-------
-11-
1139
r*^3
GRAND rB1~3».'»
n i\/coc£ I »?"
L_ ! w-4 \f !
c> "* 1 ^- ,-~-"""-- . ty.
oosEgj^f / ihjo-3 u*/
LEGEND
~~* —— Lake Michigan Watershed Boundary
ifsKriors'a Subregion Boundary
County Lines
«"*•"""" Also In Illinois River Bosin
M-6 Subregion Numbers
-i*e£*Jl,
SCALE IN MILES
GREAT LAKES — ILLINOIS
RIVER BASINS PROJECT
SUBREGIONS
LAKE MICHIGAN WATERSHED
U 3 DEPAKTMENT OF THE INTFRlOfl
fEDERAL WATER POLl-UTlON CONTROL AOMiN
-------
lifts
1 DOUGLAS MORTON
2 MR. STEIN: Are there any comments or
3 questions of Mr. Morton?
4 MR. HOLMER: I have one, Mr. Chairman.
5 Mr. Morton, (on page 11291) in your state-
6 ment, the sentence starting the second paragraph
7 indicates your intention to acquire nutrient
g reduction as soon as practicable or by July
9 1977 or the removal of effluents from Lake
10 Michigan. The removal of effluents from Lake
H Michigan would not under your present program
12 require the removal of nutrients?
13 MR. MORTON: In at least one instance
14 it will, yes, sir. The one proposal for facili-
15 ties to take the effluent from the lake will
16 require a third stage of treatment, I don't
17 want to use the word "advanced" treatment at
18 this stage, but it will require a third stage
19 treatment and nutrient removal and, of course,
20 chlorination is involved.
21 MR. HOLMER: But this is not as yet a
22 Statewide requirement in Illinois?
23 MR. MORTON: Not Statewide, no, sir.
24 It is a part of all our interstate requirements,
25 but it is not necessarily a part of all of our
-------
1141
! DOUGLAS MORTON
2 intrastate waters.
3 MR. HOLMER: Thank you.
4 MR. STEIN: Are there any other
5 further comments or questions?
6 If not, thank you very much, Mr. Morton.
7 Mr. Klassen:
8 MR. KLASSEN: The formal recommendations
9 of the Sanitary Water Board of Illinois will be
10 given following all of the other presentations.
w The next participant as far as Illinois
12 is concerned involves the largest water user,
13 public water supply user, on the lake, the City
14 of Chicago.
15 The City of Chicago has undoubtedly
16 the longest in terms of time and certainly
17 one of the most complete records of lake water
18 quality.
19 At this time I am going to call on
20 the City of Chicago to make the presentation
2i as the largest municipal water user. It will
22 be done in three parts, first by Commissioner
23 Jardine, the second by one of its assistants,
24 arid the third, more of a technical nature, by
25 another staff member.
-------
1142
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 But at this time Commissioner James
3 Jardine, the City of Chicago, Commissioner,
4 Department of Water and Sewers.
5
6 STATEMENT BY JAMES W. JARDINE
7 COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OP WATER AND SEWERS
8 CITY OP CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
9
10 MR. JARDINE: Chairman Stein, Com-
u missioner Moore, distinguished Conferees, ladies
12 and gentlemen.
13 I am very appreciative of the oppor-
14 tunity to be here today, as a representative
15 of the City of Chicago, to outline the activities
16 and responsibilities of the City relative to
11 the protection and use of Lake Michigan waters.
18 The Chicago Water Works System pro-
19 vides water service to approximately 4,700,000
20 persons in Chicago and some 66 suburban communi-
2i ties, covering a total area of over 425 square
22 miles. Our source of water is, of course, Lake
23 Michigan. The lake also provides a full range
24 of recreational activities including boating,
25 fishing, swimming and nature appreciation to
-------
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 millions of residents of Illinois, Indiana,
3 Michigan and Wisconsin, and countless visitors
4 each year.
5 The need, the urgency, and the import-
6 ance of this conference, which was called by the
7 Secretary of the Interior, Stewart Udall, at
8 the request of Governor Otto Kerner, cannot be
9 overstated. While I speak only for Chicago,
10 I am sure that there are millions of people
11 throughout the midwest, and indeed throughout
12 the Nation, who share the concern which has
13 brought us here.
14 Because of Chicago's strategic location
15 on the shores of Lake Michigan, the lake has
lg served to influence the City's development as
17 the transportation center at the heart of the
18 midwest's agricultural and industrial complex.
19 Indeed the history of Chicago is a saga of the
20 efforts to control the most important physical
21 and natural asset associated with our four States--
22 fresh water. In this apparently never ending
23 struggle to retain the full use of Lake Michigan
24 waters to support the domestic, commercial,
25 industrial, and recreational needs of Chicagoland's
-------
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 residents, the City has sought and received
3 cooperation from both Federal and State agencies
4 throughout the years. It is with a plea for
5 continued cooperation, this time between the
6 four States bordering the lake, that we are
7 here today. I would like to recount very
8 briefly some of the problems which have occurred
9 since Chicago was incorporated as a community
10 in 1833 and as a city in 1837.
11 At the time of Chicago's birth,
12 drinking water was obtained from shallow
13 wells or directly from the lake. At the
14 same time the Chicago River, which flowed into
15 the lake, was used as a receiving water for
16 removing drainage and the sanitary wastes
17 produced by the community's 4,000 residents.
18 In this way, a cycle of disease potential was
19 established. Early efforts to correct this
20 problem encouraged the infant city to form
21 its own water company and thereby assume
22 municipal responsibility for protecting the
23 public health from deadly water-borne diseases.
24 The first attempts to obtain an uncontaminated
25 water source were directed toward extending
-------
l JAMES W. JARDINE
2 water intakes into the lake in a search for
3 clean water. The first such endeavor was in
4 1854, when a water intake was located 600
6 feet from the shore. In the same year, a
6 cholera epidemic claimed the lives of 3,300
7 persons or 5-1/2 percent of the population
g of the young city, mute testimony to the
9 magnitude of the problem.
10 A further step in combating this
U problem was construction of the first integrated
12 sewerage system in the United States. With its
13 completion, the surface drainage was greatly
14 improved. However, this improvement did not
15 alleviate the pollution of Lake Michigan since
16 the Chicago River's natural flow was into the
17 lake.
jg In a further step to break the chain
1$ linking the water supply system with sewage
20 disposal, water tunnels were constructed under
21 the lake bed connecting the distribution system
22 with the water intakes located two miles from
23 shore. Completion of the first tunnel in 1867
24 attracted worldwide interest.
25 At the same time, steps to prevent
-------
1146
JAMES W. JARDINE
2 the flow of pollution from reaching the lake
3 were taken. It was determined that if the
Illinois and Michigan Canal, which was opened
in 1848, was deepened the Chicago River could
be reversed and flow away from the lake. This
7 project, which was completed in l8?l, worked
8 well for a time. However, an expanding popu-
lation increased the drainage requirements
10 of the Chicago River, resulting in its return
to its natural direction of flow into the lake.
On August 2, 1885, a torrential rain-
13 storm blanketed the Chicago area with more than
14 six inches of rain. The stormwaters scoured the
sewer system, and the mass of pollution spread
16 into the lake far beyond the water intakes.
17 The result was an epidemic of typhoid fever
18 which persisted for several years. Primarily
because of this storm, a plan was developed to
20 permanently reverse the direction of flow of
2i the Chicago River, a plan which was carried out
22 by a new governmental agency created in 1890,
23 the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater
24 Chicago.
25 While this new agency was implementing
-------
1147
1 JAKES W. JARDINE
2 a plan and program to accomplish Its mission,
3 the Chicago Water Department concerned itself
4 with providing an adequate supply of high
5 quality, safe water. In support of this
5 objective, chlorination of the raw water at
7 the intake cribs was begun in 1912 with all
8 the city water furnished receiving this
9 treatment by 1915- Shortly thereafter, liquid
10 chlorine feed equipment was installed in all
11 water pumping stations. These improvements
12 resulted in a greatly reduced frequency of
13 waterborne diseases with the annual deaths
14 from typhoid fever, per 100,000 population,
15 being reduced from 174 in 1891 to only 2 in
16 1917.
17 In 1923 and 1924, an epidemic of
18 228 typhoid fever cases occurred on the south
19 side of Chicago, resulting in 23 deaths and
20 increasing the need for a more rigid system
21 of chlorination control. New equipment was
22 installed in duplicate sets at all pumping
23 stations. Permanent attendants were employed
24 and trained and a comprehensive program of
25 water sampling, testing, and pollution study
-------
s , me
1 JAMES ¥. JARDINE
2 was initiated under technical supervision. The
3 effectiveness of these actions is demonstrated
4 by the fact that since 1924 there has not been
5 a recorded case of typhoid fever in Chicago
6 attributable to the public water supply.
7 In 1924 to 1926 evidence began to
8 accumulate that water quality was declining
9 and pollution increasing in the southern
10 portion of Lake Michigan. Numerous surveys
11 were conducted and reports prepared by the
12 United States Public Health Service and the
13 city confirming the fact of declining water
14 quality. Heeding the warning, the Chicago
15 Water Department began construction, in 1926,
16 of an experimental water filtration plant for
17 research for the design of a full-scale plant.
18 A Pollution Abatement Program was also launched
19 by industrial concerns in cooperation with the
20 City of Chicago, the Indiana Board of Health
21 and the Metropolitan Sanitary District.
22 By 1931 the abatement program had
23 significantly reduced the amount of phenol
24 pollution in the lake. However, the relief
25 was temporary and the further deterioration
-------
JAMES W. JARDINE
2 of raw water quality prompted the Department
3 to install an ammonia-chlorine treatment plant
4 at the Dunne Crib in 1936. The water filtration
5 program was also accelerating rapidly and
construction of the 600 million gallon per
day South Water Filtration Plant was started
in 1938.
Throughout the years, the Chicago
10 Water Department has thus been able to maintain
11 a safe water supply by introducing modern
water treatment techniques and construction.
13 of two water filtration plants. The South
14 Water Filtration Plant, which has been in full
15 operation since 19^7* was expanded by 50 percent
in 1967. The Central Water Filtration Plant
17 was placed in operation in
18 We are here today because we are
19 again faced with a serious pollution problem.
20 The intensity of pollution of Lake Michigan
21 has had various trends over the years, both
22 upward and downward; however, during the last
23 15 years, there has been a marked and alarming
24 increase in the pollution of the lake. In an
25 effort to provide safe water, the Chicago
-------
1150
t JAMES W. JARDINE
2 Water System includes facilities for collection,
3 treatment and distribution. Since 1955, Chicago
4 has greatly benefited from the dynamic leader-
g ship of Mayor Richard J. Daley and during this
fi period approximately $270,000,000 has been in-
7 vested for capital improvements in the Chicago
g Water System. As a result, Chicago today is
9 the only city with a population of 1,000,000
10 or over which enjoys a "Class One" rating by
.. the American Insurance Association.
12 The system today consists of the
13 world's two largest water filtration plants,
14 with a combined treatment capacity of
15 2,600,000,000 gallons a day. The system
16 includes over seventy miles of water tunnels
17 and a network of over 4,000 miles of water
18 mains fed by 11 pumping stations, with an
19 installed capacity of 3 billion gallons a
20 day. The complete water system has a replace-
2i ment value of over one billion dollars. The
22 average daily pumpage in 196? was in excess
23 of one billion gallons per day.
24 It is apparent from the preceding
25 figures that Chicago has spared no expense
-------
115,1
1 JAMES V* JARDINE
2 to provide a better supply of safe water for
3 its citizens. However, the problem extends
4 beyond Chicago. The pollution picture is
6 more alarming because of the strong indications
6 of eutrophication of Lake Michigan, as well
7 as the increase in the number and intensity
8 of periods when the quality of lake water has
9 been seriously affected by pollutants. This
10 is not a Chicago problem alone$ it is a problem
11 which we all share. Information has been
12 collected and published by the FVPCA indicating
13 the existence of complex current patterns which
14 means that pollution can affect the uses of
15 Lake Michigan water many miles from the source
1^ of the pollutant. There are also alarming
17 indications that the capacity of the lake to
18 assimilate through natural means the variety
19 of complex forms of pollution has been over-
20 taxed and that we now face a very real threat
21 to the continuation of the multi-use benefits
22 afforded by the lake,
23 Greater emphasis will be given by
24 Mr. James C. Vaughn, Engineer of Water
25 Purification, who will detail in more quantative
-------
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 terms, the continued decline of water quality
3 as indicated by increased costs of water
4 treatment and the various parameters which
5 serve as pollution indices. We would like
6 to report on various steps which have been
7 taken by Chicago in response to the critical
g problem faced today, both for your information
9 and your consideration.
10 As you know,the Army Corps of
11 Engineers is responsible for maintaining
12 navigation within the various waterways. In
13 order to maintain prescribed depths in harbors
14 and navigable channels, the Corps of Engineers
15 is forced to dredge periodically. In the past
16 these dredgings were transported and dumped
17 into selected areas of Lake Michigan.
18 On August 25, 19^6, a resolution
19 was introduced by the Honorable Richard J.
20 Daley, Mayor of the City of Chicago, requesting
21 the Corps of Engineers to study alternate means
22 of disposing of dredgings, with this resolution
23 being approved by the City Council. We are
24 pleased to note that as of the present time,
25 various means of disposal are being studied
-------
1153
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 and pilot projects utilizing shore disposal
3 already in operation. We should like to report
4 that on September 28, 19^7, the Chicago City
5 Council passed an amendment to the Municipal
5 Code to prohibit the discharge of untreated
7 or inadequately treated wastes from vessels
g into Lake Michigan. This subject will be
9 discussed later, in greater detail, by Mr.
10 Richard A. Pavia, Assistant Commissioner of
11 Water and Sewers.
12 We have considered at some length
13 the problems of the past and the present and
14 should now like to briefly comment on what
15 the future may hold. While we are not
16 gifted to predict the future, I might add
17 that through the medium of this conference
18 we can greatly influence what the future
19 will be for Lake Michigan and the type of
20 legacy we'll leave for posterity.
21 It seems obvious that unless swift
22 and decisive actions are taken, the use of
23 Lake Michigan as a source of drinking water
24 will become increasingly costly, and our
25 ability to achieve the present high quality
-------
! JAMES W. JARDINE
drinking water may be difficult or impossible.
2
Already in many areas outside of Chicago
3
bathing beaches on Lake Michigan are frequently
4
subject to restricted use. Recreation in the
6
form of swimming and boating have been curtailed
6
by physical or esthetic considerations and
7
commercial fishing has diminished in importance.
8
What were beautiful stretches of lakeshore
9
have in some areas become degraded to the
10
point where nature appreciation has been
11
curtailed.
12
On the other hand, I think we can
13
shape the future of our lake through immediate
14
and decisive action. The levels of technology
15
available today provide tools which we did
16
not have in the past. We also have an informed
17
public deeply concerned about the status of
18
our natural resources and sympathetic toward
19
whatever measures are Judged necessary to
preserve Lake Michigan for the full range of
21
public use. both for ourselves and for future
22
generations.
23
The need for action at this Four
24
State Conference is most urgent. For this
25
-------
1135
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 reason, I offer for your consideration the fol-
3 lowing recommendations:
4 1. Immediate adoption of uniform
5 water quality standards and time
6 schedule for implementation and
7 enforcement covering all of Lake
g Michigan.
9 2. Immediate adoption of a uniform
10 set of regulations for controlling
11 wastes from watercraftj again a
12 uniform implementation program and
13 time schedule should apply.
14 3« Encourage industry to study
15 methods of reducing pollution loads
16 through the use of recirculation
17 techniques designed to reduce water
18 consumption and concentrate waste
19 products for easier treatment.
20 4. Encourage industry to study
21 methods of reclaiming useful
22 materials from waste products and
i
23 thereby reduce the cost of treat-
24 ment.
25 5. Consider a cooperative effort
-------
1156
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 directed at developing a practi-
3 cal water quality surveillance
4 program, and study the feasibility
5 of using aerial reconnaissance
6 techniques, as a means for mea-
7 suring changes in water quality
g over the entire lake.
9 6. Support research directed toward
10 restoration and maintenance of the
H natural ecology in the lake to in-
12 sure the preservation of high water
13 quality and desirable forms of aquatic
14 life.
15 7- Provide adequate financiax
16 assistance for the Bureau of
17 Fisheries to research corrective
18 measures relative to the alewife
19 problem.
20 We concur with the conclusions and
21 generally support the recommended actions con-
22 tained in the report on "Water Pollution Problems
23 of Lake Michigan and Tributaries" issued by the
24 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration.
25 The battle to save Lake Michigan has- already
-------
115J
! JAMES W. JARDINE
2 begun. Our campaign must not be one of only
3 words. All available resources must be
4 mobilized for a total war with the objective
5 of an unconditional and lasting victory over
6 the pollution of our lake.
? MR. STEIN: Thank you.
g MR. JARDINE: Mr. Chairman, yesterday
9 one of the Conferees asked the question about
10 how Chicago disposes of its filter wash water
jj and sediment from the water filtration plants.
12 Chicago does the same thing that most of the
J3 other filter plants on the lake in the other
14 States do. Both the south and central filtra-
15 tion plants of the City of Chicago currently
16 return both their filter wash water and sedi-
17 ment to Lake Michigan. This is the general
18 practice throughout most of the country. The
19 justification for this is generally that this
20 material is not considered a pollutant since
2i the organic materials it contains exists in
22 the natural waters of Lake Michigan. The
23 materials added through the filtration process
24 include chlorine, alum and activated carbon.
25 All three of these materials are inorganic.
-------
1138
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 At best, the activated carbon contained in
3 the filter wash water would provide temporary
4 discoloration and this could be considered
5 esthetic pollution. However, I should like
6 to point out that the capital improvement
7 program for the City of Chicago covering the
8 period of 1968 to 1972 provides $1,200,000
9 to study, design and construct alternate
10 measures for both filter wash water and
11 sediment disposal.
12 I repeat, while we do not consider
13 this material as contributing to the pollution
14 of Lake Michigan, it is our intension to
15 correct this matter in an effort to preserve
16 and protect the Chicago lakefront from the
17 visible nuisance which these discharges
18 produce.
19 MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Jardine.
20 Are there any comments or questions?
21 I would likg to compliment you on
22 the statement and on the cooperation that we
23 have received from the Chicago Water Department
24 through the years.
25 I think, as many of you know, the
-------
1159-
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 records, the painstaking records and analyses
3 made by the Chicago Water Department served as
4 the "basis for a lot of our recommendations and
5 a lot of our work. Without the activity of the
6 Chicago Water Department I am certain we could
7 not be as far ahead in the Lake Michigan abate-
8 ment program as we are today. Some of you may
9 recall that Mr. Gerstein's work--I can see that
10 he has come in--Art Gerstein's work, who was
11 with the Water Department, in a large measure
12 served as the basis for the abatement program
13 we have had for the southern end of the lake.
14 Also I would like to point out another
15 fact of significance to me, that here we have
16 a municipality, the Federal Government and the
!7 State, as far as I am concerned, working very,
18 very closely on a concerted program to improve
19 water quality, both water supply and pollution
20 control. I don't think there are any institu-
21 tional differences here. In other words, we
22 show it can work. This is an instance in vhich
23 it can work, and as far as we are concerned
24 we practically work with the Chicago Water
25 Department as one staff, with personnel,
-------
11 fit).
1 JAMES W. JARDINE
2 exchange of information, and so forth. I
3 think if the relationships that we have had
4 with intergovernmental agencies were the
5 same that we have been able to work out with
6 the Chicago Water Department we would be
7 much farther ahead in meeting our water re-
g source problems.
9 Thank you very much.
10 MR. JARDINE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
11 I assure you we will continue to cooperate with
12 you and the other Conferees in the Federal
13 Water Pollution Control Administration.
14 (Applause.)
15 MR. KLASSEN: Problems always have
16 solutions and difficult problems always involve
17 a lot of discussion and controversy.
18 MR. STEIN: Pardon me, are the other
19 two men who accompanied Mr. Jardine coming up?
20 MR. KLASSEN: Yes. This is the
21 introduction to the next talk.
22 MR. STEIN: Pardon me. 0. K. I
23 didn't want you to call another witness other
24 than them.
25 MR. KLASSEN: I am trying to be
-------
1 C. W. KLASSEN
2 subtle, Mr. Chairman. Maybe you didn't recognize
3 it.
4 MR. STEIN: I recognized your subtlety,
5 but I couldn't figure out just how subtle you
6 were trying to be.
7 MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, if I have
8 confused you, then this is a real achievement.
9 (Laughter.)
10 Only repaying you, I might say.
11 (Laughter.)
12 Seriously, the problem of pollution
13 by watercraft is admittedly a vexing one, one
14 for which there is not a ready solution, and
15 the City of Chicago has taken a major step
16 in the direction of solving this problem,
17 at least a step in the direction. There has
18 been a lot of controversy, a lot of comment
19 on this.
20 Later I know, from having a preview
21 of other papers, that some of the voting
22 interests are going to make some comments
23 on it, but Chicago has and is leading the way
24 toward a solution, and the next presentation
25 will be given by Richard Pavia, a Deputy
-------
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 Commissioner of Water and Sewer Department,
3 City of Chicago, and will deal primarily
4 with this question and what Chicago is doing
5 and plans to do.
6 For many of you this is an opportunity
7 to get firsthand and clarified some of the
8 questions that have arisen and the problems
9 that have arisen.
10 Mr. Pavia.
11
12 STATEMENT BY RICHARD A. PAVIA
13 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WATER AND SEWERS
14 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
15
16 MR. PAVIA: Thank you, Mr. Klassen.
17 Mr. Stein, Mr. Moore, distinguished
%
18 Conferees, ladies and gentlemen,
19 With your permission, and in the
20 interest of time and your patience, I plan
21 to delete portions of this statement which
22 are overly repetitive from what you have been
23 hearing for the last two days.
24 The water pollution problems we face
25 today are of our own making—certainly not
-------
1163
! RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 intentional, but perhaps a direct result of
3 a lack of knowledge or apathy on the part of
4 all of us. Anyone who has enjoyed boating on
g the waters of Lake Michigan couldn't help but
g be awestricken by the immense size of this
7 inland sea. This factor in part probably
8 accounts for our misuse. Because of the size
9 of the lake, many would feel that its waters
10 are not pollutable and therefore need no pro-
n tection. The testimony of Mr. James C. Vaughn
12 and others certainly refutes this belief. They
13 have stated that the quality of Lake Michigan
14 waters is deteriorating at an accelerated rate.
15 Thus if we are to achieve the objective of
16 saving Lake Michigan and preserving its waters
17 for multiple uses, we must collectively agree
lg upon an action program for abating all forms
19 of water pollution.
20 The above observations relate to all
2i forms of pollution including wastes from water-
22 craft. It has been argued that the magnitude
23 of this source of water pollution is negligible
24 &nd that, at the most, minimum levels of treat-
25 ment should be required. Unfortunately this
-------
1164
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 theory, which has largely been advocated by
3 persons with special interests, isn't supported
4 by facts or accepted by the public. The area
5 of Lake Michigan is approximately 22,400 square
6 miles and by comparison the number of boats
7 is small. However, vessel usage is concentrated
8 in the locations of dense population where
9 domestic water supply and recreational uses
10 are at a maximum. As a result, marinas are
11 frequently located in close proximity to bathing
12 beaches and domestic water intakes. Along
13 Chicago's 29 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline
14 are some 30 bathing beaches covering 14 miles.
15 These beaches are visited frequently by many
16 of the seven million residents of Metropolitan
17 Chicago. Noting that there are also eight
18 boating marinas and anchorages located along
19 the Chicago lakefront, it is obvious that
20 beaches and marinas use the same waters.
21 To further describe the problems faced
22 by the City of Chicago, it should be known that
23 more than 750 overseas vessels and approximately
24 3,000 domestic and Canadian ships annually
25 call at the Port of Chicago, making it the
-------
^_____ 1165
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 largest seaport on the Great Lakes. This is
3 in addition to the approximately 4,000 pleasure
4 craft which cruise the waters off Chicago;
5 many of these craft are equipped with sanitary
6 facilities.
7 Boating and bathing in the same
8 shore waters presents a real threat of
9 infection to swimmers. Tests were made
10 last summer at various marinas to determine
11 the extent of the pollution problem. During
12 the 1967 boating season testing revealed that
13 the average ammonia nitrogen content of
14 harbor waters at seven marinas varied from
15 O.o6l parts per million at the Diversey
16 Harbor to 0.123 parts per million at the
17 Jackson Park Harbor. When eompared to the
18 water quality criteria for shore waters
19 established by the State of Illinois^ these
20 test samples disclose a variation of from
21 120 to 2^5 percent of the permissible annual
22 average. The level of ammonia nitrogen is
23 one of the primary water pollution indicators.
24 Tests in the same marinas also revealed
25 significant bacterial counts as the boating
-------
1166
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 season progressed.
3 I might add that test samples also
4 disclosed some traces of lead and oil.
While these marinas are not the
control points used to survey water quality,
7 the tests do indicate that pollution loads
g can be generated which at the whim of wind
and current can pose a threat to nearby
10 beaches. Sanitary wastes from watercraft are
heavily concentrated in boat harbors, and
12 quantitative analyses are not necessary to
13 recognize the increase of algae and weed
14 growth appearing at many Chicago harbors
15 and marinas with increased frequency and
density each year.
Because of the seriousness of the
18 problems of water pollution, Mayor Richard J.
Daley, in October 1966, appointed a committee
20 consisting of representatives of the Chicago
2i Board of Health, the Port of Chicago, and the
22 Department of Water and Sewers, to review
23 the problem of harbor pollution and determine
24 if remedial action was needed. This committee
25 studied the problem in depth for 10 months
-------
116?
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 and on August 16, 19&7, recommended that wastes
3 from vessels should be retained for shoreside
4 disposal. Many considerations entered into
5 this recommendation.
6 In reaching this conclusion, the
7 committee evaluated three alternatives:
g !• • Do nothing—and await resolution
9 of this problem by the Federal Government.
10 Inasmuch as these are interstate waters, it
u would seem that the Federal Government would
12 have a major say-so in whatever was done.
13 Various agencies, including the Public Health
14 Service, have been discussing control of
15 vessel pollution for many years with no
16 conclusion. Therefore, we felt that this
17 alternative was not acceptable and further
18 delay would only increase the problem. Also,
19 lack of direction has caused some agencies
20 and individuals to equip their craft with
2i unacceptable devices, thus further complicating
22 our problem.
23 I might add at this point that
24 the Corps of Engineers,in an effort to co-
25 operate,has equipped most of their dredges
-------
1168
RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 and vessels with equipment which is Judged
3 unsatisfactory in these waters. Similarly,
the Coast Guard has, in an effort to cooperate,
equipped or in process of equipping vessels
with equipment which may not be satisfactory
7 for all of the Great Lakes.
8 The second alternative considered:
9 2• Require that all vessels and
10 pleasure craft capable of discharging sanitary
11 waste products be equipped with approved waste
treatment devices. We discarded this alternative
13 because the water quality criteria for Lake
14 Michigan, developed as a result of the 1965
Interstate Pollution Conference, was at such
a level that investigation failed to reveal
17 any waste treatment device capable of satisfying
18 this standard. This water quality criteria for
Lake Michigan was developed with the partici-
20 pation of the States of Illinois and Indiana,
and under the auspices of the Federal Water
22 Pollution Control Administration. The criteria
23 was submitted by the State of Indiana and
24 approved by the Secretary of the Interior,
25 and thereby its status in Indiana has been
-------
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 changed from State Water Quality Criteria to
3 Federal Water Quality Standards. The State
4 of Illinois submission of water quality
5 criteria for Lake Michigan is identical to
6 that of Indiana. Therefore, we can only
7 conclude that Illinois submission-will
g be approved and thereby constitute Federal
9 Standards. In anticipation of imminent
10 Federal approval, we determined that it
H would be improper to sanction the use of
12 waste treatment devices which could not
13 satisfy the water quality criteria of the1
14 receiving waters.
15 3« Encourage the use of retention
16 tanks or treatment devices which require no
17 discharge to lake waters. This alternative,
18 while presenting many difficulties for boat
19 owners and operators, as well as governmental
20 agencies charged with responsibilities of
21 providing shoreside disposal facilities,
22 was judged the only reasonable choice. We
23 believe that the retention tank concept with
24 or without recirculation features offers
25 the best solution to the problem of handling
-------
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 waste from watercraft In spite of the in-
3 convenience it fosters. Boats frequently
4 cruise on waters with widely different water
5 quality standards. The one device which will
6 satisfy all water quality standards, whether
7 they be very very high or very low, is the
8 waste retention tank. We further believe
9 that the total cost of this solution, including
10 necessary shoreside disposal facilities, will
11 be the least expensive.
12
13 In evaluating this subject, major
14 consideration was given to the fact that unlike
15 a flowing stream where a quantity of water
16 passes a given cross section only once, the
17 effect of dilution in a still body of water
18 such as a lake is less beneficial. Pollutants
19 are, therefore, assimilated in the natural cycle
20 and gradually increase, lowering the quality
21 of the receiving waters to that of the dis-
22 charges. In Lake Michigan, the problem is
23 particularly acute since approximately 100
24 years is required for a complete water inter-
25 change.
-------
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 Mayer Daley having concurred with
3 the committee's recommendations, transmitted
4 them to the Chicago City Council where after
5 a Public Hearing they were approved on Septem-
6 ber 28, 1967. Attached to the statement which
7 you have is a copy of important excerpts from
g Chapter 38 of the Chicago City Code, which
9 deals with the Chicago Harbor.
10 (Which said document is as follows:)
11 Excerpts From Chapter 38
12 Municipal Code, City of Chicago
13 Pertaining To Water Pollution
14
City of Chicago, Richard J. Daley, Mayor
15
Department of the Port of Chicago
16
Executive Offices - Navy Pier
17
Chicago, Illinois 6o6ll
18
January 1, 1968
19
20 The City of Chicago is most proud of
21 its long record of accomplishments with regard
22 to preventing pollution of Lake Michigan, and
23 thereby preserving in large measure the future
2* of this valuable resource for water supply, a
25 prime source of recreation in the Midwest, and
-------
1172
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 Chicago's most important physical asset. Be-
3 cause of its location on the shores of Lake
4 Michigan, at the Junction of the St. Lawrence
5 Seaway and Illinois-Mississippi inland waterway,
6 the City of Chicago has been and will continue
7 to be vitally concerned with and influenced by
g water management activities.
9 In support of these objectives, it shall
10 be the policy of the City of Chicago that pollution
11 of Lake Michigan will not be tolerated. Regula-
12 tions designed to support this policy have been
13 prepared, and the administration and enforcement
14 of these controls will be of prime concern to
15 appropriate City agencies.
16 The Federal Government, the States bor-
17 dering on the Great Lakes and the City of Chicago
18 have taken positive action in establishing programs
10 for the prevention, regulation and abatement of
20 water pollution, bacterial, chemical and physical,
21 and including solid waste emanating from munici-
22 palities and industries bordering the shore of
23 Lake Michigan. The provisions of the Municipal
24 Code of Chicago, State an Federal regulations
25 and statutes, all prohibit the fouling of the
-------
1173
1 | RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 waters of Lake Michigan, and the enforcement of
3 provisions designed to prevent the pollution of
4 the waters and harbors of Chicago by vessels,
5 both foreign and domestic, private and commercial,
6 as well as pleasure craft, and land extensions
7 which contribute to the pollution of Lake Michigan,
8 are Judged to be essential in order to preserve
9 the health, welfare and safety of citizens of
10 Chicago and all residents of the Great Lakes
11 Region.
12 The following regulations are estab-
13 lished in accordance with the provisions of
14 Chapter 38, Sections 8, 9 and 10 of the Municipal
15 Code, the enforcement of which rests with the
16 Director, Department of the Port of Chicago.
17
A. Definitions as Stipulated in Para-
18
graph #38-1 of Chicago's Municipal Code.
19
Chicago Harbor.
20
21 The harbor shall consist of
22 the Chicago River and its branches
23 to their respective sources and
24 all slips adjacent to and connecting
25 therewith, the Ogden Canal, the
-------
117ft
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 Calumet River and its branches
3 and all slips connecting there-
4 with, the waters of Lake Calumet
5 and all slips and basins con-
6 nected therewith and all piers,
7 breakwaters, and permanent struc-
g tures therein, the Drainage Canal
9 and all piers and basins, and the
10 waters of Lake Michigan, including
11 all breakwaters, piers, and perma-
12 nent structures therein, for a dis-
13 tance of three miles from the shore
14 between the north and south lines of
15 the city extended, to the extent
16 that the above-named waterways are
17 within the territorial limits of
18 the city.
19
Lake Michigan waters at Chicago
20
21 This shall include the waters
22 of Lake Michigan for a distance of
23 three miles from the shore between
24 the north and south lines of the
25 city extended, the Calumet River
-------
1175
RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 and its branches and all slips
3 connecting therewith, and the
waters of Lake Calumet and all
slips and basins connected there-
with, to the extent that the above
named waterways are within the
territorial limits of the city.
9
River Waters
10
This shall include the Chicago
River and its branches to their
respective sources and all slips
adjacent to and connecting there-
15 with,, the Ogden Canal, and the
Drainage Canal, to the extent that
17 | the above-named waterways are within
the territorial limits of the city.
19
Navigable Streams Regulated
20
2i Any public stream which is or
22 can be made usable for water com-
23 merce. These streams come under the
24 Jurisdiction of the United States
25 Corps of Engineers
-------
1176
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2
B. Commercial vessels
3
4 Any vessel, boat or ship
5 operated for hire or in the com-
g mercial carriage of passengers
7 and/or cargo or other commercial
g purposes.
9
C. Pleasure craft
10
11 Any vessel, boat or ship
12 privately owned and operated for
13 ordinary cruising, racing, water
14 skiing or other recreational pur-
15 poses.
16
D. Vessels of Local, State and Federal
17
Agencies.
18
19 Any vessel, boat or ship
20 publicly owned and operated by a
21 local municipality, the State of
22 Illinois or the U. S. Government.
23
E. Pollution
24
25 Pollution shall mean the
-------
^____ 1177
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 discharge or deposit in or upon
3 such waters of sewage, industrial
4 wastes, or other wastes containing
5 soluble or insoluble solids of
6 organic or inorganic nature which
7 may deplete the dissolved oxygen
8 content of such waters, contribute
9 settleable solids that may form
10 sludge deposits, contain oil, grease,
H or floating solids which may cause
12 unsightly appearance on the surface
13 of such waters or contains soluble
14 materials detrimental to aquatic life.
15
ORDINANCE
16
17 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OP
18 THE CITY OP CHICAGO:
19 SECTION 1. The Municipal Code of Chicago is
20 amended by striking the existing Section 38-9
21 inserting in lieu thereof a new Section 38-9 to
22 read as follows:
23 "38-9. No person shall throw,
24 dump, place, deposit or cause or
25 permit to be thrown, dumped, placed
-------
x RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 or deposited any pollutant as
3 defined in Section 31-2.1 (k)
4 of this Code, or any garbage,
5 refuse, filth, putrid or unwhole-
Q some substance, or the contents
7 of any toilet or head, catch
g basin, or grease trap upon the
9 margin or banks or within the
10 limits or into the waters of the
11 harbor. Discharge of any of the
12 aforementioned pollutants within
13 the radius of four miles of any
14 domestic raw water intake is further
15 expressly prohibited."
16
SECTION 2. The Municipal Code of Chicago is
17
amended by adding the following new Section 38-9•
18
to read as follows:
19
20 "38-9.1. In addition to the pol-
21 lutants enumerated in Section 38-9
22 aforesaid, no operator of any vessel,
23 craft, floats or motor boat shall
24 discharge, dump or deposit into the
25 harbor any fuel, solid or liquid,
-------
1179
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 or the contents of any ballast
3 tank, bilge tank or other recep-
4 tacle capable of causing pollution
5 of waters."
6
SECTION 3. The Municipal Code of Chicago is
1
amended by adding the following new Section 38-9.2
8
to read as follows:
9
10 "38-9.2. All vessels, crafts,
11 floats, and motor boats equipped
12 with toilets, heads, urinals, or
13 capable of discharging galley wastes
14 which have not been discharged through
15 a grease trap or grease interceptor,
16 or solid or liquid waste from shipboard
17 hospital facilities, shall be equipped
18 with a waste retention tank of approved
19 type and capacity to store such waste
20 material for subsequent disposal at
21 a shoreside facility."
22
SECTION 4. The Municipal Code of Chicago is
23
amended by adding the following new Section 38-9-3
24
to read as follows:
25
-------
I RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 "38-9.3. A treatment system
3 utilizing a method of waste treat-
4 ment approved by the Port Director
5 and complying with the Rules and
6 Regulations Establishing Water
7 Quality Criteria for Lake Michigan
g as set by the Illinois Sanitary
9 Water Board may be permissible on
10 vessels, craft, floats or motor
11 boats operating in harbor waters
12 in lieu of a retention tank. The
13 effluent of any waste treatment
14 system not meeting the approved
15 standards of the Illinois Sanitary
1C Water Board shall be discharged
17 and collected in a retention tank
18 while such vessel, craft, floats
19 or motor boat is located or operating
20 within the harbor of Chicago. All
21 such waste retention tanks must be
22 properly equipped with pumps and
23 piping so that wastes can be dis-
24 charged from a connection located
25 above the water line to approved
-------
1181
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 shore-based or floating installa-
3 tions."
4
SECTION 5. The Municipal Code of Chicago is
5
amended by striking Section 38-10 in its entirety
6
and inserting in lieu thereof the following new
7
Section 38-10:
8
9 "38-10. The Port Director shall
10 have the authority to promulgate
11 rules and regulations necessary
12 to the effective control of harbor
13 pollution.
14 "Any person who violates any of the
15 provisions of Sections 38-8, 38-9,
16 38-9.1, 38-9.2 and 38-9-3 shall be
17 fined not less than $50 nor more
18 than $200 for each offense and each
19 day's continuance of such violation
20 shall constitute a separate offense."
21
SECTION 6. This ordinance shall be in force
22
and effect from and after its passage and due pub-
23
lication.
24
25 MR. PAVIA: The key sections of the
-------
1182
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
revised Chicago Harbor Pollution Code read as
3 follows:
4 "38-9.2. All vessels, craft, floats
6 and motor boats equipped with toil-
6 ets, heads, urinals, or capable of
7 discharging galley wastes which have
8 not been discharged through a grease
9 trap or grease interceptor, or solid
10 or liquid waste from shipboard
11 hospital facilities, shall be
12 equipped with a waste retention
13 tank of approved type and capacity
14 to store such waste material for
15 subsequent disposal at a shoreside
16 facility."
17 "38-9.3. A treatment system util-
18 izing a method of waste treatment
19 approved by the Port Director and
20
I complying with the Rules and Regu-
21 lations Establishing Water Quality
22
Criteria for Lake Michigan as set
99
by the Illinois Sanitary Water Board
24 may be permissible on vessels, craft,
25
floats or motor boats operating in
-------
1183.
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 harbor waters in lieu of a reten-
3 -cion tank. The effluent of any
4 waste treatment system not meeting
5 the approved standards of the Illinois
6 Sanitary Water Board shall be dis-
7 charged and collected in a retention
8 tank while such vessel, craft, floats
9 or motor boat is located or operating
10 within the harbor of Chicago. All
11 such waste retention tanks must
12 be properly equipped with pumps
13 and piping so that wastes can be
14 discharged from a connection lo-
15 cated above the water line to
16 approved shore-based or floating
17 installations."
18 Basically the Revised Harbor Pollution
19 Code may be interpreted as containing the follow-
20 ing provisions:
21 1. Prohibits discharges of fuel
22 or the contents of ballast or
23 bilge tanks or other receptacle
24 capable of causing water pollution.
25 2. Prohibits discharge of marine
-------
1184
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 toilets into the lake and requires
3 retention tanks to store such
4 wastes for shore disposal.
5 3. Requires that galley wastes be
8 passed through a grease interceptor
7 before discharge to lake waters, or
8 collected in a retention tank for
9 shoreside disposal.
10 **•• Requires that wastes from ship-
11 board hospital facilities be col-
12 lected and held in a retention tank
13 for shoreside disposal.
14 5- Permits waste treatment systems
15 on vessels or boats only if the
16 treated effluent meets the Water
17 Quality Criteria established by the
18 Illinois Sanitary Water Board.
19 6. Establishes penalties for vio-
20 lations at not less than $50 nor
21 more than $200 with each day con-
22 stitutlng a separate violation.
23 While the Chicago Harbor Pollution Code
24 specifies that the Port Director is responsible
25 for ordinance administration and enforcement, the
-------
1183
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 City Departments of Health, and Water and Sewers
3 together with the Chicago Park District and
4 Illinois State Sanitary Water Board regularly
5 provide technical assistance for his considera-
6 tion. To date, the Technical Advisory Committee
7 (TAC) has recommended the acceptability of the
8 recirculating toilet, the electric incinerator
9 type toilet, the gas-fired incinerator toilet
10 (subject to local safety regulations) and pro-
11 vided a set of guidelines relating to retention
12 tank size. The Advisory Committee has also
13 recommended prohibition of the use of the
14 portable toilet which utlizes a disposal bag
15 and macerator-chlorinator devices. The Cora-
16 mittee also recommended that wastes from garbage
17 disposal units be retained for shoreside disposal.
18 Having elected to develop a program
10 for controlling wastes from watercraft and to
20 encourage the use of waste retention tanks, we
21 immediately enlisted the support and cooperation
22 of the Chicago Park District, a separate and
23 autonomous City government, and the Illinois
24 state Sanitary Water Board. Since the Chicago
25 Park District is responsible for the operation
-------
- 1186
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 of seven pleasure craft marinas located on the
3 Chicago lakefront, it is obvious that their
4 full support will be needed to insure the
5 success of Chicago's program of protecting
6 our waters for a full range of public use.
7 In passing this ordinance, the City
g of Chicago was well aware that criticism and
9 problems would be abundant. However, we believe
10 our analysis of the problem of water pollution
11 from vessels is correct, and our evaluation of
12 the alternatives is complete. If this be true,
13 then the conclusion we have reached represents
14 the best course of action open to us. ¥e hope
15 you will agree with this analysis and urge your
16 consideration and support in the enactment of
17 uniform water quality standards for all of
18 Lake Michigan along with uniform rules and
19 regulations to control pollution resulting from
20 watercraft. In each case, we strongly urge
21 that a common implementation and enforcement
22 time schedule be adopted by all four States.
23 Favorable consideration by the Conferees could
24 well lead to enactment of similar regulations
25 by the Department of the Interior, covering all
-------
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 of the Great Lakes. If this were the case,
3 Federal regulations would benefit both the
4 manufacturers of vessels and pleasure craft
5 and the using public by permitting new vessels
6 to be equipped with sanitation devices meeting
7 national specifications.
g The commercial vessel operators and
9 pleasure craft owners are entitled to an end
10 to this confusion which now surrounds the
11 subject.
12 Thank you.
13 MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Pavia.
14 Are there any comments or questions?
15 MR. POSTON: I would just like to
16 comment very briefly that I think the City of
17 Chicago is to be commended for the leadership
18 they have shown in this matter of boat pollution
19 and the way they have tackled the problem in
20 a manner which I feel will result in abatement
21 of this problem of boat pollution.
22 MR. STEIN: Are there any other com-
23 ments or questions?
24 MR. HOLMER: Mr. Stein.
25 MR. STEIN: Yes.
-------
118.8
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 MR. HOLMER: I want to commend
3 Chicago for what it has done In this area
4 and the Importance of achieving a degree
5 of uniformity in the establishment of these
6 regulations is reflected in your report and
7 is heartily endorsed by Wisconsin.
8 My question, at least the first one,
9 has to do with the commercial vessels, those
10 engaged in interstate and foreign commerce.
11 Is it expected that these will .cause
12 for Chicago enforcement any particular problems?
13 I know your ordinance affects only operations
14 within harbor waters. Is this a significant
15 problem now as far as the commercial vessels
16 are concerned?
17 MR. PAVIA: Well, there are really
18 two major groups, the overseas shippers and,
19 of course, the domestic or Great Lakes lines.
20 I would be less than honest if I said that we
21 didn't foresee any problems there, but I do
22 think that thus far, on the basis of the
23 information we have received, the overseas
24 carriers seem to indicate their willingness
25 to cooperate. But they keep pointing out that
-------
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 what they would like to see happen here is
3 that rather than have to serve a variety of
4 sets of regulations, they would like to see
5 one set of regulations for all of the Great
6 Lakes. And, of course, I think we all endorse
7 this concept.
8 But in the interest of the Chicago
9 ordinance, they do intend to make arrangements
10 this year; in fact, many of them are talking
11 about putting on temporary units at Montreal
12 when they enter the St. Lawrence River and
13 having them serviced during the entire stay
14 in the Great Lakes.
15 MR. HOLMER: You dealt with the
16 Federal involvement in this process rather
17 lightly in your paper. I know you considered
18 it at some length, and I am sure that most
19 of the people in the room are aware of the
20 Federal legislation which deals rather
21 directly with this subject but has not,
22 apparently, been very effective, and, of
23 course, is addressed to the major vessels
24 rather than to the pleasure craft.
25 Is there a possibility still in
-------
1190
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 your mind that the problem of regulations of
3 this matter ought to be the subject of a Federal
4 standard rather than a regional standard?
5 MR. PAVIA: Mr. Holmer, very
6 definitely. I might add that at this point there
7 is a report before the U. S. Congress which has
8 been prepared by the Federal Water Pollution
9 Control Administration and there is also a Senate
10 Bill 2525 which would give the Secretary of In-
11 terior the regulatory powers on vessels.
12 However, I think that inasmuch as
13 this bill may have some difficulty, it would
14 certainly be of great assistance to the Secre-
15 tary of Interior if four States could agree
16 on something, and I am sure that this would
17 go a long way towards initiating passage.
18 MR. HOLMER: Thank you.
19 MR. STEIN: Are there any other com-
20 ments or questions?
21 If not, thank you very much for a very
22 complete presentation. You know, Mr. Pavia,
23 for a long time at these conferences and water
24 pollution control meetings we were getting a
25 lot of talk on boat pollution but very little
-------
1191:
RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 direction. I think the analysis here indicates
3 that we may have a solution in sight. You are
4 to be commended for your presentation.
6 MR. PAVIA: Thank you.
(The complete statement of Mr. Pavia
7 is as follows:)
8
9 STATEMENT BY RICHARD A. PAVIA
10 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OP WATER AND SEWERS
BEFORE THE FOUR STATE WATER POLLUTION CONFERENCE
12 FEBRUARY 2, 1968
13
14 Mr. Chairman, Conferees, distinguished
15 officials, ladies and gentlemen.
16 For the past two days you have heard
17 discussions concerning the vital problems of
18 Lake Michigan pollution. Those of us from the
19 four States bordering Lake Michigan, as well as
2o many other people throughout the Midwest, consider
21 the waters of Lake Michigan as our single most
22 valuable natural resource and perhaps the most
23 impressive physical feature within our region.
24 Lake Michigan is used for a multitude of purposes
25 including water supply, navigation, swimming,
-------
1192
! RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 boating, fishing, and esthetic appreciation.
3 Over the last year it has been in-
4 creasingly rare to read a newspaper or magazine
5 which has not mentioned the problems we face
6 because of the threat of air and water pollution.
7 There is no question but that the general public
g has become aroused and intensely concerned with
9 the importance of environmental factors. Con-
10 tamination of one's environment is a very per-
il sonal matter, because we all are dependent
12 upon the atmosphere we breathe and the water
13 we drink. Yesterday's presentation by the
14 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
15 makes clear that water pollution knows no boun-
16 daries and what one State or city does may have
17 a very serious effect on a neighboring community.
18 The water pollution problems we face
19 today are of our own making—certainly not
20 intentional, but perhaps a direct result of a
21 lack of knowledge or apathy on the part of all
22 of us. Anyone who has enjoyed boating on the
23 waters of Lake Michigan couldn't help but be
24 awestricken by the immense size of this inland
25 sea. This factor in part probably accounts for
-------
p—— 1193.
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 our misuse. Because of the size of the lake,
3 many would feel that its waters are not pol-
4 lutable and therefore need no protection. The
5 testimony of Mr. James C. Vaughn and others
6 certainly refutes this belief. They have stated
7 that the quality of Lake Michigan waters is
g deteriorating at an accelerated rate. Thus if
9 we are to achieve the objective of saving Lake
10 Michigan and preserving its waters for multiple
11 uses, we must collectively agree upon an action
12 program for abating all forms of water pollution.
13 The above observations relate to all
14 forms of pollution including wastes from water-
15 craft. It has been argued that the magnitude
16 of this source of water pollution is negligible
17 and that, at the most, minimum levels of treat-
18 ment should be required. Unfortunately this
19 theory,which has largely been advocated by persons
20 with special interests, isn't supported by facts
21 or accepted by the public. The area of Lake
22 Michigan is approximately 22,^00 square miles and
23 by comparison, the number of boats is small.
24 However, vessel usage is not uniformally dis-
25 tributed over the entire lake area but instead
-------
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 is concentrated in the locations of dense
3 population where domestic water supply and
4 recreational uses are a maximum. As a result,
5 marinas are frequently located in close proximity
6 to bathing beaches and domestic water intakes.
7 Along Chicago's 29 miles of Lake Michigan shore-
g line are some 30 bathing beaches covering 1^
9 miles. These beaches are visited frequently
10 by many of the seven million residents of
H metropolitan Chicago. Noting that there are
12 also eight boating marinas and anchorages located
13 along the Chicago lakefront, it is obvious that
14 beaches and marinas use the same waters.
15 To further describe the problems faced
l
-------
1195
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 Tests were made last summer at various marinas
3 to determine the extent of the pollution problem.
4 During the 196? "boating season testing revealed
5 that the average ammonia nitrogen content of
6 harbor waters at seven marinas varied from O.o6l
7 ppm at one marina (Diversey) to 0.123 Ppm at
8 another (Jackson Park). When compared to the
9 water quality criteria for shore waters estab-
ift lished by the State of Illinois, these test
11 samples disclose a variation of freSt 120 to 245
12 percertt of the permissible annual average. The
13 level 5f ammonia nitrogen is one of the primary
14 water pollution indicators. Tests in the same
15 marinas also revealed significant bacterial counts
16 as the boating Season progressed. While these
17 marinas are not the Control points used to survey
18 water quality, the tests do indicate that pollution
19 loads can be generated which at the whim of wind
20 and current can pose a threat to nearby beaches*
21 Sanitary wastes from watercraft are heavily con*
22 centrated in boat harbors, and quantitative
23 analyses are not necessary to recognize the in-
24 crease of algae and weed growth appearing at many
25 Chicago beaches and marinas with increased
-------
1196
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 frequency and density each year.
3 Because of the seriousness of the
4 problems of water pollution, Mayor Richard J.
5 Daley in October 1966 appointed a committee
6 consisting of representatives of the Chicago
7 Board of Health, the Port of Chicago, and the
8 Department of Water and Sewers, to review the
9 problem of harbor pollution and determine if
lO remedial action was needed. This committee
11 studied the problem in depth for ten months
12 and on August 16, 19&7, recommended that wastes
13 from vessels should be retained for shoreside
14 disposal. Many considerations entered into
15 this recommendation.
16 In reaching this conclusion, the commit-
17 tee evaluated three alternatives:
18 1• Do nothing--and await resolution of this
19 problem by the Federal Government. Various agen-
20 cies including the Public Health Service have been
21 discussing control of vessel pollution for many
22 years with no conclusion, therefore, we felt that
23 this alternative was not acceptable and further
24 delay would only increase the problem. Also, lack
25 of direction has caused some agencies and individuals
-------
1197
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 to equip their craft with unacceptable devices,
3 thus further complicating our problem.
4 2. Require that all vessels and pleasure
5 craft capable of discharging sanitary waste prod-
6 ucts be equipped with approved waste treatment de-
7 vices. We discarded this alternative because the
g water quality criteria for Lake Michigan developed
9 as a result of the 19&5 Interstate Pollution Con-
10 ference, was at such a level that investigation
11 failed to reveal any waste treatment device capable
12 of satisfying this standard. This water quality
13 criteria for Lake Michigan was developed with the
14 participation of the States of Illinois and
15 Indiana, and under the auspices of the Federal
16 Water Pollution Control Administration. The
17 criteria was submitted by the State of Indiana
18 and approved by the Secretary of the Interior,
19 and thereby its status in Indiana has been changed
20 from State Water Quality Criteria to Federal Water
21 Quality Standards. The State of Illinois sub-
22 mission of water quality criteria for Lake Michigan
23 is identical to that of Indiana. Therefore, we can
24 only conclude that Illinois submission will be
25 approved and thereby constitute Federal Standards.
-------
119.8
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 In ancitipation of imminent Federal approval, we
3 determined that it would be improper to sanction
4 the use of waste treatment devices which could not
5 satisfy the water quality criteria of the receiv-
6 ing waters.
7 3. Encourage the use of retention tanks
g or treatment devices which require no discharge to
9 lake waters. This alternative, while presenting
10 many difficulties for boat owners and operators
11 as well as governmental agencies charged with
12 responsibilities of providing shoreside disposal
13 facilities, was judged the only reasonable choice.
14 We believe that the retention tank concept with
15 or without recirculation features offers the best
16 solution to the problem of handling waste from
17 watercraft in spite of the inconvenience it fosters
18 Boats frequently cruise on waters with widely
19 different water quality standards. The one device
20 which will satisfy all water quality standards,
21 whether they be very very high or very low, is the
22 waste retention tank. We further believe that the
23 total cost of this solution including necessary
24 shoreside disposal facilities will be the least
25 expensive.
-------
1199
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2
3 Major consideration was given to the
4 fact that unlike a flowing stream where a quantity
5 of water passes a given cross section only once,
6 the effect of dilution in a still body of water
7 such as a lake is less beneficial. Pollutants
8 are assimilated in the natural cycle and gradually
9 increase, lowering the quality of the receiving
10 waters to that of the discharges. In Lake Michi-
11 gan the problem is particularly acute.since
12 approximately 100 years is required for a complete
13 water interchange.
14 Mayor Daley having concurred with the
15 committee recommendations, transmitted them
16 to the Chicago City Council where after a public
17 hearing they were approved on September 28th.
18 The key sections of the revised Chicago Harbor
19 Pollution Code read as follows:
20 "38-9.2. All vessels, craft, floats
21 and motor boats equipped with toilets,
22 heads urinals, or capable of dis-
23 charging galley wastes which have
24 not been discharged through a grease
25 trap or grease interceptor, or solid
-------
120 0
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 or liquid waste from shipboard
3 hospital facilities, shall be
4 equipped with a waste retention
5 tank of approved type and capacity
6 to store such waste material for
7 subsequent disposal at a shoreside
8 facility."
9 "38-9'3- A treatment system
10 utilizing a method of waste treat-
11 ment approved by the Port Director
12 and complying with the Rules and
13 Regulations Establishing Water
14 Quality Criteria for Lake Michigan
15 as set by the Illinois Sanitary
16 Water Board may be permissible on
17 vessels, craft, floats or motor
18 boats operating in harbor waters in
19 lieu of a retention tank. The ef-
20 fluent of any waste treatment system
21 not meeting the approved standards
22 of the Illinois Sanitary Water
23 Board shall be discharged and col-
24 lected in a retention tank while
25 such vessel, craft, floats or motor
-------
1201
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 boat is located or operating
3 within the harbor of Chicago.
4 All such waste retention tanks
5 must oe properly equipped with
6 pumps and piping so that wastes
7 can be discharged from a connec-
8 tion located above the water
9 line -co approved shore-based or
10 floating installations."
11 Basically the Revised Harbor Pollution
12 Code may be interpreted as containing the following
13 provisions:
14 1. Prohibits discharges of fuel or the
15 contents of ballast or bilge tanks or other recep-
16 tacle capable of causing water pollution.
17 2. Prohibits discharge of marine toilets
18
into the lake and requires retention tanks to store
19 such wastes for shore disposal.
20
3. Requires that galley wastes be
passed through a grease interceptor before discharge
22
to lake waters or collected in a retention tank for
03
shoreside disposal.
4. Requires that wastes from shipboard
hospital facilitiesdK collected and held in a
-------
1202
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 retention tank for shoreside disposal.
3 5. Permits waste treatment systems on
4 vessels or boats if the treated effluent meets the
6 .Water Quality Criteria established by the Illinois
6 Sanitary Water Board.
7 6. Establishes penalties for violations
8 at not less than $50 nor more than $200 with each
9 day constituting a separate violation.
10
11 While the Chicago Harbor Pollution Code
12 specifies that the Port Director is responsible
13 for ordinance administration and enforcement, the
14 City Departments -of Health, and Water and Sewers
15 together with the Chicago Park District and Illinoi^
16 State Sanitary Water Board regularly provide tech-
17 nical assistance for his consideration. To date,
18 the Technical Advisory Committee (TAG) has recom-
19 mended the acceptability of the recirculating
20 toilet, the electric incinerator type toilet, the
21 gas-fired incinerator toilet (subject to local
22 safety regulations) and provided a set of guideline^
23 relating to retention, tank size. The TAC also has
24 recommended prohibition of the use of the portable
25 toilet which utilizes a disposal bag and macerator-
-------
1203
1 RICHARD A. PAVIA
2
3
4
5
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
chlorinator devices . The committee also recom-
mended that wastes from garbage disposal units
be retained for shoreside disposal.
Having elected to develop a program
for controlling wastes from watercraft and to
encourage the use of waste retention tanks, we
immediately enlisted the support and cooperation
of the Chicago Park District, a separate and
autonomous city government, and the Illinois
State Sanitary Water Board. Since the Chicago
Park District .is responsible for the operation
of seven pleasure craft marinas located on the
Chicago lakefront, it is obvious that their full
support will be needed to insure the success of
Chicago's program of protecting our waters for a
full -range of public use.
In passing this ordinance the City of
Chicago was well aware that criticism and problems
would be abundant. However, we believe our analy-
sis of the problem of water pollution from vessels
is correct, and our evaluation of the alternatives
is complete. If this be true, then the conclusion
we have reached represents the best course of
action open to us. We hope you will agree with
-------
1204
1 i RICHARD A. PAVIA
2 this analysis and urge your consideration and
3 support in the enactment of uniform water quality
4 standards for all of Lake Michigan along with
5 uniform rules and regulations to control pollution
6 resulting from watercraft. In each case we
1 strongly urge that a common implementation
8 and enforcement time schedule "be adopted by all
9 four States. Favorable consideration by the
10 Conferees could well lead to enactment of similar
H regulations by the Department of the Interior,
12 covering all of the Great Lakes. Federal regu-
13 lations would benefit both the manufacturers of
14 vessels and pleasure craft and the using public
15 by permitting new vessels to be equipped with
16 sanitation devices meeting national specifications
17 - - -
18 MR. STEIN: Mr. Poston.
19
20
21
22 JJB.JUL PRESENTATION
23
24
25
-------
120§
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 MR. POSTON: Our next presentation
3 is to be General Robert Tarbox, the Division
4 Engineer for the Corps of Engineers. He
5 has a presentation on the Corps of Engineers
g activities.
7
8 STATEMENT BY
9 BRIGADIER GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
10 DIVISION ENGINEER, NORTH CENTRAL DIVISION
U CORPS OP ENGINEERS
12
GREAT LAKES DREDGINGS DISPOSAL PROBLEM
13
14 GEN. TARBOX: Mr. Chairman, gentlemen.
15 I am Brigadier General Robert M.
16 Tarbox, Division Engineer, North Central Engi-
17 neer Division. My headquarters is in Chicago.
18 North Central Division is responsible for Corps
19 of Engineers Civil Works functions in the Great
20 Lakes Basin.
21 The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
22 appreciates the opportunity to present at
23 I this conference information on our program to
24 identify the pollution problems associated
25 with the disposal of polluted dredgings, and
-------
. 12M
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 to develop procedures for insuring that State water
3 standards are met. We believe it will be helpful
4 in your consideration of actions needed to improve
6 and preserve the quality of the Lake Michigan
6 waters. The information is in two parts:
7 a. A brief narrative of the Corps ap-
8 proach to identify the problem and to
9 determine solutions that are in the best
10 public interest; and
11 b. Our proposal for actions during the
12 transition period prior to determination
13 of long-term solutions.
14 Lt. General Cassidy, the Chief of Engi-
15 neers, regrets that he is not able to discuss this
16 with you himself, and he has asked me to present
17 this report to you.
18 (Slides marked Conference Exhibit No. 6 are on file
at the FWPCA office in Washington, B.C., with copies
19 I at the Regional Office, Chicago, Illinois.)
20 Shipping and Development:
2i To the American economy, transportation
22 of commodities on the Great Lakes is a most im-
23 portant use of this great natural resource.
24 And I have a slide there that shows
25 the flow of iron ore through the Great Lakes.
-------
1207
l GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 There have been tremendous population
growth and intensive industrial developments
along the shores of Lake Michigan, in part be-
5 cause of low-cost water transportation.
„ This slide shows the U. S. Great
D
_ Lakes commercial harbors that have been developed.
These expensive industrial developments along
the shores of Lake Michigan have been in part
because of low cost water transportation.
Both have contributed to a serious
pollution problem which, in some localities,
13 impairs the aesthetics and recreational aspects
14 of the water resource, threatens its utility
15 as a source of water supply, and pollutes the
materials which we must dredge in our harbor
maintenance.
18
Maintenance Dredging;
19
20 The need to dredge arises because of
21 the location of harbors on the Great Lakes, pre-
22 dominantly at the mouths of rivers flowing into
23 the lakes. In many instances, the rivers, in
24 | their flood flows and freshets, carry heavy
25 sediment loads into the harbor channels. This
-------
1208
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 accounts by far for the major portion of the
3 material to be dredged. In other instances,
4 it consists largely of bars at the harbor
5 entrance, resulting from the drift of lake
6 sand along the shore.
7 In general, although not entirely,
8 for more than 40 years we have placed the
9 dredged material in authorized disposal
lO areas in deep-water areas of the lakes.
H I have a slide that shows these
12 authorized disposal areas on Lake Michigan.
13 They are the little red dots that you see all
14 along the shore of the lake. The one at the
15 southern end of the lake is the one that is
16 authorized for the ports in the vicinity of
17 Chicago. But you can see these dots that go
18 all along both sides of the shore. They are
19 the authorized disposal areas plotted to
20 scale on this map.
21 The areas were selected so as to
22 be remote from water intakes and swimming
23 beaches. During this time there is no history
24 of contamination of beaches or water supply
25 intakes attributed to lake disposal dredgings.
-------
1209
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 Now, I should make it clear that not all of
3 the harbors on the Great Lakes are polluted.
4 Of the Lake Michigan ports tested by FWPCA,
5 it appears that at more than half of them
6 the material to be dredged is suitable for
7 disposal in the lake.
8
The Problem;
9
10 In early 1966 we investigated the
11 feasibility of alternate disposal areas for
12 a number of the Great Lakes harbors. Realizing
13 that we had to insure that we would not degrade
14 the quality of the water in the Great Lakes,
15 we looked at the possibility of using diked
16 disposal areas. However, one does not have
17 to look at more than a city map of any of the
18 ports which have grown and thrived with the
19 commerce resulting from our navigation projects
20 to realize that unused land on which dredge
21 spoil can be placed Just is not available, in
22 most cases, within a reasonable distance of
23 the harbor and channel which must be maintained
24 each year. And in most ports where there is
25 intensive land use, additional filled areas of
-------
1210
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 the type that dredged material would provide
3 are not desired by local interests.
4 Now, this aerial photograph I have
5 projected here is of the central portion of
6 the City of Cleveland. You can see the Cuyahoga
7 River winding up through the central portion
8 of the area and the intensive'development there,
9 not only in the City but also along the harbor.
10 The Cuyahoga River winding through this area.
11 As you can see, there Just isn't land available
12 there that could be used for alternate disposal
13 areas.
14 In considering the use of more distant
15 land disposal areas, the costs of rehandling the
16 dredged materials and transporting them rapidly
17 drive the costs of maintenance sky high. So
18 we took a look at how we could dispose of large
19 quantities of dredge spoil along shore, along-
V
20 side of the breakwater in or near the harbor,
21 or in shallow water areas of a bay. And let
22 me explain, gentlemen, that when I refer to
23 "large quantities of dredge spoil," I am talking
24 about quantities like 150,000 cubic yards which
25 have to be taken from Calumet Harbor and Channel,
-------
1211
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 at Chicago, each year. To give you an Idea
3 of the size of the problem, that amount wo ild
4 fill this Bal Tabarin ROOM 30 times over each
5 year, or, if spread over one Chicago City
6 block, would be about 20 feet deep. Or, take
7 a look at this one: We dredge over one million
g cubic yards of spoil from the outer harbor and
9 the Cuyahoga River at Cleveland, which is
10 shown here, during our maintenance each year.
11 That amount would cover a City block of Cleve-
12 land about 150 feet deep.
13 The use of the diked disposal areas
14 that I mentioned would provide some worthwhile
15 benefits.
16 This industrial area has resulted from
17 dike disposal area. Being adjacent to or in the
18 port area, they could provide valuable land
19 for commercial use. In some areas, the new
20 land would meet needs for recreation areas
21 adjacent to the water. However, in most cases,
22 the users would have to wait several years for
23 the area to be filled and, after filling, for
24 the material to consolidate and dry out before
25 the land could be developed.
-------
i2ia
I GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 Our investigation indicated that, at
3 most ports where the bottom material is polluted,
4 there are possibilities for the use of diked
5 disposal areas. However, it was estimated that
6 the cost of constructing the dikes to hold the
7 quantities involved, plus the increased costs
8 of handling the material, would substantially
9 increase the cost of harbor maintenance. The
10 increase in cost varied considerably from
11 harbor to harbor, but in general the net cost
12 per cubic yard of maintenance dredging would
13 be increased from two to five times.
14 I must point out that placing the
15 dredged material in a diked enclosure is not
16 necessarily a panacea in the solution of pol-
17 lution problems, with only higher costs in-
18 volved. Placing dredged material on shore
10 may increase the possibility of pollution to
20 the surrounding area. The dredged material
21 is taken from the water; in some cases it is
22 even conveyed hydraulicallyj and it is, at best,
23 wet.
24 I have a couple of slides here which
25 will illustrate that. Here is the dipper bucket
-------
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 from a dipper dredge picking up the material
3 from the bottom, and you can see that wet
4 is a good adjective there.
5 This is a hydraulic dredge that is
g used in some type of maintenance dredging with
7 the head on the bottom at the left hand end
g picking up the material off of the harbor
9 floor, of the channel bottom, it goes up
10 through these pipes through the dredge and
11 out the bottom along this pipeline. It is
12 conveyed with the water and about 85> roughly,
13 percent of the material that comes out is
14 water.
15 There you see the other end of the
16 pipeline discharging the dredge spoil in a
17 diked disposal area, on land.
18 While a diked area will retain most
19 of the solids, there will be an effluent that
20 will run out. The dissolved contaminants
21 and suspended solids in the effluent could
22 have an adverse effect on water quality, bathing
23 beaches or fish and wildlife habitat, and we
24 could have the problem of treating the effluent.
25 I must point out also that in seeking
alterna teare a. s for disposal Of the di*
-------
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 materials, a new question is raised concerning
3 the responsibilities of local interests to
4 provide the diked disposal areas at local
5 cost. Many of these lake harbors were authorized
6 for construction with the provision that materials
7 dredged in the annual maintenance of these har-
g bors be placed in lake disposal areas.
9 Again here is the map showing our
10 lake disposal areas.
11 Use of lake disposal areas was
12 specified in almost all of the authorizing
13 documents for the Great Lakes harbors before
14 the days of the Water Pollution Control Act
15 and related legislation. There was and is
16 a distinct economic advantage to lake disposal.
17 In fact if the economics of the justification
18 for some of the projects had been based on
19 use of other more expensive methods, these
20 would not have been economically Justified,
21 and thus would not have been recommended for
22 authorization and for construction. It is
23 the current U. S. policy, however, where land
24 disposal is required for local interests to
25 provide the diked disposal areas without
-------
GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
cost to the Federal Government as an item of
2
local cooperation.
3
Returning to my report, based on
our investigations we developed a four-year
5
program for construction of diked disposal
6
areas at the 15 most critically polluted
7
harbors of the Great Lakes, and in the early
8
fall of 1966 we presented the program to the
9
Bureau of the Budget. Our estimate indicated
that it would cost $95*566,000 to construct
the 15 diked disposal areas, and that the
12
additional annual cost of dredging and use
13
of these areas would amount to $3pOO,000.
14
15 The Pilot Program;
16
The Bureau of the Budget expressed
the view that before the taxpayers were re-
10
lg quested to carry the burden of additional
20 harbor maintenance cost, there should be
21 further study of alternatives and further
22 consideration of the public benefits of using
23 alternative methods of dredgings disposal.
24 The Bureau requested that we and the FWPCA
25 Jointly conduct a pilot study of the program.
-------
1216
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 We were asked to study alternate means of
3 disposing of dredged material, the pollution
4 effects of the alternates, and the costs.
5 The FWTCA was asked to assist us in deter-
6 mining the effects and to identify the
7 benefits that would be gained from the various
g alternatives. In August 1966 we received
9 $1 million to begin the study, and we were
10 granted an addition $5 million in fiscal
11 year 1968 to continue it. We expect to receive
12 sufficient funds to complete the study in
13 fiscal year 1969.
14 Early in 1967 we initiated our
15 Pilot Program for Disposal of Dredgings
16 from Great Lakes Harbors. In March the
17 Department of the Army and the Department
18 of the Interior issued a Joint public state-
19 ment announcing agreement of the two Depart-
20 ments that Joint effort is required for
21 the development of acceptable alternative
22 disposal means, with the ultimate objective
23 of providing leadership in the Nationwide
24 effort to improve water quality through
25 prevention, control and abatement of water
-------
1217
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 pollution by Federal water resources projects.
3 This joint effort is the Pilot Program of
4 the Corps and the PWPCA. Its objective is
5 to develop the most economical methods for
6 management of whatever pollution problems
7 may result from dredging operations on the
g Great Lakes.
9 The Federal Water Pollution Control
10 Administration is participating in the program
11 by sampling, testing and analyzing the materials
12 to be dredged and the waters surrounding them,
13 as well as by participating in discussions of
14 various methods under study. The Fish and
15 Wildlife Service of the Department of the
16 Interior and the Public Health Service of
17 the Department of Health,Education and Welfare
18 are also advising us-
19 The Corps has engaged the services
20 of a Board of Consultants to assist us in
21 the Pilot Program. The Board consists of
22 five members, each eminent in his field:
23 Dr. Gordon M. Fair of Harvard University and
24 Dr. Gerard A. Rohlich of the University of
25 Wisconsin, are both sanitary engineers; Dr.
-------
12l8_
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 Alfred M. Beeton, Assistant Director, Center
3 for Great Lakes Study, University of Wisconsin,
4 is our consultant on biology; Dr. Fred Gurnham,
5 Illinois Institute of Technology, is our con-
6 sultant on chemical engineering; and Mr.
7 Sanford S. Farness, Michigan State University,
8 is our consultant on urban planning.
9 Eight localities on the Great Lakes
10 have been selected for the Pilot Program.
H These are shown on the map that is projected
12 on the screen. We have Great Sodus Bay on
13 Lake Ontario, then Buffalo, Cleveland, and
14 Toledo Harbor on Lake Erie and the Rouge River
15 at Detroit, and then on Lake Michigan Indiana
15 Harbor, Calumet Harbor and Green Bay Harbor.
17 They were selected for two basic reasons:
18 (1) to test the effectiveness and compare
19 costs of different types of disposal areas,
20 structures, methods of handling the dredged
21 material, and methods of treating any effluent
22 from the disposal areas; and (2) to obtain
23 this data at various representative harbors,
24 with the degree of pollution varying from
25 heavy to negligible.
-------
1219
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 Great Sodus Bay is a harbor with
3 no discernible pollution problem. It is
4 shown on the slide. The others are considered
5 to be polluted to various degrees.
6 To mention a few examples of methods
7 under investigation:
g This slide shows the enclosed area
9 we have built at Buffalo; there we are looking
10 at the suitability of slag as a material for
11 constructing dikes for a disposal area where
12 the dredged spoil would be placed within the
13 enclosure mechanically rather than hydraulically.
14 This is the enclosure that we are using. The
15 dredge spoil is brought down the Buffalo River
16 in skows out into the outer harbor, tied up
17 alongside the enclosure there. This crane
18 on this barge here (indicating) has lifted
19 it off and put it in the enclosure. We got
20 a great deal of valuable data in 196? at
21 this project. In 1968 we are going to vary
22 the method a little bit using the hydraulic
23 methods of bringing the material and putting
2* it into the enclosed area.
25 This is a slide of our experimental
-------
122Q
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 area at Cleveland, and here you see a self-
3 unloading ship constructing a diked area. The
4 dikes here are made of crushed rock with a
5 filter blanket. Here we have another finger
6 which forms a slit, the barges containing the
7 material that has been dredged from the
8 Cuyahoga River and the Cleveland Harbor are
9 brought into that slit, the material is
10 deposited in the slit and then pumped
ll hydraulically into the enclosed area, and
12 there we want to experiment with how to treat
13 or handle the effluent that results.
14 This is a view of the area at Indiana
15 Harbor* Here we have a water area completely
16 enclosed except for a gap to allow the entrance
17 of dump skows, and we have experimented with
18 closing that gap by means of an air curtain.
19 This is enclosed with sheet steel piling
20 except at the gap,and there it only comes to
21 within 12 feet of the floor of the harbor
22 entrance there. We brought our skows down the
23 channel and into here (indicating) and spread
24 the material uniformly over the bottom.
25 At Calumet we are able to test certain
-------
1221
.
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 aspects of disposal areas that are completely
3 onshore. This shows the area there. The
4 Calumet Channel, the skows are brought into
5 this slit, they are dumped on the bottom
6 there, and then the material is conveyed
7 hydraulically through pipelines and is
g spread out over this area (indicating) in
9 a manner similar to that slide I showed you
10 with the discharge from the pipeline.
11 At Green Bay we have two areas;
12 this one shows the dikes the City built around
13 a disposal area on low ground, where the City
14 wants to develop some land. These are the
15 dikes surrounding the area. The material is
16 brought in by skow and then pumped into that
17 area. This slide shows the diked areas that
18 we formed in the shallow waters of the Bay
19 utilizing the material that we dredged to
20 form the dike.
21 Here we have a picture of the diked
22 disposal area in Maumee Bay at Toledo. This
23 I is a facility for tying up our hopper dredge
24 and pumping material all through a pipeline
25 enclosed through the--spread itself out over
-------
1222
I GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 the area there.
3 This area shows our area in the
4 Rouge River at Detroit with the dredge tied
5 up and pumping out. This is the pipeline
6 leading out to the area and then the material
7 spreads out within the diked area.
8 At a number of locations we will
9 test various methods of treating the effluent
!0 from the disposal operation. The feasibility
H of disposal in pits, mines and other areas
12 away from the lake is also being investigated.
13 An important part of the Pilot
14 Program consists of sampling water and bottom
15 sediments at the dredging areas and in the
16 vicinity of the alternate disposal areas and
17 conducting various tests on the samples.
18 This slide shows the Corps of
19 Engineers lakes survey boat,Shenahon, which
20 is a floating test boat and laboratory. Some
21 of the tests on material are being accomplished
22 j right in this laboratory.
23 j The samples are being taken before,
24 during and after the dredging operations.
25 We are working to complete our
-------
1223
GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
investigations and to render a report by
December 1968. However, we are hoping that
we can have some preliminary information by
next fall in time for the budget hearings on
the fiscal year 1970 program. In our report
we will present our recommendations on
8 alternate methods of disposing of and treating
9 polluted dredged materials, including the
10 economic implications of any significant
changes in maintenance costs. We contemplate
12 presenting recommendations for each individual
13 harbor. We will include recommendations on
any cost sharing required of local interests.
15 We will include our recommendations for any
legislation required to carry out the alternate
17 methods of disposing and of cost sharing.
18
Local Cooperation;
19
20 I emphasize local interest participation
21 because in some quarters the disposal of dredgings
22 from navigation channels is considered to be
23 solely a Corps of Engineers problem which the
24 Corps can solve simply by putting the dredgings
25 on land rather than in the authorized lake
-------
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 disposal areas. However, while the Congress
3 has assigned to the Corps the work of providing
4 and maintaining navigation depths at authorized
5 river and harbor projects, the current Con-
6 gressional policy in connection with such
7 projects has been that where they are needed
g disposal areas and retaining dikes or bulkheads
9 will be provided by local interests at local
10 expense as a part of the local cooperation
11 required for the projects.
12 Of additional concern to local
13 industry and commerce using Great Lakes harbors,
14 is the necessity to dispose of materials
15 dredged from private and public slips and
16 alongside of docks, outside of the Federal
17 channel. It is the responsibility of the
18 owner to get this done and to pay for it.
19 This slide illustrates what I am
20 talking about. In white you have the Federally
21 authorized and maintained projects. ¥e,
22 the Corps of Engineers, do the dredging
23 of the area shown in white. Here is the
24 area between the Federal projects and the
25 public wharf, which the local authorities
-------
1225
l GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 have to dredge. Here Is the area between the
3 Federal project and a private wharf, which
the owner of that Installation has to maintain.
And again the industry or commercial enterprise
that has this private slip (indicating) has
- to maintain the depths in that area so that
8 the ships which he has come in there can use It.
9 I repeat, it is the responsibility
of the owner to get this done and to pay for It.
11 Actions by the Corps:
12 At this point It is appropriate
13 that I set forth the various actions the Corps
of Engineers is taking in disposal of dredged
material:
1. Under the Pilot Program, alternate
17 methods and areas for disposal of dredged material
18 containing pollutants were used during the calen-
19 dar year 196? dredging program at six localities:
20 Buffalo, Toledo, River Rouge at Detroit, Indiana
21 Harbor, Calumet Harbor and Green Bay. The last
22 three localities are on Lake Michigan. During
23 1968 we plan to add Cleveland to this list on a
24 pilot scale.
25 2. In addition to the Pilot Program
-------
1226.
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 localities, arrangements are being made for
3 the use of alternate disposal areas at Monroe
4 Harbor on Lake Erie, and at New Buffalo,
5 Manitowoc and Menominee Harbors on Lake Michigan.
6 At Monroe, a land disposal site has been pro-
7 vided by the Port Authority and hopefully the
g diking will be completed to permit use of the
9 area in 1968. At New Buffalo a land disposal
10 site will receive dredgings when maintenance
11 is next required. At Manitowoc and Menominee
12 alternate disposal areas will be used to re-
13 ceive dredgings during 1968.
14 3« During the next few months, each
15 district engineer is visiting local authorities
16 at every port where the FWPCA has reported that
17 the material to be removed by dredging contains
18 pollutants. They will be informed of the extent
19 of the problem and of the requirement for the
20 use of suitable alternate areas and methods of
21 disposal of polluted dredged materials. Their
22 assistance in obtaining such areas for the use
23 of the Corps and also by private contractors on
24 permit dredging will be requested.
25
-------
1227
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2
Proposal for 1968;
3
4 There are 31 harbors on Lake Michigan
5 where maintenance dredging is required during
6 calendar year 1968, if authorized navigation
7 depths are to be maintained. More than half
8 of the harbors are considered to be clean.
9 While at this time we are still
10 developing long-term solutions for disposal
11 of dredgings from polluted harbor areas,
12 interim solutions have been and will be
13 necessary. Our proposals for the calendar
14 year 1968 dredging program are as follows:
15 1. The Corps plans on placing no
16 polluted dredged material in Lake Michigan
17 from Calumet and Indiana Harbors during
18 calendar year 1968.
19 2. At other polluted harbors,
20 alternate disposal areas will be used during
21 1968 where arrangements can be made for
22 suitable areas.
23 3. Ports where the F¥PCA has deter-
24 mined that the channel and harbor contain pol-
25 luted materials and where local authorities are
-------
1228
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 unable to provide a suitable alternate disposal
3 area in 1968 will be individually considered.
4 Where postponement of maintenance would result
5 in an economic hardship for the port and region,
6 the maintenance dredging will be accomplished
7 as authorized by the Congress in the 1968
g maintenance program, with the dredged materials
9 placed in the authorized disposal area in the
10 lake.
11 4. At ports where the F¥PCA has
12 determined that there are no pollutants in
13 the material to be dredged, the clean dredged
14 materials will be placed in the authorized
15 disposal areas in the lakes.
16 5. The Pilot Program for determining
17 alternate systems for disposal of polluted
18 dredged materials will be completed by the
19 end of 1968. The feasibility and efficacy of
20 each method of handling, moving, treating and
21 containing various types of polluted dredged
22 materials and the applicability to each local
23 port will be known.
24 6. The Pilot Program report will
25 recommend use of alternate disposal areas
-------
1229
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 for the disposal of polluted dredged material
3 at some harbors where the material is now
4 being placed in lake disposal areas. The
5 report will consider and make recommendations
5 for legislation, where appropriate, to include
7 consideration of the share that local interests
g should bear of the costs of alternate disposal
9 methods in accordance with the current policy
10 for new projects. The report will also address
11 itself to the question of economics of alternate
12 maintenance methods.
13
Conelusion;
14
15 In summary, the Corps of Engineers
16 agrees wholeheartedly that everything possible
17 should be done to ensure water of acceptable
18 quality in the Great Lakes. The Corps is
19 enthusiastically working with FWPCA and
20 others to determine means of disposal and
21 management of dredged materials so that they
22 will not degrade the water quality of the lakes.
23 We hope that we will have information from our
24 Joint study this fall in time for the budget
25 hearings on the fiscal year 1970 program, and
-------
1230
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 we expect to complete the study in December of
3 this year.
4 Meanwhile, it is essential that
5 everyone understands that this problem of
6 dredgings disposal implies local and State
7 responsibilities also. Local interests may
g have to locate and provide suitable disposal
9 areas when the degree of pollution of the
10 dredged material prevents its disposal in
11 the lake, and may have to share with the
12 Federal Government the added costs incurred.
13 We need your understanding of the
14 problem an4 your assistance in reaching a
15 solution in the best public interest. Immediate
16 absolute interdiction of disposal of any dredged
17 materials in the Great Lakes is as. impracticable
18 as telling the cities discharging heavy pollu-
19 tants into the Illinois Waterway to discontinue
20 the practice today. We can introduce new harbor
21 maintenance procedures in trie same time frame
22 that communities are being given for adoption
23 of improved treatment plants, and our problems
24 will be greatly reduced as communities and
25 industries effect a better treatment of their
-------
1231
I GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 wastes.
3 A transition period is needed. We
4 are in that period, and I can assure you that
5 whatever pollution problems there are associated
6 with the maintenance of ports can be corrected
7 in accordance with the time schedule developed
8 for other aspects of the clean waters program.
9 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10 MR. STEIN: Thank you.
11 Are there any comments or questions?
12 Mr. Oeming.
13 MR. OEMING: General, could you tell
14 us what the depths are in these authorized
15 areas in Lake Michigan now where the disposal
16 is taking place, approximately?
17 GEN. TARBOX: They vary, Mr. Oeming,
18 but in the majority of the cases they are
19 greater than 50 feet.
20 MR. OEMING: One more question,
21 General.
22 Are there any dredgings from the
23 Chicago River or the canal taken into the lake?
24 GEN. TARBOX: You mean right now,
25 this year?
-------
1232
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 MR. OEMING: Last year.
3 GEN. TARBOX: We did not maintain the
4 Chicago River and the canal last year.
5 MR. OEMING: The last time you main-
6 tained it, then?
7 GEN. TARBOX: Yes, the last time we
8 maintained it they were put there.
9 MR. OEMING: Would that be put in
10 the program if you had to maintain it in the
11 future, the dredgings from the Chicago River
12 and the canal?
13 GEN. TARBOX: I have stated, Mr.
14 Oeming, that we will not place any polluted
15 dredged materials from the ports of Chicago
16 in Lake Michigan.
17 MR. OEMING: I see.
18 GEN. TARBOX: And we are working on
19 alternate methods of disposal of the polluted
20 materials from those ports.
21 MR. OEMING: Thank you.
22 MR. STEIN: Let me clarify
23 this by a question, General, beforetwe have
24 these other ones, as long as you are on that
25 point.
-------
1233
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 When you talk about polluted dredged
3 material from Calumet and Indiana Harbor, what
4 other kind of material is in that harbor except
5 polluted material?
6 GEN. TARBOX: They are polluted.
7 MR. STEIN: Yes. In other words, there
g will be no dredged material, as I read this—and
9 this is just for clarification, the first point—
lO no dredged material from Calumet and Indiana
11 Harbor will be placed in the lake during
12 calendar year '68. Is that a fair reading?
13 GEN. TARBOX: I did want to bring
14 this out, Mr. Chairman—now that you have
15 raised the question—that in Calumet Outer
16 Harbor there are some rock pinnacles where
17 the navigation depths are not quite down to
18 the authorized depth. They have no fine grain
19 .sediments on top of them; they are Just pure
20 clean rock. We would expect that good clean
21 rock, there would be no objection to placing
22 that in the authorized disposal area in Lake
23 Michigan.
24 MR. STEIN: I want to make that point
25 clear, but you have raised that and I am not
-------
123%
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 prejudging your point. However, in discussion
3 with our Fish and Wildlife friends in the
4 Department of the Interior, I don't know that
5 we have a complete unanimity of view yet on
6 the effect of good clean rock on the bottom.
7 They say, you know, "y°u say this is chemically
g pure and stuff. This is like saying possibly
9 you don't object if someone wants to give you
10 a blood transfusion with distilled water since
11 it is purer than your blood, and they are not
12 sure they can stand all that purity.
13 (Laughter.)
14 But I think this is a question we
15 have to resolve and I think the facts are
16 clear on what your program is in the harbor.
17 GEN. TARBOX: Yes, sir, I think that
18 that will be one of the--I hope this will be
19 one of the problems that the conferees will
20 seriously consider—
21 MR. STEIN: Yes. .
22 GEN. TARBOX: --because it is a matter
23 of economics.
24 MR. STEIN: Yes.
25 GEN. TARBOX: What are the benefits
-------
1235
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 that are going to be obtained from not placing
3 some of the clean material in the lake.
4 MR. STEIN: Yes. All right.
5 Yes, sir.
6 MR. POOLE: General Tarbox, you
7 indicated that the Pilot Program would be
g completed by the end of 1968, calendar '68.
9 Our papers last week carried items on the
10 Federal budget and there was a $7,000,000
11 item in there for fiscal '68 and '69 that
12 led me to believe it was for a continuance
13 of the Pilot Program. Did I misconstrue it
14 or is that correct?
15 GEN. TARBOX: That is correct, Mr.
16 Poolfi. The last half of calendar year '68
17 will have to be paid for with fiscal year 1969
18 funds, and then after we put some of these
19 methods that we come up with as a result of the
20 Pilot Program into operation, we will want to
21 keep track of them, to make sure that they
22 are coming along as we expect they would.
23 so there will be funds involved in checking
24 up on the methods t.hat we put in operation
25 as a result of the Pilot Program,
-------
1236
! GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 But definitely we need fiscal year
3 1969 funds to complete the Pilot Program by
4 the end of calendar year 1968.
5 MR. POOLE: I am aware of that,
6 I was just a little intrigued by the figure
7 because it was a million dollars last year
g and. five million dollars this year, and then
9 going up to seven caused me to Jump to the
10 conclusion that there might be more Pilot
tl Programs introduced in fiscal '68-69.
12 GEN. TARBOX: We have no new areas
13 in mind now, Mr. Poole.
14 MR. POOLE: Thank you.
15 MR. STEIN: Are there any other
16 comments or questions?
17 Mr. Poston.
18 MR. POSTON: I would like to comment
!9 that the Federal Water Pollution Control Ad-
20 ministration has been cooperating with the
21 Corps of Engineers in these problems of
22 dumping of dredged materials, and I feel
23 that we have made definite progress. We do
24 have much to do yet.
25 I am hopeful that the cleanup of
-------
1237
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 waste materials dumped to our water courses,
3 polluted materials, which are really the
4 cause for the problem of transporting dredged
5 materials around, I hope that this conference
6 is successful in eliminating these so that
7 at some future date we will not be concerned
8 with this problem.
9 I note that the Corps of Engineers
10 does receive payment for dredging or has
11 dredging done for them by certain industries
12 in some of the areas where the industry
13 either pays or has the dredging done of material
14 which they admit that they have deposited
I5 in the water courses. I think that this
16 expense of their dredging can be eliminated
17 when they clean up their works.
18 I was glad to hear General Tarbox
19 indicate that dumping of dredged materials
20 will be such that they will be able to meet
21 the standards. I did note that there will
00
be no dumping of dredged materials in the
oq
| Chicago area, but that it will be necessary
i
24 in certain cases of economic need where dredging
25 will be necessary until completion of the
-------
1238
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 Pilot studies and some other ways of disposal
3 are defined.
4 Is this correct, then?
5 GEN. TARBOX: Yes, Mr. Poston. As
g I mentioned, the istrict ngineers are visiting
7 each port authority where your agency has deter-
g mined that there are polluted materials in an
9 area that we have to dredge advising the port
10 authorities of that fact, recommending that
11 even prior to completion of the Pilot Program
12 they try to obtain an alternate disposal area
13 for the 1968 program of maintenance dredging,
14 and if it is located so that it is economically
15 feasible to use it, we will use it during 1968.
16 Where that cannot be arranged, if
17 a hardship would result if we did not perform
18 that maintenance dredging, we will go ahead and
19 perform it and place the dredged materials in
20 the lake disposal area.
21 MR. STEIN: Are there any further
22 comments or questions?
23 Mr. Holmer.
24 MR. HOLMER: Do we have a list of the
25 communities involved in this list of PWPCA of
-------
1239
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 polluted dredging?
3 GEN. TARBOX: Yes, sir.
4 In the State of Wisconsin--
5 MR. HOLMER: You don't need to start
Q with us.
7 (Laughter.)
8 GEN. TARBOX:—Mr. Holmer, if I may
9 start with you, the harbors of which the PWPCA
10 has determined that the material to be dredged
ll under the 1968 maintenance program include
12 Menominee, Green Bay, which is already under
13 the Pilot Program, Manitowoc, Sheboygan, and
14 Milwaukee.
15 Now, harbors where there is no
16 polluted material^-
17 MR. HOLMER: Incidentally, Menominee
18 is in Michigan. Maybe you meant Marinette?
19 GEN. TARBOX: p. K., it is Marinette,
20 part of it.
21 (Laughter.)
22 MR. HOLMER: All right.
23 GEN. TARBOX: The project goes under
i
24 the name of Menominee, but it is —
25 MR. HOLMER; Because of the river?
-------
1240
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 GEN. TARBOX: Yes.
3 Do you care to have the list of
4 unpolluted also?
5 MR. HOLMER: I would like all of
6 them, General.
7 GEN. TARBOX: Clean harbors--
8 MR. HOLMER: No. We know that there
9 are a great many clean harbors in Wisconsin.
10 I would like to know what the others are.
11 GEN. TARBOX: State of Illinois,
12 Calumet Harbor and River--
13 MR. STEIN: Pardon me, I didn't get
14 that question, Mr. Holmer. You want to know
15 what the clean harbors are in the other States?
16 MR. HOLMER: No, the ones that have
17 been identified for polluted dredging.
18 MR. STEIN: Oh, I see.
10 GEN. TARBOX: These are in the 1968
20 maintenance program: Calumet River and Harbor.
21 Then in the State of Indiana: Indiana Harbor.
22 State of Michigan: Muskegan and Manistique.
i
23 i I am not saying these are the only
24 harbors where there is polluted material.
25 Say these are the ones in the 1968 maintenance
-------
1241
l GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 program.
3 MR. STEIN: Any other comments or
4 questions?
. MR. POSTON: I would like to ask
o
c General Tarbox one other question, and this
o
_ pertains to a schedule. I feel that for this
g conference to be a success we will need to
9 come up with a schedule for abatement of all
10 pollution, and I think we will be pushing
u hard for schedules on municipalities and
12 industries and I feel that the rest of the
13 conferees will be asking me and I will want
14 to know myself:
15 Would you have any date in mind
16 that we could stop all dumping of dredged
11 materials in Lake Michigan?
18 GEN. TARBOX: As I mentioned in my
!9 presentation, Mr. Poston, I feel that we can
20 meet the date that the FWPCA has recommended for
2i municipalities and we hope to beat that.
22 Now, aside from the Pilot Program,
23 we have no funds for the increased Federal costs
24 until we can get our needs known in the fiscal
25 year 1970 budget. That is why I say we are
-------
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 going to try to -come to some tentative
3 conclusions this fall, even before the
4 completion of the Pilot Program, so that
5 we can eliminate as much of this problem
6 as possible starting in 1969, the latter
7 half of calendar year 1969, and fiscal
8 1970.
9 So that with the cooperation of
j0 localities, even before then, as you well
11 know, we are starting in 1968, and I think
12 they will add more alternate areas every
13 year and I am confident that we can meet
14 mid-1972. Of course,I have to qualify, that
15 is subject to the availability of funds.
1$ MR. STEIN: Are there any other
17 comments?
18 MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman, could
19 we get a clarification? Mr. Poston said
20 all dredged materials and I got an indication
21 that the answer was on polluted dredged materials.
22 MR. POSTON: Polluted dredged materials.
23 MR. MITCHELL: 0. K., thank you.
24 GEN. TARBOX: That is the way I took
25 your question, Mr. Poston.
-------
! GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 MR. POSTON: Yes, polluted dredged
3 materials.
4 GEN. TARBOX: I am hoping that the
5 conferees will agree, the States will agree,
6 that there is no need to go to alternate dis-
7 posal areas for dredged materials that are
g not polluted.
9 MR. STEIN: This is the question
10 and we appreciate your point of view here,
H but again let me clarify the question. I
12 don't know that the conferees have ever
13 indicated that they want to make a distinction
14 between so-called polluted dredged materials
15 and any dredged materials. Some people say
16 there is no point in cleaning up Lake Michigan
17 if you are going to use it as a dump. And
18 the next question that you have is where do
19 you draw a distinction.
20 As I pointed out, we have a view
21 from the Fish and Wildlife people that if
22 you take any material, no matter how pure
23 it might be or what you would ordinarily
24 call clean rock, and strew it on the bottom,
25 you may be changing the ecology of the area,
-------
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 and I am not sure that these people are in
3 favor of doing this.
4 The questions to be resolved are,
5 one, whether we are going to permit the Great
6 Lakes to be used for the disposal of any
7 dredged material, and two, whether we are going
8 to confine that to so-called "polluted" dredged
9 material. I think we are all in agreement on
10 that. As I understood the agreement between
11 the Department of Interior and the Corps of
12 Engineers there is a prohibition now against
13 disposal of that kind of material in all the
14 Great Lakes, not Just around the Chicago area.
15 So I think most of these issues are
16 resolved except that first one that Mr. Mitchell
17 raised, which is still an open question, of how
18 far the prohibition on disposal of dredged
19 spoils should obtain.
20 Again I am trying to state the facts
21 of the case and the determinations as I see it.
22 i know of no official body that has made a con-
23 elusion we are Just dealing with, quote, polluted
24 dredged material. Obviously, General, when any
25 determinations are made, you will follow them out,
-------
1245,
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 follow the policy. But I think they are
3 still working on that one.
4 Are there any other comments or
5 questions?
6 There is one point that was possibly
7 skirted over in Mr. Boston's remarks. The
8 General mentioned this (page 1211) in his
9 statement. I think this is a critical one
10 that we, the Corps, the other public agencies,
11 the States, and the industries have to face.
12 Page 1211 he points out, "To give
13 you an idea of the size of the problem, the
14 amount taken from the Calumet Harbor and
15 channel would fill the Bal Tabarin Room 30
16 times over each year." Also "We dredged over
17 one million cubic yards of spoil from the
18 outer harbor and the Cuyahoga River at Cleve-
19 land"--and if any of you have been on the
20 Cuyahoga River, you know that is not a
21 pristine pure mountain stream—"the amount
22 would cover a city block of Cleveland about
23
150 feet deep."
24 The question is, why do we have to
25
-------
1 GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 get rid of the dredged material? And I think
3 the Corps is under a statutory obligation t<->
4 maintain these channels. Obviously if we
5 didn't have these channels and we couldn't
6 maintain shipping we would have a tremendous
7 detriment to our interstate commerce.
8 But how do these channels get what?
9 Where is the material coming from? The material
10 is coming from precisely those industries that
11 have the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
12 tion, the States, and the Corps of Engineers striving
13 with the difficult problem of maintaining the chan-
14 nel so they can get the boats or ships up to their
15 dock to bring in their raw materials and put out
16 their finished product. And I think the General
17 mentioned that the problem will be greatly re-
18 duced as communities and industries effect a better
19 treatment of their wastes.
20 It seems to me we have enough problems
21 in pollution control, and this is the question
22 that everyone asks--that the best way to pre-
23 vent pollution is to prevent this at the source.
24 And a lot of people are saying this whole con-
25 troversy doesn't make sense because what we are
-------
! GENERAL ROBERT M. TARBOX
2 doing is we should stop that pollutant from
3 getting in there in the first place and then the
4 problem will be minimized. And I think this
5 is what we have to keep our eye on.
6 (Applause.)
7 Are there any further comments or
8 questions?
9 Thank you very much.
10 GEN. TARBOX: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
j^ (Applause.)
12 MR. STEIN: At the behest of the
13 conferees making the statements, we will
14 forego any recess this morning and we will
15 try to go through right to 12:30.
16 Again let me point this out, I have
17 asked that those curtains be opened in the rear
lg of the room. Once you get behind that curtain,
19 whether they are open or not, they are not
20 soundproof* If you are going to caucus, go
21 out into the hall. I know there is a psychologi-
22 cal notion that once you step beyond those
23 curtains you are in another room. You are
24 making the hearing very, very difficult for
25 the people in the conference room if you keep
-------
1248
1 ILLINOIS PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)
2 that hubbub there. I ask you to bear with us
3 on this.
4 Mr. Klassen.
5
6 ILLINOIS PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)
7
8 MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, to continue
with the Illinois Presentations, I know we all
10 recognize that one of the vital parts of cleaning
11 up Lake Michigan is the legal aspect and the co-
12 operation that each of the States will receive
13 from their Attorney General. Illinois has this
14 cooperation, and the man responsible for this is
15 our next speaker, William G. Clark, the Attorney
16 General of the State of Illinois.
17 (Applause.)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1249
! WILLIAM G. CLARK
2
3 STATEMENT BY THE HONORABLE WILLIAMS, CLARK
4 ATTORNEY GENERAL
5 STATE OF ILLINOIS
6
7 MR. CLARK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
8 Ladies and gentlemen.
9 Not too many years ago, IPlinois
lO coal miners put canaries in cages and carried
H them below ground to detect dangerous and
12 sometimes lethal fumes.
13 Today we have gone below the surface
14 of our waterways and have detected poisons
15 Just as dangerous and just as lethal as those
16 deadly vapors of the mine pits. This is
17 pollution, the insidious cancer that threatens
18 the lifespan of our lake and the health of our
19 people.
20 In convening this conference, Secre-
21 tary Udall and Governor Kerner have set in
22 motion a meaningful effort to mobilize the
23 power of four States and the Federal Government
24 into a single pollution-fighting force.
25 Like advanced cancer, pollution has
-------
1250
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 progressed so far that the only solution is
3 some radical surgery.
4 I call on every Federal agency con-
6 cerned with public health, conservation and
6 economic development and on every State agency,
7 municipal and county authority concerned with
8 protecting public health to make Illinois a
9 no-quarter battleground against pollution,
10 from the Mississippi River to the Wabash,
11 from Cairo to Galena.
12 I ask for a radical surgery policy
13 on the part of every agency.
14 As the officer charged with enforcing
15 the anti-pollution lavs of Illinois in the
16 courts, I will take determined action. We
17 will sue anybody who is certified to us by
18 the Sanitary Water Board as a violator. We
19 will sue everybody so certified where a suit
20 will serve the public interest and expedite
21 corrective actions. There will be no exceptions.
22 Where penalties or damages are asked
23 and where there is evidence of disregard for the
24 public interest, we will seek maximum monetary
25 judgments in the courts.
-------
1251
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 I recommend that the Legislature,
3 without delay, give Mr. Clarence Klassen and
4 the Sanitary Water Board any amount of money
5 and additional number of investigators and
6 engineers that he needs to do the job of
7 policing Illinois waters now--right now--not
8 two or five or six years from now!
9 I think it is outrageous to expect
10 the Board and Mr. Klassen, with a staff of
H only 5^ and annual appropriations of some
12 $518,000, to police adequately many hundreds
13 of miles of waterways, some 1,000 lakes and
14 reservoirs, 10,000 industrial plants, and the
15 sewage operations of hundreds more municipalities
16 and public agencies.
17 The Legislature must act to give
18 Mr. Klassen the muscle he needs to do the Job.
19 The dialogue here in the last three
20 days has told us much, and it is encouraging
21 to us.
22 Watercraft in Chicago harbors can no
23 longer flush unseen wastes. We are promised
24 determined enforcement.
25 The dumping of dredged materials
-------
1252
1 IWILLIAM G. CLARK
„ into the lake has been sharply restricted.
£
3 Timetables have been set for pollution
. abatement by offending industries and municipal
_ agencies. We are holding a stopwatch on them.
o
Water quality standards have been
raised to safe levels.
7
The Attorneys General of the four
8
lake States are exchanging lists of known pol-
•7
luters within their own States. They are com-
mitted to obtain compliance.
The question that concerns us most
12
today is not so much what can be done, but
13
. how soon we can accomplish it.
,_ There is, therefore, no time for
Id
lg guesswork, only hard work and fast work. The
17 public, the press and Federal and State Govern-
lg ments share the belief that the greatest danger
19 at this hour is the danger of delay, of paralysis
20 by analysis.
2i I have a great fear though, a great
22 fear that in concentrating our massed firepower
23 on Lake Michigan we may give a distorted im-
24 | pression that pollution stops at the shoreline,
25 and thus there is no real cause for concern
-------
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 anywhere else in the State of Illinois.
3 I am aware that many downstate
4 Illinoisans regard water pollution as the
5 private and exclusive problem of their
6 neighbors along the distant lakeshore. This
7 kind of myopia could lose the war on pollution
g in Illinois.
9 Let me invite your attention to
10 this map which we have here behind me. Each
11 of these dots represents a pollution .problem
12 so severe in the State of Illinois that sus-
13 tained legal action by my office was required
14 and was taken in cooperation with the State
15 Sanitary Water Board to prevent the further
16 infection of a waterway.
17 Let me now read to you one of the
18 most frightening assessments of the downstate
19 pollution problem on record. Qn page l6l of
20 this official State of Illinois document,
21 which I am holding in my hand, which is the
22 latest and most knowledgeable analysis of
23 our water problems, called "Water for Illinois,
24 A Plan for Action," there is the chilling
25 statement that because of bacterial pollution,
-------
125 4
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 "swimming or water skiing in any of the streams
3 and rivers of Illinois is not recommended."
4 Please think about that for a moment.
5 Because of bacterial content, it is recommended
6 in an official State document that we do not
7 swim in any Illinois river or stream.
8 Just one year ago, the Federal Water
9 Control Administration completed its assessment
10 of pollution damage to our waterways during the
n preceding year. It was found that in Illinois,
12 more than 800,000 fish died from the direct
13 effects of pollution. Our State was, in fact,
14 the fifth largest killer of fish in the Nation
15 that year.
16 The fish cannot survive in Illinois
17 rivers and if we cannot swim in them, how far
lg away is disaster?
19 My point is simply this: If we are
20 going to end pollution, we must end it from
2i border to border and from shoreline to county
22 line, otherwise we leave the cancer unchecked
23 in many parts of our corporate body.
24 I hope that every Illinoisan will
25 have a chance to see this map that I have
-------
1255
I \ WILLIAM G. CLARK
* i
2 here with me today to see for himself that
3 the cancer of pollution is spread throughout
I
4 the entire body of the State of Illinois.
5 Mr. Klassen and his too-limited
6 staff have fought a constant, and consistent
7 fight and often a lonely fight against
8 pollution and always against odds. We know,
9 'because we have been his legal ally these
10 past seven years. Illinois would be in chaos
11 today if police and law enforcement had to
12 face such impossible odds.
13 I aia convinced that pollution in
i
14 downstate Illinois is now intolerably wide-
15 spread. To put it plainly, Mr. Klassen has
'j
16 been ordered to wage a war without troops.
17 Of equal priority in this antl-
18 J pollution campaign is the need for a Pollution
19 Litigation Division in the office of the
20 Attorney General of the State of Illinois.
21 I have twice asked and twice failed to receive
22 from the Legislature funds for this purpose.
23 j I will, therefore, go a third time
24 to the Legislature on March 4 to attempt to
25 fill this most apparent need.
-------
1256
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 In the meantime, two Assistant
3 Attorneys General, Mr. Morrow in Springfield
4 and Mr. Barth in Chicago, are, on a part-
5 time basis, attending hearings and filing
6 lawsuits in both air and water pollution
7 cases. Because of staff limitations, they
8 cannot presently be assigned to full-time
9 pollution enforcement. I wish they could!
10 The law itself contains penalty
H provisions adequate to deal with pollution
12 in Illinois at either the civil or criminal
13 level.
14 Under the pollution statutes, the
15 courts may fine individuals or industries,
16 cities or sanitary districts $500 for the
17 first day of a violation and $100 per day for
18 each day of violation thereafter.
i
19 Under the Illinois criminal code,
20 fines up to $1,000 or a year in jail or
21 both can be assessed for reckless conduct
22 involving public safety. Finally, there is
23 also the restraint of court injunction.
24 At the same time that we proceed
25 against polluters, we will apply the Rule
-------
1257
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 of Reason to those with honest difficulties.
3 In many cases, lawsuits do not provide solutions.
4 In Williamson County, Illinois, for
5 example, a pollution suit proved to be an
6 exercise in futility. The offending community
7 of Carterville, Illinois, was bankrupt. There
g was no money to correct the pollution problem
9 in the first place. Of what value, then, is
10 a penalty judgment, I ask you?
H In Cass County in Central Illinois we
12 were asked to. sue a village which had failed to
13 comply with orders of the Sanitary Water Board.
14 The voters twice rejected bond issues to correct
15 a faulty sewage system. Ultimately, with the
16 promise of a $2.50,000 Federal assistance grant,
17 the voters consented to remedy the situation.
18 We were requested, and happily agreed, to defer
19 legal action in the face of one particularly
20 overwhelming fact: 3y the time the sewage
21 facilities were completed, the village would
22 have been liable for $365,000 in penalties,
23 or $115,000 more than the total Federal grant.
24 Case closed.
25 We do not find within the Rule of
-------
1258
i •
1 | WILLIAM G. CLARK
i
2 Reason, however, the occasional threat of an
3 industry to pack up its jobs and equipment
4 and leave Illinois if anti-pollution laws
5 are enforced against the company. We don't
6 want to lose any industry. But presented
7 with such ultimatums, we are going to stand
8 with the statutes of the State of Illinois.
9 ! And I would like to remind such
ji
10 industries that there is no longer any haven
11 ! from pollution prosecution. Federal anti-
12 i pollution enforcement reaches to every sector
13 I of the Nation and that enforcement is constantly
14 I increasing.
15 i The Rule of Reason is serving, and
16 i serving well, the four States involved in this
i
17 I conference. After 50 years of quarrelsome
I
18 !| litigation over the amount of water Illinois
19 diverts from Lake Michigan, the dispute ended
20 last year with the amount of diversion unchanged.
i
21 Illinois neighboring States were our adversaries
22 * during much of that half-century of litigation.
i|
23 | But on November 3> 196*7, we became
24 allies. On that date Attorneys General Frank
25 Kelley of Michigan, Bronson LaFollette of Wisconsin,
-------
1259
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 and John Dillon of Indiana met with me in
3 my offices in Chicago to prepare a cooperative
4 regional campaign against pollution violators
5 irrespective of State lines or the special
6 interests of any single State.
7 As our first point of agreement,
8 we resolved not to repeat the mistakes of
9 the past, filing suits and countersuits
10 against each other, State against State.
11 Instead, we have exchanged lists
12 of all known polluters of Lake Michigan from
13 within each State as prepared and presented
14 to us by our State experts. We are now
15 prepared to file lawsuits individually or
16 to mass the combined powers of the four States
17 through the offices of the Attorneys General
18 with all four Attorneys General acting as
19 Joint plaintiffs.
20 Thus, through the Rule of Reason,
21 the attack upon pollution is now both regional
22 and cooperative, a far step ahead of the
23 divisive quarrels of the past.
24 I feel that we are making significant
25 strides at both the State and regional levels.
-------
1260
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 Certainly the added impact of the Federal
3 Government gives far greater force to our efforts
4 I am personally convinced we will
5 ultimately win the war against pollution.
6 Next November Illinois voters will be asked
7 to approve a one billion dollar bond issue
8 to finance a massive attack on both air and
9 water pollution.
IQ This can be the main offensive in
H the Illinois pollution war. I endorse this
12 proposal with the greatest enthusiasm and
13 conviction. This program will give us all we
14 need, all the weaponry required for the war
15 we wage.
16 Every dollar of this money will be
17 used to benefit every Illinoisan by erasing
18 the peril that hangs in our air and swirls
19 through our waterways.
20 The question is not, "Can we afford
21 to do it." The question is, "Can we afford not
22 to do it? "
23 The victory we seek over pollution
24 will not come overnight, but I am certain that
25 it will come because of the involvement and
-------
126'L
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 total commitment of men like Secretary Udall,
3 Governor Kerner, Mayor Daley, Clarence Klassen,
4 Peter Kuh and Ted Rogowski of the Department
5 of Interior, Murray Stein and H. W. Poston
6 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Adminis-
7 tration, and all of the other people that we
g have been meeting with. They are men of dedi-
9 cation and they are determined to win a victory
10 against pollution. It must be a victory that
11 is total in every part of Illinois.and certainly
12 in every part of the four States bordering Lake
13 Michigan.
14 Thank you.
15 MR. STEIN: Thank you very much, sir.
16 (Applause.)
17 MR. STEIN: Are there any comments
18 or questions?
19 (No response.)
20 MR. STEIN: Illinois has been one
21 of the best States in the pollution fight,
22 I think this isn't, at least from our experience,
23 Just talk, because whenever we have gone to
24 Bill Clark on a Joint case or on a problem,
25 his hand has always been outj the full
-------
1262
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1263
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 facilities of his office have been available,
3 and we have moved ahead.
4 I have one question and one slight
5 comment.
6 Under the Federal law, as you know,
7 we give the States the first crack, to proceed
8 against the polluters under their own laws of
9 procedures. Now, when the Attorneys General
10 of the four States met and your program was
11 set up, did you have the same kind of procedure,
12 that e^ch one of you was going to get the
13 first crack at your own polluters, or were
14 you going around suing polluters in other
15 States?
16 ATTORNEY GENERAL CLARK: ¥e agreed
17 that we each would ask the experts in our
18 State for the list of polluters and then we
19 would exchange lists so that we would each
20 have a check on the other. Once having done
21 that, we were going to have a further meeting
22 to decide if each of us should individually
23 sue those within our State or whether the four
24 should join in every suit. In any event,
25 each advocate would have a complete list of
-------
1264
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 the polluters in all four States of Lake
3 Michigan and each would be a check on the
4 other.
5 And I think that arrangement, Mr.
6 Stein, makes a great deal of sense, because
7 we had just gone through the lake diversion
8 cases--Mr. Kuh was working on that long before
9 I was Attorney General, I know—and for some
10 50 years the lake States fought this battle.
U And after millions of dollars and 50 years
12 later, it was finally resolved. That could
J3 have been resolved 50 years ago.
14 And so I called the Attorneys General
15 of the States and said that rather than each of
IQ us suing each other and 50 years from now the
11 Supreme Court of the United States would find
lg that each of us had within our State pollution
19 problems, let's all agree right now that we
20 have it$ let's assume the Supreme Court has
21 just entered the decree, and let's start out
22 from there.
23 So as a result, we have complete
24 cooperation of the Attorneys General of those
25 States. I met with two of them in Washington
-------
1265
1 WILLIAM G. CLARK
2 yesterday. They are all either going to "be
3 here or present papers to you. And we would
4 like the opportunity, of course, to be able
6 to do this on a Statewide basis with your
5 continuing help and expertise.
7 MR. STEIN: Right. And I think we
8 are in full agreement on that.
9 There is one more point, and this is
10 one I want to put out in passing, particularly
H for Mr. Klassen.
12 I think all the States here have
13 good programs, but when foreign visitors
14 come and they want to look at a good program,
15 we say, "Why don't you go out to Illinois?"
16 And then we get this other figure that you
17 mentioned that you have the fifth largest
18 fish kill statistics in the country.
19 This is the paradox in pollution
20 control. In a Federal enforcement operation
21 like this you will often find with the most
22 progressive States, such as Illinois, with
23 the fifth largest fish kill—and I am sure
24 this is a very serious problem—that the
25 question you have to ask is how much can
-------
1 WILLIAM 0. CLARK
2 this be attributed to the full reporting
3 system and candor of Illinois in sending
4 in the statistics.
5 Very often you will find that
6 the States who are doing a good Job in
7 outlining what the pollution problems are,
8 spotlighting cities and industries so that
9 everyone thinks there is a tremendous pol-
10 lution problem are really the States that
11 are being alert, finding pollution problems
12 where they are, and identifying them so
13 they can meet them.
14 Thank you very much.
15 ATTORNEY GENERAL CLARK: Thank you,
16 Mr. Stein.
17 MR. STEIN: Mr. Klassen.
18 MR. KLASSEN: The Department of
19 Public Works of the State of Illinois has
20 in office concurrently a man of many parts.
21 He is a member of the Illinois Sanitary Water
22 Board and we want to hear from him now,
23 particularly because he is the person that
24 signs and authorizes any permits for dumping
25 into Lake Michigan.
-------
126?
1 FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 At this time we want to present
3 Francis 3. Lorenz, Director of Public Works
4 of the State of Illinois.
5
6 STATEMENT 3Y FRANCIS S. LORENZ
7 DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
8 PUBLIC WORKS AND BUILDINGS
9 STATE OF ILLINOIS
10
11 MR. LORENZ: Thank you very much,
12 Clarence.
13 Mr. Chairman, State and Federal con-
14 ferees, distinguished guests and ladies and
15 gentlemen of the conference. j
j
16 The Department of Public Works and I
i
17 Buildings is one of several Illinois agencies !
j
18 which exercises Jurisdiction over aspects of
19 j the use and study of Lake Michigan. Responsi- I
20 bilities which rest with this Department of
21 State Government concerning Lake Michigan
I
22 include acting as trustee for the people of
23 j Illinois who own the bed of the lake, cooperating
i
24 ; with Federal and State agencies and making sur-
25 veys and reports in relation to the levels of
-------
1268
! FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 Lake Michigan, execution of permit powers for
3 construction of works in the waters of che lake,
4 and more recently, the allocation of water
_ supplies from Lake Michigan to both government
. and private entities.
D I
Other Departments of State government
have proper and appropriate jurisdiction over
O
water pollution, water recreation, and fishing
«/
and wildlife aspects of the lake. The City of
Chicago, the Metropolitan Sanitary District,
12 the North Shore Sanitary District and numerous
i, local units of government have responsibilities
13
14 for their geographical boundaries and functional
15 purposes.
i- I The wide variety of jurisdictions
lo
17 in Illinois is duplicated in Wisconsin, Indiana
lg and Michigan to the end that hundreds of govern-
19 mental jurisdictions have responsibilities for
2Q aspects of the Lake Michigan resource. Often
2i times, particularly when State lines are
22 crossed, conflicts develop between the aims
23 and capabilities of .the several agencies.
24 The conflicts involve criteria of judgment
25 such as water quality standards, and requirements
-------
1269
FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 of economic enhancement, such as the maintenance
3 of deep-draft harbors and waterways.
4 There have been many reasons set
forth relative to the causes of pollution
g in Lake Michigan and other problems which
7 may be hastening the degradation of the deep
g waters of the lake. One of the activities
which has received considerable public
attention is the possible discharge of pol-
luted material in the disposal grounds on the
12 bed of the lake. In the State of Illinois
13 utilization of the official disposal grounds
14 may be accomplished only upon issuance of a
15 permit by the Department of Public Works and
Buildings of the State of Illinois.
17 The Department of Public Works and
18 Buildings completely endorses strict control
19 over the discharge of any material to Lake
20 Michigan waters and believes the discharge
2i of any material which would pollute the waters
22 of our great resource should be totally and
23 finally prohibited. Several actions have been
24 j undertaken to enforce this position of the
25 Department.
-------
1270
|FRANCIS S. LORENZ
At the present time a strict embargo
2
on the basis of an Executive Order issued by
3
Governor Otto Kerner prevents the deposit of
4
any material in Lake Michigan for either off-
5
shore disposal purposes or for the construction
6
of additions to beaches, groins, or breakwater
protections. The purpose of this embargo is
8
to place the State of Illinois in an absolutely
«?
certain position relative to the adoption of
10
strict and appropriate quality criteria for
permissive placement of inorganic materials in
Lake Michigan.
13
In addition to the Executive Order
14
which defines the present posture of the
Department, through the strong leadership
16
of Governor Kerner and the admirable bipartisan
17
action of the General Assembly of Illinois,
lo
new measures have been enacted into law to
1*1
aid in the preservation of the water quality
of Lake Michigan. The legislation requires that
21
the Department of Public Works and Buildings
issue permits for the disposal of material in
Lake Michigan only after certification has been
made by the Sanitary Water Board of the State
-------
1271
I FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 of Illinois as to the acceptability of the
3 material in the lake waters from the standpoint
4 of water quality. In addition, the bill
5 specifically requires that the Sanitary
6 Water Board undertake studies and work in
7 close cooperation with units of local govern-
g ment to ensure adequate waters for swimming
9 on public beaches in the Chicago area, to
10 provide absolute control of waste discharge
U from vessels moving on the lake in Illinois,
!2 and to satisfy the requirements set forth by
13 the State conferees which were convened for
14 the purpose of controlling the pollution of
15 shore waters of Lake Michigan. This strong
18 bipartisan measure was presented to Governor
17 Kerner at a special session of the General
18 Assembly. This law became effective on
19 October 30, 1967.
20 The measures will cost the State of
21 Illinois virtually no monies, but will effective-
22 ly close the door to contamination of the
23 waters of Lake Michigan by the use of the
24 offshore disposal grounds because of the
25 dumping of dredgings originating in Illinois
-------
1272
I FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 rivers and harbors.
3 I call your attention to the fact
4 that if this action by Illinois is a unilateral
5 one the lake will not be benefited. The
6 dumping of pollutants knows no boundary, just
7 as the water of the lake knows no boundary.
8 We agree that the pollution caused by the use
9 of the disposal grounds, even if polluted
10 material is discharged, is small. But the
11 important fact is that this is a degree of
12 pollution that can be completely eliminated.
13 Illinois has taken the unilateral action to
14 set the example! Elimination of this clearly
15 visible, repugnant use of the waters of Lake
16 Michigan is a necessity to our eventual control
17 of the pollution problem. It is our belief
18 that you conferees should urge the other States
19 to this conference to become equally as tough
20 as Illinois now is.
21 The two main problems of pollution
22 in Lake Michigan will require more time and
23 much more money for an effective solution.
24 it is our opinion that there is no way to
25 acquire the desirable degree of protection
-------
1273
FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 without the expenditure of great sums of money
3 ana this fact should be thoroughly recognized
by all concerned. It is the considered opinion
of the Department that it is erroneous and
wasteful to attempt the control of Lake Michigan
water quality by concentrating upon isolated
aspects of the total pollution problem. The
membership of this conference must be aware
of the tremendous problems which face the States
bordering upon the Great Lakes. Prom the stand-
point of both economic impact and water quality
control, it is our opinion that the two most
serious problems relative to pollution of Lake
15 Michigan may be arranged in the following order:
a. The inflow of nutrients in
17 the form of phosphates and nitrates
from agricultural land and from
19 sewage treatment facilities. The
20 extremely critical nature of this
2i problem is apparent from two con-
22 siderations. First, we do not
23 know how to control the inflow
24 of nutrients to Lake Michigan, and
25 secondly, we have no means of
-------
I FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 controlling the impact of the
3 nutrients on the ecology of the
4 lake.
g b. The second area of concern
has to do with discharge of domes-
tic and industrial wastes into
the peripheral waters of Lake
Michigan. We view this problem
with less concern than the first
only because we have the means,
12 both technically and financially,
to control this source of pollution.
14 We have the water quality standards
15 and in Illinois we have the law to
support the standards. Satisfaction
of the requirements will not be easy,
18 and it will be expensive, but it
must be done to protect the health
20 and wealth of all those served by
Lake Michigan. The work will be done
22 in the field by industry, by officials
23 of government and by all our citizens.
24 It will be the result of long, hard,
25 painstaking, professional work.
-------
1275
1 FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 Let me state here that we deeply
3 appreciate the sincere help of the press and
4 other news media in this regard. Their efforts
5 in making the public aware of the problem have
6 been outstanding. In addition the responsibili-
7 ties already cited the Department of Public
8 Works and Buildings is responsible for the
9 regular surveillance of the shores of Lake
lO Michigan to ensure that the interests of the
H people of Illinois are protected. In conjunc-
12 tion with this work we have completed numerous
13 studies of the currents and waves of Lake
14 Michigan as well as of the problems of shore
15 erosion and accretion. Several reports have
16 been published as the result of these studies
17 and are generally available to the public.
18 In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me
19 assure you, and all others in attendance at
20 this conference, of the complete cooperation
21 of the Department of Public Works and Buildings
22 as we move forward with this great task.
23 Directions to me from the Honorable Otto
24 Kerner, Governor of the State of Illinois,
25 emphasize his great and specific interests
-------
1 FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 in the utilization of the waters of Lake
3 Michigan. Directions by me to the professional
4 units of my Department will assure that every
5 possible degree of cooperation Is afforded by
6 the Department of Public Works and Buildings
7 to each and every agency Interested in working
g toward the final development of the Lake Michl-
9 gan resource.
10 And let me say finally in closing,
H I hope that the efforts of the State of Illinois
12 in this regard will not go unnoticed by the
13 other States to this conference, that we have
14 got to work together and not be in competition
15 with each other, and that if there Is going
16 to be any banning of the dumping of dredged
17 materials in the lake we should all follow
18 the strongest possible course in this regard.
19 Thank you very much.
20 MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Lorenz.
21 (Applause.)
22 MR. STEIN: Are there any comments
23 or questions?
24 Again I would like to compliment
25 Mr. Lorenz on his statement and Indicate that
-------
1277
1 FRANCIS S. LORENZ
2 the problem in dealing with the disposal of
3 dredged material has not been a simple one.
4 As you can tell, it is still not completely
5 resolved.
6 Again} in working with Mr. Lorenz,
7 we have had the fullest cooperation through-
g out a very sticky Pederal-State-local prob-
9 lem. If we had more people like him everywhere,
10 with his attitude, flexibility and complete
11 knowledge of the field, we could move way
12 ahead. That is the kind of cooperation,
13 give and take and full candor we have had
14 from Mr. Lorenz and the Illinois group.
15 I am sure if we get this from all parties
16 who are concerned with the disposal of
17 dredged materials, we wi?l have a satisfactory
18 solution.
19 Thank you.
20 MR. LCRENZ: Thank you very much.
21 MR. STEIN: Mr. Klassen.
22 MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, to
23 continue, the Director of the Department of
24 ! Conservation of the State of Illinois likewise
25
-------
1278
! WILLIAM T. LODGE
2 has many hats. He is a member of the Illinois
3 Sanitary Water Board and, of course, is the
4 person that is deeply involved in fish and
. recreation involving Lake Michigan.
6 At this time I would like to present
7 the Director of the Department of Conservation,
Q William T. Lodge.
8
9
10 STATEMENT BY WILLIAM T. LODGE
n DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
12 STATE OF ILLINOIS
13
14 MR. LODGE: Mr. Chairman, conferees,
15 ladies and gentlemen.
16 The boundaries and jurisdiction of
17 the State of Illinois are defined in Article I
18 of the State Constitution. This gives the
19 Illinois Department of Conservation the re-
20 sponsibility of carrying out statutory regu-
2i lations for fish, game and boating for over
22 976,000 acres of water in Lake Michigan. At
23 the present time, even with this large acreage
24 | of water, there is only a small area of
25 recreational activity primarily located close
-------
^___ 127 9
1 WILLIAM T. LODGE
2 to the 63 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline in
3 Illinois. With the quest for quality in Lake
4 Michigan water, there will be a change to
5 using increasingly greater amount of the lake
6 offshore rather than Just near the shoreline.
7 It indeed is important to have for the future
g a well-managed lake with clean water to provide
9 a large potential area of interest to people
10 ready and available for recreational fishing,
11 boating and other allied outdoor activities.
12 Our Department exercises concurrent
13 jurisdiction with the Federal Government and
14 various political subdivisions of the State
15 with regard to enforcing the provisions of
16 the Illinois Boat Registration and Safety Act
17 and providing boating facilities on that area
18 of Lake Michigan alluded to previously. The
19 State of Illinois has direct jurisdiction
20 over only about three miles of its lakeshore
21 on Lake Michigan. The entire remainder of the
22 lakeshore in Illinois is either in private
23 ownership or is under the direct control and
24 i supervision of various park districts and
25 municipalities within which the snoreline lies.
-------
1280
1 WILLIAM T. LODGE
2 The purpose of the boat law is to provide
3 persons with a safe and enjoyable boating
4 environment and to provide boating facilities
5 throughout the State. It is anticipated by
6 the year 2000 there will be five times the
7 number of boaters using the waters of our
g State as are presently doing so.
9 One of the main deterrents to providing
10 quality water recreational activities in the
11 State is the rising pollution levels along
12 lower Lake Michigan. It is Incumbent upon
13 us to keep abreast of these problems in
14 facing the necessities of the future in
15 recreational boating. We must attack the
16 problems of water pollution on all fronts.
17 Pollution from pleasure boating is not con-
18 sidered to be extremely serious at this time
19 as compared with other sources of water pol-
20 lution. However, this is a definite type of
21 pollution which can and must be eliminated.
22 The City of Chicago has recently
23 taken the lead in establishing regulations
24 for pleasure boats which will eliminate this
25 problem. The State of Illinois will
-------
1281
1 WILLIAM T. LODGE
2 undoubtedly follow this lead in the near future,
3 and it is hoped that other States bordering on
4 Lake Michigan will cooperate in this type of
5 regulation for the elimination of this pollution.
6 Due to the availability of marine fuel
7 tax funds, it is anticipated that our Depart-
g ment will, in the future, be in a better posi-
9 tion to create more and better harbor facilities
10 on Lake Michigan. Our Department should increase
U facilities for water-related recreation through
12 State and Federal assistance to local governments
13 in developing additional public harbors, mooring
14 facilities and harbors of refuge.
15 Sport fishing in Lake Michigan in
l
-------
1282
1 WILLIAM T. LODGE
2 the lake, the fishing for this species has
3 fallen off drastically. Smelt fishing has
4 severely declined and the catch of herring
5 is virtually absent. There has been a
6 corresponding decline in the number of
7 fishermen using Lake Michigan in Illinois
8 waters as depicted in the fishing license
9 sales. The combined total number of fishing
10 licenses sold in Cook and Lake Counties has
11 dropped from 300,000 in 1957 to about 170,000
12 in 1965.
13 During the past 12 years the alewife
14 population in Lake Michigan has expanded at a
15 rapid rate with a peak population being es-
16 pecially evident in Illinois waters in 1966
17 and 1967. This great abundance of alewlves
18 has followed with massive die-offs of this
19 species especially during the summer of 19^7.
20 The concentrations of the greatest number of
21 dead fish were generally along the entire
22 shoreline of Lake Michigan, but especially
23 heavy accumulations occurred in lower Lake
24 Michigan. Serious problems connected with
25 disposal of these fish were presented to all
-------
1283
1 WILLIAM T. LODGE
2 beach and shoreline areas. Also there are
3 serious problems to water intakes being
4 clogged with this overabundant fish. A co-
5 ordinated plan to meet the problem of alewife
6 die-offs is now underway and a long range plan
7 to prevent such occurrences is a major project
g of the Great Lakes Basin Commission. Private,
9 City, county, State and Federal agencies will
10 "be a part of this needed work which is underway
11 at the present time.
12 In Illinois no commercial fishing
13 is done for the alewife and it is not a fish
14 that can be taken on hook and line. The un-
15 fortunate feature of the alewife explosion
16 from a fisheries standpoint is that it has
17 crowded out some of the more important fishes
18 of southern Lake Michigan such as herring,
19 yellow perch and chubs. The number of commercial
20 fishermen operating out of Illinois ports on
21 Lake Michigan has become greatly reduced over
22 the past 20 years. Part of this has been be-
23 cause of low income gains compared to investment,
24 and part of it is due to a reduction in avail-
25 ability of marketable fishes. The commercial
-------
1284
1 WILLIAM T. LODGE
2 fishing industry in Illinois waters of Lake
3 Michigan from 19^5 to 1955 changed from a perch-
4 lake trout to a perch-chub fishery. From 1956
5 to the present time the change has been from a
6 perch-herring-chub fishery to one dependent
7 almost exclusively on the chubs. At the present
g time there are only three full-time boats
9 fishing commercially out of Illinois ports
10 plus six part-time boats (all gill net opera-
11 tors). No fishermen in Illinois have yet made
12 the expensive conversion of equipment to trawl
IS for alewives. At the present time commercial
14 fishing is closed for lake trout, coho and
15 Chinook salmon in Illinois waters.
16 While the above conditions of fish-
17 eries in Lake Michigan possibly cannot be
18 directly related to lake pollution, they do
19 point up a problem which has arisen in the
20 lake of an imbalance of marine life which
21 must be corrected. The correction of this
22 problem will undoubtedly be greatly fecilitated
23 by the attaining of water quality good enough
24 so as to not pose an additional problem to
25 the development of the habitat.
-------
1285
1 WILLIAM T. LODGE
2 The Great Lakes Fishery Commission
3 working with the U. S. Department of the
4 Interior has been and will continue to be
5 particularly interested in work to improve
6 the structure of the fish population. This
7 active program is in cooperation with States
g bordering the lake. The lake trout program
9 of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission and
10 the recent salmon introduction of the State
11 of Michigan may well be the lead into an
12 important specialized offshore sport, troll
13 fishing in all areas of Lake Michigan and
14 especially in Illinois waters.
15 MR. STEIN: Thank you, sir.
16 Are there any comments or questions
17 of Mr. Lodge?
18 Thank you very much for your state-
19 ment.
20 Mr. Klassen.
21 MR. KLASSEN: Normally, Mr. Chairman,
22 we would get back and finish up the Chicago
23 Water Department presentation. The technical
24 j part of this is quite lengthy and involved,
25 and we are going to defer this until the time
-------
1286
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 right after lunch and hope now for the 12:30
3 time for lunch I understand the Chairman has
4 imposed, which is good. We want to pick up
5 a few short ones.
6 Responsible for much of the water
7 pollution activities in our State Legislature
8 is the Commission on Water Pollution and Water
9 Resources.
10 I am going to call on the Chairman
11 of that Commission at this time--with a certain
12 risk, being a State employee, having to tell
13 the Chairman of an important committee like
14 this that he has only three minutes--Carl Klein,
15 Representative of the Chicago area.
16
17 STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE CARL L. KLEIN
18 CHAIRMAN, WATER POLLUTION AND
19 WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
20 STATE OP ILLINOIS
21
22 MR. KLEIN: Thank you, Mr. Klassen.
23 My staff is passing out my statement and a
24 report on Lake Michigan from the Water Pollution
25 and Water Resources Commission of the State of
-------
128?
CARL L. KLEIN
2 Illinois.
3 Mr. Chairman, honored guests and
ladies and gentlemen.
My statement today is my own,
although I am sure it coincides with many
7 aspects with that of my colleagues on the
g Commission.
I state to you that the Commission
10 report on Lake Michigan is now being distributed
among you, and I call to your particular
12 attention, to the summary, conclusions and
13 recommendations of the Commission in regard
14 to the problems.
(Which said report is as follows:)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1288'
Report on Lake Michigan
Water Pollution and Water Resources
Commission of Illinois
Chairman - Rep. Carl L. Klein
V. Chairman - Prof. Norman G. P. Krausz
Secretary - Sen. Robert W. Mitchler
Executive Secy. - Mr. Gordan E. Kerr
MEMBERS:
Sen. Paul Broyles
Sen. Z. A. Sokolnicki
Rep. Ben Blades
Rep. Joseph Tumpach
Mr. Elmer Smith
Prof. Harold Gotaas
-------
1289
THE MOVING FINGER WRITES; AND, HAVING WRIT,
MOVES ON: NOR ALL YOUR PIETY NOR WIT
SHALL LURE IT BACK TO CANCEL HALF A LINE,
NOR ALL YOUR TEARS WASH OUT A WORD OF IT.
AND THE MOVING FINGER HAS WRIT: ON LAKE MICHIGAN
Pulp sugars. . . .
Canning sugars....
Kerosene. . .
Salt Water. . .
Garbage dump. . .
Coal dust. . .
Oil and paints. . .
Dieldrin. . .
Septic overflow. . .
Drug remnants. . .
Sulphuric acid. . .
Oil and grease...
Flue dust. . .
Shipping discharges...
Bathing pollution. . .
Sport boating discharges...
Dumping of dredgings...
Landfill operations...
Plankton. . .
Raw sewage. . .
Partially treated sewage...
Phosphates - Nitrates...
Alluvial s. . .
Farm fertilizers....
Cattle and hog lot flushings...
Thermal pollutions. . .
ALGAE, ALGAE EVERYWHERE AND NOT A PLACE TO SWIM —
HOW LONG WILL THE LAKE STAY FIT TO DRINK?
-------
WATER POLLUTION
CHAIRMAN:
CAM. I. KLEIN
6428 South Francisco Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60629
VICE CHAIRMAN:
NORMAN G. P. KRAUSZ
University of Illinois
431 Mumtbrd Hall
Urbana, Illinois 61803
SECRETARY:
SENATOR DONALD D. CARPENTIER
2208 37th Str.et
Mollne, Illinois 61265
MEMBERS:
SENATOR PAUL BROYLES
1800 Franklin
Mount Vernon, Illinois 62864
SENATOR THAD KUSIBAB
2043 Augusta Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60622
REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPH TUMPACH
4644 Highland
Downers Grove, Illinois 60515
REPRESENTATIVE BEN BLADES
503 Northeast 4th Street
Falrfield, Illinois, 62839
PROF. HAROLD GOTAAS
618 Coltax
Evamton, Illinois 60603
MR. ELMER SMITH
Caterpillar Tractor Co.
Peorla, Illinois 61611
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY:
GORDON E. KERR
Brookport, Illinois 62910
12QO
RCES COMMISSION
from Iht Offlco of H>» Chairman:
STATE REPRESENTATIVE CARL L.KLEIN
6428 South Francisco Avonue
Chicago, Illinois 60629
January 2$, 1968
His Excellency Otto Kerner
Governor, State of Illinois
and
Members of the ?5th General Assembly:
The Water Pollution and Water Resources Commission, created
by House Bill No. 1059 during the 1965 General Assembly.
herewith submits its supplemental report concerning Lake Michigan
based on its hearings in the area.
We trust the results of our additional studies will be helpful
as a guide to the State of Illinois and its communities in
determining their forward progress in the field of water use
and water resources, especially insofar as Lake Michigan problems
are concerned.
Respectfully submitted,
WATER PQK^CON AND WATER
RESO'
tt, V. KLETO, CHAIRMAN
-------
1291
BACKGROUND
Basically, the southern portion of Lake Michigan is without
regular currents.
Y/hen the Lake is calm and windless, probably the only
discernable movement is a littoral one southward along
both the East and Vest shores bringing nutrient and
industrial pollution from Michigan and Indiana into the
Calumet River, and from Wisconsin and Lake County, Illinois
into the Chicago River; both littoral flwws being induced
by the water diversion from Lake Michigan into the Illinois
waterway.
When the Lake is beset by wind and wave, currents may run
clockwise or counterclockwise depending on the direction
of the wind; then sands shift in the current and the
pollution in the water is distributed from one location
to another spot, which may also be a source of pollution.
The inactive quality of Lake Michigan waters is the greatest
threat to its continued well-being. While running water
cleanses itself of pollution by bacterial action and
renewed oxygenation, pollution introduced into Lake Michigan
just lays there dormant and becomes greater day by day,
week by week, month by month, and year by year.
Pollution in the Lake is more probably similarized to
cancer — the danger is probably in a geometrical pro-
gression rather than arithmetical. As with cancer, the
need is to recognize the early symptoms of pollution and
to take heroic steps to cure it even to the point of
amputation, because the welfare of Illinois, Indiana and
Wisconsin are largely based on Lake Michigan as source
of pure domestic water and plentiful industrial water.
MICHIGAN:
The sweep around the Lake should start with the sovereign
State of Michigan.
The State of Michigan presents the least industrialized
face toward Lake Michigan — but even here, the hand
of man changing the forest into farm and orchard, using
fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides, setting up
canneries, processing salt, using kerosene, and building
cities, villages and towns with inadequate sewage treat-
ment and inadequate horse-and-buggy septic tanks has
brought pollution into the streams and into Lake Michigan.
-------
1292
WISCONSIN:
Our sister State of Wisconsin is more industrialized —
in the Fox River Valley and Green Bay, at Manitowoc,
Sheboygan and the Milwaukee—Racine—Kenosha complex,
Extreme industrial pollution in the Fox River Valley
empties into Green Bay; pulp processing and dumping of
polluted dredgings and inadequate sewage treatment makes
the picture of Green Bay gloomier every day.
Wisconsin rivers emptying into Lake Michigan bring
herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, feed lot pollution,
untreated or inadequately treated sewage into Lake Michigan,
The Milwaukee complex problem bring unregulated industrial
pollution into the Lake — but even more important, the
large populations dependent on the industries cause more
important problems — untreated raw sewage, inadequately
treated sewage, and nutrient pollution by phosphates and
nitrates from efficiently treated sewage.
INDIANA:
The sovereign State of Indiana is highly industrialized
on_ its most important frontage on Lake Michigan.
Steel mills bring flue dust, and also cause thermal
pollution from heated waters; oil processing causes
thermal pollution and careless handling in tankers or
processing brings oil slicks and tainted dredgings;
other industries contribute many other forms of pol-
lution to the overburdened waters of the Lake.
The lakeside cities of Gary, Hammond, Whiting, and
East Chicago, fortunately have sewage relief through
the Illinois Waterway or the situation would be
unbearable.
However, Indiana farmlands and feedlots contribute their
share of fertilizer, herbicide, pesticide and feeder
lot pollution via streams such as the St. Josephs River
flowing into Lake Michigan.
-------
1293
LAKE COUNTY;
The problem here is twofold;
1. Hi£tory_: The North Shore Sanitary District has been
overwhelmed with new cities, new industries and an
incredible growth of population. Inadequate treat-
ment plants have become more and more inadequate as
the North Shore Sanitary District "marked Time" waiting
for final decision in the famed water-diversion case.
Now the case has been settled; a bond issue is
proposed for renovation and renewal, rebuilding and
building of new plants, with use of part of the
water diversion, 60 to 150 c.p.f.s. formerly allo-
cated only to Cook County and the Metropolitan
Sanitary District, as a diluant factor with that
treated effluent to be discharged into either the
Skokie-Chicago River system or the Des Plaines
River system.
2. Advantages: 1. No more discharge of treated sewage
effluent into Lake Michigan with its cargo of phos-
phorus fertilizers to cause rapid growth of algae.
2. More efficient sewage treatment (up to 90$) by
building secondary treatment plants at all locations.
However, the nutrient pollution problem (phosphorus)
has only been transferred from the Lake to the rivers.
3. Problems: The following questions are pertinent to
the pollution posed by the North Shore Sanitary
District:
What problems of floods and flood control will arise
along the Skokie and Chicago Rivers because of the
additional water placed therein — How much will the
river levels rise in ordinary flow?
What problems of floods and flood control will arise
along the Des Plaines River because of the additional
water placed therein — especially in the western
suburbs crowding along the Des Plaines and in the
"green belt" of the forest preserves?
The Des Plaines River, according to hearings testimony,
has very little pollution down to the north edge of
the City of Des Plaines and has good fish life above
there — What will the sewage effluent do to the
quality of the water north of Des Plaines? What will
the sewage effluent do to the quality of water running
through the western suburbs?
-------
1294
In light of the fact that the sewage effluent discharges
are flowing directly and shortly into the heavily pop-
ulated areas of Chicago and its western suburbs, would
it not be more practical and certainly highly desirable
to demand that tertiary treatment be required with 95/£~
98$ efficiency on all levels and that further treat-
ment be required to remove nutrient pollution before
discharge into the Skokie, Chicago and Des Plaines
Rivers?
What disposal is planned for storm water discharges?
Any appreciable amount of additional runoff water could
cause havoc in the crowded plains of Chicago, Des Plaines,
Stone Park, River Grove, Maywood, River Forest and
other suburbs.
Also: 'What happens when a lesser amount of water is
available to Cook County and the Metropolitan Sanitary
District of Chicago?
Recommendations: The present plans of the North Shore
Sanitary District are salutory insofar as Lake County and
Lake Michigan pollution problems — BUT there appears
to be inadequate planning for flood control and for suf-
ficient treatment when the factor of the heavily populated,
built up areas of discharge are taken into account. Proper
planning is necessary for proper water resources management
and the planning herein has only been partial and not
complete. All aspects must be considered before engineering
is begun, and monies are expended.
COOK COUNTY. ILLINOIS
No farm problems exist here, no feed lot problems, and the
industrial discharges and sewage discharges have been minimized
by the reversal of the Chicago River away from Lake Michigan
into the Illinois Waterway; but the extreme urbanization has
brought shipping and boat pollution, dumping of polluted
dredgings; bathing pollutions, combined sewer flushings as
well as intermittent sewage and industrial and thermal
pollutions. Nor can we minimize the sewage and industrial
pollution factors: Reversal of the Chicago River flow has
saved Lake Michigan but has turned the problem inward down
the Illinois Waterway, to other Illinois cities, such as
Peoria, who secure part of their drinking water from the
Illinois River.
The pollution problems caused by sewage and industry are
universal: The solutions applied to saving Lake Michigan
must be reapplied to other lakes and to all rivers and
streams receiving discharges. Therefore Cook County's
industrial and sewage problems must be considered as part
of the Lake Michigan picture.
-------
1295
I. INDUSTRY; Hearing In Chicago with follow-up letters
have shown that industry generally is taking necessary
steps on all pollution except thermal: steel is
eliminating flue dust disposal, Wisconsin Steel is moving
toward recirculation with minimal disposal of wastes;
more and rcore industries are disposing of treated wastes
into Sanitary District interceptors. The Metropolitan
Sanitary District of Chicago has strenghtened its
industrial waste division and enforcement.
II. SET./AGE:
A. The Metropolitan Sanitary District of Chicago
has entered Into scientific research of radiation
disposal of wastes and more importantly is building
a pilot plant project of tertiary treatment of
sewage by filtration at its Hanover Plant.
B. There still remain many septic tanks and drain
tiles which are a remnant of the horse-and-buggy
age. Difficulty of supervision of the necessary
repetitive cleanings are the big problems here.
And then the homeowner with a septic tank winds up
with a second problem of finances when the septic
system is replaced by a sanitary sewer and sewage
treatment works at considerable personal expense
to him.
C. The public utility companies for water, sewer and
sewage treatment in Cook County (and Lake County
as well) are generally inefficient, understaffed
and overpriced and are slowly being taken over by
municipal or county corporations at tremendous costs.
D. The septic systems and public utility water and
sewage companies are not a direct part of the Lake
Michigan problem, but their problems add to the
local problems.
III. SHIPPING; The ocean-going and lake-traveling freighters
and tankers dump sewage and used waters into the Lake
and into the rivers and Lake at their docking points.
These ships should have dockside sewer connections
for all discharges when docked and recirculating
systems when traveling.
-------
1296
IV. BOATING-: The incredible increase of pleasure "boats
has magnified and multiplied their problems of raw
sewage discharge. An ordinance of the City of Chicago
is now dealing with the larger part of this problem, and
harsh though the ordinance may be, it is still necessary.
V. DUMPING OF DREDGINGS; The bottoms of the Chicago and
Calumet River become fouled with pollutant and polluting
materials which have in the past been dredged and uncere-
moniously dumped into Lake Michigan without treatment;
the Corps of Engineers, responding to public pressure
ceased this practice in 196? with "dry" dumping at
double the expense.
VI. FLOOD CONTROL: EXCESSIVE RAINS WITH IMMEDIATE RUN-OFF
HAVE CAUSED RAW SEWAGE TO BE PLACED IN LAKE MICHIGAN
FROM COOK COUNTY (and from Lake County, Illinois, Lake
County, Indiana, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin as well).
The best method of flood control or a combination of
methods, deep-tunnel, underflow or deepening of channels,
combined with water installations is absolutely necessary
to prevent further "sewage-into-1he-Lake".
VII. LAKE AIRPORT INSTALLATION: ALL FACTS OF POLLUTION
AND FOULING OF THE LAKE FROM INSTALLATION AND OPERATION
OF AN ISLAND AIRPORT, and its approaches (preferably
tunnelled must be fully detailed and engineered before
the facility can be built.
Complete public hearings on all advantages and disad-
vantages must be had before finalization of a decision.
SUMMARY;
The problems on Lake Michigan:
1. Farm and agriculture pollution of herbicides,
pesticides, fertilizers and feed lot animal sewage
combined with siltation.
2. Industrial wastes from pulp, canning, salt,
kerosene, suphuric acid, drug remnants, oil wastes,
flue dust, coal dust, greases and paints.
-------
3. Thermal pollution from utilities, oil"and steel
companies.
JK Raw sewage from some communities; inefficiently
treated sewage from others.
5. Nutrient pollution from efficiently treated sewage.
6. Polluted dredgings dumped into the lake under the
Federal government's program to keep waterways open,
and from industry seeking a "cheap" way to rid itself
of dredgings.
7. Raw sewage and wastes from pleasure boaters who
have increased in myriad numbers in the last few years,
and from commercial freighters and tankers, whose
numbers have grown fantastically since the opening of
the Great Lakes to ocean-going ships.
8. The fantastic problem of the alewives dying and
fouling our water and beaches caused by the imbalance
of fish population in turn brought about by the opening
of the Welland Canal for shipping.
CONCLUSIONS:
I. CHICAGOLAND AREA;
Due to the intensive news coverage and campaigns by
newspapers, especially the Chicago Tribune, and the
Chicago American, all the radio stations such as ¥GN
and WIND, all of the television stations, many of whom
have run special programs, progress has been made and
will probably continue apace, although most of it will
be in spurts and jerks as public attention is focused
and refocused from time to time on the matter.
A. Industry— has taken long, giant steps to meet the
present objections and will, in the main, probably
meet all necessary standards by December 31, 1968
or shortly thereafter.
However, the present standards of performance are
really short-range and not the long-range standards
necessary for the full preservation of Lake Michigan
and they will therefore have to be revised time and
again with considerable additional costs to industry,
-------
1298
B. Government—The Metropolitan Sanitary District
of Chicago has steadfastly maintained its position
of "no-dumping" into Lake Michigan; the State of
Illinois has not yet realized that no further
dumping should "be allowed; the City of Chicago has
realized that "boat pollution, which causes only a
small portion of the problem, must be halted; the
County of Cook has no direct approach herein, since
it has no jurisdiction.
The County of Lake, Illinois is in somewhat the
same position as the County of Cook because of
lack of jurisdiction; the North Shore Sanitary
District has begun planning but these plans are
inadequate and need re-evaluation on the basis of
a complete water resources management and flood
control program.
Nor can the Metropolitan Sanitary District of
Chicago rest easy: the threats of pollution
downstream into the Illinois Waterway, and into
Lake Michigan in times of flood (raw sewage has
been in the past and may again in the future be
released into Lake Michigan) must be corrected
once and for all.
II. INDIANA;
As a result of being closely associated with, and
drawn into a partnership in the Chicagoland Metro-
politan Area, the problems and conclusions are much
the same as the Chicagoland Area.
III. WISCONSIN AND MICHIGAN:
The problems are specific to specific areas of each
state and require planning and execution — but the
planning and execution must be immediate to stop the
present trends of pollution, and to reverse these
trends in order to prevent the incredibly high cost of
repurifying Lake Michigan.
-------
1299
IV. INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION;
The problems entailed herein will probably be solved
first. Industry has been given a strict timetable
in Southernmost Lake Michigan and is taking steps to
meet their problems, particularly and especially
because of the light of publicity.
V. SEUAGE:
This is the danger zone of the future. The bigger
problems of raw sewage, inefficiently treated sewage
and nutrient pollution by efficiently treated sewage
will remain and will increase as the greater, the
larger problem growing day by day. The algae problems
from these sources will undoubtedly get worse before
they get better.
There is no reason to place a completion date of
December 31, 1968 on industrial compliance on
industrial wastes and to set a date of December 31,
1972 for governmental agencies such as the North
Shore Sanitary District to stop dumping sewage into
our drinking waters of Lake Michigan. These time-
tables should be comparable.
RECOMMENDATIONS;
This problem — cancer by pollution of our waters, especially
Lake Michigan must be met by long range water management- and
resources policies, all of them to meet the challenge of the
handwriting on the wall:
"MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN"
(A fateful, a direful event is about to occur)
I. INDUSTRY—will finally be faced with the proper solution:
COMPLETE RECIRCULATION OF WATER WITH USE OF
COOLING TOWERS AND NO DISCHARGE OF ANY
INDUSTRIAL HASTES INTO ANY LAKES, RIVERS OR
STREAMS.
-------
1300
II. SANITARY DISTRICTS AND MUNICIPALITIES— whether they
discharge directly into Lake Michigan, into tributary
streams, or into streams flowing away from the Lake
must install and operate at 98% or 99$ efficiency and
must remove nutrient pollution. At the present status
of recognized treatment —
THIS MEANS TERTIARY TREATMENT BY FILTRATION
¥ITH REMOVAL OF NUTRIENT POLLUTANTS.
Ill, STATES. MUNICIPALITIES AND SANITARY DISTRICTS— must
solve the problems of the combined sewers — by flood
control of reservoirs, deep tunnels, underflow tunnels,
deepening of channels, or a combination of them, further
combined with the best sewage treatment and water
management and water resources practices to prevent
pollution, to secure proper dilution, and to provide
"reusable" water for industry, and for other municipalities,
IV. FEED LOT OPERATORS — cannot and must not be allowed to
flush animal wastes into our drinking waters, directly
or indirectly.
V. PLEASURE BOATERS AND SPORTSMEN — should in their own
best interests comply with all statutes and go beyond
same voluntarily to prevent all pollution on their part...
"PEOPLE mO LIVE IN GLASS HOUSES ____ "
VI. COMMERCIAL SHIPPING — should immediately cease discharge
of all pollutant materials while traveling; and when
docked should be furnished a connection at dockside
to the nearest sewage facility.
VII. THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE — which has
preempted the farm problems, including siltation,
herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers, must needs
devote more time, more money and more men to these
problems immediately.
-------
1301
VIII. THE FOUR SOVEREIGN STATES—bordering on Lake Michigan
must adopt the necessary legislative acts and regulations
consistent with the proven goal —
THE CONTINUED SAFETY AND PURITY
OF THE WATERS OF LAKE MICHIGAN
as their prime goal. This includes complete removal
of the right to issue dumping permits.
IX. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT--must bend all its efforts to
the same goal —
THE CONTINUED SAFETY AND PURITY
OF THE WATERS OF LAKE MICHIGAN
instead of divisive efforts between and among; the
various agencies. The Corps of Engineers must be
provided with sufficient funds to end all Lake dumpings,
•whether it be Lake Michigan, Lake Superior, Lake Huron,
Lake Erie or Lake Ontario. Keeping the waterways open
for commercial traffic is important, but keeping drinking
water safe is still more important.
x- THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT—must provide distinctive
leadership and the major share of funds and tax
incentive devices to lead the way:
Not as the overseer with the whip, not as the indulgent
father with goodies for obeying children, not with pro-
nunciamentos and press releases with no results, but
with down-to-earth conferences to seek out problems, to
devise the best solution in line with the best water
management resources policies and with tax-incentive
policies to aid all industries, and with the providing
of sufficient funds through small interest loans and
grants so that the problems can be met by the states,
counties, municipalities and sanitary districts and
the solutions applied properly.
XI. THE CITIZENRY OF THE AREA—must be kept aware of the
problems as they arise — and old and new problems
will undoubtedly continue to arise; having been advised
of the problems and potential solutions, it is the
belief of this Commission that an aroused citizenry
will make and will enforce its demands for the
necessary solutions.
-------
1 302
THE MOVING FINGER WILL URITE—
BUT WE HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE THE STORY IT IS WRITING.
MENE, MENE, TEKEL—
BUT WE HAVE THE KNOW-HOW TO PREVENT THE OCCURENGE OF
THE DIREFUL EVENT....
ALGAE, ALGAE, EVERYWHERE
BUT WE CAN PROVIDE SAFE, CLEAN BEACHES FOR SWIMMING
ALL CONCERNED MUST PLAN, ENGINEER AND EXECUTE
TO
SAVE OUR LAKE....
-------
1303
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 MR. KLEIH: I have been appalled
3 during our investigations and during con-
4 versations and more recently by statements
5 in the press and other news media of the
6 following attitudes:
7 "We are only causing minor pollution."
g "I'm not polluting as much as the
9 other fellow."
10 "I am working on the problem but my
11 neighbor isn't."
12 "I'll do something about it tomorrow
13 or the next day, but I have to con-
14 tinue polluting now."
15 "My sister State isn't doing anything.
16 Why should I? "
17 "Let the Federal Government do it,"
18 followed by, "Get them out of here,
19 but have them leave their money."
20 Gentlemen, it is time to stop this
21 senseless bickering. Stop looking for the mote
22 in thy brother's eye and look into thine own
23 eye for thine own mote.
24 All of us know the problems are here,
25 no great effort is needed to enumerate the most
-------
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 important.
3 1. By far, the most important is:
4 Nutrient pollutants from sewage and industrial
5 waste. We have planted the seeds of algae
6 pollution, which will continue to haunt us
7 for generations to come.
8 2. Dumping of raw or inadequately
9 treated human sewage.
10 3- Industrial wastes from pulp,
11 canning, steel, oil and a thousand other
12 industries.
13 4. Siltation, herbicides, pesticides
14 and fertilizers from agriculture.
15 5. Pollution from cattle and hog
16 feed lots.
17 6. Dumping of polluted dredgings.
18 7. Thermal pollution from coolant
19 use of water.
20 8. Boat pollution both from commercial
21 freighters and sporting boats.
22 An all-out attack is indicated as
23 being necessary. Complete solutions must be
24 begun. Patchwork solutions which only eompli-
25 cate the simple issue of saving the lake must
-------
. 1305,
I CARL L. KLEIN
2 be put aside to arrive at these final and
3 these definitive conclusions:
4 1. INDUSTRY--Must install complete
5 recirculation of water, including use of
6 cooling towers wherever necessary. No dis-
7 charge of industrial waste and no thermal
8 pollution is the final answer.
9 2. SANITARY DISTRICTS--Tertiary
10 treatment by filtration with removal of
H nutrient pollutants is required. All con-
12 cerned recognize that there must be a dis-
13 charge of treated sewage effluents and,
14 therefore, 98 percent to 99 percent removal
15 is necessary, as well as removal of nutrient
16 pollutants. FAILURE TO DO SO WILL ONLY
17 MULTIPLY THE ALGAE PROBLEMS.
18 3. The dates for completion of
19 all anti-pollution measures must be comparable
20 whether industrial or municipal. We cannot
21 set a short date for industry and boaters
22 and then say to a sanitary district, "You
23 can keep on throwing partially treated or
24 raw sewage into Lake Michigan for another
25 four years . "
-------
1306
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 &. There can be no dumping of
3 polluted dredgings at any time by anybody,
4 Federal, State or private, into any of our
5 Great Lakes. We must stop issuance of all
g State permits for this purpose, and our
7 Congressmen, Senators and Federal Government
8 must vote sufficient funds to the Corps of
9 Engineers to have complete "dry dumping"
10 without any pollution after effects.
H 5. My other recommendations are set
12 forth in the report of the Commission.
13 And if you say to me these are too
14 tough, you are unrealistic, I say to you,
15 "You are not doing long range planning of
16 water resources management."
17 "You have not taken into account the
18 future inevitable, fantastic growths of popu-
19 lation and industries on this marvelous supply
20 of life-giving water."
21 And, "You are being selfish and you
22 are being untrue to your posterity, who need
23 your protection."
24 And the above solutions are being
25 already recognized as being necessary.
-------
1307
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 Industry has already seen the hand-
3 writing on the wall and is now proceeding to
4 complete recirculation in their plants, such
5 as Arnold Engineering in Morengo and Wisconsin
6 Steel on the Calumet River.
7 Our own Metropolitan Sanitary District
g of Chicago is installing tertiary treatment by
9 filtration at Hanover.
10 The City of Chicago is requiring
11 recirculation on pleasure boats.
12 The Corps of Engineers is bending
18 every effort in the Chicagoland area to prevent
14 further dumping of dredgings into Lake Michigan.
15 And why are these tough remedies
16 necessary? We have had a succession of speakers
17 saying: "The lake is sick, it is dying, it is
18 going the way of Lake Erie," but the things
19 they have not said plainly are:
20 1. Pollution is cancer of the water.
21 Like cancer, heroic remedies are needed to stop
22 it and to cure it.
23 2. The spread of pollution, and
24 especially algae pollution, is not ai*
25 arithmetical progression, but more probably
-------
: 1308
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 a geometric progression. Today it is spreading
3 at a fantastic rate all over the lake. Even
4 the billions of gallons of pure water in the
5 center of the lake have shown signs of pollution
6 and need protection from this curse.
7 3« Words are not sufficient; only
g positive, thorough and complete action will do
9 the Job. This is now a matter for the engineers
10 to plan, engineer and construct on the guide-
11 lines and deadlines set by the four States in
12 conjunction with the Federal Government.
13 Gentlemen, let us leave off the
14 pronunciamentos and press releases. They cure
15 nothing and only confound the issues.
16 Let us have Federal leadership and
17 emergency appropriations for this emergency
18 on Lake Michigan to set an example to our
19 solution on water problems in other areas as
20 well of our States and of our United States.
21 Let us bend our actions to four-
22 State cooperation of doings to complete the
23 legislation and the further appropriations
24 necessary to do the Job.
25 These are the recommendations. And
-------
. . 1309,
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 now I will go off on another tracK.
3 It is obvious that one • ->/ the prime
4 requirements is uniform anti-pollution standards
5 and laws and uniform water resources management
6 laws in these four States to accomplish our
7 goals:
g To that end, being concerned on the
9 future conservation of Lake Michigan3 legis-
10 lators from the four States of Illinois,
11 Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin have been in
12 contact with each other since the early part
13 of 1967 with no fanfare, but with honest
14 correspondence, conversations and conferences,
15 with sometimes two, sometimes three and
16 sometimes all four of the legislators partici-
17 pating.
18 We have recognized the problems,
19 we are working on the solutions. We expect
20 to present to the General Assemblies of the
21 four States in 19^9 a series of uniform bills
22 designed to meet the problems and solve them
23 properly.
24 This action on our part is in con-
25 formity with the thoughts, words and deeds
-------
1310
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 of this Pour State Conference.
3 May I Introduce the other three
4 legislators who have been working with me
5 on this project?
5 Senator William Christy of Hammond,
7 Indiana, Chairman of the Conservation Committee.
8 Senator Christy.
9 (Applause.)
10 Representative James C. Devitt of
H Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Member of the Committee
12 on Conservation.
13 (Applause.)
14 We have a fourth member who got
15 called to the phone Just at this time,
16 Representative Raymond L. Baker of Farmington,
17 Michigan, Chairman of the Joint Legislative
18 Committee on Water Resources Planning.
19 (Applause.)
20 Gentlemen, four-State cooperation is
21 a fact. We have put it into being and we will
22 follow it through to the necessary ends.
23 Thank you.
24 (Applause.)
25 MR. STEIN: Thank you, Representative
-------
; 13H
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 Klein.
3 Are there any comments or questions?
4 MR. HOLMER: Mr. Chairman, I have
5 a question, and I hesitate to do this with--
6 MR. STEIN: No, you go right ahead.
7 MR. HOLMER: —lunch just a short
g way off.
9 But I find accompanying your remarks,
10 Representative Klein, is a document entitled
11 "Report on Lake Michigan Pollution" by the
12 Water Pollution and Water Resources Commission
13 of Illinois of which you are Chairman, and
14 inside it makes a swing around the lake, so
15 called, in which it makes some remarks about
16 the state of water pollution in Michigan and
17 Wisconsin and Indiana as well as a very
18 extensive treatment of the Illinois part of
19 the lake.
20 There are several statements made
21 in the paragraphs that relate to Wisconsin
22 which lead to what would seem to me to be
23 a rather unfortunate impression. One, for
24 example, at the end of the first paragraph
25 I is that the picture of Green Bay is gloomier
-------
1312
1 CARL L. KLEIN
2 every day. I would certainly not want to
3 pretend that the picture of Green Bay is
4 not one that does not require our best and
5 most vigorous efforts, but these efforts are
6 in process. We have Just completed within
7 the last two weeks a major hearing on the
g results of our pollutional investigation
9 of the lower Pox River that empties into
10 Green Bay and are in the process of developing
11 necessary orders to achieve further cleanup.
12 But we do not in Wisconsin view
13 our picture as gloomier every day. Rather
14 we take some pride in the fact that we have
15 a strong and vigorous law and one that looks
16 to the improvement of Fox and of Green Bay.
17 And so we would not certainly want that
18 statement to pass unchallenged.
19 I could say more about the other
20 paragraphs in the report, but I think that
21 is perhaps enough at this time.
22 MR. KLEIN: If I may, I would say
23 to you that so far as I am concerned the
24 picture gets gloomier every day on all four
25 States as far as Lake Michigan is concerned.
-------
1313
I CARL L. KLEIN
2 I cannot see but where the lake will be worse
3 this year than it was last year and where it
4 will be worse the year after that, but I
5 hope that by the end of 1970 we will halt
6 the trend and start the other way. I Just
7 don'b think we have the tools that are able
g to stop it immediately, and, therefore, I
9 do think it is gloomier and it is not Just
10 that one portion thereof.
ll I think you will find that I have
12 carried that all the way through there. I
13 Just think we all got started too late because
14 we Just didn't know the problem was there until
15 recently. We are all getting started and I
16 don't see how we can stop this trend this
17 year or next year. Maybe by the end of 1970
18 we will have stopped the trend and be able
19 to reverse it.
20 MR. STEIN; Do we have any further
21 comments or questions?
22 | If not, we will stand recessed for
23 I lunch and reconvene at 2 o'clock.
24 (Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., a recess
25 was taken until 2:00 p.m., of the same day.)
-------
1
AFTERNOON SESSION
2 (2:00 p.m.)
3 MR. STEIN: The conference will
4 reconvene.
5 Mr. Klassen.
6
7 ILLINOIS PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)
8
9 MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, Just a
10 quick rundown on what Illinois plans are for
11 this afternoon.
12 Again because the technical presen-
13 tations of the Chicago Water Department will
14 take about 45 minutes, we are deferring this
15 until the first thing Monday morning.
16 Also President John Egan of the
17 Metropolitan Sanitary District of Chicago is
18 in the hospital, expected to be released this
19 morning in time to make a presentation. His
20 doctors advised him not to. Their presentation
21 will also be made by President Egan on Monday.
22 The time alloted, I understand, about
23 an hour plus or minus, for Illinois this after-
24 noon will be taken up with a number of short
25 presentations that had been originally scheduled
-------
1315
1 ILLINOIS PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)
2 nearer the end of Illinois time. But in
3 adjusting the time schedule to this afternoon
4 and some of the other presentations that I
5 understand the Federal agencies want to make,
6 the Illinois time will be taken up with a
7 number of short statements by interested
8 people, organizations, and political entities
9 like the North Shore Sanitary District, for
10 example.
H We have made some commitments here.
12 The first person I want to call on this after-
13 noon is Representative Harold Katz, who will
14 make a statement, I believe, on his own
15 behalf and then merely read into the record a
16 statement from another organization.
17 Representative Katz.
18
19
20 ILLINOIS STATE REPRESENTATIVE
21 GLENCOE, ILLINOIS
22
23 MR. KATZ: Mr. Chairman and ladies
24 and gentlemen, since I have a prepared statement,
25 I will not take the time of everyone here to
-------
1316
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 read that statement. I will simply put it in
3 the record.
4 MR. STETN: Without objection, the
5 statement will appear in the record as if read.
6 (Which said statement is as follows:)
7 STATEMENT OF ILLINOIS STATE REPRESENTATIVE
8 HAROLD A. KATZ (D. Glencoe) AT FEDERAL
9 POLLUTION HEARING, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
10
(SUMMARY OF REMARKS)
11
12 State responsibilities must go along
13 hand-ln-hand with "state's rights." Federal
14 Government has wisely entered field since States
15 have been derelict in meeting their responsi-
16 bilities in the water pollution field. In
17 addition, nature of the problem requires a
18 paramount authority that only Federal Govern-
19 ment can exercise.
20 Lake Michigan States discharge daily
21 into the lake the pollution equivalent of the
22 raw sewage from a population of almost ten
23 million citizens, as follows:
24
25
-------
1317
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
State
Indiana
Wisconsin
Michigan
Illinois
TOTAL
(See
HAROLD A. KATZ
Population Equivalent
Percentage Discharge to Lake
55.5% 5,370,000
38. 2# 3,709,^00
6.0# 599,500
0.3$ 27,000
100.0$ 9,705,900
Table at end for fuller breakdown)
Industrial polluters that discharge
substances that settle in streams and require
dredging to keep the streams navigable should
be forced to bear the cost of such work, Just
as citizen who damages public property (such as
police
cost of
car or fire plug) is made to pay for the
restoring the object to its original
condition.
rising
fore so
* * *
The problem of our time is that our
social consciousness has brought to the
many genuinely substantial problems
affecting human well-being that we are in danger
of not
genuine
portion
patient
being able to respond adequately when a
crisis of monumental and historic pro-
is presented. As we procrastinate, the
is being killed by the toxic materials
1
-------
1318
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 that daily are Introduced Into the circulatory
3 system. The Calumet River and Burns Ditch pour
4 cancerous cells into the Midwest's vital artery;
5 the once lovely Fox River has become the aquatic
6 equivalent of Typhoid Mary. We are well along
7 the way toward destruction of our most precious
g natural resource, and I would like to suggest
9 briefly here what seems to me to be the major
10 things which we shall have to do to prevent such
H a result.
12 !• Waste disposal system; We shall
13 have to decide whether we will any longer toler-
14 ate the use of Lake Michigan and other tributary
15 streams as a repository for human and industrial
16 wastes. It is an extraordinary thing that men
17 who would never countenance the dumping of
18 garbage and industrial wastes in the streets
10 would both permit, and indeed participate in the
20 dumping of such material into our waterways and
21 into the lake. We shall have to firmly resolve
22 that this waterway system will not be permitted
23 to be used any further for the purpose of waste
24 disposal, and this shall have to be made the very
25 top priority so that no exceptions will be
-------
1319
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 permitted.
3 I have been hearing a great deal
4 recently about "state's rights," with hostility
5 expressed by some State water officials toward
6 the Federal Government for having "moved in."
7 Well, let us have an equivalent attention to
g the question of State responsibilities. The
9 story is told of the man laboring in the hot
10 sun one summer day in his beautiful garden.
11 A congenial minister happened to be strolling
12 down the street. Impressed by the beauty of
13 the flowers and the grass, the pastor remarked
14 to the man, "You and the Lord have done a mag-
15 nificent Job working this lawn together." To
16 which the man responded: "You should have seen
17 it when the Lord took care of it alone." What,
18 Mr. Secretary, did the Lake Michigan States do
19 when each was taking care of its part of the
20 lake alone?
21 The Lake Micuxgan States discharge
22 daily into the lake the pollution equivalent of
23 the raw sewage discharge from a population of
24 almost ten million citizens. Any wonder that
25 Lake Michigan is staggering under the Impact of
-------
1320
I HAROLD A. KATZ
2 that load? Here In a nutshell is where the pol-
3 lutants that peril the lake originate:
4 Population Equivalent
State Percentage Discharge to Lake
5
Indiana 55.5$ 5,370,000
Wisconsin 38.2$ 3,709,^00
7 ,- _,
Michigan 6.0$ 599,500
g
Illinois 0.3# 27,000
TOTAL 100.0$ 9,705,900
10
(See Table at end for fuller breakdown)
11
12 Now, Mr. Secretary, I want to make
13 perfectly clear that while I am pleased that my
14 own State, Illinois, ranks so low in this Table,
15 I do not Justify even the three-tenths of one
16 percent that we contribute toward this problem.
11 The day has now passed when any further pollution
!g of Lake Michigan can be tolerated, or where re-
19 crimination is an acceptable substitute in the
20 solution of the problem of contamination. On
21 the other hand, I do not accept the notion that
22 State boundaries insulate responsible officials
23 of one State from accountability to citizens of
24 another lake State, any more than to their own.
25 It is our lake they are polluting, as well as
-------
1321
HAROLD A. KATZ
« their own. That is why it was inevitable that
3 the Federal Government act, and Governor Kerner
4 is to be commended for having made the request
5 that initiated this conference.
„ 2. Enforcement; A successful enforce-
O
_ ment program must do two things: first, it must
8 lodge authority in a responsible and accountable
source; and second, that source must promulgate
not pious pronouncements but a specific series of
dates by which in a relatively short period of
12 time, step by step, the lake will have been pro-
13 tected from all sources of pollution.
14 The source of responsibility must
15 clearly be the Federal Government. So long as
responsibility can be shifted, buck-passing
will continue to be the order of the day. If
lg the public and the press know wherein the
19 responsibility is vested, woe unto the public
20 official who fails to discharge this mandate.
21 All of us who are State officials are,
22 I am sure, most zealous in our desire to see that
23 the power of the States be maintained. This
24 problem, however, is one that inherently re-
25 quires some top authority. Through our
-------
1322
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 Constitution, this must necessarily be the
3 Federal Government. Lodging the authority in
4 the Federal Government, as Congress has done,
5 will in fact make it possible for each State
6 better to discharge its own responsibilities
7 in this regard.
8 Cleaning up pollution is obviously
9 not only a difficult, but expensive, endeavor.
10 Yet the nature of the problem is such that the
11 expenditure in a particular State will be in
12 vain if one of the other States fails to dis-
13 charge its responsibilities. All of us will
14 be able to exact the greatest effort and contri-
15 bution from the citizens in our own State if we
16 are assured and they are assured that the ex-
17 penditure will not be a needless and useless
18 expenditure, which would be the case if another
19 State were permitted to drag its feet while the
20 inexorable pollution process continues.
21 Finally, the polluters themselves have
22 made it essential that the Federal Government
23 act vigorously. In recent litigation undertaken
24 by the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater
25 Chicago against certain pffending firms, some
-------
1323
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 of the defendants argued that the enactment of
3 the Federal Water Pollution Act had preempted
4 the State from any authority to act in this
5 field. Having undertaken to act, the Federal
5 Government must act decisively. Otherwise, it
7 may have created a no-man's land in which its
g activities would insulate harmful activities
9 from public control. In fairness also to those
10 who must now take corrective action, it is vital
11 that there be uniform standards. Otherwise,
U action taken at the behest of one State may be
13 held to be insufficient by another. Only the
14 Federal Government can prevent such a result.
15 3« Dilution: It would be a healthy
16 thing for the lake if substantial dilution water
17 could be obtained from Canada. Immediate steps
18 should be undertaken by the Federal Government,
19 acting in concert with Lake Michigan States, to
20 work out an agreement with Canada to bring about
21 this result. But the urgency of the crisis de-
22 mands an urgent response.
23 ^» Sewer separation; With full knowl-
24 edge of the immensity of the task, it is still a
25 fact that sewer separation is essential for the
-------
1324
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 protection of the lake. Standards shall have to
3 be imposed which must be complied with as a con-
4 dition of continued use of the lake and of the
5 tributaries for sanitation purposes. Fortunately
6 our basic knowledge and technology have expanded
7 to the point where we can now continue to make
8 use of the lake for human and industrial purposes
9 without adversely affecting the quality of the
10 water. The processes are there for us to use,
11 but compulsion shall have to be applied to see
12 that they are utilized.
13 5» Cost of pollution; ¥e hear a lot
14 about the cost industry will incur if it has to
15 purchase the equipment necessary to purify its
16 waters, but not enough about the cost that is
17 necessitated by its not doing so. A general
18 example is the increasing cost of municipal
19 purification of marginal water. A specific
20 example is in the field of dredging. Industry
21 discharges substances that collect on the bottom
22 of the tributaries of the lake. It then becomes
23 necessary for the stream to be dredged to enable
24 it to be used for navigational purposes. As it
25 has operated, the public has had to bear the cost
-------
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 of this dredging work. But why should not an
3 industry that is polluting the stream be required
4 to bear the full cost of its deleterious activi-
5 ties? If I get in an automobile accident and
6 damage public property, the cost for correcting
7 the damage is placed upon me. Why should a com-
8 pany be treated any differently? With lake
9 dumping no longer tolerable, the cost of dredging
will substantially increase. Why should not the
cost be imposed on the responsible party?
12 There has been talk recently of
13 "creative federalism" in which the Federal
14 Government and the States work together within
15 the Constitutional framework to advance mutual
16 vital objectives. I would suggest that no field
17 exists in which the partnership can be more
18 productive and useful, and the results more
19 meaningful, than in the preservation of the
20 Nation's natural resources.
21
22
23
24
25
-------
00
(H
n)
u
co
Q
1326
CO
H
t— 1
rt
<;
^H
H
H-v
1— t
CQ
i— t
Oi
H
Q
S
<
2;
^*
5
3
u
^
W
<1> tsi
•-< 5
•8 5
H 0
H
^
W
o
cd
r^H
<•
s
U
CO
t— 1
Q
Q
O
PQ
.j
t— i
ff
^N
f\
1-M
r— 1
u
z
H-*
ri
ft
4-)
fl
•Y-*
ft
W
c
0
•i-H
4->
nJ
i— i
d
OH
ft
1 1 j
0
4->
fl
D
o
M
1)
T)
0)
OJO
J,
M
ni
X!
O
CO
•|H
Q
>,
ni
Q
»H
*
ni
Q
i
m
CO
,— i
(TJ
*u
J->
O
H
c
o
4->
i— )
rH
O
ft
!-H
n!
-*->
O
H
CO
F— 1
ni
•4->
O
H
CO
_j
^
• H
f-l
4->
CO
Tl
w
^
£
CO
^
co ovOoom —t^vOom Tfi
,-1 mi-t-^ .-ii-iooeM
o
o
o
in
o
r-
H>
fTv
V
-1
<
H
O
H
^
0
o
o
i-H
o
m
m
in
o
vO
i — i
o
i — i
t>-
OO"
1^
OO
^
r-l
O
Tt<
oo
i — i
oo
(VJ
XI
•< !-i VM
fl ni 0
° " b»
•rt co &
2cS »
- s
to » ?
••-i ni >
•S 1 fl
l^p
1 ^ £
^ S;
,_,
CO
A
n 4
t) *J
> Q
DIANA
2
i— t
Calumet Ri
and Burns '.
a,
d
0
M
O
[SCONSIN
£
Milwaukee
Sheboygan
Fox River
ft
d
0
M
O
o
CO
• H
£
d
2
ft ft FH
NVOIHDJ
S
d d D
0 0 >
M >H -j
O O PS
13
£ W nl
> . ^
2^0
^ tl
\w
>
22
Kalamazoo
St. Joseph
ft
d
0
rH
LINOIS
-]
*— t
u
o
U
0)
1
Tf\
J
i— 1
<
H
O
H
- 6 -
-------
1327
I HABOLD A. KATZ
2 MR, KATZt How, I would like, however,
3 to make a few very brief remarks that are
4 touched on and it will take no more than a
5 very few moments.
6 I believe that in our present
7 situation we have ^sen prone to talk a good
8 deal about State's rights, and I would like to
9 urge that we direct attention to another facet
10 of that problem, which is State responsibilities.
11 And I suggest that we take a look at where the
12 pollution is coming from and that there is a
13 responsibility incumbent upon those States to
14 do something about it,
is And I have suggested in a table here,
16 which is being put into the record, that the
17 study of the principal BOD discharges to Lake
18 Michigan and tributaries would indicate that
19 there is being discharged into Lake Michigan
20 at the present time the equivalent in terms of
21 its BOD pounds per day discharge of what would
22 be discharged from a population of 9,705,900,
23 raw sewage in that amount, the equivalent of
24 that is being discharged into our lake; that
25 of this more than the equivalent of 5,000,000
-------
1328
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 people comes from the State of Indiana, 55.5
3 percent of the total BOD pollution comes from
4 Indiana, 38-2 percent from Wisconsin, 6 percent,
5 or perhaps greater, because the data is somewhat
6 lacking, comes from Michigan, and from Illinois
7 3/10 of 1 percent.
g Now, I don't want to be up here to
9 express any sense that Illinois is perfect. I
10 think that we should try to get rid of that
11 three-tenths of one percent that we do have.
12 But I do not either accept the notion
13 that State boundaries insulate responsible
14 officials of one State from accountability
15 to citizens of another lake State any more than
16 an official of Indiana is responsible, for
17 example, to the people in Indiana, because It
18 is our lake they are polluting as well as their
19 own lake, and that is the reason why the Federal
20 Government, in my opinion, had to come in and
21 had to act in this situation.
22 I do believe that enforcement,
23 immediate enforcement, and very active steps
24 by the Federal Government is quite essential,
25 it was impossible ever early to believe that
-------
1329,
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 the four States in concert could solve the
3 problem alone. Very practically, I, as a
4 legislator in Illinois who is going to have
5 to vote on some very large amounts of money
6 that is going to be required, will be assisted
7 in my task if I Know that the other States are
8 going to have to be doing the same thing;
9 because it would be totally or almost a
10 totally useless expenditure for one State to
11 make if, in fact, the other States did not
12 live up to their obligation, because, of course,
13 any one of the States can succeed in polluting
14 the entire lake.
15 For that reason, it seems to me that
16 the entrance of the Federal Government in the
17 field really makes the States much better able
I8 to discharge the responsibility that each State
19 has.
20 I do think that more could be done
21 and must be done by way of dilution water
22 from Canada. I think there are real reasons
23 why it could be beneficial, to Canada and
24 certainly to us. I think sewer separation is
25 going to have to come, even though it is a
-------
s 1330
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 costly process, but it is absolutely essential.
3 Now, we hear a lot about the cost
4 industry will incur if it has to purchase the
5 equipment necessary to purify its waters, but
6 not enough about the cost that is necessitated
7 by its not doing so. A general example is the
g increasing cost of municipal purification of
9 marginal water. A more specific example is
10 in the field of dredging. Industry discharges
ll substances that collect on the bottom of the
12 tributaries of the lake. It then becomes
13 necessary for the stream to be dredged to
14 enable it to be used for navigational purposes.
15 As it has operated in the past, the public has
16 had to bear the cost of this dredging worK,
17 but should not an industry that is polluting
18 the stream be required to bear the full cost
19 of its deleterious activities? If I get in an
20 automobile accident and damage public property,
21 for example if I damage a police car in an
22 accident or I damage a fire plug, the cost for
23 correcting the damage is placed upon me, I must
24 pay for it. Why should not the cost of cleaning
25 up and dredging streams, if the condition
-------
1331
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 resulted from the discharges of an industry
3 into that stream, be assessed upon that company?
4 There is no reason why that should be a public
5 cost, as it now is.
6 And I indicate here that with lake
7 dumping no longer tolerable the cost of dredging
8 will substantially increase. I gathered this
9 morning that the Army Corps of Engineers may
10 still entertain some doubts about this question
11 of lake dumping, and that seems to me an extra-
12 ordinary situation, that with the patient in its
13 throes and with the possibility of death facing
14 the lake that the Army Corps of Engineers would
15 be still sitting and debating about dumping into
16 the lake. It seems to me that we have passed the
17 point where we can put anything into the lake
18 which poses any problems. And I would suggest
that the Federal Government through its arms,
20 namely the Army Corps of Engineers, should get
21 in step with what seems to me the essential
22 movement of the people of this area, their
23 representatives, and I believe the general eon-
24 sensus, and that is that dumping into Lake
Michigan in any form is no longer tolerable
-------
1332
1 HAROLD A. KATZ
2 and that we must do something about this problem
3 immediately.
4 Now, Mr. Chairman, there was another
5 statement that was to be presented this morning
6 by Mr. Robert Johnston, the Regional Director of
7 the United Auto Workers. Mr. Johnston did re-
8 main around all morning, but he had to go to
9 negotiations involving International Harvester
10 Company, since there may be a strike there, and
11 I have his statement and ask that it be in-
12 corporated in the record as if he had presented
13 it this morning.
14 MR. STEIN: Yes, that statement will
15 be presented as if read, without objection.
15 Do you have copies of that statement?
17 MR. KATZ: Yes. I don't have enough
18 to go around. I have one for your reporter and
19 it can be in the record.
20 MR. STEIN: All right.
21 Mr. Cook,do you want to see if you can
22 get that reproduced?
23 MR. COOK: Yes, I will.
24 t (Which said statement is as follows:)
25
-------
1333
1 ROBERT JOHNSTON
2
3 STATEMENT BY ROBERT JOHNSTON, DIRECTOR,
4 UAW., REGION 4, (Chicago, Illinois) ON
5 BEHALF OF THE UNITED AUTO, AEROSPACE,
6 AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS UNION,
7 TO THE FOUR STATE CONFERENCE ON LAKE
g MICHIGAN, SHERMAN HOTEL, FEBRUARY 1, 1968.
9
10 The UAW wishes to associate itself
11 at this conference with those who believe that
12 we are in danger of being too late with too
13 little if we are to save Lake Michigan. Fifty
14 years of indifference and inaction about Lake
15 Michigan and the Great Lakes has created a prob-
16 lem that can't be solved by old techniques that
17 are comparable to trying to bail out pollution
18 with a bucket. Reliance on such techniques will
19 only result in creating another Dead Sea along
20 the industrial and urban waterfronts of Lake
21 Michigan.
22 The formula for saving Lake Michigan
23 and the Great Lakes is simple enough. All that
24 is needed is higher anti-pollution standards and
25 the realization of these standards by faster
-------
. 133*1
! ROBERT JOHNSTON
2 action and rigid enforcement. We believe that
3 the present Federal and State laws are inadequate
4 to secure the enforcement of the anti-pollution
6 measures that are needed. We believe that the
g present Federal funds, reduced in the proposed
7 new budget, are inadequate to assist cities and
g States in pure water projects. We also believe,
g despite the good intentions of President Lyndon
10 Johnson and Secretary Udall, that there are too
11 many members of this Congress who aren't any
12 more interested in saving lakes than they are
13 cities.
14 If these are the current political
15 facts of life, then one of the most important
16 things that can be done immediately is to arouse
17 public opinion to demand that those most respon-
18 sible for polluting Lake Michigan, the corpora-
19 tions and the shipping companies, move immediately
20 to stop polluting the lake.
21 The corporations responsible for turn-
22 ing the lakefront into an industrial cesspool
23 reads like a Blue Book of big profit companies
24 in America. United States Steel, Ford Motor
25 Company, Standard Oil, International Harvester,
-------
1335
1 ROBERT JOHNSTON
2 Inland Steel, Republic Steel, Sinclair Refining
3 Company. The Who's Who of Big Business have
4 helped themselves to billions in profits by
6 using the lake water and dumping back pollutants,
6 These same corporations are protesting adequate
7 anti-pollution standards, and dragging their
g feet under the inadequate enforcement provisions.
9 An excellent example of this public-be-damned
10 attitude is the refusal of steel companies to
11 permit Indiana Harbor muck to be dumped on their
12 land, and the high price being asked by Standard
13 Oil to permit dumping on its undeveloped property
14 near Wolf Lake.
15 The labor movement deserves to be
16 criticized for leaving the corporation polluters
17 alone too long. It isn't enough for a union to
18 get sufficient drinking fountains and hot show-
19 ers in an auto plant or a steel mill and ignore
20 the fact that the companies are helping kill a
21 great natural resource like Lake Michigan. The
22 * lake belongs to union dues payers and the rest
23 of the public, and not to corporations. The
24 ' labor movement therefore has an obligation to
25 also fight to save the lake.
-------
1336
1 ROBERT JOHNSTON
2 The UAW Is proud of the fact that it is
3 the only union that has held a national conferenc^
4 to arouse our membership to the necessity to
5 participate in all City, State and Federal
6 activities on water and air pollution. We urge
7 the rest of the labor movement to take similar
g action. The results of this four-State confer-
9 ence will be discussed at the UAW's regional
10 council next month in Chicago, and our local
11 union leaders will be asked to help implement
12 its result. We have assigned International
13 Representatives to work specifically on the
14 problem of Lake Michigan because we consider
15 it to be one of the biggest grievances we have
16 against the corporations. And we intend to win
17 it.
18 The corporations certainly can plead
19 poverty about our grievance over Lake Michigan.
20 Corporations in the industrial complex along
21 the lake make several billion in profits an-
22 nually. They have invested hundreds of millions
23 in the most modern automated equipment and new
24 plants while delaying the installation of
25 effective anti-pollutant systems.
-------
1337
! ROBERT JOHNSTON
2 The UAW has welcomed recently the
3 signs of an awakening social conscience on
4 the part of some corporations on such national
- problems as hard-core unemployment, open
. housing, and low-cost housing developments.
The corporations should also expand their
g moral obligation to cleaning up Lake Michigan.
g All these problems have a relationship. Behind
10 the big profit plants on the polluted lake
n are the poor neighborhoods and the slums
12 enveloped in polluted air and all the Increasing
13 social problems of the urban centers. We are
14 either going to clean up Lake Michigan and the
15 slums behind them or the Indifference of corpor-
16 ate neglect and public apathy will fan some
17 social firestorms that all the polluted water
lg in the Great Lakes canft put out.
19 The final solution to pure water, the
20 new sewerage and sanitation systems needed by
21 the cities and the cleaning up of the rivers
22 that dump into Lake Michigan and the Great Lakes,
23 depends upon putting a proper high national and
24 State priority on this crucial problem and al-
25 locating adequate funds to solve the problem.
-------
1138
1 ROBERT JOHNSTOM
2 We in the UAW believe that our Nation
3 must remain strong, not only in military hard-
4 ware, but in social progress. As President
5 Walter Reuther pointed out at our National
6 Pure Water Conference, "We must find a way to
7 spend as much on such basic necessities of
g life as water and fresh air and social welfare
9 as we do on defense and armaments."
10 The saving of Lake Michigan could be
11 greatly aided immediately by the practical step
12 of Congressional or Executive action to require
13 corporations who are profiting from Government
14 orders to take effective action to stop polluting
15 any national lake or waterway. There isn't any
16 good reason why corporations should be paid tax-
17 payers money for Government work if they continue
18 to pollute Lake Michigan or any other waterway.
19 The UAW also believes that all candi-
20 dates for City, State and Federal office should
21 have their position on corrective water and air
22 pollution actions taken into account before they
23 receive any endorsement by labor unions in forth-
24 coming elections. In Illinois this evaluation
25 must include a candidate's position on the
-------
1339
1 ROBERT JOHNSTON
2 proposed one billion dollar bond issue for pure
3 water that will be submitted to the voters in
4 the November election. The passage of this tnond
5 issue is a necessary first step at the State
g level because of the long years of unrestricted
7 pollution of Illinois waterways.
g MR. STEIN: Mr. Klassen.
9 MR. KLASSEN: Next is Mr. Abner
10 Mikva, a citizen on the lake.
11
12 STATEMENT BY ABNER J. MIKVA
13 CITIZEN, CITY OP CHICAGO
14
15 MR, MIKVA: Mr. Chairman, members.
16 I appreciate the opportunity to
17 appear here as a private citizen who sees and
18 uses both sides of the lake. And as a former
19 State Representative^I have had to wrestle with
20 some of the budgetary problems that Representa-
21 tive Katz referred to.
22 I live on Chicago's South Side,
23 approximately one-half mile from the lake. I
24 own a house in the Michigan Dunes in an un-
25 incorporated area Just outside of New Buffalo,
-------
1340
1 ABNER J. MIKVA
2 Michigan. As a consistent user of both sides
3 of the lake, I can tell you that in addition
4 to the dire predictions that you have been
5 hearing for the last couple of days about the
6 things that are going to happen to the lake,
7 I want to tell you that as of last summer Lake
g Michigan was and continues to be a disaster
9 area. The changes that have occurred in the
10 last ten years have incredibly diminished--
11 incredibly diminished—both its usability for
12 recreational purposes and its esthetic values.
13 I am aware that you have heard}and
14 will continue to hear,many days of expert testi-
15 mony about the causes of lake pollution and
16 their cures. I don't pretend to be an expert,
17 but I am dismayed when I hear the solutions being
18 talked about in 1970 and 1971 and 1972, because
19 I say that unless some of these esthetic and
20 recreational values of the lake are preserved,
21 you will lose the much needed support of the
22 public for the kind of expenditures that you
23 are talking about to solve the long-range
24 problems of lake pollution.
25 tfor example, I was very dismayed to
-------
1341
ABNER J. MIKVA
2 find the Department of Interior report, a
3 very commendable job technically, which was
4 presented to this conference, devoted the
5 total of one-half page--one-half page — to
6 the alewife problem, and not a single word
7 in there recommends about what to do about it.
8 Gentlemen, last year, for over half of the
9 summer recreational season Lake Michigan was
virtually unusable--unusable--because of the
11 alewives. It was not only sickening to the
smell and touch, it brought on practical
health problems as well. For example, kids
14 could not use the beach because their feet
15 would end up a bloody mess from the Jagged
edges of dried alewives. The maggots and
17 flies that followed the alewife inundation
lg made it impossible to use the beach for weeks
after the alewives finally stopped coming
20 in. I don't know how much it cost the cities
21 and villages along the lake to clear the ale-
22 wives on almost a daily basis; I do know that
23 in many unincorporated areas such as mine it
24 meant constant raking and digging, to absolutely
25 no avail. For the entire months of June and
-------
13M
I AB3SER J. MIKVA
2 July, gentlemen, the lake was unusable for
3 swimming purposes, for walking purposes, or
4 for being anywhere within a couple of blocks
5 of it if you had a nose on your face.
g I am aware that there is some hopeful
7 long-range plan for restoring the fish life
8 balance of Lake Michigan, and they are great
9 plans. I hope they are pursued. But you know
10 and I know that restocking the lake with salmon
U isn't going to do one thing about the alewife
12 problem next year. The question I think that
13 citizens have the right to ask you now is what
14 will you do for next summer and the summer after.
15 There must be, and, gentlemen, you know there
lg are, some short-range steps, not cures, but
17 short-range steps that can be taken to alleviate
18 the alewife problem. The bands of alewlves,
19 for example, stretch for miles out in the lake
20 before they hit the shore. Is it too much to
21 ask the Federal and/or State Governments to co-
22 operate in cutting off the dead alewife supply
23 before they hit the beach? Surely there is a
24 way of seining them out. It has been done
25 elsewhere. I am aware there is some money
-------
, 13113,
1 ABNER J. MIKVA
2 involved, but In comparison with the millions
3 we are talking about about the long-range
4 solution, isn't it worth a few hundred thousand
5 dollars to seine the lake of these alewives,
6 at least along the recreational portions that
7 are being used?
g I realize that the causes of algae
9 are complex. The growth of it on the eastern
10 shore, for example, in the last eight years
11 has been incredible. When I first started
12 going up to Michigan that lake water was
13 absolutely pure and pristine, at least to the
14 eye, and now you can't tell it from the very
15 southern tip of the lake. But I think that in
16 terms of short-run effects, it is unreasonable
17 to ask our governments, Federal and State, to
18 do something about cleaning and protecting the
19 beaches and other recreational areas from some
20 of the algae until the long-run solutions are
21 achieved. Would it not be a worthwhile project
22 for Federal and State conservation crews to
23 net some of the beaches to at least hold out
24 some of the algae?
25 Gentlemen, there are approximately 80
-------
1344
1 ABNER J. MIKVA
2 miles of beaches on Lake Michigan, a shoreline
3 consisting of thousands of miles. Surely it
4 is worth that to keep the public on our side
5 in using the lake.
6 In the same vein, I again think some-
7 thing can be done now about what is a compara-
g tlvely small problem. I refer to the outboard
9 motor boats. I should hasten to add that I own
10 one and certainly am not hostile to boats joer
11 ae. My objection goes to their litter. I have
12 seen Coast Guard cutters and sheriffs' patrol
13 boats blithely pass some of the outboard motors,
14 wave to them while the outboard motors are
15 dumping their beer cans and wastes right into
16 the lake, without any action being taken whatso-
17 ever. I think the rules against littering the
18 lake ought to be strict and they ought to be
19 strictly enforced and, indeed,in this instance
20 I think they ought to be Federal rules. I do
21 not think it would be unreasonable to take away
22 a boat owner's privilege to use a lake if he
23 insists on fouling it while he is using it.
24 I think that the ordinance Chicago passed re-
25 quiring boats to have suitable waste facilities
-------
! ABNER J. MIKVA
2 should be emulated as a matter of Federal rule.
3 While I am on the matter of boats,
4 I think it is not too soon to start doing
5 something about the oil spewing problems of
6 outboard motors. I understand there are new
7 engines on the market which do not use the oil
g and gas mixture common to present boat motors.
9 Again, I do not know how serious a pollution
10 problem this causes. I do know what an un-
H sightly mess follows in the wake of any motor
H boat with the standard type motor. It seems
13 to me it would not be too soon for the Federal
14 and/or State governments to insist that all
15 boat motors manufactured in the future should
16 be of a design which would cut down the amount
17 of oil and gas spilling into the lake that goes
18 out in the present use of outboard motors.
19 Gentlemen, I hope these deliberations
20 will save our lake for the future generations.
21 However, I earnestly believe that unless some
22 immediate steps and visible steps are taken
23 that the public can see and feel and smell,
24 Just as they can see and feel and smell the
25 alewives and the algae, unless they are taken
-------
134$
1 ABNER J. MIKVA
2 for this summer, I think that the people will
3 abandon the lake, and once they do that, the
4 task of developing popular support for the
5 long-run solutions, the task of developing
6 popular support for million dollar bond issues,
7 is going to be an almost impossible one.
8 Gentlemen, this is February and
9 summer is Just around the corner. As a citizen,
10 I think I speak for a lot of lake users who
11 ask, what are you going to do for us right
12 now?
13 Thank you very much.
14 (Applause.)
15 MR. STEIN: Thank you, Representative
16 Mikva.
17 You know, the ways of any large organi-
18 zation such as the Federal bureaucracy are passing
19 strange. Maybe the people who work close with it
20 have a little different view, and I can understand
21 the situation.
22 The question of the Federal report
23 on the alewives, if you read this report that
24 Was put in and read the small print, this- is a
25 report from the Federal Water Pollution Control
-------
1347
I ABNER J. MIKVA
2 Administration. The alewife situation here
3 was deliberately handled very lightly with
4 a paragraph or two, as I understand it, to
5 flag i-c because the Fish and Wildlife group
5 made the extensive statement on the alewives,
7 and to avoid duplication, the work was divided
g up in that way.
9 Of course the alewife problem is
10 a vital one, the question of what to do about
11 alewives in the short run, if anything.
12 We can propose a program. It is certainly
13 open for discussion by the conferees. Several
14 of the other participants—Mr. Clevenger, for
15 example—have also spotlighted the problem of
16 dealing with the alewives next summer.
17 Now, we have also had several re-
18 quests, and I understand in a big conference
19 like this sometimes you can't tell the players
20 without a scorecard. People have asked for
21 a list of the conferees and their titles.
22 Sometime this afternoon you can pick that up in
23 the back, together with a fact sheet on the
24 conference,which may make this possibly more
25 meaningful if you are interested in that.
-------
1 ABNER J. MIKVA
2 I hope we won't let the accouterments
3 or indicia of the vast bureaucracy we represent
4 here from the States, the Federal Government,
5 and the interstate agencies get in the way of
6 the essential problem that we are dealing with--
7 Representative Mikva outlined that--to identify
8 the sources and kinds of pollution in Lake
9 Michigan and try to devise methods of coping
10 with them.
11 Mr. Klassen.
12 MR. KLASSSN: Mr. Chairman, privately
13 I have requested, and I again want publicly to
1* ask, all of the participants to please be as
15 brief as possible. Time is extremely important.
16 One of the largest- users from a
17 recreational standpoint on Lake Michigan is
I8 the Chicago Park District, which has a real
19 interest in the recreational quality of the
20 water.
21 Mr. John Trinka is going to give
22 the Chicago Park District Presentation.
23
24
25
-------
I JOHN M. TRINKA
2
3 STATEMENT BY JOHN M. TRINKA
4 DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL SERVICES
6 CHICAGO PARK DISTRICT
6
7 MR. TRINKA: Mr. Chairman, conferees
8 and ladies and gentlemen.
9 The Chicago Park District has about
10 22 miles of lakefront on Lake Michigan that
U has served millions of persons annually with
\
12 the recreational facilities we have in this
13 area. We have 30 beaches, bathing beaches,
14 7 harbors, 7 launching ramps, many fishing
15 piers, and miles of sea wall that are made
15 into fishing areas.
17 We have 2,400 boats assigned to
lg moorings in our harbors. These range from
19 20 feet to about 103 feet, and about 2,500 outboard
20 motor boats up to 20 feet use our launching
2i ramps. We moor approximately 700 out-of-state
22 visiting boats.
23 I would estimate that about 1,600
24 of these boats have one or more heads aboard.
25 Most of them flush raw sewage into the lake.
-------
1350
1 JOHN M. TRINKA
2 The City of Chicago passed a recent ordinance
3 that will prohibit this. The Chicago Park
4 District Commissioners are contemplating a
5 similar ordinance. Subsequent to this new
6 boating law, we worked with our engineering
7 section to come up with the best solution of
g pumping out retention tanks that are connected
9 to toilets on boats.
10 This spring plans are to have pumping
11 stations located in each of our seven harbors.
12 They will adequately service any boat that has"
13 a retention tank. Toilets that dump raw sewage3
14 and do not conform with the new law must be
15 eliminated or sealed.
16 Gentlemen, recently our lakefront
17 waters have deteriorated at a fast rate. Just
18 a few years ago our waters were much clearer
19 and during the early spring harbor work., we
20 j could see thousands of minnows, bait minnows,
21 j f:sh swimming in our waters. Last season,
22 ! I noticed the density of our water. Sea scum,
i
23 a seaman's term for algae, was attached to our
24 i sea walls, made our launching ramps slippery
25 and the bottoms of the boats that were moored
-------
1351
1 JOHN M. TRINKA
2 they were thick with algae. This caused the
3 boat yards quite a problem in cleaning the boats
4 for their winter lay-up.
5 This algae problem was much greater
6 this year than it has been in prior years.
7 Talking to some of the old-time fishermen
g along our lake, I was informed that last year
9 ! was the poorest fishing that they ever had.
10 In fact, they told me that not one herring
11 was caught in the past three years, and that
12 the smelt and perch runs are very small.
13 My office as the Director of Special
14 Services, signs permits for seining our harbors
15 for bait minnows, but there are no longer
16 any bait minnows in our harbors. This is be-
17 cause of pollution and alewives fish.
18 The alewives fish have caused the
19 Chicago Park District a great problem, particu-
20 larly last year which was at least fivefold
21 over any prior years. Millions of them were
22 washed up onto our bathing beaches. Our Land-
23 scape Division worked around the clock hauling
24 hundreds of truckloads away, to be disposed of
25 in trying to keep our beaches open.
i
-------
1352
1 JOHN M. TRINKA
2 Strangely enough, I talked to our Mr.
3 Baker, our Director who is here personally,and
4 he said that they have taken over a million
5 pounds of alewives off of our beaches.
6 Our harbors were filled with them.
7 In fact, gentlemen, I left a photograph showing
8 you a picture of our Belmont Harbor. You can
9 see the boat there practically swimming on
10 top of the fish. Of course you can see a beer
11 can also, which is a very bad thing for some of
12 these boaters who are littering our harbors.
13 Many people did not use our beaches
14 or our fishing areas or our harbors because
15 of the stench.
16 Fortunately for us, these scavenger
17 fish leave our shores sometime in August and
18 they do not come back until the next spring.
19 Unfortunately, from there on out we do have
20 some smell because of these fish being buried
21 in the sand, which makes swimming putrid and
22 awful. Of course I heard Mr. Mikva make the
23 statement here, and I absolutely was told
24 that a young girl was on a floating raft and
25 she made a scream and getting off they asked
-------
1353
1 JOHN M. TRINKA
2 her what was wrong, and the raft was just
3 loaded with maggots. So this is what is
4 happening with our algae, what our algae
5 are causing to our recreational divisions.
g We have another problem, gentlemen.
7 The freighters, sea freighters, many of our
g yachters have complained to me that they
9 have seen these freighters dump garbage and debris
10 overboard when they are several miles out. Some
11 of this debris has floated into our harbors
12 and beaches. Last year we had a tremendous
13 amount of bunker oil that caused our park
14 district a lot of trouble, particularly our
15 beaches and our harbors. I conferred with the
16 City Port Director. Since then much of the
17 problem has been eliminated. Some of our
18 pleasure boats are also violators of the
19 litter law. We constantly are on the lookout
20 for them. We want to eliminate this violation.
21 These alewife fish have a good
22 nutrient value and should not be dismissed
23 as a great pollutant. I urge this committee
24 j to give this alewives problem a hard look
25 and study for some means to eliminate this
-------
1 JOHN M. TRINKA
2 scavenger fish from our waters. I know
3 personally we use fertilizer that has fish
4 element in it, so we do know there are
5 nutrients in fish, and particularly the ale-
6 wives.
7 On behalf of the Chicago Park
g District, may I thank this committee, the
9 press and other media and the various com-
10 mittees for their efforts in saving our
11 Lake Michigan so that the future generations
12 can take advantage of our lakefront facilities
13 just as millions of us did annually.
14 I thank you.
15 (Applause.)
16 (The photograph of Belmont Harbor
17 referred to by Mr. Trinka follows:)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-------
-------
133o
I JOHN M. TRINKA
2 MR. STEIN: Will you wait Just a
3 moment? I think we have a question.
4 MR. OEMING: Mr. Trinka.
5 MR. TRINKA: Yes, sir.
6 MR. OEMING: Will you clear up
7 some little confusion in my mind? Why is it
8 necessary for the park commissioners to
9 enact an ordinance on this matter of waste
disposal from boats when the City of Chicago has
one here? Is there some question of Jurisdiction**
MR. TRINKA: The Chicago Park
District is a separate corporation from the
14 City of Chicago. We naturally can help enforce
15 the City ordinance, which we will do» But
usually due to the fact that most of the
lakefront is under the Jurisdiction of the
Chicago Park District, we then deem it somewhat
necessary to have rules. Presently we do
20 have a rule, it is Rule 19, that states
21 regarding boats littering our waters are
22 no heads, toilets are^ to be used while they
23 are docked in our harbors. So, therefore,
24 this does not protect the City waters. That
25 is Just while they are in our harbors. We
-------
1357
1 JOHN M. TRINKA
2 want to change that over where it says
3 no raw sewage that will be dumped overboard
4 into the Lake Michigan waters in our areas,
6 the City areas.
6 MR. OEMING: Do I understand, Mr.
7 Trlnka, then, that the ordinance that has
8 been adopted by the City of Chicago does
9 not apply to the waters that you have ;Juris-
10 diction over here?
11 MR. TRINKA: That is quite right
12 to a point, but that is, we are a separate
13 political subdivision and we will then do
14 everything possible to enforce this in our
15 way. Also, I believe, our commissioners
l« will have an ordinance of theirs.
17 MR. STEIN: What waters do these
18 apply to?
19 MR. TRINKAs What is that?
20 MR. STEIN: What waters does the
21 City ordinance apply to?
22 MR. TRINKA: Well, it applies to
23 the waters in the City of Chicago. There
24 is a technicality there that I will have
25 to get to--
-------
1358
1 JOHN M. THINKA
2 MR. STEIN: You have the map behind
3 you. Can you indicate the scope of the waters
4 under your Jurisdiction and the City Juris-
5 diction?
6 MR. TRINKA: There is a difference
7 there because I do know, for instance, now,
g Meigs Field, which T understand some years
9 ago that they petitioned the Park District to
10 get permission to make up this Field, and
11 then the park then turned this over to the
12 City of Chicago. There is a technicality
13 there and possibly our Law Department could
14 Explain this better than I can, but that part
15 I do know, that there is a separation in
16 corporations.
17 MR. OEMING: Mr. Trinka, the City
18 §f Chicago has a boundary line at the south
10 and at the north here, I suppose. Now, does
20 your boundary of the Park District run con-
21 currently with the City of Chicago boundary
22 lines?
23 MR. TRINKA: Yes, we do. About
24 most of the lakefront is under the Park
25 District jurisdiction. We have our parks
-------
1359
1 JOHN M. TRINKA
2 in along the lakefront, such as Lincoln Park,
3 Grant Park, Jackson Park, and they do run
4 into the City of Chicago areas. But these
5 parks again, as I say, are under the juris-
6 diction of our park commissioners. These
7 commissioners are appointed by law, the
g Mayor of the City of Chicago appoints the
9 park commissioners for certain terms, I believe
10 a term of five years each.
11 MR. OEMING: Well, I think I am
12 probably a little more confused than I
13 was when I started to ask the question.
14 (Laughter.)
15 I am trying to find out here who
16 has Jurisdiction to regulate boat pollution
17 in the Chicago Park District.
18 MR, TRINKA: The Chicago Park
19 District has .
20 MR. OEMING: Does the regulation
21 that the City of Chicago has adopted apply
22 to the Park District?
23 MR. TRINKA: I believe it would.
24 I MR. OEMINGi I wouM like to have
25 that answer. As a conferee, I think that
-------
1360
1 JOHN M. TRINKA
2 we need to know this.
3 MR. TRINKA: Yes, I will get the
4 answer for you after I talk to our Law Depart-
5 ment, I will give you the answer on that.
6 MR. STEIN: I would hope that the
7 ordinance would apply to all the waters under
8 your jurisdiction, because again, and I speak
9 personally as a lawyer and having lost cases
10 on Jurisdietional matters, I know the best
11 laws in the world can't do a thing for you.
12 If you will Just take one second, I will
13 give an actual case I was involved in. I
14 would like to do this off the record.
15 (Off the record.)
16 MR. STEIN: Let's go back on the
17 record.
18 MR. TRINKA: Is that all?
19 Thank you.
20 MR. STEIN: Mr. Klassen.
21 MR. KLASSEN: I think, as most of
22 you who are familiar with Chicago know, that
23 a large section of the Illinois Lake Michigan
24 shoreline is under the Jurisdiction of the
25 Metropolitan Sanitary District of Chicago,
-------
1361
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 which has already removed wastes from Lake
3 Michigan.
4 The other sector on the shoreline is
5 from the Cook County line north to the Wis-
6 consin line. This is all under the Jurisdiction
7 of another sanitary district, the North Shore
g Sanitary District. We hear a lot of talk about
9 what should be done, what the long-range plans
10 are.
11 I want to call on the Manager of the
12 North Shore Sanitary District. I am sure he is
13 going to outline not some vague ideas or long-
14 range plans, but something that definitely
15 is being proposed, even to the point of money,
16 by the North Shore Sanitary District.
17 Mr. Anderson.
18
19 STATEMENT BY RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
20 GENERAL MANAGER
21 NORTH SHORE SANITARY DISTRICT
22 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
23
24 MR. ANDERSON: Mr. Chairman, dis-
25 tinguished conferees, ladies and gentlemen.
-------
1362
1 RAYMOHD E. ANDERSON
2 In the interest of time and to
3 prevent repetition, I will omit the first
4 two paragraphs of my presentation and begin
5 reading in the middle of page one.
6 (Which first two paragraphs are
7 as follows:
8 (Americans everywhere are demanding
9 a halt to water pollution. The be-fouling
10 of our water, perhaps our greatest natural
H resource, must cease. No longer do we have
12 unlimited supplies, such as Lake Michigan,
13 to do with as we please. Our great lake
14 must not go the way of Lake Erie, which is
15 sometimes referred to as being "dead". The
16 demand for fresh, pure water is mounting,
17 as more and more is used by our homes, our
18 commercial establishments and our industries.
19 (Obviously, the used water must be
20 disposed of in such a manner as to prevent
21 pollution or degradation of the receiving
22 waters. Former methods, that were entirely
23 acceptable, are fast becoming obsolete in
24 the light of new standards set forth by
25 Federal and State water pollution control
-------
1363
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 agencies. Practices that were once routine
3 or standard can no longer be tolerated. The
4 demands of the public and of our water
5 pollution control agencies are such as to
6 rule out disposal methods once considered
7 entirely adequate.)
8 MR. ANDERSON: For many years the
9 Trustees of the North Shore Sanitary District
10 have focused their attention upon the problem
11 of providing adequate sewage disposal facili-
12 ties, with the expectation that most, if not
13 all, effluent must eventually be removed
14 from the lake. Following a successful bond
15 issue in 1953> a comprehensive program of
16 improvements and additions to existing facili-
17 ties was undertaken. New construction was
18 barely completed when it became apparent
19 that additional planning should be undertaken.
20 Accordingly, in June I960, the Board
21 authorized our consulting engineers to begin
22 a study of our future needs. Their report,
23 presented in May 1963 included the following
24 consideration of population growth, sewage
25 quantities, facilities required, future
-------
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 boundaries, and the effect of annexations.
3 The first serious consideration of the aban-
4 donment of the small lakefront plants at Lake
5 Bluff, Lake Forest, and Highland Park, with
6 diversion of the flow from Lake Michigan
7 to the East Branch of the North Fork of the
g Chicago River, was set forth.
9 This report was discussed in detail
10 with Clarence W. Klassen, Technical Secretary,
11 Illinois Sanitary Water Board, in October 1963.
12 Mr. Klassen agreed with the recommended plan
13 of aoandonment of the small lakefront plants,
14 but expressed concern over the possible effect
15 adoption of such a plan at that time would
16 have on the so-called "Diversion Suit,"
17 With this in mind, Mr. Klassen advised the
18 District to defer adoption of the project
19 until the "Diversion Suit" was settled. At
20 the same time, he complimented the Board on
21 being foresighted and expressed the opinion
22 that the long-range plan proposed by the Horth
23 Shore Sanitary District would eventually be
24 carried out.
25 In December 1965 the Trustees of the
-------
1363
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 District instructed their engineers to review
3 and update the May 1963 report and to broaden
4 its scope.
5 Concurrently, the Board was becoming
6 more concerned with the effects of storrawater
7 discharges into the municipal sanitary sewers
g tributary to the District interceptors and
9 treatment works. The Board set forth its
10 position with regard to stormwater in an
11 open letter to the editor of the Waukegan
12 News-Sun in September 1965.
13 This was followed,in October of the
14 same year, by an invitational meeting attended
15 by municipal and governmental officials from
16 throughout the District. At this meeting the
17 District pointed out the undesirable results
18 of stormwater infiltration into the sewerage
19 systems and the effect upon the sewage treatment
20 works. The municipalities were challenged to
21 undertake a program of sewer rehabilitation
22 and ordinance enforcement, to prevent hydraulic
23 overloading of the treatment works and subse-
24 quent pollution of Lake Michigan.
25 A similar meeting, held in June of
-------
. 1366
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 1966, has been followed by concrete action on
3 the part of most of the municipalities within
4 the District. This action has included a bond
5 issue, a sewer tax, smoke testing, and a special
6 assessment program.
7 The Board's awareness of the need
g for extended and enlarged facilities and
9 its desire to divert the small plant effluents
10 from Lake Michigan was shared with the public
11 through widespread news releases in April 1966.
12 The first official Mention by the
13 Sanitary Water Board that the small lakefront
14 plants would either have to be upgraded to a
15 higher degree of treatment or abandoned was
16 contained in a June 1966 letter on beach
17 sampling. In response to a request from the
18 District for clarificai-ion of the Sanitary
19 Water Board position, C. W. Klassen then stated
20 in November that it "will be necessary that all
21 sewage receive at least secondary treatment,
22 in addition to adequate effluent disinfection.
23 This must be accomplished by additional or
24 replacement facilities in operation within
25 five years (i.e. by July 1, 1972)."
-------
1367
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 Subsequently, the Sanitary Water
3 Board stated that it "is therefore strongly
4 recommended that immediate plans be made to
5 divert all sewage or all effluent."
6 It should be pointed out that the
7 District has always met or exceeded the State
8 requirements for treatment facilities. A
9 letter from C. W. Klassen in January of 196?
10 stated that "the North Shore Sanitary District
11 currently has the degree of treatment that
12 has been required by the Sanitary Water Board...
13 the need for providing additional treatment
14 is a fact that 'has been recognized by the
15 District, as evidenced by its studies."
16 In the meantime, the "Diversion Suit"
17 was drawing to a close. In December 1966 Judge
18 Albert B. Maris, Special Master for the U. S.
W Supreme Court, presented his comprehensive
20 report to the Court. This contained findings
21 of fact, conclusions, and a recommended decree,
22 which was adopted by the Supreme Court in June
23 19^7. This decree provides that northeastern
24 Illinois may divert no more than 3,200 cubic
25 feet per second of water away from Lake Michigan
-------
1368
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 for purposes of sewage treatment, stormwater
3 runoff and navigation. The Court further
4 stated that "there are feasible means reasonably
5 available to improve water quality and to con-
6 serve and manage the water resources of the
7 region."
8 In May of 1967, the Division of
9 Waterways of the Illinois Department of Public
10 Works and Buildings was designated by Governor
H Otto Kerner as the agency to receive and act
12 on requests for allocation of water under the
13 Supreme Court decree. Immediately following
14 this designation, the District made application
15 for enough water to permit diverting the lake-
16 front plants away from Lake Michigan.
17 The District's desire to abandon the
18 small lakefront plants was expressed In testi-
19 mony before the Corps of Engineers in February
20 of 1967, before the Illinois Technical Advisory
21 Committee on Water Resources in May 19^7, before
22 the Illinois Water Pollution and Water Resources
23 Commission in August 1967, and, most recently,
24 before the Northern Illinois Water Resources and
25 Conservation Commission November 8,
-------
1359
RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 Two recent developments are signifi-
3 cant to the District. First, the Illinois
House of Representatives, meeting in special
session in October of 1967 passed a resolution
"that we strongly urge the North Shore Sanitary
7 District to inaugurate programs which will
8 enable them to cease depositing domestic
sewage from primary treatment plants in Lake
10 Michigan by December 31, 1968."
Second: The District received its
12 engineer's report in completed form in November
13 1967. A preliminary report, made public in
14 May 1967, has been updated to take into account
15 the following developments:
16 1. The effect of stormwater problems
17 on existing facilities of the District.
18 2. The feasibility of providing
19 service to lands adjacent to the
20 District.
21 3. The effect of the possible an-
22 nexation of these lands to the District.
23 4. The Federal Water Quality Act
24 of 1965.
25 5. Illinois Water Quality Standards
-------
137 0
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 and Minimum Treatment Requirements
3 and Stormwater Treatment.
4 6. The Botanic Garden at County
5 Line Road*
6 7. The Report of Special Master
7 Judge Albert B. Maris pertaining
g to the so-called "Diversion Suit."
9 8. The development of subdivision
10 and municipal sewer systems.
ll 9* Sludge disposal.
12 10. Complete diversion.
13 Based on this Report the District has
14 adopted an immediate and long-range plan, with
15 four major goals as follows:
16 1. Diversion from Lake Michigan
17 by means of pumping stations and
18 force mains of the effluent from
19 the small treatment plants on
20 Lake Michigan, at Lake Bluff,
21 Lake Forest, and Highland Park.
22 This will also include all storm-
23 water overflow.
24 2. Diversion from the Chicago
25 River system by means of a pumping
-------
1371
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 station and force main of the
3 Clavey Road plant effluent to
4 the Des Plaines River.
5 3. Diversion from Lake Michigan
§ by means of a pumping station
7 and force main of the Waukegan
8 plant effluent to a new tertiary
9 treatment plant in Qurnee, with
10 effluent discharge to the Des
11 Plaines River.
12 ^. Diversion from Lake Michigan
13 by means of a pumping station and
14 force main of the North Chicago
15 plant effluent to the Gurnee
16 tertiary treatment plant, with
17 effluent discharge to the Des
18 Plaines River.
19 In a letter to the District dated
20 December 21, 1967, C. W. Klassen stated that
21 accomplishment of these diversion goals "will
22 completely meet the Lake Michigan Water Quality
23 Standards recently adopted by the Sanitary Water
24 Board." He further stated that, "This solution
25 will meet the need to protect the public beaches
-------
1372
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 to the fullest extent and minimize nutrient dis
3 charge to Lake Michigan," and that, "This solu-
4 tion will meet the intent and requirements of
5 the State of Illinois regarding allocation of
6 Lake Michigan diversion." He also stated that,
7 "The combined project will coordinate with the
8 State plan for water resource development in
9 this area."
10 The plan adopted by the District in
eludes the following auxiliary works:
12 1. A new secondary treatment plant
13 in Gurnee to treat sewage from North
Chicago, the upper Skokie Valley,
and Gurnee before discharge into
the teritary plant on the Des
Plalnes River.
18 2. A reservoir at Clavey Road to
receive and store excess stormwater
20 overflows diverted from the five
21 lakefront plants. When the storm
22 flow subsides the contents of the
23 reservoir will be discharged to the
24 | Clavey Road plant for secondary
25 treatment.
-------
137 3
RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 3. A polishing lagoon and
3 chlorination facilities for
effluent disinfection at the
Clavey Road Plant.
4. A reservoir at North Chicago
to receive, settle out, and treat
with chlorine stormwater over-
9 flows before discharge to Lake
10 Michigan.
5. A similar reservoir at Waukegan.
12 6. Storrawater sedimentation tanks
13 and chlorination facilities at
14 Highwood, Winthrop Harbor, and
15 Zion.
7. An extension of the Winthrop
Harbor interceptor from Ninth
Street northward to Third Street.
8. A parallel sewer to reinforce
20 the Zion to Waukegan interceptor.
2i 9« A parallel sewer to reinforce
22 the Waukegan to Highland Park
23 Skokie interceptor.
24 10. Additional treatment facili-
25 ties at the existing secondary
-------
1374
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 plants at Waukegan, North
3 Chicago, and Clavey Road.
4 11. Sludge dewatering facili-
5 ties at the Clavey Road and
6 Waukegan plants, with possible
7 sludge incineration for both
g plants at Waukegan.
9 The entire project is estimated to cost
IQ approximately $58,000,000, of which about
H $35,000,000 can be financed by the issue of
12 general obligation bonds, with the balance
13 to come from State and Federal grants.
14 The District welcomes the spotlight
15 on its plans, for this fosters public awareness
16 of the problem and the extent to which the
17 District is attempting to solve it. It further
18 points up the public responsibility to pay
19 for the improvements it demands. We are prepared
20 to go as far as necessary to prevent pollution
21 of Lake Michigan, so long as we have the finan-
22 cial backing of the voters.
23 We are planning a referendum on May 4
24 to secure voter approval of a $35,000,000 bond
25 issue. We anticipate a favorable vote, in light
-------
1375
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 of today's stringent requirements and the demands
3 of an enlightened public.
4 MR. STEIN: Thank you.
5 Are there any comments or questions?
6 Mr. Holmer.
7 MR. HOLMER: Mr. Chairman, Mr.
8 Anderson's report was a very interesting and
9 exciting, forward-looking one.
10 However, I am still nervous, and I
11 wonder if the conferees could have a water
12 budget for this 3,200 cubic feet per second,
13 that looka to the year at least 1980 if not
14 2000 or some years in that period, which takes
15 into account the increased anticipation of per
16 capita consumption of water. This appears to
17 be a feasible and desirable course of action
18 to be taken by the North Shore Sanitary District
19 at this time.
20 I Just want to be sure that the water
21 is accounted for and will meet the needs through
22 the next generation,
23 I MR. STEIN: Yes. I think your concern
24 I is well taken, but I raise the question, and the
25 conferees might think about this, whether this is
-------
1376.
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 the forum co get at that.
3 I think we are dealing with water
4 quality and as you know in the long history
5 of the States around Lake Michigan, when you
Q deal with allocations of water or taking the
7 water out and putting something in the lake, this
g has been the subject of much court action.
9 MR. HOLMER: I would certainly agree
10 with you that I don't want to re-raise the
11 whole legal question of the diversion.
12 On the other hand, what has been
13 presented here is one of the alternative ways
14 of reducing the pollution of Lake Michigan,
15 and I want to be sure that nothing that comes
16 i out of this conference stores up trouble for
17 the next generation.
18 |! MR. XLASSEN: I might speak to Mr.
19 Holmer's point there.
20 The Supreme Court has said, and I
j
21 think we are the only State that it has said,
22 you can take so much water out of the lake,
23 the State of Illinois. It didn't say any
24 i particular subdivision, and i,t is up to the
25 State of Illinois to allocate how much each
-------
1377
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 particular entity will take out of the lake
3 Just so the total amount does not exceed
4 3,200 second feet. The problem that confronts
5 the North Shore Sanitary District, if, for
6 example, they remove 100 second feet from the
7 lake and do not put it back, this 100 second
8 feet has got to be deducted from the amount
9 that the City of Chicago is now using or the
10 Metropolitan Sanitary District of Chicago by
11 some State agency that has not yet actually
12 been named.
13 But I Just want to reassure you,
14 j Mr. Holmer, that by these solutions of re-
15 i moving water from the lake and not putting it
16 i back, so far as the State of Illinois is con-
17 cerned, we are limited to a total from here
18 I on of 3,200 second feet, and no matter how
19 I many of these plans are proposed we must live
j
20 j within that 3,200 second feet budget. i
i
21 j MR. HOLMER: I rather repeat my request
i
j
22 for some idea of the anticipation of how you
23 i are planning to use that diversion in the next
i
24 generation simply because there are limits to
25 it and there are limits to this technique for
-------
1378
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 dealing with the pollution problem. ¥e face
3 somewhat similar problems, as you may be aware,
4 and the consideration of such an opportunity
5 for, say, the City of Milwaukee, and the problem
6 that confronts us there is one of, for one
1 thing, how much could be diverted, how much
8 litigation that would take, and then what
9 would happen when population doubles and
10 doubles again and whether there may not be
H a real problem that lies in the future.
12 MR. KLASSEJJ: He has raised a good
13 point there, Mr. Chairman. I want to just
14 comment on this a minute.
15 It has been advocated that wastes
16 be removed from Lake Michigan. We in Illinois
17 are very much concerned about the point that
18 Mr. Holmer has raised, because if Milwaukee,
19 for example, decides to do the same thing that
20 the Chicago Sanitary District is doing and the
21 North Shore Sanitary District proposes to do,
22 I the State of Illinois would be the recipient
23 | of the effluent from their sewage treatment
24 plant, because they would go into streams that
25 I flow into the State of Illinois.
-------
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 He has raised an interesting point and one,
3 frankly--this isn't an official statement;
4 it may be a personal reaction--! hope that
5 in the interest of the State of Illinois that
6 Milwaukee doesn't press this too soon, because
7 we really don't care to be the recipient of
8 Milwaukee's effluent. And the same situation
9 applied to Indiana. It has been proposed,
10 not by the State of Indiana, I would say, that
11 all of the wastes in Northern Indiana be taken
12 south away from the lake. Again these would
13 come into Illinois through the Kankakee River.
14 And I am glad that Mr. Holmer raised
15 these points, because this would be the subject
i6 of much, much litigation. But it is something
17 that these conferees, I think, are going to
18 have to face up to, because these proposals
19 have been made.
20 MR. STEIN: Well, you know, we are
21 off and running on this point. We are not
22 going to cut off discussion, but you know,
23 history repeats itself. With Illinois being
24 the recipient I think reading historic
25 public record will show you that as the
-------
1380
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2
aftermath of the great reverse of the flow
3
of the Chicago River and the establishment
4
of the canal, was the famous case of Mis-
5
souri against Illinois litigated in the
6
U. S. Supreme Court. You heard Mr. Jardine
7
speak of these typhoid epidemics which were
8
rampant then; the people in St. Louis had a
9
little disease at the time; and once the
10
waters began to flow down, they were the
11 I
recipients of the water coming down from
12
Illinois. They weren't very happy too and
13
they took it to the Supreme Court.
14
15 I think once we talk in terms of
16 getting water out of the lake and once we
17 talk in terms of transbasln diversion, we
18 are going to be faced with two things, either
19 we are going to do it in the old way and
20 litigate this in the Supreme Court or maybe
21 you want to develop some plans with Mr.
22 Clevenger and the Great Lakes Commission.
23 That may be an alternate way.
24
25
-------
1381
! RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 But I think what we do is have some
3 enticing vistas opened here, and while we are
4 open for discussion I am not sure how defini-
5 tive a conference of this kind with the limited
6 powers that we have can be in resolving these
7 issues. In the past these have been issues
8 which have only been able to be resolved by
9 decisions of the Supreme Court, and as you
10 know, not all of them are unanimous. Some
11 of them are pretty close.
12 MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, we have
13 a very, very brief statement here.
14 MR. STEIN: Wait.
15 MR. KLASSEN: Oh, I am sorry.
ie MR. STEIN: Mr. Oeraing has a comment.
17 MR. OEMING: I am not sure who should
18 clear up this question, whether Mr. Johnson
19 should or Mr. Klassen, but on page —
20 MR. KLASSEN: Which Mr. Johnson,
21 Lyndon?
22 (Laughter.)
23 MR. OEMING: What is this man's name
24 who was Just on?
25 | MR. STEIN: Anderson.
-------
1382
1 RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 MR. OEMING: Anderson, I am sorry.
3 Mr. Anderson.
4 MR. KLASSEN: They are all Swedes.
5 (Laughter.)
6 MR. OEMING: On page 1368 in Mr.
7 Anderson's statement, he says that the Division
g of Waterways of the Illinois Department of Public
9 Works and Building has been designated by
10 Governor Kerner as the agency to receive and
11 act on requests for allocation of water under
12 the Supreme Court decree.
13 As I understand Mr. Klassen, I
14 think you said that nobody had been desig--
15 you weren't sure yet who was designated.
16 Would you clear this matter up, somebody?
17 MR. KLASSEN: Well, the Department
18 of Public Works has been designated, I under-
10 stand, by Governor Kerner as the agency that
20 currently has Jurisdiction over this question,
21 and I think that is where the matter stands.
22 So far as I know, this is the agency in Illinois
23 that will act upon this particular application
24 and future applications.
25 I don't want to say this is still open
-------
1383
I RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 to some question, but I don't know, frankly,
3 whether this has been completely resolved,
4 I personally feel that that is the agency
5 that has the authority and that will act on
6 this.
7 I might say that in view of this,
8 the North Shore Sanitary District has officially
9 submitted an application to that agency, and
10 I presume that when the Department of Public
H Works acts on this, if there is any legal
12 question at that time, then the courts would
13 decide.
14 But I would say to answer your
15 question, Mr. Oeming, at the present time,
16 the Department of Public Works is that agency
17 until some other one is designated.
18 MR. STEIN: Mr. Klassen, did you have
19 one more?
20 MR. KLASSEN: We had a very short
21 one, We had a group here that we had hoped
22 to get on, the North Shore, some of the water
23 problems, but a very short statement here that
24 I think is apropos at this time.
25 Illinois has a legislative pattern
-------
1384
RAYMOND E. ANDERSON
2 of creating legislative commissions, and they
ll
3 have done an outstanding job in this regard,
4 all of these commissions.
5 We have a legislative commission
for Northern Illinois Water Resources and
7 Conservation Commission problems. The Chairman
8 of that Commission is here and he has promised
9 to read only what he has submitted here, and if
10 so, it is only going to take about two minutes.
11 Chairman Representative John Kle'nt';.
12 Being a legislator, and being a State
13 employee, I must say that I have always found
14 Representative Kleine, as well as every one of
15 the other legislators, to be a person of his
16 word.
17 (Laughter.)
lg We have a group of promising legis-
19 lators; they promise us anything.
20 (Laughter.)
21
22
23
24
25
-------
1385
1 JOHN HENRY KLEINS
2
3 STATEMENT BY JOHN HENRY KLEINE
4 STATE REPRESENTATIVE AND CHAIRMAN OP THE
5 NORTHERN ILLINOIS WATER RESOURCES
6 AND CONSERVATION COMMISSION
7
8 MR. KLEINE: Mr. Chairman and distin-
9 guished conferees.
10 As Chairman of the Northern Illinois Water
11 Resources and Conservation Commission I wish
12 to congratulate "both Secretary Udall and our
13, Illinois State agencies for calling this very
14 timely conference. I should like to interject
15 a moment of congratulations to the North Shore
16 Sanitary District for their very progressive
17 effort and their vision and their courage with
18 this very ambitious plan.
19 j Our Commission, which deals with water
20 and conservation problems in the entire northern
21 part of the State of Illinois from Lake Michigan
22 to the Mississippi, is vitally interested in
23 | saving Lake Michigan
24 ! Through the efforts of our Commission,
25 the State agencies, and the Illinois State
-------
1386
I JOHN HENRY KLEINE
2 Legislature, the State of Illinois has assumed
3 leadership in the field of the war on pollution
4 of Lake Michigan among its sister States.
5 Even now, the North Shore Sanitary
6 District is ready to implement a $57,000,000
7 water treatment program which will remove all
8 discharge into Lake Michigan. This will then
9 compliment the fine Job and the excellent
10 performance of the Chicago Metropolitan Sanitary
11 District, under Vinton Bacon, and the Chicago
12 Department of Sewers and Water, under Comrals-
13 sioner James Jardine, in their efforts to clean
14 up Lake Michigan.
15 If all the participants in this con-
16 ference believe in the philosophy that Lake
17 Michigan shall be cur great fresh water reser-
18 voir, and everything shall be done to achieve
19 this goal, then Illinois has been the leader.
20 It is now up to our neighboring States to confirm
21 this position. The time of decision is here and
22 there can be no compromise.
23 The States must act in uniformity on
I
24 boating laws, dumping of materials, establish
25 uniform water criteria for the entire lake;
-------
1387
p—-—-—-—-—-—• -*
1 j JOHN HENRY KLEINE
2 eliminate the discharge of all polluted effluent
3 into the lake; and most important, gentlemen--
4 I think this is the first time I have heard
5 this--establish State scholarships in their
6 respective universities toward developing
7 more trained sanitary research engineers;
g establish cooperative programs to restock
9 the lake with fish for which it was once famous.
10 May I say that I would like to
11 compliment my sister State of Wisconsin,
12 Freeman Homer and Ted Wisniewski, for the
13 I very fine rapport that our Commission has
14 I had at all times with the Wisconsin Commission.
15 Thank you.
16 MR. STEIN: Thank you, Representative
17 Kleine.
18 Any comments or questions^
19 j Mr. Klassen.
20 | MR. KLASSEN: I know, Mr. Chairman,
21 our allotted time for this afternoon for
22 i Illinois is up so that we may hear from som6
23 i Federal agencies. I made a promise to Senator
24 : Paul Simon, who promised me he would only take
25 i five minutes. He can't be here next week.
-------
1388
1 PAUL SIMON
2 And I would like to take another five minutes
3 if I can for the Navy.
4 As a matter of fact, I think he is
5 an old Navy man anyway.
6 MR. STEIN: All right. Will you come
7 up?
g As you know, we have ready speakers
9 in Washington too that are expert at speaking
10 within their five-minute limit. But one time
H one of these Congressmen went to the Mayflower
12 Hotel, got there the wrong night and found a
13 woman's group waiting in the room, never heard
14 of them, but they were without a speaker. Pretty
15 soon they arranged a happy marriage. They asked
16 him if he would speak and he spoke to the group.
17 The press heard about this, were
18 intrigued with the story, got the Congressman
19 and one of those women's page reporters, I guess,
20 said to him, "But Congressman, what did you
21 speak about?" He said, "Oh, about a half hour."
22 (Laughter.)
23 MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, you have
24 i already used up three minutes of his time.
25 (Laughter and applause.)
-------
1389
1 PAUL SIMON
2 MR. STEIN: This morning I discovered
3 what a Southern Illinois three minutes is.,
4 (Laughter.)
5 STATEMENT BY PAUL SIMON
6 STATE SENATOR, 53RD DISTRICT
7 STATE OF ILLINOIS
8 MR. SIMO?!: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Klassen,
9 distinguished members of the conference and
10 friends.
11 The first portion of my statement
12 simply thanks Governor Kerner and the officials
13 here for calling the conference, urges steps that
14 can be taken to make enforcement of our pollution
15 laws, make possible a little faster action on
16 the enforcement of our pollution laws, and then
17 in addition to talking about ways of cleaning
18 up our water I believe we must broaden our con-
19 cerns--first to discuss new and creative ways of
20 getting maximum recreation benefit from our
21 water resources> and second, to consider the
22 whole water problem of the area as it relates
23 I to Lake Michigan. Here in Illinois the great
24 j majority of those people living in the Chicago
25 Metropolitan area are in the peculiar position
-------
1390
1 PAUL SIMON
2 of drawing their water from the lake and re-
3 turning it, as waste, to the Illinois River.
4 It is accomplished by 52 miles of canals
5 that took over 30 years to complete. Some
6 communities along the North Shore are today
7 actually building new sewers to direct more
8 sewage into the Illinois River, all in the
9 name of cleaning up Lake Michigan. I urge
10 this conferenc-e to put a stop to attempts
ll to solve one problem by merely transferring
12 it to another area.
13 As to looking for better ways to
14 receive the maximum benefit from our lake,
15 I like that creative, imaginative spirit
16 which caused us to fill in the lake east
17 ! of Michigan Avenue to form Grant Park, and
18 j the spirit that reversed the flow of the
19 Chicago Hiver.
20 What is needed today for Lake
21 Michigan is not Just a defensive complex
22 but an offensive dream.
23 | Just as one possibility, let me
24 ; suggest a practical plan--and I have the maps
25 here that have been worked on by people from
-------
1391
1 PAUL SIMON
2 the University of Illinois and the University
3 of Chicago—practical plan which would consider
4 the recreational need of the seven million who
5 presently reside in the Greater Chicago area
5 and the greatly increased population which we
7 will have fifty years from now, which some
g experts "believe may be double the? present figure.
9 This plan would call for the building
10 of a chain of islands which would oxtend into
11 the lake starting at 79th Street and stretch
12 in a graceful arc about 25 miles east to Burns
13 Ditch.
14 The lake side of the islands would
15 constitute recreation zone for bathing, hiking,
16 sight-seeing and boating.
17 The inner side would be equally
18 appropriate for sight-seeing and would also
19 form, with the current lakeshore, a zone for
20 pleasure boating, industrial and transportation
21 use.
22 This latter zone incidentally would,
23 for the first time, allow year-round barge
24 navigation where, because of high winds and
25 wave action, only about 100 days per year is
-------
1392
1 PAUL SIMON
2 possible now. Also since the Metropolitan
3 Sanitary District needs a place for surface
4 reservoirs for their Deep Tunnel project,
5 they could use this zone for that purpose.
6 A scenic causeway, showing Lake
7 Michigan on one side and our giant industrial
g plants on the other, would run the full length
9 of the island chain. At each end gates would
10 allow the passage of boats. These gates,
11 coupled with the O'Brien Lock and Dam, would
12 keep this zone slightly lower than the lake
13 itself.
14 Prom where would the materials come
15 from? They are right under our feet today.
16 Indeed, they are a great problem where they are
17 and must be removed at great cost. I refer to
18 the 60 million cubic yards of rock that will be
19 removed in the Metropolitan Sanitary District
20 Deep Tunnel project and the almost equal amount
21 of impermeable clay that must be removed before
22 our new subway plan can be implemented. These
23 materials, rock and clay, would form the base
24 and outer edge of the islands. The hollow
25 center could be filled in with the slag that
-------
1393
1 PAUL SIMON
2 threatens to strangle our major steel producers.
3 The cost of building the islands is
4 approximately one billion dollars. That's about
5 $1.50 per square foot. Today, much less valuable
6 beach front is selling for considerably more.
7 And these islands would produce revenue. Six
8 thousand to twelve thousand pleasure boats could
9 easily moor there to produce more than $750,000
10 per year, Just as one example. Revenue also
11 could come from steel companies for depositing
12 slag there. Other examples could be given.
13 We would have the option of paying
14 for the islands from present governmental
15 revenues or by issuing revenue bonds, or a
16 combination of both.
17 The contribution such a chain of islands
18 would make to recreational, cultural and industriajl
19 progress in this area is beyond calculation. Its
20 cost- would be but a fraction of the added value
21 it would bring to the area, a small part of the
22 annual industrial addition to the region, and it
23 would give much of the lake back to the people,
24 to whom it belongs.
25 Such a plan obviously would need the
-------
I PAUL SIMON
2 approval of the City of Chicago, the two States
3 involved, the Federal Government and other
4 governmental units.
5 One of our Nation's philosophers
6 suggested in a new book that what our Nation
7 lacks today more than anything else is
g imagination and the pioneering spirit which
9 symbolizes our country to much of the world.
10 My hope is that his criticism will
n not be applicable to those of us who look
12 "to the future of Lake Michigan. Yes, we want
13 to solve the problem of alewives. Yes, we
14 want to stop pollution of the lake. But let
15 us add one more affirmative. Yes, we want
16 to make no little plans for making the lake
17 an even greater asset to the people of our
lg Nation.
19 In 1909 Daniel Burnham said, "Make
20 no little plans; they have no magic to stir
2i men's blood and probably themselves will not
22 be realized. Make Big Plans. Aim high in
23 hope and work, remembering that a noble logical
24 I design once recorded will never die, but long
25 after we are gone will be a living thing,
-------
1395
1 PAUL SIMON
2 asserting itself with growing intensity.
3 I will be happy to try and answer any
4 questions, Mr. Chairman.
5 MR. STEIN: Are there any comments
g or questions?
7 If not, thank you very much.
8 MR. SIMON: Thank you.
9 (Applause.)
10 (The entire statement of Senator Simon
11 is as follows :)
12
13 GENERAL ASSEMBLY
14 STATE OF ILLINOIS
15 PAUL SIMON
16 State Senator 53rd District
17 Troy, Illinois
18 62294
ID Member of Committees on: Secretary
Illinois Legislative
20 Education Council
(Minority Chairman)
21 Advisory Committee
Agriculture on Tourism
22
Conservation School Problems
23 Commission
Public Welfare
24
Rules
25
-------
1396
I PAUL SIMON
2
For further information,
3 contact:
Mrs. Jeanne Sullivan
4 Telephone: 312-935-7800
5
STATEMENT BY SENATOR PAUL SIMON TO THE
FOUR STATE CONFERENCE ON LAKE MICHIGAN
7
Sherman House, February 2, 1968
8 * * * *
9 I greatly appreciate the opportunity to address
10 you. I also want to commend Governor Kerner for
11 calling this conference and for the courage and
12 energy that he has given to what promises to be
13 a long and tiring fight against pollution.
14
I can see that we all agree that our water quality
15
is inadequate and getting worse. We can also agree
16
that no improvement can come without using improved
17
waste treatment methods.
18
19 I regard this conference as a test of whether the
20 present legislative scheme for controlling pollu-
21 tion really can work. If this conference cannot
22 take concrete and immediate steps to eliminate the
23 obvious problem areas, then we, ought to consider
24 | legislation to hasten procedures for cutting off
25 pollution. The present enforcement procedure
-------
1397
1 PAUL SIMON
2 under the Federal acts is cumbersome, it requires
3 a long period of time, and it contains many built-
4 in possibilities for delay, confusion and inaction
5 while serious pollution continues unabated. If
6 the present procedure cannot work, Congress must
7 consider: one, changing the hearing board from
g an ad joe board to a permanent administrative
9 board; two, cutting down the time allowed to pol-
io luters for compliance with the recommendations of
11 conference like this one; three, cutting down the
12 time between a conference and ohe convening of a
13 hearing board. These are, however, only a set of
14 suggestions for changes that would help the Federal
15 Water Pollution Control Administration to effect
16 what we all recognize as essential work.
17
However, in addition to talking about ways of
18
cleaning up our water, I believe we must broaden
19
our concerns:
20
First, to discuss new and creative
21
ways of getting maximum recreational
22
benefit from our water resources; and
23 |
Second, to consider the whole water
24
problem of the area as it relates to
25
Lake Michigan.
-------
1398
1 PAUL SIMON
2 Here in Illinois the great majority of those
3 people living in the Chicago Metropolitan area
4 are in the peculiar position of drawing their
5 water from the lake and returning it, as waste, to
6 the Illinois River. It is accomplished by 52
7 miles of canals that took over 30 years to complete
g Some communities along the north shore are today
9 actually building new sewers to direct more sewage
10 into the Illinois River, all in the name of clean-
H ing up Lake Michigan. I urge this conference to
12 put a stop to attempts to solve one problem by
13 merely transferring it to another area.
14
As to looking for better ways to receive the
15
maximum benefit from our lake, I like that creative
16
imaginative spirit which caused us to fill in the
17
lake east of Michigan Avenue to form Grant Park,
18
and the spirit that reversed the flow of the
19
Chicago River.
20
21 What is needed today for Lake Michigan is not Just
22 a defensive complex but an offensive dream.
23
Just as one possibility, let me suggest a practi-
24
cal plan which would consider the recreational
25
need of the seven million who presently reside
-------
1 PAUL SIMON
2 in the Greater Chicago area and the greatly
3 increased population which we will have 50 years
4 from now, which some experts believe may be
5 double the present figure.
6
This plan would call for the building of a chain
7
of islands which would extend into the lake
8
starting at 79th Street and stretch in a graceful
9
arc about 25 miles east to Burns Ditch.
10
11 The lake side of the islands would constitute
12 recreation zone for bathing, hiking, sight-seeing,
13 and boating.
14
The inner side would be equally appropriate for
15
sight-seeing and would also form, with the current
16
lake shore, a zone for pleasure boating, industrial
17
and transportation use.
18
19 This latter zone incidentally would, for the first
20 time, allow year-round barge navigation where,
21 because of high winds and wave action, only about
22 100 days per year are possible now. Also, since
23 the Metropolitan Sanitary District needs a place
24 for surface reservoirs for their Deep Tunnel
25 project, they could use this zone for that purpose.
-------
i4oo
l PAUL SIMON
2 A scenic causeway, showing Lake Michigan on one
« side and our giant industrial plants on the other,
u
4 would run the full length of the island chain.
At each end gates would allow the passage of
boats. These gates, coupled with the O'Brien
6
Lock and Dam, would keep this zone slightly
lower than the lake itself.
O
9 From where would the materials come from? They
1 are right under our feet today. Indeed, they
11 are a great problem where they are and must be
removed at great cost. I refer to the 60 million
13 cubic yards of rock that will be removed in the
14 Metropolitan Sanitary District Deep Tunnel project
and the almost equal amount of impermeable clay
that must be removed before our new subway plan
17
can be implemented. These materials, rock and
18
clay, would form the base and outer edge of the
islands. The hollow center could be filled in
20
with the slag that threatens to strangle our major
21
steel producers.
22
23 The cost of building the islands is approximately
24 one billion dollars. That's about $1.50 per square
25 foot. Today, much less valuable beach front is
-------
1401
1 PAUL SIMON
2 selling for considerably more. And these islands
3 would produce revenue. Six thousand to twelve
4 thousand pleasure boats could easily moor there
5 to produce more than $750,000 per year, Just as
6 one example. Revenue also could come from the
7 steel companies for depositing slag there. . Other
g examples could be given.
9
We would have the option of paying for the islands
10
from present governmental revenues or by issuing
11
revenue bonds, or a combination of both.
12
13 The contribution such a chain of islands would
14 make to recreational, cultural and industrial
15 progress in this area is beyond calculation. Its
16 cost would be but a fraction of the added value
17 it would bring to the area, a small part of the
18 annual industrial addition to the region, and it
19 would give much of the lake back to the people,
20 to whom it belongs.
21
Such a plan obviously would need the approval of
22
the City of Chicago, the two States involved, the
23
Federal Government and other governmental units.
24
25
One of our Nation's philosophers suggested in a
-------
1402
1 PAUL SIMON'
2 new book that what our Nation lacks today more
3 than anything else is imagination and the pio-
4 neering spirit which symbolizes our country
5 to much of the world.
6
My hope is that his criticism will not be appli-
7
cable to those of us who look to the future of
8
Lake Michigan. Yes, we want to solve the problem
9
of alewives. Yes, we want to stop pollution of
10
the lake. But let us add one more affirmative.
11
Yesj we want to make no little plans for making
12
the lake an ever greater asset to the people of
13
our Nation.
14
15 In 1909 Daniel Burnham said, "Make no little plans;
16 they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably
17 themselves will not be realized. Make big plans.
18 Aim high in hope and work, remembering that a
19 noble logical design once recorded will never die,
20 but long after we are gone will be a living thing,
21 asserting itself with growing intensity. Remember
22 that our sons and grandsons are going to do things
23 that would stagger us. Let your watchword be order
24 and your beacon beauty."
25 _ _
-------
U03
1 FEDERAL PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)
2
3 MR. STEIN: Mr. Klassen.
4
5 MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman, I want
6 to say that Illinois has used up about eight
7 minutes more than the time that you allotted,
8 and I just want to suggest to all of the
9 Illinois participants that I said would be
10 on this afternoon, if you would congregate
11 at a place of your choice for dinner, I
12 will not be there, but you can call the
13 Illinois Conferee anything you care to and
14 you may report on your findings Monday morning
15 when I am here.
16
17 I apologize again, but those of you
18 who have run meetings know what some of the
19 problems are, and I have already now taken
10 minutes.
21
22 I want to turn this back as promised
23
24
25
-------
1 FEDERAL PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)
2 to the Federal people and the Chairman for
3 their presentation the rest of the afternoon.
4 I want to say that the other part
5 of the I115.nois presentation, the first thing
6 Monday morning when we reconvene,will be the
7 City of Chicago Water Department, next the
8 Chicago Sanitary District presentation, and
9 then all of those that were not able to be
10 on today.
n MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Klassen,
12 I will say, I enjoyed those 10 minutes. It
13 was like a Beethoven symphony. Every time
14 I thought it was going to end you came up with
15 another fanfare.
16 (Laughter.)
11 Mr. Pos ton.
18
19 FEDERAL PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)
20
21 MR. POSTON: I would like to at this
22 time to call on Captain George R. Shepard, Midwest
23 Division of the Naval Facilities Engineering
24 Command, located at Great Lakes.
25 While he is coming up, is Captain
-------
1403
CAPTAIN G. R. SHEPARD
2 Riblett here?
3 CA?T. SHEPARD: He went bac*. I
will introduce his paper
5 MR. POSTON: All right.
6
COMMANDANT, NINTH NAVAL DISTRICT STATEMENT
FOLK-STATE WATER POLLUTION CONFERENCE
31 JANUARY 1968
10 PRESENTED BY
i
n I CAPTAIN G. R. SHEPARD, CEC, USN
12 DISTRICT CIVIL ENGINEER
13
14 CAPT. SHEPARD: Mr. Chairman, distin-
15 guished conferees, ladies and gentlemen.
J!
15 i I appreciate the opportunity to
i
17 I present on behalf of the Commandant of the
i
lg Ninth Naval District, Rear Admiral H. A.
i
19 HeriKen, information which will indicate
20 the extent of the Navy's participation in
2i [ this all-important campaign to reduce water
i
t
22 '< pollution.
!i
23 we. maintain close contact and co-
i
24 ordinate our efforts with the various Federal,
25 State and local organizations. While we are
i
-------
1 CAPTAIN G, R. SHEPARD
2 not a major contributor to the overall problem,
3 we have taken certain steps in the form of
4 (1) accomplished minor projects, and, (2)
5 planned future projects which will control
6 pollution in the manner specified by appli-
7 cable criteria. My presentation does not
g cover steps which are being taken by the
9 Naval Ships Systems Command to control
10 pollution by ships while operating on the
11 lake proper. This subject will be covered
12 by Captain Riblett.
13 Both of the sewage treatment plants
14 at Great Lakes provide secondary treatment to
15 the effluent. Under normal operating conditions
16 the effluent from these plants meets current
17 criteria. At our Lake Michigan plant we do
18 have a future problem involving peak loading
19 and the disposal of water and boiler plant
20 wastes. A military construction project de-
21 signed to remedy these deficiencies was sub-
22 mitted several years ago. It is presently
23 programmed for fiscal year 1970. When funded
24 and completed it will enable the Navy to meet
25 expected water quality criteria for Lake Michigan
-------
1407
1 CAPTAIN G< R. SHEPARD
2 up to 1977.
3 A Navy program for the installation
4 of tertiary treatment will depend on the out-
5 come of the program under development by the
6 North Shore Sanitary District providing for
7 inland pumping to other watersheds. The state
g of the art 10 years from now may very well
9 dictate that the desired results may be ob-
10 tained by means more economical than the
11 pumping of 5 to 6 million gallons per day
12 "to another system. A second military con-
13 struction project for either pumping or
14 tertiary treatment will be required to comply
15 with the 1977 criteria.
16 This last summer we completed a
17 sewage collection system at the Naval
18 Training Center which accommodates the small
19 ship homeported there and discharges the waste
20 into our sanitary system. A plan solving a
21 long standing problem at the Chicago Naval
22 Armory and its training ship has been developed
23 recently in conjunction with Federal^State
24 and local agencies. Funds will be granted
25 in the near future which will provide the
-------
1408
1 CAPTAIN G. R. SHEPARD
2 Navy's share of the combined project to collect
3 the sewage discharge from the USS Parle.
4 Additionally, this project will accommodate
5 various privately-owned small craft, utilizing
6 the Monroe Street Harbor and the Naval Armory
7 itself. Sewage will be delivered to the city
g sanitary sewer system.
9 In conclusion, it is our aim by close
10 coordination and liaison with all agencies con-
H cerned, to develop and maintain Navy facilities
12 which will comply with applicable water quality
13 ; standards of the States and surrounding communi-
14 ties.
15
16 STATEMENT OF THE NAVAL SHIP SYSTEMS COMMAND
17 PRESENTED BY
18 CAPTAIN GEORGE R. SHEPARD
|
19 |
20 CAPT. SHEPHARD: The second paper
i
21 is one prepared by the Naval Ship Systems
I
22 j Command. Essentially it briefs a formal docu-
23 raent known as Senate Document No. 48 that is
24 available through the Government printing es-
i
25 i Lablishiaent. I will skip the part which is
-------
1 CAPTAIN G. R. SHEPARD
2 paraphrased and take up the last three para-
3 graphs, which essentially deal with the efforts
4 of Ship Systems Command to install treatment
5 facilities on the various Naval ships.
6 (Reading) A three-phase development
7 contract was awarded in May 1966. The first
g phase established system feasibility by means
9 of a laboratory model, and the second phase
10 produced a full-scale prototype which is now
11 undergoing evaluation at a Navy laboratory.
12 A second full-scale unit is being installed
13 in an Atlantic Fleet destroyer for shipboard
14 evaluation of operating and maintenance con-
15 cepts.
16 While preliminary tests of this
17 developmental plant indicate that it will
18 meet or exceed the effluent standards specified
19 in the contract, it was not designed to meet
20 the very stringent water purity standards
21 which have been established by the Illinois
22 Sanitary Water Board. There is no known equip-
23 ment either available or under development which
24 will meet these standards and still meet the
25 critical weight and space requirements of a
-------
_ ___ ___ 1 4 1 0
1 CAPTAIN G. R. SHEPARD
2 Naval ship Installation.
3 The only apparent method by which
4 Naval Reserve Training ships berthed in the
6 Chicago area can meet the Illinois purity
6 standards is by re -plumbing the sewage drains
7 into holding tanks from which the wastes may
8 be pumped ashore into a sewer main. Naval
9 authorities are now evaluating the cost of
10 such installations, as well as the effects
11 on the operations of the ships involved.
12 Mr. Chairman, I would like to have
13 this paper introduced for the record.
14 MR. STEIN: Without objection, this
15 will be introduced in its entirety as if read.
16 (Which said paper is as follows : )
17 Program for Treatment of
18 Shipboard Wastes from U. S. Navy Ships
19 The Federal Water Pollution Control
20 Administration Report to the Congress dated
21 August 7, 1967 entitled "Wastes from Watercraf t, "
22
which has been reprinted as Senate Document No.
oo
, contains a brief description of the Navy's
24 program for shipboard waste disposal. This
25 paper will summarize the salient points of that
-------
1 CAPTAIN G. R.SHEPARD
2 program, which has as its aim the treatment of
3 shipboard sewage to produce an effluent which
4 will meet the criteria listed in the Public
5 Health Service Handbook of Sanitation for
6 Vessel Construction. It will also cover
7 briefly the particular requirements imposed
8 upon Naval ships when moored' or operating
9 in the waters of the Chicago Metropolitan
10 Sanitary Water District.
11 As noted in the above cited FWPCA
12 report, Naval ships pose special design prob-
13 lems because damage control features of all
14 systems are important design considerations,
15 and penetration of watertight decks and main
16 watertight bulkheads must be minimized. For
17 that reason as well as economy of ship con-
is struction and maintenance, normally all waste
19 drainage systems are gravity systems discharging
za directly overboard with minimum internal piping.
21 In developing a program to provide
22 a satisfactory solution to the Naval shipboard
23 sewage disposal problem, existing shipboard
24 sewage treatment systems were evaluated. The
25 system that has found the most widespread
-------
1412
1 j CAPTAIN G. R. SHEPARD
2 acceptance in commercial shipbuilding circles
3 is the extended aeration, activated sludge
4 process. The fundamental feature of the
5 unit is a system of continuous aeration of
6 the organic material in an aeration chamber
7 with no other sludge digestion required. The
8 increase in space and weight requirements
9 of this system make it unattractive for Naval
10 shipboard use.
11 To illustrate this, the following
12 compares the space-weight relationships for
13 two ship types:
14 Guided missile Aircraft
frigate carrier
15 j
Treatment units required 4 22
16 i
Deck area (square feet) 550 4,500
17
Weight (tons) 30 250
18
19 In addition to the adverse penalties
20 imposed on the ship, operating experience h*s
21 indicated that treatment efficiency has been
22 ' marginal and sludge-holding facilities are not
23 being recommended.
24 In the absence of factual data on ship
25 sewage characteristics and treatment hardware
-------
1 CAPTAIN G. R. SHEPARD
2 adaptable to Naval ship use, Naval Ship Systems
3 Command (NAVSHIPS) undertook a comprehensive
4 research and development program. The first
5 phase of this program was a waste survey In
g representative areas in each of four different
7 type ships.
g The U. S. Navy Marine Engineering
9 Laboratory, Annapolis, Maryland, conducted
10 this survey and findings are reported in "U.S.
11 Navy Marine Engineering Laboratory Research
12 and Development Report 346/64, January 1965."
13 Using the results of the waste survey
14 as a characteristic influent and the proposed
15 effluent standards of the interagency committee
16 as the treatment goal, NAVSHIPS contacted
17 industry to develop the required system hardware.
18 A three-phase development contract
19 was awarded in May 1966. The first phase
20 established system feasibility by means of
21 a laboratory model, and the second phase pro-
22 duced a full-scale prototype which is now
23 undergoing evaluation at a Navy laboratory.
24 ! A second full-scale unit is being Installed
25 in an Atlantic Fleet destroyer for shipboard
-------
1 CAPTAIN G. R. SHEPARD
2 evaluation of operating and maintenance concepts.
3 While preliminary tests of this
4 developmental plant indicate that it will
5 meet or exceed the effluent standards speci-
6 fied in the contract, it was not designed
7 to meet the very stringent water purity
8 standards which have been established by
9 the Illinois Sanitary Water Board. There
10 is no known equipment either available or
11 under development which will meet these
12 standards and still meet the critical weight
13 and space requirements'of a Naval ship installa-
14 tion.
15 The only apparent method by which
16 Naval Reserve Training ships berthed in the
17 Chicago area can meet the Illinois purity
18 standards is by re-plumbing the sewage drains
19 into holding tanks from which the wastes may
20 be pumped ashore into a sewer main. Naval
21 authorities are now evaluating the cost of
22 such installations, as well as the effects
23 on the operations of the ships involved.
24
25
-------
1415
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF UNITED STATES
2 MR. STEIN: Mr. Poston.
3 MR. POSTON: At this time I would like
4 to call on Mrs. Donald Clusen, League of Women
5 Voters. She represents the National headquarters.
6 Mrs. Clusen has been very patient.
7 Mrs. Clusen had asked for quite some time; I
8 think she inquired of the State of Wisconsin,
9 also, since she is a resident of Green Bay.
10 Mrs. Clusen.
11
12 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES
13 .MRS. DONALD E. CLUSEN, DIRECTOR
14 AND WATER RESOURCES CHAIRMAN
15
16 MRS. CLUSEN: Mr. Chairman and distin-
17 guished Conferees, I might say seldom has a woman
18 had so much trouble getting a word in edgewise.
19 (Laughter.)
20 However, I am most grateful for
21 the time and I will summarize the statement
22 which is now in the hands of the Conferees
23 and the reporter.
24 In order to clarify my status here,
25 let me say that although I live in Green Bay,
-------
1416
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 Wisconsin, I am National Water Chairman for
3 the League of Women Voters. I am here today,
4 however, as spokesman for the ladies in the
5 four states who are a party to this conference,
6 so the views which I am presenting here are
7 those of the Lake Michigan interleague group.
g In addition to that, I would like
9 to request permission of the conference for
10 the detailed statements from these State
11 leagues to "be entered into the record of this
12 conference following our testimony.
13 MR. STEIN: Are they ready now?
14 MRS. CLUSEN: Yes, they are in the
15 material which you have Just received.
16 I MR. STEIN: Without objection, they
17 will be introduced into the record as if read.
18 (Which said statements are as follows:}
19
LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED
20
STATES, 1200 Seventeen Street, N.W.,
21
Washington, D. C. 20036
22
23 STATEMENT TO THE FEDERAL-STATE ENFORCE-
24 MENT CONFERENCE ON POLLUTION IN LAKE
25 MICHIGAN AND ITS TRIBUTARY BASIN, BY
-------
1417
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 MRS. DONALD E. CLUSEN, DIRECTOR
3 CHAIRMAN, WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE
4 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP THE
g UNITED STATES, February 1, 1968
6 I am Mrs. Donald E. Clusen, of Green
7 Bay, Wisconsin, Water Resources Chairman of the
8 League of Women Voters of the United States. I
9 am here today as a resident of the Lake Michigan
10 Tributary Basin to express the views of local
n and State Leagues of Women Voters in this four
12 State area, Leagues in these States have joined
13 together to study and seek solutions to water
14 problems which plague the Lake Michigan Region,
15 and the views which I will present to you are
16 those of the Lake Michigan Inter-League Water
17 Group. In addition to this overall presentation,
18 the State Leagues of Indiana, Illinois, Michigan
19 and Wisconsin have prepared individual statements
20 in greater detail regarding the situation as they
21 find it in their part of the Lake Michigan shore-
22 line. At this time, we would like to request
23 ] permission of the conferees for these four state-
24 ! raents to be entered into the record of this con-
25 ference, following my testimony for the Inter-Leagtae
-------
1418
I LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 Group of the Lake Michigan region.
3 We think it is significant that
4 the Leagues of Women Voters in these four
5 States have chosen to work Jointly in their
6 efforts to gather information and reach
7 decisions on present and future pollution
g abatement efforts concerning Lake Michigan.
9 We believe it is even more important that
10 these four States approach the growing prob-
11 lems of Lake Michigan in the same spirit of
12 Joint endeavor.
13 We wish to use this opportunity
14 to urge both the Federal Government and the
15 States to look at Lake Michigan as a whole--
16 to see beyond the most urgent crisis of water
11 quality to consideration of such other problems
18 as navigation, water supply, water use and re-
19 use, eutrophication, land fill and procedures
20 for dumping and dredging. We wish to commend
21 the calling of this conference, which we pre-
22 viously urged through letters to Governors of
23 the States, as an important step in achieving
24 greater unity of purpose among these States
25 and between them and the Federal Government.
-------
1419
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF UNITED STATES
2 We note also another encouraging factor in the
3 stated intent of the four Attorneys General
4 to compile and exchange lists of known polluters
5 in these States.
§ Few citizens can doubt the wisdom
7 of wholesale, Joint attack upon our problems.
3 A piecemeal approach on a single problem basis
9 can only lead to inconsistency, inadequacy,
10 and confusion. Each State is obvioulsy
11 affected by the discharges of its neighbors,
12 intrastate standards set for water quality,
13 handling of the increasing alewife problem,
14 and local and State regulations which govern
15 dumping of polluted materials in our common
16 waterway.
17 From observation, research, and
18 discussion, including pooling of information
10 and points of view of League members in the
20 four States, the Lake Michigan Inter-League
21 Group wishes to express the following recom-
22 mendations to the conference:
23 1. That a uniform plan for enforce-
24 ment of interstate water quality
25 standards be established, which
-------
1420
LEA3UE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 necessarily involves:
3 a) coordination of stan-
dards among the four States
involved, particularly as
they pertain to streams draining
7 into Lake Michigan,
g b) uniform enforcement
9 procedures,
c) Federal surveillance and
11 testing of water with regular
12 reports to the Federal Water
13 Pollution Control Agency and
14 the States,
15 2. That the Federal Government and
the States look at Lake Michigan as
an entity, whether the focus be on
18 problems of pollution, supply, or
19 use.
20 3« That a timetable be established
21 which provides for consistent, planned
22 advances in pollution abatement.
23 4. That enforcement of the time-
24 | table and standards be strict, and
25 action upon the recalcitrant polluter
-------
1421
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF UNITED STATES
2 speedy.
3 5. That coordinated research
4 programs among States be encour-
5 aged to facilitate feasible,,
6 economical solutions and prevent
7 duplication of effort and ex-
g pense.
9 These recommendations are based upon
10 results of a study currently underway by State
11 and local Leagues in the four States. While the
12 conference will, we hope, want to read the de-
13 tailed statements submitted by each of these
14 four State Leagues, I would like to quote briefly
15 from them so that you gentlemen will understand
16 the depth and scope of League concern for Lake
17 Michigan.
18 The League of Women Voters of Indiana
19 in commenting on the Jones Subcommittee Hearing
20 held in Chicago in 1963 says, "in the four years
21 since we made our statement to the Jones Com-
22 mittee, conditions in Lake Michigan have not
23 improved, not even remained as they were then,
24 in fact have become much worse." Later in the
25 Indiana statement, in commenting on efforts since
-------
1422
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 that time, they say, "Indiana's schedule for
3 compliance on industrial criteria in the Lake
4 Michigan area proved to be a year and a half
5 later than the one agreed upon by the conferees
6 of the 1965 two-state conference. Also, Indiana
7 reports that three of the industries of this
8 area have not agreed to abide by Indiana's
9 schedule."
10 The League of Women Voters of Illinois
11 points up need for a look, at the total picture
12 by saying, "The elusive sources of this increased
13 pollution, in spite of a two-year effort to abate
14 it in the southern end of the lake, call for the
15 wider study of the entire lake." ... "We find
16 that lack of information on the true sources of
17 pollution entering our sector of Lake Michigan
18 sometimes leads to public unwillingness to tackle
19 local problems." !
20 The League of Women Voters of Michigan !
|
2i has completed its section of the study and copies '
i
22 of their findings are attached to their statement.
23 Ao one point they say, "The League of Women Voters
i
24 of Michigan is concerned about the lack of co-
25 ordination of agencies involved in the Lake
-------
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF UNITED STATES
i
2 Michigan Basin . . . there are five U. S.
3 Coast Guard stations in Michigan which are
i
4 discharging raw sewage into the Lake . . .
5 two facilities of the Corps of Engineers and. . .
6 a National fish and wildlife station discharging
7 wastes into Lake Michigan."
8 The statement of the League of Women
9 Voters of Wisconsin includes these sentences:
10 "We still have some municipalities without
11 sewage -treatment plants, some without secondary
12 treacment, many with combined sanitary storm
13 ij sewers, and, of course, thousands of septic
14 | tanks operating at less than top efficiency. . . |
i !
15 | Wow we are seeing the results of our carelessness !
16 ! in the destruction of the shoreline and pollution !
i i
17 s of the waters of Lake Michigan."
i|
18 It would seeia that these statement.;:.
i
19 also point up the finding that no State is
20 blameless as a contributor to pollution of Lake
jl
21 Michigan. No State, however, is apathetic or
22 I unconcerned, either. As League members, as
23 citizens of the Lake Michigan Basin, we believe
24 | the time for pointing an accusatory finger at
25 any one State, industry, or local community is
-------
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 past. What is needed is a sincere, earnest,
3 forthright attempt to assess where we are now
4 in controlling the quality of the lake, what
5 things we can do better in this four-State
g area by working together on the State level,
7 what kind of Federal assistance can be most
8 effective in helping us to achieve cleaner
9 water in Lake Michigan.
10 In working to accomplish this objective,
jj the League of Women Voters is prepared to accept
12 responsibility for helping citizens to understand
13 their necessary role—be it via State or local
!4 legislation involving bond issues, Increased
15 taxation, more strict monitoring and enforcement
16 procedures. The League is also uniquely equipped
17 to influence public opinion and public support
jg for the climate of opinion and spirit of unity
19 and cooperation which must exist among govern-
20 ments and citizens in these four States.
21 Because we are a National organization--
22 which operates on State, local and on water
23 matters, a basin level—it is possible for us
24 to try to evaluate the problems and proposed
25 solutions for Lake Michigan without undue concern
-------
1425
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF UNITED STATES
2 for arbitrary governmental boundaries and
3 administrative restrictions. We are eager
4 to be of whatever assistance we can to both
5 Federal and State conferees in implementing
g decisions and/or recommendations of this
7 conference. In itself, this conference will
g not clean up Lake Michigan, but we hope it
9 will point the way to preservation and wise
10 use of this vital asset. Thank you for the
11 opportunity to present our views.
12
League of Women Voters of Indiana
13
506 Illinois Building
14
17 West Market
15
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
16
January 1968
17
18 STATEMENT TO THE FEDERAL-STATE
19 ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE ON POLLUTION
20 IN LAKE MICHIGAN AND ITS TRIBUTARY BASIN
21 BY THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF INDIANA
22 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS - JANUARY 31, 1968
23 In the opinion of the League of Women
24 i Voters of Indiana, the most Important thing to
25 realize, is that time has run out for Lake
-------
1426
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF INDIANA
2 Michigan. There is no future time left.
3 Improvements nius_t^ begin now and continue at
4 an accelerated pace. The damage to Lake
5 Michigan that has occurred to date will take
6 a great many years to reverse. We need not
7 add to the description of poor conditions
8 that is being presented to this conference.
9 We do believe that, since the four States on
lO Lake Michigan participating in this current
H conference create the entire boundaries of
12 the lake which is entirely contained within
13 the United States, it is possible to develop
14 the kind of control of lake conditions that
15 would allow Lake Michigan to have the top
16 water quality in the Great Lakes.
17 At a hearing held in Chicago, Illinois,
18 September 6, .1963* by the Subcommittee on Govern-
19 ment Operations of the House of Representatives,
20 chaired by Mr. Jones, the League of Women Voters
21 of Indiana filed a written statement relating to
22 conditions on Lake Michigan. Since that date
i
23 there has been an enforcement conference with
24 ! follow-up meetings for Indiana and Illinois.
!
j
25 Considerable public interest and discussion have
-------
1427
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF INDIANA
2 taken place also. We know that the Indiana-
3 Illinois conference was productive of regu-
4 lations and criteria for water. It is to be
5 expected that the 1965 Indiana-Illinois con-
6 ference will produce some results by the end
7 of 1968. But will they be enough?
g In the four years, plus, since we made
9 our statement to the Jones committee, the con-
10 ditions in Lake Michigan have not improved, not
11 even remained as they were then, in fact have
12 become much worse.
13 The Indiana League of Women Voters
14 hopes that this 1968 four-State conference can
15 produce an agreement that will greatly accelerate
16 the action so vitally needed.
17 We were advised by a letter, written
18 on November 17, 1967, by Mr. Blucher Poole,
19 Technical Secretary of the Indiana Stream and
20 Pollution and Control Board, that the Secretary
21 of the Interior has approved Indiana State
22 water quality criteria and plan of implementation.
23 Yet in these water quality standards, as approved,
24 Indiana schedule for compliance on industrial
25 criteria in the Lake Michigan area proved to be
-------
1428
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP INDIANA
2 a year and one half later than the one agreed
3 upon by the conferees of the 1965 two-State
4 conference.
5 Indiana news reports have said that
6 Indiana standards are more strict than the
7 ones agreed upon at the 1965 conference. Some
8 industries have stated that they could meet
9 the 1965 conference standards but not Indiana
10 stricter standards until 1970. These reports
11 point up the need for a uniform set of standards
12 and time schedule. Also, Indiana reports that
13 three of the industries of this area have not
14 agreed to abide by Indiana schedule.
15 Among the many things that this con-
16 ference could consider are the problems of
17 eutrophication. What can be done about en-
18 couraging the kind of municipal treatment facili-
19 ties that can remove phosphates or separate storm
20 sewers? Some Indiana municipalities are reported
21 as having inadequate or overloaded treatment
22 plants. The Army Corps of Engineers needs
23 permanent, not a temporary, arrangement for
24 dumping canal dredgings, other than in Lake
25 Michigan. Is it not time to consider the manner
-------
1429
I LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF INDIANA
2 of caring for the water that will be used by the
3 planned nuclear power.plants? What can be done
4 about landfills? Is the Army Corps of Engineers,
5 whose interest is centered on navigation, to
g remain the only body concerned in permitting
7 landfill? This present practice seems strange,
3 if our modern day population'and industrial
9 needs are considered in regard to the vast water
10 use of Lake Michigan.
H The peculiar water currents in the lake
12 should be given utmost consideration. The new
13 report made by the Federal Water Pollution Con-
14 trol Board on lake currents could prove helpful.
15 How do seasonal change,wind direction, or other
16 phenomena affect the amounts of accumulated
17 polluted material? Currents should be fully
18 understood in regard to these effects before
19 allowing shore or island fills.
20 We wish to express our commendation
21 of Joint action and cooperation between the
22 four States and our hopes for beneficial re-
23 suits from this enforcement conference.
24
25
-------
x LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ILLINOIS
League of Women Voters of Illinois
67 East Madison Street
3
. Chicago 60603
4
January 31, 1968
5
6 STATEMENT TO THE FEDERAL-STATE
7 ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE ON POLLUTION IN
8 LAKE MICHIGAN AND ITS TRIBUTARY BASIN
9 BY THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ILLINOIS
10
The League of Women Voters of Illinois
supports the concept of regional planning for
12
Lake Michigan and its tributary basin. We be-
13
lieve that all Federal, State and local agencies
14
in the area must plan cooperatively for the
15
orderly development and protection of this vast
16
public water resource. We applaud the convening
I of this four-State conference and appreciate the
IB
opportunity to present our views.
20 There is graphic evidence of the deter-
21 ioration of water quality in Lake Michigan. The
22 Calumet Area Post Action Surveillance Project,
23 Department of the Interior, submitted a report
24 to the Illinois-Indiana Conference in September
25 1967. That report indicated that water quality
-------
1431
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP ILLINOIS
2 at the City of Chicago public water intake
3 cribs did not meet the criteria established
4 by that conference in early 1966. In many
5 instances, contaminants exceeded those reported
6 by the Chicago Department of Water and Sewers
7 in March 1965. This department reported on
8 September 11, 1967, that there had been a steady
9 decline in open water quality of Lake Michigan
10 since the report of March 1965. This lowered
11 quality affected the water intake at both the
12 Central Filtration Plant and the South District
13 Filtration Plant, whereas the report of March
14 1965 had shown only occasional pollution at
15 the Central Filtration Plant. The elusiveness i
i
16 of the sources of this increased pollution, in j
17 spite of a two-year effort to abate it in the
18 southern end of the lake, calls for a wider
19 study of the entire lake.
20 The League of Women Voters believes
21 that an ongoing four-State conference is essential
22 to coordinate the implementation and enforcement
23 j of water quality standards for Illinois, Indiana,
24 ! Wisconsin and Michigan, as soon as the standards
25 have been approved by the Secretary of the
-------
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP ILLINOIS
2 Interior. We urge the conference to establish
3 a surveillance team which will make regular
4 reports to the conferees on the progress of
5 pollution abatement in the lake basin. Such
6 a surveillance team can pinpoint sources of
7 pollution and bring more prompt compliance
g with standards. The publication of surveillance
9 reports when published will serve to win public
10 support for abatement measures.
11 We urge the conferees to establish
12 routine methods for uniformly upgarding each
13 State's water quality standards relating to
14 Lake Michigan and its tributary rivers as water
15 quality Improves. The conferees will want to
16 assess the damage to lake waters from chemical
17 fertilizers and pesticides and adjust standards
18 to eliminate the danger of pollution from these
19 sources. With the anticipated construction of
20 nuclear power plants using Lake Michigan water
i
21 at a number of locations on her shores, we
22 suggest the study of the effects of thermal
23 j pollution and radio activity with subsequent
i
i
24 adoption of suitable criteria for these facili-
25 ties. As the many research projects now underway
-------
l LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ILLINOIS
2 identify other sources of pollution and develop
„ the technology to cope with them, the conferees
o
. will wish to make recommendations for new
_ measures to control these sources of danger.
5
. We would further urge a study of
6
uniform laws for both private and commercial
8 vessels using Lake Michigan and its tributary
_ waters. Such laws should control pollution
10 from all sanitary and oil discharges from both
.. types of vessels.
12 We urge the conference to resolve the
13 apparent inconsistency in having June 1970
14 remain—in the Indiana standards approved by
15 the Secretary of the Interior—as the compliance
M" date for specific industries now under a Decem-
17 ber 1968 compliance order by action of the 196?
18 Illinois-Indiana Enforcement Conference. We
IQ would expect adherence to the original date.
20 The League of Women Voters of Illinois
2i recognizes that some of the Lake Michigan pol-
22 lution originates in our own State and has
23 supported all Illinois legislation aimed at
24 j reducing it. In the Illinois Legislature, we
25 testified in support of the passage of the
-------
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ILLINOIS
2 $1 billion Resource Development Bond Act and
3 will work for its passage in November 1968.
4 Since funds from this Bond Act will not be
5 available before 19^9> we have also supported
6 an immediate appropriation for State funds to
7 match Federal grants for construction of
g sewage treatment plants under Public Law 660.
9 This latter legislation was vetoed. We have
10 supported legislation to prohibit the dumping
11 of dredgings in Lake Michigan, and are grati-
12 fied to know that such legislation will become
13 effective this year. Inasmuch as this anti-
14 dumping measure affects only the Illinois portion
15 of Lake Michigan, we urge the conferees to con-
16 sider measures to protect all other parts of the
17 lake as well from the dumping of polluted dredging^
18 Local Leagues in Illinois are studying
19 the problems created by sewage disposal plants
20 and local industries which contribute to the
21 pollution of Lake Michigan. We are aware that
22 the North Shore Sanitary District in Lake County,
23 Illinois faces major costly problems in plant
24 improvement to reduce the pollution now dis-
25 charged into the lake from its primary treatment
-------
3A35
! LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF ILLINOIS
2 facilities. We can no longer afford the luxury
3 of indifference and will work realistically to
4 eliminate this pollution. Our other major
j source of Lake Michigan pollution from Illinois
6 is the Calumet River area where combined storm
7 overflow and industrial wastes must be elimi-
8 nated. We shall support compliance with water
9 quality standards for municipal and industrial
10 polluters as determined and enforced by the
11 Illinois State Sanitary Water Board.
12 We find that lack of information on the
13 true sources of pollution entering our sector of
14 Lake Michigan sometimes leads to public unwilling-
15 ness to tackle local problems. We feel that this
16 four-State conference can eliminate misinformation
17 and increase popular support for all Federal,
18 State and local measures essential to the pro-
19 tection of Lake Michigan.
20 In summary, we request the conference
21 to consider:
22 1. Basinwide surveillance with
23 reporting.
24 | 2. Four-State, unified action to
25 upgrade standards as needed.
-------
, 3A3.6
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF ILLINOIS
2 3- Broadening of standards to
3 include criteria not now included,
4 as research establishes these
g criteria.
6 4. Uniform shipping and boating
7 regulations.
8 5» Uniform dumping measures.
9 6. Continued public hearings.
10 7. Strict enforcement with prompt
U reporting of non-compliance.
12
League of Women Voters of Michigan
13
4612 Woodward Avenue, Room 317
14
Detroit, Michigan 48201 - TE 3-7133
15
January 31> 1968
16
17 STATEMENT FILED WITH THE FEDERAL
18 CONFERENCE ON POLLUTION OF LAKE MICHIGAN
19 AND ITS TRIBUTARY BASIN BY MRS. ROBERT ZILLY,
20 WATER RESOURCES CHAIRMAN
21 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF MICHIGAN
22 FEBRUARY 5, 1968
23 The preservation of clean waters in
24 the Lake Michigan Basin is of prime importance
25 to the" State of Michigan because of its unique
-------
U37
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP MICHIGAN
2 geographical location, its many miles of beaches,
3 and its myriad streams and inland lakes offering
4 recreational outlets to an increasing population
5 centered around the southern end of Lake Michigan.
6 A sizeable resort and tourist industry exists in
7 western Michigan and is dependent upon the main-
8 tenance of waters suitable for swimming and
9 streams capable of supporting fish and wildlife.
10 A population increasing in geometric
11 proportions in Michigan will be dependent upon
12 waters that are safe for drinking without the
13 addition of huge quantities of chlorination.
14 Expanding industrialization and the development
15 of extensive power generation plants, both
16 nuclear and steam, in the basin are dependent
17 upon water quality and the State water resources.
18 For these reasons, the League of Women Voters of
19 Michigan urges the strict enforcement of the
20 highest water quality standards possible for
21 Lake Michigan.
22 We would like to take this opportunity
23 to commend the Michigan Water Resources Commission
24 and the Department of Conservation for its efforts
25 to set adequate water quality standards, develop
-------
1438
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP MICHIGAN
2 studies of present and future water resources
3 and uses, and use designations for the tribu-
taries of the Lake Michigan Basin which reflect
g full consideration of the varied uses of Michigan
6 waters. The following concerns voiced "by the
League of Women Voters of Michigan are made,
not in criticism of any agency, but as a recog-
nit-ion of the rapidly deteriorating quality
of the waters of Lake Michigan and its tribu-
varies.
12 Our first concern is the proposed
13 Michigan water quality standards per se. The
wording in the summaries of programs to control
and abate pollution seeui to present loopholes
for enforcement and are subject to varied
17 interpretations. The use of such terms as
"when feasible," "the best practical treatment
19 or control," "such technology and processes which
20 are known" and the interpretation of the word,
2i "injurious," offer escape clauses in a strict
22 enforcement program. The League of Women Voters
23 of Michigan is concerned, also, about Federal
24 acceptance of the water quality standards for
25 Michigan. We appreciate the time taken for
-------
1439
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP MICHIGAN
2 careful evaluation before Federal approval,
3 but we do hope that acceptance of Michigan
standards will be expedited. Finally, the
strict enforcement of the highest possible
water quality standards concerns the League
7 of Women Voters of Michigan. The pressures
8 for lowering of some standards have been many
9 and varied. If the four-State conference can
10 establish uniformly high water quality require-
ments in the basin, these pressures may be
12 alleviated.
13 Secondly, the League of Women Voters
of Michigan is-concerned about the lack of co-
15 ordination of agencies involved in the Lake
Michigan Basin. While the Federal Water Pol-
17 lution Control Administration actively woi*ks
for pollution abatement, there are five U. S.
Coast Guard stations in Michigan which are
20 discharging raw sewage of human origin directly
21 into Lake Michigan and two facilities of the
22 Army Corps of Engineers which are contributing
23 waste waters to Lake Michigan.
24 Besides the need for coordination
25 between agencies, it seems necessary to
-------
1440
l LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP MICHIGAN
2 coordinate water quality standards between the
3 four States in the basin. Pollution from one
4 State streams into Lake Michigan inevitably
. affects water intakes and uses in other States.
5
_ If one State sets low standards or
o
does not enforce its standards, it is difficult
g to enforce high water quality standards in
g another State. It would be logical for the
10 four States to coordinate their water quality
n standards, plans for implementation and enforce-
,0 ment procedures in any realistic attempt to
J.Z
13 abate pollution in Lake Michigan.
14 Pollution of Lake Michigan by Michigan
15 industries and municipalities does not compare
16 proportionately to pollution from other sections
17 of the basin where there is heavy industry.
lg However, the League of Women Voters of Michigan
19 is concerned about the wastes discharged in the
20 lake from Michigan plants as established by the
2i Michigan Water Resources Commission. We hope a
22 strict enforcement program with specific time-
23 tables for each municipality and industry now
24 discharging wastes into the lake or its tribu-
25 taries will be realized by the Commission.
-------
I LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF MICHIGAN
2 Filamentous algae In the St. Joseph River,
3 algae blooms In the Traverse Bay area, and
4 nuisance accumulations of algae at the mouth
5 of the Grand River are evidence of the need
6 for such a program.
7 Finally, the League of Women Voters
8 of Michigan is particularly concerned about
9 the effect of thermal pollution on Lake Michigan.
10 A nuclear power generating plant is in the
a process of being built at South Haven which
12 will use an estimated 7^3 million gallons per
13 day for cooling water to be returned to the lake.
14 A proposed plant forty miles south of South
15 Hav^n at Bridgman will be an ever larger user
16 of Lake Michigan waters for cooling. The
17 accumulated effect of these discharges into
18 a lake which has a very low rate of exchange
19 presents a disturbing problem.
20 It seems to us that here is an oppor-
21 tunity to apply preventive measures as opposed
22 to waiting for 20 years under existing standards
23 and then try to remedy a problem. The State of
24 Michigan has established a new use ordinance
25 which requires an industry to present a statement
-------
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP MICHIGAN
2 to the Michigan Water Resources Commission setting
3 forth the nature of the development which requires
* a new use or increase over the present use, the
5 amount of water to be used, its source, its point
6 of discharge, the estimated amount, and the ex-
7 pected characteristics of the water. However, the
8 language as now written seems to apply to waste
9 disposal or sewage.
10 Whether these terms will be interpreted
11 in a court case to include cooling waters is not
12 clear. It is our understanding that proposals for
13 nuclear energy plants in the other three States
l4 would also use Lake Michigan waters for cooling.
15 Given the nature of currents in the southern half ofcf
16 Lake Michigan, a giant whirlpool of very warm water
I7 at the southern tip of the lake is within the realm
18 of possibility. This is in the same area of the
19 densest population and the greatest number of Indus
20 tries now discharging wastes into the lake. The
21 prospect offers an opportunity for creative planninjg
22 on the part of the Federal and State agencies in-
23 volved. The League of Women Voters of Michigan hopjes
24 this conference grasps this opportunity rather than
25 waiting to find costly remedial measures necessary,
-------
League of Women Voters of Michigan
U612 Woodward Avenue, Room 317 Price:
Detroit, Michigan V8201 - TE 3-7133 January, 1968
LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN STUDY; MICHIGAN SECTION
Table of Contents
Page
CHARACTERISTICS 1
EXISTING PROBLEMS 6
WATER USE AND CONTROL PROGRAMS IN THIS BASIN 7
POLLUTION ABATEMENT 9
FLOOD CONTROL : 12
IRRIGATION ,1*
POWER 15
COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION l6
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 19
RECREATION, FISH, AND WILDLIFE 26
BIBLIOGRAPHY I
-------
1444
- 1 -
CHARACTERISTICS
Lake Michigan is the sixth largest fresh water lake on earth, with an area of
22,1*00 square miles and a volume of I,ll6 cubic miles. The lake surface elevation
averages about 580 feet above sea level, common with Lake Huron. It is divided into
two deep-water basins by a submerged ridge running roughly from Grand Haven to
Milwaukee. The average depth of the ridge is approximately 232 feet. The maximum
depth of the lake, 923 feet, is in the northern basin. The land drainage area is
1*5,1*60 square miles, 6h% of which is in Michigan. The lake surface accounts for
over 31$ of the total drainage area. Discharge of Lake Michigan occurs through the
broad, deep straits of Mackinac (no measurable gradient) into Lake Huron, and by
diversion through the Chicago Sanitary & Ship Canal and into the Mississippi River
system. The latter discharge is approximately 3,100 to 3,200 cubic feet a second
(cfs) and combines direct diversion and domestic pumpage. The normal outward flow
into Lake Huron has not been precisely determined. It is estimated to be between
approximately 1*0,000 and 55,000 cfs.
Lake Michigan occupies a great valley in the Paleozoic sedimentary rocks which lap
onto the southern edge of the Pre-Cambrian Canadian Shield. This valley originated
in pre-glacial times and in rock least resistant to erosion. Jack L. Hough in his
Geology of the Great Lakes (1958) suggests that the existence and orientation of
this feature exerted a strong influence on subsequent glacial ice movement which was
responsible for the final shaping of the Lake Michigan basin. The existing Great
Lakes are of comparatively recent origin, the present levels having been reached
only about 2,500 years ago.
The coastline of Lake Michigan, with the exception of Green Bay, Little Traverse
Bay and Grand Traverse Bay is quite regular. Lake Michigan is characterized by few
natural good harbors; however, the outlets of drowned estuary lakes in the mouths of
several Michigan rivers have been improved and protected to provide excellent
facilities.
Some of the Nation's finest beaches are found along the ejast coast of Lake Michigan.
The 1,058 miles of Michigan shoreline are comprised of relatively limited areas of
sedimentary rock outcrops and shingle beaches; some areas of till and clay bluff,
and many hundreds of miles of sand. Sands are either piled high in the great dunes
or low and undulating in the beach ridges. Sands that slope gradually into deeper
waters, provide an excellent swimming facility.
HYDROLOGY
Knowledge of the hydrology of Lake Michigan is essential for the solution of most
practical problems pertaining to this body of water. The United States Lake Survey
has recorded water levels for over 100 years, and has made detailed surveys of the
bottom topography. The Great Lakes Research Institute began a continuing program
of fundamental investigations in 195^-
Lake Currents
Surface currents are produced mainly by wind action and differences in barometric
pressure over different parts of the lake. Brief windstorms may create surface
waves which cause strong local currents of short duration. Strong winds of longer
duration will produce a transfer of water toward the leeward shore and a temporary
circulation which is affected by the shape and topography of the lake basin. Such
water movements are of a temporary nature. In addition, there appears to be patterns
of permanent, or at least seasonal, circulation involving a slow drift of the water.
-------
1445'
- 2 -
There is a southward drift along the western side of the lake which continues around
the south end and turns northward on the eastern side, where it becomes more pro-
nounced. Around the Beaver Island group in the north and in the major southern
basin there are counter-clock-wise swirls. Between these swirls the surface water
tends to move eastward along lines which are curved with their convex sides to the
south.
The prevailing westerly winds, coupled with the flow toward the outlet, are con-
sidered the cause of the above flow patterns. Some authorities dispute the counter-
clock-wise swirls described above. Northeasterly winds can alter normal flow
patterns. At times the flow through the Straits of Mackinac is temporarily reversed.
Lake Levels
The principal natural factors which affect the longer-period fluctuations of the
level of Lake Michigan are precipitation and evaporation. Precipitation falling
directly on the lake surface raises the surface immediately. Precipitation falling
on the land surface of the drainage area has a delayed and variable effect. Average
annual precipitation varies from about 28 inches on the northern part of the lake to
about 32 inches on the southern part. Evaporation from the lake surface has been
estimated as being approximately equal to precipitation upon it.
The levels of Lakes Michigan and Huron for 105 years (1860-1965) have ranged between
583.68 feet (1886) and 577.09 feet (1964), a range of 6.59 feet. The highest modern
level occurred in 1952, 582.69 feet. The levels of Lakes Michigan and Huron is
affected by the diversion at Chicago of 3,100 cfs (withdrawal) and the diversion into
Lake Superior of 5,000 cfs via the Long Lake and Ogoli projects. The net effect of
both diversions is to raise the levels of Lakes Michigan and Huron about O.lU foot
above what it would be without withdrawals and additions.
Levels follow a seasonal pattern with highs generally occurring in summer and lows
in winter or early spring. Within a year, variations average about 1.1 feet.
Water Quality
The chemical and biological characteristics of Lake Michigan waters are not uniform.
They vary from north to south and from the deep central part of the lake to the
shallow shore zones.
The natural waters of Lake Michigan are moderate in hardness, and very low in
turbidity and chlorides. The over-all chemical quality shows little change from
year to year. Tributary runoff influences the quality of the onshore lake waters in
the vicinity of the tributary outlets increasing in some instances the coliform
counts at other points of water use.
Tributary Streams in Michigan
Pine River; Boardman River; Manistee River; Pere Marquette River; Pentwater River;
White River; Muskegon River; Grand River; Black River, Holland; Kalamazoo River;
Black River, South Haven; St. Joseph River; Menominee River; and Manistique River.
Aquatic Life
The bottom sediments of Lake Michigan along the shoreline of Michigan are of two
major types; cobbles and boulders or sand. In addition, these two types may be
mixed with or overlain by organic and inorganic solids carried to the lake by the
rivers. In the rocky areas the predominant organisms are longnosed dace, sculpins,
-------
_ 3 -
crayfish, stoneflies, mayflies, caddisflies, midges, and scuds. In the
areas of clean, sand bottom the most commonly found organisms are scuds, aquatic
worms, midges, and fingernail clams. In the area affected by the deposition of
organic sediments carried in by rivers the predominant organisms may be the tolerant
aquatic earthworms. Water quality along our Michigan shoreline is very good and
exceeds that necessary to guarantee the growth and propagation of the aquatic life
found in these areas. Green filamentous algae grow in the rivers draining into Lake
Michigan. In certain areas of the lake further growth takes place in Lake Michigan
itself.
POPULATION
There were more than 2,500,000 people in the Michigan portion of the Lake Michigan
basin in I960. The population varied from the densely settled metropolitan areas
of Grand Rapids and Lansing to the virtually uninhabited State and Federal forest in
the Upper Peninsula. The area can be divided into the three traditional zones of
Michigan: the relatively densely settled and intensely developed southern Lower
Peninsula had 26% of the land area and 83% of the 1960 population, while the
moderately populated northern Lower Peninsula had 21% of the land and 11$ of the
population, and the sparsely settled Upper Peninsula had 11% of the land and only
6% of the I960 population. The I960 population densities were below IT people per
square mile for the Upper Peninsula, nearly .27 people per square mile for the
northern Lower Peninsula, and over 150 people per square mile for the southern
Lower Peninsula. Based upon past history, the population will be approximately
2,800,000 in this area in 1980, with the bulk of this increase in the southern
Lower Peninsula.
ECONOMY
The Lake Michigan Basin of Michigan is divided into three areas as given below:
Western Michigan Lake Shoreline
I960 Population 976,000 change 1950-1960 2k%
Land Area 6,662 square miles
The early economy was largely timber oriented. As the great timber resources were
cut, the logs were floated to the sawmills, located at the mouth of all principal
rivers. Around these mills, and the docking facilities required to transport the
sawn timber, there developed many of the cities of western Michigan...Muskegon,
Grand Haven, Manistee, Ludington, Traverse City. With the end of the timber harvest,
the sawmill towns were able to convert their economies to a general manufacturing
and wholesale and retail trade base. This transition was made possible in a large
measure by the existing lake port transportation facilities. There are two metro-
politan areas in the area, Grand Rapids and Muskegon. Grand Rapids made a rather
natural transition in its economy, from sawmills to furniture to a modern industrial
city, manufacturing a wide range of fabricated metal products, automobile parts,
machinery, etc. Muskegon, once one of the world's leading producers of lumber, has
become a manufacturing center of engines, automobile parts, foundry products, etc.
The smaller cities of the area are also manufacturing oriented. Food processing,
canning and marketing are a significant segment of the economy. Western Michigan
is one of the nation's leading fruit and vegetable growing regions. This is made
possible by the climatic influence of Lake Michigan. Apples, cherries, peaches and
pears are the leading tree fruits. Truck farming and small fruit producing are
also major agricultural enterprises. The entire west coast of Michigan is used
intensively for recreation. Tourism and summer residences furnish a substantial
income to non-agricultural workers in rural areas.
-------
Uppe- Peninsula - Eastern Area
I960 Population 128,521 change 1950-1960 3.6%
Land area 7,832 square miles
The general unsuitability of much of the area to agriculture (both climate and soils),
the lack of mineral wealth, and its remoteness to population centers are reflected
by the sparse population of the eastern Upper Peninsula. Nearly a third of the
population is centered in the cities of Escanaba, Menominee and Sault Ste. Marie.
All three are important ports on the Great Lakes. The past economy of the area was
natural resource oriented (timber, fish, recreation). The current economy is based
on wood-using industries (pulp, paper, wood products), light manufacturing and
recreational facilities, resorts and summer homes. Although farming has declined
in general, that remaining is more efficient and more profitable.
Lower Peninsula - Northwestern Area
I960 Population 11*1,019 change 1950-1960, 2.6%
Land area 6,1^*7 square miles
The economic history of this area was once timber, the northern Lower Peninsula of
Michigan together with areas in other states bordering the Great Lakes was the site
of the world's greatest white and red pine forest. This vast region was logged off
in the last four decades of the 19th Century. During the logging, and for a con-
siderable period afterwords, the most extensive forest fires in this Nation's history
ravaged these pine lands, often burning over the same area several times. Not only
were the few remaining trees destroyed, but of even more significance was the
destruction of the soil. The meager humus and organic matter on the northern sandy
soils were consumed. For over a generation the burned lands remained bare and stark.
Gradually the burns were re-forested, but not with the original species. The great
pine stands were replaced by aspen, oak, pin cherry and jack pine. So great an
amount of land was re-forested by these rapid growing hearty species that they be-
came a valuable resource. Once again wood products utilization is an important
aspect of the economy. The great wooded stretches are gaining in economic impor-
tance with recent development of an expanding wood using industry (particle board,
pulp and paper). Farming is an important part of the economy, providing employment
for nearly one-third of the population. The trade, services, construction and
employment by the recreation industry is increasing yearly.
Agriculture
Of the kQ counties which lie wholly or partially in the Lake Michigan basin, all
of which have Soil Conservation Districts formed, dairying is the most important
type of agricultural activity in 25 of them. Field crop production is the most
important in 13 of the counties, fruit production in eight of the counties and
poultry production and livestock production in one of the counties each.
Agricultural Irrigation
The use of Lake Michigan waters for agricultural irrigation is of little signifi-
cance in the total water use picture. Less than UOO acres are presently known to
depend upon Lake Michigan as a source of irrigation water. The greatest amount of
this irrigated acreage, approximately 300 acres, is located in Leelanau and Grand
Traverse Counties.
-------
— 5 —
Land Use
The land use of the Lake Michigan basin ranges from the intensive use of the metro-
politan areas of the southern Lower Peninsula to the extensive use of the forests
in the northern Lower Peninsula and the Upper Peninsula. The dominant land use in
the southern Lower Peninsula is farmland, with over Q0% of some counties devoted to
agricultural use. The percentage of forest land, ranges from below 9% in Clinton
County in the southern Lower Peninsula to over 9Q% in Roscommon County in the north-
ern Lower Peninsula and in several counties in the Upper Peninsula. The value and
use of the land is reflected in the fact that the percentage of publicly-owned land
ranges from a 1 ow of 0.01$ for Van Buren County in the southern Lower Peninsula
to a high of nearly 6l% for Schoolcraft County in the Upper Peninsula.
(All data in this report and whatever maps accompany it are used with the permission
of the Water Resources Commission, Michigan Department of Conservation.)
-------
. 6 -
EXISTING PROBLEMS
BEACH EROSION
Certain waters along the shoreline of Lake Michigan show the effects of man's
activities in the use of the land and the water resources. Conditions of these
waters reflect soil erosion, land runoff, municipal and industrial waste, water
effluents and tributary flows.
The coastline of Lake Michigan has severe problems of beach erosion. Damage occurs
primarily during periods of high lake levels, as was experienced during the early
1950's. Wave action on clay and sandy bluffs causes slides which not only damage
lakefront property on the bluff, but come to rest in the lake to reduce its recrea-
tional value.
BIOLOGICAL PROBLEMS
Algae and slimes are produced in significant amounts in the lower 1 1/2 miles of
the Boardman River which discharges into the west arm of Grand Traverse Bay. These
growths slough and are carried in suspension to the bay where they accumulate off
the river mouth and may be deposited along adjacent beaches, depending on wind and
current conditions. Higher aquatic plants and filamentous algae are produced on
the shallow shelf of the southeast corner of the bay. The Michigan Water Resources
Commission is of the opinion that the waters of the Boardman River, enriched by the
discharge of municipal waste water treatment plant and several cherry processors,
cause the development of these growths. Plans are now being prepared to improve
the water quality problems of this area.
The effects of wastes from groundwood and paper mill on benthic fauna in the Little
Bay de Noc area was studied in 1963. Some areas had a woody, paper odor. Some
areas produced gas, had a noticeable surface fibre layer, and a sour odor of de-
composing wood.
Approximately 60 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline from South Haven to Pentwater had
noticeable accumulations of cladophor during August, 1966. In a 30-mile area around
Muskegon, park managers received complaints that algae stained bathing suits and
conditions were unsuitable for swimming. The Grand River, Muskegon River, and White
River dishcarge into this section of Lake Michigan and the Water Resources Commission
relates this to agricultural and urban areas of midwestern Michigan.
ALEWIVES
Alewives have become a major problem on the beaches of Lake Michigan. Mortality
of alewives is high enough to cause windrows of dead carcases on the beaches which
create an odor nuisance, are of concern to the Department of Public Health, and
greatly affected the resort area in the summer of 196?.
COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION
The number of incidents of oil pollution from commercial navigation vessels has in-
creased in recent years. These incidents correspond to the increasing use of oil
as a fuel. An attendant problem is the indiscriminate overboard disposal of garbage
and trash.
-------
. 7 -
THE WATER USE AND CONTROL PROGRAMS IN THIS BASIH
WATER SUPPLY
Principal sources of local water supplies (covering municipalities of 10,000
population or more in State of Michigan within the drainage basin of Lake Michigan)
include:
23 municipalities (I960 population of 650,000) using Lake Michigan as raw water
supply withdrawing over 90 million gallons a day in 1966.
Of these 23 municipalities the following are over 10,000:
St. Joseph Muskegon
Benton Harbor Ludington
Holland Traverse City
Wyoming Escanaba
Grand Rapids Menominee
Muskegon Heights Grand Haven
In six locations water is withdrawn directly from Lake Michigan for power generation.
In addition the following cities over 10,000 are within the Lake Michigan drainage
basin:
Battle Creek Lansing - wells
Kalamazoo East Lansing - wells
Jackson - wells Cadillac
Principal Sources of Water Supply in Basin:
In the Upper Peninsula many small lakes and seven rivers drain southward into Lake
Michigan.
In the Lower Peninsula roughly one-half of the state divided by a north-south line
nearly in the center of the state comprises the basin which drains into Lake
Michigan. There are hundreds of lakes in this basin, ranging from small ponds to
Houghton Lake, which is 16 miles long and 7 miles wide and is the source of the
longest river in the Lower Peninsula, the Muskegon. The next longest river is the
Grand, and there are seven other rivers which empty into Lake Michigan from the
Indiana border to the Straits of Mackinac.
In addition there are so many artificial lakes, ponds, and reservoirs that some
experts believe the artificial surface water may soon be competitive with the
natural surface water. In the early development of Michigan several hundred sites
were found on streams for the production of electricity. Most of these plants have
been abandoned, but the dammed up waters still serve recreational purposes. Around
'a hundred reservoirs are still marked on the map in this Lake Michigan basin, and
there are six municipal and industrial water supply reservoirs.
Water supply for present population & industry:
The supply is sufficient in most areas most 6f the year, though in times of drought
municipalities have found it necessary to restrict the use of municipal water supply
for lawn sprinkling, car washing, etc. There is a tendency for cities to shift
from ground to surface water as this is a source of more unlimited supply.
-------
. 8 -
Ground water is being depleted faster than it is being replenished:
This is most evident in some areas of high population density. The ground water
level is being lowered each year. In the East Lansing-Lansing area, for example,
the Red Cedar River has become almost an intermittent stream.
Anticipated demands will intensify the problem as population is estimated to in-
crease by 550,000 in this portion of Michigan by 1970 and industry will increase
proportionately. Electric generating plants, .in particular the nuclear variety,
will be demanding increased supplies of cooling water.
Plans for expansion of water supply systems include a feasibility study now being
made of a proposed 215 mile pipeline from Grand Haven on Lake Michigan through
Jackson, Battle Creek, Kalamazoo, Lansing, and South Haven.
Agencies
State agencies having a responsibility in connection with water supplies in the
Lake Michigan basin include:
Department of Public Works
Department of Commerce
Water Resources Commission
Department of Health
Other
Federal agencies include:
U. S. Geological Survey
Army Corps of Engineers
Soil Conservation Service
Public Health Service
Other
As an example, the following federal and state agencies were involved in the
Grand River Basin Study:
Federal State of Michigan
Department of Agriculture Department of Agriculture
" " Commerce " " Conservation (Geological
" " Health, Education & Welfare Survey)
" " Interior " " Economic Expansion
Federal Power Commission " " Health
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers " " Highways
Soil Conservation Commission
Waterways Commission
Water Resources Commission
(Department of Conservation)
Office of Attorney General
-------
- 9 - 1452
POLLUTION ABATEMENT
The Michigan Water Resources Commission states that the overall chemical quality of
Lake Michigan shows little change from year to year but that the tributary runoff
influences the quality of the on shore lake waters in some instances increasing the
coliform count at other points of water use. But, at the organizational meeting of
this group, William Kerr of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
(F.W.P.C.A.) warned that Lake Michigan was accumulating 3A parts per million of
persistent chemical salts per year. Pollution determination seems to depend on a
definition of what constitutes pollution. According to chemist Robert Rainey of
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the natural flow of water through Lake Michigan is
so slight that it would take 100 years to purify 90% of its polluting wastes if
pollution were to cease tomorrow.
The pollutants which cause a lake to age are the phosphates and nitrates in munici-
pal waste water even after it has had secondary treatment. Many industries in
Michigan are also phosphate and nitrate-producing such as pulp and paper industries
located in Kalamazoo, Muskegon, Escanaba, as well as other areas: the fruit-
canning industries, notably in Traverse City; the tanneries, an example of which
may be found in Grand Haven; and other types of industries. Also contributing to
organic wastes are the large and small craft, many of which contain no facilities
for sanitary disposal of sewage and garbage. Large quantities of oil often reach
Lake Michigan, directly or indirectly from ships, industries, or gas stations which
may dispose of oil by emptying it into storm sewers.
Some tributary rivers of Michigan that empty into Lake Michigan pollute the on
shore waters of the lake. H. C. Grounds, Chief of Engineering of the F.W.P.C.A.,
lists the Grand, Menominee, St. Joseph, and the Kalamazoo Rivers as badly polluted.
The Michigan Water Resources Commission monitors the water quality of 11 tributary
rivers at 12 monitoring stations as they flow into Lake Michigan. Using coliform
count , biochemical oxygen demand, and chemical oxygen demand compared with dissolved
oxygen present as criteria from these records; it appears that ten of these .tri-
butaries are polluted but the severity of the pollution varies. Muskegon and
Manistee Lakes are flushed into Lake Michigan by powerful rivers. These lakes are
polluted by organic wastes, salts, oilslicks and garbage from ferrying operations.
The Boardman River is polluted in the Traverse City area from municipal and in-
dustrial wastes. The Pere Marquette River is polluted in the Ludington area by
sewage and industrial wastes. The White River is polluted in the Whitehall and
Montague primarily by industrial wastes. The four rivers listed as badly polluted
carry the treated wastes of cities and the untreated wastes of villages, s ilt,
organic and inorganic wastes from industry, fertilizer, and pesticides.
The Pere Marquette is a trout stream, but it is polluted in the Ludington area where
the city pours about ten tons of solid sewage into Pere Marquette Lake each month
from its outmoded sewage plant built in 1936. Storm and sanitary sewers are com-
bined which creates an overflow in the sewage plant during storm water conditions.
There is also a chemical company located near Ludington which is filling a marsh
near the mouth of the river with wastes. Brine is pumped by pipeline 5,000 feet
down into the depths of Lake Michigan where it is there to stay. The Water
Resources Commission allows the company to dispose of its wastes in this manner.
Dredging operations carried out by the United States Army Corps of Engineers are
a source of pollution. At the present time, the dredgings are carried out of river
channels and estuaries and dumped into Lake'Michigan. The Corps has agreed to
remedy this situation within three years.
-------
- 10 -
The Pine, Au Sable, Platte, and Betsy Rivers are desirable trout streams, but they
are sometimes polluted by septic tank seepage or other sanitary arrangements of the
cottages which border these streams.
At one time all of the rivers in Michigan were trout streams. With the anadromous
fish program now being carried on by the Fish Division of the Michigan Department
of Conservation, all of the streams again have the potential for unlimited recrea-
tional opportunities, if pollution can be abated.
Some rivers in Michigan have been developed for trout fishing and therefore, are
reasonably clean in most areas. Management projects to prevent silting financed by
the Dingell-Johnson fund which is supported by a 10% federal tax on fishing tackle,
are carried out on the White River, the Big Manistee, the Little Manistee, the
Platte, and the Pine Rivers. Stabilizing stream banks with stumps, rocks, or seed-
ing aids in the high quality of trout stream waters.
The Black River has improved in recent years due to the work of the Water Resources
Commission to the extent that fish may again be caught. The water quality standards
for the St. Joseph River, set by the Water Resources Commission, have been the sub-
ject for much disapproval and debate by the Michigan United Conservation Clubs.
M.U.C.C. contends that the standards are not high enough for the support of fish
life.
Two lakes which are continually flushed out into Lake Michigan by powerful streams
are Muskegon Lake and Manistee Lake. These lakes are lined with industries which
empty their wastes, both liquids and solids into the receiving waters which empty
directly into Lake Michigan. Fish may be caught in both of these lakes which are
flushed and aerated by rivers, but which, nevertheless, carry a heavy load of
pollution. One company located on the southern bank of Muskegon Lake has been
ordered by the Water Resources Commission to reduce its waste load, but so far, it
has not.
Other major sources of pollution in Manistee and Muskegon Lakes .are oil slicks and
garbage dumped from ferrying operations as well as manufacturing, chemical works,
and inadequately treated sewage. Manistee Lake was the site of a steelhead fish
kill in 1950 due to salts and organic wastes. The fish have since been restored,
but the situation is still not aesthetically pleasing.
SANITARY DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
All Michigan cities with a population of 5,000 or over operate sewage treatment
plants or maintain contractual arrangements for treatment with other municipalities.
However, the cities of Lansing and Jackson are the only two cities with up-to-date
treatment. As of July 1, 1967, the Michigan State Department of Public Health re-
quired that all sewage effluent be chlorinated 12 months of the year instead of only
the warm weather months. The Water Resources Commission will require upgrading of
all treatment facilities +~ ^eet water quality standards no later than June 1, 1972.
Three municipalities and ten industries use the waters of Lake Michigan directly
for waste assimilation. Eight cities use Lake Michigan waters to wash intake fil-
ters and return the water to the lake without treatment. Of the municipalities,
Gladstone (estimated population 5,^00) uses primary treatment, Harbor Springs
(estimated population 1,^33) uses fine screen treatment, and Petoskey (estimated
population 6,^00) uses chemical precipitation. Of the ten industries emptying into
Lake Michigan, the Water Resources Commission has rated six A (control adequate);
one B (control provided—adequacy not established); one, E (control inadequate); and
one Esp (control inadequate, plans being prepared and studies underway).
-------
- ii - 1*154
INDUSTRIAL WASTE
The Michigan Water Resources Commission lists 621 industries and commercial esta-
blishments on its "Industrial and Commercial Pollution Status List as of April 1,
1967;" 3UU of these are in the Lake Michigan drainage basin. The Commission issued
195 orders to restrict waste discharges of these plants or businesses; 151 were
given A ratings, 88 had B ratings, 9 were given C ratings (no control—need not
established); kk had D ratings (control provided—protection unreliable); and 52 had
E ratings. Included in these ratings it is noted that in 55 cases studies are
underway, plans are being prepared, or construction is underway to control pollution
problems. It is the Commission's intent that identified industrial waste problems
be abated no later than June 1, 1970.
LARGE AND SMALL CRAFT
The number of incidents of oil pollution from vessels engaged in commercial navigation
has increased in recent years. These incidents have ranged from a sinking of an oil
barge on the Lake Michigan coast with the massive fouling of stretches of beaches
for over 200 miles to the nearly continuous summertime complaints of swimmers
smeared by heavy fuel oils. Increasing numbers of boats, both commercial and pri-
vate, using Lake Michigan intensify the problems of raw sewage, garbage, and trash
that come from these boats.
There are eight federal installations discharging raw sewage of human origin into
the waters of Lake Michigan. The authority for controlling this lies with the
Federal Water Control Administration.
APPROPRIATIONS
According to Norman Billings of the Water Resources Commission the federal money
available to Michigan this year is $7 million. An additional $2 million is available
from the State of Michigan. Under the existing formula for priorities, Detroit
alone could use all of these funds. Legislation to amend the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act to allow a program of research and demonstration for control of pollu-
tion is lakes was recently introduced by Congressman Guy VanderJagt. This legisla-
tion envisions an appropriation of $5 million for fiscal 1969. The Secretary of the
Interior is authorized to enter into contracts with, or make grants to, public or
private agencies or organizations or individuals for the conduct of research and
demonstrations for the purpose of developing effective and practicable remedial
measures; including without limitation, measures for the prevention of nutrient
entry and the removal of existing nutrients and vegetation to improve the quality
of the waters of the lakes of the United States. This bill is being referred to
the House Public Works Committee.
The Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Program makes direct payment for the
installation of good soil and water practices of privately owned land. The Conser-
vation Reserve makes a yearly cash payment to farmers for keeping cropland under
permanent cover. This is noticeable in reforestration for shade and erosion control.
The Michigan Water Resources Commission, under the present Water Pollution Control
Act (Act 2^5, Public Acts of 1929, as amended) has the authority to protect and
conserve the water resources of the state and the Great Lakes. The Michigan Depart-
ment of Public Health is involved in the control of water pollution in the State of
Michigan. The Water Resources Commission and the Health Department maintain regular
surveillance programs to provide information for the evaluation of water quality.
Federal agencies involved are the Department of Interior, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, and the U. S. Army Corp of Engineers.
-------
- 12 -
FLOOD CONTROL
Heavy spring rains falling over frozen or saturated ground with inadequate channel
capacity have caused floods in the larger tributaries of the major streams in the
Lake Michigan Basin: Grand, Muskegon, Kalamazoo, St. Joseph, Manistee, and
Sturgeon Rivers. These floods have caused heavy damages to farms, businesses, and
industries as well as to individual home owners.
Steps to control these floods have been taken in several ways. As of January, 1967,
Watershed Protection Flood Prevention projects under PL 566 in the Lake
Basin were: ^'
Approved for construction:
East Branch of Sturgeon River, Dickinson County
Little River, Menominee County
Black Creek, Mason County
Catlin Waters , Clinton County
Fowlerville , Livingston County
Completed Projects:
Muskrat Creek, Clinton County
Approved for Planning:
North Branch of Chippewa River, Clinton and Shiawasee Counties
Black Creek, Ottawa and Allegan Counties
Lower Maple , Clinton and Gratiot County
Approved for Application:
Buck Creek, Kent County
Durham Creek, Mason County
Application Submitted:
Battle Creek in Eaton and Calhoun County
Libhard Creek, Ionia County
Application Disapproved:
Ox Creek, Berrien County
Watershed Reviews :
Galien River, Berrien County
Paw Paw River , Berrien and Van Buren Counties
Nottowa River , Calhoun County
Portage River, Ingham and Jackson County
Carrs Creek, Mason County
W. Branch of Clam River, Osceola and Missaukee Counties
Aetna Township, Missaukee County
Bark River, Delta County
Corps of Engineers flood projects include :
Underway: - Battle Creek, Kalamazoo
Not Started: - Grand at Lansing
Kalamazoo River at Kalamazoo
Grand at Grandville
(l) From Watershed Progress in Michigan
(2) From Water Resources Development in Michigan (map)
Authorized Federal Projects, Flood Control
Underway - Battle Creek, Kalamazoo
Not Started - Grand at Lansing, Kalamazoo River at Kalamazoo, Grand at
Grandville
-------
- 13 -
1456
At present there is no flood plain zoning although there are two flood plain infor-
mation studies underway being conducted by the Corps of Engineers - one concerning
the Grand River and the other at Red Cedar River at Lansing.(3)
Local interests are asked to contribute to local flood protection projects in vary-
ing ways. Under PL 566, flood prevention construction costs and engineering costs
are covered by federal funds. In projects under the Corps of Engineers, the local
protection works are turned over to non-federal authorities for maintenance, as are
small resevoirs vith only localized effect.
The frequency of floods varies greatly from river basin to river basin and year to
year. In PL 566 areas (e.g. Muskrat Creek) the average is estimated to be two every
five years. Flood plain zoning is considered to be practicable in the Basin.
Officials of the Michigan Soil Conservation Service state that such zoning is
"practicable in most watersheds, especially in watersheds where cities or urban
development is taking place. In rural areas, zoning is practicable, whereby the
flood plain is zoned to such use that flood damages are reduced to a minimum."^)
The Soil Conservation Service has not yet made any estimates of the overall cost of
flood control measures.
Present flood control plans provide for the creation of upstream river storage
reservoirs under PL 566 whenever adequate storage sites are available and a need
for storage is required. This type of action is also possible under Michigan Law,
State Act 253 of 1961* (Local River Management Act) and under the Corps of Engineers
projects. It is required that all structure sites and reservoirs must be economi-
cally justifiable and feasible before work of any type begins.(5)
Listed below are the flood control functions of involved agencies:
Army Corps of Engineers: This agency develops comprehensive plans for the water and
land-related resources of the region and identifies the programs and projects that
will best meet the needs for flood control.'"' The objectives of flood control
works is to regulate flood flows and thus prevent flood damage, accomplished with
reservoirs, local protection works, or combinations of both. Local protection is
provided by channel enlargement, removing obstructions, constructing levees and
walls, providing channel paving, and stabilizing banks with stone or combinations
of these methods.
Department of Conservation: Act IT, 1921, Section 3, declares "the duty of the Con-
servation department to protect and conserve the natural resources of the state of
Michigan."^
Michigan Water Resources Commission: A division of the Department of Conservation,
this Commission is charged with the protection and conservation of the water re-
sources of the state and is the state agency to cooperate and negotiate with other
governments and agencies in matters concerning the water resources of the state.'"'
Soil Conservation District: A department within the Department of Agriculture, the
District works for the conservation of the soil and soil resources of the state and
for the control and prevention of soil erosion and control floods. The State Soil
Conservation Committee created under Act 297 administers watershed planning funds
appropriated by the state legislature and accepts and approves or disapproves water-
shed applications (under PL 566) for the governor.^"'
(3) Ibid.Flood Plain Information Studies. Underway -Grand River, Red Cedar River
at Lansing.
(U) Letter from Verne Bathurst, State Conservationist, Soil Conservation Service.
(5) Ibid.
(6) Ibid.
(7) Michigan Laws Relating to Water, p. 299
(8) Ibid. p. 311
(9) Ibid. p. 287
-------
- lU -
1457
IRRIGATION
In the past the use of Lake Michigan waters for agricultural irrigation has been of
little significance to the total water use picture. Less than 1*00 acres were known
to depend on Lake Michigan as a source for irrigation water. The greatest amount
of this irrigated acreage, approximately 300 acres, is located in Leelanau and
Grand Traverse Counties and is privately operated and financed. ^D
The Great Lakes Irrigation Bill passed in 196? (Senate Bill 222) permits supple-
mentary irrigation utilizing Great Lakes waters and will probably see greater acreage
involved in irrigation projects. Initial steps in forming an association under the
new law for this purpose are being undertaken in Grand Traverse County.
According to the Census of Agriculture there are approximately 32,200 acres under
irrigation. However, they are presently all privately constructed irrigation
facilities, and obtain the majority of their water from wells and streams.'2^
At present there are irrigation projects authorized but not yet constructed in the
basin of the East Branch of the Sturgeon River, Dickinson County. Reasons for the
proposed project, other than the land and food needs of the population, are in-
volved. It is a multiple-purpose project which would provide flood control,
recreation and irrigation, primarily for Russet Burbank potatoes. The plans for
sharing the costs are as follows: PL 566 will provide all technical engineering
service and 50/5 of the construction costs. Other than PL 566 funds will provide the
other 50$ of the construction costs, and all land, easement and rights-of-way and
administration of contract costs. Without government subsidies, the project would
probably not be built.
The repayment period for the project is not yet determined. The sponsors are
eligible for loans up to 50 years at federal long-term borrowing rates through FHA.
All of the costs allocated to irrigation are to be repaid by the users of the water.
None of the revenues from power are assigned for repayment beyond the water users'
ability to pay. No portion of the revenues from furnishing water for municipal
water supply or miscellaneous purposes will be assigned for repayment beyond the
water users' ability to pay.
The acreage limitation of 695 acres for the project will be enforced.
The law clarifies the ownership of water and water rights. However, Michigan laws
have been updated in recent years to provide ways of obtaining the most efficient
use of these water resources. Act 297, Sec. 282.8 provides for obtaining the
consent of the owner.
Generally, in a PL 566 project the following federal, state, and local agencies are
concerned:
Federal: Soil Conservation Service, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service,
Farmers Home Administration, Corps of Engineers, Agricultural Stabiliza-
tion & Conservation Service.
State: State Soil Conservation Committee, Water Resources Commission, Department
of Conservation, Highway Department.
Local: Local sponsors, Soil Conservation Districts, County Highway Department,
Water Users' Associations, Drainage Districts.
(1) Michigan Water Resources Commission, Water Resource Uses...for Lake Michigan,
p. U6.
(2) Communication from Verne Bathurst, State Conservationist of Soil Conservation
Service, p. 5.
-------
1458"
- 15 -
POWER
For the purpose of analyzing power needs for the state, the Michigan Public Service
Commission has divided the state into three zones—Upper Peninsula, Lover Peninsula,
and Southwestern Michigan. We were unable to locate useful information relating
to the Upper Peninsula, although it is understood that several small hydro instal-
lations are in operation there. Most of the power needs of Southwestern Michigan
are supplied through transmission lines owned by the American Electric Power Company
running through northern Indiana.
Until November 27, 196? when Consumers Power Company announced plans for a huge
hydro-electric plant to be built on the bluffs above Lake Michigan at Ludington, it
was thought that hydro-electric installations in lower Michigan were of lesser im-
portance in supplying power needs than coal-fired or nuclear steam generation systems.
In fact, according to information received from Consumers Power Company, l6 hydro-
electric plants supply only about h% of the system's needs, although in 1912 Con-
sumers operated 33 hydro plants which generated the bulk of the area's requirements.
Of these l6 plants, 10 are in the Lake Michigan Basin. There are two at Sabin and
Boardman in the Traverse City area; one at Hodenpyl on the Manistee River and at
Tippy on the Pine River. Three hydro plants are located on the Pine River in Newaygo
and Mecosta counties and two more serve the Grand Rapids area with a third plant
situated on the Looking Glass River near Webber. Many of these plants are located
on river lands adjacent to forest sites, and Consumers claim to have set aside land
for recreational use and to have inaugurated tree planting programs.
Eventually three nuclear generating stations will be located on Lake Michigan's
shoreline in Michigan. One at Big Rock Point, north Of Charlevoix, is already in
operation; another at Palisades, just south of South Haven, is under construction;
and the third one is proposed by American Electric Power Company in the Bridgman
area at a cost of $300 million dollars. While these plants do not use water power
in the conventional sense, the lake water is utilized in cooling the reactor. It
is estimated that 7^2 million gallons per day will be withdrawn by the Palisades
plant for cooling before being returned to Lake Michigan. Estimates for the
Bridgman plant are not available at this time. The quality of the water will not
be changed except for its temperature. Under a new water quality standard, a new
use statement must be filed for these plants with the Michigan Water Resources
Commission. If the Commission determines it is necessary, cooling towers may be
required of nuclear energy plants to insure the maintenance of lake temperatures
not to exceed 15 degrees above ambient temperatures.
The proposed hydro-electric plant at Ludington, when completed in 1973, will have
an electrical capacity of 1,872,000 kilowatts. A pumped storage plant on a 1,800
acre site four miles south of Ludington on the shore of Lake Michigan will be built.
The project will include an upper reservoir with a circumference of about six miles,
an average depth of about 120 feet and a capacity of about 27 billion gallons of
water; six reversible-pump turbine generator units; steel pipes, 1,100 feet long,
carrying water from the upper reservoir to the generators. The reservoir will be
constructed on a bluff about 300 feet above lake level. During periods of slow
electrical demand, the generators will pump water out of Lake Michigan into the
reservoir at a rate of several million gallons a minute. When demand for electri-
cal power is high, the water will flow out of the reservoir at a rate of 33
million gallons a minute. The company does not expect any effect on the level of
Lake Michigan.
-------
- l6 - 14.59
COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION
Commercial navigation is of great significance to the past, present and the future
economy of the Great Lakes region. In the past, settlement patterns and the loca-
tions of cities and industrial complexes were either determined by proximity to
lake commerce or strongly influenced by it. Much of today's commercial and in-
dustrial activity of the Great Lakes region is geared to lake shipments. The
potential of the St. Lawrence Seaway is being fulfilled and promises to provide
even closer links between the Great Lakes and world markets. With each passing
season there are increases in direct foreign shipments, both to and from lake ports.
Although there were few adequate natural harbors on Lake Michigan, improvement of
navigation facilities paralleled that of the development of the commercial capabi-
lities. In early times, only canoes, Mackinaw boats and other small sailing vessels
used the harbors provided by western Michigan border lakes (Muskegon, White, Pere
Marquette, etc.) and these were not greatly hindered by the always present sand bars
which partially blocked the entrances of these lakes. But as commerce increased
and larger vessels began using Lake Michigan and the developing ports, navigation
improvements became a necessity. At first, local citizens assumed the responsibility
for these improvements. Sand bars were cut through and lined with cribs or wood
piles. This was followed shortly thereafter by the first breakwaters—timber cribs,
sunk to the lake bottom, filled with rocks and timber-decked. Some of these early
efforts remain as a part of the substructure of the existing breakwaters. At South
Haven (1868), Holland (i860), and Grand Haven (1857) these early structures have
passed or are near the century mark.
As the costs and engineering capabilities exceeded the abilities of local citizens,
at the direction of the Congress, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers assumed
responsibility for harbor and channel improvements. A federal assistance project
was authorized for Holland as early as 1852. To date 22 federal projects have been
authorized in Michigan on Lake Michigan. Expenditures for these projects have been
substantial—over $^,000,000. These costs have been incurred from new work (over
$13,000,000), maintenance ($2U,ltU7,000) and rehabilitation ($6,575,^7). The
relatively high figure for maint enance results from annual dredging required at many
of the harbors. Littoral movement of shore sediments is a process which is con-
tinually filling artificially deepened harbor entrances.
Current freight movements on Lake Michigan are based on intra-state, interstate
and international commerce. In 19&1*, 22,1*22,595 tons of freight were moved at
Michigan ports on Lake Michigan.
Total tonnage ranged from highs of 7,707,9^0 at Escanaba; 3,90^,089 at Ludington;
3,3^9,682 at Muskegon; 2,598,375 at Grand Haven to lows of 130 tons from North
Manitou Island to no commerce reported at the ports of Pentwater, Saugatuck and
Cedar Rivers; all considered commercial harbor facilities.
An important segment of this movement is by railroad car ferry. Since Lake Michigan
provides a geographical interruption to cross-continental rail routes, the ferry
service is an essential link in the rail transportation system. Three railroads
operate ferry service across Lake Michigan.
The are:
The Grand Trunk-Western, Muskegon to: Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
The Chesapeake & Ohio, Ludington to: Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
Manitowoc, Wisconsin and Kewaunee, Wisconsin.
The Ann Arbor, Frankfort to: Manitowoc, Wisconsin, Kewaunee,
Wisconsin and Menominee and Manistique, Michigan.
-------
- 17 - 1460
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HARBOR PROJECTS
The Corps of Engineers, in their annual report on Water Resources Development in
Michigan, published January 1, 1967, have listed 19 projects completed concerning
Lake Michigan navigational facilities.
Some of these are:
Grand Haven Harbor and Grand River - Currently handling an excess of 2 1/2 million
tons of commerce annually. The harbor depth is 21 feet and the width is 300 feet.
From I960 to 1964, average tonnage v&s 2,79*1,000.
The facilities of the harbor have been improved by dredging a wide, deep channel,
and constructing protective piers and revetments. A shallow-draft barge channel
goes about 15 miles up river. The river channel is 8 feet deep and 100 feet wide.
Total costs to June 30, 1966 were $7,632,481*; of which $972,l40 was for new work;
$5,846,731 was for maintenance, and $8l3,6l3 was for rehabilitation.
Ludington Harbor - The project dates back to 1867, consists of a deep channel, 18
feet deep by 100 feet wide, with outer breakwaters, inner piers and revetments.
Total commerce for a five-year period, I960 to 1964, averaged $3,904,000 tons.
Total costs for the existing project to June 30, 1966, were $4,802,666, of which
$1,036,086 was for new work, $3,408,666 for maintenance and $357,914 for rehabi-
litation.
Ludington is one of the main car and railroad ferry ports.
Muskegon Harbor - One of the most progressive and busiest ports on the Great Lakes,
maintaining St. Lawrence Seaway depths in the channel which is 27 feet deep and
200 feet wide.
Total tonnage for the five-year period, I960 to 1964, averaged 3,518,000 annually.
Total costs through June 30, 1966 for the project were $3,836,277; of which
$2,298,702 was for new work, $1,091,720 for maintenance, and $445,855 for rehabili-
tation.
Some other five projects now underway on Lake Michigan ports are:
Frankfurt Harbor - A channel 18 feet deep and 143 feet wide.
Average annual tonnage from I960 to 1964 was 1,305,000, with most of the tonnage
being carried by railroad car ferries.
Total cost of the completed portion of the project has been $1,747,000, with
$1,257,570 for maintenance and $274,420 for rehabilitation.
Cedar River Harbor - Plans call for an entrance channel 100 feet wide and 10 feet
deep, approximately 2,100 feet long to the mouth of Cedar River, with an inner
channel in the river, 1,400 feet long, 80 feet wide and 6 feet deep upstream to
connect with the inner bridge channel. Estimated costs of the modifications will
be $736,000 in federal monies, $155,000 in non-federal monies. There is no water-
borne commerce at Cedar River Harbor.
Leland Harbor - Construction of a new breakwater, anchorage and maneuvering areas
and an approach channel.
-------
- 18 - 1461
Estimated costs of the modifications will be $860,000; $1+60,000 in federal funds,
and $400,000 in non-federal funds.
Menominee Harbor - The project almost finished with the exception of those modi-
fications authorized in I960 consists of: parallel piers, channel dredged, a
municipal wharf, and an enlarged turning basin. The remaining work is now classi-
fied as inactive.
Total costs of the project through June 30, 1966, was $2,911,000, of which $1+82,000
was for new work and $1,352,000 for rehabilitation of piers.
Waterborne commerce consists primarily of car-ferry traffic. Total tonnage in 1961+
was 1+5^,000.
New Buffalo Harbor - The project calls for north and south breakwaters, entrance
channel 850 feet long, a river channel 1,250 feet long.
The estimated cost of the project is $1,885,000 as of July, 1965, with $755,000 of
this cost in federal funds.
A project waiting for receipt of funds and local contribution is that of Cross
Village Harbor.
Menominee Harbor and River and South Haven Harbor presently are being surveyed
and reports being reviewed for Small Navigation Projects.
At least 12 other projects are currently being surveyed, are waiting funds from
the federal government, or are awaiting required local participation.
Sources: Michigan Water Resources Commission, Michigan Department of
Conservation, "Water Resource Uses for Lake Michigan."
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
"Water Resources Development in Michigan, 1967."
-------
- 19 - 1462
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
At present, the Lake Michigan basin has no overall watershed management since'such
management involves more than one state. Within the Michigan portion of the drain-
age basin, Act 253 enables units of local government to cooperate in planning and
carrying out a coordinated water management program in the watershed which they
share. Presently, the only river which has such a watershed management council is
the Grand River. In addition, watershed projects under PL 566, the Watershed
Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 195^, have been authorized.
AUTHORIZATION
The Watershed Protection & Flood Prevention Act (PL 566) was enacted by the Congress
in 195U. The Act was subsequently amended in 1956, 1958, I960, 1962, and in 1965.
The Act, as amended, authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to provide technical,
cost sharing and credit aid to local organizations in planning and carrying out
works of improvement for (l) flood prevention, (2) agricultural water management,
(3) fish and wildlife development, (U) recreational development, and (5) municipal
and industrial water supply purposes, both for present and future use.
Such authorization provides broad authority for assistance in the development of
projects serving multiple purposes. Local sponsoring organizations are encouraged
to consider watershed project development to serve all possible beneficial uses.
Eligible local sponsoring organizations include any state or local agency having
authority, under state law, to carry out, maintain and operate watershed works of
improvement. In Michigan, the State Attorney General has determined that the
following Michigan units of government have such authority:
Townships
Cities (if their charter (permits)
County Drainage Districts
Inter-County Drainage Districts
Water Management Districts
Michigan Department of Conservation
Soil Conservation Districts
Board of County Road Commissioners (when authorized by 2/3 vote of Countv
Board of Supervisors)
Successful watershed projects, utilizing assistance as provided by the Act, require
close cooperation and teamwork among a number of local, state and federal agencies.
Carrying out of this phase of the soil and water conservation program in Michigan
has been achieved by cooperation and assistance of the following offices and agencies:
Local Sponsoring Organizations
Office of the Governor
Michigan Department of Agriculture, State Soil Conservation Committee
Michigan Department of Conservation, Water Resources Commission
Michigan Cooperative Extension Service
Michigan State University Department of Agricultural Engineering
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service, U.S. Department
of Agriculture
Farmers Home Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army
Fish & Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Interior
-------
- 20 -
U.S. Department of Health, Education & Welfare
Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of Interior
A number of private organizations interested in conservation and agriculture have
made contributions, also.
SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN MICHIGAN
WATERSHEDS APPROVED FOR OPERATIONS
District Cooperators
Basic Farm Conservation Plans
Conservation Cropping Systems, acres
Cover & Green Manure Crops, acres
Crop Residue Use, acre?
Diversion, lin. ft.
Farm Ponds
Field Windbreak, lin. ft.
Grade Stabilization Structures
Hedgerow Planting, lin. ft.
Grassed Waterway or Outler, acres
Land Smoothing, acres
Livestock Exclusion, acres
Minimum Tillage, acres
Drainage - Main or Lateral, lin. ft.
Tile Drains - lin. ft.
Streambank Protection, lin. ft.
Wildlife Habitat Preservation, acres
Wildlife Wetland Development, acres
Wildlife Habitat Development, acres
Wildlife Wetland Preservation, acres
Woodland Harvest Cutting, acres
Woodland - Thinning, acres
Cropland to Grassland, acres
Cropland to Wildlife-Recreation, acres
Cropland to Other, acres
All Other Uses to Cropland, acres
All Other Uses (except cropland) to Wildlife-
Recreation, acres
1,1*50
1,125
78,820
92,650
5,525
8k
l85,96l
529
72,250
86
12,303
7,318
1*1,058
1*05, I*l6
13,596,81*0
lU,l*63
1*,175
1*7
988
587
2, 1*1*5
2 1*1*
330
722
I,6l8
1,729
1,591
Quantities of a number of other soil and water conservation practices also have been
applied in watersheds .
Applications received - 1*1
Projects authorized for planning - 19
Projects completed - 3
Applications approved - 3l*
Projects authorized for construction - 15
COMPLETED PROJECTS
Little Black River Watershed
Location - Cheboygan County
Sponsors - City of Cheboygan,
Cheboygan County Soil Conservation
District
Size - 17,130 acres
Problems - Annual flooding in the city
of Cheboygan caused primarily by snow-
melt. Some flooding of agricultural
lands.
-------
- 21 -
Remedial Measures - Four floodwater retarding structures, l.k miles of floodwater
diversion and channel improvement in addition to on the land treatment measures
applied under the Cheboygan County Soil Conservation District program through
district agreements.
Status - All planned structural and land treatment measures have been installed.
The Project was completed in July, 196^.
Muskrat Creek Watershed
Location - Clinton County Size - 7,65U acres
Sponsors - Clinton County Soil Conserva- Problems - Poor agricultural drainage
tion District, Morris Drain Drainage outlets and flooding of agricultural
District lands.
Remedial Measures - Land treatment and U.6 miles of multiple purpose channel
improvements (flood prevention and agricultural water management).
Status - All planned structural and land treatment measures have been installed.
The project was completed in October, 1963.
PROJECTS AUTHORIZED FOR INSTALLATION OF LAND TREATMENT AND STRUCTURAL MEASURES
Little River Watershed
Location - Menominee County Size - 37,973 acres
Sponsors - Little River Drainage Problems - Poor agricultural drainage
District, Menominee County Soil Con- outlets and flooding of agricultural
servation District lands and roads and bridges.
Remedial Measures - Land treatment and 5-7 miles of multiple purpose channel
improvements (flood prevention & agricultural water management).
Status - Start of construction work awaits local arrangements for needed land rights.
Black Creek-Mason Watershed
Location - Mason County Size - 6,678 acres
Sponsors - Black Creek Drainage District Problems - Flooding of agricultural
Mason County Soil Conservation District lands, and poor agricultural drainage
outlets.
Remedial Measures - Land treatment and 6.3 miles of multiple purpose channel
improvements (flood prevention and agricultural water management).
Status - Preparation of final designs for the proposed improvements is being
delayed pending completion of drainage district proceedings.
Catlin-Waters, Reynolds-Session Watershed
Location - Clinton County Size - 2,800 acres
Sponsors - Clinton County Soil Problems - Flooding of agricultural lands
Conservation District and poor agricultural drainage outlets.
Catlin-Waters Drainage District
-------
- 22 - 14 6$
Remedial Measures - U.3 miles of multiple purpose channel improvement (flood pre-
vention and agricultural water management).
Status - Preparation of final design plans is underway.
East Branch of Sturgeon River Watershed
Location - Dickinson County Size - 83,980 acres
Sponsors - Dickinson Soil Conservation Problems - Flooding of roads, bridges,
District rural residences, and in communities of
Dickinson County Road Commission Poster City & Hardwood. Need for water
East Branch of Sturgeon River Water supply for supplemental irrigation of
User's Association agricultural lands, and need for
recreational developments.
Remedial Measures - Land treatment and three multiple purpose structures (one for
flood prevention, and recreational purposes, one for flood prevention, irrigation
and recreational purposes, and one for irrigation and recreation).
Status - Preparation of final design plans is underway.
PROJECTS AUTHORIZED FOR PLANNING UNDER PL-566
Upper Maple River Watershed
Location - Shiawassee, Clinton & Gratiot Size - 199,700 acres
Sponsors - Shiawassee County Soil Problems - Flooding of agricultural
Conservation District lands, poor agricultural drainage
Clinton County Soil Conservation District outlets, and a need for recreation
Gratiot Soil Conservation District and fish and wildlife developments.
Maple River Drainage District
Remedial Measures - Proposed measures under consideration include 38.9 miles of
multiple purpose channel improvement, 16.2 miles of levees, pumping plants and
two multiple purpose dams (flood prevention and recreation or fish and wildlife)
and land treatment.
Status - Field Surveys and investigations necessary for preparation of a work plan
are partially completed.
PLANNING TERMINATED OR SUSPENDED
Black Creek Watershed
Location - Kent, Ottawa, and Allegan Size - 17,600 acres
Counties
Sponsors - West Ottawa Soil Conservation Problems - Flooding of agricultural
District lands and inadequate agricultural
Northwest Kent Soil Conservation District drainage outlets.
Wagner Inter-county Drainage District
Remedial Measures - One floodwater retarding structure, 9-2 miles of multiple pur-
pose channel improvements (flood prevention and agricul-tural vater management) and
land treatment.
Status - Planning activities have been suspended until such time as watershed
residents submit a petition requesting installation of improvements and
a board of determination finds improvements necessary.
-------
- 23 - 146-6
GRAND RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL
Basin Description
The Grand River Basin, Michigan, is located in the western part of the lower
peninsula of the state. It drains into Lake Michigan. Land area of the basin is
about 5,600 square miles, or 3.6 million acres.
The basin contains approximately 1.1 million persons. It includes three of
Michigan's eleven Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas: Grand Rapids, Lansing,
and Jackson.
Lansing, although primarily dependent on the auto industry, is also a center of
government and education. It is the capital of Michigan, and its largest suburb,
East Lansing, is the site of Michigan State University.
Grand Rapids has a diversified industrial base, and is the wholesale and retail
trade center of western Michigan. Fabricated metal products, furniture, and in-
struments are the city's most important products, but it manufactures an array of
other goods, both durable and nondurable, including bakery products, textiles and
leather, electrical machinery, and household refrigerators and freezers.
Jackson is dominated by the transportation equipment industry. It manufactures
parts and equipment for automobiles and airplanes, including tires and tubes. Long
a supplying city for the automobile industry, -it has developed along lines that have
encouraged diversification into the fields of electrical machinery and electronic
components.
The basin as a whole is characterized by an emphasis on manufacture of durable
goods. Heavy industry in the basin is closely integrated with that of the rest of
the state.
Watershed Council History and Functions
The Michigan Grand River Watershed Council was officially organized in June, 1966,
through proviso of Act 253, the Local River Management Act, Michigan, for the
benefit of the 59 governmental units located in the Grand River Basin.
Its functions or purposes are:
Conduct, or cause to be conducted, studies of water resources of the
Grand River Watershed.
Prepare periodic reports concerning trends in water use and availability,
emerging water problems and recommendations for appropriate public policies
and programs necessary to maintain adequate water resources for the Grand
River Watershed.
Conduct informational programs to explain the need for effective water
management practices and promote the support of all public agencies and
private organizations to preserve the water resources of the Grand River
Basin.
Make plans for development and management of water resources and recommend
the creation of a river management district or districts in the Grand
River Watershed.
-------
- 21* -
146?
Advise agencies of federal, state, and local government as to the council's
view of the problems and needs of the Grand River Watershed.
Cooperate with federal, state, and local agencies in providing stream
gauges, water quality sampling stations, or other water resource data-
gathering facilities or programs that aid the Council in its responsibility
for studying and reporting on water conditions.
The Grand River, from its source in Hillsdale County and its mouth in Lake Michigan
at Grand Haven is 260 miles long. Its tributary streams and rivers are:
Rogue River, Flat River, Maple River, Looking Glass River, Red Cedar River,
Portage River and the Thornapple River. The average mean rainfall is 31 inches,
and soils of the basin run the gamut of loams, sandy loams, sands, clays and
combinations of the above soils; silts, mucks and peats.
The present membership in the Grand River Watershed Council comprises 51 of the
59 eligible governmental units, and its current budget for 1967-68 is $51,500.00.
The administrative offices are located in Lansing, Michigan, under the direction
of the Executive Secretary, John H. Kennaugh, and Chairman, Jerrold H. Keyworth.
-------
1468
GRAND RIVER BASIN
Drainage Area 5,572 square miles.
Second largest drainage system in Michigan.
All the runoff from the shaded area
(1230 square miles) flows through Lansing.
-------
- 26 - 1469
RECREATION, FISH. AND WILDLIFE
There are 68 state and county parks in the Lake Michigan Basin in Michigan.
In addition we have 3,121 miles of shoreline on both Lake Michigan and 11,037
inland lakes (of over 10 acres) plus 36,350 miles of streams. Two major wildlife
refuges totaling 100,000 acres are located in the eastern upper peninsula. There
are also 735 state owned water access sites and 6k game and wildlife areas (255,000
acres) and 3,500 miles of canoe streams.
There are 2.5 million acres of national forests an,d "managed" land for timber and
recreation. The Sylvania Tract in the upper peninsula is a major recent addition.
According to 196^ estimates, there are ^.7 million visits made per year. Fifty
per cent of all lands within federal forest boundaries are privately owned.
Michigan has the largest state forest system in the nation with 3.7 million acres
in 29 units. Eighty per cent of these lands have come to the state through tax
reversion. The rest have been purchased for a total cost since 1903 of $^8 million.
There are 7.5 million visits paid to the state forests every year. Multiple use
management is paying off. The annual dividend to the people of Michigsi totals
$100 million. Timber production, game management, and general public recreation
are the major objectives, but lands are used for sites for oil wells, power and
pipe lines, aircraft landing fields, sawmills, grazing, research, and special pre-
serves. Experts say that in the years ahead there will be need for a formalized
system of designating land uses, built around periodic reviews which will permit
changes when and where needed.
BOATING
Generally, the types of pleasure craft found in the Lake Michigan Basin are
outboard motor boats, inboard motor boats, and sailboats.
The above craft range from 11-foot day-sailers, rowboats, and fishing boats to
50-foot yachts. A recent survey showed that the total number of craft of these
types totaled 121,kkQ. The county with the largest boat ownership was Kent County
with 20,851. Second was Kalamazoo County with 10,520.
Mooring—Private and Marina
The demand for mooring can be classified into two groups, private sector and
marina sector.
The private sector consists of those slips and moorings located at cottages of
individually owned waterfront property. A mooring in this sector can be nothing
more than property owned and available to the owner with conditions that are right
for anchoring a boat offshore.
The marina sector consists of those slips provided by commercially and publicly
operated marinas and by yacht clubs. Few marinas offer seasonal moorings other
than slips.
The private sector provides most of the moorings. This is especially true in the
inland lakes. Larger craft need and use marina facilities. As Great Lakes boat-
ing increases, more marinas will be necessary.
A shift in emphasis in mooring needs may take place by I960 from the inland lakes
to Lake Michigan. Moorings have been in the greatest demand in the inland lakes
-------
- 27 -
and streams up to this time. However, three important things are changing this:
1. Planting of the coho salmon in Lake Michigan,
2. Inland property is becoming less available,
3. Inland lakes are becoming very crovded.
All indications are that a shift will take place, but when and to what extent is
not yet known. If this shift takes place, marinas will play an increasing role
for moorings on Lake Michigan. These are costly on a large lake because of the
artificial conditions that must be created. Breakwaters and similar protective
devices, carefully constructed slips and piles, and extensive dredging of channels
and portions of the harbors will be necessary periodically.
Launching sites are becoming more and more crowded in all inland and Lake Michigan
areas so that many boaters must be turned away, especially on holidays. The
situation will be severe if more launching sites are not provided soon.
Harbors
Harbors in the Lake Michigan Basin with public or private boating facilities.
1. New Buffalo
2. St. Joseph-Benton Harbor
3. South Haven
k. Saugatuck
5. Holland
6. Grand Haven
7. Muskegon
8. White Hall
9. Pentwater
10. Ludington
11. Manistee
12. Portage Lake
13. Arcadia
Ik. Frankfort
15. Leland
16. South Manitou (island off Leland)
17. Buttons Bay
18. Northport
19. Greilickville
20. Traverse City
21. Elk Rapids
22, Charlevoix
23. East Jordon
2U. Boyne City
25. Petoskey
26. Harbor Springs
27. Mackinaw City
28. St. Ignace
29. Beaver Island
30. Manistique
31. Gladstone
32. Escanaba
33. Cedar River
3^. Menominee
-------
-28-
Major harbors in Michigan and in the Lake Michigan Basin
1. Escanaba
2. Frankfort
3. Manistee
U. Ludington
5. Muskegon
6. Grand Haven
T. Benton Harbor
CAMPING
Western Michigan has 21 state park areas with a total of more than ^,200 campsites.
All but four have electricity.
The 1^ national forest campgrounds are concentrated in Oceana, Mason, Lake,
Manistee, and Wexford Counties.
The 26 state forest campgrounds are found in Allegan, Lake, Missaukee, Manistee,
Benzie, Grand Traverse, Newaygo,Charlevoix, and Kalkaska Counties.
The Upper Peninsula in the Lake Michigan Basin has a total of five state parks,
Ik national forests, and 18 state forests.
Upper Peninsula Campgrounds and Facilities
State Parks
Delta County
Fayette State Park on Big Bay de Hoc; swimming, fishing, water.
Mackinac County
Detour State Park, IT miles east of Cedarville; swimming.
Straits State Park, Straits of Mackinac at St. Ignace; electricity,
water.
Menominee County
Wells State Park, Green Bay, Lake Michigan; swimming, electricity,
water.
Schoolcraft County
Indian State Park, Indian Lake; swimming, fishing, electricity, water.
National Forests
Delta County
Pole Creek Lake, Hiawatha National Forest; swimming, boat launch,
trailer park, tent sites, campstoves, water, fishing.
Peninsula Point, Hiawatha National Forest; swimming, boat launch,
campstoves, tent sites, water.
HayiroacLow Creek, Hiawatha National Forest; campstoves, water.
Flowing Well National Forest; swimming, trailer park, tent sites,
campstoves, water.
-------
1472
- 29 -
Coi-ner Lake, Hiawatha National Forest; boat launch, campstoves, water.
Camp Seven Lake, Hiawatha National Forest; swimming, boat launch,
trailer park, tent sites, campstoves, water.
Mackinac County
Lake Michigan, Hiawatha National Forest; swimming, trailer park,
tent sites, campstoves, water.
Brevort Lake, Hiawatha National Forest; swimming, launch sites,
trailer park, campstoves, water.
Foley Creek, Hiawatha National Forest; trailer park, camp sites,
campstoves, water.
Carp River, Hiawatha National Forest; trailer park, tent sites, water,
campstoves.
Schoolcraft County
Colwell Lake, Hiawatha National Forest; swimming, boat launch, water,
campstoves, tent sites, trailer park.
Petes Lake, Hiawatha National Forest; swimming, boat launch, trailer
park, tent sites, campstoves, water.
Indian River, Hiawatha National Forest; campstoves, water.
Little Bass Lake, Hiawatha National Forest; boat launch, campstoves,
water.
State Forests
Dickinson County
Lower Dam, Sturgeon River State Forest, Escanaba River; trailer park,
campstoves, tent sites, water.
West Branch, Sturgeon River State Forest, west branch of the Escanaba
River; trailer park, tent sites, campstoves, water.
Little Kates Lake, Sturgeon River State Forest; fireplaces, water.
Mackinac County
Little Brevort, Lake Mackinac State Forest; swimming, boat launch,
tent sites, trailer park, campstoves, water.
Hog Island Point, Mackinac State Forest; on Lake Michigan, swimming,
boat launch, trailer park, tent sites, water, campstoves.
Black River, Mackinac State Forest; trailer park, tent sites, camp-
stoves, water.
Milakokia Lake, Markinac State .Forest; swimming, boat launch, trailer
park, tent sites, campstoves, water.
Garnet Lake, Mackinac State Forest; swimming, trailer park, tent sites,
boat launch, campstoves, water.
-------
1473
- 30 - - •
Menominee County
Big Cedar River, Menominee State Forest; trailer park, tent sites,
campstoves, water.
Schoolcraft County
Mead Creek, Manistique River State Forest; trailer park, tent sites,
campstoves, water.
Merwin Creek, Manistique State Forest; trailer park, tent sites,
campstoves, water.
West Branch, Manistique River State Forest; trailer park, tent sites,
campstoves, water.
Canoe Lake, Grand Sable State Forest; boat launch, trailer park, tent
sites, campstoves, water.
Cusino Lake Grand Sable State Forest; swimming, trailer park, boat
launch, tent sites, campstoves, water.
N. Gemini Lake, Grand Sable State Forest; swimming, boat launch,
trailer park, tent sites, campstoves, water.
Ross Lake Grand Sable State Forest; swimming, trailer park, boat
launch, tent sites, campstoves, water.
Fox River, Grand Sable State Forest; trailer park, tent sites,
campstoves, water.
Stanley Lake, Grand Sable State Forest; swimming, boat launch, trailer
park, tent sites, campstoves, water.
Lower Peninsula Campgrounds and Facilities
In western Michigan in the lower peninsula, there are camping facilities in all
counties in the Lake Michigan drainage basin. Generally, the facilities are more
complete than in the upper peninsula. Most include those facilities mentioned in
the upper peninsula campsites plus swimming; bathhouse, laundry and shower
facilities; and electricity outlets. The larger ones include nature tours, nature
centers, libraries, and picnic areas.
State Parks
Boyne City Yankee Springs
Cadillac Muskegon
Carp Lake Newaygo
Grand Haven Charles Mears at Pentwater
Holland Warren Dunes
Benzie Traverse City
Interlochen White Cloud
Ludington Van Buren
Michilimackinac Fort Custer
Orchard Beach D. H. Day
Silver, Lake
-------
- 31 -
State Forest Campgrounds
Baldwin—2 Interlochon
Barryton Kalkaska—2
Beaver Island Kingsley—2
Cadillac Lake Ann
Charlevoix Houghton Lake—3
Copemish Pere Marquette—2
Fife Lake—2 Thompsonville
Honor
National Forest Campgrounds
Baldwin—k Hesperia
Cadillac—2 Irons—2
Harrietta Wellston—5
In addition, there are over Uo county, municipal, or township campgrounds in
western Michigan.
FISHERY RESOURCES
Generally, Lake Michigan waters are either shallow or deep. There is little
in between. Patterns of fish distribution in Lake Michigan evolved largely as a
result of this condition. Following is a list of the types of fish found in
Michigan waters and in Lake Michigan:
Lake trout—present in a few inland lakes, greatly reduced in Lake Michigan
due to sea lamprey predations.
Muskellunge—two strains are present: the northern muskellunge occurs
in northern inland lakes; the Great Lakes muskellunge is present only in
the Great Lakes and a few inland lakes connected to the Great Lakes.
Northern pike—abundant and statewide in distribution in all types of lakes
and ponds and in quiet waters of large streams; generally rare in Lake
Michigan, except in bays and connecting waters.
Walleye—abundant in the Great Lakes and large inland lakes, mainly in
large, clear lakes; widely distributed in Michigan.
Yellow perch—extremely abundant, present throughout the state, common in
mouth of Lake Michigan tributary streams, provide excellent spring fishing
from Lake Michigan piers.
Bluegill—widely distributed, abundant in many lakes of the lower peninsula
and in a few lakes in the upper peninsula.
Largemouth bass—abundant in lakes throughout the lower peninsula and in
some lakes of the upper peninsula, common in weedy bays and protected
margins of Lake Michigan.
Brook trout—native to Michigan, abundant in many streams of the northern
two-thirds of the state and common in a few streams in the southern one-
third. Common in small lakes and ponds of the upper peninsula, widely
introduced to all suitable waters throughout the state.
-------
.- 32 -
Brown trout—most commonly found in streams of northern half of lower
peninsula, rare in inland lakes and Lake Michigan.
Rainbow trout—most commonly found in •northern parts of Lake Michigan, with
spawning runs entering the larger rivers, especially those north of
Muskegon. Adults maturing in Lake Michigan are referred to as steelheads
because of their similarity to the Pacific Coast steelhead. They are
regularly planted in many suitable lakes and streams throughout the state.
Not included in this list is the coho salmon recently planted in Lake Michigan.
It may be one of the most exciting additions to fishing resources in a long time.
Sport fishermen and commercial fisheries are enthusiastic about it.
Seasonal runs of some species, including smelt, channel catfish, walleye and
smallmouth bass move from Lake Michigan into tributary streams and provide good
fishing. Movement into the tributary streams is dependent largely upon water
quality in the-streams.
Many fishing shacks built on stilts are located on the St. Joseph River at Berrien
Springs, fifteen miles upstream from Benton Harbor. The shacks are unused other
than during the spring fishing runs when minnow seines are suspended from poles
and used for dipping suckers and smelt. Water quality is good in this section of
the St: Joseph River and is not a limiting factor to fish production or movement.
Perch fishing from piers on either shore of Lake Michigan is probably the most
important type of sport fishing in the basin. During the perch runs, thousands
of fishermen line the piers.
Smelt Waters
These are the best smelt waters in the Lake Michigan Basin.
1. Lake Michigan.
2. All streams feeding into Lake Michigan and its connecting waters in
Menominee County.
3. All streams feeding into Lake Michigan for a distance of 1 1/2 miles
from the mouth in Allegan, Berrien, Ottawa, and VanBuren Counties.
k.- All streams feeding into'Lake Michigan and its connecting waters for a
distance of 1,500 feet from the mouth in Emmet. Mackinac, and School-
craft Counties.
Additional counties where smelt is found are Antrim, Benzie, Charlevoix, Delta,
Emmet, Grand Traverse, Leelanau, Manistee, Muskegon, and Oceana.
State Fish Hatfaeries
Benton Harbor, Berrien County
Harrietta, Wexford County
Oden, Emmet County
Paris, Mecosta County
Thompson, Schoolcraft County
Wolf Lake, VanBuren County
-------
- 33 - 1*76
Trout Rearing Stations
Baldwin, Lake County
Bear Creek, Manistee County
E. Br. Fox River, Schoolcraft County
Platte River, Benzie County
Lakes and Ponds Planted with Trout in Lake Michigan Basin
County Number of Lakes and Ponds
Allegan k
Antrim 6
Muskegon 2
Mecosta 2
Barry k
Benzie 3
Branch 3
Calhoun 2
Cass 8
Charlevoix 5
Newaygo 5
Osceola 5
Delta 6
Dickinson 2
Grand Traverse 9
St. Joseph 1*
Kalamazoo 6
Kalkaska 9
Kent 3
Lake 5
Schoolcraft 11
VanBuren h
Leelanau 9
Manistee 2
Wexford 3
WILDLIFE
The shoreline counties and the adjacent and limited shoal waters are the areas of
principal importance to wildlife in the Michigan portion of the Lake Michigan Basin.
The forest region of Lake Michigan's shore supports a wildlife community much
different from the community of farm game species in the southern area. The forest
and often untouched area of the upper peninsula of Michigan in the Lake Michigan
Basin contains the following wildlife:
1. ruffed grouse (plentiful)
2. sharp-tailed grouse
3. prairie chicken (few)
k. cottontail rabbit (reduced)
5. snowshoe hare
6. fox squirrel
7- gray squirrel
8. pine and red squirrel
9. deer (many)
10. black bear
11. porcupine
12. bobcat
13. coyote
-------
Waterfowl in the area include black ducks, hooded and American mergansers, diving
ducks, and Canadian geese.
Escanaba is the best waterfowl area in Lake Michigan. Many pintails are found
here.
Along the uorxnern shoreline of the lower peninsula there are less game and fur
animals. Two things have contributed to this, man and his cities. Several large
inland lakes, Charlevoix, Torch, and Elk, lie within a mile of Lake Michigan and
offer refuge for migrating ducks. Grand Traverse Bay has a bird rare for this
area, the mute swan. There are some 150 birds now. Some of the birds migrate
but many remain throughout the winter on the tributary waters. This is a wild
population of mute swans and is very rare in this hemisphere.
The elk is another species of special interest in this area. The elk herd does
not extend to the shores of Lake Michigan but is found in parts of Emmet, Charle-
voix, and Otsego Counties. There is careful management of the herd because over
population could cause problems because of the closeness of the herd to the cherry
and apple orchard areas.
The region from the Sleeping Bear Dunes south is referred to as the "fruit belt"
area of Lake Michigan. Farm game species predominate in the "fruit belt" area,
include pheasants, fox, squirrel, cottontail, and woodcock.
Allegan State Forest has a high population of deer, ruffed grouse, and an
established flock of wild turkeys.
Muskegon marks the southern boundary which separates ruffed grouse in the north
and pheasants to the south.
The Betsie River near Frankfort, the Manistee River near Manistee, the Pere
Marquette River near Ludington, the Pentwater near Pentwater, Muskegon River near
Muskegon, the Grand River near Grand Haven and several of the small tributaries
have extensive marshlands near their mouths. These areas are important producers
of waterfowl and fur animals. The principle species are mallard, blue-winged
teal, wood duck, and muskrat.
Many of these wetland areas lie almost within the city boundaries. Most of these
areas are being acquired by the Michigan Department of Conservation. Because these
marshlands are found so close to the industrialized areas, pollution of the streams
is causing a marked decrease in the wildlife.
VanBuren and Berrien Counties provide wetlands for ducks and muskrats. Many of
the islands in Lake Michigan are nesting places for gulls and terns.
A wildlife inventory is not complete unless the waterfowl adapted to deep water is
included. Often these birds occur in large numbers far out on Lake Michigan.
Some, are old squaw, white-winged scoter, lesser scaup, red-breasted merganser,
red-throated loon, American merganser, Holboell's grebe, horned grebe, common
loon, and American scoter.
-------
- 35 -
Public Wildlife Areas. Michigan Part of the Lake Michigan Basin
1478
Management Acres
1.
2.
3.
k.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
lU.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Name
Fenniville State Game Area
Swan Creek Wildlife Experimental Station
Grand Haven State Game Area
Muskegon State Game Area
Pentwater River State Game Area
Pere Marquette State Game Area
Manistee River State Game Area
Betsie River State Game Area
Grass Lake Wildlife Flooding Project
Headquarters Lake Wildlife Flooding Project
Petobego State Game Area
O'Neal Lake Wildlife Flooding Project
French Farm Lake Wildlife Flooding Project
Little Beaver Island State Game Area
Portage Marshes
Hayward Lake Wildlife Flooding Project
Michigan Islands Refuge
Seney National Wildlife Refuge
Major
Agency Owned Interest*
M.D.
"
ii
ii
ii
ii
ii
ii
ii
M
ii
ii
ii
ii
ii
n
U.S. D.I.
U.S. D.I.
C.»* 3, 1*50
6,875
675
5,120
513
33
3,575
650
1)82
1.82
1*1+2
130
802
9, II1*
Lake only
1,800
--BSFW*** 5
--BSFW 95,530
w,
W
W
W
w,
w,
W
W
w
w
w
w
w
D,
W
W
G,
W
UG
UG
UG
RG
.T
* W - waterfowl
UG - upland game
D - deer
T - tern
G - gulls
RG - ruffed grouse
** Michigan Department of Conservation
*** United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
WATER SUPPLY
Proposed- Water Quality Criteria for Michigan Waters
State of Michigan, Water Resources Commission, 1967
Water Resources Development in Michigan. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1967
Water Resource Uses, State of Michigan Water Resources Commission, Revised
June, 1967
Water Resource - Conditions and Uses in the Upper Grand River Basin, Michigan
Water Resources Commission, 1961
Grand River Basin,, Comprehensive Water Resources Study, Information Booklet on the
Economic Base Study, 1966
Water - Bulletin #12, Preliminary Inventory of Michigan's Artificial Surface Water,
C. R. Humphrys & R. F. Green, Michigan State University, 1962
IRRIGATION
"Michigan Laws Relating to Water", prepared by the Joint Committee on Water
Resources Planning by the Legislative Service Bureau, 1966
"Water Management Information", Cooperative Extension Service and Department of
Natural Resources, MSU, East Lansing, Michigan, July, 1967
"Watershed Progress in Michigan", January, 1967, Soil Conservation Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, lU05 So. Harrison Road, East Lansing, Michigan
"Water Resources Development in Michigan", U.S. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army
Engineer Division, North Central, Chicago, Illinois, 1967
"Water Resource Uses, Present and Prospective for Lake Michigan and Water Quality-
Standards and Plan of Implementation," State of Michigan Water Resources Commission,
Department of Conservation, Revised, June, 1967
Communication from Verne M. Bathurst, State Conservationist, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, SCS., October 23, 1967
RECREATION, FISH, AND WILDLIFE
CAMP-West Michigan; West Michigan Tourist Association, Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Carefree Days in West Michigan; West Michigan Tourist Association, Grand Rapids,
Michigan.
Guide to Fun in Michigan; Clarkson Map Company; Kaukauna, Wisconsin; copyright, 1965.
Transportation Predictive Procedures, Recreational Boating and Commercial Shipping;
Waterways Division, Department of Conservation in cooperation with Arthur D. Little,
Inc., Consultant; Technical Report No. 9C, December, 1966.
Fish and Wildlife as Related to Water Quality of the Lake Michigan Basin, a special
report on fish and wildlife resources, United States; Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service; Clarence F. Poutzke, Commissioner; March, 1966.
-------
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN
2 League of Women Voters of Wisconsin
3 433 West Washington Avenue
4 Madison, Wisconsin 53703
5
STATEMENT TO THE FEDERAL-STATE
6
ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE ON POLLUTION
7
IN LAKE MICHIGAN AND ITS TRIBUTARY BASIN
8
BY THE
9
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN
10
JANUARY 1968
11
12 Along with many other citizens those
13 of us in the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin
14 have long felt ourselves to be residents of a
15 "favored" State. We have been blessed by
16 beautiful countryside, rich growing lands,
17 timber, rivers and lakes, mineral resources,
18 four sometimes two distinct seasons, a pro-
19 gressive, forward-thinking people, and we are
20 bounded by one side by the great Mississippi
21 and on the other by Lake Michigan. It is only
22 natural that we should have a deep interest
23 in water resources and that the League of Women
24 Voters has been concerned with the various rami-
25 fications of our water resources for many years.
-------
1481
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN
2 In large part in Wisconsin the damage
3 done to our rivers and lakes—and it.has been
4 considerable—has been done through neglect
5 and ignorance. This, at least, can be said
6 of the situation until the last decade or so.
7 Recently we have watched and abetted a sweeping
8 flood of public education on pollution now
9 existing and on the irreversibility of some
IQ of the damage.
11 Looking at Lake Michigan, we see that
12 Wisconsin still has some municipalities without
13 sewage treatment plants, some without secondary
14 treatment, many with combined sanitary-storm
15 sewers and, of course, thousands of septic
16 tanks operating at less than top efficiency.
17 In most of eastern Wisconsin the drainage is
18 to tributaries leading to Lake Michigan. As
19 a dairy State we still have many food products
20 plants operating with insufficient treatment
21 of wastes before being released to the stream.
22 We have evidences of over-fertilization and
23 siltation from farm land runoff. We have some
24 j problems with chemical contamination of rivers
25 with soluble and insoluble materials. And we
-------
. 1482
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN
2 have massive evidence of insufficiently treated
3 waste from pulp and paper mills and other
4 factories along our most industrialized rivers.
5 Now we are seeing the results of our careless-
6 ness in the destruction of the shoreline and
7 pollution of the waters of Lake Michigan.
g Lest we Judge ourselves too harshly
9 we have also been blessed with leaders who have
10 informed themselves of the technical knowledge
11 available and proceeded to attempt correction of
12 the problems. Our recently organized Department
13 of Natural Resources, the hearings to adopt
14 intrastate water standards, the recent Pollution
15 Source Surveys made in our most urbanized areas,
16 and the appropriation of State funds to match
17 Federal construction grants for pollution abate-
18 ment are all examples of steps taken in the right
19 direction.
20 In the past few years there has also
21 been effort on the part of some industries to
22 reduce the amount of waste released to the stream.
23 Unfortunately we are growing in population and
24 industry faster than we are adding treatment
25 plants and "savealls." In their conclusions
-------
1483
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN
2 the investigators for the Wisconsin portion of
3 the Fox (Illinois) River Drainage Basin say
4 that "further degradation of water quality
can result unless pollution abatement steps at
least keep pace with the population and indus-
7 trial growths." In the conclusions drawn for
8 Wisconsin's Lower Fox River Pollution Survey
it is stated: "The major industries have re-
covery facilities for strong wastes and by the
spring of 1968 it is anticipated that all
12 municipal sewage treatment plants within the
13 basin will have provisions for secondary treat-
14 ment." None the less, they add that some mu-
15 nicipalities are in need of improved facilities
and industry must reduce its pollutional load
17 to alleviate undesirable conditions and that
18 substantial improvements are needed to meet
19 the proposed water quality standards.
20 Navigation pollution is an area
21 problem. Two local Leagues situated on Lake
22 Michigan interested themselves in promoting
23 pollution abatement for ships more or less
24 permanently in harbor. One League spent many
25 woman hours over several years before holding
-------
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN
2 tanks were installed in a Coast Guard ship.
3 Another found it relatively e asy to interest
4 ship personnel in connecting the ship to
5 municipal sewers. Now the first League feels
6 a definite attitude of foot-dragging and
7 perhaps only token compliance in the design,
g installation and prospective use of these
9 facilities by Coast Guard authorities and
10 personnel. Why should a State not require--
11 and be able to require — the same degree of pol-
12 lution control from Federal installations that
13 the State requires from industries and munici-
14 palities?
15 One of our most important problems
16 is in accelerated enforcement, although we have
17 seen gains in this field too. During the month
18 of October 1967 alone, Wisconsin announced
19 satisfactory compliance in 22 water pollution
20 abatement orders. Our gorwth is rapid and
21 pollution abatement must gain on growth to
22 reduce the problems existing today, as well as
23 control future waste disposal. Enforcement
24 is a double-edged cost: it costs industries
25 and municipalities money to reduce pollution
-------
1485
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP WISCONSIN
2 load to the stream, and it costs money for
3 agencies to monitor conditions and use derao-
4 cratic procedures necessary to gain compliance.
5 Municipalities have some recourse to Federal
6 funds under the Clean Water Restoration Act
7 of 1965 and in our State some matching funds.
g Nationally the League "believes that the costs
9 of industrial pollution abatement are the
10 responsibility of the polluter, but acknowledges
11 that some Federal help should be made available
12 because of the urgency of the problem and the
13 high costs involved. However, duration and
14 scope of assistance should be limited and strict
15 enforcement of antipollution measures should
16 accompany financial assistance.
17 We believe that there has been
18 improvement as well in coordination between
19 States, but, as within our State, much more
20 is possible. And now the League is interested
21 in rounding out the forward thrust with co-
22 ordinated planning and effort on a regional
23 or basin concept. The League of Women Voters
24 of Wisconsin views, the Enforcement Conference
25 not as a panacea but as another vehicle toward
-------
I LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP WISCONSIN
2 improved coordination and sounder planning
3 in water resource development.
4
5 MRS. CLUSEN: We think it is signifi-
6 cant that the Leagues of Women Voters in these
7 four States have chosen to work Jointly in their
8 efforts to improve the condition of Lake Michigan,
9 We think it is even more important that these
lO four States approach the problems of Lake Mi chi-
ll gan in the same spirit of joint endeavor,
12 I affl going to skip a considerable
13 portion of this. We merely want to say that
14 we want to use this opportunity to urge both
15 the Federal Government and the States to look
16 at Lake Michigan as a whole, to see beyond
17 the immediate crisis and consider such other
18 problems as navigation, water supply, water
19 use and re-use if this seems properly within
20 the scope of this Conference. We are encouraged
21 by the calling of the Conference and by the
22 fact that the four Attorneys General have
23 agreed to compile and exchange lists of known
24 polluters.
25 We have some recommendations which
-------
3A87
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF UNITED STATES
2 we would like to express, among them the fact
3 that we believe that a uniform plan for the
4 enforcement of interstate water quality stan-
5 dards should be established and we think
6 that this necessarily involves coordinating
7 the standards among the four States, uniform
8 enforcement procedures, Federal surveillance
9 and testing of water with regular reports to
10 FWPCA and the States involved. We hope that
11 the Federal Government and the States look
12 at Lake Michigan as an entity regardless of
13 the problem they are discussing.
14 We hope that a timetable will be
15 established which will provide for consistent
16 planned advances in pollution abatement.
17 We recommend that enforcement of the
18 timetable and the standards be strict and action
19 upon the recalcitrant polluter speedy.
20 We recommend that coordinated research
21 programs among the States be encouraged in order
22 to facilitate feasible economical solutions and
23 to prevent duplication of effort and expense.
24 These recommendations are based upon
25 the results of a study which is currently underway
-------
1488
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 by the four State Leagues. We hope the
3 Conferees will want to read the detailed
4 statements which have been submitted to them.
6 I would Just like to quote very briefly from
6 these four statements so that you will know
7 how very concerned the League of Women Voters
8 is about the situation.
9 For instance, the League of Women
10 Voters of Indiana in commenting on the Jones
H subcommittee hearings held in 19^3 says:
12 "in the four years since we made
13 our statement to the Jones Committee, the
14 conditions in Lake Michigan have not improved,
15 not even remained as they were then, in fact
16 have become much worse."
17 The Indiana League goes on to say
18 that Indiana schedule for compliafi.ee on
19 industrial criteria in the Lake Michigan area
20 proved to be a year and a half later than the
21 one agreed upon by the Conferees of the 1965
22 two-State Conference.
23 The Illinois League points up the
24 need for a look at the total picture by saying;
25 "The elusive sources of this increased
-------
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OF UNITED STATES
2 pollution, in spite of a two-year effort
3 to abate it in the southern end of the lake,
4 calls for a wider study of the entire lake."
5 They say:
6 "We find that lack of information on
7 the true sources of pollution entering our
g sector of Lake Michigan sometimes leads to
9 public unwillingness to tackle local problems."
10 The Michigan League has completed its
11 section of the Lake Michigan study which the
12 League is doing, and their findings are attached
13 to our statement. This is the blue brochure
14 which you have. At one point they say:
15 "The League of Women Voters of Michigan
16 is concerned about the lack of coordination of
17 agencies involved in the Lake Michigan Basin.
18 There are five U. S. Coast Guard stations in
19 Michigan which are discharging raw sewage into
20 the lake, two facilities of the Corps of
21 Engineers, and a National fish and wildlife
22 station discharging wastes into Lake Michigan."
23 The statement of the League of
24 Women Voters of Wisconsin includes these
25 sentences:
-------
1490
1 LEAGUE OP WOMSK VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 "We still have some municipalities
3 without sewage treatment plants, some without
4 secondary treatment, many with combined sani-
5 tary-storm sewers and, of course, thousands
6 of septic tanks operating at less than top
7 efficiency. How we are seeing the results of
8 our carelessness in the destruction of the
9 shoreline and pollution of the waters of Lake
10 Michigan."
ll It seeias to us in essence that these
12 statements point up the finding that no State
13 is blameless as a contributor to the pollution
14 of Lake Michigan. No State, however, is apathetic
is or unconcerned either. As League members and as
16 citizens of the Basin, we believe that the time
17 for pointing an accusatory finger at any one
18 State, industry or local community is past.
19 What is needed is a sincere, earnest, forth-
20 right attempt to assess where we are now in
21 controlling the water quality, what things we
22 can do better in this four-State area by
23 working together on the State level, what kind
24 of Federal assistance can be most effective in
25 helping us to achieve cleaner water in Lake Michigan
-------
1491
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 In conclusion, I would simply like
3 to say that in working to accomplish this
4 objective that the League of Women Voters
5 in these four States is prepared to be of any
6 assistance which it can in helping citizens to
7 understand their necessary role, whether it is
g by State or local legislation, whether it
9 involves bond issues, whether it means more
lO taxation or whether it means more strict
11 monitoring and enforcement.
12 We think that we are in a good posi-
13 tion to attempt to influence public opinion
14 and public support for these things and to
15 help provide the climate of opinion and the
16 spirit of unity and cooperation which must
17 exist among governments and citizens in these
18 four States if anything is to be accomplished.
19 We also would like to suggest to yen
20 that because we are a national organization,
21 because we operate on the State, local and,
22 on water matters, even the basin level, that
23 it is possible for us to try to evaluate the
24 problems and the proposed solutions for Lake
25 Michigan without worrying about Governmental
-------
. 1*192
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 boundaries and administrative restrictions.
3 We are eager to be of whatever assistance
4 we can to both Federal and State Conferees
5 in implementing decisions and recommendations
6 of this Conference.
7 In itself this Conference will not
8 clean up Lake Michigan, but we hope it will
9 point the way to preservation and wise use
10 of this vital asset.
11 Thank you for your time, gentlemen.
12 (Applause.)
13 MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mrs. Clusen.
14 (Applause.)
15 MR. STEIN: Any questions or comments?
16 MR. HOLMER: Mr. Chairman.
17 MR. STEIN: Yes.
18 MR. HOLMER: I would like to ask
19 Mrs. Clusen a question to which I think I know
20 the answer.
21 First of all, I would like to commend
22 her on the brevity and the incisiveness of her
23 comments.
24 Beyond that, the League has been in
25 this business now for some little time. Am
-------
' 1493
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF UNITED STATES
2 I on sound ground to assume that the League
3 recognizes that this is a program of long
4 duration and that we can count on their
5 support for as long as it takes?
6 MRS, CLUSEN: I think I can safely
7 say that we have been in this earlier than
g most, but later than a few, and that we are
9 in it for the long haul for whatever it takes,
10 yes.
11 MR. STEIN: Are there any other com-
12 ments or questions?
13 , I would Just like to call one point
14 to your attention. I only do this because it
15 is the League and a well-thought-out statement.
16 There may be some factual points
If here which may be clarified later on, particu-
18 larly on what the Indiana program is doing in
19 the case of industry.
20 But you talked about a plan for the
21 four States, and one of your points was
22 uniform enforcement procedures. This in-
23 trlgues me a little because the enforcement
24 procedures in the States are slightly different.
25 And while we have dealt with many of these
-------
1 LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 States, all four States on the enforcement
3 procedures, they all work it slightly differ-
4 ently. We have had satisfactory results with
5 the four States in their enforcement procedures.
6 We have never recommended in the suggested State
7 ¥ater Pollution Control action, revised, that
8 every State has to have a uniform enforcement
9 procedure as long as they get the Job really done.
10 What is the virtue of having a uniform
11 enforcement procedure?
12 The reason I raise this is because if
13 there is no real purpose, you might be spending
14 a lot of energy achieving something which really
15 doesn't come up with an appreciable result.
16 MRS. CLUSEN: I would be tempted to
17 agree with ycu, Mr. Stein. I don't think that
18 we are committed to this idea. I think the point
19 probably that we are trying to make is that per-
20 haps in the time limitation set by various State
21 procedures that a lag might develop. We are more
22 concerned with operating somewhat within the same
23 framework and timetable that we are.
24 And may I say in regard to the specific
25 statements that I think you will find them more
-------
U95.
1 LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP UNITED STATES
2 fully explained in the State statements. I was
3 pulling this out rather hurriedly. And I might
* also say that because of the League reputation
5 for accuracy that I did ask each of these State
6 Leagues to check their statements with their
7 State agencies so this should reflect the
8 situation as it really exists.
9 MR. STEIN: I think we are very lucky
10 in this area. Again, we have had experience
11 with all four States. In my opinion--! think
12 I have been in this field a long time and have
13 paid particular attention to the enforcement
l4 aspects of the State laws—all these States have
15 enforcement procedures and enforcement policies
16 which will enable them to take appropriate State
17 action to meet any reasonable deadline. This
18 has never been a problem, as far as I can see,
19 in these four States.
20 MRS. CLUSEN: We are very glad to know
21 that.
22 MR. STEIN: We have a letter I would
23 Just like to introduce into the record from the
24 Izaak Walton League of America, Calumet Region
25 Chapter, by John Chura, President, which will be
-------
1496
I IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OP AMERICA
2 introduced Into the record. This letter Is ad-
3 dressed to Secretary Udall, dated January 24, 1968,
4 IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA, INC.
Defender of Woods, Waters and Wildlife
5 CALUMET REGION CHAPTER
14736 Beachview Terrace
6 Dolton, Illinois
7 January 24, 1968
8 The Honorable S. Udall, Secretary of the Interior
United States Department of the Interior
9 Office of the Secretary
Washington, D. C. 20240
10
Dear Secretary Udall:
11
The Calumet Region Chapter, Dolton,
12
Illinois, of the Izaak Walton League of America,
13
sharing the environmental objectives of the State
14
and the Department of Interior for Lake Michigan
15
and indeed all of our country's waters, will rec-
16
commend adoption of the following resolution to
17
both the Illinois State Division and National Con-
18
ventions of the Izaak Walton League of America.
19
WHEREAS: The necessity for enforce-
20
ment of water pollution control is
21
self-evident, and Federal laws since
22
1956 and State laws since June 30, 1967,
23
have not been uniformly enforced, and
24
now that water quality standards are
25
established
-------
1*197
1 IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OP AMERICA
2 THEREFORE: Let It be resolved that
3 the Izaak Walton League of America,
4 through its membership, will initiate
5 energetically and promptly court
5 action to produce enforcement.
7 Passed as a recommendation to the Illinois
g State Division Convention and National Convention by
9 the Board of Directors. Calumet Region Chapter, Dol-
10 ton, Illinois, in special session on January 23,1968
11 We would appreciate the transmittal be
12 read into the record of the Lake Michigan Four-
13 State Conference that is scheduled to commence
14 January 31, 1968.
15 Sincerely yours,
Calumet Region Chapter, IWLA
16 (Signed)
John Chura, President
17
cc: Reg. H.W. Poston
18 Regional Dir. Dept. Interior
Mr. Vinton Bacon
10 Gen. Supt. Met. San. Dist.
Mr. Clarence W. Klassen
20 Technical Secty. 111. State Water Brd.
21 MR. POSTON: I also have a letter here
22 from the United States Department of Agriculture,
23 Mr. George S. James, Regional Forester, which I
24 would like to introduce in the record. I will
25 have copies made and distributed to the Conferees.
-------
1498
1 U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2 (Which said letter is as follows:)
3 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FOREST SERVICE
4 EASTERN REGION
633 W. Wisconsin Ave., Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203
5
In Reply Refer to
6 2500
7 January 19, 1968
g Mr. H. W. Poston, Regional Director
Great Lakes Region, Federal Water
9 Pollution Control Administration
33 East Congress Parkway, Room 410
10 Chicago, Illinois 60605
11 Dear Mr. Poston:
12 Thank you for your invitation to present
13 a statement at the Conference in the matter of
14 pollution of Lake Michigan and its tributary basin
15 on January 31, 1968.
16 A Forest Service statement for inclusion tin
17 the record of the conference is attached. We are vi
18 tally concerned with the quality of waters flowing
19 into and from National forests,and in particular thje
20 effect of our management on this water quality.
21 As the focal point of the meeting will
22 probably be the matter of industrial and municipal
23 pollution towards the southern end of Lake Michi-
24 gan, we will not request time for presenting this
25 statement in person.
-------
1499,
1 U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2
Sincerely yours,
4
5 (Signed) George S. James
Regional Forester
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 STATEMENT BY GEORGE S. JAMES
13
REGIONAL FORESTER, EASTERN REGION
14
15 U. S. FOREST SERVICE, MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN
16
17
18
19 For inclusion in the records of the
20
Conference in the Matter of Pollution of Lake
21
22 Michigan and its Tributary Basin, January 31, 1968
23
24
25
-------
1500
-------
150-1
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FOREST SERVICE - EASTERN REGION
REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS
633 W. Wisconsin Ave., Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203
FIELD OFFICES
ILLINOIS
Shawnee National Forest
Harrisburg Nat'l. Bank Bldg.
Harrisburg, III. 62946
Ranger Districts and Headquarters
Elizabethtown Elizabeth town, III.
Jonesboro Jonesboro, III.
Murphysboro Murphysboro, III.
Vienna Vienna, III.
INDIANA-OHIO
Wayne-Hoosier National Forests
Stone City Nat'l. Bank Bldg.
Bedford, Indiana 47421
Browns town
Tell City
Athens
Ironton
Brownstown, Ind.
Tell City, Ind.
Athens, Ohio
Ironton, Ohio
MICHIGAN
Hiawatha National Forest, P.O. Bldg.
Escanaba, Mich. 49829
Manistique
Munising
Rapid River
St. Ignace
Sault Ste. Marie
Manistique, Mich.
Munising, Mich.
Rapid River, Mich.
St. Ignace, Mich.
Sault Ste. Marie, Mich.
Huron-Manistee National Forests
Cadillac, Michigan 49601
Baldwin
Cadillac
Harrisville
Manistee
Mio
Tawas
White Cloud
Baldwin, Mich.
Cadillac, Mich.
Harrisville, Mich.
Manistee, Mich.
Mio, Michigan
East Tawas, Mich.
White Cloud, Mich.
Ottawa National Forest
Ironwood, Michigan 49938
Bergland
Bessemer
Iron River
Kenton
Ontonagon
Water smeet
Bergland, Mich.
Bessemer, Mich.
Iron River, Mich.
Kenton, Mich.
Ontonagon, Mich.
Watersmeet, Mich.
MINNESOTA
Chippewa National Forest
Cass Lake, Minnesota 56633
Bena
Blackduck
Cass Lake
Cut Foot Sioux
Dora Lake
Marcell
Remer
Walker
Bena, Minn.
Blackduck, Minn.
Cass Lake, Minn.
Deer River, Minn.
Northome, Minn.
Marcell, Minn.
Remer, Minn.
Walker, Minn.
Superior National Forest, P.O. Bldg.
Duluth, Minnesota 55801
Aurora
Gunflint
Halfway
Isabella
Kawishiwi
LaCroix
Tofte
Two Harbors
Virginia
Aurora, Minn.
Grand Marais, Minn.
Ely, Minn.
Isabella, Minn.
Ely, Minn.
Cook, Minn.
Tofte, Minn.
Two Harbors, Minn.
Virginia, Minn.
MISSOURI
Clark National Forest, Rolla, Mo. 65401
Ranger Districts and Headquarters
Centerville
Fredericktown
Houston
Poplar Bluff
Potosi
Rolla
Salem
Centerville, Mo.
Fredericktown, Mo.
Houston, Mo.
Poplar Bluff, Mo.
Potosi, Mo.
Rolla, Mo.
Salem, Mo.
Cedar Creek LU Area Fulton, Mo.
Mark Twain National Forest, 304 Wilhoit Bldg.,
Springfield, Missouri 65806
Ava
Cassville
Doniphan
Van Buren
Willow Springs
Winona
Ava, Mo.
Cassville, Mo.
Doniphan, Mo.
Van Buren, Mo.
Willow Springs, Mo.
Winona, Mo.
NEW HAMPSHIRE & MAINE
White Mountain National Forest, Federal Bldg.
719 Main St., Laconia, N.H. 03246
Ammonoosuc
Androscoggin
Evans Notch
Pemigewasset
Saco
Littleton, N.H.
Gorham, N.H.
Bethel , Maine
Plymouth, N.H.
Conway, N.H.
PENNSYLVANIA
Allegheny National Forest, P.O. Bldg.,
Warren, Pa., 16365
Bradford
Marienville
Ridgway
Sheffield
Bradford, Pa.
Marienville, Pa.
Ridgway, Pa.
Sheffield, Pa.
VERMONT & NEW YORK
Green Mountain National Forest,
Rutland, Vermont 05702
Central
Middlebury
Rochester
Hector LU Area
Manchester, Vt.
Middlebury, Vt.
Rochester, Vt.
Ithaca, N.Y.
WEST VIRGINIA
Monongahela National Forest, Dept. of Agric.Bldg.,
Sycamore St., Elkins, W.Va. 26241
Cheat Parsons, W. Va.
Gauley Richwood, W. Va.
Greenbrier Bartow, W. Va.
Marlinton Marlinton, W. Va.
Potomac Petersburg, W. Va.
White Sulphur White Sulphur Springs, W. Va.
WISCONSIN
Chequamegon National Forest, Federal Bldg.
Park Falls, Wisconsin 54552
Glidden
Hayward
Medford
Park Falls
Washburn
Glidden, Wis.
Hayward, Wis.
Medford, Wis.
Park Falls, Wis.
Washburn, Wis.
Nicolet National Forest, Merchants St. Bank Bldg.,
Rhinelander, Wis. 54501
Eagle River
Florence
Lakewood
Laona
Three Lakes
Eagle River, Wis.
Florence, Wis.
Lakewood, Wis.
Laona, Wis.
Three Lakes, Wis.
-------
1502
! U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2 The Eastern Region of the U. S. Forest
3 Service consists of 17 National Forests located
4 in a 20-State area, spreading from Minnesota to
g Missouri to the northeastern States. There are
6 four National Forests located in the Lake Michigan
watershed.
g The Manistee National Forest is located
9 in lower Michigan. Tributary streams to Lake
10 Michigan either originating on or flowing through
u the Manistee National Forest Include the White,
12 Pere Marquette, Big Sable, and part of the
13 Manistee Rivers, as well as several smaller
14 streams. The deep sandy soils in this area have
15 a moderating effect on streamflow with resultant
16 moderate peak flows and substantial low flows.
17 There are three miles of Lake Michigan shoreline
18 in Federal Government ownership administered as
19 part of the Manistee National Forest.
20 The Hiawatha National Forest, consisting
21 of two separate units located in upper Michigan,
22 has about 20 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline in
23 government ownership. The streams draining into
24 Lake Michigan Include the Pine, Carp, Brevort,
25 Indian, White Fish, and Sturgeon Rivers, The
-------
1303
U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2 Hiawatha National Forest has extensive areas of
3 wetlands as well as its forested lands. Soils
4 are generally sandy with streamflows being
moderately stable.
6 The Nlcolet National Forest in northern
_ Wisconsin is located inland some distance. The
Q Forest includes headwaters of -the Brule, Pine,
o
9 and Popple Rivers (which flow into the Menominee),
10 and the Peshtigo, Oconto, and Wolf Rivers. A
small part of the Ottawa National Forest located
in upper Michigan and adjacent to the Nicolet
13 National Forest, also forms a part of the head-
14 waters of the Menominee River.
15 There are approximately 3,300,000 acres
16 within National Forest boundaries in the Lake
Michigan watershed. Of this gross acreage,
approximately 1,800,000 acres are in government
19 ownership administered by the Forest Service.
20 The Organic Act of June ^, 1897, cites
21 "securing favorable conditions of water flows" as
22 a principal purpose of National Forests. The
23 Weeks Act of March 1, 1911, further recommends
24 for purchase such forested, cutover, or depleted
25 lands within the watersheds of navigable streams,
-------
! U. S. FOREST SERVICE
„ as may be necessary to the regulation of the flow
ti
of navigable streams.
3
Because those "favorable conditions of
e water flows" and "the regulation of the flow of
6
navigable streams" include quantity and timing,
6
in addition to quality, a great responsibility
lies with the Forest Service in the use, manage-
o
ment, and administration of these key lands.
9
To meet Forest Service responsibilities
in the water resource field, there are established
water resource objectives for all watersheds.
12
These objectives are determined by examining the
13
total water resource use and the related needs,
14
both within National Forest boundaries and for
15
,_ areas downstream, and both for National Forest
lo
and non-National Forest purposes.
18 We consider all water uses including
ig municipal, commercial and industrial, agricul-
20 tural, recreational (include aesthetics), fish,
21 and other aquatic life, wildlife, and forest
22 activities, both present and future.
23 Based on water needs, if the conditions
24 of water flows are satisfactory regarding the
25 quality, quantity, and timing of flows, then
-------
1505_
U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2 water resource objectives include protection
3 requirements to insure that the present satis-
factory conditions are maintained. Other resource
activities, such as recreation use, timber har-
vesting, and road building must be carried out
7 in a manner which will prevent stream sedimen-
8 tation and other pollution. In fiscal year 196?
9 there were 124 million board feet of timber cut
within the Lake Michigan watershed under contract
with commercial timber operators. Timber har-
vesting contracts contain clauses directed towards
the prevention of stream sedimentation and other
pollution. We believe that managed timber har-
15 vesting causes little, if any, sedimentation or
other pollution.
17 There were about 26 miles of road
lg constructed or reconstructed on National Forest
19 lands in the Lake Michigan watershed in fiscal
20 year 1967. Erosion control measures are included
21 in the design and construction of Forest Service
22 roads.
23 Other water quality protection require-
24 ments include the proper design of Forest Service
25 j sanitary systems to insure that the affected
-------
1506
! U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2 natural waters meet the standards set for the
3 various uses of that water. Forest Service
4 sanitary engineers, watershed scientists, soil
6 scientists, and geologists are all involved to
6 insure adequate design of sanitary systems. The
7 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
8 further approves our sanitary system designs.
9 Of primary concern to UL is the problem
10 of excessive fertilization of surface waters.
H This problem is perhaps of more immediate concern
12 to smaller inland lakes within the Lake Michigan
13 Basin. Eutrophication of surface waters is
14 accelerated by excessive use of fertilizers and
15 the dumping of nutrients from sanitary systems
16 into the waters. Various systems of sewage treat-
17 ment may be safe from a health standpoint and yet
18 be responsible for the addition of phosphates,
19 nitrates, and other nutrients to surface waters
20 to the point where the waters become aesthetically
21 unpleasing with algae blooms and other weed growth.
22 In extreme cases, the biotic balance and fisheries
23 of the waters may be harmed. Developments with
24 I septic systems in very permeable soils as well as
25 impermeable soils ringing small lakes can be
-------
1507
U. S. FOREST SERVICE
responsible for accelerated eutrophication.
If there Is a need to improve the
quality, quantity or timing of the water resource
appropriate improvement objectives are established,
We may employ any reasonable action to meet these
objectives. These land management prescriptions
a may include such things as the restoration of the
9 eroding streambanks, the effective use of vege-
tation or engineering structures to regulate the
quantity and timing of waterflows, or the proper
12 redesign of faulty sanitary systems.
While the water resource is the prime
14 factor in any land management decision, other
15 resource uses of these lands are, and must be
made. Land management prescriptions to meet
17 water resource objectives must be in harmony
18 with these other resource uses. This is in
19 accordance with the multiple use principle set
20 forth in the Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act
21 of 1960. Multiple use is the management of all
22 the lands so that the renewable surface resources
23 of the National Forests are utilized in the combi-
24 i nation that will best meet the needs of the
25 American people.
-------
1508
1 U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2 In accepting our responsibilities, we
3 have developed five Forest Service policies related
4 to water quality.
5 1. Insure that return flows,
6 particularly those associated with
7 recreation and other domestic use,
8 do not impair natural waters for
9 the other purposes water is expected
10 to serve,
ll 2. Make certain that National Forest
12 land management practices are con-
13 ducted in a manner which will insure
14 a quality of water yield suitable
15 for its intended purposes.
1$ 3. Maintain a water quality satis-
17 factory for other National Forest re-
lg source uses, such as fish habitat,
19 and swimming and related uses whenever
20 it is within the capability of the
21 Forest Service to do so. All Forest
22 Service swimming areas are now moni-
23 tored to Insure that they are safe
24 for swimming.
25 4. Insure biologically safe, suitable
-------
1309
l U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2 drinking water for use of the
3 public. All wells are monitored
and tested on a planned basis.
5. Modernize sanitary systems
at existing Forest Service in-
stallations where necessary. An
approved sanitary system at all
new installations is a basic part
10 of the installation plan
Compliance with these guidelines is no
12 simple task. About 40 percent of the gross area
13 within National Forest boundaries in the Lake
14 Michigan watershed is held in private ownership.
15 We have no Jurisdiction over these private lands.
16 A large proportion of this private land is located
along major streams or adjacent to lakes, con-
18 atituting a potential pollution source over which
the Forest Service has no control.
20 The most obvious way, then, to make a
21 meaningful contribution to the water quality prob-
22 lem starts with cooperation with private landowners
23 industry, and the various Federal, State, and local
24 government units. This need for cooperation is, of
25 course, the reason for this Conference.
-------
1510
l U. S. FOREST SERVICE
One of our objectives Is to cooperate
0 with the various States in improving fisheries
o
. habitat. We are becoming increasingly involved
4
in the anadromous fisheries program in the Great
5
Lakes. Good quality waters are needed for salmon
6
and trout fisheries. Water temperatures must be
maintained within acceptable limits. Chemical
9
pollutants must be held below certain limits.
»r
Siltation must also be maintained below certain
10
acceptable limits to prevent the filling of
spawning beds with sediments and the accompanying
reduction of oxygen levels. Often what we do to
13
control erosion on National Forest lands is
14
negated by the erosion that is still taking place
15
t. on other lands upstream.
lo
Thus, we are not only concerned with
lg the effect of our management on water quality.
19 We are also concerned with the effect of the
20 quality of waters beyond our control on our
21 ability to provide needed services for the
22 American people. For instance, we now have
23 recreation areas with swimming facilities along
24 Lake Michigan shores. We are planning additional
25 recreational facilities of this type. The water
-------
1511
r— 1
I U. S. FOREST SERVICE
2 quality of Lake Michigan will, in part, determine
3 the enjoyment that the people will derive from
4 these areas and the economic development of the
5 surrounding area associated with these recrea-
6 tional facilities.
7 Compared to the total impact of man on
3 water quality in Lake Michigan and its tributary
9 waters, the National Forest influence water
lO quality to a relatively small degree. Neverthe-
U less, the Forest Service can and does contribute
12 to the water quality of the Lake Michigan water-
13 shed. It is our sincere desire that our contri-
14 butions to this very important aspect of our total
15 environment are meaningful and correct. We will
16 make every effort to insure that they are.,
17 - - -
18 (The following statements were also
19 submitted for inclusion in the record as if
20 read:)
21
22 REMARKS OF ROMAN H. KOENINGS
23 REGIONAL DIRECTOR, LAKE CENTRAL REGION
24 BUREAU OF OUTDOOR RECREATION
25 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
-------
1512
AT THE LAKE MICHIGAN ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE
l BUREAU OF OUTDOOR RECREATION
2
. JANUARY 31, 1968, IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
3
4
I am Roman H. Koenings, Regional Director
5
of the Lake Central Region of the Bureau of Outdoor
6
Recreation, U. S. Department of the Interior. We
are deeply concerned about the continued reduction
o
of water quality and attending degradation of the
«f
environment in the Lake Michigan Basin. At stake
are present and future opportunities for recrea-
tional use and, even more important, the livability
of the basin for present and future generations.
13
Water for recreational purposes is
becoming increasingly essential. The availability
,. of more leisure time and increased use of that
lo
leisure time for outdoor recreational activities
lg will place greater demand on our lakes and streams
ig to satisfy these demands. The increase in leisure
2Q time associated with a general higher disposable
21 income will provide the population of the States of
22 Wisconsin-, Michigan, Illinois, and Indiana, as well
23 as their vacationing guests an opportunity to par-
24 ticipate in outdoor recreation more frequently and
25 for longer periods of time.
-------
1513
1 BUREAU OP OUTDOOR RECREATION
2 The economics of outdoor recreation
3 cannot be ignored, Both Michigan and Wisconsin
4 report their tourist industry as over a billion
5 dollars a year. As indicators, the basin contains
6 about 80,000 summer homes, 200 private campgrounds,
7 and 400 private group camps and many resorts. Add
8 to these the supporting facilities and services
9 from restaurants, motels and gasoline stations to
10 sporting goods manufacturing and sales, and you
n have a whopping private investment in outdoor
12 recreation in the basin.
13 The Bureau has conducted or is partial-
14 pating in several water resource studies involving
15 all or portions of the Lake Michigan Basin. These
16 include the International Joint Commission Great
17 Lakes Water Levels Study, the Great Lakes Illinois
18 River Water Quality Study, the Upper Mississippi
19 River Basin Comprehensive Study, the Island Study
20 in Wisconsin and Michigan, the Grand River Basin
21 Study in Michigan and the St. Joseph River in
22 Indiana and Michigan. Some of the more pertinent
23 findings to date are:
24 1. The population of the four-State
25 area was 2*J- 1/2 million people in 1960 and is
-------
1514
1 BUREAU OP OUTDOOR RECREATION
2 expected to double by the year 2000. About a
3 third of these people reside in the highly
4 urbanized areas, including Milwaukee, Chicago,
5 and Gary-Hammond-East Chicago.
6 2. The 625 Federal, State, and local
7 public recreation areas in the Lake Michigan
8 Basin have 88,300 acres developed for recreational
9 use. On Lake Michigan, 1,300 miles are classed
10 as recreational shoreline, including some of the
U finest beaches in the country. Much of this
12 shoreline is privately controlled.
13 3. The existing areas are not meeting
14 needs, and the demand for opportunities to partici-
15 pate in boating, swimming, water skiing, and
16 fishing are expected to increase fourfold by the
11 year 2000. To provide for these and other
lg recreation needs, about 240,000 acres of inten-
19 sively developed recreation land and 550,000 '
20 acres of extensively developed land will be
21 required to meet demand in the year 2010.
22 This summary not only points up some
23 of the outstanding recreational resources
24 presently available in the Lake Michigan Basin
25 but it also shows the pressing need for additional
-------
1515
BUREAU OF OUTDOOR RECREATION
2 recreational opportunities. The availability of
3 high quality water is a prime consideration in the
4 planning and development of recreational facilities
whether we use the water to boat on, swim in, or
picnic and hike near. Water quality degradation
riot only threatens to eliminate or seriously
limit existing developments, but it also precludes
9 future or expanded developments at many desirable,
10 strategically located sites.
11 Continued degradation of the water re-
12 sources in the basin will place greater recrea-
13 I tional use pressure on the few remaining acceptable
14 water areas, particularly near urban areas.
15 Our 1965 study on the Lake Michigan
i
16 Basin shows the extent of water quality influences
17 on recreation. Areas where water quality has
18 grossly or moderately impaired the opportunities
!
19 j for body contact water activities include the
20 densely populated shore areas of Green Bay,
21 Xanitowoc, Milwaukee, Kenosha, Racine, Gary-
22 Hammond-East Chicago, Benton Harbor, Holland,
23 [ Grand Haven, and Escanaba. In addition, numerous
24 tributary rivers are not suitable for water-based
25 activities and contribute significantly to lakeshor^
-------
1516
1 I BUREAU OF OUTDOOR RECREATION
2 problems. Some of the specific recreation
„ facilities that have been or are in danger of
. being damaged by pollution include: Bay View
. Beach at Green Bay, Indiana Dunes State Park,
.. Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, Muskegon
D
State Park, Warren Dunes State Park, Chicago
Q metropolitan parks, and Milwaukee county parks.
o
Research is generally lacking to show
«f
10 exact correlations between recreational use and
n pollution. In some instances health hazards are
12 much greater in waters that are aesthetically
13 pleasing. Cases have been reported that swimming
14 use remains high even when a beach is posted to
15 the risk of infection. On the other hand, areas
16 that have been defiled visually or that emit
17 odors are considered unusable by the public even
18 though bacterial contamination is a minor problem.
19 In the cities, where open space and natural areas
20 are at a premium, people will use whatever is
21 available. I believe we would be disturbed if
22 we knew the extent to which city children play
23 in the polluted harbor and waterfront areas.
24 Despoiling aesthetic values of the lake
25 are usually the result of uncontrolled pollution
-------
1517
I BUREAU OF OUTDOOR RECREATION
2 over a long period. While the buildup of bottom
3 deposits does not directly impair recreational
4 use, the subsequent dredging in harbors and off-
5 shore dumping have been responsible for fouling
6 some of our heavily used beaches. Nutrification
7 over a period of time has also created aesthetic
8 problems caused by algae buildups which accumulate
9 and decay on many beaches. Wastes from boats
10 have been responsible for fouling harbors and
H beaches with oil, untreated sewage, and debris.
12 In most cases beach health hazards are
13 closely associated with pollution sources in the
14 vicinity of the recreation area. We believe the
15 greatest initial benefits to recreation would come
16 from the control of nearby sources of pollution.
17 Solving the long term degradation of the lake,
18 however, will require a major coordinated effort
19 to control both shoreline and tributary stream
20 pollution sources. It is as unrealistic to control
21 pollution on half of the lake as it is to control
22 shoreline sources without consideration of upstream
23 problems.
24 i There can be no question that outdoor
25 recreation is one of the principal beneficiaries
-------
1518
! BUREAU OP OUTDOOR RECREATION
2 of pollution abatement programs, But outdoor
3 recreation also is a contributor to pollution.
4 Pleasure boats use the lakes as if they were
6 oversized toilets; summer cottages and associated
6 recreation areas often have inadequate sewage
7 treatment facilities; and the American citizen
8 is a notorious litterbug. As a matter of fact,
9 from an esthetic standpoint, I sometimes wonder
lo if littering isn't as serious as the many other
U types of environmental intrusions.
12 Boaters accustomed to dumping wastes
13 overboard will have to be educated and convinced
14 that it is in their best interest to acquire and
15 use the equipment needed to treat these wastes
ig for onshore discharge. New marinas should be
17 required to have adequate facilities for receiving
13 boat wastes and existing marinas should be required
19 to provide such facilities within a reasonable
20 time.
2i Communities must be sold on the need
22 for local ordinances governing the disposal and
23 treatment of wastes emanating from laKe and
24 | riverside residential areas.
25 Littering is a national disease which
-------
1319
1 BUREAU OF OUTDOOR RECREATION
2 can be cured through education. And the most
3 effective education is in the family where parents
4 show by example that gum wrappers and beer cans
5 belong in the trash can and not on the ground or
g in the water.
7 Closely allied with water quality are
g other environmental problems which set the tone
9 of livability, particularly in our urban areas.
10 In many cases the solution of these problems is
11 interrelated to water quality. Social values are
12 assuming greater importance in resource allocation
13 and development and cannot be molded to fit a
14 clean-cut cost benefit analysis. The social
15 revolution now, in progress demands new thinking
16 and new methods of solving problems. The tre-
If mendous costs of solving water and air pollution
18 as an initial step to improving livability may be
19 minor when compared to the social damage of pol-
20 lution. Recreation opportunities will be increased
21 substantially by a coordinated multi-stage pollution
22 abatement program but the real beneficiaries of the
23 program will be the people who live near and use
24 the waters of the basin.
25 Thank you.
-------
1520
I BUREAU OP SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
2
3 BUREAU 0? SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
4 STATEMENT FOR THE
6 LAKE MICHIGAN WATER QUALITY CONFERENCE
6 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS - JANUARY 31, 1968
7
8 The sport fish and wildlife resources
9 of Lake Michigan are of National importance. In
10 I960, about 19 million angler-days and 5 million
U hunter-days, valued at approximately $45 million
12 (estimated by procedures described in Supplement
13 No. 1 of Senate Document No. 97, 87th Congress,
14 2nd Session, titled "Evaluation Standards for
15 Primary Outdoor Recreation Benefits") were spent
15 within the lake's Basin. This use is continuing
17 to increase. Within the next 50 years, fishing
18 use probably will triple and hunting use, double
19 for Lake Michigan.
20 In terms of numbers of fishermen, pier
21 fishing for perch is probably the most important
22 type of sport fishing in the lake. A 1964. investi-
23 gation of fisherman-day use along the Chicago
24 lakefront revealed that 1 million people fished
25 this 30 miles of shoreline that year. Other
-------
1321
BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
2 species of importance to Lake Michigan sport
3 fishermen include sraallmouth and largemouth bass,
walleyes, northern pike, trout, and salmon.
Important spawning runs of native and
introduced trout occurring in Lake Michigan were
seriously curtailed in the late 1950's because
of sea lamprey depredations. They are now
increasing and with the success of the lamprey
control program and recent fish introductions
it is hoped they will continue to. These increases
are encouraging the States to take definite steps
13 to increase present runs and to establish new
14 spawning populations.
15 We are all aware of the tremendous
success Michigan has had with its coho salmon
17 introduction. When the spawning adults returned
to their home streams this fall they provided a
19 new and spectacular fishery. The 72,000 flsher-
20 men who took advantage of this new fishery left
21 a distinct mark on the economy of the region.
22 Available evidence indicates that this program can
23 be expanded to include more of Lake Michigan.
24 Fishing opportunities need not be limited to the
25 mouths of Michigan streams.
-------
1322
1 BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
2 We are proud of the role we have played
3 in the development of these fisheries. Under the
4 terms of the Anadromous Fish Act of 1965 (P.L.
5 89-304) the Bureau has supplied over a million
6 dollars to States bordering Lake Michigan on a
7 cost-sharing basis ". . .for the conservation,
g development, and enhancement of the Nation's
9 anadromous fish. . . !1
10 By nature of their reproductive require-
11 ments, fish that ascend streams to spawn are highly
12 subject to pollution. Adults are subjected to the
13 concentrated pollutants in the lower stream reaches
14 If these are sufficient to discourage or kill the
15 adults, there can be no reproduction. If the adult^
16 are able to negotiate pollution barriers their off-
17 springs, which are more delicate than the adults,
18 must be able to move downstream through the pol-
19 luted area to the lake. We are especially inter-
20 ested in the maintenance and enhancement of these
21 fisheries. While we can provide material assis-
22 tance to the States, this assistance is to no avail!
I
23 if runs of sport fishes have little chance of
I
24 perpetuating themselves.
25 Future fishing and hunting opportunities
-------
1323
l BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
2 in Lake Michigan and its tributaries would be
3 almost unlimited if these renewable water re-
4 sources were managed and intensively developed,
6 The quantity and quality of the fish and wildlife
6 resources of the Basin are, however, dependent
7 on the quality of the water in tributary streams,
8 connecting marshes, and in the lake.
9 With the exception of Milwaukee Harbor
10 and some inshore and river-mouth areas, there is
11 little evidence yet of general deterioration of
12 water quality throughout most of Lake Michigan.
13 This is not to say that Lake Michigan has not
14 changed or is not changing. Concentrations of
15 several major ions and total dissolved solids are
15 increasing at a slow and constant rate. Without
17 acceleration of this rate, significant detrimental
18 fishery effects throughout most of the lake are
19 not anticipated for many years. The possibility
20 of a sudden acceleratory shift cannot be altogether
21 discounted. Such a shift occurred in Lake Erie
22 around 1910 and appears to be symptomatic of
23 accelerated aging of that lake. Declines in many
24 of the more valuable fisheries have been associated
25 with this dramatic process.
-------
1524
I BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
2 The relatively small changes in the
3 water quality of Lake Michigan do not preclude
4 the possibility of other drastic changes in
5 the environment of considerable damaging conse-
6 quence to fish and wildlife. Little is known of
7 the possible accumulation of toxic substances such
8 as pesticides, detergents, and other chemicals in
9 the water, sediment, fish flesh, and important
10 food organisms. Studies are being made to deter-
11 mine the extent of accumulation of toxic materials
12 and their effect on fish and wildlife.
13 Many of the tributary streams are used
14 extensively for waste disposal. This was and is
15 a convenient method of disposal. Bottom conditions
10 of many tributaries have been so severely degraded
17 that only pollution-tolerant organisms can survive.
18 Extensive mortality of fish has occurred, generally
19 due to surges of pollutants or to lack of oxygen
20 during periods of low stream flows. One of the
21 most serious sources of organic pollution is
22 attributable to the manufacture of pulp and paper.
23 We are concerned over the increasing
24 dredging and spoil deposition activities pursued
25 by private and commercial interests, rural
-------
1 BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
2 communities, and urban centers bordering the
3 Great Lakes shores. Valuable aquatic habitat
4 is disrupted or destroyed, in addition to degra-
5 elation of water quality in the vicinity of the
5 work. The need for alternate dredge disposal
7 sites, located and constructed so as to keep
g damages; to our aquatic environment at a minimum,
9 looms ever larger as a paramount problem facing
lO all Federal, State, and local interests.
11 The Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
12 Wildlife participates directly in the Great Lakes
13 Fishery program by cooperating with the Great
14 Lakes Fishery Commission. The Bureau has con-
15 structed three fish hatcheries to rear 4 million
16 lake trout annually, 2 million of which are
17 stocked in Lake Michigan. The annual cost of
18 Lake Michigan fish stocking by the Bureau approxl-
19 mates $86 thousand. Assessment studies by the
20 Bureau of Commercial Fisheries indicate that this
21 program is highly successful. There is indication
22 that a natural brood stock of lake trout will be
23 established from these plants, thus eliminating
24 most of the need for additional plantings past
25 1978. The quality of the Lake Michigan water and
-------
1526
1 BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
2 quantity of spawning areas will.have a direct
3 bearing on the ability of the breeding stocks
4 to maintain themselves. Further adverse changes
5 in water quality will require extension of the
Q stocking period or eliminate the program entirely.
7 If pollution of the lake is arrested and fishing
g pressures reach projected levels, our hatchery
9 capacity can be used to produce other needed sport
!0 fishes.
H Lake Michigan is not a primary producer
12 of waterfowl, but it is important during migration
13 periods and winters a large number of sea and
14 diving ducks. Oil pollution is one of the more
15 important causes of non-hunting mortality of
16 ducks using Great Lakes waters. The bird's in-
17 sulating plumage becomes matted, allowing cold
18 water and air to reach the skin. Body heat is
19 lost faster than it can be generated, and In cold
20 weather the birds soon perish. For a creature
21 that must maintain a body temperature of 102 P.,
22 this becomes a real problem. As many as 12,000
23 "oiled" ducks have been lost from just one such
24 pollution case.
25 Other forms of pollution also influence
-------
1527
1 1BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
_ ducks either directly or indirectly. Some chemi-
£
cal pollutants are toxic when ingested, while
3
others such as silt and sewage destroy or degrade
the environment.
5
Wise use of our fish and wildlife
o
resources is imperative if the greatest recrea-
tional value is to be received and the resources
O
perpetuated. Pollution losses are serious and
V
10 can be avoided. Purposeful environmental contami-
nation is gradually being eliminated, but
"accidental" discharge of pollutants, particularly
13 oils, is the result of inadequate laws, less than
14 vigorous enforcement of existing laws, and apathy
15 on the part of industrial and shipping interests.
16 It is the position of the Bureau that
17 an ultimate goal of the clean waters program of
18 the Nation should be to maintain or achieve such
19 quality in every stream, lake, estuary, bay, or
20 other water as will support the full potential of
21 the water for production and human use of aquatic
22 life and water-dependent wildlife resources. Since
23 many waters now have water qualities higher than
24 those set by States or recommended by the Governmenjb,
25 every effort should be made to protect these high
-------
: 1328
BUREAU OF SPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
2 quality waters where they exist and decrease
3 pollution loads in all other waters. It should
be the primary purpose of all individuals,
communities, and State and Federal agencies
6 having an interest in Lake Michigan to continue
7 to develop a mutual comprehensive program for
reducing the pollution or this interstate body
9 of water. To this end, the Bureau of Sport
10 Fisheries and Wildlife will work closely with
n any group or agency having an interest in the
12 improvement and maintenance of this valuable
13 resource
14
15 STATEMENT OF
16 GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS
17 SUBMITTED BY MRS. ALVA APPLEBY
18 CHAIRMAN, POLLUTION DIVISION
19
20 Secretary Udall, Governor Kerner and
21 Conservationistsi
22 As a spokesman for the General Federa-
23 tion of Women's Clubs through the request of Mrs
24 Alva Appleby of Skowhegan, Maine, Pollution
25 Chairman of the General Federation, I somehow
-------
1529
! GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS
2 hope to voice the thoughts and expectations of
o club women throughout the United States.
4 Women in general, but particularly club
g women have become infinitely more sophisticated
. conservationwise in the past decade. In lay own
b
State of Wisconsin, I as State Conservation Chair-
Q man, try to inform and direct conservation chair-
o v
9 men in each of 10 districts, who in turn channel
10 information to the 322 clubs and approximately
n 22,000 club women in the State. This pattern
12 Is carried out in all States, and club women are
13 usually well informed individuals who have a deep
14 and genuine concern for the quality of their
15 environment.
16 Of all of the interlocking facets of
17 Federation conservation activities, however,
jg perhaps the area which arouses the greatest
!9 response is the division of water pollution.
20 Water, whether it be streams, rivers, small lakes,
21 or our Great Lakes, arouses an emotional drive in
22 women that cries out for action. Women throughout
23 the Nation have striven to be informed, to be
24 articulate, and to present concerted action because
25 they want clean water. Women are concerned about
-------
153_0_
1 GENERAL FEDERATION OP WOMEN'S CLUBS
2 aesthetic values as well as moral values, and the
3 continued and worsening degradation of Lake Michi-
4 gan offers e hideous challenge to both.
5 I think that it is pretty well understood
8 that the deteri.oration of this vast body of water
7 must be reversed soon if Lake Michigan is to be
8 saved at all. This Conference therefore seems to
9 be the first bright spot on the horizon, because
10 it is the first true attempt to deal with the
H problem as a whole. No matter how concerned each
12 of the four bordering States may be about pollution
13 in Lake Michigan, it seems improbable that States
14 working alone can cope with a situation of this
15 magnitude, and the General Federation commends the
16 calling of this very much needed Conference.
17 Surely all of the work and energy and knowledge
18 brought together in this united effort will produce
19 results that will have far reaching consequences.
20 There are three points that I would like
21 to briefly touch on in this statement. I do not
22 pretend to be a specialist, but while I may speak
23 in generalities rather than specifics, these are
24 the areas of concern that trouble thousands of
25 women who are interested in the outcome of this
-------
1531
l [ GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS
0 Conference on Lake Michigan.
£
„ The first question concerns the Water
o
. Quality Standards of the State of Wisconsin which
_ have been approved by the Federal Government.
9
Wisconsin club women, especially those who attended
. o
the Green Bay hearings, know that the Fox, the
Oconto and the Peshtlgo Rivers have contributed
9
to the almost total degradation of the lower part
•F
10 of Green Bay, which is a part of Lake Michigan.
u Under the minimum standards for water quality, a
12 low classification for these rivers had been pro-
., posed, but it is expected that these standards
lo
14 will be upgraded as soon as possible. We do not
15 wish to, in effect, preserve the status quo by
lg legalizing existing sources of pollution, so we
I7 would ask--do we already need to upgrade water
18 quality standards which in some Instances would
19 tolerate existing conditions? The Wisconsin Water
20 Quality Standards are good, but we expect better.
21 The second point concerns the need for
22 a "crash program" to save Lake Michigan. Although
23 this is an over used cliche it does invoke the
24 Images of Immediacy and money, and I believe that
25 both are necessary. The General Federation of
-------
1532
I GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS
2 Women's Clubs believes that women understand that
3 there is a price associated with this, and that
4 women are willing to pay that price because there
5 is a sense of shame involved in allowing a great
6 national asset to die. Somehow there is no glory
7 in putting a man on the moon when a great civili-
8 zation fouls and despoils its waters, and perhaps
9 our claim to greatness will stand or fall on our
IQ determination to preserve and restore our own
11 environment for the benefit of all of the people,
12 The third point I would bring up is the
13 urgent need to prevent new sources of pollution.
14 There can be no hope of ever cleaning up the lake
15 if there is an ever mounting backlog of contami-
16 nation, so club women ask specifically for the
17 prevention of new threats to the lake. One such
18 danger is that of thermal pollution from the
19 nuclear power plants already under construction.
20 Surely cooling towers or other devices,which have
21 already been proved technically feasible, should
22 be made mandatory.
23 The other danger comes from new Indus-
24 tries which will be built. The General Federation
25 of Women's Clubs believes that tertiary treatment
-------
GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS
of wastes to remove the phosphates will be
required to clean up Lake Michigan, and that
3
through a licensing process new industries
4
would have to conform to acceptable means of
5
waste disposal which would include tertiary
6
treatment. It would seem incredible, if after
7
a Conference such as this, any other course
8
could be followed.
9
In connection with this additional
10
treatment of wastes it might be added that we
will still have the continuing problem of
12
detergents that has plagued us for so long--
13
detergents which contribute so much of the phos-
14
I phates to our waters. Women are cognizant of
I
the fact that not only tertiary treatment of
16
waste disposal is necessary, but that there is
also a detergent break-through to be solved.
18
In conclusion, I would like to say that
u
20 club women from all over America are looking to
21 i this Conference with the highest hopes and ex-
22 pectations. The President of the Illinois
23 i Federation of Women's Clubs is here today and
24 Joins with me in wishing that from this meeting
25 will come the united efforts and knowledge and
-------
1534
1 GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS
2 determination that can save our Great Lakes
3 and perhaps signal a better day for all of our
4 inland waters.
5 Mrs. G. L. McCormick
State Conservation Chairman, WFWC
6 S37 W26861 Holiday Hill
Waukesha, Wisconsin 53186
7
Representing:
8
Mrs. Alva Appleby, Skowhegan, Maine
9 Chairman Pollution Division
General Federation of Women's Clubs
10
11
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments
12
or questions?
13
(No response.)
14
MR. STEIN: In view of the lateness
15
of the day--
16
MR. HOLMER: Mr. Chairman.
17
MR. STEIN: Yes.
18
MR. HOLMER: Before you get to the
19
lateness of the day (laughter), this statement
20
by the Forester will be introduced into the
21
record. Will it be shared with the members of the
22
Conference also?
23
MR. POSTON: Yes, I indicated the
24
Conferees will get a copy of it shortly.
25
-------
l MURRAY STEIN
2 MR. HOLMER: Will we have an opportunity
3 sometime along the way to have representatives of
. the Department of Agriculture here? I am not so
_ much interested in the Foresters, although these
o
c are significant, as I am in some of the other
V
areas that relate to our concern.
g MR. STEIN: What is the situation on
_ that? Perhaps, Mr. Cook--can you answer that
y
10 question?
' MR. COOK: We have a short report, if
12 you want to take a few minutes.
.„ MR. STEIN: No, no. He wants to question
13
14 the representative of the Agriculture--
15 MR. COOK: No, there will be no repre-
16 sentative of Agriculture here.
17 MR. STEIN: Haven't they been invited?
18 MR. COOK: They were invited. They had
19 to leave. They asked us to read the report if
20 the opportunity arose.
2i MR. STEIN: In view of the interest of
22 Mr. Holmer, we will try to get back the agricul-
23 tural interests here, because questions are fairly
24 obvious in the area that he wants to talk about.
25 MR. COOK: This is a report I think you
-------
1536
1 MURRAY STEIN
2 should hear.
3 MR. STEIN: Let's try to get those
4 people here when we reconvene the Conference,
5 because I do think we need them in person.
Q Are there any other comments or
7 questions?
8 (No response.)
9 MR. STEIN: We can get back to the
10 lateness of the day.
H (Laughter.)
12 MR. STEIN: We are thinking of
13 recessing a little early to let the people
14 who are lucky enough to get home over the
15 weekend to make their plane and train connections,
16 but here is the way we look at the schedule.
17 Next week, same place, 9?30. On
18 Monday we anticipate that we will complete
19 the Illinois and Federal statements.
20 On Tuesday, Michigan and Indiana.
21 On Wednesday, Wisconsin.
22 Of course, if a Governor or a Mayor
23 or a Congressman or a Senator comes in, we will
24 make the necessary adjustments to meet his
25 busy schedule.
-------
1537
MURRAY STEIN
. MR. POOLE: Mr. Chairman.
z
MR. STEIN: Yes.
MR. POOLE: You advised me at noon we
would complete Indiana and Illinois Monday. I
9
have some people that are working people and I
6
have told them to come on Monday.
7
MR. STEIN: Yes, I stand corrected.
o
Illinois and Indiana on Monday.
Michigan will "be on Tuesday and
Wisconsin on Wednesday.
We also have ,the Federal Recommendations
and Conclusions, and we will try to work those in
la
on Monday or Tuesday when we get a chance.
15
14
Am I correct now? Will the Conferees
16 bear with me on this?
17 Monday, Illinois and Indiana, Tuesday,
lg Michigan, Wednesday, Wisconsin? Is that correct?
(All Conferees answered in the
20 affirmative.)
MR. STEIN: All right, we will stand
22 recessed until 9:30 Monday.
23 (Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., an adjournment
24 was taken until 9:30 a.m., Monday, February 5, 1968
25
SO— 312-667 (VOL 3>
-------