Lake Michigan LaMP Highlights 2002

Introduction

The purpose of this Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP) 2002 is to provide:

• An executive summary of the status of the Lake Michigan ecosystem;
• A report on the progress in achieving the Lake Michigan goals described in LaMP 2000 and examples of significant activities completed in the past two years;
• A summary of the current Lake Michigan mass balance data and findings;
• Links to more detailed information in LaMP 2000 or other sources;
• An opportunity to comment on targets and plans for pollution reduction and ecosystem restoration;
• A proposal to identify additional pollutants to be addressed by the LaMP in the future.

What is the Status of the Lake?

“Lake Michigan is an outstanding natural resource of global significance, under stress and in need of special attention.” LaMP 2000

Since the release of LaMP 2000, several key indicators point to the continuing concern for the health of the ecosystem.

• Last year’s beach season exhibited a growing number of beach closings.
• Studies revealed that a critical layer of the Lake Michigan aquatic food web appears to be disappearing, and with the discovery of two new aquatic nuisance species–there are now a total of 160 in the Great Lakes ecosystem–the integrity of the food web of Lake Michigan is in question.
• Mercury in fish is such a prevalent problem that 41 states now have mercury fish advisories, and a national advisory has been issued for certain ocean fish pointing to a problem of global proportions.
• Climatic pattern changes, whether temporary or permanent, are lowering lake levels as well as raising concerns about groundwater and lake interaction and diversion.
• Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the issue of protecting the lake’s vast supply of fresh drinking water has become a higher priority.

Despite these concerns, Lake Michigan supports many beneficial uses. For example, it provides drinking water for 10 million people; has internationally significant habitat and natural features; supports food production and processing; supplies fish for food, sport, and culture; has valuable commercial and recreational uses; and is the home of the nation’s third-largest population center. Furthermore, significant progress is being made to remediate the legacy of contamination in the basin. Specifically, ongoing actions to restore the Areas of Concern (AOC) have been successful and are outlined in Appendix B.

Background on the LaMP

Under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA), as amended in 1987, the United States and Canada agreed “ to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem.” To achieve this objective, the parties agreed to develop and implement, in consultation with state and provincial governments, LaMPs for open waters. In the case of Lake Michigan, the only one of the Great Lakes wholly within the borders of the United States, the Clean Water Act (Section 118c) holds the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accountable for the LaMP.

Work on the Lake Michigan LaMP began in the early 1990s with a focus on critical pollutants affecting the lake. At that time, monitoring data showed that point source regulatory controls established in the 1970s and 1980s were reducing the levels of persistent toxic substances such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), DDT, and other pesticides. Monitoring results also indicated that nonpoint sources of pollution such as runoff and air deposition, as well as aquatic nuisance species, were stressing the Lake Michigan ecosystem. The LaMP states that “pathogens, fragmentation and destruction of terrestrial and aquatic habitats, aquatic nuisance species, uncontrolled runoff and erosion are among the stressors contributing to ecosystem impairments.”

It has been documented that core regulatory programs at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels have effectively controlled many pollutants. Increased water quality protection is now being addressed with the adoption of higher water quality standards for the Great Lakes basin by each Great Lakes state, with the goal of having the new standards reflected in all permits by 2006. What remains is a set of difficult, persistent, and multifaceted problems. In response, agencies must develop new tools, refocus their strategies and methods, and continually obtain new data. As the 1994 State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference reported, “governments have traditionally addressed human activities on a piecemeal basis, separating decision making on environmental quality from decision making on natural resources management or on social or economic issues....” In addition, decisions at different levels of government or across political boundaries are being made unilaterally without regard to watershed or ecosystem alignment.

What is LaMP 2000?

The publication of LaMP 2000 was the beginning of a basinwide dialogue on which pollutants and stressors should be prioritized for control, what reduction targets should be applied to them, and which ecologically rich areas should be identified for restoration and protection. Some issues, such as aquatic nuisance species, legacy sites, and drinking water protection, require immediate attention. Others will continue to be the subject of public dialogue, while still other issues may arise that require additional research. In 2000, the Binational Executive Committee determined that an adaptive management approach would guide the LaMP process, making it an iterative approach. This status report provides new information, responds to input received, and sets targets and objectives for public comment.

What was Accomplished and What Challenges Remain?

Areas that were highlighted in LaMP 2000 and have been accomplished include the following:

• Setting targets for reduction of critical pollutants and stressors,
• Reviewing the LaMP list of contaminants and stressors,
• Filling data gaps, including the Lake Michigan Mass Balance Project,
• Identifying ecologically rich areas and habitats,
• Developing the concept of the area of stewardship, and
• Convening public conferences and workshops for development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) strategy, beach management, and monitoring issues.

Progress made on accomplishing these objectives is outlined in this status report. More detailed sections on TMDLs, mass balance, and adaptive management implementation will become supplements to LaMP 2000 by 2003.

Areas of LaMP Work that Remain a Challenge

Finalization of a monitoring plan and prioritization of indicators are still in progress. A draft monitoring plan was issued along with a set of recommendations in August 2000. To prioritize indicators and gather missing data, two major initiatives have begun that are focused on wetlands and the importance of the “coastal area.” The results of these efforts will provide not only new data but also refined indicators for wetlands by 2004, and the LaMP will utilize this work in finalizing a set of LaMP indicators.

What is the LaMP? How and by Whom is it Used?

The LaMP issued in April 2000 is both a large reference document and a set of iterative proposals or strategic agendas for remediating past errors and achieving sustainable integrity in the Lake Michigan basin ecosystem. It was prepared collaboratively and is designed to be used by any number of Lake Michigan entities or individuals. See the back cover of this document for a list of Lake Michigan partners who collaborated on the LaMP.

The LaMP document is being utilized as a guide for decision making on policy issues and to help guide funding like EPA’s Coastal Environmental Management Program and the Great Lakes National Program Office grant process. At the state level, for example, Michigan has utilized it for the Clean Michigan Initiative grant program. A number of universities are using it as a text book. Results from grants and research provide the information used in determining the lake status as reported in this 2002 status report.

How is the Process Utilized?

The list of goal, subgoals and activities have produced projects like the Cook County PCB/ Mercury Clean Sweep Project. Other issues have highlighted the need to convene and train managers from around the basin resulting in sessions on the Federal Beach Bill and a number of monitoring conferences. LaMP partners have also participated in the TMDL strategy discussion. For education and outreach, materials have not only been produced, but distribution opportunities have been supported like the State of Lake Michigan 2001 Conference and the Making Lake Michigan Great Boat Tour.

The goal of going beyond regulation requires a focus on ecosystems, partnerships and innovation, shared information, and the future.

A Focus on Ecosystems

In 1995, the Federal Interagency Ecosystem Management Task Force defined an ecosystem as “an interconnected community of living things, including humans, and the physical environment with which they interact. As such, ecosystems form the cornerstone of sustainable economies.” With regard to ecosystem management, the Task Force explained that “the goal of the ecosystem approach is to restore and maintain the health, sustainability, and biological diversity of ecosystems while supporting sustainable economies and communities. Based on a collaboratively developed vision of desired future conditions, the ecosystem approach integrates ecological, economic, and social factors that affect a management unit defined by ecological–not political–boundaries.”

In 1998, the Lake Michigan Management Committee adopted the ecosystem approach. The significance for the Lake Michigan LaMP was the intent to address not only the 10 areas that had been formally designated AOCs by the 1987 GLWQA amendments, but also other areas that were responsible for impairing the lake’s ecosystem. The prime example was the Chicago area. Because of the rerouting of the Chicago River into the Mississippi River system, Chicago’s surface water has been diverted out of the basin; however, groundwater from the Chicago area has not been diverted, and the city’s large airshed has been shown to be a source of pollutants that are deposited in and affect the lake.

A Focus on Partnerships and Innovation

As the LaMP 2000 points out, this framework “also develops partnerships of organizations brought together to solve problems too large or complex to be dealt with by one agency with a limited mission. This approach also has the potential to leverage and direct local, state and federal, and private resources into a coordinated effort. The challenge is to create the framework for participating organizations to contribute their expertise and resources, often on an uneven basis, but in a manner that allows all partners to participate in the decision making on an even basis.”

A Focus on Shared Information

A key to engaging the necessary partners is a common, accessible, and scientifically sound body of knowledge. Lake Michigan protection and restoration requires open dialogue between academia and government agencies, as well as a collaborative monitoring plan to provide a current database. Reporting of current data and conclusions to the public is an important component of this system. This component presents many challenges, as data quality plans improve data accuracy but hinder the speed of reporting. Current management decisions are often made with gaps in both data and interpretation. These gaps may lead to incorrect problem assessments or incorrect response actions. The Lake Michigan LaMP has formed a basinwide coordinating and monitoring council to coordinate and promote common protocols and comparability in monitoring. The goal is to facilitate data sharing across agencies as well as among academic and research disciplines. Lake Michigan as a studied object is a moving target, and to provide adaptive management, there is a continuing need for monitoring and reporting of the lakes’s current status.

A Focus on the Future: Sustainability and Stewardship

While partnerships can leverage resources, they also must be led and supported. Setting shared goals, objectives, and indicators in alignment helps to conserve resources but does not do away with resource needs. The interdependencies inherent in the ecosystem approach require a balance among three fundamental elements: environmental integrity, economic vitality, and sociocultural well-being. The ability of these elements to function in balance over time is one measure of sustainability. Complex ecological processes link organisms and their environment. These processes are often referred to as “ecological services” because they perform functions that combine to sustain life in the ecosystem. The significant natural features of Lake Michigan, such as its encompassing the world’s largest collection of freshwater sand dunes, supporting 43 percent of the Great Lakes’ large sport fishing industry, and providing drinking water for over 10 million residents, means billions of dollars not only to the economies of the four states that share the lake but also to the nation as a whole.