Georgian Bay Forever

To see the latest water levels information click here
 

When the Bay's water levels fell dramatically in 1999, we began to collect data and run some crude models of water supplies and outflows in Lake Huron and it's connecting waters. We found some evidence to suggest that the St. Clair River may have increase its conveyance and was possibly contributing to the low water levels.

Our findings were confirmed. In 2004, Georgian Bay Forever retained the internationally respected coastal engineering firm W.F. Baird to investigate the Bay's low water levels. The Baird Report confirmed that shoreline hardening in Lake Huron and the St. Clair river, sand and gravel mining, and navigational dredging were contributing to the increase in the conveyance capacity of the St. Clair River; a significant contributing factor to the continuing low water levels. We presented the findings to the International Joint Commission (IJC) and they added the St. Clair River to their $17M International Upper Great Lakes Study.

In December 2009, the International Upper Great Lakes Study Board (IUGLSB) released its report on the St. Clair River. Its key findings and those found in the Baird Report differed somewhat but were within the reported data errors. The main recommendation of the IUGLSB Phase I final report was remedial measures needed to slow down the outflow of the middle Great Lakes should be deferred until the Phase II study which addresses climate change. The Phase I Upper Great Lakes study showed that up to six billion more gallons (almost 23 billion litres) of water per day were flowing out of the Middle Lakes compared to 1971 (an increase of almost 6%) but has declined as expected when water levels have dropped. Should water levels once again increase, this flow rate will again be experienced.

Georgian Bay Forever believes losing any more water from the middle Great Lakes must not continue. Impacts are already being experienced through drying up and stranding of wetlands, fish habitat losses and declingin water quality in closed bays. With more climate change impacts imminent and adequate future water supplies uncertain, multi-lake regulation is required immediately to balance all of the competing stakeholder requirements around Lakes Michigan-Huron. Eliminating high or low water level extremes and balancing water levels throughout the entire Great Lakes system is possible only through multi-lake regulation. 

To this end:

The IJC should establish a binational Control Board to monitor and regulate the flow of water out of the single body of water that is made up of Lakes Huron, Michigan and Georgian Bay. The three other Great Lakes have binational Control Boards and some form of control structures to regulate outflows. The IUGLSB’s report admits no reliable flow data on the St. Clair River have existed since 1986. A Control Board would be able to establish reliable data needed to devise sensible solutions. Georgian Bay Forever believes independent scientific reviews show the conveyance increase of the St. Clair River – the amount of extra water flowing through the river – is double what the IUGLSB has acknowledged in its report. The Study Board is recommending the formation of a new Water Quantity Board to measure and report on water levels throughout the entire great Lakes system. Multi-lake regulation might go one step further and establish a regulatory authority that would oversee the balancing of water levels throughout the entire system.

The IJC should consider recommending the installation of flexible control measures in the St. Clair River. These types of structures could slow down the outflow during periods of low water on the middle lakes, and be adjusted when water levels are within normal or high cycles in order to prevent high water extremes. Right now, with levels near the long-term average on Lakes Erie and Ontario – but still below the long-term average on Lakes Michigan, Huron and Georgian Bay in spite of unusually high precipitation levels there – it would be possible to hold back some of the surplus water to the middle lakes while maintaining a required minimum flow as is currently part of the regulation governing outflows from Lake Superior through the St. Mary's river with no impact on the lower lakes.
 

SINK OR SOLVE?

• The IJC examined the St. Clair River issue as early as 1917 and designed mitigation as recently as 1993. They have yet to implement it, however, despite past approvals by both U.S. and Canadian governments
• Drawing down Lake Superior to alleviate the crisis in Michigan/Huron/Georgian Bay is both wrong and impractical
• New technology and possible feasible solutions should be studied by the IJC
• Fixed structures to restore water levels to a predetermined height were examined as part of a restoration report and rejected for a variety of reasons including their inability to respond in the event og high water extremes.
• Ships need only 30 feet of depth for navigational channels. Some localized areas in the St. Clair river have eroded to over 70 feet in depth so there is plenty of room for regulatory flexible control measures.
• Due to the finding of an increase in the cross sectional area of the river, much of the compensating dredging noted in the materials presented by the study board in the summer of 2011 is likely unneccessary since mother nature has already done the work.
• Work presented in the Vital Commons report prepared by the Brookings Institute and Mowat Centre showed that ecological and economic interests can no longer be separated and must be considered together in order to ensure sustainable benefits.  

With both the Canadian and U.S. governments actively funding restoration projects and green energy initiatives, it is imperative that we follow a solutions based, collaborative and respectful dialog working together with our partners and government agencies on both sides of the border.