Skip to main content

The Globe and Mail

Canada and U.S. update protection of Great Lakes

Rowers get some early morning practice on Lake Ontario as dawn breaks over Toronto, Friday, Sept. 7, 2012.

Graeme Roy/THE CANADIAN PRESS

Canada and the United States have updated a decades-old agreement to protect the Great Lakes, adding new commitments to protect aquatic habitats, curb invasive species and help coastal communities adapt to climate change.

The changes were widely praised by environmental groups, who said they help provide a more relevant framework for bi-national protection and should improve governmental accountability.

"We've been waiting for a long time to see a bi-national commitment to updating the approach to managing the Great Lakes," said Bob Oliver, chief executive officer of Pollution Probe in Canada. "This amendment actually takes it beyond the classic definition of water quality and expands the scope of responsibility."

Story continues below advertisement

The agreement calls for more work on reducing nutrients that can cause algae blooms – a particular problem in Lake Erie – and better clean-up efforts for heavily polluted areas.

But as officials met in Washington to sign off on the changes, environmentalists on both sides of the border expressed concern that the enhanced agreement could be toothless unless Canada and the U.S. are willing to spend the money that's needed to monitor and restore the Great Lakes.

"We're just getting out of the gate at this point," Mr. Oliver said. "Then there's the actual implementation, when the rubber hits the road, the money has to flow."

Ongoing pollution from ships and agricultural activities, combined with a growing concern about invasive species such as zebra mussels and Asian carp, mean governments must constantly monitor and, when necessary, perform major clean-up projects to keep the lakes healthy.

While United States has stepped up funding significantly – committing more than $1-billion over the past three years to its Great Lakes Restoration Initiative – Canada's investment has remained relatively stagnant in recent years.

The U.S. investment represents "tremendous progress," particularly in cleaning up toxic hotspots, said Andy Buchsbaum, director of the National Wildlife Federation's Great Lakes office, in Ann Arbor, Mich.

"For awhile, Canada was ahead on that, but now I think they've fallen much further behind," he said. "When the U.S. was not stepping up its fair share, that was hurting Canadian waters. And now that Canada is not spending nearly as much as it should, that's hurting U.S. waters – as well as Canadian waters."

Story continues below advertisement

Canada, by comparison, has committed close to $50-million to remediating contaminated areas, $8-million a year for remediation of areas of concern in the Great Lakes, and $16-million to combat the re-occurance of toxic algae – targeted largely at Lake Erie, according to Environment Canada.

Another $17.5-million comes from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to protect against Asian carp.

Environment Minister Peter Kent said Canada's commitment to the Great Lakes shouldn't be measured on those projects alone, and pointed to infrastructure funding and waste water management as elements that are important to the health of the Great Lakes, but don't get recognized as such in the budget.

"While the current U.S. administration has made a wonderful and huge contribution, previous governments haven't," he said. "If you look at the Canadian government's performance over the [past] 40 years, you'll see that … we're doing our part. We're batting our weight."

Lana Pollack chairs the U.S. section of International Joint Commission, which monitors how the Great Lakes agreement is implemented. She said her group can make recommendations to Canadian and U.S. governments, but it's up to the public to call on officials to do a better job protecting the lakes.

"The lakes have the good fortune to be located between two great democracies, but pressure for doing anything well has to rise up from the public," she said after the agreement was signed. "At the end of the day, the only thing any of us have is public outrage if the Great Lakes aren't being protected."

Story continues below advertisement

Report an error Licensing Options
About the Author
Parliamentary reporter

Kim Mackrael has been a reporter for The Globe and Mail since 2011. She joined the Ottawa bureau Sept. 2012. More

Comments

The Globe invites you to share your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful to everyone. For more information on our commenting policies and how our community-based moderation works, please read our Community Guidelines and our Terms and Conditions.

We’ve made some technical updates to our commenting software. If you are experiencing any issues posting comments, simply log out and log back in.

Discussion loading… ✨

Combined Shape Created with Sketch.

Combined Shape Created with Sketch.

Thank you!

You are now subscribed to the newsletter at

You can unsubscribe from this newsletter or Globe promotions at any time by clicking the link at the bottom of the newsletter, or by emailing us at privacy@globeandmail.com.