Protection of Great Lakes is a smart US investment

It’s premature to declare victory as Congress works to protect the Great Lakes from President Donald Trump’s proposed elimination of $300 million in funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, but action taken last week by the House Appropriations Committee is encouraging.

By a 30-21 vote, the committee restored $300 million for the GLRI to the budget. Many of the “no” votes such as that of U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan of Howland, D-13th, weren’t opposed to the $300 million restoration, but to other cuts made to Environmental Protection Agency funding.

The GLRI is a coalition of federal agencies that has been used to clean up toxic waste, control the spread of invasive species, restore habitat and detect and prevent toxic algae blooms in the lakes.

Since 2010, more than 3,000 projects in the eight-state Great Lakes Region have been completed. Those projects have a direct impact on Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, as well as the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec.

But seven years of aggressive efforts to undo decades of abuse suffered by the lakes is only a start. Continued funding is needed to protect the lakes against invasive species, to restore wildlife habitats, to clean up watersheds polluted by Rust Belt industries in the past and agricultural runoff today.

The Great Lakes are an underappreciated asset, both for the region and the neighborhood. The day will come when people – perhaps even President Trump – realize that if the goal is to manufacture things in the United States, the place to do it is in the Great Lakes Region. Water is our most important natural resource.

Today the lakes provide nearly 35 million people with drinking water and support tourism and fishing industries that generate an annual $7 billion in economic activity. About 117,000 of those jobs and 3 million of those water drinkers are Ohioans.

Constant assault

The Great Lakes and everything they provide to the region can’t be taken for granted. They are under constant assault by algae blooms, sewage runoff and an existential threat to the ecosystem – invasive species that are attempting to migrate from the Mississippi into the lakes.

U.S. and Canadian researchers say the voracious grass carp has been found in Lakes Erie, Michigan and Ontario; and some are reproducing. They and other carp species would compete with native fish for food and would destroy native spawning grounds.

Nonnative species of carp were introduced to the southern U.S. in the early 1960s to control weed growth in waterways. Like other Asian carp, some escaped into the Mississippi River and have migrated northward toward the Great Lakes.

The Trump administration would shift the cost of containing fish species that were brought to the United States by southern states and now endanger the Great Lakes to state and local taxpayers.

President Trump wants to shift that burden from the federal government to the very people who put him in the White House. Of the eight Great Lake States, only Illinois, Minnesota and New York voted for his opponent.

Most Great Lakes voters saw Trump as their champion.

Before the election, Mike Budzik, former head of the Ohio Division of Wildlife, represented the presidential candidate at a Great Lakes conference in Ohio. In remarks approved by the Trump campaign, Budzik said the candidate was “supportive of programs like the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative” and that “when Donald Trump becomes president, he assures me he’ll do all he can do to make the Great Lakes great again.”

The president’s attempt to eliminate GLRI funding would damage both Ohio’s economy and its environment.

Fortunately, restoring full funding for the GLRI would seem to have sufficient bipartisan support in Congress. Ohio senators Rob Portman, a Republican, and Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, both pledge to fight for the appropriation when the budget reaches the Senate.

Perhaps on his way to Youngstown tomorrow, the president could have Air Force One make a swing over Lake Erie. A look out the window will show him that shortchanging Erie and its sister lakes is not a great idea.