"We are not making sure the anti-pollution technology is being used in the Great Lakes, and I am afraid that the results of the gap between promise and performance will become clear in the next 5 or 10 years." - Representative Abner Joseph Mikva, 1972
In the first five years of the GLWQA, the structured system established policies to improve water quality but failed to delegate specific responsibilities to each country.
These implementation issues furthered pre-existing conflicts over responsibility of the Great Lakes water quality. Within the same year, the US created the Water-Pollution Control Act, pursuing federal rather than international guidelines per the GLWQA. These issues resulted in the recommendation of more specific objectives for both countries.
|
Adapting to New Contexts
Contrasting Effects, Dr. Meredith Nevers, Research Scientist, U.S. Geological Survey, Great Lakes Science Center , personal interview, 2018
" The 1972 Agreement provided the springboard for dramatic phosphorus reductions, the 1978 Agreement provided the platform for new strategies to address toxic chemicals." -The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Promises to Keep; Challenges to Meet Perspectives from Citizens, 1980 |
Government Responsibility
"The GLWQA does not delineate the means for which governments should implement Remedial Action Plan, but it does require governments to make sure the plans are implemented." -Water, Water Everywhere by Jill T. Hauserman, 1995 "The IJC recommends that each federal government should make adequate resources available and that accountability and responsibility should be assigned to specific agencies" -IJC, 1976 |
As the process continued limited budgets resulted in minimal efforts towards phosphorus reduction. Although limits on phosphorus were passed, the structure of the GLWQA made revision difficult. Each bordering state was responsible for a portion of the water quality, leading to further conflict within the U.S. and further deterioration of Lake Erie. The lack of response and accountability became more apparent to the IJC, prompting substantial revisions to the GLWQA in 1978 and 1987
|
“The reason that so little real progress is being made is that there are really dueling notions about what the Great Lakes are, and whom they should serve." -Maude Barlow, National Chairperson, The Council of Canadians, 2011
“The reports of the IJC to the two governments include recommendations for actions needed to achieve the objectives of the agreement. In the 1980’s, lack of response by the governments to the IJC reports came to be seen by the non governmental environmental organizations as a reason to demand more accountability of the parties” - Pollution from Land Use Activities Reference Group, 1987 "Status of Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement", Dr. Susan Hedman, U.S. EPA Administrator, 2013. Courtesy of Great Lakes Now
|
"Phosphorus loading contributes to harmful algal blooms", 1997. Courtesy of GLEAM
"...to prevent degradation with regards to phosphorus in the boundary waters of the Lakes System." - Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978
"Throughout human history, water has defined our sense of place. International water law reflects the connections between water and local people, communities, and the environment. " -Noah D. Hall, environmental and water law, 2010
Proudly powered by Weebly