Take a lake-by-lake look at Great Lakes stewardship

In Michigan’s Great Lakes Coordination Program, four lake coordinators lead state agency efforts and collaborations to protect and restore the four Great Lakes that border Michigan, plus Lake St. Clair and the Detroit, St. Clair, and St. Marys rivers. Guiding them in part is a binational Lakewide Action and Management Plan (LAMP) for each lake, created under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) by the governments of the U.S. and Canada. 

Waves roll in on Michigan’s Lake Erie shoreline.

 

The Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative (CSMI) under the GLWQA coordinates Great Lakes research and monitoring, providing resource managers with science to support management decisions. States, provinces, tribes and First Nations, universities, regional organizations, and others help U.S. and Canadian governments identify lake-wide needs. 

Lake Erie, including Lake St. Clair and the St. Clair and Detroit rivers: Softening the shoreline 

Fish net sampling takes place along the Lake St. Clair shoreline. Courtesy of the DNR.

 

In the Lake Erie watershed, Michigan is reducing nutrient loads to address harmful algal blooms and reduced oxygen levels in Lake Erie. Efforts are being led by the Domestic Action Team, a collaboration of EGLE, the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, and the DNR. 

Meanwhile, ecological challenges persist in Lake St. Clair. Current work focuses on addressing hardened shoreline and restoring coastal habitat.    

In 2021, a fish net sampling survey by the DNR, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry of 110 sites along the Michigan and Ontario shorelines found dramatic differences between the two sides in abundance of fish and variety of species. For each net, DNR found an average 44 fish of 23 species and FWS found 87 fish of 28 species, while Ontario found 566 fish of 42 species.  

While Ontario’s shoreline is 27.5% marsh and wetland and 52.5% hardened, 90% of Michigan’s lakeshore is hardened, composed mainly of sea walls and rock riprap. 

Lake Huron: Focusing on nutrients 

The 2022-26 LAMP identifies 52 actions to help protect and restore the lake. A top priority is to better understand nutrient dynamics in Saginaw Bay and the connection to the main body of Lake Huron.  

Cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae, blooms at Wenona Beach on Saginaw Bay in past years.  

 

Federal, state, tribal, and local partners formed the Saginaw Bay Monitoring Consortium (SBMC), which in 2023 began a nutrient water quality monitoring network for the Saginaw Bay watershed and bay. The SBMC will collect tributary water quality and stream discharge data at 18 locations within the watershed and water quality data at 10 locations within the bay.

The SBMC will collect tributary water quality and stream discharge data at 18 locations within the watershed and water quality data at 10 locations within the bay.  

Data collected will be used to assess nutrient loading and dynamics and is publicly available through an online story map and dashboard so all partners can use the data. This data will lead to improved deployment of nutrient-related best management practices throughout the watershed.  

This project is funded through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI).

Lake Michigan: Prepping for field work 

The CSMI’s five-year cycle last focused on Lake Michigan in 2020-21. The U.S. Geological Survey and partners sampled larval whitefish along Michigan’s western shore to support population recovery. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) began long-term monitoring of nutrients off Muskegon to identify trends. And Grand Valley State University deployed buoys and an autonomous underwater glider to collect water quality data.  

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Lake Guardian supports Cooperative Science and Monitoring Initiative research in Lake Michigan. Photo courtesy of the EPA.

 

This monitoring helps characterize Great Lakes water quality and inform future priorities for the next field year, 2025. 

In 2023, agencies reviewed outcomes from 2020 to identify new or ongoing needs. 

Wide-ranging priorities include better understanding the changing food web; assessing nutrient impacts from watersheds; and monitoring chemical trends in water, sediment, and fish. Up-to-date monitoring data are vital for management actions in and around the lake. 

Lake Superior: Wetland restoration 

The 36 partners in the Lake Superior Partnership Working Group identified 47 actions in the 2020-24 LAMP to assess threats such as chemical contaminants, climate change, invasive species, and algal blooms, and address the restoration of fish and wildlife habitat.  

A new bridge spans a former dam site on the Ontonagon River estuary. Courtesy of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources. 

 

EGLE and the EPA coordinated with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) on a project for the Ontonagon River to benefit species like brook trout. 

The project reconnected a lower Ontonagon coastal wetland by removing a 1960s-era dam that separated the estuary from the river and did not allow for fish passage. The restoration also allowed for kayaking, canoeing, and extending a cycling and hiking path. 

Adapted from an article in the 2023 Michigan State of the Great Lakes Report by EGLE Great Lakes Management Unit Supervisor Melanie Foose and Great Lakes Coordinators Andrew Bahrou (Erie and St. Clair), Bretton Joldersma (Huron), Matt Preisser (Michigan), and Stephanie Swart (Superior).