State of the Great Lakes 2005
Highlights
&EPA
Canada
-------
State of the Great Lakes 2005
What's Inside
Overall Assessment of the Great Lakes
Ecosystem Assessment
Management Challenges
Reporting on Indicators
Indicator Categories:
• Human Health
• Land Use-Land Cover
• Contamination
• Biotic Communities
• Invasive Species
• Aquatic Habitats and Coastal Zones
• Resource Utilization
• Climate Change
Great Lakes and Rivers
State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference
Photo Credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office
ISBN 0-662-41451-9
Cat. No. Enl61-3/2005E
EPA 905-F-05-006
Front Cover Photo Credits:
Blue Heron, Don Breneman
.•g Bear Dunes, Robert de Jonge, courtesy Michigan Travel I
Port Huron Mackinac Race, Michigan Travel Bureau
Toronto Skyline, Environment Canada
<$>
- - • -
Overall Assessment of the
Great Lakes
This report summarizes
information on the status of the
Great Lakes basin ecosystem
drawn from the State of the Great
Lakes 2005 report. Indicator
reports presented at the State of the
Lakes Ecosystem Conference
(SOLEC) held in Toronto, Ontario, in October 2004, are used
to form the basis of both the Highlights and the State of the
Great Lakes 2005 reports. Fifty-six indicators under the
following nine categories were assessed: Human Health,
Land Use-Land Cover, Contamination, Biotic
Communities, Invasive Species, Aquatic Habitats,
Coastal Zones, Resource Utilization and Climate
Change. In addition, each lake basin, the St. Clair River-Lake
St. Clair-Detroit River ecosystem and the St. Lawrence River
were also assessed using available information.
Every two years, in accordance with the requirements of the
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, the Great Lakes
community reports on the condition of the Great Lakes
ecosystem at SOLEC using a consistent set of indicators.
Indicators are measures of ecosystem and human health that
help us determine whether management activities are
successful or are in need of change. Almost every indicator
report is replete with scientific information collected and
assessed by Great Lakes experts from both Canada and the
United States. Authors of these indicator reports have assessed
ecosystem conditions based on a combination of data
collected, a review of scientific papers and best professional
judgment.
Overall, the combined expertise of more than 150 scientists
and natural resource managers led to the assessment that the
state of the Great Lakes ecosystem is mixed, with areas and
conditions that are good and other areas that are in poor
condition. The trend of Great Lakes ecosystem health remains
unchanged, i.e. some conditions are getting better while
others are getting worse.
-1-
-------
Highlights
o
The following colour and symbol guide is used throughout
the report to provide the reader with a clear assessment of
the indicators highlighted in this document.
Status
Good. The state of the ecosystem component
is presently meeting ecosystem objectives or
otherwise is in acceptable condition.
Fair. The ecosystem component is currently
exhibiting minimally acceptable conditions,
but it is not meeting established ecosystem
objectives, criteria or other characteristics of
fully acceptable conditions.
Poor. The ecosystem component is severely
negatively impacted and it does not display
even minimally acceptable conditions.
Mixed. The ecosystem component displays
both good and degraded features.
Trend
Improving. Information provided by the
report shows the ecosystem component to be
changing toward more acceptable conditions.
Unchanging. Information provided by the
report shows the ecosystem component is
neither getting better nor worse.
Deteriorating. Information provided by the
report shows the ecosystem component to be
changing away from acceptable conditions.
Undetermined. Data are not available to
assess the ecosystem component over time, so
no trend can be identified.
Ecosystem
Assessment
Assessments vary among indicators, indicator
categories and lake basins. Every effort has been
made to include the most up-to-date information.
Development of relevant indicators, along with
increased and co-ordinated monitoring across the
basin, is ongoing and expected to improve the
ability of experts to assess ecosystem and human
health conditions in the Great Lakes basin.
Photo Credit: U.S. Envir=. . ."ational Program Office
-2-
-------
State of the Great Lakes 2005
Management Challenges
Several management challenges, highlighted below, were
identified and discussed through the SOLEC process,
including: a special session of Great Lakes environmental
managers; comments provided by SOLEC participants; and
challenges reported in the lake, river and indicator assessment
reports. The management challenges focus on the protection
and restoration of the Great Lakes basin, including land use,
habitat degradation and loss, climate change impacts and toxic
contamination. The management challenges also consider
future potential impacts of chemicals of emerging concern,
non-native species and the inevitable stress from an increasing
human population.
Land Use
Management Challenge: What land use practices will sustain
the ecosystem over the long term, thereby contributing to
improvements in the quality of land and water?
Current land use practices throughout the basin are affecting
the chemical, physical and biological aspects of the ecosystem,
including the quality of land, water and the quality of life for all
biota. Each lake and river assessment presented in the State of
the Great Lakes 2005 report cited the need for improved land
use practices to counter the effects of urban sprawl and
population growth. There is a need to demonstrate and
encourage environmentally-friendly land use practices, e.g.,
strategically locate urban growth to limit the impact on habitat,
air and water quality. Enlightened managers (whether private
land owners and developers or public service employees)
should seek assistance from the many planning tools and
decision support systems that are currently available.
Habitat Degradation and Loss
Management Challenge: How can essential habitats be protected
and restored to preserve the species and the unique and globally
significant characteristics of the Great Lakes ecosystem?
Zebra Mussels
Photo Credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Great Lakes National Program Office
Many factors, including the spread
of non-native species,
urbanization and population
growth, degrade and decrease the
amount of habitat available for
plants and animals. Native mussel
species are facing extinction due
to pressures from non-native zebra
and quagga mussels. Hydrological
alterations are impacting the
functioning of wetland habitats and poorly planned
development (as discussed in the Land Use section above) is
degrading or destroying essential habitats and migration
corridors. Defining and identifying essential habitats in the
Great Lakes are critical, along with actions that promote
ecological protection and restoration in the basin. Managers
need current data and research to determine appropriate
ecological protection and restoration tools and technologies,
including the ability to identify the location, viability and
amount of habitat required to sustain a particular species.
Monitoring programs to understand species trends and
educational programs that provide the public with a broad
spectrum of actions to assist with the preservation of species'
habitats are also required.
Climate Change
Management Challenge: Given the findings of climate change
research, how will managers prepare for potential climate
change impacts?
Studies suggest that the climate in the Great Lakes region is
changing. Climate change has the potential to impact Great
Lakes water levels, water and air temperatures, ice duration on
the lakes, the amount and type of precipitation, habitats for
biological diversity and human land uses, such as agriculture and
forestry. In order to adapt to the impacts of a changing
environment, managers need to consider
climate change in long-term
planning (including investments in
infrastructure, public health, coastal
development, etc). A challenge is to
evoke management action to prepare
and adapt to the potential impacts of a
changing climate.
-3-
-------
Highlights
Toxic Contamination
Management Challenges:
• How will the economic and practical issues of continuing the
removal of toxic contamination from our ecosystem be
addressed?
• How will we determine when, and to what extent, to monitor
specific chemicals and those of emerging concern?
The Great Lakes community achieved significant progress
in its more than 30-year effort to remediate toxic contamination
in water, fish, wildlife, sediments, air and people. Loadings of
contaminants to the lakes have been dramatically reduced from
their peaks in the 1970s, although problems still exist.
Reductions in non-point source runoff have been significant,
but optimal reductions have yet to be achieved. Adopting
alternative agricultural practices to reduce runoff of pesticides
and fertilizers may require a mix of approaches, including
voluntary measures and incentives. Controls on industrial
emissions of contaminants have been legislated and enforced,
resulting in reductions in levels of contaminants in the
environment. A management challenge is to continue to
remove toxic contamination and excess nutrients economically
and practically from the ecosystem, and to prevent additional
Vadit: U.S.
the system. There are currently several studies in the
Great Lakes basin investigating the presence of brominated
flame retardants. These compounds are added to consumer
products in an effort to reduce fire-related injury and property
damage. The health effects of multiple contaminants, including
endocrine disrupting chemicals, pharmaceuticals and other
chemicals of emerging concern, need to be addressed.
Reporting on Indicators
Given the large number of indicators needed to assess the status
of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem, how can the findings be
sorted and interpreted in a way that is expedient and productive
for managers? Indicator categories are one way to convey
ecosystem status to Great Lakes managers and to the public.
Managers may use a compilation of indicator information to
make appropriate management decisions, or to interpret better
the information presented in the State of the Great Lakes
reports. A challenge is to find a method for compiling or
indexing groups of indicators in such a way that it leads to more
informed management decision-making. The indicators in the
State of the Great Lakes 2005 report were organized into nine
categories and overall assessments were prepared for some of
these categories. The overall category assessments, found on the
following pages, were based on the individual indicator
assessments and information within that category.
The current set of categories does not exclude the possibility of
reorganizing indicators into different categories or indices to
meet a manager's needs. For example, one approach to analyze
the resource utilization category is the "Ecological Footprint."
One of the originators of the approach, Dr. William Rees (Our
Ecological Footprint, 1996), estimated that the footprint of the
Great Lakes basin, or the area of Earth required to support the
current lifestyle of Great Lakes basin citizens, would be
equivalent to more than five times the actual area of the basin, hi
other words, if every person on earth today enjoyed the same
type of lifestyle that most Great Lakes basin citizens enjoy, we
srsity of Britiw,
would need an
additional four
earth-like planets
to accommodate
everyone
sustainably!
Similar "index"-
approaches
Photo Craiit: u-s • Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office
may be reported in future State of the Great Lakes reports.
-4-
-------
State of the Great Lakes 2005
Human Health
In general, human health-related conditions in the Great Lakes
are improving. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in fish
continue to decline, biological markers of human exposure to
contaminants are better assessed, progress is being made to
reduce air pollution, beaches are better assessed and more
frequently monitored, and drinking water quality continues to be
good - that is, safe to drink.
Drinking Water
Treated drinking water quality
is safe to drink. It is unknown to
what extent new pressures such as
chemicals of emerging concern
and non-native species will impact
water treatment technology.
Urbanization and sprawl are
negatively affecting the quality
and quantity of groundwater,
which is an important source of
drinking water for many basin
residents.
Beaches are generally safe for
swimming. Contamination from
sediments, combined sewer
overflows, wildlife and livestock
operations are the primary sources
of bacteria (E. coli) in the water,
causing beach postings or
closures. Information for the 2003
swimming season showed that for
more than 900 beaches which are
monitored in both countries, 69
percent of Great Lakes beaches
were open throughout the entire
swimming season. Nevertheless, the public is advised to heed
current public health advisories. Due to the nature of lab
analyses, each set of beach water samples requires an average of
one to two days before the results are available and
communicated. New testing methods that will provide prompt E.
coli results are needed so that beach information is relayed to the
public quickly and effectively.
Air is a primary pathway by which persistent bioaccumulative
toxic chemicals reach the Great Lakes. Once they reach the lakes
they can, and do, bioaccumulate in fish and wildlife.
Concentrations and loadings of banned or restricted toxic
chemicals (PCBs and banned organochlorine pesticides such as
dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, commonly known as DDT)
and concentrations of dioxins and furans are generally
decreasing. Concentrations of other substances are either staying
the same, for example polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and
mercury, or increasing, such as polybrominated diphenyl ethers
(PBDEs), used as flame retardants and other pollutants of
emerging concern. While concentrations of some of these
substances are very low at rural sites, they may be much higher
in pollution "hotspots" - typically in urban areas.
Atmospheric deposition of toxic compounds is likely to continue
into the future. Further reductions in emissions are necessary to
Beaches
Concentration of PCBs as Measured in the
Atmosphere of the Great Lakes Basin
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Year
Source: Statec- i . i.es 2005 report
reduce the concentrations of contaminants in the ah- and then-
deposition into the Great Lakes.
As PCB and DDT contaminant levels diminish, the number and
frequency offish consumption advisories for these
chemicals is expected to decrease. Mercury concentrations,
however, will continue to be a cause for fish consumption
advisories in the Great Lakes basin. Lake Superior has the least
restrictive fish consumption advisories: coho salmon may be
consumed in unlimited quantities. In Lakes Michigan, Huron
and Erie, coho salmon consumption is limited to one meal per
month. In Lake Ontario, consumption of no more than one meal
every two months is advised. Ontario sport fish sampling
indicates that contaminants in lake trout have also been reduced
since the late 1970s and early 1980s when fish consumption of
lake trout was completely
restricted. Lake trout can be
safely consumed in Lakes
Superior and Huron at an amount
of four meals per month and
Lakes Erie and Ontario at an
amount of two meals per month.
No samples were collected from
Lake Michigan under the Ontario
sport fish sampling program.
PCBs in Coho Salmon
Photo Credit: U.S . Envk . • . . 5reat Lakes National Program Offi
Contaminants such as certain brominated flame retardants,
however, are increasing in the environment and the human
health impacts related to these chemicals are not known.
O
Good
O
Fair
Poor
O
Mixed
-5-
-------
Highlights
Land Use-Land Cover
Total forest area has expanded across the Great Lakes basin in
recent decades and previously contaminated urban areas
(brownfields) are being revitalized. Development, land
conversion and shoreline hardening, however, are occurring in
ecologically sensitive areas of the basin, thereby threatening
native habitats and species.
Photo Credit: U.S. Envh. . ction A : -it Lakes National Program Office
Forest area is increasing and is associated with positive
impacts on water quality and quantity, such as reducing erosion,
and thereby reducing the amount of sediment entering the water.
Forests cover 27.8 million hectares, or about half (51 percent),
of the land in the Great Lakes basin. The U.S. portion of the
basin contains 14.8 million hectares or 36.6 million acres of
forests (47 percent of the land in the U.S. basin), while the
Canadian portion contains 13 million hectares or approximately
32 million acres (57 percent of the land in the Canadian basin).
Land Cover in the Great Lakes Basin
1990s
Source: State of the i . ; ::es 2005 report
Improving
Unchanging
Deteriorating
Undetermined
Photo Credit:!; : redeMontreal
Brownfields are abandoned, idled or under-used industrial
and commercial facilities where expansion, redevelopment or
reuse is complicated by real or perceived environmental
contamination. All eight Great Lakes States, Ontario and
Quebec have programs to promote remediation or "clean up"
and redevelopment of brownfields sites but not all jurisdictions
track brownfields activities, and methods vary where tracking
does occur. Information on hectares of brownfields remediated
from Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and
Quebec indicate that, as of 2002, a total of 13,000 hectares
(32,124 acres) have been remediated in these states and
province alone. Available data in 2002 from the eight Great
Lakes states and Quebec indicate that more than 24,000
brownfield sites have participated in clean-up programs since
the mid-1990s, although the degree of "remediation" varies
considerably.
Brownfields Redevelopment:
Erie Front Street Complex, PA
Before
Photo Credit: Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
-6-
-------
State of the Great Lakes 2005
Contamination
Contamination
Over the last 30 years, a decrease
in the amount of contaminants in
the Great Lakes suggests overall
improvement. There is a marked
reduction in levels of toxic
chemicals in air, water, biota and
sediments. However, many
indicator species still contain
levels of contaminants above established guidelines.
Historically regulated contaminants such as PCBs, DDT and
mercury have declined in most fish species that are monitored.
However, contaminants in aquatic invasive species are of major
concern. Non-native zebra and quagga mussels are thought to
alter the pathways and fate of persistent toxic substances,
possibly changing the contamination accumulation pattern
among fish - particularly for top predator fish. Although
concentrations of many contaminants have decreased in fish
tissue, fish consumption advisories continue to be in effect
for PCBs, mercury and other contaminants.
Snapping turtles are a very
useful biological indicator
species of local wetland
contaminants and the effects of
these contaminants on wetland
communities throughout the
lower Great Lakes basin.
Although there is evidence that
some sites near or at Areas of
Concern (AOCs) experienced declines in total PCBs,
contamination in snapping turtle eggs continues to exceed the
Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines. Remediation of
sediments in some AOCs is beginning to address historical
sources of contamination to the Great Lakes.
The Sediment Quality Index (SQI) is based on five metals: lead,
zinc, copper, cadmium and mercury. The trend in sediment
quality for these metals is generally indicative of trends for a
wider range of persistent toxic chemicals. Areas of Lakes Erie,
Ontario and Michigan show the poorest SQI scores as a result of
historical urban and industrial activities.
Great Lakes Sediment Quality Index
Sediment Quality Index
• 0-39 (Poor)
• 40-59 (Marginal)
60-79 (Fair)
80-94 (Good)
95-100 (Excellent)
e: State<~, . •• . • '"-'es2005report
PCBs in Whole Lake Trout
Lake Superior
2.5
2
f"
a
OS
1
nil
1 1
Mill i,.,i,i
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Year
Lake Michigan
25'
20'
1 15
ID-
S'
1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ,
72 1977 1882 1987 1992 1997
Year
Lake Huron
Lake Erie
Lake Ontario
1987 1992
Year
Source: State oj . " es 2005 report
o
Good
O
Fair
Poor
Mixed
-7-
-------
Highlights
Data from the long-term monitoring of herring gull eggs show
that the levels of most contaminants are continuing to decline at
a constant rate. However, even at current contaminant levels,
more physiological abnormalities, such as a male-biased sex
ratio of hatchlings and feminization in more than 10 percent of
adult males, are being found in herring gulls at Great Lakes
AOCs compared to sites outside of the Great Lakes basin.
.,
Trends in Concentrations of DDE in
Herring Gull Eggs
Toronto Harbour, Ontario
25
g/g, wet weight)
£ 8
a
c
1 10
I
J *
0
1!
n n
[I n _ n n fin n
ly nfl ilOnnnnnnn
I74 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001
Year
Source: State of the Great Lakes 2005 report
Chemicals of emerging concern, such as brominated flame
retardants, are increasing in some biota. These compounds have
increased dramatically in herring gull eggs over the past 20
years. More research is needed to help us understand the effects
that these chemicals have on the health of the ecosystem and all
of its inhabitants.
Large quantities of PAHs and metals continue to be released,
especially near large population centres. Future reductions in the
emissions of contaminants may decelerate as management
efforts are offset by the consequences of population growth and
urban sprawl, such as increased vehicle emissions.
Sources of Brominated Flame
Retardants
Photo Credit: >' * Clip Art,
http://office.microsoft.com/clipart/default.aspx?lc=
Phosphorus was a major concern in the 1960s and 1970s, but
concerted government action has led
to the attainment of guideline levels
for phosphorus in all Great Lakes
except Lake Erie. Management
activities, such as the removal of
phosphorus from the discharge of
large wastewater treatment plants,
the restrictions on the amount of
Phosphorus
soluble phosphorus in laundry detergents and the control of
agricultural run-off through no-till farming practices, resulted
in the reduction of phosphorus in the Great Lakes.
Improving Unchanging Deteriorating Undetermined
Total Phosphorus Trends in the Great
Lakes from 1970 to 2003 (ug/L)
Superior
I.I I l
Western Erie
• ft
"
I
lichi
I
I I
I
I Illllllllllllllllllll "l
Source: State o • - - -?-es 2005 report
-------
State of the Great Lakes 2005
Biotic Communities
Populations of native benthic species such as Diporeia and
freshwater mussels seem to be in decline. Predation on lake
trout by sea lamprey in Lake Huron, deterioration ofpreyfish
populations and thiamine deficiency in salmonids feeding on
alewife are contributing to declines in other fish species.
Populations of some amphibian and wetland-dependent bird
species have generally declined. However, Hexagenia
populations may be improving in some areas and some species
offish are showing signs of reproductive recovery.
Diporeia populations have dramatically declined in Lakes
Michigan, Huron and Ontario.
Diporeia are small shrimp-like
organisms that are fed upon by
many forage fish. Declines in
Diporeia and other native benthic
populations appear to be related to
increasing populations of non-
native species. This decline has
affected the condition and
abundance of whitefish.
Diporeia
Preyfish
Walleye
Overall, preyfish abundance has
declined in all the lakes. Predation
by salmon and trout and the
collapse of Diporeia are
influencing preyfish populations.
Despite recent declines in
walleye yields, environmental
conditions have improved relative
to the 1970s. Degradation and
loss of adequate spawning and
nursery habitats, and the presence
of non-native species such as
zebra and quagga mussels, are
continuing to stress walleye
populations.
Common
Yellowthroat
Several species of birds that are dependent on coastal wetlands
for feeding and/or nesting are showing basinwide population
i declines, including the black tern, marsh
wren and least bittern. Declines may be in
part due to wetland habitat conditions.
Populations of some amphibian species
have generally declined, including the
American toad, chorus frog, green frog and
northern leopard frog. Anecdotal and
Mallard
Diporeia Density
1992
1993
1599
20CO
2001
2002
2003
Source: State:-: u • - .-kes2005report
research evidence suggest that wide variations in the occurrence
of many amphibian species at a given site are a natural and
ongoing phenomenon. For both the wetland-dependent birds and
amphibians, additional years of data will help distinguish
whether declines in these species indicate significant long-term
trends or simply a natural variation in population size.
Some populations offish species, however, are improving. Lake
trout reproduction in Lake Superior is self-sustaining and is
increasing in Lake Ontario. Yellow perch populations in Lake
Erie remain high. Forage species such as bloater and herring are
showing signs of recovery. Populations of lake sturgeon appear
to be improving. Also, some species of wetland birds are
showing increases in population, including willow fly catcher,
common yellowthroat and mallard. These birds are generalists or
prefer the habitat along wetland edges.
Lake Trout Abundance in Lake Ontario
25
20
™ 15
E
3
S. 10-
x-x
«-U.S. -fall
—•— Canada - fall
- -x- - Canada - summer
1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000
Year
Source: Stater,. >:es 2005 report
Photo Credit:
http://www.g]fc.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/landscape/herp_e.html
Photo Credit: E. Engs.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
o
Good
O
Fair
Poor Mixed
-9-
-------
Highlights
Invasive Species
Activities associated with shipping are responsible for more than
half the aquatic non-native invasive species introductions to the
Great Lakes. Total numbers of invasive species introduced and
established in the Great Lakes have increased steadily since the
1830s. However, numbers of ship-introduced invasive species
have increased exponentially during the same time period.
Since the opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway in 1959, release
of contaminated ballast water by transoceanic ships has been
implicated in more than 70 percent of the introductions of non-
native animal species in the Great Lakes. Non-native invasive
species such as zebra and quagga mussels continue to impact the
food web detrimentally. The growth of industries such as
aquaculture, live food markets and aquarium retail stores is
increasing the risk of non-native species introduction.
Photo Credit: U.S. Environmental Proti
Great Lakes National Program Office
Photo Credit: I V ildlife Service
Sea lamprey almost eliminated lake trout from all Great Lakes
waters before control efforts began
in the 1960s. With the exception
of Lake Huron, these controls have
been effective in maintaining sea
lamprey populations within
acceptable limits to allow for
successful rehabilitation of lake
trout. Newly discovered
populations of sea lamprey, from
the Manistique River,
Sea Lamprey
Sea Lamprey on Lake Trout
have contributed to the
increase in sea lamprey
abundance in Lake
Michigan.
Photo Credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Great Lakes National Program Office
Photo Credit: U.S. Envit tection Agency,
Great Lakes National Program Office
Cumulative Number of Aquatic
Non-native Invasive Species
Established in the Great Lakes Basin Since the 1830s
180
160
14°
120
j!
!* «i
Cumulative Number =169
1830s 1850s 1870s 1890s 1910s 1930s 1950s 1970s 1990s
Decade
'.•••• . . ' :" • •: •
Type E botulism can cause mortality in fish and fish-eating
birds. Live fish, especially non-native round goby, could be the
transfer link for this toxin to water birds. Infected fish display
loss of equilibrium and surface breaching, becoming more
susceptible to capture by avian predators.
Although it is believed that only a small percentage of non-native
species introduced to terrestrial ecosystems pose human health,
environmental or economic hazards, this small percentage of
successful terrestrial non-native species can have large impacts on
the ecosystem. The Asian long-horned beetle, for example, is one
non-native invasive species responsible for the demise of
hardwood trees in Chicago, Toronto and other locations in the
Great Lakes basin.
Purple Loosestrife
Improving Unchanging Deteriorating Undetermined
Asian Long-homed Beetle
Photo Credit: J. Appleby,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
-10-
-------
State of the Great Lakes 2005
Aquatic Habitats and Coastal Zones
Aquatic habitats continue to deteriorate, especially in the
nearshore. Unique structures, such as reefs, need more and
consistent protection. Nearshore habitats are being degraded
due to development, shoreline hardening and non-native
invasive species. Wetlands continue to be lost and degraded.
As well as providing habitat and feeding areas for many
species of birds, amphibians and fish, wetlands also provide a
refuge for native fish from the non-native ruffe and provide
refuge for native mussels from non-native zebra mussels.
Water level controls have resulted in a decrease of coastal
wetland area and a lower diversity of native species.
Degradation of coastal wetlands from nutrients and
sedimentation continues to threaten invertebrates, some native
fish species, marsh birds and amphibians. Coastal wetlands of
northern Lakes Michigan and Huron generally have relatively
high quality fish and invertebrate communities.
Coastal wetlands totalling 216,743 hectares (535,584 acres)
have been identified along the Great Lakes and connecting
rivers through to Cornwall, Ontario. Despite significant loss of
coastal wetland habitat in some regions of the Great Lakes, the
lakes and connecting rivers still support a diversity of wetland
types including barrier protected, drowned rivermouth and
protected embayment coastal wetlands.
Coastal Wetland Health
Shoreline hardening is resulting in the depletion of
sediment for shoreline nourishment and the loss of nearshore
aquatic habitats. Shorelines are hardened to prevent loss
during high-water events and to increase shoreline stability for
shipping, recreation and other uses. The connecting channels
have the greatest percentage of shoreline hardening: St. Clan-
River (69 percent), Niagara River (44 percent) and St.
Lawrence Seaway (12.6 percent).
Photo Credit: En-
Lake Superior has the largest cobble shoreline of all the
Great Lakes with 960 kilometres (595 miles) of cobble
beaches. This shoreline type provides habitat for rare plant
species, including the Lake Huron tansy, redroot and heart-
leaved plantain. Cobble beaches are the type of coastal habitat
most frequently threatened and lost to shoreline development.
Coastal Wetland
'
Photo Credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Great Lakes National Program Office
Photo Credit: Steve Olson, USDA-NRCS PLANTS Database
ulT^yy
Photo Credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office
Photo Credit: U.S. Envj; imeii action Agency,
Great Lakes National Program Office
o
Good
O
Fair
Poor Mixed
-11-
-------
Highlights
Resource Utilization
Although water withdrawals have decreased, overall energy
consumption is increasing as population increases along the
shoreline. Human population growth will lead to an increase in
use of natural resources.
The shutdown of nuclear power facilities and the advances in
water efficiency at thermal power plants have contributed to a
decrease in water withdrawals since 1980. In 2000, water
was withdrawn from the Great Lakes basin at a rate of more
than 174,000 cubic metres
(46 billion gallons) per day,
with almost 80 percent of the
energy supplying
I thermoelectric and industrial
users. Public water systems
accounted for about 13
percent of the total use.
Data from 2000 indicate that
in Ontario, the per capita
energy consumption
increased by 2 percent between 1999 and 2000, whereas in the
U.S., per capita consumption decreased by an average of 0.9
percent. Energy demand in Ontario is expected to grow at an
average annual rate of 1.3 percent between 1995 and 2020.
On the Canadian side of the Lake Ontario basin, the population
in 2000 was 7.4 million. By 2030 it is projected that in excess of
three million more people will live in this region, an
increase of 43 percent, with most of the growth concentrated at
the western end of Lake Ontario, within the Golden Horseshoe.
Without conservation measures, there will be increased resource
use as well as loss of habitat and prime agricultural lands due to
development.
Photo Credit: U.S. Envii i i . .ection Agency,
Great Lakes National Program Office
Population Change for the Extended Golden
Horseshoe, Western Lake Ontario
1996-2001 by 2001 Census Subdivision
Source: Statistics Canada Census, http://geodepot.statcan.ca/Diss/Maps/ThematicMaps/Population/Regional/
Horseshoe_popchg_E.pdf, July 20, 2005.
ics Canada information is
. .)! and/or red'sseminate the
:>sed permission of Statistic
.
-------
State of the Great Lakes 2005
Great Lakes and Rivers
In the Lake Superior basin, bald eagles, grey wolf and
cormorants have recovered. Forest land cover has increased.
Fisheries appear to be recovering well. However, invasive
species continue to be a problem and remain a threat to the
recovering fish populations. Stressors to the Lake Superior
ecosystem include shoreline development, habitat loss, land use
change and chemicals of emerging concern.
Because of an engineered connection
between the Mississippi River and Lake
Michigan drainage basins, the bighead carp
now represents one of the most dramatic (but,
fortunately, not yet established) food web
threats to Lake Michigan. It is an invasive
species that was reported to have escaped
from aquaculture ponds adjacent to the
Mississippi River in the 1980s and the 1990s.
This large carp species, which weighs up to
40 kilograms (90 pounds), is considered a
major threat to the entire Great Lakes food
web.
Photo Credit: K. Westphall,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
••:•• -••. ! : .
':
In Lake Huron, loss of coastal wetland habitats and shoreline
alteration continues to occur as a result of development. Habitat
degradation has occurred primarily through sedimentation of
coastal wetlands and bays. Construction of dams has fragmented
tributary habitat as can be seen in the Ausable River basin,
Michigan. In the past (green line), more than 200 kilometres of
the river were available for fish habitat. Dams now limit fish
passage to only 20 kilometres of the river (orange line).
The largest human-induced stresses on
groundwater are pumping from wells for
water supply and various forms of drainage, such as tile drains,
which reduce recharge to the groundwater. Withdrawal of
groundwater in the Lake Michigan watershed totals about one-
third of surface water withdrawal.
Tributaries Available to Fish Along the
Ausable River, Ml
Groundwater Withdrawal in the
U.S. Great Lakes Basin
I I Great Lakes Drainage Basin
USA/Canada barter
. Cities/towns
^"A.,, >•--„
•,e Superio,
«"•!«? g>
" 'a
s
•im^i 13
Lake
Huron
¥
lon
, v*™^*^*™ l^
Photo Credit: U.S. Envir- imentalP . . Mi. Lakes National Program Office
-13-
-------
Highlights
Land use continues to be one of the key stressors in the St.
Clair River-Lake St. Clair-Detroit River ecosystem. As
a result of land use changes and population increases,
especially on the U.S. side, the loss of native habitats
continues. However, many stakeholders throughout this
ecosystem are actively pursuing actions to protect and restore
key habitat areas. Contaminant concentrations have been
generally decreasing over time. Contaminant inputs throughout
the system, however, are resulting in a net increase in
contaminant concentrations from the head of the St. Clair River
to the outlet of the Detroit River.
Nutrient and sediment inputs to Lake Erie tributaries have
been reduced by as much as 50 percent in some instances.
However, some tributaries are still overwhelmed with sediment
and nutrients by the time they reach the lake. This load of
sediments and nutrients has contributed to the low oxygen
condition in the central basin, making this area unsuitable for
many organisms. Nearshore, improved water transparency has
allowed for the resurgence of aquatic vegetation in coastal
habitats, providing benefits to many fish and wildlife species.
Transparency changes are also responsible for the resurgence
of Cladophora (a filamentous algal species) in the eastern and
central basins. Cladophora fouls spawning shoals and beaches
and is a poor food source for invertebrates and other organisms.
Decomposing Cladophora is also thought to be one of many
contributors to the environmental conditions that caused
outbreaks of avian botulism in the eastern basin from 1999-
2002.
Evidence suggests that the management of lake levels has
inadvertently reduced the area, quality and functioning of
Lake Ontario nearshore wetlands. Regulated water levels
have affected the natural range, frequency, timing and duration
of water level changes in coastal wetlands and, in turn, reduced
the extent and diversity of wetland communities and altered
habitat quality for wetland animals. The low levels of
variations in water levels are thought to have led to cattail
dominance and reduced species diversity.
In the St. Lawrence River, from Cornwall to the
downstream end of Montreal Island, approximately 80 percent
of the shores are hardened and 20 percent are natural, while the
reverse situation occurs from Montreal Island down to the
outlet of Lake St. Pierre, where 80 percent of the shores are
natural. Downstream to Quebec City, the ratio of hardened/
natural shores is 40:60. The most severe erosion is observed on
the islands between Montreal and Lake St. Pierre. This erosion
is due mostly to navigation. Despite the major structural
changes to its ecosystems, the St. Lawrence River has shown a
strong resilience and still shelters very productive habitats and
diversified plant and animal species.
Potential Conservation Areas within the
Lake St. Clair Basin
Bathymetry of Lake Erie and
Lake St. Clair
ww » xnt ti ww • m» m am » »v» n an
St. Lawrence River: Technoparc Area, Montreal
-14-
-------
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 on behalf of the two countries. These conferences are held every two years in response to a reporting
requirement of the binational Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). The purpose of the Agreement is "to
restore and maintain the physical, chemical and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin"
The conferences provide independent, science-based reporting on the state of the health of the Great Lakes basin
ecosystem every two years.
Four objectives were established for the State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conferences:
• 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; And,
• 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-informed decisions. Although SOLEC is primarily a reporting venue rather than a management
program, many SOLEC participants are involved in decision-making processes throughout the Great Lakes basin.
United States / Canada
For more information about Great Lakes indicators
and the State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference,
visit:
www.binational.net
or
www.epa.gov/glnpo/solec
State of the Great Lakes 2005
Highlights
by the Governments of
Canada
and
The United States of America
Prepared by
Environment Canada
and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
------- |