Tag: nova group

Who Gets Great Lakes Water?

  • Lake Superior's North Shore. (Photo by Dave Hansen - Minnesota Extension Service)

For the first time, state legislatures in the Great Lakes region have a set of laws in front of
them that could comprehensively define how and where they can use Great Lakes water.
Melissa Ingells has a look at the document called the Great Lakes Compact:

Transcript

For the first time, state legislatures in the Great Lakes region have a set of laws in front of
them that could comprehensively define how and where they can use Great Lakes water.
Melissa Ingells has a look at the document called the Great Lakes Compact:


For a long time, nobody thought much about regulating the water of the Great Lakes.
They just seemed inexhaustible. There was no firm legal definition of who the water
belonged to, or who could give it away.


At some point, scientists figured out the boundaries of what’s known as the Great Lakes
Basin. It’s like a huge land bowl where all the waterways flow back into the Lakes. It
includes areas of eight states and parts of Canada. Scientists figured out that you had to
leave at least 99% of the water in the lakes in order to maintain all the important
ecosystems that depend on the water.


The natural boundary of the Great Lakes basin started to become a political boundary
when demand for water started rising. The only regulation for a long time was a 1984
federal law that said all the Great Lakes governors had to agree before any water could
be taken out of the lakes.


Then, in 1998, an organization called the Nova Group got a permit from Ontario to ship
water to Asia. People didn’t like that idea at all, and the politicians reacted:


“It seems like every major policy change has a triggering event.”


Dennis Schornack is the U.S. chairman of the International Joint Commission, which
oversees Great Lakes issues:


“The Nova permit granted initially by Ontario to this shipping company to take Great
Lakes water apparently by tanker to the far east… was the triggering event to start the
compact in motion. There have been a number of cases over the years… they all lead
down the same path, and that is that we had to have a structure to manage these waters
cooperatively.”


The Compact Schornack was talking about is the Great Lakes Compact. It’s a
comprehensive set of strict water usage laws. The states realized the need for something
like it after the Nova Group incident, and work on it was completed in 2006. It’s a strong
agreement because each state, and two Canadian provinces through a separate agreement,
must get it through their legislatures and get their governors to sign it. After all the states
have passed it, it has to be approved by the U.S. Congress.


Schornack was one of the people who helped write it. He thinks it’s a pretty good
solution for the lakes:


“This is really a big deal. Whether it’s a perfect solution, who knows, only time will tell,
but it certainly is a very strong and positive step in the right direction. When eight
governors get together and two premiers and decide we’re going to manage a fifth of the
world’s fresh surface water, and we’re going to do it with conservation, we’re going to do
it with very severe restrictions on diversions, this is all very good for the basin, this is
good news.”


The Compact does have its detractors. There are people from the business and
environmental worlds who have problems with some of it, but the general feeling is that
something has to be settled on, and the Compact is a good start. Most states seem
to have bipartisan support in their legislatures, although so far only Minnesota has
actually passed it. Peter Annin is the author of “The Great Lakes Water Wars.” He
thinks that by legislative standards, things are moving pretty quickly:


“The pace of ratification to the average citizen might seem like it’s
painfully slow and laborious. But in fact, with compacts in general, some of them have
taken ten, twenty years to make it through all the various legislatures. And so here we
are about 18 months after the documents were released… if you look at the eight states,
the vast majority of them have some sort of activity going.”


Annin also thinks that given the pressing issues over natural resources everywhere, that
agreements like the Compact will change the way other regions think about their
resources:


“Why it’s a model I think is because it’s encouraging to people to think not just in
political boundaries, but in watershed boundaries, in that the Compact encourages people
to work communally to a greater social and sustainability good on behalf of the regional
water supply and water resources and I think that’s going to be a model for the future no
matter where you are.:


Annin thinks there will be a flurry of activity in the legislatures in the next year or so.
That’s because after the 2010 congressional redistricting, the water-hungry Southwest
will likely have more power in the U.S. House. So it’s in the interest of Great Lakes
States to get the Compact through Congress before those political changes happen.


For the Environment Report, I’m Melissa Ingells.

Related Links

Great Lakes State Lags Behind in Water Regulations

  • Harry Randolph lives above a shallow aquifer in southeast Michigan. His dad taught him the vanishing rural folk practice of well witching (locating underground streams). His dad used a cherry branch. Harry uses bent metal rods. (Photo by Sarah Hulett)

States around the Great Lakes regulate large-scale water withdrawals with one exception. Michigan – the state surrounded by the Great Lakes – does not restrict withdrawals. Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm says it’s “shameful” that Michigan is the last of the Great Lakes states to require permits before pumping large amounts of water. But the businesses and farmers who use the water don’t see a need for regulation in a state that’s surrounded by the world’s largest freshwater supply. We have more from the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett:

Transcript

States around the Great Lakes regulate large scale water withdrawals with one exception.
Michigan – the state surrounded by the Great Lakes – does not restrict withdrawals. Michigan
Governor Jennifer Granholm says it’s “shameful” that Michigan is the last of the Great Lakes
states to require permits before pumping large amounts of water. But the businesses and farmers
who use the water don’t see a need for regulation in a state that’s surrounded by the world’s
largest freshwater supply. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:


“This is a restoration on a Model A. ’29. That’s a ’31.”


Harry Randolph runs an auto body shop in the southeast part of Michigan. He needs water to
help prep the cars for sanding and spray painting. He also needs water for his home next door. In
2000 his well went dry … like hundreds of other wells in the area. He dug deeper for water.
That worked for a while. But in 2002, his well went dry again.


He collected rainwater to wash the cars in his body shop, and had drinking water delivered to his
house. Randolph and his neighbors blame a nearby mining operation that was pumping millions
of gallons of water to get to the sand and gravel underground.


They believe that theory was proven when water came back a few weeks after the quarry stopped
pumping in early 2003.


“It’s all pretty clean. You’ll hear the pump come on in a minute. It’s come up faster than it ever
has.”


In his corner of the state, homes and businesses sit above a shallow aquifer. And Randolph says
it should be the state’s job to make sure that the big kid on the block isn’t draining too much from
a sensitive water supply.


“I mean, pump the water, sure go ahead and pump the water. But when you’re hurting a whole
community because they haven’t got the water on account of it, they should be stopped pumping
that water. Or regulated.”


But Michigan doesn’t regulate water withdrawals. It’s the only Great Lakes state that doesn’t.
There’s so much water around Michigan, not much thought’s been given to limiting use… except
when that use was simply exporting the water.


Six years ago, officials in Ontario, Canada agreed to let a company called the Nova Group ship
about 150 million gallons of Lake Superior water to Asia every year. There was an immediate
and loud protest. People didn’t like the idea of shipping Great Lakes water to other countries.


The uproar over the plan forced the provincial government to rescind that permit. But it was
enough to worry Great Lakes leaders. And later that year, they started work on a regional plan to
prevent similar threats to Great Lakes water from other parts of the world.


What came out of the governors’ and premiers’ efforts was a regional agreement called Annex
2001, an amendment to an agreement between the U.S. and Canada. It commits the states and
provinces to come up with standards to protect Great Lakes water and to regulate large
withdrawals by this year. The Annex 2001 calls for two things:


One was to require users to register withdrawals of more than 100-thousand gallons a day. The
eight states and two provinces surrounding the Great Lakes have done that. But Michigan never
met the second requirement: that states regulate withdrawals of more than two million gallons a
day. Dennis Schornack chairs the U.S. sector of the International Joint Commission which works
to prevent and resolve water disputes between the U.S. and Canada.


To this point in time today, Michigan is the only state that has not complied with that piece of the
puzzle. And it’s sort of the price of admission to participate in consultations about withdrawals.
And Michigan so far hasn’t met that price of admission.


Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm is hoping to pony up her state’s admission price with a
new plan to regulate large water withdrawals. It calls for new farms and businesses that pump
100-thousand gallons a day to apply for a state permit by the end of the decade.


But the state’s agriculture and business lobby has resisted similar plans in the past.


Scott Piggott is with the Michigan Farm Bureau.


“The farmers in Michigan, what’s really hard to get across to them: why. What is the benefit of a
full-blown, water use, comprehensive, regulation system on an area that doesn’t see scarcity of
the resource, that agriculture is an excellent steward of the resource. I think they’d feel it’d be a
regulation not worth having.”


But for people in a few pockets of Michigan, water has been scarce. Just ask autobody shop
owner Harry Randolph. And he’s not the only one. In rural central Michigan, people say their
wells go dry in the summertime when large-scale farms pump groundwater to irrigate their crops.


But those aren’t the withdrawals people worry about.


For much of the Great Lakes region, fears about water diversion usually involve arid southwest
states, or shipping freshwater in tanker ships to other parts of the world as the Nova Group
planned to do.


But Dennis Schornack of the IJC says the real problem of water diversion is not so far away. It’s
dealing the demand for water by the growing communities just outside the Great Lakes basin.


“And the people living just on the other side of the divide can’t use the water. They can see it,
they can smell it, they can swim in it, they can boat in it, fish in it. But they sure as heck can’t
use it for drinking water, or for industrial purposes.”


And advocates for water withdrawal regulations say unless Michigan gets its own house in order,
it’s going to be hard to say no to thirsty communities – whether they’re just outside the Great
Lakes basin, or on the other side of the globe.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Sarah Hulett.

Related Links

GREAT LAKES STATE LAGS BEHIND IN WATER REGULATIONS (Short Version)

  • Harry Randolph lives above a shallow aquifer in southeast Michigan. His dad taught him the vanishing rural folk practice of well witching (locating underground streams). His dad used a cherry branch. Harry uses bent metal rods. (Photo by Sarah Hulett)

Michigan is the only Great Lakes state that does not regulate large-scale water withdrawals. But the state’s Governor Jennifer Granholm is hoping to change that. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:

Transcript

Michigan is the only Great Lakes state that does not regulate large-scale water withdrawals. But
the state’s Governor Jennifer Granholm is hoping to change that. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Sarah Hulett reports:


Michigan sits right in the middle of the world’s largest fresh water supply. And Governor
Granholm says unless the state starts to regulate the water use of its own farms, golf courses, and
power companies, Michigan won’t have the political clout to say no to other interests outside the
state.


“I do not want to see other states coming into this region and dipping their straw into the Great
Lakes and pulling it out. If we don’t have a law to prevent that, that’s what’s going to happen.”


The Democratic Governor’s proposal calls for new farms and businesses that pump more than a
hundred-thousand gallons a day to apply for a state permit by the end of the decade.


But Republicans control the state Legislature. And some of them worry that new permit
requirements would burden already struggling farms and businesses.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Sarah Hulett.

Related Links

Stronger Restrictions on Water Export

The number of people living in areas without fresh water is
growing. And that’s made the Great Lakes more vulnerable to proposals
that would remove large volumes of water. In late March, the International Joint Commission announced a plan to regulate
water removal from the Great Lakes. If adopted, it will severely
restrict
bulk exports of drinking water. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s
Karen Kelly reports:

Water Diversion Plan Dropped

An Ontario company has withdrawn its bid for a permit to sell Lake
Superior water to Asian countries. But, as the Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports, it probably won’t be the last time
someone will try to divert water from the Great Lakes:

Appeals Made in Water Diversion Decision

A series of pre-hearing meetings have begun over an Ontario waterbottling company’s efforts to export Lake Superior water to Asia. TheGreat Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mike Simonson reports that the appeal isfacing an uphill battle:

Water Diversion Battle Continues

After being denied once, a Canadian company hoping to divert water fromthe Great Lakes and sell it to Asia is again seeking the permission ofthe Canadian Government. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s MikeSimonson reports the U.S. Congress may intervene: