lei 



experience I had a year ago last May to attend as a representative of the Great 

 Lalfes Basin Commission the International Symposium on Large Lakes at 

 Uppsala, Sweden, under the sponsorship of the Organizatitjn for Economic Co- 

 operation and Development. The purpose of the conference was to study the 

 development of the scientific knowledge required for the management of large 

 lakes considered as an integral part of a larger water resource system. 



A number of case studies of large lakes was presented and intensely discussed. 

 The extent of the present knowledge of these lakes was of major interest, and 

 there was strong difference of opinion on the meaning of water quality. I believe 

 that several of the recommendations which emerged from the Uppsala Symposium 

 could have enriched the Marine Commission report. 



For example on basic considerations : 



1. Thei"e is need for improved communication of the results of research to 

 management and the translation of this research into effective programs. 



2. The kinds of new research needed should be separated into prioritie.s — 

 that needed for immediate action and that for long term. 



3. Management must define its requirement of the scientists in precise 

 terms. 



4. On specific ideas, here were a few from Uppsala : "Any stream water 

 quality standards now set should be quite tentative and re-examined reg- 

 ularly. New technology is changing management needs daily." 



5. Any mention of water quality should be prefixed with indication of 

 use for which water quality is intended. Quality for one purpose is meaning- 

 less for another purpose. 



There are a number of sections of the report which are of concern to us, 

 First is the recommendation of establishment of coastal zone authorities. These 

 authorities would be created by the States. Their principal purposes would 

 be to plan and regulate land and water uses and to acquire and develop land 

 in the coastal zone. 



I feel that this proposal would have difficulty, in its present concept, in ob- 

 taining enthusiastic reception by the States of the Great Lakes region. Most 

 States already possess the regulatory machinery proposed and any new layer- 

 ing of agencies at this level would have a difficult journey to success. In addi- 

 tion, the coordination of programs visualized for the coastal authorities is 

 perhaps already being approached. 



Because of the acceleration of problems of the Great Lakes, the States and 

 the federal agencies have formed the Great Lakes Basin Commission to guide 

 the development of the lakes via planning on a partnership basis. This is a 

 young organization ; in fact, it had not even emerged at the time the marine 

 study was started. However, we feel great progress can be made through this 

 existing arrangement, and we are apprehensive that the creation of yet another 

 agency with overlapping powers and inevitably limited funds would only confuse 

 and constrain progress now being made. Time is critical if we are to preserve 

 the lakes. We agree with the goals of the Marine Sciences Commission regard- 

 ing the Great Lakes, but feel the institutional vehicle for achieving these goals 

 has already been formed and is now functioning. Private industry, conservation 

 groups, municipalities, port authorities, and appropriate state and federal 

 agencies are represented in the Great Lakes Basin Commission, or its task forces. 



Federal agency representatives include the Departments of Agriculture, Army, 

 Commerce, Health, Education and Welfare. Housing and Urban Development, 

 Interior, Justice, Transportation, and the Federal Power Commission. State 

 members include Ohio, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Penn- 

 sylvania, and New York. 



The overall coordination of the Basin Commission in policy, state and fed- 

 eral planning fund sharing, and the establishment of priorities for project and 

 program development is provided by the Water Resources Council. Through this 

 chain. Congress and the President receive well organized and vital recommenda- 

 tions on critical needs. 



At present, the Great Lakes Basin Commission is working on a framework 

 plan. Twenty-six different work groups have been established — each contain- 

 ing federal, state, and other representatives. Some of the work groups which 

 are similar to the study projects recommended in the Marine Commission report 

 include: limnology of lakes and embayments, water quality, fish, navigation, 

 lake levels and flows, shore use and erosion, land use, recreation, and plan 

 formulation. The Great Lakes Basin Commission framework study is scheduled 

 to be completed in 1972. 



