Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Research Articles

The perceived ecological and human well‐being benefits of ecosystem restoration

Abstract Traditionally, ecosystem restoration has focussed on standard ecological indicators like water or habitat quality, species population abundance or vegetation cover to determine success. However, there is growing interest in how restoration might impact people and communities. For example, researchers have documented positive socio‐ecological links between restoration and human well‐being indicators like property value, natural hazard mitigation, recreation opportunity and happiness. Furthermore, public health benefits from restoration have been linked to public support for programmes. Drawing from this research, the United Nations declared 2021–2030 the ‘Decade of Ecosystem Restoration’ and set a goal to promote more socio‐ecological goals in ecosystem restoration. Nonetheless, there is still a lack of information on the extent to which restoration practitioners consider well‐being because many granting programmes only require ecological goals and monitoring. To explore how restoration practitioners design, implement and measure the success of their projects, we used the federally funded Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) as a case study. Since 2010, GLRI has awarded over $3.5 Billion to over 5300 projects across the midwestern United States, but it does not presently require human well‐being considerations. We performed an online survey targeting project managers with a sample of GLRI projects (N = 1574). We received 437 responses and found that almost half set a human well‐being goal, and more than 70% of those who did believe they reached it. In comparison, 90% of project managers believed they met their ecological goals. These documented perceptions of positive impacts for both people and nature suggest that restoration may already transcend traditional indicators and monitoring for socio‐ecological metrics could capture many ‘unseen’ benefits. Therefore, we recommend that ecosystem restoration programmes adopt a socio‐ecological lens to document the full extent of their restoration outcomes. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Assessing Contaminants of Emerging Concern in the Great Lakes Ecosystem: A Decade of Method Development and Practical Application.

Assessing the ecological risk of contaminants in the field typically involves consideration of a complex mixture of compounds which may or may not be detected via instrumental analyses. Further, there are insufficient data to predict the potential biological effects of many detected compounds, leading to their being characterized as contaminants of emerging concern (CECs). Over the past several years, advances in chemistry, toxicology, and bioinformatics have resulted in a variety of concepts and tools that can enhance the pragmatic assessment of the ecological risk of CECs. The present Focus article describes a 10+- year multiagency effort supported through the U.S. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to assess the occurrence and implications of CECs in the North American Great Lakes. State-of-the-science methods and models were used to evaluate more than 700 sites in about approximately 200 tributaries across lakes Ontario, Erie, Huron, Michigan, and Superior, sometimes on multiple occasions. Studies featured measurement of up to 500 different target analytes in different environmental matrices, coupled with evaluation of biological effects in resident species, animals from in situ and laboratory exposures, and in vitro systems. Experimental taxa included birds, fish, and a variety of invertebrates, and measured endpoints ranged from molecular to apical responses. Data were integrated and evaluated using a diversity of curated knowledgebases and models with the goal of producing actionable insights for risk assessors and managers charged with evaluating and mitigating the effects of CECs in the Great Lakes. This overview is based on research and data captured in approximately about 90 peer-reviewed journal articles and reports, including approximately about 30 appearing in a virtual issue comprised of highlighted papers published in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry or Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:2506-2518. © 2023 SETAC. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.

Prioritizing Pesticides of Potential Concern and Identifying Potential Mixture Effects in Great Lakes Tributaries Using Passive Samplers.

To help meet the objectives of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative with regard to increasing knowledge about toxic substances, 223 pesticides and pesticide transformation products were monitored in 15 Great Lakes tributaries using polar organic chemical integrative samplers. A screening-level assessment of their potential for biological effects was conducted by computing toxicity quotients (TQs) for chemicals with available US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Aquatic Life Benchmark values. In addition, exposure activity ratios (EAR) were calculated using information from the USEPA ToxCast database. Between 16 and 81 chemicals were detected per site, with 97 unique compounds detected overall, for which 64 could be assessed using TQs or EARs. Ten chemicals exceeded TQ or EAR levels of concern at two or more sites. Chemicals exceeding thresholds included seven herbicides (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, diuron, metolachlor, acetochlor, atrazine, simazine, and sulfentrazone), a transformation product (deisopropylatrazine), and two insecticides (fipronil and imidacloprid). Watersheds draining agricultural and urban areas had more detections and higher concentrations of pesticides compared with other land uses. Chemical mixtures analysis for ToxCast assays associated with common modes of action defined by gene targets and adverse outcome pathways (AOP) indicated potential activity on biological pathways related to a range of cellular processes, including xenobiotic metabolism, extracellular signaling, endocrine function, and protection against oxidative stress. Use of gene ontology databases and the AOP knowledgebase within the R-package ToxMixtures highlighted the utility of ToxCast data for identifying and evaluating potential biological effects and adverse outcomes of chemicals and mixtures. Results have provided a list of high-priority chemicals for future monitoring and potential biological effects warranting further evaluation in laboratory and field environments. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:340-366. Published 2022. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

An extrapolation method for estimating loads from unmonitored areas using watershed model load ratios

It is important to routinely estimate loads from an entire watershed to describe current conditions and evaluate how watershed-wide management efforts have affected the nutrient and sediment export that affect downstream water quality. However, monitoring in most areas, including the Great Lakes watershed, consists of sampling at a limited number of sites that are only periodically used to estimate total watershed loading. Here, we describe a technique to extrapolate loads measured at a limited number of reference sites to the total load from a large watershed using load ratios between monitored sites and unmonitored areas obtained from a watershed model (i.e., model load ratio, MLR, approach). In this study, modeled nonpoint-source load ratios between monitored tributaries (reference sites) and nearby unmonitored areas and point-source delivery factors for all areas were obtained from a Spatially Referenced Regression On Watershed attributes (SPARROW) model and used to extrapolate the measured loads from an ongoing monitoring program (Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Tributary monitoring program) to the entire Great Lakes watershed. The MLR approach incorporates spatial variability in nonpoint- and point-source delivery, watershed characteristics, and hydrology that are often not considered when estimating loads from unmonitored areas, such as using the unit area load (UAL) extrapolation approach. The MLR approach provided smaller watershed loads than the UAL approach because yields from monitored sites, in general, were larger than from unmonitored areas. When both approaches were used to estimate loads at adjacent monitored sites, the MLR approach provided more accurate estimates than the UAL approach.

Male fathead minnow transcriptomes and associated chemical analytes in the Milwaukee estuary system

Contaminants of Emerging Concern (CECs) can be measured in waters across the United States, including the tributaries of the Great Lakes. The extent to which these contaminants affect gene expression in aquatic wildlife is unclear. This dataset presents the full hepatic transcriptomes of laboratory-reared fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) caged at multiple sites within the Milwaukee Estuary Area of Concern and control sites. Following 4 days of in situ exposure, liver tissue was removed from males at each site for RNA extraction and sequencing, yielding a total of 116 samples from which libraries were prepared, pooled, and sequenced. For each exposure site, 179 chemical analytes were also assessed. These data were created with the intention of inviting research on possible transcriptomic changes observed in aquatic species exposed to CECs. Access to both full sequencing reads of animal samples as well as water contaminant data across multiple Great Lakes sites will allow others to explore the health of these ecosystems in support of the aims of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

Challenges in linking soil health to edge-of-field water quality across the Great Lakes basin.

To better understand agricultural nutrient losses, we evaluated relationships between management (e.g., manure and tillage), soil health measurements, and resulting edge-of-field (EOF) surface water quality. This work was conducted before or early into conservation implementation at 14 Great Lakes Restoration Initiative EOF sites spanning Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and New York. Analyses of site characteristics (hydroclimate, management, catchment properties) along with 3 yr of soil health measurements (chemical, biological, and physical properties) showed EOF-nutrient export depended on both site and soil properties. A pattern emerged whereby sites not receiving manure and sites with manure defined opposite ends of several gradients for soil and water data. Sites receiving manure had increased microbial activity, organic matter (3.2 vs. 2.7%), and soil test phosphorus (P) (2.8 times more) relative to sites without manure. Suspended sediments (SS), total P (TP), and total nitrogen (TN) in EOF surface runoff varied over three to five orders. Multivariate analysis among sites showed covariant linkages between soil nutrients, soil C, microbial properties, and nutrients in EOF water. There were positive univariate relationships between water-extractable soil P and annual EOF-water concentrations and yields of orthophosphate, TP, TN, and SS (p<.01). Some soil physical properties (e.g., bulk density and infiltration) also covaried among sites but were not consistently related to runoff index or water yield variables. Given the observed among-site variability, we were not able to isolate desirable soil health signals on EOF surface water quality.

Tweeting the Laurentian Great Lakes: A community opinion analysis about Great Lakes areas as assessed through mentions on Twitter

Accounting for community opinions of environmental restoration is critical both for planning and evaluating these initiatives. While considerable research assesses the value of restoration through economic metrics focusing on expenditures or preferences for ecosystem services, these metrics may not adequately account for the sociocultural services that ecosystems provide communities, such as mental and physical health or recreational opportunities. To address this challenge, we explored the use of social media data to assess online discourse communities’ opinions about ecosystem services through a case study of Twitter mentions of sites targeted for restoration through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). While there is evidence of the economic and ecological benefits of GLRI, little is known about how these benefits at sites targeted for funding are perceived by the public. From April through October 2019, we collected 40,000 tweets that mentioned an Area of Concern or a Great Lakes National Park that received GLRI funding. We used a mixed-methodological approach combining tweet content and sentiment analysis to determine themes of discussion and characterize online discourse communities’ opinions around these topics. Half of all tweets were about one of three Areas of Concern, and recreation was the most discussed theme with an overall positive sentiment. A metric accounting for the number of tweets and the sentiment of tweets was derived to understand community opinions of restoration at these areas. Our findings demonstrate the potential of social media data mining as a tool for examining online conversations about and engagement with the Great Lakes.

Stewardship after delisting: Sustaining long-term progress in Michigan’s Areas of Concern

The Michigan Areas of Concern (AOC) program has made significant progress in recent years following the influx of external funding from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the Great Lakes Legacy Act. However, as more AOCs near delisting, community members from Michigan Public Advisory Councils (PACs) are concerned that the loss of programmatic funding will constrain their ability to sustain key public engagement and long-term restoration progress. In order to understand the local community perspectives surrounding delisting, our study presents findings and recommendations that emerged from interviews with Michigan PAC members. We found that PACs recognize the need to transition away from projects with a short-term focus and instead prioritize longer-term, holistic strategies that could help catalyze effective public engagement and produce transformative community revitalization. This study’s recommendations for the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) include: (1) dedicating more time to post-delisting planning, (2) enhancing communication efforts with PACs, and (3) strengthening long-term public engagement efforts and PAC organizational capacity. These recommendations add to the growing literature supporting the value of local community perspectives and social dimensions of environmental restoration and may also provide transferable insights to communities outside of Michigan that are currently engaged in similar complex, multi-stakeholder environmental restoration projects.

A synthesis of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative according to the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation

The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), designed to restore and protect the ecology of the Laurentian Great Lakes, is one of the largest environmental funding programs in the United States. Over 5,400 grants have been awarded in the last 11 years (2010–2020), representing over $3.5 billion in federal spending. A publicly available database that contains a written description about each grant is available online. However, analysis cannot easily be performed given that the descriptions are only textual. Therefore, we applied a modified version of the Conservation Action Classification (CAC 2.0), an established framework from the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation, to synthesize the number of restoration actions, target species, and specific threats mentioned using thematic content analysis. The framework was modified to expand the CAC 2.0 by adding actions specific to GLRI. For example, we created typologies for the monitoring performed, site stewardship actions, and maritime ballast management practices. Based on this tally, we provide a summary of all the GLRI efforts to date. In addition to the more widely known restoration actions, we also describe the extent of educational, capacity building, and the non-monetary value projects that considered human wellbeing and/or focused on traditional ecological knowledge, recreation, or public outreach and engagement. Finally, we conclude with a discussion about the state of GLRI, the extent of the social or community-oriented efforts, and possible areas for adaptive management. This systematic coding process, and our shared supplementary data, can assist future GLRI research and strategic planning.

SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE

ABSTRACT Interviews illuminate impacts of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), a United States’ federal program designed to improve the Great Lakes by restoring the region’s most polluted harbors and coastal landscapes. To see how GLRI funds caused changes in the built environment and to attitudes toward place, semi-structured interviews were conducted with private- and public-sector leaders. Case studies are four EPA-designated Areas of Concern receiving substantial GLRI funds in Buffalo, New York; Duluth-Superior, Minnesota and Wisconsin; Muskegon, Michigan, and Sheboygan, Wisconsin. Results show that GLRI serves as a catalyst in three principal ways: The program leveraged local and state funds, both private and public. GLRI also leads to greater socio-spatial consciousness regarding rehabilitated places. Also, GLRI had led to stronger and deeper senses of place. This study reveals interviews help to calculate a more holistic return on investment for a prominent federal program. This study offers a way forward for ecosystem services research to take a more holistic view than has traditionally been done, in that semi-structured interviews illuminate impacts that traditional economic modeling alone cannot. Concurrently, this research is an example of how a prominent federal program affects community perceptions integral to holistic coastal planning processes.

Using tree swallows to assess reductions in PCB exposure as a result of dredging at Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) sites in the Upper Midwest, USA.

Tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) were used to assess the effectiveness of reducing polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) exposure to wildlife as a result of contaminated sediment removal at locations across the Great Lakes under two dredging scenarios, full or spot dredging. For comparative purposes, other locations where no dredging occurred were also assessed. Calculating accumulation rate, from the mass of a contaminant in tree swallow eggs and nestling carcasses, is a useful tool to assess the effectiveness of sediment removal. It has the advantage over more commonly used metrics such as cubic yards of sediment removed or kg of a contaminant removed, because it assesses a biotic endpoint that has more societal understanding. Egg and nestling concentrations of total PCBs and accumulation rate (μg of total PCBs accumulated per day) were compared pre- and post-dredge. At the most contaminated site, Waukegan Harbor, Illinois, the accumulation rate decreased by 95% because of dredging. At less contaminated locations in Wisconsin and Ohio, the accumulation rate was reduced by dredging as well, but not to such a large extent (~50%). Even at reference locations, there was a very small amount (0.01-0.06 μg/day) of PCBs accumulated each day because of the prevalence of this contaminant in the environment. The profile of individual PCB congeners also differed pre-and post-dredge and demonstrated significant changes as a result of dredging activities.

Great Lakes Tribes Great Lakes restoration initiative (DOI)

Federal Grants & ContractsVolume 45, Issue 8 p. 4-4 Grants Alerts Great Lakes Tribes Great Lakes restoration initiative (DOI) First published: 16 March 2021 https://doi.org/10.1002/fgc.31621Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume45, Issue818 March 2021Pages 4-4 RelatedInformation

Establishing Climate Change Resilience in the Great Lakes in Response to Flooding

Over the past decade, both the average rainfall and the frequency of high precipitation storm events in the Great Lakes Basin have been steadily increasing as a consequence of climate change. In this same period, cities and communities along the coasts are experiencing record high water levels and severe flooding events (ECC Canada et al. 2018). When cities are unprepared for these floods, the safety of communities and the water quality of the Great Lakes are jeopardized. For example, coastal flooding increases runoff pollution and contaminates the freshwater resource that 40 million people rely on for drinking water (Lyandres and Welch 2012, Roth 2016). Since the Great Lakes are shared between two nations, the United States and Canada, the region is protected by several international treaties and national compacts, including the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) and the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). In order to increase climate change resiliency against flooding in the region, we recommend the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) work with Environment and Climate Change Canada to relocate the GLRI under the GLWQA in order to guarantee consistent funding and protection efforts. We additionally recommend expansion of both agreements in their scope and long-term commitments to engender cooperative efforts to protect the Great Lakes against climate change.

Applying best-worst scaling to rank ecosystem and economic benefits of restoration and conservation in the Great Lakes

Since 2010, over $2.4 billion in public funds have been invested in the cleanup and restoration of the Great Lakes Basin through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Efforts have targeted restoration of Areas of Concern and other degraded sites. While the ecological benefits of Great Lakes restoration have been highlighted by the Environmental Protection Agency, and the economic benefits studied by the binational International Joint Commission, public preferences for Great Lakes conservation and restoration have not been well studied. Using best-worst scaling and a seven-preference choice set, 1,215 Basin residents quantitatively ranked their preferred reasons to restore and conserve Great Lakes shorelines and waterways, with a focus on restoration at Areas of Concern and National Park Service sites. The analysis shows the most preferred reason for restoration and conservation is to promote human health, followed by the protection of native species, and the prevention of new invasive species from entering the Great Lakes. The least preferred reason for restoration and conservation is to improve local property values. Although respondents' top reason was human-centered, respondents' preferred ecosystem conservation over the benefits of economic revitalization, recreational use, and improved property values. Preferences analyzed by gender, income, and home location followed these same rankings. Preferences for habitat restoration and the prevention of invasive species align with the focus areas guiding the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, providing evidence of public support for this expansive, publicly funded restoration effort.

Restoring Fish and Wildlife Habitat in U.S. Great Lakes Areas of Concern

ABSTRACT Beginning in 1985, remedial action plans were developed to restore any of 14 beneficial use impairments in Great Lakes areas of concern (AOCs). The designation of &amp;#x93;loss of fish and wildlife habitat&amp;#x94; as a beneficial use impairment helped elevate the priority for habitat restoration and helped focus AOC stakeholders on habitat restoration options and priorities. Funding from the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) has been the critical factor in realizing habitat restoration in U.S. AOCs, with over $280 million allocated since the beginning of the GLRI in 2011. Together, habitat restoration and contaminated sediment remediation have been a springboard for local communities to convert areas that were once a detriment to economic growth into valuable waterfront economic assets (e.g., Buffalo River AOC, River Raisin AOC, Sheboygan River AOC). These communities are transforming formerly polluted rivers in the Rust Belt into healthier and more attractive waterfront destinations for businesses, recreation, and tourism.

The Europeanization of the Great Lakes States' Wetlands Laws and Regulations

The gleaning by activist federal courts from legislative history of wetlands protection from the Clean Water Act, a statute that did not refer to the term “wetlands” until the CWA’s 1977 amendments, and then only once in a single provision intended to delegate responsibility for CWA implementation to the States, has its roots in the environmental movements of the 1970’s. These movements were the result of the Nixon administration’s 1970 creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) via Reorganization Plan No. 3, its signing into law Congress’ 1972 revision of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (the CWA 1977’s predecessor statute), and its execution of the first iteration of the Canada-United States Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (“GLWQA”). Quite clearly, former President Nixon “recognized the huge political power of environmentalism, which blossomed into a popular movement just around the time of his election,” and “[p]oliticians, both Democratic and Republican, were falling over themselves to claim the mantle of environmental advocacy.” Apparently, little is publicly known about the GLWQA and its most recent amendment, the other transborder agreements reached and the initiatives pursued by the national governments of Canada and the United States, and by the governments of the Canadian provinces and the U.S. States bordering the Great Lakes, since the birth of the American environmental movement, such as the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (“GLRC”) and the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (“GLRI”). And even less is known about how those agreements and initiatives incorporate the legal and scientific norms championed by the European and global environmental movements now anchored in the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development established in 1992 and United Nations Environment Programme, which have, in turn, adversely influenced the design, implementation and enforcement of strict liability environmental laws and regulations in the eight Great Lakes States. The thesis of this article is that various wetlands, floodplains, inland waterway and soil and erosion control provisions of Michigan’s Natural Resources Environmental Protection Act (“NREPA”) and implementing regulations, and the enforcement practices of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and the Michigan Department of Natural Resources have effectively been “Europeanized” as the result of the confluence of these national, regional and global environmental agreements, implementing federal and state laws and regulations, and international, national and interstate initiatives. The article will identify and discuss these agreements and initiatives and demonstrate their adverse impacts via legal analysis and anecdotal examples culled from legal representation of clients with business operations in the State of Michigan.

Assessment of site-specific agricultural Best Management Practices in the Upper East River watershed, Wisconsin, using a field-scale SWAT model

The Great Lakes “Priority Watershed” effort targeted the Upper East River watershed, a 116.5-km2 tributary watershed to Wisconsin's Green Bay, to reduce its sediment and nutrients loads from agricultural sources. A Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model was created to determine the effectiveness of agricultural Best Management Practices (BMPs) funded through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. The model was calibrated at the monthly time-step for flow, sediment, dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP), total phosphorus (TP), nitrate, and total nitrogen (TN). Field- and watershed-scale sediment and nutrient reductions were calculated due to the implementation of 74 BMP combinations on dairy and cash grain rotations. Modeling results indicated that when multiple BMPs were placed on a field, especially those including filter strips and grassed waterways, sediment and nutrient loads generally were reduced more than single BMP implementation. The most effective in-field practice at reducing DRP and TP on dairy fields was a combination of 5 different BMPs: cover crops, crop rotation, nutrient management plan, reduced tillage, and a filter strip. Conservation cover was the single most effective practice at reducing sediment and nutrient yields. Sediment and nutrient loads decreased at the watershed scale as the quantity and coverage of BMPs increased. When all contracted BMPs were simulated at the watershed scale, sediment loads were reduced 2%, while TP, DRP, TN and nitrate loads were reduced 20%, 9%, 24%, and 17%, respectively. Modeling scenarios also indicated that over-winter manure storage was important to keep soluble nutrients out of waterways.

Delineation of tile-drain networks using thermal and multispectral imagery—Implications for water quantity and quality differences from paired edge-of-field sites

As part of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, paired edge-of-field sites were established in high priority subwatersheds to assess the effectiveness of agricultural management practices. One pairing was in Black Creek, a tributary to the Maumee River and Lake Erie. These fields were paired because of similarity in soils, topography, and agricultural management. Following two years of baseline data collection from these fields, consistent differences in water quantity and quality were observed for tile networks draining the fields, despite these fields being adjacent and managed together. Consequently, it was hypothesized that differences in subsurface water movement, specifically tile-drain density and connectivity, were the source of the observed differences. Our objective was to map the tile-drain network using remote sensing methodology in order to improve the understanding of nutrient and water transport as well as management on these fields. A combination of multispectral and thermal imagery, collected in spring of 2017, was incorporated to delineate the tile-drain network within each field. This imagery led to locating a cracked tile, which provided a direct path for overland flow to enter the tile-drain system and suggested that a tile-drain segment under the road connected the two fields. A ground-penetrating radar survey verified multiple tile locations, including the tile segment under the road. The distribution of these tiles helps explain the difference in water quantity and quality in the two fields.

United States progress in remediating contaminated sediments in Great Lakes Areas of Concern

Starting in 1985, comprehensive Remedial Action Plans were initiated to restore impaired beneficial uses in Great Lakes Areas of Concern. These plans were a catalyst for developing programs to remediate contaminated sediments. In 1987, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency implemented the Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediment Program to: measure contaminant concentrations in sediments and their potential effects on aquatic life; evaluate risks to wildlife and human health; and test technologies that might be used to clean up these contaminated sediments. In 2002, the U.S. Great Lakes Legacy Act was signed into law with the intent to remediate contaminated sediments at Great Lakes Areas of Concern. Before Great Lakes Legacy Act, only limited progress had been made in addressing contaminated sediments, a major, intractable issue impacting 9 of the 14 listed beneficial use impairments in Areas of Concern. Between 2004 and 2017, Great Lakes stakeholders have completed a total of 46 contaminated sediment remediation projects in U.S. Areas of Concern, resulting in the remediation of over 6.6 million m3 of contaminated sediments at a cost of over $1 billion. Although much has been accomplished, more contaminated sediment remediation must be undertaken to fully restore Areas of Concern. The Great Lakes Legacy Act and Great Lakes Restoration Initiative have been essential components for completing this important remediation and restoration work in Areas of Concern that is resulting in significant economic and environmental benefits.

Use of collaborative funding to implement the Remedial Action Plan for the St. Louis River Area of Concern, Minnesota, USA

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, collaborative funding by some of the nation’s leading tycoons led to development of Duluth, Minnesota and the surrounding area. This included Andrew Carnegie, Jay Cooke, Andrew Mellon, J. P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller, to name a few. This tremendous period of growth and expansion included major industrial developments, including grain, lumber, iron mining, manufacturing, rail, shipping and shipbuilding, and associated development of the frontier. Although critical to the development of a vital community, these activities took a toll through unchecked alteration of natural habitat and contamination of St. Louis River estuary sediments. These adverse legacy impacts, which occurred well before the establishment of our current environmental regulatory framework, became well recognized in 1985 when the International Joint Commission’s Great Lakes Water Quality Board identified the St. Louis River as an Area of Concern requiring the development and implementation of a remedial action plan to restore all impaired beneficial uses. This commitment to Remedial Action Plans was then codified in the 1987 Protocol to the U.S.-Canada Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. The initial Stage 1 Remedial Action Plans for the St Louis River Area of Concern was completed in 1992 with the initial Stage 2 Remedial Action Plan completed in 1995, followed by periodic updates through 2012. However, these updates did not have budgets and action timelines necessary to secure the financial commitments to implement identified actions. Establishment of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative in 2010 led to the 2013 Remedial Action Plan update (i.e. Stage 2 Remedial Action Plan) that included a business plan that identified specific actions, timelines, and budget estimates. Minnesota began implementing recommendations utilizing collaborative funding through a partnership approach. Ninety-nine percent of the actions identified in the Remedial Action Plan have been completed or are currently underway. Funding needs and sources have been clearly identified and the project is on track to complete major actions by 2020 and remove all beneficial use impairments and delist as an Area of Concern, dependent upon confirmation of use restoration, by 2025.