President Barack Obama helped get the plan off the ground through the ... Learn more at www.healthylakes.org or follow u
After
Before William C. Sterling State Park before Phragmites control project
Great Lakes Programs Deliver Results
Preserve Funding to Restore the Great Lakes
Before
After
Kinnickinnic River before cleanup project
T
he Great Lakes supply drinking water to more than 30 million people in the eight-state region of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York. And millions more in the United States and Canada depend on the lakes for their jobs, health, and way of life. Yet despite their size and significance, the Great Lakes suffer from sewage overflows, a legacy of toxic pollution, the introduction and spread of invasive species, and the loss and degradation of habitat. These factors, among others, are placing tremendous stress on the Great Lakes and are threatening the economy, livelihoods, environment, and outdoor heritage for millions of people who depend on them. Fortunately, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) is addressing many of these threats to achieve the long-term goals of fish that are safe to eat; beaches that are clean to swim in; water that is safe to drink; and a healthy ecosystem in which native fish and wildlife thrive. Over the last three years, the GLRI has received approximately $1 billion to clean up toxic sediments, restore wetlands and habitats, beat back invasive species, reduce polluted runoff, research new problems, and monitor the effects of ongoing work. Another critical program that helps clean the Great Lakes is the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), which provides low-interest loans to states for projects to improve
wastewater treatment and reduce nonpoint source pollution. Over the last three years, the CWSRF has provided more than $1.8 billion to the eight Great Lakes states to end sewer overflows and keep Great Lakes beaches safe and open. The projects funded by the GLRI and CWSRF are producing results — but there is more work to do. However, the looming budget cuts — referred to as “sequestration” — will jeopardize the progress that is being made and, ultimately, cost taxpayers more money. The next president of the United States needs to work with the U.S. Congress to continue to make Great Lakes restoration a priority.
Looming Budget Reductions Threaten Great Lakes Programs
Spurred by the debt ceiling debate in 2011, Congress passed the Budget Control Act of 2011. It increased the debt limit while imposing tight annual caps on defense and nondefense discretionary spending through 2021 — totaling approximately $900 billion. The Act also established the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, commonly referred to as the Super Committee, to come up with an additional $1.2 trillion in entitlement reforms and new revenues by a specific deadline. The Super Committee failed to reach an agreement on a deficit reduction plan, and as a result, triggered automatic cuts of $1.2 trillion scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2013 unless Congress acts. These automatic cuts, known as sequestration, are in addition to the $900 billion in annual spending caps and will include indiscriminant, across-the-board reductions in defense and non-defense programs. Sequestration will force more than $100 billion in cuts in fiscal year 2013: more than $54 billion from domestic programs and an additional $54 billion from defense programs. So what do the budget caps and looming sequestration mean for the Great Lakes? According to the Office of Management and Budget, if the sequester happens, in 2013 alone, there will be an 8.2 percent cut from fiscal year 2012 enacted levels in all non-defense discretionary accounts, which includes programs critical to the Great Lakes such as the GLRI and CWSRF. This is on top of the $900 billion budget cap. The threat of a sequester and additional budget cuts are contending with the already imposed spending caps in the Budget Control Act. If budget cuts are made and the sequester takes place, critical restoration projects may end and the progress that we are seeing may slow or halt. Now is not the time to cut these programs that help solve the many threats facing the Great Lakes.
Urgent Need Remains
There is still much work that needs to be done. Aging sewers dump billions of gallons of sewage into the lakes, closing beaches and threatening our health. Invasive species such as zebra mussels and sea lamprey are harming the Sea Lamprey control food web and commercial and sport fisheries, while new threats like the Asian carp continue to appear. There is a backlog of projects that are shovel-ready. The Great Lakes Regional Collaborative Strategy called for a minimum $20 billion investment to restore the lakes, and the nation faces $390 billion in needed wastewater infrastructure upgrades. If we wait and allow Great Lakes restoration funding to be cut, projects will only become more difficult and more expensive. Cutting back on our commitment will cost the region the opportunity to create thousands of jobs; will worsen existing threats while not preparing for new and emerging ones; will continue to put public health at risk; will erode the quality of life of millions of people; and will deter workers and businesses from moving to and staying in the region. Cutting restoration programs will not save taxpayers one penny. In fact, scaling back restoration activities will cost the nation more money because problems will only become more difficult and expensive to solve the longer we wait to address them.
An 8.2 percent cut to FY 2012 funding levels means that:
>> The GLRI will be cut by $25 million — from $300 million to $275 million.
>> Nationally, the CWSRF will be cut by $120 million — from $1.47 billion to $1.35 billion.
$475
$2,100 $1,525
in millions
$275
$1,350
FY 2010 FY 2010
FY 2011
$1,468.81
$300 in millions
$300
FY 2012
FY 2011
FY 2012
>> For the eight Great Lakes states, the CWSRF will be cut by $44 million — from $533 million to $489 million.
The 8.2 percent cuts due to sequestration are in addition to other possible budget cuts.
For every $1 invested in Great Lakes restoration, $2 will be generated in new jobs, development, and increased property values.
Recreational boaters spend $2.35 billion annually, an additional $1.44 billion to purchase and maintain boats, and support 60,000 jobs that generate $1.77 billion in personal income. More than 37 million people boat, fish, hunt, and view wildlife, generating over $50 billion annually.
125 jobs were created for a $10 million project to restore fish and wildlife habitat in Muskegon Lake.
Great Lakes Restoration: A Solid Return on Investment
Great Lakes Restoration — A Priority among Voters
The Great Lakes are one of the world’s greatest economic assets. Restoring them is vital to sustaining the region’s long-term prosperity. >> A Brookings Institution report concluded that for every $1 invested in Great Lakes restoration, $2 will be generated in new jobs, development, and increased property values. >> A study by Grand Valley State University economists found that a $10 million restoration project at Muskegon Lake in Michigan produced more than $66 million in economic benefits via increased property values, more tourism and higher tax revenues. >> According to a study by the Great Lakes Commission, more than 37 million people boat, fish, hunt, and view wildlife, generating over $50 billion annually. >> Great Lakes businesses and individuals account for about 28 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. >> According to the Great Lakes Information Network, it is estimated that recreational boaters spend $2.35 billion annually, an additional $1.44 billion to purchase and maintain boats, and support 60,000 jobs that generate $1.77 billion in personal income. >> The University of Michigan has found that more than 1.5 million people region-wide depend on the Great Lakes for their jobs — worth more than $60 billion in wages annually. >> In 2009, 273,410 people were employed in businesses that depend on Great Lakes resources, earning $6.9 billion in wages and producing $14.5 billion in goods and services, according to economists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Tourism and recreation account for 79.5 percent of Great Lakes-dependent jobs.
Poll after poll finds that voters in the Great Lakes region want to see a continued federal investment to restore the lakes. In late spring and summer, Fallon Research & Communications conducted two surveys in Ohio and Wisconsin of approximately 800 voters in each state. Key findings include: >> In Wisconsin, 75 percent of voters support continuing Great Lakes restoration funding.
Many jobs have been created directly by efforts to clean up the Great Lakes and restore fish and wildlife habitat: >> 125 jobs were created for a $10 million project to restore fish and wildlife habitat in Muskegon Lake, a Great Lakes Area of Concern in Michigan. >> 177 people are employed to control the invasive sea lamprey in the Great Lakes, which costs the U.S. and Canadian governments $20 million annually. >> 174 jobs were created, some of which were filled by at-risk youth, to remove dams and other barriers in a 150-mile stretch of the Milwaukee River system.
63%
78%
84%
>> In Ohio, 72 percent of voters support continuing Great Lakes restoration funding. 63%
72%
79%
Support for Great Lakes restoration funding remains strong even when voters are asked if it should take a budget cut like everything else to reduce the deficit. In fact, more voters reject such an idea than support it. >> Nearly half of voters in Wisconsin (49 percent) say restoration funding should be maintained to keep the Great Lakes healthy. In comparison, only 39 percent of Wisconsin voters overall say restoration funding should be cut like everything else to reduce the deficit. >> A majority of Ohio voters (54 percent) reject the idea that the Great Lakes should take a budget cut along with everything else. This level of support can be found throughout the Great Lakes region. In 2011, Belden, Russonello & Stewart surveyed more than 1,500 residents in all eight Great Lakes states on public attitudes towards Great Lakes restoration. >> The poll found that 75 percent of the public supports continued funding for Great Lakes restoration efforts, without cuts, even at a time of budget deficits, to improve the condition of the Great Lakes by cleaning up toxic waste and bacteria, protecting and rebuilding wetlands, and preventing and managing invasive species such as Asian carp. This support cuts across political lines.
White House and Congressional Leadership are Vital
Thankfully elected officials have been listening to voters in the Great Lakes region. Over the last decade, presidential leadership has been instrumental in accelerating Great Lakes restoration progress. President George Bush called on the region to craft a plan to restore the lakes. The result was the $20 billion Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy that has been widely credited with galvanizing support for restoration among conservation, business, industry, and civic leaders in the region. President Barack Obama helped get the plan off the ground through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, the largest federal investment in regional restoration programs in decades. White House leadership will continue to be essential to restore and protect the Great Lakes. Congressional support for restoration programs is equally important. Republican and Democratic leaders have worked together to make restoration a national priority. Through their efforts, communities large and small are benefiting from cleaner water, an increase in business opportunities, and a better way of life. If these successes are to continue, it will be essential for the Great Lakes congressional delegation to work together and with the Administration in a spirit of bipartisan collaboration. Great Lakes efforts will falter without the continued leadership and engagement of Congress and the President.
Restoration Moving Forward
After decades of neglect, the Great Lakes are receiving much needed support. With sustained funding, the GLRI and CWSRF are taking significant steps toward achieving restoration goals, a cleaner environment, and a healthier economy. We must work together to find a balanced approach to the federal budget crisis that does not unfairly burden the Great Lakes. Restoration funding for the Great Lakes accounts for less than one hundredth of one percent of the federal budget. It is not the cause of our deficit problems. And cutting restoration programs will not save taxpayers money—it will exacerbate budget problems, because projects will only become more difficult and expensive the longer we wait. At a time when federal lawmakers need to make smart choices about the budget, Great Lakes restoration offers one of the best returns on the dollar in the federal budget. Restoration programs help communities big and small by creating jobs and laying the foundation for long-term prosperity. Simply, restoration programs are good for the environment and the economy. The nation cannot afford not to restore the Great Lakes.
About the Healing Our Waters® – Great Lakes Coalition More than 120 organizations representing millions of people are uniting to restore one of America’s greatest natural wonders — the Great Lakes. The coalition seeks to stop sewage contamination, shut the door on invasive species, and restore wetlands and other damaged habitat, each of which is an essential component of restoring the health of the Great Lakes. Learn more at www.healthylakes.org or follow us on Twitter @healthylakes. For more information, contact: Jeff Skelding, Campaign Director • 202-797-6893 •
[email protected] Chad Lord, Policy Director • 202-454-3385 •
[email protected] Jennifer Hill, Field Director • 734-887-7104 •
[email protected] Jordan Lubetkin, Communications Director • 734-887-7109 •
[email protected]
Great Lakes Programs Deliver Results People across the Great Lakes region are working to heal the lakes. Through federal efforts like the GLRI, nonprofit organizations, government agencies, private businesses, and property owners are working together in public-private partnerships to clean up toxic hot spots, restore fish and wildlife habitat, and protect against invasive species. The results of this work are becoming more evident by the day. At the Ashtabula River in Ohio, a sediment cleanup and habitat restoration project have restored the lower two miles of the river and advanced efforts to get it de-listed as a Great Lakes Area of Concern. The cleanup removed 630,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment that contained more than 25,000 pounds of hazardous polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and other toxic compounds. The project improved water quality and deepened the river channel, making the lower Ashtabula suitable again for maritime commerce, fishing, and recreational boating. In Cleveland, urban development left Big Creek, a tributary of the Cuyahoga River, a polluted mess that was prone to flooding. Restoration work created wetlands and other habitat for fish and wildlife and restored a more natural flow in the creek. The work also curtailed flooding and reduced the volume of sediment and other pollutants that wash into the Cuyahoga River and Lake Erie following rain showers or periods of snow melt. The Grand Calumet River, which flows through a heavily industrialized area south of Chicago, was for years considered America’s most polluted river. Thanks to a major cleanup, a large wetland was restored and more than 575,000 cubic yards of toxic mud were removed from the Lake Michigan tributary. This restoration project removed contaminated sediments in and around the Roxana Marsh that
led to fish consumption advisories, destroyed wildlife habitat, and caused an array of other environmental problems. Muskegon Lake in Michigan is closer to being removed from a binational list of Areas of Concern with the completion of a project that removed 43,000 cubic yards of sediment contaminated with mercury and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) at the Division Street Outfall to Muskegon Lake. The contamination contributed to limits on eating fish caught in the lake and posed public health risks, which may contribute to cancer; liver, nerve, and skin damage; cognitive impairment; and kidney and respiratory failure. In Keweenaw County, Michigan, a grant from NOAA and the GLRI added 1,475 acres to the Bete Grise Preserve along Lake Superior, which will add to the protection of one of the highest quality dune and wetland complexes in the upper Great Lakes. At Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, crews have restored 55 acres of Cowles Bog wetland complex, a nationally recognized natural feature along the Lake Michigan coast, by replacing invasive plants with native species and restoring natural water flow in the marsh. The marsh restoration filters pollutants out of surface water before it flows into Lake Michigan and creates new fish and wildlife habitat. More success stories on the following page.
At Clear Creek in Freedom, New York, excess stream erosion and sediment, in-stream barriers, elevated water temperatures, and competition from invasive fish restricted brook trout to a few tributaries in the watershed. A GLRI project restored 1,200 linear feet of in-stream habitat and re-established fish passage over a sheet-pile grade control structure, reconnecting six miles of prime trout habitat. Near Mesick, Michigan, a dam removal on Wheeler Creek restored natural conditions in seven miles; reestablished the creek’s natural connection to the Manistee River; removed 1,446 cubic yards of sediment from the creek; restored the natural movement of sediment and nutrients in the creek; and provided miles of new habitat for the native brook trout population.
At Milwaukee’s Lincoln Creek and the Milwaukee River channel, the dredging of 140,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment removed the largest source of toxic PCBs in the river, which will reduce contaminant concentrations in fish. The first phase of the cleanup, completed in January 2012, removed nearly 10,000 dump trucks of contaminated material that contained 5,000 pounds of PCBs and 4,000 pounds of PAHs. Crews also restored native fish and wildlife habitat where the cleanup took place, stabilized stream banks and re-shaped the bottom of the river channels. More dredging could take place after scientists complete a study characterizing the extent of contaminated sediments remaining in the river and creek.
Sequestration and other budget cuts will severely curtail restoration efforts. Fewer restoration projects will mean progress will take longer and cost more to achieve.
