Farmers Could Feel Impact From the Great Lakes Compact

By Joan Sanstadt, News Editor
Thursday, February 7, 2008 12:59 PM CST

“Water, water everywhere and not a drop to drink.”

These words, written in the late 1700s by Samuel Taylor Coleridge in his epic poem “Rime of the Ancient Mariner,” may become more familiar to many of us as the discussion of the Great Lakes Compact comes under closer scrutiny.

The Great Lakes Compact-St. Lawrence River Basin Agreement is a good-faith agreement among the eight Great Lakes States, plus the Canadian Provinces of Ontario and Quebec, that details how these states and provinces will manage and protect the Basin and provide a framework for laws to be enacted for protection of these waters. This agreement was signed by the Great Lakes Governors and Premiers back in 2005. The eight Great Lakes States are Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York.

In 2006, the Wisconsin Legislature formed a Joint Legislative Council Study Committee, chaired by State Rep. Neal Kedzie (R-Elkhorn), to draft legislation to ratify and implement the Compact in Wisconsin.

After meeting for more than a year, the committee disbanded without ever having reached an agreement.

Now the State Legislature is poised to introduce Compact legislation n “poised” it may be, but the actual legislation has not yet been introduced.

Jordan Lamb, an attorney with DeWitt Ross & Stevens, during last week’s Ag Day at the Capitol outlined issues surrounding the Great Lakes Compact that could be of special concern to producers.

Wisconsin seems to be alone in not having adopted the legislation called for in the Compact. Lamb, who is a lobbyist for several ag organizations, indicated “we have a good idea of what the legislation will look like when it is introduced.”

Definitions

Here are some key definitions Lamb provided regarding groundwater that come from the compact itself.

“Water means ground or surface water contained within the Basin.”

“Waters of the Basin or Basin Water means the Great Lakes and all streams, rivers, lakes connecting channels and other bodies of water, including tributary groundwater, within the Basin.”

Tributary groundwater is not defined under the Compact.

Participation

Before the Compact becomes effective it must be ratified in IDENTICAL statutory terms by all eight states and Congress must approve of the Compact.

So far the progress of those eight states n and the two Canadian provinces n is mixed.

Under the Compact, a diversion to a community within a straddling county, could be prevented by a single vote from the governor of any Great Lakes state (or similar authority from a Province).

“Michigan has a definite advantage because 99 percent of its land is in the basin,” Lamb said. Wisconsin water basins straddle several counties and drain toward three basins n those of Lake Michigan, Lake Superior and the Mississippi River. These basins (sometimes called watersheds) cut through a number of counties that are referred to as straddling counties.

A good example of a straddling county is Waukesha County. Waukesha needs more water and is close to Lake Michigan, yet part of the county lies outside the Lake Michigan Basin (that part is within the Mississippi Basin). Waukesha can be prevented from drawing from its nearest source of water (Lake Michigan) n all it would take to prevent this action is a single vote from a governor of any one of the other states or premier of a province.

“Illinois already has an advantage in that an earlier agreement permitted it to divert 2.1 billion gallons daily from Lake Michigan and it can extend water as far inland as needed,” Lamb explained.

Comments »

Comment on this story

Comments will be approved within 48 hours

Name:

Email: (optional)

Comments:

Image Verification: (Case sensitive)