binational nutrient management

Note to Reader

Purpose of the Strategy

The Lake Erie Binational Nutrient Management Strategy is a coordinated and strategic response from Canada and the United

States that outlines nutrient management actions to reduce excessive phosphorus loading and the eutrophication of Lake Erie.

The Strategy was created by the Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP) Work Group to inform the Lake Erie LaMP

Management Committee and its respective agencies of management actions needed to mitigate nutrient threats to Lake Erie: it

is a blueprint for action. The Strategy was developed based on the ndings of the Status of Nutrients technical report (http://epa.

gov/greatlakes/lakeerie/erie_nutrient_2010.pdf). Both documents are based on the best available science as of November 2008.

The Strategy outlines the goals, objectives, quantitative targets, and actions needed to improve current conditions and prevent

further eutrophication. The success of this Strategy will depend on the commitment from various stakeholders to join forces

and change how nutrients are currently used, applied, transported and discharged. Multiple jurisdictions, in both Canada and the

United States, will be responsible for implementing actions.

As part of the LaMP’s commitment to adaptive management, the LaMP will closely monitor advancements and recommend

appropriate adjustments to nutrient management actions and targets, and will ensure that sound science continues to serve as the

basis for responsible public policy.

Intended Audience

Achieving the goals of the Lake Erie Binational Nutrient Management Strategy is essential for the successful restoration of Lake

Erie and depends on a renewed commitment from LaMP partners. Accordingly, partnerships will be critical to the achievement

of results, and require the dedication and participation of those responsible for improving water quality in the Lake Erie basin.

Partners that will play a key role in implementing nutrient management actions include:

▪ Canadian and U.S. federal, state and provincial governments

▪ Towns, cities and counties in the Lake Erie basin

▪ Conservation authorities as well as watershed and environmental organizations involved in lake-specic issues

▪ Industry, businesses, farmers, developers and landowners in the Lake Erie basin

▪ Academia

Suggested Citation

Lake Erie LaMP. 2011. Lake Erie Binational Nutrient Management Strategy: Protecting Lake Erie by Managing Phosphorus.

Prepared by the Lake Erie LaMP Work Group Nutrient Management Task Group.

Acknowledgements

The Lake Erie Nutrient Management Task Group under the direction of the Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP)

Management Committee prepared the Lake Erie Binational Nutrient Management Strategy.

Writing: Randy French, French Planning Services Inc.

Editing: Luca Cargnelli and Marie-Claire Doyle, Environment Canada

Layout/Design: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

Agencies and individuals that participated on the Lake Erie Nutrient Management Task Group include:

▪ Dan O’Riordan, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. Chair)

▪ Sandra George, Environment Canada (Canadian Chair)

▪ Jennifer Vincent, Environment Canada

▪ Marie-Claire Doyle, Environment Canada

▪ Matthew Child, Essex Region Conservation Authority

▪ Julie Letterhos, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

▪ Pamela Joosse, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs

▪ Mary Ellen Scanlon, Ontario Ministry of the Enviroment

▪ Lori Boughton, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

▪ Jim Grazio, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

This Report has been endorsed by the Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP) Management Committee Members. These

include:

▪ Environment Canada - Director, Great Lakes Division

▪ Essex Region Conservation Authority - General Manager

▪ Fisheries and Oceans Canada - Manager, Great Lakes Laboratory of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences

▪ Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment - Chief, Aquatic Nuisance Control and Remedial Action Unit

▪ Ohio Department of Natural Resources - Coordinator, Lake Erie Program

▪ Ohio Environmental Protection Agency - Chief, Division of Surface Water

▪ Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs - Manager, Program Co-ordination, Research and Partnerships Unit

▪ Ontario Ministry of the Environment - Director, West Central Region

▪ Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources - Manager, Lake Erie Management Unit

▪ Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection - Chief, Ofce of the Great Lakes

▪ Upper Thames River Conservation Authority - General Manager

▪ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Director, Great Lakes National Program Ofce

▪ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Deputy Complex Manager, Lower Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Conservation Ofce

▪ U.S. Geological Survey - Coordinator, Great Lakes Program

Resources that supported the development of this Strategy include:

▪ Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan Update (2008)

▪ Status of Nutrients in the Lake Erie Basin (2009)

▪ Literature Review on Benecial (Best) Management Scenarios in Nutrient Management for the Lake Erie Basin (2008)

▪ Review and Evaluation of Lake Erie Nutrient Management Programs (2009)

▪ Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan Nutrient Indicator Draft Report (2009)

▪ Ohio Lake Erie Phosphorus Task Force Final Report (2010)

iii

The algal blooms that began their return to the western basin

in the mid-1990s are composed primarily of the cyanobacteria

(commonly referred to as “blue green algae”) Microcystis

aeruginosa. This species is capable of producing high

concentrations of the toxin microcystin which can impact

human health through drinking water supplies, recreational

use, and the aquatic community. Health Canada reports that

some of the impacts associated with the ingestion of water,

sh or blue-green algal products containing elevated levels

of cyanobacterial toxins, include headaches, fever, abdominal

pain, nausea and vomiting. Risks associated with swimming in

contaminated water include itchy and irritated eyes and skin,

as well as other hay fever-like allergic reactions.

At the mouth of the Maumee River, Sandusky Bay and in the

eastern basin, benthic mat-forming blue-green algae oat to

the surface and wash ashore after storms; the fouled shorelines

can have harmful impacts on people and the ecosystem. There

are trends of increasing loads of soluble reactive phosphorus

in the Maumee and Sandusky Rivers. Similar loads may be

present in other tributaries, but monitoring data are limited for

these areas.

Water is the keystone resource upon which all life is

dependent. Impacts associated with excessive nutrient loading

include unstable sh and wildlife populations and degraded

habitats, beach contamination and closures, declines in

property values and tourism, and added costs to municipalities,

industry and people for the provision of safe drinking water.

The Lake Erie Binational Nutrient Management Strategy is

a coordinated and strategic response from Canada and the

United States that outlines nutrient management actions to

reduce phosphorus loading and the eutrophication of Lake

Erie. It represents the consensus of Lake Erie resource

managers. The Strategy provides quantitative targets and

identies nutrient management, research and monitoring

actions that need to be considered and adopted by everyone

(government agencies, non-government organizations,

academia, local communities) in the watershed.

This approach, to make phosphorus reduction a priority and to

engage and promote the actions of a wide range of people and

agencies, will result in a signicant reduction in phosphorus

concentrations and ensure a healthy Lake Erie for everyone to

enjoy.

There is an urgent need now for a coordinated and strategic

response to the nutrient management issues on Lake Erie.

We are now again faced with the challenge to reduce

phosphorus inputs and help the lake become healthy again.

We faced this challenge before, and succeeded; and with

coordinated actions and the same commitment to working

together, we can again succeed.

Lake Erie water quality has taken a turn for the worse. Despite

successful past efforts to reduce phosphorus loadings to the

lake, evidence of phosphorus enrichment (eutrophication)

is again before us and Lake Erie water quality continues to

decline.

Algal blooms that threatened the Lake Erie ecosystem in

the 1960s and 1970s have returned. In the 1970s and 1980s,

collaborative efforts to reduce phosphorus in Lake Erie by

treating point source discharges were successful and lake

conditions improved (efforts to reduce non-point sources were

also initiated; however, reductions have not achieved the same

success and remain a critical issue to the health of the Lake).

Problems resurfaced in the mid-1990s but the reasons for

the resurgence of the algal blooms are much more complex

than in past decades. For example, the introduction of non-

native invasive species such as zebra mussels and round

gobies has signicantly changed the cycling of nutrients and

food web dynamics in the lake; there is evidence that the

form of phosphorus entering the lake has changed to one

that increases the growing ability of algae (called soluble

reactive phosphorus); water temperatures have increased;

and, there has been a reduction in the extent and duration of

ice cover over the past 50 years. There are ongoing scientic

investigations to determine how these changes are interacting

and contributing to the re-emergence of algal blooms in

locations throughout the Lake Erie basin.

Preface

Table of Contents

Note to Reader ....................................................................................................................................................................................... i

Purpose of the Strategy ..................................................................................................................................................................i

Intended Audience ......................................................................................................................................................................... i

Acknowledgements ..............................................................................................................................................................................ii

Preface .................................................................................................................................................................................................iii

1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 About Lake Erie ................................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Why is Water Quality in Lake Erie Important? ................................................................................................................. 2

1.3 What is the Lake Erie Binational Nutrient Management Strategy? .................................................................................. 2

1.4 Why is Phosphorus the Focus of the Strategy? ................................................................................................................. 3

2.0 A Vision for the Lake ............................................................................................................................................................... 5

3.0 Lake Erie’s Nutrient Status and Effects ................................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 History of Cultural Eutrophication .................................................................................................................................... 7

3.2 What is the Status of Nutrients in the Lake Erie Basin? ................................................................................................... 8

3.2.1 Nutrient Status of Offshore Waters ........................................................................................................................... 8

3.2.2 Nutrient Status of Nearshore Waters ......................................................................................................................... 9

3.2.4 Nutrient Status of Coastal Wetlands ....................................................................................................................... 10

3.2.5 Summary of Lake Erie Phosphorus Status ..............................................................................................................11

4.0 Nutrient Targets for Lake Erie ............................................................................................................................................... 13

4.1 Offshore Nutrient Targets ................................................................................................................................................ 13

4.2 Nearshore Nutrient Target ................................................................................................................................................ 13

4.3 Tributary Nutrient Target ................................................................................................................................................. 13

4.4 Coastal Wetlands Nutrient Target .................................................................................................................................... 14

5.0 Nutrient Management, Research and Monitoring Goals ....................................................................................................... 15

5.1 Phosphorus Management Goals ...................................................................................................................................... 15

5.2 Research Goals ................................................................................................................................................................. 15

5.3 Monitoring Goals ............................................................................................................................................................. 16

6.0 Moving Forward and Making a Commitment ....................................................................................................................... 17

6.1 Who Is Involved and What Can Be Done? ..................................................................................................................... 17

6.1.1 Implementing Actions ............................................................................................................................................. 17

6.1.2 Research and Monitoring ........................................................................................................................................ 18

6.1.3 Collaborating ........................................................................................................................................................... 18

6.1.4 Public Reporting ...................................................................................................................................................... 18

6.1.5 Education and Awareness ........................................................................................................................................ 18

Acronyms............................................................................................................................................................................................ 19

Glossary .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 20

References .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 21

1.1 About Lake Erie

The Lake Erie watershed, the most populated of all Great Lakes

basins, is very diverse; it is largely agricultural, intensively

industrialized, and highly urbanized. About one third of the total

population of the Great Lakes basin resides within the Lake

Erie watershed. This amounts to 11.6 million people (10 million

U.S. and 1.6 million Canadian), including 17 metropolitan

areas, each with more than 50,000 residents. Lake Erie provides

important natural, economic and recreational values and

provides drinking water to 11 million people.

Of all the Great Lakes, Lake Erie is exposed to the greatest

stress from urbanization, industrialization and agriculture.

Lake Erie surpasses all the other Great Lakes in the amount

of efuent received from sewage treatment plants and is also

most subjected to sediment loading due to the nature of the

underlying geology and land use. Exposed agricultural and

urban lands, particularly in southwest Ontario and northwest

Ohio, contribute immense sediment loads to the lake.

Lake Erie is the smallest of the Great Lakes by volume and

also the shallowest. It warms quickly in the spring and summer

and cools quickly in the fall. The shallowness of the basin

and the warmer temperatures make it the most biologically

productive of the Great Lakes. Eighty percent of Lake

Erie’s total inow of water comes through the Detroit River.

Eleven percent is from precipitation (rain and snow) and the

remaining nine percent comes from the other tributaries.

Bathymetry of Lake Erie and Lake St. Clair.

The lake is naturally divided into three basins that virtually

function as three separate lakes:

▪ The western basin is very shallow, with an average depth

of 7.4 metres (24 ft) and a maximum depth of 19 metres

(62 ft). It is the most turbid region of the lake as most of

the lake bottom is covered with ne sediment particles

that are easily disturbed by wind and wave action.

▪ The central basin is quite uniform in depth, with an

average depth of 18.3 metres (60 ft) and a maximum

depth of 25 metres (82 ft).

▪ The eastern basin is the deepest of the three basins, with

an average depth of 24 metres (80 ft) and a maximum

depth of 64 metres (210 ft).

The central and eastern basins thermally stratify every year.

Stratication refers to the layering that occurs, particularly

in the warmer months, where a warmer, less dense layer of

water (the epilimnion) overlies a colder denser layer (the

hypolimnion). Stratication can occur in the western basin

but does not last very long. Stratication impacts the internal

dynamics of the lake physically, biologically and chemically,

and this in turn affects the amount of dissolved oxygen present

at the bottom of the lake.

1.0 Introduction

1.2 Why is Water Quality in Lake Erie

Important?

The Lake Erie basin ecosystem is important because of the

many ecological services that it provides:

▪ Drinking water: Provides drinking water for 11 million

people.

▪ Biodiversity: Provides important areas for food, forage,

spawning and safe refuge for many species of sh and

wildlife.

▪ Recreation: Provides many opportunities for swimming,

shing, boating and tourism.

▪ Aesthetics: Provides many opportunities to simply enjoy

the aesthetic and natural environment.

Increased phosphorus loadings to Lake Erie and associated

algal blooms are a concern for a number of reasons:

▪ Risks to human health from the threat of harmful algae

toxins near drinking water intakes or through recreational

contact;

▪ Risks to water quality for agricultural use (e.g., food

safety);

▪ Unstable sh communities due to harmful algae blooms

and low levels of dissolved oxygen;

▪ Disruptions in food web and energy ow that cause

negative impacts on species and their habitat;

▪ Degraded habitats especially in nearshore, wetlands and

tributaries due to increases in Cladophora and Lyngbya

(algal) biomass;

▪ Beach contamination and closures and loss of tourism

revenue;

▪ Added costs to municipalities, industry and the public

to protect drinking water sources and restore recreational

areas; and

▪ Declines in property values due to loss of recreational

opportunities and aesthetics.

1.3 What is the Lake Erie Binational

Nutrient Management Strategy?

The Lake Erie Binational Nutrient Management Strategy (the

Strategy) is a coordinated and strategic response from Canada

and the United States that outlines priority management

actions to reduce excessive phosphorus loadings and the

eutrophication of Lake Erie. The Strategy represents the

consensus of key binational Lake Erie resource managers on

the vision, goals, and targets for the protection, conservation

and restoration of the Lake Erie ecosystem. The Strategy

identies the steps for managing nutrients, conducting

research and monitoring, and reporting on current conditions,

trends and progress.

Eutrophication refers to the addition of nutrients in excessive

amounts to a body of water and the eects of the added

nutrients (e.g., increased plant and algal growth, reduced

levels of dissolved oxygen). The nutrient of primary concern in

Lake Erie is phosphorus.

Photos (top to bottom):

Jonathan S. Yoder, Centre for Disease

Control (from SOGL Highlights 2009);

Jim Schmidt, provided

by U.S. National Parks Service; Upper Thames River Conservation

Authority (2 photos)

The Strategy is the result of research undertaken in

collaboration with the agencies and organizations involved

in the Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP). It

is a mechanism for the LaMP to engage government and

non-government groups to take action to reduce excessive

phosphorus inputs to Lake Erie.

The successful recovery of Lake Erie will require a strong

multi-jurisdictional, multi-partner and multi-year commitment.

1.4 Why is Phosphorus the Focus of

the Strategy?

In Lake Erie, phosphorus is the primary nutrient causing

excessive algae and other water quality associated-impacts,

such as beach closings and contamination of drinking water.

In most lakes and rivers, phosphorus is typically considered to

be the primary limiting nutrient that stimulates algal growth.

While many other nutrients are present in water, such as

nitrogen, silica, carbon, and even trace metals, these nutrients

are considered to be only secondarily or seasonally limiting

in Lake Erie. Almost any nutrient can be shown to appear

limiting to algae on a given day, but nitrogen or other nutrients

present in Lake Erie do not cause the same algal response

as phosphorus. This rationale is based on the best current

scientic knowledge; however, it is important to continue to

research and monitor the effects of nitrogen and other nutrients

so that management decisions and actions can be adapted to

appropriate concerns.

To communicate the nutrient status of water and predict the

potential for algae problems, measures of total phosphorus

concentration and load are used. Total phosphorus is the

easiest and most reliable form of phosphorus to measure

and this is why federal, provincial and state agencies

regularly measure total phosphorus concentrations in water.

Total phosphorus is comprised mostly of particulate and

dissolved phosphorus. Typically, the higher the dissolved

component the higher the bioavailability, which means that

plants and algae can readily absorb or uptake this nutrient

for growth. The dissolved component of total phosphorus is

What is the LaMP?

The LaMP provides a binational management framework

for planning, coordination and reporting in support of the

Canada-United States Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

(GLWQA). The LaMP also provides the overall direction

and scientic support for the restoration, protection and

maintenance of the waters of the Lake Erie ecosystem,

including nearshore and oshore waters, tributaries and

coastal wetlands.

made up of a number of different forms, including soluble

reactive phosphorus (SRP). SRP is the chemical method

used to quantify orthosphosphate, the most available form

of phosphorus for algal growth. Orthosphosphate is found

in sewage and fertilizers, and when dissolved, is highly

bioavailable.

While total phosphorus loads to Lake Erie have been stable

or declining since 1981, studies from Heidelberg University

indicate that the tributary loading of SRP to the lake is actually

increasing. While there is evidence that SRP loadings may be

increasing throughout the lake, the trend is particularly evident

for the Maumee and Sandusky Rivers.

Monitoring SRP provides better information for resource

managers to understand the conditions leading to an algal

bloom and the impacts of management decisions. There is a

strong need to develop and use consistent and reliable methods

to collect and monitor SRP (in addition to total phosphorus) at

the tributary, nearshore, and offshore scales.

Phosphorus is the primary limiting nutrient causing excessive

algae and other water quality associated impacts.

While total phosphorus loads to the lake have been stable or

declining, recent studies indicate that the loading of soluble

reactive phosphorus to the lake from the Maumee and

Sandusky rivers is actually increasing.

Photo: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

In order to move forward, we must rst envision what Lake

Erie’s future state will be. Achieving this vision will require

the commitment and imagination of all people in the Lake Erie

watershed.

Implementation of the Nutrient Management Strategy and

achievement of the Vision will be based on the following key

principles:

▪ Adaptive Management – Decisions must be exible and

be adjusted in the face of uncertainties, natural variability

and new information.

▪ Precautionary Principle and No Regrets Actions –

The lack of full scientic certainty shall not be used as

a reason for postponing cost effective best management

practices.

▪ Prevent Pollution – It is better for the environment and

more cost effective to prevent nutrient enrichment than to

clean it up after the fact.

▪ Shared Responsibility – The responsibility for policy

and program development and implementation should be

shared within the mandate of all jurisdictional levels.

▪ Promote Awareness – Connecting people with the

watershed and nutrient issues facing the Great Lakes

provides a key motivating force for actions.

▪ Accountable and Clear Actions – Actions must be

coordinated and transparent and everyone must be

accountable for their actions.

▪ Work Together – Integration and cooperation must occur

across traditional environmental, social and economic

boundaries to align our actions.

2.0 A Vision for the Lake

Lake Erie LaMP Vision

The Lake Erie LaMP envisions a future state of Lake

Erie with a sustainable ecosystem that supports benecial

economic and social activities for society.

Lake Erie LaMP Nutrient Goals

Nutrient inputs from both point and non-point sources are

managed to ensure that ambient nutrient concentrations are

within the bounds of sustainable watershed management.

A substantial reduction in the current levels of algal biomass

to levels below a nuisance condition in Lake Erie, including

associated bays and other areas where nuisance algal

blooms occur. (GLWQA, Annex 3-1).

Lake Erie LaMP Nutrient Objectives

Stop further degradation – Ensure no further human-

induced eutrophication. Nutrient concentrations in waters

are, at a minimum, to be maintained at current levels so

eutrophication does not get worse.

Conserve and protect waters that meet nutrient targets

– Maintain current nutrient concentrations and loadings in

those waters that already meet nutrient targets and protect

those waters from increases due to future land use practices.

Restore waters that do not meet nutrient targets – Work

to reduce phosphorus concentrations and loadings in those

waters that are not meeting water quality targets by using a

focused nutrient management approach that considers both

current and future land uses.

Regularly monitor and report on the status of nutrients

in the tributary, coastal wetland, nearshore, and offshore

waters of Lake Erie, as they relate to established LaMP

targets and goals.

Conduct research to better understand nutrient cycling

and the effect of human activities, to improve management

decisions.

3.1 History of Cultural Eutrophication

Prior to European

settlement, the estimated

phosphorus load to Lake

Erie was 3,000 metric

tonnes per year.

By 1900, the load had

increased to about 9,000

metric tonnes per year as a

result of land use changes

that occurred after 1850.

At that time the majority

of the total annual loading

was derived from spring

runoff to the western

basin and from continuous

inputs from municipal and

industrial sewage wherever

rivers entered Lake Erie.

From about 1900, sewage

and detergents containing

phosphate increased the

total phosphorus load to

a peak of approximately

28,000 metric tonnes in

1968.

In 1972, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA)

was signed and programs were initiated to protect, maintain

and restore the waters of the Great Lakes. As a result, by 1980

annual loadings to Lake Erie had declined to approximately

15,000 metric tonnes.

In 1981, the GLWQA target load of 11,000 metric tonnes per

year was achieved as a result of a substantial drop in the point

source total phosphorus load resulting largely from sewage

treatment plants being improved and a reduction of phosphates

in laundry soaps and detergents.

During the mid-to-late 1980s, dreissenid mussels (zebra and

quagga) arrived in the Great Lakes. The mussels are lter

feeders capable of removing large quantities of phytoplankton

from the water. Colonization of Lake Erie by dreissenid

mussels resulted in several years of improved water clarity

and dramatic food web changes, especially a shift in algal

production from phytoplankton to bottom-dwelling algae and

plants.

By the early 1990s, the average annual load from tributaries

had been reduced to about 10,000 metric tonnes. However, in

the mid- to late-1990s, large late-summer algal blooms began

to reappear sporadically in western Lake Erie and have been

increasing in frequency ever since.

Algal blooms of varying magnitude occurred in the western

basin each summer from 2003 to 2011. These blooms have

been dominated by the blue-green alga (cyanobacteria)

Microcystis aeruginosa. Microcystis had been a common

species in Lake Erie for at least a century, but rarely grew to

nuisance bloom proportions. Blooms of Microcystis become

most evident during warm, calm periods when the cells oat

to the surface and form a layer of scum. Blooms from 2009 to

2011 extended into the central basin.

During the period from 1981 to 2007, the GLWQA total

phosphorus loading target was achieved in 16 of the 27 years

(see gure above). This variability in annual loading is the

result of hydrological inuences, with loads exceeding the

target in years with higher precipitation and runoff.

3.0 Lake Erie’s Nutrient Status and Effects

Annual Loads of Total Phosphorus in Lake Erie. The dashed red line represents the phosphorus target for

Lake Erie, as set in the 1978 Canada-United States Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. Graph provided by

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

1997 2002 2007199219871982197719721967

5 000

10 000

15 000

20 000

25 000

30 000

UnspeciﬁedNonpoint SourcesPoint SourcesAtmospheric Deposion

Total Phosphorus, metric tonnes

Lake Huron

Lake Erie: Annual Loads of Total Phosphorus

Year

3.2 What is the Status of Nutrients in

the Lake Erie Basin?

3.2.1 Nutrient Status of Offshore Waters

The offshore waters of Lake Erie consist of three distinct

basins – western, central, and eastern (see map, page 1) – and

are generally found greater than 3-4 km (2 miles) from the

shore at depths exceeding 15 m (49 ft).

From 1967 to 1981 the annual total phosphorus load to Lake

Erie dropped substantially from approximately 28,000 metric

tonnes to 11,000 metric tonnes. However, between 1982 and

2007, total phosphorus loading uctuated annually, resulting

in loads exceeding the GLWQA target in years with relatively

high precipitation.

While estimates of phosphorus loading from point sources,

atmospheric sources, and the interconnecting channel have

remained relatively stable since 1982, non-point sources

via the tributaries continue to contribute the largest portion

of phosphorus loadings and are mostly responsible for the

periodic exceedences of the Lake Erie loading target during

high ow years.

Reductions in non-point source phosphorus, especially in

high ow years, would reduce nutrient related impacts to the

offshore waters, including hypoxia and algal blooms.

Eects of Excessive Nutrient Inputs to Oshore Waters

Hypoxia – Hypoxia is the depletion of oxygen in the bottom

waters (hypolimnion) of the lake. Prolonged events of

hypoxia can have a devastating eect on sh and lake

processes. Although hypoxia may be a natural characteristic

of the central basin, research has now determined that

increased phosphorus loading aects the magnitude and

duration of oxygen depletion. Through the mid-1990s, there

was a decrease from historic levels in the severity of hypoxia;

however, there is evidence that seasonal hypoxia may again

be intensifying in the central basin.

Algal Blooms – There are increasing reports of blue-green

algae species concentrations in the central basin. These

species can form blooms containing natural toxins that are

dangerous to humans and wildlife. Increased phosphorus

concentrations enhance the probability of blue-green algal

growth. Increased algal productivity in the central basin

is expected to exacerbate seasonal hypoxia as dead algae

accumulate in the hypolimnion, resulting in increased

biological oxygen demand throughout the growing season.

Photo: NASA image courtesy Je Schmaltz, MODIS Rapid Response Team at NASA GSFC, October 2011.

3.2.2 Nutrient Status of Nearshore Waters

The nearshore nutrient situation is complex and dynamic

and varies widely across Lake Erie. For denition purposes,

the Lake Erie LaMP divides the nearshore into two areas:

coastal margin and nearshore open-water. The coastal margin

is dened as the shoreline, water column and substrate in

embayments with water depths of 3 m (10 ft) or less. The

nearshore open-water is dened as the water column and

substrate with water depths between 3 m (10 ft) and 15 m (49

ft). The primary sources of nutrients to the nearshore waters

include loads from tributaries (similar to offshore sources) and

inputs from shoreline land uses, agricultural activities, and

municipal wastewater treatment plant outows.

Although the relative proportion of non-point source versus

point source loadings has not been quantied on a whole

lake basis, there is growing evidence that non-point sources

are accounting for the majority of the loadings throughout

much of the basin. A recent thorough assessment undertaken

in Ohio found that non-point sources are the most important

source of dissolved phosphorus in the Maumee and Sandusky

watersheds, Ohio’s largest agricultural watersheds. The Ohio

Lake Erie Phosphorus Task Force also reported that peak SRP

concentrations coincide with peak storm water runoff. In the

Maumee and Sandusky Rivers over a 20 year period, 90% of

the sediment and phosphorus load was delivered during storm

events (Ohio EPA, 2010).

Nearshore waters tend to ow parallel to the shore and, if

there are specic local inputs, certain portions or reaches of

the nearshore can develop their own chemical, physical and

biological properties. This can be the result of local water

currents, depth and weather conditions. Under calm conditions

the effects of offshore currents are lessened; however, under

storm events or windy weather, the nearshore is subsequently

mixed with the offshore water.

Water quality studies in the nearshore area are plagued

by extreme variability. It is important to gain a better

understanding of how nutrient sources (such as tributaries,

urban runoff, ground water, and sewage efuents) dissipate

in lakes, and how nutrient concentrations affect the nearshore

ecosystem, especially the nearshore phosphorus shunt

and algae blooms. Our short-term challenge is to gain a

better understanding of the nearshore processes through

more research and consistent approaches to water quality

monitoring.

Eects of Excessive Nutrient Inputs to Nearshore Waters

Nearshore Phosphorus Shunt and Dreissenid Mussels

– Variations in total phosphorus loading to nearshore

areas may be aected, or exacerbated, by the “nearshore

phosphorus shunt”. This hypothetical model seeks to

describe a change in nutrient movement and quantity

caused by the presence of dreissenid mussels (e.g., zebra and

quagga mussels).

The bedrock areas in the eastern basin are prime habitat for

both dreissenid mussels and Cladophora. Dreissenid mussels

are thought to lter the nearshore waters and concentrate

their energy and nutrients locally within their population

and waste products. While this may result in clear water

due to reduced nutrient concentrations surrounding the

dreissenids, the accumulating shells of the mussels provide

a physical refuge for many species and a place where their

decomposing waste can concentrate. The mussels are

thought to stimulate Cladophora growth by the excretion

of concentrated soluble nutrients in their waste bi-products.

Further, as the mussels increase water clarity during lter

feeding, sunlight is able to penetrate to ever greater depths

thereby expanding the amount of habitat available for

Cladophora colonization.

Algal Blooms – Algal populations vary widely throughout

the three basins of the lake. One of the most visible

responses to excess phosphorus inputs in the nearshore is

the lamentous algae Cladophora. Nuisance growths of

Cladophora are again being reported in the eastern basin.

Accumulations of Cladophora on the shoreline decompose

and cause obnoxious smells and visual impairments of the

waterfront, impacting recreational enjoyment and property

values.

However, the growth of Cladophora is limited by the

availability of soluble reactive phosphorus. This is good

news, because it means that the reduction of phosphorus

through better phosphorus controls could be eective at

controlling Cladophora blooms. Dealing with localized

phosphorus inputs from tributary streams, groundwater

discharge, and non-point agricultural runo will play an

important role in reducing these nearshore Cladophora

blooms.

Blue-green algae, such as Microcystis, are being reported in

the western basin and fouling shorelines and embayments

in areas where, historically, they did not proliferate. These

species can form blooms containing natural toxins that are

dangerous to humans and wildlife.

3.2.3 Nutrient Status of Tributaries

The majority of total phosphorus loading to Lake Erie is the

result of inputs from a few major tributaries, including the

Detroit River (especially the Trenton Channel, Michigan);

Maumee River, Ohio; Sandusky River, Ohio; Grand River,

Ontario; and Thames River, Ontario. These larger rivers

contain a mix of non-point source pollution, including

agricultural and urban runoff, and point source pollution,

such as treated municipal sewage. While phosphorus inputs

from these tributaries may be the key driver of intensifying

central basin hypoxia and eutrophication on a lakewide basis,

localized inputs from smaller tributaries and other sources play

a primary role in exacerbating nuisance Cladophora growth in

the nearshore waters. As well, the nearshore phosphorus shunt,

and changes in the timing, frequency and intensity of storm

events (possibly related to changes in global climate patterns)

may be exacerbating total phosphorus inputs, resulting in

accelerated eutrophication.

Most tributary watersheds in the Lake Erie basin urgently need

reductions in total phosphorus concentration. The following

priority watersheds are very far above target and require

focused total phosphorus concentration reductions: Clinton

River, Trenton Channel-Detroit River, River Raisin, Maumee

River, Sandusky River, Vermilion River, Cuyahoga River,

Grand River (Ohio), Grand River (Ontario), Big Otter Creek,

Kettle Creek, Thames River, Essex Region watersheds and

Sydenham River.

Although there have been signicant reductions in total

phosphorus loading, recent research indicates that SRP, the

most biologically available form of phosphorus, is increasing

in watersheds where data are available. The Ohio EPA’s recent

Ohio Lake Erie Phosphorus Task Force Final Report reported

that the majority of annual phosphorus loading to Lake Erie

is associated with the storm pulsed runoff from the landscape

into the tributaries that drain to Lake Erie (Ohio EPA, 2010).

These ndings suggest a particular emphasis must be placed

on the timing and delivery of nutrients from non-point sources

throughout the agricultural portions of the Lake Erie basin and

that the focus of any phosphorus management efforts must

target actions in the watershed to reduce phosphorus sources

and loads (Ohio EPA, 2010).

Major Tributaries Contributing Phosphorus to Lake Erie

Detroit River/Interconnecting Channel – The Detroit

River, which carries the inowing waters from all the upper

Great Lakes, contributes roughly 80% of the total inow to

Lake Erie. All other Lake Erie tributary rivers and streams

combined provide 9%, with the remaining 11% coming from

precipitation falling on the lake’s surface. Despite being the

principle source of inow to Lake Erie, the waters of the

Detroit River contain relatively low concentrations of total

phosphorus, estimated to contribute 16% of the annual total

phosphorus load to Lake Erie (1,800 metric tonnes).

Total phosphorus concentrations in the Trenton Channel,

which is the outow of the Detroit wastewater treatment plant,

were found to be signicantly higher than at other sampling

sites in the Detroit River and have the potential to exacerbate

the phosphorus overload effects in the Maumee River area.

Maumee River – The Maumee River is estimated to

contribute the same annual total phosphorus load to Lake Erie

as the Detroit River (1,800 metric tonnes).

While total phosphorus concentrations in the Maumee River

have decreased due to municipal sewage plant upgrades and

agricultural cultivation techniques designed to reduce soil

erosion, the fraction of total phosphorus that is soluble reactive

has increased. These concentrations are of great biological

concern and are believed to be feeding the blue-green algal

blooms in the western basin.

Sandusky River – Although the Sandusky River has a much

smaller discharge than the Maumee River, the total phosphorus

properties of these two rivers are very similar. The total

phosphorus and soluble reactive phosphorus concentrations

measured in the river between 2001 and 2009 were more than

enough to stimulate algal blooms and the establishment of

Cylindrospermopsis, an invading cyanobacterium which is

capable of generating dangerous toxins, in Sandusky Bay.

Ontario Tributaries – Less

information about phosphorus

loading exists for the Ontario

tributaries. Increased research

and monitoring is needed,

especially to conrm loading

estimates and to determine the

status of SRP. Total phosphorus

concentrations in most Ontario

Lake Erie streams and rivers

exceed the Provincial Water

Quality Objective (PWQO)

of 30 micrograms per litre

(µg/L) which is thought to be

a threshold for deleterious in-

stream effects.

The total phosphorus

loads from Ontario

tributaries are not known.

The Grand River sediment

plume can be detected up

and down the coast for a

distance of 12 km (7 miles)

and up to 3 km (2 miles)

oshore depending on

weather, and the Thames

River sediment plume can

be detected as far away as

the western basin.

Eects of Excessive Nutrient Inputs from Tributaries to the

Lake

All tributaries contribute to the net nutrient load to Lake Erie

which exacerbates problems (algal and hypoxia growth) in

the oshore and nearshore waters. Major tributaries may

be the principal driver of open lake processes, but research

is showing that smaller tributaries and other localized

nutrient sources may be equally important in the nearshore

environment and play a primary role in local nuisance algal

growths, such as Cladophora.

Urgent action must be taken to reduce nutrient loadings from

large and small tributaries that are not meeting nutrient

targets, and more research and monitoring is needed to

understand the relationship between smaller tributaries,

nearshore nutrient conditions and nuisance algal growth.

3.2.4 Nutrient Status of Coastal Wetlands

Coastal wetlands play a signicant role in the mitigation

and release of phosphorus into the nearshore. Similar to the

nearshore waters, the nutrient cycles around coastal wetlands

are complex and dynamic and vary depending on local

conditions.

Although a signicant amount of information exists about the

location of coastal wetlands, very little is known about the

complex relationship between these environmentally sensitive

areas and nutrient loading. More research is needed to

understand the status and function of these wetlands and how

they interact with the nearshore nutrient cycle.

3.2.5 Summary of Lake Erie Phosphorus

Status

Between 1981 and 2007 the total phosphorus annual target

load of 11,000 metric tonnes was met in 16 of 27 years. The

variation in annual loads is due to the positive correlation

between non-point source loads and precipitation amounts.

The ongoing effects of excessive nutrient loading include:

▪ Seasonal hypoxia (depleted oxygen conditions) appears to

be intensifying in the central basin.

▪ Blue-green algal blooms are occurring regularly in the

western basin and fouling shorelines and embayments in

areas where they never used to proliferate.

▪ Fouling of nearshore areas of the eastern basin

by Cladophora is reminiscent of the early 1970s.

Additionally, new species of cyanobacteria are appearing.

▪ Loading of soluble reactive phosphorus, the most

biologically available form of phosphorus, is increasing in

the Sandusky and Maumee rivers and may be increasing

in other Lake Erie tributaries. Research is needed to

develop and implement a consistent approach to reliably

measure SRP.

In addition, climate change-related increases in water

temperatures, reduced winter ice extent and duration, and

colonizing invasive species are exacerbating the nutrient

problems of Lake Erie.

While the mechanisms behind these changes are areas

of active scientic investigation, there is a clear need for

immediate phosphorus reduction actions coupled with ongoing

research and monitoring.

Photo: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

In order to sustain a healthy lake ecosystem, total phosphorus

targets have been established for the four different habitat

types in the Lake Erie basin: offshore, nearshore, tributaries

and coastal wetlands.

These water quality targets are based on the desired ideal

biotic response in the environment that should result in

negligible risks to all living things, including the ecosystem

features that they depend on for survival.

The comparison of lake total phosphorus concentrations to

these targets over long- and short-term periods will inform us

of new trends and provides a means for assessing the results of

our management efforts and adapting to the natural variability

of the ecosystem.

Research and monitoring will continue to rene these targets

to ensure they are ecologically credible and appropriately

sustainable to meet the vision, goals and objectives of the Lake

Erie Binational Nutrient Management Strategy.

4.1 Offshore Nutrient Targets

The offshore spring total phosphorus concentration target is

15 micrograms per litre (µg/L) for the western basin and 10

µg/L for the eastern and central basins. These targets are based

on achieving the GLWQA total phosphorus loading target for

Lake Erie of 11,000 metric tonnes/year, and complement the

Great Lakes Fisheries Commission’s Lake Erie Environmental

Objectives (2005) to support a desirable sustainable sh

community by maintaining mesotrophic conditions (10-20

µg/L) in the west and central basins.

4.2 Nearshore Nutrient Target

The nearshore total phosphorus concentration target is 20

µg/L. This target applies to both the coastal margin and the

nearshore open-water. The nearshore total phosphorus target

is based on the Ontario Provincial Water Quality Objective

(OMOE, 1999) of 20 µg/L for lake water during the ice-

free period, and complements the Great Lakes Fisheries

Commission Lake Erie Environmental Objectives (2005) to

support a desirable sustainable sh community by maintaining

mesotrophic conditions (10-20 µg/L) in the nearshore waters

of the eastern basin.

Due to the extreme variability of the nearshore environment

and the unknowns about nutrient sources, dissipation and

the distribution of total phosphorus concentrations, it is very

difcult to take measurements and generate conclusions that

can be consistently applied across the lake. Therefore, it is

extremely important that research and monitoring efforts

continue to develop scientically credible and ecologically-

based targets for the nearshore areas and that the targets are

adapted as better science becomes available.

4.3 Tributary Nutrient Target

The tributary total phosphorus concentration target is 32 µg/L.

The tributary target applies to tributary waters immediately

above the lake effect zone of the tributary, which is the zone

of water near the mouth of the tributary that contains a mix of

Lake Erie water and tributary water. The size and shape of the

lake effect zone will differ with each tributary.

The tributary nutrient target is based on research by

Environment Canada that established a total phosphorus

concentration target of 32 µg/L for smaller, agriculturally-

dominated watersheds (Chambers et al., 2008). Further

research and monitoring is required to assess the applicability

of this approach in both larger and more urban-inuenced

watersheds. Other existing tributary total phosphorus

concentration targets established by various agencies such

as the Ontario Provincial Water Quality Objective (OMOE,

4.0 Nutrient Targets for Lake Erie

Targets for Total Phosphorus Concentrations

Lake Erie and Watershed

Habitat Type Total Phosphorus Concentration (μg/L)

Oshore*

West Basin 15

Central Basin 10

East Basin 10

Nearshore** 20

Tributaries*** 32

Coastal Wetlands one recording of <30 μg/L/year

* Mean spring total phosphorus concentration

** Mean total phosphorus concentration during ice free period

*** Mean annual total phosphorus concentration

Photo:

David Poulson, Great Lake Echo

1999) (30 µg/L), the New York State Guidance (2008) (20

ug/L) and the 2000 US EPA Recommendation (33 µg/L), were

also considered.

4.4 Coastal Wetlands Nutrient Target

The total phosphorus concentration target for coastal wetlands

is based on the State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference

indicator “Nitrate and Total Phosphorus for Coastal Wetlands

(Indicator ID: 4860)” which recommends a target of at least

one instance per year of less than 30 µg/L.

Although a signicant amount of information exists about

the location of coastal wetlands, more research is needed

to understand the complex relationship between these

environmentally sensitive areas and their role in nutrient

loading and management.

Photo: Ontario Parks

Lake Erie is a complex watershed with a diversity of

characteristics, uses and threats. As a result, a one-size-ts-

all approach will not be successful in achieving a sustainable

nutrient cycle. The following provides nutrient management,

research and monitoring goals to be considered for action

by all levels of government (federal, provincial, state

and municipal), non-government organizations, industry,

academia, community groups, and landowners.

5.1 Phosphorus Management Goals

Halting further degradation and restoring Lake Erie waters

requires a commitment to reducing anthropogenic phosphorus

loadings to the lake and its tributaries. Focusing immediate

attention on priority watersheds where targets are being

exceeded and on sources that are locally dominant will

produce short- and long-term benets.

5.0 Nutrient Management, Research and

Monitoring Goals

Photo: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

Phosphorus Management Goal 1: Focus on Priority

Watersheds and Dominant Sources – Identify and focus

efforts in priority watersheds where targets are being

exceeded, and on dominant sources of phosphorus in these

watersheds.

Phosphorus Management Goal 2: Establish Policies and

Practices to Reduce Phosphorus Loading – Put in place

appropriate policies, controls and practices to mitigate the

form and timing of dominant phosphorus sources across the

Lake Erie basin.

Phosphorus Management Goal 3: Take Action to Reduce

Phosphorus Loadings from Existing Sources – Implement

specic actions to reduce phosphorus loading in priority

watersheds and from existing dominant sources.

Research Goal 1: Conduct Research to Understand

Nutrients and Ecosystem Processes – Improve our

understanding of how nutrients affect Lake Erie’s water

quality and ecosystem processes.

Research Goal 2: Conduct Research to Understand

Human Impacts – Improve our understanding of how

human activities change over time and how they impact

nutrient conditions in Lake Erie in order to develop effective

phosphorus management options.

Research Goal 3: Conduct Research to Predict

Outcomes – Develop new, and improve existing, models to

better predict the effects of stressors and alternative nutrient

mitigation actions.

Research Goal 4: Develop Benecial (Best) Management

Practices – Continue to research and develop new

technologies and best management practices for reducing

phosphorus losses from land, reservoirs, rivers and lakes.

Research Goal 5: Communicate Science Findings

– Promote awareness and understanding about the

linkage between individual and communal actions and

nutrient issues in Lake Erie to develop a strong sense of

responsibility and motivation from everyone to participate

in the reduction of phosphorous loadings.

5.2 Research Goals

Scientic research provides essential information that will

help us to better understand nutrient and ecosystem processes,

anthropogenic sources and impacts, and to direct management

decisions and actions to priority areas.

There are many knowledge gaps regarding the type of

phosphorus entering the lake and how the lake ecosystem

responds. These gaps need to be addressed in order to consider

the adequacy of phosphorus management practices and to

adopt necessary future changes.

5.3 Monitoring Goals

Consistent monitoring allows for a better understanding

of how Lake Erie responds to natural and anthropogenic

inuences and is an essential component in adaptive

management. Monitoring is already ongoing through the

LaMP partnership and a regular review of these programs

will ensure there are resources to meet current and future

needs. Currently, there are spatial and temporal gaps in the

monitoring data that must be addressed to understand the

effectiveness of management programs and practices, and to

determine our progress towards meeting the nutrient targets.

Monitoring is an essential component of adaptive management

and the implementation of the Nutrient Strategy. Photo: National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Great Lakes Environmental

Research Laboratory.

Monitoring Goal 1: Monitor Nutrient Status – Monitor

the status of total phosphorus and soluble reactive

phosphorus in open waters, nearshore and tributaries to

identify trends and measure progress towards meeting

nutrient targets. Regular monitoring of nutrient status is a

key component of adaptive management, and will ensure

that targets are being met, actions are anticipatory and that

plans put in place are making a difference.

Monitoring Goal 2: Monitor Ecosystem Response –

Monitor how the ecosystem responds to natural lake cycles,

invasive species and the implementation of management

programs and benecial (best) management practices.

Monitoring Goal 3: Monitor Human Health/Socio-

Economic Implications – Monitor the occurrence and

impacts of harmful algae blooms on drinking water sources

and recreational activities.

Monitoring Goal 4: Monitor Progress of Implementation

– Measure the progress of implementation efforts to ensure

we are headed in a sustainable direction.

6.1 Who Is Involved and What Can Be

Done?

Achieving the goals of the Strategy will depend on a renewed

commitment from throughout the watershed. Partnerships

will be critical to achieving results. A commitment to work

together and take action is required from federal, state,

provincial and local governments, academia, non-government

organizations, businesses, landowners and local citizens, in

both Canada and the United States.

▪ Federal, State and Provincial Governments can

provide leadership and coordination, set basin-wide

targets, work across jurisdictional boundaries and

watersheds, provide technical advice and funding, enact

and enforce legislation and establish policy direction,

conduct research and monitoring, and report the ndings

to everyone.

▪ Towns, Cities and Counties can provide direction

in their land use plans and make wise development

decisions that mitigate the impacts of phosphorus

loadings. Municipal governments are responsible for

sewage treatment plants, stormwater management and the

protection of environmentally sensitive areas. They can

create by-laws and introduce stewardship initiatives to

promote benecial management practices for nutrients.

▪ Academics and Schools can lead research programs,

conduct restoration projects and provide educational

programs to improve our understanding and appreciation

of the Lake Erie ecosystem.

▪ Conservation Authorities and other watershed-based

organizations can rene and/or design and implement

watershed based phosphorus reduction programs in

consultation with local communities to achieve LaMP

targets. They can provide leadership and guidance for

watershed and sub-watershed based projects such as water

budgets for rivers and streams, restoration projects, and

monitoring. They can provide advice to municipalities

on environmental management and they can work with

community members and property owners through

stewardship programs.

▪ Non-Government Organizations can be environmental

leaders and encourage others through education and

communication programs, research and monitoring,

restoration projects and the preservation of

environmentally sensitive areas such as coastal wetlands,

streams and rivers.

▪ Community Groups can take on-the-ground action

and raise local awareness about the importance of living

sustainably in the Lake Erie Basin.

▪ Industry, business, farmers, developers and

land owners can lead their peers by demonstrating

strong environmental values and adopting Benecial

Management Practices that lessen their impacts on the

Lake Erie ecosystem.

▪ All people including politicians, planners, engineers,

scientists, residents, cottagers and land owners can

practice phosphorus reduction activities in their everyday

work and lives.

By working together we can take appropriate actions to protect

the waters of Lake Erie and achieve a sustainable ecosystem

that supports sh and wildlife populations while providing

economic and social benets for society.

The LaMP’s Commitment and Path Forward

Lake Erie LaMP members are committed to improving

the health of the Lake and will continue to facilitate the

implementation of management actions and to promote

focused research and monitoring efforts. The LaMP will work

with partners to identify specic actions to be undertaken in

support of the Strategy. Progress on actions will be reviewed

annually and will be integrated into the ve-year Lake Erie

LaMP management, work planning and reporting cycle.

6.0 Moving Forward and Making a Commitment

Everyone is responsible for reducing phosphorus loads

to Lake Erie. By joining forces we can better achieve a

sustainable ecosystem.

Photo: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

6.1.1 Implementing Actions

As a next step, the LaMP will work with partners to develop

domestic action plans targeted at priority areas. Action plans

in support of the Strategy will be reective of the institutional

and legislative differences between Canada and the United

States. These work plans will focus on the needs of the Lake

and will create the domestic decision frameworks necessary to

lead to actions on the ground.

6.1.2 Research and Monitoring

The Lake Erie LaMP and Lake Erie research networks

depend on comprehensive and timely research and monitoring

information to adapt policies and actions to restore and

protect the lake. In 2009, scientists and researchers conducted

intensive eldwork and data collection on the status of

nutrients in Lake Erie. Initial results are scheduled to be

available in 2011 and will be formally released in the LaMP’s

Five-Year Report in 2013.

6.1.3 Collaborating

Lake Erie LaMP managers are committed to working with

partners to learn how priority actions can be adopted and

implemented. The LaMP will continue to work with partners

to enhance and build on ongoing initiatives. These include:

▪ The Ohio Task Force Phosphorus Report

www.epa.ohio.gov/dsw/lakeerie/ptaskforce/index.aspx

▪ The US EPA National Nutrient Strategy

www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nutrient/strategy/

nutstra3.pdf

▪ Lake Erie Millennium Network

http://web2.uwindsor.ca/lemn/

▪ SOLEC Nearshore Areas of the Great Lakes (2009)

http://binational.net/solec/sogl2009/SOGL_2009_

nearshore_en.pdf

▪ Water Quality in Ontario Report (2008)

www.ene.gov.on.ca/publications/6926e.pdf

▪ Proceedings of the Great Lakes Phosphorus Forum

www.sera17.ext.vt.edu/Meetings/greatlakespforum/index.

html

▪ An Urgent Call to Action: Report of the State-EPA

Nutrients Innovations Task Force (US EPA 2009)

www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nutrient/nitgreport.pdf

▪ Essex Region Conservation Authority 2009 WQ Status

Report

www.erca.org/downloads/watershed_water_quality_

report_09.pdf

▪ Lake Simcoe Phosphorus Reduction Strategy

www.ene.gov.on.ca/publications/7633e.pdf

▪ Great Lakes Fishery Commission

www.glfc.org/lakecom/lec/lechome.php

6.1.4 Public Reporting

Lake Erie LaMP managers are committed to regularly

reporting on research and monitoring results and on the

effectiveness of nutrient management activities to ensure the

Lake Erie community has up-to-date information on the status

of nutrients. This reporting will be integrated into the regular

public reporting cycle required by the LaMP. Reporting on

nutrient status, ecosystem response and management outcomes

will incorporate the monitoring and research data acquired

over the ve-year LaMP cycle and compare progress towards

achieving the phosphorus targets. The next LaMP Report

will be released in 2013 and will include the most up-to-date

information on the status of nutrients in Lake Erie.

6.1.5 Education and Awareness

Lake Erie LaMP managers are committed to continuing

education and awareness activities that help connect the

Lake Erie community to their watershed and to the lake. The

LaMP will work with partners to increase awareness of how

communities can help to manage nutrients in their watershed

and improve the health of Lake Erie. Outreach and educational

actions to reduce nutrients in Lake Erie will be identied

within the LaMP ve-year Work Plan.

Photo: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

Acronyms

BMP - Benecial (Best) Management Practice

CA - Conservation Authority (Canada)

DFO - Fisheries and Oceans Canada

EC - Environment Canada

GLFC - Great Lakes Fishery Commission

GLWQA - Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

HAB - Harmful Algal Blooms

LaMP - Lakewide Management Plan

MDEQ - Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

MDNR - Michigan Department of Natural Resources

NGO - Non-Government Organization

NWRI - National Water Research Institute (Canada)

NYSDEC - New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

NYSDOH - New York State Department of Health

ODNR - Ohio Department of Natural Resources

ODH - Ohio Department of Health

OEPA - Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

OMNR - Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

OMOE - Ontario Ministry of the Environment

SRP - Soluble Reactive Phosphorus

U.S. EPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency

µg - Microgram

Glossary

anoxia - a condition where dissolved oxygen in the water

column is totally depleted.

anthropogenic - of man-made origin, not occurring naturally.

benthos - bottom-dwelling organisms.

bioaccumulation - the process whereby a contaminant

increases in an organism over time in relation to the amount

consumed in food or absorbed from the surrounding

environment.

biomass - the total mass (weight) of all living organisms in an

area

biotic - of or relating to living organisms.

chlorophyll a - the pigment that makes plants and algae

green. Measurement of chlorophyll a is used to determine the

quantity of algae in the water.

Cladophora - a long lamentous type of green algae that

attaches to hard surfaces, particularly near the shoreline.

Abundant growth is an indicator of phosphorous enrichment.

dissolved oxygen - the amount of oxygen measured in the

water.

ecosystem - the complex of a living community and its

physical and chemical environment, functioning together as a

unit in nature, with some inherent stability.

eutrophication - the process by which a lake becomes rich in

dissolved nutrients and decient in oxygen, occurring either

as a natural stage in lake maturation or articially induced by

human activities such as the addition of fertilizers and organic

wastes from runoff.

Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement - an agreement

signed by the United States and Canada to restore and

maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the

waters of the Great Lakes Basin ecosystem.

hypolimnion – the cooler, lower most layer of water in a

thermally stratied lake.

hypoxia – the reduction of oxygen levels.

lake effect zone - the area within the tributary where the water

of Lake Erie and the river are mixed. This is typically the point

at which the tributary reaches lake level. The size of the lake

effect zone for every river is different and also varies with

rising and falling lake levels.

loadings - the amount of pollutants being discharged or

deposited into the lake.

limiting nutrient - A chemical nutrient, such as phosphorus,

which is necessary for growth but is currently insufcient

relative to other required nutrients and so controls potential

plant growth.

microcystin - a naturally-occurring, potent liver toxin

produced by species of blue-green algae

Microcystis - a blue-green algae that causes algae blooms

under eutrophic, high phosphorus conditions. It can be toxic to

aquatic life and humans if ingested in sufcient quantities due

to the presence of microcystin.

phytoplankton - planktonic algae.

soluble reactive phosphorus - The fraction of phosphorus

(dened by methodology) consisting largely of the inorganic

orthophosphate (PO4) form of phosphorus. Orthophosphate

is directly taken up by algae, and the concentration of this

fraction constitutes an index of the amount of phosphorus

immediately available for algal growth.

stratication - water stratication occurs when water of high

and low oxygenation, density and temperature forms layers

that act as barriers to water mixing.

total phosphorus - the total concentration of phosphorus

found in the water.

turbid - sediment or foreign particles stirred up or suspended

in the water column that can inhibit growth of submerged

aquatic plants and affect other species’ behaviour.

References

Bertram, P. and N. Stadler-Salt, 2000. Selection of Indicators

for Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem Health, Version 4. Retrieved

from: www.on.ec.gc.ca/solec/indicators2000-e.html.

Chambers, P.A., C. Vis, R.B. Brua, M. Guy, J.M. Culp and

G.A. Benoy, 2008. Eutrophication of agricultural streams:

dening nutrient concentrations to protect ecological

condition. Water Science & Technology – WST. 58-11: 2203-

2210. Environment Canada 2008.

International Joint Commission, 1987. Great Lakes Water

Quality Agreement as Amended by Protocol Signed November

18, 1987. Washington, DC and Ottawa, Ont.

Lake Erie Committee, Great Lakes Fisheries Commission,

2005. Lake Erie Environmental Objectives. Report of the

Environmental Objectives Sub-committee. Retrieved from:

www.glfc.org/lakecom/lec/EOs_July5.pdf.

New York State, 1998. Division of Water Technical and

Operational Guidance Series (1.1.1) Ambient Water Quality

Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Efuent

Limitations. 28 pgs.

Ontario Ministry of Environment, 1999. Provincial Water

Quality Objectives. Environmental Standards Section,

Standards Development Branch, Ministry of Environment and

Energy. 31 pgs.

U.S. EPA, 2000. Ambient Water Quality Criteria

Recommendations. Information supporting the development

of State and Tribal nutrient criteria for rivers and streams in

ecoregion VII. December 2000. U.S. EPA. Washington, DC.