Canada-Ontario Agreement on the Great Lakes 2002
Introduction
The Canada–Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem (COA), signed on March 22, 2002, commits the federal and provincial governments to work together “to understand, restore and protect the environmental quality of the Great Lakes Basin ecosystem.” Led by Environment Canada (EC) and Ontario’s Ministry of the Environment, COA defines roles and responsibilities for cleaning up the Great Lakes Basin. It applies to the five Great Lakes, the waters that drain into them, and the St. Lawrence River from Lake Ontario to the Ontario-Quebec border. The 2002 COA replaces the 1994 Agreement, which expired in April 2000.
By the early 1970s, primarily due to phosphorus-loading, Lake Erie was thought to be a “dead” lake. In response, in 1972, Canada and the United States signed the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA), which required governments, industry, agriculture and citizens to clean up the Great Lakes Basin. Since then, COA has set out the means by which both Ontario and Canada must meet their commitments under the GLWQA.
The GLWQA, which is overseen by the International Joint Commission (IJC), has been revised several times and now includes requirements for virtually eliminating persistent toxics in the Great Lakes, such as PCBs and dioxins and for reducing phosphorus-loading. The Agreement also calls for addressing concerns such as runoff from land, contaminated sediment, airborne pollutants, contaminated groundwater and non-native invasive species. Remedial action plans must also be prepared for Areas of Concern (AOCs), i.e., specific areas where there has been a loss of “beneficial uses,” including restrictions on fish consumption, bird or animal deformities, undesirable algae and beach closings. Sixteen of the 43 AOCs are located in Ontario.
Prior to the 2002 COA, beneficial uses had been restored to only one Canadian AOC — Collingwood Harbour. The 2002 COA commits Canada and Ontario to restoring beneficial uses to at least two more AOCs. As of October 2002, this goal had been achieved for the Severn Sound AOC. The 2002 COA also requires the completion of all required activities in the remedial action plans in at least six AOCs and progress on remedial action plans for the remaining AOCs. COA defines who will provide leadership — whether the federal or provincial government or both — for each of the 16 AOCs. And although the 2002 COA indicates that funding will be provided to the agricultural community, municipal and regional planners, and local organizations, there are no specific details on how much funding will be available, and when and how to obtain the funding.
Under the 2002 COA, Canada and Ontario have committed to providing the resources needed to implement the Agreement for a five-year period. A Management Committee, co-chaired by EC and MOE, is responsible for delivering on these commitments, and for publishing a progress report and State of the Lakes report every two years. A stakeholder advisory group has also been formed in response to widespread concern about the lack of public involvement in Management Committee decision-making.
| Signing Partners to the 2002 COA | |
|---|---|
Federal Departments
|
Provincial Ministries
|
The 1994 COA commitments to reduce persistent bioaccumulative toxic substances — for instance, to reduce mercury emissions by 90 per cent by 2000 – have not been achieved. Thus, the 2002 COA continues to work toward their virtual elimination, with priority given to PCBs, mercury, dioxins and furans. Commitments have been made to destroy all PCBs in storage by 2008 and to phase out PCBs still in service.
The 2002 COA also recognizes the impact of smog and other pollution sources on water quality, with commitments to reduce air pollutants and to conduct research on contaminated sediment. Targets have been set to reduce sulphur concentrations in gasoline, to 30 parts per million, and in diesel, to 15 parts per million. Timelines to reduce emissions of nitrous oxide and volatile organic compounds will be accelerated, although no specific targets have been set (for additional information, see pages 62-64 on Ontario’s Anti-smog Plan). Canada has committed to conducting research on the impact of endocrine-disruption substances, and Ontario has committed to the development of a nutrient management policy to control land application of biosolids and septage (see The Nutrient Management Act, 2002 for additional information).
The 2002 COA also includes several commitments regarding ship-source pollution. For example, Ontario will monitor invasive species and develop educational materials. Canada will implement the Sea Lamprey Control Program and existing ballast water treatment. Research will also be conducted into new treatment methods for ballast water and the impacts of invasive species.
A joint federal-provincial information management system will also be developed. The system has the potential of improving understanding of the Great Lakes Basin and providing earlier detection of changes and trends, which will result in better and more timely decision-making.
ECO Comment
In our 1999/2000 annual report, the ECO reported on the provincial government’s performance under the 1994 COA and concluded that “most targets were still unmet by the time the agreement expired, especially those targets with direct impacts on the environment.” Several reasons were proposed as contributing factors: funding and staffing cuts, targets set without identifying who was accountable and without measurable performance indicators, and inadequate project management and quality control. The ECO is concerned that some of the factors that hampered progress under the 1994 COA have not been adequately addressed and could limit achievement of the goals of the 2002 COA. As well, under the 1994 COA, the ECO found that the progress reports were “largely self-congratulatory in tone” and lacked clear statements regarding progress and the barriers encountered. An objective analysis of progress is necessary to ensure transparency and to provide greater assurance of progress.
The ECO is concerned that there are no specific funding commitments, and that the funding itself will not be sufficient. For example, the provincial government spent $23 million to restore one AOC – Severn Sound – but has committed to investing only $50 million to clean up the Great Lakes over the next five years. With 15 AOCs still needing attention, it is reasonable to expect that AOC remediation activities alone will cost significantly more than $50 million. Without adequate resources and firm ongoing funding commitments from MOE and the other provincial signees, the ECO is concerned that these goals will not be achieved.
During the public consultation on the draft COA, concerns were raised that measurable targets were not always provided, which, in effect, removes any basis on which government performance can be objectively measured. Environment Canada has since advised the ECO that measurable targets, and the government units responsible for meeting them, will be clearly identified in the 2002 COA workplan, and that a summary version of the workplan will be published for public viewing.
The 2002 COA is an important step in advancing the rehabilitation of the Great Lakes Basin, and the ECO is encouraged that prior concerns regarding targets and accountability are being addressed. However, the ECO is concerned that commitments to combat invasive species do not reflect the seriousness of the problem. In February 2003, the IJC advised the federal government that invasive species are now the number one threat to the economic and ecological health of the Great Lakes. Although Canada and the U.S. are spending billions of dollars combating zebra mussels and sea lamprey, new invasive species such as the round goby and the spiny water flea continue to enter the Great Lakes. The ECO believes that Canada and Ontario should develop a coherent strategy specifically to deal with invasive species. (See also Creating a Biodiversity Framework for Ontario - 2003.) Current remedial efforts will be undermined unless effective and aggressive control measures are taken to stop the entry of new invasive species and to limit the impact of existing species.
See also: Exotic Species: Invading the Great Lakes Basin
| Recommendation 4:
The ECO recommends that the provincial government ensure that sufficient funds are available to achieve the results defined in the Annexes to the 2002 Canada-Ontario Agreement Respecting the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem. |
| This is an article from the 2002/03 Annual Report to the Legislature from the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. |
Citing This Article
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2003. "The New Canada–Ontario Agreement on the Great Lakes." Thinking Beyond the Near and Now, ECO Annual Report, 2002-03. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 73-76.
