Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

Slow the flow... save the lake

Throwing money at Lake Winnipeg won't help much, but some ditch-digging might

  • Print

If you listen to the Selinger government's latest plan to aid Lake Winnipeg, money has the power to scrub phosphorus from the water of Manitoba's largest lake.

On Thursday, the province announced a new "Lake Friendly Accord" intended to leverage $1 billion worth of investment into ways to improve the ecological state of the vast Lake Winnipeg watershed, which stretches from the Rocky Mountains in the west down to the edge of South Dakota and then east into Canadian Shield between Atikokan and Thunder Bay.

The accord emphasizes an effort to co-ordinate the environmental efforts of the many political jurisdictions across the watershed, which includes portions of five provinces and four states and encompasses hundreds of Canadian and U.S. municipalities.

 

It's a lovely idea, if you believe it's possible to convince the humans in charge of every city, town, rural municipality, farm, factory, cottage, boat and septic field across a vast swath of North America to reduce the amount of phosphorus and nitrogen they allow to flow into their rivers and streams.

All of those waterways wind up in Lake Winnipeg, where the nutrients promote the growth of algae. Along with causing unsightly blooms -- a mostly cosmetic nuisance -- this algae contributes to the turbidity of the lake, making the underwater environment less hospitable for invertebrates that have evolved to survive in clearer water.

And after all the algae dies, the decomposition process removes oxygen from the lake, making life more difficult for fish and other species that tend to rely on oxygen.

As scientists at Ontario's Experimental Lakes Area first demonstrated decades ago, removing phosphorus from the lake is even more important than removing nitrogen, which blue-green algae can access directly from the air.

Policy-makers are well aware of this, even as many Manitobans remain confused and erroneously believe Lake Winnipeg is contaminated in some way. It can be tough for ordinary people to wrap their brains around the fact a lake can be completely safe for people right now and still be perched on the precipice of ecological disaster.

What form would that disaster take? In even more overfertilized bodies of water such as Africa's Lake Chad and Asia's Aral Sea, the entire food chain essentially collapsed.

Hence the conventional wisdom that preventing nutrients from making their way into Lake Winnipeg is the best means of avoiding a similar calamity in Manitoba.

But the recent work of researchers tasked to do nothing but study Lake Winnipeg's nutrient problem suggests this effort may be futile. All the money in the world may not be able to reduce the flow of nutrients into the lake considering the vast array of sources for the phosphorus and nitrogen.

According to the landmark report by the Lake Winnipeg Stewardship Board, 64 per cent of the nutrients that wind up in the lake come from outside Manitoba.

Within the province, Winnipeg accounts for five per cent of the nutrients and other point sources account for two per cent. All agricultural activity in Manitoba accounts for only five per cent.

Meanwhile, a pair of natural processes -- atmospheric deposition on the lake and non-agricultural runoff in Manitoba -- accounts for the remaining 24 per cent of phosphorus and nitrogen that winds up in the lake.

Over the past decade, hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent trying to reduce the nutrient emissions of two specific types of nutrient sources: agriculture and the point sources, which include the City of Winnipeg.

But even if every farm in Manitoba and Winnipeg's three sewage-treatment plants suddenly stopped contributing any nutrients by way of magic, Lake Winnipeg's nutrient loads would only be reduced by 12 per cent. The remaining 88 per cent of the nitrogen and phosphorus would still find its way into the lake.

This brutal arithmetic has led researchers at the University of Manitoba, conservation groups and think tanks to propose it may be far cheaper, way easier and immensely more effective to hold back the water instead of holding back the nutrients.

Their idea: Build a series of low-tech dugouts on every available piece of agricultural land across the watershed and change the slope of drainage ditches to allow them to store more water on a temporary basis.

Water in both the dugouts and ditches would then be used to nourish specialty crops, hay or even marsh plants. This growth would scrub out plenty of nutrients before the water is released downstream. The side benefits include less severe flood peaks and more water sources during potential droughts.

But this low-tech idea is meeting resistance in some corners of government where officials have a lot invested in the current nutrient-reduction orthodoxy. And it's hard to blame them, considering they've just spent the past decade ordering farmers and municipalities to spend hundreds of millions to reduce their nutrient outputs in a manner that has so far done very little to save Lake Winnipeg.

Obviously, any nutrient-reduction effort is beneficial. But the benefits to date have been exaggerated.

On Thursday, the province claimed sewage-treatment upgrades in Winnipeg will reduce nutrient loads within the province by seven per cent. This is a meaningless statistic, as Winnipeg contributes only five per cent of the total load into Lake Winnipeg every year.

Within the province, that figure is 14 per cent. Assuming that provincial figure could be cut to seven per cent -- which may not be possible -- it would only cut the total nutrient load to Lake Winnipeg by 2 1/2 per cent, a tiny amount.

The province also told another white lie, claiming it's paying for a third of the city's sewage upgrade. On Thursday, the province pegged that third at $235 million, which works out to a sewage-treatment upgrade with a $705-million price tag.

There was a time when the upgrade only cost $705 million: 2003. Thanks to construction inflation and scope inflation, that number was revised upward to $1.2 billion in 2005 and then $1.8 billion.

In fact, when the total cost of combined-sewer replacements are factored in, the price tag for Winnipeg's waste-water improvements is expected to wind up somewhere between $4 billion and $5 billion.

And yes, that is all to reduce the total nutrient loads into Lake Winnipeg from five per cent to 2 1/2 per cent. The work has value, but will not come close to sparing the lake from ecological disaster.

So what can be done instead? The province has the right idea when it plans to consult every jurisdiction within the watershed, but the focus should be on water-retention and nutrient reuptake from this stored water -- both difficult but achievable goals.

No one's arguing in favour of allowing the city to dump raw sewage into Red River or allowing hog barns to spew liquid manure into drainage ditches, but even if the City of Winnipeg and hog farming did not exist, Lake Winnipeg would still be in trouble.

So let's stop pretending money can serve as a magic phosphorus sponge. The real solutions to the Lake Winnipeg conundrum involve a radical transformation of the watershed into something that resembles a patchwork of swimming pools and storage canals, in a manner that can deliver revenues to agricultural producers and won't cost governments and the private sector a ridiculous amount of money.

This is what scientists are saying right now. Who in government will be brave enough to make this happen?

bartley.kives@freepress.mb.ca

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition June 9, 2013 A1

History

Updated on Sunday, June 9, 2013 at 5:08 PM CDT: adds missing word to sentence

Fact Check

Fact Check

Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.

* Required
  • Please post the headline of the story or the title of the video with the error.

  • Please post exactly what was wrong with the story.

  • Please indicate your source for the correct information.

  • Yes

    No

  • This will only be used to contact you if we have a question about your submission, it will not be used to identify you or be published.

  • Cancel

Having problems with the form?

Contact Us Directly
  • Print

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.

letters

Make text: Larger | Smaller

LATEST VIDEO

Key of Bart - Take It Easy

View more like this

Photo Store Gallery

  • A young gosling flaps his wings after taking a bath in the duck pond at St Vital Park Tuesday morning- - Day 21– June 12, 2012   (JOE BRYKSA / WINNIPEG FREE PRESS)
  • JOE.BRYKSA@FREEPRESS.MB.CA Local-(  Standup photo)-    A butterfly looks for nector on a lily Tuesday afternoon in Wolseley-JOE BRYKSA/WINNIPEG FREE PRESS- June 22, 2010

View More Gallery Photos

About Bartley Kives

Bartley Kives wants you to know his last name rhymes with Beavis, as in Beavis and Butthead. He aspires to match the wit, grace and intelligence of the 1990s cartoon series.

Bartley joined the Free Press in 1998 as a music critic. He spent the ensuing 7.5 years interviewing the likes of Neil Young and David Bowie and trying to stay out of trouble at the Winnipeg Folk Festival before deciding it was far more exciting to sit through zoning-variance appeals at city hall.

In 2006, Bartley followed Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz from the music business into civic politics. He spent seven years covering city hall from a windowless basement office.

He is now reporter-at-large for the Free Press and also writes an outdoor-recreation column called Offroad for the Outdoors page.

A canoeist, backpacker and food geek, Bartley is fond of conventional and wilderness travel. He is the author of A Daytripper’s Guide to Manitoba: Exploring Canada’s Undiscovered Province, the only comprehensive travel guidebook for Manitoba – and a Canadian bestseller, to boot. He is also co-author of Stuck In The Middle: Dissenting Views of Winnipeg, a collaboration with photographer Bryan Scott.

Bartley appears every second Wednesday on CityTV’s Breakfast Television. His work has also appeared on CBC Radio and in publications such as National Geographic Traveler, explore magazine and Western Living.

Born in Winnipeg, he has an arts degree from the University of Winnipeg and a master’s degree in journalism from Ottawa’s Carleton University. He is the proud owner of a blender.

On Twitter: @bkives
Email: bartley.kives@freepress.mb.ca

Poll

Should Winnipeg control growth to deal with climate change?

View Results

Ads by Google