Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T02:01:00.673Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS AND CASE STUDIES: “Make No Little Plans”: Developing Biodiversity Conservation Strategies for the Great Lakes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 January 2014

Douglas R. Pearsall ,
Mary L. Khoury ,
John Paskus ,
Dan Kraus ,
Patrick J. Doran ,
Scott P. Sowa ,
Rachael Franks Taylor  and
Lauri K. Elbing
Douglas R. Pearsall*
Affiliation:
Senior Conservation Scientist, The Nature Conservancy, Lansing, Michigan
Mary L. Khoury
Affiliation:
Aquatic Ecologist and Conservation Planner, The Nature Conservancy, Chicago, Illinois
John Paskus
Affiliation:
Conservation Planning Section Leader, and Senior Conservation Scientist, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan
Dan Kraus
Affiliation:
Manager of Conservation Science and Planning, Nature Conservancy of Canada, Guelph, Canada
Patrick J. Doran
Affiliation:
Director of Conservation, The Nature Conservancy, Lansing, Michigan
Scott P. Sowa
Affiliation:
Director of Science, The Nature Conservancy, Lansing, Michigan
Rachael Franks Taylor
Affiliation:
Director of Coastal Conservation, The Nature Conservancy, Traverse City, Michigan
Lauri K. Elbing
Affiliation:
Policy Associate, The Nature Conservancy, Lansing, Michigan
*
Doug Pearsall, The Nature Conservancy, 101 East Grand River Avenue, Lansing, MI 48906; (phone) 517-316-2259; (fax) 517-316-2886; (e-mail) dpearsall@tnc.org
Get access

Abstract

The Laurentian Great Lakes represent the world's largest freshwater ecosystem and contain irreplaceable biodiversity. Lakewide Action and Management Plans (LAMPs) hold the highest potential for ecosystem management in the Great Lakes but have not specifically addressed biodiversity status or strategies for conservation. For four Great Lakes, recently completed biodiversity conservation strategies (blueprints) have assessed the status and threats to biodiversity and recommended strategies for conservation and restoration; a blueprint is under way also for Lake Superior. Here, we compare the completed blueprints and explore challenges to conservation planning for large ecosystems. We also assess whether earlier blueprints are being adopted and offer suggestions for more effective implementation. All of the blueprints focus on biodiversity in the lakes and coastal areas, and some include tributaries and migratory species. Biodiversity status was rated as fair (out of desirable range but restorable) in each lake, with some exceptions and considerable spatial variability. Aquatic invasive species ranked as a top threat to biodiversity in all four blueprints. Other highly ranked threats included incompatible development, climate change, terrestrial invasive species, dams and barriers, and non-point-source pollutants. The recommended strategies are characterized by six themes: coastal conservation, invasive species, connectivity and hydrology, fish restoration, nearshore water quality, and climate change. Each blueprint highlights high-priority strategies, but successful protection and restoration of Great Lakes biodiversity require revisiting these priorities in an adaptive approach.

Environmental Practice 15:462–480 (2013)

Type
Features
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , December 2013 , pp. 462 - 480
Copyright
Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adesoji, A., Gibson, M., Paskus, J., Klatt, B., Hailu, Y., Borowy, T., Calnin, B., and Schools, E.. 2012, February 3. Drivers of Economic Importance in Michigan: Natural Features, Green Infrastructure and Social/Cultural Amenities. Land Policy Institute (LPI) New Economy Report Series LPR–2011–NE–04. Michigan State University LPI, East Lansing, 72 pp. Available at http://mnfi.anr.msu.edu/reports/2012-08_Drivers_of_Economic_Performance_in_Michigan.pdf (accessed March 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Albert, D.A., Wilcox, D.A., Ingram, J.W., and Thompson, T.A.. 2005. Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Great Lakes Coastal Wetlands. Journal of Great Lakes Research 31(1):129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allan, J.D., McIntyre, P.B., Smith, S.D.P., Halpern, B.S., Boyer, G.L., Buchsbaum, A., Burton, G.A. Jr., Campbell, L.M., Chadderton, W.L., Ciborowski, J.J.H., Doran, P.J., Eder, T., Infante, D.M., Johnson, L.B., Joseph, C.A., Marino, A.L., Prusevich, A., Read, J., Rose, J.B., Rutherford, E.S., Sowa, S.P., and Steinman, A.D.. 2013. Joint Analysis of Stressors and Ecosystems Services to Enhance Restoration Effectiveness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 110(1):372–377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, M., and Ferree, C.. 2010. Conserving the Stage: Climate Change and the Geophysical Underpinnings of Species Diversity. PLoS ONE 5(7):e11554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bronte, C.R., Krueger, C.C., Holey, M.E., Toneys, M.L., Eshenroder, R.L., and Jonas, J.L.. 2008, April. A Guide for the Rehabilitation of Lake Trout in Lake Michigan. Misc. Publ. 2008-01. Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Ann Arbor, MI, 41 pp. Available at http://www.glfc.org/pubs/pub.htm#misc (accessed August 29, 2012).Google Scholar
Burgman, M., Carr, A., Godden, L., Gregory, R., McBride, M., Flander, L., and Maguire, L.. 2011. Redefining Expertise and Improving Ecological Judgment. Conservation Letters 4(2):81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conceptual Framework Working Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2003. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment. Island Press, Washington, DC, 245 pp.Google Scholar
Conservation Measures Partnership. 2013, April. Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation, Version 3.0. 47 pp. Available at http://www.conservationmeasures.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/CMP-OS-V3-0-Final.pdf (accessed May 2, 2013).Google Scholar
Environment Canada and US Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. State of the Great Lakes 2009. Environment Canada, Toronto, and US Environmental Protection Agency, Chicago, 437 pp. Available at http://binational.net/solec/sogl2009/SOGL_2009_en.pdf (accessed August 29, 2012).Google Scholar
Ewert, D.N., Doran, P.J., Hall, K.R., Froehlich, A., Cannon, J., Cole, J.B., and France, K.E.. 2012, November. On a Wing and a (GIS) Layer: Prioritizing Migratory Bird Stopover Habitat along Great Lakes Shorelines. Final Report to the Upper Midwest/Great Lakes Landscape Conservation Cooperative. The Nature Conservancy, Lansing, MI, 86 pp. Available at http://glmigratorybirds.org/downloads/LCC_PhaseIStopover_Report_Final.pdf (accessed May 2, 2013).Google Scholar
Flakne, R., and Keller, R.. 2012. A Plan for Nature in Glenview: Creating and Implementing a Natural Resources Plan at the Community Level. Environmental Practice 13(1):35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks Taylor, R., Derosier, A., Dinse, K., Doran, P., Ewert, D., Hall, K., Herbert, M., Khoury, M., Kraus, D., Lapenna, A., Mayne, G., Pearsall, D., Read, J., and Schroeder, B.. 2010, June. The Sweetwater Sea: An International Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Lake Huron: Technical Report. The Nature Conservancy, Environment Canada, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Michigan Natural Features Inventory Michigan Sea Grant, and The Nature Conservancy of Canada, Lansing, MI, 264 pp. with appendices. Available at http://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/michigan/projects/biodiversity/Pages/default.aspx (accessed May 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Government of Canada and US Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. The Great Lakes: An Environmental Atlas and Resource Book, 3rd edition. Environment Canada, Toronto, 46 pp. Available at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/atlas/ (accessed August 29, 2012).Google Scholar
Government of the United States and Government of Canada. 1987. Protocol Amending the 1978 Agreement between the United States of America and Canada on Great Lakes Water Quality, as Amended on October 16, 1983. Consolidated by the International Joint Commission, Washington, DC, and Ottawa, 41 pp. with annexes. Available at http://epa.gov/grtlakes/glwqa/1978/index.html (accessed March 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Government of the United States and Government of Canada. 2012, September 7. Protocol Amending the Agreement between the United States of America and Canada on Great Lakes Water Quality. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 75 pp. with annexes. http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/glwqa/20120907-Canada-USA_GLWQA_FINAL.pdf (accessed March 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Henson, B.L., Brodribb, K.E., and Riley, J.L.. 2005. Great Lakes Conservation Blueprint for Terrestrial Biodiversity, volume 1. Nature Conservancy of Canada and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto, 157 pp. with appendices.Google Scholar
Henson, B.L., Kraus, D.T., McMurty, M.J., and Ewert, D.N.. 2010. Islands of Life: A Biodiversity and Conservation Atlas of the Great Lakes Islands. Nature Conservancy of Canada, Port Rowan, 154 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, A.T., Cowling, R.M, and Campbell, B.M.. 2006. An Operational Model for Implementing Conservation Action. Conservation Biology 20(2):408–419.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lake Ontario Biodiversity Strategy Working Group. 2009, April. The Beautiful Lake: A Binational Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Lake Ontario. The Nature Conservancy, Nature Conservancy Canada, and US–Canada Lake Ontario Lakewide Management Plan. Nature Conservancy of Canada, Toronto, 40 pp. Available at http://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/michigan/projects/biodiversity/Pages/default.aspx (accessed May 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Lake Ontario LAMP (Lakewide Action and Management Plan) Work Group and Technical Staff. 2011, April. Implementing a Lake Ontario LaMP Biodiversity Conservation Strategy. Lake Ontario Lakewide Management Plan. 43 pp. Available at http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/lakeont/lake-ontario-biodiversity-conservation-strategy-201104.pdf (accessed March 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Lake Superior Lakewide Action and Management Plan (LAMP)–Superior Work Group (SWG). 2013, February. A Biodiversity Conservation Assessment for Lake Superior [Draft]. 117 pp. Available at http://support.natureconservancy.ca/pdf/on/lake-superior/DRAFT_Lake-Superior-Biodiversity-Conservation-Assessment_22Feb2013.pdf (accessed May 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Madenjian, C.P., Bunnell, D.B., Desorcie, T.J., Chriscinske, M.A., Kostich, M.J., and Adams, J.V.. 2012, March 19. Status and Trends of Prey Fish Populations in Lake Michigan, 2011. Presented at Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Lake Michigan Committee Meeting, Windsor, Canada.Google Scholar
The Nature Conservancy (TNC). 2000. Towards a New Conservation Vision for the Great Lakes Region: A Second Iteration. TNC, Chicago, 46 pp.Google Scholar
The Nature Conservancy (TNC). 2007. Conservation Action Planning Handbook: Developing Strategies, Taking Action and Measuring Success at Any Scale. TNC, Arlington, VA, 129 pp.Google Scholar
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC). 2006. Binational Blueprint for Conservation of the Great Lakes. TNC, Chicago, and NCC, Port Rowan, 12 pp.Google Scholar
NatureServe Explorer. 2013. NatureServe Conservation Status. Available at http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/ranking.htm#globalstatus (accessed May 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Pearsall, D., de Grammont, P. Carton, Cavalieri, C., Chu, C., Doran, P., Elbing, L., Ewert, D., Hall, K., Herbert, M., Khoury, M., Kraus, D., Mysorekar, S., Paskus, J., and Sasson, A.. 2012a. Returning to a Healthy Lake: An International Biodiversity Conservation Strategy for Lake Erie. Technical Report. The Nature Conservancy, Nature Conservancy of Canada, and Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI, 340 pp. with appendices. Available at http://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/michigan/projects/biodiversity/Pages/default.aspx (accessed May 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Pearsall, D., de Grammont, P. Carton, Cavalieri, C., Doran, P., Elbing, L., Ewert, D., Hall, K., Herbert, M., Khoury, M., Mysorekar, S., Neville, S., Paskus, J., and Sasson, A.. 2012b. Michigami: Great Water—Strategies to Conserve the Biodiversity of Lake Michigan. Technical Report. The Nature Conservancy and Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI, 313 pp. with appendices. Available at http://www.conservationgateway.org/ConservationByGeography/NorthAmerica/UnitedStates/michigan/projects/biodiversity/Pages/default.aspx (accessed May 18, 2013).Google Scholar
Petersen, B., Hall, K.R., Doran, P.J., and Kahl, K.. 2013. In Their Own Words: Perceptions of Climate Change Adaptation from the Great Lakes Region's Resource Management Community. Environmental Practice 15(4) [in this issue].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodriguez, K.M., and Reid, R.A.. 2001. Biodiversity Investment Areas: Rating the Potential for Protecting and Restoring the Great Lakes Ecosystem. Ecological Restoration 19(3):135–144.Google Scholar
Vanderploeg, H.A., Pothoven, S.A., Fahnenstiel, G.L., Cavaletto, J.F., Liebig, J.R., Stow, C.A., Nalepa, T.F., Madenjian, C.P., and Bunnell, D.B.. 2012. Seasonal Zooplankton Dynamics in Lake Michigan: Disentangling Impacts of Resource Limitation, Ecosystem Engineering, and Predation during a Critical Ecosystem Transition. Journal of Great Lakes Research 38(2):336–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wichert, G.A., Brodribb, K.E., Henson, B.L., and Phair, C.. 2005. Great Lakes Conservation Blueprint for Aquatic Biodiversity, volume 1. Nature Conservancy of Canada and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto, 86 pp. with appendices.Google Scholar