What have you done for lakes lately?

Haunting refrains are being heard again within the committee rooms of the State Capitol. We've heard it before-that another one of our state resources is so vast and abundant there is no need to regulate its use. First it was our timber resources, then the fish of the Great Lakes. Now it's the Great Lakes themselves. The question is, have we learned our lesson?

There is no denying, the lakes are large. They represent 80% of North America's surface fresh water. However, it is also true that only 1% of the water is renewed each year. This means some chemical pollutants take years to exit lakes in the case of Erie and Huron, and decades in the case of Lake Superior. And although a withdrawal of 100,000 gallons a day from the middle of Lake Michigan will not have a measurable effect, the same withdrawal in the headwaters of a coldwater trout stream could have alarming impacts.

Michigan's future economic strength and quality of life depend on healthy Great Lakes. However, we are one of two Great Lakes states that do not regulate lake water withdrawals. Those advocating that we hide our heads in the sand are ignoring the obvious warning signs:

The Great Lakes basin is now home to more than 33 million people, 25 million in the United States.
Residents of the United States use four times the world average of water per day.
The total amount of irrigated farms in the Great Lakes states has increased by 25 times over the last 50 years, and by an average of 30% in the last decade.

As a first step, Sen. Patricia Birkholz recently introduced SB 289 to regulate water withdrawals from pre-determined "critical aquifers." As introduced, the bill focused mainly on conflicts with other human users in limited problem areas. MEC has been working with a group of stakeholders assembled by Sen. Birkholz on an alternative approach that focuses on "critical withdrawals," looking at both human and natural resource impacts.

Will the voices of the past calling on Michigan legislators to ignore this growing threat be heard? Despite weeks of hearings, no consensus is building around legislation to protect these world-class resources. Contact your legislators today and tell them what you think.

For more information, contact James Clift at (517) 487-9539; Cheryl Mendoza, Lake Michigan Federation at (616) 850-0745; or Andy Guy, Michigan Land Use Institute at (616) 308-6250.

Strong legislation will help prevent diversions

One key reason for Michigan to pass comprehensive water withdrawal legislation is to prove to the rest of the country that Michigan and its neighboring states should be trusted with decisions regarding future use of the Great Lakes. "When the Great Lakes states ratify a common conservation standard governing all proposals for water diversion or withdrawal, we keep the control of our lakes out of Washington DC and in our own hands," stated Governor John Engler in his 2001 State of the State address. SB 289 could be the first step in providing the leadership Michigan needs to demonstrate in this critical area.