DOCSLIB.ORG

Freshwater Future Grant Recipients

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Appendix D. Great Lakes Aquatic Habitat Network and Fund Grant Recipients Comprehensive Running List Updated as of December 22, 2003 Fall 1996 Grants Program Recipients Valerie Spale Wendy Johnson Save the Prairie Society Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve Inc. 10327 Elizabeth St PO Box 5 Westchester, IL 60154 Big Bay, MI 49808-0005 Title: Stream Corridor Recovery Project - Wolf Title: Yellow Dog Community Outreach Road Prairie Nature Preserve and Eco-Region Program Grant Award: 1000 Grant Award: 2250 Grant Cycle: F1996 Grant Cycle: F1996 Jennifer Cannon Nicole Hill Sierra Club-Hoosier Wetlands Project Southwest Michigan Land Conservancy 6224 N College Ave 6851 South Sprinkle Rd Indianapolis, IN 46220-1927 Portage, MI 49002-9708 Title: The Wetlands Project Media Network Title: SWMLC Volunteer Training Number Grant Award: 3250 Grant Award: 2250 Grant Cycle: F1996 Grant Cycle: F1996 O'Brien Kerrrin Jo Anne Beemon Mid-Michigan Environmental Action Council St Clair/Six Mile Lk Ntrl Area P.O. Box 17164 204 Clinton St Lansing, MI 48901 Charlevoix, MI 49720 Title: Homeowner Association River Title: St. Clair Lk/Six Mile Lk. Natural Area Stewardship Project Promotion and Public Education Project Grant Award: 2650 Grant Award: 1000 Grant Cycle: F1996 Grant Cycle: F1996 Ken Smith Elizabeth Riggs Northern Michigan Environmental Action Huron River Watershed Council Council 1100 N Main St Ste 210 539 E. Eighth Street Ann Arbor, MI 48104-1059 Traverse City, MI 59686 Title: Fleming Creek Watershed Education Title: Environmental Summit 1997. Judical Project Threats to the Protection of Michigan's Grant Award: 945 Wetlands Grant Cycle: F1996 Grant Award: 2500 Grant Cycle: F1996 John Jablonski, III Tom Bernthal Chautauqua Watershed Conservancy Friends of Pheasant Branch 413 N Main St P.O. Box 628242 Jamestown, NY 14701-5007 Middleton, WI 53562 Title: Chautauqua Creek and Watershed Title: Restoration and Water Resource Habitat Stewardship Project Preservation in the Pheasant Branch Marsh Grant Award: 2600 Grant Award: 2000 Grant Cycle: F1996 Grant Cycle: F1996 Affinity Newspaper Diana Toledo 5 Skyline Dr. River Alliance of Wisconsin Moreland Hills, OH 44022-2429 306 E Wilson St--#2W Title: Special Center Spread in Affinity: A Madison, WI 53703-3427 Focus on the Great Lakes Basin Title: Research and Strategy Development to Grant Award: 1600 Address Small Dam Removal Grant Cycle: F1996 Grant Award: 1500 Grant Cycle: F1996 John Katko Friends of Wetlands Mike Gardner 41953 Adelbert St Inland Sea Society Elyria, OH 44035-2509 P.O. Box 145 Title: Multi-media Membership/Fundraising Washburn, WI 54891 Campaign Blitz Title: Inland Sea Society Renewal Project Grant Award: 2080 Grant Award: 2250 Grant Cycle: F1996 Grant Cycle: F1996 Ryan Plummer Ontario Streams 201 Waterloo Street Kitchener, ONT N1G 2W1 Title: River Rendezvous '97 Grant Award: 2300 Grant Cycle: F1996 Friends of the Menomonee River 1907 Ludington Ave Wauwatosa, WI 53226-2806 Title: Capacity Building, Computer Grant Award: 2000 Grant Cycle: F1996 1996 Special Opportunity Grants Rick Van Landingham Citizens for Buckeye Basin Parks, Inc. 1312 Paxton St Toledo, OH 43608 Title: Manhattan Marsh Nature Preserve- protecting of wetlands Grant Award: 500 Grant Cycle: SOG96 Marion Olson Tinkers Creek Land Conservancy, Inc PO Box 805 Twinsburg, OH 44087-0805 Title: Attendance to 1996 National Land Trust Alliance Rally Grant Award: 500 Grant Cycle: SOG96 Mike Lovejoy Lower Trent Region Cnsrvtn Athrty 441 Front St Trenton, ONT K8V 6C1 Title: Hire technicians to assess stream habitat Grant Award: 500 Grant Cycle: SOG96 Diana Toledo River Alliance of Wisconsin 306 E Wilson St--#2W Madison, WI 53703-3427 Title: How to Build a Sustainable Organization for River or Watershed Protection Grant Award: 500 Grant Cycle: SOG96 Charlie Luthin Wisconsin Wetlands Association 222 S Hamilton St Ste 1 Madison, WI 53703-3201 Title: Volunteer equipment for Lake Farm Park wetlands restoration efforts Grant Award: 250 Grant Cycle: SOG96 Spring 1997 Grants Program Recipients Cheryl Larson Schultz Lake Property Owners' Association Jane Dustin 4206 Turner Rd Cedar Creek Wildlife Project Duluth, MN 55803-9258 P.O. Box 140 Title: Inform and Advise Schultz Lake Property Huntertown, IN 46748 Owners Title: Protecting Neotropical Migrant Birds by Grant Award: 825 Savingh Watershed Riverine Forests Grant Cycle: S1997 Grant Award: 2310 Grant Cycle: S1997 Lynne Olson EAGLE Michael Beaulac 394 S Lake Ave -#308 Friends of the Shiawassee River Duluth, MN 55802-2325 861 N. Hintz Road Title: Green Thumb Project Owosso, MI 48867 Grant Award: 3000 Title: Self-Help Environmental Assessment of Grant Cycle: S1997 the Shiawassee River Grant Award: 2000 Rachael McConnell Grant Cycle: S1997 Friends of Sandy Pond Beach PO Box 326 Keli MacIntosh Sandy Creek, NY 13145-0326 Traverse City Children's Theater Title: Establishing the Independence of the PO Box 6416 Friends of Sandy Pond Beach Group Traverse City, MI 49696-6416 Grant Award: 1250 Title: Learn From The Animals Grant Cycle: S1997 Grant Award: 300 Grant Cycle: S1997 Chris Bunch Medina Summit Land Conservancy PO Box 141 Michigan Clean Water Action Medina, OH 44258-0141 38875 Harper Title: Rocky River and Wolf Creek Presevation Clinton Township, MI 48036 Project Title: Making the Aquatic Habitat Protection- Note: ext. granted to June 30, 2001 for final Drinking Water Connection Project report Grant Award: 3000 Grant Award: 2500 Grant Cycle: S1997 Grant Cycle: S1997 Linda Hudson Daniel Melcher Les Cheneaux Chamber of Commerce Audubon Society of Greater Cleveland PO Box 10 316 Eldridge Rd Cedarville, MI 49719-0010 Aurora, OH 44202 Title: Les Cheneaux Compatible Economic Title: Appeal of Certification for Nationwide Development Project, 1997 Permit 26 in Ohio Grant Award: 1250 Grant Award: 3500 Grant Cycle: S1997 Grant Cycle: S1997 George Sorger Eric Miller WATER Kenosha/Racine Land Conservation Fund LSB-529 McMaster University 4007 1st St Hamilton, ONT L8S 4K1 Kenosha, WI 53144-1001 Title: Watershed Stewardship Programme Title: Land Trust Development Grant Award: 2000 Grant Award: 3000 Grant Cycle: S1997 Grant Cycle: S1997 Vicki McKay Rondeau Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Program PO Box 1168 Chatham, ONT N7M 5L8 Title: The Rondeau Bay Lead Sinker and Jig Awareness Campaign Grant Award: 2000 Grant Cycle: S1997 Brennain Lloyd Northwatch PO Box 282 North Bay, ONT P1B 8H2 Title: North Shore Project Grant Award: 3500 Grant Cycle: S1997 James Rutkowski Strong Vincent High School 1330 W 8th St Erie, PA 16502-1017 Title: The Cascade Project Grant Award: 2500 Grant Cycle: S1997 Bob Olsgard Lake Superior Alliance P.O. Box 472 Spooner, WI 54801 Title: Michigan Upper Peninsula Mining Issues Advocacy Project Grant Award: 3000 Grant Cycle: S1997 Fall 1997 Grants Program Recipients Rol Crummel Victoria Jagar Muskegon Lake and White Lake Public Nine Springs Network Advisory 1036 W Pacific Ave 3071 Memorial Dr Waukegan, IL 60085-1867 Muskegon, MI 49445-2123 Title: Information, Education and Advocacy Title: Demonstration Plantings and Strategic Campaign Planning Grant Award: 2500 Grant Award: 2000 Grant Cycle: F1997 Grant Cycle: F1997 Russ & Judy Bernacchi Ellen Kohler Bernacchi Wetland Legal Defense Fund Michigan Environmental Protection Foundation 5698 South 500 West P.O. Box 984 La Porte, IN 46350-9583 Traverse City, MI 49685 Title: Wetland Legal Defense Title: Restructuring and Strategic Planning for Grant Award: 1000 MEPF Grant Cycle: F1997 Grant Award: 3000 Grant Cycle: F1997 Wasserman Arlin Coalition for Sensible Growth Rosie Loeffler-Kemp P.O. Box 4627 Clean Water Fund Traverse City, MI 49685 394 Lake Avenue S.-#312 Title: Boardman River Bridge Alternatives Duluth, MN 55802-2325 Grant Award: 3150 Title: Clean Water Action Activist Network Grant Cycle: F1997 Grant Award: 2500 Grant Cycle: F1997 John Hummer Friends of the Jordan River Watershed John M. Klaers P.O. Box 412 Miller Creek Task Force East Jordan, MI 49727 5255 Maple Grove Rd Title: Jordan River Watershed Handbook Hermantown, MN 55811-3661 Grant Award: 3000 Title: Miller Creek Restoration and Grant Cycle: F1997 Preservation Grant Award: 3200 James Schramm Grant Cycle: F1997 Michigan Hydro Relicensing Coalition PO Box 828 Minnesota Parks and Trails Council Pentwater, MI 49449-0828 275 E. 4th Street #642 Title: Community Involvement in Saint Paul, MN 55101-1651 Hydroelectric Dam Operations Title: Implementation of North Shore Grant Award: 2000 Opportunities Plan Grant Cycle: F1997 Grant Award: 2250 Grant Cycle: F1997 Neil Patterson Chris Henschel Atlantic States Legal Foundation Wildlands League 658 W Onondaga St 401 Richmond St W-# 380 Syracuse, NY 13204-3711 Toronto, ONT M5V 3A8 Title: Tuscarora Nation Environment Program: Title: Ontario Forest Protection Project Data Gathering Project Grant Award: 2331 Grant Award: 2000 Grant Cycle: F1997 Grant Cycle: F1997 David Ruttan Charles Muniak Blue Mountain Watershed Trust Foundation Nine Mile Creek Conservation Council 189 Minnesota St 20 Daniluck Drive Collingwood, ONT L9Y 3S4 Camillus, NY 13031 Title: Landowner Survey/Contract Program Title: Board Development and Critical Grant Award: 2450 Environmental Area Monitoring Grant Cycle: F1997 Grant Award: 2000 Grant Cycle: F1997 Ron Reid Couchiching Conservancy Margit Brazda Poirier Box 704 Rochester Museum & Science Center Orillia, ONT L3V6K7 657 East Avenue Title: Wetlands Involvement Project Rochester, NY 14607 Grant Award: 2100 Title: Freasibility Assessment of Rehabilitating Grant Cycle: F1997 the Dowagiac River System Grant Award: 700 Nancy A. Andersen
Recommended publications
  • Sex Trafficking in the Twin Ports by Terri

    Sex Trafficking in the Twin Ports by Terri

    Sex Trafficking in the Twin Ports Sex Trafficking in the Twin Ports Terri Hom, Social Work Dr. Monica Roth Day, Department of Human Behavior and Diversity ABSTRACT More than 600 Minnesota women and children were trafficked over a three year period and more than half from one minority group (LaFave, 2009). Specific services need to be available for victims of sex trafficking in the Twin Ports. This study explored whether there are services available for victims of sex trafficking. The research showed that sex trafficking is a growing problem and that sex trafficking victims could be supported by improving or implementing services. This information can be provided to Twin Ports agencies to determine additional services or changes in current services to support victims of sex trafficking. Introduction Problem Statement This study was a needs assessment of services available to victims of sex trafficking in the Twin Ports (Duluth, Minnesota and Superior, Wisconsin). The intent was to determine if services exist for sex trafficking victims. A study done by The Advocates for Human Rights a non-profit organization, showed that more than 600 Minnesota women and children were trafficked over a three year period and more than half from one minority group (LaFave, 2009). The devastating effects on sex trafficking victims are immediate and long term and thus specific services are required for support and rehabilitation. These services have not been found to be prominent in human service organizations. The research question asked was “What services are available for victims of sex trafficking in the Twin Ports?” to determine if services are offered in the Duluth, Minnesota and Superior, Wisconsin urban area.
  • Kalamazoo River Assessment

    Kalamazoo River Assessment

    ATUR F N AL O R T E N S E O U M R T C R E A S STATE OF MICHIGAN P E DNR D M ICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Number 35 September 2005 Kalamazoo River Assessment Jay K. Wesley www.michigan.gov/dnr/ FISHERIES DIVISION SPECIAL REPORT MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FISHERIES DIVISION Special Report 35 September 2005 Kalamazoo River Assessment Jay K. Wesley MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) MISSION STATEMENT “The Michigan Department of Natural Resources is committed to the conservation, protection, management, use and enjoyment of the State’s natural resources for current and future generations.” NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION (NRC) STATEMENT The Natural Resources Commission, as the governing body for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, provides a strategic framework for the DNR to effectively manage your resources. The NRC holds monthly, public meetings throughout Michigan, working closely with its constituencies in establishing and improving natural resources management policy. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES NON DISCRIMINATION STATEMENT The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) provides equal opportunities for employment and access to Michigan’s natural resources. Both State and Federal laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, disability, age, sex, height, weight or marital status under the Civil Rights Acts of 1964 as amended (MI PA 453 and MI PA 220, Title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended, and the Americans with Disabilities Act). If you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire additional information, please write: HUMAN RESOURCES Or MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL RIGHTS Or OFFICE FOR DIVERSITY AND CIVIL RIGHTS MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CADILLAC PLACE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE PO BOX 30028 3054 W.
  • 1. Executive Summary

    1. Executive Summary

    1. Executive Summary “The significant problems we The Looking Glass River Watershed is one of three watersheds that were face cannot be solved at the same delineated as a result of the formation of the Greater Lansing Regional level of thinking we were at Committee on Phase II Nonpoint Source Pollution Prevention (GLRC) on when they were created.” May 21, 2004. The GLRC is comprised of 22 political agencies (i.e. - Albert Einstein communities, drain commissioner’s offices, and road commission) that each chose to fulfill the requirements of the Michigan Watershed-Based National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Storm Water Permit. The Looking Glass River Watershed contains 14 of the 22 political agencies. Working together as the Looking Glass River Watershed Committee, the permittees have developed this Watershed Management Plan (WMP) to fulfill the permit requirements. The Looking Glass River Watershed includes both rural and urban areas. The urban areas, which encompass approximately 11% of the watershed, Lower Grand include a portion of the Lansing metropolitan area (the Cities of Lansing, River Looking Glass River Watershed Management East Lansing, and Lansing Township), Meridian Township, and the City of Planning Area DeWitt. The City of DeWitt and Bath and DeWitt Townships are experiencing development but still have rural (agricultural and forest) areas that can be protected. Watertown, Woodhull, Victor, Olive and Riley Upper Grand Townships are all in the watershed and all have rural areas with significant River
  • The Growth and Decline of the 1890 Plat of St. Louis

    The Growth and Decline of the 1890 Plat of St. Louis

    2/3/2017 The Growth and Decline of the 1890 Plat of St. Louis: Surveying and Community Development Northern Pacific Ry‐Lake Superior Division The SW corner of Section 22 T.48N. R.15W. Monument found in field work summer 2007 Looking East on the St. Louis River toward Oliver Bridge from the old Duluth Lumber dock. Our survey project ran between the St. Louis River to the abandoned Northern Pacific RR. 1 2/3/2017 The Plat of St. Louis project area was west of the Village of Oliver and South of Bear Island. Bear Island is also called Clough Island & Whiteside Island. Village of Oliver platted in 1910. Current aerial view of the Twin Ports. 1898 Map: The Twin Ports was rapidly growing by 1890. 2 2/3/2017 Early points of development in the Twin Ports Duluth and St. Louis County Superior and Douglas County • 1856‐Duluth first platted • 1854‐Superior first platted • 1861‐Civil War • 1861‐Civil War • 1870‐L.S.&M RR Duluth‐St. Paul • 1869‐Stone Quarry Fond du lac • 1871‐Construction of Ship Canal • 1871‐Duluth Canal slows economy • 1872‐Fond du lac Stone Quarries • 1878‐Grain Elevators Connors Point • 1873‐Financial crash on economy • 1881‐NPRR to Superior from NP Jct. • 1880‐Duluth Grain Elevators‐GM • 1882‐Superior Roller Flour Mills • 1886‐CMO RR to Duluth • 1882‐NPRR Lake Superior Division • 1885‐NPRR Bridge across River • 1884‐CMO RR to Superior‐Chicago • 1889‐Duluth Imperial Flour Mill • 1885‐NPRR Bridge across River • 1890‐Superior Land Improvement Co. • 1886‐Grassy Point Bridge x Depots • 1890‐Duluth Population 33,000 • 1887‐Land&River Improvement Co • 1891‐D.M.&N.
  • Annual Report for the Fiscal Year 2002-2003

    Annual Report for the Fiscal Year 2002-2003

    A nnual Report 2002 - 2003 The Ontario Trillium Foundation Investing in communities 45 Charles Street East, Fifth Floor Toronto, Ontario M4Y 1S2 Telephone: 416.963.4927 Toll free: 1.800.263.2887 Fax: 416.963.8781 TTY: 416.963.7905 The Ontario Trillium Foundation, an agency of the Ministry of Culture, receives annually $100 million of government funding generated through Ontario's charity casino initiative June 30, 2003 The Honourable David H. Tsubouchi Minister of Culture 12th floor, Ferguson Block 77 Wellesley Street West Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1N3 Dear Minister: On behalf of the Board of Directors of the Ontario Trillium Foundation, I am pleased to submit a copy of our Annual Report for the fiscal year 2002-2003. In it you will find a brief narrative that details goals achieved and the challenges met by our volunteers and staff. Also included is a list of grants made under our various programs as well as audited financial statements. Through the allocation of $100 million from the government’s charity casino initiative, we have been able to improve the quality of life of Ontarians, build strong communities, and contribute to the province’s economic strength. The Foundation’s volunteer Grant Review Teams and the members of the Board of Directors, supported by an able professional staff, continue to provide outstanding leadership. All of us share a collective pride in the Foundation’s continuing accomplishments, as described in this report. We value the effective working relationship the Ontario Trillium Foundation has with your ministry, and we look forward to continuing to work together to build healthy, caring and economically strong communities in Ontario.
  • Charitable Impact (“CHIMP”) Foundation: Analysis of 11650 Gifts

    Charitable Impact (“CHIMP”) Foundation: Analysis of 11650 Gifts

    Charitable Impact (“CHIMP”) Foundation: Analysis of 11,650 Gifts (2011-2018) Vivian Krause April 28, 2020 NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER This document offers a summary of the analysis, questions and opinions of the author, Vivian Krause. While the information herein is believed to be accurate and reliable, it is not guaranteed to be so as the information available to me is limited to publicly available data. The author makes this document available without warranty of any kind. Users of this material should exercise due diligence to ensure the accuracy and currency of all information. The information contained herein is subject to change without notice, and may become out-dated as additional information is identified, disclosed, or otherwise becomes available. This document may or may not be updated. Vivian Krause reserves the right to amend this document on the basis of information received after it was initially written. No part of this document may be reproduced, stored, distributed or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of Vivian Krause. Gifts Made By Charitable Impact Foundation (2011) # of % of Total Value of % of Total Amount of Gift By # of Gifts By $ of Gifts Gifts Gifts Gifts Value of Gifts <$10 68 12.1% $450 0.1% $10-$24 115 20.5% $2,484 0.6% $25-$49 95 16.9% $4,026 0.9% 491 87% $43,442 10% $50-$99 93 16.5% $8,195 1.9% $100-$249 78 13.9% $12,849 3.0% $250-$499 42 7.5% $15,438 3.6% $500-$999 35 6.2% $23,549 5.4% $1K-$2,499 18 3.2% $30,384 7.0% $2,500-$5K 8 1.4% $27,731 6.4% 65 12% $120,547 28% $5K-$10K 3 0.5% $24,060 5.5% $10K-$25K 1 0.2% $14,823 3.4% $25K-$50K 5 0.9% $158,858 36.6% $50K-$100K 0 0.0% $0 0.0% 6 1% $270,459 62% $100K- $1M 1 0.2% $111,601 25.7% $1M-$2M $2M-$20M 0 0% $0 0% >$20M Total: 562 100% $434,448 100% 562 100% $434,448 100% Summary: In 2011, almost 90 percent of CHIMP’s gifts were for less than $500 meanwhile one of CHIMP’s 562 gifts accounted for more than 60 percent of the total value of all gifts.
  • Descendants of Susanna Johnson

    Descendants of Susanna Johnson

    Descendants of Susanna Johnson Generation 1 1. SUSANNA1 JOHNSON was born on 01 May 1812 in Weaverthorpe, East Yorkshire, England1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. She died on 27 Feb 1901 in Clinton, Huron Co., ON, CA7, 8, 9. She married (1) ALPHONSO S. ALLAN on 02 Apr 1832 in St James Anglican, Toronto, ON, CA10, 11, 12. He was born about 1812 in Vermont, USA13, 14, 15. He died before 186116. She married (2) WILLIAM WILSON on 28 May 1862 in York Co. (Toronto), ON, CA17. He was born about 1804 in England18, 19, 20, 21. He died on 29 Jul 18939. Notes for Alphonso S. Allan: He was in or near Toronto (York at the time) in 1830 and 1831 as evidenced by the letters waiting for him at the York post office. The Colonial Advocate published lists including his name for April 5, 1830 - A. S. Allen; June 5, 1830 - A. S. Allen; Sept 5, 1830 - Alphonso Allen; and, Dec 5, 1830 - A. S. Allen. In "Brown’s Toronto City and Home District Directory, 1846-1847", Alphonso Allen resided at Lot 6, Con 4, Toronto (township). {Leo & Walter Baldock, Henry Hetherington, possibly others were on same lot} In the 1880 census for New York, Co Niagara, Village of Lewiston, pg 11, ln 40, the following family: Alphonso Allen, aged 75, bo: Vermont Mary A, aged 43, Wife, bo: Canada Andrew, aged 19, son, bo: Canada Alphonso A, aged 17, bo: New York Frederick f, aged 14, bo: New York Michael C, aged 12, bo: New York Martha, aged 6, bo: New York Alexander, aged 4, bo: New York Could it be that our Alphonso simply left his first wife? Of course, he always gave Alphonso S, or A S.
  • Docket 119 Synthesis Iof Comments on the Review.Pdf

    Docket 119 Synthesis Iof Comments on the Review.Pdf

    i ii Synthesis of Public Comment on the Forthcoming Review by the Federal Governments of Canada and the United States of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement A Report to the Governments of the United States and Canada January 2006 The views expressed in this synthesis are those of the individuals and organizations who participated in the public comment process. They are not the views of the International Joint Commission. INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION JOINT MIXTE COMMISSION INTERNATIONALE Canada and United States Canada et États-Unis INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION JOINT MIXTE COMMISSION INTERNATIONALE Canada and United States Canada et États-Unis Herb Gray Dennis Schornack Chair, Canadian Section Chair, United States Section Robert Gourd Irene Brooks Commissioner Commissioner Jack Blaney Allen Olson Commissioner Commissioner International Joint Commission Offices Canadian Section United States Section 234 Laurier Ave. West, 22nd Floor 1250 23rd Street, NW, Suite 100 Ottawa, ON K1P 6K6 Washington, D.C. 20440 Phone: (613) 995-2984 Phone: (202) 736-9000 Fax: (613) 993-5583 Fax: (202) 467-0746 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Great Lakes Regional Office 100 Ouellette Avenue, 8th Floor Windsor, ON N9A 6T3 or P.O. Box 32869, Detroit, MI 48232 Phone: (519) 257-6700 or (313) 226-2170 Fax: (519) 257-6740 Email: [email protected] Acknowledgements The International Joint Commission thanks the people from the Great Lakes, the St. Lawrence River and beyond who took part in the public comment process and whose voices are echoed in this report. ISBN 1-894280-60-1 This report is available online at www.ijc.org.
  • 1989 Senate Enrolled Bill

    1989 Senate Enrolled Bill

    Act No. 154 Public Acts of 1989 Approved by the Governor July 24, 1989 Filed with the Secretary of State July 27, 1989 STATE OF MICHIGAN 85TH LEGISLATURE REGULAR SESSION OF 1989 Introduced by Senators Arthurhultz and Gast ENROLLED SENATE BILL No. 287 AN ACT to make appropriations to the department of natural resources; to provide for the acquisition of land; to provide for the development of public recreation facilities; to provide for the powers and duties of certain state agencies and officials; and to provide for the expenditure of appropriations. The People of the State of Michigan enact: Sec. 1. There is appropriated for the department of natural resources to supplement former appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1989, the sum of $15,442,244.00 for land acquisition and grants and $5,147,415.00 for public recreation facility development and grants as provided in section 35 of article IX of the state constitution of 1963 and the Michigan natural resources trust fund act, Act No. 101 of the Public Acts of 1985, being sections 318.501 to 318.516 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, from the following funds: GROSS APPROPRIATIONS........................................................................................................ $ 20,589,659 Appropriated from: Special revenue funds: Michigan natural resources trust fund......................................................................................... 20,589,659 State general fund/general purpose............................................................................................. $ —0— (59) For Fiscal Year Ending Sept. 30, 1989 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES A. Michigan natural resources trust fund land acquisition (by priority) 1. Manistee river-phase II, Wexford, Missaukee, Kalkaska counties (#88-100) 2. Acquisition of Woods-phase II, Oakland county (grant-in-aid to West Bloomfield township) (#88-172) 3.
  • Huron County Food Hub Research – Growing the Network

    Huron County Food Hub Research – Growing the Network

    FARM AND FOOD CONSULTING Huron County Food Hub Feasibility Research Project : Growing the Network Joan Brady 12/31/2015 Huron County Food Hub Research – Growing the Network The purpose of the Huron County Food Hub Feasibility Project was borrowed from a similar project in Perth County. Authors: Ryan Turnbull, Mary Ferguson, Cathy Lang stated that the purpose of the Perth County Regional Food Hub Feasibility Study was “to test the hypothesis that there is unmet market demand for local fresh food products in the County and that the demand could be met by linking markets with the underutilized production capacity of local producers and value-added agri-businesses. The broader assumption has been that creating local infrastructure to manage distribution and broker relationships between food producers and large scale customers is an effective strategy to bolster the County’s local economy.” Operating under the same hypothesis in Huron, this research project seeks additional information to suggest some practical aspects that should be considered assuming the hypothesis is proven true. Research was conducted by Consultant Joan Brady, of Sustainable Futures – Farm and Food Consulting with support from the Huron Food Action Network Steering Committee which acted as the project oversight committee. Additional project administration and oversight was provided by Huron Business Development Corporation as project lead. Preliminary Business Case A full business case describes, in detail, the objectives, outcomes and financial requirements to initiate a project. It is used to justify the expenditure of time, money and resources into a project by outlining the benefits that the project will bring. In the case of the Huron County Food Hub Feasibility Project, a preliminary business case has been developed to both indicate the feasibility of establishing a food hub for Huron County and to suggest the most plausible project design at this time.
  • Nonpoint Source Program 319 Approved Watershed Plans

    Nonpoint Source Program 319 Approved Watershed Plans

    NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM 319 APPROVED WATERSHED PLANS 7/15/2021 Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy 800-662-9278 Michigan.gov/EGLE 07/2021 NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM 319 APPROVED WATERSHED PLANS WITHIN LARGER 319 PLANS Page 2 NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM CMI APPROVED WATERSHED PLANS Page 3 NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM PENDING AND UPDATING WATERSHED PLANS Page 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Nonpoint Source Program 319 Approved Watershed Plans ...................................................... 1 Nonpoint Source Program 319 Approved Watershed Plans within Larger 319 Plans ............ 2 Nonpoint Source Program CMI Approved Watershed Plans .................................................. 3 Nonpoint Source Program Pending and Updating Watershed Plans ..................................... 4 Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 11 Summary of Approved Watershed Plans ................................................................................. 12 Watershed Plans ..................................................................................................................... 20 Lake Huron Initiative ............................................................................................................. 20 Cadillac District 319 Watersheds .........................................................................................
  • Kalamazoo River Draft Supplemental Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment

    Kalamazoo River Draft Supplemental Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment

    Kalamazoo River Draft Supplemental Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment Prepared by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy Michigan Department of Natural Resources Michigan Department of Attorney General April 2021 Regulatory Notes An Environmental Assessment is prepared to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The NEPA is the Nation’s premier environmental law that guarantees every American the right to review, comment, and participate in planning of federal decisions that may affect the human environment. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) on July 16, 2020 issued in the Federal Register a final rule updating its regulations for the NEPA (85 Fed. Reg. 43304, July 16, 2020). On January 20, 2021, President Joseph R. Biden issued an Executive Order entitled “Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis” that requires agencies to immediately review promulgation of Federal regulations and other actions during the previous four years to determine consistency with Section 1 of the Executive Order. This may include the CEQ reviewing the July 16, 2020 update to the NEPA regulations. The goals of the July 2020 amendments to the NEPA regulations were to reduce paperwork and delays and to promote better decisions consistent with the policy set forth in section 101 of the NEPA. The effective date of these amended regulations was September 14, 2020. However, for actions that began before September 14th, such as this one, agencies may continue with the regulations in effect before September 14th because applying the amended regulations would cause delays to the ongoing process.