Johnny Sullivan
March 5, 2012
Transboundary Waters
MANAGEMENT OF THE GREAT LAKES BY THE U.S. AND CANADA
The Great Lakes are a group of freshwater lakes located along the northern border of the
United States and the southern border of Canada. They consist of Lakes Superior, Michigan,
Huron, Ontario, and Erie. Together, the lakes border eight U.S. states and one Canadian
province: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York,
and Canada’s Ontario. The lakes are located within separate basins, but they form one single
interconnected body of water; in fact, lakes Michigan and Huron are hydrologically the same
lake, in that they exist at the same elevation and rise and fall at the same rate. Water that starts in
Lake Superior eventually reaches the Atlantic Ocean via the Saint Lawrence Seaway and the
Great Lakes Waterway.
The five lakes taken as a whole form the largest group freshwater lakes on Earth, with
their total surface area of 94,250 square miles essentially equal in size to the state of Oregon (at
96,000 square miles). They account for an astounding 21% of the world’s surface fresh water,
and approximately 84% of the fresh water in North America.
Management History
The Great Lakes have been vital to the region for centuries, driving the economy and
maintain the ecology. In the last century, however, pollution of the Great Lakes waters has
increased substantially, damaging this critical water supply. The U.S. and Canada have a
fundamental interest in preserving and protecting the quality of this massive resource, and so a
series of agreements have been forged that seek to collaboratively deal with the management of
these jointly-owned water bodies.
The first agreement was the Boundary Waters Treaty. This treaty is the first significant
piece of legislation that attempts to deal with the shared management of the Great Lakes. Agreed
upon by the U.S. Secretary of State, Elihu Root, and the British Ambassador to the United States,
James Bryce, the treaty was signed in 1909 between the U.S. and Great Britain (on behalf of
Canada). The treaty describes its own purpose as follows:
The United States of America and His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India,
being equally desirous to prevent disputes regarding the use of boundary waters and to
settle all questions which are now pending between the United States and the Dominion
of Canada involving the rights, obligations, or interests of either in relation to the other
or to the inhabitants of the other, along their common frontier, and to make provision for
the adjustment and settlement of all such questions as may hereafter arise, have resolved
to conclude a treaty in furtherance of these ends, and for that purpose have appointed as
their respective plenipotentiaries.
Most importantly, the treaty established the International Joint Commission, a binational
organization intended to act as a tribunal to investigate management of transboundary tributaries
and rivers. The commission reviews issues only when requested by both countries; crafts
nonbinding recommendations; and is headed by six commissioners, three from each country.
The treaty also stated that neither country may change the level of transboundary waters
without the International Joint Commission’s approval. Transboundary waters were defined as
waters that actually form the boundary between the two countries. Interestingly, the treaty
reserves the right of each country to govern its waters “which in their natural channels would
flow…across the boundary.” In other words, each country can affect rivers that flow across the
boundary with no concern for the downstream effects.
The next agreement, the Great Lakes Basin Compact, was not enacted until 1968. It
established the Great Lakes Commission, a U.S. body intended to collect data, publish reports,
and make nonbinding technical and policy recommendations related to water management in the
basin.
Shortly thereafter, in 1972, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement was signed. It
expressed “the commitment of each country to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and
biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem.” It also reaffirmed the rights and
obligations of the Boundary Water Treaty. Certain “areas of concern” were defined as those that
that failed to meet the agreements objectives and where that failure has led or will lead to
“impairment of beneficial use of the area's ability to support aquatic life.” The objectives are as
follows:
a) Free from substances that directly or indirectly enter the waters as a result of human
activity and that will settle to form putrescent or otherwise objectionable sludge deposits,
or that will adversely affect aquatic life or waterfowl;
b) Free from floating materials such as debris, oil, scum, and other immiscible substances
resulting from human activities in amounts that are unsightly or deleterious;
c) Free from materials and heat directly or indirectly entering the water as a result of
human activity that alone, or in combination with other materials, will produce colour,
odour, taste, or other conditions in such a degree as to interfere with beneficial uses;
d) Free from materials and heat directly or indirectly entering the water as a result of
human activity that alone, or in combination with other materials, will produce
conditions that are toxic or harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life; and
e) Free from nutrients directly or indirectly entering the waters as a result of human activity
in amounts that create growths of aquatic life that interfere with beneficial uses.
These are clearly very stringent objectives, and the agreements directs the Great Lakes
Commission to focus on these “areas of concern.” The main problems dealt with in these areas
include: invasive species (sea lamprey, zebra mussels), point-source pollution from industry
along the rivers, and nonpoint-source pollution.
The Great Lakes Charter was agreed upon in 1985. It was a kind of good-faith agreement
between the Great Lakes state governors and the Canadian Premiers (the Canadian province of
Quebec was included here due to its proximity to the Saint Lawrence Seaway. While past
agreements were intended to manage disputes and preserve environmental quality, this one was
intended to facilitate the collective management of the Great Lakes’ water supply. Specifically, it
created a management process for withdrawals of large quantities of water from the basin;
notice, consultation, and approval from all parties involved were required for withdrawals greater
than five million gallons per day.
The following year, in 1986, the Water Resources Development Act codified what was
outlined in the Great Lakes Charter. It mandates that diversion of Great Lakes water requires
approval of all eight Great Lakes governors through the Great Lakes Commission. This was
difficult to achieve, and thereby prevented outside entities from taking advantage of the Lakes’
valuable supply of fresh water.
The next significant piece of legislation governing management of the Great Lakes was
the 2001 Annex to the Great Lakes Charter. The involved parties (the Great Lakes states and the
Canadian provinces) developed a collaborative system for managing the water in the basin. They
established a framework for creating a set of binding agreements between the U.S. and Canadian
entities. New standards were agreed upon for the review of proposals to withdraw Great Lakes
water.
Following this, in 2005, the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water
Resources Agreement was created. It was a completion of the plans set forth in 2001 Annex. As
such, it set forth a management process that the member states would adhere to and fostered the
collaborative management and protection of the shared water resources.
Finally, the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact was
approved in 2008 by the U.S. Congress and signed by President George W. Bush. It finalized
American adherence to 2005 agreement.
Conclusion
In all of these agreements, an overriding sense of cooperation and unity between the
governments of the U.S. and Canada is evident. The bodies of water that make up the Great
Lakes are so intertwined with the two nations that doing otherwise would prove impossible. Still,
the agreements stand as a model for effective management of a large water supply. Though the
Great Lakes were not always regarded in sufficient esteem to prevent contamination, when it was
made clear that the water bodies were threatened both parties acted to correct this problem. The
existence of these agreements will continue to prove vital to the area as the Lakes face new
problems, such as the myriad impacts of global climate change.
Discussion Questions
1. Why do you think the U.S.-Canada relationship has been so cooperative and successful
compared to other countries that have struggled with water management agreements?
2. How would the history of Great Lakes management have changed if Canada had been a
developing nation?
3. What lessons can other nations learn from studying the relationship between the U.S. and
Canada?
Sources:
http://www.nwcouncil.org/history/BoundaryWatersTreaty.asp
http://bwt.ijc.org/index.php?page=Treaty-Text&hl=eng
http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/glwqa/1978/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_Waters_Treaty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Joint_Commission
http://www.worldwater.org/datav7/water_brief_great_lakes_water_agreement.pdf
http://www.cglg.org/projects/water/legal.asp
http://www.cglg.org/projects/water/docs/GreatLakesCharter.pdf