Putting Great Lakes Stress on the Map

While different projects tackle the many threats to Great Lakes health – from invasive species to climate change – one has put them all on the map.

Glstress The Great Lakes Environmental Assessment and Mapping Project put together this map of 34 cumulated stressors. Areas with the most stress tended to be popular recreation areas. An interactive version can be found at www.greatlakesmapping.org.

The Great Lakes Environmental Assessment and Mapping (GLEAM) Project has cumulated information on 34 stressors, like pollution, that impact the Great Lakes to show what areas have the most to worry about.

An interactive version of the map can be found at http://www.greatlakesmapping.org.

“The information was out there but it wasn’t publicly available, and generally speaking it hadn’t been pulled together for the entire basin – the U.S. and Canadian side,” said Peter McIntyre, co-lead for the GLEAM Project.

The project began in 2010 to help environmental groups, scientists and researchers see where money should go. Projects in highly stressed areas should be priorities and get more funds.

“If the Obama Administration is able to give this level of funding to Great Lakes restoration, we’ve really got to get it right,” McIntyre said. “What’s the basis of prioritizing one place over another?”

In 2010, President Barack Obama, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and leaders from 15 other federal agencies created the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to rehabilitate the Great Lakes ecosystem. Over $2 million has been awarded to projects that benefit Door County, from beach renovation to phragmites removal.

McIntyre and other project leads David Allan and Sigrid Smith surveyed 161 Great Lakes researchers from around the basin to decide which stressors, or threats, carry the most weight. Although all stressors are negative, some cause a greater disturbance.

And it works. Cameron Davis, senior adviser to the EPA Administrator, said he’s already used the map to double-check that GLRI projects fit the GLEAM Project’s priorities.

“The GLEAM Project just released their map, and the priorities and the issues that we’re working on under the GLRI actually overlap very well,” Davis said. “It was a very good confirmation that we’re working on the things we should be working on.”

The EPA has its own list of priorities stressors that need to be addressed, including invasive species, polluted runoff, toxic pollution, habitat restoration and accountability of projects.

The GLEAM team identified invasive species, zebra mussels, ballast water invaders, sea lamprey, temperature changes or water level changes due to climate change as the most stressful threats in the Great Lakes.

“We’ve gone through and evaluated the locations for 231 sites where a good chunk of the restoration money has been spent in the last few years,” McIntyre said. “The authorities have done a great job identifying the high-stress sites”

High-stress sites on the GLEAM map are bright red, and low-stress sites are blue. But not every stress is equal. If a place has a lot of invasive species, it’s a brighter red than a place with more light pollution. Layers on the map can be turned on and off for a closer look at what troubles specific areas.

“Zebra mussels have many, many times the impacts on the ecosystem that light pollution has,” McIntyre said.

While McIntyre said the GLEAM map is the best one to use to look at ecosystem stress on a big scale, he cautions relying on it for regional data.

He used Green Bay as an example. It’s bright red, indicating the highest level of stress, but only relative to the rest of the Great Lakes basin.

“Red does not mean the sky is falling,” McIntyre said. “It just means that relative to other locations around the basin the stress levels are high so the ecosystem is likely in a highly degraded or a poor state of health.”

But the sky may be falling in the funding department, considering the uncertain fiscal future for many government programs and agencies. GLRI was given a continuing resolution that keeps the program alive through March, but the future beyond that is uncertain.

“Anybody who could tell you they could predict the future [of GLRI] really doesn’t have the crystal ball they’re saying they have,” Davis said.

Even without GLRI funding, McIntyre said the combined stress map will help states and other groups prioritize projects.

“If there isn’t [continued funding], after we’re done licking our wounds, we can go out at more local or regional scales to lobby for continued restoration efforts even with the absence of this massive federal investment,” McIntyre said.