Advisor November/December 2003 Volume 16, No.6 Share thoughts, advice on ecosystem priorites Restoration workshops reach out to stakeholders What do Great Lakes stakeholders think about ecosystem restoration? What are their concerns, their priorities and their opinions on how to address them? These and related questions form the centerpiece of a restoration priorities initiative fully under- way in the region, thanks to a partnership between the Great Lakes Commission and the Great Lakes state Sea Grant Programs. With funding from the National Sea Grant In This Issue College Program, state-by-state workshops will be held over the next five months to address these questions, and help inform and advance the development and implemen- Features tation of priority actions. Stakeholder advice will make a difference in shaping restoration priorities. The Inland Sensitivity Atlas offers comprehensive guide to spill response workshops, for example, provide an opportunity for participants to 2003 ends with Great Lakes federal “Restoration, by any definition, legislation pending review the nine restoration themes recently released by the Council of is inherently a community based Great Lakes Commission directs $1.9 Great Lakes Governors, and offer million to state projects process that will require unprec- perspectives on their further devel- edented cooperation at all levels Point-counterpoint: Groundwater use opment and implementation. within and outside government.” - Are stronger laws needed? The initiative is off to a strong start, thanks to an initial workshop -Mike Donahue, president/CEO News & Views . 2 President/CEO Mike Donahue held in Ann Arbor, Mich., this past fall. Co-sponsored by the Michigan Office of the Great Lakes and the University of Commission Briefs . 3 Michigan, the event brought together a diverse group of approximately 100 stakehold- ers, ready and willing to share their views. Point: counterpoint . 9 Workshop outcomes were enlightening, with a series of facilitated breakout sessions yielding ten broad restoration themes. These included water resources management, Around the Lakes . 10 withdrawals and diversions; aquatic nuisance species; wildlife and habitat; toxic con- taminants; Areas of Concern and other toxic “hot spots;” nonpoint source pollution; Calendar . 11 land use planning; sustainability; commercial and recreational maritime transporta- tion; and water-based recreation and beaches. The Last Word . 12 Commission Chair Sam Speck Participants also offered advice on the often daunting task of translating priorities into action. In developing any such strategy, critical elements to consider include The Advisor is published bimonthly by public education, outreach and participation; science, monitoring and data access; the Great Lakes Commission. The Great funding; institutional arrangements; accountability and enforcement; priority setting; Lakes Commission is a binational agency established in 1955 to promote the policy review and research; scale and focus; and action orientation. orderly, integrated and comprehensive “Restoration, by any definition, is inherently a community based process that will development, use and conservation of the require unprecedented cooperation at all levels within and outside government,” said water and related natural resources of the Great Lakes basin and St. Lawrence River. Mike Donahue, Commission president/CEO and a co-convener of the event. “This workshop series will help open the lines of communication as regional interests close continued on page 6 Commission News & Views From the desk of the president/CEO... Great Lakes Commission Its all in the definition The Great Lakes Commission is a binational public agency dedicated to the use, “If you can’t define it, you can’t solve it.” The Great Lakes Commission coined the management and protection of the water, This adage has stood the test of time, and rallying cry of “Restore the Greatness!” land and other natural resources of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence system. In partnership with for good reason. In the realm of public back in 2000 at the urging of members of the eight Great Lakes states and provinces policy, we often find ourselves searching for Congress who wanted to see a common of Ontario and Québec, the Commission applies sustainable development principles in solutions to problems that are ill-defined, theme – a “brand identity” – for the Great addressing issues of resource management, undefined, or subject to multiple, mutually Lakes. As the larger restoration effort environmental protection, transportation and exclusive definitions. There’s a corollary to moves to the next level, the matter of defi- sustainable development. The Commission provides accurate and objective information this in another time-tested adage: “If you nition becomes absolutely essential. on public policy issues; an effective forum for don’t know where you’re going, you won’t Allow me to get the discussion going. developing and coordinating public policy; and a unified, systemwide voice to advocate know when you get there.” Let’s define ecosystem restoration as “the member interests. It’s not difficult to identify instances reinstatement of beneficial uses of the Board of Directors where this simple wisdom was ignored water and related natural resources of the Samuel W. Speck (OH), Chair Thomas E. Huntley (MN), Vice Chair at the nexus of Great Lakes science, Great Lakes ecosystem through projects Nathaniel E. Robinson (WI), Immediate planning and policy and activities that Past Chair “It is our responsibility, as Frank L. Kudrna (IL) making. Terms like improve environmen- John R. Goss (IN) “virtual elimination,” taxpayers and managers tal quality and ensure appt. pending (MI) Erin M. Crotty (NY) “zero discharge,” and of public funds, to make e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y William J. Carr (ON) “ecosystem approach” sure we know what we’re sound and sustainable Cathleen Curran Meyers (PA) come immediately to resource use.” The Yvan Bédard (QC) mind. Absent a viable, investing in before checks key concepts here are President/Chief Executive Officer Michael J. Donahue, Ph.D. i.e., broadly accepted, are written or cashed.” those of “beneficial Advisor Editor definition, even the use” and “sustainabil- Kirk Haverkamp most legitimate and innovative concept ity.” The former acknowledges the multiple Program Managers can be marginalized or rendered altogether dimensions of the resource and prompts Thomas Crane, Resource Management Matt Doss, Environmental Quality meaningless. us to collectively identify priorities. The Roger Gauthier, Data and Information We can’t afford to make the same mistake latter is just plain common sense: why Management Christine Manninen, Communications and when it comes to the notion of ecosystem bother restoring a resource to some pre- Internet Technology “restoration.” It’s not difficult to under- ferred state if we can’t maintain that state Steve Thorp, Transportation and Sustainable stand why this term has captured our over time? Development imagination. It’s a rallying cry to give the As we move from concept to application, Project Managers Stuart Eddy, Katherine Glassner-Shwayder, Dave lakes their due. It’s also begun to capture we’re also well-advised to regard restora- Knight, Ric Lawson, Jon MacDonagh-Dumler, the imagination of those in Washington tion as something more than a finite set of Gary Overmier, Victoria Pebbles, Tom Rayburn who can make it happen. specific projects. To determine where we Program Specialists Laura Blackburn, Karl Geil, Shannon Glutting, What’s our vision for the lakes? Do we are, we need research on baseline environ- Christian Guenther, Kirk Haverkamp, John want to restore the system to presettle- mental conditions. To determine where we Hummer, Elizabeth Johnson, Laura Kaminski, Becky Lameka, Jennifer Read, Michael ment or preindustrial conditions, or to want to be, we need a community vision. Schneider, Anne Sturm, Kevin Walters, Kevin some more recent point in time? What do To determine how to get there, we need Yam, Hao Zhuang we want to restore, and for whom? Is there a science-based strategic plan. Finally, to Director of Research, Emeritus Albert G. Ballert, Ph.D. room for environmental, economic, social determine when we’ve arrived, we need Administrative Staff and cultural dimensions within the con- monitoring and analysis. Pat Gable, Ron Hasselbring, Marilyn Ratliff, fines of this concept? These are all legiti- Take any one component out of this equa- Rita Straith mate questions that need to be answered tion, and only one thing will be certain: Research Associates/Fellows – soon! It is our responsibility, as taxpayers we’ll be going around in circles. Suzan Campbell, Jon Dettling, Lora Freeman, Erin Higbee, Devra Polack, Simon van and managers of public funds, to make sure Leeuwen, Daniel Weckstein we know what we’re investing in before Cover photo: Tugboat at Duluth Harbor; Jerry checks are written or cashed. Bielicki, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Michael J. Donahue, Ph.D. 2 Advisor • November/December 2003 www.glc.org www.glc.org November/December 2003 • Advisor 3 Commission Briefs Online atlas aids hazardous spill preparation, response The Inland Sensitivity Atlas series, the most ment it, the Commission has been working with comprehensive hazardous spill preparedness and area committees, designated under the Clean response maps in the nation, has recently been Water Act to plan and prepare for spills of oil completed by the Great Lakes Commission and and hazardous