----- Forwarded by Richard
L Whitman/BRD/USGS/DOI on 02/27/2008 01:58 PM -----
Ralph Grundel/BRD/USGS/DOI
02/27/2008 11:19 AM
To
Richard L Whitman/BRD/USGS/DOI@USGS,
Muruleedhara Byappanahalli/BRD/USGS/DOI@USGS
cc
Subject
GL
February 27, 2008
Great Lakes Officials Seek Aid From
U.S. and Canada
By MONICA DAVEY
CHICAGO — Regional government agencies
around the Great Lakes spend some $15 billion a year to protect the lakes
from invasive species, contaminated sediment and sewage overflows, a new
study shows. But local officials say that still more protection is needed
and that the United States and Canadian governments should pay for it.
“They’re saying it’s not a federal
problem, but it is,” Mayor Richard M. Daley of Chicago said of the five
lakes, which hold 20 percent of the world’s fresh water. Mr. Daley and
other regional leaders say they intend to press for more federal money
in light of the study, to be released Wednesday, which for the first time
estimates what local governments are devoting to the lakes.
Several mayors said the lakes should
not be deemed merely local concerns, but seen as a broader issue, akin
to assisting the New Orleans region after Hurricane Katrina or restoring
the Everglades in Florida. The study, arranged by the Great Lakes Commission
and the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, both advocacy groups,
concluded that the 688 local governments in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence
River region spend much of the money on aging wastewater systems, which
can release sewage when overwhelmed with rain. The $15 billion estimate
was based on responses by 143 of the local governments to a survey on their
spending in 2006.
It is uncertain exactly what federal
authorities in the United States and Canada now spend on the Great Lakes,
in part because so many agencies and programs are tied to the lakes. “That
is one of the problems; we can’t find out what’s being spent,” said
David Ullrich, executive director of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities
Initiative.
No one was available on Tuesday at the
United States Environmental Protection Agency to answer questions about
Great Lakes spending. But Dale Kemery, a spokesman for the agency, wrote
in an e-mail message that its budget provided “significant funding” for
wastewater infrastructure nationally.
“We’re doing more with less by advancing
innovative technologies and growing greater partnerships for sustainability,”
Mr. Kemery wrote.
Still, Mr. Ullrich pointed to a main
federal fund — one that helps states with wastewater projects — as an
example of shrinking federal money that he said would leave the Great Lakes
in jeopardy: the Clean Water State Revolving Fund dropped to $689 million
in the 2008 fiscal year, from $1.08 billion a year earlier.
“The same problem can be seen here,”
David Miller, the mayor of Toronto, said of Canada’s federal financing.
“The national government doesn’t seem to understand the urgency and importance
of the Great Lakes.”
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS
First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map
**********************************************
Ralph Grundel
U.S. Geological Survey
1100 N. Mineral Springs Road
Porter, IN 46304