State of the Great Lakes 2007
Highlights
&EPA
ii..
anacia
c
r

-------
State of the Great Lakes 2007
This Highlights report is based on
environmental indicator reports that
were prepared for the State of the
Lakes Ecosystem Conference
(SOLEC) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
1-3 November 2006. Many experts
on various components of the Great
Lakes basin ecosystem contributed
to the process. Data sources and
contact information for each
indicator are included in the
technical report, State of the Great
Lakes 2007.
ISBN 978-0-662-46106-7
Cat. No. En 16 1-3/2007E
EPA 9iJ5. .Q7.ØiJ2
Front Cover Photo Credits:
Blue Heron, 1)on Brenensan
Sleeping Rear l)unes. Robert de longe. courtesy of Michigan Travel
Bureau
Port Huron Mackinac Race, Michigan Travel Bureau
Milwaukee Skyline. Visit Milwaukee
10% Post Consumer Waste. Acid Free.
Assessing Status and Trends of the
Great Lakes Ecosy ern
Indicator cg ssments and
Manageme ’Chall .
• Contamiiiation
- ii
• Human Health _______
• Biotic Co rninities
Invasive, Spedç _______
• Coastal Zones and Aquatic
Habitats..
ResourceUhhzati
• Land Use-Land Cover
Climate Cha
What is Being Done to Improve
Condition4..
State of the Lakes Ecosystem
Conference , .
Assessing Status and Trends of the Great Lakes
Ecosystem
1,, 2006, the oi’eral! status of (lit ( rr’at Lakes
t’cc)Sistel?i Otis tiSStSSc’(l 05 !?ILVCiI betaiise sonie
couldut ions or areas were good it/ide oilie,s iiere
poor. The tre,ids of ( treat I.akes e ’sisl ’uui couidilio,is
i-iiriei/: soiuie couidjtjouis iiere improving tind so,,w
iiere worseti itig.
Si lice 1998, the U. S. 1 uvironmental Protection
A encv and Environment ( a iiadii have coordillated
a biennial assesslilent of the ecological health of
the Great I akes ecosvsteni 051 iii. a consistent set of
environmental and human health indicators. This assessilkilt is in accordance with the
Great lakes \Vater Quality Agreement ( 1.\VQ,\ . Each indicator report is supported 1w
scientihc information collected and assessed 1w (leat Lakes experts from Canada and the
United States, along with a review of scientific pipers and use of l)Cst professional
judgment.
Indicators are organized 1 1th) hiDe Latt..gork5: Contamination, Human Health, Biotic
Communities, Invasive Species, Coastal Zones, Aquatic Habitats, Resource Utilization,
Land Use—Land Cover, and Climate Change. Overall assessments and management
challeni . es were prepared i r each category to the extent that indicator information was
available. l his ‘ tale o/the Great Lakes 2H !l:t hlit’hts report is derived from a more
detailed State oftlie Great Lakes 20U report. the 2QHT Hi ’/i!igIiis report also includes
iiiformation on “What Is Being 1)one to Improve ( ;onditions, which oUtlilles some
examples of actions taken 1w the Great lakes community in response to environmental
conditions.
clcsilt: Putt licsi

-------
Highlights
i\uthors of the indicator reports assessed the status of ecosystem
components in relation to desired conditions or ecosystem
objectives, if av nlable. Five status categories were used (coded by
color in this I Iighliglits report):
I I GOOD. llie state of the ecosystem component is
presenti meeting ecosvsteni objectives or otherwise
is in acceptable condition.
FAIR. The ecosystem component is currently
exhibiting minimally acceptable conditions, I)Ut it is
not meeting established ecosystem objectives, criteria,
or other characteristics of full acceptable conditions.
POOR. The ecosystem component is severely
negatively impacted and it does not display even
mmnimall acceptable conditions.
I I MIXE!). l’he ecosystem coiliponent dispLivs 1)0th
good and degraded features.
I I UNI)ETERMINED. 1)ata are not available or are
insufficient to assess the status of the ecosystem
c iii p0 n en t.
Four categories vvere also used to denote current trends of the
ecosystem component (coded by shape in this II ighlights
report ):
I M 1 ROVING. Information provided shows the
e us\stemu con ponent to be changing toward more
acceptable condit ions.
UNCHANGING. Information provided shows the
ecosystem component to he neither getting l)etter nor
worse.
A DETERIORATING. Information provided shows the
ecosystem . ompunent to be departing from
acceptable conditions.
UNDETERMINED. I)ata are nut available to assess
• the ecosystem component over time, so no trend can
be identified.
Indicator Category Assessments and
Management Challenges
CONTAMINATION
Tile transfer 0/natural (111(1
hu,na,i—,nade substances
froiiz iiz; sedinients,
c ’roii,uln’ait’r, iviistc’itizter,
iiiiil riuioflf’roni non—poiiit
5O IIrCCS iS constaiitli’
changing the chemical
composition of the Great
Lakes. Oi’er tiit’ last 30
(ontimin.flion rears, co,zcentratioiis of
SOIlU’ Cllt’??iiciilS Or eiieiiiical t rOilJ) 5 hare decli,zed szgnificaiitlr
Tbe,e is a marked ii’diictio,s in i/ic levels of toxic chemicals in au;
itatei; biota, and seili,,iei,ts. \ lanv reinainnig problems are
associated nit/i loctil rt’s ,’i i,is sue/i (iS ; jois of (oncer,:. Howeve,;
conce!ltratioils of several other elu’,,,icals that June bee;i recently
in (;,eat Lakes hai’c bccii identified us chemicals of
ei?iei i ic. coiucrn.
Levels of most
contaminants in herring
gull eggs continue to
decrease in all the ( reat
Lakes colonies monitored,
although concentration
levels vary from good in
Lake Superior, to mixed in
Lake v lichigan, Lake Erie
and Lake Huron, to pour (‘onliminanisinWatcrhirds
in Lake Ontario. While the
frequency of gross effects of contamination on wildlife has
subsided, many subtle (most Iv physiological and genetic) effects
that were not measured in earl icr yea rs of sampling remain in
herring gulls. ( oncentrations of flame—retardant polvbroniinated
diphenvi ethers (PBDEs are increasing in herring gull eggs.
Concentrations of most organic contaminants in the offshore
waters of the Great lakes are low and are declining, indicating
progress in the reduction of persisteI t toxic chemicals. Indirect
inputs of in—use orgarmochlorine pesticides are most likely the
current source of entry to the Great Lakes. Continuing sources
of entry of man\’ organic contaminants to the Great Lakes
include indirect inputs such as atmospheric deposition,
agricultural land runoff, and resuspension of contaminated
sediments. Overall, mercury concentrations in offshore waters
are vvell below water quality guidelines. Mercury concentrations
in waters near major urban areas and harbors, however, exceed
water quality criteria t r protection of wildlife. The spatial
distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
reflects the major source from the burning of fossil fuels.
Concentrations of P:\ 1 Is are therefore higher in the lower lakes,
where usage is greater.
l()r many indicators, ecosystem objectives, endpoints,
or benchmarks have not been established.
For these indicators, complete assessments are
difficult to determine.

-------
State of the Great Lakes 2007
5uurtre: Sttte the ( ,it I ikt Sit)
The status of atmospheric deposition of toxic chemicals is
mixed and improving for polychiorinated biphenyls ( P( Bs),
banned organochiorine pesticides, dioxins, and furans, but
mixed and unchanging or slightly improving for PA I Is and
mercury across the Great lakes. For Lake superior, lake
Michigan, and Lake Huron, atmospheric inputs arc the largest
source of toxic chemicals due to the large surface areas of these
lakes. While atmospheric concentrations of some substances
are very low at rural sites, the ’ may be much higher in some
urban areas.
Sour ,c: •5(j , ol the irt’it f,,ke 200T’ report
Juvenile spottail shiner, an important prevfish species in the
Great Lakes, is a good indicator of nearshore contamination
Year
Sotire: State ‘j the Great L akt’ 21)11’ report
because the species limits its distribution to localized, nearshore
areas during its first ear of’ lift’, Total dichloi’odiphenvltrichloru—
ethaiie (Dl )‘I’ ) in juvenile spottail shiner has declined over the
last 3() \‘eats but still exceeds ( i i\\’Q;\ criteria at most locations.
Loitcentrations of’ P( Us in juvenile spottail shiner have
decreased below the ( 1.\VQ:\ guideline at many, I)Ut not all, sites
in the Great lakes.
‘I’ he status of’ coil tam ma n (5
in lake tmut, walleve and
smelt as monitored
annually in the open waters
of each of the ( ;re it Lakes
is mixed and improving i r
P( Us, I )l)T, toxaphene,
d ieldrin, ii i rex, c ii lorda ne,
and niercurv.
( oncentrations of’ PU! )is and other chemicals of emerging
concern such as perflourinated chemicals, however, ti .i.
iflcreasint . , Both the lnhte(l tites and ( anada continue to
monitor for these chemicals in whole fish tissues and have over
31) veal’s of data to support the status a iid trends information.
Phosphorus concentrations in the ( ;r lt Lakes were a major
concern in the I 9f()s and I9 ()s, but private and government
act ions have reduced
phosphorus loadi rigs.
tlitis maintaining or
- reducing phosphorus
concentrations in
open waters.
-- lii iwever, high
phosphorus
concentrations are
_____________ still measured iii
sortie embavments,
harbors, and nearshore areas. Nuisance growth of the green alga
Cladop/wra has reappeai’ed along tile shoreline in mans’ places
and niav be related, in part, to increased availaL)ilitV of
ph )s p h( ) ru s.
Maiuigc’metit Clialleisges:
• Presently, there are no standardized analytical monitoring
methods and tissue residue guideli lies for new contami nailt
and chemicals of emerging concern, such as PR! )Fs.
• P( Us from residual sources in the United ‘ tates, ( : iii td i,
and throughout tile world enter the atmosphere and are
ransported long distances,’l hereloi’e, at iiiospheric
deposition of PCUs to the ( ;reat lakes ssill still be signihcant
at least decades into the flit tire.
• Assessment of’ the capacity and operation of existing sewage
treatment plants for phosphorus removal, in tile context of
increasing human populations being served, is warranted.
Cladophora Bloom
Conce ? ,of Total Mercury (ng/L)
._7 ,

Total Mercury(ngIL) . f ‘ o
• 0.0-0.7 ) - -
o 0.7-1.3 c
• 13-26 • . I
• 2.6-5.0 ‘ .
• 5.0+ e
The Canadian Water Quality Guideline for the protection of freshwater life is
26 parts per trillion (26 ngIL).
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Great Lakes Initiative (GLI) water
quality criterion for the protection of wildlife is 0.0013 pgIL (1.3 ngIL).
1>1)1,111 iii: (‘.5. I iiviro,itii’tii,tl Pite liii
Agent
Gas Phase PCB Concentrations in Air
1200 for Rural and Urban Areas
1000
800
600
a)
400
200
• 2000
t] 2001
• 2002
2003
• , 1 1 14
I’hoiti retit: Tip iii the Mitt \V,iicr hed (:iiuteit
Superior Michigan Huron
Ene Ontano
200
150
100
Mean Total DDT Levels in Juvenile Spottail Shiners
Lake Erie at Leamington
0 )
a,
C
I-
a
a
0
I— 50
Indicates the wildlife protection
guideline of 14 ng/g for D .LJ
, ,;‘ , n , , i
2

-------
Highlights
Monitoring of tributary point source, and urban and rural
non-point source contributions of phosphorus will allow
tracking of various sources of phosphorus loadings.
• Investigating the causes of Cladophora reappearances will
aid in the reduction of its impacts on the ecosystem.
Chemical Integrity of the Great Lakes-What the Experts are Saying
In addition to the ecosystem information derived from
indicators) six presentations on the theme of “Chemical
Integrity of the Great Lakes” were delivered at SOLEC 2006
by Great Lakes experts. The definition of Chemical Integrity
proposed by SOLEC is “the capacity to support and maintain
a balanced, integrated and adaptive biological system having
the full range of elements and processes expected in a region’s
natural habitat.” James It Karr, 1991 (modified)
The presentations focused on the status of anthropogenic
(man-made) contaminants and imbalances in naturally-
occurring chemicals in the Great Lakes basin. The key points
of each presentation are summarized here.
Anthropogenic Chemicals
Ron Hites, Indiana University: While concentrations of
banned or regulated toxic substances such as PCBs and
PAHs have decreased over the past 30 years, the rate of
decline has slowed considerably over the past decade.
Virtual elimination of most of these chemicals will not
occur for another 10 to 30 years despite restrictions or bans
on their use. Further decreases in the environmental
concentrations of PCBs, PAHs, and some pesticides may
well depend on emission reductions in cities.
Derek Muir, Environment Canada: Some 70,000
commercial and industrial compounds are now in use, and
an estimated 1,000 new chemicals are introduced each year.
Several chemical categories have been identified as
chemicals of emerging concern, including polybrominated
diphenyl ethers (flame retardants), perfluorooctanyl
sulfonate (PFOS) and carboxylates, chlorinated paraffins
and naphthalenes, various pharmaceutical and personal
care products, phenolics, and approximately 20 currently-
used pesticides. PBDEs, sioxanes and musks are now
widespread in the Great Lakes environment.
Implementation of a more systematic program for
monitoring new persistent toxic substances in the Great
Lakes will require significant investments in
instrumentation and researchers.
Joanne Parrot, Environment Canada: Some
pharmaceuticals and personal care products appear to
cause negative effects in aquatic organisms at very low
concentrations in laboratory experiments. Some municipal
wastewater effluents within the Great Lakes discharge
concentrations of these products within these ranges. There
is some evidence that fish and turtles show developmental
effects when exposed to municipal wastewater effluent in
the laboratory. Whether these effects appear in aquatic
organisms including invertebrates, fish, frogs, and turtles, in
environments downstream of municipal wastewater
effluent is not known, indicating the need for more research
in this area.
Naturally-occurring Chemicals
Harvey Bootsma, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee:
Changes in levels of nitrate, chloride and phosphorus in
Great Lakes waters are attributed to human activities, with
potential effects on phytoplankton and bottom-dwelling
algae. Changes in lake chemistry shown through variations
in calcium, alkalinity, and even chlorophyll, are linked to
the biological activity of non-native species. Non-native
species also appear to be altering nutrient cycling pathways
in the Great Lakes, by possibly intercepting nearshore
nutrients before they can be exported offshore and
transferring them to the lake bottom.
Susan Watson, Environment Canada: The causes and
occurrences of taste and odor impairments in suthce
waters are widespread, erratic, and poorly characterized but
are likely caused by volatile organic compounds produced
by species of plankton, benthic organisms, and
decomposing organic materials. In recent years, there has
been an increase in the frequency and severity of nuisance
algae such as Cladophora outbreaks in the Great Lakes,
particularly in the lower Great Lakes. Type E botulism
outbreaks and resulting waterbird deaths continue to occur
in Lake Michigan, Lake Erie and Lake Ontario.
David Lam, Environment Canada: Models and supporting
monitoring data are used to predict Great Lakes water
quality. A post-audit of historical models for Great Lakes
water quality revealed the general success of setting target
phosphorus loads to reduce open water phosphorus
concentrations.
2

-------
L State of the Great Lakes 2007
Lc’t c/s of/k ‘Bs i i, sport/is/i
L’OIltl!lllt ’ 10 tit’E’/l )it’,
pn) ’1t’ss is beiii’ iiicide to
i’e(IlIc ’ iii?’ pollutioi:,
/ ‘ac!1t’s Ole better iss
iiiii ?llt)re Iietjtie,ith’
n:oni(ort’il for J)(l1IIo ) e,:s,
tim! treated tIriiikins it’iiter
1/tl(111t1’ ( .i1liti l lies 10 be
tl&’ 5 . t’g / (iS i’titiitiiii ’ii
(i)lltt’!lti(l 1iolis Of lll (i1ll’
ori niocii1orine chemicals in tilt’ Great Lakes Iiai’e declined since 1/it’
1 970s, sport fish co,isiii,iptio,i advisories persist f )r all of tilt’ Great
The quality of
municipally-treated
drinking water k
considered good. The risk
of human exposure to
chemicals and/or
microbiological
contaminants in treated
drinking water is generally
low. However, improving
and protecting source
water quality (before
treatment) is important to
ensure good drinking
water quality.
In 2( ) , 71 percent of
monitored Great lakes
beaches in the United
States and Canada
renia nied open more thaii
percent of the
swin1mint seasoll.
Post i ligs, advisories or
closu res were due to a
vartet v Of reasons,
includitn the presence of E. co/i
bacteria, poor water qual t v , algae
aE)Undance, or preeniptive beach
postings based oti storm events
and predictive models. Wildlife
waste on beaches can be more of a
contril)u t ing l ictor U twa ids
bacterial contanlinat ion of water
and 1)eaches than prey i(ttlslV
thought.
Beach Postings and Closures for 2005
Great Lakes Swimming Season
nine: Slate 1 iii ( ;rt’at l.iike 2H rep. ri
Number of beaches monitored
in
the Great Lakes basin in 2005 was
1086
• Beaches opi 95%
swimming shison
D Beaches posted 5-9. of
• Beaches posted s 10% of
Concentrations of organochiorine
contaminants in Great L .akes
sportfish are generally decreasing.
I losvever, in the United States, P( ;R
drive consumption advisories of
Great lakes sportlish. In Ontario,
most of the consumption advisories
for reat Lakes sport tish are driven
by PC Bs, mercury, and dioxins.
Toxaphene a l o contributes to
Photo retIit: I nvliiitrlrnnt t .,inad,i —
consu niption auvisorles of sIlOrtIlSfl
from lake Superior and Lake I luron. slonitoriiis for other
contaminants, such as PI l )Es, has begun in some locations.
Guide to Eating Ontario Sportfish
for PCB Concentrations in Lake Trout
03
m
02
01
U
!_
Lake Ontario Lake Erie Lake Huron Lake Superior
‘ii iit
c: ‘life if iI: (Till I i i 2(91 spur
Application of a Uniform Fish
Consumption Advisory for PCB
Concentrations in Chinook Salmon, 2003
—
1
One meal per month
Sensitive (women of
—
.
‘

a.
oro
::
— — — -
child-bearing age and
children under 15 years
I One meal per week of age) population limits
used In graph.
M hkg Ulmtdcosumpto
,
4 ’
LkLk
oursi: “file if lii. I ,reaf L.ikts 2Qi) Fe ri
I II I I I I.
:1
COOl) FAIR POOR NIIXI [ ) UNI)EFERNIINEE)
• 2005
• 2006
Sensitive (women ol
child-bearing age and
children under 15 years
of age) population limits
used in graph
HUMAN HEALTH
Lakes.
i)riniing V.tter
Photo credit: E rtvirott itten I
luI)i)tti criultt: I lvtr,)nri (el)( (
4

-------
Highlights
Overall, there has been significant progress in reducing air
pollution in the Great Lakes basin. However, regu)nal pollutants,
such as ground-level ozone and fine particulates remain a
concern, especially in the Detroit-\Vi ndsor-Ottawa corridor, the
Lake Michigan basin, and the Buffalo-Niagara area. Air quality
will be further impacted by population growth and climate
change.
Management Challenges:
• Maintenance of high-quality source water will reduce costs
associated with treating water, promote a healthier
ecosystem, and lessen potential contaminant exposure to
humans.
• Although the quality
of treated drinking
water remains good.
care must be taken to
maintain water
treatment facilities.
• One-fourth of
monitored beaches
still have beach
postings or closures.
• A decline in some Photo reda City ofTorunit
contaminant concentrations has not eliminated the need for
Great Lakes sportflsh consumption advisories.
• Most urban and local air pollutant concentrations are
decreasing. However, population growth ma v impact future
air pollution levels.
BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
2 1)espztc’ inlproi’etnents in
levels of contaminants in
the Great lakes, many
• biological components of
the ecosi stemmi arc’ severe/i
stressed. Populations of the
,iatii ‘e species ii cit r the l’ tse
of the / oil tech, sue/i as
Diporeia and species f
Biotic Communities zoopliiiiktoii , are in decline
in some of the Great Lakes.
Native preyflsh populations luii’e declined in all hikes except Lake
Superior. Significant natural reproduction of lake trout is occurring
in Lake Huron and Lake Superior only. Wa/frye harvests have
improved but are still below fishery target levels. Lake sturgeon are
locally extinct in many tributaries and waters it/fete they omice
spawned and flourished. Habitat loss and deterioration remain the
predominant threat to Great Lakes amphibian ti,id wetland—
dependent bird populations.
•
?
IMPROVING
UNCHANGIN( 1
DE’FERIORATING
UNDETERMINED
The aquatic food web is
severely impaired in all the
Great Lakes with the
exception of Lake
Superior. Zooplankton
populations have declined
dramatically in Lake
Huron, and a similar
decline is occurring in
___________________________________ Lake Michigan.
Populations of Diporeia,
the dominant native benthic
(bottom-dwelling)
invertebrate in offshore waters,
continue to decline in Lake
Huron, Lake Michigan, and
Lake Ontario, and they may be
locally extinct in Lake Erie.
The decline of Diporein
coincides with the
introduction of non—native
zebra and quagga mussels. Both zooplankton and I)iporeia are
crucial food sources for man other species, so their population
size and health impact the entire sstem.
Situ Fe: St,, ’ u/the Great Lakes 200’ report
‘l’he current mix of native
and non—native (stocked
and naturalized) prey and
predator fish species in the
system has confounded the
natural balance within
most of the Great Lakes. In
all but Lake Superior,
native preyfish populations
have deteriorated.
However, the recent decline
of non-native preyfish (alewife and smelt) abundance in all Great
Lakes except Lake Superior could have positive impacts on other
prevlish populations. Preyfish populations are important for their
role in supporting predator fish populations, so the potential
effects ot these changes will be a significant lactor to be considered
in fisheries management decisions.
Diporeia
Photo crcdit.N ition l Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration
1994-1995
Diporeia Density
2000
2005
Diporela Densit I rurnhers m 2 10 1)
Prcyfish
5

-------
[ )espite basin-wide efforts to restore lake trout populations that
include stocking harvest limits, and sea lamprey management,
lake trout have not established self—sustaining populatioiis in
Lake ‘slicliigan, Like Erie, and lake Ontario. In Lake Huron,
substantial and widespread
nat ural reproduction of lake
trout was observed starting in
2004 following the near
collapse of alewite pOpulatR)ils.
Ihis change may have been due
to the reduced predation on
juvenile lake trout by adult
alewives and the alleviation of a
Photo (c shcdd Aquarium!
rt) ut vitamin dehcicncv
problem caused 1w trout wnsuming alewives, in lake Superior,
lake trout stocks have recovered such that hatchery-reared trout
are no longer stocked.
Reductions in phosphorus loadings during the I 9T”()s
substantially improved
spawning and nu rserv habitat
for mans’ fish species in the
Great Lakes. Walleye harvests
have improved hut are still
below target levels. Lake
sturgeon are now locally extinct
in many tributaries and waters
where the ’ once spawned and
flourished, although some
remnant lake sturgeon
populations exist throughout
the (;re it Lakes. Spawning and
rearing habitats have been
destroyed, altered or access to
them blocked. Habitat
restorat i on is req u i red to help
re—establish vigorous lake
sturgeon populations.
horn 1995 to 2005, t lie
American toad, bull frog,
chorus to g. green to g,
and nort hem leopard I o
exhibited signifIcantly
declining population
trends while the spring
peeper was the only
am phibian species that
Amphibians eXhil)i ted a signitica ntlv
increasing population
trend in Great Lakes coastal wetlands. I-or this same time period.
14 species of wetland-depeiident birds exhibited signiticaiitlv
declining population trends, while only six species exhibited
significantly increasing population trends.
I’Ii(iit) credit: ) Shcdd \qu.it urn
I ’ , i ,iv.ti .h 1 h ,,ii,s.iji
Soilic: “til t ‘i iii , ’ lOt I ik, report
the Great lakes arc now facing a challenge from viral
hemorrhagic septicemia (VHS). l’his virus has affected at least
37 fish species and is associated with fish kills in lake I lurun,
Lake St. (lair, Lake irie, lake Ontario, and the Si. Lawrence
River.
I inageiueni (‘halleuges:
• Nlanagement actions to address the decline of 1 )iporcia may
be ineff’ective until the underlying causes of the declines ,ire
identified.
• The decline of T)iporeiii coincides with the spread of ion-
native zebra and quagga mussels. Cause and ef1 ct linkages
between non-native species in the Great Lakes and
ecological impacts may be difficult to establish.
• identification of remnant lake sturgeon spats’ ni ng
populations should assist the selection of priority
restoration activities to improve degraded lake sturgeon
‘4la\vn ing and rearing
habitats.
• Protection of high—
quality wetland
habitats and adjacent
upland areas will help
support populations of
\ ‘et Ia iid -dependent
birds and ,iii phihians.
INVASIVE SPECIES
till i’iiit’S iiSSOtiOtt’l u’iili
s/1:J)pnig arc’ i’t’sponsthlc’ tot
oi’t’r oiic’—i/in’tl 0/i/it’
il(Jii(iiit ’ i0ii-!i iiii’(’ SJt(’( ’i(’S
iii! iotliic’t iOPi ,S to flit’ (;,t’iit
i .akc’s. it)Ial ?ii!,,i/lt’I’s (‘I
ii oii—iioitii’t’ spc’c’ic’s
j itH1oliic’c’tl oilUl t’sioil’lis/it’d
j i 1/it’ (;,‘c’oi, L lke 5 li(ii’t’
i?iCI ’o’ l t’t / sh’tu lilt’ i i itt ’ 1/ic’
I83O . / !0tt’i’it’i, ,iii,nl,t’rs
o/sliip—iiitroiliict’il oitjuatic’ species have i,icreased cxpo ieiii: il/i
I I I I I I
COOl) I-AIR POOR 11XE1)
UNl)l I’IRM IN Ii)
State of the Great Lakes 2007
Trends of Amphibian Species from 1995—2005
T ,, d
8 l iftg
—. ..— . . .- .—
,th ,,, L.p d
Sp , , ,g P••p , -
I
:1 . ’1 ‘ ‘‘b
V.,
Walleye
4P: 4.
__
-__
i’hoto credit: Ohio 5e,l (lull
i’hot credit: I Elliot, N, ,tuteSii iind Sitidli
6

-------
Highlights
(ii1riwç i/ic’ Sililit’ tiiiit’ J)CriOd. flit,’!, f)cl/)iiItiiuull ilc’ii iii, i ,i, , ’ii_
i’oJ: ,, ,u’ iraiisport 0/ goods, (liii! i/ ic’ (Ic’t, ’Iil(i(l1l0 i of iiatii’e
t’CsVSl’? us iUit’t’ ( : 1s t , iflO(it’ tilt’ ( ;1t’ (lt L iet toii i’iiIii’i ihi’ to
iin’asioiis l, ,uui it’rrt’stru :l u :oui—nc :tui’c sj teles. liii rocIiittiou: of these
SJ)c’tlc’S is 01k’ 0/ I/it’ c ,’reiitt’st threats to the /‘iodui’e,sui i- (i/ill uiaiuml
?(‘ ‘(liilt(’ ’ Of this region, Sc’Ct)liil ‘ui/u to hai;ziat (iesIrii(t loll.
Level of Impact of Non-native Terrestrial Species
on the Great Lakes Ecosystem
50
a
U)
40

C
0
Z 20
0
10
z
5& iircc: Stile of ii, , (,reat LoL ’ 2007 rt pori
Unknown
ihere are currently I
kno vn aquatic and I 4
known terrest ri I non—
native species that have
become estal)Iished in the
(;reat Lakes basin. Noii-
native species are
perv.isive throughout the
( re ut Lakes basin, and
tlie ’ coiitiiiije to exert
iiii pacts oii native species
and communities. Approximately tO percent of iquatic non-
native species are considered invasive and have an adverse effect,
causing considerable ecological, social, and economic burdens.
Both aquatic and terrestrial wildlife li ibitats are idverselv
impacted 1w invasive species. The terrestrial non- ndtive emerald
ash borer, for example. is a tee-killing beetle that has killed
• ?
IMPROVING t.N( ;HAN(;IN(, DIJERJ()R;\ II \(. tN1)l TI R\1INlD
Emerald Ash Borer
more than I iiiillion trees
iii the state of \hichigan
alone as of 200F ’. the
emerald ash borer probably
arrived in the I ii ited t at es
on solid wood packing
material carried in earu4()
ships or airplanes
originating rom its native
.\si a.
Introductions of non—native invasive Suedes as a result of voitd
trade and travel have increased steadily since the I Os and will
continue to rise if prevention measures ‘ire not improved. ihe
reat lakes basin is particularly v ulneral)le to non — native
invasive species because it is J major pathwa\’ of trade and is an
area that is already disturbed.
5iur .c: 5( (, ‘I I/ u I iI _‘ISi epull
Ma izageni cut Challenges:
- \ better ii nd erstand i iig (St the en t rv is nit es of 11011—native
invasi\ e species would aid in their control and prevention.
Prevention and ontrol require coordinated regtilation and
enl rcement eI1 rts to etlectivdv limit the introduction of
non—native invasive species.
Prevention uf unauthori,’ed ballast water exchange b ships
will eliminate one key p itliwav of non - native aquatic species
introductions to the ( treat I aLes.
1 lie unauthoriied release, transfer, and escape of introduced
aquatic non— native species and private sector activit es
related to aquaria, garden
ponds, baittish, iiid live
food fish markets need to be
considered.
i’h ’t , elect Ii: t ( I1arkhI _ il/toot ’ \tur.iI
I ii ,tor 5c ,r ccilllin,,is—Iiitli cpi,i sil ( r tisi
Ph it > ic-a: i (; l ’ ’ 1eri Si l hIi/ in Si.il
i lllVel it (
icidit: l.nvrtiiiniiiit 1 ( Li ii. iltitu -lit: Sic liciri Si
kehnkal ()pcr iiiiii1
Release Mechanisms for Aquatic
Non-native Species Established in the
Great Lakes Basin Since the 1830s
30
25 -
— • Fauna
20 [ 7 0 Flora
Cumuiativ. Numb.r • 183
Z
10 1:1 11 F !L a
PrImary m.chanhsm
Impact
Invasive Species Control
7

-------
State of the Great Lakes 2007
COASTAL ZONES AND AQUATIC HABITATS
( )asIal /,aliitais arc’
(j (’ç,v 1 ( 1 (j( (j (lilt 10
(l( ’l’t’lOf)?? lt’ll(, slli)?c’li!lt
llill (lt’ll1lic , ii,icl
c’sial’lisluiic,,t ot 1( 1(111
,P0J)lll a1l0iiS i/ llO l!—iiciliie
illi’i. i I C Pt1’1t ’. t ethuul .
t )ii! 1,1 lIt’ to le lost iii i
(l(’t ’1(hlt’(l. Iii (1(1(111 ion to
pitii’iiliii /uil,itat ,itl
111’as /01 lilil!lI
f)t 1t’s of hints aiizpliihiia is iiml (is /i, tt’t’iIwuls also strie us a
1t’filt., ’t’ fr ilatiic’ iiiii sels aiul (is!, huh (lie tIii euitt’iic’d lii lI0!l—IJatile
il ll 0 5i 1’t’
The ( ,reat lakes coastline is more than I ,UO kilonieters
1O ,5(u3 miles) long. t ‘flique habitats include more than 3() ,(RH1
islands, over Y kilometers ( 9() miles ) of cobble beaches, and
uiver 3U,U () heLtares (74.131 acres of sand dunes. Lachi coastal
zone region is subject to a combination of human and natural
st ress irs such as agriculture, resideiitial developiiient, point and
non—point sources of pollution, and weal her ‘attern . 1’ he
coastal zoiie is heavily stressed, with man of the basin’s 42
million people living along the shoreline.
\\ etlaiids are essential f r
pn per lu net ion i ng (it
aquatic ecos steiiis. 1 hey
provide a refuge h r native
fish and mussels from non-
native predators and
conipetitors. Ihie ( reat
I akes ua last inc includes
more tha i i 21 l( l,( (II) hectares
Phutu (:rc&1ut: itil liii. ( 494,00() acres of coastal
wetlands, less than hail of the ai in nint of wetland a rca that
existed prior to European settlement of the basin. ;\ii inventor\
of Great lakes coastal wetlands in 2 11 1)4 demonstrated that Lake
I luron and lake \lichigan still have exteilsis c wetlands,
S IIrLt: Suite ol the I 17 1 ( 1 1 Iakt’
especially harrier-protected wetlands. Reductions in wetland area
are occurring, however, due to filling, conversion to urban,
residential, and agricult nra I uses, shoreline mod i heat ion, water
level regulation, non—native species invasions, and nutrient
loading. St ressi irs, such as these, may also impact the nid if n
ut cilia Iii iig wetlands and an threat en their nat ural function.
oastal wetland plant
community health, which
is iiidicat ye ( if overall
coastal wetland health,
varies across the ( ;ie it
lakes basin. In general,
there is deterioration ( if
natis e plant diversity iii
many wetlands as
shoreline alterations may
La use habitat degradation
and allow for easier invasion 1”JV 11011—native species.
Nat ii rally Iluctuat ing water levels ire essential t r maintaining
the ecological health of Great I aLes shoreline ecos\ steilis,
especial lv ci last al wetlands. \Vet land pia ills and hi it a have
adapted to seasonal and ioiig—terni water level fluctuations,
allowing wetlands to be more extensis e and more productive
than they would lie if water levels were stable. lii 21)00, ( reat
lakes water levels were lower than the I 40-year average \vater
level measured from I 5 (i ))- 2) 1)0. Furthermore, many climate
change models predict Ios er water levels for tile ( ‘cit I aLes.
(It iastal wetlands that directly border t lie lakes and do not have
barrier beaches may be able to migrate toward the lakes in
i’esp ilise to lower water levels. Inland and enclosed wetlands
would I ikelv dr up and become arabic or to rested land.
I I I liii iiiiiii ,.’iii I
Phi’ LrL’LliI: I
Shoreline hardening,
• primarily associated with
artificial structures that
at tempt to ct 1 lit rol en)sRn i,
can alter sediment
traiisport in coastal
t legions. When the balance
(if accretion a iid en isit in sf
sedIment ci rried along the
shi teline liv wave IL lion
and lake currents is
ii isrupted, the ecosystem
lunctuining tll coastal
wetlands is impaired. The
St. (lair, I )etroit, iiid
Niagara Rivers have a
Ii igher percentage iii their
sIn ir cli ic hardened thaii
anywhere else in the basin.
I II I I
I
(1001) FAIR POOR \II\FI)
[ \I)FTF
R 1INII)
—-- ,,
1 ________
- - - _________
.-* .‘-
Coastal Wetland Area by Type
within the Lakes of the Great Lakes System
27.500
25.000
22.500
• Barrier Protected
20,000
Embaymera
UI
5 ; I
Pu it-lied Embayment
17.500
• n .
15000 I DDrowned Rivermouth
5 12.500
< 10000 I
HR
7.5001
[ Li ..LI!á
5,000
2,500
0
Superior Huron Michigan St. Clair Erie Ontario
Lake
8

-------
Highlights .1
Of the live ( re rt lakes, Lake Lrie has the highest per et1t lt e of
its shoreline artificially hardened, and I ake I luron and Lake
Superior have the lowest percentages arti ficialls hardened.
Groundwater is critical l r maintaining ( reat lakes aquatic
habitats, plants and animals. I luman act ivit es such as
groundwater wit hd awa is for mu ii icipal water siippl es and
irrigation, and the increased proportion of in lpervR)us stiiia es
in urban areas, have clet rimental Iv impacted grou ndwater. ( )n a
larger scale, climate change could further contribute to
reductions in groundwater sR)ra ( e.
Management Our IIc’ngt’s:
• L)espite improvements in research and monitoring of
coastal zones, the basin lacks a comprehensive plan for long—
term moni ng ) I these areas. I .ong— term mon itori rig
should be an important component of a oniprehensive
plan to maintain the condition and integrit v of the coast il
ZOflCS and . 1(1 uatic hal)itats.
• ‘n educated public Is essential to ensuring wise decisions
about the stewardship of the ;re it lakes basin ecosvstejll.
• Protect ion of groundwater recharge a reas, et niservationi of
water rest itt rees, informed Ia rid use planning, ra i si rig of
public awareness, arid improved monitoring are essent a!
actions for improving grouiidwater quality and quantity.
RESOURCE UTILIZATION
littler
1t’ilIl(IIliii’(l/S !iti1’t
I Itt/t i 1 5( 11, (II (‘1(11/ ( Iii ‘It:
C()II iIl!i/)l 11)11 ! I/1Cl(’i i iiic ,
1 15 j o /’iiIiiiioii iiiiil 111/)i1?i
splint’! ll1 le i _ se throi,’Izo,ii
1/it’ ;iC ! 1 1 ik’ 5
I I1ii,iti!i f)(i/i/i/iitioil t .,’! iitt’ili
iii!! lt u! to iii lliCO’ iist’ ii?
1/it’ //5( (if !i it tutu ieSOi1ii(’s.
The population of the Great I akes l)asin is approximately •L
million. Growth forecasts for the western end of Lake Ontario
(known as the ( olden I lorseshoe I pred that t Ii is portion of
the (:ari idkiri population will grow by an additional 3.7 million
people 1w 2031. Population size, distribution, and density are
contributing factors to resource use iii the basin, although riianv
trends have not been adequately assessed. In general, resource
uSe is connected to economic prosperity and onsuniptive
behaviors.
Although the Great Lakes and their tributaries contain 2()
percent of the worlds supply of surf ice I teshtt rter, less than one
percent of these waters is renewed annually through
•
?
IMPROVING
UNCI 1AN(; 1N;
1)11 16R1()RAriNi ,
u\r)l•riit\rrNi I)
precipitat I( 11, n-un—of I and
in tilt rat ion. ilie net has in
water supply is est innated
to be SOt) billion liters (132
billion gallons) per day. In
2000, water from the reaL
I akcs was used at a rate
equal to approxnniatelv 35
percent of the available
i’h i credit: Etivit’nmcni I anada daily supply. The ma orit v
of water withdrawn is returned to the basin through discharge
or run—off. Ilowever, approxirnateiv seven percent Is lost through
evapI) t raii prration or depleted by human activities. 1)ue to the
shutdown of nuclear power f icilities arid improved water
ci tictencv at thermal power plants, water use ii i ( anid the
Lii ted states has decreased since 1 98(). I tithe fin Lure, increased
pressu es on water resources are expected to coiiie from
population growth in communities l)ordering the basin, and
front climate change.
‘‘ilurci.; Si j, ii ! the (at•,it I i&i ’ 2 1/liT I•i:r ii
Populat ion size, geography, climate, a rid trends in housi rig size
and density all affect the amount of energy consumed in the
basin. Fleet ricity generation was the largest energv—consuniing
sector in the ( ;i-eit lakes basnn (lure to the energy requnired to
convert fossil fuels to electricity.
Total Secondary Energy Consumption in the
Great Lakes Basin, in Megawatt-hours (MWh)
U.S Basin Total Energy
Concumpt ii 2000
Canadian Basin Total nerijy
Consumption 2002
478,200,000
3 300 000 _ 80 lO00
9 03. 00’OOO; i 2064 u000 -
Sector
Industrial
T 40QC
@Uu i Qcr
E eer Ic;tv
G nr t;on 953600000 303,830,000
Domestic
Irrigation
0.8%
Water Withdrawals in the Great Lakes Basin,
by Sector Category as a Percentage of Total, 2000
Public
Other supply
27% 132
ni-
Thermoelectric
716%
Note: The majority of the warer wiihdrawn is reiurned to ihe basin.
9

-------
State of the Great Lakes 2007
Popuhition growth and
urban s r,i cl in the h ,isin
have led 10 an ii lease in
the number of vehicles on
roads, fuel consumption,
and kilometers/miles
traveled. Over a ten ear
period (1 (,19I—20()4 ) fuel
coliSu mpt ion increased h
17 percent in the U.S. states
bordering the ( reat Lakes
and by N percent in the
province of Ontario. Kilometers/miles traveled within the s,ime
areas increased () percent for the it ted States and 56 percent
for Canada. The increase in rer istercd vehicles continues to
outpace the increase in licensed drivers.
SoIlrLc: .‘111t’ o ft / ic (iccit / ,ke _ 5)(I; cpurt
Management Challenges:
• Increasing requests for water from communities bordering
the basin where existing water supplies are sLar ce or of pool
quality will require aret’ul evaluation.
• Energy production and ilisers ,it I l in iieed to be carefully
managed to meet current and future energy consunipt ion
demands.
• Population growth and urban sprawl are ex pected to
challenge the current and hit ore transportation svstenls and
infrastructures in the Great Lakes basin.
LAND USE-LAND COVER
The Great lakes has,,:
c’!lColl:passes all UlCi 0/
i:ore ti,t,,, n. ,HO() sqillile
kilometers (2 ,OO() sqila e
illi/es). I / o i i’ 1ti,id is tiseil
ililpacis 1101 oiilj’ h i! it’?’
quality it/ic ( ;r ’ai Lakes.
luui u/so 1’ ,oIo ieal
prouhiuci 1 i’ii l:iodii ersit i,
iiiiil the ‘t0!I0? ?l1
1)ata from I “))2 and 2 U2 indicate that forested land covered ( I
percent of the . ireat Lakes basin and 7 percent of the land
imniediatelv buffering so il,icc waters, known as ripariall lOll’s.
l’he greater the rcst c tscr,it e iii a ripa na n lone, the greater the
capacit v for the watershed to maintain biodiversi lv, store water,
regulate ,iter temperatures, and limit excessive nutrient and
sediment load i nt4s to the waterways. Urban i/at ion, seaM nial
home construct ion, and increased recreational use are among
the general demands being placed on forest resources
nationwide. Additional disturbances caused by lumber removal
and l irest lics can also alter the structure of ( ;re t lakes basin
f rests. However, the area if ioi sted lands certified tinder
sustainable forest us programs li,is sioniticantlv increased iii
ftc eflt ears, c’semplih’ing continued commitment from torest
i ndust r prof ssionals to practices that help protect local
c Los\stem susLiii bilit\. (;ontimied t io th in these pr.ILt Ices
s ill lead to i iii proved soil and water resou rces and increased
timber productivity in areas of implementation.
5 ’Ljroc: it, of i/pt’ lie,, l k,’ 2(111 report
Under the pressure of rapid population it vth in the Great
lakes region. urban development has ii ndergoiie u nprecedented
growth. Sprawl is increasing in rural and urban fringe areas of
the ( ;ie it lakes l)asin,
placing a strain on
in trast ructu ic and
consuming habitat in
areas that tend to have
healthier environments
than those that remain in
urban areas. Tb is trend is
expected to continue,
which will e\acerh,itc
other probleiiis. such as __________ ______________________
longer commute times
Photo (red IVIIII thetis. ,itttesv,it the N. ,iui,)
iies, ’tiri .es I ‘tfl 85%
?
land h-I ind ( over
10

-------
Highlights
horn residential to ‘ork areas, increased COflSUIllptiOIl of fossil
fuels, and fragmentation of habitat. I-or example, at current
development rates in Ontario, residential building projects are
predicted to consume some I ,000 square kilometers (386 square
miles) of the countryside, an area doul)le the si/c of loronto, by
2031 i\lso, vehicle gridlock could increase commuting times b
45 percent, and air quality could decline due to an estimated 40
percent increase in seluck emissions.
In 2006, The Nature ( onservancv Great Lakes Program and the
Nature ( .onservanc\’ of ( anada ( )ntario Region released the
Bnzatio ,ia/ ( o iseri’atioiz !Thieprint / u ’ tiit Great Lakes. the
Blueprint identified Sf) I areas across the Great Lakes that are a
priority for biod versitv conservation. The Blueprint was
developed 1w scientifically and systematically identifying native
species, natural communities, and aquatic system characteristics
of the region, and determining the sites that need to be
preserved to ensure their long—term survival.
Management Challenges:
As the volume of data on land use and land conversion
grows, stakeholder discussions will assist in identifying the
associated pressures and management implications.
(;onlEIrehe llsi\-e land use planning that incorporates “green”
feat u res, such as cluster development and greenwav areas,
will help to alleviate the pressure from development.
Managing forest lands in was that protect the continuity of
forest cover can allow for habitat protection and wildlife
species mobility, therefore maintaining natural biodiversitv.
Policies that l ivor an economically viable forestry industry
will motivate private and commercial landowners to
maintain land in forest cover versus conversion to
alternative uses such as development.
CLIMATE CHANGI
Ice Cover
:1 qioilitiiiii’e iisst’ Ssiiit’?it of
______________________________________________________ t/iL’ I li(hCIitOi ’ i(t’t 0ul ’
( ‘liniate ( :I ll1 e coii!ui not
ilL’ SliJJJJOi( L’t / /01 tills ic/Nil!
/)t’C allSc’ tht’ ii i(iit ’(itOl ’S are
iliconip/ete at i/us tune.
‘tO!IiL’ l sei’i’’d c i fccts /,i flit’
i ’al Lakes reu,’ion, hotrci’cr,
june i;ee,i (it! rthuted to
ciuiiiges in clinuiie. 1 ’i,iters
(ill’ c ettinc shorter; annual
(1 i ‘Cfl i’ ten ipen Ui iics a ic
growing ivariner; ext renie heat events are occurring iiiorc
frequieiitlv; diinitio, , of lake ice cater is Iccrcasnig as air and lt’ater
tefliper(ii iirt’s are 1iicreiisI ,lc ’; iiu ! iieai ‘i precipitatlo?? cleats, hot/i
1 ’(uili (111(1 s,ioir, (uI ’e iieco,i ,i,it ’ iiiore couiuioii.
•
?
IMPROVING
N(IIANGING
I)I-TERIORATIN(
IJNI)FIIRxIINI-D
Low Water Levels
Continued declines in the duration and extent of ice cover on
the Great Lakes and possible declines in lake levels due to
evaporation during the
winter are expected to
occur in future years. If
water levels decrease as
predicted with increasing
temperature, shipping
revenue may decrease a ii c i
the need for dredging
could increase. Non hwa id
migration 1)1 species
naturally fouind south of’
the Great lakes region and
invasions by warm water, non—native aquatic species will likely
increase the stress on native species. A change in the distribution
of forest types and an increase in finest pests are expected. An
increase in the frequency of winter run—off and intense storms
may deliver more non—point source pollutants to the lakes.
Management Challenges:
• Increased modeling, monitoring, and analysis of the effects
of climate change on Great Lakes ecosystems would aid in
related management decisions.
• Increased public awareness of the causes of climate change
may lead to more environmentally—friendly actions.
I. , .
I ’ / ,
A
•r, •
- /, \\
Plititii cr dii: Nit ional - cron,lLlik utd Sp .icc .\dnt,iiisii 111,11 iindd,i i 5i’ke Flight ( 1 1th -F
\iOI)IS i( tpid l . , ’si5 ’I1sc
thi r ,. dii: Envirotinieni ( ,i
i’hotii credii: i ii I rnnnieni (inid,t
11

-------
State of the Great Lakes 2007
What is Being Done to Improve
Conditions
In mi c/fort to restore il iil preserve tile ( , reat Lakes, letlsliilt)ls,
l?iahlacj ,erS, scientists, educators ( 111(1 ;iiiiiu’roiis others an’ respondziiç
to e,iviron ,nental challenl ’es it’itli , ,ii ,ltzfaceteii so/litlolls. JIlt
responses alul actions ref ere ,ui’t! Iu’re aie i ,ite ,ulei! to s(’rl’e (15
examplc’s 0/ positive strides beinc,’ takc’iz in i/u’ Great Lakes basi,i to
improve ecosvsteiii conditions. Lva n pies from hot/i ( anada ciiiil
the L ,iited States and fro ,,, each 0/i/ It’ ( reai I akes are included.
ihere are inaii;’ more actions that could lime heel! nco ’iii:e I in
this report. Each is an iniportant pail of our collective commitment
to a c/ca ii am! healthy Groit Lakes eosrstem.
Canada and the United States implement numerous actions
across the basin at national, regional and local scales. For
example, in Ontario, the City of loronto is addrc sing water
pollution through the Wet Weather Flow Nianagement Master
Plan, a long—term solution to reduce pa11 ut ion trom r mwatcr
and combined sewer ivert]i w .
Communities, states, the ‘. 5. Environmental Protection Agency
and local industr are working together to remediate
contaminated sediments in t ‘. 5. ;\reas at Concern •\O( .s with
funding provided through the U.S. ( ieat Lakes Legacy Act. Since
inception of the Act in 2(11)2. sediment remediat ion has been
completed at three S. \( )( sites ( Ruddiman ( ‘reek and
Ruddiman Pond iii N lichigan, Black lagoon in Michigan, and
Newton Creek and 1 log Island Inlet in Wisconsin
The Oswego River A( )( on lake ( )ntario was delisted in 21)1)6,
the first removal of an A( )( designation in the United States. In
Canada, two At )( .s have been delisted, both on Lake 1—luron
(Collingwood Harbour in I 1)( .) ,) and Severn Sound in 2003 ).
Delisting of an A( )( occurs when ens’ ironmental ii onitoring has
confirmed that the remedial actions taken have restored the
beneficial uses in the area and that locally derived goals and
criteria have been met.
Photo rc )iL I1\
Pr:t) ) ii (i iii it Niti in)
Effective actions are often based
on collaborative work. In 2005,
The Nat nrc ( onservancv, the
State of NI icli i gil n and The
i’Ii ,itii rc&tii: I ii fliflilit I miii
Forestland ( roeip ( a limited partnership collaborated in a sale
and purchase agreement that created the largest conservation
project in Michigan’s history. ‘I his purchase will protect more
than II 0,00() hectares (271 ,00() acres) through a working forest
easement on I 00,362 hectares I 24i’ ,00() acres and acquisition of
9,443 hectares I 23,33 acres in the Upper Peninsula of
N lichigan. By connecting appro\inlatelv one million hectares
2.5 million acres ) , the project cUi’l)s land fragmentation and
incompatible development l)\ establishing buffers around
conservation sites such as the Pictured Rocks National lakeshore
and Porcupine Niountains Wilderness State Park.
Lake Superior
communities have
embraced a goal of zero
discharge of critical
chemical pollutants by
engaging in a number of
act ions to remove
contaminants. Ellurts to
reach this goal have
included electronic and
hazardous waste collect ion
events run l w Larth
ke epers. a faith—based environmental initiative, which is based in
the Upper Peninsula of NI ichigan. On Earth Day 21)06, over 272
metric tons 300 U.S. tons) of household hazardous waste,
primarily household electronics, were collected and properly
disposed or recycled, In ( lanada, through Ontario’s mercury
Switch Out program, more than I I ,5(X) mercury switches Ira m
scrap automobiles we’re collected in 2005.
Research, monitoring
and assessment efforts
operating at various
geographic scales are the
backbone of
I management actions and
decisions in the basin.
Coordinated monitoring
among Canadian and
United States federal,
provincial, state, and
university groups began
in 2003 to focus on
monitoring physical, biological, and chemical parameters with
monitoring occurring on a live—year rotation of’ one C reat Lake
per year. .\ binational Great l.akes Monitoring lnventor ’ has
been established that currently provides information on 1,137
monitoring programs in the basin. The International Joint
Corn in ission maintains a C reat E.akes — St. Lawrence Research
Inventory of the many funded projects that help increase our
knowledge about the si rtict tue and function of the ( reat Lakes
cc as ‘sic! 11.
Strategic planning occurs at basin-wide, lake—wide and local
scales. ;\n example of’ strategic planning is the C anada—Ontario
Agreement, a federal—provincial agreement that supports the
PIt ,t ’ .rcdmt: sit .rimmr \\‘,mtcrsh , ,’d P.mmimk’r ltIp
i’hmmtmi rem.Iii: lily ri mnm,’n m 1 .mnad,m
—
12

-------
Monitoring the Pulse of the Great Lakes
Sampling Equipment used aboard the
R(V Lake Guardian
Rosette Sampler
The rosette sampler is used to
collect water samples for
chemical and biological
parameters (nutrients,
phytoplankton, chlorophyll a,
and dissolved oxygen) and
physical parameters
(temperature, total suspended
solids, turbidity, specific
conductance, and pH).
Attached to the sampling
apparatus is the Seabird
multiparameter sensor array that records depth,
temperature, dissolved oxygen, optical transmittance,
photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), pH, electrical
conductivity, chlorophyll fluorescence, and distance
from bottom. The latitude, longitude, date, time, and
number of water samples collected are also recorded
automatically.
Plankton Nets
Plankton nets are used to
collect the small organisms
that form the base of lake
food webs: phytoplankton
(algae) and zooplankton
(small animals). Plankton
are evaluated for their
abundance, diversity, and
overall health, since the
base of the food web
supports the entire lake
ecosystem.
Sediment Grabs and Cores
The PONAR grab sampler and the box
core (shown here) are two devices used
to collect bottom sediment. The PONAR
grab sampler retrieves a small amount of
surface sediment and is used to collect
benthic (bottom-dwelling) invertebrates.
The box core collects a much larger
and deeper section of sediment without
disrupting the sediment surface. Box
core subsamples are used for analysis
of contaminants in the sediment and
collection of benthic invertebrates.
Mysis Diporeia Sled
The sled with its large mesh
bag is towed along the lake
bottom to collect two of the
larger crustaceans present in
the Great Lakes: Mysis and
Diporeia. Both animals are
crucial components of the food
web, therefore their population size and health impact the
entire Great Lakes ecosystem.
Air Samplers
High volume air samplers are
used to collect air pollutants
in the particle and gas
forms. A vacuum pump pulls
air through a filter and then
through an adsorbent.
The filter captures particles
and the adsorbent captures
pollutants in the gas form. The adsorbent and filter are sent to
a separate laboratory for analyses. The air samplers are
mounted on a boom that is extended over the bow of the ship.
Scientists measure the concentrations of pollutants in air to
determine the amount of pollutants deposited from the air to
the Great Lakes.
Educational materials like these are availabk from Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant at www.iisgcp.org.
This poster serie was produced in cooperation uth the Illinois Indiana ‘ ii rint Colkt,e Pro ,ram
Photo credits:
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
IISG-05-2 I

-------
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office Limnology Program
Monitoring Great Lakes Water Quality
Clean water and a healthy food web are
fundamental to the health of the Great
Lakes. The U.S. EPA Great Lakes
National Program Office (GLNPO)
Limnology Program monitors the status of
key environmental parameters that
influence water quality, the food chain,
and fish of the Great Lakes. Water is
collected annually from sampling stations
in each lake in the spring and summer.
The EPA research vessel Lake Guardian
is used to conduct the monitoring
surveys.
The objectives of the GLNPO Limnology
Program are to:
Monitor the water quality in the lakes.
The U S EPA P V Lake Guardian
• Evaluate trends and annual changes in
chloride, nitrogen, silica, phosphorus,
chlorophyll a, and water clarity.
• Provide data for water quality models.
• Calculate the trophic state of each
lake. The trophic state is indicative of
the amount of living material supported
within a lake, primarily in the form
of algae.
+
I
‘ : :
i_i
GLNPOs Open Lake Water Quality Survey sampling stations
Educational materials like these are available from Illinois-Indiana S i (Irunt at o %.lIsgcp.org. This poster eric -.
produced in cooperation with the Illinois-Indiana ‘e.i (irani (ollege Program.
Photo credits:
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
IISG-06-08
--

eaI t
ILLINOIS INDIANA
(i)

-------
Lake Michigan Deep Station - Summer
0.000 3.000 6.000
Oxygen-m Ii
Beam Attenuation/Particles
0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500 3.000 3.500
12.000
60.
r
a)
C D
(I)
00.000
120.
140.000
I 60.000
0.000
5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000
Temperature-deg C
0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 2.500 3.000 3.500 4.000 4.500 5.000
15.000
20
0.000
40.000
- -.- - - -
4.000 4.500 5.000
Fluorescence

-------
PCB Inventory
Water Column = 1164 kg
Active Sediment = 6242 kg
(0-1 cm interval)

-------
• GLNPO data
• LMMB data
— constant conditions - 1994-95 loads
77 predicted recovery -
V/A based on literature decline rates of
atmospheric and tributary inputs
over the past decade

-------
Highlights
restoration, protection, an(I conservation of the ( reat Lakes
basin ecosystem. To achieve the collective goals and results,
Canada and Ontario work closely with local and regional
governments, industry, community and environmental groups.
In the United States, more than 140 different federal programs
help fund and implement environmental restoration and
management activities in the basin. The C reat Lakes Water
Quality Agreement, Great Lakes Regional Collaboration and
Federal Task Force, Great Lakes Binational loxics Strategy,
Lakewide Management Plans, Binational Partnerships, and
Remedial Action Plans are other examples of strategic planning
in the Gieat lakes basin.
In many cases management and con servation actions are based
on or supported by federal, state, provincial, or local legislation.
For example, Ontario s Greenbelt Act of 2005 enabled the
creation of a Greenbelt Plan to protect about 728,437 hectares
(1.8 million acres) of environmentally—sensitive and agricultural
land in the Golden I Torseshoc region from urban development
and sprawl. Tile Plan includes and builds upon approximately
324,000 hectares (800,000 acres) of land within the Niagara
Escarpment Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan.
Proving that sonic legislation effectively crosses national
borders, in December, 2005, the Great Lakes Governors and
Premiers signed tile ;kiincx 2001 Iiiipleiucnting - It’Cl1Ici1t5 at tile
Council of Great Lakes Governors Leadership Summit that will
provide unprecedented protection for tile Great Lakes—St.
Lawrence River basin. Tile agreements detail how tile states and
provinces will manage and protect the llaSiil and provide a
framework for each state and province to enact laws for its
protection, once tile agreement is rat ihed.
Education and outreach about Great Lakes cnvirollmental
issues are essential actions for fostering both a scientifically—
t
- - ‘;
literate public as well as inthrmed decision-makers. The Lake
Superior Invasive—Free Zone Project involves community groups
ill tile inventorying and control of non—native invasive terrestrial
and emergent aquatic plants through education. The project
combines Canadian and United States programs at federal, state,
provincial, municipal, and local levels and has the goal of
Cumulating non-native plants within a designated 291 hectare
(720 acre) area.
A shoreline stewardship manual developed for tile southeast
shore of Lake Huron and promoted tllrougll workshops and
outreach programs encourages sustainable practices to improve
and maintain tile quality of groundwater and surface water aild
the natural landscape features that Support tilem. The Lake
Huron Stewardship Guide is a collaborative effort by the Huron
( )untv Planning I)epartment, the Liliversitv of Guelph, tile
Huron Stewardship Council, the Ausable Bayfield Conservation
Authority, the Lake Huron Centre kr Coastal Conservation, and
tile Friends of tile Bavfield River, and a high level of community
engagement has been iilst rumental in its success.
The Great Lakes Conservation Initiative of the Siledd Aquarium
in Chicago aims to draw public attention to the value and
vulnerahilities of the Great Lakes. \Vit h collaboration by Illinois-
Indiana Sea Grant and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the
Shedd Aquarium opened a new exllibit in 2006 which features
nlanv of the invasive species found ill the Great Lakes. Tilis
exilibit provides public audiences with the opportunity to see
many of these live animals and plants, and is also llighlighted in
teaciler workshops.
As these examples show, there is mucll planning, uilformation
gatilering, research and education occurring in the Great Lakes
basin. ‘\ Iucll mere remains to be done to meet the goals of tile
GLWQA, but progress is 1)eiilg made with the involvement of all
Great Lakes stakeholders.
\\
.i a\ E .
ti .
1. •• ‘
H
LEGEND OrG no
Source: Ontario Niiiii i n of NiuniLipil ;\llair and i—iousiiig
13

-------
State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference
The State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conferences (SOLEC) are hosted
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Environment
Canada every two years in response to the reporting requirements
of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
The conferences and rep. Ets provide independent, science-based
reporting on the state of the health of the Great Lakes basin
ecosystem. Four objectives for the SOLEC process include:
• To assess the state of the Great lakes ecosystem based on
accepted indicators
• To strengthen decision-making and environmental
management concerning the Great Lakes
• To inform local decision makers of Great Lakes
environmental issues
• To provide a forum for communication and networking
amongst all the Great Lakes stakeholders
The role of SOLEC is to provide clear, compiled information to
the Great Lakes community to enable environmental managers to
make better decisions. Although SOLE(1 is primarily a reporting
venue rather than a management program, many SOLEC
participants are involved in decision-making p ses throughout
the Great Lakes basin.
For more information about Great Lakes indicators and the State
of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference, visit:
www.binational.net
www.epa.gov/glnpo/solec
www.on.ec.gc.ca/solec
nada
— (
:Sf teofthe
Great Lakes
Highlights
by the Governments of
Canada
and
The United States of America I
Prepared by I
Environment Canada
and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency..
_____ _________! WP 7

-------