Jan 6: According to a release from the Michigan Attorney General, late in the day on January 5, the U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court opposing Cox's efforts to protect the Lakes by closing the Chicago-area locks and waterways connecting carp-infested waters with the Lakes. Since filing his suit on December 21, 2009 [See WIMS 1/4/10], Cox has been joined by the states of Minnesota, New York, Ohio and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario. The State of Indiana has also expressed support for Michigan's action. Additionally, a number of environmental organizations have also supported the legal action to close the locks. Asian carp are an aggressive invasive species that could quickly devastate Great Lakes fish populations and the hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in economic activity which they support.
In his release Cox said he is "extremely disappointed by President Obama's choice to protect the narrow interests of his home state of Illinois while ignoring the pleas of Michigan and at least four other Great Lakes states" which have asked the United States Supreme Court for the immediate closure of Chicago-area waterways containing Asian carp. Cox called on Obama to immediately meet with him, Governor Jennifer Granholm, and others to hear first-hand the concerns Great Lakes states have due to the immediate threat posed by the aggressive invasive species.
Cox said, "I am extremely disappointed that President Obama sided with his home state while ignoring the concerns of the millions of families in Michigan, New York, Ohio, Wisconsin and Minnesota, whose jobs and way of life depends on protecting the Great Lakes from this economic and ecological disaster. I am hopeful, however, that by sitting down with us and listening to our concerns, he will come to recognize the urgency of protecting the jobs and ecology of the entire Great Lakes region."
Interestingly, the Obama Administration's Senior Advisor for Great Lakes issues, Cameron Davis, is the former head of the Alliance for the Great Lakes which also stongly supports the Supreme Court legal action initiated by the Michigan Attorney General. In June of 2009 U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson appointed the long-time Great Lakes advocate Davis to be EPA's Senior Advisor for Great Lakes issues. However, the newly announced Alliance President Joel Brammeier said in a release on December 21, "The Alliance applauds Michigan's move to protect the lakes. Knowing there are carp less than seven miles from Lake Michigan, we have to take every precaution until we know those canals are free from carp and the barrier is not being breached."
So what does EPA's Senior Great Lakes Advisor have to say. The Great Lakes Town Hall (GLTH) recently interviewed Cameron Davis (CD) and published the interview on January 3, 2010, The following is the portion of the interview dealing with the Asian Carp issue.
(GLTH) - After the waters past the electric barrier tested positive for Asian carp DNA, why weren't the locks immediately closed as a precautionary measure until it could be determined if any carp had made it as far as Lake Michigan?
(CD) - Thanks for asking the question because the call for lock closure has been really charged and it's important to have an honest discussion about it. First, the locks are old and leaky. Closing them would provide a false sense of security. But second and more important, the call for lock closure is largely based on eDNA sampling results. We're learning that eDNA is a good early warning system, but it shouldn't be relied on exclusively for making major management decisions. When rotenone (a piscicide) was applied near the Corps of Engineers' electric fences, where lots of Asian carp could have been, we only found one Asian carp. When the Illinois DNR contracted with commercial fishermen -- these people's livelihoods are based on capturing Asian carp among others -- they didn't find a single Asian carp out of hundreds and hundreds of other fish captured. eDNA is a new technology. It's an important color in the palate that helps us paint a picture of what's going out there in a waterway, but it's one color.
(GLTH) - What does the Asian carp emergency teach or tell you about the federal and state response to ecosystem threats, both urgent and especially for the long-term?
(CD) - The agencies have an enormous sense of urgency about keeping carp out of the Great Lakes. The December Rapid Response action to keep carp out of the Chicago Sanitary Ship Canal while the Corps of Engineers' electric fence IIA was down was a textbook team effort by local, state, provincial, federal and bi-national agencies that worked. Our goal was to keep carp out of the Great Lakes and in December we won. But that was just one battle. The agencies need to hit the gas on longer term, sustainable solutions.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) which has also supported the states' Supreme Court lawsuit responded to the latest action of Illinois and the Federal government in a blog post saying, "We might be forced to wait 10 years for the Army Corps of Engineers to finish a study on permanent solutions to this mess, but it is inevitable that some sort of barrier will have to be put in place to re-establish the separation that existed between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River basin to prevent this dangerous invasive species, and the multitudes of other queued up to follow, from threatening 1/5 of the world’s fresh water. It seems to me that the threat should spur action on its own, but as I’ve noted repeatedly in this slow-motion disaster, the State and Obama administration should seize this moment as the biggest opportunity that this region has seen in a century to fix real problems and begin the real work of improving the environment, economy and commercial transportation infrastructure of the Great Lakes."
Access the release from Michigan AG Cox (click here). Access the release from the Alliance (click here). Access the complete GLTH interview with Davis (click here). Access the lengthy NRDC blog post (click here).
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
ICR Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Accountability System
Jan 5: U.S. EPA has issued a Federal Register information collection request (ICR) for comments on the Great Lakes Accountability System [75 FR 362-364, 1/5/10]. In 2010, EPA, in concert with its Federal partners, will begin implementation of a new Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) which was included in the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-88). The GLRI will invest some $475 million in programs and projects strategically chosen to target the most significant environmental problems in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
The legislation calls for increased accountability for the GLRI and directs EPA to implement a process to track, measure and report on progress. As part of the process, Federal and non-Federal entities receiving GLRI funds will be required to submit detailed information on GLRI projects as part of their funding agreement. Recipients will be required to provide project-level information on the nature of the activity, responsible organization, organizational point of contact, resource levels, geographic location, major milestones and progress toward GLRI goals. The information is necessary to provide an accurate depiction of activities, progress and results. Information would be entered and updated on at least a quarterly basis.
A web-based Great Lakes Accountability System (GLAS) is being developed as the primary mechanism for collecting information on GLRI activities. The website will contain a user-friendly data entry interface for recipients to enter and submit project information directly into the GLAS. The data entry interface will consist of a series of screens containing pull-down menus and text boxes, where users can enter project specific information. The GLAS will provide the necessary information for reports to the President and will be accessible to the public via Internet.
Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection. Comments must be submitted on or before March 8, 2010.
Access the FR announcement (click here). Access the EPA docket for this action for background and to review and submit comments and (click here).
The legislation calls for increased accountability for the GLRI and directs EPA to implement a process to track, measure and report on progress. As part of the process, Federal and non-Federal entities receiving GLRI funds will be required to submit detailed information on GLRI projects as part of their funding agreement. Recipients will be required to provide project-level information on the nature of the activity, responsible organization, organizational point of contact, resource levels, geographic location, major milestones and progress toward GLRI goals. The information is necessary to provide an accurate depiction of activities, progress and results. Information would be entered and updated on at least a quarterly basis.
A web-based Great Lakes Accountability System (GLAS) is being developed as the primary mechanism for collecting information on GLRI activities. The website will contain a user-friendly data entry interface for recipients to enter and submit project information directly into the GLAS. The data entry interface will consist of a series of screens containing pull-down menus and text boxes, where users can enter project specific information. The GLAS will provide the necessary information for reports to the President and will be accessible to the public via Internet.
Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection. Comments must be submitted on or before March 8, 2010.
Access the FR announcement (click here). Access the EPA docket for this action for background and to review and submit comments and (click here).
FY 2010 Request For Fish & Wildlife Project Proposals
Dec 21: The Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act of 2006 (GLFWRA) Grant Program provides Federal grants on a competitive basis to states, tribes and other interested entities to encourage cooperative conservation, restoration and management of fish and wildlife resources and their habitat in the Great Lakes basin. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is requesting project pre-proposals that focus on the restoration of fish and/or wildlife resources and their habitats in the Great Lakes Basin. Supported in part by President Obama’s Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), a total of $8 million will be available to support projects this fiscal year. This represents the largest amount appropriated for this effort since the grants program began in 1998. Pre-proposals are due on Friday, January 22, 2010, by 11 PM EST.
Access links to complete information including the RFP, releases and related information (click here).
Access links to complete information including the RFP, releases and related information (click here).
Draft Lake Superior Aquatic Invasive Species Plan
Dec 23: U.S. EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office has release the Draft Lake Superior Aquatic Invasive Species Complete Prevention Plan and is soliciting comments by February 26, 2010. The Lake Superior Binational Program developed the draft Plan for the lake which identifies the pathways aquatic invasive species use to enter and become established in the lake. The Plan recommends prevention actions that need to be newly implemented, in addition to existing efforts, in order to close existing pathways on both sides of the border and prevent new aquatic invasive species from entering the Lake Superior ecosystem.
A series of conference calls will be scheduled for February 2010. On these calls, the plan will be presented via a webcast, and comments will be welcome. In addition, a series of workshops will be held in the spring and summer of 2010 to provide additional information and answer questions. Additional workshop details will be available in early 2010. After the comment period closes on February 26, all comments will be considered and the Plan will be revised and finalized accordingly. An implementation plan will then be written and circulated which will help relevant agencies and organizations incorporate prevention actions and activities into their respective work plans.
Access an overview, links to the complete draft Plan, on-line commenting and related information (click here). Access the EPA Great Lakes website for links to extensive information (click here).
A series of conference calls will be scheduled for February 2010. On these calls, the plan will be presented via a webcast, and comments will be welcome. In addition, a series of workshops will be held in the spring and summer of 2010 to provide additional information and answer questions. Additional workshop details will be available in early 2010. After the comment period closes on February 26, all comments will be considered and the Plan will be revised and finalized accordingly. An implementation plan will then be written and circulated which will help relevant agencies and organizations incorporate prevention actions and activities into their respective work plans.
Access an overview, links to the complete draft Plan, on-line commenting and related information (click here). Access the EPA Great Lakes website for links to extensive information (click here).
Q&A's On Great Lakes Restoration Initiative RFP
Dec 30: U.S. EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office has posted a number of questions and answers to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) Request for Proposals (RFP) [See WIMS 12/8/09]. EPA notes that many questions were presented in email and in two public webinars which took place in early December 2009. These questions and all other questions that have been received have been answered and the answers posted on-line.
On November 23, EPA announced the issuance of the RFP [79 pages, Announcement No: EPA-R5-GL2010-1] which solicits proposals from eligible entities for grants and cooperative agreements to be awarded pursuant to a portion of the $475 million Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Proposals must be received by EPA by noon Central standard time on January 29, 2010.
Access complete information on the RFP and Q&A's on the GLRI RFP website (click here).
On November 23, EPA announced the issuance of the RFP [79 pages, Announcement No: EPA-R5-GL2010-1] which solicits proposals from eligible entities for grants and cooperative agreements to be awarded pursuant to a portion of the $475 million Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Proposals must be received by EPA by noon Central standard time on January 29, 2010.
Access complete information on the RFP and Q&A's on the GLRI RFP website (click here).
Monday, January 4, 2010
MI & MN Ask U.S. Supreme Court To Stop Asian Carp
Dec 21: Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox announced that he has filed an action with the United States Supreme Court to immediately order Federal, state, and local officials responsible for Chicago-area locks and waterways to close them in order to stop Asian carp from entering the Great Lakes. According to a release from the AG, "The fish are an aggressive invasive species that could quickly devastate Great Lakes fish populations, causing severe damage to Michigan's economy by ruining the Great Lakes' $7 billion fishing and tourism industries."
AG Cox said, "Stopping Asian carp is an economic and environmental necessity for Michigan. The Great Lakes are an irreplaceable resource. Thousands of jobs are at stake and we will not get a second chance once the carp enter Lake Michigan. The actions of Illinois and federal authorities have not been enough to assure us the Lakes are safe. That's why the waterways must be shut down until we are assured that Michigan will be protected."
The lawsuit filed in the U.S. Supreme Court asks for the following actions: (1) Closure of the locks at the O'Brien Lock and Dam and the Chicago Controlling Works; (2) Operation of the sluice gates at the Wilmette Pumping Station, the O'Brien Lock and Dam, and the Chicago Controlling Works in a manner that will prevent carp from passing into Lake Michigan; (3) Creation of new barriers to prevent carp from escaping from the Des Plaines River into the Chicago Sanitary and Shipping Canal during flood events, and from getting to Lake Michigan through the Grand and Little Calumet Rivers; (4) Comprehensive study of the Chicago waterway system to define where and how many carp are in these waters, and to eradicate them; and (5) Action to permanently separate these waterways from the Great Lakes.
The suit comes after Illinois and Federal authorities reportedly executed the largest fish kill in Illinois history in response to the discovery of Asian carp DNA just miles from Lake Michigan [See WIMS 12/8/09]. Cox said, "The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has itself admitted allowing Asian carp into the Great Lakes would be an 'ecological and economic disaster. Michigan families whose jobs and way of life depend on the health of the Great Lakes deserve to know there is a long-term solution to this crisis." Cox has appointed veteran assistant attorneys general Peter Manning and Robert Reichel to lead the team of lawyers handling this case.
On December 22, the Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson filed a brief joining in the action and supporting the relief requested by Michigan. Minnesota has 140 miles of Lake Superior shoreline. Swanson’s brief points out that recreational and commercial fishing on Lake Superior are important to Minnesota’s economy. The brief indicates that, “Maintaining proper stewardship of the Great Lakes by stopping the entry of Asian carp is essential to the continued use and enjoyment of this important American natural resource.” She cited the December 4, 2009 report of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers saying, “The prevention of an interbasin transfer of bighead and silver carp from the Illinois River to Lake Michigan is paramount in avoiding an ecologic and economic disaster.”
Swanson’s brief also expresses concern for Minnesota’s regular fishing industry if Asian carp advance into inland Minnesota lakes through Lake Superior: She indicated, “If they invade the Great Lakes, they will have access to the rivers and tributaries that feed into the Great Lakes, thereby threatening inland waters. This would be extremely destructive to Minnesota’s economy and way of life, where inland fishing is an important recreational and economic pursuit. Indeed, Minnesota is known as ‘The Land of 10,000 Lakes,’ and the recreational fishing in Minnesota alone is a $2.725 billion per year industry.”
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which lauded the action, issued a release saying the lawsuit re-opens a nearly century-old Supreme Court case against the State of Illinois and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago to force immediate action on the carp issue. Legal and policy experts from NRDC said the suit could "trigger an improvement of the region’s water infrastructure and enhance Great Lakes transportation policy."
Henry Henderson, Director of NRDC's Midwest Program (and a former Commissioner of the Environment for the City of Chicago) who has blogged extensively on the potential for the Supreme Court case to be a viable legal tool to bring increased urgency to the carp crisis said, “Michigan has made a smart move with this bid to re-open the U.S. Supreme Court’s review of threats posed by the Chicago Diversion to the well-being of the Great Lakes ecosystem. The other Great Lakes states should join Michigan in pursuing all available legal steps to permanently separate the Great Lakes from the Mississippi River watershed.
“Throughout this slow-motion disaster we have seen a decided lack of urgency in the actions taken to fend off the carp threat. Hopefully, Michigan’s action will light a fire. Temporary emergency closure of the locks will not fix the problem -- but it will provide breathing room while real, scientifically sound, legally binding solutions are installed and public processes are engaged. This will not be a quick long-term fix. Though only a fraction of the goods passing through the Chicago region are waterborne, there are legitimate shipping and business concerns about the impact that this could have on barge traffic and management of sewage. With the health of the Great Lakes at stake, however, the interests of multi-billion dollar fishing, boating, and tourism industries and the quality of 1/5 of the world’s fresh water should really take precedence.”
Access a release from the Michigan AG (click here). Access a release from the Minnesota AG (click here). Access a release from NRDC with links to related information (click here).
AG Cox said, "Stopping Asian carp is an economic and environmental necessity for Michigan. The Great Lakes are an irreplaceable resource. Thousands of jobs are at stake and we will not get a second chance once the carp enter Lake Michigan. The actions of Illinois and federal authorities have not been enough to assure us the Lakes are safe. That's why the waterways must be shut down until we are assured that Michigan will be protected."
The lawsuit filed in the U.S. Supreme Court asks for the following actions: (1) Closure of the locks at the O'Brien Lock and Dam and the Chicago Controlling Works; (2) Operation of the sluice gates at the Wilmette Pumping Station, the O'Brien Lock and Dam, and the Chicago Controlling Works in a manner that will prevent carp from passing into Lake Michigan; (3) Creation of new barriers to prevent carp from escaping from the Des Plaines River into the Chicago Sanitary and Shipping Canal during flood events, and from getting to Lake Michigan through the Grand and Little Calumet Rivers; (4) Comprehensive study of the Chicago waterway system to define where and how many carp are in these waters, and to eradicate them; and (5) Action to permanently separate these waterways from the Great Lakes.
The suit comes after Illinois and Federal authorities reportedly executed the largest fish kill in Illinois history in response to the discovery of Asian carp DNA just miles from Lake Michigan [See WIMS 12/8/09]. Cox said, "The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has itself admitted allowing Asian carp into the Great Lakes would be an 'ecological and economic disaster. Michigan families whose jobs and way of life depend on the health of the Great Lakes deserve to know there is a long-term solution to this crisis." Cox has appointed veteran assistant attorneys general Peter Manning and Robert Reichel to lead the team of lawyers handling this case.
On December 22, the Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson filed a brief joining in the action and supporting the relief requested by Michigan. Minnesota has 140 miles of Lake Superior shoreline. Swanson’s brief points out that recreational and commercial fishing on Lake Superior are important to Minnesota’s economy. The brief indicates that, “Maintaining proper stewardship of the Great Lakes by stopping the entry of Asian carp is essential to the continued use and enjoyment of this important American natural resource.” She cited the December 4, 2009 report of the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers saying, “The prevention of an interbasin transfer of bighead and silver carp from the Illinois River to Lake Michigan is paramount in avoiding an ecologic and economic disaster.”
Swanson’s brief also expresses concern for Minnesota’s regular fishing industry if Asian carp advance into inland Minnesota lakes through Lake Superior: She indicated, “If they invade the Great Lakes, they will have access to the rivers and tributaries that feed into the Great Lakes, thereby threatening inland waters. This would be extremely destructive to Minnesota’s economy and way of life, where inland fishing is an important recreational and economic pursuit. Indeed, Minnesota is known as ‘The Land of 10,000 Lakes,’ and the recreational fishing in Minnesota alone is a $2.725 billion per year industry.”
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which lauded the action, issued a release saying the lawsuit re-opens a nearly century-old Supreme Court case against the State of Illinois and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago to force immediate action on the carp issue. Legal and policy experts from NRDC said the suit could "trigger an improvement of the region’s water infrastructure and enhance Great Lakes transportation policy."
Henry Henderson, Director of NRDC's Midwest Program (and a former Commissioner of the Environment for the City of Chicago) who has blogged extensively on the potential for the Supreme Court case to be a viable legal tool to bring increased urgency to the carp crisis said, “Michigan has made a smart move with this bid to re-open the U.S. Supreme Court’s review of threats posed by the Chicago Diversion to the well-being of the Great Lakes ecosystem. The other Great Lakes states should join Michigan in pursuing all available legal steps to permanently separate the Great Lakes from the Mississippi River watershed.
“Throughout this slow-motion disaster we have seen a decided lack of urgency in the actions taken to fend off the carp threat. Hopefully, Michigan’s action will light a fire. Temporary emergency closure of the locks will not fix the problem -- but it will provide breathing room while real, scientifically sound, legally binding solutions are installed and public processes are engaged. This will not be a quick long-term fix. Though only a fraction of the goods passing through the Chicago region are waterborne, there are legitimate shipping and business concerns about the impact that this could have on barge traffic and management of sewage. With the health of the Great Lakes at stake, however, the interests of multi-billion dollar fishing, boating, and tourism industries and the quality of 1/5 of the world’s fresh water should really take precedence.”
Access a release from the Michigan AG (click here). Access a release from the Minnesota AG (click here). Access a release from NRDC with links to related information (click here).
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
IUGLSB Says No Action Needed On St. Clair River Water Loss
Dec 15: Since 2007, a binational team of experts, with extensive public input, has been investigating whether there are ongoing changes in the St. Clair River that might be affecting water levels in the upper Great Lakes [See WIMS 5/5/09]. The International Upper Great Lakes Study Board (IUGLSB), of the International Joint Commission (IJC), released its final report and found that: (1) There has been no significant erosion of the channel in the upper reach of the St. Clair River bed since at least 2000. (2) Based on 15 different analyses, an increase in the river’s conveyance capacity accounts for 7 to 14 cm (2.8 to 5.5 inches) of the decline in head difference between Lake Michigan‐Huron and Lake Erie from 1963 to 2006; however, this change is not ongoing and there has been a slight decrease in conveyance capacity since 2000. (3) Climate is the main driver of lake level relationships over time and accounts for 9 to 17 cm (3.5 to 6.7 inches) of the decline in head difference.
In particular, hydroclimatic change contributed to a substantial decline in net water supplies to Lake Michigan‐Huron in the most recent decade. Overall, the Study Board also found that the difference in water levels between Lake Michigan‐Huron and Lake Erie (head difference) declined on average by about 23 cm (9 inches) between 1963 and 2006. They also found that shifts in the earth’s crust as it continues to adjust to the retreat of glaciers account for 4 to 5 cm (1.6 to 2 inches) of the decline in head difference with the apparent resulting decrease in water levels being more pronounced in the Georgian Bay region of eastern Lake Huron.
Given that the change in conveyance capacity is not ongoing, is small relative to the degree of scientific uncertainty associated with the various analyses and data measurements and appears to be decreasing, the Study Board did not recommend remedial measures in the St. Clair River at this time.
The organization Georgian Bay Forever (GBF), a Canadian environmental charity which has been the leading voice in raising concerns about the impact of low water levels on the unique ecology of Georgian Bay said the IUGLSB "missed a historic opportunity to recommend environmentally sound solutions to the serious water levels situation facing the middle Great Lakes." The group is now calling on IJC Commissioners to reconsider and overrule the 'do nothing' recommendations" of the IUGLSB.
GBF said, "The main recommendation of the IUGLSB final report -- that no remedial measures are needed to slow down the outflow of the middle Great Lakes -- ignores the consequence of the continuing and irretrievable loss of water from the Lakes Huron/Michigan and Georgian Bay." They indicated that, "The IUGLSB has previously conceded up to six billion more gallons (almost 23 billion litres) of water per day are flowing out of the Middle Lakes compared to 1971, but have decided the amount is too insignificant to justify any action."
Access a release from IUGLSB (click here). Access links to the complete scientific report, a summary for the public, 34 scientific reports that form the foundation for the main report and additional information (click here). Access a release from GBF (click here). Access the GBF website for links to a critique of the report and extensive background information (click here).
In particular, hydroclimatic change contributed to a substantial decline in net water supplies to Lake Michigan‐Huron in the most recent decade. Overall, the Study Board also found that the difference in water levels between Lake Michigan‐Huron and Lake Erie (head difference) declined on average by about 23 cm (9 inches) between 1963 and 2006. They also found that shifts in the earth’s crust as it continues to adjust to the retreat of glaciers account for 4 to 5 cm (1.6 to 2 inches) of the decline in head difference with the apparent resulting decrease in water levels being more pronounced in the Georgian Bay region of eastern Lake Huron.
Given that the change in conveyance capacity is not ongoing, is small relative to the degree of scientific uncertainty associated with the various analyses and data measurements and appears to be decreasing, the Study Board did not recommend remedial measures in the St. Clair River at this time.
The organization Georgian Bay Forever (GBF), a Canadian environmental charity which has been the leading voice in raising concerns about the impact of low water levels on the unique ecology of Georgian Bay said the IUGLSB "missed a historic opportunity to recommend environmentally sound solutions to the serious water levels situation facing the middle Great Lakes." The group is now calling on IJC Commissioners to reconsider and overrule the 'do nothing' recommendations" of the IUGLSB.
GBF said, "The main recommendation of the IUGLSB final report -- that no remedial measures are needed to slow down the outflow of the middle Great Lakes -- ignores the consequence of the continuing and irretrievable loss of water from the Lakes Huron/Michigan and Georgian Bay." They indicated that, "The IUGLSB has previously conceded up to six billion more gallons (almost 23 billion litres) of water per day are flowing out of the Middle Lakes compared to 1971, but have decided the amount is too insignificant to justify any action."
Access a release from IUGLSB (click here). Access links to the complete scientific report, a summary for the public, 34 scientific reports that form the foundation for the main report and additional information (click here). Access a release from GBF (click here). Access the GBF website for links to a critique of the report and extensive background information (click here).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
