Evidence of meeting #12 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was phosphorus.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Regional Director General, Ontario Region, Department of the Environment
They're all declining significantly in terms of the persistent toxins.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
So that's not the area we should be looking at.
What's the water temperature doing, and what's the historic...?
Regional Director General, Ontario Region, Department of the Environment
Water temperature is increasing. There is a link to algae growth. We're seeing a longer growing season for algae in Lake Erie.
The lakes are all different. Lake Superior is a very large and deep lake, so it's a colder lake and it's not as responsive. Lake Erie is the shallowest of the lakes and that's why we're seeing more rapid changes, and more development of algae.
Certainly, water temperature is one of the factors.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
I've heard reports that in Georgian Bay there is a great decline in the water levels. Is that correct?
Section Head, Watershed Stressors and Nutrients, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
That's correct. They're experiencing near record lows in Georgian Bay.
NDP
Section Head, Watershed Stressors and Nutrients, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
What we've seen is that with the water levels going down, the temperatures in the summer and the slight increase in temperatures is driving those warmer waters down deeper into the water column, so to speak. That collapses that narrow cold band on the bottom and makes it more shallow. In those sorts of cases in those particular years when it's very warm and that bottom layer collapses, we see lower and lower oxygen levels in the bottom of the water. The lower level of oxygen and how that's affected by temperature are certainly a concern to us.
NDP
Section Head, Watershed Stressors and Nutrients, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
It's related to that, yes. That's consuming some of the oxygen.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Okay, and that of course affects the fish life and everything.
Section Head, Watershed Stressors and Nutrients, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
Yes, changes to the oxygen or the extent of the oxygenated zone can affect the fish.
Section Head, Watershed Stressors and Nutrients, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
It can. I really can't speak to the details of that, but it affects the zonation of the lake.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Do you do sediment analysis or water column analysis of sediment for any reason?
Section Head, Watershed Stressors and Nutrients, Science and Technology Branch, Department of the Environment
We collect sediments routinely for both analysis of contaminants as well as nutrients to look at the oxygen demand of the sediment. One of the concerns is that we've had nutrients coming into these lakes...well, they come in naturally so they've been coming in since geologic times, but that addition of nutrients has been exacerbated in recent years. Those nutrients ultimately will settle into the bottom of the lake and as bacteria and other...work over those sediments, they'll consume oxygen. We are concerned about how the lakes differ and how the sediments in the lakes are affected by human activity.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht
Thank you.
Mr. Bevington, you're over time.
We'll go now to Mr. Toet.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you to the witnesses for appearing before us today.
I want to ask you about your areas of concern, the 17 in Canada you talked about. There are three fully remediated ones, two areas where basically the actions have been completed and it's now just time for recovery of the environment, and a further five in which completion will happen in the next five years. Where are we with the remaining seven, and what is the status of those?
Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Branch and Regional Directors General Offices, Department of the Environment
I'll start and Mike, who knows more about these things, can add.
Of the remaining seven, the biggest one is the Randle Reef, and we've talked about that. That's one that we think will stretch beyond the timeline we're talking about there. That's going to take us a bit of time.
There are a few that I mentioned in my remarks, which we're still looking at, finding partners and finding what approach we need to follow in terms of remediation, the best way to move forward.
As it stands right now, we think, from where we are with the resources we're putting into this, that we would have the work done on all of the areas of concern by 2025, if I'm correct.
I don't know if you want to add to that, Mike.
Regional Director General, Ontario Region, Department of the Environment
I'd just like to say that 2025 is our goal for those other seven. It's a bit hard to project that far out.
Randle Reef is a sediment problem, and we have a solution and we're beginning to implement.
Port Hope harbour is another place where there is a sediment problem, contamination due to radioactive materials, and that will be remediated as part of the major initiative by Natural Resources Canada in the Port Hope area.
There are three other sites, Thunder Bay, St. Marys River, and St. Clair River, where there are very challenging contaminated sediment problems. We have sediments contaminated by historic discharges, sometimes discharges over more than 100 years, so we're still looking for solutions in those three areas.
That's why they're a little bit longer term, but we're projecting that by 2025 we should be finished in those areas.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Are you able to use some of the knowledge at this point in time, and specifically some of the knowledge you've built through the work on Randle Reef, in some of these other sediment areas? Are you able to translate that knowledge to help speed up those processes?
Regional Director General, Ontario Region, Department of the Environment
For sure, and we're actually using that knowledge in other parts of Canada, North America, and around the world. We developed the way we assess sediments in the Great Lakes, and we use that nationally now to characterize sediments and figure out how much of the sediment we need to remediate.
At Thunder Bay, we're looking at the possibility of using the same type of approach we're using in Randle Reef. It's a bit challenging and we're not sure that will work, but we're constantly applying the lessons learned to the other areas of concern, both within Canada and within the United States. We work very closely with the U.S. on their remediations.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
You did mention that there's an 80% to 90% reduction of chemicals in the Great Lakes. It sounds as though most of what you're left to deal with on these cleanups are historic issues and there are no new issues arising that you're aware of or that you're seeing in these areas that are exacerbating this issue at all.
Regional Director General, Ontario Region, Department of the Environment
Certainly in the contaminated sediment field that's correct. These are legacy problems.
What's changed in the Great Lakes since we started working in the 1970s is that we now have national legislation and provincial legislation that controls the discharge of chemicals. Federally we have the chemical management plan and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. We're constantly assessing new chemicals and trying to prevent the release of harmful chemicals into the environment.
Really, our contribution to that at an ecosystem level is to address those legacy problems.
Conservative
Lawrence Toet Conservative Elmwood—Transcona, MB
When you have this end date of 2025, and when you're looking at that in the context of the reduction in chemicals that are already there, you are basically dealing with sediment issues. It's not a moving issue, so to speak, at this point in time.
Are you very confident that by 2025, with a few of the projects perhaps going slightly beyond that, you'll have done pretty much all of the remediation that will need to be done in the lakes and that we will have a good, safe environment in the lakes?