Tag: inland lakes

Clean Water: It’s About Holding Officials Accountable

Published on October 18th, 2022 by - Blog Posts

Editor’s note — See FLOW’s additional coverage of the Clean Water Act and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement here:

By Lana Pollack

As the Clean Water Act turns 50 years old today—on October 18, 2022—I’m reminded that this notable birthday is shared with another milestone environmental achievement, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). This U.S.–Canada accord, which started out as a limited commitment to address excessive phosphorus in just two of the Great Lakes, grew into scores of ambitious binational programs that today encompass the entire Great Lakes Basin.

Lana Pollack is former chair of U.S. Section of the IJC and a former three-term state senator.

Driven by the visionary goals of the Clean Water Act and Canadian laws, the GLWQA has morphed into the driver of a long overdue, costly cleanup of the Great Lakes’ 44 most highly contaminated sites, along with recognition of both countries’ obligation to prevent further degradation of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem.

This dual semi-centennial celebration begs for honest assessments of Clean Water Act and Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement achievements and failures.

The successes of the Clean Water Act and other environmental laws and programs it inspired, are legion. But stubborn problems persist.

I’m old enough to recall remarkable “before and after” achievements gifted to us by Clean Water Act prohibitions and accountability measures. Rivers and lakes that were previously untouchable, are now favorite sites for swimming and kayaking. The successes of the Clean Water Act and other environmental laws and programs it inspired, are legion. But stubborn problems persist—many of them from non-point source agricultural pollution and others from mining, plating, and military operations. 

I know the power of polluting interests, and recognize that further protection of Great Lakes Basin waters will be achieved only when voters hold their elected officials accountable for the pollution that persists in defiling those waters.

Having worked in the world of politics, I know the power of polluting interests, and recognize that further protection of Great Lakes Basin waters will be achieved only when voters hold their elected officials accountable for the pollution that persists in defiling those waters.

About the author: Lana Pollack is former chair of U.S. Section of the International Joint Commission and a former three-term state senator who sponsored Michigan’s “polluter pay” law.

Considering Michigan’s Orphaned Resource—Inland Lakes—on the 50th Anniversary of the Clean Water Act

Published on October 18th, 2022 by - Blog Posts

Bass Lake in the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (Photo/Kelly Thayer)

Editor’s note—See FLOW’s additional coverage of the Clean Water Act and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement here:

By Ralph Bednarz

Ralph Bednarz is a retired State of Michigan limnologist.

Today, on the 50th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, is an opportune time to look at the law’s Clean Lakes Program. It was enacted as Section 314 of the Act and implemented in 1976 to address the degraded conditions of the nation’s inland lakes.

Congress has appropriated no funds for the Clean Lakes Program since 1995, even though 45% of the nation’s lakes continue to be in poor condition as a result of nutrient enrichment and other stressors, according to the most recent National Lakes Assessment.

The Clean Lakes Program provided funds to help assess the water quality of lakes in a state or tribal jurisdiction, conduct diagnostic feasibility studies to identify the causes of pollution in the lake, implement projects to mitigate the problems, and carry out post-restoration monitoring studies. The Clean Lakes Program awarded $145 million in grants through 1995. But Congress has appropriated no funds for the Clean Lakes Program since 1995, even though 45% of the nation’s lakes continue to be in poor condition as a result of nutrient enrichment and other stressors, according to the most recent National Lakes Assessment.

Michigan is a lake-rich state with approximately 3,300 miles of Great Lakes shoreline and more than 11,000 inland lakes. Michigan’s history of lakes management dates back to the early 1900s, along with fisheries management and the desire to culture and stock fish in Michigan lakes and streams. However, prior to the passage of the Clean Water Act and the implementation of the Clean Lakes program, little water chemistry data had been collected on Michigan lakes, which hampered understanding and documentation of status and trends in lake water quality.

Michigan is a lake-rich state with approximately 3,300 miles of Great Lakes shoreline and more than 11,000 inland lakes.

Michigan initiated a systematic effort in 1973 to monitor the quality of its inland lakes. However, by 1979 only 300 lakes had been sampled due to budget and staff constraints. Additional Clean Lakes Program funding became available to the states in 1980 as one-time grants for inventorying and classifying publicly owned freshwater lakes according to trophic or biological condition. Michigan was awarded a lake classification grant in 1980, which was the catalyst that launched Michigan’s inland lakes water quality monitoring and assessment programs. In addition to the lake classification grant support, Michigan was awarded 16 individual project grants: seven diagnostic-feasibility studies awards, eight restoration and protection implementation projects awards, and one post-restoration, monitoring studies award.

Another important section of the Clean Water Act is the Section 319 Nonpoint Source Program, established in the 1987 Amendments to the Act. Nonpoint source pollution is caused by rainfall or snowmelt moving over and through the ground, where it picks up and carries away natural and human-made pollutants, finally depositing them into lakes, rivers, wetlands, coastal waters, and groundwater.

The 50th Anniversary of the Clean Water Act shows the work is far from done, especially for inland lakes.

Since 1990, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been providing financial support to states and tribes through Section 319 grants to implement their nonpoint source management programs. The EPA has encouraged states and tribes to use Section 319 funds to support the Clean Lakes work previously funded under the Section 314 Clean Lakes Program. The use of Section 319 funds to support lakes-related projects varies widely by state and tribe, but it has been reported in the range of 5-19%. Michigan does not track individual lake watershed projects supported with Section 319 grant funds.

There is support for expanding the implementation of the Clean Lakes Program by adding a “healthy lakes” component to protect high quality lakes and to prioritize lakes with significant cultural heritage value, as well as lakes in communities where there are environmental justice concerns.

The 50th Anniversary of the Clean Water Act shows the work is far from done, especially for inland lakes. The North American Lakes Management Society (NALMS) is calling for an “enhanced” Section 314 Clean Lakes Program with restored funding. NALMS is advocating for expanding the implementation of the Clean Lakes Program by adding a “healthy lakes” component to protect high quality lakes and to prioritize lakes with significant cultural heritage value, as well as lakes in communities where there are environmental justice concerns. An “enhanced” Section 314 Clean Lakes Program also will need to be fully integrated with other Clean Water Act tools, such as the Section 319 Nonpoint Source Program, Section 106 Water Pollution Control Grants, and the ongoing National Lakes Assessment.

About the author: Ralph Bednarz is a limnologist who retired after a 35-year career in environmental protection and water resources management with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. Bednarz managed Michigan’s inland lakes water quality monitoring programs. He was responsible for the implementation of the 2007 and 2012 National Lakes Assessment in Michigan, and he served as a national trainer for the 2012 assessment.

Appreciating and Protecting Michigan’s Inland Lakes

Published on July 11th, 2022 by - Blog Posts

Photo courtesy of Michigan Department of Natural Resources.

The Great Lakes rightly command our attention and affection, but maybe it’s time to take stock of Michigan’s other lake resource—the thousands of lakes distributed across the state map like freckles.

Mocked by a friend of mine as “baby lakes,” Michigan’s inland lakes span a large range of sizes and occur in a variety of environments. It’s appropriate during the state’s Lakes Appreciation Month to take pride in them.

The Michigan Lakes and Streams Association describes the state’s inland lakes as sparkling jewels. “These priceless creations of the last ice age provide unlimited high quality recreational opportunities for hundreds of thousands of our citizens and visitors to our magnificent state as well as economic opportunity for tens of thousands of Michigan residents. The near shore areas of these freshwater gems provide unique lakefront living opportunities with enhanced property values that benefit hundreds of Michigan communities and public school districts.”

As the number of inland lakefront property owners climbs, water quality is increasingly at risk. Michigan’s chapter of the North American Lake Management Society observes, “The quality of Michigan’s inland lakes is ranked among the highest in the nation. However, invasive species, nutrients and other stressors continue to threaten these lakes and shorelines.”

“These priceless creations of the last ice age provide unlimited high quality recreational opportunities for hundreds of thousands of our citizens and visitors to our magnificent state as well as economic opportunity for tens of thousands of Michigan residents. The near shore areas of these freshwater gems provide unique lakefront living opportunities with enhanced property values that benefit hundreds of Michigan communities and public school districts.”

One significant threat to inland lake water quality is failing septic systems, whose discharges of poorly treated human waste contribute to algal blooms and contaminated water. FLOW supports closing this gap by state legislative enactment of a requirement that all septic systems be inspected on a regular basis and replaced if necessary.

A tool for improving inland lake water quality is installation of natural shoreline vegetation, which can filter contaminants before they reach open water. The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE) has advice for shoreline property owners on Michigan’s inland lakes.

“The quality of Michigan’s inland lakes is ranked among the highest in the nation. However, invasive species, nutrients and other stressors continue to threaten these lakes and shorelines.”

Now, to the statistics. 

How many inland lakes does Michigan contain? The number varies across different measuring methods. But if only bodies of water larger than 5 acres qualify, Michigan competes well with neighboring states. Minnesota, whose nickname is Land of 10,000 lakes, only edges out Michigan by a margin of 11,842 to 11,037. And Michigan’s inland lakes include “a good handful covering 1,000 acres or more.”

There is dispute over the most common lake name in Michigan. One source estimates that Mud Lake is the winner with over 300 currently or historically wearing that name. But another source says Long Lake is most common with only 21 wearing that name.

Only one state, Maryland, has not a single lake. Alaska is easily the inland lake leader in the U.S. with over 3,000 named lakes and over 3 million total.