STATE
OF THE
GREAT LAKES
1997
Report Highlights
-------
STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES 1997
Report Highlights
THE 1997 STATE OF THE GREAT LAKES REPORT
The Great Lakes ecosystem has improved vastly over the
past 30 years, but we are still a long way from full restora-
tion— this will take the cooperation not only of agencies,
stakeholders and decision-makers from within the basin, but
also those outside of it because of the global nature of pol-
lutants. After decades of abuse to the ecosystem, dramatic
successes achieved include: nutrient reductions; recovery of
oxygen levels and of aquatic organisms that require higher
levels of oxygen; declines in contaminant levels in fish and
wildlife; a resurgence of some fish and wildlife populations;
and improvements in public health. But much work remains
to be done including halting the loss of wetlands, preserving
and protecting remaining habitat, decreasing the amount of
toxic contaminants released into the ecosystem so that fish
consumption advisories are no longer required, and so that
the subtle effects of these chemicals are no longer felt on
the fish, wildlife and human populations within the basin.
The 1997 State of the Great Lakes Report summarizes
information presented at the November 1996 State of the
Lakes Ecosystem Conference (SOLEC 96), held in Windsor,
Ontario. The Report examines the state of health of the
Great Lakes nearshore ecosystem in two ways:
A basin-wide examination of the condition of the
nearshore ecosystem; and
A lake-by-lake examination of the nearshore
ecosystem.
The Report also gives a limited update of the subjects
addressed in the 1995 State of the Great Lakes Report. The
information in both these Reports assists the governments of
Canada and the United States to fulfil their responsibilities
under the 1987 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.
-------
What is SOLEC?
SOLEC 96 Participants
The State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conferences
(SOLEC), are a series of science-based meetings,
held biennially, to review and assess the state of the
Great Lakes from an ecosystem perspective.
SOLEC 94 focussed on the overall health of the Great
Lakes basin ecosystem at the end of 1994 while
SOLEC 96 narrowed the scope to summarize the
health of the nearshore ecosystem and to examine
the effects of land use practices on ecosystem health.
Led by Environment Canada and the United States
Environmental Protection Agency, SOLEC 94 was the
first binational scientific meeting of its kind. SOLEC
96 continued in the same vein.
Nearly 500 participants attended SOLEC 96 representing:
• Federal Governments
• Provincial/State/Tribal Governments
• Local Governments
« Conservation/Wildlife/Environmental Groups
• Industry/Agriculture/Commercial Fishing
» Academia/Research
• Health Groups
• Citizens/Public Advisory Groups
Why Nearshore?
One of the findings of SOLEC 94 was that these areas
represent the most diverse and productive parts of the Great
Lakes ecosystem, and, at the same time, support the most
intense human activity. As a result, the areas that contain
the greatest biological resources are subject to the greatest
stress.
-------
Information for the 1997 Report can be found in five
supporting documents presented at SOLEC 96:
• Nearshore Waters of the Great Lakes;
• Coastal Wetlands of the Great Lakes;
* The Land by the Lakes: Nearshore Terrestrial
Ecosystems;
* Impacts of Changing Land Use; and
• Information and Information Management.
Land use is by far the largest source of stress to the system
and warranted special attention. Additionally, because of the
importance of information and information management, and
because of the rapid changes in electronic data systems, a
separate paper on this topic was prepared.
SOLEC 96 MAJOR FINDINGS: A SUMMARY
I, Importance of Locally Based Action
It is essential that ecosystem management happen at the
local/community level, with support from all levels of
government and the public. Municipal governments play a
key role in determining the health of the nearshore.
2. Resources are Declining
At this time, both financial and human resources are in short
supply. Public and private sector budgets are shrinking, and
it is becoming increasingly important to prioritize where the
remaining resources will be dedicated. Cost effectiveness of
restoration will be factored into decision-making processes,
and programs must be shown to get the required results in a
cost effective manner. Agencies must work together and
share data.
3. Need a Long Term Perspective
In order to recognize changes in the health of the Great
Lakes nearshore, it is necessary to compare the current
state of the ecosystem with earlier states. Commitments to
long term monitoring and data collection are necessary for
assessing progress and, if necessary, re-prioritizing efforts.
-------
4, Need Ecosystem Goals
We must agree on what end state would be most desirable
for the Great Lakes ecosystem before we can work toward a
desirable end state. It must also be recognized that with
respect to ecosystem health, end results are difficult to
predict because of the extreme number of variables.
5. Focus on Prevention and Preservation
Years of reactive measures to ecosystem problems have
provided results. The time has come to build on the success
of restoration efforts, and focus on preserving and protecting
the less impacted areas which remain.
6. Need to Improve Communication
Communication within agencies and between agencies
needs to be improved. Using a common vision and common
vocabulary to define and address key issues can help to
achieve this goal.
7. Non-Point Sources of Pollution
Action is well underway to address point sources of pollu-
tion. Now is the time to focus more efforts on non-point
sources.
8. Urgency for Action
Immediate action is needed on three fronts. Where there is
agreement on steps needed to protect and restore the eco-
system, those steps should be taken now. Where existing
information is not sufficient to support decisions and imple-
mentation, immediate action must be taken to identify infor-
mation gaps and obtain the information needed. Action is
also needed to protect areas where restoration efforts have
already yielded successful results.
9. Land Use
SOLEC 96 carried out a major analysis of land use in the
Great Lakes basin and found that poor land use practices
are the major source of stress. Action to address this must
occur at the local level (see SOLEC 96 Major Finding #1).
-------
INDICATORS OF STRESS
Some preliminary indicators to measure both the state of
health of the total ecosystem and the stressors that influence
that health were developed and assessed in SOLEC 94.
SOLEC 96 continued this process by developing indicators
to measure the state of health of the nearshore ecosystem.
The indicator ratings assess the condition of the ecosystem
or the stressor in three broad categories; poor, mixed or
good. A trend statement indicates whether things are getting
better, worse or remaining stable.
In addition, the Land by the Lakes paper used a ratings
system of A to Ffor the ecoregions and special ecological
communities. However, on a lake-by-lake basis the health of
the nearshore terrestrial ecosystems were rated as above.
In general, the ratings have the following meanings:
• Poor—significant negative impact.
• Mixed—the impact is less severe.
* Good—the impact or stress is removed and the state of
the ecosystem component has been restored (or remains)
at a presently acceptable state.
In general, the trends have the following meanings:
* Deteriorating—the trend is towards greater impact.
• Stable—no change in the impact.
* Improving—the trend is towards less impact.
Mixed
Poor
Good
Mixed
Poor
Good
The diagram at the left indicates that the environmental
conditions started as Mixed and are deteriorating.
The diagram at the left indicates that the environmental
conditions started as Mixed and are improving.
The Information and Information Management paper used
the ratings of good (G), fair (F) and poor (P) to describe the
indicators of the nearshore information needs.
-------
Nearshore Waters
Overall State of the Great Lakes Aquatic
Nearshore Ecosystem
Mixed/Improving
Healthy Fish and Wildlife:
1. Status of native species and their habitat
2. Status of exotic species
Mixed/Improving
Poor/Deteriorating
Virtual Elimination of Persistent Toxic Substances:
1. Levels of persistent toxic substances in water
and sediment
2. Concentrations of persistent toxic substances
in fish and wildlife
Mixed/Improving
Reduced Nutrient Loading, Eliminating Eutrophication:
1. Dissolved oxygen concentrations of bottom
waters
Good/Improving
-------
2. Water clarity / algal blooms
Mixed/Improving
Healthy Human Populations:
1, Drinking water quality
2. Fish consumption advisories
Good/Stable
Mixed/Improving
3. Beach closures
4. Acute human illness (associated with locally
high levels of contaminants)
5. Chronic human illness
Coastal Wetlands
Overall State of the Great Lakes Coastal
Wetlands Ecosystems
Preserve or Restore Wetland Area:
1. Wetland size or abundance - Upper Lakes
M ixed/Deterio rati ng
-------
2. Wetland size or abundance - Lower Lakes
3. Land use adjacent to wetland
4. Land use changes, encroachment, and
development
5. Shoreline modification
Poor/Deteriorating
Poor-Mixed/Deteriorating
Preserve or Restore Wetland Quality:
1. Water level fluctuation
Unregulated lakes
M
Lake Superior
M
Good/Stable
Poor-Mixed/Stable
Lake Ontario
M
Poor/Stable
2. Levels of nutrients and persistent toxic
substances
Mixed/Improving
3. Protection from erosive forces
Preserve or Restore Health of the Habitat:
1. Status of plant communities
2. Status of individual plant species
Mixed/Deteriorating
8
-------
Preserve or Restore Healthy Fish and Wildlife Populations:
1. Concentration of persistent toxic substances
in biota
Mixed/Improving
2. Effect of exotic species
Poor/Deteriorating
Land by the Lakes - Nearshore Terrestrial Ecosystems
1. Retention of shoreline species and/or communities
Lake Superior Remaining Lakes
Good/Stable
Mixed/Deteriorating
2. Retention of natural shoreline processes (un-armored shoreline)
Lake Superior
M
Lake Huron
M
Good/Stable
Lake Michigan
Mixed/Stable
Lakes St. Clair, Erie and Ontario
M
—-\
G
Mixed/Deteriorating
Poor/Deteriorating
-------
3. Representation of biodiversity in lakeshore parks and protected areas
Lake Superior Lake Huron Remaining Lakes
Good/Improving
Mixed/Improving
Mixed/Stable
4, Gains in biodiversity investment areas
Lakes Superior & Michigan
Mixed/Improving
Lake Ontario
M
Lake Huron
M
Mixed/Deteriorating
Lakes St. Clair & Erie
M
Mixed/Stable
Poor/Stable
Land Use Stressors
Efficient Urban Development:
1. Recreation opportunities (number & area of
parks)
2. Wastewater quality (based on nutrient & toxic
loadings)
3. Industrial water use
Mixed/Improving
4. Center-town economy (based on fiscal
condition, vacancies, etc.)
Mixed/Deteriorati ng
10
-------
5. Energy use (per capita)
6. Waste created (residential & industrial)
7. Urban population density
8. Brownfields (number & area)
9. Residential water use
10. Suburban land conversion
11. Traffic congestion
12. Transit use
Poor/Improving
Poor/Stable
Poor/Deteriorating
Protection of Human Health:
1. Sewage quality (based on nutrient & toxic
loadings)
2. Pollution-prevention programs
3. Fish advisories
4. Outdoor recreation (based on opportunities &
participation)
Mixed/Improving
5. Land-fill capacity
6. Respiratory illness (based on hospital
admissions & death records)
7, Air pollution levels (based on particulates &
ozone levels)
Mixed/Stable
Poor/Improving
11
-------
8. Stormwater quality (based on nutrient & toxic
loadings)
Poor/Stable
9. Beach closings (number of unswimmable
days)
Protection of Resource Health:
1. Hunting pressure
2. Agriculture pesticide/fertilizer use
3. Conservation tillage
4. Contaminated sites (area & number)
5. Wildlife populations
6. Forest clearing (based on cutting rates),
replanting and renewal
7. Mineral extraction
8. Wetland habitat (number & area)
9. Fishing pressure
10. Groundwater quality (based on area/number
of contaminated wells)
Good/Stable
Mixed/Improving
Mixed/Stable
Mixed/Deteriorating
12
-------
11. Municipal pesticide/fertilizer (usage)
Poor/Stable
12. Agricultural & natural land loss (area lost to
rural development)
13. Hardening of land surface (based on area of
roads & buildings)
14. Cottage & second homes (number per
coastal area)
Poor/Deteriorating
Information and Information Management
1, Data coverage (how well data covers the
Great Lakes nearshore area)
2. Data time frame (how recent the data are)
3. Data applicability (how well data can be used
to measure the indicators discussed above)
4, Data usability (how well data can be used
across disciplines)
Fair
13
-------
ANALYSIS OF THE LAKES AND CONNECTING CHANNELS
I. Lake Superior
Lake Superior is the only lake in which the overall health of
the nearshore terrestrial zone was rated positively,
* Development pressures are not as intense in the Lake
Superior basin as they are in the other Great Lake basins,
and the land use activities in the Lake basin have had a
relatively low impact on Lake Superior's nearshore
ecosystem. However, shoreline development on the U.S.
portions of the north shore is increasing rapidly.
« Non-point source pollution deposited from the atmosphere is
a large source of pollution in Lake Superior, and it has been
determined that non-point sources actually have a bigger
influence over nearshore water quality in the Lake than do
point sources. Atmospheric sources account for 93% of total
mercury, and 98.8% of PCBs loadings to the Lake.
« The lake trout fishery is now maintained through natural
reproduction from wild fish. This represents the first
successful rehabilitation of lake trout stocks in the Great
Lakes.
• Ongoing control of the sea lamprey continues to be very
important to ensure the preservation of lake trout stocks.
* Lake Superior's coastal wetlands are in comparatively good
condition, and less affected by human stressors than those
of the other Great Lakes. However, some local areas are
degraded and regulation of lake levels is having negative
effect on coastal wetlands lakewide.
14
-------
2. Lake Michigan
Lake Michigan is the most diverse of any of the Lakes. Its
shoreline changes continuously from one major landform to
another, with each major type extending for hundreds of
miles.
Lake Michigan's coast contains about 40%of all U.S. Great
Lakes coastal wetlands. These wetlands are as equally
diverse as the shoreline.
Contributors of point source pollution include paper mills in
the northern basin, and steel related industry in the south.
However, in the past two decades, implementation of
pollution control policies have dramatically reduced the
amount of pollution being discharged from these sources,
and currently non-point pollution sources are the primary
cause of degraded water and air quality in the basin.
Spawning and fry production by stocked fish have been
recorded at several locations, and wild yearling and older
lake trout have also been found in the Lake. Substantial
numbers of adult wild lake trout have not been produced as
yet.
The predominant development trend in the Lake Michigan
basin is continued low-density sprawl which consumes vast
amounts of agricultural lands and open space. Counties in
the eastern Lake Michigan basin, for example, experienced
reductions in farmland acreage from 7 to more than 15%
from 1982 to 1992, exceeding the average loss rates for the
State of Michigan during that period (7,8%).
The Lake Michigan basin economy supports more than twice
as many jobs as the next largest economy among Great
Lakes basins (Lake Erie). The basin has the most
manufacturing jobs among the individual Great Lakes
basins, but employment in the sector has been declining
while employment in the service sector has been on the rise.
Between 1970 and 1990, the service sector in Lake
Michigan's drainage basin grew nearly 100%, and today,
over 2 million service jobs are located there.
15
-------
3. Lake Huron
4. Lake Erie
Lake Huron boasts the only Area of Concern that has been
delisted to date - Collingwood Harbour, Ontario.
Within the last ten years, along the Canadian shore of Lake
Huron, there has been incremental and site-specific loss of
wetland area from agricultural encroachment and cottage
development.
The fish community in Lake Huron is recovering after
decades of overharvest and the effects of introduced
species, but remains unstable. Modest numbers of stocked
lake trout are reproducing in the Lake, and populations of
whitefish are more abundant than at any other time in this
century. Starting in the 1980s, the sea lamprey increased in
abundance in the northern end of the Lake, imposing high
mortality on lake trout and reversing gains that had been
made in lake trout restoration in that area.
Of all the Great Lakes, Lake Erie is exposed to the greatest
stress from both urbanization and agriculture. The Lake Erie
basin has the largest percentage of land use in agriculture
of any Lake basin, but agriculture is experiencing intense
competition with other land uses, especially from urban
sprawl and scattered rural development.
The economies of the Lake Erie basin are markedly different
in their range and type. They include the Detroit, Cleveland
and Buffalo urban-industrial complex, rural agricultural
villages, commercial and recreational fisheries, and the
water-based cottage and recreational industry. Along the
shoreline itself, except for metropolitan areas, the economy
is generally driven by recreation and tourism including
cottages, marinas, and fishing.
16
-------
Lake Erie has shown low concentrations of toxic
contaminants in water and fish. This is due to the
sedimentation of fine soil particles and algae, which tend to
adsorb pollutants from the water.
Beaches all along the shoreline have experienced high
bacterial levels leading to closures, but those in the Western
and Central Lake basins are particularly affected.
The near total removal of native vegetation from the basin
and the severe exploitation of fisheries followed by exotic
species invasions have devastated the original aquatic
community of the Lake.
The long-term impact of exotic species, such as zebra
mussels, is unknown. Although mussels have increased
water clarity by approximately 75% between 1988 and 1991,
their feeding habits have led to large changes in the food
web which may result in undesirable changes in fish species
populations.
They are also suppressing and may be completely
destroying populations of native mussels. In addition,
blooms of blue green algae have started to occur in Western
Lake Erie. This may be the result of zebra mussels causing
an imbalanced ecosystem.
The round goby, another exotic fish species, has now
expanded its range into Lake Erie.
The coastal wetlands of Lake Erie support the largest
diversity of plant and wildlife species in the Great Lakes.
The status of 34 species of Lake Erie fish is are either rare,
threatened, endangered, extirpated, extinct, or of special
concern. Lake whitefish, however, are continuing to recover
and walleye and yellow perch are intensively managed to
provide productive recreational and commercial fisheries in
the U.S. and Canada.
17
-------
5. Lake Ontario
Wetlands of Lake Ontario have suffered severe loss over the
last two centuries. The main causes have been agricultural
drainage and urban encroachment.
A major source of stress to Lake Ontario coastal wetlands is
lack of normal water level fluctuation. Water levels have
been regulated in the Lake since the construction of the St.
Lawrence Seaway in 1959. Prior to regulation, the range of
water level fluctuations during the 20th century was about 2
meters (6.5 feet). However, since 1976 the range has been
reduced to about 0.9 meters (2.9 feet).
The fish community has improved considerably from a low
point in the 1960s. Alewife and rainbow smelt abundance
declined in the 1980s in response to increased trout and
salmon predation and less nutrients in the Lake. In the
1990s, stocking of trout and salmon was reduced to bring
them into better balance with their food supply. Lake
whitefish, were nearly absent in the 1970s, but began
increasing in the 1980s, and were 30- to 40- fold more
abundant in the 1990s than in the 1970s. In addition in 1995,
lake trout which had been eliminated from the Lake by sea
lamprey, habitat loss and overfishing, began to reproduce
naturally after an absence of some 45 years.
The most significant land use change in the Lake Ontario
basin for the past forty years has been, and continues to be,
the urban expansion of the Greater Toronto Area. Low net
population growth has been replaced by suburban and rural
expansion, extension of the urban fringe, and development
of adjacent rural areas.
18
-------
6. Connecting Channels
The connecting channels of the Great Lakes consist of the
St. Marys River, the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, the Detroit
River, the Niagara River and the St. Lawrence River. They
are the vital links between the Lakes carrying the surface-
water outflow from one Great Lake to the next and are
nearly always considered "nearshore".
The connecting channels are affected by the impacts of
urbanization, industry and agriculture, as well as the impacts
of physical alterations for shipping, water level management
and power generation. Connecting channels are often the
most heavily utilized areas by humans within the basin,
causing impaired habitat in all, and contaminated sediments
in most. Therefore, part or all of each connecting channel
has been designated as an Area of Concern.
In many cases, shoreline hardening (such as bulkheading
and diking) is the common solution to erosion. Where this
hardening occurs adjacent to remaining wetlands, it restricts
their connection to upland habitats and limits the landward
migration of wetlands during high water periods. This causes
a backstopping effect, reducing the size and diversity of
wetland communities.
About half the wetlands in Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair
Delta have been diked. Recreational and urban
developments also fragment the remaining habitats.
Many connecting channel wetlands have been identified as
significant areas of waterfowl production in the Great Lakes
basin, are important migratory staging areas and are used
as habitat or breeding areas by other birds (non-waterfowl).
The St. Clair River Delta has been identified as one of the
most significant areas for waterfowl production, staging and
migration in the Great Lakes.
19
-------
OVERALL MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES
The fundamental challenge is to be able to understand that
the nearshore is an ecosystem, and to obtain enough
relevant information to make informed decisions. Although
the ecosystem is complex, there is an urgent need to agree
upon the present state, desired states, and the key steps
needed to attain what is desired.
Information: The challenge is to develop a common set of
indicators and then to bring together available information on
the state of the nearshore ecosystem into accessible formats
and systems.
Ecosystem Integrity: The challenge is to integrate the
concepts of biodiversity and habitat into existing programs
traditionally devoted to pollution control or natural resource
management for harvest.
Integrative Management: The challenge is to integrate
LaMPs (Lakewide Management Plans), RAPs (Remedial
Action Plans), fisheries management plans, and other
planning activities so that they become fully viable
management mechanisms, useful for decision-makers
throughout the Great Lakes basin ecosystem in taking action
and assessing results.
Efficient Land Use: The challenge is to find ways to promote
efficient land use, and land use that is protective of high
value habitat.
Priority Areas: The challenge is to identify areas of unusual
importance to the health and integrity of the Great Lakes
ecosystem for priority attention.
Indicators: The challenge is to develop easily understood
agreed-upon indicators to support an understanding of the
state of the system and to obtain wide-spread agreement on
what needs to be done to measure progress.
20
-------
Research and Monitoring: Research should be prioritized in
order to fill the many gaps that exist, such as: the global
nature of contamination; the effects of changes in the food
chain on contaminant movement within the Lakes; the
implications on the fishery of changing the amount of
phosphorus entering the lakes; and the subtle effects of
long-term exposure to toxic substances on humans and
wildlife. Prioritizing research will also help determine
monitoring programs.
Sustainability: The challenge is to create ways of life and
communities within which we humans prosper while our
actions restore the natural life support system upon which all
life and prosperity depends.
THE FUTURE OF SOLEC
SOLEC will convene every two years to provide
information on the state of the Great Lakes
ecosystem.
SOLEC 98 will be held in Buffalo, New York, in
October, 1998.
SOLEC 98 is being designed around an indicators
theme and seeks to develop Great Lakes indicators
that can be used by managers to track progress in
overall ecosystem health.
21
------- |