DOCSLIB.ORG

Ruffe - a Problem Or Just a Pest? by Raymond M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ruffe - a Problem Or Just a Pest? by Raymond M ANS Aquatic Nuisance Species Volume 3 No. 4 November 1999 FRESHWATER DIGEST FOUNDATION Providing current information on monitoring and controlling the spread of harmful nonindigenous species. Egeria Invades the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta By Lars W.J. Anderson ust when state and federal water resource managers in water hyacinths eventually led to a state-funded control program California felt they had the “bad” actor - Hydrilla verticillata- that has effectively kept it at low levels. Although it’s not certain J(family Hydrocharitaceae) eradicated, another invasive rela- when egeria got its start, populations really began to expand in the tive, egeria (Egeria densa) has recently spread to one of the state’s mid-1990s, shortly after the end of a six year drought period. It most vital and sensitive ecosystems. For almost 25 years since may be that a combination of the low runoff from the Sierra hydrilla was discovered in the Golden State, an effective eradica- Nevada Mountains and clearer, warmer water conditions facilitat- tion program has kept it in check, and importantly, out of the mas- ed the expansion. It is also likely that the removal of water sive delta created by the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers, just hyacinth “cover” provided more suitable habitat (particularly “upstream” from San Francisco Bay. This massive waterway is available light) for egeria. Whatever the reasons, current surveys not only a critical habitat for fish and wildlife, including the by the California Department of Boating and Waterways (CBWW) endangered Delta Smelt; it is also the water life-line for some 23 indicate that egeria occupies more than 3,000 acres at varying den- million thirsty southern Californians, and much of the state’s sities (see Figure 1). The biomass (standing crop) in some of the multibillion-dollar agricultural economy. It’s easy to see the most heavily populated sites ranges from 1 to 2 kg/ sq. meter, or importance of keeping this system healthy and free of intruding nearly 9 tons per acre. pests that can interfere with critical habitats, food webs, and water California is not alone in trying to cope with egeria. Several delivery. Unfortunately, there is no eradication tool or program other western states including Oregon and Washington, as well as for egeria. southeastern areas of the U.S., have varying levels of infestations. The saga of noxious aquatic weeds in the Delta actually Since this plant is freely available in aquarium shops and specialty began when water hyacinth was introduced in the early 1900s and nurseries in most states, including California, it’s not surprising subsequently created huge problems in 1983. The explosion of that egeria has been introduced and become widespread. Egeria continued on next page Ruffe - a Problem or Just a Pest? By Raymond M. Newman he ruffe (Gymnocephalus cernuus L., to over 150,000 eggs during spawning. Tformerly Acerina cernuua), a small This high reproductive potential often In This Issue: perch-like fish native to Europe and Asia, results in abundant but “stunted” popula- was first found in North America in the St. tions with smaller maximum sizes (Popova Louis River Harbor, at the western end of et al. 1998). Nuisance Notes from Western Lake Superior, in 1986 (Pratt et al. 1992). Ruffe are benthic feeders (Ogle 1998), Regional Panel on ANS . 41 They most likely arrived in ballast water relying on small benthic invertebrates that from Europe, probably from somewhere in live in lake and river bottoms. Minnesota DNR Tests the Use of the Danube basin (Stepien et al. 1998). In Chironomids are often a dominant compo- 2,4-D in Managing Milfoil . 42 Europe, ruffe, though often abundant, are nent of the ruffe diet. Like perch and wall- of little sport and commercial value due to eye, ruffe are well adapted to dark and tur- Upcoming Meetings . 46 their small size (rarely larger than 25 cm or bid conditions such as those found in more 10” and more commonly less than 15 cm) eutrophic waters. Ruffe possess a well- Great Lakes Update . 47 and spiny body. Ruffe are prolific and developed tapetum lucidum, a layer of have a high reproductive potential; they reflecting plates behind the retina, that may spawn two to six times during the enables them to feed in low light to dark year and females can produce from 10,000 conditions. In addition, ruffe have a highly Ruffe continued on page 44 Aquatic Nuisance Species Digest Egeria continued from previous page Percent of Egeria Area Coverage 0.10 - 10.0 Freshwater Foundation Staff 10.0 - 20.0 Jeanne C. Prok, Editor 20.0 - 30.0 Gene B. Hansley, Managing Editor 30.0 - < Ann Conrad, Program Director Editorial Board Lars W. J. Anderson, Ph.D. University of California–Davis John W. Blake, Ph.D. New York Power Authority (retired) Allegra Cangelosi Northeast-Midwest Institute James T. Carlton, Ph.D. Williams College–Mystic Seaport William Culpepper SePRO Corporation Thomas Fritts, Ph.D. USGS–Biological Resources Division Katherine Glassner-Shwayder Great Lakes Commission Douglas A. Jensen University of Minnesota Sea Grant John Kahabka New York Power Authority Stuart C. Leon, Ph.D. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Leo G. Nico, Ph.D. USGS–Biological Resources Division Jay Rendall Minnesota Department of Natural Resources William E. Roper, Ph.D. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Edwin Theriot, Ph.D. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Janet Thompson 1 2 3 4 USGS–Water Resources Division Randy Westbrooks, Ph.D. MILES U.S. Department of Agriculture Figure 1. Enlarged view showing the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California. The Direct questions and comments about ANS shaded areas show the locations of Egeria densa infestations: darkest shading indicates the Digest to: Jeanne Prok, Freshwater Foundation, most abundant populations. (Courtesy of Califorina Department of Boating and Gray Freshwater Center, 2500 Shadywood Road, Waterways) Navarre, MN 55331; (888) 471-9773; e-mail: [email protected]. Aquatic Nuisance Species Digest (ISSN 1083- Impacts Caused by Egeria 8864) is produced by the Freshwater Foundation, a public nonprofit foundation whose mission is to The first public alarm was sounded in 1994 by marina operators and by some of the com- pursue the sustainable use of freshwater resources mercial vessel operators in the Delta. Large stands of egeria were beginning to block access to through education, conferences, publications and boat slips, fishing and swimming areas, and even some boats had begun to experience mechani- research. Funding for this issue of ANS Digest cal problems. Egeria wraps up on propellers, rudders, keels, and the smaller fragments clog came from the National Sea Grant Program through the Minnesota Sea Grant Program. cooling systems, which results in burned-out engines. Some interference with irrigation pumps Minnesota Sea Grant is a statewide program that was noted as well. In some areas, property values became affected by the persistent masses of supports research and public education related to egeria in what were formerly open and aesthetically pleasing delta waterways. Finally, enough Lake Superior and Minnesota’s inland lakes. It is waterfront property owners and marina owners reacted. The state legislature was compelled to part of the National Sea Grant Program, which enact State Assembly Bill 2193 in 1997, which added egeria control to the water hyacinth con- supports research and outreach in 31 coastal and Great Lakes states and territories. trol program responsibilities of the Department of Boating and Waterways. © 1999, Freshwater Foundation. Other impacts of egeria are less obvious. These include the displacement of native ATMOSPH ND ER A IC IC pondweed species (Potamogeton spp.), impairment of access for waterfowl, and severe shading N A A D E M I C N O I S L T of the upper water column. The dense upper “canopy” formed by egeria blocks light that A R N A O T I I O T A N N would normally be available to the microscopic algae (phytoplankton). The lack of primary U E S C D R E E P M production by the phytoplankton inhibits fisheries production since these organisms form the AR M TME F CO NT O base of the food chain. Some effects remain unclear. For example, how does egeria alter nor- Egeria continued on next page 38 Aquatic Nuisance Species Digest Nomember 1999 Volume 3, No. 4 Egeria continued from previous page mal spawning habitat for salmon, bass and, importantly, the endan- Bay/Delta. This of course has not prevented the invasion and establish- gered native, Delta Smelt? Presumably, prior to the intrusion by ege- ment of many other exotic plants and animals that thrive in saline con- ria, native fish had adequate habitat provided by native aquatic plant ditions! The Bay/Delta area is now home to over 200 invasive plant species. and animal species. In addition to negative impacts on wildlife, egeria acts like a filter and accelerates deposition of suspended materials. Each year, hun- dreds of tons of organic and inorganic materials are carried down- stream with the seasonal snowmelt. In areas where egeria has formed dense stands, the water is slowed and materials that are normally trans- ported and spread throughout the Delta and upper Bay become entrapped and settle. The net result is localized heavy organic loading of the sloughs; these shallow areas will have to be dredged eventually. Taking a broader perspective, the persistence and continued spread of egeria in the Delta will also greatly increase the opportunity for the exotic plant to invade lakes, ponds, and streams because thou- sands of boaters can inadvertently carry hitch-hiking fragments on their trailers, boats, and motors. Since the plant can survive for sever- al days, each boat and trailer becomes a dispersal agent.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary
    www.thunderbay.noaa.gov (989) 356-8805 Alpena, MI49707 500 WestFletcherStreet Heritage Center Great LakesMaritime Contact Information N T ATIONAL ATIONAL HUNDER 83°30'W 83°15'W 83°00'W New Presque Isle Lighthouse Park M North Bay ARINE Wreck 82°45'W Old Presque Isle Lighthouse Park B S ANCTUARY North Albany Point Cornelia B. AY Windiate Albany • Types ofVesselsLostatThunderBay South Albany Point Sail Powered • • • Scows Ships, Brigs, Schooners Barks Lake Esau Grand Norman Island Wreck Point Presque Isle Lotus Lake Typo Lake of the Florida • Woods Steam Powered Brown • • Island Sidewheelers Propellers John J. Grand Audubon LAKE Lake iver R ll e B HURON Whiskey False Presque Isle Point • Other • • Unpowered Combustion Motor Powered 45°15'N 45°15'N Bell Czar Bolton Point Besser State Besser Bell Natural Area Wreck Defiance (by quantityoflossforallwrecks) Cargoes LostatThunderBay • • • • Iron ore Grain Coal Lumber products Ferron Point Mackinaw State Forest Dump Scow Rockport • • • • 23 Middle Island Sinkhole Fish Salt Package freight Stone Long Portsmouth Lake Middle Island Middle Island Lighthouse Middle Lake • • • Copper ore Passengers Steel Monaghan Point New Orleans 220 Long Lake Creek Morris D.M. Wilson Bay William A. Young South Ninemile Point Explore theThunderBayNationalMarineSanctuary Fall Creek Salvage Barge &Bathymetry Topography Lincoln Bay Nordmeer Contours inmeters Grass Lake Mackinaw State Forest Huron Bay 0 Maid of the Mist Roberts Cove N Stoneycroft Point or we gi an El Cajon Bay Ogarita t 23 Cre Fourmile Mackinaw State
    [Show full text]
  • Wisconsin Wisconsin
    LAKE WINNEBAGO WATERSHED (WI) HUC:04030103 Wisconsin Wisconsin Rapid Watershed Assessment Lake Winnebago Watershed Rapid watershed assessments provide initial estimates of where conservation investments would best address the concerns of landowners, conservation districts, and other community organizations and stakeholders. These assessments help landowners and local leaders set priorities and determine the best actions to achieve their goals. Wisconsin October 2007 The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To fi le a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Offi ce of Civil Rights, Room 326W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington DC 20250-9410, or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 1 LAKE WINNEBAGO WATERSHED (WI) HUC:04030103 CONTENTS o g a b e n n i W e k a L INTRODUCTION 3 COMMON RESOURCE AREA DESCRIPTION 4 ELEVATION MAP 5 LAND USE AND ANNUAL PRECIPITATION MAPS 6 ASSESSMENT OF WATERS 7 SOILS 9 DRAINAGE CLASSIFICATION 10 FARMLAND CLASSIFICATION 11 HYDRIC SOILS 12 LAND CAPABILITY CLASSIFICATION 13 PRS AND OTHER DATA 14 CENSUS AND SOCIAL DATA (RELEVANT) 15 ECOLOGICAL LANDSCAPE 16 RESOURCE CONCERNS 17 WATERSHED PROJECTS, 17 STUDIES, MONITORING, ETC WATERSHED ASSESSMENT 17 PARTNER GROUPS 18 FOOTNOTES/BIBLIOGRAPHY 19 2 LAKE WINNEBAGO WATERSHED (WI) HUC:04030103 1 INTRODUCTION The Lake Winnebago watershed is located in east central Wisconsin and surrounds the largest lake in the state, Lake Winnebago, which covers 137,708 acres.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Extent of Aquatic Protected Areas in the Great Lakes
    Status and Extent of Aquatic Protected Areas in the Great Lakes Scott R. Parker, Nicholas E. Mandrak, Jeff D. Truscott, Patrick L. Lawrence, Dan Kraus, Graham Bryan, and Mike Molnar Introduction The Laurentian Great Lakes are immensely important to the environmental, economic, and social well-being of both Canada and the United States (US). They form the largest surface freshwater system in the world. At over 30,000 km long, their mainland and island coastline is comparable in length to that of the contiguous US marine coastline (Government of Canada and USEPA 1995; Gronewold et al. 2013). With thousands of native species, including many endemics, the lakes are rich in biodiversity (Pearsall 2013). However, over the last century the Great Lakes have experienced profound human-caused changes, includ- ing those associated with land use changes, contaminants, invasive species, climate change, over-fishing, and habitat loss (e.g., Bunnell et al. 2014; Smith et al. 2015). It is a challenging context in terms of conservation, especially within protected areas established to safeguard species and their habitat. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), a protected area is “a clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associat- ed ecosystem services and cultural values” (Dudley 2008). Depending on the management goals, protected areas can span the spectrum of IUCN categories from highly protected no- take reserves to multiple-use areas (Table 1). The potential values and benefits of protected areas are well established, including conserving biodiversity; protecting ecosystem structures and functions; being a focal point and context for public engagement, education, and good governance; supporting nature-based recreation and tourism; acting as a control or reference site for scientific research; providing a positive spill-over effect for fisheries; and helping to mitigate and adapt to climate change (e.g., Lemieux et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Map of the Lake Winnebago System [PDF]
    Lake Winnebago System (includes tributaries up to the first dam or barrier impassable to fish) SHAWANO Spencer Creek Shawano Willow Dam Creek School W Branch Shioc River Mill Rose Section Creek Pella Dam Brook Creek Schoenick Slab City Lake Creek Green East Branch Bay Clintonville Shioc River Dam Wolf River Mink Pigeon Creek River Herman WAUPACA Shioc Creek River Embarrass Black River Toad Creek Creek Scandinavia Millpond Dam Ogdensburg Millpond Dam Manawa Peterson S Branch Millpond Dam OUTAGAMIE Creek Little Wolf River N Fork S Branch Little Wolf Little Wolf River Sannes River BROWN Skunk Bear Creek Lake Lake Bear Creek Weyauwega Fox River Millpond Dam Black Otter Lake Waupaca Dam River Spencer Walla Walla Lake Creek Rat Little Lake Austin Hatton River Creek Creek Alder Butte des Morts LakeCreek Magdanz Poygan Creek Lake Arrowhead WAUSHARA Poy Sippi Winneconne Creek Millpond Dam Pine River Lake Daggets Butte Creekdes Morts Neshkoro Willow Millpond Dam Creek Pumpkinseed Spring Creek Creek Lake Sawyer Auroraville Waukau Winnebago Creek Millpond Dam Fox River Creek WINNEBAGO White River Barnes Creek Germania Rush Lake Puchyan Marsh Dam River Black Snake Creek MARQUETTE Creek W Branch Green Lake Fond du Lac Outlet Dam Mecan River River Oxford Montello Millpond River Dam GREEN Dam Lake Puckaway LAKE E Branch Buffalo Fond du Lac River Lake Parsons Creek Neenah Grand Campground Creek River Kingston Creek Fox River Dam COLUMBIA Dam or impassable barrier 6/07 Park Swan Lake Dam Lake.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lake Superior Aquatic Invasive Species Guide Prepared By: Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters March 2014
    The Lake Superior Aquatic Invasive Species Guide Prepared by: Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters March 2014 Acknowledgements: This guide was made possible and is relevant in Canada and the United States thanks to the Lake Superior Binational Program, and the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species. Funding and initial technical review for this guide was provided by the Government of Canada, through Environment Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada, respectively. Oversight and technical reviews were provided by the Province of Ontario, through the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species. The University of Minnesota Sea Grant Program provided oversight, review, and through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative helped provide funding for the first print run. This guide was patterned after The Lake Champlain Basin Aquatic Invasive Species Guide, developed by the Lake Champlain Basin Program Aquatic Nuisance Species Subcommittee - Spread Prevention Workgroup. We sincerely thank them for allowing us to use their guide. Suggested Citation: Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters. 2014. The Lake Superior Aquatic Invasive Species Guide. Prepared in collaboration with the Lake Superior Binational Program and the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species. Available at www.Invadingspecies.com. Cover photo of Round Goby by David Copplestone-OFAH Lake Superior Watershed Table of Contents Introduction ...........................................page 2 Guide to Aquatic Invasive Fishes
    [Show full text]
  • Starting a Business Guide
    Starting a Business Guide 2 Starting a Business Guide Prepared by: Tourism & Economic Development’s Thunder Bay & District Entrepreneur Centre P.O. Box 800, 111 Syndicate Avenue South Victoriaville Civic Centre, 2nd Floor Thunder Bay, Ontario P7C 5K4 Contact: Lucas Jewitt Development Officer Entrepreneur Centre Telephone: (807) 625-3972 Toll Free: 1-800-668-9360 Fax: (807) 623-3962 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ThunderBay.ca 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Are you an Entrepreneur? Introduction 4 Finding a Business Idea Chapter One 5 The Feasibility Analysis Chapter Two 7 The Business Plan Chapter Three 11 Financing Chapter Four 15 Legal/Regulatory Information Chapter Five 28 City/Municipal Policies and Regulations 28 Provincial Policies and Regulations 34 Federal Policies and Regulations 45 Other Administrative Questions 46 Agency and Organizational Contacts to Assist with Your Start-up Chapter Six 50 Local Agencies and Organizations (Thunder Bay) 50 Provincial Agencies and Organizations 57 Federal/National Agencies and Organizations 57 Quick Reference Telephone List for Thunder Bay 61 Quick Reference Telephone List for Unorganized Townships 62 Organizational and Informational Websites 63 4 INTRODUCTION: ARE YOU AN ENTREPRENEUR? Starting a business can be very rewarding, but also time- consuming and labour-intensive. Before you start researching, obtaining sources of funding, finding a location and completing all of the other tasks necessary to open a business, you’ll probably want to know if you possess the typical characteristics of successful entrepreneurs. Of course, there are many variables in determining entrepreneurial success, but knowing that you fit the profile is an important first step (as well as a confidence booster!) in getting your business off the ground.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Lakes Commission Info Sheet
    lllinois Indiana Michigan Minnesota New York Ohio Pennsylvania Wisconsin Ontario Québec www.glc.org The Great Lakes The Great Lakes are an environmental and economic asset for the United States and Canada. The lakes fuel a $6 trillion regional economy and hold 90% of the U.S. supply of fresh surface water, providing drinking water for more than 40 million people. More than 1.5 million U.S. jobs are directly connected to the Great Lakes and those jobs generate $62 billion in wages annually. The Great Lakes Commission To ensure that this vital resource is protected, the The GLC provides the following core services to our member eight Great Lakes states created the Great Lakes states and provinces: 1) communications and outreach; Commission (GLC) in 1955 via the Great Lakes Basin 2) information management and delivery; 3) facilitation and Compact. In 1968, Congress provided its consent to the consensus building; 4) policy coordination and advocacy; and Compact and the interstate compact agency it created. 5) regional project management. We employ these services to carry out a variety of projects and activities in the areas of: The eight U.S. states and two Canadian provinces are represented on the GLC by a delegation of government- Water Quality appointed commissioners. The GLC recommends policies Water Use, Management and Infrastructure and practices to balance the use, development, and Commercial Navigation conservation of the water resources of the Great Lakes and Great Lakes Waterfront Community Revitalization and Economic Development brings the region together to work on issues that no single Coastal Conservation and Habitat Restoration community, state, province, or nation can tackle alone.
    [Show full text]
  • The Geography Fox-Winnebago Valley
    WISCONSIN GEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY E. A. BIRGE, Director W. O. HOTCHKISS, State Geologist Bulletin XU! Educational Series No. 5 THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE FOX-WINNEBAGO VALLEY BY RAY HUGHES WHITBECK Pro/ellor 0/ PhYliography and Geographu Uniuuluu 0/ Wilconsin ivm MADISON, WIS. PuBLISHED BY THE STATE 1915 "scolaln 68010glcal and Natural History Surve, BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS EMANUEL L. PHILIPP Governor of the State. CHARLES R. VAN HISE, Pusident. President of the University of Wisconsin. CHARLES P. CARY, Vice-President State Superintendent of Public Instruction. JABE ALFORD President of the Commis&ioners of Fisheries HENRY L. WARD, Secretary President of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters. STAFF OF THE SURVEY ADMINISTRATION: EDWARD A. BIRGE, Director and Superintendent In immediate charge of Natural History Division. WILLIAM O. HOTCHKISS, State Geologist. In immediate charge of Geology Division. LILLIAN M. VEERHUSEN, Clerk. GEOLOGY DIVISION: WILLIAM O. HOTCHKISS, In charge. T. C. CHAMBERLIN, Consulting Geologist, Pleistocene Geology. SAMUEL WEIDMAN, Geologist, Areal Geology. E. F. BEAN, Geologist, Chief of Field Parties. O. W. WHEELWRIGHT, Geologist, Chief of Field Parties. R. H. WHITBECK, Geologist, Geography of Lower Fox Valley. LAWRENCE MARTIN, Geologist, Physical Geography. E. STEIDTMANN, Geologist, Limestones. F. E. WILLIAMS, Geologist, Geography and History. NATURAL HISTORY DIVISION: EDWARD A. BIRGE, In charge. CHANCEY JUDAY, Lake Survey. H. A. SCHUETTE, Chemist. DIVISION OF SOILS: A. R. WHITSON, In charge. W. J. GEIB,* Inspector and Editor. GUY CONREY, Analyst. T. J. DUNNEWALD, Field Assistant and Analyst. CARL THOMPSON, Field Assistant and Analyst. C. B. POST, Field Assistant and Analyst. W. C. BOARDMAN, Field Assistant and Analyst.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Lakes Compact Commission
    2018 Annual Report 1 Board of Directors John Linc Stine, Chair Commissioner, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sharon Jackson, Vice Chair Deputy General Counsel, Office of the Governor of Indiana Jon W. Allan, Immediate Past Chair Director, Office of the Great Lakes, Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wayne A. Rosenthal Director, Illinois Department of Natural Resources Basil Seggos Commissioner, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation James Zehringer Director, Ohio Department of Natural Resources William Carr Senior Manager, Government of Ontario Office of International Relations and Policy Timothy J. Bruno Chief, Office of the Great Lakes, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Jean-François Hould Québec Government Representative in Chicago, Government of Québec Stephen G. Galarneau Director, Office of Great Waters, Great Lakes and Mississippi River Environmental Management Divison, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Board of Directors list is as of December 2018. Cover photo: Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore in Munising, Michigan, on Lake Superior ©flickr/74418101@N02/David Marvin. This page: Oak Street Beach in Chicago, Illinois, on Lake Michigan ©flickr/romanboed/Roman Boed. 2 John Linc Stine Darren J. Nichols Investing in a National Asset: Restoring the Great Lakes Basin Ecology and Economy ... Together MAY 2019 s the Great Lakes community of Partnership formally welcoming Ontario today, tomorrow and going forward to ensure heads into 2020 together, thank and Québec as members of the Great Lakes that we leave the Great Lakes Basin in better A you for joining us as we take Commission and as supporting partners condition and with even more opportunities a moment to reflect on the history and of the Great Lakes Basin Compact.
    [Show full text]
  • Misery Bay Chapter 2
    Existing Conditions The first step in developing a plan to protect the coastal resources of Misery Bay is to establish an accurate representation of existing cultural and environmental features within the study area. This chapter will present a series of maps and associated text to describe key features such as owner type, land uses, vegetation cover types, soils and geology. NEMCOG used information and digital data sets from the Center for Geographic Information, State of Michigan, Michigan Resource Information System, Alpena Township, Alpena County, Natural Resource Conservation Service, and U.S. Geological Survey. Information from the Alpena County Master Plan and Alpena Township Master Plan was used to develop a profile of existing conditions. Field surveys were conducted during 2003. Community Demographics Trends in population and housing characteristics can provide an understanding of growth pressures in a community. Population trends from 1900 and 2000 are summarized in Table 2.1. Population levels have risen and fallen twice in the last 100 years, first in the early part of the century and again in the 1980’s. The 1980 US Census recorded the largest population for Alpena Township and Alpena County at 10,152 and 32,315 respectively. During the 80’s decade, population fell by over five percent and has not climbed back to the 1980 US Census level. Table 2.1 Population Trends Alpena Township and Alpena County, 1900-2000 Alpena Township Alpena County Year Population % Change Population % Change 1900 1,173 --- 18,254 --- 1910 928 -20.9% 19,965 +9.4% 1920 701 -24.5% 17,869 -10.5% 1930 813 +16.0% 18,574 +3.9% 1940 1,675 +106.0% 20,766 +11.8% 1950 2,932 +75.0% 22,189 +6.9% 1960 6,616 +125.6% 28,556 +28.7% 1970 9,001 +36.0% 30,708 +7.5% 1980 10,152 +12.8% 32,315 +5.2% 1990 9,602 -5.4% 30,605 -5.3% 2000 9,788 +1.9% 31,314 +2.3% Source: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • A D V I S O R
    A D V I S O R Vol. 11 No. 3 Guest editorial May/June 1998 One lakes problems mirror larger pollution Inside issues facing Great Lakes region Lake St. Clair By Rep. William Callahan, Member, Michigan Delegation to the Cleanup Great Lakes Commission ake St. Clair, as many of you know, has numerous problems. Local Even though this is just one lake—and not even one of the environmental L Great Lakes—its problems are symptomatic of the larger pol- action gets lution issues facing the Great Lakes region. One of the biggest prob- results lems facing Lake St. Clair is combined sewer overflow and high bacte- ria counts, which have resulted in closed beaches during the summer season. Lake St. Clair is of particular importance to the state of Michigan, In this issue with 60 percent of southeast Michigan’s drinking water derived from it. Also found in the Lake St. Clair system are numerous beaches, fishing, boating and other recre- Commission Briefs........2 ational and wildlife opportunities. It is easy to identify that there is pollution in a body of water, especially when there are as Another surprise for Great Lakes many problems as we’ve had with Lake St. Clair. The “closed beach” signs along our shore- community * Legislative and line in Macomb County bluntly show the public the severity of the problems. But identify- appropriations priorities * River ing pollution sources and developing solutions to the problems are much more difficult and basin organizations * Beneficial use involved processes. workshop * RAP Summit * Great I worked closely with 30 other members of Lakes Spill Protection Initiative * We have long pointed to Sediment transport modeling * the Blue Ribbon Commission on Lake St.
    [Show full text]
  • Line 5 Straits of Mackinac Summary When Michigan Was Granted
    Line 5 Straits of Mackinac Summary When Michigan was granted statehood on January 26, 1837, Michigan also acquired ownership of the Great Lakes' bottomlands under the equal footing doctrine.1 However before Michigan could become a state, the United States first had to acquire title from us (Ottawa and Chippewa bands) because Anglo-American law acknowledged that we owned legal title as the aboriginal occupants of the territory we occupied. But when we agreed to cede legal title to the United States in the March 28, 1836 Treaty of Washington ("1836 Treaty", 7 Stat. 491), we reserved fishing, hunting and gathering rights. Therefore, Michigan's ownership of both the lands and Great Lakes waters within the cession area of the 1836 Treaty was burdened with preexisting trust obligations with respect to our treaty-reserved resources. First, the public trust doctrine imposes a duty (trust responsibility) upon Michigan to protect the public trust in the resources dependent upon the quality of the Great Lakes water.2 In addition, Art. IV, § 52 of Michigan's Constitution says "conservation…of the natural resources of the state are hereby declared to be of paramount public concern…" and then mandates the legislature to "provide for the protection of the air, water and other natural resources from 3 pollution, impairment and destruction." 1 The State of Michigan acquired title to these bottomlands in its sovereign capacity upon admission to the Union and holds them in trust for the benefit of the people of Michigan. Illinois Central Railroad Co. v. Illinois, 146 U.S. 387, 434-35 (1892); Nedtweg v.
    [Show full text]