STATE
     OF THE
GREAT LAKES
     1995


-------
                  905R951O3
   State of the
   Great Lakes
       1995
         By
   The Governments of
the United States of A merica
        and
       Canada

-------
       COOPERATING TO IMPLEMENT THE GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY AGREEMENT
        MISE EN OEUVRE DE L'ACCORD SUR LA QUALITE DE L'EAU DES GRANDS LACS
               STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES
                                  Prepared by

      Environment Canada                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                         For additional copies please contact:
ENVIRONMENT CANADA
   867 Lakeshore Road
   Burlington, Ontario
       Canada
       L7R 4A6
ENVIRONNEMENT CANADA
    867, rue Lakeshore
    Burlington, Ontario
       Canada
       L7R 4A6
    ISBN 0-662-61887-4/Catalogue No. En40-11/35-1995
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    Great Lakes National Program Office
        77 West Jackson Blvd,
        Chicago, Illinois 60604
             U.S.A.
      EPA 905-R-95-010 - July, 1995

-------
Table of Contents
Executive Summary  	 i
1. Introduction	1
2. Concepts of Ecosystem Health and Integrity	5
3. Indicators  	6
4. Aquatic Community Health 	10
      4.1 State of Aquatic Community Health	 10
      4.2 Major Stresses on Aquatic Communities 	15
5. Human Health and Wellbeing	25
6. Socio-Economics  	28
7. Lake By Lake 	33
      7.1 Lake Superior  	35
      7.2 Lake Michigan	38
      7.3 Lake Huron  	41
      7.4 Lake Erie	44
      7.5 Lake Ontario 	48
      7.6 The Connecting Channels	51
8. Management Challenges for the Future  	51
                   STATE OF THE  GREAT LAKES - 1995

-------
Data Sources for Tables and Figures
Table 1:   Governments of Canada and the United States. 1995. The Great Lakes: An
          Environmental Atlas and Resource Book. (ISBN 0-662-23441-3)	3
Table 2:   SOLEC Steering Committee  	8/9
Table 3:   Koonce, J.F. 1994. Aquatic Community Health of the Great Lakes.  (SOLEC
          Working Paper - modified)	12
Table 4:   SOLEC Steering Committee  	20
Table 5:   Manno, J. et al. 1994. Effects of Great Lakes Basin Environmental Contaminants
          on Human Health. (SOLEC Working Paper)	28
Table 6:   Hartig, J.H. and N.L.  Law. 1994. Progress in Great Lakes Remedial Action Plans:
          Implementing the Ecosystem Approach in Great Lakes Areas of Concern.
          (EPA 905-R-24-020)   	34
Table 7:   same as Table 6 	36
Table 8:   same as Table 6 	39
Table 9:   same as Table 6 	42
Table 10:  same as Table 6 	45
Table 11:  same as Table 6 	49
Table 12:  same as Table 6	52

Figure 1:  Environmental Conservation Branch, Environment Canada  	2
Figure 2:  Great Lakes National Program Office, U.S. EPA	6
Figure 3:  Great Lakes National Program Office, U.S. EPA	7
Figure 4:  Koonce, J.F. 1994. Aquatic Community Health of the Great Lakes.  (SOLEC
          Working Paper) 	13
Figure 5:  For data between 1940's-1990: Environment Canada, et al. 1991. Toxic Chemicals
          in the Great Lakes and Associated Effects. Vol II, p.588. For data beyond 1991:
          Environment Canada. 1995. Great Lakes Fact Sheet - The rise of the Double-
          crested Cormorant on the Great Lakes: Winning the War Against Contaminants.
          (ISBN 0-662-23280-1)	,	13
Figure 6:  Environment Canada, et al. 1991. Toxic Chemicals in the Great Lakes and
          Associated Effects. Vbl II, p.592 	14
Figure 7:  Dodge, D. and R. Kavetsky. 1994. Aquatic Habitat and Wetlands of the Great
          Lakes.  (SOLEC Working Paper)	15
Figure 8:  same as Figure 7	17
Figure 9:  De Vault, D. et al. 1994.  Toxic Contaminants.  (SOLEC Working Paper)	21
Figures 10 & 11: same as Figure 9	22
Figure 12:  Neilson, M. et al. 1994. Nutrients: Trends and System Response. (SOLEC
          Working Paper)	23
Figure 13:  same as Figure 12	24
                 STATE  OF THE  GREAT  LAKES- 1995

-------
Figure 14:  Health and Welfare Canada. 1992. A Vital Link: Health and the Environment in
          Canada (ISBN 0-660-14350-X)	26
Figures 15 & 16: Allardice, D. and S. Thorp. 1994. A Changing Great Lakes Economy:
          Economic and Environmental Linkages (SOLEC Working Paper)	29
Figure 17:  same as Figure 15	30
Figure 18:  Mackay, D. et al.  1992.  Virtual Elimination of Toxic and Persistent Chemicals
          from the Great Lakes: The Role of Mass Balance Models. Report to the IJC's
          Virtual Elimination Task Force	37
Figure 19:  Great Lakes National Program Office, USEPA  	41
Figure 20:  Great Lakes Fishery Commission. 1994. Sea Lamprey Management Program:
          FY 1997 Program Requirements and Cost Estimates (Draft Working Document) . 44
Figure 21:  De Vault, D. et al. 1994.  Toxic Contaminants (SOLEC Working Paper)	50
Photo Credits
Zebra mussels on a crayfish: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources  	16
Agriculture in the Great Lakes Basin: Governments of Canada and the United States. 1995.
The Great Lakes: An Environmental Atlas and Resource Book	31
Sand dunes on Lake Michigan: Governments of Canada and the United States. 1995. The
Great Lakes: An Environmental Atlas and Resource Book	54
Acknowledgements
This report was prepared with the help of many individuals who provided input at SOLEC and
subsequently. The Governments wish to acknowledge the particular efforts of the following
people without whom this report could not have been produced:
      Environment Canada            U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

          Harvey Shear                       Paul Horvatin
          Nancy Stadler-Salt                  Kent Fuller
          Violeta Glumac                     Bob Beltran
          Maureen Evans                     Philip Hoffman
                 STATE  OF  THE  G R EAT 'LAKES - 1 995

-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The  purpose of the United States/Canada
Great  Lakes  Water  Quality  Agreement
(GLWQA) is the restoration and maintenance
of the  chemical,  physical  and biological
integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes basin
ecosystem.  In support of that purpose the
governments of the United States and Canada
sponsored a State of the Lakes  Ecosystem
Conference (SOLEC) in October of 1994.

Two objectives of the conference  were to
promote   better  decision-making   through
improved  availability  of  information, and to
review current information and find out where
there were data gaps.

Six papers were prepared as background for
the conference: aquatic  community health,
human health, habitat, contaminants, nutrients
and  the  economy. These papers form the
appendices  to  this report.   Discussions at
SOLEC have been incorporated into this report
as appropriate.

The condition of the living components of the
system,  including  humans,  is the  ultimate
indicator of its health, reflecting the total effect
of stresses on the system.  Measures of the
physical, chemical and biological stresses that
affect the system are equally important in
describing the state of the Lakes and providing
vital information for programs that  restore and
protect the integrity of the ecosystem.

For purposes of this report, a small number of
indicators has been chosen.  These simple
indicators are intended to summarize the  state
of the ecosystem and progress made to date in
addressing  the  many  sources  of  these
stresses.

Conditions shown by the indicators were rated
in  four  categories  by a  panel  of  technical
experts:    poor,    mixed/    deteriorating,
mixed/improving  and  good/restored.   The
report draws on information from a variety of
sources.

Overall, the health  of the Great Lakes basin
ecosystem is variable. By some measures, the
health is good/restored; such  as the aquatic
community in Lake Superior. At the other end
of the spectrum, a number of indicators shows
that some aspects of ecosystem health are
poor such as habitat loss, encroachment and
development in wetlands, and the imbalance of
aquatic   communities  in  Lakes  Michigan,
Ontario  and the eastern basin of Lake Erie.
Other indicators  show  conditions between
these extremes.

The state of aquatic communities,  including
native species loss  and ecosystem imbalance
(these two indicators incorporate some of the
effects of exotic species) and  reproductive
impairment of native species shows generally
mixed/improving  conditions throughout  the
Great Lakes. Lakes Michigan, Ontario and the
eastern  basin of Lake Erie rated somewhat
lower, but Lake Superior rated higher because
of fewer numbers  of  native  species  lost to
extinction  and  to   healthier   lake   trout
populations.

Data for the human health indicators do not
exist  basin-wide,   but air, water,  soil and
                  STATE  OF  THE GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
11

sediment  contamination,  fish  consumption
advisories, levels of contaminants in humans
and  measures of health  status and  health
effects were considered as surrogates.  The
overall   state   for   human   health   and
environmental contaminant risks for the Great
Lakes basin is likely mixed or in some cases
improving.  This rating reflects the general
decline  of concentrations  of persistent toxic
substances in all media throughout the Great
Lakes.

Aquatic  habitat and wetlands have been given
an overall rating of poor.  This is because of
the huge losses of wetlands and other habitats,
in quality as well as quantity.  There are a few
bright spots however, for example brook trout
stream habitat in the upper  lakes is in relatively
good condition, and there are programs which
exist to  protect remaining habitat.

Nutrients such as  phosphorus are  no  longer
the widespread problem they once were in the
early 1970s thanks, in large part, to the efforts
made under the GLWQA.  Nutrient stresses
have  been  given  an  overall  good/restored
rating in the  Great Lakes basin.   Indicators
such  as  phosphorus  concentrations  and
loadings must still be  monitored however,  to
ensure  that elevated  nutrient  levels do not
throw the ecosystem out of balance again, and
because they can still create local problems.

Loadings  of  persistent toxic  contaminants,
levels of chemical contaminants in fish  and
herring gulls, and concentrations in water were
rated as mixed/improving. This rating is based
on the  positive response  of reductions from
peak levels, but many contaminants still need
further reductions to reach acceptable levels of
risk.
In terms of the economy, infrastructure and
land-use change indicators were rated as poor.
Employment,   research  and  development,
population growth and personal  income were
rated as mixed/deteriorating, whereas pollution
prevention,  stewardship  approach,  water
conservation and energy use indicators were
rated as mixed/improving, reflecting a shift in
public attitudes.

A section on each of the five Great Lakes is
also contained in the report. These sections
include  more comprehensive information on
each  lake's unique conditions/problems, its
Areas of Concern and  the  progress that is
being made in lakewide restoration, including
the Lakewide Management Plans.

The report  concludes with a brief section on
challenges  in  several   areas  including the
adequacy of information, the management and
communication of information, the means of
making   decisions,  improving   institutional
arrangements,  dealing  with  biodiversity,
agreeing on endpoints for restoration, focusing
on  geographic variability, facing  the  subtle
effects  of  toxic  substances,   connecting
decisions to ecosystem improvements, and the
challenge of sustainability.
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                         STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES
1. INTRODUCTION

    This  report summarizes the state  of the
    Great Lakes as observed at the end of
1994 by the governments of the United States
and Canada  as  Parties to the Great  Lakes
Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA).  Much of
the material  in  this  report,  and  its  six
background   papers,  was presented and
discussed   extensively  at  a   binational
conference, the State of the Lakes Ecosystem
Conference (SOLEC), held in October,  1994.
For that conference,  working  papers were
prepared on six topic areas: aquatic community
health, human health, habitat, contaminants,
nutrients and the economy. These conference
working papers have been finalized,  and are
the  background   papers  to  this   report.
Additionally,   information  obtained from  the
discussion sessions  at the conference has
been incorporated into this report.

It  should be recognized  that  this  report
addresses the state of the Lakes, not the state
of programs  created  to  deal with stresses
impacting the system.  Program information is
presented in  a  different  series of reports
prepared  by  the  Parties individually,  for
example the Canada-Ontario Reports and the
U.S. Reports to Congress on the Great Lakes.
In presenting  the State of the Great  Lakes
Report,  the Parties wish to draw  attention to
the  substantial  improvements  that  have
occurred in response to cleanup activities and
to the major improvements yet to be achieved.

In developing SOLEC and this  report,  the
Parties asked some basic questions  that are
often  asked  by decision makers  and  the
average citizen:
Can we swim, eat the fish that we catch, and
drink the water?

Are the Lakes affecting human health?

Are the Lakes getting better?

Are the fish and birds healthy?

How are endangered species doing?

What are we doing about exotic (non-native)
species?

This report  attempts to answer these and
related questions by looking at the state of the
Great Lakes ecosystem and  the  complex
interactions with the many  stressors  on the
system.

The  ecosystem  includes   the  interacting
components of air, land,  water and living
organisms, including humans.  The  Great
Lakes basin ecosystem is made up of a mosaic
of smaller ecosystems each of which differs
from the others, but none of which is  separate
from  the  others.  They contain  interacting
physical, chemical  and biological components.
Each of these provides habitat for various living
organisms. Within the living organisms are the
genetic resources  of the ecosystem, including
genetic  diversity  that  has  evolved  over
thousands  of years.  This  genetic  legacy,
consisting of evolving traits that survived during
varied conditions over millennia, is the basis for
the biodiversity of the ecosystem.

This report views the state of the Great Lakes
ecosystem by looking at the living  system,
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                     Dull


             MINNESOTA '
                  N
      -75   0
                                                                           PENNSYLVANIA   /  " - C.._ -ft
                     300km
                                      Great Lakes Profile
                 Duluth Chicago






      Lake Superior



    Lake Michigan


        SEA LEVEL
                                                                                        244m
                                            NOTE  :   1  The profile is taken along the long axes of the lakes
                                                     2. The vertical exaggeration is 2000 times.
                                                     3 Lake surface elevations are given above sea level,
                                                       and maximum depths are below lake surface level.
Figure 1.   The Great Lakes Basin
                       STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
Physical Features and Population

Elevation
Length
Breadth
Average Depth
Maximum Depth
Volume
(feet)
(metres)
(miles)
(km)
(mites)
(km)
(feet)
(metres)
(feet)
(metres)
(cu. miles)
(km3)
Superior
600
183
350
563
160
257
483
147
1,332
406
2,900
12,100
Michigan
577
176
307
494
118
190
279
85
925
282
1,180
4,920
Huron
577
176
206
332
183
245
195
59
750
229
850
3,540
Erie
569
173
241
388
57
92
62
19
210
64
116
484
Ontario
243
74
193
311
53
85
283
86
800
244
393
1,640
Totals










5,439
22,684
AREA:
Water
Land Drainage Area
Total
Shoreline Length
Retention Time
Population: U.S.
Canada
Totals
Outlet
(sq. mi.)
(km2)
(sq. mi.)
(km2)
(sq. mi.)
(km2)
(miles)
(km)
(years)
(1990)
(1991)


31,700
82,100
49,300
127,700
81,000
209,800
2,726
4,385
191
425,548
181,573
607,121
St. Marys
River
22,300
57,800
45,600
118,000
67,900
175,800
1,638
2,633
99
10,057,026

10,057,026
Straits of
Mackinac
23,000
59,600
51,700
134,100
74,700
193,700
3,827
6,157
22
1,502,687
1,191,467
2,694,154
St. Clair
River
9,910
25,700
30,140
78,000
40,050
103,700
871
1,402
2.6
10,017,530
1,664,639
11,682,169
Niagara
River
Welland
Canal
7,340
18,960
24,720
64,030
32,060
82,990
712
1,146
6
2,704,284
5,446,611
8,150,895
St.
Lawrence
River
94,250
244,160
201,460
521,830
295,710
765,990
10,210
17,017

24,707,075
8,484,2900
33,191,365

Table 1.  The Great Lakes Factsheet
                 STATE  OF  THE GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
specifically the health of aquatic communities
and  humans.   From  that  perspective  it
examines the major stresses which affect the
health of the system. Detail is provided in the
background papers to this report.

As discussed in this report, the state of human
health  within  the  Great  Lakes  basin  is
determined primarily by factors unrelated to
conditions in the Lakes.  The stresses related
to the Lakes that can significantly affect human
health   are  toxic  contaminants  from  the
consumption of fish, and  microbial  disease
organisms encountered when  swimming, or
occasionally found  in  inadequately  treated
drinking water.

In contrast to human  health,  the health of
aquatic organisms is primarily determined by
the many interacting physical,  chemical and
biological  factors within the  Lakes.   This is
because most aquatic organisms obtain all of
their food from within the system and are in
continuous contact  with it.   Thus, aquatic
community health is the direct result of the
complex   conditions  and   interrelationships
within the Great Lakes ecosystem.

The Setting

By almost any standards, the Laurentian Great
Lakes basin is rich in resources.  The Great
Lakes contain one-fifth of all the fresh surface
water on  Earth.  The basin is blessed with
extensive  forests and wilderness areas, rich
agricultural land, hundreds of tributaries and
thousands of smaller lakes, extensive mineral
deposits, and abundant and diverse wildlife.
There are 28 cities with populations of more
than 50,000  in the region, and  some  33.2
million people call it home. The basin remains
one  of North America's major industrial and
agricultural  regions,  is  linked by  a strong
transportation system, and supports a vibrant
and growing tourism and travel sector.

Yet with all its riches, and perhaps because of
them, the Great Lakes  basin ecosystem is
under   tremendous   stress  from   human
activities. Past and current industrial practices,
nutrient   loading,     resource    extraction,
urbanization,  deforestation, introductions of
exotic species, alterations and destruction of
natural areas, contamination of air, water and
soil —  all these stresses,  and more,  have
caused  the ecosystem  to become  out of
balance.

As European  settlement began 400 years
ago the Great Lakes were far different than
they are today.  Compared to their biological
diversity at that time and the virtual absence
of toxic substances and human pathogens,
the Lakes today are severely degraded.

Through the  efforts of  government  and
citizens over the past 25 years, recovery has
been   made   in  many   areas.     Vast
improvement has been made in  control of
nuisance   conditions,  nutrients,   human
disease-causing   organisms,    and   in
conventional pollutants  that lead  to oxygen
depletion  (biochemical  oxygen  demand).
Also,  much progress has been made in
controlling  toxic contaminants,  although
much remains to  be done.   In contrast,
although some progress is being made in
protecting and restoring habitat, continuing
losses far  exceed gains.  In the case of
biological  diversity,  because each loss of
genetic diversity is permanent, all losses are
additive.  Thus the challenge facing Great
Lakes   rehabilitation,  is  to   minimize  or
eliminate the loss of native species  and to
protect  the genetic  variation  within  those
species to the greatest extent possible.
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
The  long term losses in  biodiversity  and in
habitat have been severe as reported in the
Aquatic Community Health and Aquatic  Habitat
and Wetlands background papers. Although
increasing efforts are being made and losses in
biodiversity and habitat are slowing, the low
point has probably not yet been reached for
both aquatic community  health and  habitat.
The  hope for habitat is that preservation of
habitat essential to high priority ecosystems will
accelerate together with restoration successes.
For biodiversity, its  importance  is at  least
becoming widely  recognized and steps are
being taken to protect high priority species and
the ecosystems necessary to support them.

For human health, the low point was reached
in  the late 1800s  before adequate treatment
was provided for drinking water.  In major cities
large numbers of people died  due to water
borne diseases.  Now the risk of illness  from
pathogens is slight and acute risks from  toxic
substances have been  virtually  eliminated,
although the  chronic effects  of long-term
exposure to low levels is still uncertain.
2. CONCEPTS OF ECOSYSTEM HEALTH
AND INTEGRITY

     Concepts of human illness and wellness are
     fairly well defined and familiar to most
people.  Applying similar concepts to the entire
ecosystem is possible, but not yet well defined,
however, ecosystem health can be measured
to some  degree  at  various  levels.    For
example: populations can be measured as to
age, size, reproductive success, incidence of
disease, and rate of death.  Alternatively,
health  of   individual  organisms  can  be
measured    by    biochemical,   cellular,
physiological or behavioural  characteristics.
One expression of ecosystem health is that of
ecosystem integrity, the term used in the Great
Lakes  Water Quality  Agreement.    The
Agreement's stated purpose is "to restore and
maintain the chemical, physical and biological
integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes Basin
Ecosystem".   While  not precisely defined,
integrity is understood to include the health of
the constituent populations of the ecosystem,
the  biological diversity  of  the ecological
communities,  and the ecosystem's  ability to
withstand stress or adapt to it.

Ecosystem integrity  includes the health of
living things, the ability of systems to self-
organize,  and   also  the  physical  and
chemical  environment  needed to support
good health.  This stands in contrast to the
physical, chemical and biological  stresses
which act to disrupt integrity and are usually
the  result of human  activity.   Figure 2
illustrates   these   stresses   and   their
relationship to the physical, chemical and
biological environment.

An  essential  concept  in  dealing  with
ecosystem health is that ecosystems and
ecological  communities are dynamic  and
exist within ranges of condition that reflect
the various disturbances that occur in nature
even without human activities.  They exist in
balance with these disturbances and their
composition  changes through  sequential
states  that  tend   toward  stability  and
increasingly   complex   interrelationships.
Mature and relatively stable communities
tend   to   contain   proportionately  more
organisms that are  longer lived and have
specialized   and   demanding   habitat
requirements. The Great Lakes ecosystem
was in this  state before the  coming  of
European settlers.
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
           KEY IMPACTS FROM HABITATS

           Phyclnl
            •. Sunlight
            b. Shaltar
            c. Raproducthra Suppport

           Btoloflleal
            d. Contaminant* (thru Btoaccum
            a. Preditlon
            f. Food
            B. Ganattea
            h. Pathogani
            I. Taate and Odor
            j. Aaithatlci
                   ...
                 1. Toxic Contamination

                NutrlantB.and EufrppMcaBnn
                 2. Phoiphonji

                Biological
                 3. Pathogana
                 4. Exotic Special
                 S.Ganatie Lost
                 6. Population Olaruptlon

                Physical
                 7. Sadbnanta
                 8. Destruction or Accett Lott

Economic*




Social
Valu**/
Behaviour



liutttutlon*
a
Organizations



Lawa
1
PollclM




Program*

                                                                         FACTORS
                                                                          THAT
                                                                         STIMULATE
                                                                         OR LIMIT
                                                                        STRESSORS
Figure 2.   Primary Ecosystem Stressors and Effects
 3. INDICATORS

     Doctors  use  indicators  such  as  blood
     pressure  and  weight to gauge  human
health;  economists  use  indicators such as
interest rates and housing starts to assess the
health of economies. One way to determine
the status of the health of the Great  Lakes
ecosystem is to use indicators, which address
a spectrum  of conditions ranging from the
health of humans and other living components
of the system to stressors and the activities
that cause them. Ecosystem health indicators
measure ecosystem quality or trends in quality
that are useful to managers and scientists.
An illustration  of one such  spectrum  can be
found in Figure 3.

To determine whether conditions are getting
better or worse it is necessary to identify things
that people can  measure  and accept as
indicative  of the  condition  of  the  system.
Further, if these indicators can be agreed upon
as representing acceptable  conditions,  they
can serve as objectives, targets or criteria to be
achieved through protection or restoration of
various attributes of the system.

Many attempts to  develop ecosystem health
indicators have been made or are underway in
                   STATE  OF  THE  GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
            ACTIVITY MEASURES
           	(1 &2)	
 ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES
 	(3-7)	
Figure 3.  Spectrum of Indicators for Contaminants
the U.S., Canada and internationally, including
those  outlined in the  Aquatic  Community
Health background paper.

Ecosystems are inherently complex  so that
indicators cannot be completely representative
of all possible conditions. A few very simplified
indicators were developed for SOLEC by a
team of technical experts and are shown in
Table 2. There are many levels of increasing
detail and specificity as subsets of these. The
indicators developed are  for the  state  of
aquatic communities,  human health and health
risks, aquatic habitat; and for three categories
of stresses  —  nutrients,  persistent  toxic
contaminants   and   economic   activity.
Economic activity is considered to be a stress
because the economy of the basin is the basis
for most of the activities that are the source of
stresses affecting the ecosystem.  Of course it
is also important to recognize that the economy
also provides the means to control stresses
and  restore the  system.     The indicators
developed for SOLEC and used here are rated
based  on  information  collected  for the
background papers. Rating was done  in four
broad categories:

 —     poor,  (meaning  significant negative
       impact);
                  STATE  OF THE GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
8
INDICATORS

STATUS OF INDICATORS
Poor
Mixed/
Deteriorating
Mixed/
Improving
Good/
Restored
|H STATE OF AQUATIC COMMUNITIES H
1 . Native Species Loss (# of native species)
Lake Superior
Lakes Huron, Michigan, Erie & Ontario
2. Ecosystem Imbalance (Lake Trout Dichotomous Key)
Lake Superior
Lake Huron
Lakes Michigan, Erie & Ontario
3. Reproductive Impairment
Effects - all Lakes
Body burdens - alt Lakes

•




•
•
•
•
•
•

H HUMAN HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINANT RISKS •
Overall state
1 . Air/water/soil/sediment contamination
• contamination trends (0,, S04, dust)
• hospital admission and death rates for respiratory illness (eg.
asthma)
• beach closings
• infectious diseases related to recreational uses
• atmospheric and total radioactivity
2. Fish consumption advisories
• contaminant loadings
3. Human contaminant body burdens
4. Measurements of health status/health effects
• birth defects and cancer
• longevity
• children's body weight/development


-
-
'


-
-
'
•

-
-
'


-
-
'
• STATE OF AQUATIC HABITAT AND WETLANDS •
1 . Loss in habitat/wetlands quality & quantity
U.S. - Michigan Survey
• other states
Ontario - CWS coastal wetlands
- Brook trout stream habitat (Upper Lakes)
- Brook trout stream habitat (Lower Lakes)
2. Encroachment/development basinwide
3. Gains in habitat/wetlands quality & quantity
* areas protected under the North American Wildfowl
Management Plan
• net effect
•
•
•
•
•
•






•

•
Table 2.  Preliminary Indicators of Ecosystem Health
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
INDICATORS

STATUS OF INDICATORS
Poor
Mixed/
Deteriorating
Mixed/
Improving
Good/
Restored
1 NUTRIENT STRESSES I
1 . Total phosphorus loads
• targets achieved in 4 of 5 Lakes (1 991 )
2. Total phosphorus intake concentrations
• objectives achieved in all Lakes (1991)
3. Lake Erie dissolved oxygen (central basin hypolimnion)
4. Chlorophyll a (as indicator of nuisance algal growth) in
Lower Lakes










•

•
•

•
I CONTAMINANT STRESSES I
1. Loadings
2. Residue in fish
3. Residue in birds (herring gulls)
4. Body burdens - all Lakes








•
•
•
•




I ECONOMIC STRESSES AND MITIGATING ACTIVITY i
1 . Employment (manufacturing & other sectors)
2. Infrastructure investment (public & private sectors)
3. Research & development (measures of technological
innovation)
4. Land-use and reuse changes (loss of agricultural land
and urban development)
5. Population growth & stability (compared to other regions)
6. Pollution prevention (expenditures & results -
loadings/emissions/discharges)
7. Personal income (statistics)
8. Adoption of stewardship approach (public & private
sectors)
9. Water conservation (industry & per capita)
10. Energy use (per capita)

•

•






•

•

•

•








•

•
•
•










Table 2.  Preliminary Indicators of Ecosystem Health (continued)
                    STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
10
 —    mixed/deteriorating (meaning that the
       impact is less severe, but that the trend
       is towards greater impact);

 —    mixed/improving  (meaning  that  the
       impact is less severe, but that the trend
       is towards less impact); and

 —    good/restored (meaning that the impact
       or stress is removed, that the state of
       the ecosystem  component is restored
       to a presently acceptable level).

The condition of the living components of the
system,  including  humans,  is  the ultimate
indicator of its health, reflecting the total effect
of stresses on the system.  The effects upon
the living system, often  expressed as use
impairments,  are  also the  most meaningful
indicators as far as the public is concerned, i.e.
can  we  swim, fish  and  drink  the  water?
Measures  of the physical,  chemical and
biological stresses that affect the system are
equally important in describing the state of the
Lakes  and  providing vital  information for
programs that restore and protect the integrity
of the ecosystem.   An illustration  of the
stressor-effects framework  is  provided  in
Figure 2.
4. AQUATIC COMMUNITY HEALTH

4.1 STATE OF AQUATIC COMMUNITY
HEALTH

    Compared to their chemical, physical and
    biological integrity 400 years ago, the
Great Lakes have  changed drastically.  The
devastating  loss of  biological  diversity  and
subsequent establishment of non-indigenous
(exotic)  populations  is  the  most  striking
indication of degradation of the Great Lakes.
At least 17 historically important fish species
have become depleted or have been extirpated
(eliminated)  from one or more of the Lakes.
Amplifying this loss of species diversity is the
loss of genetic diversity of surviving species.
For example, prior to 1950, Canadian waters of
Lake Superior supported about 200  distinct
stocks of lake trout,  including some 20 river
spawning stocks.  Many of these stocks are
now extinct, including all of the river spawners.
The loss of genetic diversity of lake trout from
the other Lakes is even more alarming, with
complete extinction  of native stocks  of lake
trout from Lakes Michigan,  Erie and Ontario
and all but one or two remnant stocks  in Lake
Huron. Lake  trout from other sources are being
stocked into those  lakes  but  little  natural
reproduction is ocurring.

Contributing to this loss of diversity has been a
succession  of  invasions   and  deliberate
releases of  exotic (non-indigenous) aquatic
species.  Some 139 non-indigenous aquatic
species have become established in the Great
Lakes  since the 1880s.  Species that  have
established substantial populations include sea
lamprey and  the following fish species: alewife;
smelt; gizzard shad; white perch; carp; brown
trout; chinook, coho and pink salmon; rainbow
trout;  and round goby.  To this list can  be
added more  recent imports such as the zebra
and quagga  mussels, and fish such as ruffe,
rudd,  fourspine stickleback and others,  and
plant  species such as  purple  loosestrife.
Together, these species have had a dramatic
and cumulative effect on the structure of the
aquatic community in the Great Lakes.

Exotic species may impact native organisms in
a variety of ways ranging from direct predation
or competition for food, to disruption  of food
chains or habitat.  Whatever the mechanism
of impact, the continuing presence of these
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
non-indigenous  species  poses  substantial
problems    for   the    rehabilitation   and
maintenance of native species associations.

This loss of biodiversity and the establishment
of non-indigenous populations  in the Great
Lakes has been little short of catastrophic. The
history of the Great Lakes and the collapse of
its  commercial  fisheries   offer   dramatic
examples of the effects of over-fishing, habitat
loss, pollution and exotic species. Native top
predators, once dominated by lake trout, have
been  replaced  by  hatchery-reared imports.
Table 3 lists the many species of Great Lakes
fish that have been extirpated or are severely
depleted due to human activities. What is not
shown by the table is the fundamental loss of
genetic diversity among  surviving  species.
U.S.  and  Canadian  stocking  programs  to
reintroduce lake trout and non-native salmonid
predators to the Great Lakes,  have resulted in
the development of highly successful sports
fisheries providing a wide range  of species for
anglers.   However,  they rely heavily on
continued stocking  and  the  stability of fish
communities and fisheries are not predictable
at this time.

Three indicators for measuring  the health of
aquatic communities were selected.  The first
indicator — the number of native species lost
—  was rated  as  good/restored  for  Lake
Superior,  and mixed/improving  for the other
Lakes. As compared to the other Lakes, fewer
aquatic species  have been  lost  in  Lake
Superior  because  of the lower  levels  of
development, industry and human population.
Even in the more disturbed Lakes, attempts to
reintroduce depleted species of native predator
fish such as walleye and lake  trout have been
partially successful.  One must bear in mind
that even though species may  be reintroduced,
                                                                                     11
hatchery reared fish do not have the genetic
variability of wild populations.

The   second  indicator,   the  Lake   Trout
Dichotomous Key, provides a measure of how
balanced the aquatic ecosystem is. The Key is
a complex index based on the scores from a
series of questions relating to lake trout and
the conditions necessary to sustain naturally
reproducing populations.   Because of the
dichotomous structure (yes/no), the key does
not necessarily reflect small changes or trends.
The  rationale for using  lake  trout as an
indicator for ecosystem health is based upon
their historical dominance in the Great Lakes
food web and their biological characteristics —
this makes them a good surrogate indicator of
changes in aquatic ecosystem health.  Further
discussion on this  indicator can be found in the
Aquatic Community Health background paper.

Using this indicator,  Lake Superior rated as
good/restored,     Lake      Huron     as
mixed/improving,  and Lakes Michigan, and
Ontario as poor (Figure 4). For Lake Erie, the
key applies only to the eastern basin of the
Lake which is deep and cool enough to support
lake trout. A similar key based on sustainable
reproduction of the top predator fish in the
remainder of the  lake (walleye) would rate a
higher score. While aquatic communities in all
the Lakes have  been significantly disturbed
and altered by over-fishing,  exotic species,
habitat destruction,  nutrient  enrichment and
persistent toxic substances, those in Lakes
Michigan and Ontario are the most unstable.

The  third indicator for the state of aquatic
communities is reproductive impairment.  This
indicator is rated as mixed/improving in all the
Lakes. Exposure to a variety of environmental
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
12
Common Name
Lake sturgeon
Lake herring
Lake whitefish
Bloater
Deepwater Cisco
Kiyi
Blackfin cisco
Shortnose cisco
Shortjaw cisco
. Burbot
Deepwater sculpin
Spoonhead sculpin
Emerald shiner
Atlantic salmon
Lake trout
Sauger
Blue pike
Species Name
Acipenser fluvescens
Coregonus artedii
C. clupeaformis
C. hoyi
C. johannae
C. kiyi
C. nigripinnis
C. reighardi
C. zenithicus
Lota lota
Myoxocephalus thompsoni
Cottus rice;
Notropis atherinoides
Salmo salar
Salvelinus namaycush
Stizostedion canadense
S. vitreum glaucum
Lake
Superior
1



NP

NP
NP
1




NP



Lake
Michigan
1
1


3
2
3
1
2


2

NP
2*


Lake
Huron
1
1


3
2
3
2
2


1
2
NP
2*


Lake
Erie
1
1
1
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
2


2
1
NP
2*
2
3
Lake
Ontario
1
1

2
NP
2
NP
2
2
1
2
2

2*
2*

3
An asterisk (*) indicates stocking programs exist to attempt re-introduction. Status codes are: 1 (Depleted),
2 (Extirpated), and 3 (Extinct). Open cells indicate that status is not depleted relative to historical conditions.
NP indicates that the species was not known to be present historically.
Table 3.  Summary of Fish Species Lost or Seriously Diminished in the Great Lakes
stresses including organochlorine compounds
(some  widespread,  some  local)  caused
reproductive problems for Great Lakes wildlife,
especially  aquatic  birds.    In  fact,  various
studies have identified contaminant-associated
effects on 11 species of wildlife in the Great
Lakes.  Affected species  include fish-eating
mammals (mink and otter), a reptile (snapping
turtle), and fish-eating birds (double-crested
cormorant,  black-crowned  night heron,  bald
eagle, herring and ring-billed gull, and Caspian,
common and  Forster's tern).   All of these,
except  the  ring-billed gull,   have  shown
historical evidence of reproductive impairment
due to contaminants.  In the 1950s, 1960s and
early 1970s severe effects were observed and
populations  of some  aquatic  bird  species
declined, often because of thinning of egg
shells.    Population  problems  were  often
attributable to environmental contaminants, but
in a few cases populations actually increased
during times of high contaminant loadings, for
example the population of ring-billed gulls
increased during this time.

With the reduction  in loadings of persistent
toxic contaminants such as PCBs, most of the
fish-eating  bird populations have  recovered
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    13
         100-t
          80-
       UJ
       (ฃ.
       O
       O
       W
          60
          40-
          20-
              Superior  Michigan
Huron
LAKE
                                    Erie
                I
             Ontario
  Figure 4.  Lake Trout Dichotomous Key - a score of 100
  would indicate optimum and pristine conditions for lake
  trout.
and populations of herring gulls, Caspian terns,
black-crowned  night  herons  and  double-
crested    cormorants    have
become  re-established  in the
Great  Lakes (see Figure  5 for
cormorant      populations).
However, problems such as birth
defects or  failure to reproduce
have  continued to  occur in  a
small    percentage   of   the
population  in local areas.  For
example low rates of bill  defects
and    other    developmental
abnormalities were seen through
the    1980s   in    cormorant
populations in areas  of high
contamination (toxic "hot spots"
— see Figure 6). This suggests
that the  birds  were still being
exposed to excessive amounts
of     PCBs    and      other
organochlorines from the fish in
           these hot spots. It is worth noting
           that the "background" frequency
           of deformities, as determined from
           Western Canada bird populations,
           does not differ significantly from
           the frequency of deformities in
           most other  areas of  the Great
           Lakes.

           The  reproductive  success  of
           breeding  eagles  eating  Great
           Lakes fish remains lower than that
           of those nesting inland.  However,
           recovery of the bald eagle is likely
           to be limited by contaminants, by
           the  absence  of  appropriate
           habitat,  and may be  limited by
           food supply.   Over 80%  of the
           Lake    Erie    shoreline,    and
           substantial  portions    of  the
           shorelines  of  Lakes  Ontario,
Michigan and Huron are no longer suitable
habitat  for  the  bald  eagle  because  of
35000 -
30000
25000
CO
111
z
JJ- 15000
*



o-









|
1
ป1 ""3 *S
111;
1 11 1
ra para^HHHllill






T 1 T T T T T T T T T T r f T



1
1
i
i
•
1

r


1
i
1




i
^
1

-------
14
                                                       Chicks with bill defects
Figure 6.  Geographical Variation in Observation of Bill Defects in Cormorant Chicks 1979-87
agriculture, urban  sprawl  and other human
disturbances (Figure 7).

Mink and otter have also shown the effects of
exposure to contaminants. Both live in wetland
habitat near the shorelines and consume Great
Lakes fish in their diets.   Mink diet consists
mainly of other mammals but is supplemented
by birds, fish and invertebrates. They are one
of the most sensitive mammals to PCBs,
resulting  in reproductive problems and death.
Otters  may not  be  as  sensitive to these
chemicals, however they  may be exposed to
higher levels  than mink  because their  diet
consists  mainly of fish.   Trends  in  mink
populations have followed those of fish-eating
birds; the population  began to decline in the
mid 1950s and was lowest in the early 1970s
but have recovered somewhat in the 1980s.
Data for otter populations have not shown the
same trends, however they do have a lower
rate  of  reproduction  and  therefore,  slower
recovery.   Mink and otter could  serve  as
biological indicators of the levels of PCBs in the
shoreline wetlands habitats of the Great Lakes
basin. Thriving populations would indicate the
"virtual  elimination"  of  PCBs  from  their
environment.

While exposure of the aquatic community to
most  known toxic contaminants is  declining,
the  effect   of  chronic  exposure  to  low
concentrations of persistent toxic substances
remains uncertain.
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                     15
                                                  HABITAT QUALI

                                                   9t Marginal

                                                      Good
             I
Figure 7.  Bald Eagle Nesting Habitat
Over all, the status of aquatic communities is
assessed as mixed/improving. This is based
on  recovery resulting from  pollution control
since the 1970s.
exotic species, over-fishing and excess
fish stocking (including non-indigenous
species);  resulting  in  imbalances in
aquatic  communities  and   loss  of
biodiversity;
4.2   MAJOR  STRESSES  ON  AQUATIC
COMMUNITIES

     Great Lakes aquatic communities continue
     to be exposed to a multiplicity of physical,
chemical and biological stresses.  In terms of
importance, the major  stresses  on aquatic
communities are:
degradation and loss of tributary and
near shore habitat including coastal
wetlands;

impacts     of     persistent    toxic
contaminants; and

eutrophication in localized areas.
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
16
Exotic  Species,  Excessive  Harvest  and
Loss of Biodiversity

Although physical and chemical stresses have
contributed to the decline in integrity of Great
Lakes' ecosystems, stresses associated with
biological factors have, in fact, caused much
more severe degradation.  In particular, over-
fishing and introduction of exotic species have
had   tremendous   impacts   on   aquatic
communities, causing profound changes and
imbalances. This has been discussed in the
section on aquatic community health.

Degradation and  Loss of Aquatic  Habitat
and Wetlands

The degradation and loss of habitat is a major
stress upon aquatic communities.  Habitat in
general  constitutes  the  entire  ambient
environment, including physical, chemical and
biological aspects  as illustrated  in Figure  2.
Upland habitat is of concern as it impacts the
aquatic ecosystem and is addressed from that
perspective.

Wetlands, tributaries, connecting  channels,
open lakes and near shore areas of the Great
Lakes  each play a  vital role  in ecosystem
function.  The  ultimate  health of the Great
Lakes ecosystem is strongly dependent on the
health,  availability  and  capacity  of these
components. The habitat that  is  important to
any  one species  is  the  portion  of the
environment that   significantly  affects   its
survival during each of its life stages.  For
purposes of this report, emphasis is on aquatic
habitat  directly  associated  with the Great
Lakes.

Basin-wide data on the quality and quantity of
aquatic habitats are scarce and  fragmented,
however the   best  information  exists  for
wetlands.  A U.S. National Wetlands Inventory
is now  being developed which is  mapping
wetlands survey information, on the basis of
drainage  basins.   Environment Canada,  in
cooperation with other agencies and groups is
gathering habitat-related information through a
number of programs.  Notwithstanding these
initiatives, quantifying habitat status remains
largely descriptive and anecdotal, and there
are  no  accepted basin-wide  classification
systems that integrate all aquatic habitat types
and allow habitat health to be easily measured.
Aquatic habitats function in many important
ways. They play a vital role in nutrient cycling,
uptake and transfer. They are among the most
productive of systems in terms of the growth of
photosynthetic organisms (the assimilation of
energy by plants). Aquatic habitats help  to
Photo of zebra mussels on crayfish
                  STATE  OF THE  GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                     17
maintain water quality and regulate water flows
and  levels.They  play  important,  sometimes
very  specific roles  in  the life  cycles  of
terrestrial, aquatic and avian species, providing
areas for spawning, nesting, rearing, foraging
and  sheltering.   Aquatic habitats, and  the
species that live within them, provide the basis
for  a   significant  proportion  of  the  total
biodiversity   of   the  Great  Lakes   basin
ecosystem.    Among  all  types  of aquatic
habitats, the inshore zone  (and its wetlands)
ranks highest in  terms of performing  these
functions (Figure 8 shows  the distribution of
U.S. Great Lakes coastal wetlands).

It is difficult to overestimate the importance of
adequate and diverse aquatic  habitat  for
healthy aquatic communities — it is simply the
most basic building block of ecosystem health.
Without adequate habitat in which to spawn,
breed, nest, stopover, forage and hide,  many
species of fish and wildlife  cannot survive.  In
Lakes Ontario and Michigan, and to a lesser
extent  in  Huron
and
                                              least partially compensated for these effects by
                                              restructuring and replacing missing tributary-
                                              dependent stocks. Lack of basin-wide data on
                                              the amount and quality of aquatic habitat is a
                                              major barrier to measuring habitat health,
                                              quantifying habitat status, and  rehabilitating
                                              aquatic communities.  Ensuring  the health of
                                              aquatic  habitats and  wetlands  is  a priority
                                              concern for ecosystem health in the basin, and
                                              will require a greater share of resources than it
                                              has been receiving to date.

                                              Stress on aquatic community health caused by
                                              loss  and degradation of physical habitat is
                                              pervasive  throughout  the  Great   Lakes
                                              ecosystem, but is most notable in the near
                                              shore and wetland areas. These  habitats exist
                                              in  a relatively narrow band along the shores
                                              and it is these highly diverse and biologically
                                              complex   areas   that   contain   unique
                                              assemblages  of organisms and  provide food
                                              and shelter for many species during sensitive
                                              reproductive and juvenile stages. The highly
       Superior,
stocking     of
predators
obscures    the
effects     of
degraded
habitat.  The lack
of    adequate
spawning areas,
for     example,
becomes    less
obvious at least
in terms of fish
production.   In
highly   polluted
areas   of  the
Great Lakes, fish
communities
may  have  at
                                   Distribution of Approximately 300,000 acres
                                               (120,000 ha)
                  Figure 8.  Distribution of U. S. Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
18
productive  shallow  water   habitats   are
particularly crucial to forage fish and wading
birds.

In pelagic (deep  water) areas  the  loss of
habitat quality is not well  documented,  but
sedimentation  is  probably  impacting   the
benthic community and may be impairing some
spawning areas.  Anoxia in the  hypolimnion
(colder bottom layer) of the central basin of
Lake  Erie  is  still  affecting  the  benthic
community there, although nutrient control has
reduced the area affected. For Lake Erie some
anoxia   may   be  a   naturally  occurring
phenomenon.   In shallower areas such as
western Lake Erie and other near shore areas,
the benthic (bottom dwellers)  communities
were  severely  impacted by  pollutants  and
sedimentation.    Most  of these  areas  are
showing signs of recovery.

In the shallow littoral zone, often characterized
by the presence of rooted aquatic vegetation,
aquatic  communities have suffered  large
losses in area and in the quality of the areas
that remain.  Destruction and degradation of
the nearshore habitat has been caused by a
variety of factors, but primarily by draining,
sedimentation, filling, and invasion by exotic
species  such as carp.   Similarly   in  the
tributaries and associated wetlands,  aquatic
communities have been degraded or lost due
to those same stresses. Further loss of habitat
has been caused not by actual destruction, but
by isolation from  lakes by dams and  dykes.
Lastly, degradation has occurred because of
changes  in timing and duration of inundation
and drying because of changes in  river flows
and regulation of lake levels. These changes
destroy aquatic communities that have evolved
with cycles established over many centuries.
The quality of chemical  habitat has been
degraded first by oxygen depletion in harbours
and then by excess nutrients and widespread
eutrophication.  This  has been followed by
contamination by  bioaccumulative  persistent
toxic substances as well as by non-persistent
toxic substances.

The first indicator selected for  the state of
aquatic habitat and wetlands  is the loss of
habitat (both in terms of quality and quantity),
and was given a rating of poor.   Loss of
wetlands in the U.S., loss of coastal wetlands
in Ontario,  and loss of brook trout habitat in
tributaries  to  the  Lower  Lakes   were all
considered  evidence  of  poor conditions.
Wetland losses,  in particular,  have  been
significant across the basin.  Studies show that
in some areas up to 100% of coastal wetlands
in Lakes Ontario,  Erie, Michigan and St. Clair
have been lost to development.  Losses of total
wetlands (including both coastal and inland
wetlands) have been staggering. Sixty percent
of the  original wetlands in the Great Lakes
basin states have been lost since the 1780s; in
Ontario,  south  of the Precambrian Shield,
wetland losses have been estimated to be as
high as 80%. While losses continue, current
rates of loss are  unknown, as are rates of
impairment.  In many cases, wetlands may still
appear  to   exist  but  may be functionally
degraded     through     siltation,    nearby
development, the introduction of foreign plants
and animals, and other stresses.  Few  data
exist on the magnitude of losses  for other
critical habitats such as rocky shoals,  sheltered
bays, estuaries and tributaries.

In contrast, the indicator for loss of brook trout
stream habitat in the Upper Lakes was rated as
good/restored. Fewer cold water streams have
                  STATE OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    19
been lost and degraded in the Upper Lakes
basins  because  of  the lower degree of
urbanization and human disturbance.

A  second  indicator — encroachment  and
development of wetlands was also rated as
poor.  This reflects the continuing loss and
degradation of wetlands basin-wide due to
urban   development,  recreational  uses,
agriculture and other forms of encroachment.

The third indicator selected considered gains
in  habitat and wetlands through protection,
enhancement and restoration efforts.  There
are  various  international,   national  and
state/provincial  policies and  programs  for
habitat/wetlands protection, some of which
rate quite high in results. However, the net
effect  of  protection,   enhancement  and
restoration is considered to be poor since
programs  are  not keeping up with habitat
losses.  An example of a program producing
good results is the North American Waterfowl
Management Plan which has resulted in the
protection  of  over  17,500  hectares  of
wetlands in the basin.
Persistent Toxic Substances

Persistent toxic contaminants have had an
impact on  fish and wildlife  species in the
basin as noted  in the  aquatic community
health section.   Observed  effects include
alteration    of    biochemical     function,
pathological  abnormalities,  tumours,  and
development and reproductive abnormalities.
Recent studies  have  suggested  that the
estrogenic  effects of some organochlorines
are implicated in developmental abnormalities
in wildlife species. A possible consequence
of the effects is a decrease  in fitness of
populations. In fish, however, it is difficult to
link cause (i.e. exposure to one or more toxic
contaminants) to effects. Laboratory studies
and field observations suggest that tumours
in Great Lakes bullheads and suckers (both
bottom   feeders)  may  be  caused  by
contaminated  sediments.    In  general,
however, the effects of exposure to low levels
of contaminants  are  less  clear  for  fish
populations than for wildlife in the basin. For
a list of priority contaminants see Table 4. To
measure the  impact  of  persistent  toxic
contaminant stressors, three indicators were
selected:   loadings   of  persistent   toxic
contaminants,     levels    of    chemical
contaminants in  fish and levels in herring
gulls. Each of these indicators is considered
as mixed/improving.  Levels of persistent
toxic  contaminants  have  been   reduced
substantially since 1970. As to reductions in
loadings of persistent toxic substances,
detailed figures are not available basin-wide,
but the  ecosystem response over time can
be    seen    in    declining    contaminant
concentrations in waters, sediments, fish and
wildlife as illustrated in Figures 9, 10 and 11.

Levels of organochlorine contaminants in the
tissues  of  top predator and  forage  fish
declined significantly from the late 1970s to
mid 1980s but have shown a slower rate of
decline  more recently (Figure 10).  Despite
this overall trend, during the  late  1980s, in
some  areas,  levels of some  of  these
contaminants increased in some fish. On the
other hand, from the late 1970s to the  mid
1980s,  concentrations  of  heavy  metals
showed  little change.   Regardless of the
general downward trend, levels of persistent
toxic contaminants in certain fish species in
some areas continue to be high enough to
restrict consumption by humans.
                  STATE OF  THE  GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
20
CHEMICAL

Aldrin
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chlordane
Copper
DDT and metabolites
Dieldrin
Furan
Heptachlor
Heptachlor epoxide
Hexachlorobenzene
Alkylated lead
a Hexachlorocyclohexane
P Hexachlorocyclohexane
Mercury
Mirex
Octachlorostyrene
PCBs
2,3,7,8-TCDD (a dioxin)
Toxaphene
REFERENCE
GLWQA
Annex 1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GLWQI


•
•
•
•

•

•



•


•
•
•
LaMPs
critical
pollutants

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Pollution
Prevention










•


•





IJC list of 1 1
critical
pollutants
•
•


•

•


•
•


•
•

•
•
•
Lake
Superior
Priority
Substances


•

•
•



•



•

•
•
•
•
COA
Tier t list
•
•
•

•
•
•


•
•


•
•
•
•
•
•
COA
Tier II
list











•
•






GLWQA=Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement GLWQI-Great Lakes Water Quality Initiative
LaMP-Lakewide Management Plan IJC=lnternational Joint Commission COA=Canada-Ontario Agreement
7a6/e 4.  Priority Contaminants of the Great Lakes
One possible cause of these continuing high
levels is that contaminant concentrations in
fish are influenced  by changes in food that
varies in availability and contaminant content.
As a result, changes in contaminant levels in
fish may be influenced by shifts in feeding
behaviour by the fish or elsewhere in the food
web.

Adult herring gulls, as permanent residents of
the Great Lakes basin,  offer a monitoring
opportunity  to detect regional  variability in
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES -1995

-------
                                                                                 21
           Lake Superior       Lake Michigan      Lake Ontario
      1990
      1980
      1960
      1940
      1920
      1900
      1880
      1860
      1840
      1820
      18001
        0
100   200    300  0
100   200    300  0
100   200    300
Figure 9.  Lead (Pb) and Mercury (Hg) in Dated Sediment Cores
contaminant stress that is not complicated by
migratory patterns characteristic of other fish-
eating   bird   species.     Monitoring  of
reproductive successes at various sites first
began on Lakes Erie and Ontario in the early
1970s and  in 1975 for Lakes  Superior and
Huron  by  the Canadian Wildlife Service
(CWS).   Depressed  productivity levels of
herring gulls have not been found at most of
the sites on Lakes Huron and Superior since
1975. However, on the more populated and
contaminated lakes,  reproductive success
was low in the early 1970s and has improved
since.  From 1974 onward,  organochlorine
residues in herring gull eggs have generally
declined from higher levels in the early 1970s
(Figure 11).

Chemical residues in herring gull eggs have
been monitored since 1974. Organochlorines,
                              including PCBs,  DDT/DDE, mirex,  dieldrin
                              and  HCB,  have  shown  a  statistically
                              significant decrease at more than 80% of the
                              sites sampled.  Chemicals monitored later in
                              the program, such as oxy-chlordane, photo-
                              mirex, and 2,3,7,8-TCDD, have also shown
                              significant decreases. The greatest decrease
                              observed occurred between 1974  and 1981;
                              since then the rate of decrease has slowed
                              and levelled off.   In 1991-1992,  increases
                              in  the  level  of certain contaminants have
                              been  noted in some locations.  The reasons
                              for this apparent increase are not known, and
                              may  be  linked to changes in  diet due  to
                              changes in the food web.

                              Over all, contaminant levels  have shown
                              good  response to control programs although
                              the rate of response has slowed. However, it
                              is important to recognize that although large
                 STATE  OF THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
 22
                                                                                     BSttBS
      Drnt* Source: Dซpซrtm*nt of FIซh*rtปB and Ocปซnซ
             US environmental Protection Agency'NiOonat Btotofllcel Surv.y
     PCB levels (pg/g wet weighttS.E.) in aged 4+whole trout, 1970-1992.

     • PCB tovcto (pa/a w*l wปlghtฑS.D.) In whoto lake Mul (cempoM**. 600-700 mm T.L.), 1BTT-1M2.
     Late* Erto { US Dcta) ttbtttncd wltft Waltoy*.
F/'gure -/O.   Tote/ PCB Levels fag/g wet weight) in Lake Trout  1970-1992
               Figure 11.  PCB Levels (ug/g wet weight) in Herring Gull Eggs 1974-1993
                            STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES - 1995

-------
                                                                                     23

                                                      Data Sourc* EnwrxvnirtaJ Conaปrvซfcon Branch, Envwnnnw* Canada
                                                           Great LaJtM National Program Offkป, US EPA
Figure 12.  Spring Mean Total Phosphorus Trends for Open Lake  1971-1992
percentage reductions have been achieved in
comparison   to  peak   levels,  for  many
contaminants, an additional ten fold reduction
is  needed to reach acceptable levels of risk.
Also, as more  is learned about long  term
exposure and endocrine effects, even lower
levels may be required to reach acceptable
risk.
Eutrophication

Although eutrophication is no longer a problem
in the Great Lakes  on a lake-wide basis, it
continues to occur in local areas and has a
significant  impact on  aquatic  communities.
This is particularly of concern  in tributaries,
bays, coastal marshes  and inland  wetlands.
Nutrient enrichment causes excess growth of
algae, the decomposition of which depletes the
oxygen  needed to sustain other forms  of
aquatic life. Algae can also limit penetration of
sunlight to the  extent that rooted plants are
affected.

Three indicators were rated as good/restored.
The first indicator is total phosphorus loadings,
where GLWQA targets have been achieved in
Lakes Superior, Huron and Michigan, and in
Lakes Erie and Ontario are at or near their
target loads.  The  second indicator is total
phosphorus concentrations in open water;
GLWQA objectives were achieved by 1990 in
all lakes, then fluctuated near the limit for Lake
Erie during 1991-92 (see Figure 12). The third
"good/restored" rating was given to an indicator
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
24

F/gure 73.  Spring Mean Nitrate-plus-Nitrite Trends for Open Lake 1968-1992
measuring the levels of chlorophyll a in the
Lower Lakes, that  is a  surrogate  for the
productivity of the system (the amount of algae
growth).  The low level of chlorophyll a found
today is consistent with the GLWQA objective
for these  Lakes  of "reduction in the present
level of algal biomass to a level below that of a
nuisance condition".  However eutrophication
and/or undesirable algae continue to present
problems  in 21 of the 42  Areas of Concern
(AOCs).

The  fourth  indicator — levels  of dissolved
oxygen in Lake Erie's bottom waters — was
considered mixed/improving. Oxygen levels in
Lake Erie's bottom waters are much better
than they were twenty years ago.
Notwithstanding this, and despite phosphorus
loading reductions, periods of anoxia (lack of
oxygen) were still occurring from 1987 to 1991
in the late summer in some  areas of the central
basin. This continued anoxia may be related to
the continuing release of phosphorus from old
bottom  sediments,  or,  it   may  be  that
intermittent anoxia is an inherent property of
Lake Erie's central basin.

Another nutrient that is monitored in the Great
Lakes is nitrate-plus-nitrite. Levels have been
increasing  over  the  past  two  decades,
especially in Lake Ontario  (Figure 13). Major
sources  of nitrogen to the  Lakes  include
agricultural   runnoff,    municipal   sewage
treatment plants and atmospheric deposition.
                  STATE OF  THE GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                   25
The  concentrations currently  found in open
lake waters do  not create a public health
concern because they are at least 20 times
lower that the guideline for  drinking water
(10mg/L), however, monitoring  will continue as
warranted.
5. HUMAN HEALTH AND WELLBEING

    The  overall  rating   for  environmental
    contaminant stresses  from the  Great
Lakes  on  human  health  in  the  basin is
mixed/improving. Because limited data exist to
measure impacts of contaminant stresses on
humans in the Great Lakes  over  time,  the
levels  of  contaminants  in   the   ambient
environment and in fish and wildlife are used
as a surrogate. Based on this,  the stress from
toxic contaminants on human health was rated
as mixed or in some cases improving.  This
rating  reflects  the  general  decline   of
concentrations of persistent toxic substances in
all media including fish throughout the Great
Lakes, and the fact that the  major route of
human exposure to Great Lakes contaminants
is through fish consumption.

Direct indicators of human health include the
incidence   of birth  defects   and  cancer;
longevity;   children's   body   weight   and
development;  and  incidence of  infectious
diseases related to water sports and drinking
water.    Indirect  measures  include  beach
closures  and fish consumption advisories.
Although basin-wide data for these measures
are not available at this time, the 1994 Report
Progress in  Great  Lakes  Remedial Action
Plans: Implementing the Ecosystem Approach
in Great Lakes Areas of Concern did show 35
of the 42 AOCs around the Great Lakes have
fish consumption advisories. The report also
showed 24 of the 42  AOCs  have  beach
closures   or  recreational   body   contact
restrictions.
Because human health reflects the effects of
stresses of many kinds from many sources,
direct measurement of the effect of any one
stress  or  category of stress  is  extremely
difficult and costly. As a result, most indicators
of human  health are expressed in terms of
health risks attributable to various stresses. A
number of factors make it difficult to establish
a link  between environmental  contaminants
and human health effects. These include:

       the continuous nature of exposure over
       many   years  to   low  levels   of
       contaminants;

•      exposure  to  mixtures  rather  than
       individual compounds;

       the large number (and in some cases
       poor   definition)  of  health   effect
       endpoints to be examined, and  the
       difficulty of measuring some effects;

       experimental    design     problems,
       including the inability,  in some cases, to
       obtain  adequate  sample  sizes and
       measurements  that  are   suitably
       sensitive  and  specific  to  detect
       changes;

       dose-response questions;

       accurate exposure assessment; and

       confounding variables that may hinder
       research studies.

Environmental contaminants  are  only one
category of variables that affect human health.
Other  variables  include nutrition, adequate
shelter, genetic make up, exposure to bacterial
or viral disease agents, lifestyle factors such as
smoking, drinking and fitness, social well-being
and others.
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
26
A  number of  indicators  can be  used  to
indirectly measure environmental contaminant
stresses on  humans in the Great  Lakes.
These include measures of water quality; air
quality;  atmospheric and  total radioactivity.
However, even with measures of stress and
exposure,  information on differences  among
basin, national and global levels is limited.  In
order to  assess  better  the  impacts  of
environmental stresses  on human  health,
better trend data over time are needed on body
burdens,  exposures  and  potential  health
effects.

Hundreds of chemicals have been identified as
being present in the Great Lakes ecosystem.
Of these, the IJC has identified 11 as critical
pollutants based on: 1) presence in the Great
Lakes environment; 2) degree of toxicity;  3)
persistence; and 4) ability to bioconcentrate
and bioaccumulate.  The 11 substances are
listed in Table 4 together with several others
identified for priority  consideration.   While
these have been recommended for
priority  consideration, there  are   _
numerous other substances which
must also  be considered because
of their known or suspected impact
on  the  ecosystem  and  human
health.
There are a number of pathways by
which humans in the Great Lakes
basin can be exposed to persistent
toxic  contaminants.   The major
route of human exposure to PCBs,
dioxins,  furans,   organochlorine
pesticides  and   certain  heavy
metals  is  food   consumption,
particularly    consumption    of
contaminated  fish.     Food  is
believed to contribute between 40
to nearly 100% of total intake for
many of these substances. Studies
of fish eaters in  the Great Lakes
basin have shown a correlation
between     sport-caught     fish
160

140
                                      120
       consumption and body burden of PCBs and
       DDE in blood and  serum.  Other routes of
       exposure  include drinking water,  breathing
       contaminated air, and dermal (skin) exposure.
       For contaminants other than chemicals, such
       as microbes, the major routes of exposure for
       humans are through poorly treated drinking
       water and  recreational  activities such  as
       swimming. An example of microbial problems
       is the protozoan Cryptosporidium.  Its presence
       in drinking water caused  over one  hundred
       fatalities and 400,000 people to become ill in
       the Milwaukee area  in 1993.

       Human populations  in the Great Lakes basin,
       as with those living elsewhere, are exposed to
       many  toxic  pollutants  present  in  the
       environment.  Those of particular concern in
       relation to the GLWQA include  dioxins and
       furans, organochlorine  pesticides and their
       byproducts  such   as  hexachlorobenzene,
       combustion byproducts such  as polycyclic
       aromatic  hydrocarbons  (PAHs),  and certain
       1967    1970    1973    1982    1986
                      Year
DDT
                          PCB
                                 Figure 14.  DDT and PCBs in Breast Milk (Canada)
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                   27
metals and their compounds such as cadmium,
lead, and mercury.  Figure 14 shows trends of
PCBs  and  DDT  in  breast milk.    Other
contaminants  include radioactive  elements
such as radon and air contaminants such as
ground level ozone and smog.
While there is  a large  volume of scientific
evidence  to  show  that these agents  are
harmful, it is not certain how much harm they
are causing to  the  inhabitants of the Great
Lakes basin.  There are several reasons for
this uncertainty.  One is the scarcity of suitable
health statistics (indicators) to show the spatial
and temporal trends of the state of health of
various Great Lakes  populations relative to that
of people living  elsewhere.  Suitable data are
lacking, for example, on the "normal" growth
and  physical and  mental development of
children; on the general state of health  and
longevity of people living  in various regions; on
the number of  people seeking treatment for
infectious  diseases  caused by contaminated
recreational or  drinking water; and  on the
number of people  admitted  to hospital for
effects  caused  by  exposure to  chemical
environmental   contaminants.      Reliable
statistics on the occurrence of birth defects or
cancers are lacking for  some regions of the
basin.  It is also difficult to ascertain exposure
(i.e. to what kinds of  contaminants and to what
levels people are exposed).  A large number of
contaminants occur at  low  concentrations,
some of which  may gradually accumulate in
the body; others are  excreted without leaving a
trace, although they may  have done some
damage.
In the past,  health  researchers and  public
policy-makers  have  tended  to  focus  on
dramatic episodes accompanied by obvious
health effects  such  as  massive spills of
chemicals, or smog episodes, and on the most
serious kinds of health effects such as cancer.
Recent  scientific  evidence, however,  based
mostly on  observations  in animals, raises
concerns that exposure to low levels of certain
contaminants may cause subtle reproductive,
developmental and physiological effects that
may go easily unnoticed, but which  in the long
term may lead to serious cumulative damage.
This includes such effects as immunotoxicity,
neurotoxicity, hormone mimicry, subtle pre-
and  postnatal  developmental effects,  and
decreased  fertility.   In  trying  to assess the
effects of contaminants on human  health, the
U.S. and Canadian governments have moved
to use a "weight of evidence" approach which
relies on  information from  many sources,
including data on animals  as well as humans.
This allows educated guesses to be made and
then to be tested through appropriate long-term
medical and scientific studies.
The  health of the human population of the
basin has improved dramatically since the early
pioneering days, as measured by longevity, or
in the incidence of fatal or crippling infectious
diseases such as poliomyelitis or typhoid fever.
However,  much  of that improvement  is the
result of improvemehtsnn sanitation, vaccines
and drinking water disinfection. On the other
hand,  there  have been slow,  but  steady
increases  in the  incidence of certain cancers
and respiratory illnesses, and we do not know
whether,  or to  what  extent,  the  many
environmental  contaminants  contribute  to
these and  other human diseases.  In addition,
there are indications that  certain kinds of
chemical contaminants may interfere with the
reproduction and development of animals and
humans.  These and other  signs of possible
subtle environmental contaminants on human
health need further investigation.
Comparing the Great Lakes basin with other
areas, available  information  indicates  that
levels of priority contaminants such as PCBs,
dioxins and furans in human tissues  of Great
Lakes residents are similar to levels  found in
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
28
AreaTYr
Michigan (76)
Michigan ('77-78)
Michigan ('82)
N, Carolina ('78-84)
Binghamton, N.Y. ('85-'87)
St. Lawrence, N.Y, ('90}
U.S. (79)
U.S. (79-'80)
Number of
samples
95
1057
138
617
7
57
50
102
% Positive
100
100
100
94
pooled

2
100
Mean* (ppm)
0.82 (med)*
1.5
0.74 (med)*
1,5 (med)*
0.15
0.405
>1 (med)*
0.97
Range (ppm)
0.1-3.3
0,3-5.1

0.3-14.8

0.25->1.0
>1-3
0.08-4,4
+ Arithmetic mean *med=median
                                                                       other  hand,  the
                                                                       strength  of  the
                                                                       economy
                                                                       provides
                                                                       resources
                                                                       potential
                                                                       restore
                                                                       maintain
                                      the
                                      and
                                       to
                                      and
                                      the
Table 5.  Mean Concentration of PCBs in Breast Milk Throughout the U. S.
         and St. Lawrence
human populations elsewhere, suggesting that
exposures are also similar.  Table 5 shows a
comparison of PCBs in breast milk between
the Continental  U.S.  and the Great  Lakes
region.  Although the contaminant levels in
Great Lakes residents are comparable to other
areas, this does not mean that they  are
acceptable.
6.0 SOCIO-ECONOMICS

     Growth of the North American economy
     followed the arrival of European people
with   their intensive  agriculture,  resource
exploitation, urbanization and exotic fauna and
flora. The result of this growth has been a
significant  disruption  of the   ecosystem.
Conversion of native forests and prairies to
agriculture had an immense  impact  on the
native fauna and flora throughout  the region.
Urbanization with its intensive land uses and
transportation   facilities   provided  further
impacts.  Today's continuing  urban  sprawl
adds to the stress on the ecosystem.  On the
                          integrity  of  the
                          ecosystem.

                          Historically  the
                          Great Lakes and
                          their  tributaries
                          provided  access
                          and     trans-
                          portation     for
                          development of a
                          major portion of
                          the inland area
                          of  the   North
                          American
continent.  The agricultural and mineral wealth
of the region then fuelled the development of
an   economy   that   included   a   major
concentration of iron and steel production and
metal fabricating. This in turn spawned a large
cluster  of durable  goods  manufacturing.
Machinery,   transportation   and   other
equipment, appliances, construction materials
and  motor vehicles  became manufacturing
mainstays.   Industries of  the  Great  Lakes
region today continue to rely on water.  Water
use  in manufacturing  is concentrated in  5
sectors: steel production,  food  processing,
petroleum refining , chemicals and the paper
industry. Although industrial water use is now
declining, water from the Great Lakes supplies
more than three-quarters  of  the  industrial
demand in the basin.

The Great Lakes basin represents nearly 11 %
of total employment and 15% of manufacturing
employment for the two nations. However, the
economy of the region has slowed in  recent
decades and has been shifting away from its
historic concentration in manufacturing. From
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    29
1970 to 1990 the basin lost nearly
21%  of  its  manufacturing  jobs
(Figure  15).    In  contrast,  total
manufacturing   jobs   throughout
Canada increased by 22% and held
nearly steady throughout the  U.S.
with a 0.3% gain. This has caused a
dramatic      redistribution     of
employment within the basin. During
this same time period service sector
jobs  have  increased by just  over
100% with more than 2 million jobs
added in the basin.

The regional  economy is  strongly
integrated and is the  largest such
binational  relationship in the world.
Trade between Canada and the eight
Great Lakes  States in  1992 was
valued at $148 billion Can. ($106
billion U.S.) — see Figure 16, or
56.2% of the U.S. — Canada total.  Three-fifths
of this was in autos, auto parts and engines.
On a national scale,  Canada accounts for one-
fifth of U.S. trade and in turn the U.S. receives
two-thirds of Canada's exports.
                           •70  '80  '90
70  '80 '90
  YEAR
                                                         70  '80  '90
                               ||  Manufacturing Employment
                               H|  Service Employment
                               |   |  Total Employment
                  Figure 15.  Great Lakes Basin Employment
                             Population within the region is distributed
                             unevenly and is concentrated in  metropolitan
                             areas.  Approximately three-quarters  of the
                             population  is  concentrated  in the  Lake
                             Michigan  and  Lake  Erie  basins.   Another
                             one-fifth is in  the  Lake Ontario basin and
                             the  remaining  tenth in  the  Huron and
                                             Superior  basins  (Figure
                                             17).
              Canada - Great Lakes State Trade
                            1992
                                                 Wl TOTALS
Canada Imports
                                   Canada Exports
Figure 16.  Canada-Great Lakes States Trade for 1986
   The  majority of the basin
   population is located within
   the 17 largest metropolitan
   areas most of which are on
   the shores  of  the  Lakes.
   Six areas contain 75% of
   Canada's   Great  Lakes
   population  and 11 contain
   81%  of the  U.S.  basin
   population.          Total
   population   of  the Great
   Lakes     basin     is
   approximately   33  million,
   although estimates can vary
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
30
depending on  how much  of  the Chicago
metropolitan area population is included based
upon current or historic watershed boundaries.

Population growth  in the recent decades has
slowed. While the combined population of the
U.S. and Canada grew by 22% from 1970 to
1990, rising from 225 million to 275 million, the
binational population of the Great Lakes basin
grew by less than 1%. Ontario, with more than
a  third of Canada's population,  has been
gaining population  nearly twice as fast as the
Great Lakes states  but its rate of growth is also
slowing.   By 1990, the Great Lakes  states'
population increased by only 1.7% since 1970
whereas Ontario's  1991  population increased
by  31%  from 1971.   However,  within this
relatively    static    picture,     substantial
redistribution of population is  taking  place
causing significant impact on the ecosystem.
While both central city and rural areas have
been losing population, suburban areas have
been growing rapidly, often drawn to "coastal
amenities"  along the  shores of the Lakes.
Industry and service business  development
have  been decentralizing from built-up city
locales to suburban-exurban fringe areas and
connecting corridors  between  metropolitan
areas.  Land and water availability, lower wage
scales, transportation access, proximity to new
residential  markets and  other cost/service
factors are propelling this kind of sprawl.
Figure 17.  Population of the Great Lakes Basins
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                     31
The most significant  population and  related
development issue in the Great Lakes basin
and surrounding  region  is  the continuing
growth of major metropolitan  areas and the
virtually uncontrolled sprawl of lower  density
residential  and other  development.    The
detrimental consequences of these trends are
well known. Increased generation of water and
air   pollution,  higher  transportation  and
residential     energy     use,    increasing
encroachment on agricultural lands and natural
areas, higher housing costs, disinvestment in
older communities and  social  disruption and
burdensome    infrastructure    requirements
portend a more difficult, if not  unsustainable,
future for the  Great Lakes basin ecosystem.
However, the  escalating  cost of  extending
utilities and other basic urban services to these
lower density regions may ultimately slow the
process  and  stimulate  a  more sustainable
pattern.  One of the  challenges in attaining
more sustainable forms of development is the
lack of accurate and visible cost accounting
showing  the real cost to  society of allowing
suburban sprawl. A new land stewardship
ethic would rely more on intensification of
development within prescribed boundaries
and existing infrastructure  capacity as is
done in some other countries.
Agriculture in the Great Lakes basin is both
diverse and productive, and is a major part
of the overall economy  not only of the
basin but also of the two nations.  With
respect to value and volume, dairy, cash
grain and livestock sales are the region's
agricultural  mainstays.   In addition, the
region has  a wealth  of  specialty crops,
attributable to small unique climatic zones.
Since farming depends on the vagaries of
weather, the Great Lakes basin agricultural
productivity   could   be  jeopardized  if
significant climate change occurs.  Other
issues of concern for the region include the use
of chemicals and soil erosion. More than 57
million tonnes (63 million tons) of soil  erode
annually in the U.S. portion of the Great  Lakes
basin.   This results in reduced agricultural
productivity (lower yields),  increased fertilizer
use, and  also causes increased sedimentation
of streams and tributaries.

On a positive note, the Great Lakes basin, with
more than 260,000 square kilometres (100,000
square miles) of navigable  water and 16,926
kilometres (10,579 miles) of  shoreline, anchors
an  important and growing coastal recreation
industry.  The recreational boating industry is
represented  by  boat  manufacturers and
retailers,  marina operators, marine business
suppliers as  well as millions of recreational
boaters and anglers.  For the Great Lakes it is
estimated that between 900,000 and  1 million
U.S. and Canadian boats operate each year
with a direct spending impact of more than
$2.8 billion  Can.  ($2 billion  U.S.).  With a
strong connection to boating,  Great  Lakes
                                        Agriculture in the Great Lakes Basin
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
32
sport fishing is a major part of regional fishing
activity.  U.S. federal surveys projected 2.55
million U.S. anglers fished in the Great Lakes
in  1991  and  had  total  trip-related  and
equipment sales expenditures of $1.86 billion
Can. ($1.33 billion U.S.).  Expenditures per
angler were calculated  at about  $700 Can.
($500 U.S.) for the year.
Economic activity produces both stresses on
the ecosystem and the means to address or
mitigate them, so economic indicators should
be viewed from that perspective.
this  time  period  grew   at   15%,  while
employment in the Canadian side of the basin
grew by only 6%. Research and development
are measures  of technological innovation, an
area  that  has  recently   faltered  in  the
manufacturing   industry.     However,   the
emergence of a  substantial "environmental
industry"   sector    including    resource
conservation,    pollution   remediation   and
reduction technology and  other goods  and
services intended to help the economy reduce
its negative impact on the physical and social
environment,  may soon  see  this indicator
change to a mixed/improving rating.
Ten economic indicators were selected.  Two
of these were rated as poor- infrastructure
investment and loss of agricultural land and
urban  development.   Public infrastructure
includes  roads,  sewers  and water  supply
systems. This rating reflects the continuing low
levels  of  government  investment in  basic
infrastructure. An exception is the expenditure
of $14 billion Can. ($10 billion U.S.) in sewage
treatment plant construction and sewer system
upgrades in both countries during the past two
decades as a direct result of the GLWQA. A
poor rating was also given to land use changes
because  of the  continuing trend  to urban
sprawl and the loss of agricultural land.
Four  economic  indicators were rated as
mixed/deteriorating — employment, research
and  development,  personal   income,  and
population growth and stability.  For the years
1970 to 1990, employment growth in the basin
lagged behind that experienced overall by the
U.S. and Canada. During this period, total U.S.
employment grew at 53% while employment in
the U.S. side of the basin grew at only 25%.
Similarly, total Canadian employment during
In recent years, personal income growth in the
basin has slowed substantially, reflecting the
loss of manufacturing jobs and  increase in
service sector employment.   From  1970 to
1980, personal income in the basin  grew by
140%; that for 1980 to 1990 grew at only 83%.
Four other indicators — pollution prevention,
adoption of  a stewardship  approach,  water
conservation, and per capita energy use —
were  rated  as  mixed/improving,  reflecting
changing  public  attitudes towards  resource
conservation  and sustainable  development.
Increasing public concern about environmental
issues   and   aggressive   environmental
regulation   have  focused   attention   on
environment-economy linkages and on the
concept   of   sustainable    development.
Strategies for a sustainable future must try to
correct  the   past  imbalance  between  the
economy  and the environment, and  apply
ecosystem  management  principles    and
sustainable development policies in the future.
Recognition    of   economic-environmental
linkages  in   resource  management   and
protection is increasing throughout the  Great
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                  33
Lakes basin.  However, the leap between the
concept of sustainable development and its
application is a formidable one.
7. LAKE BY LAKE

    Because of the large size of the watershed,
    physical characteristics such as climate,
soils and topography vary across the basin. To
the north the climate is cold and the terrain is
dominated by a granite bedrock known as the
Canadian (or Laurentian) Shield consisting of
Precambrian rocks under a generally thin layer
of acidic soils. Conifers dominate the northern
forests.

In the southern areas of the basin the climate
is significantly warmer. The soils are deeper
with layers or mixtures of clays, silts, sands,
gravels and boulders deposited as glacial drift
or as glacial  lake and river sediments.  The
lands are usually fertile and the relatively flat
landscape has  been  extensively drained for
agriculture.  The original deciduous forests
have  given way to agriculture and sprawling
urban development. Although part of a single
system, each lake is different.

While it is recognized that all aspects  of the
ecosystem are  interrelated,  the  agencies
responsible for management have tended to
set priorities for action because they can not
adequately deal with all the environmental
issues in  their jurisdiction.   In addition,  the
number of jurisdictions and agencies involved
in management of the Great Lakes is quite
large  - two federal, one provincial and eight
state  governments, as well as thousands of
local  governments and  various stakeholder
groups  - making the task of managing  the
Great Lakes  ecosystem as a whole a major
challenge.  Also the management agencies
and other stakeholders such as the scientists,
general public, and industries do not always
agree on the desired ecosystem  goals and
objectives for each lake.

The  GLWQA addresses  many  of  these
problems. Canada and the United States are
committed   to   the   development   and
implementation  of  Lakewide  Management
Plans (LaMPs) for all of the Great Lakes. The
LaMPs  are designed  to reduce loadings of
critical  pollutants so that the beneficial uses
can be restored (see Table 6 for a listing of
beneficial   use  impairments).    Using  a
comprehensive  and coordinated ecosystem
approach, the Parties  will also be examining
other ecosystem stressors,  so  that a truly
ecosystem-based management program can
be developed and delivered. There is also a
commitment  to  develop  and   implement
Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) in partnership
with     state/provincial    and    municipal
governments  and other  local stakeholders
including industry, indigenous peoples and the
public.  The primary purpose of the RAPs is to
restore  the environmental quality in the 42
Areas of Concern (AOCs) in the Great  Lakes
basin ecosystem.   In addition,  under  the
auspices  of  the  Great   Lakes  Fishery
Commission,  state   and provincial fishery
management agencies are developing joint
management plans. The Great Lakes Fishery
Commission was  created in  1955 with  the
signing  of  the Convention  on Great  Lakes
Fisheries.  In 1980 fisheries management
agencies  formally  organized  their  inter-
jurisdictional  activities  by  signing "A Joint
Strategic Plan for Management of Great  Lakes
Fisheries" also known as the Strategic Great
Lakes Fisheries Management Plan (SGLFMP).
It committed fishery management agencies to
develop a set of fish community objectives and
associated environmental objectives for each
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
34
BENEFICIAL USE IMPAIRMENTS BY CATEGORY
Ecological Health
000EIDE!
1 . Degradation of fish and
wildlife populations
2. Degradation of benthos
3. Degradation of plankton
populations
4. Eutrophication or
undesirable algae
5. Fish tumours or other
deformities
6. Bird or animal deformities
or reproductive problems
Habitat
0
7. Loss of fish and
wildlife habitat





Human Health
00
8. Restrictions on fish and
wildlife consumption
9. Beach closings




Human Use
E9E3HII3I3I
10. Tainting offish and
wildlife flavour
1 1 . Restrictions on dredging
activities
12. Restrictions on drinking
water consumption, or
taste and odour
problems
13. Degradation of
aesthetics
14. Added costs to
agriculture or industry

Table 6.  Beneficial Use Impairments
of  the  Lakes.    The  SGLFMP  call  for
environmental objectives relates well with the
1978 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
call for  an ecosystem  approach.   Potential
linkage  with SGLFMP  was strengthened in
1987 with Agreement provisions calling for
development  of ecosystem  objectives and
indicators.

Fishery  management agencies and  water
quality management agencies are beginning to
work  together  to  achieve  the   common
objectives  of  RAPs,  LaMPs  and  fishery
management plans, but much remains to be
done  in joining  the  separate  histories and
expectations of the agencies and professions
involved.

Fishery  management agencies have, over the
past 100  years, been involved in stocking
programs. These programs were originally the
direct result of the  depletion of fish stocks
caused by overfishing, and more recently due
to loss of habitat and most devastatingly, the
invasion of sea lamprey.  Another major reason
for stocking was the need to control nuisance
populations of alewife. The stocking strategies
involved primarily the lake trout and coho and
chinook salmon.   Salmon  were selected
because they mature, spawn and  die in four
years,  and  the populations  were  able  to
withstand  lamprey predation better that the
slower  growing lake trout.   The salmon
stocking program has been very successful,
and  has resulted in a  very  valuable sport
fishery.    While there  is   some   natural
reproduction of these salmon in the  Lakes, the
fishery remains largely "put  and take". Lake
trout  stocking   has, to date, been  less
successful. There is little natural reproduction
of lake trout except in Lake Superior and a few
remnant stocks in Lake Huron. Loss of lake
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    35
trout spawning habitat may be a significant
factor in this failure.
7.1 LAKE SUPERIOR

    Lake Superior is the largest of the Great
    Lakes in both surface and volume.  It is
also the deepest and coldest of the five.  In
volume Superior could contain all the other
Great  Lakes  and three  more  Lake Eries.
Among the lakes of the world, Lake Superior is
the largest freshwater lake in area. In volume,
it is the third largest in the world. Because of
its size, Superior has a retention time of 191
years.   Retention time is a measure of the
volume of water in the Lake and the average
rate of flow  out  of the  lake.   Additional
information on Lake Superior can be found in
Table 1.

The basin population is approximately 740,000
which  is 2% of the total  for the Great Lakes
basin.    Approximately  75%  of the  Lake
Superior population lives within the U.S.  The
population and industrial base is small, and
most of the Superior basin is forested with little
agriculture because  of the cool  climate and
poor  soils.    Relatively  small  quantities  of
pollutants enter Lake Superior directly, except
through airborne deposition.

In  terms of  environmental  quality,  Lake
Superior  is distinguished by  its high quality
compared to the other Great Lakes and many
parts of the U.S. and southern Canada. This is
due in large  part  to  the relatively  small
population and  very  limited industrial  base.
Notable exceptions to this high quality are the
seven Areas of Concern where beneficial uses
including  the  aquatic   communities  are
impaired.  AOCs include- the  lower reach of
the St.  Louis River/Bay near Duluth,  MN and
Superior, Wisconsin; Thunder Bay, Ontario;
and the smaller areas of Jackfish Bay, Nipigon
Bay  and Peninsula Harbour  in Ontario and
Torch and Deer Lakes in Michigan.  Progress
is being made in restoring beneficial uses to all
of the AOCs as reported in Progress in Great
Lakes Remedial Action Plans: Implementing
the Ecosystem Approach in Great Lakes Areas
of Concerns and as seen in Table 6.

Most of  the  losses within  the aquatic
community  occurred  in  previous decades
during   exploitation  of  natural  resources,
particularly  excessive  fisheries  harvests
followed by impacts of the sea lamprey.  The
most severe and permanent loss has been to
the  lake trout  population which  lost many
genetic  stocks,  most notably all  those that
spawned in tributaries. Although the remaining
stocks  are  reproducing    naturally,   the
population  has  not  yet  become  fully  self-
supporting, since hatchery fish are still needed
to supplement natural reproduction.

Despite genetic losses within fisheries stocks,
biodiversity within the Lake Superior basin is
relatively unimpaired compared to the  other
Lakes. Tributary habitat is degraded in many
areas, but there are  also large tracts of very
high quality habitat.   The challenge in Lake
Superior is  to  preserve  the  relatively  high
quality areas that exist throughout  the basin.
In terms of stressors, the greatest threats to
the aquatic community at present are the river
ruffe and  sea lamprey.  Ruffe is  an exotic
species with no commercial or sports value,
introduced into Duluth Harbor in ballast water
from transatlantic cargo vessels.  It is steadily
spreading through  near shore waters and it is
feared that it will have severe impact on perch
and  other native species.  On the other hand,
sea  lamprey invaded the Great Lakes system
in the 1800s, probably via the Erie barge canal.
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
36
With the opening of the Welland Canal, and
later the  Sault  locks, the  lamprey gained
access  to  all  five Lakes.  With  no natural
predators,  the lamprey devastated  the  lake
trout  populations  in  Lakes  Ontario,  Erie,
Michigan and to some extent Huron.  Some
stocks were lost in Lake Superior,  but sea
lamprey control,  started in 1958, managed to
halt the loss. The sea lamprey control program
has resulted in a 90% reduction  in  lamprey
abundance  in   Lake  Superior.    Without
continued lamprey control, it is unlikely that
lake trout populations could be sustained.
Chemical   stressors   of   concern   are
bioaccumulative  persistent toxic substances.
Although    Lake     Superior     receives
proportionately little input of contaminants in
comparison to  its  volume,  they   remain
available to the food chain for a relatively long
time.  This is because there is little algae or
suspended particles to absorb them and carry
them to the bottom. There are nine chemicals
of concern, as outlined in the Lake Superior
Binational Program including mercury,  DDT,
PCBs   and   toxaphene-like   substances.
Toxaphene remains in the aquatic environment
for a very long time and is mainly a problem in
Lake  Superior  as well  as northern  Lake
Michigan. Although data on toxaphene are
complicated by analytical  limitations, it appears
that concentrations are showing little response
to cancellation of its use as an insecticide. It is
present in some Lake Superior fish at levels
that require fish consumption advisories.

The largest external source of contaminants to
Lake Superior is the atmosphere, via wet and
dry deposition. This is the most difficult source
LAKE SUPERIOR
Area of Concern
Peninsula Harbour
Jackfish Bay
Nipigon Bay
Thunder Bay
St. Louis River
Torch Lake
Deer Lake
IMPAIRMENT CATEGORY
Ecological Health
••DDKin
••aaBH
•BOB ED
•••ana
•BDOBEI
DHDDDD
aaaaaa
Habitat
•
•
•
•
•
D
D
Human Health
•0
HO
DO
••
••
ฉD
•a
Human Use
oHoaa
DBDBn
•BDBD
DBDBB
BBOBD
annnn
DODPCJ
• = Impaired Use
E3 = Likely, Suspected, Under Assessment, or Unknown Impairment
O = No Impairment
ฉ - Restored Use
For a more complete breakdown of impairments see Table 6
Table 7.  Areas of Concern for Lake Superior
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    37
to control since the contaminants may travel
hundreds or even thousands of miles, and may
undergo   many   chemical   transformations,
before  being  deposited   on  the  Lake.
Atmospheric    deposition   accounts    for
approximately 90% of some toxic contaminants
input  into  Lake Superior.  For semi-volatile
compounds such as PCBs, however, outputs
to the atmosphere can be a substantial fraction
of total inputs (see Figure 18).  Nitrogen is
being monitored  in the  Lake  with trends
showing that it is increasing, although these
increases have  no apparent  effect on the
ecosystem. Input of nitrogen to the Lake from
the atmosphere is  suspected of being the
major cause of nitrogen increases in the Lake.
An estimated 58% of the total nitrogen load to
the Lake is attributable to precipitation. The
trends in contaminant concentrations in fish
can  be  seen  in  Figure  10.    For PCBs,
concentrations   in   lake   trout   declined
significantly during the period  1977-1990 in
Lake  Superior as in the  other Great Lakes.
However,  as in the other Lakes, the declines
have not continued in recent years as can be
seen  in  Figures  10 and
11.  Whether this is the
result    of   continuing
sources,    recycling   of
previous   discharges  or
changes in the food chain
remains to be seen.
Fish      consumption
advisories are in effect for
many Lake  Superior fish
because of contaminants.
Advisories are  issued by
states and the province by
species and size of fish.
The public is advised  not
to eat the siscowet form of
lake trout  at any time and
                   to limit consumption of other lake trout, brown
                   trout, steelhead, coho salmon, chinook salmon,
                   white fish, walleyed  pike, smelt,  and  lake
                   herring.    The  recommended  limits  for
                   frequency of consumption differ by species and
                   by political jurisdiction, so it is  important for
                   consumers to consult consumption guides in
                   their respective jurisdictions.

                   Despite the foregoing, Lake Superior is still
                   considered to be the most pristine of all the
                   Great   Lakes.   The  International   Joint
                   Commission (IJC) called on Canada and the
                   U.S. in 1989 to declare Lake Superior an area
                   where no further point sources of persistent
                   toxic chemicals  would  be permitted.   The
                   Parties responded  in 1991  with the Lake
                   Superior Binational Program. This calls for the
                   water quality to be maintained and enhanced,
                   to protect, and where necessary, restore the
                   integrity of Lake Superior's ecosystem, as well
                   as outlining a zero  discharge demonstration
                   project for nine critical toxic substances from
                   point sources.   An  action plan has been
                   developed and  many actions have already
    INFLOW
DEPOSITION
WET   DRY  ABSORPTION VOLATILIZATION
                                                    OUTFLOW
                                          4200
    Kg/year
                            370
Figure 18.  PCB Budget for Lake Superior 1992
                  STATE OF  THE GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
38
been taken to move towards zero discharge.
However  the  effectiveness  of  the  zero
discharge program in eliminating the impacts of
persistent toxic substances also depends upon
the effectiveness of programs to deal with the
airborne deposition of these substances.

The Binational  Program  is evolving and
broadening to include all of the elements of a
Lakewide Management Plan as well as natural
resources,   habitat,   exotic  species  and
biodiversity issues.   It is building upon the
ecosystem objectives and indicators identified
in the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
and also upon  fish  community  objectives
developed in  response to the Strategic Great
Lakes Fisheries Management Plan.

The background  and   problem  definition
portions of the LaMP are nearing completion
for  critical  pollutants,  other stressors and
ecosystem objectives and are to be presented
to the IJC by September 1995. A schedule of
necessary load reductions for critical pollutants
is being developed and will be provided to the
IJC following public comment.
7.2 LAKE MICHIGAN

    Lake Michigan, the third largest in area, is
    the  only Great  Lake entirely  within the
United  States.   It is the  fourth  largest
freshwater lake in the world in terms of area
and fifth largest in terms of volume.  Water
retention time in the Lake is estimated at
approximately 100 years.

The northern  part  is  in the  colder,  less
developed upper Great Lakes region.  It is
sparsely populated,  except for the lower Fox
River Valley which drains into Green Bay. This
Bay has one of the most  productive Great
Lakes fisheries but receives the wastes from
the world's largest concentration of pulp and
paper mills.  The more temperate southern
basin of Lake Michigan is among the  most
urbanized areas in the Great Lakes system.  It
contains  the   Milwaukee   and  Chicago
metropolitan areas.  This region is home to
about eight million people or about one-fifth of
the total population of the Great Lakes basin.
The basin  as a whole  has  a population of
approximately 14 million. Fortunately for the
Lake, drainage for much of the Chicago area
has been redirected out of the Great Lakes
basin.   For additional  information on  Lake
Michigan see Table 1.

Environmental quality in the  basin generally
follows a north south gradient,  being best in the
north and degrading to the south. There are
ten Areas of Concern around the Lake where
the worst degradation exists (see Table 8). In
terms of  magnitude,  the Indiana  Harbor,
Milwaukee  and  Green  Bay  AOCs  are the
largest  and  most degraded  although  the
Kalamazoo River contains very large quantities
of   PCBs.      Manistique,   Menominee,
Sheboygan, Muskegon and White Lake are
less degraded, but still  have beneficial  use
impairments.

The aquatic community in Lake Michigan has
undergone  huge changes. The  fishery was
very productive until over fished and decimated
by exotic species. The sea lamprey eliminated
all stocks of lake trout and severely depressed
whitefish and other populations.  Lamprey
populations declined substantially  after control
measures were  implemented in the  1960s,
thus allowing for the increased survival of the
stocked  trout and salmon. Current increases in
lamprey wounding  rates  of  lake trout in
northern Lake Michigan are  thought to  be a
result of the proximity to the St. Marys River.
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                   39
Alewife populations exploded in the absence of
predators; and during the die-offs of the 1950s
and  1960s were  estimated to constitute  as
much as  90% of the biomass  in the Lake.
Coho salmon, chinook salmon, rainbow trout
and  brown trout were stocked to support a
sport fishery and  control alewife  through
predation. Alewife populations have decreased
to 20% or less of their former abundance as a
result  of  poor  over-winter   survival  and
predation  from the stocked predators. As a
result, native burbot, yellow perch, and bloaters
have made a spectacular recovery since the
early 1980s.  Bloaters are now more abundant
than alewife were in the 1970s.

Algae and zooplankton populations have also
undergone major changes due to changing
predation by fish, changes in water quality and
invasion by exotic species such as the spiny
water flea and zebra mussels.  What the long
term  aquatic  community  will  be, remains
unknown.

The sport fishery remained productive until the
mid 1980s when a bacterial kidney disease
LAKE MICHIGAN
Area of Concern
Manistique River
Lower Menominee River
Lower Green Bay and Fox
River
Sheboygan River
Milwaukee Estuary
Waukegan Harbor
Grand Calumet River/
Indiana Harbor Ship Canal
Kalamazoo River
Muskegon Lake
White Lake
IMPAIRMENT CATEGORY
Ecological Health
DBnnnn
MDDDD
••••HI
••••••
••••••
HMD DEI
••••••
nnnnrjB!
BBBBDH
••BIDS
Habitat
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Human Health
••
••
••
•a
••
••
••
•a
•a
•a
Human Use
DBDBD
DBnnn
HBBBO
nBnan
aBoBa
HBaaa

BBBBB
aaaan
DBBBD
QBBBa
• = Impaired Use
El = Likely, Suspected, Under Assessment or Unknown Impairment
O = No Impairment
ฉ = Restored Use
For a more complete breakdown of impairments see Table 6
 Table 8.  Areas of Concern for Lake Michigan
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
40
(BKD)  outbreak reduced the abundance of
Chinook salmon by 50% or more. Sport fishing
effort also dropped by more than 50% in some
states because chinook salmon comprised the
majority of the sport catch.  The cause of the
BKD outbreak remains unknown.  In addition,
a sharp decline in the survival of coho salmon
eggs in hatcheries began in the early 1990s.
This lack of survival was designated as "early
mortality syndrome".  Treating the eggs in the
hatchery with thiamine reverses the syndrome,
but the ecological cause of the  syndrome
remains unknown. The goal of self sustaining
lake trout  populations based on   natural
reproduction remains elusive, but whitefish and
bloater  populations   have  increased  and
support a valuable commercial fishery. Habitat
losses,  especially  wetlands,   have  been
extensive throughout the basin, but  have been
most severe in the southern portion. Losses in
habitat and biodiversity continue to add up as
major stressors continue unabated.   Urban
sprawl and recreational development continue
to destroy habitat and biodiversity as they do
throughout the Great Lakes basin.  Progress is
being made in inventorying existing  resources,
but  losses  far exceed conservation and
restoration efforts.

Accelerated  eutrophication has been brought
under control except in localized areas, and in
Green  Bay where  good progress has been
made, but much remains to be done. In Green
Bay seven of the 12  impaired uses are the
result of excessive nutrients.  This case is a
good example of problems caused by nutrients
and how it has become recognized that land
runoff  must be  addressed on a  watershed
basis if these problems are to be solved.

Trends   for   bioaccumulative   persistent
contaminants are similar to the other Lakes as
described in  section 4.2. Contaminants in fish
in Lake Michigan are among the highest in the
Great Lakes, being similar to levels in  Lake
Ontario (see Figure 10).

Fish consumption advisories are in effect for
lake trout,  brown  trout,  steelhead,   coho
salmon, Chinook salmon, whitefish, walleyed
pike, perch and smelt. It is advised that  large
lake trout and brown trout should not be eaten
at  all,  whereas  it  is  recommended  that
consumption  of the  others  be  in  limited
amounts.   Advisory  recommendations for
frequency of consumption  differ by species,
size and location, so  it  is important for
consumers to consult consumption guides in
their respective jurisdictions.

On  a lakewide scale  contaminants are being
addressed by both the Lakewide Management
Plan (LaMP) and  the Lake  Michigan  Mass
Balance  Study.   A  draft  LaMP for  critical
pollutants for Lake Michigan was published
early   in   1995.     The   LaMP   reviews
contaminants, their effects and their loadings,
and  also  incorporates  five   ecosystem
objectives  derived from the Lake  Ontario
LaMP.     Following  public  comment  and
appropriate revision the plan will be adopted.
Although the plan is primarily focused on toxic
contaminants, work is currently  underway to
develop an expanded plan which will include
natural resource and habitat factors as well as
 pollutants. Also, further efforts are underway
to strengthen the science base for dealing with
contaminants.

To  obtain better information on  the sources,
loadings and behaviour of toxic contaminants
the U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency
together with various  the state and federal
agencies are conducting Lake Michigan Mass
Balance  Study.   The  study is seeking  to
determine how toxic contaminants move into
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    41
and   through  the   Lake  ecosystem.   A
mathematical model of Lake Michigan is to be
constructed based upon intensive sampling.
Sampling includes inputs from tributaries and
airborne deposition,  sediment  burial  and
resuspension, and movement of contaminants
through foodchains (Figure 19).  The purpose
is to  better predict  the  benefits of reducing
contaminant  loads  in  terms  of resulting
decreases  in contaminant levels in fish.  The
multi-year  study  will   support   improved
management of contaminants throughout the
Lake Michigan basin.

Fish community objectives for Lake Michigan
were  approved in 1995 in response  to the
Strategic Great Lakes Fisheries Management
Plan and are to be factored into the LaMP.

7.3 LAKE HURON

   Lake Huron, including Georgian Bay, is the
   second largest  in area.   It is the third
largest freshwater lake in the world in area and
sixth   in   volume.      The   population   is
approximately 2.4  million  with about 55% of the
population  in the  U.S.   Like  Lake
Michigan, the northern  portion is
lightly  populated  and extensively
forested. In contrast, the Saginaw
River  basin is intensively farmed
and   contains   the  Flint  and
Saginaw-Bay  City   metropolitan
areas.  Saginaw  Bay, like Green
Bay in Lake Michigan, contains a
very  productive  fishery.    For
addition information on Lake Huron
see Table 1.
Lake  Huron is literally the lake  in
the middle, both geographically and
in  environmental quality. It  has
relatively good quality of water and
                                             wetlands except in the Areas of Concern.  The
                                             fishery  is relatively  healthy  except  for the
                                             lamprey threat from  the St. Marys River,
                                             discussed later in this section.  Originally, there
                                             were five AOCs on Lake Huron. One of them,
                                             Collingwood Harbour, has since been cleaned
                                             up and was taken off the list of AOCs in 1994.
                                             The binational St. Marys area at the  head  of
                                             the Lake was originally designated because of
                                             contaminants, but is also a major and growing
                                             source  of lampreys.   Control  of industrial
                                             sources is progressing and pollution loads are
                                             being  reduced.   The  two other  Canadian
                                             AOCs, Spanish River and Severn Sound are
                                             responding  well  to remedial  actions  and
                                             showing recovery (Table 9).

                                             The remaining AOC is Saginaw Bay. The Bay
                                             is a rich biological resource and is the largest
                                             freshwater coastal area in the U.S. with a water
                                             surface of 1,143 square miles (2960 square
                                             kilometres).  Biodiversity of the  Bay  and its
                                             watershed remains  quite high although  138
                                             plant and animal species have been identified
                                             as  endangered, threatened  or of  special
                                             concern.  The area continues to   provide
                                         Atmosphere Transport
                                                                to/Water OyPareote
                                                                Exchange Deposition
                                 Figure 19.  Mass Balance Diagram
                  STATE  OF THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
42
LAKE HURON
Area of Concern
Saginaw River/Bay
Collingwood Harbour
Severn Sound
Spanish Harbour
IMPAIRMENT CATEGORY
Ecological Health
mmmmom
ฉDDฉDD
••DBDD
•HBDDH
Habitat
•
ฉ
•
B
Human Health
••
ฉa
•a
••
Human Use
mmmma
DDDDD
niain
DBDDB
• = Impaired Use
H = Likely, Suspected, Under Assessment or Unknown Impairment
O = No Impairment
ฉ = Restored Use
For a more complete breakdown of impairments see Table 6
Table 9.  Areas of Concern for Lake Huron

essential habitat for both fish and wildlife with
more than  3  million waterfowl  migrating
through the area annually.

Historically there were approximately 37,000
acres (14,800 hectares) of emergent  marsh
around the Bay, but less than half remains.
Throughout the watershed, wetlands originally
covered approximately two thirds of the basin
but now cover only about 15%.

The Bay receives runoff from an 8,700 square
mile (22,530 square  kilometre) watershed that
contains 1.4 million people, approximately 35%
of the population of the entire Lake  Huron
basin. The watershed of the Bay also contains
large amounts  of  industry and  intensive
agriculture. As a consequence, it has received
heavy  loadings  of   nutrients  and   toxic
contaminants. Loadings have been reduced,
but   problems   of   contamination    and
eutrophication  continue,   partially  due   to
recycling of old deposits.
In addition to human stresses, the most recent
problem, the zebra mussel invasion, has the
potential  to  significantly  impact  biological
communities and  contaminant cycling in the
Bay.

For the  remainder of  Lake  Huron,  aquatic
community health and biodiversity is perceived
as  being  relatively   good,  at  least   in
contemporary terms and in comparison to the
other  Lakes.   The  forage  fish  population
appears   to  be  healthy.    Walleyes  are
recovering locally in both Saginaw Bay and
Severn Sound. Whitefish have recovered and
are at historically high levels.  However, there
is some concern over whether current levels of
walleye  are  sustainable,  particularly with
growing populations of lampreys and unknown
food  chain impacts  resulting  from  zebra
mussels.   There is  also  concern over the
continued health of other large fish in northern
Lake  Huron due to  the threat  of lamprey.
Additionally, lake trout populations are still not
                  STATE  OF  THE GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    43
self   sustaining.   They   are   genetically
impoverished  and  rely  on  hatcheries  for
reproduction.  Declining walleye populations in
Georgian Bay are another concern.

Consumption  advisories  with  respect   to
amount and frequency of consumption are in
effect for chinook salmon, coho salmon, brown
trout, steelhead,  walleyed pike and  yellow
perch.  As in other lakes, advisories differ by
species, size and location so it is important to
check advisories  in  effect for the appropriate
state or provincial jurisdiction.

Lake Huron is the most important Lake of all
the Great Lakes in terms of having the highest
number of fish-eating birds that breed along
lake shorelines.   This is due to the diversity
and  area! extent of habitats available to the
birds on the Lake.   Most populations of the
fish-eating breeding  birds are increasing, for
example  cormorants,  Caspian  terns,  and
osprey.  Pairs of bald eagles have returned to
nest along the Lake Huron shoreline.  The
herring  gull population is  declining  in a few
areas on the Lake but this is probably due to
changes in the fish community structure rather
than contaminants. Caspian terns and osprey
are  no  longer showing  adverse effects  of
contaminants,  however,   they  are  not  as
sensitive to the current contaminants as other
species.   Loss  of  shoreline marshes  and
wetlands have been moderate compared to the
other Lakes except in Saginaw Bay. However,
continuing loss of wetlands along the shores
and  tributaries is a  serious threat to habitat,
one  aspect of which is  loss of resting and
feeding areas for migratory waterfowl. Some
of the important staging areas on Lake Huron
for migrating  birds  include  the wetlands  of
Saginaw Bay, Severn Sound and the St. Marys
River.   Physical  habitat loss in the past,  in
southern Lake Huron, was catastrophic as land
was converted to agriculture and streams were
dammed for various purposes.

With respect to stressors affecting Lake Huron,
exotic  species such as sea lamprey, zebra
mussels, and purple loosestrife  and  other
organisms pose major threats.  Shortly after its
arrival in the Lakes, the sea lamprey population
exploded and nearly eliminated native fisheries
by the 1950s and 1960s.  In  the  late 1950s
Canada and the U.S., under the auspices of
the Great Lakes Fishery Commission,  began
treating tributaries and  coastal waters with
TFM, a chemical used to kill lamprey larvae in
streams.  By the 1970s the lamprey population
had  been  reduced  by 90% throughout  the
Great Lakes.  However, lamprey are a growing
threat in Lake Huron with populations doubling
in northern Lake Huron  since  1985. Using
current  methodologies,   the   population
reproducing in the St. Marys River cannot be
treated because of the large flow in the River
and the many bays and side channels. Since
salmon transport lamprey throughout the Lake,
the problem will likely spread.

As shown in Figure 20 lamprey control is vital
and should continue as a priority  before  the
fisheries in  Lake  Huron are  lost.   More
information is needed  on the  distribution of
adult and larval lamprey as part of the search
for non-chemical  controls. Development of
non-chemical controls are needed  not only for
the St. Marys River, but to allow reduced use
of  chemical  treatment  which   has  some
undesireable side-effects.  Efforts to deal with
the problem  are  being coordinated by  the
Great  Lakes Fishery Commission but costs
may increase substantially. Invasion by zebra
mussels has yet to run its full course and little
can be done except to monitor its progress and
try  to  understand   the  cause   and effect
relationships involved.  The full impact on  the
                  STATE OF  THE GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
44
food chain, aquatic community and biodiversity
remains to be seen.

Contaminant levels in  Lake Huron  fish and
birds are  declining  as  they are in the other
Lakes as  seen in  Figures 10  and  11.
Continuing  sources  of contaminants  are
primarily   from   sediments   from   earlier
discharges,  airborne  deposition  and  land
runoff.

Shoreline  development is a growing stress on
habitat and aquatic  communities as  marshes
and  other wetlands are dredged,  drained or
filled, often  for  recreational  development,
including  summer   homes   and  cottages.
Although the change is taking place in small
increments, the collective effect is substantial.
The most intense areas  of impact are the result
of urban population pressures from both Detroit
and Toronto.
An emerging issue is how public and private
natural resource lands within the basin are
managed.  Often land is managed by
individual   agencies  or  organizations
carrying   out   single,   often   narrow,
mandates.  The efforts to  maximize a
narrow objective can have major negative
impacts on the aquatic community as a
whole or on components within it.
There is a danger of complacency for
Lake Huron. As the "lake-in-the-middle",
it is the lake without high-profile issues or
advocacy groups to focus attention on it.
Nonetheless, the problems are real and
there is a need to identify  what most
needs to be protected and restoration. A
plan for action is then needed to address
the problems. Fish community objectives
have  been  approved,  but there  is
currently no LaMP structure in place and
       is unlikely to start before 1998 due to a scarcity
       of resources. What is needed is a process for
       developing a Lakewide Management Plan that
       includes  both  environmental   quality  and
       fisheries management.
       7.4 LAKE ERIE

          Lake Erie is the smallest of the Lakes in
          volume and second smallest in area.  Yet
       it is still the tenth largest freshwater lake in the
       world  in terms of surface  area and 16th in
       volume. Of all the Great Lakes it is exposed to
       the  greatest  stress from  urbanization and
       agriculture. The Lake receives runoff from the
       rich agricultural lands of southwestern Ontario
       and parts of Ohio, Indiana and  Michigan.
       Seventeen metropolitan areas of over 50,000
       population are located within its basin.  The
       basin  population  is approximately  13 million
       with approximately  88%  of the  population
       within  the U.S. For Additional information on
       Lake Erie see Table 1.
    350000 -

    300000 -

    250000

    200000 -

    150000-

    100000-

     50000 -

         0
            Superior Michigan  Huron    Erie

            IH  Current   |  Target
Ontario
Figure 20.  The Status of Current Sea Lamprey
Populations in the Great Lakes (and control program
targets for their suppression)
                  STATE OF THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    45
LAKE ERIE
Area of Concern
River Raisin
Maumee River
Black River
Cuyahoga River
Ashtabula River
Presque Isle Bay
Wheatley Harbour
Buffalo River
IMPAIRMENT CATEGORY
Ecological Health
QBDDDD
Homo
BBBHBH
••amฎ
BBDDBD
DHDnBn
DBDBBID
BBDDBB
Habitat
0
D
•
B
B
D
B
B
Human Health
BD
BB
BB
BB
Bn
DB
DEI
BD
Human Use
OBDDD
OBBBD
BBQBB
HBBBa
DBana
DBaoo
DBDDD
BBDDD
• = Impaired Use
13 = Likely, Suspected, Under Assessment or Unknown Impairment
P = No Impairment
ฉ = Restored Use
For a more complete breakdown of impairments see Table 6
Table 10.  Areas of Concern for Lake Erie

There are eight Areas of Concern on Lake Erie
(Table 10), but four more from the Detroit and
Sarnia areas contribute to its problems.  The
Buffalo AOC has little affect on the Lake as
most of its discharge is drawn into the Niagara
River and into  Lake Ontario.  Presque  Isle,
Pennsylvania and Wheatley Harbour, Ontario
are relatively small, but the others are major
problem areas.  The Ashtabula, Cuyahoga,
Black, Maumee and  Raisin River areas all
present formidable  problems as do the St.
Clair, Clinton, Detroit and Rouge River areas
upstream.
The Lake is  large in area, but the average
depth is only about 19 metres (62 feet).  It is
the shallowest and therefore warms rapidly in
the spring and summer and frequently freezes
over  in  winter.    It  also  has  the  shortest
retention time of the Lakes, 2.6 years.  The
western  basin, comprising about one-fifth  of
the Lake, is  very shallow  with an  average
depth of 7.4 metres (24 feet).  The waters of
the Lake, like the surrounding farm lands, are
highly productive; far more productive than the
other Lakes.
Although the  Lake Erie basin is  the most
intensively  populated  and  farmed,  pollution
loading   has   been   mitigated   through
sedimentation from the productive algae and
fine  soil particles  from farmland  erosion.
                  STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
46
Therefore, with respect to toxic contaminants,
Lake Erie organisms have historically shown
relatively low concentrations compared to the
other Lakes. As eroded soil and nutrient levels
decline  and  zebra  mussels  deplete  algal
populations, this may change, increasing rates
of bioaccumulation.

In terms of environmental quality, Lake Erie is
severely  degraded with  respect  to  habitat.
Although  never  "dead" as reported in the
1960's,   it   was   severely   stressed   by
eutrophication stimulated by excess nutrients.
The resulting  algal blooms closed beaches,
disrupted    food   chains    and    aquatic
communities, and caused wide spread oxygen
depletion  in  the  central basin.    Massive
investment in  municipal and industrial waste
treatment and voluntary programs to control
agricultural land runoff have produced excellent
results. They have achieved target levels and
are producing the biological results expected.
Oxygen depletion  still  occurs  in the bottom
waters of the central basin, but to a diminishing
extent.   Phosphorus  concentrations in the
western  basin  have nearly reached target
levels  but  sediment  resuspension during
storms results in recycling  of  nutrients from
bottom deposits.

The near total removal of  native vegetation
from the  basin, and severe  exploitation  of
fisheries followed by exotic species invasions,
have   devastated   the   original   aquatic
community of the  Lake.  Recovery is under
way, but the long term  nature of the resulting
community  is  unknown.   Species having
particularly  heavy impact  include  zebra
mussels, and carp. Others such  as  alewife,
smelt, white perch, pacific salmon, and most
recently the round  goby have added stress to
the system.
Zebra and quagga mussels are closely related
exotic species that  prefer habitats typical  of
Lake Erie. The two species are very similar, a
major difference  being  that  quagga  prefer
deeper water than zebra mussels. Without any
natural predators or diseases, their populations
have exploded. Both mussels are voracious
filter feeders, and as such, have had profound
effects on the Lake's ecosystem including
abrupt changes in water quality, water clarity
and the food web.

By consuming large amounts of phytoplankton,
they have increased water  clarity  (a 77%
increase  in water transparency has occurred
between  1988 and 1991).  By increasing the
clarity of the water, sunlight is able to penetrate
deeper,   allowing  rooted aquatic plants  to
spread into deeper water.   This has  had
ecological benefit to  many organisms but has
interfered with swimming and boating in some
areas.

The eating habits of mussels have led to large
changes  in the food web which may result in
major changes in the future abundance  of
various species of fish.  They have depleted
the food source (phytoplankton) for other filter
feeders,  and  have also  assimilated  toxic
contaminants.  By removing large amounts of
particulates,      which      formerly
absorbed/adsorbed     pollutants,     more
contaminants are left in the water. This could
result in higher contaminant concentrations in
the remaining phytoplankton and zooplankton
as well as higher concentrations in fish and
wildlife species feeding on the  plankton  or
directly on the mussels and  other benthos
(bottom dwellers).   The results  of the zebra
mussel   invasion  have become far  more
complex than the physical problems of clogging
intake pipes or jamming machinery.
                  STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                    47
Although not  yet  established in Lake  Erie
another exotic species to be concerned with is
the ruffe.  Ruffe  habitat consists of warm
shallow water such as found in much of Lake
Erie.   In fact,  considering all of the Great
Lakes, Lake Erie has over half the thermally
suitable habitat.   Potential effects  of large
populations of ruffe on fish communities are
unknown, but if it were to become as abundant
in all the thermally suitable habitat as it did in
the St. Louis River estuary of Lake Superior, it
would be a major problem for the  Great Lakes
fisheries.   A  decline  in  the yellow perch
abundance similar to that seen in the St. Louis
River  estuary  would seriously  impact the
fishery which  is presently  valued  at $141
million Can. ($101 million U.S.)  in Lake Erie
alone for yellow perch.

Historically, the  top commercial  fish  in Lake
Erie included whitefish, walleye, blue pike, lake
trout (only found in the eastern basin of Lake
Erie in the colder deeper waters) and sturgeon.
The  demise of the lake  trout was mainly a
combination    of   overharvesting    and
environmental stress.   The populations  of
whitefish,   walleye  and   sturgeon  have
diminished from overfishing and blue  pike
became extinct. In 1970 high levels of mercury
led to the closure  of the  commercial walleye
fisheries  in the U.S.  and Canada as well as
restrictions on the retention of walleyes caught
by anglers.  After 1972 the mercury levels had
declined and the walleye fishery re-opened in
Ontario to both sport and limited commercial
use;  however in Michigan and  Ohio it was
restricted to angling.  Due to the relief  from
commercial fishing and to the quotas imposed
after re-opening the fishery, the walleye fishery
of the western basin has shown a spectacular
recovery.

Some fish consumption advisories are in effect
for lake trout,  Chinook salmon, coho  salmon,
walleyed pike,  smallmouth bass and white
bass. As in other lakes, advisories differ by
species, size and location so it is important to
check with the appropriate state  or province.

A  LaMP  (Lakewide Management  Plan)  is
currently being developed for Lake Erie,  in
accordance  with  the GLWQA,  between the
Canadian and U.S. federal governments, the
four Great  Lakes states (Ohio,  Michigan,
Pennsylvania, and New York) and the province
of Ontario. The goal of the LaMP is to restore
and protect  the beneficial uses of Lake Erie
using an ecosystem approach. It will address
critical pollutants, habitat loss, exotic species
and natural  resource management including
fish  community objectives.   Fish community
objectives are being developed in response to
the   Strategic   Great   Lakes   Fisheries
Management Plan and are currently under
review.

Four critical pollutants have already  been
identified for immediate action: PCBs, DDT and
metabolites, chlordane, and dieldrin, and the
remainder  of  pollutants  will  be identified
through   the   beneficial  use   impairment
assessment.   LaMP  activities will  closely
coordinate with the Remedial Action Plans for
the AOCs in the Lake Erie drainage basin, as
well  as   coordinating   with   programs
downstream such as the Niagara River Toxic
Management Plan and the Lake Ontario LaMP.
Lake St. Clair

Lake St. Clair is a relatively small shallow lake
of 1114 square kilometres (430 square miles)
and a volume of 4.2 cubic kilometres (1 cubic
mile).  It lies between Lakes Huron and Erie
but is completely within the Lake Erie drainage
basin.  There is a high population and industrial
base surrounding it. This has led to the loss of
                  STATE OF  THE GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
48
much of the surrounding habitat/wetlands, and
to contaminant problems in both the water and
the sediments. Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair
River are very important staging  areas  for
migrating birds and fish,  so  habitat loss is a
real  concern.  Zebra mussels are having a
major impact on the Lake St. Clair ecosystem
but the end result remains  unknown.  One
effect of the mussels has been improved water
clarity.  This in turn  has  altered the nutrient
cycling and  food chains,  as  well as allowing
aquatic vegetation to spread throughout the
Lake.   The vegetation  provides  improved
habitat, but impedes some recreational uses.

As mentioned previously, there are four AOCs
in the Lake St. Clair area which affect Lake
Erie:  St. Clair, Clinton, Detroit,  and Rouge
River.  There is no specific LaMP for the Lake
although it will receive some  consideration as
part  of the Lake Erie LaMP.  Fish community
objectives have been developed  for Lake St.
Clair.
7.5 LAKE ONTARIO

    Lake Ontario, although slightly smaller in
    area, is much  deeper than its upstream
neighbour, Lake Erie, with an average depth of
86 metres  (283 feet) and a retention time of
about six years.   In terms of world  rank of
freshwater lakes, Lake Ontario is 13th in area
and  11th in volume.  Major urban industrial
centres,  such  as  Hamilton,  Toronto  and
Rochester are located on its shore. The U.S.
shore is less urbanized and is  not intensively
farmed, except for a narrow coastal plane.

There  are  approximately 6.6  million people
living within the Lake Ontario basin of which
nearly  69% reside in  Canada.  Most of  the
population  is concentrated in the western half
of the  basin, including the Toronto-Hamilton
crescent, that contains more than half of the
entire Canadian Great Lakes basin population.
U.S.  population  is  concentrated  in  the
Rochester and Syracuse-Oswego areas. Lake
Ontario is also directly impacted by the Buffalo-
Niagara area since pollutant loadings from that
area typically flow into Lake Ontario via the
Niagara River,  rather than mixing  into Lake
Erie.

The aquatic community of Lake  Ontario as in
the  other  Lakes,  suffered  major  losses
because of agriculture, deforestation, damming
of streams and  urbanization.  Atlantic salmon
was extirpated  through  over-fishing  and
sedimentation of spawning habitat.

Lake Ontario contains seven AOCs (Table 11),
of which  Toronto  and Hamilton  Harbour are
the largest. The others are Port Hope and the
Bay of Quinte in  Ontario and Eighteen  Mile
Creek,  Rochester and Oswego  in New York.
An eighth, the  Niagara River AOC, supplies
approximately 70%  of the toxic contaminant
loading to Lake Ontario.  Lake Erie's Buffalo
River also  primarily impacts Lake  Ontario
rather than Lake Erie.

Lakewide, accelerated eutrophication has been
brought under control, but remains a problem
in localized bays and  river mouth  areas,
notably Hamilton  Harbour and  the  Bay  of
Quinte.

Contaminant levels in fish are following trends
similar to the other Lakes as  described  in
section 4.2 (and shown in Figure 10) but are
relatively  high and  similar to those  in Lake
Michigan.   The levels of contaminants are
being maintained by the continued inputs from
point and non-point sources, from atmospheric
deposition and locally from  the sediments.
                  STATE  OF THE GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                   49
LAKE ONTARIO
Area of Concern
Eighteen Mile Creek
Rochester Embayment
Oswego River
Bay of Quinte
Port Hope Harbour
Metro Toronto and Region
Hamilton Harbour
IMPAIRMENT CATEGORY
Ecological Health
Habitat
Human Health
Human Use
Still Under Assessment
BBBBBB
BBBBBH
•BBBHD
aaanna
••BIBB
••am
•
•
•
D
•
•
BB
•D
••
DD
BB
•
HDBBB
DODHD
DBBBD
OIDDO
DBDBO
DBOBD
• = Impaired Use
El = Likely, Suspected, Under Assessment or Unknown Impairment
n = No Impairment
ฉ = Restored Use
For a more complete breakdown of impairments see Table 6
Table 11.  Areas of Concern for Lake Ontario
Levels declined rapidly in the 1970s and early
1980s but since that time contaminant levels in
the biota have declined much more slowly or
even, in a few cases,  increased (Figure 21).
Mirex  and  photomirex  are  contaminants
whose impacts are mainly  confined to Lake
Ontario fish and fish-eating birds, although
very low  levels (100-200 times less) have
been  found  in  Lakes Erie  and Huron birds
and fish.  Mirex concentrations in  fish have
declined  significantly  since  the  1980s  in
Lake  Ontario.  Increases were observed  in
1991 and  1992, but  they are  thought to be
the  result of  changes in  the  food chain
rather than increased loadings to Lake Ontario.
Nevertheless the concentrations  remain  high
enough  to  be  the  basis  for  some  fish
consumption advisories.
In Lake Ontario consumption advisories are in
effect for lake trout, Chinook salmon,  coho
salmon, brown trout, rainbow trout, walleye,
white sucker and white perch.  As in the other
Lakes, advisories differ by species, size and
location,  so it is important that consumers
check with the appropriate state or province.
The  present  fishery  of  Lake  Ontario  is
maintained by stocking hatchery reared fish,
primarily pacific salmon.  Originally introduced
to control alewife they have become the basis
of an economically important sport  fishery.
                  STATE OF THE  GREAT LAKES-1995

-------
50
2500-
2000-
c
01
| 1500-
o
I loco-
s'
O)
a
500-







71 7





II.
IHInli _
iBBlllBBlBraii-HH.--
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
2 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 '80 '81 '82 '83 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89 '90 '91 '92
Year
Figure 21.  Dioxin (2,3,7,8- Tetrachloro-di-benzo-dioxin)
Concentration in Herring Gull Eggs from Eastern Lake Ontario
1971-1992
However,  there is a question as to whether
reliance of hatcheries on non-native fish can be
naturally sustained in the long term.

In 1984, the management agencies of the Lake
Ontario fishery stocked 8.2 million fish. Since
that time,  they have recognized that there is
not enough food to sustain this amount  of
stocked fish. It is estimated that Lake Ontario
will support 4-5 million of "put and  take" fish
added each year.  As a result the agencies
have decreased the amount of fish stocked in
Lake  Ontario each year so that by 1994 the
amount stocked was almost half  that of a
decade ago (4.5 million fish were stocked in
1994).  The province of  Ontario  has also
encouraged increased harvesting of salmon
and trout to reduce the demand for food by
predator fish.  There is still the question  of
rehabilitating  the  Lake Ontario fishery to a
more  "natural" system with, for example, a top
predator species such  as Atlantic salmon.
               Since Atlantic salmon depend
               on tributaries for spawning,
               they  would also be a  good
               indicator  of  Lake  Ontario
               ecosystem health. However,
               much of the Atlantic salmon
               habitat has  been destroyed
               through deforestation, stream
               modification, dams  and  pH
               changes.  These factors were
               largely responsible  for the
               demise of the Atlantic salmon
               in the late 1800s.   It  would
               take   more   than   merely
               stocking the fish to restore
               them.

               Habitat   and    biodiversity
               losses continue, most notably
               due  to  urban  sprawl  and
               agricultural  practices.    The
               bald   eagle  illustrates  the
               combined  effects of habitat
loss and toxic chemicals on birds of prey. Bald
eagles were extirpated from  many of the
islands and shorelines of the Great Lakes in
the 1950s and early  1960s due to effects  of
DDT (causing egg shell thinning). However,
prior  to  widespread use  of  DDT,  eagle
populations were already in decline. The loss
of nesting habitat, changes in fish populations,
and persecution by humans were some of the
reasons for their initial decline.  Together the
remaining contaminant levels and the lack of
habitat  (mature  eagles  favour  coniferous
perches away from human disturbance) have
resulted in little success in the return  of the
bald eagle to the Lake Ontario shoreline.  The
eagles have been more successful inland from
the Lake.

The problem of persistent toxic contaminants in
the  Lake  led  federal and  provincial/state
governments to develop the Niagara  River
Toxics Management Plan (NRTMP). Following
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                   51
this, the Lake Ontario Toxic Management Plan
(LOTMP) was developed.  These plans were
developed   to   reduce  the  loadings  of
contaminants into Lake Ontario.

The most significant sources of toxic chemicals
in  Lake Ontario  are  considered to be the
Niagara River (which also includes the entire
Great Lakes drainage basin upstream  of the
Niagara River); inputs from the ten other major
tributaries;   non-point   sources   (including
surface  water   runoff  and  atmospheric
deposition);  and  inputs from point  sources
(municipal and industrial facilities  discharging
directly into the Lake). Since the Niagara River
constitutes nearly 85% of the tributary flow into
Lake   Ontario,   and   since  it  is  heavily
industrialized, it is a significant source of most
of the toxic chemicals entering the Lake.

The LOTMP is currently being expanded into a
more  ecosystem  based LaMP to protect the
Lake and to focus on restoring beneficial uses.
This will be achieved using indicators, that are
representative of a healthy  self-sustaining
ecosystem, to identify the pollution problems
and to further determine the areas of degraded
quality.   Fish community  objectives for the
Lake have been developed, but continue under
review  based on public  comment. These
objectives will be used as one component of
the overall suite of environmental objectives for
the LaMP.
7.6 THE CONNECTING CHANNELS

     Connecting channels are often the  most
     heavily utilized by humans, therefore all
five of the connecting channels have impaired
habitat.  Part or all of each connecting channel
has been designated as an AOC (as discussed
in each lake section and shown in Table 12).
In addition to  the  impacts of  agriculture,
industry and urbanization (which also affect the
Lakes), the connecting channels  suffer from
physical alterations for shipping,  water level
management and power generation causing a
loss of wetlands and rapids habitat.
8. MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES FOR THE
FUTURE

    As discussed in this report, the health of the
    Great Lakes ecosystem is variable.   In
Lakes Huron and  Superior which are less
urbanized and  industrialized,  water quality,
aquatic communities and habitats are relatively
healthy; in the other lakes, human activities
have   caused  widespread   environmental
degradation.   Even  in the more disturbed
Lakes, though,  progress has  been made in
halting or undoing the damage caused by past
unsustainable practices. The water is cleaner;
loadings  and  levels  of   persistent  toxic
chemicals have been reduced  from the those
seen  in the  1970s,  and the nutrient control
programs instituted in the 1970s have largely
achieved  their  objectives.     Phosphorus
loadings  are much reduced  and  nuisance
blooms of algae are no longer a problem.  In
fact, success in reducing phosphorus loadings
under the GLWQA has provided a binational
resource management model to the world.
Awareness of the fragility of the ecosystem is
now widespread throughout the basin. Fish
and wildlife  communities are  healthier than
they were twenty years ago with some native
(indigenous)  top  predators  undergoing a
resurgence, and some progress being made to
protect and enhance aquatic habitat. Citizens
have been galvanized into action over the past
20  years, and action at state/provincial and
local levels to conserve and restore important
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
52
CONNECTING CHANNELS
Area of Concern
St. Marys River
St. Glair River
Clinton River
Detroit River
Rouge River
Niagara River (Ont)
Niagara River (NY)
St. Lawrence River (Cornwall, Ont)
St. Lawrence River (Massena, NY)
IMPAIRMENT CATEGORY
Ecological Health
UDMD
DIDDBM
•••MID
DID DID
••nun
mmsmam
BflDDlEI
••BflH
EHBDHH
Habitat
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Human Health
••
••
••
••
••
••
•a
••
•a
Human Use
DHDBD
ฎm*mm
DBDBD
amn
DBDBD
QUOD
rJBDDD
BHHM
nnaaa
• = Impaired Use
EH = Likely, Suspected, Under Assessment or Unknown Impairment
a = No Impairment
ฉ = Restored Use
For a more complete breakdown of impairments see Table 6
Table 12.  Areas of Concern for the Connecting Channels
ecosystems is now occurring through the RAP
process and other domestic initiatives.

It must be recognized that there is still a long
way to go  to restore the Lakes to a healthy
state, despite the progress that has been made
in the last twenty years. Society is moving —
many may argue, too slowly — to embrace the
principles of sustainability, waste reduction,
pollution  prevention, and resource efficiency.
However,  the   Lakes  are  besieged  with
pollutants  released   hundreds,   or  even
thousands, of miles away from the basin, and
locally pollutants are still being discharged into
air, soil and water by individuals, municipalities,
industries  and  agriculture.      Persistent
contaminants continue to cycle  through the
ecosystem affecting fish and wildlife, and the
effects  of long  term  exposure  to  small
concentrations of contaminants continue to be
discovered.  Aquatic habitat loss  has been
slowed, but it continues to take  place on an
unacceptable  scale.  Exotic species continue to
destabilize aquatic  communities,  degrade
habitat, and alter the cycling of nutrients and
contaminants.

The complexity of  the ecosystem and the
intricacy of interrelationships pose tremendous
challenges for managers in the 1990s.  How
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                  53
well these, and other challenges are met will
define the condition of the Great Lakes for
future generations. These challenges include:

The challenge  of adequate information:
This report, and the background papers on
which it is based, cite numerous examples of
areas in which research  and data collection
need to be done. In many cases, however, the
amount of research necessary is overwhelming
relative to the resources available.  Some
priority research needs  include data on the
quality  and  quantity  of  aquatic  habitat,
information on atmospheric transformation and
deposition  to  aid in  the  determination  of
pollutant loadings to each of the Great Lakes,
information on contaminant cycling,  a better
understanding  of food web dynamics, spatial
and temporal  data on  humans and aquatic
biota, and basic economic data on the Great
Lakes basin.  Effective steps forward require
good information on stresses, interactions and
effects on which to base decision-making.  It is
vital to fill these priority data gaps.
The challenge of information management
and  communication:     Information  on
environmental conditions  is  possessed by
hundreds of boards, agencies, commissions,
and interest groups in the basin.  But all too
often this information is not readily available.
Moving forward to restore ecosystem health
will  require  taking   advantage  of   the
tremendous  strides  made  in  computer
networks,  integrated information, cable, and
other  telecommunication   opportunities  to
improve  communication  on  environmental
issues.   Effective  communication is key in
transferring scientific knowledge to the policy
makers  in  a  useful  and  understandable
language.  For this to happen the data must
first become  consolidated, standardized and
accessible.
The challenge of how decisions are made:
Traditional  decision-making  is  linear.    A
decision is made by an individual or agency, it
is passed along for review or approval by a
long  "chain of command."   This is time-
consuming,     compartmentalized,     and
antithetical to the ecosystem approach.  The
ecosystem approach requires "round table",
interdisciplinary,    inter-jurisdictional    and
intersectoral approaches to decision-making,
approaches which aim for consensus  among
stakeholders  often at the local level.  The
ecosystem approach to decision-making is at
work in the LaMPs and RAPs programs.
The     challenge     of     institutional
arrangements:  The  goal of restoring and
maintaining the integrity of the Great Lakes
basin ecosystem poses many challenges to
institutional structures.  Each agency has its
own goals, objectives and mandates, which are
not necessarily those  that are best for the
ecosystem. The emphasis for management of
the Great Lakes has  gradually shifted  from
traditional  approaches  to pollution control in a
single  medium,  such  as  air,   water  or
sediments, towards an ecosystem approach
where  agencies  examine  the   combined
impacts of a  variety   of stressors  on  the
environment.   This requires  recognition  of
ecosystem impacts from all  decisions and
recognition of  effects beyond  the narrow
purposes  of  specific   laws,   regulations  or
organizational  missions.  It also requires a
consensual "buy in" to goals,  objectives and
strategies   from federal,  state,   provincial,
regional and municipal governments, and from
the private and non-governmental  sectors.
Because  of the complexity  of  the  Great
Lakes basin ecosystem,  and the complex
nature  of  the problems it faces,  partnerships
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
  54
Sand dunes on Lake Michigan

  and  coordination  of  actions  are  key  to
  implementing   an  ecosystem  approach  to
  management.
  The challenge of dealing with biodiversity:
  Recognition  of the need to protect genetic
  resources and the habitats needed to sustain
  various   species,  genetic  variety   within
  populations, and biological communities poses
  new   challenges  and   requires   different
  perspectives that fit well within the ecosystem
  approach.  Related challenges are whether
  programs can  be adapted to  supply  the
  information needed to address the issue, and
  whether  effective  strategies   to   protect
  biodiversity can be developed. As discussed in
  this report some  of the greatest stresses  on
  biodiversity  result from habitat destruction,
over-exploitation of resources, and competition
from non-native species.
The challenge of agreeing on endpoints for
restoration:   Since  some of the  genetic
diversity and physical features of the system
have been irrevocably lost, and some exotic
species appear to be permanently established,
how can  physical,  chemical and  biological
integrity  be  defined?   What measurable
conditions should programs seek to attain?
Objectives for  restoration  of the physical,
chemical,  and  biological  integrity  of the
ecosystems of the Great Lakes are just now
being  developed.   However,  the historical
benchmark (ie. the post-glacial state of the
Great Lakes ecosystem) remains an important
reference point with which to judge the extent
                   STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
                                                                                   55
of degradation of Great Lakes ecosystems and
the prospects for various levels of restoration.
Jurisdictions around the Great Lakes are now
faced with decisions regarding the restoration
of the aquatic communities in the Lakes, and
the composition of those restored communities.
Justification of preferences  for a particular
community structure may be aided by historical
analysis, but an alternate structure, with non-
historical  species  performing  the  same
ecological function, is also  possible.  One
expression of this is to manage towards pre-
settlement conditions, recognizing that these
conditions will never be fully attained.  The
decision  about which  ecological  community
becomes the  objective of restoration efforts is
a matter of social preference and how much
they  are  willing  to  pay to  achieve  their
objectives.  Scientific advice should contribute
to an informed decision-making process.  Lake
Erie provides us with  a good example.  The
historic  ecosystem  of Lake Erie no longer
exists, and is unlikely ever to exist again. The
ecosystem is more fragile  now and the goals
must  be redefined based  on the  impacts  of
zebra   mussels,    loss   of   habitat  and
contaminants.   The  major  shifts  in  the
biological    community   structure   make
predictions about  the future  status of the
ecosystem highly uncertain.
While it is important to define benchmarks and
to achieve societal consensus on the desired
endpoints for restoration, managers must also
know when  it is best to act on  behalf of the
lake.  Again using Lake Erie as an example,
during the mid-1980s when water levels on the
Lake were quite high and damage to shoreline
properties occurred  with  every storm, the
public  wanted   regulated  water   levels.
Managers were able to convince them that it
was better for the ecosystem to regulate its
own water levels.
The challenge of dealing with a focus on
places: Applying an ecosystem approach to
restoring and  maintaining the Great  Lakes
basin ecosystem requires a recognition of the
extent to which natural systems  vary from
place to place, and how local systems relate to
those around them. Traditional environmental
regulations and programs have used blanket
objectives and standards, used on  a  national,
provincial  or state-wide basis.  One  of the
challenges   for  governments  and  other
stakeholders is to understand and  address
restoration  with respect to local ecosystems
(both structure and function) and their linkages
elsewhere.
The challenge of subtle effects of toxic
substances on people and wildlife:  The
subtle effects of long term exposure to small
quantities  of  toxic  substances   poses  a
challenge  to   managers  as  well  as  to
researchers. If some substances have effects
at such low concentrations that the ecosystem
has virtually no ability to absorb them, or the
global    environment   already   contains
concentrations at levels that  may be causing
adverse effects, how can use or generation of
them be avoided or prevented?
The challenge of connecting decisions with
ecosystem results:   A major  part of the
challenge  is   to   understand  ecosystem
problems and the stresses that cause them.
Another important aspect of the challenge is
establishment  of  well  defined  ecosystem
objectives and indicators to measure success
                  STATE  OF THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------
56
in  restoring  and  maintaining  ecosystem
integrity. Such indicators can provide a focus
for bringing  together  seemingly  disparate
programs and serve as a basis for integrating
programs that were originally created to deal
with separate aspects of enviromental quality,
resource management  or other purposes.
However, it must be remembered that because
of the complexity of the ecosystem, outcomes
can never be predicted with absolute certainty,
and can often be entirely unpredictable.
The challenge of sustainability:  Restoration
and protection of the Great Lakes ecosystem
requires   a   commitment   to   achieving
sustainability.  As a society, we  still deplete
non-renewable  resources,  still  spend  our
environmental "capital." A truly healthy Great
Lakes  ecosystem will be one in which the
consideration of the  environment and the
economy will be integrated with the  social
needs  of  humans   in  a  balanced  and
sustainable manner.  The Great Lakes basin
and surrounding region face a future filled with
opportunities  as well as uncertainties.  A
sustainable development course  will require
new measures to enhance economic growth as
well as institutional mechanisms among public
and private  sectors  designed  to   foster
cooperation and coordination in environmental
protection.  There is a continued need on the
part of governments and industry to prevent
pollution problems before they arise.
development", defining it in terms of a way of
life that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations
to meet their own needs.  This in turn clearly
requires  prudent  management of resources
including   maintaining   the  integrity   of
ecosystems.

The concept received global recognition and
support in the 1992 United  Nations Conference
on Environment and Development.  Following
the conference individual  countries, including
Canada  and   the   U.S.  have   identified
sustainable development as a goal and taken
various steps to attain it.
In 1991 the Chairman of the Council of Great
Lakes  Governors described  a vision of the
region as a world leader in natural beauty and
economic might.  It is a vision that recognizes
that the restoration and protection of the Great
Lakes  is dependent upon  a  world-class
economy. At the same time it recognizes that
the health of the Great Lakes is central to the
region's economic future.   The  vision also
recognizes that the region's industries will not
be competitive in the world economy, unless
they are  world leaders  in clean,  sustainable
production.
The  connection  between the quality of the
environment and viability of economic systems
has been recognized by some for a long time,
but it was given new meaning and immediacy
in 1987. Our Common Future, the 1987 report
of the World Commission on Environment and
Development coined  the term  "sustainable
                  STATE  OF  THE  GREAT  LAKES-1995

-------