The Great Lakes have had a rough ride over the last century. From fish kills to flaming rivers, the globe's largest concentration of fresh water has borne the brunt of the Rust Belt's rise and fall. Most folks in Chicago only concern themselves with the Great Lakes during summer heat waves, when boating and beaches beckon.
However, the hydrological assets of the Great Lakes are astoundingly valuable. Alan Atkisson wrote on Worldchanging in 2004 that water conservation may well prove to be the defining environmental effort over the next few decades. The water in Lake Michigan, for example, is poised to become Chicago's greatest natural resource in the future and a key element of the city's evolving economy. Safeguarding the supply of fresh water to our east is rapidly becoming essential to the future of Chicago and other Lake cities.
According to Great Lakes Forever, a nonprofit dedicated to furthering education and conservation efforts around the Lakes, about 5,000 gallons of water are lost annually for every one of the Great Lakes basin's 33 million residents, which is equivalent to 157 billion gallons of water forever lost from the region's watershed. So not only must we clean and purify the water remaining in the Lakes, but we must also watch over and cultivate its healthy renewal.
An article in Rachel's Democracy & Health News by Tim Montague spotlights exactly what's been done over the years, both to damage and repair the Great Lakes system. According to the article, the management of the Lakes in the last century can best be categorized as a series of missed opportunities. Vague laws and lackluster enforcement resulted in a narrowly averted catastrophe – and we're not out of the woods yet.
But unlike many other environmental causes, the Great Lakes have a relatively powerful advocate out front. The International Joint Commission, a US-Canadian governing entity established by the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909, has been increasing its calls for more regulation and conservation of the Great Lakes. The commission has even taken the important and unusual step of calling for the elimination of all substances for which health and environmental information is still uncertain.
Most importantly, the IJC recently called for an entirely new rendition of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. The 1972 legislation was well-intentioned but doomed to fail when the US Congress and the Canadian Parliament refused to ratify it. The new Agreement advocated by the IJC is streamlined and forward-thinking – but Rachel's article suggests as much as $20 billion will be required to return the Great Lakes to something approaching a sustainable development path.
There's no doubt the Great Lakes will be part of the Midwest's worldchanging future, but will that future see the Great Lakes as a rusty reminder of our industrial past or a shining example of resource management on a grand scale?
