Editorial — Give it another look: IJC committee embarks on second phase of Plan 2014 review

Scientists worked for 16 years on the new policy. They concluded that allowing more natural flows would restore wetlands and wildlife populations.

So finally putting Plan 2014 into effect was essential. But the timing couldn’t have been worse.

Plan 2014 was implemented by the International Joint Commission in January 2017. Shoreline communities in Northern and Central New York experienced severe flooding that spring and summer — and the same thing happened two years later. Plan 2014 was labeled by many people as the culprit.

Created by the Water Boundary Treaty of 1909, the IJC advises Canada and the United States on water-usage regulations, approves project applications and resolves disputes between international parties. The International Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Board, which reports to the IJC, oversees outflows from the lake through the Robert Moses-Robert H. Saunders Power Dam in Massena and Cornwall, Ontario.

Initial reviews found that excessive flooding from 2017 and 2019 resulted more from climatic conditions rather than a change in water management policies. Regions along all the Great Lakes experienced extensive rainfall over the previous few years due largely to climate change. And each lake feeds into the other, so they’ll take on excess water from adjacent waterways.

This excess water flows downstream, so it will eventually end up in Northern New York. Lake Superior has an elevation of 600 feet, Lake Huron and Lake Michigan about 577 feet, and Lake Erie roughly 569 feet.

With an elevation of 243 feet, Lake Ontario is the lowest of the Great Lakes. It captures all the water flowing downstream from the other Great Lakes. This makes getting rid of excess water a monumental task.

The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Adaptive Management Committee, an IJC subcommittee, was previously tasked with reviewing Plan 2014 to determine its effectiveness. The group completed the first phase of its study and has embarked in the second phase.

“The focus of GLAM’s initial phase of review was to provide the board with information that would help it make short- and long-term decisions about the impacts of deviations, including better ability to inform real-time decision-making. Much of the research conducted or sponsored by GLAM focused on the impacts of extreme high water on six identified uses and interests on the lake-river complex: municipal and industrial water systems; commercial navigation; hydropower production; lake and river shoreline properties; lake and river ecosystems, and recreational boating and tourism. The committee also respected and recognized that indigenous nations must be included in the review of the regulation plan,” according to a story published Feb. 12 by the Watertown Daily Times. “According to a statement from GLAM, its second phase of Plan 2014’s review will strive to find improvements for managing Lake Ontario outflows, especially during extremely wet or dry periods to reduce impacts on the various uses and interests throughout the lake and river system, although it cautions that no regulation plan will be able to prevent extremely high or low water levels and flows or eliminate their impacts.”

We’re confident GLAM will conclude that Plan 2014 is a sound policy. The benefit is that this additional review will look for ways to improve the plan, which can be incorporated moving forward. Restoring the health of these waterways while serving the needs of shoreline communities are worthy goals that can be achieved.