|
August 25, 2006
Shepherd off-base on MMSD
By Lynn Broaddus, Executive Director,
PhD, MBA
Many of you have called me asking what I
think of this week’s Shepherd Express piece entitled “MMSD
Works, So Why Does Everyone Hate It?” My answer is pretty
simple: It was a masterful public relations piece, but certainly
wasn’t journalism.
The piece’s sins of omission included failure to note that almost
all of the interviewees are closely tied to the sewerage district,
including Don Theiler of Seattle. Heck, even the photographer is
tight with MMSD – those photos are hanging on the walls of the MMSD
Commission room! It also failed to mention that the Clean Water Act
and the removal of the North Avenue Dam deserve huge amounts of
credit toward the cleaning of the Milwaukee River, leaving the
unwitting reader to think that the deep tunnel was the sole cause of
improved water quality.
But most importantly, the piece entirely
skips over the issue of illegal sanitary sewer overflows. I’m not
entirely surprised: when Mr. Rondy interviewed me he didn’t know the
difference between a combined sewer and a sanitary sewer. Sanitary
sewer overflows are illegal, so this distinction is important. I
thought I explained this to him, but maybe it didn’t fit with his
headline.
Failure to end sanitary sewer overflows, even though the deep tunnel
was supposed to end – yes, END – this type of overflow when it came
on line, is but one reason that the public is frustrated with MMSD.
We’ve had an average of 4.6 per year, including five in the first
eight months of 2006. There are more of these illegal overflows per
year than of the combined sewer overflows!
The public is also frustrated because MMSD spends our taxpayer
dollars on hired lobbyists – both internal and contractual – trying
buy friendship. Meanwhile, MMSD’s lax approach to environmental
regulations has led to an increasing amount of storm water getting
into its system and causing sewage overflows year after year after
year.
Maybe we’d be less frustrated if MMSD spent less of our money on
lobbyists, and more on figuring out where the biggest storm water
problems are occurring, and fixing them.
Do you have your own reason to be frustrated with MMSD? If so, drop
me a line: Lynn_Broaddus@mkeriverkeeper.org.
August 17, 2006
NR 243 sent back to the drawing board –
a call to action
Wisconsin’s Senate and Assembly
Agriculture Committees voted down NR 243 – a bill that would protect
drinking water and streams from contamination due to winter
spreading of manure. The bill was sent back to the DNR for further
revisions.
The bill would affect only ½ of 1% of Wisconsin farmers whose
practices cause contamination of drinking water.
The DNR will be revising the bill and will re-submit it for
consideration. There is still hope that this important piece of
legislation will be enacted. If you are concerned about the health
of drinking water in Wisconsin, then please contact your
representative today and let them know that you want strong rules
that would ban winter spreading of manure.
FMR comments on NR
243 revisions
August 15,
2006
No Need to Obey This
Sign
by Doug Hissom
The law may have
changed but the sign says something completely different.
Friends of
Milwaukee's Rivers Riverkeeper Cheryl Nenn spent 16 months stuck on
a rock with the Village of Shorewood over its ban on launching
canoes from scenic Hubbard Park, succeeding in finally getting the
ordinance off the books last month.
Nonetheless, a sign
banning the practice still stands at the park as a barrier to those
who may not know the ordinance was changed.
Shorewood village
leaders gave Friends of Milwaukee's Rivers permission to include the
village's most pastoral park as a put-in site on FMR's new Milwaukee
Urban Water Trail map. What they didn't say, however, is that a
village ordinance prohibits launching of all watercraft from village
property--including Hubbard Park on the Milwaukee River and Atwater
Beach along Lake Michigan--unless written permission is obtained
from the Shorewood Police Department.
After a year of
silence from Shorewood officials, Nenn again wrote village officials
informing them that even when paddlers tried to comply with the
ordinance it was more akin to paddling upstream against a strong
current. Some had to pay for a permit, some were given verbal
permission, while others were told they had to wait until 3 p.m. the
next day to launch and still others were told they could stop by the
police department 24 hours a day.
"While I understand
the rationalization for notifying the police of citizens launching
at the site was primarily for safety reasons, this type of ordinance
really adds needlessly to the workload of your police officers,"
Nenn wrote village officials, "Since it appears that permit fees are
not uniformly collected and liability waivers are not required (thus
liability doesn't seem to be a concern), then there really is no
reason to have paddlers request permission to access the river."
The Village Board
agreed with Nenn's reasoning in July, changing the rule to exempt
non-motorized watercraft. Village Manager Chris Swartz confirmed the
ordinance was changed, but when asked about why the prohibition was
still posted and who was responsible to take the signs down, he did
not return a call.
Milwaukee County changed its similar anti-launching rule in the
1990s, however, Wauwatosa is still known to occasionally question
paddlers as to where they launched their boats on the Menomonee
River in an attempt to enforce its anti-launching rules.
The water is
currently low at Hubbard Park, but the site offers one of the more
peaceful launching areas in that portion of the Milwaukee River,
just south of Capitol Drive. Before the North Avenue dam was
removed, the park was also the home base and launching area for the
Milwaukee Rowing Club.
August 14,
2006
Brews and Canoes News
By Doug Hissom
Last month's Canoes and Brews event--which traversed the Milwaukee
River from Estabrook Park to downtown Milwaukee--saw 55 people in 28
boats fill the waterway with enthusiastic and sometimes artful
paddling. A dog or two showed up as well. It was the third annual
event FMR co-sponsored with the River Alliance of Wisconsin. While
the paddlers' goals were to get to Rock Bottom for a free brew, FMR
Riverkeeper Cheryl Nenn and the River Alliance's Helen Sarakinos
talked along the way about the river's recovery efforts and the
importance of removing the North Avenue dam. There were a few spills
of more than just beer, but the weather was warm enough to shake it
off.
See pictures from
canoes and brews
August 3,
2006
Officials plan $92.4 million deep tunnel sewer extension
Journal
Sentinel article
August 2, 2006
Milwaukee tops list of polluted beaches
in Great Lakes region
Milwaukee has the dubious distinction of ranking highest among Urban
Areas in the Great Lakes for the percent of water samples taken from
local beaches that exceeded the national standard for bacteria in
2005. Nearly a third of the time (30%) the samples had bacteria
levels of E. coli above the standard of 235 E. coli colony forming
units per 100 ml of fresh water.
Milwaukee beaches continue to be a source of concern,” said Rosemary
Wehnes, Sierra Club Associate Midwest Representative. There’s a lot
more that we should be doing to protect beachgoers.”
At the top of the list of polluted beaches was South Shore Beach,
with a percent exceedance rate of 47%. This put South Shore close to
the cutoff for designation as a “Beach Bum” at the 50% level. Other
beaches in Milwaukee County with an exceedance level above 25%
included Bradford Beach (38%), Tietjen Beach (Doctor’s Park)(33%),
Grant Park Beach (34%), Bender Beach (30%), McKinley Beach (30%),
and Atwater Park (28%).
"Milwaukee's beaches are sending out an S.O.S. and we need to come
to their rescue," said State Rep. Jon Richards (D-Milwaukee) who
represents Milwaukee's lakefront neighborhoods in the Wisconsin
State Assembly. "We now know that stormwater, seagull waste, sewer
overflows and lack of constant attention from lifeguards all
contribute to the decline of our beaches. Addressing these problems
will throw our beaches the lifeline they need."
“While we appreciate the efforts that MMSD and Milwaukee County have
made to improve the beaches with grooming,” said Rosemary Wehnes,
“these measures have not been enough to substantially improve the
water quality at our Milwaukee County Beaches. We need to address
failing infrastructure and storm-water outflows on Bradford Beach
and continued high bacteria levels at South Shore Beach as well as
the other polluted beaches in Milwaukee County.”
Addressing these problems requires the commitment of financial
resources. Unfortunately, existing federal funding such as the State
Revolving Fund that governments have relied on to address failing
infrastructure has been slashed in half. The Great Lakes
Collaboration Implementation Act that would appropriate needed funds
to help restore our beaches through federal grants has still not
been passed by Congress.
“Instead of being a source of civic pride, our beaches are often a
source of civic shame” said Cheryl Nenn, Riverkeeper for Friends of
Milwaukee’s Rivers. “To see the beaches relatively empty, especially
during these days of record heat, is very disconcerting. Our cities,
counties, and MMSD need to work together to find funding to address
documented infrastructural problems and make our beaches assets to
our community again.”
Nationally, the number of closing and health advisory days at ocean,
bay, and Great Lakes beaches topped 20,000 in 2005 – the most since
NRDC began tracking the problem 16 years ago – confirming that our
nation’s beaches continue to suffer from serious water pollution.
This year’s report includes new information that provides a more
alarming picture of the problem. For the first time, NRDC evaluated
beachwater quality nationwide and found 200 beaches in two dozen
states whose beachwater samples violated the standards at least 25
percent of the time. In most cases, beachwater was contaminated with
bacteria, and beachgoers were either swimming in it or banned from
swimming because of the health risks. Overall, 8 percent of the
beachwater samples taken nationwide violated health standards, while
samples at Wisconsin beaches exceeded health standards 16 percent of
the time.
Other polluted beaches that violated the standards at least 25% of
the time, along Lake Michigan include Kohler Andrae Beaches and KK
Road Beach in Sheboygan County, Eichelman Beach and Simmons Island
Beach in Kenosha County, YMCA Beach and Point Beach in Manitowoc
County, and Crescent Beach in Kewaunee County.
The current beachwater health standards, however, do not adequately
protect the public and need to be updated, according to NRDC. Today
the organization announced it is suing the Environmental Protection
Agency for failing to modernize the standards as ordered by Congress
six years ago.
“A day at the beach should not turn into a night in the bathroom, or
worse, in the hospital,” said Nancy Stoner, director of NRDC’s Clean
Water Project. “There have been significant advances over the last
two decades that we should be using to protect beachgoers, but the
EPA is dragging its feet in implementing them.”
In 2000, Congress passed the Beaches Environmental Assessment,
Cleanup and Health Act (BEACH Act), which required the EPA to revise
the current health standards by October 2005. The agency missed the
deadline, and now says it will not be able to finish updating them
until 2011.
The current beachwater quality standards are 20 years old and rely
on obsolete monitoring methods and outdated science that leave
beachgoers vulnerable to a range of waterborne illnesses. Risks
include gastroenteritis, dysentery; hepatitis, respiratory ailments
and other serious health problems. For senior citizens, small
children, and people with weak immune systems, the results can be
fatal.
“Swimming at Wisconsin’s beaches should not risk the health of our
children and families, especially when these problems are
preventable” said Bruce Speight, WISPIRG Field Director. “Congress
should take immediate action to restore the Clean Water State
Revolving Fund, providing municipalities with the resources to
update their sewage systems, and the EPA should take steps
immediately to update the beachwater health standards as required by
the Beach Act. Wisconsin’s waterways and beaches are too important
to be neglected.”
“The pollution that fouls our beaches largely comes from stormwater
runoff from roads and buildings, as well as from failing sewage
infrastructure and septic systems,” said Cheryl Nenn, Riverkeeper
for Friends of Milwaukee’s Rivers. “Poorly planned development along
our waterways has paved over wetlands and other vegetation that
traditionally soaked up and filtered polluted stormwater.
“Some of these problems are preventable,” Nenn added. “It would be a
lot safer to swim if we would use rain barrels and native vegetation
to capture and filter stormwater at its source. Shorter- term
solutions could include filtering stormwater at the “end of the
pipe”, upgrading aging sewer systems, and installing covered garbage
cans at beaches to discourage gull activity.” (For more information
on cleaning up stormwater pollution, go to: www.nrdc.org/water/pollution/rooftops/rooftops.pdf.)
Based on the report’s findings, NRDC today announced the best and
worst beaches for protecting beachgoers from contaminated water.
This year there are 32 Beach Buddies and 22 Beach Bums. (For more
details about each beach, go to www.nrdc.org/media/docs/060803.pdf.)
Beach Buddies: NRDC’s 32 Beach Buddies – which monitored beachwater
quality regularly, had no violations of public health standards, and
took significant steps to reduce pollution. In Wisconsin, they
include seven beaches in Door County: Gislason Beach, Haines Park
Beach, Percy Johnson Memorial Park Beach, Rock Island State Park
Beach, Sand Dune Beach, School House Beach, and Whitefish Bay Boat
Launch Beach. Door County was a 2005 Beach Buddy and continues to
identify sources of contamination at all 28 of its monitored Lake
Michigan beaches. It received a grant from the Wisconsin Coastal
Zone Management Program for the 2006 beach season to develop best
management recommendations for each monitored beach—and an incentive
cost-share program for 11 beaches—to obtain stormwater reduction
engineer plans. The county also protected beach water quality by
preventing new pollution sources from being sited near a beach.
|
