MEETING RECORD FOR THE 142^nd MEETING OF THE
GREAT LAKES SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD

Thursday October 5, 2006

Draft Minutes of the 142nd Meeting of the IJC's
Great Lakes Science Advisory Board
Held October 4 - 5, 2006 Windsor, Ontario

October 4, 2006

Meetings of the Board Work Groups; WGEH, WGPI, and WGEI were scheduled and held.

October 5, 2006

1. Welcome and Introductions

   Dr. Donahue called the meeting to order and brief self introductions followed.

2. Approval of the Agenda

   The secretary indicated that item 4.0 regarding the 13^th Biennial Report would entail a broader discussion on accountability as the proposed theme of the report, and would require approximately one hour to accomplish. A second item under item 8, Other Business was proposed to consider the topics being considered for the Biennial meeting program.

3. Invited Scientific Presentation:

   "Submerged Treasure? New Findings about the Economic Value of Contaminated Site Remediation." Dr. John Braden, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

   Dr. Braden provided a presentation of his study of the potential economic value to homeowners in Sheboygan and Buffalo that would support community investment in remediation. The results showed that the increased property values and the associated tax base could justify and possibly secure long term clean up commitments. Dr. Braden's power point presentation is available as a CD upon request.

4. IJC Update

   Advice to Governments on Their Review of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement - a special Report to the Governments of the United States and Canada

   Mr. Weiner, the IJC Ottawa Section liaison to the SAB, provided a brief review of highlights of the special report. The report is available on the IJC web site www.ijc.org

   13^th Biennial Report
   Mr. Weiner provided the genesis of the current report to be short, focused on a single issue and to address accountability. Mr. Weiner then reviewed the scope of the report and requested Board input on the topic of accountability. Several comments were provided as follows:

   The concept of improving the effectiveness of reporting to governments by focusing on a single theme was supported by the Board. The concern is how this new approach will be introduced and how the IJC Priorities and the Board's work in terms of the 2003-2005 Priorities Report can then be reflected in the biennial cycle. One suggestion was to use the 2003 - 2005 Priorities Report as a basis for the analysis of the issue of accountability.

   The Board concurred that the issue of accountability is salient, and that it warrants further expert advice and consideration - a hallmark of IJC advice and credibility to governments. It was suggested that perhaps the biennial report could identify the issue while indicating that the Commission intends to further explore the full implications of improving accountability through the formation of its own multi Board task force. Such an approach would have the added benefit of signaling an offer from the Commission to assist the governments in the solution of the problem, as opposed to simply identifying the problem and leaving it to governments to solve themselves.

   Several ideas on the scope of such a multi Board activity were explored including the definition of ecosystem based metrics, a review of current Agreement accountability mechanisms, and an analysis of current accountability frameworks that could be highly applicable for the Great Lakes. Several examples of accountability frameworks were referenced by members during the discussion. It was stated that the Board could assist in identifying any other examples that may be relevant to the Great Lakes.

   The larger question of the purpose of Board reporting, as initially raised by the Board in its June 14 memorandum to the Commission was also discussed again within the context of the IJC's Biennial reporting process. The Board agreed that there is a significant opportunity to improve the advisory process to inform Biennial reports and to ensure that there are strong linkages with the Commission and its Boards

   Following the discussion, Drs. Findlay, Jones and Donahue volunteered to provide Mr. Weiner with scientific support as he prepares the drafts of the 13th Biennial Report for Commissioners.

   IJC Fall Semi Annual Meeting; Ottawa, October 18, 2006
   Mr. Weiner indicated that three topics were likely to be raised during the meeting in Ottawa; i.e. Should the 14^th Biennial Report be another single topic report on the theme of urban land use? How can the priorities report be better utilized? How can the IJC improve its performance in evaluating the Parties?

5. Work group Work Plan Activities

   SAB Acceptance of Microbial Source Tracking Report for Web Posting
   Dr. Carpenter moved that the report be so released, with seconding by Dr. Donahue. The motion was approved by all present. Dr. Swackhamer noted that she was confident that the full scientific report could be published in the Journal of Environmental Monitoring. She said that she would contact Dr. Rose with the relevant information.

   Work Group on Ecosystem Health
   Dr. Carpenter reported that the WG would be proceeding with the preparation of a discussion paper on the estimation of the benefits of reducing the concentration of persistent toxic substances in Great Lakes fish. Dr. Carpenter stated that another project would involve organizing a session at an American Water Resources Association meeting in June 2007 to address the technology of waste water treatment plants in the treatment of new chemicals such as pthalates and pharmaceuticals. Dr. Carpenter said that it will be the WG's intention to follow up on the Dam Removal Consultation with a workshop, possibly at the IJC Biennial Meeting. Dr. Donahue suggested that another possibility would be holding such a session at an upcoming National Ecosystem Restoration Conference. Dr. Carpenter reported on the WG's proposed special session planned for thefor the Mercury Conference last August .August. The workshop did not occur. He indicated that some of the information from the meeting could still be provided in the 2005 - 2007 Priorities Report.

   Work Group on Parties Implementation
   Mr. Unwin summarized the groundwater consultation process which will culminate with the 3rd event at the SOLEC meeting in November. He said that a field trip has been organized to view a development area that is representative of low impact development. He said that the plan for reporting includes having a draft report for the IJC Semi Annual Meeting in April 2007, with a final report by May 2007. Mr. Unwin reviewed the outcomes of the recent Urban Symposium co sponsored by the WQB, IAQAB, and the HPTF. He said that there were two reactions to the meeting - so what? And, Wow! He said that while not much new was discussed, the meeting brought together many interesting international experiences. He added that the reporting process would include a preliminary report to the Commission at the IJC Semi Annual Meeting, an outline of a summary report prepared for the December IJC Executive meeting, a summary report supported by the discussion papers to be developed by the WQB, IAQAB and HPTF with the SAB taking the lead, with a draft summary report to be prepared by the June IJC Biennial Meeting in Chicago.

   Work Group on Emerging Issues
   In the interests of time, Dr. Jones indicated that the WGEI would provide their report in writing. He said that the meeting primarily addressed work plan activities, as well as issues related to the proposed 13^th Biennial Report. N.B. the work plan was forwarded to members on Friday, October 6, 2006 as "Business Arising from the 142nd meeting of the SAB - WGEI Work Plan Activity Report" and is attached to these minutes.

6. 2005 - 2007 SAB Report Time Line and Content

   The secretary reportedsecretary reported that this item is a reminder for the Work Groups and members that the end of the biennial work planning cycle is drawing near, and they should anticipate its conclusion with an activities report to form the SAB submission to the 2005 - 2007 Great Lakes Priorities Report. He said that based on the last biennial cycle, the deadline for submission of Board input was August 19 (2004). He indicated that he thought that the process would be similar this biennial cycle. He added that further details would be provided as decisions are made by the Commission.

7. Future Meetings

   Next; December 6 - 7, 2006, Windsor, Ontario
   Future Approved; February 27 - 28, 2007 Windsor, Ontario
   Future Proposed; on the occasion of the IJC Biennial Meeting to be held in Chicago on June 7 - 9, University of Chicago at Illinois

   Dr. Jones suggested that the December meeting be held in Chicago to allow those interested to also attend the Binational Toxics Strategy meeting. It was agreed that such a change could be accommodated in principle, subject to confirmation that such a change was necessary. The secretary said that he would consult with those members not present and determine if such a change in location was justified based on planned BTS attendance.

8. Other Business

   Review of the Agreement - Parties Consultation Process
   The secretary provided a brief review of the public review process undertaken by the Parties over the summer. Several members indicated that they had participated in some of the conference calls.

   Biennial Meeting Program
   A list of proposed topics was provided for discussion purposes.

   1. What is the Great Lakes worth? Invited presentations of the values of provided ecosystem services
   2. Urban Groundwater: Examining demand, supply and aquifer protection issues
   3. Overcoming Urban Policy Barriers: An Examination of policy roadblocks at all levels of government and techniques to overcome them
   4. Urban Water Quality Best Practices: Tools for municipalities and citizens
   5. Deteriorating water supply and wastewater treatment infrastructure: potential for catastrophic failure?
   6. Costs and benefits of increasing traffic through the St. Lawrence Seaway
   7. International approaches to shared aquatic ecosystems (i.e., Baltic Sea, Aral Sea or Murray-Darling watershed)
   8. Status of Annex 2001
   
   
9. Adjournment

   There being no further business of the Board, Dr. Jones moved that the meeting be adjourned with seconding by Dr. Carpenter. The motion was approved by all present.

ATTACHMENT 1
SAB Work Group on Emerging Issues 2005-2007 Work Plan Topic #1
June 21, 2006 Draft

1. Title of Activity: The Application of Principles of Precaution, Robustness and Adaptive Management in a Revised GLWQA
   
   
2. IJC Priority: This is not an IJC Priority activity and therefore it is unfunded.
   
   
3. Board Collaboration: The WG will consult with the WQB, IAQAB, CGLRM, and the HPTF as required, however no formal collaboration in undertaking the project is planned.
   
   
4. Descriptor: This activity will build on the finding from the Science Advisory Board Wingspread Expert Consultation on Strengthening Science Under a Renewed Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement that "the current specification of core principles in the Agreement should be augmented to take into account new knowledge on decision making under uncertainty". The recommendation that accompanied this finding stated that "the Agreement should explicitly commit the Parties to decision making including the overarching principles: the precautionary principle; the principle of adaptive management; and the principle of robustness. These principles should be defined in Article 1 of the Agreement."

   The project will seek to define the scientific criteria or parameters that can be applied to the three principles of precaution, adaptive management, and robustness to provide a standard protocol to define the terms and to guide decision making.

   The project will be undertaken by inviting scientific experts to attend regular WG meetings and provide their advice to the WG, who will synthesize the information and apply it to the GLWQA. Two consultations are proposed:

   Consultation #1
   
   On the occasion of SAB Meeting #142; October 4-5, 2006, Windsor Ontario - two experts will be identified to address precaution and adaptive management.

   Consultation #2
   
   On the occasion of SAB Meeting #143; December 6-7, 2006, Windsor Ontario - Two experts will be identified to address robustness and integration of the three concepts into the GLWQA.

5. Outcome

   Recommendation(s) to the IJC to support implementation of the three principles in the Agreement.

SAB Work Group on Emerging Issues 2005-2007 Work Plan Topic #2
June 21, 2006 Draft

1. Title of Activity: Assessing Weight of Evidence as it Applies to Great Lakes Science
   
   
2. IJC Priority: This is not an IJC Priority activity and therefore it is unfunded.
   
   
3. Board Collaboration: The WG will consult with the WQB, IAQAB, CGLRM, and the HPTF as required, however no formal collaboration in undertaking the project is planned.
   
   
4. Descriptor: This activity will build on the previous work of the IJC and the SAB as outlined in the respective reports Applying Weight of Evidence: Issues and Practice, A Report on a Workshop held October 2-4, 1993, and, 1993-95 Priorities Report, Chapter 2.3 - Weight of Evidence: Approaches to Decision Making in the Face of Uncertainty.

   This activity will identify the inferential strength of the process and the methodologies for integrating scientific evidence, including traditional ecological knowledge. The development of a standard protocol will provide a prescription for Agreement adherents to follow when making recommendations and decisions under uncertainty.

   The project will be undertaken by inviting scientific experts to attend regular WG meetings and provide their advice to the WG, who will synthesize the information and apply it to the GLWQA. One consultation is proposed:

   Consultation #1
   
   On the occasion of SAB Meeting #144; February 27-28, 2007, Windsor, Ontario. Three experts will be invited to provide presentations on Weight of Evidence.

5. Outcome

   This project will provide criteria to assess weight of evidence for any scientific hypothesis that indicates the probability that it is indeed true, given certain evidence. The determination of criteria will also include implementation guidelines that will direct the user how to apply the WOE metric in a given context, and how the estimated WOE can be interpreted in the decision process. (For example, if the weight of evidence supporting hypothesis H is very high, it would imply uncertainty is low, which in turn might suggest that any decision based on the premise that H is true need not be precautionary.)

SAB Work Group on Emerging Issues 2005-2007 Work Plan Topic #3
July 6, 2006 Draft

1. Title of Activity: Climate Change Monitoring and Surveillance Requirements for the Great Lakes
   
   
2. IJC Priority: This is not an IJC Priority activity and therefore it is unfunded.
   
   
3. Board Collaboration: The topic of the Impact of Climate Change on the Great Lakes was a previous IJC priority, and it has been the subject of IJC advice to the Commission by all of the Boards. Therefore, the WG anticipates that there will be extensive collaboration with all of the Boards on this activity. Impacts of climate change were identified as one of the top challenges to the Great Lakes in the 21st Century.
   
   

4. Descriptor: a day-long consultation adjacent to a regular SAB meeting that would inform the WG on the current forecast for the Great Lakes region, assessment of areas of vulnerability and impacts on such areas, threatened ecosystem services, current monitoring programs, and provide discussion on indictors and monitoring strategies for addressing the following needs:

   • Critical assessments of current monitoring programs, and possible adjustments to these programs
   • Baseline data for the evaluation of climatic, hydrological, water quality, ecosystem variability and trends over time to provide context for changing climate
   • Monitoring, analysis, and indicator development to detect climatic, hydrological, water quality, ecosystem variability and trends over time
   • Monitoring and analysis to corroborate climate change impacts (duration of effects, spatial extent, changes in species composition, etc)
   • Monitoring and assessment of water use, consumption, and withdrawal rates (including groundwater)
   • Evaluate SOLEC indicators for applicability to climate change
   • Monitoring of effectiveness of adaptation strategies that have been implemented

   We envision that the Consultation will include approximately 10-15 invited experts, some of whom will be invited to present information and others who are expected to contribute to the discussion. Current suggestions include Catherine Hayhoe and Lucinda Johnson (ESA/UCS modeling); Roger Galthier, Steve Brandt, Dave Schwab, Don Scavia, Gerry Galloway, Gail Krantzberg, Paul Horvatin (and Canadian counterpart on monitoring programs), Joel Scheragu, Canadian lead on GL Climate program and also a GL fisheries ecologist. We plan on presentations on:

   • Current forecasts of climate change in GL
   • Current status of GLOS
   • Current monitoring programs and any plans they have for adjustments to address climate change

   This will be followed by panels addressing prepared questions and significant discussion periods. The WGEI will then prepare a report on behalf of the SAB to the Commissioners that summarize their recommendations.

5. Outcome

   Recommendation(s) on surveillance and monitoring requirements to address climate change impacts on the Great Lakes for consideration by the Commission and the Parties for inclusion under Annex 11 related revisions to the Great Lakes Water quality Agreement.