According to a brief announcement, "Preventing the introduction of aquatic invasive species into the Great Lakes through stricter ballast water standards and a comprehensive enforcement policy is a top priority for the U. S. Coast Guard. In 2009, 100% of ships bound for the Great Lakes via the Seaway received a ballast tank exam. A total of 5450 ballast tanks onboard 295 different ships were sampled and had a 97.9% compliance rate. Ships that failed to properly manage their ballast tanks were required to either retain the ballast water and residuals on board, treat the ballast water in an environmentally sound and approved manner, or return to sea to conduct a ballast water exchange. The BWWG anticipates continued high ship compliance rates for the 2010 navigation season.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
2009 Summary Of Great Lakes Ballast Water Management Report
According to a brief announcement, "Preventing the introduction of aquatic invasive species into the Great Lakes through stricter ballast water standards and a comprehensive enforcement policy is a top priority for the U. S. Coast Guard. In 2009, 100% of ships bound for the Great Lakes via the Seaway received a ballast tank exam. A total of 5450 ballast tanks onboard 295 different ships were sampled and had a 97.9% compliance rate. Ships that failed to properly manage their ballast tanks were required to either retain the ballast water and residuals on board, treat the ballast water in an environmentally sound and approved manner, or return to sea to conduct a ballast water exchange. The BWWG anticipates continued high ship compliance rates for the 2010 navigation season.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Meetings & Comment On St. Clair River Water Level Study
The Study Board concluded that: The difference in water levels between Lake Michigan-Huron and Lake Erie has declined by about 23 centimetres (cm) (9 inches) between 1963 (following the last major navigational channel dredging in the St. Clair River) and 2006. They also concluded that Three key factors contributed to this 23 cm (9 inches) change including: (1) A change in the conveyance
(water-carrying capacity) of the St. Clair River accounts for an estimated 7 to 14 cm (2.8 to 5.5 inches) of the decline. (2) Glacial isostatic adjustment (the uneven shifts of the earth's crust since the last period of continental glaciations ended) accounts for about 4 to 5 cm (1.6 to 2.0 inches) of the fall. (3) Changes in climatic patterns account for 9 to 17 cm (3.5 to 6.7 inches); this factor has become even more important in recent years, accounting for an estimated 58 to 76 percent of the decline between 1996 and 2005.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.
Access a release from IJC with details on the meeting locations, two teleconferences and commenting procedures (click here). Access a 28-page summary report (click here). Access more background and additional information on the report and study (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).
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
GLC Calls For Ecological Separation To Stop Asian Carp
The resolution also calls for accelerating the timetable for full operation of the Asian carp barrier system on the Chicago Ship and Sanitary Canal and to establish structural measures to prevent the inadvertent introduction of Asian carp from floodwaters of the Des Plaines River into the canal, and ultimately the Great Lakes. The action took place at the Commission's 2010 Semiannual Meeting in Washington, DC where the eight member states of the Commission, along with associate Canadian member provinces of Ontario and Québec, voiced consensus on the need to inhibit further movement of Asian carp northward to the Great Lakes.
In other Commission business, implementation and ongoing support for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) were key focal points of the Great Lakes Commission's federal legislative priorities for FY 2011, formally released at the meeting. The Commission's federal priorities, outlined in the publication "Fulfilling the Promise for the Great Lakes: Advancing Great Lakes Restoration and Economic Revitalization," are largely driven by the GLRI's five focus areas: aquatic invasive species, contaminated sediments, nonpoint source pollution, degraded wetlands and threatened fish and wildlife resources. Enacted by Congress with full funding of $475 million for FY 2010, the GLRI is planned as a five-year program to restore and protect the Great Lakes. The Administration has proposed funding at a level of $300 million for FY 2011. The complete GLC 2011 legislation program is available from the Commission's website indicated below.
Great Lakes Advocates In DC For Funding & Carp Action
prosperity. It's time for the nation to roll up its sleeves and get to work, before the problems get worse and more costly."
Monday, February 22, 2010
Administration Releases Great Lakes Restoration Plan
According to an announcement of the Plan, the Initiative is not intended to be "another grand statement about the Great Lakes; it is intended to operationalize those statements. It builds on countless hours by elected, agency, business, public interest and other leaders, which resulted in the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy (GLRC Strategy). The GLRC Strategy provides a framework for the Action Plan, and the Action Plan is just that: an action driver. It articulates the most significant ecosystem problems and efforts to address them in five major focus areas."
The five areas of major focus include: (1) Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern, including pollution prevention and cleanup of the most polluted areas in the Great Lakes; (2) Invasive Species, including efforts to institute a "zero tolerance policy" toward new invasions, including the establishment of self-sustaining populations of invasive species; (3) Nearshore Health and Nonpoint Source Pollution, including a targeted geographic focus on high priority watersheds and reducing polluted runoff from urban, suburban and, agricultural sources; (4) Habitat and Wildlife Protection and Restoration, including bringing wetlands and other habitat back to life, and the first-ever comprehensive assessment of the entire 530,000 acres of Great Lakes coastal wetlands for the purpose of strategically targeting restoration and protection efforts in a science-based manner; and (5) Accountability, Education, Monitoring, Evaluation, Communication and Partnerships, including the implementation of goal- and results-based accountability measures, learning initiatives, outreach and strategic partnerships.
The Action Plan identifies goals, objectives, measurable ecological targets, and specific actions for each of the five focus areas identified above. The announcement indicates that, "The Action Plan will be used by federal agencies in the development of the federal budget for Great Lakes restoration in fiscal years 2011 and beyond. As such, it will serve as guidance for collaborative restoration work with participants to advance restoration. The Action Plan will also help advance the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement with Canada."
Access the announcement (click here). Access the 41-page Action Plan (click here). Access the GLRI website for complete information (click here).
Friday, February 19, 2010
Officials To Announce Great Lakes Action Plan Sunday
Enviros Join In Supreme Court Request To Stop Asian Carp
Lyman Welch, attorney and Water Quality Program manager for the Alliance said, "An issue of this magnitude and consequence for all of the Great Lakes states should land squarely in the Supreme Court. We're asking the Court to intervene in an unprecedented crisis that, left unchecked, will impact the livelihoods of all who depend on a healthy Great Lakes." Alliance President Joel Brammeier, who co-authored a study on the subject in 2008 said, "The permanent solution is not technology, but what we call 'ecological separation' -- or no movement of live organisms between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River via the canals."
Built to divert Chicago's wastewater away from Lake Michigan and into the Illinois River, the groups indicated that the City's complex system of rivers and canals creates an "aquatic superhighway for the jumbo-sized Asian carp and other invasives to travel between the Lake Michigan and Mississippi watersheds." The environmental groups have called for a physical separation of the two watersheds -- essentially returning them to their natural status -- as the only permanent way to protect both basins. The Great Lakes Fishery Commission and U.S.-Canadian International Joint Commission (IJC) have commended the Alliance for leading the separation initiative, and the concept is now supported by most experts, states and the international community as the only long-term solution.The Supreme Court on January 19 rejected Michigan's request for a preliminary injunction to temporarily seal off two Chicago-area locks and waterways leading into Lake Michigan [See WIMS 1/19/10 & 1/20/10]. The court has not yet ruled on another Michigan request to reopen a nearly century-old case in which the high court allowed Chicago to divert its wastewater from Lake Michigan to the Illinois River, despite the protests of the other Great Lakes states. Thom Cmar, attorney with NRDC said, "The Asian carp invasion is a crisis, but it's also an economic opportunity for Chicago and the entire Great Lakes region. By investing in a real solution to stop this army of fish, at the same time we can create new jobs and move toward sustainable transportation and wastewater infrastructure. The multi-billion dollar Great Lakes fisheries, tourism and recreation industries are at stake. The Supreme Court should take this case so we can bring the states together to solve this problem."
Michigan and the environmental groups argue that the Supreme Court should appoint a "special master" -- an expert in water law, shipping, or related fields -- to decide whether to temporarily close the locks on Chicago-area canals and create an ecological separation between the Mississippi River and Great Lakes basins. NRDC's Cmar said, "Having the Supreme Court available as this neutral arbiter of disputes among states would take it out of this world we're in now where we're being asked by the state of Illinois and the Army Corps to just trust them. There are all sorts of reasons why we're concerned we can't simply trust them."
Access a release from the groups (click here). Access the 31-page amicus brief to the Supreme Court (click here). Access a blog posting by NRDC with further explanation of the legal action (click here). Access a release and link to the Alliance study on ecological separation (click here). Access links to all Michigan filings in the Supreme Court case (click here). Access the Michigan, Illinois and all legal filings in the case (click here).













