“Great Lakes water diversions:

political hearsay or an impending reality?”Student: Eric Bacyinski

ENST 485 Term PaperID #: 3408-5792Ebacyins@umd.umich.edu

What is a water diversion? Any transfer of water across

watershed boundaries through a man-made pipeline or canal

2,121 million gallons of water are being diverted out of the Great Lakes every day

Happen for variety of reasons: social, political and economical Most in GL due to

growing large metropolises

Pros Cons

-Supply range of uses from municipal supplies to irrigation and industry

-Provide for bottled water (groundwater)

-alter natural flow, water quality, lake levels and general ecology of the Great Lakes

-secondary impacts in wetlands, nearshore ecosystems, tourism, property values

Water, Water…not everywhere…- Covers 70% of Earth’s surface

- Only 3% of that is fresh- 20% of that lies in the GL

- Today 1 in 6 people worldwide do not have access to fresh-water

- 40% of world’s population subject to serious water shortages- Within 25 years, half the world’s population could have

trouble finding freshwater for drinking & irrigation - Michigan could be the future Saudi Arabia

Unique Nature

2 Nations: 8 States & 2 Provinces

+ 33 million people

= A complicated history & complex legal parameters

Significance

Cultural-State mottos

-Sports-Recreation

Environmental-Sub-continental divide

-1% of water is renewed annually-Habitat for specialized species

Economic

-Brookings Institute report; direct economic benefit of restoring the Great Lakes – $50 billion

-38% of the nation’s bachelor’s degrees and 37% of its advanced science and engineering graduates

A statewide poll of Michiganders found that 70% of residents supported the creation of a binding no-diversions pact

A billboard in SE Michigan (2001) sponsored by the organization, “Citizens for Michigan’s Future’

History Lesson: Chicago’s Dirty Water Late 1800’s: Downtown slaughterhouses, factories Poor sanitation system + stagnant water =

PROBLEMS 1885: 90,000 die from Cholera from drinking water

1/10th of Chicago’s population at the time formation of the Drainage and Water Supply

Commission and the Sanitary District of Chicago Reversal began in 1892; took 8,500 workers to

construct Courts consistently sided w/ Chicago on legal

challenges

…to be continued…

Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 Canadian and U.S. governments Prior to, fear ran rampant that

anyone could tap waters without consequences

International Joint Commission (IJC)

• Created to facilitate management of waters; advisory body• Role has expanded to include Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, border air quality; uses an ecological approach

…continued… 1930: Wisconsin wins ct. case against

excessive Chicago diversion Supreme Ct. mandates Chicago wean itself off

excessive quantities; from 8,500 cfs 1,500 cfs by ’39

’40 & ’56: Dry-times ’56: 1st time Chicago diversion was increased

solely for needs of people outside the GL Basin ‘80’s & ’90’s: Controversy rages

’96: Memorandum of Understanding ’03: Daley cuts off the flat-rate for H20

Current Chi-town issues Grand-fathered into

every GL agreement Adding 1 new

community every two years Most are well beyond GL

Basin boundary Rising population and

increased contention

Long Lac and Ogoki diversions Unknown yet brings billions of gallons into GL Completed in ’43, 20% larger than Chicago d.

Economic opportunity locals in late 1930’s & to boost Canada’s hydro. capabilities during WWII

Offsets all other diversions in GL Basin

The not so Pleasant Prairie Small Wisconsin community discovered

local groundwater was contaminated w/ Radium 4X the federal level; EPA mandated

alt. source Community decided: L. Michigan water Proposed diversion was 3.2 mgd and did

not trigger GL Charter Yet, Water Resources Development

Act of ‘86 applied ½ of the community lies outside GL Basin GL States eventually signed off on their

proposal Lessons learned…

Little ol’ Lowell Lowell, IN; 1987: EPA orders drinking water unsafe New source chosen: L. Michigan 30 mi. to N Town in 5 mi. S. of GL Basin boundary Asking for <5 million gallons/day; No Charter but WRDA

Michigan objected & Engler vetoed proposal Situation becomes symbolic ? Of ‘how far is too far?’

The Nova Group 1997: Canadian entrepreneur proposes to export/sell GL H20 to Asia

Permitted & approved by Ontario govt.; 158 million gallons/year

Controversy/Public outcry WRDA & Charter not

applicable Identified gaps in system Dropped proposal & leaders

realize need for better system/solution

Beginnings of GL Compact

The Compact International agreement/interstate compact - prohibits most new

diversions & exports of water out of GL Basin Boundary straddling communities can request All state legislatures/Governors then U.S. Congress must ratify As of 4/3/08: MN, IL, NY and IN are only adopters; passed one

chamber in OH, PA, WI. Still not through one chamber in MI.

Straddling communities must…

1 have no reasonable alternative, including conservation AND

2 the water diverted must be used solely for public supply and returned as treated wastewater to the Great Lakes watershed

Census scare

GL states are losing people; especially MI

+ Brain-drain w/ following ↓ in political clout

+ Shrinking congressional delegation

+ SE & SW gaining pop. & congressional rep.

___________________________________________________________________

= GL increasing eyed as national fresh-H20 resource

2000 Census Results

2010 Census Predictions for Congressional seats

Political Chemistry of H20

“We’re not going to buy it. We’re going to be stealing it. You’re going to have to protect your Great Lakes.”

- U.S. Representative Dick Armey (R-Texas), 2000.

• Water as a fundamental resource has a long political history

•Example: The Toledo War between Michigan and Ohio, 1835

•Any resource that is crucial to lifestyle will be politically intertwined; see Petroleum

•Gov. Bill Richardson, Congressman John Linder (R-Georgia)

“…we must remember that water is not like oil, in that ecosystems do not depend on oil for their survival, we must manage it in a completely different context,” Peter Annin.

Economic Nature

Hydroelectric power for Canada (mostly) 58% of Canadian electricity

from Hydro Much from dams, etc. in GL

Basin or St. Lawrence Seaway….same place as Canadian population

Alberta Tar Sands Need water for extraction…

tapping of GL? To what extent will North

Americans go to have cheap, easily accessible oil?

“Water is a commodity; it’s a lot like oil. We use oil to heat Boston, but that oil doesn’t come from Boston…”, Hal Rothman.

Acts, compacts, laws and bills

Great Lakes Water

Quality Agreement crafted in 1972 and established

‘common U.S. and Canadian goals for the Great Lakes resources’

only standing agreement of its kind between the U.S. and Canada

Not really any anti-diversion measures

Water Resources Development

Act of 1986 requires all Great Lakes Governors

to approve any exports or diversions of Great Lakes water out of the Basin

Legally-binding prevents federal agencies, except

the IJC, from studying possible diversions

Drawback: No CA involvement Amended in 2000

2008 American Presidential Candidates

Has committed that he would not ‘enter into an agreement that would move water out of the Great Lakes to other states’ Signed ‘Great Lakes Protection Pledge’

Signed ‘Great Lakes Protection Pledge’Member of U.S. Senate’s Great Lakes Task Force

Stated that when he is President, “the Great Lakes Collaboration will receive real support, real financial resources and real leadership from the federal government “Signed ‘Great Lakes Protection Pledge’Member of U.S. Senate’s Great Lakes Task Force

Conclusion Remember despite hoopla: “when all of these

diversions both in and out of the Great Lakes are summed, there is a positive net gain of water coming into the Great Lakes”

Future of GL is promising and highly dependant upon GL Compact being ratified by Congress

Most important anti-diversion measure: Public Outcry