28.11.2014 Views

Lower Welland River Characterization Report - Niagara Peninsula ...

Lower Welland River Characterization Report - Niagara Peninsula ...

Lower Welland River Characterization Report - Niagara Peninsula ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Lower</strong> <strong>Welland</strong> <strong>River</strong> Study Area<br />

<strong>Characterization</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />

Water Quality<br />

<strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong> Area of Concern<br />

In 1987 the International Joint Commission (IJC) designated the <strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong> as one of 43 Areas<br />

of Concern (AOCs) around the Great Lakes Basin due to its degraded water quality impairing<br />

complete use of its resources. The AOC spans both the Canadian and American <strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong><br />

watersheds. The Canadian <strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong> AOC includes the 58 kilometre long <strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong> to<br />

the international border and the <strong>Welland</strong> <strong>River</strong> drainage basin (Figure 10). The <strong>Welland</strong> <strong>River</strong> is<br />

the largest tributary of the <strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong> and its drainage basin accounts for approximately 80<br />

percent of the AOC (Canada).<br />

Water quality issues in this AOC stem from sedimentation and toxic contaminants from industry,<br />

municipal sources of heavy metals, nutrients and other toxic pollutants, urban and rural runoff, and<br />

combined sewer overflows (NPCA 2002). As a result of the poor water quality many Beneficial Use<br />

Impairments (BUIs), as outlined in the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (1987), have been<br />

identified.<br />

In response to concerns over the health of the entire <strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong> watershed and its ecosystem,<br />

a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) was created with representation from various stakeholders including<br />

the federal and provincial governments, resource agencies and the public (NPCA 2000). The<br />

Remedial Action Plan uses an ecosystem approach to environmental decision-making that<br />

involves three stages. The first stage, completed in 1993 (Environmental Conditions and Problem<br />

Definition), included a detailed assessment of environmental problems and their sources in the<br />

AOC and the extent of the impairments. In the Stage 2 report, (The Cleanup Connection 1995), the<br />

representatives of the RAP identified goals and objectives; made recommendations to achieve the<br />

goals; and proposed an implementation strategy to address the recommendations (<strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong><br />

RAP 1995). In 2000, Implementation Annex (NPCA) was published and along with The Cleanup<br />

Connection (<strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong> RAP 1995) completed Stage 2 of the RAP. The Implementation Annex<br />

identified responsible stakeholders for the implementation of the recommendations; provided a<br />

schedule of activities, timelines and project costs (NPCA 2000).<br />

Since the release of the 1995 Stage 2 report, and with various implementation activities completed<br />

or ongoing within the AOC, the outstanding questions that need to be addressed now are: “What<br />

remains to be done in order to delist the <strong>Niagara</strong> <strong>River</strong> (Ontario) as a Great Lakes AOC?” and<br />

“How long will it take to achieve delisting?” Many changes have occurred during that time with<br />

regard to environmental conditions within the AOC; remediation technologies; advances in<br />

analytical capabilities; advances in scientific understanding of environmental issues; and, the<br />

programs and priorities of RAP partners.<br />

To answer these questions, government agencies and RAP partners felt it was necessary to<br />

review and update the RAP. With assistance from Technical Committees, a Steering Committee<br />

and a Public Advisory Committee, a full review of the Stage 2 report was initiated in 2004 to<br />

determine the status of implementation activities, identify any information gaps that require<br />

monitoring and assessment, and to focus all actions under the RAP towards delisting.<br />

The Stage 2 Update report (2009) is a product of this review. It provides an update to the Stage 2<br />

(1995) report and contains a summary of progress and several significant efforts which have taken<br />

place over the past nineteen years. It also contains the current status of impairments in the AOC<br />

38

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!