Late last summer we watched the water level drop at a rate of about four inches (.1 m) in thirty days. This rate is about one foot in three months. Certainly the prospect of this continuing decline was alarming, although of course it was a seasonal phenomenon, most certainly to be reversed.

From mid-October into early November, barring spurts of higher water due to weather conditions "backing up" the river, the low levels ran about 74.2m above sea level. Then about November 7 they suddenly dropped about 2.75 inches to new lows of 74.13. This is .48m or one foot seven inches lower than the long-term average. An informative graph of changing water levels is available online.

Beyond being inconvenient for many of us, who had had difficulty docking our boats late last summer, the low water has impaired Seaway shipping. As water level drops, hulls of ships cannot be so deep, so load must be lightened. For every inch of draft (depth of a ship’s hull below water) lost, a thousand foot laker will lose 267 tons of cargo carried. Because lower water levels make it difficult for some ships to dock in port, there is a decrease in Great Lakes cruises scheduled for 2008.

Water Intake at Ian Coristine's island, exposed by low water. Ian had to dig a hole to lower the intake.

Despite the very real problems caused by the unusually low water, in fact the condition was not record-breaking. We've had water this low before, with the lowest recorded level occurring in 1934. The water level late last summer may have been the lowest we have seen in a decade, but variations of this scale are not extraordinary historically.

We may think that wide fluctuations in water level are aberrations, a stable level being the norm. To the contrary, an unchanging level would be literally "unnatural," not necessarily to be desired. Douglas Wilcox, with the U.S. Geological Survey's Great Lakes Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, observes, "Natural variability is an absolute necessity. The [Great Lakes] plant and animal communities are not only adapted to that variability, but they absolutely require that variability to provide habitat and food, and nesting/spawning [areas] to maintain their populations."

We have heard how the flooding of the Nile, by enriching the soil of the flood plain, was responsible for the long prosperity and power of ancient Egypt, and how periodic burning of the forest provides regeneration of woodlands that otherwise might become aged and unproductive. Similarly, receding and advancing shore lines provide zones of biological fertility, where new varieties of growth suddenly appear to enrich the regional bank of flora and fauna.

Historically, Great Lakes water levels have varied by as much as six feet. Such records as we have suggest that there are natural cycles, high and low water levels being separated by about fifteen years. Record low and high levels of the river have occurred in this writer's lifetime, in 1933 and 1945.

At this writing (December, 2007) the level of Lake Ontario is 74.288m above sea level. The lowest level recorded was 73.74m in 1934, which was .048m (3.31 inches) lower than the present level.

But more recently, nine years ago, the 1998 level of 74.29m was merely.002m higher than at this writing--virtually the same level as today. So rather than supposing that we have evidence of some alarming trend, due to global warming or some such phenomenon, it may be less alarmist to suppose that we are witnessing cyclical trends in water levels.

More warranting alarm, however, is another long-range trend: population growth in areas of the United States where water supply is inadequate to support larger populations. The declining water levels of the past season may presage the future, if the water of the Great Lakes is diverted to assuage drought in Georgia, to irrigate farms in California, to water suburban lawns (or even a water park) in arid Arizona and to fill swimming pools and operate Las Vegas fountains.

As population, not merely in North America but throughout the world expands, there will be ever increasing demand to share the world's largest fresh-water reservoir, the Great Lakes. But most of this water was deposited back in the ice age, with merely about one percent being renewable from rainfall.

Peter Annin has forecasted the future in his 2006 book, The Great Lakes Water Wars. He also maintains a web site. Annin foresees increasing pressure to divert Great Lakes water to supply areas of growth elsewhere on the continent--merely one aspect of a global thirst for fresh water. Peter Annin will be keynote speaker at the winter meeting of Save the River, February 8-10, at the Clayton Opera House.

This writer knows a Florida developer who has pulled up stakes, returning north, because he sees the Florida building boom bursting inevitably, due to exhaustion of available water supply. The world's most rapidly growing populations are in relatively arid portions of the globe. The water crisis will be global.

This past season we have seen the impact on our region of low water. More broadly, Seaway shipping has declined, since lower water levels mean less cargo carried. In our lower Great Lakes, recent water levels make it difficult for some ships to dock in port. There is a noticeable decrease in the inventory of Great Lakes cruises for 2008.

From Montreal, Marc Hudon, director of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence program at Nature Québec, an environmental organization, noted in November:

"If there are prolonged periods of low water in the lakes, there will be more pressure from power plants, industry, pleasure boaters and fast-growing surrounding communities to keep the water there instead of letting it flow to Quebec. Lower water levels mean big transport ships will have difficulty plowing the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway. Already, marinas on the St. Lawrence say there's an increase in pleasure boats hitting rocks.

"Climate change is part of the answer but the studies are not conclusive [that global warming the only cause]. It could be a natural cycle but it's one we've never seen before." How global warming may affect our local water levels is another matter where there is no agreement. Most commonly it is observed that loss of ice cover on the Great Lakes will lead to increased evaporation throughout the year, resulting in lower water levels

Related to the larger issue of water supply is our local concern for managing levels of Lake Ontario and St. Lawrence River, our own orgnization, Save the River, has been monitoring proposals and hearings. Marg Dochoda also has kept many of us informed about changing water level developments and news of proceedings of the International Joint Commission during and after the season.

What can we do about the growing problem? Since 1955 we have had an eight-state agreement calling for joint management of the Great Lakes. In 2001, governors from the eight states met in Niagara Falls to strengthen the charter so as to close loopholes, proposing a gentleman’s agreement with Ontario and Quebec, since states are not authorized to negotiate a binding agreement with Canadian provinces.

The agreement would ban new or increased water diversions either within the Great Lakes basin or to other parts of the country. Meanwhile, Governor Richardson of dry New Mexico currently is proposing a "national water policy." Beware the Trojan horse. The demographic shift of population from Great Lakes states to the Sun Belt states is reducing our representation in Congress while increasing that of thirsty states. Ceding control of our water to Washington could be disastrous. The Great Lakes Compact needs approval by all eight Great Lakes states, and New York should be leading that effort instead of lagging.