may have arranged to murder William Henry Harrison through malevolent medical treatments. [12.8.2005 - Benton - Falls Church News-Press]

[2] 'Office Space' is one of my favorite movies, so I suppose it's not surprising that I found this piece interesting: A Side of Decor: T.G.I. Friday's and Ruby Tuesday Cooked Up New Looks for Mass Consumption - reminds me of a Ben Folds lyric, 'you get notalgic for the last ten years before the last ten years have passed.' ['Bastard' from Songs for Silverman]

[3] At times I've felt a bit odd using the term 'mainstream news' because it's taken on a negative connotation. I don't intend it that way; I don't think 'mainstream' is a bad thing. 'Kooky' or 'fringe' would be a bad thing. At its best, mainstream news provides the core of edited, gatekept, professional journalism that keeps the public informed and keeps a news hound coming back for more. I use the term 'mainstream' to contrast it with online independent writers and commentators typically called 'bloggers'.

When the stars are properly aligned a good online indy writer can leverage a collection of links to mainstream news to create a piece of unusual clarity. Here is just such a piece by Joshua Clayborn -- while a dispute over tenure of a prof at a law school (in this case IU-I) is a bit of a tempest in a teapot, the story is, nevertheless quite interesting: Web of Lies [12.7.2005 - In the Agora]

[4] I'm a fan of William Kunstler's 'eyesore of the month' which documents the pervasive bad taste of recent American buildings and public spaces -- but this month he takes a break and shows some positive developments: A little holiday time relief. The changes caused by high energy costs will not all be bad, if you roll with the punches.

[5] Yesterday's photo on Kay Westhues' Fourteen Places to Eat is fun.

[6] I'm not impressed by the remake of the South Bend Tribune. Sadly, the once proud daily appears to be sinking into the bush league.

Miteckwee Trail, 30nov2005

11.30.2005 - I'm working with a group of local volunteers to help open the railbanked Erie JK Line between North Judson and Monterey Indiana to the public as a rail-trail. It's a 16 mile stretch through sand country, crossing the Tippecanoe River -- great stuff! It's under consideration as a potential link in the transcontinental American Discovery Trail. I've posted photos and some commentary -- best for faster links. Here's the link.

Link to State Rep. Dvorak's comments regarding ethanol, 17nov2005

11.17.2005 - Reading E. Thomas Kemp's always informative Kemplog today, I followed a link to an entry in State Rep. Ryan Dvorak's blog entitled Ethanol and Net Energy Balance [11.15.2005 - Rep. Dvorak's - ryandvorak.com].

Rep. Dvorak discusses some of the same points I made in my 11.1.2005 entry, Whose energy policy is it, anyway?. I was pleased to see Rep. Dvorak's post on this subject, including the potential of cellulosic ethanol production. It reassures me to know that we do have clueful, inquisitive people working on this issue in Indiana and that at least some of our elected legislators aren't relying exclusively on lobbyists for their information.

Rep. Dvorak's entry explains more about certain aspects of cellulosic ethanol production that I mostly glossed over. Ethanol production from corn produced by current farming methods isn't an energy panacea, but does appear somewhat helpful. The real pay-off will go to those who learn to produce ethanol (or perhaps some other liquid fuel) with significantly reduced inputs - not just of fossil fuels, but of labor as well.

I've added Rep. Dvorak to the 'worthy blogs' list on the left column.

The Monon reconstruction project - cost ranking and assessments, 15nov2005

11.15.2005 - The hearing on the Monon Reconstruction is tonight at West Central HS. For those who are considering attending here's a link you may find interesting: Joint Drainage Board of Pulaski, White, Jasper and Starke Counties - an interactive GIS mapping look at the Monon watershed [Beam, Longest and Neff, LLC]]

The site requires that you use MSIE as your browser, and may be sluggish on slow connections. 'Autodesk' will automatically download to your computer; after that it's a matter of selecting 'overlays'. It worked well on my machine, and displays a wealth of relevant data.

I found it interesting that despite the availability of sophisticated data on soil types, hydrology, land use, and 'cost ranking', the joint board opted for a flat rate tax. As I understand it the Joint Board set a minimum per parcel rate of $75.00 and a flat rate per acre of $69.00. Of particular interest is the feature called 'cost ranking' -- no explanatory key is provided but 'cost ranking' appears to sketch out the benefits projected to be derived in various parts of the watershed, with lighter green indicating more benefits, and darker shades of green indicating less benefits.

While I'm on this subject, here's another useful link: Big Monon project receives thumbs up - [2.17.2005 - Howell - Monticello H-J]

 

Another local headline worthy of note: Battle over Wheatfield hog farm brewing - [11.15.2005 - McCollom - nwiTimes - link from Indiana Law Blog]

Monon ditch reconstruction raising eyebrows, 10nov2005

11.10.2005 - a brief piece (sorry, no longer available): Monon Ditch Fees Anger Area Residents - $8M Monon Ditch reconstruction (Pulaski, White and Starke Counties) generates $70/acre reconstruction fee; objections by Town of North Judson, Starke Co. Commissioners, landowners. [11.10.2005 issue - WKVI.com]

There's been sparse press coverage of this eyebrow raising project, probably due to the sparsely populated area it is alleged to serve. The Monticello Herald-Journal has had a little coverage, but none currently that I can find.

I've been following The Big Monon Project for quite awhile here on bigeastern.com, but until the bills actually turned up in mailboxes, there didn't seem to be much interest. You can find more info by Googling bigE for 'Monon'. In some cases you may need to scroll around to find the content referencing this issue. As I understand it, a flat assessment of $70/acre is being charged throughout the watershed.

It would be interesting to see an account inquiring into the cost/benefit analysis justifying this expenditure -- for a quick backgrounder read my 7.21.2001 entry here, Are you benefited? Indiana's drainage tax system; beware however that the legal force of a case I cite, Whitley, Noble and Allen Joint Drainage Bd. v. Tschantz, 461 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. App. 1984) may have been undercut to a degree by a more recent case, Clouse v. Noble County Drainage Bd., 809 N.E.2d 849 (Ind.App. Jun 04, 2004).

Globalizing means health care too - adapt and thrive #5, 9nov2005

11.9.2005 - today's point of departure: The Doctor Is Out - How GM's deal to cut its medical benefits hurts every retiree. [11.14.2005 issue - Colvin - Fortune]

This article is a perfect example of the uglier side of adaptation. You know, the 'adapt or die' part. Geoffrey Colvin is, I think, right on point. The UAW had no choice but to offer concessions on retiree health care. Perhaps the health care contracts UAW had with GM were always unrealistic; they certainly are under current international competitive conditions.

Debating the merits and demerits of globalization may pass a few stimulating hours in a coffee shop, but meanwhile the process marches onward relentlessly. I think Colvin is also correct that the GM/UAW agreement to rollback retiree benefits marks the point from which all such agreements are hollow and hence, obsolete. Now the question becomes, 'which international model of health care will we adopt' -- (a) public health care (call it socialized medicine if you will) or (b) the 'fend for yourself' system. The U.S. system of negotiating health care as part of labor contracts worked reasonably well while US industry was head and shoulders above the rest of the world. But that's history folks.

Note to Governor Daniels: the first state to recognize the implications of this issue and to establish a workable system for making health care a public function (socializing it, if you prefer) will be a magnet for industrial development, and a destination of choice for smart people. Indiana is a smallish, highly industrialized, state with a fairly well developed health care system. Seems like a good fit, doesn't it?

11.8.2005 - Workers face paycheck pinch - [11.7.2005 - Trumbull - CSM - link from Masson's Blog]

This article does a good job of summarizing the squeeze on US workers. In the current economy there isn't anything holding US industrial worker's wages up against international competition, so it seems almost inevitable that this trend will continue.

11.3.2005 - Today, just a couple of quick links: Growing pains for Indiana ethanol - a look at some possible consequences of sharp rise in use of corn for ethanol production in Indiana - concludes that supply of corn is probably adequate, but reduction in bean production could be side-effect of higher corn prices. [11.2.2005 - Truitt - Brownfield]

Canada Opens New Run-of-River Hydro Facility - run-of-river hydro facilities produce renewable energy without C02 emissions, and with less deleterious effects on river ecosystems than are caused by typical large dams. [11.2.2005 - R.E.A.]

Hydro played prominently in Indiana's early electrical service, but declined in the era of cheap fossil fuels. Indiana has many big rivers and myriads of creeks, and most communities are located on one of them. Hydro power potential is a product of flow (volume of water per unit time) and fall (elevation lost per unit distance traveled). Most Indiana streams have lots of flow, but not so much fall.

Nevertheless, small hydro projects could help contribute to decentralization of power production. One of the goals of energy policy should be to give consumers more choices for buying their electrical power, especially sustainable alternatives that don't require transporting fuel and don't contribute to C02 or other harmful emissions. Creating energy alternatives also means building energy systems that are locally owned, operated and controlled. This keeps us in control of our own destinies, instead of slowly sliding into peasant status. A municipal utility, for example, could leverage a small hydro project to 'get a leg up' on the competition by taking control of at least a portion of their citizen's energy needs, and cutting investors, oil barons and distant politicians out of the mix.

Indiana Energy Group - currently under construction, right now the only content is about Lt. Gov. Skillman's 'listening tour' at various sites throughout Indiana. Today Lt. Gov Skillman travels to Fowler amongst the open fields of Benton County. [in.gov] - The tour is good, but let's see some documents about Indiana's energy policy online soon. And an opportunity to comment.

Whose energy policy is it, anyway? - adapt and thrive #4, 1nov2005

The Ft. Wayne N-S posted an editorial yesterday, Energy policy for Indiana, aptly posing the question, 'Will energy conservation rate as much attention as energy production?'

It's a good review of some of the items on the menu for beginning to adapt to the obsolesence of the petroleum economy due to high prices, or even lack of availability. The core point of the the editorial -- that more than lip service needs to be paid to conservation -- makes a good point. A problem with Indiana government (maybe all governments) is that the interest level in particular solutions seems mainly related to the wealth of the lobbyists supporting them.

It's all about selling product. Solutions that sell product have a focused economic effect, and so there are dollars (or Yuan) available to keep the lobbyists on the job of promoting these solutions. Solutions that don't sell product, or at least don't have a focused effect on product sales, aren't supported by lobbyists and one wonders if anybody in the halls of government is even talking about them.

I'm not saying that lobbyists are necessarily evil, or even that they're always promoting bad ideas. The problem is that their job is serving a particular interest, and not with advocating the best possible solutions to our problems. Who's in Indianapolis spending lots of money promoting conservation?

Indiana has a well-placed and well-heeled farm lobby, so it's not surprising that Indiana's energy policy involves consuming familiar agricultural products. Here at the corporeal Big Eastern we have a few acres of corn/soybeans, so I'd be happy to see commodity prices rise a few cents. My geeky side thinks it would be kinda' neat if the local school ran their buses on soy-diesel. If Remington can heat their houses on pig manure, that too would be an interesting demo.

But the current corn/soybeans agricultural production system developed (a) in a low energy/high labor cost economy, and (b) to produce commercial food products. Wouldn't it seem an unlikely coincidence if the production system currently in place turned out to be ideal as an alternative energy production system?

Corn/soybean agriculture as it's currently practiced in Indiana relies on considerable inputs of petroleum based fuels, herbicides and nitrogen fertilizer. These facts have spawned a debate about whether there's much of a net gain in ethanol production. But there's another input: that hot summer sunshine imparts plenty of energy that is fixed into the crop too. Ethanol production offers a way to grab solar energy and move it around in a convenient form.

The recent Argonne Nat'l Lab Ethanol Study is somewhat encouraging as far as ethanol production being a net gain in energy. It shows, roughly, a net delivery to the consumer of 1.23 units of energy for each unit of fossil fuels consumed in production for ethanol, compared to 0.74 units of fossil energy delivered to the consumer per unit of fossil fuel consumed in production and delivery of gasoline. That's a significant net gain, but the reliance on petroleum remains.

The criticism that corn based ethanol is 'food burning' also remains. [See Ethanol fuel from corn faulted as 'unsustainable subsidized food burning' in analysis by Cornell scientist] Personally, I'm not religiously opposed to burning food as fuel, but it's highly dubious whether it's the ideal approach of converting solar energy into a concentrated and portable form capable of firing an internal combustion engine. Corn farming produces an edible starch, most of which is then fed to pigs, but (although it's more difficult) ethanol can be made with plant material that can't be made into tortillas, or indirectly into sausage.

While the Argonne Nat'l Lab study supports the idea that ethanol holds promise, it also hints at the impending obsolesence of corn based ethanol production. More promising in the long run may be production of cellulosic ethanol, which uses generally inedible cellulose as the plant based source for ethanol production. The link above, to the renewable fuels association website, points out that cellulosic ethanol can be produced from waste materials, and may be feasible outside of traditional grain producing regions. However, even in the heart of a traditional grain region such as Indiana, cellulosic ethanol may offer the opportunity to drastically reduce energy, labor, and fertilizer inputs.

For example, here in northern Indiana's sand country, a tract of land could be planted in native prairie. At the end of most growing seasons (perhaps 2 out of 3 years) the vegetation could be removed and processed for cellulosic ethanol. The waste material could be returned to the land to reduce nutrient loss. With the proper mix of plants (including abundant nitrogen fixers) little or no fertilizer would be required. No herbicides would be needed. Little or no seeding would be needed once the stand was established. Artificial drainage wouldn't be required. Labor inputs would be minimal. The biodiversity of the prairie would not only be preserved, but it would be an asset because it would make the energy source less susceptible to pests or disease.

The biggest advantage is that perennial plants are being used, instead of corn that must be planted again every spring. The perennial plant root systems would be allowed to grow untouched, year after year. These extensive and deep roots systems would allow good productivity on sand even without irrigation. Add some cattle or bison into the mix to graze areas in the fallow years and it starts looking not only sustainable but productive and attractive. In other regions, fast growing woody plants like aspens might fill the same role. Would it work? That's just it, I'm not sure if anybody here in Indiana is even studying use of native perennials as a source for ethanol biomass.

We grow corn, son.

That brings us back to the point of departure -- we need an energy policy that's driven by public interest and true innovation. Perhaps some corn based ethanol may be worthwhile, especially as a transitional strategy, but the real gains in the game of adapt and thrive will go to those who rethink their entire production chain and build a new one optimized for our current goals. Trying to piggyback on current production systems looks like a recipe for failure.

The public should demand an energy policy that serves the public, and not merely existing business interests. Government needs to ameliorate corporate power, not merely be another face of it. Governmental energy policy should be about providing citizens more energy choices, and innovating in energy production systems that will improve choices.

State forests as old-growth reserves - by Andrew Sipocz

[27oct2005 - Andrew Sipocz sent this interesting note suggesting that, despite the attractiveness of hardwood timber, Indiana's state forests should be primarily devoted to re-establishing significant areas of old growth hardwood forest, and that my suggestion of 25% old-growth is far too modest.]

I do think that Indiana’s timber and furniture industry is a sleeping giant. I’ve been many places and few have the capacity to produce the amount of high quality timber that Indiana can.

As an avid furniture maker I know the value of the high quality hardwood lumber that Indiana can produce so well. There is a world-wide shortage of this wood that is going to get much worse as soon as the cutting of the tropical forests comes to an end. Prices are going nowhere but up. The value of these timber lands will rival today’s oil fields. The State needs to seriously consider the future of their timber lands. The furniture industry can make up for the loss of high paying industry jobs if the State can encourage them to stay here. Keeping Indiana’s lumber in Indiana via added value manufacturing will have to be done as a matter of pride and will not be a strictly business decision. Indiana needs to foster via training and start-up assistance its cabinet-making (furniture-making) industry.

However,

It is important to remember that different forestlands in the State have greatly differing potentials in producing timber. Some parts of Indiana if left completely uncut would produce no more than a short-statured forest of black oak that reaches its maximum growth in a 100 years, while others would produce forests that attain a greater height and timber volume than those of the Amazon basin and take several hundred years to achieve this growth.

This observation was made by Robert Ridgeway, an Indiana ornithologist who spent a lot of time documenting forest conditions in both the Amazon and the lower Wabash Valley while that area was first being cut. He made many exact height and diameter measurements of trees being brought into sawmills. Purdue’s Forestry School has a collection of some of his photographs. The best forests had attained a height of 120-130 feet (average canopy height) with some outstanding tulip trees attaining a height of nearly 200 feet. The canopy trees in these forests were probably over 200 years old on average.

Some of the State’s best timber in this, the Nation’s best hardwood timber state, is that which has been given a chance to grow for a good while on Indiana’s State forestland. I am worried that what is about to happen in Indiana is that there is just too much money to resist out there now and that Indiana’s citizens are going to lose the opportunity to see large areas of mature forestland for another 200 years. Perhaps our kids great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandchildren will have more restraint at the next opportunity.

There are many acres of land that given assistance from the State, could be converted from soybeans and corn back to timber (someone has to help pay the bills while the timber grows). I think Indiana’s State forests should be left as the old growth reserves. Much of it is poor forestland, but some is not and most importantly, most all of it has been left to grow a good while. Let the commercial timber be grown on private lands. In terms of wildlife, old growth reserves need to be large enough to function. This size is dictated by the demographic and genetic dynamics of their populations and unfortunately these real world parameters do not bend to societal compromises. The entire State forest properties are hardly large enough to provide reserves for old growth dependent wildlife, let alone 25% of their area.

I would also recommend that folks visit the Pioneer Mothers Memorial Forest before taking a stance on this issue.

Andrew Sipocz
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
105 San Jacinto St.
La Porte, TX 77571

Andrew is certainly correct that there's a wide variety of richness in Indiana's forest lands; much more than most people realize. At Big Eastern, in the Kankakee Sand Region, we have those 100 year black oak groves he mentions. Truth is, these areas are better for hiking than forest production. At the other extreme are the amazing forests of the lower Wabash, which rivaled and perhaps even outshined Amazonia. These were centered around New Harmony, and in fact attracted the creation of that community. Mostly these areas grow corn and watermelons today, but a fine remnant example can be seen on the Illinois side of the river at Beall Woods State Park. At Beall Woods not only are the trees huge, but even more striking is the species diversity. In our woods in Starke County, about 10 species of trees account for the vast majority of the canopy; at Beale Woods it must be at least five times that number. I found a few photos online, but they don't do the place justice; Miles Lowry did the best; I also enjoyed his photography at Porcupine Mtns., in the U.P.

Some good photos of Pioneer Mothers Memorial Forest are available though [Hoosier Nat'l Forest]. One little quibble with the copy on the page: I don't think old growth forests were common in Indiana 100 years ago. That would be 1905; there were probably less forests in 1905 then there are today. Two hundred years ago, 1805, would get you back to the vast primeval forests.

Warren Woods in southeastern Michigan is another fine example of old growth; this one developed in the beneficent climate on the eastern shore of Lake Michigan.

So the idea that uncut forests are worthless places of decaying trees certainly is not one I subscribe to. They are precious. More than 25% devoted to old-growth would be great, my point is that significant areas of old growth should be preserved permanently.

Careful with that axe - adapt and thrive #3 - 24 October, 2005

24.Oct.2005 - It's been linked previously elsewhere, but here's a good piece by Kevin Howell at the Monticello Herald Journal:

TNC partly supportive - [10.19.2005 - Howell - Monticello H-J]

Chad Watts, TNC's Tippecanoe River Project Mngr. (and occassional correspondent with bigeastern.com) explains TNC's qualified support for increased managment of Indiana's state forests. The support is based on TNC's core mission 'to preserve the plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth, by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive.' Logging, done correctly, can help maintain a diversity of habitats, and hence help protect biodiversity.

At the same time, Chad points out that TNC also supports preservation of old growth forest in parts of the matrix, and selective harvesting in other areas to the extent that the harvest supports sustainability.

I can't help but think back one of my recurring themes -- the loss of trust in resource managment issues. Environmentalists don't trust political administrations to have the best interests of their beloved forest at heart. An example is the argument that the cutting will increase the oak component, which will be beneficial because oak forests are richer in terms of biodiversity. Critics point out that the result is likely to be contrary because oaks are also more valuable as timber and are therefore likely to be targeted disproportionately in selective harvests. That's lack of trust at work.

How do I feel about that argument? I wonder if the critics are correct. When you're standing near somebody swinging an axe, you really need to have some trust. Bad things can happen.

Earning trust requires good acts, good relations, good results, transparency and consistency. All of these, like growing a forest, take time.

There are people on both ends of the spectrum who will never be happy: people who aren't interested in a tree except for how much money they can make from killing it, and people who wouldn't feel comfortable building a foot trail in a forest for fear of disturbing the gnomes. Most of us, thankfully, are somewhere between these two extremes: we appreciate, even love, trees, and also like making a buck and living in a community with a robust economy. Most of us enjoy fine hardwood based products in our homes, and quite a number personally participate in crafting useful items using fine hardwoods at work or on our own time.

So I come back to the trust issue. My humble suggestion is that increasing timber harvesting in the state forests can work, and achieve a degree of acceptance in the environmental and outdoors community if the process remains open, and is phased in gradually with careful monitoring.

At the outset significant old growth reserves should be established and respected; by that I mean at least 25% of the total state forest acreage, and they should be configured to minimize edge effects. The public should be actively involved in the process of defining these areas. The areas should be marked, and significant fines attached and enforced for any logging related encroachment into the areas.

Outside of the reserves, logging roads should be minimized, and the behavior of logging crews should be actively policed. Monitoring of effects, such as erosion, sedimentation, and invasive species, should be thorough and the results published to the public without being 'washed and put through the spin cycle'. The transfer of funds from harvests to land acquisition should be transparent, and should be accomplished through a non-vulnerable trust fund.

Some nature lovers will never be satisfied, and part of me feels the same way. A cut-over forest can be a sad thing to see. But a regenerating forest is a vibrant place, and if the result is a net increase in acreage in forest land, and a greater economic stake in forest sustainability, in the end some degree of trust will be established.

None of this should be rushed. Forests work at their own pace...swing that axe carefully.

Getting back to Chad Watts' comments -- here's a link to a somewhat related piece by Gerould Wilhelm describing the native American relationship to forests -- and it wasn't a 'hands-off' point of view: What is a Savanna? - [2002 - Wilhelm - Soc. for Range Mngmnt Conf].

Rethinking infrastructure - adapt and thrive #2 - October 20, 2005

10.20.2005 - Here's a worthwhile read:

Indiana is falling behind - [10.20.2005 - Editorial - Ft. Wayne J-G]

Infrastructure projects like the municipal geothermal systems I wrote about recently can help, and they are neither welfare nor 'make-work' projects. Infrastructure projects that reduce future energy expenses in particular have several positive features. These kinds of projects (1) can't be moved to China. (2) create a local market for cutting edge skills -- if a community has 500 geothermal systems that means there's a good living to be made for people with skills relating to geothermal (3) reduce export of money, and foster community self-reliance, (4) enhance the value and livability of the neighborhood (i.e. they don't trash the environment), and, (5) all of these prior factors work together to help make the community more attractive to smart people seeking a place to live.

These are features we need in development strategies. CAFOs, for example, are suspect because they are unlikely to produce a lot of desirable local employment, aren't going to attract many skilled and educated newcomers to the community, and are often owned by corporations with little interest in the community's progress. In fact, it's not unreasonable to think CAFO owners might want to keep folks 'down on the farm'. That means no trips to Paris, if you see what I mean. To be fair about it, Indiana may be a good place for hogs, due to the climate and availability of corn. But that doesn't mean that your town will be better off when it becomes CAFO central -- unless, perhaps, you own the CAFO. [for excellent CAFO coverage, follow kemplog.]

Big highways and airports are suspect too. They're petroleum hogs, and therefore may already be obsolete. Here's the thing about the automobile: it's a device that owes its success to the availability of abundant and cheap fossil fuels. Fossil fuels aren't cheap now, and will never be cheap again. The same is true for big jets. I'm not saying that we're not going to have any gasoline (or some other liquid fuel), I'm just saying it's not going to be cheap to drive a large petrol powered machine anymore. Are you going to stay home for the rest of your life? Certainly not -- therefore communities with cheap, reliable transportation are going to be very popular, and hence very successful. Since 'cheap' excludes petrol powered motorcars, it's time to start investing in what comes next.

10.17.2005 - adapt and thrive: the new bigeastern

I've decided on my new focus for the bigeastern blog -- henceforth I'll be focusing on how we can adapt to the fairly drastic changes in our lifestyle that we'll be experiencing in the next few years. As is my wont, I will attempt to synthesize technical, social, and economic factors and suggest legal and institutional changes that may be warranted. Or just as often, suggest that changes aren't warranted.

The types of changes I'm talking about are: (1) the end of cheap oil and gas, (2) a decline in the power and influence of the U.S., (3) the ageing of the population, (4) an increasing rate of critical environmental problems, (5) an economy increasingly dominated by the super-rich, and (6) global warming.

While these changes are global, I'll continue to focus on regional ways to cope. History is replete with periods of resource strain; these were painful times but civilization ultimately marched onward. Those that are able to innovate, not only technologically, but socially as well, are likely to fare best. I'll try to leave the gloom and doom to others but folks, we need to talk about making some changes.

Okay, let's get started.

Open the loop to municipal geothermal - adapt and thrive #1 - October 17, 2005

One of the most pressing problems we're facing here in northern Indiana right now is the looming winter heating crunch. Maybe it's not quite a crisis, but it's close. We have an abundant resource that could provide a huge savings in energy consumption, if it could be tapped on a systematic basis. No, I'm not talking about not hog manure or corn. While these seem quite abundant in Hoosierland, I'm afraid the scale of the problem is a bit bigger than that. The resource I'm talking about is groundwater; and the solution I'm talking about is open loop geothermal heat pumps.

Most of northern Indiana is blessed with abundant groundwater (and some deep lakes too), and it's generally easily pumped to the surface with fairly minimal energy consumption. Water has a high specific heat (i.e. a gallon of water can hold quite a lot of energy, compared to say, air) and Indiana's average annual temperature is close enough to the comfort range that water based geothermal heat pump systems are more than merely practical, they can offer impressive savings in energy consumption (as high as 60% reductions). And while the aquifers aren't limitless, in the case of shallow aquifers at least, much the water can easily be recycled to the earth in a pond or wetland. Where open loops aren't feasible, a closed loop system may be. In either case, there's no reason why a geothermal system should contaminate the water, or anything else.

Geothermal requires access to groundwater (or in the case of a closed loop system, the ground), and also a way to dispose of the water (or at least to exchange the heat). They tend to require a bigger up-front investment to install compared to a gas furnace, but a lot of that is due to the plumbing. Geothermal systems are reasonably sustainable and the net energy inputs and carbon outputs are drastically less. Sure, some burning coal at a power plant is driving the process in most cases, but the amount is reduced substantially.

Currently, for an open loop system water disposal is problem in developed areas. Installing an underground recycling system is one way to solve the problem, but many homeowners would be less than thrilled about digging up their lawns. Maintenance of an underground recycling system is another issue. Discharge into a surface body of water through and open system is cheaper. System 'scaling' (the buildup of lime on heat exchange components) where the water is high in carbonates is another issue, but doesn't seem insurmountable.

So here's my proposal -- municipal utilities should consider getting into the geothermal business and not just for public buildings, though that would be a start. Most municipalities already have the infrastructure to supply the water, many from existing well systems. While they don't have the plumbing to dispose of the water, municipalities at least already have the easements where such lines could be installed. Obviously, the used water shouldn't go into the sewers; it should stay clean and discharge somewhere that can use clean water, like a wetland or pond. If possible, the discharged water should be allowed to percolate back into the ground to help recharge the resource.

Retrofitting existing communities doesn't seem impossible, though it might prove difficult to get enough existing homes to change over to geothermal to make it work. It seems more reasonable than trying to heat a town with hog manure, though that might work in a really small town. A good place to start would be to make some new developments in fast growing communities 'all geothermal'. It seems a safe bet that a cluster of many geothermal homes on a shared well and disposal system would be significantly more cost effective in terms of installation as compared with a multitude of smallish separate systems. The discharge site could make a nice park. Reductions in heating (and cooling) costs of over 60% would be quite feasible, and what energy is used is electrical which can be generated in a wide variety of ways, including solar, wind and hydro, and so this isn't 'locked in' to petroleum or natural gas.

Indiana already has some policies in place that encourage geothermal, including a tax credit and statutory policies aimed at encouraging governmental entities to consider geothermal among other energy efficient technologies -- for more see the backgrounder links below. Geothermal is already becoming competitive in rural areas, but more policy changes are needed to help foster more geothermal in developed areas. Here's one that comes to mind -- billing for water usage in the heat pump system should be separated from the traditional household uses. In Indiana, municipal water rates are typically set artificially high to subsidize the sewage disposal system making municipal water quite expensive. This isn't an evil conspiracy, it's simply because it's easier to meter water usage than it is to meter sewage output. Imagine a sewage meter. Well, maybe you don't really want to imagine that... Anyway, the costs associated with disposing of heating/cooling water would, one would think, be relatively modest, and there's no reason the discharge from the heat pump can't be metered, so there's no technical problem with discounting the heating and cooling water.

A more pervasive policy change, and one that involves rethinking the American mindset, is the need to embrace a governmental role in helping citizens with their heating and cooling needs. Most communities readily accept the social benefits of having a municipal role in water, sewage, and often to an extent in solid waste disposal too. Why not heating and cooling? Sewage disposal is necessary. So is not freezing to death; I don't want my neighbors freezing to death either. Does that make me a liberal? Am I arguing for 'big government'? If you like; I prefer to call arguing for 'useful government'.

To adapt and thrive we need to get past the idea that we're all rugged individuals, 'chopping our own firewood' out on the frontier, as it were. Sorry folks, but John Wayne isn't going to chip in on your gas bill. Policy decisions about heating and cooling need to be seriously addressed by local governments representing the interests of the local populace. It's time to recognize that your corporate utilities aren't necessarily always looking out your your interests. Sure, they formerly sold you that natural gas cheap, but no more. And most likely, never again.

Backgrounders

• here's a Summary of Regulations affecting geothermal installations in Indiana - [geoexchange.org]
• here information about Selecting and Installing a Geothermal Heat Pump System - [energy.gov]
• the big fly in the ointment is the fact that most Indiana wells produce hard water; the familiar lime deposits are bad news for the heat exchangers in geothermal systems: Scaling in Geothermal Heat Pump Systems - [Rafferty - Oregon Institute of Technology]
• Geothermal is recognized as an 'energy efficient technology' I.C. 4-13.6-9 meaning that these technologies are to be considered by the Div. of Public Works where feasible; a similar provision applicable to local governmental entities can be found at: I.C. 36-1-12.7-2
• Homes with geothermal systems generally qualify for a property tax deduction under I.C. 6-1.1-12-34, though I'm not quite sure how this deduction operates under the current fair market value theory.
• The Improvement and Maintenance Distrcit of the Indiana Central Canal of Indianapolis is authorized to assess a fee to state govt. for allowing geothermal discharge water to be disposed of in the canal: I.C. 36-7-15.5-16.

10.11.2005 -

I'm making progress on my backlog of work, and hope to be posting regularly again within a few days. Anyway, the coverage of environmental policy issues available on the ILB, Indiana Barrister, Kemplog, and Masson's Log to name a few is quite thorough these days. It's tempting to just sit back and read. At any rate, the days of the bigeastern.com as a headline service are about over...it's time to morph into what comes next.

10.4.2005 - It's a warm day for October, it was a warm night for anytime of year. But that's about to change. In a month we'll be heading into winter, and it looks like it will be a very painful one indeed. We're days away from changes in the bankruptcy code that will make debt relief inaccessible for low income people (kind of ironic, isn't it?). More or less simultaneously minimum payments on credit cards will approximately double. Gasoline prices, it seems, will hover around $3.00/gallon, and natural gas prices are expected to rise up to 70% according to some accounts. All that, and then the gales of November.

This winter we're going to have a lot of desperate people here in Indiana. We're going to have cold people, we're going to have angry people. We're going to see more home fires as people use risky space heaters. We're going to see disconnections. Where I live I expect to start seeing vehicles abandoned by the side of the road as people walk away from machines they can no longer fuel up. Oh, and if you don't have a locking gas cap, you might want to get one.

While the Bush administration is finally making (half-hearted, in my opinion) noises about conservation, it's a bit too little, a bit too late. Remember the reception environmentalists received when they've tried to talk up the need for energy conservation? Well, now winter is going to give us all a chilly reception. We're facing some big changes, and we can either adapt, or... Well, you know.

Today's link: Sweat, Fire Help Bring US Midwest Prairies Back - nice feature about prairie restorations in the Chicago area...small quibble, 'garlic mustard' is a small invasive herbaceous plant, not a tree or shrub. [Planet Ark - Reuters - link from IER>

10.3.2005 - Jim Sweeney writes saying a permit application for filling of 41 acres of wetland adjacent to Hobart Wetlands in NWI is currently pending before the ACOE, he reports that the purpose of the fill is for use in the Evergreen Cemetery.

today's links:

Bicycle sales boom in US amid rising gas prices - high fuel costs, congestion, trail construction and fitness goals combine to bring human powered transportation back to the fore. [10.1.2005 - Yahoo!]

Here's an interesting post on Masson's Blog about some (fairly mild) puffery at IDEM: If you must lie, lie about something good - see also: IDEM backlog caught in dispute - [10.2.2005 - AP - SoBndTrib]

Here's some background info about the remarkable skills of our cover-bug (and a bug it truly is), the Water Strider, including their hydrophobic (non-wettable) legs, and 'Denny's Paradox'. [wikipedia] One interesting thing to notice about these bugs is that they only use the rear four legs for locomotion; the front legs are used for predation.

9.30.2005 - New forestry policy: the state forests - In my entry on 9.26 I wrote some comments about the state's new forestry policy. The policy is intended to promote the state's hardwood industry, including boosting the production of hardwood timber. Cutting a tree is a sad thing, but oak, cherry, walnut and maple trees produce wonderful lumber. It's beautiful and amazingly durable. My house was built around 1900 and the white oak woodwork is still in great condition (after a laborious refinishing about 10 years ago). Making furniture, flooring and trim out of a tree isn't quite like grinding it up into pulp; the lumber can become a treasured item of craftsmanship for decades or even generations.

Hardwood trees have a very long potential lifespan, but they aren't exactly immortal. It's true that a few oaks can live to be hundreds of years old, but from my personal observations at least, the mortality rate begins to increase for trees over 100 years, at least for most species (not so much for beeches and white oaks).

There's also a consensus that substantial tracts of forest land in Indiana, especially in southern Indiana, are suffering from low oak regeneration as maples and beeches begin to dominate. This is, to a degree, a natural process but it's simply not true that the forests of Indiana have developed without any impact of human activity. Native Americans started fires in the forest to help keep them open, more productive, and more pleasant to live in. At some level, the Native Americans understood that oak trees are, on balance, the keystone species for keeping the forests and woodlands in our region rich and productive. Fire suppression has decreased the oak component in our forest in many areas (not where I live in NWI though), and that's not such a good thing.

So, this is a complex issue. It's always painful to watch a forest being logged, but trees grow and live and die. If the administration really does devote a significant amount of the revenue to expanding the acreage of forested land, that would be great. I'd like to see some state forest land here in northern Indiana.

Changes to the classified forest and wildlife program - After reading the executive summary about the changes in the state's forestry policies, I wrote an e-mail to the IDNR Div. Forestry, but not about the state forests. I'm sure they get plenty of comments on that.

I wrote about proposed changes in the Classified Forest program expressing concern that (a) the 'sunset' of the Classified Wildlife Habitat program would hamper efforts to protect non-forest plant communities on private lands, most notably prairies and non-forested wetlands, and (b) it looked like the state might require landowners to harvest timber in order to keep their classification, and the associated property tax benefits.

I was pleased and impressed to receive a quick and responsive reply. Others had expressed my concern for prairies and wetlands, and the policy has been modified to allow these important and rich areas into the program. Monocultures of limited value, such as fescue fields would be excluded from the program. I was quite satisfied with that answer, but a little less so on the question of whether landowners would be required to cut trees to stay in the program. The answer was a bit equivocal. There are good reasons to recommend a harvest of trees in some situations, but I'm opposed to any rule that allows a forester to pressure a landowner into harvesting against their wishes. Quite simply, the landowner owns the trees and should be able to let them rot if that's their wish (doing so would be good for the soil, after all). Then there's that pesky 'socialism' thing. Moreover, allowing a non-owner to gain control an asset is a situation ripe for, at best, bad judgment and at worst corruption. More about this later.

The fact that the Daniels admin. is seriously looking at forest management as a priority issue is a good thing, in my opinion. There will be some disagreements, some mistakes, and some pain, but in the end the enhancement of the hardwood industry will help ensure the preservation of hardwood forests here in Indiana, and hopefully provide rewarding, craftsman oriented employment to many people.

Here's a link to a good article that I found reading Marcia Oddi's ILB -- [Indiana] to expand logging of forests - [9.30.2005 - Wiedenbener - Louisville C-J]

Cashing in on what's priceless - revision of state forestry practices will increase harvests on state forest lands by seven times, eliminate state forestry technical assistance for tracts 'less than ten acres' [9.25.2005 - OpEd by Carpenter - IndyStar - link from ILB]

9.26.2005 - today's links feature proposed changes to Indiana forestry management, most notably in the Classified lands progam and in the State Forests:

Cashing in on what's priceless - revision of state forestry practices will increase harvests on state forest lands by seven times, eliminate state forestry technical assistance for tracts 'less than ten acres' [9.25.2005 - OpEd by Carpenter - IndyStar - link from ILB]

Time to think about state forests - Consultant forester Don Bickel provides his perspective on Indiana state forest management which (predictably) touts the virtues of forestry consultants, and decries misguided environmentalists [9.25.2005 - OpEd by Bickel - Crawfordsville Journal Review] - comment - I read a lot of Indiana forestry publications and I can't help but note how often forestry consultants tout themselves, and how rarely anybody else does. Here's my 'country lawyer' suggestion to landowners...even if you don't care a whit about saving the forest on your property, those trees are assets that you own. Before agreeing to a timber sale, landowners ought to compare the value of their property before the harvest and what it will be after a harvest. If your asset is losing more value than the income you derived from the timber sale, the timber sale looks like a loser, doesn't it? Part of the problem is that people tend to be unhappy with the way a forest looks after it's logged -- not so much due to the stumps, but because of the ruts, tree tops, and sometimes even trash like oil cans, etc. Loggers typically say they have to do it that way to make money, and I'll be the first to admit that the workers don't seem to be getting rich. So it's a cost transfer really; the timber industry gets what they want out and leaves the landowner with a mess because it's easier for them that way. But landowners have caught on to this, and they don't like it. Perhaps in the western mountains or in the Great White North timber harvests happen where noboby much sees the results. That's not the case here in Indiana. On the other hand, the administration is correct that the forestry products industry in an excellent one for Indiana, and ultimately the commodity value of the timber ought to insure the resource's long-term survival.

Seeing both forest and trees - OpEd generally supports increased logging on 150k acres of state forest land [9.21.2005 - OpEd by Caylor - Ft. Wayne N-S]

IN-DNR Div/Forestry Strategic Plan 2005-2007 - Exec. Summary II - Fragmentation, 'inappropriate uses' and invasive species identified as the biggest problems in Indiana forests - proposes discontinuation of free forestry services for landowners with less than 10ac or forest land - proposes increased management of larger forest tracts, including development of 'demonstration forests' on Classified Forest Lands. Proposes harvest of timber in reservoir areas (and notes the state can generate $100k/yr doing this) - Eliminates the Classified Wildlife Habitat program, and folds it into the Classified Forest and Wildlands Program [bad new for preservation of prairie in Indiana, it seems] - More bad news for our portion of the state is the moth-balling of the tree nursery at J-P; at Big Eastern, we've not had good luck with trees grown at the Vallonia nursery. Our climate is quite a bit tougher up here, and those coddled trees from Vallonia's relatively mild climate and rich soils just don't seem to make it in the alternately hot and cold sands of the Kankakee sand region. [IN-DNR]

Long ago and far away...

9.15.2005 - Memory Lane Dept. - Back in April of 1995 I was working at the Internet Multicasting Service in Washington, D.C. We were experimenting with uses for this crazy new thing called the Internet, and in 1995, particularly the 'world-wide-web', using an early browser called 'Mosaic'. The boss-man at IMS, Carl Malamud, was always great about getting all the new toys to work with (and tolerating my crazy ideas for content). About that time he picked up a gizmo that really knocked me out: a digital camera. It was a solution looking for a problem because for the first time it became possible to take a photograph and get it online within just a few minutes. I decided to put my nascent HTML skills to work to try to post about an event while it was still in progress.

So here's the link to: Earth Day XXV on the Mall. I interviewed representatives of several environmental groups that had tents on the Mall that day. You'll find a menu to the various pages at the bottom. Use your browser's back arrow to return to the main menu. Try not to laugh, the web was at the time a frontier wilderness.

Yes, I did get the site posted that very day, April 22, 1995, though it was past 10:00 p.m. Almost like blogging, wouldn't you say? And no, the "World Wide Cobweb" thingie wasn't originally on the page, it was added later, to indicate that the site wasn't being updated. It's pretty amazing its still online at all. Old webbies will recall that all websites had the same background color in those days, a sort of battleship grey. That's why the graphics have a grey background; at the time they would have matched the page color. My favorite page? SeaSun Power Systems, the demo with the light run by the Gilligan bike made a lasting impression on me.

Tondu proceedings demonstrate lack of public faith in Indiana regulatory protections

9.14.2005 - The coverage of the Tondu Corp's proposal for a coal gasification plant near New Carlisle raises some interesting issues. Review of the online literature suggests that coal gasification technology holds promise for cleaner coal-fired electrical generation, including opportunities for C02 capture. We all use electricity, and at least coal doesn't have to be imported.

No doubt some simply don't want to see any more coal fired plants constructed. There's appeal to that point of view, we certainly don't need any more pollution (and in particular, mercury) in our region and burning coal to make electricity somehow screams 'rust-belt'. On the other hand I doubt that it's realistic to hope we can get enough generation capacity out of solar arrays and windmills in the short run -- and windmills have their own environmental issues. Nukes anyone? In any case, I certainly don't think the public is ready for rolling blackouts.

The really unfortunate thing I see when I read these accounts is that, right or wrong, Indiana's administrative agencies charged with environmental protection have limited credibility with the public.

More than anything else, the public needs to believe that permitting agencies like IDEM are scientifically credible, and truly committed to protecting the public health and welfare. To a large extent entities like IDEM were created to speak on behalf of the public's desire to live in a clean, healthy and non-stinky place, and the public's recourse if the permitting authority allows a harmful activity is limited. Many people have little faith that the permitting process will protect their interests.

This loss of credibility erodes the entire process. It's entirely possible that Tondu's plant would be a model of progressive technology, offering significant reductions in emissions and improvement in efficiency over our ageing electrical generation capacity. But if a spokeperson for IDEM reported that to be the case, would anybody believe it? As one South Bend resident told me -- they promised us the ethanol plant wouldn't smell, but it does.

It's a point I've made here many times before, and will no doubt make it again. Environmentalists need to 'support their local regulator', because they are the ones with the power and (hopefully) the expertise to take on these complex issues. That means voting for candidates that will bring in and retain top quality, highly skilled and highly committed people for Indiana's regulatory agencies. It's not just environmentalists that need to support their local regulator. Industry should support a highly skilled and diligent regulatory staff too, so that when an IDEM staff person appears at a meeting and says, for example, 'this is a good concept, it will produce more electricity with lower emissions, including reductions in C02 and mercury', at least some of the public will be swayed. But folks, you've got to earn that kind of respect.

Who are you calling 'livestock friendly'?

Indiana details plan to double pork production - Speaking at Midwest Pork Conference in Indianapolis Indiana Dept./Ag dir Andy Miller says 'We have to educate the rest of the state on just how important livestock expansion, in particular pork production, is' -- describes concept of 'Livestock Friendly' designation wherein incentives would flow to counties to adopt planning and zoning rules favorable to CAFO installations. [9.1.2005 - Truitt - Brownfield - link via kemplog] - comment Okay, educate me, but I'm skeptical about this 'Livestock Friendly' designation, I can't help but suspect it will basically be a way for Indianapolis corporate types to pick off lower income counties to do the dirty work by offering their harried public officials a few goodies. I'll bet they won't be putting any CAFOs in Fishers. Or Granger. Or any other Dick and Jane Republican sprawl-burb. Ah, but if they did -- now that would be educational.

Here's another interesting point about this piece -- note this statement by Mr. Miller: 'If a producer wants to put up a new farrowing building then he should be able to get the same kind of credits a company who puts up a new warehouse does.' Perhaps that's true, but the statement also supports one of the key points of those questioning the easy siting of CAFOs throughout currently unspoiled rural areas. These are animal factories, industrial facilities, and can't be considered farming in the traditional sense. Certainly they have impacts on neighbors that are much more onerous than say, a corn field.

One more thing, and this is admittedly kind of a cheap shot. Check out this link to the Indiana Dept. of Ag's website links page. A tall outdoorsy blonde lass with two fine looking cattle out in a nice green field; not a CAFO (or even a hog) in sight. Very educational, don't you think?

Also, Marcia Oddi's Indiana law blog's recent entry: Environment - Several stories today has links about a CAFO issue in Richmond, and the EPAs action regarding Cargill's facilities including one in Hammond. [9.2.2005]

Death or Climax?

8.30.2005 - I focus on local and regional issues that involve the environment, not for lack of interest in national or global issues, but because those issues are well covered elsewhere. But lately, in the wake of the whole 'Death of Environmentalism' debate, I've been wondering just how well they really are being covered. No -- to be more blunt, I've been thinking that the 'Death of Environmentalism' essay is correct that environmentalism has become fractured and somewhat disfunctional as a movement, but I'm not sure why I should care. As Paul McCartney once observed, 'the movement you need is on your shoulders.'

We don't need a movement and we certainly don't need generational finger pointing. We need a more environmentally benign and sustainable lifestyle. Much of this is on our shoulders as individuals. Beyond individual action (e.g. leaving your car parked once in a while), we need to reform and rebuild institutions to reflect current and future realities relating to population demographics, globalism, technology and resource limitations and allocations. We need a practical strategy for accomplishing that end, not a bunch of ideological clap-trap.

I strongly encourage everyone who is interested in environmental and development policy to follow this link and think seriously about its message:

The Climax of Humanity - 'Demographically and economically, our era is unique in human history. Depending on how we manage the next few decades, we could usher in environmental sustainability -- or collapse' [September 2005 - Musser - Scientific American]

backgrounder - Just in case you haven't seen it yet, here's the now-famous essay The Death of Environmentalism - [October 2004 - Shellenberger and Nordhaus] - micro-review - thought-provoking, but of limited practical value.

Indiana Comprehensive Wildlife Strategy

Here's a good concept, at least in theory: protect enough critical habitat in a systematic way so that organisms don't become endangered. To that end here's the Indiana Comprehensive Wildlife Strategy [DJ Case]- here's a quote that provides an overview:

'There are hundreds of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife species in Indiana. The vast majority of them are located on private land and some are in very inaccessible places like caves, wetlands, and large rivers. Often we don’t know everything about the distribution, life history, and conservation needs of these species.'

'Therefore, the DNR Division of Fish and Wildlife is developing a strategy that focuses on habitats and communities that sustain all wildlife species. Technical experts are identifying the species with the greatest need of conservation efforts, grouping them by the habitats upon which they depend, and identifying representative species that we can most efficiently monitor.'

'Habitat management, in the context of this discussion, is a common and widely used wildlife management tool in Indiana. Any species-specific habitat management technique can have impacts ranging from strongly positive for the target species to strongly negative for other species that inhabit the same habitats. Access to information about the potential for these impacts is critical. The strategy will identify the management needs of those species and their habitats for which the state doesn’t have adequate funding and will help prevent more species that rely on these areas from becoming threatened or endangered in the future. By focusing on habitats and communities, the strategy will ensure, in the most practical and cost-effective manner, that all species will be conserved.'

A quick look at: Possibilities Unbound

If you're interested in Indiana ag policy, you'll want to check out Possibilities Unbound: The Plan for 2025, a .pdf detailing the Daniels' admin vision for the future of agriculture in Indiana.

According to the study the key sectors with potential for growth are: hardwood lumber, grains and oilseeds, and pork. The policy calls for a doubling of pork production, increased management (and presumably harvest) of hardwoods on both public and private lands, and efforts to develop more food processing in-state. I'm not going to attempt to review the whole document here, but simply to highlight some issues I found interesting, or controversial.

I wondered, how is doubling pork production consistent with working to reduce Indiana's high rate of obesity? To me this points out a disconnect between mere lip service and actual policy. I'm not picking on pork here, but isn't it pretty clear Hoosiers are fat because they eat too much meat and sweet stuff, and not enough fruits and vegetables? If state policy is really to improve eating habits, forget about doubling the number of pigs. Work instead to foster local production of fruits and vegetables and find ways to help farmer's markets and community supported agriculture projects get wholesome and varied foods from Indiana's land to its dinner plates.

I also wondered, is it going to be state policy to depress land values for the benefit of ag producers? This is hinted at (see page 25), but not really made explicit. I'll be really blunt on this one: a government policy intended to depress land values for the benefit of a particular production sector is just plain wrong. I would argue that increasing property values are one of the most reliable signs that government is doing a good job, as it indicates an increasing demand for an asset inextricably linked to the locality.

It's clear that the Daniels administration eschews any sentimental attachment to the family farmer. In fact, it seems that the policy is aimed at promoting larger, more corporate operations. Conversely, the policy does recognize that there are rural land-intensive operations that aren't exactly farms -- hunting preserves, dude ranches and bed and breakfasts get mentioned. That's a positive thing, in my opinion. The idea, deeply rooted it seems in Hoosier culture, that all rural lands are farmlands, is obsolete.

Recognizing the diversity of rural land uses is just a start. Now the question is whether the Daniels administration is willing to recognize that a rural bed and breakfast owner has a reasonable expectation that their land use will be respected. That means that the bed and breakfast's owners can invest in developing their business without running the risk of having it made worthless when a 30,000 hog CAFO moves in upwind.

Another thing troubled me: the reference to the need for a 'science based' regulatory approach. Nobody is more pro-science than me, but this sounds like it could be a sneaky way of setting an agenda to the detriment of many legitimate interests and values. Science, I would argue, is not a thing, it's a process or method, involving systematic observation, experimentation, peer review of results, and replicability. It's a tremendously useful intellectual process, but that doesn't mean it's the only process that's relevant to policy decisions.

Land use regulation involves issues not readily amenable to the scientific method, including community values, ethics, esthetics, and law. Does 'science based' regulation apply to the siting of an 'adult book store'? Not really. Is the fierce resistance to same-sex unions science based? Hardly. Are zoning decisions about the siting of an industrial facility based on a scientific analysis? Typically they are not. Why would agriculture operate under a different set of rules? Most likely as a way of hobbling critics.

Here's another issue the report raises, and it's a subject where some science-based analysis would be a good idea; making the right decision with respect to investment in bio-energy products like ethanol and bio-diesel. I heat my office with bio-diesel, so I'm not against it, but I am skeptical as to whether it'll prove to create a net gain in energy production and costs. I hope the administration will also be skeptical and will apply the same kind of 'science-based' analysis to this question that it would to a regulation opposed by ag-industry lobbyists.

I found the link to the 'Possibilities Unbound' on Kemplog, here's a link to an interesting current entry there: Pigs Front and Center - More about CAFOs, particularly in Wayne Co., from Kemplog.

CRP: buying time

In The CRP: Paying Farmers Not to Farm Dan Charles looks at some of the criticisms being made of the Conservation Reserve Program, wherein the government pays rent on property taken out of commodity production and planted with one of several approved types of vegetation. [7.11.2005 - Charles for All Things Considered - NPR]

It's a worthwhile read, and I found the map of CRP acreage especially interesting. At the corporeal Big Eastern we have a couple of hundred acres enrolled in CRP. In my opinion, it's tremendously beneficial environmentally.

The radio piece is intended to be entertaining, and therefore it can't possibly explain the details of this sophisticated program - here's a link to the official USDA CRP page.

At our place, we have a CRP hardwood reforestation project, planted with 100,000 acorns that we hand collected mostly on the property, along with thousands of machine planted 'mast producing' hardwoods on approximately 55 acres. Mast producing means the trees will eventually produce acorns, seeds and nuts like hickories and walnuts, which are critical elements in the food chain; many of these trees are also slow-growing.

In addition there's about 60 acres of prairie plantations which include numerous species of forbs (prairiespeak for wildflowers), both from purchased seeds and from seeds we collected on native prairies on our property. And while the bison no longer roam at bigeastern (much to the relief of passing motorists), there are plenty of herbivores grazing the area from grasshoppers to deer to turkeys. There's an additional 17 acres of mixed hardwoods and pines. Riparian areas have filter strips and there's cool season grass areas (basically that's a hayfield, and the closest thing we have to 'doing nothing'). It hasn't all been smooth sailing: our woodland restorations are progressing very slowly due to the repeated droughts we've experienced in the past few years. Without CRP none of these projects would have been possible.

With CRP we're not out there doing it all alone, creating a desert island in the midst of endless cornfields. Many other landowners are enrolled and CRP projects dot the landscape here in Starke County. It's easy to see raptors cruising between them on sunny-day thermals.

Maybe CRP is contributing to population out-migration from North Dakota, but it certainly doesn't do that here in Indiana. On the contrary, it makes the countryside more varied and richer in pretty things like flowers, butterflies and, well, just the wind across big bluestem on a fine autumn day. [see Dan Charles' companion piece about the greening of ag subsidies in Europe: EU Shifts Subsidies from Crops to Land Stewardship - maybe Indiana is a bit more like England than it is like North Dakota]

And another thing: the article says it pays 'farmers' not to farm. Generally true, perhaps, but not technically accurate. It pays landowners to establish a land use practice other than commodity production agriculture. Landowners are not always farmers, and farmers often farm land they are leasing. This isn't completely a farming issue, in my opinion. It's a land use issue, and it's about finding a way to increase the amount of fallow land on the landscape using local people to manage it.

More troubling is the Puritan work-ethic that underlies this concept. The Tao Te Ching says 'if nothing is done, all will be well.' This ancient Chinese wisdom says alot about CRP. As we've seen, under CRP landowners are required to establish a practice (e.g. reforestation) so it's not quite doing nothing, but it's true that it will take a long time for that woods to develop. In the meantime the landowner continues to get tax bills; I also get drainage bills. (Meanwhile my trees whither from drought!) The CRP helps defray the cost of planting the trees, and also helps pay the taxes -- and my ditch assessments -- while the trees get established. We need to get over the idea that unless somebody is out there driving around on a tractor burning fossil fuels that it's tantamount to neglect. Sometimes nothing is exactly what needs to be done.

There are many ingredients to restoring a piece of nature: seeds, soil, fungus, sun, rain, winter ice, prairie fires, herbivores and insects. Some you can buy, some you can control, and some you can't. But there's one ingredient that is more precious than all the others. Time. It takes time, years of time. CRP buys some of that time.

More Kelo

A follow-up to my prior comments about the Kelo v. New London decision: one of my current favorites among Indiana blogs, Masson's blog, posted on this subject with his usual wit and insight. Doug's post is a nice counter-argument to what I said. He argues that the Kelo decision is sufficiently limited because the use of eminent domain power was part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan in a community that sorely needs some redev action. These are good points and if the application of the Kelo decision is limited to its facts, it won't cause any widespread hardships.

However, decisions are all-too-often applied beyond their facts, and I think that's especially likely when the decision is an application of deference to local government officials. The part I found most alarming was the implication that the local government could use its eminent domain powers to take land for the purpose of building up the tax base. That bothers me, though I can't point to a specific constitutional argument supporting my feelings.

This is a rare situation where I find that I'm more in line with the conservatives than the liberals -- and that set me to thinking as to why that would happen. I think it's this: liberalism has come to be strongly (perhaps too strongly) associated with urban opinions. The higher population densities in urban situations may to some extent justify weaker property rights, and possibly even weaker individual rights. There are activities you can engage in 'out on the range' that simply aren't acceptable in the city. I've found myself at odds with urban liberal friends (with whom I mostly agree on policy issues) on the issue of gun ownership, but then out in the country it's a time honored amusement to take your 22s out 'plinkin' -- it's fun, but you probably shouldn't try it in a major metropolitan area.

To me, constitutional analysis starts out quite simply. The constitution says you have the right to have a gun, so you do. The constitution says you have the right to speak freely, so you do. The consitution says eminent domain power can only be used to take for a public use, and that's exactly what it means, even if it would be more convenient (and would generate more tax dollars) for local government to get those pesky landowners off their grandfathers place so developers can get some luxury waterfront condos installed. Sure, the analysis gets more complicated as prior precedent is considered, but I'm suspicious of constitutional analysts who always end up at a typical liberal or a typical conservative conclusion. So, in terms of the general public welfare, the Kelo decision has a lot to say for it, but I'm still concerned that it's a close case that ultimately undermines the public use requirement.

Kelo decision undermines 'public use' requirement in takings clause law

6.23.2005 - Late posting - the US Supreme Court made an important ruling today interpreting the 'takings' clause:

Court widens scope of property seizure - in Kelo v. New London case SCOTUS rules 5-4 that local gov. can take property with intention of turning it over to private developer. [6.23.2005 - Richey - Christian Science Monitor] - here's another account: Justices, 5-4, Back Seizure of Property for Development [6.23.2005 - Stout - NYTimes] - here's the official opinion of the court for Kelo v. New London 04-108.

commentary - I can understand the high court's hesitance to substitute their judgment for that of local officials in this locale specific area of the law. No doubt local officials are better situated to know what's needed in their communities, and hopefully most local officials will conduct themselves in a manner intended to promote the public interest. However, the result is yet another step in the trend where the wealthy and powerful can get whatever they want and the other 99.5% of us get a couple of crumbs. In my opinion, the function of the law is to protect individuals from excessive intrusion by government, and I think that certainly was the intent of the takings clause. I think this decision weakens one of a private property owners most important rights -- the right to sell or not to sell.

The Kelo case deals with homes in an area not considered blighted. The homes were simply in the way of a proposed development and some of their owners declined to sell out. Some of the homes had been held by their families for generations. Unfortunately, a family's intensely personal connection with their home place isn't going to figure in to the property's appraised market value.

The fact that government can take your property (with compensation) by eminent domain is nothing new, but use of the eminent domain power was limited to public use projects like highways, airports or parks. Broadening eminent domain power to distinctly private projects deemed to be broadly in the public interest in terms of general ecomonic development, or enhancing the tax base, threatens to make government a super-real estate broker for favored private interests and leaves smaller property owners with a vastly diminished bargaining position. The problem may be particularly acute for 'undeveloped' properties -- you know, places with trees and wildflowers, not yet paved over. A lifetime, even generations, of stewardship might have little effect but to make the property cheaper for the fatcats to acquire through government's vast power.

Justice O'Connor says it well in her dissent: 'The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result.'

It seems that most commentators I see online agree with the Court's decision, and perhaps it is the correct one under the particular facts of the case. However, the consitution limits governmental takings to property destined to be dedicated to a 'public use'. A public park is a public use. A public highway is a public use. A government building is a public use. A luxury hotel complex is 180 degrees opposite from a public use, and it's my opinion the founders intended to prohibit just that very application of eminent domain.

6.3.2005 -

Ruling Vacates Upper Elkhart River Regulated Drain

Following is a somewhat simplistic overview about a ruling in a case I'm working on: Acres, Inc. et al and Dir. Indiana DNR v. Joint Noble-LaGrange Co. Drainage Board, in Noble County Circuit Court. I'd prefer to link to a press article about it, but none have yet appeared online and I think it's worthy of note.

On May 26, 2005 Special Judge James R. Heuer vacated and set aside an order of the Joint Noble and LaGrange County Drainage Board that would have converted the entire upper Elkhart River watershed into a regulated drain. The joint drainage board had approved a petition by the Noble County Commissioners to convert the Middle, North, and South Branches of the Elkhart River into a regulated drain.

I represented a coalition of parties opposed to the project including riparian landowners, several municipal governmental entities located in the watershed, and the ACRES, Inc. land trust. The parties opposing the conversion believed the project was unneeded, would increase taxes, and would cause irreparable harm to wetlands and the riparian corridor in the watershed, which includes several dedicated state nature preserves. The private landowners I represented argued in addition that the proposed ditch easement would constitute an unconstitutional taking of their property without compensation.

The State of Indiana, represented by deputy Atty. Gen'l Sierra Cutts, also opposed the project, citing potential harm to the nature preserves and arguing that to the extent work was needed on the river's branches, it could be done cooperatively without turning the upper Elkhart River's branches into ditches.

The joint drainage board contended that the rivers' surface water elevations have risen as much as three feet within the past couple of decades and without dredging and other intervention will continue to do so, threatening to cause a major flood. The opponents of the projects disputed the claim that the rivers have been rising precipitously and on their behalf I presented official government gauge data gathered over several decades showing no discernable long range trends in either average surface water elevation or maximum flood crests.

Judge Heuer vacated the regulated drain relying mainly on two issues:
    (1) Under the Indiana Drainage Code a petition to create a regulated drainage district of the scope of the one in question (192,500 acres) should generally be based upon a landowner initiated petition. The court noted that while the statute authorizes the commissioners to intiate a petition to 'provide for drainage of a public roadway', the Noble County Commissioners' petition had exceeded the bounds of that authority when it merely listed all the public roads and streets in the watershed as in need of drainage. IC 36-9-27-61(5) requires that projects must address a particular need in the 'best and cheapest' manner, and therefore the county commissioners authority is limited to projects to address a particular road drainage issue; and,
    (2) The joint drainage board failed to comply with the Indiana Nature Preserves Act at I.C. 14-31-1-15(a)(4) providing that a dedicated nature preserved 'may not be taken for any other use except other public use: (a) after a finding by the [Natural Resources Commission] of the existence of an imperative and unavoidable necessity for the other public use; and (b) with the approval of the governor.' No such findings were present in the record of the joint drainage boards proceedings.

The Court remanded the case to the joint drainage board for 'further proceedings consistent with the findings and order of this Court.'

4.14.2005

Indiana gets into CREP

Indiana signs CREP agreement - Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) will bring fed dollars to Indiana to help landowners improve management practices on up to 7k-ac ag lands in target watersheds including the Tippecanoe w/ 10 yr target of enrolling 26.5k-ac [4.13.2005 - Truit - Brownfield] - here's FSA's CREP Q&A page - for a previous related entry see TNC supports CREP proposal for watershed protection and TNC's Tippecanoe River Project offers incentives for conservation tillage in the bigeastern archives.

Chad R. Watts of TNC's Tippecanoe River Project writes saying:

This was a big step for Indiana CREP. This signing was a significant show of support for the Indiana CREP Program, and is the culmination of 4 years of work between many public agencies and private entities that have been working to make this program a reality. The document that the Lt. Governor signed was the agreement between the State and USDA that will set the stage for CREP to be authorized for use in Indiana. This agreement that she signed will soon be forwarded to USDA in Washington DC for their approval. Once approved by USDA, there will likely be a large signing ceremony that will initiate the Indiana CREP with both the Governor and the Secretary of Agriculture.

At this time, there is no signup for CREP in Indiana as these agreements still need to be approved by USDA, but this is a big step towards getting the program authorized for use in Indiana, and this agreement is a very important piece of the puzzle that will enable that to happen. The Tippecanoe River is one of the three priority watersheds where producers will be able to sign up for CREP and take advantage of the additional incentives that the program brings to enroll their land in conservation uses for the protection of water quality. It is a very important piece of the overall protection strategy that will help to protect the Tippecanoe River, and we applaud the Daniels administration and the Lt. Governor for taking this big step in making this commitment to bring this program to both the Tippecanoe River and the other Indiana priority watersheds.

The Nature Conservancy in the Tippecanoe River is adding additional incentives to the CREP. We are adding provisions where producers who incorporate forest into their buffer areas within designated priority areas can either voluntarily enroll these areas in permanent easements that will protect these sensitive areas in perpetuity, or voluntarily increase the length of their 15-year CREP contracts to 25 years with additional management agreements. If producers choose to exercise either of these options on their CREP enrollments, they would be eligible for additional incentives that are intended to encourage the adoption of these options. These two enhancements will give producers additional options that are above and beyond what the normal CREP or continuous CRP contracts traditionally provide, and they will help to leverage the CREP funds from USDA to get more protection on the land and greater coverage of necessary conservation practices.

After the No-Gas Weekend

Finally a brief note about the no-gas weekend, mentioned in a couple of earlier entries. Yes, my wife and I actually did the no-gas weekend [6:00 p.m. Friday to 8:00 Monday, as it turned out]. Basically, I'd have to say it was uneventful, not difficult and more fun than trouble. The main effect was that it motivated me to dust off our bikes, pump up their tires, grab our old backpacks and get on the road with pedal power. I think we put in about 20 miles or so over the weekend, so that wasn't too ambitious. The weather couldn't have been nicer.

I live in a Victorian house in an old part what was once a rail town, and that made it pretty easy for me. My office and most anything I'd really need from a store are easily accessible by bike, without braving any crazy traffic. The place was created to allow people to get around by horse and buggy, bicycle and walking (and hasn't changed all that much), so going carless for a couple of days demonstrated a hidden charm of this and other old town neighborhoods. If you're looking to reduce your reliance on motor vehicles, a great place to start is to live in a place that was laid out before the automobile.

Sure, it was only a couple of days, but it was a positive experience. The next step is to leave the car parked without planning it as some kind of event. It all reminded me a little bit about an entry I made here way back in January of 2001, The Off Button.

I haven't heard from any readers who tried the no-gas weekend, but perhaps it's catching on quietly...Stocks Seen Higher; Oil Prices Fall. [4.11.2005 - Reuters]

No Gas Weekend II

3.31.2005 - A couple of days ago I rolled out the idea of the No Gas Weekend, and so-far I've mainly been hearing from family members reminding me about my many obligations, all of which are worthy but all of which also it seems, involve burning a bit of 'the juice'. Could it be that the NGW looks a lot like a 'no-work weekend'? Well, then it's not all bad anyway.

But the idea isn't to stock up on beer and burgers and veg out in front of the telly for fifty-odd hours straight, although that would qualify as an NGW. The idea is to try to maintain something close to normalcy without burning gas.

When gas prices hit two bucks and seemed destined to stay there, my wife and I invested in a Honda Civic. Not a hybrid -- that technology is a little advanced for where I live -- but the 36.4 mph (real mileage, I measured it) really helps. But I still need to put gas into the Jeep Cherokee that I use in the rugged conditions on the corporeal Big Eastern. Yes folks, some people really need 4-WD, and I'm one of them. We're talking a simple 6 cylinder Jeep, but it's getting expensive to drive. Then I look around in a parking lot and most the vehicles are bigger, some much bigger. Most of the people driving them aren't exactly svelte either.

I spent a about ten days in Amsterdam a few years ago. The Dutch get by just fine without spending half their lives in a car. I didn't get in a car once except to and from the airport. I rode a bike and those electric trams that run around the city, and walked. It was great, but then it's a beautiful city scaled to the human hoof. In Amsterdam it's not unusual to see people in their seventies and eighties bicyling. The bikes aren't fancy either, mostly they're rusty, beat-up junkers, and most have been stolen a few times to boot. But, owing a lot to all that cycling, the people look wonderful and Amsterdam's space is devoted to people, not parking.

When I went to college at IU Bloomington, my first car, a monstrous Buick Estate Wagon with a 455 4-barrel carb known to all as the Wagonious opecus, sat gathering dust for weeks on end. The car was great to get me (and six or seven others) out of town, but in town I left it parked as much as possible, and got along just fine.

So the main goal of the NGW is to continue normal life without burning gas every day, and to make a teeny-tiny step toward a long-term change in lifestyle. Another purpose is to make a social statement that it's okay to leave your car at home, even if you have a perfectly valid driver's license, insurance and everything. Right now I'm intending to try on the weekend of April 9th and 10th. If I don't make it through the weekend, no biggee, I'll try again. At least it'll motivate me to get my bike fixed.

Oh, and speaking of addictions, this weekend I'll be burning the juice like the red-blooded American I am.

March 30, 2005

The Public Can Help Protect Indiana's Wildlife Legacy - by Jim Sweeney

Among the highest priorities of the Izaak Walton League of America is the conservation of the nation's wildlife and its rare and endangered species. The State of Indiana has two programs that allow you to be an active participant in their conservation.

The Indiana Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Wildlife Diversity Section, (WDS) is the only state program that focuses on rare and endangered species and is funded primarily by donations.

Most of the $439,000 raised in 2004 was contributions by Indiana taxpayers that elected to donate all or part of their income tax refund through the voluntary check off on their tax returns. The balance of the income comes from direct donations by individuals, organizations, and businesses.

Look at some of the accomplishments of the WDS over last few years.

Once extirpated from Indiana, the bald eagle was the first reintroduction program and has been very successful. There were 44 active nests throughout Indiana last year with seven new breeding pairs that fledged 85 eaglets. Peregrine falcons had 10 active nests in Indiana fledging 30 young around the state.

The river otter program has been incredibly successful. Otters were released at 12 locations since 1995 and in just 8 years have been confirmed living in 70 counties.

In addition, studies are under way that will determine the status of such animals as the hellbender (a large salamander,) lake sturgeon, bobcats, songbirds, frogs and toads, and all the mussels of Indiana streams and rivers.

This program is producing amazing results for the citizens of Indiana on not a lot of money.

Much of the responsibility of conserving wildlife in Indiana falls on the IDNR yet less than four percent of the state is publicly owned. This number includes federal, state, and county levels of government, state and national parks, state and national forest land, fish and wildlife areas, etc., even military bases.

In 1991, the Indiana General Assembly created the Heritage Trust to increase the amount of publicly owned land in Indiana. So far, over 33,000 acres have been protected in 57 counties. The Environmental License plate has been around for a while now and is still the most popular vanity plate in Indiana.

The only source of funds for the IHT is the license plate money. There has been no general fund support for years but matching IHT funds with other agency grants and private funds have produced some great projects throughout the state.

Due to the Indiana budget problems it is likely that these programs will continue to be dependant on donations from the private sector.

So, if you are a teacher or a scout leader, a local conservation club or just a lover of nature, you can help these programs. Be part of bringing ospreys and trumpeter swans back to Indiana and protect hundreds of other species by donating to Endangered Wildlife Fund. Look for the eagle logo on your tax form and make a tax-deductible donation to the WDS or send them a check outright.

Tell your friends, neighbors, and coworkers to buy the blue "Sun and Eagle" license plate and help start a new nature preserve or buy an addition to a state park or a public hunting area.

In these tough economic times the private sector is needed more than ever to make these programs happen. You can make a difference.

Send donations to Indiana Endangered Wildlife Fund, 402 W. Washington, W273, Indianapolis, IN 46204. For more information visit the Wildlife Diversity Section web page.

Jim Sweeney
Endangered Species Committee Indiana Division
Izaak Walton League of America
1773 Selo Dr.
Schererville, IN 46375
219.322.7239

[Bigeastern.com provides an open forum for responsible viewpoints relevant to environmental, conservation, and quality of life issues relevant in Northern Indiana. Bigeastern is not affiliated with the IWLA. To submit your opinions or releases send me e-mail.]

the No-Gas Weekend

Here's an idea I've been thinking about: the 'No-Gas Weekend' -- a whole weekend, from the close of work on Friday until midnight Sunday without use of a motorized vehicle of any sort. No car, no truck, no gasoline powered mowers -- and no riding in anybody else's either. Getting somebody else to run errands for you is cheating, but less so if they are (a) from another household and (b) making the trip anyway. Having something (e.g. a pizza) specially delivered to you is in the grey area.

Now, the idea of the NGW isn't to cut fuel use, think of it more as a practice session for coping without 'the juice' should it become necessary. It's even sort of a game. And, of course, if there's an emergency you can use your car, but then you failed.

It's okay to stock up on necessary items during the week before-hand, as I said the idea isn't that it's going to cut consumption a heckuva lot. It's okay to run electrical contrivances; around here they probably run mostly on coal anyway. Electrical trains are okay. Well, okay, any train, even if its a diesel. Trains are good. Obviously, you're going to want a bicycle and if you're coordinated maybe a pair of roller skates too.

The NGW isn't any particular weekend, but it would probably be best to try it for the first time in warm weather. It'll be hard enough without fighting the elements.

Nor is the NGW intended to be any kind of public demonstration, a strike back at big oil, OPEC or anything dramatic like that. Your arms are way to short to box with them. It's more of a personal test. Can you do it? What part did you enjoy? What were the biggest problem issues that you encountered? Did it give you any ideas for coping without gasoline powered conveyances?

And for those of you that laugh at the dinky little town where I live (and others of its ilk), I'll say this. I'll bet it'll be easier here than in the 'burbs.

I'll try it sometime soon and tell you how it went. If any readers try it, I hope you'll consider sharing your experiences.

Clearcutting issue re-surfaces on the Yellow River

The Marshall County Drainage Board is, once again, discussing the possibility of clear-cutting at least one bank of the Yellow River: Confusion found over tree cutting - Current Marshall Co. DB members seek review of tapes from earlier meeting to clarify decision regarding clearcutting of banks of Yellow River [3.23.2005 - Ochstein - SoBndTrib]

This issue has been the subject of prior commentaries here on bigeastern, two of which are available in the archives: Drainage Board says no intention to clear-cut at heron rookery on Yellow River recounting a report from Joe Skelton to the effect that the Marshall Co. DB had indicated it wouldn't disrupt a great blue heron rookery on the Yellow River. [5.18.2004 - Lucas - bigeasternotes] - For more about the heron rookery see an earlier commentary: Drainage Board clear-cut threatens heron rookery on Yellow River - including photos of the rookery by Joe Skelton. [5.10.2004 - Lucas - bigeasternotes]

Riverbank clearing seems a bit barbaric to me, but there may be a need to do it in a few places. I've followed the course the Yellow River throughout Marshall County -- there are stretches in the upstream portion where it's little more than a medium sized ditch. Of course, the health of headwaters is important to a river, but clearcutting in these areas isn't necessarily too shocking assuming the banks are properly stabilized.

On the other hand, there are other stretches of the Yellow River, like the one shown at the top left of this page, where the river is quite scenic and has plenty of fall too. It's very difficult to understand why these beautiful areas need to be ravaged at taxpayer expense. If the landowner wants to cut their trees, that's their business, and their trees too. If property owners want to preserve the natural beauty of their riverfront land, all the better.

While drainage boards may have the authority under the Indiana Drainage Code to clearcut along a river against the wishes of the landowner (provided it's a regulated drain), that doesn't mean that they should. Drainage Boards ought to demand really persuasive evidence to so severely interfere with the landowners wishes. Environmental issues aside, real estate 'with a view' is at a premium in Indiana, so spoiling beauty has a major economic downside. And if we really want young, educated and active people, to stay in Indiana we need to promote places like the Yellow River for canoeing and kayaking, not rough them up with bulldozers. Anglers will note that the Yellow supports smallmouth bass and northern pike.

Anyway, is clearcutting really necessary? If there is a sediment problem, the Yellow River is certainly large enough to support a floating dredge in all but the uppermost reaches. Use of a floating dredge would eliminate the need to destroy the riparian forest.

Here's a photo of the Yellow River in spring (200k) for download. Nice, eh?

3.17.2005 -

A think-tank in every column and a three-eyed fish on every plate.

Today let's examine the anti-reg take on the mercury emissions debate, with this article as a point of departure: The problems confronting fresh water supplies - outdoors writer supports need for conservation easement, argues that eating fish offers health benefits and that cutting mercury emissions isn't needed citing CEI study. [3.17.2005 - Maciulis - the Star]

Mr. Maciulis' statements about fish consumption are contrary to official recommendations, and possibly dangerously so. The trouble is he's relying on a study that doesn't address the problem of contamination in fish caught by anglers in our region. The study he cites, Fishy Advice, the Politics of Methylmercury in Fish and Mercury Emissions [CEI] largely deals with methylmercury in commercially caught salt water fish (e.g. canned tuna).

But we're not talking about the ocean, we're talking about the fresh waters of the Kankakee, Lake Michigan, and the Tippecanoe, and our many natural inland lakes. The CEI study doesn't deal with this issue, nor does it claim to: consider this passage from page 25:

"Freshwater fish tend to accumulate more mercury than saltwater fish, because the characteristics and sulfate-reducing bacteria in many freshwater bodies stimulates methylmercury production. However, less than 10 percent of fish eaten in the U.S. is of the wild freshwater variety. And, for recreationally caught fish, the EPA monitors and issues local fishing advisories when higher levels are found. So, by following advisories there is little need to worry."

One needs to consider the source of this study, the Competitive Enterprise Insitute, a pro-industry, anti-regulatory 'think-tank'. The conclusion of the study -- that 90% of Americans don't eat recreationally caught freshwater fish, so who cares how contaminated they are -- is pretty much an admission of the problem, and a bit of a paradox since one of the premises of the piece is that eating fish is good for you. Note also that CEI doesn't actually claim that mercury contamination in wild freshwater fish isn't being caused by power plant emissions, they merely gloss over it by saying the power plant emissions haven't had much effect on the ocean. If there's a study out there that doesn't link the methylmercury in Northern Indiana waters with coal-fired power plant emissions, I haven't seen it. In fact, the CEI study supports the contentions I've been making all along -- that mercury from power plant emissions is something of a regional problem and therefore it needs to be addressed on a regional basis.

Reading the CEI study, I couldn't help but picture Mr. Burns and blinky. But seriously folks, you've got to read critically, whether a study is being put out by an environmental organization or an anti-reg 'think-tank'. In any event, my Hoosier brethren, keep this in mind. Most coastal types simply don't give a dang what happens here in the Midwest, it's just fly-over country to them. We've got to learn to protect our own interests.

Sure, any plan to reduce mercury emissions needs to consider economic impact. But I'd like to be able to catch a fish and eat it too! Is that too much to ask? Yes, we're going to continue to burn coal in Indiana, no doubt at higher levels than other regions. If we invest in keeping it clean, this can be a real plus for Indiana because we'll be less dependent on imported energy sources. A buck or two a month, I suggest, is well worth it. If not a 90% decrease in mercury emissions, how about a 50% decrease? But don't tell me that tuna is okay so I shouldn't worry.

There's certainly nothing wrong with questioning regulation as being the only approach to environmental concerns; I agree with that in many situations. But it doesn't follow that there aren't any contexts in which regulation is needed. Mercury from coal fired plants is a case where regulation seems to be a necessary part of the control strategy; the industry emitting the mercury has no incentive to control those emissions because they don't have a property interest in the resource they're despoiling.

I'm sure most bigeastern readers are well aware of Indiana's extensive fish advisories (mostly for mercury or PCB contamination) but in case you want to get up-to-date, here's a link with a county clickable map: Fish for Your Health^TM - hosted by that noted enviro-activist bastion, Purdue University.

Walk away from HB 1383

The Democrat walkout at the Indiana legislature derailed (at least temporarily) numerous bills being promoted by the Daniels administration. Among the derailed bills, possibly the most important from an environmental standpoint was HB 1383 which would have prohibited Indiana's environmental rule making entities from adopting standards more stringent than federal law. If you're interested in the details of what's happening in the legislature, there's excellent coverage in Marcia Oddi's Indiana Law Blog, including a lively discussion about the history and motivations at work.

Personally, I think HB 1383 was clearly a bad idea because it ties Indiana state policies to federal policies, even if the federal policies are wrongheaded, regionally inappropriate or downright erroneous.

An example to consider is with respect to mercury emissions. Indiana burns lots of coal, and will almost certainly continue to do so. The thing about coal is that, unlike oil or gas, we have abundant supplies right here. But burning coal emits mercury, among other pollutants. Because Indiana has a concentration of coal burning plants, Indiana may well need to have stricter mercury emission rules than some other areas of the country in order to protect children from the toxic effects of methylmercury. Why would we let a senator from (say) Alaska, decide how much mercury is safe for Indiana's children?

If there's a particular environmental rule that the legislature thinks is too strict, or is unnecessarily burdensome, then they certainly have the authority to act to remedy that situation. But at least there would then be an open debate about that specific issue and that's what we, as citizens, should demand out of our elected representatives. Hopefully HB 1383 is really very truly dead.

Today's Animal Story - the interloping owl

Today's animal story - The Cabin at Lena Park wasn't rented last weekend, so my wife Corinne and I stayed out there ourselves, did a little trail construction work, and generally enjoyed the relatively mild late winter weather. On Sunday night we were enjoying a small bonfire behind the cabin when we heard the unmistakable call of a barred owl coming from the swampy forested area a hundred yards or so north of the cabin. Barred owls (Strix varia) are the common large owl in our area, and their typical call sounds a bit like who, who, who cooks for you. The woods north of the Cabin at Lena Park is prime barred owl habitat, and we've often seen not only adult owls there, but families of fledglings as well.

Another owl (with a slightly less booming voice) answered from the grove of white pines just adjacent to the cabin. The owl down in the swamp answered back, but he'd moved closer and this time was perhaps just fifty yards away.

I thought it would be amusing to get in on the chorus and echoed the swamp owl's call. Birds generally will respond to a call even if it's fairly inept so long as you get close to the right pitches and get the timing right. Immediately after I'd finished my rough, but serviceable, imitation we heard a loud rustling in the pines just a few yards away. Then both owls started a very agitated call and response with a faster tempo and distinctly rising pitch. It sounded like a couple of tropical monkeys. It ended with a crash, suggesting that one or both birds ended up on the ground. Then the woods became very quiet indeed.

A little research online confirmed that we'd heard a courship duet by a pair of these big owls, a memorable experience. According to the published materials, barred owls mate for life. Corinne and I both had the impression that my call (which I'd say sounded more like a male's call than the female's) was perceived by the male (the one who first called from down in the swamp) as being a potential rival and he'd moved right away to assert himself. I suppose there's nothing like a little competition to spice things up a bit.

2.18.2005

It depends of who's choosing.

a bit afield - I attended a CLE on Indiana Worker's Compensation law yesterday; there was one noteworthy moment. One of the presenters, well known Valparaiso attorney Dave Hollenbeck, was explaining the worker's compensation rules about medical care. In a nutshell, in a worker's compensation case, the employer pays for medical treatment for a worker injured at work, but the worker must get the treatment from a physician selected by the employer.

Atty. Hollenbeck recounted testimony presented to the Indiana legislature during the 1990s, when an overhaul of Indiana's worker's comp system was underway. Not surprisingly, the testimony of industry experts emphasized the importance of the employer's right to select the injured worker's attending physician. Obviously, this helps control costs, but while injured workers are sometimes happy with the treatment they receive from the 'company doctor', in other cases they are less than happy.

Hollenbeck said that, only days before, some of the same witnesses had testified in opposition to Hillary Clinton's national health care initiative at hearings on Capitol Hill in Washington. At those hearings, he said, the same experts had described how terrible it would be if patients lost the right to choose their own physician, a likely aspect of any socialized health care system.

I suppose it depends on 'what sort of person' is doing the choosing.

2.10.2005

Commentary: Mercury a threat to swimmers?

As much as I agree with the point of the 2.6.05 IndyStar editorial Soot gets in your eyes: Pollution threatens Hoosiers' health, I'd like to point out something about it that I think is just a bit misleading, and I think it's worth commenting on because it's a widespread misconception. The otherwise excellent piece says:

'Hoosiers have been warned not to swim in most rivers and lakes because of mercury pollution. For the same reason, fishermen are warned against eating their catches.'

I don't think the level of mercury contamination typically present in Indiana rivers and, especially lakes, is sufficient to cause any alarm as to body contact, or even the small amount of water a swimmer would likely end of drinking. The advisories are for fish consumption only (there may be exceptions, check it out yourself to be sure). See for example Facts About Illinois' Methylmercury Advisory [Illinois Dept. of Health] which says 'Contact with, or the accidental swallowing of, the water will result in minimal exposure to methylmercury.'

The problem is that the mercury becomes methylized and then it's a persistent substance in the environment. Methylmercury accumulates in animal tissues as it goes up the food chain; ironically, this can make it a bigger problem in a clean looking low nutrient (oligotrophic) lake than it is in a murky looking high nutrient (eutrophic) lake. That's because the oligotrophic lake has relatively less bio-mass for the methylmercury to concentrate in. The toxin is present at much higher levels in game fish than in the ambient water, because game fish are several levels up the food chain. So, in terms of mercury exposure, it's typically somewhat safer to eat fish that are relatively low in the food chain (say a perch) than one that's high (say, a bass).

I'll follow up on this up with a link to an expert's commentary when I find one that's clear and straightforward. [or maybe a bigeastern reader with some bio-chemistry background can help - send me e-mail]

Not to say, of course, that some northern Indiana lakes may have pollution problems that would make swimming risky, but these are more often bacterial issues related with bad septic systems, CSOs or surface runoff contaminated with excessive quantities of animal wastes. Mercury contamination in most northern Indiana lakes originates primarily from power plant emissions and therefore poses a special problem: it's not possible to control it at the watershed level. But don't let it scare you off taking a nice swim in one of our beautiful lakes.

Mí casa, pero no hay casa para usted

Zoning law - I found this zoning law story interesting, even though it's not per se an environmental issue: Planners recommend changes to definition of 'family' in city ordinance - Plymouth Plan Com. recommends amendment to definition of 'family' to limit number of unrelated persons living together to three, down from previous five. Their atty. had suggested this could be done based on a recent Indiana Appellate case (actually the Indiana Supreme Court) upholding a Bloomington ordinance with a similar definition; obviously done to help control 'student ghettos' in that most collegiate of Indiana cities. [presumably the case referred to is Dvorak v. City of Bloomington 796 N.E.2d 236 (Ind. 2003)] However rather than apply the more restrictive definition in 'residential A or residential B' areas only as suggested by the attorney, the commission decided to apply the rule to all areas, even agricultural zones. [2.3.2005 - Middaugh - Ply-Pilot] Not included in the report, but possibly of note is that Plymouth is devoid of a college, but like many light-industry oriented Indiana towns has experienced an increase in hispanic residents in recent years, who often travel to work in the frosty north while leaving their families at home. From a legal standpoint one can't help but wonder whether the holding in Dvorak v. City of Bloomington is being stretched pretty thin in this case. The Dvorak decision authorized the three person rule in a residential district, not all districts.

The right to catch a three-eyed fish

1.27.2005 - Okay, I tried to avoid this story...it just seems so silly. Yes, that's right, the proposed amendment to the Indiana constitution guaranteeing the right to hunt, fish and trap. For some reason the right to watch basketball, sit in a coffee shop whilst complaining about the government, cruise about in a gas-guzzler, or to eat excessive quantities of high-fat, high-sodium food didn't get included, despite being valued parts of our heritage. Maybe next year.

For the record here's the text of the proposed amendment

'The people have a right to hunt, fish and harvest game, which are a valued part of our heritage and shall forever be preserved for the public good, subject to laws prescribed by the General Assembly and rules prescribed by virtue of the authority of the General Assembly.'

But seriously now folks, I'm pretty much in the loop as far as environmental issues go, and there simply isn't a movement afoot to ban hunting or fishing.

Personally, I don't hunt, but I do fish. The threats to fishing are pollution and habitat degradation, not animal rights activism. The threats to hunting are loss of hunting destinations due to suburban sprawl, and chronic wasting disease in deer. A constitutional amendment seems ill suited to address these threats.

In Indiana outdoors sportsmen and environmentally concerned people are mostly working for the same goals. As a practical matter, hunting and fishing licenses are a key source of funding for natural areas preservation.

This whole deal smells like a spin factory to me; just another example of an issue designed and promoted by conservative 'think tanks' as a way to offer opportunities for some right-wing grandstanding, and leverage a schism between sportsmen and non-hunting nature enthusiasts. You know, a 'wedge issue', like gay marriage.

It's mostly a distraction from the real issues, but nevertheless it could cause some problems. At the corporeal Big Eastern I sometimes have to deal with trespassing hunters, trappers and fishermen. [no offense to quality sportsmen, you guys have met the bad apples too] Now I just know they're going to be waving around their guns saying "Son, I gotta' con-stee-tush-in-ul right to hunt!" Note that the proposed amendment does not clearly state that it's limited to areas where the person has a right to be, only that the state has a right to regulate the activity.

Anyway this sort of thing trivializes the constitution, which I take pretty seriously. On the bright side, it should generate work for lawyers (some may not see this as a plus) and might be fodder to oppose activity resulting in water pollution detrimental to game fish. I'd like it better if it said that the people have a right to 'fish that are safe to eat'.

More than enough said, and in the future I'll probably go back to glossing over this issue. It just doesn't matter that much one way or another. Here are the links:

House moves toward constitutional right to hunt and fish - [1.26.2005 - AP - Wabash P-D]

The Big Monon project

1.7.2005 - The Big Monon dredging project in Starke, Pulaski and White Counties appears to be moving closer to receiving regulatory approval, subject to some conditions intended to ameliorate environmental and water quality impacts associated with the project. There's been negligible press coverage, but a reader forwarded me a copy of a recent letter from IDEM to the joint drainage board proposing the project.

IDEM is the permitting authority on Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. [See also 327 IAC 2 and Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, and 307 of the Clean Water Act] According to the letter, the joint Starke Pulaski White DB has:

[P]roposed to dredge approximately 625,000 cubic yards of material from 29 miles of Big Monon Ditch and dredge approximately 7,000 cubic yards of material from 1.1 miles of Big Monon Creek. It is also proposed to place approximately 13,335 cubic yards of riprap and geotextile below the ordinary highwater mark of Big Monon Ditch. Additionally, it is proposed to clear the east and north bank of Big Monon Ditch for the entire 29 miles and the west and south bank up to the 100 year flood level. The stated purpose of the project is to "... provide a properly operating stormwater runoff and groundwater conveyance system for the entire watershed area by reconstructing the Big Monon Ditch to its profile and cross sections from 1940."

The Big Monon Ditch has its headwaters in southwestern Starke County and empties into the Tippecanoe River at Lake Shafer in White County. The Big Monon watershed is a sparsely populated agricultural area, including highly productive corn agricultural lands. The Tippecanoe has its headwaters in the Indiana's lakes region and its confluence with the Wabash at historical Prophetstown. The Tippecanoe is considered one of Indiana's most environmentally significant resources, as well as a popular recreational asset.

The main conditions proposed in the certification letter are:

"1. Removing the placement of riprap and geotextiles from the project plan.
2. Removing only leaning and dead trees from the West Bank from Station 16+80 to to Station 211+00 (White/Pulaski Line).
3. Development of specific plans for IDEM approval for the proposed sediment trap on Big Monon Ditch prior to its confluence with Lake Shafer."

It appears that a primary purposes of the proposed certification conditions are (1) to minimize the creation of an artificial aquatic environment in the Big Monon and (2) to control the transport of sediment into Shafer Lake (the Tippecanoe River).

Worthy of note are the passages that indicate that IDEM, along with IN-DNR Div/Wildlife will continue to monitor critical parts of the project. Prior to removal trees will be marked by a joint action with representation by the joint DB, IDEM and or IN-DNR. However, it appears that all trees and woody vegetation will be removed from both sides on the upper Big Monon, and the lower portion will retain trees on only one side.

Similarly, IDEM appears to be asserting an active role in review of sediment trap design and maintenance, including approval of sediment trap design and implementation. A sediment trap located near the confluence with the Tippecanoe at Lake Shafer will allow sediment (and perhaps some nutrients) to settle out before getting into the river.

The certification letter is not the final word on the matter; the applicant drainage board can seek modification of the conditions. I hope to find time to follow up on this next week.

bigeasternotes - 12.23.2004

CAFO's and 'The Smell of Money'

I attended a continuing legal education program in Indianapolis on Monday -- topic: Zoning and Land Use. A good program, put on by NBI, but the pervasively pro-development viewpoint of the legal profession always troubles me. One of the speakers (and a good one too) made a comment that I found particularly telling on the subject of CAFOs.

The speaker described the odor emanating from these facilities as the smell of money and commented that people living in rural areas should expect to smell that smell, and shouldn't complain that it interferes with 'having a cookout'. I have a couple of major problems with this point of view:

(1) It's condescending, even exploitative, to rural people. The person making such a comment almost invariably lives in an 'exclusive' (meaning expensive) suburb, and there is no way they would tolerate the 'smell of money' at their own home; and,
(2) CAFOs aren't an established fixture of the rural landscape, they are a new concept, so the point that we ought to expect to smell them in rural areas is factually inaccurate.

While it's true that an old-fashioned hog or horse barn would sometimes create a strong odor (mostly in spring, right after the thaw), this would be a seasonal, and generally short lived event. I grew up on a cattle farm; cattle in reasonable numbers roaming about in a field simply do not smell bad. I always found them kind of handsome looking out there, and reasonably clean creatures too given half a chance.

We've been having cookouts, going fishing, and taking walks out here in the country for generations. Yes, at times there is a little smell of 'nature's fertilizer', but typically from a manure wagon not a 200,000 gallon pit. I want to be able to plan a cookout with guests, go for a hike, or simply open my window without smelling the wastes of 50,000 hogs.

What gives the CAFO owner the right to trash his neighbors' property, and ruin their quality of life? Perhaps it is the 'smell of money' for the CAFO owner, but until they start sending me a check adequate to compensate for my loss, then it's the smell of lost money to me and the rest of the neighborhood. People choose to live in the country so they can breath fresh, sweet air, and drink pure water, and get together for a nice cookout on a fine summer day. Here's an idea -- put your CAFO in the 'burbs and you can smell the money and shop at Wal-Mart at the same time!

If CAFOs are coming, then the odor and manure disposal issues have got to be solved. Simply driving into town in a BMW and telling me that I should learn to like it doesn't work. You want to run a business, it's on you to do so without hurting others, even 'rubes' that live out in the sticks.

Oh, and just once, I'd like a CLE to include an attorney that isn't a tassle-loafer wearin' lap-dog for corporate interests. Just for variety.

bigeasternotes - 12.16.2004

Mountain lions move east

[comment sparked by] Mountain lions move east - rising deer populations spark resurgence of the mighty puma...some aren't thrilled though, and then there are those pesky 'black helicopters' [12.16.2004 - Harden - MSNBC]

Personally, I observed what I still consider to be indisputable evidence of a mountain lion in the hills of sourthern Indiana in the 1970s. No I won't say exactly where or when, and I haven't seen 'hide ner hair' of one since. But 'the truth is out there.' Back then, I mentioned my observations to a wildlife official in the area. He tried the old 'you're such a silly boy' approach. I reminded him that I was working the area doing archaeological recon for the feds, and that I had been included on the crew due to my knowledge not just of archaeology, but also plants, animals and other natural phenomena. The project description included reporting all important natural resources in the area, not just archaeological resources (for example, I also reported an impressive fossil tree-fern). My kit included a notebook and measuring tapes, and anyway I wasn't talking about seeing yeti, this was a creature native to the area. In fact, a nearby placename referenced this particular beast, known in the Hoosier hills as a 'painter', kind of a backwoods way to say 'panther'. The wildlife officer's attitude changed: okay maybe you saw something, but let's not panic people, it's not a big deal.

His point was well taken. Large parts of the west have pumas, and they're not generally common or particularly dangerous. Suitable den sites (e.g. a cave or massive hollow tree) are scarce in our region and so pumas were never all that common here; it's wolf country. Pumas are, however, capable of posing a threat to humans and livestock, that's a fact. Maybe the time is coming to deal with the reality of this and to develop methods for identifying and controlling problem individuals. There's a big plus for pumas; they're a natural approach to controlling deer populations. They're pretty much born to hunt deer. They're less likely to attack people than domestic dogs are, that's for sure. It's a cliché that a dog biting somebody isn't news -- it's just so common. But if a cougar bites somebody (or a shark, or a bear) now that's news. My point is just that risk control should be based on statistical data, not on yellowish journalism.

The article also makes reference to the whole 'black helicopter' thing (I'll not repeat the conspiracy theory here, it's mentioned in the article linked above). The funny part is that I actually have some photos of 'black helicopters'; no doubt it was some kind of military exercise, or possibly an escort for a high ranking government official. Quite impressive, I'll say that, but not sneaky. If somebody was going to take it upon themselves to reintroduce pumas, I don't think they'd draw attention to themselves by flying about in military helicopters. Those things are really loud. But when officials deny phenomena that people see, then there's a disconnect that results in lack of trust. Country folk may be a bit different than city folk, but they generally have the same number of eyeballs.

So, whatever the source, maybe big cats will be prowling these woods again in the not so distant future. Don't panic. Let's talk about it. To my fellow country dwellers -- let's not act like rubes. To my friends in wildlife management -- please don't treat country people like rubes, even though some may seem to fit the mold all too well.

bigeasternotes - 12.03.2004

Hunting safety zone proposed - with e-mail from Ind. State Senator Rose Ann Antich-Carr

On December 1st, I commented on an account in the Chesterton Tribune describing the shooting of two dogs by a hunter, apparently near Beverly Shores. The article said that State Senator Rose Antich (D - Merrillville) intends to re-introduce a bill that would ban hunting within 600 yards of a residence. My impression was that a safety zone was a good idea, but that 600 yards might be excessive (and suggested that 200 yards might be more appropriate). I wrote to Senator Antich asking for her comments and she was kind enough to reply. Here are her comments in relevant part:

Thank you for your email regarding my hunting guideline legislation. When I introduced the bill in past years, the limit banned hunting within 600 yards of a residence. The bill for the 2005 legislative session states that hunting would be banned within 200 yards of a residence.

I appreciate your attention to this important matter, and I thank you for providing me with the link to your weblog. I do want to bring to your attention the details that the dogs that were shot in the woods were not intentionally let loose, but ran into the woods after being let outside for a moment. The owner did not pursue the dogs due to the danger of being in the woods during hunting season. The owner did contact the proper authorities regarding the loose dogs, and attempted to bring them home in a manner which would be safe for her and her pets.

[last paragraph providing contact info omitted to shield information from spammers]

Sincerely,
Rose Ann Antich-Carr
State Senator
District 4

Thanks for writing, Senator Antich-Carr. The 200 yard buffer seems reasonable to me, though I'm certainly not an expert on hunting safety. I appreciate having the opportunity to clear up the record on the unfortunate shooting of the dogs; these facts paint a somewhat different picture then I gleaned from the Chesterton Trib story.

I calculated the acreage on which hunting would be banned for the current 200 yard proposed safety zone, and the prior 600 yard version. According to my calculations a circle with a radius of two hundred yards encompasses 25.96 acres. The prior proposal would have created a no hunting zone on a minimum tract described as a circle with a radius of 600 yards; according to my calculations the area encompassed in the no-hunt zone would have been 233.67 acres. I'm guessing the actual exclusion zone will end up being a bit larger, depending on how you determine the starting point (i.e. where is the residence?). For you city folk, an acre is about the size of a football field.

bigeasternotes - 11.29.2004

Turkey populations and habitat decline - e-mail from Andrew Sipocz

More from our ongoing discussion of the relative increase of wild turkeys in comparison to other ground nesting fowls. Andrew Sipocz of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department writes suggesting that one of the reasons for the increase in wild turkey numbers, at a time when almost all other ground nesters declined across much of their range, is simply that there has been a concerted effort to reintroduce them. Of perhaps more concern are Andrews observations raising questions about whether changes in land use on the Texas coast could threaten the wintering grounds of the greater eastern sandhill crane.

"Regarding the increase in wild turkey numbers, it's important to remember that the turkey was extirpated from almost all of the eastern U.S. in the 1960's and that reintroduction efforts had just begun. When I worked for the Indiana DNR in the early 1980's we were still trapping grouse and trading them to Missouri for turkeys. So it is expected that a comparison between 1960's and current turkey numbers would show an increase."

"Note that here in Texas (my current residence), there has been a substantial decrease in wild turkeys. Turkeys were never extirpated from this region and had done quite well on the large south Texas ranches where they mainly reside in riparian forests and coexisted well with cattle. Many of these ranches have recently been cleared for the production of sorgham. Thanks to our land grant University and the new drought resistant high yield sorgham strain they developed, the once inhospitible Texas climate has been made safe for sorgham. A good portion of the sandhill cranes that pass through Jasper-Pulaski Wildlife Area end up on the Texas coast. I imagine at some point there maybe a noticable decrease in their numbers unless they find a new winter home. The sorgham fields are kept in a plowed condition whenever they aren't planted to prevent moisture loss from transpiration so they provide next to no wintering bird habitat."

bigeasternotes - 10.26.2004

Pileated Woodpeckers on the Kankakee - e-mail from Jim Sweeney

I do some of the Christmas bird counts every year and we have ID'd pileateds the last two years on some Kankakee bottomland formerly owned by the Griffith Izaak Walton League chapter.

The first Christmas count we got pileateds, Chris Salberg and I were trying to keep warm after a few hours on foot so we were driving a lot of south Lake County back roads looking for hawks, horned larks, and sparrows.

Down by Schneider, we stopped at an area that should have been holding redheaded woodpeckers. Sure enough, I looked about a quarter of a mile down the Niemeyer levee with my binoculars and saw a bunch of redheads flying around.

We bundled back up and headed down the levee when Chris noticed the tell-tale hole of a pileated woodpecker. That was enough to get us all excited, but within minutes of our finding that tree, a pileated flew right by us. He landed in a snag about 30 yards away and gave us a great look at him. There must have been at least 20 redheads there too.

That moment made our day and made us forget about the cold and wind and sore feet and spilled coffee. A day like that is what bird geeks like us live for.

The DNR guy we talked to said that the pileateds almost disappeared from Indiana a century ago when the state was pretty much denuded of all its good timber. Pileated woodpeckers need trees of a certain size and they had all been cut down. Since then, the second growth has come back well enough to support good populations of them in southern Indiana. Successional growth has allowed a number of individuals to resettle in the Dunes and along the Kankakee. He thinks these birds came from Michigan and the Momence Wetlands in Illinois.

Their future should be secure for a while with all the good things happening along the river.

He also said that if it were not for the Depression starting in 1929, Indiana would have very little hardwood forest left today. So many landowners had gone bankrupt that the state became the unwilling owner of tens of thousands of acres of land that had been logged and homesteaded. Conservation interests convinced the state that it was time to start a state forest system. The rest is history.

It is interesting how some things work out.

Jim Sweeney

bigeasternotes - 10.25.2004

A pileated woodpecker at Lena Park

Yesterday I spent a fabulous morning in the woods, mainly to consider how to build a footbridge across one of the small creeks there, but also running a tally of the bird species I could observe. It was generally a pretty typical list including: Blue Jays, White Breasted Nuthatch, Cardinal, Wood Duck, Barred Owl, Cape May Warbler, Ruby-Crowned Kinglet, Red-bellied Woodpecker, Downy Woodpecker, Robin, Savannah Sparrow (?), Buzzard, Woodcock, Crow, Tufted Titmouse -- all birds I've seen many times in the area. But just as I found the perfect location for my footbridge, I also tallied a species I'd never seen on our place in 40 some years of wandering the woods there. It was a pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus), a common species in southern Indiana's extensive forests. I've seen a couple at Tippecanoe River SP, and I understand they're sometimes seen in the dunes. I'm guessing they're found in the swamp forests along the Kankakee, but I've never actually seen one there. When I was a student at IU-Bloomington, I saw them often, even right on campus.

Mostly, we watch nice native species like this disappear, and so it's really a treat to see one re-appear -- and the pileated came back on its own, not through a reintroduction program. I hope to see them (and hear them -- actually, I first noticed its characteristic loud clucking call) for many years to come. I must say it was gratifying too because one of my goals at the corporeal Big Eastern is to return the forest and woodland portion of the landscape into a condition where it would support creatures that need more than a mere woodlot. Part of the program has been to identify gaps in the existing forests that can be reforested. Maybe its working.

So today, it's a special 'pileated woodpecker' edition of Big Eastern. If any readers have some good Pileated Woodpecker stories from northern Indiana or Illinois, maybe you'll consider sharing them with us -- I'm guessing they turn up in the mesic forests of northern LaPorte County and St. Joseph County. Here are some pileated woodpecker backgrounders:

TNC's Species Management Abstract - Pileated Woodpecker - status and conservation needs for the pileated woodpecker. [TNC - 1998]

Photos of the Pileated Woodpecker - by Mark Trabue - Muscatatuck NWR, 2004 [Indiana Audubon Society]

Vintage depiction of the Pileated Woodpecker - Birds of Indiana [Butler U.]

bigeasternotes - 10.22.2004

Quail decline cause: loss of habitat - e-mail from Andre Sipocz

The habitat acreage decline mentioned in the pheasant article is pretty good support for the "lack of habitat" hypothesis as an explanation as to why bobwhites are declining.

Quail and other gallinaceous birds (pheasant, prairie chickens, grouse) don't live too long. A result is that they need to maintain large and well-connected populations in order to persist. It is very important that they maintain a high level of genetic diversity as well as they are constantly being pelted with diseases, climactic flucuations and changing food resources and a large, well mixed breeding pool allows this.

As available habitat becomes smaller, more disconnected populations start to "wink out". Eventually some critical point is reached and you wake up one spring day and notice that the birds are all gone. This is happening to sage grouse out west, quail in the midwest and southeast, and prairie chickens everywhere. We went from about 1,800 Attwaters Prairie Chickens at the APC NWR near Sealy, Texas to zero in about a decade. The habitat surrounding the refuge was plowed up and the birds could not sustain themselves on the refuge alone.

The bottom line is that your good and bug-filled habitat may not be near enough.

I think turkeys are doing so well because they are much more mobile than other gallinaceous birds. They can travel from one good spot to another to get what they need and essentially link together a bunch of separated habitat patches.

Andrew Sipocz
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
Dickinson, TX

bigeasternotes - 9.28.2004

Fox squirrels and oak trees

Squirrels could change forests - squirrel's habit of burying nuts helps spread and propagate important mast producing species, esp. oaks and hickories - trend for red squirrels to replace gray squirrels in some regions of Indiana seen as potentially harmful to propagation of certain mast producing species, esp. black walnuts [9.27.04 - Lowe - SoBndTrib] - editor's note: Here in the Kankakee Sand Region, where oak savannas and woodlands are the primary arboreal squirrel habitats, it's always been a stronghold of the big brown squirrels known as 'fox squirrels' (so named because their pelt resembles that of a fox). As savanna natives, they have no problems crossing large open expanses of prairie or barrens, and can be seen to carry acorns quite a distance from any trees; with the advent of agriculture fox squirrels have proliferated as unbroken tracts of forest (gray squirrel habitat) have been broken into an open mosaic of cropland, fields, woodlots and yards. In the Kankakee Sand Region red squirrels are typically found around pine plantations, hence the old-timey local name I learned for them as a child in the wild: 'piney squirrel'. You'll rarely if ever see a gray squirrel in sand country - they live in mesic forests (e.g. beech/maple) or, oddly, in cities where they can become distinctly rat-like. So it's not that they are purely forest creatures, they just don't feel comfortable in open spaces. But getting back to the point of the article linked above, I really believe there's a lot to it. Many areas of Indiana are reporting poor oak regeneration and it's all too often being blamed on lack of fire. Fire's don't plant oak trees, squirrels do. In my casual observation if you have fox squirrels and oak trees, you'll get plenty of oak regeneration, as long as there's enough sunshine.

Anne Hazlett on behalf of the Mitch Daniels campaign - 9.7.2004

Daniels' staff details candidate's policy on livestock production

[This is an e-mail I received from Republican gubernatorial candidate Mitch Daniels staffer in charge of ag policy, Anne Hazlett, in response to a request from me for more details about the campaign's policy promoting an increase in livestock production in Indiana. I posted a note about the subject, Daniels campaign promotes increase in livestock production on August 31, 2004. We thank the Ms. Hazlett for taking the time to respond on behalf of the Daniels campaign. The e-mail is reproduced below in relevant part.]

Thanks so much for your note regarding Mitch's position on livestock production. I handle agriculture matters for the campaign and appreciate the opportunity to share our position.

Over the past 14 months, Mitch has traveled the state extensively (over 50,000 miles) to learn about the opportunities that will lead an economic comeback in our state. Those travels have included many stops to farms and agriculture-related businesses. From these visits, Mitch has concluded that there is great untapped potential in agriculture. One of the particular areas in agriculture where we are currently underperforming is livestock. In the past 10 years, Indiana hog production has declined to 5.6 million head as compared to our 10.5 million-head capacity. As you may know growing up on a cattle farm, livestock is a critical piece of Indiana agriculture. Over 65 percent of Indiana grain production goes to livestock feed -- without livestock, our current farm economy and the fiscal health of our rural communities will collapse, leading to further urbanization of our state.

From his time on the road, Mitch has learned that livestock operations are leaving this state NOT because of a stringent regulatory environment, but because our regulatory agency is dysfunctional. In fact, Mitch has spoken to multiple farms who are expanding in other states with MORE stringent regulation simply because they are able to get an answer quickly and because the regulations are being applied in a consistent, transparent and dependable manner.

Our campaign takes issue with Seth Slabaugh's characterization of our proposal as one aimed to "loosen" environmental regulation. To the contrary, Mitch is most supportive of a clean environment and strongly believes that bad actors should not be tolerated. Mitch recently took the opportunity to tour the infamous "Pohlmann Farm" in Montgomery County where he learned about the virtual agriculture brownfield that was left once that operation was finally closed down after years of violation under the current administration. Today, a new company has invested in the property -- Mitch went to the site to learn of the company's plans to renovate and re-open the site in an environmentally responsible manner. He hopes that this facility can be a prototype for future operations.

Mitch's vision for the future of livestock in this state is one in which the regulatory agency is overhauled in such a manner that operators and citizens are functioning in an environment where the agency renders timely, consistent and transparent decisions -- one in which businessmen and concerned citizens alike know what is expected of business operations. Beyond agency reform, he also hopes to provide opportunity for operators of all sizes by creating an Indiana Grown branding program designed to increase consumer loyalty to Indiana-raised produce. Such a program should provide newfound opportunity for smaller size operations by assisting them in creating niche markets. Lastly, Mitch intends to create a business climate that will foster new technologies to ensure that Indiana meat is grown in the most environmentally-responsible manner possible. Specifically, he intends to increase the research and development investment tax credit from 10 to 15 percent. Such a benefit could benefit, for example, the efforts of United Feeds (Sheridan swine nutrition company) to develop a new product -- Optifos -- which is designed to reduce the amount of phosphorus excreted from pigs. Mitch believes that supporting such R & D efforts will enable livestock agriculture to expand while continuing to protect our environment.

Sincerely,
Anne Hazlett

[editor's note - bigeastern.com provides an open forum for all responsible viewpoints relevant to environmental issues in Indiana - if you'd like to comment on this, or any other relevant subject, send me e-mail.]

bigeasternotes - 8.31.2004

Daniels campaign promotes increase in livestock production

The campaign of Republican candidate for governor, Mitch Daniels has been running lots of ads promoting the need for economic growth in Indiana. As anyone who reads bigeastern.com knows, I'm a liberal Democrat, but anytime anybody says they've got a plan to get Indiana moving forward they've got my attention. Daniels' ads are a bit short on substance, but that's the way these things are done these days. So I went to his web site, My Man Mitch to take a look at the details.

Before I get into the environmental end, I will say that I found his page on Health Care interesting, even a bit progressive.

But then I took a look at the Jobs page. Under the heading "Grow Indiana", candidate Daniels says he would like to "Overhaul an environmental regulatory system that is creating unnecessary obstacles for livestock production, with a goal of doubling production during this decade" and "[L]aunch an aggressive campaign to sell Indiana as the location of choice for agricultural and food processing companies." Note that this is the only reference to the environment made on Candidate Daniels' position statement - and it's actually his policy to make our environment worse.

Candidate Daniels also favors an Indiana Grown promotion campaign to help market locally grown fruits, vegetables and other produce -- a fine idea.

But getting back to the livestock issue. I'm probably in the minority of the pro-enviro world in thinking that it's not a bad idea to raise more livestock in Indiana. Maybe that's because I grew up on a cattle farm; albeit one that hosted about 70 head on about 600 acres. Indiana is well suited for livestock production, and the world's trying to feed more hungry mouths every day. The problem comes with simultaneously rolling back environmental controls and doubling the livestock population. That's a recipe for disaster.

Candidate Daniels' ads talk about making the kind of Indiana that kids will choose to make their home, instead of fleeing as soon as they're old enough to get a driver's license. Indiana is already one of the dirtiest parts of America; making it even dirtier and stinkier will not inspire what I'd call progress.

If Indiana really wants to become a leader and not just a cesspool, then the goal should be to foster research and development of the most advanced livestock production methods for the 21st century so that when a consumer sees Indiana Grown on a meat product they'll know its the safest, highest quality, most humane and most environmentally responsible product available. That, I'm afraid, means more regulation not less.

bigeasternotes - 8.27.2004

Follow-up on Tippecanoe River meetings

I wrote to Chad Watts, TNC's Tippecanoe River Project Manager, asking about the recent meetings hosted by TNC. Watts says about 25 people interested in the Tippecanoe attended the meetings. According to Watts, TNC is "in the beginning stages of organizing the group of citizens that have the desire to contribute to the project in a meaningful way. Our hope is to have a group of citizens that are interested in the project and interested in protecting the Tippecanoe River. We want that group to have the mechanism to contribute their talents and expertise to the effort to protect the Tippecanoe River."

Watts said that some of the attendees expressed concern that conditions on the Tippecanoe have deteriorated over the past twenty years. "We began talking about what could have contributed to the degradation of the River in their minds and broke into groups that it is hoped will eventually become committees. These committees talked about things such as information and education, conservation programs that could be implemented to solve problems, and also assessing threats to the river that need to be addressed." Watts hopes the meetings will turn out to be the beginning of a citizen group dedicated to improving our local environment.

TNC News Release - 7.30.2004

Citizen Input Requested for Tippecanoe River Project

WINAMAC, INDIANA - July 30, 2004. The Nature Conservancy's Tippecanoe River Project has a meeting scheduled to increase the citizen input on the effort to protect the Tippecanoe River. This meeting is scheduled for the 9th of August at from 7 to 9PM at the Community Building at the Fulton County Fairgrounds. This meeting is for people who want to contribute their time to helping The Nature Conservancy to protect the Tippecanoe River by sharing their talents with the project leadership.

"With just two individuals running The Nature Conservancy's project on the Tippecanoe, we felt it necessary to involve the public to reach a larger audience" says Kent Wamsley, Field Representative for The Nature Conservancy's Tippecanoe River Project. "Our goal is to get conservation done on the ground, and with citizen input the amount of projects found and implemented will only increase, and the Tippecanoe River will benefit from that involvement".

The purpose of the meeting will be to establish committees with specific tasks related to conservation and project promotion so that citizens can become involved in the protection effort. Citizen participants who are interested will be asked to pick from a variety of committees that will help to guide a specific portion of the work that the project staff will work on. Committees will address issues from conservation programs and strategies to marketing the project, and will provide direct input into the way that the project works and the kinds of things that the project will do.

"Helping us out by serving on one of these committees will provide citizens an opportunity to add input into strategies and decisions that will help guide the project", says Chad Watts, Tippecanoe River Project Manager. "We are looking for citizens who have knowledge of the Tippecanoe River and who want to help us make a positive difference in the River".

This meeting will start at 7 PM in the Community Building at the Fairgrounds in Rochester. Anyone wishing to attend is encouraged to do so. If you have questions or would like more information about the meeting, you are encouraged to contact Chad Watts or Kent Wamsley at the Tippecanoe River Project office in Winamac at (574) 946-7491 or by e-mail at either cwatts@tnc.org or kwamsley@tnc.org.

TNC News Release - 7.30.2004

The Nature Conservancy Plans Project Open House

WINAMAC, INDIANA - July 30, 2004. The Nature Conservancy's Tippecanoe River Project is holding an open house to highlight the accomplishments of the project over the past year and give watershed residents an opportunity to learn more about the natural resources in the Tippecanoe River watershed. The open house will take place at the Winamac Town Park on Saturday, August 14th from 9 until 3. The day will feature a variety of speakers that will appeal to a wide range of people.

At this open house, participants will get the opportunity to listen to a variety of speakers on topics that pertain to natural resources and the Tippecanoe River. In addition to hearing about The Nature Conservancy's work on the Tippecanoe River, participants can hear presentations on landscaping with native plants, conservation farming, rehabilitating injured wildlife, and also attend a fish shocking demonstration put on by fisheries biologists from the Indiana Department of Natural Resources.

After lunch, which will be provided by The Nature Conservancy, participants who wish can take part in a 2 hour canoe trip guided by Chad Watts, the Tippecanoe River Project Manager, and Kent Wamsley, the Field Representative for the Tippecanoe River Project. This trip will take place on a scenic section of the Tippecanoe River downstream from Winamac. This easy and enjoyable canoe trip will feature wooded riverbanks and discussions on the native biodiversity that lives in the Tippecanoe River. The trip will be a suitable for both expert canoeists and beginners alike.

"This is a day to come out and enjoy the Tippecanoe River and learn a little bit about the species that are in it and the protection efforts that are underway to protect them" says Chad Watts, Tippecanoe River Project Manager for The Nature Conservancy.

The Winamac Town Park is located three blocks east of State Road 35 on Washington Street in Winamac and on the east side of the Tippecanoe River. The open house will be held at the brick picnic shelter just off the main road in the park. Signs will mark the open house location. It is asked that you RSVP for the open house by August 11th, and indicate whether or not you will be attending the canoe trip in the afternoon. For more information about this open house or to RSVP, please contact either Chad Watts, or Kent Wamsley at the Tippecanoe River Project Office at (574) 946-7491 or via e-mail at either cwatts@tnc.org or kwamsley@tnc.org.

7.29.2004

County namesakes, part III - Jasper and Newton

South of the Kankakee and on Indiana's western side, Jasper and Newton counties line up side by side in what was once the midwest's greatest wetland, the Grand Marsh of the Kankakee. There's a bit of poetry in this; their namesakes Sgt. John Newton and Sgt. William Jasper both were from South Carolina and both served in the Revolutionary War under the command of the legendary Major Francis Marion, known as the Swamp Fox (Marion appears to be the inspiration behind Mel Gibson's character in the Patriot). It seems unlikely these facts result from a mere coincidence -- Indiana's founders must have thought it appropriate to commemorate the Swamp Fox's NCOs in Indiana's sprawling swamps.

Sgt. William Jasper is remembered for his exceptional bravery under fire, first under the command of Col. Moultrie during the British bombardment of Ft. Sullivan in 1776. Under heavy fire, he remounted the U.S. Flag, and was offered a commission. He refused due to his lack of education. In 1779, during an assault on Savannah he was killed while planting the regimental colors. He was 29.

Sgt. John Newton's name is memorialized on many placenames around the nation, but his story is not so well remembered. While it seems undisputed that he was a member of the Swamp Fox's semi-legendary brigade, it's unclear how much that's attributed to him is historical and how much is romanticized early 19th century literature, including a novel by Weems, The Life of Gen. Francis Marion. For more, follow the links below; the prior installments of this series are at the bottom of this page.

Sources:

Newton and Jasper: A Search for Their Stories - includes an explanation of the romanticization of Jasper's exploits in Weem's The Life of Gen. Francis Marion, and how that captured the popular imagination despite being fictitious. The book was a runaway best seller in the early 19th century. [Chapin - NIU]

Jasper and Newton Counties [Texas] - it happens that Jasper and Newton counties are paired up in Texas too -- coincidence? [Gerry Mander - Texas Escapes]

Origin of Newton Co's Name - scroll down for an excerpt from early 19th century novel The Story of Marion's Men which makes Sgt. Newton out as Sgt. Jasper's partner, more or less.

Origin of Indiana County Names - carved from a left-over slice of mostly marshy land, Newton Co. was organized in 1859, the last county in Indiana to be formed. [Indiana St. Library]

7.2.2004

County names: Commodore David Porter; a real-life swashbuckler

A couple of days ago posted a few tidbits and links about Revolutionary War hero John Stark as part of a series looking at the people behind the names of northern Indiana counties. Today, let's take a look at Commodore David Porter, for whom Porter County is named.

With its wide sandy beaches and the blue water of Lake Michigan, Porter County's north shore has a bit of a seaside look, so it's altogether appropriate that Porter County selected a seafaring legend as its namesake. Commodore David Porter was born in Boston in 1780, and so he was too young to serve in the Revolutionary War. He started as a midshipman in the 'Quasi-War' against France. As a 1st lieutenant he fought the Barbary Pirates 'on the shores of Tripoli' and was captured there in 1803 when the ship he was aboard, the Philadelphia, ran aground in Tripoli harbor. He was held for two years as a POW.

As his next assignment, Porter captained the USS Enterprise. Later, as captain of the USS Essex during the War of 1812 he reportedly flew a flag that said 'Free Trade and Sailor's Rights'. While commanding the Essex during the War of 1812 Porter gained fame by capturing the first British warship of the conflict, the Alert, on August 13, 1812.

Porter lost the Essex in a battle where he was badly outgunned by two British frigates, the HMS Phoebe and the HMS Cherub, off the coast of Valpariso, Chile in 1814, though by all accounts the commander and crew of the Essex fought valiantly. The county seat of Porter County is, of course, another place named Valparaiso but it is less well known that it was originally named 'Portersville', with the name being changed about 1837. According to the City of Valparaiso History Page: 'H.M. Skinner, an early historian, tells of a group of old sailors who stopped at Hall's Saloon and passed the evening by telling nautical tales. One tale was of a South American seaport where Porter fought his famous battle aboard the Essex. The story must have captured the imagination and admiration of local residents for in 1837 the town was renamed 'Valparaiso', which means 'Vale of Paradise', and a township was called Essex.'

In the 1820s he led US naval expeditions to suppress pirates in the West Indies commanding a novel group of vessels dubbed the mosquito fleet with considerable success. Perhaps he developed a taste for the tropics, because he then resigned his commission so that he could take a post as commander in chief of the Mexican navy. (One cannot help but wonder what the Mexican navy was like in 1827). He died in 1843 while minister to Turkey.

His son, David Dixon Porter, was a prominent naval leader during the Civil War; several warships have been named for this famous father and son pair, including the current USS Porter a Burke Class guided missile destroyer.

Here's another, more detailed (if somewhat unreadable) bio of this real-life swashbuckler: David Porter [Virtual American Biographies]. Picture 'Master and Commander' in real life.

7.1.2004 - Bigeastern readers will know that I'm interested in North American archaeology; that was my undergraduate major (well, anthropology technically) back in the day. A major find has been announced in eastern Utah's Book Cliffs region. This is the stuff of legend, so pardon my 'off topic' links. Anyway, if you're interested in the environment, archaeology is something you ought to learn about. It reminds us that humans have been here in America for thousands of years, and that people have at times lived in harmony with nature, and at other times dnot -- and eventually suffered the consequences.

6.30.2004

County names: Revolutionary War hero John Stark (no 'e')

Many northern Indiana counties are named for Revolutionary War heroes; often these people are, sadly, largely forgotten today. Their stories are often quite interesting too; these people had guts. Over the next couple of weeks, as time allows, I'm going to add some links about a few of these remarkable individuals.

First lets look at John Stark, native of New Hampshire (and populizer of their sometimes controversial state motto, 'Live Free or Die'), woodsmen, and one of the most successful generals in the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War.

Starke County was named for John Stark, it's pretty ironic that his name is incorrectly spelled, but I digress. General Stark was involved in the Revolutionary War from the beginning to the end. Stark (then a Colonel) served at the Battle of Lexington and Concord, the first battle in the war, and at the Battle of Bunker Hill. You can read summaries of his career at John Stark on fact-index.com and at John Stark on Virtual Vermont. His role leading an American victory against mostly German forces in the Battle of Bennington is considered a key contribution in the Revolutionary War. He is also remembered as a member of the court martial that condemned British agent John André of inducing legendary turncoat Benedict Arnold to betray West Point. André was executed but Arnold escaped to London and (like Stark) returned to private life and attained a ripe old age.

6.4.2004

Indiana Appeals Court decision could presage loosening of drainage board assessment rules

Up until this afternoon, it had been a quiet day in enviro-news. Unfortunately, it's not so any longer. The Court of Appeals for the 3rd Dist. of Indiana filed its opinion in a drainage case, Clouse et al v. Noble Co. Drainage Bd. et al. A quick review of the case might create the impression that it's of little import, but it's likely to increase drainage board dredging and clearing activities, especially in northern Indiana. No doubt some of these activities are needed, but the environmental consequences of unregulated bulldozing, dredging and herbicide spraying projects along virtually all of northern Indiana's rivers and streams are often quite severe, not to mention how expensive these projects are for landowners. I hope this decision doesn't presage even more laxity in application of the modest safeguards in Indiana's truly awful drainage code; but I expect that's what we'll see.

Here's the case: Clouse et al v. Noble Co. Drainage Bd., et al - Noble Co. Drainage Bd. made determination that 2.8k-ac watershed in NE-Ind. was in need of periodic maintenance as defined in Indiana Drainage Code and adopted flat rate ditch tax. Landowners objected, arguing flat rate ditch taxes violate Indiana law, and showing that woodlands and uplands aren't benefitted. Appellate Ct. distinguished prior cases that rejected flat rate ditch taxes saying Noble Co. Surveyor wasn't required to use criteria set out in IC 36-9-27-112, as long as he considered benefits, decision to apply flat rate not per se unreasonable. [6.4.04 - Judge Najam - Ind. Ct. App. 3rd Dist. - link X Indiana Law Blog]

Those who've followed my commentaries here may recognize the Court's opinion in this case as adopting what I've called the 'pennies from heaven' theory: if it rains on your property (no matter how dry your land is) you owe some of those pennies to your local drainage board. Previously, it was my understanding that this theory had been rejected in Whitley, Noble and Allen Joint Drainage Bd. v. Tschantz, (Ind. App. 1984) 461 N.E.2d 1146 See: Abundance Breeds Contempt - [11.16.02 - Lucas - bigeastern] Drainage Boards love the 'pennies from heaven' method of making assessments, because (a) it makes it easy for them to bring in money from more acreage, even if there's no provable actual benefit, and (b) it effectively creates a subsidy for draining wetlands and other low areas, by requiring landowners with little interest in the projects to help pay for them.

In very small watersheds with a uniform topography and land use a uniform assessment may be appropriate, but it's just too easy for a county surveyor to look at a map and say, 'yep, looks like everybody's gettin' the same benefits to me.' The relatively small size of the watershed in the Clouse case may be a factor the Court considered as supporting their decision. I hope the 'pennies from heaven' won't become accepted policy for larger watersheds, but I predict we'll see drainage boards try it. It's very tempting. [ml]

6.3.2004

Preserving working railroads is good for agriculture - and everybody else too.

Here in North Judson, demolition is underway on another of Lane Street's old buildings -- as I'm typing this I'm now and again feeling a basso profundo wave through the building as the walls come booming down about a half block away.

I suppose I should be aghast at this, but it wasn't that great of a building anyway, and it was in poor repair too. A vacant lot is, in someways, better than an abandoned building. Plant a tree and some flowers on it and it's a park...or a lawn anyway.

Quite the contrary is the situation with the smaller railroads remaining in the area. Existing railroads are heavily booked, even over booked [for info about this pick up a copy of TRAINS magazine], so abandoning existing lines is a dangerous business. But more to the point, every railroad abandoned means more truck traffic, more fuel consumption, more pollution -- or worse, it means that products just don't get to market. I don't think there's much question that moving products by rail is environmentally more benign than trucking them, especially for bulk materials like corn and beans.

Readers here will know that I don't always side with ag interests (I doubt that most farmers actually side with the IFB). But here's one of many issues where ag, industrial, and enviros can all agree. So, I heartily support the cooperative efforts of officials in Porter, Starke and LaPorte Counties to preserve the CSX line. It's not just for agriculture, though that may be the current main application. It's critical infrastructure. [ml]

Porter County Commissioners support purchase of farm rail line - Porter Co. commissioners pledge $50k toward preservation of CSX line from Malden to North Judson. [6.2.04 - Urbanik - Chesterton Trib]

6.1.2004

7th Circuit issue CWA Opinion in Fawn River discharge dase; evidence of misconduct by state cited - clean-up estimated at $14m

editor's note: - following is a press release from Friends of the Fawn River, written by Rev. Thomas E. Smith, of Orland, IN, reprinted here as a public service. I'll be reviewing this important judicial decision soon, and will publish my comments then. The Court's opinion was handed down 3.19.2004, but it hadn't come to my attention until this morning.

Addressing the 1998 destruction of an Indiana river, the United States Court of Appeals, sitting in Chicago, recently issued a national landmark decision interpreting the federal Clean Water Act ("CWA") in the case of Greenfield Mills, et al., v. Larry Macklin, (formerly) Director of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, et al., 2004 WL 541153 (case no. 02-1863). The Seventh Circuit issued its opinion on March 19, 2004 holding that officials of the Indiana Department of Natural Resources ("IDNR") could be found responsible under the CWA for using a dam to discharge dredged materials into the Fawn River.

An environmental catastrophe resulted when local IDNR workers in Orland, Indiana, used their dam to rapidly flush decades of accumulated sediments from a state reservoir on May 18, 1998. This deposited an estimated 100,000 cubic yards of silt into the lower Fawn River. Engineering estimates put the clean up costs at 14 million dollars.

The Court noted that the riparian property owners had submitted extensive and well documented evidence of the destruction of Fawn River, including the work of nationally respected Indiana University Professor emeritus, Daniel Willard, and his team of scientists and engineers. By contrast, the Court noted the IDNR's lack of evidence on its competing claim to have caused little harm. The Court stated:

The defendants [IDNR officials] do not dispute with affidavits or other evidence any of the expert or lay testimony by the plaintiffs showing that massive amounts of sediment were deposited into the river or onto the plaintiffs' property.

The Seventh Circuit is the first federal Court of Appeals in the nation to hold squarely that operation of a dam can be subject to the permitting system of the CWA. Robin Craig, an associate professor of environmental law at Indiana University, Indianapolis had this to say about the recent decision:

For years, federal courts have generally refused to address dam-related water pollution under the Clean Water Act. However, in last week's decision in Greenfield Mills, the Seventh Circuit -- picking up and expanding upon the Second Circuit's 2001 suggestion of disenchantment with this historical unwillingness to hold dams accountable -- finally acknowledged that dams can be significant sources of downstream water pollution that the Act should regulate. The Seventh Circuit recognized for the first time that waters downstream of dams are entitled under the Clean Water Act to be protected from damage resulting from unreasonable or unnecessary dam "maintenance." Specifically, the Court held that dam operators "added" sediments and other dredged materials when they opened dam gates and allowed the draining waters to flood the Fawn River with sediments that had accumulated behind the dam, triggering Clean Water Act's permitting requirements. While much of the opinion focused on whether this alleged "maintenance" was reasonable and necessary, the Court's discussion of the Clean Water Act's "recapture" provision also suggests that dams may not be able to use even proper maintenance as a way of escaping regulation under the Act if the maintenance activities disrupt downstream water quality. As a result, the Seventh Circuit is the first federal appellate court to suggest that even normal activities at traditional dams can trigger the Clean Water Act -- a result that national organizations such as the National Wildlife Federation have tried repeatedly to achieve in other courts, without success.

While not essential to the main holdings, the Seventh Circuit pointed to strong evidence that local IDNR workers used the claim of "maintenance" to cover-up an illegal discharge of dredged materials without a CWA permit. Indiana State officials have always refused to consider that the local IDNR employees may have engaged in any wrongful conduct. In contrast, the Seventh Circuit said:

The defendants were slow to repair, performed quite 'haphazardly,' and let the supply pond drain substantially farther (and for much longer) than was needed to do the repairs.

[D]uring this time, the defendants had lunch, purchased supplies and examined other areas of the hatchery. At the end of the day, the defendants had not repaired, or even attempted to repair, the pump. The defendants also have not brought forth evidence explaining the importance or necessity of a test draw-down to the subsequent repair of the gates. Finally, the plaintiffs submitted evidence that the DNR had expressed an interest in dredging the supply pond in the years prior to the draw-down and had been informed that obtaining a permit for this action would be difficult.

On the basis of the record before us, a reasonable fact finder could conclude that the purpose of drawing down the water in the supply pond was not to perform maintenance on either the pump or the dam, but rather was to dredge the supply pond without a permit.

Over the last decade, the Fawn River has become a flash point between development and conservation interests. Throughout the 90's, three public projects attempting to use the Fawn for discharge of partially treated sewage were defeated by local activists and landowners, while at the same time, IDNR developed strong public political positions which favored the sewage projects. The 1998 destruction of Fawn by local IDNR workers came after years of political and legal conflict, with growing hostility by IDNR towards the landowners and other local activists.

The case was on appeal from the federal District Court of Northeast Indiana, which had originally ruled in favor of the IDNR in 2001. That decision has now been reversed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals with directions that the District Court must process the case in accordance with the recent opinion. In the prior District Court proceedings, IDNR maintained that the discharge of the sediments was part of necessary maintenance to its local fish hatchery, and therefore it should be immune from liability under the CWA. The Seventh Circuit disagreed, and specifically commented that the evidence would support finding that the local IDNR workers' actions were not reasonably necessary and, therefore, would be regulated. The Court stated:

[W]e believe the plaintiffs have brought forth sufficient evidence to permit the trier of fact to conclude that the dredging of the pond was not reasonably necessary to either the maintenance of the pump or the alleged inspection of the gates.

Mr. Meyer [IDNR employee] stated in his deposition that he and Mr. Clary [IDNR employee] made no repairs to the plumbing on May 18, 1998. He also stated that the repairs on the plumbing that had been planned for May 18, 1998, were actually accomplished a few weeks later. The actual repairs were accomplished without drawing-down, lowering or draining the supply pond. Mr. Clary noted that a DNR diver completed the plumbing repair in less than three hours. With respect to the repair to the dam gates, DNR Structural Engineer Larry Wayland suggested three different alternative repair scenarios, none of which required a rapid draining of the supply pond. Two alternatives involved using a coffer dam to retain the water in the pond while the repairs were being performed; these options did not require the supply pond to be drained at all. Indeed, the repair eventually was accomplished using such a device. According to the defendants, the only repair work that Mr. Meyer and Mr. Clary accomplished on May 18, 1998, was attaching a chain to two of the lower gates. Mr. Meyer admitted, however, that this attachment was not really a "repair"; he explained that the action "was kind of an afterthought" taken as a result of the difficulty they experienced raising the three lower gates.

Prior to its destruction, this stretch of Fawn River was recognized by many, including the IDNR, as the best surviving native cool-water gravel bottom stream in Indiana. Its waters were highly transparent with a bright clean cobbled bottom running through well forested gently rolling hills. Fawn River was also well known as one of a handful of self-sustaining native small mouth bass fisheries left in Indiana.

The Seventh Circuit opinion, pictures and additional information can be viewed at The web site is slowly being updated with the recent developments, and will be brought fully on-line over the next few days.

Despite the misconduct and negligence of the local IDNR hatchery workers and attempts to deny the destruction, we believe that these events are not reflective of most IDNR employees or the new leadership of IDNR. Under Director John Goss, many positive changes are being made at IDNR, including the implementation of comprehensive regulations designed to prohibit future careless or unauthorized operation of all dams throughout Indiana. We believe that the vast majority of IDNR employees are conscientious people, who perform their duties with great respect and care for our environment. We hope the Seventh Circuit's decision opens the door to a constructive dialogue with IDNR that will allow all parties to work in partnership to restore Fawn River to its former pristine condition for future generations.

We would like to express our gratitude to the many volunteers who have supported our efforts to restore the Fawn River, with special appreciation to the editors of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette for their thoughtful full page editorial in 2001, as well as the Bush Department of Justice for filing an Amicus brief. The Seventh Circuit opinion favorably cited key positions taken by the Department of Justice on regulation of dams under the federal CWA.

by Rev. Thomas E. Smith

5.18.2004

Drainage Board says no intention to clear-cut at heron rookery on Yellow River

5.18.2004 - Joe Skelton writes saying that he attended the Marshall Co. Drainage Board meeting last night and that the subject of clearcutting in a great blue heron rookery along the Yellow River came up. Joe reports that the drainage board said there wouldn't be any clearcutting in the rookery if the landowner prefers to keep the section wooded. Joe says the drainage board indicated that there had never been any intention to impose clearcutting where the landowner didn't want it.

This is a major positive step -- I would question the wisdom of clearcutting river banks with taxpayer money in most cases, but if it's limited to areas where the property owner believes it to be desirable that's a big step forward. Personally, I think a goodly share of landowners will want to preserve the scenic beauty and natural productivity that goes along with a forested river corridor. Even some people who don't care about such things will want to preserve the value in their real estate that accompanies natural beauty. The one kind of green so often follows the other.

I had a similar experience over the weekend; I met with and floated the Bogus Run with the Starke County Surveyor and a local farmer. The Bogus Run is a tributary of the Kankakee with headwaters in Pulaski County and its confluence with the Kankakee at English Lake; it's been featured on bigeastern.com's 'cover art' - imagine a 'mini-kank'.

The float was a thoroughly pleasant experience despite the somewhat overloaded and clumsy jon boat we used. The trip of about two miles included (along with a certain amount of splashing around) a good discussion about how legitimate agricultural drainage needs can be addressed while preserving and possibly even enhancing the quality of the stream -- projects like careful logjam removals that help flow and make canoeing easier, sediment traps that allow sediment removal without clearcutting and save tax dollars too, and ways to avoid using heavy machinery on fragile wetlands soils.

Efforts of concerned citizens, have perhaps, started to push local officials to take a more balanced approach toward natural resource stewardship. The problem won't go away until Indiana's archaic drainage code is replaced by a water resources management system, but raising awareness of the issues is where progress must begin. As Joe Skelton likes to say (quoting anthropologist Margaret Mead), "Never believe that a few caring people can't change the world. For, indeed, that's all who ever have."

backgrounder: for more about the Yellow River dredging project in Marshall Co. see the 5.10.2004 entry here on bigeastern.

5.10.2004

Drainage Board clear-cut threatens heron rookery on Yellow River

5.10.2004 - pm update - Joe Skelton has provided this photograph of a heron rookery on the banks of the Yellow River in Marshall County in an area slated for clear-cutting:

To get a better look, click on the image and a larger version will open in a new browser window. The trees include sycamores. You can see a heron about to alight in the upper middle of the photo.

For contrast, here's a photograph of the Yellow River at the Starke/Marshall County line. I took this photograph a couple of springs ago, I hope it hasn't been 'cleaned' or 'improved'. Note the rich bank vegetation including blooming redbud trees. Fishermen will want to note that this reach supports smallmouth bass.

5.10.2004 - Joe Skelton writes expressing his alarm at the clear-cutting associated with a dredging project on the Yellow River in the Bremen area of Marshall County, Indiana. Here's a photograph he sent:

Joe reports that this photo shows the Yellow River after clear cutting and that great blue heron nesting sites along the river are being destroyed as the riverside sycamore trees they nest in are cut down.

"They are clear cutting the river still. The farmer that showed me the heron rookery does not want his part of the river clear cut, but that doesn't seem to stop them. They still have 65' on each side of the river. I counted 11 nests in the area. We saw 6 herons in the river when he took me down there."

In an e-mail Joe reports that this project is causing considerable bank erosion, noting, "One interesting thing is a stream bank stabilization project the drainage board is doing. It involves erosion on a piece of land that is 180'. The person is close to losing their home. The price for doing this project is close to $100k. They have no problem getting the money. This is a result of the increased velocity from clear cutting the river. If they would leave the trees in it would stop a lot of erosion."

He says The DNR is doing a stream bank stabilization in Starke County. Mesh socks filled with soil will be place on the banks which will then be sealed with a polymer. Trees will then be planted on the upper banks. He reports that the Kankakee River Basin Commission ('KRBC') gave the Starke Drainage Board $3c toward the project. Joe also reports that the Marshall Co. DB will be contracting for monitoring of the Yellow River for log jams, and erosion areas.

The Yellow River is a major tributary of the Upper Kankakee, running through downtown Plymouth and Knox and joining the Kankakee at English Lake.

5.3.2004

IN-Farm Bureau Lobbying for state ag dept.

Today's most interesting story is publication of an Indiana Farm Bureau report advocating creation of a new cabinet level Indiana Department of Agriculture.

The real eyebrow raiser is the suggestion that primary duties for the regulation of CAFOs be taken away from IDEM and moved to a department explicitly intended to promote Indiana agriculture. It's worth noting that the IFB report does recognize that IDEM would continue to be the enforcement authority against problem CAFO operators with a history of repeated water pollution discharges so it does recognize the risk that an Ind. Dept. of Ag. would be overly farmer friendly to the exclusion of other interests. Another big CAFO problem is odor; the IFB doesn't mention that.

I'd be a bit nervous about CAFOs being regulated by a Dept. of Agriculture, but there's a lot more to agriculture in Indiana than hi-tech pig barns. On several points the IFB report makes some sense, and there's no doubt that more effective promotion of Indiana agriculture could prove beneficial to all of us who live out in the country. With so many industrial processes moving overseas, we probably should think about ways to move Indiana agriculture into a new era that can generate more value and employment than the current corn and beans model; a cabinet level ag department could help. For the purpose of promoting agriculture I think the IFB suggestion looks pretty good. But I don't think promoters (salesmen) can be regulators (policemen) too.

One thing in particular I noticed was a comment that IN-DNR does a better job of acquiring and managing lands for public use than it does of partnering with private landowners for better stewardship. 'Partnering' to be blunt, means finding revenue sources to implement stewardship plans. Personally, while I've always gotten a lot useful help and information from IN-DNR's forestry division, I think there's something to this criticism.

IN-DNR faces a huge job handling public properties and they're rightly proud of these lands including the wonderful Indiana state park system. It's been my experience, sadly, that IN-DNR is a lot less interested in protecting natural resources on private lands even when the owners are committed to preserving them.

Stewardship funds are available at the federal level that Indiana landowners haven't been able to access; for example Indiana's participation in CREP has been quite limited. However, it was my impression that this was, in part at least, due to opposition from IFB.

I'd prefer to see reforms at IN-DNR to upgrade their emphasis on public-private partnerships. I think this would be more sensible because (a) these partnerships need to be encouraged on all private lands, not only those managed primarily for agricultural production and (b) IN-DNR already possesses the expertise and knowledge about Indiana's natural environments. So I'm suggesting reform of the currently existing state administrative system would be preferable. Such reforms might also have the benefit of warming relations between farmers and IN-DNR. For one thing, if IN-DNR was passing out some of those stewardship goodies, they'd also gain a lot of useful clout in dealing with ongoing landuse problems like preservation of wetlands and forested riparian corridors.

3.23.2004

The Big (invisible) Monon dredging project

Sometimes the most remarkable thing about the news is what you don't see. That's certainly the case with the Big (invisible) Monon dredging project. It's a big project, and expensive too. But it doesn't go through any big towns, and most of the project won't be visible from any highways. So it's very, very, low profile. Let's review the official Public Notice, dated for publication on March 15, 2004 (although, try as I might, I couldn't find a copy online anywhere...and YES I did peruse IDEM's online permit section. Perhaps I missed it.) Following are selected portions of the notice.

[update 2.23.2004] I've confirmed that the Public Notice isn't posted on IDEM's site. Most of it is available here: Monon Ditch Project - Official Public Notice Document [.pdf]. You'll also want to download the official Proposed Profiles. Please beware that we're not official here, for the complete official version contact IDEM.

[editor's comments] It's just amazing to me that a project of this scope, and involving destruction of 210 acres of riparian forest, woodlands and other 'woody vegetation' on a major tributary of the Tippecanoe River has received so little attention. I've heard some pretty high estimates of the cost too (the kind of numbers usually associated with building a new school) and yet there's hardly a raised eyebrow out there.

posted 2.13.2004

Sticks and mud

Yesterday, I linked an article by Seth Slabaugh covering the controversy of IDEM's 'rule 5' intended to control problems associated with stormwater runoff from construction sites. You know - mud. No construction site, it seems, is complete without mud. Pools of mud, ruts of mud, gullies of mud, piles of mud. Heck, they bring mud onto the site in buckets. I started out by studying anthropology, and throughout history and way back into prehistory people have been making buildings out of sticks and mud. The technology has advanced, but when it comes down to it, we still do.

As any construction guy'll tell you, 'you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs', and there's a whole lot of truth to that. As long as the mud stays on the construction site it's really a temporary problem that will pass after the heavy equipment departs and the landscaping takes hold.

But often, when it rains the mud doesn't stay onsite. When the mud runs into storm drains, streams, rivers and lakes it first clouds the water, and then chokes the bottom. That's bad for aquatic life and can reduce the capacity of the streams too, causing flooding and leading to expensive, environmentally destructive dredging operations.

So there's really no doubt that it's best if the soil stays onsite where it can do what it does best - grow green plants. IDEM is working to control the construction mud problem through the 'Rule 5' permit process. Here's a link to IDEM's stormwater runoff page.

I also reviewed the comments about rule 5 on the Indiana Builders Association website. I had intended to provide a link to their position, but their website is a pretty disappointing effort. Their positions, I'm sorry to say, don't seem to be either well thought out or well argued. They pretty much seem to say, 'let's do what we always done,' which is a shame because I would think, being in construction, they could be -- well -- more constructive. For example, the IBA says they support preserving wetlands and greenspaces if they are 'outside the path of development.' What's that supposed to mean, exactly? And where is this place that's 'outside the path of development?'

Well, okay, here's a link, make up your own mind: Indiana Builders Assoc. - legislative scene.

posted 2.03.2004

Indiana Supreme Court supports state's right to acquire land for preserves

Here's a little good news for Indiana's environment, and no, not from the legislative branch. In a newly reported decision, IDNR v. Newton Co. that's important for preserving natural areas in northern Indiana, especially, the Indiana Supreme Court nixed a Newton Co. ordinance purporting to prohibit land acquisitions by DNR, pointing out that the county can't regulate the state. Newton County wasn't the only rural county that asserted 'home rule' as a theory for prohibiting state acquisitions of land in their county. Silly as this position sounds, these kinds of ordinances had not previously been challenged.

Court watchers may be interested to know that because the Newton Co. Circuit Court had declared the 'Game Bird Habitat Act' unconstitutional, by court rule the appeal went directly to Indiana's highest court; the opinion also reverses the Newton Co. Circuit Court on this issue, finding the GBHA constitutional.

e-mail from Jim Sweeney - posted 1.30.2004

Jim Sweeney: Indiana legislators falsely believe environmental values compete with economic development

[editor's note - Jim Sweeney shares his thoughts about the veto override of HEA 1798 - if you have an opinion you'd like to share please send me an e-mail.]

A muskrat trapper friend of mine was actually quite surprised when he found out that the Indiana General Assembly had voted to override the veto of HEA 1798.

I, on the other hand, was not the least bit surprised. I was disappointed, but not surprised.

The Indiana General Assembly has repeatedly shown that they have absolutely no interest in conserving the natural resources of Indiana. When presented with any opportunity to promote development and exploit a resource they will, no matter what it may do for the long term disposition of that resource.

I would hope that the GA, as the duly elected leaders of Indiana, would responsibly, or even reluctantly, accept their roles as stewards of the natural resources of state. But noooooooooo.

The Indiana General Assembly is locked into an archaic philosophy that believes you have to sacrifice the environment in order to have economic development. They refuse to look any farther than that. They think, "if you have wetlands, (or clean air or healthy wildlife,) the economy suffers." "If you have economic development, you can't have wetlands." Their thinking is so dated, it would be laughable if not so depressing.

There are literally a handful of people in Indianapolis that do what they can to work the Assembly for good environmental protection. A few are volunteers and a few others are underpaid and overworked employees of conservation organizations. Every year they (we) get steamrolled by utilities, the Farm Bureau, the Association of Cities and Towns, the Indiana Manufacturers Association, the Chamber of Commerce, and other special interests that lobby full time for less regulation for business and no restrictions on development.

And do not expect the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to do any good. Their leadership is there only to make the Governor look good.

There are legislators who are in Indianapolis simply to do the will of the party leadership. They vote on bills and issues they no nothing about and rely on the advice of others to make up their minds for them. I personally mailed every member of the House a letter with an analysis of 1798 by an attorney and I would bet most of them didn't even read it.

A month before the GA convened, I sent a formal letter requesting to meet with my state representative, Earl Harris of East Chicago on 1798. He did not reply to my letter or return three subsequent telephone calls or even provide an auto-response to several e-mails that I sent him. He voted with the majority because somebody told him to.

The justification to sustain the veto of HEA 1798 was available to anyone that would do an Internet search. The Indiana General Assembly just does not care. They can't even provide general revenue funds for something as popular as the Indiana Heritage Trust.

I will now join the growing number of people in Indiana who believe that the best thing for the air and water quality in Indiana would be to surrender all the environmental programs to the US Environmental Protection Agency. Maybe that will wake up the General Assembly.

e-mail from Chad Watts - posted 1.9.2004

TNC supports CREP proposal for watershed protection

[editor's note - yesterday I posted some fairly cursory information about Indiana's proposal to take part in the federal gov's Conservation Reserve Enhanced Program ('CREP').Chad Watts at the TNC's Tippecanoe River office in Winamac has offered additional insight into Indiana's CREP proposal, how the program works and how it can help landowners 'do the right thing' watershed-wise.]

Indiana's CREP would include three watersheds in Indiana. These watersheds are the Tippecanoe River, the Upper portion of the White River (the part affected by the recent spill in parts of Madison, Hamilton, Tipton, Hancock and Marion Counties), and the Pigeon-Highland watershed (down near Evansville in Gibson, Warrick, Pike, Vanderburgh, and Posey Counties). In all, the CREP will include at least portions of 28 counties in Indiana.

CREP is a federal - State matching program that is focused on increasing buffer and wetland acres in the three affected watersheds. The basic goals of this program are to provide for the enhancement of water quality in the three watersheds by reducing sediment and nutrient runoff into the streams, and enhancing wildlife habitats for State and Federally listed threatened and endangered species and other wildlife. The goal of the Indiana CREP is to enroll 26,250 acres into buffering and wetland practices that will help to reduce the negative effects of non-point source pollution in the affected watersheds, and help to reduce Indiana's contribution to the hypoxia problem in the Gulf of Mexico. In CREP, landowners will have a greater practice list from which to choose when compared to the Continuous portion of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). These practices include grassed and forested buffers along open drains, wildlife plantings along open drains, and forest plantings in floodplain fields.

The benefit to Indiana are that we are receiving additional conservation dollars from the federal government for little State investment. For every dollar that the State and private partners invest in CREP, the Federal Government will contribute four dollars. This ratio of 4:1 increases in Indiana's favor as the State and private CREP partners donate in-kind service towards the program.

With CREP, landowners in the affected watersheds will have the opportunity to enroll farmland into the program to install buffers and restore wetlands. When doing this, they will realize increased incentives from the State, Federal and private partners involved in CREP. These incentives come in several forms including direct incentive payments for acres enrolled in the program, cost share payments to help defray the cost of installing the conservation practices, and increased rental payments for the land taken out of farm production when compared to the rental payments currently being paid by the continuous portion of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).

In the Tippecanoe River, if the practices include forest and are located within two miles of the Tippecanoe River, landowners will be eligible for additional incentives paid by The Nature Conservancy. These incentives include incentive payments for those landowners who desire to extend the length of their 15-year CREP management contracts to 25 years, and also additional incentive payments for those landowners who wish to grant a permanent conservation easement on the wetland and buffer acres. These incentives will be paid over and above the incentive payments received as a part of the program, the cost share payments and the increased rental rates for land taken out of farm production.

One thing that will dictate the ability of CREP to reach its goals in the three priority watersheds will be the amount of funding that the State has to allocate towards the program. Since we are going into a legislative session where budgets will be discussed, it is important that our legislators know the value of this program and can speak to its values as the budget is being decided. This is especially important given the status of our current State budget, where dollars for programs are tight. Given the small investment that the state would have to give to the program to receive big returns from Federal and Private partners should be a big selling point of this program to the legislators. If interested, I would encourage landowners to contact their legislators to let them know the importance of this program and what kinds of conservation benefits could be realized by this type of program in the Tippecanoe River and the other watersheds in Indiana that will be affected by this program. If you would like more information on Indiana's CREP, I would encourage you to contact me at my office in Winamac at 574.946.7491 or e-mail me at: cwatts@tnc.org.

TNC press release - posted 12.16.2003

TNC's Tippecanoe River Project offers incentives for conservation tillage

[Winamac, Indiana] The Tippecanoe River Project of The Nature Conservancy is offering a win/win proposition for local farmers. The Conservancy has begun to promote its new conservation/no-till program. This program assists landowners and growers in the Tippecanoe River watershed who wish to adopt new tillage methods on their corn acreage. Landowners can learn more on Thursday, December 18, at the Community Building at the Fulton County Fairgrounds.

The benefits of this program for growers are two-fold: growers are provided financial incentives to purchase equipment and attachments; growers are also provided risk protection on the acreage enrolled into the program (thus there will be no economic loss for adopting the conservation method). Just as importantly, the resulting benefits of this program to the Tippecanoe River will be reduced sedimentation, erosion, and limited chemical runoff into the tributaries as well as directly into the river. This will lead to an improvement in quality of water, benefiting humans and fish and mussel habitats.

"The Nature Conservancy has had great success with this program in northeastern Indiana," said Chad Watts, program manager for the Tippecanoe River Project. "Farmers benefited, and definitely the waters of the St. Joseph River and its tributaries benefited, as did the sensitive aquatic communities. We're hoping to have similar success with the Tippecanoe."

With conservation tillage and no-till, growers leave 30% or more of the previous years crop residue on the soil surface at the time of planting. While helping farmers to conserve their topsoil and their time, the lack of tillage on farmland helps to create soil structure, encourages healthy soil microbes, and improves water retention and water movement through the soil. Leaving the soil untilled also helps to store carbon in the soil, reducing the amount of carbon entering the atmosphere that has been linked to global warming.

The Conservation/No-Till program kick off meeting is scheduled for December 18th from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. at the Community Building at the Fulton County Fairgrounds. At this meeting, growers can learn about new conservation programs that can help increase profits, while helping to improve water quality. Speakers will discuss conservation/no-till and how it can benefit local growers on their farms. Those growers interested in converting to conservation tillage or no-till as a part of this program can meet the crop consultant chosen to help with this initiative. For more information, please contact The Nature Conservancy at (574) 946-7491.

About TNC: The Nature Conservancy is a leading international, nonprofit organization that preserves plants, animals and natural communities representing the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive. To date, the Conservancy and its more than one million members have been responsible for the protection of more than 14 million acres in the United States and have helped preserve more than 83 million acres in Latin America, the Caribbean, Asia and the Pacific. In Indiana The Nature Conservancy has protected over 43,000 acres of irreplaceable forest, wetland and prairie. On the web at: nature.org/indiana.

GO TO CURRENT FRONT PAGE -->

GO TO KANKAKEE RIVER LOG ARCHIVE -->

©1996-2007 M. Lucas