PRIORITIES 2003-2005 Priorities and Progress under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement June 2006 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION JOINT MIXTE COMMISSION INTERNATIONALE Canada and United States Canada et États Unis Report to the International Joint Commission by the Great Lakes Water Quality Board Great Lakes Science Advisory Board International Air Quality Advisory Board and Council of Great Lakes Research Managers International Joint Commission Rt. Hon. Herb Gray Dennis L. Schornack Chair, Canadian Section Chair, U.S. Section Robert Gourd Irene B. Brooks Commissioner Commissioner Jack P. Blaney Allen I. Olson Commissioner Commissioner International Joint Commission Offices Great Lakes Regional Office International Joint Commission or International Joint Commission 100 Ouellette Avenue – 8th Floor P.O. Box 32869 Windsor, Ontario N9A 6T3 Detroit, Michigan 48232-0869 Phone: (519) 257-6700 Phone: (313) 226-2170 Fax: (519) 257-6732 Email: [email protected] Canadian Section United States Section International Joint Commission International Joint Commission 234 Laurier Avenue West – 22nd Floor 1250 23rd Street N.W. – Suite 100 Ottawa, Ontario K1P 6K6 Washington, D.C. 20440 Phone: (613) 995-2984 Phone: (202) 736-9000 [email protected] [email protected] Visit the International Joint Commission website at www.ijc.org Photo Credits Pages 8 and 23, Karen Vigmostad; p. 28, Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Commission; p. 35, Deb Dupuis; front cover, p. 78 and 99, Bruce Jamieson; p. 81, Lynn Betts, courtesy of NRCS; p. 88, Softy Softerson radio program; p. 106, Lake Michigan Federation; p. 113, J. Gunderson; p. 121 Digital Stock; p. 152, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission; p. 166, Zsolt Kovats. ISBN 1-894280-65-2 ii Table of Contents Introduction v Summary of Recommendations vii The Priorities Chapter 1 Review of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement 1 Chapter 2 Atmospheric Transport of Mercury 35 Chapter 3 Annex 2 of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement 71 Chapter 4 Urbanization 81 Chapter 5 Human Health 99 Additional Work of the Advisory Boards Chapter 6 Great Lakes Science Advisory Board 145 Chapter 7 Council of Great Lakes Research Managers 159 Chapter 8 Great Lakes Water Quality Board 173 Appendix List of Acronyms 179 iii INTRODUCTION Through the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, Canada and In addition to investigating these issues directly, the Commission the United States (the Parties) have committed “to restore and assigned the priorities to the Boards and the Council according maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the to each group’s mandate, expertise, and allocated monetary waters of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem.” and human resources. Many priorities were undertaken collaboratively. Some were designed for completion in two years; A fundamental role of the International Joint Commission is to others are addressed for a longer term. evaluate the progress of the two governments in implementing the Agreement, identify unmet challenges, provide advice, and recommend solutions. The Commission provides a report at Reports least once every two years presenting its findings, advice, and recommendations to governments. This Priorities Report for 2003-2005 contains insight and advice developed by the Boards and the Council regarding research, science, and policy that are fundamental for advancing stewardship Priorities of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem. This report, we believe, presents compelling arguments for positive actions that will contribute to In consultation with its Great Lakes Water Quality Board, restoring and protecting the Great Lakes basin ecosystem for the Great Lakes Science Advisory Board, International Air Quality enjoyment and use of present and future generations. In so doing, Advisory Board, and Council of Great Lakes Research Managers, we are acting in the best interests of our client, the Great Lakes. and also soliciting the views and opinions of basin residents, the Commission establishes priorities for study on a biennial The Commission will consider the information and cycle. The studies enhance understanding and offer potential recommendations in this 2003-2005 Priorities Report as it resolution to critical issues faced by the Parties and by citizens develops its advice to governments and reports to the public of the Great Lakes basin. The Commission’s investigations through its forthcoming Thirteenth Biennial Report on Great are not a substitute for the work of the Parties, but rather take Lakes Water Quality, and other special reports. advantage of its unique independent and binational role under the Agreement. The Report’s Authors During 2003-2005, the Commission investigated seven priorities: The Great Lakes Water Quality Board is the principal advisor to the Commission under the Agreement. The Water Quality Board: • Advice regarding review of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement; . Makes recommendations on the development and implementation of programs to achieve the Agreement’s • Urbanization; purposes; • Human health; . Assembles and evaluates information from those programs; • Annex 2—Remedial Action Plans and Lakewide . Identifies deficiencies in program scope and funding, and Management Plans—of the Great Lakes Water Quality evaluates the adequacy and compatibility of results; Agreement; . Examines the appropriateness of programs in light of present • Atmospheric transport of mercury; and future socio-economic imperatives; and • Great Lakes research strategy; and . Advises the Commission on program progress and • Aquatic invasive species. effectiveness. v The Board’s membership includes 20 program managers and The Council of Great Lakes Research Managers provides administrators from the two federal governments and the eight advice regarding Great Lakes research programs and needs. states and two provinces in the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence River The Council enhances the Commission’s ability to provide basin. effective leadership, guidance, support, and evaluation of Great Lakes research, and in particular how this research satisfies The Great Lakes Science Advisory Board serves as the scientific the Agreement’s requirements and intent. The Council’s 24 advisor to the Commission and the Water Quality Board. members include federal, state, and provincial research program The Science Advisory Board is “responsible for developing managers and representatives from academia, private industry, recommendations on all matters related to research and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, and the International the development of scientific knowledge pertinent to the Association for Great Lakes Research. identification, evaluation, and resolution of current and anticipated problems related to Great Lakes water quality.” The Given the significance of the air as a pathway by which Board’s 18 members – nine from each country – represent a contaminants reach Great Lakes waters, the Commission relies broad range of disciplines from the social, physical, and natural on its International Air Quality Advisory Board to provide sciences. Members are drawn from universities, government advice pertinent to airborne issues. Its 10 members are drawn institutes and agencies, and private industry. from academia and government institutes and agencies in both countries. vi SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS The following 28 recommendations were developed by the Great CHAPTER 3 – ANNEX 2 OF THE GREAT LAKES Lakes Water Quality Board, the Great Lakes Science Advisory WATER QUALITY AGREEMENT Board, and the Council of Great Lakes Research Managers. Substantiating details are provided in the full chapters following The Great Lakes Water Quality Board recommends to the this summary. International Joint Commission that: • Governments identify a Remedial Action Plan CHAPTER 1 – REVIEW OF THE GREAT LAKES coordinator for each Area of Concern at the state, WATER QUALITY AGREEMENT provincial, and/or local level and provide funding to support the position. Principles for Review of the Great Lakes • Governments provide stable funding for monitoring Water Quality Agreement the appropriate parameters to show progress toward the restoration of beneficial uses. The Great Lakes Water Quality Board recommends that: • The Commission help raise the profile of Remedial • The Principles for the Review of the Great LakesWater Action Plans. Quality Agreement be used as a guide for all governmental and nongovernmental activities relevant to the review. • The Commission help coordinate meetings and workshops to bring together for mutual education representatives from Areas of Concern, including Science and the Agreement binational Areas of Concern, dealing with similar issues. The Great Lakes Science Advisory Board reiterates the following • The Commission encourage and foster the science recommendation from its 1997-1999 Priorities Report that: necessary to assist Remedial Action Plan groups with the • The IJC advise the Parties of the importance of development of delisting criteria. traditional ecological knowledge for understanding the Great Lakes basin ecosystem, and the need to develop mechanisms and processes to ensure that the opportunity CHAPTER 4 – URBANIZATION to contribute such knowledge is fully provided to aboriginal people and their structures of governance. Urban Land Use The Great Lakes Science Advisory Board recommends to the Defining a Research Coordination Strategy International Joint Commission that: for the Great Lakes • The Commission, in cooperation with the Parties, state/ The Council