Lake Michigan Monitoring Coordination Council

 

Draft Meeting Summary

 

Spring Meeting

May 20, 2002

Monona Terrace Convention Center

Madison, WI

 

 

A total of 16 people attended the Spring Meeting of the Lake Michigan Monitoring Coordination Council (the Council).  A list of participants is provided below.

 

Participants List

(See Council Members and Interested Parties List for contact information.)

 

Name                                      Affiliation

Judy Beck                               U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5 – Lake Michigan Team

Steve Blumer                          U.S. Geological Survey

Naomi Detenbeck                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development

Victoria Harris                         University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute

Paul Horvatin                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Great Lakes National Program Office

John Hummer                         Great Lakes Commission

Bob Kavetsky                          U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Gary Kohlhepp                        Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

Russell Kreis                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development

Ric Lawson                             Great Lakes Commission

Chris Magruder                     Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

Mary Moffett                             U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development

Elizabeth Moore              Great Lakes Commission

Charlie Peters                         U.S. Geological Survey

Jana Stewart                           U.S. Geological Survey

Eric Waldmer                          Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District

 

 

I.            Welcome and Council Background

 

Lawson welcomed several newcomers and began with a brief presentation/overview of the Lake Michigan Monitoring Coordination Council.

 

 

II.                  Updates of Monitoring Activities in the Basin

 

Peters reported that the Western lake Michigan Drainages NAWQA study has been restarted.  They are sampling four sites on a bi-monthly basis for chemistry and flow.  They will also be sampling these four sites annually for fish, macroinverebrates and algae.  Additionally, habitat assessments will be conducted.  They will also be sampling eight sites for mercury in water, sediment and tissue.  Project personnel will be starting a special mercury study and a special urban land use study next year.  They will be resampling the Cambrian Ordivician Aquifer and the sandy glacial agricultural area aquifers from cycle one.  They will be sampling the entire glacial aquifer and conducting a flow system study in the sandy glacial aquifer area.

 

Peters reported that one aspect of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences—Waters of Wisconsin (WOW) project would be looking at current water monitoring networks in Wisconsin and conducting a needs assessment.  (See Jana Stewart’s report below for more information on this project.)

 

Peters also reported that the Aquatic GAP project has begun for the Great Lakes.  (See Jana Stewart’s report below for more information on this project.)

 

 

Stewart first spoke briefly about the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences—WOW project.  The project is in its second year.  The products to be produced in the short-term include a report, a statewide water summit and additional outreach activities.  The report will include an overview of the current status of Wisconsin’s water, a history of water policy, short and long-term demand scenarios and a discussion of strategies for promoting sustainable management of the state’s water resources.

 

Stewart also gave an update on the Aquatic GAP project.  She reported that Wisconsin and Michigan are building a bio-database with a focus on fish.  They are also in the process of developing ecological stream classifications.  The project will assess gaps in biodiversity and help develop a bio-monitoring network.  Several states around the Great Lakes basin (including Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York, Ohio and Wisconsin) are in various stages of the project – building bio-databases, developing ecological stream classifications, or becoming partners in the project.  Future work will include assessments of freshwater mussels and other macroinvertebrates.

 

 

Beck gave an update on the Lake Michigan LaMP.  An update of the LaMP is out on CD and small quantities of hard copies.  She indicated there is now more focus on setting targets for making progress on various parts of the plan.  Some topics which have received attention recently include PCBs, mercury, Superfund, and atmospheric deposition.  The LaMP team is developing total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for PCB and mercury. She added that there is a draft proposal in the works for a mercury phase-out program.  The program will require a monitoring element, which she would like to discuss in more detail at the next Council meeting.

 

Beck also reported on the work of a “Critical Ecosystem Team” for Region 5.  They have developed a GIS map that highlights trouble spots in the region using a 1994 baseline.

 

 

Horvatin provided an update on the Lake Michigan Mass Balance project.  He reported that results have been “rolled out” at state capitals in four states.  He is planning to get LMMB investigators together in March or April 2003 for a final “roll-out” of results.  He is hoping that by 2004-05 that more intensive monitoring can be accomplished by using the LMMB results as part of a monitoring framework to help measure change over time.

 

Horvatin also reported on the International Air Deposition Network.  This November, the group is meeting with representatives from Canada on their implementation plan.  Part of the plan includes an additional monitoring station on the water intake crib three to four miles offshore near Chicago.

 

Horvatin reported that fish contaminant results for Lake Michigan for the period 1999-2001 would be released in July.

 

Horvatin also reminded participants that the State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference (SOLEC) would take place October 16-18 in Cleveland.  He indicated that an update on the State of Lake Michigan would be one of the agenda items, of which the Council will take part in.  Some reports on specific indicators may be presented.

 

Finally, Horvatin suggested that the Council take up discussion on the idea of completing a TMDL for Lake Michigan for PCBs and mercury.  He could have more information for the next Council meeting.

 

 

Blumer reported that a St. Joseph River Watershed conference is taking place June 10-11, 2002 at the Century Center in South Bend, IN.  The conference features sessions discussing environmental conditions in the St. Joseph River watershed and their impacts on Lake Michigan; agriculture & atrazine issues; and bi-state and local efforts to restore and protect water quality.  (For more information, see the Spring LMMCC newsletter under “Coming Events” distributed via the Council listserve May 17.)

 

Blumer reported that PCB sampling in the Pere Marquette and Muskegon River watersheds is underway.  Sampling will take place at 16 sites for each river, four times per each site.  The sampling is primarily TMDL-related.

 

Blumer also reported that through funding from the Clean Michigan Initiative, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Land and Water Management Division and USGS are sampling 70-100 inland lakes per year; each being sampled twice a year (late summer and ice-out) to establish a trophic index for each lake.

 

Blumer added that Michigan State University is doing related work – looking at sediment cores to gather more detailed information on contaminant concentrations for mercury and most metals.

 

 

Kohlhepp announced that Michigan now has a monitoring web page:  http://www.mi.gov/deq/0,1607,7-135-3306_28610---,00.html 

He indicated that 2001 monitoring reports would be accessible on the web page some time this fall.  The web page also includes volunteer monitoring and beach monitoring information.

 

 

III.            Council Workgroup Updates

 

The following information was presented on the status of each of the 10 workgroups:

 

Air:  (Still seeking workgroup chair)  Nothing new to report.

 

Aquatic Nuisance Species:  (Still seeking workgroup chair)  Hummer reported that the Great Lakes Commission received preliminary acceptance of a grant proposal it submitted to the U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office.  The purpose of the grant is to advance the development of a regional ANS monitoring program, the initiation of a Nonindigenous Invasive Species Early Detection System pilot – which would be done in the Lake Michigan basin – and a corresponding implementation plan.  Work would be a collaborative effort among the LMMCC ANS workgroup, the Great Lakes Panel on Aquatic Nuisance Species, and the Great Lakes Commission.  The GLC/Great Lakes Panel is currently developing a Rapid Response System for “high risk” areas for non-indigenous invasive species.

 

Fisheries:  Great Lakes Commission staff has received some feedback on a strategic plan developed for the workgroup.  GLC staff will follow up on the plan in the months ahead.

 

Groundwater:  (Norm Grannemann, chair)  Nothing new to report.

 

Land Use:  Beck (chair) reported that the workgroup is coming together on the Illinois side of the lake.  An informal partnership of the NE Illinois, the NE Indiana and Milwaukee area planning commissions has received two grants.  She added that they hope to get Michigan involved in the project.  Beck also reported that she is developing a watershed academy and that continuing education credits can be earned by taking the course.  Contact Judy for more information.

 

Open Lake:  (Glenn Warren, chair)  See update report from Paul Horvatin on the Lake Michigan Mass Balance project above.

 

Recreational Waters:  (Kathy Luther, chair)  On behalf of Holly Wirick (U.S. EPA Water Division) and Dr. Richard Whitman (USGS) Hummer reported that FY’02 Beach Act grant applications were currently due. These grants are a continuation of last year’s grants to develop beach monitoring and public notification programs.  Most of the states have formed advisory committees to help develop the state plans. He added that six Great Lakes states (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI) each received somewhere between $200,000-$300,000.  Hummer also reported that the BeachNet listserve has grown substantially.  The beaches association will be planning an upcoming conference – before or just after SOLEC.  Tentative ideas would be a call for papers from management, environmentalists, regulators and scientists.

 

Tributaries:  (Charlie Peters chair)  Peters reported that the workgroup developed a strategic plan in October 2001.  The workgroup has not been able to meet to implement the strategic plan since that time.

 

An initial tributary inventory was conducted by the Great Lakes Commission.  A more detailed survey was developed by a few entities in the basin.  The focus will be on getting the USGS, WDNR, and MDEQ to complete that survey.

 

The BEC workshops, the Great Lakes workshops, and the Capacity Building workshop each provided some information for this work group to work from.

 

The USGS involvement with the WOW effort should provide some information for the work group. This effort will develop a purpose statement, current status, and recommendations for stream flow, water quality, groundwater level and water use monitoring. The draft will be done in July.

 

The USGS NAWQA report on establishing a Lake Michigan Monitoring Network should also provide some information for the workgroup.  This effort is reviewing water quality and flow information in the USGS and STORET database from 1970 to present.  One product of the project will be a map of sites and what was collected at each of those sites in a simple graphical format.  A draft of the report is expected to be completed in September.

 

Kohlhepp reported that Michigan is doing extensive monitoring for metals and nutrients for most Lake Michigan tributaries.  They are striving for data compatibility with NAWQA standards.

 

Wetlands:  Hummer reported on behalf of the Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands Consortium.  Earlier this spring, the GLC selected six research projects that will lead to a long-term Great Lakes coastal wetlands monitoring strategy.  The purpose of this year’s fieldwork is to test the coordinated collection and analysis of selected methods and metrics across the basin in several geomorphic types of wetlands.  Project work will take place in over 30 wetland sites distributed across the Great Lakes basin.  Data will be collected and analyzed on all of the Consortium’s pre-selected indicators, which include biological measures, physical and chemical measures, and landscape measures.  Data will be centrally compiled at the end of project work so that cross-site comparisons can be done.  Hummer gave a brief summary of each of the six projects for Year One.

 

Wildlife:  (Laurie Rounds chair)  Lawson reported that draft priorities (a Summary of Monitoring Priorities for Relevant States and Agencies) and species lists have been compiled by GLC staff.  These lists cut across state and federal rankings for the species.  Follow up work to these lists will be coordinated by this workgroup in the months ahead.

 

 

IV.               U.S. EPA’s Lake Michigan Diagnostic Case Study

 

Detenbeck gave a detailed presentation on the Lake Michigan Diagnostic Case Study being conducted by U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development.  The following summary is extracted from her presentation:

 

The primary goal of this study is to develop an efficient systematic approach for the Lake Michigan basin to:

 

The project’s sub-objectives are to:

 

For more information on this presentation/project, contact Detenbeck directly at detenbeck.naomi@epa.gov.  

 

 

V.                 Future Council Activities

 

Lawson stated that future Council activities include moving the workgroups forward, a possible presentation at the October SOLEC meeting, and the Council’s fall meeting.  Due to time constraints, discussion regarding details for these initiatives was very limited.

 

 

VI.               Adjournment

 

The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:00 p.m.