Bay of Quinte

From Community Press Online:: "Where next for the Bay of Quinte?
by Louise Livingstone

For almost 100 years, since Canada and the United States of America signed the Boundary Water Treaty in 1909, the two countries have worked together to safeguard the Great Lakes. The International Joint Commission (IJC) monitors the working of the trans-boundary agreements which now include the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and the Air Quality Agreement, and alerts governments to emerging issues along the boundary that may give rise to bilateral disputes. The IJC met in Kingston last weekend for its biannual meeting and announced the two governments have asked the IJC to consult the public on a revised water quality agreement. There is a growing consensus the Water Quality Agreement, first signed in 1972 and last updated in 1987, should be reviewed in light of advances in science and new challenges to the integrity of the Great Lakes ecosystem.

Dennis Schornack U.S. chair of the IJC spoke in Kingston about laying the foundation for a new era of progress in restoring the Great Lakes.
Before the Kingston meeting the Water Quality Board (advisors to the IJC) came to Quinte, as each year the board visits one of the Areas of Concern (AOC) in the Great Lakes to learn about successes and barriers to action.
Representatives of the board, both American and Canadian, met with local politicians and members of the Bay of Quinte Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Restoration Council at the Ramada Inn on Wednesday, June 8.
The Right Honourable Herb Gray, Chair of the Canadian Section of the IJC, elder statesman and former deputy prime minister of Canada attended the meeting.

Jim Kelleher joint chair of the Bay of Quinte RAP Restoration Council and general manager of Lower Trent Conservation welcomed the Right Honourable Herb Gray, members of the Water Quality Board and many local politicians including Mary-Ann Sills, Bob Campney, Jim Dunlop, Margaret Walsh, Jim Harris, and Jack Nicolson and representatives from the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte and thanked them for their support.
Barry Jones, Bay of Quinte RAP implementation officer, spoke of key big ticket items as they move toward delisting.
“Twenty one per cent of Lake Ontario drainage, which includes both U.S. and Canada, is from the Bay of Quinte watershed,” said Jones. “The watershed of the Bay of Quinte covers 18,000 square kilometres. All of which is covered by conservation authorities (CA). Around the bay these include Lower Trent Conservation, Quinte Conservation and Cataraqui Conservation.

“The Bay of Quinte is 100 kilometres long and riverine [like a river] in structure covering a surface area of 250 square kilometres. The Upper Bay is only three metres deep, the Middle Bay is five metres deep and Adolphous Reach or the Lower bay is between 30 and 60 metres deep. Fresh water comes in from Lake Ontario into the Lower Bay usually at the deep water level unless there is a storm.”
He showed aerial photos of Belleville dating from 1948 and 1992. “There was a great deal of infilling of coastal wetlands in the fifties and and sixties,” said Jones. “The area on which the Ramada Inn is built was a landfill site. One can still see leachate seeping out. The issues are boiling underneath us.
“The Bay of Quinte was designated as an area of concern in 1985, because of eutrophic problems, loss of fish and wildlife habitat, and degraded benthos.

“In 1986 a multiple government department agency was set up to resolve problems. A Public Advisory Committee was formed in 1989 which included the conservation authorities and the Mohawks of Bay of Quinte.

“The steering committee produced the Stage One document in 1990 and the Stage two document with 80 cleanup recommendations came out in 1993. These cleanup actions are related to restoring the impaired beneficial uses.

“In 1998 Restoration Council was formed with local groups taking the lead. The two chairs Terry Murphy and Jim Kelleher are from the conservation authorities which ensure the involvement of 25 different municipalities.”

Jones paid tribute to the people involved in the Restoration Council.
“The current five-year plan is coming to an end, and we need new pubic work plan,” said Jones.
He gave a brief review of what has been achieved. “For the last 11 years the Quinte Conservation engineer has reviewed all new storm water developments greater than one hectare, so water leaving a development is cleaner than water going in,” said Jones.
“The Rural Water Quality program with farmers reduced the loading of phosphate, bacteria and sediment to the Bay of Quinte by 16,500 kilograms which was the target figure.

“The Community Wildlife Monitoring program recruits local volunteers for parent programs. For example we sign up and train volunteers for marsh monitoring and they send results to the province-wide programs.

“In the mid-nineties the land owner contact program visited every land owner on the Bay of Quinte with advice on naturalizing and buffering the shorelines. All private land owners on coastal wetlands and all Upper Bay shoreline owners received a mail box drop off with information. We now have a targeted communication strategy with regular media bulletins, an annual report, a web site and radio promotions.”
“The Restoration Council is working on computer modeling,” said Jones.

“We are redoing, with the University of Toronto, the contamination model of loading and sources of contaminants in the Bay of Quinte. This includes the life span of contaminants and how long contaminants stay in the system.

“There is also a phosphorus simulation model of environmental sources of phosphate, bacteria, and sediment loading to the bay. We need to plug in a new sewage treatment plan and model different scenarios.”

Barry Jones played tribute to Project Quinte, which started in 1972. “it is the longest running data base in the Great Lakes and is now doing ecosystem modelling,” said Jones.

He identified the need to accommodate future growth as the municipalities expand; problems with exotic species like zebra mussels which will soon be all though the watershed; and with climate change which could reduce inflows to bay.
“We could lose many of the gains we have made,” said Jones
“There used to be good monitoring of the streams coming into the bay. We need to rerun the phosphorous model of what is coming in and look at the effectiveness of point source control [at the sewage treatment plants].
“Pollution prevention is good with new developments but we need to revisit the storm water system with existing development as they may need retrofitting.”
He ended by quoting government figures produced in 2000 showing for the $120-million spent on the Bay of Quinte Cleanup, the economic benefit was $230-million, and 302 new positions were created.
“Ecosystems are complex, and we may not have the effect we would like to have,” said Jim Kelleher. “Often we don’t understand all the relationships. Phosphorus management involved upgrading sewage treatment plants [STP] and setting tight limits. Elements are very successful and municipal STPs have met targets going down from 200 kilograms per day between 12 - 14 kilograms per day. This is a testament to the investment and to the operators. However, it is not straightforward and we are finding seasonal problems. Also, we must plan how to accommodate future growth as municipalities expand.”
He spoke about the work done to reduce the loss of fish and wildlife habitat and the draft fish habitat plan.
“Because of the sheer size of the whole watershed where should the cut off be or should we just focus on the coastal area?” asked Kelleher. He said they focus on the Bay and the coastal area.
“There are many players and it is difficult to co-ordinate and agree on actions,” said Kelleher. “Balancing social demand and ecological possibilities is difficult. This area used to called the walleye capital when walleye was the dominant fish species. Now, the bay has changed and other fish species have come in. Some people say, ‘I don’t like other fish, I like walleye.’ We need to complete the fish habitat plans.
“We will be able to compare the fate of contaminants and transport models done in 1992 and 2005. The major sites are being addressed such as the Deloro Minesite, Meyers Pier and Zwicks Island. Domtar Creosote Ponds have been cleaned up. However, we need ongoing monitoring and vigilance.”
He spoke of what the delisting process might entail, and the difficulty of getting sufficient money for research and monitoring.
“Project Quinte research doesn’t always match the needs of the RAP. We have to get in line and wait our turn. We need sufficient and stable funding and we need to revisit targets in Stage Two implementation document. There have been changes since the period between 1985 and 1993 when this was prepared and some of the recommendations are fuzzy. We have to rationalize them and work out what is acceptable to the public.”
A current problem facing the Restoration Council is how to fund the two RAP staff. “We have to make multiple applications to fund them,” said Kelleher.
Terry Murphy, joint chair of Restoration Council and general manager of Quinte Conservation speaking directly to the Water Quality Board and the Right Honourable Herb Gray said, “We need your help to get us money.
“The provincial and federal governments need to look at the whole watershed and give technical expertise and funding, and provide co-ordination.
“Deloro, 50 kilometres to the north, is contaminating the Bay of Quinte. There will be a plan in place in a couple of years time of how to contain the site.
“We are looking for watershed solutions. Sixty years ago the conservation authorities were set up to manage watersheds. Now, the whole of the Ontario side of the Great Lakes is covered by conservation authorities.
“We can delist the Bay of Quinte tomorrow, but we need to continue to monitor forever. The local CAs have programs which supplement the Bay of Quinte, for example, with wetland and source water protection.
“The IJC and Water Quality Board should be looking at all watersheds and their impact on Great Lakes and not just at the Areas of Concern. I am asking for support for a watershed approach to the Great Lakes. A third of the Canadian population lives in the watershed of the Great Lakes and 95 per cent of Ontario live in the Great Lakes watershed. This is why the federal government should be involved in watershed protection.”