|
|
|

Great Lakes Concerns
GLOSSARY
Bioaccumulation The
increase in concentration of a substance by a biological organism
above the level found in its food supply or environment; often the
concentration increases through successive levels of the food chain
(biomagnification).
Consumptive use Human
consumption of basin waters through agricultural and industrial
processes (e.g., evaporation from irrigation and steam emitted from
power plants) plus that incorporated into products (e.g., milk).
Ecosystem The interdependent
relationship among members of a biological community and their natural
environment.
Great Lakes basin The
hydrological unit (region) drained by the Great Lakes; also referred
to as the Great Lakes watershed.
Great Lakes states The
eight U.S. jurisdictions bordering the Great Lakes: Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
Two Canadian provinces also border the lakes: Ontario and Quebec.
Non-native species (exotics)
Species not native to a locale.
Nonpoint-source discharge A
diffuse discharge (one that does not have a single point of origin)e.g.,
rain or runoff from adjacent lands that enters a water body; may
carry pollutants.
Point-source discharge A
single, identifiable source of a discharge, (e.g., pipe or smokestack);
may carry pollutants.
BACKGROUND
[APRIL 1, 2002] The Great LakesErie, Huron,
Michigan, Ontario, and Superiorand their connecting channels
form the largest fresh surface-water system on Earth. Covering more
than 94,000 square miles, the Great Lakes and connecting waterways
comprise about 90 percent of the nation's supply of fresh water
and 18 percent of the world's. If the volume of Great Lakes water
were spread over a surface area the size of the lower 48 states,
it would create a lake nearly 10 feet deep. With 3,288 miles of
Great Lakes shoreline, Michigan has a longer coastline than any
state except Alaska. More than 200 Michigan rivers flow into the
Great Lakes.
This system greatly affects the quality of life in
Michigan and throughout the Great Lakes basin, the region drained
by the lakes. It is a major source of domestic and industrial water;
it provides an economical way to transport raw materials, agricultural
products, and manufactured goods; it is the cornerstone of the tourist
industry of the region; and it provides a wealth of recreation opportunities.
The Great Lakes affect the region's weather and provide unique water
and coastal habitats that support a wide range of plants and animals.
Problems
In the 1960s, reports of serious Great Lakes problems
began to alarm the region's residents. Domestic water supplies were
threatened, swimming beach closures were common, and toxic chemicals,
including mercury, DDT, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), were
found to be accumulating at alarming levels in fish and wildlife.
Moreover, alewifewhich had been limited to the Atlantic Ocean
and Lake Ontario until the 1932 Welland Canal expansion around Niagara
Fallshad become the dominant species in lakes Huron and Michigan,
and the annual die-off was fouling beaches and clogging water-intake
systems.
In the last three decades significant progress has
been made in controlling pollution and improving the quality of
Great Lakes water. There is heightened public awareness about how
land use and waste-disposal practices affect the lakes. Federal
law requires the governors of the eight Great Lakes states to agree
to any significant diversion of Great Lakes water outside of the
basin. However, the following issues are still of major concern:
- Toxic contamination
- Nonpoint-source pollution and excessive nutrients
- Exotic species
- Water diversions
- Lake levels
- Habitat loss
Lakes Management
While the legal ownership of Great Lakes bottomland
rests with the eight states and two Canadian provinces that border
the lakes, the interests of the two countries in commercial navigation
and pollution control in this shared water resource prompts strong
federal interest. Under the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, Canada
and the United States established the International Joint Commission
(IJC) to prevent and resolve disputes over water use and provide
independent advice on such other transboundary environmental issues
as air pollution.
Under the auspices of the IJC, in 1972 the two governments
entered into the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) to
restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem.
The focus of the IJC and the cooperating federal, state, and provincial
agencies for nearly 30 years has been to develop and implement pollution-abatement
measures that will restore and maintain beneficial uses of the lakes.
DISCUSSION
Toxic Chemical Contamination
The Great Lakes basin is vulnerable to the accumulation
of pollutants released as by-products of agriculture, manufacturing,
power generation, and waste incineration. The IJC has identified
at least 360 pollutants in the water, sediments, and wildlife of
the Great Lakes, including many persistent toxic chemicals that
are of significant concern: dioxin, PCBs, mercury and lead, poly-aromatic
hydrocarbons, and several pesticides. These pollutants are toxic
at low concentrations, accumulate in fish and wildlife (bioaccumulation),
and increase in concentration at successive levels of the food chain
(biomagnification).
Toxic chemicals enter the Great Lakes by direct discharge
from such point sources as manufacturing sites and wastewater
treatment facilities, from atmospheric deposition (precipitation
containing toxic particles), and through runoff from the land. Studies
show that atmospheric deposition accounts for as much as 90 percent
of the PCBs, lead, and mercury that annually reach the lakes, coming
from as far away as Mexico and South America. State and regional
initiatives to protect the lakes from toxic deposition include the
Regional Great Lakes Air Toxics Emissions Inventory, a collaborative
monitoring effort among the Great Lakes states.
In cooperation with state food-inspection agencies,
the federal Food and Drug Administration regulates the chemical
levels allowed in commercial food products, including commercially
caught fish. The Great Lakes states and provinces, however, are
responsible for protecting their residents from the health risks
of consuming contaminated, non-commercially caught fish and wildlife.
This is accomplished by issuing consumption advisories for the general
population (and sensitive subpopulations, such as pregnant women,
nursing mothers, and children) when a lake's fish/wildlife are found
to contain concentrations above a certain level of such chemicals
as mercury and dioxins. In Michigan, the advisories are issued annually
by the Michigan Department of Community Health and recommend limiting
or avoiding consumption of certain fish/wildlife from specific water
bodies.
Nonpoint-Source Pollution and Excessive
Nutrients
Nutrientsincluding phosphorus, various forms
of nitrogen, and other elementsprovide the basic building
blocks for biological productivity of aquatic organisms, and they
support the production of small plant organisms (i.e., phytoplankton)
that are the primary link in the Great Lakes food chain. Too many
nutrients, however, can cause significant problems. Excessive phosphorus
in Lake Erie led to widespread algae blooms, odors, poor aesthetics,
and lowered dissolved oxygen to the point that in the 1960s Lake
Erie was declared dead.
One major source of phosphorus is household laundry
detergent. Since 1972 the United States and Canada have spent approximately
$10 billion on building and upgrading sewage treatment facilities,
and this has reduced all nutrients, but primarily phosphorus, that
eventually find their way to the lakes. In addition, in the 1970s,
Michigan imposed a phosphorus content restriction on laundry detergents
sold in the state.
Another source of lake nutrients is runoff, or non-point
source pollution: When rainfall or melting snow flows across the
landscape, it washes soil particles, bacteria, pesticides, fertilizer,
animal waste, oil, and numerous other toxics into the lakes
and the tributaries that feed them. This is one of the leading causes
of water-quality problems in Michigan and the Great Lakes. Through
both voluntary and regulatory programs, the Michigan Department
of Environmental Quality's (MDEQ) Nonpoint Source program targets
activities to reduce the effect of polluted runoff in Michigan.
Non-Native Aquatic Nuisance Species (Exotics)
So-called exotic species of plants and animals are
those that have been transported from their natural range into new
territory. Many are highly beneficial: Most U.S. crops and domestic
animals, many sport fish and aquaculture species, numerous plants,
and most biological-control organisms originated elsewhere. Many
exotic species, however, cause significant environmental, socio-economic,
and public health damage because they have no natural predators
in their new locale. They can negatively affect commercial and recreational
fishing, power generation, manufacturing, navigation, tourism and
beach use, natural area/native species appreciation, public water
supplies, and whole populations of native plants and animals. A
Cornell University study (1999) tags the annual cost of harmful
exotics in the United States at $138 billion.
Since the 1800s, more than 160 exotic aquatic organisms,
including plants, fish, algae, and mollusks have become established
in the Great Lakes. About 10 percent have created severe problems.
These species out-compete more desirable species for food and habitat
and carry diseases that are transmitted to other fish and wildlife.
One, the zebra mussel, was discovered in Lake St. Clair in 1988
and now has been found in all five Great Lakes and 165 inland Michigan
lakes and is spreading across the country. The zebra mussel is particularly
troublesome to industries and municipalities that rely on large-scale
water withdrawals from the Great Lakes because they attach themselves
in barnacle-like colonies to water-intake screens and restrict water
flow, costing millions annually to keep intakes free of them.
More than one-third of the current exotics have been
introduced in the past 30 years, a surge that coincides with the
St. Lawrence Seaway expansion. Once successfully established, a
non-native organism is virtually impossible to eradicate. The most
effective defense is to prevent unintentional introductions in the
first place. Shipping practices, most notably the discharge of ballast
water from ocean-going vessels, primarily are responsible for introduction
of exotics, but they also can enter the Great Lakes through aquaculture,
bait harvesting operations, aquarium trade, and other ways.
In 1993 the U.S. Coast Guard issued regulations requiring
that ships destined for the Great Lakes from abroad and not fully
loaded with cargo must discharge and exchange their ballast water
in the ocean; the intent is to flush out potential invaders. Although
this is an important step in reducing future exotic invasions, it
is not completely effective. Critics point out that the regulations
exempt approximately 80 percent of the 500 or so vessels transiting
here each year from conducting any type of ballast-water management
or treatment. These are the infamous NOBOB (no ballast
on board) vessels. No ballast is a misnomer, because
they actually may be carrying up to 100 metric tons of unpumpable
water and residual sludge, which mixes with the Great Lakes ballast
water that they take on and discharge as they off load cargo at
one port (e.g., steel at Gary) and take on cargo at another (e.g.,
grain at Duluth).
Michigan Public Act 114 of 2001 addresses the ongoing
invasion of exotic species. The law requires the MDEQ to
- determine whether vessels operating on the Great
Lakes and the St. Lawrence Seaway are complying with ballast-management
techniques adopted by the Shipping Federation of Canada (for oceangoing
vessels) and by the Lakes Carriers' Association and the Canadian
Ship Owners' Association (for non-oceangoing vessels);
- determine whether ballast-water management practices
have been made a condition of passage on the St. Lawrence Seaway;
- determine whether oceangoing vessels operating
on the Great Lakes are using a ballast-treatment method to prevent
introduction of exotics; and
- compile and maintain lists of vessels that comply
with the management practices or treatment methods, maintain the
lists on the MDEQ Web site, and provide them to the governor,
certain legislative committees, and shippers.
The act has focused public attention on the severity
of problems related to the ongoing invasion of exotics, but some
suggest that it relies largely on voluntary compliance and is only
a beginning step in reducing the risk of future invasions. Given
interstate commerce protections under the U.S. Constitution, international
trade agreements, and the geographic scope of the Great Lakes, many
believe that more stringent federal action is required to address
this issue.
Water Diversion
The present means of managing diversions from the
lakes are the Great Lakes Charter, a voluntary agreement signed
in 1985 by the Great Lakes governors and Ontario and Quebec premiers,
and the U.S. Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), enacted in
1986.
Great Lakes Charter
The charter and a recently adopted amendment (Annex
2001) set out a diversion notice-and-consultation process by which
no Great Lakes state or province will proceed with any new or increased
diversion or consumptive (human) use of Great Lakes water exceeding
five million gallons/day average over 30 days without notifying,
consulting, and seeking the consent of all affected states and provinces.
The amendment provides a framework through which new agreements
may be reached among the states/provinces to take such actions as
changing the water-withdrawal limit, collecting water-use data by
jurisdiction, implementing environmentally sound and economically
feasible water-conservation measures, and resolving disputes regarding
proposed diversions and consumptive uses of Great Lakes water.
Water Resources Development Act
The WRDA requires that the eight Great Lakes governors
unanimously approve any diversion from the lakes or their tributaries
for use outside the basin. In reviewing proposals subject to the
act, the governors consider whether the proposed diversion (1) is
necessary to protect the requesting locality's public health, safety,
and welfare, (2) is consistent with water resource planning and
existing uses of basin waters, (3) has incorporated environmentally
sound and economically feasible water-conservation practices, and
(4) is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative.
Lake Levels
Great Lakes water levels have fluctuated for thousands
of years. Unlike oceans, where the ebb and flow of tides are constant
and predictable, Great Lakes fluctuations rarely are regular, and
they cannot be predicted accurately for the long term. The major
influences on the hydrology of the lakes and their connecting channels
are weather and climate. Water enters the system via precipitation,
runoff, and groundwater inflow. It leaves the system via surface
evaporation, groundwater outflow, consumptive use and diversion,
and the St. Lawrence River. Because most of these factors cannot
be controlled or accurately predicted for more than a few weeks,
humans' ability to regulate the lake levels is very limited. Nature
has the last word.
Recent years have seen a drop, to lows not experienced
since the mid-1960s, in lake levels, particularly in lakes Michigan
and Huron. This is due partly to low precipitation in the Lake Superior
region during the winter of 199899, which reduced runoff into
the lake, and partly to higher air temperatures throughout the region
in 19992000, which warmed the water and increased evaporation.
Any dramatic change in lake levels or temperatures causes problems.
For example, high water causes erosion, and low water affects boaters
and the marine industry; in addition, the recent warmer weather
(and, thus, warmer water) has resulted in more algal blooms than
usual.
The rapid increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2)
concentrations and greenhouse gasses in the last century is believed
to have resulted in a significant rise in the global average temperature,
and a warmer climate with either more or less precipitation could
result. The potential effects on Great Lakes water levels could
be significant. Large fluctuations have important impacts on wetlands,
fisheries, habitats, and human use of the shoreline.
Habitat Loss
Adequate high-quality physical and chemical habitat
is necessary to ensure the successful growth, survival, and reproduction
of plants and animals that make up a healthy ecosystem. A decline
in ecosystem health often may be attributed directly to the loss
of critical habitat.
The Great Lakes system is home to hundreds of thousands
of plant, fish, and wildlife populations, a good many of which depend
on near-shore habitatthat is, they breed, grow, and/or live
some or all of their life on the land or in the water along the
shoreline of the big lakes and the connecting rivers, streams, and
channels. These areas are greatly affected by both water level changes
and human use.
Human activity contributes to habitat degradation
and loss through agriculture, urban and industrial development,
exotic species introduction, mining, nonpoint-source pollution and
sedimentation, solid waste disposal, recreation, air emissions,
water discharges, and water-level management.
The full picture of the state of Great Lakes habitat
is insufficiently documented and largely anecdotal, but many researchers
and experts contend that loss and degradation are severeindeed,
existing data collection and research, which are largely local and
piecemeal, support this view. The biennial State of the Lakes Ecosystem
Conference (SOLEC, hosted by Environment Canada and the EPA to deliver
a bi-national, science-based review of the state of the basin ecosystem
without assessing agency programs), reviews research and papers
on habitat health but there currently is no funding or plan in either
country to tackle the big picture.
Directional Drilling
Directional drillingthat is, drilling that begins
in one location (e.g., on land) and angles to reach an oil or gas
deposit in another location (e.g., under a lake)is used when
it is undesirable or impossible to position a wellhead directly
above the mineral deposit. Until recently, Michigan was the only
state that permitted such drilling in the Great Lakes, and it was
a matter of considerable controversy. The practice was banned in
Michigan with enactment of Public Act 148 of 2002. The act prohibits
the Michigan Department of Natural Resources from entering into
a contract that allows drilling operations for the exploration or
production of oil or gas beneath Great Lakes bottomlands, connected
bays or harbors, or connecting waterways.
Great Lakes Conservation Task Force
In January 2002, the state Senate's bipartisan Great
Lakes Conservation Task Force released The Citizens' Agenda:
An Action Plan to Protect the Great Lakes, presenting 17 issue
briefs as well as findings and recommendations. The plan is expected
to provide the basis for legislative proposals to address the matters
raised in public meetings and through other input that the panel
received.
See also Air Quality; Water Quality.
Research on this policy topic was made possible
by a grant from the Frey Foundation.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Citizens' Agenda: An Action Plan to Protect
the Great Lakes
Michigan Senate Great Lakes Conservation Task Force (2002)
Great Lakes Commission
400 Fourth Street
Ann Arbor MI 48103
(734) 665-9135
(734) 665-4370 FAX
www.glc.org
Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
2205 Commonwealth Boulevard
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
(734) 741-2235
www.glerl.noaa.gov
Great Lakes Information Network
400 Fourth Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
(734) 665-9135
(734) 665-4370 FAX
www.great-lakes.net
Great Lakes National Program Office
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 886-4040
(312) 353-2018 FAX
www.epa.gov/glnpo
Great Lakes United
P.O. Box 3040
Ann Arbor, MI 48106
(734) 998-0760
(734) 998-0821 FAX
www.glu.org
International Joint Commission
Great Lakes Regional Office
100 Ouellette Avenue
Windsor, Ontario N9A 6T3
Canada
(519) 256-7821
(519) 256-7791 FAX
www.ijc.org
Michigan Environmental Science Board
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Constitution Hall
P.O. Box 30680
Lansing, MI 48909
www.michigan.gov/mesb
Michigan Sea Grant College Program
Natural Resources Building, Room 334
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
(517) 353-9568
(517) 353-6496 (FAX)
www.miseagrant.org
Office of the Great Lakes
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Lansing, MI
(517) 335-4056
(517) 335-4053 (FAX)
www.michigan.gov/deq
CONTENT CURRENT AS OF APRIL 1,
2002
© 2002 Public
Sector Consultants, Inc.
Sponsored by the Michigan Nonprofit Association and the Council
of Michigan Foundations
www.michiganinbrief.org
|