What's in your negotiation?

The US and Canada are forging ahead with a new Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, but not telling us what's on the table.  Here's a Jane Elder short list for things we need to address in the new GLWQA.  What's on your list?

 

1. Content-lite IJC meetings, BEC, LAMPS and RAPS have added to the complexity of the Great Lakes management regime, and have done so without serving to expedite solutions, increase research and knowledge capacity, or more meaningfully engage the public. The waters are very muddy on where the buck stops (sorry about the mixed metaphor) and the relationships to “real” regulatory agencies and jurisdictions. We need simplicity, clarity and transparency of management roles and responsibilities.

 

2. The shift to bi-lateral vs. bi-national-ecosystem approach has left the Great Lakes without a unifying vision and strategy, and without the independent “Lake-centric” advocacy approach previously served us well.

 

3. Dated, if not archaic, institutional missions and approaches for agencies created to respond to the environmental crises of the 1960s and 1970s continue to force a silo approach on multi-media, cross-media, and ecosystem-wide impacts of pollution, hydrology, land management, etc. The Agreement and its implementation strategies could serve to drive new, more realistic ecosystemic approaches if crafted right.

 

4. We have not solved the toxics problem—especially from atmospheric inputs and long-range transport, nor are we conducting the research and developing meaningful strategies to address the tens of thousands of new chemicals in the Great Lakes since 1987.

 

5. The land/water interface seems to have been largely forgotten other than a few high profile green infrastructure projects. High-input and industrial-scale agriculture is a major threat to Lake Erie, Lake Michigan, Saginaw Bay, etc. Forest fragmentation and new mining threats are a major threat to Lake Superior and the upper reaches of Lakes Michigan-Huron. The Agreement must address the landscape-scale issues.  Watershed-scale management is certainly a logical step, as might be "bioregional" strategies, such as the boreal forest watersheds of Lake Superior, etc.

 

6. Climate. Hello!! Terrestrial and bird species redistributions are already happening. Warmer water is already happening. The Great Lakes need a game plan for mitigation and adaptation, and the Agreement should be a central organizing force in articulating scope, goals, objectives, timelines.

 

7. Invasives. Let’s face it. North America needs a new continental game plan. The Agreement could provide the catalyst for this, with recommendations to the Parties, the CEC, etc.  It is Asian carp one day, VHS the next, and there’s no real plan to prevent the next crisis.

 

8. Energy (see climate).  See also the need to re-invent the energy systems in the Great Lakes region, and potential impacts on water quality and ecosystem health, from huge pushes to develop biofuels and potential impacts on landscape and watersheds, to the reappearance of nukes (can you temper your excitement), to wind farms in shoreline and near-shore habitat, to…well, you get the picture.

 

9. Driving sustainability and resilience strategies.  If we can’t shift to sustainable industry, agriculture and transit in the Great Lakes region, how can we expect other major freshwater ecosystem-regions of the world to do it?  We need to figure out ways that these larger strategies get “unfuzzy” and real and pragmatic in terms of urban design, water use and treatment, habitat integration and protection, etc. How can the Agreement serve to reward and incent these types of economic and social goals through its water quality strategies?

 

10. Remember research? Field data? Trends? Inter-disciplinary review? Predictive capacity? Remember how IJC-inspired work helped us figure out Toxaphene? The Agreement must serve as a catalyst for cutting edge investigation and analysis of the Great Lakes ecosystem’s health, vital signs, and prescription for recovery.

 

Now, don’t forget to check the old stuff from the May 2008 postings, some of which is wrapped into my list above.