HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS AND HYPOXIA IN THE 

GREAT LAKES RESEARCH PLAN AND ACTION 

STRATEGY: AN INTERAGENCY REPORT

PRODUCT OF THE

National Science and Technology Council

August 2017

iv

About the National Science and Technology Council

The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is the principal means by which the Executive Branch 

coordinates science and technology policy across the diverse entities that make up the Federal research 

and development (R&D) enterprise. One of the NSTC’s primary objectives is establishing clear national 

goals for Federal science and technology investments. The NSTC prepares R&D packages aimed at 

accomplishing multiple national goals. The NSTC’s work is organized under five committees: Environment, 

Natural Resources, and Sustainability; Homeland and National Security; Science, Technology, Engineering, 

and Mathematics (STEM) Education; Science; and Technology. Each of these committees oversees 

subcommittees and working groups that are focused on different aspects of science and technology. More 

information is available at www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/nstc. 

About the Office of Science and Technology Policy

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) was established by the National Science and Technology 

Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976. OSTP’s responsibilities include advising the President in 

policy formulation and budget development on questions in which science and technology are important 

elements; articulating the President’s science and technology policy and programs; and fostering strong 

partnerships among Federal, State, and local governments, and the scientific communities in industry and 

academia. The Director of OSTP also serves as Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and 

manages the NSTC. More information is available at www.whitehouse.gov/ostp.

About the Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology

The purpose of the Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology (SOST) is to advise and assist on national 

issues of ocean science and technology. The SOST contributes to the goals for Federal ocean science and 

technology, including developing coordinated interagency strategies, and fosters national ocean science and 

technology priorities, including implementation of the National Ocean Policy. 

About the Interagency Working Group on Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia 

Research and Control Act

In recognition of the challenges presented by harmful algal blooms (HAB) and hypoxia, the Harmful Algal 

Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2014 (HABHRCA 2014, P.L. 113-124) 

emphasizes the mandate to advance the scientific understanding and ability to detect, predict, control, 

mitigate, and respond to these types of events. This legislation called for the establishment of the 

Interagency Working Group on HABHRCA (IWG-HABHRCA). It tasked the group with coordinating and 

convening Federal agencies to discuss HAB and hypoxia events in the United States, and to develop action 

plans, reports, and assessments of these situations.

About this Document

The IWG-HABHRCA developed this document, and it was published by OSTP.

The report is intended to promote greater investment and coordination of United States government 

resources to address HABs and hypoxia, but it is not a budget document and does not imply approval for 

any specific action under Executive Order 12866 or the Paperwork Reduction Act. The report will inform 

the Federal budget and regulatory development processes within the context of the goals articulated in 

the President’s Budget. All activities included in the National Strategy are subject to budgetary constraints 

and other approvals, including the weighing of priorities and available resources by the Administration in 

formulating its annual budget and by Congress in legislating appropriations.
v

Acknowledgements

The IWG-HABHRCA thanks Deborah Lee, Leslie Irwin, Ariana Sutton-Grier, and Kaye Lafond of the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for their help with editing and designing this report.

Special thanks and acknowledgment to the following subject-matter experts who contributed significantly 

to the writing of this report: 

• Chris Loeffler, Food and Drug Administration;

• Laura Lorenzoni, National Aeronautics and Space Administration;

• Suzanne Bricker, Quay Dortch, Alan Lewitus, Wayne Litaker, Rob Magnien, John Ramsdell, Trevor

Meckley, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;

• Tracy Ziegler, National Park Service; and

• Patrick Deliman, United States Army Corps of Engineers.

Copyright Information

This document is a work of the United States Government and is in the public domain (see 17 U.S.C. §105).

Subject to the stipulations below, it may be distributed and copied with acknowledgement to OSTP.

Copyrights to graphics included in this document are reserved by the original copyright holders or their 

assignees and are used here under the government’s license and by permission. Requests to use any images 

must be made to the provider identified in the image credits or to OSTP if no provider is identified.

Printed in the United States of America, 2017.
vi

National Science and Technology Council

Chair Staff

Ted Wackler Vacant

Acting Director Executive Director

Office of Science and Technology Policy Office of Science and Technology Policy

Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability

Co-Chairs Staff

Deerin Babb-Brott Lisa Matthews

Acting Principal Assistant Director for Environment and Executive Secretary

Energy Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Science and Technology Policy

Tom Burke

Science Advisor

Environmental Protection Agency

Benjamin Friedman

Acting Undersecretary for Oceans and Atmosphere

Administrator of the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration

Deputy Under Secretary for Operations

Department of Commerce

Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology

Co-Chairs Staff

Jennifer Lee Jessica McGrath

Office of Science and Technology Policy National Science Foundation

Cisco Werner Jeanette Davis

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

Richard W. Murray

National Science Foundation
vii

Interagency Working Group on HABHRCA

Co-Chairs Staff

Steven Thur Caitlin Gould

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Elizabeth Southerland Linda Novitski

Environmental Protection Agency Cooperative Institute for Limnology and

Ecosystems Research

Great Lakes Leadership

Deborah Lee

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Subgroup Leads/IWG-HABHRCA Representatives

Lesley D’Anglada (Harmful Algal Blooms) Stacey DeGrasse (Engagement)

Environmental Protection Agency Food and Drug Administration

Timothy Davis (Great Lakes) Rachel Melnick (Hypoxia)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Institute of Food and Agriculture

Great Lakes Subgroup

Eric Anderson Lisa Duriancik

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Natural Resources Conservation Service

Mary Anne Evans Lisa Fogarty 

United States Geological Survey United States Geological Survey 

Tony Friona Norman Grannemann

United States Army Corps of Engineers United States Geological Survey

Elizabeth Hinchey Malloy Mari-Vaughn Johnson

Environmental Protection Agency Natural Resources Conservation Service

Kevin King Russell Kreis

Agricultural Research Service Environmental Protection Agency

Joe Makuch Todd Nettesheim

Agricultural Research Service Environmental Protection Agency

Elizabeth Rohring John Rothlisberger

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration United States Forest Service

Steve Ruberg

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
viii

IWG-HABHRCA Representatives

Lorraine Backer Paula Bontempi

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Aeronautics and Science Administration

Tony Clyde Megan Butterworth Davidson

United States Army Corps of Engineers Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

Erich Emery Wayne Estabrooks

United States Army Corps of Engineers United States Navy

Dave Garrison Sara Handy

National Science Foundation Food and Drug Administration

John Haynes Donna Myers

National Aeronautics and Space Administration United States Geological Survey

Teri Rowles Fred Tyson

National Oceanic and Atmospheric National Institute of Environmental Health 

Administration Sciences
ix

Table of Contents

Executive Summary........................................................................................................................................1

Introduction...............................................................................................................................................................2

1. Revealing the Problem: Understanding HABs, Hypoxia, and Nutrient Sources in the Great Lakes.........8

2. Managing HABs and Hypoxia: What are the Options?..........................................................................26

3. Research Recommendations and Action Strategy Opportunities................................................................44

4. Conclusion............................................................................................................................................................51

Appendix 1 – Great Lakes HABs, Toxins, and Bioactive Compounds and their Effects..................................52

Appendix 2 – Great Lakes HAB-Related Human Illnesses...................................................................................53

Appendix 3 – HABHRCA Federal Agency HABs and Hypoxia Program Activities............................................54

Appendix 4 – Great Lakes HABs and Hypoxia Toolkit.........................................................................................78

References................................................................................................................................................................82

Acronyms................................................................................................................................................................101

Glossary...................................................................................................................................................................103
1

Executive Summary

This report provides a research plan and action strategy for addressing the causes and impacts of harmful 

algal blooms (HABs) and hypoxia on stakeholders of all types within the Great Lakes region. Over the past 

several decades, HABs and hypoxia (low-oxygen conditions) have caught the nation’s attention due to the 

associated negative socioeconomic, public health, and environmental impacts. Since the mid-1990s in 

particular, the Great Lakes region has seen an increase in the size, duration, and prevalence of these 

scientifically complex events.

This report responds to the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (HABHRCA) and 

provides a strategy for communities, state officials, congressional leaders, and Federal agencies to address 

the causes and effects of HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes. It is the second report produced in response 

to the Act, the first report being Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Comprehensive Research Plan and 

Action Strategy: An Interagency Report. This current report, which complements and supports the 

recommendations under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, discusses recent advancements in 

technology and conservation practices, including improved instruments, modeling, and understanding of 

how to manage and reduce nutrient runoff, allowing for continuous HABs and hypoxia monitoring, 

detection, and abatement. It reviews developmentsthat improve understanding of what causes HABs and 

hypoxia; how long events last; the best methods for managing causes; and how HABs and hypoxia can 

affect human and animal health, the economy, and the ecology of the Great Lakes. It shows how the 

Federal government works with communities, resource managers, and other stakeholders to minimize 

impacts during an event, and to be prepared well in advance through forecasts, policies, and other means. 

Additionally, it takes nutrient pollution control into account, including best conservation practices and 

associated costs. 

The report contains a number of research recommendations and actions for Federal agencies to take, as 

summarized below:

• Improve comprehensive conservation planning, by evaluating and implementing existing 

and new best management technologies and conservation practices for reducing land-derived 

nutrient inputs;

● Expand ecological forecasting, monitoring, and modeling for HABs and hypoxia across the Great 

Lakes. This will be useful in predicting HABs and hypoxia occurrences and severity, and informing 

decision-makers and the public about risks associated with HABs and hypoxia. This includes 

developing and documenting an initial prediction of the impacts of a changing climate leading to 

extreme weather events on HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes;

● Refine and develop methods for detecting HAB-related toxins found in the Great Lakes, allowing 

for quicker toxin detection, and earlier communication to the public. Likewise, the report 

recommends developing unified messages on the causes, risks, and mitigation efforts on HABs 

and hypoxia, along with research on the most effective communication approaches for affecting

behavior and influencing decision-making processes; and

● Expand and integrate information on current and potential future social and environmental 

impacts of HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes. This includes helping communities of all scales 

to conduct cost-benefit and preparedness analyses to ensure they have adequate sources of 

drinking water, food, and revenue before a bloom or hypoxia event occurs.
2

Introduction

What are HABs and Hypoxia?

The Great Lakes are more than bodies of water; they are the linchpin for the region’s identity. The 

nearshore areas of the Great Lakes are sources of drinking water for tens of millions of people. Multitudes

of people each year recreate in the lake waters. Fishermen, tourism operators, and other industries 

depend on the Great Lakes for revenue. 

Although HABs and hypoxia only occur in some areas of the Great Lakes (indicated in Figures 2 and 4), 

they frequently happen in areas where humans and animals commonly come into contact with the water. 

As a result, HABs and hypoxia can cause substantial detrimental effects to aquatic life, wildlife, humans, 

pets, and livestock. They also can have serious effects on a community’s social health, causing lost revenue 

for lakefront economies that are dependent on aquatic or seafood harvests or tourism; disruption of 

subsistence, social, and cultural practices; or loss of community identity tied to aquatic resource use. 

These impacts cause us to ask critical questions: Is it safe to drink or bathe in my tap water? Can we swim 

at the beach? Can I eat this fish? Are my pets at risk? How will this affect my business or job? 

Defining HABs

HABs are a naturally occurring subset of microscopic or larger plant-like cyanobacteria or algal species 

(Appendices 1 and 2). Dominant cyanobacteria species in the Great Lakes that may become harmful

(Appendices 1 and 2) include Microcystis, Dolichospermum, Aphanizomenon, Planktothrix, and Lyngbya. 

There also is a separate category of harmful algae that includes the well-documented and non-toxic 

benthic green alga Cladophora spp. (Brooks et al., 2015). When promoted by human-influenced 

ecosystem changes such as nutrient-loading, extreme weather events, and invasive organisms, these 

species can form dense overgrowths also known as “blooms” that can disrupt the environment and local 

economies, or can produce toxinsthat are harmful to people and animals (giving rise to the term “harmful 

algal bloom”). HAB overgrowths and toxins have the potential to kill fish directly; additionally, people may 

become sick if they ingest sufficient amounts of toxins through drinking water, during recreational 

activities, eating contaminated food, or breathing contaminated air (Wood, 2016). In contrast to marine 

HABs, where exposure can occur through eating seafood or inhaling aerosols, people and animals 

primarily have contact with HAB toxins in the freshwater Great Lakes through drinking water and 

recreation. Water intakes can draw in HAB toxins, leading to disruptions in the water supplies for large 

numbers of the population. The toxins can also sicken or kill pets, livestock, and wildlife through

contaminated water and food supplies (Byappanahalli et al., 2003; Carmichael and Boyer, 2016). Pets are 

particularly susceptible to exposure via drinking HAB-laden water because they drink or play in nearshore 

waters, where certain species of HABs are likely to occur.

Algae and cyanobacteria are considered to be the cornerstones of life on Earth and form the basis of most 

aquatic food webs, including in the Great Lakes. Many of these species play a crucial role in maintaining 

healthy ecosystems. For instance, the Great Lakes are home to over 1,400 species of diatoms, a common 

type of algae, which represent an important and diverse part of the regional ecosystem (Stoermer et al., 

1999). The annual spring diatom bloom provides an important food source for fish. Fall diatom blooms 

equally are important to fish and other organisms in the lakes, providing a reliable food source throughout 

the winter (Reavie et al., 2016). 
3

Figure 1. This figure demonstrates some of the causes and ecosystem consequences of HABs and hypoxia. Changes 

in precipitation patterns, including rain and snowfall; pollution and runoff due to changes in the landscape; and 

increased amounts of carbon dioxide in the water column, are some of the contributing factors to the development 

of HABs (here, represented by the cyanobacteria bloom) in a waterbody and the onset of toxin production in algal 

cells. Weather patterns also affect the distribution of a HAB. Additionally, while groundwater contributes nutrient 

inputs into waterbodies, researchers are less certain about the extent of these inputs.

This diagram also shows how HABs and hypoxia enter and affect the food web. Smaller organisms like fish or shellfish 

ingest algal cells, and then are eaten by larger species, such as humans or wildlife. Additionally, some organisms are 

unable to escape hypoxic areas and die from lack of oxygen. (Image courtesy of the Lake Champlain Basin Program.)

Figure 1 depicts factors contributing to HABs, and shows impacts that HABs may have on the ecology of 

an ecosystem. Currently, little is known about the movement of freshwater HAB toxins and bioactive 

compounds once they enter the food web (Gademann and Portmann, 2008), although microcystins have 

been found in the tissue and organs of freshwater fish (Schmidt et al., 2013). They also accumulate in 

marine shellfish and other organisms, accumulating in flesh and leading to the deaths of marine mammals

(Miller et al., 2010; Gibble et al., 2016). There are challengesthat arise, however, in measuring cyanotoxins 

in biological specimens, including a wide variability between uptake rates, half-lives, and overall 

concentrations of these compounds (USEPA, 2015a, 2015b, 2015c). 

Blooms that are considered not toxic, such asthose caused by Cladophora spp. and other green algae, can 

negatively impact ecosystems by blocking light to bottom-dwelling plants, restructuring food web 

dynamics, giving drinking water a bad taste or odor, and harboring pathogens (Lopez et al., 2008; Auer et 

al., 2010; Paerl et al., 2016). Mats of Cladophora and other green algae are associated with pathogens, 
4

including avian botulism, which kills fish and birds, as well as waterborne pathogens that can harm

humans(Lan et al., 2015; Brooks et al., 2015; Kenow et al., 2016). The blooms can also form thick, odorous

algal masses that clog water intakes, boat motors, fishing nets, and fish gills.

Cyanobacterial HABs occur throughout the Great Lakes, including in western and central Lake Erie; 

Saginaw Bay in Lake Huron (Fahnenstiel et al., 2008); Green Bay in Lake Michigan; and in smaller 

embayments, tributaries, and nearshore areas, such as Muskegon Lake, Lake St. Clair, Sandusky Bay, 

western Lake Superior, the Sandusky and Maumee Rivers, Little Bay du Noc, Bay of Quinte (Canada), 

Hamilton Harbor (Canada), Sturgeon Bay (Canada), Honey Harbor (Canada), and Sodus Bay (New York). 

Cladophora blooms are found in the Grand Traverse Bay and Sleeping Bear Dunes areas in Lake St. Clair, 

along the northern shorelines of Lake Erie near Ajax (Canada) and Lake Ontario (Canada), and the southern 

shore of Lake Ontario (Auer et al., 2010; IJC, 2013; Shuchman et al., 2013). Figure 2, below, shows known 

locations of cyanobacteria and Cladophora throughout the Great Lakes region.

Figure 2. Map of reported cyanobacterial and Cladophora HAB locations in the Great Lakes basin. Every lake 

experiences at least one type of HAB. A variety of factors impact the distribution, size, and species of HAB (Shuchman 

et al., 2013; Brooks et al., 2015). (Graphic courtesy of GLERL/OAR/NOAA.)

Defining Hypoxia

Hypoxia is a naturally-occurring condition where the concentration of dissolved oxygen in a portion of the 

water column decreases to a level that can no longer support living aquatic organisms, typically below 2-

4mg dissolved oxygen (DO)/liter (L). As with HABs, natural and human-induced environmental changes 

can exacerbate hypoxic conditions. Low oxygen conditions occur in waterbodies due to the confluence of 

physical, chemical, and biological processes. 
5

Figure 3. Hypoxia causes and consequences in the Great Lakes. Hypoxia in fresh water occurs naturally when the 

water column separates into warmer (light blue) and colder (dark blue) layersthat do not mix. Oxygen enters warmer,

upper regions of the water but cannot move into lower, colder regions beneath the warm-cold transition layer. At 

the same time, organisms that feed on dead organic matter consume oxygen at the bottom of the water body. Human 

influences can worsen the situation when excess nutrients enter the water body and cause algal blooms, which then 

die and sink to the bottom, thereby increasing decomposition activity and depleting even more oxygen. (Image 

courtesy of NOAA/OAR/GLERL.)

Warm, calm conditions in the Great Lakes (Figure 3) can promote the stratification (layering) of waters by 

temperature, which effectively reduces vertical circulation and can lead to oxygen-depleted bottomwaters. Hypoxia occurs most often in waters of intermediate depth, where organic matter and nutrients 

congregate and settle at high concentrations, versus in deeper waters where the nutrients may be 

diffused (Rabalais et al., 2010). Very shallow waters seldom experience hypoxia, in all but the most 

eutrophic conditions, because they rarely stratify. In deeper waters, stratification leaves the bottom layer 

isolated from the surface layer and cut off from a normal resupply of oxygen from the atmosphere.

However, there usually is a sufficient level of oxygen present in this water layer, which prevents hypoxic 

conditions. Algal blooms can exacerbate hypoxic events, particularly in the central basin of Lake Erie, 

which stratifies in summer. The algal biomass ultimately settles to the lake bottom, stimulating bacterial 

respiration in the deep water layer (hypolimnion). It results in hypoxia that persists until the autumn, 

when deeper waters rise to the upper layers of a lake in a process known as “turnover” (Kraus et al., 2015; 

Bocaniov and Scavia, 2016). Hypoxic water subsequently can promote HABs by increasing phosphorus 

release from the sediments (Correll, 1998; Hawley et al., 2006). In this way, HABs and hypoxia sometimes

may be self-perpetuating or exacerbating.

Currently, as shown in Figure 4, hypoxic zones occur most frequently in the central basin of Lake Erie and 

in Lake Michigan’s Green Bay (Burns et al., 2005; Hamidi et al., 2013), and episodically in western Lake 

Erie and Saginaw Bay (Bridgeman et al., 2006; Stow and Höök, 2013). Though the size of the Lake Erie 

hypoxic zone varies between years, it generally is approximately the size of Rhode Island and Delaware 

combined (EcoFore; last accessed September 2, 2016). Natural and human-influenced hypoxia events also
6

occur in sinkhole regions of Lakes Huron and Michigan, due to the shallowness in some parts of the Great 

Lakes basin (Delorme, 1982; Biddanda et al., 2009; Ruberg, 2016).

Figure 4. Known Hypoxia Regions in the Great Lakes. The two prominent hypoxic zones in the Great Lakes are the 

central basin of Lake Erie and Green Bay, Lake Michigan (GLEAM, 2011). The area in red experiences "persistent 

hypoxia" (weeks to months), whereas the areas in yellow are "episodic hypoxia" (days). (Graphic source: 

NOAA/OAR/GLERL.)

Report Basis 

The purpose of this report is to explain the science, outline research needs, and provide an action strategy 

for addressing HABs and hypoxia in the United States’ Great Lakes. The report recommendations are 

based on the most current, sound science; existing knowledge of the Great Lakes system; and stakeholder 

input (IJC, 2013; Scavia et al., 2014; Bingham et al., 2015; GLWQA, 2015; Keitzer et al., 2016; USDA, 2016a, 

2016b). The report builds upon science reviews, as well as the strong existing foundation of other basinwide initiatives and agreements, such as the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), Farm Bill-related 

programs, and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA). 

Stakeholder Engagement Methods for this Report

Members of the Interagency Working Group on HABHRCA (IWG-HABHRCA) employed a variety of 

methods to communicate with academic institutions, international groups, state and local governments, 

nonprofits, members of the agricultural community, water resource managers, tourism groups, food and 

beverage providers, and the interested public. The group held a series of three discussion-focused 

webinars in early 2016 that engaged over 400 unique registrants, to connect with a wide variety of 

stakeholders in an open forum. One webinar was directed towards subject-matter experts, although it 

was open to all interested parties. The othertwo webinars were held for a broader audience. The webinars 

included a short presentation that informed stakeholders on HAB and hypoxia issues in the Great Lakes, 

explained the role of the IWG-HABHRCA, and described the focus of this report. The majority of the time 
7

during each webinar allowed for stakeholders to provide input, and to foster open discussion between 

interested parties and Federal representatives. 

Stakeholders provided input through a few primary methods. First, they submitted feedback and asked 

questions via email, through an account maintained by the IWG-HABHRCA (IWG-HABHRCA@noaa.gov).

Second, stakeholders submitted detailed bibliographies that focused on technology, issues related to 

HABs and hypoxia, and additional related topics. Finally, IWG-HABHRCA members held group and 

personal conversations with stakeholders, in order to delve into more detail on concerns and challenges. 

This included holding a workshop in 2015 at Bowling Green State University near Toledo, Ohio. The 

different methods of communication maximized the opportunity to receive feedback from individuals 

with diverse backgrounds and interests.

Image 1. Harmful algal bloom in western Lake Erie, July 2011. (Photo credit: NOAA/OAR/GLERL.)

Stakeholder Contributions

This report incorporates information submitted by stakeholders and generated during the engagement 

activities. Stakeholders and Federal agencies similarly expressed the needs and challenges for mitigating, 

managing, and responding to HABs and hypoxia. There also were numerous novel insights and ideas 

shared with the IWG-HABHRCA that are included in this report.

Stakeholders used engagement opportunities to discuss management measures and concerns about HABs 

and hypoxia. A number of common themes prevailed during the conversations. It is clear that continuing 

to hold and encourage conversations between Federal agencies and their stakeholders, and between 

state and local officials and constituents, is important to helping communities understand and limit the 

effects of HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes. The IWG-HABHRCA learned of numerous needs while 

speaking with stakeholders, which demonstrated the importance of improving public engagement and 

communications. For instance, in some states, public health offices have jurisdiction only over public 

beaches; they cannot monitor or provide signage at private beaches, leaving some constituents at risk of 

exposure to HABs. Expanding monitoring programs and requiring signage at all beaches helps to limit the 

risks of HAB exposure. Making individuals aware of risks by enhancing communication across all levels of 
8

government, and with the community, is essential to minimizing HAB and hypoxia impacts. Stakeholders 

specifically expressed the need for improved communication among all groups, including the following:

• The availability of consistent information about threats and HAB and hypoxia events throughout 

the region; 

• The challenges of monitoring and messaging along municipal beaches; 

• The lack of financial and human resources to effectively monitor and educate; and 

• A general disconnect between officials and their constituent groups, as well as how different 

people and communities value or understand potential impacts from HABs and hypoxia. 

1. Revealing the Problem: Understanding HABs, Hypoxia, and 

Nutrient Sources in the Great Lakes

Since the 1960s, research has shown linkages between human activities and HABs in the Great Lakes 

(Beeton, 1965). Prior to the enactment of the 1978 GLWQA, western Lake Erie experienced high nutrient 

inputs from point-source (direct) pollution. This fueled annual HAB events, although the dominant HAB 

species have differed over the years (Steffen et al., 2014a). Lake Erie’s water quality improved after the 

GLWQA was established, and the United States and Canada implemented, phosphorus goals for Lake Erie. 

Wastewater treatment plants improved treatment methods in response to the agreement, lowering 

phosphorus loads. HAB events dissipated. Since the mid-1990s, however, increases in certain types of 

phosphorus concentrations1 and nitrogen, attributed to nonpoint (indirect) sources, led to cyanobacterial 

HABs once again becoming an annual occurrence in the Great Lakes region (Richards and Baker, 2002; 

Fishman et al., 2009; Davis et al., 2010; Fishman et al., 2010; Daloğlu et al., 2012; Stumpf et al., 2012; 

Horst et al., 2014; Steffen et al., 2014a;). Cladophora blooms also increased during this period (Smith et 

al., 2015a). Increases in dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) concentrations appeared to promote 

Cladophora in Lake Erie, as well as cyanobacterial HABs. Researchers found that in o the Great Lakes, 

zebra and quagga mussels cleared the water column, leading to higher light levels at the bottom of each 

lake, and in effect boosting Cladophora growth (Auer et al., 2010; Brooks et al., 2015). 

The hypoxic zone in the central basin of Lake Erie has increased in size and duration over recent years, 

likely due to human-influenced nutrient-loading (Zhou et al., 2013; Scavia et al., 2014; Figure 4). While 

HABs and hypoxia occur throughout the Great Lakes (Figs. 2 and 4), to-date, Lake Erie is the most impacted 

by these events; and, as it was with Lake Erie’s environmental degradation in the mid-20th century, Lake 

Erie’s conditions provide an early warning indicator of trends in the less productive lakes. 

 1 Specifically, DRP, the type of phosphorus most readily taken up by plants.
9

Image 2. Mats of Cladophora washing up on the shore of Lake St. Clair, a part of the connecting river system adjacent 

upstream of Lake Erie. The bloom caused thick muck along the shoreline. (Photo credit: T. Joyce NOAA/OAR/GLERL.)

Notable advancements in understanding of some of the immediate causes of Great Lakes HABs (Bullerjahn 

et al., 2016) and hypoxia (Scavia et al., 2014), such as nutrient inputs, have occurred in recent years. 

Significant questions remain, however, including:

• explaining and understanding the relative importance of the drivers of bloom toxicity and severity, 

including internal sources or drivers; 

• understanding the impacts of current HAB and hypoxia prevention strategies, including those

targeting nutrient runoff; 

• enhancing knowledge of how a changing climate will influence extreme weather events, and how 

the changes subsequently may affect the ability to achieve nutrient reduction targets, or will

influence bloom growth and toxicity (O’Neil et al., 2012; Brooks et al., 2016); and

• a better understanding of the economic costs and societal impacts in ever-changing 

environmental conditions, which can be used to make strategic decisions about management and 

investment tradeoffs.

Scientists must understand these knowledge gaps in order to make salient recommendations to address 

HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes. As a recent audit by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) 

demonstrated, Federal agencies are taking note of policy and research needs by increasing resources 

towards related work (GAO, 2016). 
10

1.1. Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act

By the 1990s, researchers identified serious and large-scale water-quality problems in United States 

waters, including HABs and hypoxia, most prominently in the northern Gulf of Mexico, Lake Erie, 

Chesapeake Bay, and Long Island Sound. These problems prompted Congress to pass HABHRCA in 1998. 

Recognizing the ongoing nature of HABs and hypoxia, and how they continue to affect the entire U.S., 

Congress has reauthorized HABHRCA twice, mostly recently in 2014 (HABHRCA 2014, P.L. 113-124). 

The 2014 HABHRCA reauthorization is unique for several reasons. It calls for Federal agencies to consult 

with stakeholders when developing action strategies, in order to develop recommendations that directly 

address needs and concerns related to mitigating and preventing HABs and hypoxia. It expands the focus 

of HABHRCA to include a specific emphasis on HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes and in fresh waters 

around the country, and recognizes the need for further coordinated action across the Federal sector to 

address these issues. Additionally, the legislation calls for Federal agencies to provide integrated 

assessments identifying the causes, consequences, and approaches to reducing HABs and hypoxia 

nationally, with particular emphasis on the Great Lakes. It calls for operational forecasting, observations, 

and modeling tools required to support forecasting, all of which are of particular relevance for the region. 

Lake Erie HABs and Hypoxia

HAB and hypoxia events in Lake Erie over the past several years have garnered intense public and 

scientific attention. 

●The 2012 drought, with extremely low water inflow from tributaries, was associated with a 

record-breaking dead zone in Lake Erie’s central basin. Researchers forecast that there will be 

increased drought conditions in the future, and therefore anticipate more intense hypoxia 

events (Zhou et al., 2015).

●Hypoxic zones in Lake Erie may lead to higher catch-rates due to fish being concentrated in 

non-hypoxic waters. Fisheries managers may not account for this, potentially resulting in 

higher exploitation of certain stocks than is sustainable or accounted for by managers (Kraus 

et al., 2015). Hypoxia influences different fish species in different ways that can bias their 

habitat selection and food web dynamics in ways that are complex and difficult to ascertain 

(Scavia et al., 2014).

●In September 2013, microcystin levels in excess of WHO guidelines caused a drinking water 

shut down in Carroll Township, Ohio (Wynne and Stumpf, 2015). In response to the event, the 

city spent $125,000 in upgrades to its ozone treatment (Bingham et al., 2015).

●In August 2014, Lake Erie experienced a toxic cyanobacterial bloom near the intake of the 

drinking water treatment plant serving the city of Toledo, Ohio. Toledo issued a “do not drink 

or boil advisory” that affected nearly 500,000 customers that lasted just over two days due to 

the presence of microcystins, a class of cyanotoxins, that exceeded the lifetime safe drinking 

water threshold recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) (Wilson, 2014a).

●In August 2015, Lake Erie experienced the largest bloom in recorded history (Stumpf et al., 

2016), eclipsing the 2011 bloom that previously held that record the largest (Michalak et al., 

2013).
11

1.2. What Contributes to HABs, Hypoxia, and their Interactions?

There are a number of factors contributing to how, why, and for how long HABs and hypoxia occur in the 

Great Lakes. Some drivers include higher levels of nutrient inputs to the Lakes, such as DRP, and inorganic 

and organic forms of nitrogen from non-point agricultural, suburban, and urban activities. For instance, 

aging sewer and septic tank systems, as well as combined sewer overflows, can contribute to nutrient 

pollution (“eutrophication”) (USEPA, 2007). Herbicides and pesticides that wash into lakes during land 

application or at times of high precipitation may also promote HAB species by killing their natural 

competitors (Peterson et al., 1997; Lürling and Roessink, 2006), or by being a potential phosphorus source 

(Qiu et al., 2013; USEPA, 2015d). Atmospheric pollutants—especially nitrogen from fossil-fuel 

combustion, volatilized fertilizer and animal waste, and industrial outputs—can be deposited via the air 

and precipitation onto watersheds or directly into water, leading to increased nutrient levels. In addition, 

accumulated or “legacy” nutrients from point and non-point sources can become newly available to 

organisms within a system due to resuspension of sediments, and/or releases, and/or transformations of 

nutrients. This can occur through natural chemical reactions that cause the release of phosphorus from 

the sediments, in turn further stimulating algal growth (Sharpley et al., 2013; USEPA, 2015d). On the other 

hand, watersheds with a higher percentage of forested acres are less likely to contribute nutrients and 

contaminants that cause HABs and hypoxia than those with a lower percentage of forested acres 

(Seilheimer et al., 2013). Figure 5 shows the diversity of land cover types in the United States Great Lakes 

region, all of which may contribute to instances of HABs and hypoxia through point and non-point sources.

Nitrogen and phosphorus can influence cyanobacteria growth and toxicity (O’Neil et al., 2012; Steffen et 

al., 2014b; Davis et al., 2015; Gobler et al., 2016). Varying levels of phosphorus and nitrogen may drive 

changes in HAB species composition (Harke et al., 2015). Even as total phosphorus (TP) has remained 

stable or decreased in recent years, DRP has increased in some watersheds, which could be one factor 

contributing to the increasingly large blooms and hypoxic zones in Lake Erie (Michalak et al., 2013; Scavia 

et al., 2014; Stumpf et al., 2016). Increased DRP-loading locations include the Maumee watershed, which 

is the major source of nutrients fueling hypoxic zones in Lake Erie (Michalak et al., 2013; Scavia et al., 

2014; Stow et al., 2015). The relationship between DRP and blooms is well-established in the Great Lakes 

and beyond, and there is increased research interest in the linkages between nitrogen and HAB growth, 

toxin production, and bloom severity (Gobler et al., 2016; Paerl et al., 2016). 
12

Figure 5. Land cover in the Great Lakes watershed in the United States, showing agricultural, forested, and 

developed land uses by area. (Graphic source: USDA/NRCS/Resource Assessment Division.)

Researchers anticipate that climate change will lead to increased incidents of extreme weather events in 

the Great Lakes region, including droughts and flood events, which subsequently may lead to more 

intense and widespread HABs and hypoxia. For instance, researchers expect precipitation patterns in the 

Great Lakes to change in the future, with larger numbers and more intense storms (Richards et al., 2010; 

Michalak et al., 2013). Increased rainfall causes more runoff from agricultural operations and storm-sewer 

systems, which can elevate the amount of nutrients entering the lakes (Bosch et al. 2014; Cousino et al., 

2015). In turn, the influx of nutrients can promote HABs (Paerl and Huisman, 2008) and hypoxic conditions

(Wilhelm et al., 2014; Zhou et al., 2015). Furthermore, larger and longer-lasting hypoxia events are 

associated with drought conditions (Zhou et al., 2015). Stronger winds resulting from more frequent and

extreme storm events (Meehl et al., 2000) that are likely to produce changes in water stratification layers 

that can promote faster depletion of dissolved oxygen when tumultuous waters stir up the water column 

(Conroy et al., 2011; Huang et al., 2012). Conroy et al. (2011) specifically show that increased storm activity 

led to increased mixing of thermal layers, but also significant elevations in the depletion of hypolimnetic 

oxygen (Conroy et al., 2011). Rising surface water temperatures can also exacerbate low dissolved oxygen 

levels and water stratification (Fang and Stefan, 2009; Michalak et al., 2013). 
13

Another aspect of how weather events may impact HAB dynamics results from the upwards trajectory of 

carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Higher amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can encourage 

the growth of HAB species that absorb carbon dioxide for use in photosynthesis (Visser et al., 2016). High 

nutrient levels and increased water temperature may have a synergistic effect, promoting even more HAB 

growth.

1.3. How are We Monitoring and Surveilling for HABs and Hypoxia in the Great Lakes?

Though researchers’ understanding of HABs and hypoxia hasincreased substantially in recent years (NSTC, 

2015), additional ecological research, and expanded environmental monitoring using new technologies,

are needed at a variety of spatial and temporal scales to improve understanding of how and why hypoxia 

and HAB events occur. Surveillance and monitoring technologies also help with protecting human and 

animal health. 

Monitoring plays a key role in identifying the drivers of HABs and hypoxia by tracking and exploring the 

sources of nutrients and how they contribute to HAB and hypoxia formation. For instance, researchers 

can use monitoring and surveillance techniques to confirm which nutrient sources come from the 

watershed and atmosphere and then are delivered to the lakes via agricultural run-off; wastewater and

storm water discharges; runoff from individual homes and residential gardens; groundwater; or through 

atmospheric deposition from burning fossil fuels containing nitrogen (Molder et al., 2015). Edge-of-field

monitoring, in particular, is an important method. This refers to the point where water leaves a field and 

enters another field, a drainage ditch, or a waterbody, providing information on how specific nutrients 

move through the watershed at a particular location. Scientists may take samples from the lakes 

themselves, streams, groundwater sources, and tributaries. This section discusses a few key examples of 

agency monitoring techniques. Appendix 3 contains specific information on other current and planned 

agency monitoring and surveillance activities.

Expanded sampling in additional locations, and comparative work to understand how nutrients enter and 

cycle through ecosystems, ultimately may allow for more proactive, and location- and ecosystem-specific, 

HAB and hypoxia forecasts, as well as development of remediation techniques. Researchers need better 

monitoring information on sources of nutrients: local-scale information on the sources of nutrients would 

help to prioritize how to spend and target conservation dollars most effectively, and to implement 

conservation practices for those areas. Better monitoring programs also will help researchers understand 

and address the respective roles of external versus internal nutrient sources on HABs and hypoxia.

 

Image 3. A scientist collects water samples from Lake Erie on Ocean Sampling Day, June 21, 2014. (Credit: 

NOAA/OAR/GLERL.)
14

One of the key monitoring and forecasting systems for HABs in the Great Lakes is NOAA’s Lake Erie HAB 

Forecast System, which became fully operational in July 2017. NOAA has developed this system to support 

management, public water suppliers, and the various recreational and other uses of the lake. It uses a 

combination of satellite imagery, numerical circulation models, and field observations (bloom 

concentration, toxicity, and other environmental parameters) to describe current bloom conditions and 

to forecast the likely conditions over the next several days. The primary product is a bulletin, with the 

main input being satellite imagery that specifically detects the presence and amount of cyanobacteria. 

NOAA began distributing the bulletin in 2009, with weekly distribution through 2013, and twice-weekly

distribution starting in 2014. NOAA provides additional imagery to state and local partners when available 

during serious blooms. In 2016, almost 2,000 people subscribed to the bulletin. A complementary NOAA 

forecast system that tracks the horizontal and vertical movement of HABs in Lake Erie, the recently 

developed Lake Erie Experimental HAB Tracker (Rowe et al., 2016b), forecasts the short-term movement 

of blooms and produces an animation similar to a moving weather forecast.

The Federal government has a number of established monitoring programs and offices, as discussed 

throughout this section. For example, the USEPA created the Great Lakes National Program Office 

(GLNPO) in 1978 in order to carry out the responsibilities accorded to the United States under the GLWQA 

(discussed further in Section 2.2.1). The office manages long-term water quality and biological monitoring 

programs in all Great Lakes states, and a hypoxia-monitoring program in the central basin of Lake Erie. 

Federal and state water quality agencies use data generated from the programs to assess the trends in 

open lake water quality and ecological health. Additionally, USGS and USDA have extensive monitoring 

and data-analysis efforts, as discussed later.

New technologies for monitoring HABs and hypoxia deliver higher temporal resolution, as well as more 

accurate and timely information. Technologies include near-real-time toxin and organism testing 

methods, nutrient sensors, cabled and under-ice monitoring technologies for year-round monitoring of 

HABs and hypoxia; and use of satellite and hyperspectral remote sensing technologies on unmanned 

aircraft to help monitor for HABs. The technologies are in testing and comparison modes, and once vetted 

ultimately can be incorporated into future standard monitoring protocols. 

The Cyanobacteria Assessment Network (CyAN) is an important interagency monitoring effort. USEPA, 

NOAA, NASA, and USGS are developing an early-warning indicator system that supports environmental 

management and public use of lakes and estuaries, including the Great Lakes, by providing capacity to

detect and quantify cyanobacterial blooms and related water quality using satellite data. The goals of the 

project are to:

• Create a standard and uniform approach for early identification of freshwater HABs. This will 

involve creating new and building upon current data sets, based on existing and new sets of 

satellites (much of this based on methods originally developed for Lake Erie);

• Develop an information dissemination system for accelerating access to information needed for 

public health advisories; and 

• Increase understanding of the health, economic, and environmental connections that stem from

cyanobacteria and phytoplankton blooms. 

As a result, CyAN aims to enhance and expand the Lake Erie Bulletin methods across all the Great Lakes. 

The agencies anticipate that the resulting information will help stakeholders of freshwater systems 

identify when one or more water bodies are experiencing or have an elevated risk for HABs or hypoxia.
15

Image 4. In 2016, scientists from NOAA and the University of Michigan deployed ESPniagara for the first time in 

western Lake Erie. Scientists often refer to ESPs as “labs in a can” due to the technology’s ability to perform multiple, 

ongoing experiments in the field and provide daily bloom and toxicity information to researchers in a lab. The 

ESPniagara sensors provide data that complements other information gleaned by field monitoring through private 

enterprises and municipalities (Photo credit: NOAA/OAR/GLERL).

Another example of ongoing monitoring efforts in the region is the deployment of Environmental Sample 

Processors (ESPs). These “labs in a can” provide researchers and managers with near-real-time 

information about the presence and quantity of a toxin or organism of interest in a water body. ESPs are 

an established technology, although researchers only recently began using them for monitoring 

cyanobacteria. In 2016, NOAA successfully deployed an ESP in western Lake Erie, marking the first-ever 

usage of this technology in any freshwater system. The ESP will provide an increased understanding of 

fine-scale changes in bloom toxicity. In combination with NOAA’s current Lake Erie HAB forecasting tools, 

this should improve researchers’ abilitiesto provide accurate forecasts of bloom location, movement, and 

toxicity. The results will benefit resource managers and public health officials in protecting human and 

animal health and helping communities to stay informed and prepared.

The Great Lakes Observing System (GLOS), a regional association of the United States Integrated Ocean 

Observing System (IOOS®), and certified Regional Information Coordination Entity, is another example of 

an interagency partnership working to coordinate observing and data-sharing activities. GLOS is a 

national/regional partnership that coordinates the collection and integration of ocean, coast, and Great 

Lakes observing data. The body helps to organize Federal and non-Federal observing activities across the 

region and supports operation of several nearshore buoys, including two buoys used by Cleveland, Ohio, 

for monitoring for dissolved oxygen levels. GLOS manages and shares data provided by Federal and nonFederal partners through the GLOS Data Portal.
16

Agencies and researchers need to improve upon existing, basic water quality monitoring in the Great 

Lakes region. Expanding current sampling frequency and spatial coverage, including year-round sampling 

in key locations, would help to inform researchers’ understanding about nutrients sources and overwinter HAB cell-seeding (in essence, dormant algal cells that lie on the lake floor), drivers behind

differences between years in size and severity of HAB and hypoxic events, and other outstanding issues

(Francey et al., 2015). Coordinated Federal agency efforts include the use of remote sensing for 

monitoring, as is done with HABs in western Lake Erie. The remote-sensing data can complement on-site

monitoring to create more spatially- and temporally-complete data sets. Currently, there is no systematic 

monitoring or reporting of benthic HAB taxa, including Cladophora or Lyngbya blooms, due mainly to 

limitations of satellite imagery. Data derived from satellite imagery, as of now, is mostly limited to the 

water’s surface and not much further below that.2 Additionally, current satellite-image resolution 

capabilities are limited and make it nearly impossible to see algae on beaches (Brooks et al., 2015). 

Many monitoring programs in the Great Lakes region do not currently include monitoring of DRP. Based 

on sensitivity analyses, it appears that researchers need high-frequency, daily sampling to accurately 

detect and assess DRP loads over time, and how this relates to conservation practices and nutrient 

management (Williams et al., 2015). More comprehensive monitoring that better accounts for DRP 

ultimately can improve the effectiveness of planning and managing HAB events (Williams et al., 2016).

1.4. Modeling and Forecasting

Models and forecasts play important roles in helping the region and communities prepare for, and 

mitigate the impacts of, HAB and hypoxia events. The use of models can answer questions that managers 

may have regarding the environmental conditions that can lead to recurring HAB or hypoxia events. For 

instance, model simulations can suggest the main sources of nutrients polluting a water body. They also 

can show how nutrient dynamics change under different land-use management, or in different types of 

weather or ecological conditions. Some of the key questions that modeling answers, and builds upon, for 

all Great Lakes HABs and/or hypoxia events, include:

● How are specific nutrients in exact nutrient forms transported; and, when relevant, what chemical 

changes do they undergo during transport through the watershed?

 2 Satellite ocean color sensors can “see” to one optical depth.

Western Lake Erie and the Need for Ongoing Monitoring

Researchers should conduct routine surveys in areas that have experienced HABs, to understand 

temporal and spatial changes in the occurrence and severity of HAB events, and why the 

variations occur. For example, HABs re-emerged in western Lake Erie in the mid-1990s, after the 

lake had not experienced HABs in some time: until that point, managers and researchers 

considered the lake “restored”. Resource managers, scientists, and officials overlooked

changing water quality conditions that contribute to the current HAB/hypoxia dynamics in the 

lake. Many scientists and natural resource managers were unprepared when HABs re-occurred.

As researchers learned, it is important to perform continuous and frequent monitoring, even 

after implementing nutrient-reduction strategies, and that it is important to vary methods over 

time and as the aforementioned conditions change (Chapra and Dolan, 2012; Dolan and 

Chapra, 2012).
17

● Do non-nutrient factors play increasingly larger roles in bloom development over time?

● Are conservation practices improving water quality in small watersheds? In sub-basins, or basinwide? How can we make practices more effective at different spatial and temporal scales, and 

achieve broader benefits?

● How can we analyze information and scenarios to inform decision-makers? 

Potentially, the most important role of modeling is to protect public drinking water facilities through 

short-term forecasts of HAB and hypoxia events around water intake pipes. Communities can use forecast 

information to ensure that they have appropriate resources – including drinking water and alternative

sources of income, to ensure economic stability to protect citizens in the short- and long-terms. Forecasts 

allow managers to plan how much treatment material they need to have available, saving funds during 

years with weak blooms and allowing states to focus resources on communities or water intake plants 

that are the most at-risk. 

NOAA’s operational Lake Erie forecasting products are key examples of how researchers develop models 

and forecasts based on a variety of factors, and use models routinely to predict the size, intensity, and 

location of HABsin western Lake Erie (Wynne et al., 2008; Wynne et al., 2013; Rowe et al., 2016). Similarly, 

real-time measurements of dissolved oxygen near the lakebed of Lake Erie give early warnings to drinkingwater treatment-plant managers in Cleveland, OH. These managers then know to initiate additional 

water-treatment procedures to remove contaminants that tend to accumulate during hypoxic events, 

such as manganese and iron, which can turn drinking water yellow and affect taste or corrosion.

Image 5. An example of NOAA’s Lake Erie HAB Bulletin for Lake Erie, from August 25, 2016. The weekly bulletin 

provides stakeholders with information about HAB formation and toxin levels. It is a good source of information for 

all users of the lake. (Credit: NOAA/NOS/CO-OPS.)
18

Currently, HAB and hypoxia modeling and forecasts are restricted at a variety of different spatial and 

temporal scales due to limited data collected at the right resolution and frequency; data integration 

capabilities; and modeling capabilities, updates, and calibration (Daggupati et al., 2015; Brooks et al., 

2016). Yet, hypoxia modeling continues to improve with the development of new statistical and modeling 

approaches and data sets (Zhou et al., 2013; Obenour et al., 2014; Rucinski et al., 2016). Recent modeling 

results show that in Lake Erie, low dissolved oxygen levels are likely to start in nearshore areas with depths 

less than or equal to 20 m, and that current monitoring may not capture the extent of the size of the 

hypoxic zones (Bocaniov and Scavia, 2016). GLOS operates the Hypoxia Warning System that NOAA built, 

o provide decision support for drinking water managers in Cleveland. The system gives advanced warning 

of hypoxic water near water intakes. Similar HAB and hypoxia models are needed for other parts of the 

Great Lakes, including Saginaw Bay and Green Bay. Increased monitoring and data development could 

greatly expand modeling capacities.

Within the Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP), USDA-NRCS cooperates with USDAAgricultural Research Service (ARS), Texas A&M University (TAMU), and Iowa State University (ISU) to 

apply Agricultural Policy/Environmental eXtender (APEX) and Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) 

models to simulate agricultural management impacts on water quality at the edge of field, in stream and 

rivers, and being delivered to Lake Erie. CEAP is unique in its access to farmer management decisions, 

which were surveyed through a National Resource Inventory-structured system by USDA National 

Agricultural Statistics Service in the Great Lakes region in 2003-2006, and in the western Lake Erie basin 

in 2012 (USDA 2011, 2016a). Simulations conducted via CEAP benefit from cross-agency knowledge 

sharing and mutual model enhancement. CEAP modeling efforts may better inform interagency- and 

university-led in-lake modeling efforts regarding feasible future scenarios by providing more realistic 

estimates of what is achievable through conservation solutions applied to agricultural lands. Recent

results from models built to evaluate conservation practice effects, combined with monitoring data, show 

that among other benefits, conservation practices overall benefit stream health and fish populations in 

the western Lake Erie watersheds. Federal, state, and local governments should expand effortsto increase 

Experimental NOAA Runoff Risk Analysis Data for Great Lakes States – Version 2

As part of NOAA’s participation in the GLRI, and the National Weather Service’s (NWS) hydrologic 

modeling responsibility, the North Central River Forecast Center (RFC) and neighboring RFCs are 

working together to assemble and provide runoff risk analysis data for the Great Lakes states. 

The RFCs evaluate soil moisture model output to determine runoff risk based on event thresholds 

developed by the participating state agencies. Runoff risk analysis data for the Great Lakes states 

is being made available to users on an experimental basis. Runoff Risk Decision Support is in 

development Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio. It is planned for Illinois, Indiana, and 

parts of New York State. 

State partners use the experimental runoff risk guidance for determining optimized nutrient 

application, which helps to ensure safe water quality and healthy ecosystems in the nation’s 

streams, lakes, and coastal waters. Further, the information provided by Runoff Risk helps 

farmers ensure that fertilizer and manure stay on the fields, instead of washing into waterways.
19

acreage receiving conservation practices substantially, in order to achieve GLWQA phosphorus-loading 

targets (Keitzer et al., 2016). Decision-makers also can use such models to help facilitate and prioritize 

conservation practice efforts to benefit stream fish communities in the watershed along with watershed 

water quality impacts (Keitzer et al., 2016).

Without detailed information on internal and external nutrient loading, it is difficult to determine if 

nutrient reduction targets are being met, and for managers to assess how to prioritize rehabilitation 

efforts. To help address these issues, USGS developed SPAtially Referenced Regressions On Watershed 

attributes (SPARROW) models for estimating loads and sources of phosphorus and nitrogen from the U.S.

portion of the Great Lakes, among other freshwater bodies (Robertson and Saad, 2011). Results indicate 

that recent U.S. loadings to Lakes Michigan and Ontario are similar to those in the 1980s, whereas loadings 

to Lakes Superior, Huron, and Erie have decreased. The highest loads come from tributaries with the 

largest watersheds (Robertson and Saad, 2011). Agricultural areas in the region provide a significant 

source of nutrients, generally contributing about 33-44 percent of the phosphorus and about 33-58 

percent of the nitrogen. Point sources of nutrients also are significant, contributing about 14-44 percent

of the phosphorus and 13-34 percent of the nitrogen. Watersheds around Lake Erie contribute nutrients 

at the highest rate (similar to intensively farmed areas in the Midwest) because they have the largest 

nutrient inputs and highest delivery ratio (Robertson and Saad, 2011). A binational SPARROW model is in 

development for the entire Great Lakes watershed, with completion anticipated in 2017. Regional 

nitrogen and phosphorus SPARROW models are available via an interactive, online decision-support 

system so that water managers, researchers, and the public can access SPARROW models and map 

predictions of long-term average water quality conditions, track transport to downstream receiving 

waters, and evaluate management source-reduction scenarios.

Image 6. USGS’ SPARROW model uses data from a number of sources to estimate nutrient loads from streams and 

rivers. Models are developed at a range of scales, including national and major river basin levels. Managers can use 

information from the models to make informed decisions. (Credit: USGS).

Social science models may play a role in reducing public health concerns (Anderson et al., 2012), and 

demonstrating people's attitudes, actions, and resulting exposure to HABs and hypoxia. They also show 

economic trends, which can help communities prepare for potential events by helping stakeholders 
20

understand the effects of HABs and hypoxia on all aspects of the economy. Social science models also 

help to identify the factors that make communities economically vulnerable to current and future HAB 

and hypoxia events, and to help communities know what to expect during future events. This is important 

for identifying populations at higher risk to HAB or hypoxia impacts, including those with medical 

conditions that may be exacerbated by HAB toxins, vulnerable age groups, transient communities, or 

individuals who depend on the lakes for drinking water or food sources. Ultimately, models can help

policymakers determine how to distribute resources efficiently.

Models should include area-specific calibration, account for short-term and long-term processes, and 

address individual and joint agency objectives. Even then, it can be a challenge to run models consistently

if input data are insufficient or derive from different sources that are not always comparable. To provide 

the most accurate forecasts of the location, duration and intensity of a HAB or hypoxic event, researchers 

need standardized collection, analytics, data management methods, and defined quality control 

measures. A good way to accomplish this is to develop models that have the capacity to use data in 

whatever form it is collected, and to improve data-collection and sharing methods. Data from genetic and 

physiological experiments on HAB organisms, including epidemiological data and health surveillance, 

should be a priority, particularly any showing connections between species that produce toxins versus 

those that do not, ecological zones that historically are more susceptible to developing HABs or hypoxia, 

and human or animal sickness or death. Resulting models will need regular updates and calibrations via

an established monitoring and technological infrastructure.

Challenges also arise when there is limited access to data sets from different agencies or entities, or where 

measured variables or locations of measurement are not congruent. As discussed in NSTC 2016, groups 

such as the IWG-HABHRCA can help in establishing official working relationships between Federal 

agencies and outside parties, such as universities and research institutions; agreeing upon standard 

methods; and coordinating data collection (NSTC, 2016). These actions will lead to improved models that 

incorporate the best data available, and can show how to improve watersheds using management 

practices designed for affecting nutrient levels. The list below shows issues identified by stakeholders that 

improved modeling could address. Stakeholders told the IWG-HABHRCA about specific models needed 

for the Great Lakes, as well as general models that could be adapted for the Great Lakes to improve 

efficiency and accuracy. As reflected in Section 3, Federal researchers and stakeholders place a greater 

priority or need for the models listed below:

● Microcystins nowcast and forecast models for known HAB locations in each of the lakes, based on 

on-site sensors and wind/current information (Francey et al., 2015). 

● Relationship between microcystin and chlorophyll-a for application to satellite monitoring.

● Environmental impacts on HAB and hypoxia events, at a variety of scales. 

● Improved physical process models appropriate for ecological and water quality forecasts.

● Improved benthic boundary layer/ nutrient diffusion models.

● Incorporation of invasive species impacts into modeling systems.

● Incorporation of the impacts of extreme weather events into modeling systems, evaluating how 

it affects the formation, duration, and severity of HABs and hypoxia.

● Nearshore models identifying development of HABs.

● Ecological forecasts on the formation, duration, and severity of HABs and hypoxia.
21

Detailed 3-D HAB events and toxicity are difficult to forecast. The next generation of forecast products 

that could predict subsurface HAB concentrations at the depth of drinking water intakes are under

development (Rowe et al., 2016). As of this report’s publication, no toxin forecast systems exist for the 

Great Lakes because toxins are undetectable via satellite. Researchers are therefore reliant on a two-step 

model that estimates proxies for toxins (algal pigments), instead of the toxins themselves. Results from 

the two-step model can be difficult to interpret due to the variable relationship between pigments and 

toxins. At the same time, because the variability appears to result from measurable environmental factors, 

like light and nitrogen availability, it may prove possible to develop a predictive model (Stumpf et al., 

2016).

1.5. Toxicity

Some of the most critical questions about HABs include identifying which species produce toxins that are 

the most harmful to humans and animals, where toxins are located in a waterbody, whether researchers 

can predict the onset of toxicity, changes in toxicity throughout the bloom period, and how toxins affect

local ecology. Advancements in technology, certified testing methods, methods to diagnose 

cyanobacteria-associated illness, and expanded water and health monitoring will help to answer

questions regarding HAB toxicity and risk, human behavior factors, and appropriate messaging.

Furthermore, researchers need to improve understanding of the impacts of HABs on human and animal 

health, which will require additional research, monitoring, and disease surveillance efforts. These efforts 

include, but are not limited to, understanding important sources of cyanotoxin exposure, effects of low 

dose and episodic cyanobacterial toxin exposure, the movement of toxins through the food web, the 

effects of cyanobacterial toxins and associated pathogens on wildlife, and the relative toxicity and 

exposure risk of toxins and their variants (also known as “congeners”). Toxin research also should include 

the potential for new and emerging toxins in the Great Lakes region, such as saxitoxins and euglenaphycin,

and their associated health effects.

Image 7. Just because you cannot see a HAB in the water clearly does not mean that a bloom is not occurring in a 

water body. This picture shows a bloom at Maumee Bay State Park that has a high toxin concentration of 

cyanobacteria (greater than 5.0 micrograms/liter), and yet the cyanobacteria are not easy to see. (Credit: USEPA).
22

Which toxins are most toxic to humans and animals? Federal agencies, in conjunction with university

researchers, are working to improve toxin-testing methods (USEPA, 2015e; NSTC, 2016). Clinical tests for 

HAB toxins are primarily available within a research context and are not readily accessible to public health 

and healthcare practitioners. Certified toxin standards improve the validity of toxin-testing technologies, 

including more accurate, rapid tests for freshwater ecosystems, or animals or humans that appear sick 

with relevant symptoms. Standardized and rapid toxin-testing capabilities for ambient waters, treated

drinking water, animal samples, and human specimens could provide a more comprehensive 

understanding of the species, location, and timing of HAB toxins. It is also important for veterinarians, 

public health officials, and clinicians to have access to tests in order to protect human and animal health, 

or to treat illness quickly. The following are questions for researchers to address while developing 

standardized and rapid toxin tests:

● Do researchers need a different detection method for each toxin? Can researchers develop a

series of measures (nested protocols) for different detection methods?

● What is the validated detection range in each type of media tested?

● Do some methods produce a positive result for non-toxic breakdown products, making it seem as 

though a toxin is present? Does the method show cross-reactivity? Are false-negatives or falsepositives more common with some testing methods, and what are the ramifications?

● Are there modifications that can improve current tests? 

We have limited baseline information primarily from rodent studies on the relative toxicity of 

cyanobacterial toxins, which were used to support the USEPA’s health advisories for microcystin and

cylindrospermopsin (USEPA, 2015f). Researchers are unsure, however, how rodent toxicity translates to 

human health effects associated with chronic and acute exposure to cyanobacterial toxins and bioactive 

compounds (Gadmann and Portmann, 2008) from drinking, having contact with, or inhaling droplets of

contaminated water. Researchers still need, and are attempting to glean, information to understand the 

relative toxicity of each toxin’s variants. Having this information will help us to protect people against 

exposure to the most harmful toxins by aiding in setting regulatory limits for chronic and acute exposures 

and various exposure routes (e.g., dermal, inhalation, ingestion). 

Finally, stakeholders identified research needs pertaining specifically to drinking water treatment for HABs 

and cyanotoxins. Researchers and water utility managers need a better understanding of how to remove 

contaminants from drinking water sources using commonly available water treatment technologies. They 

also need to know how treatment methods affect the ability of a water treatment facility to comply with 

existing drinking water quality regulations. This will allow water utilities on the Great Lakes and 

nationwide to better prepare for and respond to HABs in source waters, and to prevent HABs from 

contaminating treated drinking water. For instance, research has shown that some treatment chemicals

can cause algal cells to break up and release toxins (Ross et al., 2006; Ou et al., 2012; Fan et al., 2013a; 

Fan et al., 2013b; Fan et al., 2014). Toxins that are released by cells are more difficult to remove with 

common water treatment approaches, compared with removing the toxins as part of the intact 

cyanobacteria cell (Chorus & Bartram, 1999; Chow et al., 1999; Drikas et al., 2001; Health Canada, 2002; 

AWWA, 2010; Newcombe et al., 2015; Ohio EPA, 2015; USEPA, 2015h; Walker, 2015; Ohio EPA, 2016).

The Federal government and utilities can develop reliable, inexpensive, easy-to-use cyanotoxin 

monitoring techniques to assess water treatment plant performance. Optimizing existing water treatment 

can help water utilities avoid costly, and perhaps unnecessary, improvements to address HABs (Chorus & 

Bartram, 1999; Chow et al., 1999; Health Canada, 2002; USEPA, 2004; AWWA, 2010; USEPA, 2015e; 

Newcombe et al., 2015; Drikas et al., 2001). 
23

How do researchers know which blooms are producing toxins? What is the occurrence and distribution of 

toxins? HAB species and associated toxins can differ among locations in a water body over the course of 

the season. Microcystins, cylindrospermopsins, anatoxin-a, and saxitoxins have been found in Lake Erie. 

Microcystins have been found in Lake Ontario; Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron; Green Bay, Lake Michigan

(Vanderploeg et al., 2001; Barrett, 2014). Beyond this, however, scientists have little information about 

which HAB species and associated toxins occur in blooms in the Great Lakes. Additional information at 

finer spatial and temporal scales for each cyanobacterial toxin, and for any given location and time during 

a bloom or bloom season, will help to better protect humans and other organisms from HAB toxin 

exposure. 

Managing exposure risk plays a major role in protecting human health. At some beaches that HABs affect, 

there already are protocols and the infrastructure to monitor bacterial pathogens and to communicate 

warnings and closures to the public. Managers could leverage and expand these resources to include HAB 

monitoring, particularly at beaches and other areas that do not presently have monitoring or outreach 

efforts. Current beach monitoring efforts mainly are at municipal or state levels, which generally only

cover public beaches, and therefore may not include many of the HAB-impacted recreational waters. 

Reducing lag times between testing samples for HAB toxins, and relaying information on risk of HAB 

exposure to the public, is important for improving outreach and protecting public health (Charnley and 

Goldstein, 1998).

Surveilling HAB-related illness will help researchers and medical professionals to gain a greater

understanding of exposure risk and health outcomes. Towards that purpose, the CDC launched the webbased One Health Harmful Algal Bloom System (OHHABS: http://www.cdc.gov/habs/ohhabs.html) in 

2016. OHHABS is a voluntary reporting system available to state and territorial public health departments 

and designated environmental health or animal health partners. It allows partners to contribute data on 

individual human and animal cases of illnesses from suspected HAB-associated exposures, as well as 

environmental data about HABs. In addition, CDC conducts health surveillance for foodborne and 

waterborne disease outbreaks (aggregate data on two or more cases of illness associated with a common 

exposure), including HAB-associated outbreaks, through the web-based National Outbreak Reporting 

System (NORS – Figure 6). Next steps include developing clinical tests to evaluate human and animal 

biological samples for evidence of exposure to cyanobacteria toxins. While currently there are no 

accepted case definitions of cyanobacteria-associated illness, or methods available for health care 

providers to recognize and diagnose cyanobacteria-associated illness, OHHABS is a first step to collecting 

information that characterizes the range of possible health effects associated with exposure and the most 

important sources and routes of HAB exposure.
24

Figure 6. This image demonstrates how CDC’s NORS and OHHABS programs overlap, in terms of what they track. 

(Credit: CDC).

Recent research shows that nutrients in the water column are likely drivers of toxin production in some 

HAB species (Gobler et al., 2016). However, thresholds related to the concentration of nutrients, nutrient 

forms that promote toxin production, and interactive effects that nutrients may have with other 

environmental factors may differ across HAB species, toxins, and locations in the Great Lakes. It is unclear 

how other environmental factors, such as water temperature or other natural chemical concentrations, 

could play a role in, or act synergistically with, nutrients to influence toxicity or HAB community 

composition at a given location or in a particular year (Davis et al., 2009; Davis et al., 2015; Harke et al., 

2015; Cory et al., 2016). Additional knowledge on toxin breakdown products and pathways will help to 

clarify and reduce risks to aquatic organisms, humans, pets, livestock, and “non-aquatic” wildlife, such as 

deer. This is particularly relevant in the Great Lakes, where cyanobacteria break down (cell lysis) and then 

produce toxins such as microcystin-LR (Bourne et al., 1996; Dyble et al., 2008). Water treatment managers 

need to have forecasts and detection capabilities available in order to protect drinking water sources.

1.6. Ecological and Fisheries Management Impacts

HABs and hypoxia can affect trophic interactions (Raikow et al., 2004) and behavior in fish (Gobler et al., 

2007; Kraus et al., 2015; Byappanahalli et al., 2003; Carmichael and Boyer, 2016). Researchers still do not 

have comprehensive understanding of how non-lethal HAB and hypoxia events affect secondary 

production, consumer organisms, or submerged aquatic vegetation in the lake littoral zone. There is a 

need to increase monitoring of blooms and fish movement, and to improve and increase toxin detection 

technology for cyanotoxins in flesh and viscera. 

In the Great Lakes, the presence of invasive zebra and quagga mussels may promote some HAB species, 

although the connection is not entirely clear (Vanderploeg, 2001; Conroy et al., 2005; Bridgeman and 

Penamon, 2010; Fishman et al., 2010; Millie et al., 2011). Selective feeding on HAB species and nutrient 

excretion by the invasive zebra and quagga mussels has the potential to influence HABs and hypoxia 

(Bierman et al., 2005; Tang et al., 2014). Herbicides and pesticides that wash into lakes during application 

or times of high precipitation may promote HAB species by killing their natural competitors (Peterson et 

al., 1997; Lürling and Roessink, 2006; Saxton, 2011).
25

Fish in the Great Lakes can be particularly susceptible to hypoxia effects because they take refuge in the 

cool bottom-waters of the lake during the summer. Hypoxia can force fish out of these deeper refuge

waters into shallower, warmer waters where the fish do not grow as well (Arend et al., 2011). In Lake Erie,

increased catch rates of fish at the edges of hypoxia have important implications for fishery-management 

assessment models that assume that catch rates are the same, regardless of water depths, temperatures, 

or other conditions (Kraus et al., 2015).

Finally, the Great Lakes are an important habitat and breeding area for several species of waterbirds,

including herons, egrets, gulls, and terns (Wires et al., 2010) (Figure 7, below). Many nesting colonies are 

located in close proximity to areas with known HAB or hypoxia zones, so there is concern that these birds 

may be impacted while foraging for food. Managers know little about the direct (e.g., toxicity) or indirect 

(e.g., reduced food) impacts of HABs and hypoxia on waterbirds breeding within the Great Lakes. Likewise, 

many species of waterfowl use the Great Lakes during migration; the effects of HABs and hypoxia on these 

species also is unknown.

Figure 7. This figure shows the distribution of colonial waterbirds in the U.S. Great Lakes, between 2007 and 2010. 

As depicted by this image, almost the entirety of the Great Lakes provides habitat, breeding grounds, food, and 

resting areas for numerous species of waterbirds. In addition to the birds’ roles in the food chain, they also provide 

sources of tourism revenue, and other benefits, to the region and the country as a whole. (Source: Cuthbert and 

Wires, 2013.)
26

1.7. Impacts of a Changing Climate on Extreme Weather Events, HABs, and Hypoxia

Researchers need to evaluate furtherthe possible effects of interactions among changing air temperature, 

water temperature, precipitation patterns, and carbon dioxide concentrations on different HAB species

or hypoxic events at different locations. How do these factors – individually, or combined – affect 

formation or duration? How, in turn, do climate-change-related HABs affect human and animal health, 

through behavior changes; water usage; or changes in how, and in what ways, exposure occurs? Further 

monitoring and modeling can help to show the connections between increased water temperature and 

water body characteristics with larger, more frequent, and more toxic blooms (Paerl and Huisman, 2009). 

Models and monitoring also can show how extreme weather events impact bloom growth in relation to 

other drivers, including differences in nutrient runoff amounts.

Resuspension of water during spring turnover and during storm or high wind events may bring nutrients 

and resting HAB cells from lake-bottom sediment, and has been associated with HABs in lakes that are 

not part of the Great Lakes (Torres and Adámek, 2013). A similar phenomenon could happen in the Great 

Lakes (Kutovaya et al., 2012). Impacts related to extreme weather events may exacerbate this (Jenny et 

al., 2016), as warming is likely to enhance stratification that leads to HABs and hypoxia (USGCRP, 2016). 

Timing of resuspension and cell seeding are likely to be important factors in Great Lakes HABs and hypoxic 

events, but scientists know few details. 

2. Managing HABs and Hypoxia: What are the Options?

Managing HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes requires access to technology, including repurposed 

technology. The implementation of conservation practices often relies on new and emerging 

technologies. Technological needs span all spatial categories from local to basin-wide. Current 

technologies for estimating loads need to be adapted and applied for more accurate real-time nutrient 

load estimation to better identify the nutrient sources.

There are a number of HAB control or suppression techniques used in small inland lakes. This includes 

applying barley straw, which exudes a chemical preventing new algal growth; dredging the bottom of the 

lake to remove nutrient-rich sediments; or mechanical aeration and mixing of the water column to 

prevent stratification, reducing the conditions that many cyanobacteria prefer (USEPA, 2016a). These 

methods, however, are ineffective in deeper, larger ecosystems, such as the Great Lakes. Given this, the 

focus of efforts has been on prevention and mitigation techniques, including gaining a better 

understanding of the drivers of HAB and hypoxia formation, and of HAB toxicity.

2.1. Nutrient Management Opportunities and Needs: How are We Addressing Nutrient 

Sources, from Watershed to Lake, Contributing to Great Lakes HABs and Hypoxia?

There are many complicating factors to consider when working to reduce HAB and hypoxia events in the 

Great Lakes. However, scientific consensus is that properly implementing nutrient management practices 

and strategies that prevent excess nutrients from entering the ecosystem of the lakes can contribute to 

preventing HABs and hypoxia (GLWQA, 2015). Phosphorus reduction targets set forth through the 1978 

GLWQA helped to eradicate HABs in Lake Erie for years. Decision-makers hope that achieving new GLWQA 

goals will help to lessen the severity of HABs and hypoxia (GLWQA, 2015). There is no source of basinwide information, however, on how setting similar targets for nitrogen would impact the development 

and severity of these events (Elmers and Watmough, 2016), including how nitrogen contributes to toxin 

production (Gobler et al., 2016). Recent reports examine progress in conservation practice adoption in 

the region by comparing how well conservation practices in use from 2003 to 2006, and then to 2012,

reduce nutrient loads entering Great Lakes tributaries and western Lake Erie (USDA, 2011; USDA, 2016a; 
27

Image 8. Edge-of-field monitoring in practice. The pictures on the left and in the centershow monitoring stations that 

allow NRCS to measure the amount of nutrients and sediment in water at the edge of a farm field. The picture on the 

right is of a calibrated flume used by USGS to measure water flow and loading of nutrients and sediment. (Credit: 

USDA/NRCS.)

Keitzer et al. 2016). As discussed later in this report, researchers and managers need additional analysis 

on the capability of conservation practices to achieve nutrient-reduction targets to minimize HABs and 

hypoxia, particularly under varying hydrologic and climatic conditions.

Researchers, decision-makers, and stakeholders need local- and field-scale information on the ecological 

costs and benefits of implementing conservation practices. Information related to the economic costs of 

agricultural conservation practices, and their impacts on soil and water quality, is available for numerous 

conservation practices in use in the region, including socio-cultural practices (e.g., nutrient management) 

and structural practices (e.g., erosion control structures) (NRCS, 2011; NRCS, 2016b). For instance, CEAP 

estimates of conservation practice impacts are valid at individual field levels – as applied in the NRCS 

conservation-planning tool, the Stewardship Tool for Environmental Performance (STEP) – and regional 

scales, as applied in CEAP-cropland assessment reports (USDA 2011, 2016a). Opportunities remain to 

refine interactive impacts of conservation practices, and to improve ties between conservation practice

impacts and biological metrics. Keitzer et al. (2016) present novel work in western Lake Erie, in which they 

explored the impacts of conservation practices in use between 2003 and 2006, with scenarios of increased 

structural controls and nutrient management in terms of effects on fish and invertebrate biodiversity in 

streams (Keitzer et al., 2016). However, biological populations and biodiversity data rarely are sufficient 

in quantity and detail to allow similarly detailed modeling exercises. Furthermore, researchers are 

uncertain about how much knowledge developed in other, smaller-scale lake systems can transfer to 

understanding the Great Lakes system. By conducting relevant studies, researchers can improve scientific 

understanding while maintaining other watershed uses, such as agriculture. Section 3.2 delineates 

relevant research needs in more detail.

Coordinated edge-of-field, in-stream, and tributary monitoring is performed in Great Lakes priority 

watersheds by GLRI Regional Working Group agencies and other partners, as well as the GLQWA Annex 4

Subcommittee, to evaluate the efficacy of nutrient reduction efforts. Ongoing and expanded coordination 

of current nutrient management-related monitoring efforts is essential to determine the sources of 

nutrients and the efficacy of conservation practices, in locations most impacted by HABs and hypoxia 

(Betanzo et al., 2015). With additional information, researchers and policymakers can more clearly assess 

the successes or specific challenges and needs of current management approaches. 
28

Researchers recommend enhancing coordination and expansion of monitoring of in-lake nutrients with 

an appropriate study design that allows for tributary monitoring, edge of field monitoring, and 

conservation practices assessments (Meals et al., 2012; Betanzo et al., 2015). The GLWQA Nutrient Annex 

(Annex 4) is developing binational approaches to monitor nutrient loadings to the Great Lakes as well as 

methods and metrics to quantify and track nearshore and open water HAB biomass and hypoxia in Lake 

Erie. Optimally, data-sharing between producers of data; conservation staff; and water monitoring 

agencies, including those at Federal, state, local, tribal, bi-national, provincial, and academic levels 

(Betanzo et al., 2015), will occur and follow the structure called for by Annex 4. 

2.2. Key Agreements and Coordinating Bodies in the Great Lakes to Improve Water 

Quality

The Federal government has made substantial progress in understanding and managing Great Lakes HAB 

and hypoxia events through expanded, improved, and coordinated policies, and through research and 

management programs. Great Lakes HAB and hypoxia prevention and management requires a strong 

Federal coordination role in addition to state, provincial, and local oversight because Canada shares and

jointly governs the waters. This section highlights some of the particular advances in Federal efforts in the 

Great Lakes, which are helping the region make significant advances in improving water quality and 

reducing the incidents of HABs and hypoxia.

2.2.1. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

The U.S. and Canada long have recognized the need for collaborative governance of these waterbodies, 

beginning with the Boundary Waters Treaty of 19093

. The GLWQA, first passed in 1972 and most recently 

amended in 2012, between the U.S. and Canadian governments commits both parties to specific 

responsibilities related to HABs and hypoxia. 

In the 1960s and 1970s, the Great Lakes experienced large algal blooms, aesthetic issues, hypoxia, fish 

kills, and drinking water taste and odor problems at water intake facilities and in home faucets, among 

other concerns. In 1983, the U.S. and Canada (the “Parties”) signed a phosphorus load supplement to the 

1978 GLWQA that established phosphorus load targets and associated water quality targets for each of 

the lakes. Phosphorus reduction targets were set for wastewater treatment plants, and the plan suggested 

accelerated prevention and practice methods for the agricultural community. During the intervening 

years, the Parties implemented other actions such as phosphorus detergent bans and reductions of 

phosphorus in lawn fertilizers. Managers also tried to reduce sediment loads, as scientists believed at the 

time that most phosphorus was transported attached to sediment into the tributaries and Great Lakes.

These actions resulted in dramatic improvements in water quality during the late-1980s and early-1990s.

In the mid-1990s, however, HABs resurged in Lake Erie, and remain an issue there and in other parts of 

the Great Lakes.

 3 The Treaty Between the US and Great Britain relating to Boundary Waters, and Questions Arising Between the US 

and Canada (“Boundary Waters Treaty”), established clear jurisdiction over and controls of the boundary waterways 

between the two countries. It also established the International Joint Commission (IJC), discussed in further detail in 

this section. Full text of the Boundary Waters Treaty is here:

http://ijc.org/files/tinymce/uploaded/Boundary%20Waters%20Treaty%20of%201909_3.pdf. 
29

Renewed binational efforts to minimize HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes occurred in 2012 GLWQA 

amendments that committed the Parties to review and update the previously established binational 

phosphorus-load reduction targets for each of the Great Lakes, beginning with Lake Erie. In response to 

this obligation, and following a robust binational science-based process and extensive public consultation,

in 2016, Canada and the U.S. adopted the following phosphorus reduction targets (compared to a 2008 

baseline) for Lake Erie:

• To minimize the extent of hypoxic zones in the waters of the central basin of Lake Erie: a 40 

percent reduction in total phosphorus entering the western and central basins of Lake Erie from 

the United States and from Canada, to achieve an annual load of 6,000 metric tons to the central 

basin. This amounts to a reduction from the United States and Canada of 3,316 metric tons and 

212 metric tons, respectively.

• To maintain algal species consistent with healthy aquatic ecosystems in the nearshore waters of 

the western and central basins of Lake Erie: a 40 percent reduction in spring total phosphorus and 

DRP loads from the following watersheds where algae is a localized problem: in Canada, the 

Thames River and Leamington Tributaries; and in the U.S., the Maumee River, River Raisin, 

Portage River, Toussaint Creek, Sandusky River, and Huron River (Ohio).

• To maintain cyanobacteria biomass at levels that do not produce concentrations of toxins that 

pose a threat to human or ecosystem health in the waters of the western basin of Lake Erie: a 40 

percent reduction in spring total phosphorus and DRP loads from the Maumee River, which 

equates to 860 metric tons per year of total phosphorus, and 186 metric tons per year of DRP in 

conditions of high spring discharge.

Consistent with the GLWQA, the U.S. and Canada currently are developing joint initiatives such as the GLRI 

and Domestic Action Plans (DAPs) that will describe the actions necessary to meet the new phosphorus 

reduction targets. In the United States, developing and implementing DAPs primarily is a state-led effort. 

Federal partners will assist states in carrying out the DAPs and developing a coordinated monitoring 

strategy to track progress. In addition, under the GLRI (see next section) Action Plan 1 and the first year 

of Action Plan 2, more than $60 million dollars were invested in the Lake Erie Basin from 2010 through 

2015 to reduce nutrient pollution and to support related science and monitoring work. By 2019, per Action 

Plan 2, the groups involved expect to reduce over 1 million pounds of phosphorus in priority watersheds.

GLWQA provides the Great Lakes region with a binational framework for coordination and setting 

priorities regarding water quality issues, including those related to HABs and hypoxia under Annex 4 

(Nutrients). The GLWQA organizational structure includes oversight by the Great Lakes Executive 

Committee, representing over 50 Federal, state, provincial, non-indigenous, municipal, and watershed 

groups (Figure 6). Environment and Climate Change Canada and the USEPA co-chair the GLWQA Annex 4 

Subcommittee. Other GLWQA Annexes that are pertinent to HABs and hypoxia are Annexes 2 (Lakewide 

Management), 7 (Habitat and Species), 9 (Climate Change), and 10 (Science). Enhanced monitoring will 

support nutrient reduction plans and adaptive management solutions for reducing nutrient loads.

2.2.2. Great Lakes Interagency Task Force and Great Lakes Restoration Initiative

Created by a May 2004 Executive Order, and chaired by USEPA, the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force 

(IATF) convenes 11 U.S. Government cabinet and Federal agency heads to coordinate the restoration of 

the Great Lakes. The IATF manages the development of consistent Federal policies, strategies, projects, 

and priorities pertaining to the restoration and protection of the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes Regional 

Working Group (RWG), composed of administrators and directors of regional offices, supports the IATF. 

Since 2009, the IATF has overseen the implementation of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) and 
30

the development of comprehensive multi-year Action Plans that identify goals, objectives, measurable 

ecological targets, and specific actions for five GLRI focus areas. The Federal government has allocated 

significant expenditures since 2010 for a wide array of projects aimed at reducing nutrient- and sedimentloading into the Great Lakes, including broader restoration goals beyond HABs and hypoxia, thereby 

directly addressing a driver of HABs and hypoxia. As an example, in response to the 2014 drinking water 

do not use/do not boil advisory in Toledo, Ohio, Federal and state agencies quickly received nearly $12 

million in GLRI funds for projects intended to reduce and monitor HABs in western Lake Erie.

Figure 8. GLRI and GLWQA are coordinated domestic and binational efforts designed to protect and restore the Great 

Lakes. GLRI science enables the attainment of GLWQA goals. As it pertains to HABs and hypoxia, funding and results 

from GLRI Focus Area 3: “Reducing Nutrient Runoff that Contributes to Harmful/Nuisance Algal Blooms”, Focus Area 

4: “Habitats and Species”, and Focus Area 5: “Science-based Adaptive Management”, all support work in GLWQA’s 

Nutrient Annex (4), which is charged in part with developing a nutrient reduction strategy to help mitigate HABs and 

hypoxia in the Great Lakes. Attainment of GLWQA Annex 4 targets also will contribute to GLRI goals.
31

GLRI has five focus areas (Figure 8): Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern, Invasive Species, Nonpoint 

Source Pollution Impacts on Nearshore Health, Habitat and Species, and Foundations for Future 

Restoration Actions. The GLRI targets high-priority watersheds and receiving waters that have high 

potential or known risk for experiencing HABs and/or hypoxia events, including the Fox River-Green Bay, 

Saginaw River-Saginaw Bay, and Maumee River-western Lake Erie. The programs also provide funding for 

nutrient-abatement projects in other high-concern areas. 

Figure 9. This chart shows the complex relationships between GLRI and GLWQA, and how they interact with 

stakeholders. Though the GLRI and GLWQA function independently, there are crossovers between the member bodies 

(Federal agencies), as well as the intent of each organization. The GLRI is not a part of the GLWQA governance 

structure, but it is a tool that provides information used to implement the annexes composing the GLWQA.

In partnership with NRCS, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and Conservation 

Technical Assistance Program (CTA) deliver GLRI funds. EQIP is a voluntary conservation program that 

provides financial and technical assistance to agricultural producers to plan and implement conservation 

practices that improve soil, water, plant, animal, air, and related natural resources on agricultural land 

and non-industrial private forestland. CTA supports comprehensive conservation planning and innovative 

outreach efforts in the region. NRCS addresses some of the key strategies and management actions for 

reducing HABs and hypoxia, targeting GLRI Priority Watersheds in the Great Lakes basin; and any 

Phosphorous Priority Watersheds that are within those, including implementing nutrient management 

plans, controlled drainage systems, livestock waste-management facilities and related practices reduced 

or no-tillage practices, and planting cover crops, among other prevention strategies (GLRI, 2014; 

Francesconi et al., 2014). NRCS demonstrates and supports on-farm innovative, new practices, such as 
32

blind inlets, phosphorous removal structures, and two-stage ditches, for other producers to see and learn 

of the benefits. Demonstration farms include field-scale water-quality monitoring by USGS and USDA ARS 

to document the effects of the conservation practices and to provide producers with more local results 

on water quality and soil health benefits, and to support conservation adoption. Additionally, innovative 

partnership efforts, such as the Great Lakes Commission-led Fox River Phosphorous Trading Program,

recently achieved the first trade involving an agricultural producer.

2.2.3. The Farm Bill

Since 2008, $371.5 million in funding provided through the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008

(P.L. 110-246; “2008 Farm Bill”), and the Agricultural Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-79; “2014 Farm Bill”), has 

supported conservation efforts on over 2.5 million acres of private land throughout the Great Lakes region 

to help address nutrient and sediment loading resource concerns. The 2014 Farm Bill, passed in February 

2014, retained and expanded many existing programs designed to reduce nutrient and sediment loads 

into the Great Lakes basin. A new, major program authorized under this legislation is the Regional 

Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), which encourages public-private partnerships in order to 

increase the conservation and sustainable use of soil, water, wildlife, and related natural resources. 

Former Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack designated the Great Lakes region as a Critical Conservation

Area for RCPP, providing more conservation funding (nearly 35 percent of the program) to new or existing 

partnerships in the region, including in the western basin of Lake Erie and Saginaw Bay. The RCPP’s 

collaborative approach leverages tools, technologies, and technical assistance for agricultural producers 

to improve nutrient and sediment management on agricultural land. For example, the Tri-State Western 

Lake Erie Basin Phosphorus Reduction Initiative rallies together more than 40 partners to spur voluntary 

conservation practices aimed at reducing phosphorus losses. NRCS dedicated $17.5 million to this major 

project, which other groups matched by $36 million. Saginaw Bay RCPP project is another major 

conservation effort based on science that is new to the region and supports targeted conservation and 

outcome assessments.

In 2016, NRCS announced a new 3-year “Western Lake Erie Basin Initiative” to accelerate conservation 

assistance delivery to agricultural producers in Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio. Along with the

aforementioned projected $36 million in funds, this will bring an additional $41 million to the region, 

leading to $77 million in financial assistance from 2016-2018 available to support conservation on private 

agricultural land in the western Lake Erie basin (USDA, 2016b). The initiative’s four elements are to avoid 

excess nutrient application, control nutrient and sediment movement, trap nutrient and sediment losses 

and manage hydrological pathways to reduce nutrient and sediment losses. NRCS prioritizes financial 

assistance on highly vulnerable soils, particularly in areas draining directly into Lake Erie tributaries.

2.2.4. Other Federally-Led Efforts

Related to some of the objectives laid out in the 2014 Farm Bill, the Federal government established a 

number of challenges and prizes that seek solutions for affordable management and monitoring tools. 

The Nutrient Water Sensor Challenge, implemented by the Alliance for Coastal Technologies with 

sponsorship from NOAA and USEPA, provides funding to develop new, affordable, real-time nitrogen and 

phosphorus sensors. This challenge ultimately intends to develop and deploy sensors that cost less than 

$5,000 to purchase; are accurate over commonly-observed concentration ranges; are easy to use in 

maintenance-free, autonomous, remote, three-month deployments; and can be commercially-available 

by 2017. The George Barley Water Prize, sponsored by the Everglades Foundation, provides funding to 

identify cost-effective, innovative solutions to remove excess phosphorus contamination from freshwater 

bodies and to produce high added-value by-products. The USEPA-led Nutrient Recycling Challenge 
33

supports creating methods to recycle nutrients from livestock manure to generate products with 

environmental and economic benefits that farmers can use and sell. The Visualizing Nutrients Challenge, 

sponsored by USGS, USEPA, and Blue Legacy International, led to the development of inventive ways to 

organize and analyze existing data on nutrient levels in water. The Tulane Nutrient Reduction Challenge 

will develop innovative, in-field solutions that will maintain crop productivity and economics, while 

reducing nutrient run-off.

The Clean Water Act (P.L. 107-303; “CWA”) establishes the legal authority and basic structure for 

regulating pollutant discharge into United States waters, including the Great Lakes, and for protecting and

regulating surface water quality standards. The CWA provides funding to states and communities to help 

them meet their clean water infrastructure needs, and it protects valuable wetlands and other aquatic 

habitats through a permitting process that ensures development and other activities are conducted in an 

environmentally-sound manner. The CWA prohibits discharge of pollutants via point sources unless 

authorized by National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits (NPDES). While the CWA does not 

require nonpoint sources to obtain permits, it encourages states through funding and technical assistance 

to address the effect of nonpoint sources of pollution on water quality. 

It also requires states and authorized tribes, with USEPA oversight, to establish water quality goals that 

include designated water uses (e.g., support of aquatic life, support of recreation), as well as water quality 

criteria to protect these uses. Groups then use these standards to determine which waters must be 

cleaned up, how much pollution can be discharged, and what is needed for protection. Numeric nutrient 

criteria identify ambient levels of nitrogen and phosphorus that, if met, ensure the protection of a 

waterbody’s designated uses. The criteria can serve as benchmark values when conducting monitoring of 

a waterbody to assess whether it is attaining its designated uses; facilitating the formulation of nitrogen 

and phosphorus limits in NPDES discharge permits; and simplifying development of total maximum daily 

loads (TMDLs) for restoring waters not attaining their designated uses (i.e., impaired waters).

The Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act (P.L. 106-284; “BEACH Act”) is an 

amendment to the CWA, designed to reduce the risk of disease to users of the nation's coastal recreation 

waters. The BEACH Act authorizes the USEPA to award program development and implementation grants 

to eligible states, territories, tribes, and local governments to support microbiological testing and 

monitoring of coastal recreational waters, including the Great Lakes and waters adjacent to beaches or 

similar points of access used by the public. BEACH Act grants also provide support for developing and 

implementing programs to notify the public of the potential for exposure to disease-causing 

microorganisms in coastal recreation waters. One source of these pathogens may be rotting HABs 

biomass, which can produce high bacteria counts. Furthermore, the act authorizes USEPA to provide 

technical assistance to states and local governments for assessing and monitoring floatable materials.

4

One of the requirements of BEACH Act grantees is to submit beach data to USEPA annually, and for USEPA 

to maintain state beach data and make it publicly available. To meet this requirement, USEPA developed 

the Beach Advisory and Closing On-line Notification (BEACON) system to house the beach data 

(https://watersgeo.epa.gov/beacon2/). Beginning with the 2016 beach season reporting, beach 

management entities now must list sources of contamination causing beach advisories and closings, 

including algae.

 4 The term “floatable material” means any foreign matter that may float or remain suspended in the water column. 

This includes plastic, aluminum cans, wood products, bottles, and paper products (BEACH Act, 2000).
34

Former President Obama signed the Drinking Water Protection Act (P.L. 114-45) into law on August 7, 

2015, effectively amending the Safe Water Drinking Act (P.L. 93-523) to provide additional protection to 

the public against cyanobacterial toxins. The Drinking Water Protection Act mandates that USEPA:

• Develop steps and timelines to assess human health effects from drinking water contaminated 

with algal toxins, 

• Develop and maintain a list of algal toxins that may have adverse human health impacts, 

• Determine whether to publish health advisories for those listed toxins and publish subsequent 

health advisories, 

• Provide bloom treatment options and analytical and monitoring approaches, 

• Summarize the causes of harmful algal blooms, 

• Recommend source water protection activities to reduce blooms, 

• Enter into cooperative agreements and provide technical assistance to affected states and 

public water systems, 

• Identify any information gaps, and 

• Publish completed and ongoing work from all Federal agencies on public health concerns related 

to harmful algal blooms affecting drinking water.

USEPA submitted the Algal Toxin Risk Assessment and Management Strategic Plan for Drinking Water to 

Congress in November 2015. USEPA has published drinking water health advisories for microcystins and 

cylindrospermopsin, released recommendations for public water systems to manage cyanotoxin risks 

including treatment options, and released analysis and treatment methods for multiple cyanotoxins. The 

agency currently is working on recreational water advisories.

2.3. Conservation Practice and Social Planning, Implementation, and Efficiency to 

Reduce the Severity of HABs and Hypoxia

While there is no single solution for addressing HABs and hypoxia, researchers have found that combining 

management strategies is effective in limiting the severity of these events. This section discusses a number 

of agricultural and non-agricultural programs and regional conservation practices used to reduce runoff 

and nutrient inputs, address water quality, and overall improve the efficiency of communities’ watermanagement facilities. 

Stakeholders and Federal Agencies Respond to HABs and Hypoxia:

Great Lakes HABs Collaboratory

Reaching the nutrient targets recommended by GLQWA Annex 4 requires coordination among 

researchers to help select conservation practice strategies, as well as to monitor progress. The 

Great Lakes HABs Collaboratory (collaboration + laboratory) is a collaboration between the 

Great Lakes Commission and the USGS-Great Lakes Science Center to promote HABs-related 

information-sharing among scientists and decision-makers. Participants include academics, 

state agencies, Federal employees, and nonprofits.
35

2.3.1. Agriculture-Related Practices

Research shows that specific agricultural conservation practices, including nutrient management, using 

no-till farming to prevent soil erosion, and planting cover crops, among other methods, can reduce 

phosphorus and nitrogen runoff from farm fields(Richards et al., 2009; USDA, 2011; Osmond et al., 2012a; 

Francesconi et al., 2014; Tomer et al., 2014; Her et al., 2016; Keitzer et al., 2016; Scavia et al., 2016; USDA, 

2016a). For example, one such study showed that no-till farming practices reduced losses of all waterquality pollutants except DRP (Smith et al., 2015a). It should be noted that no-till can, in some cases,

increase infiltration and leaching of nutrients to tile drains or shallow water tables (Williams et al., 2016).

USDA NRCS CEAP assessments have found that it is important to utilize systems of conservation practices 

to fully treat conservation concerns and address nutrient transport in various hydrologic pathways 

(Osmond et al., 2012a; Smith et al., 2015a; USDA 2016a). Therefore, NRCS recommends and focuses local 

conservation planning on determining if conservation practices systems are needed to fully treat 

conservation concerns. Conservation programs often prioritize use of systems of conservation practices, 

when appropriate, in application screening and ranking for this reason. Recent studies have shown 

successes of specific conservation practices in reducing nutrient runoff. Other studies show that an 

innovative conservation practice called a “blind inlet” provides greater filtration of surface water from 

potholes (closed depressions on agricultural land), decreasing losses of total phosphorus, DRP, and total 

suspended sediment by significant amounts (Smith and Livingston, 2013; Feyereisen et al., 2015). In 2012, 

EQIP established the blind inlet as a modification of a conservation practice standard.

Image 9. Construction of a blind inlet. Septic tiles are placed on top of a layer of coarse limestone gravel, covered in 

a second layer of gravel, encased in landscape fabric, and backfilled with coarse soil to facilitate infiltration. (Credit: 

USDA).

Researchers and managers need to consider nutrient transport pathways in effectively treating sources. 

Agricultural infrastructures may influence the implementation of conservation practices. For instance, 

while only less than 2 percent of applied phosphorous is lost in drainage (Christianson et al. 2016), 

drainage tile networks contribute approximately 50 percent or more of DRP that is lost from farm fields 

into nearby rivers and streams (King et al., 2015a; Smith et al., 2015b). Environmental factors may 

disproportionately influence the effectiveness of conservation practices, such as increased water flow 

over the soil surface during the winter thaw (Van Esbroeck et al., 2016). Incorporating this type of 

knowledge into conservation practice plans is important at a variety of spatial scales: for instance, small 

watershed information is, spatially, more closely linked to nutrient management and thus more 

informative for prevention.
36

Researchers need additional information for other conservation practices used throughout the Great 

Lakes region that are susceptible to HABs and hypoxia, and that may have different soil types (Calhoun et 

al., 2002; USDA, 2016a) and therefore have different nutrient-leaching risk-levels (Dayton et al., 2014) and 

nutrient run-off risk levels. Animal agriculture in the United States portion of the Great Lakes includes 

high-density operations in Northeast Indiana, Northwest Ohio, and the Grand River watershed that 

empties into Lake Michigan. It is important to understand the relative contribution of animal agriculture, 

especially manure handling practices, to the nutrients that drive Great Lakes HABs and hypoxia. 

States also have an important role to play in managing nutrient inputs to water sources by working with 

homeowners and businesses to adjust fertilizer application and yard maintenance practices. 

Commercially-available fertilizers contain phosphorus and nitrates, in ratios that are not always a match 

for the soils on which they are applied, contributing to nonpoint source pollution into the Great Lakes 

through runoff or leaching into the water column. Recognizing this, many Great Lakes states have policies 

in place that limit or control the use of phosphorus or nitrogen in retail fertilizers. Michigan, for instance, 

banned phosphorus use on most residential and commercial lawns (SOM, 2010). Pennsylvania has similar 

policies in place, including one for retail fertilizers that, among other things, restricts application on turf, 

which largely bans the use of phosphorus, and limits the nitrogen content percentage (COP, 2015). In May 

2014, Ohio Governor John R. Kasich signed into law Senate Bill 150, requiring fertilizer applicators to 

undergo education and certification by the Ohio Department of Agriculture (ODA); encouraging

agricultural producers to adopt nutrient management plans; and allowing ODA to better track the sales 

and distribution of fertilizer. In April 2015, Governor Kasich signed Senate Bill 1, which included

restrictions on fertilizer and manure application on frozen, snow-covered, or saturated ground in the 

western Lake Erie basin watershed, among other measures aimed at improving Lake Erie water quality.

Recent papers highlight local-scale information gaps with regard to best conservation practice option(s) 

for various locations and soil types and their effects on nutrient loss into nearby water bodies. They 

account for different spatial scales, and among different seasonal or interannual environmental 

conditions (Kröger et al., 2013; Cousino et al., 2015). More local-scale, in-stream nutrient source tracking 

methodologies and information about appropriate sampling design will help characterize the efficacy of 

individual conservation practices, strategic timing of fertilizer application, and creation of riparian buffer 

zones, on reducing nutrient output into nearby water bodies, including all of the Great Lakes (Bentrup, 

2008; Vidon et al., 2010; USDA, 2011; Syswerda et al., 2012; Smith et al., 2015a, b; USDA, 2016b). Decisionmakers can use this information to make targeted conservation actions.

Strategic selection of watersheds to monitor, and long-term, regional coordination of monitoring efforts, 

are essential for the most effective conservation practice implementation. Regional monitoring should 

ensure consistency in variables measured and method of sampling, allowing for more effective data 

aggregation. Aggregated data sets can provide comprehensive information about HABs and hypoxia, in 

effect improving ecological understanding, as well as a greater capacity to generate models and 

predictions that are more robust. Management efforts improve with easily aggregated and shared data. 

Those conducting monitoring over the long-term must also ensure temporal consistency of datasets by 

calibrating procedures as methodologies or data collection techniques change (Meals et al., 2012).

Lag times and legacy loads are characteristics of land that contribute to the time it takes for agricultural 

conservation practices to provide measureable benefits to the environment (Meals et al., 2012). Lag-times 

between the establishment of mitigating conservation practices and measurable impacts on water quality 

are well documented. Principle components of lag-time that need clarification include the time needed 
37

for an adopted practice to produce an intended impact, for that impact to reach the water body for which 

it was intended, and the time for the water body to respond in a measureable way (Meals et al. 2010). 

Understanding lag-times is important when planning conservation practice implementation, in 

interpreting water quality monitoring results, and in managing stakeholder expectations. 

Image 10. Examples of Variable Rate Irrigation Technology (left) and precision farming (right). (Credit: USDA/ARS.)

Legacy nutrients, or those that accumulate in the water or soils within a field and also within a stream 

bank or bed load, or even in lake sediments, can play a role in HAB and hypoxia development (Sharpley et 

al. 2013). Legacy load impacts on sediment and nutrient dynamics must be considered in the evaluation 

of the cumulative effects of conservation practices, spatially and temporally, and be given consideration 

in evaluation of conservation treatment options to ensure successful application of those strategies 

(Meals et al., 2010; Osmond et al., 2012b; Sharpley et al. 2013). When sediment and nutrients settle out 

of flowing water, they become a part of “legacy” sediment and nutrients. Resuspension and redistribution 

may occur days, years, or decades later, contributing to a lag-time before conservation benefits are 

discernable (Kleinman et al., 2011; Sharpley et al., 2013; Chen et al., 2014). In several cases, stream banks 

and beds are frequently contributing 50 percent or more of the sediment load in streams, for example, so 

assessment of pollutant sources is valuable information for effectively targeting conservation practices if 

load reduction is the goal (Wilson et al., 2014b; Bertani et al., 2016). Edge-of-field or in-stream monitoring 

measurements taken today integrate current management and the legacy of prior management actions, 

potentially masking benefits of conservation practices on the ground today. Stream gauge data include a 

mixture of nutrients of different “ages” of application (e.g., “live” and “legacy” loads) (Meals et al., 2010).

Precision farming practices provide previously unavailable opportunities to improve nutrient reduction 

and soil loss. NRCS (USDA, 2016a) found that agricultural producers farmed the vast majority of cropland 

acres in the western Lake Erie basin under conservation practices. The model simulations used to derive 

impact estimates of these practices at the field scale in CEAP-cropland assessments do not account for 

variability in soil type within a field, however, which affects the simulated outcome of the management 

measures. However, that does not mean that farmers are unaware of and manage for soil variability; this 

complexity highlights the difficulty of modeling systems, and in basing management suggestions on 

models simulating at large scales that do not capture soil variabilities within fields. Adopting

comprehensive conservation plans and improved precision-farming techniques are necessary to enable 

farmers to treat the mosaic of soils in their fields, e.g. treating leaching-prone soils with leaching-specific 

practices, or treating soils vulnerable to erosion with appropriate erosion-control practices (USDA, 2016a). 

As of 2012, 71 percent of western Lake Erie basin farmers had a soil test in the last five years as of 2012 

(USDA, 2016a), which help to determine nutrient input needs and develop a conservation plan. 
38

Advanced technologies using GPS interfaces and precision soil mapping enable farmers to tailor nutrient 

application and conservation management to particular soils, improving production efficiencies while 

mitigating environmental impacts. GPS mapping of soil properties increased from being in use on 8 

percent of western Lake Erie basin cropland acres in 2003-2006, to being in use on 36 percent of cropland 

acres in 2012. Variable rate irrigation systems can tailor water applications to rates that the different soils 

in an individual field can accept without runoff and deep percolation losses. Variable Rate Technologies 

(VRTs), which allow farmers to integrate GPS technologies with farming equipment such that they can 

tailor nutrient applications to the needs of various portions of their fields based on yield and soil maps, 

increased from being in use on 4 percent to 14 percent cropland acres between 2003-2006 and 2012. 

Clearly, interest in these technologies is growing, but there is room for improvement. 

2.3.2. Non-Agricultural Practices

Conservation and nutrient management practices extend beyond reducing runoff from agricultural 

sources. This section discusses a few of the many types of actions that communities and managers can 

take to reduce nutrients, including wastewater and storm water management, the use of forests and 

vegetation as buffers, and addressing the role of air pollutants.

There are many methods of managing nutrient inputs related to wastewater. Septic tanks are part of the 

infrastructure of rural areas of the Great Lakes region and commonly leak effluent as they age. Discharge 

from poorly maintained septic tanks has the potential to contribute to water quality problems, despite 

reductions in nutrient inputs from wastewater treatment plants following the enactment of the Clean 

Water Act (CWA) (IJC, 2014). Advanced septic systems are now available, which provide more effective 

nutrient removal. Additional information about the age and location of each septic system can help 

managers prioritize and replace problem systems, leading to better nutrient management for the Great 

Lakes and Great Lakes tributaries. 

CWA-authorized NPDES permits regulate nutrient discharges in storm water as point source pollution. 

During storms and in cities with combined sewer overflow (CSO), where the sewage collection system 

connects to the storm-water collection system, increased water volume can cause untreated sewage 

water and nutrients to enter nearby water bodies that feed into the Great Lakes. The USEPA issued the 

CSO Control Policy of April 19, 1994, to ensure that all levels of management, permitting, and monitoring 

bodies work together to protect public health and environmental objectives by maintaining the integrity 

of storm water containment systems, and developing a long-term plan for maintaining CSOs (USEPA, 

2016b). Similarly, wastewater treatment facilities can remove nitrogen and phosphorus from waste 

through a number of methods, including through adding chemicals to solidified matter (USEPA, 2015g). 

The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago instituted the Tunnel and Reservoir Plan 

System (TARP), the intent of which is to transmit CSOs via tunnels into storage reservoirs until after a 

storm. At that point, water in the reservoirs is pumped to a water treatment plant, where it is treated 

(Kay, 2016). Despite these management options, however, researchers need exact geographic 

information about the location of storm-water nutrient sources to ascertain if additional strategies are 

necessary for these locations, to help mitigate storm water-related nutrient contributions. Additional 

monitoring can provide this data.

Reforestation and prairie filter strips are other non-agricultural practices in watersheds used to reduce 

nutrient inputs that promote HABs and hypoxia. Prairie filter strips are effective in reducing runoff from 

cropland by using native prairie plant species (e.g., grasses and other species with long root systems) to 

create a natural buffer and filter between the field and a waterway (Zhou et al., 2014). Similarly, studies 
39

have shown that forested areas and reforestation are useful in reducing nitrogen runoff, particularly in 

agricultural areas (Bastrup-Birk and Gundersen, 2004; Hansen et al., 2007). Forested areas slow down 

storm water runoff, which can help to reduce nutrient removal and hypoxia-promoting conditions (Paul 

and Meyer, 2001; Mallin et al., 2006). Mayer et al. (2007) found that wide buffers are more effective at 

removing nitrogen, as are buffers made of plants that tend to provide more vegetative cover (e.g., low 

trees, bushes, and ground-cover plants) (Mayer et al., 2007). Lowrance (1998) states that this 

conservation method is a particular success, given the ease in implementing the practice and its economic 

benefits associated with limiting runoff (Lowrance, 1998). Researchers also have discovered that 

deforestation can cause changes in the distribution of fish populations. Some fish species that are 

relatively tolerant to hypoxia are more likely to exist in deforested areas than in forested places. As fish 

populations move between habitats, how fish speciesfeed and what they feed upon may lead to potential 

shifts in the food web (Teresa et al., 2015).

Targeted wetland restoration efforts can play an important role in nutrient reduction and improvement 

in water-quality. Restoring riparian wetlands provides numerous benefits, including water storage and 

filtration. Floodplain wetlands allow floodwaters to spread out and slow down, while the vegetation 

within floodplain wetlands help filter nutrients and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Storm water 

wetlands, in particular, remove nutrients by dispersing the nutrients (OH EPA, 2013). States use wetland 

creation and restoration as a nutrient reduction strategy, specifically. For instance, the 2013 Ohio Nutrient 

Reduction Strategy (OH EPA, 2013) lists wetland creation and restoration as two of several methods for 

improving drainage-water management. This type of conservation practice can help to reduce the rate 

and amount of runoff, while also increasing the treatment of field runoff. While wetland drainage may 

decrease water storage and treatment capacity of a landscape, it also helps to improve water quality by 

storing and filtering water, while also providing benefits to fish and wildlife. Furthermore, wetlands’ 

natural beauty can have positive aesthetic and economic benefits to communities. USDA also offers 

incentive programs for wetland restoration and creation programs (OH EPA, 2013). 

Researchers often consider watershed sources of nutrient runoff the primary drivers of HAB and hypoxic 

events in the Great Lakes. However, there also is evidence that atmospheric deposition of nutrients such 

as air pollutants (nitrogen and phosphorus) may have an impact (McDonald et al., 2010; Brown et al., 

2011; Han et al., 2011; USEPA SAB, 2011; Dolan and Chapra, 2012; NADP, 2015; Rowe et al., 2014). A more 

local-scale understanding of both atmospheric phosphorus and nitrogen loads to the Great Lakes would 

help to better elucidate any connection with HABs and hypoxia. 

2.4. Planning for Economic and Social Impacts of HABs and Hypoxia within Great Lakes 

Communities

Although economic impact assessments to date are limited in scope, researchers estimate that HABs and 

hypoxia-related impacts on Great Lakes communities amount to millions of dollars annually (Bingham et 

al., 2015; USEPA, 2015h). This includes losses in income from commercial fishing, recreation, and tourism; 

public health costs due to human and animal illness; expenses related to monitoring and management; 

and drinking water treatment (Bingham et al., 2015). More specifically, approximations of loss in property 

value to the western Lake Erie shoreline during the 2011 and 2014 HAB events were around $10 million, 

though impacts potentially were as high as $242.1 million, depending on how researchers calculated 

valuations (Bingham et al., 2015). With estimated tourism dollars during any given year in Ohio ranging 

between $66 million to $305 million (2015 dollars), and in Michigan around $25 million (Bingham et al., 

2015), there is a clear potential for substantial economic losses, even if a small percentage of businesses 

are affected for part of the year. While the costs of hypoxia have not been quantified specifically, resultant 
40

fish kills are common knowledge. Individuals and communities at all levels clearly have a lot to lose 

financially, as illustrated in the box below. Understanding economic impacts could help a community 

ensure citizens have sufficient resources to overcome the impacts of a bloom or hypoxic event.

Image 11. The Great Lakes are inviting to day-trippers, vacationers, boaters, and fishermen, bringing in significant 

revenue to the region. This image shows beachgoers taking advantage of a beautiful summer day in Grand Haven, 

MI, on Lake Michigan (Photo credit: Rodney E. Rouwhorst/Travel Michigan and courtesy of NOAA/OCM).

Feedback that the IWG-HABHRCA received from stakeholders indicates that many individuals in the Great 

Lakes region and around the country are unaware of potential effects of HABs and hypoxia. For instance, 

one stakeholder from Wisconsin mentioned that while her community is aware of the hypoxic dead zone 

in Green Bay, they are unconcerned with annual algal blooms that their part of Lake Michigan experiences. 

She remarked that she often sees her neighbors boating, fishing, playing, and even bathing in the water, 

despite the visible presence of a bloom. However, there is limited published research that demonstrates 

Water-Dependent Industries in the Great Lakes Feel the Financial Impacts of HABs

Few industries may be as aware of potential impacts by a HAB as those that rely on water from

the Great Lakes. While the exact economic impacts are only estimates, numerous examples and 

studies show the potential for industries to lose millions of dollars during HAB events. One 

example of this is the over 1,800 breweries that are found throughout the Great Lakes states. 

These businesses are in a unique position, relying almost equally upon water and agricultural 

resources to make their product. Many of the Great Lakes breweries get the water for their beer 

from the lakes themselves, making this industry highly vulnerable to water quality issues. A 

single toxic HAB event affecting drinking water intakes around the region could cause breweries 

to lose millions of dollars over a short amount of time, through canceled or delayed sales, 

spoiled product, or other situations. Similarly, tour boat operators in the Great Lakes have 

noticed decreased profits due directly to HABs (Carmichael and Boyer, 2016; Maher and 

McWhirter, 2016). HABs may have unpleasant odors or can clog motors, making it difficult for 

operators to attract customers or be able to operate. 
41

how individuals perceive human and animal health, economic, and social risks, as well as how HABs or 

hypoxia affect communities and general perception of water safety after events (McCarty et al., 2016). 

Social science helps to address and evaluate community and regional preparedness for HAB and hypoxia 

events. For instance, studying regional tourism or water-dependent economies can ultimately help to 

create mitigation measures, such as emergency funds or water supplies. It also helps to demonstrate 

collective needs. Social science research is essential for bolstering the need for policies and incentives for

implementing conservation practices. For example, communities may have well-established traditions, 

such as an annual water festival, or attitudes regarding how to farm land. They may value resources 

differently; are willing to take different types of risks, such as not saving money in case of a HAB event; or 

may value conservation practices differently (Wilson et al., 2014c; Daloğlu et al., 2014; Burnett et al., 

2015). Social science research provides place-based information to agricultural producers that can help 

them make the most effective decisions, and demonstrates the economic importance of preparedness.

Appendix 4 lays out the core questions that social scientists and managers need to examine and answer, 

in order to assess individual, community, or regional preparedness.

Social science disciplines provide decision-makers with important information for contributing to 

community knowledge about HABS and hypoxia, creating policies and mitigating economic and sociocultural effects on communities. Understanding social and economic behavior and impacts due to HABs 

and hypoxia is critical to prioritizing research and adaptive management strategies. There currently is 

limited research that evaluates how HABs and hypoxia affect communities’ traditions, lifestyles, planning, 

and policy decision-making. Additionally, ecosystem valuation studies are important; examining the 

financial, social, and aesthetic benefits ecosystems bring to a location; how communities emotionally 

value an ecosystem or conservation of the ecosystem in question; and the actual cost that individuals are 

willing to pay for conservation measures.

Cost-benefit analyses are an important part of the conservation process. Currently, some information 

exists on the ecological (USDA, 2011) and economic benefits (Stonehouse, 1999; Forster, 2000; Forster et 

al., 2000; Forster, 2002; Forster and Rausch, 2002) of selected conservation practices. Researchers must 

investigate the ecological and economic costs and benefits of a broader range of conservation practices, 

adjusting for different locations and environmental conditions (Nakao and Sohngen, 2000; Napier, 2011). 

In particular, community and public health leaders need information at smaller-watershed scales to help 

address more localized HAB and hypoxia problems. While researchers are aware of immediate impacts 

on communities - including fishing, tourism, recreation, public health, local and state government, 

homeowners, and the public – they are uncertain of the true value of resources and costs of a HAB or 

hypoxia at local, state, tribal, and regional levels. Likewise, cost-benefit and economic analyses help 

agricultural producers, decision-makers, and other resource officials evaluate types of conservation or 

nutrient management practices (Stonehouse, 1999; Napier, 2011). Without this knowledge, it is difficult 

to demonstrate to communities the need to prepare, let alone how they need to prepare. With this type 

of information, practitioners can answer questions about risk assessment and establish priorities for 

future mitigation efforts. Economic research on HABs and hypoxia is necessary to understand the value

of the water and related resources, and how this may vary with changes in HABs, hypoxia, or water levels.
42

HAB and hypoxia events, and event-response efforts, can be expensive. Bingham et al. (2015) estimated

that a repeat of the 2014 toxin contamination of drinking water in Toledo, Ohio, would cost approximately

$750,000 in related expenditures (e.g. monitoring and providing clean drinking water). However, the 

study showed also that overall economic impact would be significantly higher when considering all 

potential factors (e.g., loss of restaurant revenue, discarded foodstuffs in grocery stores, and shut-downs 

of food manufacturing factories). Low dissolved oxygen can impact corrosion control efforts in drinking 

water systems that have cold, acidic water, when hypoxic water is transported from bottom-waters to the 

surface by coastal upwellings5 in the Great Lakes (Ruberg et al., 2008). This consequently leads to 

increased costs associated with drinking water purification. 

One must also consider the costs of conservation, nutrient reduction, and HAB and hypoxia mitigation to 

the Federal, state, and local governments, and therefore to national taxpayers. In the late-1980s and into 

the 2000s, the Federal government paid millions of dollars to agricultural producers in the Maumee and 

Sandusky watersheds as nutrient reduction incentives, including approximately $143 million from 1987-

1997 (Forster and Rausch, 2002). As discussed in Section 1.3, in 2016, NRCS invested $41 million in a threeyear initiative to support the work of farmers in Ohio, Michigan, and Indiana, to improve water quality in 

the Western Lake Erie Basin. The investment helps farmers implement science-based conservation 

measures to reduce runoff from farms entering the region’s waterways.

Related to conservation costs, fish tend to aggregate on the very edge of hypoxic zones because those are 

the areas with the highest density of prey. Thus, slight changes in hypoxic zone extent and location could 

bias catch estimates in the stock assessments used by fishery managers. This could impact the Great Lakes 

fishing economy. Knowing where the fish are, and adequately accounting for their spatial variability in 

stock assessment models, can also help prevent overexploitation of economically and ecologically 

important fish species (Belore et al., 2014; Kraus et al., 2015). Additionally, as Figure 9 shows, hypoxic 

conditions can reduce the size of commercially important fish, and lead to losses in fishing revenue.

 5 Upwelling is the process by which offshore currents draw away warm, less-dense surface water from along a shore, 

and cold, denser water brought up from the subsurface replaces the warmer water. Upwelling of offshore bottomwaters that are permanently depleted of oxygen can lead to hypoxia.
43

Figure 9. This graph shows how longer-duration hypoxic events in the central basin of Lake Erie can affect the mean 

relative weight of yellow perch, a fish species that supports a thriving tourist trade and forms the backbone of the 

Great Lakes fishing industry. The points on the graph represent a year. The number of days in which Lake Erie 

experienced hypoxic conditions correlates with the average weight of female and male yellow perch caught during

those periods. As hypoxic conditions increase, perch size decreases (graph courtesy of Scavia et al., 2014).

2.5. Communication and Engagement Challenges

It is important for decision-makers to connect with the public and businesses that contribute to, and are 

affected by, HABs and hypoxia when creating and implementing management measures. Open 

conversation facilitates long-term engagement and education efforts involving a diverse stakeholder base 

that has different needs and expectations. Federal and state officials are able to demonstrate the 

importance and benefits of conservation practices. This more robust process allows people to contribute 

to decision-making in a way that sustains interest in implementing ongoing conservation practices, or so 

that citizens understand risks presented by HABs and hypoxia. For example, water utilities play a critical 

role in protecting human health by keeping their customers informed about the safety of their drinking 

water, while optimizing water treatment facilities to prepare for and address HAB and hypoxia events.

Resource and utility managers may interface with researchers, officials, and the public, testing for the 

presence of HAB biomass or toxins, and monitoring for certain levels of toxicity in drinking water sources

(CDC, 2016). Communicating with the public about a utility’s preparedness for treating water during HAB 

events is likewise important for fostering confidence in the quality of their drinking water.

Beach, water resource, utility, and other types of managers and officials can consider the following 

questions to help with preparedness:

● Do we have the appropriate procedures and contact with community members, resource-users,

and other stakeholders to alert them to issues/problems? Do we have communications materials 

(e.g., general information flyers or signage discussing impacts) that empower the public to 

understand the risks? Do we have a presence on social media, television, and/or radio that allow 

us to reach different audiences? 

● Are messages from different sources consistent and coordinated?
44

● How can we convey information regarding toxicity of fish to humans during times when HABs 

historically occur?

● What are best ways to communicate what researchers know/do not know about HAB and hypoxia 

prevention, control, and mitigation through management actions?

● Are people, businesses, and healthcare facilities prepared for a HAB or hypoxia event, with

alternative financial, socio-cultural, drinking water, recreation, and employment/revenue 

resources?

● How long before a bloom occurs should managers warn the public? What are effective and 

ineffective communication strategies during a tap water advisory (e.g., to avoid a potential public 

health scare)?

● Are we effectively communicating conservation practice successes to stakeholders and funders? 

What are the most effective ways to communicate or help managers start and continue effective 

use of conservation practices? 

● Are expectations for the roles of various parties clear; and are expectations for conservation 

practices implementation clear? How prepared is the local drinking water utility for adjusting or 

optimizing their treatment facility to avoid contamination of drinking water, when faced with a 

HAB?

● Have we included local experts and community members in implementing conservation practices, 

and how might we improve? 

Raising public awareness of HABs and hypoxia is a key component not only for addressing public health 

concerns, but also to make people aware of these events. Federal agencies have programs in place to 

address some aspects of this – notably, by increasing public health and communications efforts through 

webinars and public meetings, or by introducing information services like the National Park Service’s 

Harmful Algal Blooms in National Parks website or CDC’s Harmful Algal Bloom-Associated Illness website. 

These examples reach two sets of populations: those who are not already explicitly seeking out 

information about HABs but are interested in visiting national parks, and those who are interested in the 

health impacts caused by HAB events. Additionally, the IWG-HABHRCA heard from agencies from 

numerous Great Lakes states about how they try to message threats or concerns of an event. Some states 

rely on color-coding systems, posting colored signs at beaches or on their websites. Others use social 

media and hold public meetings. Ultimately, though, all levels of stakeholders agree that without 

consistent messaging methods, it is difficult to maximize the effectiveness of early warnings and 

prevention strategies.

3 – Research Recommendations and Action Strategy Opportunities

This section summarizes research needs and recommendations, along with an action strategy for 

addressing HABs (planktonic and benthic, and including Cladophora) and hypoxia in the Great Lakes. The 

Federal agencies that currently are conducting research on each topic are listed after each recommended 

action or need. It is important to note that these lists do not include several academic institutions, nonprofit organizations and state agencies that also conduct research in these areas.

3.1. Research Needs

The following are the research needs identified throughout this report. The authors of this report list 

nutrient reduction efforts first, as the related recommendations are a primary mitigation necessity. 

Recommendations otherwise are in no particular order of priority.
45

Water and Nutrient Management Practices

• Determine the effectiveness of current HAB and hypoxia prevention strategies, including the 

efficacy of best management conservation and land-use practices for reducing watershed sources 

of nutrient inputs.

• Refine the methodologies and estimation procedures for tributary nutrient-loads with an

emphasis on location, gauging streamflow based on nutrient sampling, and statistical uncertainty;

• Determine the relative effects of legacy sediment and nutrient loads, and lag-times, on HABs and 

hypoxia events, including from streams and tributary systems.

• Refine the atmospheric load methodologies for phosphorus and nitrogen with respect to mass 

budgets. Investigate the internal cycling of phosphorus and nitrogen in the Great Lakes and 

understand the role that legacy nutrients might play in bloom development or toxicity and how 

this nutrient source may impact bloom severity once external nutrient loads reach target levels.

• Look at the relative contributions by lake of septic systems, wastewater treatment plants, and 

CSOs to nutrient-loading in the lakes, relative to other major sources.

• Support research and outreach efforts on water management that results in methods that 

prevent nutrient movement off the landscape. For example, examine variable rate irrigation 

technology and management, including the development of decision support systems to guide 

applications.

• Develop control technologies to mitigate nitrogen and phosphorus movement in agricultural 

production systems and devise models to assess nitrogen and phosphorus life cycles in actively 

managed agricultural systems (USDA NIFA, NRCS, ARS).

Monitoring and Surveillance

• Conduct human and animal illness surveillance, and integrate health data with environmental 

monitoring data to better understand exposure risk, health outcomes, and inform mitigation 

efforts;

• Monitor the relation between TP and DRP loads, as well as HAB and hypoxia extent, onset, 

frequency, and duration, using this information to evaluate effectiveness of load reduction efforts 

and the lake response(s) over time;

• Determine specific roles of HAB and hypoxia drivers, including phosphorus and nitrogen, and their 

associated forms and dynamics. Determine the role of nutrient cycling and long-term versus 

short-term internal cycling;

• Continue to develop detection technologies, including genomic detection techniques, real-time 

sampling techniques; methods and techniques for in-place sensors for TP and DRP, in-stream and 

at edge-of-field; and satellite remote-sensing techniques;

• Expand monitoring to better understand benthic-sediment interactions for HABs and hypoxia 

within and between years, including studying the role of benthic HAB cells or cell-seeding. Use 

expanded monitoring to better understand the linkages between nutrient-release in the 

onset/timing, size, severity, and toxicity of blooms over time;

• Examine the influence of algal biomass, and winter and spring diatom blooms, on the extent and 

timing of hypoxic events;

• Assess legacy sediment and phosphorous loads in-stream and in-lake (internal loading, and how

long this can sustain blooms even after external loads have been reduced), to better understand 

the relative sources and better inform more effective management actions; and

• Prioritize data from genetic and physiological experiments, and demonstrate any connections 

between ecological hot spots and human or animal sickness or death.
46

Modeling and Forecasting

• Develop, enhance, couple, and link models that help predict the development, intensification, and 

spread of a bloom’s toxicity levels;

• Develop improved forecast models that integrate and identify relationships among nutrient

concentration information, bloom timing, algal biomass, species composition, chlorophyll-a, 

pigments, algal growth, genomics, and toxicity with regard to hypoxic extent, duration, frequency 

and intensity;

• Integrate and link agricultural and watershed process-based models and in-lake water quality 

models for greater watershed-level understanding and forecasting. Use coupled models to begin 

to evaluate the impacts of land-use shifts, changing demographics and climate, and genetic and 

technological improvements in agricultural systems;

• Improve models of the timing, spatial movement, and intensity of low-oxygen events for drinkingwater management;

• Refine models of hypoxia and fish populations interactions, including dynamics and behavior of 

fish, predators, and fishing practices;

• Compute whole-lake and basin/bay specific mass-budgets of phosphorus and nitrogen. 

• Improve ecosystem models to assist in understanding the relationship between external and 

internal phosphorus loads and the occurrence of HABs and hypoxia;

• Expand HABs and hypoxia forecast modeling to Saginaw Bay and Green Bay, among other sites, 

as needed; and

• Improve coordinated management and data-sharing, and leverage non-Federal data sources for 

use in research and model verification:

o Utilize existing data management and sharing capacity within the GLOS; and

o Where appropriate, direct the adoption of data management standards and best 

practices.

Toxins and Toxicity

• Expand toxin monitoring throughout the Great Lakes, with specific emphasis on areas that are 

known to experience HABs, and potential or suspected regions where cyanobacteria are known 

to bloom;

• Determine the drivers of HAB toxin production;

• Expand research on the effects of toxins on humans, aquatic life, livestock, and wildlife, including 

clinical toxin test method development and/or training for state or clinical use; and

• Expand the analytic methods, detection limits, breakdown products (including those that occur 

naturally in the field, as well as during the treatment process), and range of cyanobacterial toxins.

Ecological and Fisheries Management

• Investigate how HABs and hypoxia affect Great Lakes fish populations and fisheries, including 

dynamics and behavior of fish, predators, and resource managers;

• Investigate how HABs and hypoxia affect Great Lakes breeding and migratory waterbirds;

• Expand research on nutrient loading, and toxicity to other affected areas of the Great Lakes, 

including Saginaw Bay and Green Bay;

• Develop models with biological endpoints to better inform conservation practice and landmanagement impacts on fish and other aquatic organisms, in both the lake and the tributaries; 

• Conduct further research how invasive species in the Great Lakes affect bloom growth and toxicity 

and how invasive species respond to hypoxia;
47

• Investigate how nutrient-loading impacts the aquatic-plant community-structure, specifically 

ecosystem shifts from rooted plants to phytoplankton-driven systems;

• Investigate how the aquatic plant community structure can serve as a biological indicator, 

demonstrating the levels at which, and how at those levels, certain nutrient concentrations

impact the ecosystem; and

• Investigate how dressenid mussels cause and exacerbate Cladophora bloom growth, including 

interactions with other drivers.

Climate Change and Extreme Weather Events

• Conduct further research on how factors related to climate change and extreme weather events 

may influence bloom growth and toxicity, as a consequence of variations, timing, and magnitude

in precipitation, air temperature, water temperature, wave height, and water movement; and

• Examine how a changing climate and extreme weather events may impact efforts to achieve 

nutrient reduction targets across a variety of sectors, with consideration given to water 

management.

Drinking Water Treatment

• Understand chemical and physical reactions associated with cyanotoxins and common water 

treatment chemicals;

• Conduct further research on cyanobacteria cell reactions to common water treatment chemicals;

• Evaluate the potential consequences of cyanobacteria and cyanotoxin treatment techniques on 

the ability of a water treatment facility to comply with existing drinking water quality regulations;

• Evaluate short-term options for water treatment plants to adjust their existing treatment 

technologies and operational practices to respond to HABs, as well as collateral impacts on nontarget plant and animal communities associated with the source-water body; and

• Understand source-water treatment options and how they impact drinking water treatment.

Social Science

• Conduct cost-benefit analyses to determine potential economic costs of algal blooms that can be 

compared to the costs of conservation practices;

• Conduct more studies on human health impacts of HABs and hypoxia, including drinking water, 

beach and recreational exposures and documented illnesses associated with HABs; and

• Further develop local and regional cost-benefit analyses and other models to determine impacts 

on social well-being and the community, and to inform policy and management options.

• A better understanding of what motivates farmersto adopt conservation systems – monetary and 

non-monetary factors – and that lead to more effective programs for achieving concentrations of 

effort necessary to meet water quality goals.

Engagement and Communication

• Develop preparedness plans, including rapid response, warning systems, and communication 

networks for public, management, and officials involved in response activities.

3.2. Recommended Actions

The following are the recommended actions for the Federal government and stakeholders. Please note 

that the actions related to nutrient reduction should be coordinated with State-led implementation plans, 
48

such as the forthcoming DAPs for Lake Erie and any future DAPs developed for other parts of the Great 

Lakes to address HABs and hypoxia (Section 2.2.1).

Water and Nutrient Management Practices 

• Reduce nutrients and sediment from non-point sources within contributing basins and 

watersheds; and

• Continue and expand ongoing complementary programs that provide planning, knowledge 

dissemination, tools, and technical and financial assistance for nutrient and sediment pollution 

reduction and improved water management by:

o Conducting additional, comprehensive, field-scale to watershed-scale agricultural 

conservation planning (Implement within 5 years). (USDA NRCS; and external partners);

o Expanding efforts to integrate new and innovative approaches into farm implementation 

and conservation plans, including enhanced or precision nutrient management and 

nutrient-trapping conservation practices (Implement within 5 years). (USDA NRCS);

o Conducting more effective outreach on the benefits of agricultural conservation 

practices, and facilitate and support producer-to-producer networks for information 

exchange, such as done at the demonstration farm networks in the Blanchard River 

Watershed in Ohio and the Lower Fox River Watershed in Wisconsin (Implement within 

1-3 years). (USDA, USGS, NOAA, and external partners);

o Using landscape prioritization tools and partnerships to identify the locations and designs 

for potential constructed/restored wetlands that maximize phosphorous reduction in 

priority watersheds. (USACE; USDA ARS, NRCS; USGS; and external partners);

o Pursuing opportunities to construct demonstration wetlands, monitor wetland efficacy 

for nutrient and sediment reduction, and fully evaluate wetland performance, including 

the comparison of costs and benefits. (USACE, USGS, USFWS, EPA and external partners);

o Evaluating stormwater best management practices and agricultural conservation 

practices for their efficacy in reducing land-derived nutrient pollution in the Great Lakes 

region; incorporate practice effects assessments, as necessary (Implement within 5 

years). (USDA NRCS, ARS, NIFA; USGS; NOAA; EPA; USFWS; and external partners); and

o Implementing green infrastructure in urban areas that experience significant impacts by 

stormwater runoff. Share knowledge and success stories regarding implemented green 

infrastructure to gain support from additional urban communities. (EPA).

Monitoring and Surveillance

• Improve understanding of HABs, HAB toxins, and hypoxia distribution and drivers in the Great 

Lakes by:

o Expanding and coordinating in-lake HAB and hypoxia monitoring that includes frequency, 

location, toxicity, and seasonal coverage (Implement within 5 years). (NOAA, USGS, EPA);

o Determining the most effective monitoring design for successful detection of HABs, 

hypoxia, toxins, and drivers over the long-term, and in areas where this is already required 

for the GLWQA. Fill any need gaps with new efforts and coordination (Implement within 

5 years). (NOAA, USGS, EPA);

o Coordinating monitoring within strategically selected small watersheds in the basin 

designed to detect and assess multi-scalar effects (link edge-of-field with small and larger 

watersheds) of conservation implementation. Monitoring should be designed to inform 

more effective action and adaptive management (Implement within 5 years). (USDA 

NRCS, ARS; NOAA; USGS; EPA);
49

o Continuing pilot testing of at least one ESP annually in Western Lake Erie, and expand to 

other parts of the Great Lakes, as possible and necessary (Implement within 5 years). 

(NOAA);

o Using hyperspectral and other remote sensing monitoring techniques to advance 

operational ecological forecasting of HAB events in coastal areas (Implement within 5 

years). (NOAA, NASA); and 

o Increasing the use of health surveillance data for making decisions, by reporting out on 

surveillance data, improving the ability to link existing health systems such as OHHABS 

and NORS with environmental monitoring data for analysis and data visualization, and 

expanding multidisciplinary collaboration on activities that directly impact health 

surveillance (e.g., detection of HABs and detection of HAB-associated illnesses)

(Implement within 5 years). (CDC).

Modeling and Forecasting

• Improve prediction and forecasting of HABs, hypoxia, and the onset of HAB toxicity by:

o Fully operationalizing NOAA’s Lake Erie HAB Forecast (Implement within 1-3 years).

(NOAA);

o Enhancing and refining the existing ecosystem-based models in use, to meet Annex 4 

phosphorus reduction goals, to account for changing factors in the western Lake Erie 

basin watershed (Implement within 5 years). (NOAA, USGS, EPA);

o Building initial HAB and hypoxia models for Saginaw Bay and Green Bay (Implement 

within 5 years). (NOAA);

o Monitoring for phosphorus and nitrogen at whole-lake and basin scales to help model and 

predict HABs. (Implement within 2-3 years). (NOAA, USGS, EPA); and

o Building cooperative modeling relationships across Federal and state agencies, 

universities, and think tanks to improve capacity to simulating land-use management 

impacts on water quality across all sectors (Implement within 5 years). (NOAA, USGS, EPA, 

NASA, USDA).

Toxins and Toxicity

• Better understand the distribution of toxins, and to help predict the onset of toxicity:

o Developing robust rapid test kits for all forms of microcystin found in the Great Lakes;

o Developing at least two models and/or forecast techniques that aid in the detection of 

the onset of toxicity (Implement within 5 years). (NOAA, USGS);

o Developing clinical testing abilities of state health departments and clinicians for 

microcystins, saxitoxins, anatoxin-a, and cylindospermopsins to aid in the detection and 

confirmation of human and animal illness (Implement within 5 years). (CDC); and

o Improving methods to identify HAB-associated illness in humans, animals and wildlife 

(Implement within 5 years). (CDC).

Ecological and Fisheries Management

• Determine how HABs and hypoxia impact fisheries and other ecosystem variables or organisms

by

o Conducting annual research on fish population size in the Great Lakes at areas that are 

known HAB or hypoxia locations, or that experience HAB or hypoxia events. Develop 

models that show changes in fish populations and behavior in relation to HAB and hypoxia 

events, including for times when there are no water quality issues, and accounting for 
50

other factors (Implement within two years, with research intended to continue out at 

minimum 5-7 years.) (NOAA);

o Investigating how HABs and hypoxia affect natural fish populations and fisheries, 

including dynamics and behavior of lower levels of the food web (phytoplankton and 

invertebrates), fish, predators, and humans (Implement within 3 years.) (All Federal 

agencies involved in the IWG-HABHRCA); and 

o Expanding ecological research, nutrient loading, and toxicity to other affected areas of 

the Great Lakes, including Saginaw Bay and Green Bay (Implement within 2 years.) (NOAA, 

USGS, EPA).

Climate Change and Extreme Weather Events

• Better understand current and potential future influences of extreme weather events on HABs, 

HAB toxicity, hypoxia, legacy loads, and conservation management practices in the Great Lakes 

by incorporating variables related to extreme weather events into the five ecosystem-based 

models mentioned above. Produce a document that provides an initial prediction of impacts

related to extreme weather events on HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes (Implement within 5 

years). (NOAA); and

• Evaluate the impacts of changes in climate on land use, and how these may have complex and 

concurrent impacts on water quality (e.g., shifts in agricultural crop selection and production 

strategies; opportunity for reserving floodplain areas to enhance nutrient cycling as communities 

move out of increasingly flood-prone riparian areas). (USDA NRCS, USGS).

Drinking Water Treatment

• Conduct studies and evaluations with Great Lakes stakeholders and water utilities to understand 

the types of cyanobacteria present in each lake/region/area, and how existing treatment 

infrastructure performs at removing cyanotoxins. Understand limitations of Great Lakes water 

treatment plants in removing cyanotoxins and develop strategies for addressing those limitations 

(Implement within 5 years). (EPA).

Social Science

• Understand the economic and social impacts of HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes by

conducting an initial cost-benefit analysis that accounts for the economic impact of HABs and 

hypoxia on the Great Lakes, as well as the costs and benefits of current reduction strategies

(Implement within 5 years.) (NOAA);

• Improve methods to identify HAB-associated illness in humans, animals and wildlife (Implement 

within 5 years). (CDC); and

• Conduct an economic and policy assessment on the feasibility of implementing water quality 

trading models and other novel incentive programs, at scales that match objectives. (EPA).

• Evaluate and incorporate multi-sector ecosystem services to encourage cost-effective design and 

configuration of green infrastructure and nutrient management practices, and that expand the 

impact of practices for wildlife, renewable energy, and other social values beyond water quality.

Engagement and Communication

• Better inform impacted communities about the causes and consequences of HABs and hypoxia in 

general, or about specific events in the Great Lakes by

o Creating a unified message on HAB and hypoxia causes, consequences, and mitigation in 

the Great Lakes. Work with stakeholder groups and Federal agencies to identify the best 
51

strategies for increasing social awareness, attitudes, and public understanding and 

behavior regarding HABs and hypoxia (Implement within 1-3 years). (All Federal agencies 

involved in the IWG-HABHRCA); 

o Creating a unified method of informing the public about risks, and about current HAB and 

hypoxia events (Implement within 1-3 years). (All Federal agencies involved in the IWGHABHRCA); and

o Communications strategies that directly involve peer-to-peer and technology transfer 

through conduits who are trusted and accessed by agricultural producers.

• Partner with stakeholders in developing guides, documents, and literature syntheses on water 

treatment strategies for cyanotoxins to provide to Great Lakes water utilities and nationwide. (All 

Federal agencies involved in the IWG-HABHRCA); and

• Conduct workshops, and host training opportunities, for water-treatment-plant operators and 

supervisors for monitoring, sampling, and optimizing water treatment for HABs and cyanotoxins.

(All Federal agencies involved in the IWG-HABHRCA).

Conclusion

A great deal of progress has been made in the Great Lakes on partnership efforts to address nutrient 

pollution and other stressors to the Great Lake ecosystem, as well as on the science of HABs and hypoxia. 

Some of the most important advances include researchers’ ability to provide accurate HAB forecasts, to 

detect the presence of toxins in water, and to communicate better with the public. Particularly in recent 

years, however, HABs and hypoxia have varied widely in frequency, duration, effects, and toxicity. Several 

key research gaps remain in the understanding of, and ability to respond to, HABs and hypoxia, such as 

the drivers of toxicity, how to forecast events even more quickly, human and animal health impacts, 

climate change and extreme weather event impacts, and the best mitigation efforts to minimize economic 

and public health impacts.

The variability of these events, in conjunction with their uncertainty, makes the ecological, economic, 

human and animal health, and sociological impacts of HABs and hypoxia hard to predict and prevent. The 

challenges and recommendations outlined in this report represent a framework for future efforts to 

better understand and address HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes ecosystem. Adaptive management is 

a key element in all of the recommendations. Drawing from past experience, researchers know that 

improving water quality into the foreseeable future and long-term requires continued and even increased 

monitoring and management efforts. While Federal agencies and stakeholders are making progress on 

reducing HABs and hypoxia in the Great Lakes, there continue to be key uncertainties and research 

challenges that, as they are addressed, will help improve predictive abilities, management options, and 

the ability to protect the short- and long-term health of communities in the Great Lakesthrough mitigation 

efforts. This strategic document promotes effective collaboration between Federal and non-Federal 

organizations, and efficient use of resources now and in the future to reduce HABs and hypoxia in the 

Great Lakes.
52

Appendix 1

Great Lakes HABs, Toxins, and Bioactive Compounds and their Effects 

HAB Taxa Toxin/Bioactive/

Nuisance Compound

Human Health 

Effects

Animal 

Impacts

Environmental 

Effects

Economic 

Impact

Cyanobacteria

(e.g., Microcystis, 

Dolichospermum, 

Aphanizomenon, 

Cylindrospermopsis, 

Planktothrix, 

Lyngbya, and 

others)

Microcystins, 

Cylindrospermopsins, 

Anatoxin-a, Saxitoxins, 

geosmins, 

methylisoborneol

Liver and kidney 

toxicity, 

neurotoxicity, 

paralysis, 

gastrointestinal

illness, 

dermatitis

Pets, farm 

animals, 

and wildlife 

morbidity 

and 

mortality, 

fish kills

Water 

discoloration, 

drinking-water 

contamination, 

foul odors, loss of 

benthic aquatic 

vegetation, 

changes in food 

web structure, 

bioaccumulation in 

fish

Loss of tourism, 

contamination 

of drinking 

water requiring 

additional 

expensive water 

treatment or 

alternate water 

sources, make 

farmed and 

wild-caught 

freshwater fish 

inedible 

(including bad 

taste)

Macroalgae

(e.g., Cladophora)

Bad taste and 

odor

Associated 

with 

outbreaks 

of avian 

botulism

Fouls water 

intakes, creates a 

bad odor, and piles 

up on beaches, 

localized hypoxia

Loss of 

recreational use 

and clean-up 

costs, clogged 

water intakes, 

bad odor

Euglenophytes 

(Euglena 

sanguinea)

Euglenophycin Not 

characterized Fish kills Water 

discoloration

Loss of 

aquaculture 

operations

Diatoms

Possible 

contributor 

to fish kills

Blooms contribute

to hypoxia

Possible 

negative impact 

on fishery
53

Appendix 2

Great Lakes HAB-Related Human Illnesses

Toxin Vector Occurrence

of outbreak Acute Toxicity Long-Term Health Impacts

Susceptible 

Populations

Anatoxin-a, 

Homoanatoxin-a

Drinking water, 

Recreational 

waters, Dietary 

supplements

Low

Tingling, burning, 

numbness, 

drowsiness, 

incoherent speech, 

respiratory 

paralysis leading to 

death

Unknown Recreational 

water users

Cyanobacterial LPS

Drinking water, 

Recreational 

Waters

Medium

Abdominal pain, 

vomiting and 

diarrhea, acute 

dermatitis

Unknown Recreational 

water users

Cylindospermospins

Drinking water, 

recreational waters, 

dietary 

supplements

Medium

Abdominal pain, 

vomiting and 

diarrhea, liver 

inflammation and 

hemorrhage, acute 

pneumonia, acute 

dermatitis

Malaise, anorexia, 

liver failure leading 

to death

Children, 

dialysis 

patients, 

liver disease, 

recreational 

water users

Microcystins 

Drinking water, 

recreational waters, 

dietary 

supplements, fish 

consumption

High

Abdominal pain, 

vomiting and 

diarrhea, liver 

inflammation and 

hemorrhage, acute 

pneumonia, acute 

dermatitis, 

seizures leading to 

coma and death

Hepatocellular 

carcinoma, liver 

failure leading to 

death

Children, 

dialysis 

patients, 

pre-existing 

liver disease, 

recreational 

water users

Saxitoxins

(i.e. Paralytic Shellfish

Toxins)

Unknown Medium

Paralytic Shellfish 

Poisoning: tingling, 

burning, 

numbness, 

drowsiness, 

incoherent speech, 

respiratory 

paralysis leading to 

death

Unknown Unknown

BMAA

(β-Methylamino-Lalanine)

Consumption of fish 

and other 

organisms

(i.e. 

biomagnification 

through the food 

web)

Unknown Unknown

Neurodegenerative: 

Possible link to 

amyotrophic lateral 

sclerosis (ALS) and 

Alzheimer’s disease.

Unknown
54

Appendix 3

HABHRCA Federal Agency HABs and Hypoxia Program Activities

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DHHS

Great Lakes 

Restoration 

Initiative, CDC

HABs

HAB-associated case 

and outbreak 

surveillance

CDC initiated waterborne and foodborne-disease 

outbreak surveillance systems in the 1970s. United 

States states and territories voluntarily report to 

these systems via the electronic NORS, which 

receives aggregate data on human cases and their 

exposures, including exposures to harmful algal 

blooms (HABs) or HAB toxins. The One Health 

Harmful Algal Bloom System (OHHABS) launched in 

June 2016 and collects single case-level reporting of 

human and animal illness, and relevant 

environmental data. OHHABS will inform restoration 

activities in the Great Lakes but is accessible to all 

states via NORS.

DHHS CDC HABs

Great Lakes State 

Health Surveillance 

Capacity

CDC partnered with the Council of State and 

Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) since 2013 to place 

and provide technical support for epidemiology 

fellows in Great Lakes states, including Indiana, 

Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, and 

Wisconsin. The GLRI supports this activity. Fellows 

focus on waterborne disease detection, 

investigation, response and reporting. The 

fellowship has expanded state waterborne disease 

reporting and analytic capacity; improved state 

health surveillance for harmful algal blooms; and 

ensured dedicated staff time for waterborne disease 

surveillance and coordination activities. 

DHHS CDC HABs Health 

Communications

CDC’s health communications activities related to 

HABs include the launch of a HAB-Associated Illness

website with information for public health 

practitioners, clinicians, and the general public, and 

the expansion of the Drinking Water Advisory 

Communications Toolbox (DWACT) to include 

information about HAB-related drinking water 

advisories. The DWACT was created through a 

collaborative effort among CDC, USEPA, the 

American Water Works Association, the Association 

of State and Territorial Health Officials, the 

Association of State Drinking Water Administrators 

(ASDWA), and the National Environmental Health

Association (NEHA).
55

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DHHS CDC HABs

Method development, refinement, and validation 

for detecting human exposures to HAB toxins 

through the detection of toxins and specific 

biomarkers in clinical samples. Current methods 

approved for use include the detection of saxitoxin, 

neosaxitoxin, tetrodotoxin, and gonyautoxins (1-4), 

which have been applied to individual cases to 

confirm suspected HAB exposures.

DHHS FDA HABs

Method development, refinement, and validation 

for detecting HAB toxins; Improving understanding 

of HAB toxin sources and vectors that impact 

seafood and dietary supplement safety

DOC NOAA HABs

National 

Phytoplankton 

Monitoring Network

(PMN)

The intent of the PMN is to monitor phytoplankton 

and harmful algal blooms and promote 

environmental stewardship though the use citizen 

volunteers. The NOAA PMN in partnership with 

USEPA Office of Water expanded the use of citizen 

scientist to monitor HABs into Lake Erie. Volunteer 

monitors on the west coast of Lake Erie are currently 

monitoring potentially toxic cyanobacteria biweekly 

and reporting results back to NOAA through an 

online data portal. An internet map service can 

depict environmental conditions and HAB species 

information.

NOAA staff train PMN volunteers on sampling 

techniques and identification methods for over 50 

genera, including 10 potentially toxin-producing 

genera, of dinoflagellates and diatoms on the 

volunteers’ watch list. Currently, 250 sites in 22 

states and American territories including 52 schools, 

15 universities, 298 civic groups and 40 state and 

Federal agencies collect phytoplankton and 

environmental data. Since the inception of the 

program in 2001, PMN volunteers have reported 

more than 275 algal blooms and 15 toxic events.

DOC NOAA HABs

The National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science 

(NCCOS) has provided base funding (labor and 

operational funds) for development of HAB forecasts 

for Lake Erie. NOAA NCCOS develops an annual HAB 

severity forecast for Lake Erie distributed in early 

July. Also, the twice-weekly Lake Erie Harmful Algal 

Bloom Bulletin transitioned to operations in July 

2017. NOAA NCCOS will continue to improve the 

Lake Erie bulletin and will develop similar products 

for other HAB impacted regions of the Great Lakes 

including Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron and Green Bay, 

Lake Michigan. Furthermore, NOAA NCCOS will 

begin to develop a Lake Erie HAB toxicity-forecasting

model in collaboration with NOAA GLERL.
56

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOC NOAA HABs

NOAA GLERL, in collaboration with NOAA NCCOS will 

continue to develop a three-dimensional lagrangian 

particle transport-model to effectively predict HAB 

advection (HAB Tracker) as part of the Lake Erie 

Operational Forecasting System, which is set to go 

operational in fiscal year 2015. NOAA plans to fully 

operationalize the Lake Erie Experimental HAB 

Tracker by 2018. Furthermore, the HAB Tracker will 

continue to be improved to incorporate vertical 

mixing. Furthermore, NOAA GLERL plans to develop 

this bloom forecasting system in other HABimpacted areas, including Saginaw Bay, lake Huron 

and Green Bay, Lake Michigan.

DOC NOAA HABs

NOAA Sea Grant programs have funded research, 

outreach, and education programs to understand 

the causes of HABs and to help the public understand 

the risks associated with them. Sea Grant’s Great 

Lakes programs collaborate with GLERL to support 

research, and transfer research results to 

stakeholders in the region and were integral to 

public understanding of the Toledo water crisis. 

Website learning pages, HAB webinars, and 

stakeholder meetings are among the tools used by 

Sea Grant to inform decision-makers, and other 

publics on HAB topics of relevance to their lives. 

DOC NOAA HABs

Ecology and 

Oceanography of 

Harmful Algal Blooms 

(ECOHAB)

Developing a better understanding of HAB causes 

and impacts that form the basis for better 

management to reduce HABs and their impacts 

throughout the US regions, including the Great 

Lakes.

DOC NOAA HABs

Monitoring and 

Event Response for 

Harmful Algal Blooms 

(MERHAB)

National, competitive extramural research program 

that builds capacity for enhanced HAB monitoring 

and response in state, local, and tribal governments, 

including the Great Lakes.

DOC NOAA HABs

Prevention, Control, 

and Mitigation of 

Harmful Algal Blooms 

(PCMHAB)

National, competitive extramural research program 

that develops new methods of HAB prevention, 

control, and mitigation. It also addresses the 

socioeconomic impact of HABs and efforts to reduce 

HAB impacts.

DOC NOAA HABs Event Response

Provides immediate assistance for managing HAB 

events and advancing the understanding of HABs 

when they occur, including the Toledo water crisis.
57

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOC NOAA Hypoxia

Coastal Hypoxia 

Research Program 

(CHRP)

National, competitive extramural research program 

that develops understanding of hypoxia causes and 

impacts that form the basis for better management 

to reduce hypoxia and its ecological and 

socioeconomic impacts. Through CHRP, NOAA hopes 

to develop a hypoxia warning system for the central 

basin of Lake Erie. It includes all coastal systems 

except the large hypoxic zone along the northern 

Gulf of Mexico continental shelf.

DOC NOAA Hypoxia/

HABs

Outreach and 

Education

Continue to work with Sea Grant and other partners 

to engage stakeholders to drive research 

prioritization and disseminate advanced knowledge 

and tools for HAB and hypoxia mitigation to regional 

managers, fishing industry, state and Federal 

leadership and citizens to name a few.
58

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOC NOAA HABs

NOAA’s Great Lakes 

HAB monitoring and 

experiment program

Studies molecular ecology of HABs in the Great Lakes 

to improve understanding of the drivers of bloom 

growth and toxin production as well as the 

interaction of HAB-forming species with other 

microbes to understand bloom impacts on western 

Lake Erie ecosystem services. Key regions of focus 

include Lake Erie, Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron and

Green Bay, Lake Michigan. GLERL monitors eight 

routine stations in the western basin of Lake Erie and 

five sites in Saginaw Bay while collaborating with 

academic and state partners to study Green Bay.

GLERL samples Lake Erie and Saginaw Bay on a 

weekly and bi-weekly basis, respectively, during 

blooms season. At four sites in Lake Erie, GLERL 

deploys real-time water quality monitoring 

instrumentation that measure several key 

parameters including pigments, temperature, 

dissolved oxygen, nitrate and dissolved reactive 

phosphorus. GLERL supplies critical data, including 

toxicity, to stakeholders via the GLERL HABs and 

hypoxia website and that supports NCCOS and GLERL 

predictive HAB models in Lake Erie and elsewhere in 

the Great Lakes (described above). Using monitoring 

data, GLERL works with Federal, state, and academic 

partners to conduct experiments on the response of 

HAB communities to future environmental 

conditions (i.e. extreme weather events). GLERL, in 

collaboration with NOS and academic partners,

deployed the first-ever Environmental Sample 

Processor in Lake Erie during the 2016 field season 

to begin to develop an autonomous, high-frequency 

bloom toxicity monitoring network. Finally, GLERL, in 

collaboration with NASA, state, and academic 

partners, will continue to use hyperspectral flyovers 

intended to further develop the resolution of remote 

sensing imaging to distinguish phytoplankton 

functional groups which will allow for more accurate 

forecasting products.
59

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOC NOAA HABs and 

hypoxia GLRI

Investigating links between land-use changes and 

in-lake algal blooms: GLRI-funded research led by 

NOAA’s Great Lakes Environmental Research Lab, in 

collaboration with partners from the University of 

Michigan’s Cooperative Institute for Limnology and 

Ecosystems Research, is investigating impact of land 

use changes and algal bloom development in the 

western basin of Lake Erie and in Lake Huron’s 

Saginaw Bay. Measurements of total phosphorus, 

total dissolved phosphorus, and dissolved reactive 

phosphorus will contribute to the GLRI’s goal of 

reducing algal bloom growth through reductions in 

phosphorus. 

DOC NOAA Both

United States

Integrated Ocean 

Observing System 

(IOOS) and Great 

Lakes Observing 

System (GLOS)

GLOS is a certified Regional Information 

Coordination Entity under IOOS. GLOS aggregates 

data from Federal and non-Federal data sources and 

makes it more easily discoverable and accessible to 

a broader stakeholder audience including 

researchers, policy-makers, and resource managers. 

This is evidenced most directly through the GLOS 

Data Portal as well as the customized HABs Portal: 

http://habs.glos.us/map/

As a regional association of IOOS, GLOS also helps 

coordinate Federal and non-Federal observing 

activities across the region and supports operation 

of several nearshore buoys, including two buoys 

used for hypoxia monitoring by Cleveland, Ohio. 

DOD USACE HABs

Responding to HABs in response to public 

reports/complaints in close coordination with state 

water quality/public health agencies. Response

programs developed by individual USACE 

Divisions/Districts. USACE Engineer Research and 

Development Center available to support 

Divisions/Districts in assessing HAB impacts to 

USACE Civil Works Projects (e.g., water quality 

modeling, remote sensing, and technical assistance). 

General water quality monitoring and HAB response 

to meet authorized project purposes and recreation 

mission requirements.
60

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOD USACE HABs and 

Hypoxia

USACE is currently involved in modeling inthe two of 

the three GLRI priority watersheds (Saginaw, MN 

and Maumee, OH). The goals of thise modeling and 

forecasting efforts include identifying potentialthe 

highest impact locations in these watersheds that 

may be suitable for establishingfor wetlands 

forcreation and phosphorous absorption,; and 

facilitating interagency and stakeholder partnerships 

to collect data for such an effortto implement 

phosphorous optimal wetland creation when 

possible.

DOD USACE HABs

The USACE Energy Research and Development 

Center (ERDC) provides support for the Great Lakes 

and Ohio River Division’s water quality monitoring 

program. Assess hyperspectral and other imagery to 

identify water quality indicators of HABs.

DOD USACE HABs

ERDC researches and develops activities for reducing 

eutrophication and the prevalence of harmful algal 

blooms from USACE reservoir systems.

DOI FWS HABs/ 

hypoxia

North American 

Wetlands 

Conservation Act

The DOI- U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is working with 

partners throughout the Great Lakes Basin to 

protect, restore, and enhance wetland habitats 

through the North American Wetlands Conservation 

Act grant programs, the GLRI, and other grant 

programs. While most grant activities through these 

programs are not designed to directly mitigate 

HAB/hypoxic concerns, the thousands of acres of 

wetland and associated habitats protected, 

restored, and enhanced through these programs 

helps to provide habitat for birds and other wildlife 

that may be displaced by HAB/hypoxic zones, as well 

as help mitigate/lessen the effects through 

increased nutrient filtration, etc.
61

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOI NPS HABs and 

hypoxia

Outreach and 

Education

Of the 411 NPS units, 88 units are considered ocean, 

coastal, or Great Lake parks, in addition to other park 

units that have extensive surface water bodies. HABs 

have the potential to influence all of these park units 

at various levels, and it is therefore important to 

prepare for these events in order to preserve 

resources. The National Park Service is creating a 

website containing a public health and ecological 

HAB events reporting system. It also provides a point 

of contact for park managers to collaborate with 

local, state, and Federal health and environmental 

agencies that can provide park personnel with 

technical assistance for the management of HAB 

events. Outreach materials (brochures, interpretive 

displays, and materials) on HABs, their causes, the 

effects on the ecosystem, and the many ways to 

reduce or stop nonpoint source pollution, are being 

created by the NPS. NPS participates in detection of 

HAB events that negatively affect wildlife and visitor 

experiences, and actively manages natural resources 

to prevent and respond to HAB events.

DOI USGS HABs and 

hypoxia

National Water 

Quality 

Program/National 

Water Quality 

Assessment and 

Cooperative 

Matching Funds

USGS conducts long-term monitoring of nutrients 

and other water quality characteristics in surface and 

groundwater networks, nationally. USGS monitors 

the sources and quantities of nutrients delivered by 

streams and groundwater to the Great Lakes and 

estuaries at several sites and locations throughout 

the Great Lakes watersheds. The agency makes 

annual updates from monitoring sites available to 

the public, including nutrient concentrations, loads, 

and yields. Researchers use these data, along with 

data aggregated from numerous other agencies, to 

evaluate trends in critical water quality parameters 

including nutrients and sediment. USGS is pioneering 

new field sensor methods and systems for 

monitoring and delivering real-time nutrient data 

through the Nutrient Sensor Challenge. 

DOI USGS HABs and 

hypoxia

National Water 

Quality 

Program/National 

Water Quality 

Assessment

USGS collects fish-, aquatic macroinvertebrate-, and 

algae-community samples, and conducts stream 

physical habitat surveys to assess the effects of 

multiple stressors—including algal toxins—on 

aquatic organisms in streams in several ecoregions. 
62

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOI USGS HABs

National Water 

Quality Program/

Cooperative 

Matching Funds

At least 20 USGS Water Science Centers conduct 

HABs research, working closely with state, local, and 

Federal partners. Studies include both short- and 

long-term projects focused on quantifying blooms 

and associated toxins and taste-and-odor 

compounds, and understanding causal factors. Many 

studies employ new and developing sensor 

technology to detect algal pigments. For example, in

a study in Ohio, scientists are developing real-time 

and comprehensive models to estimate microcystin 

concentrations at 7 drinking-water intakes and 4 

recreational sites.

DOI USGS Hypoxia

National Water 

Quality 

Program/National 

Water Quality 

Assessment

The USGS SPARROW model quantifies nutrient and 

sediment sources and loads to the Great Lakes. 

SPARROW models link to an online Decision Support 

System, which allows direct exploration of the 

potential benefits of nutrient management for the 

Great Lakes. USGS is modeling groundwater/surface 

water interactions at the hydrologic unit code (HUC) 

8 scale throughout the US part of the Great Lakes 

Basin, which will provide key information on travel 

times for recharging water to flow to a receiving 

surface water.

DOI, USDA USGS, USDANRCS

HABs and 

hypoxia GLRI

USGS GLRI projects are assessing HABs and hypoxia 

control, prevention, and mitigation from a landscape 

perspective, and in close consultation with NRCS, 

monitoring at edge-of-field (22 sites) and small 

watershed (6 sites) locations in the GLRI priority 

watersheds to help quantify phosphorus, nitrogen, 

and sediment reductions from GLRI projects on 

agricultural lands. Rapid sharing of edge-of-field 

monitoring results with local stakeholders allow 

adaptive management processes to occur.

Additional monitoring near the mouths of 24 

tributaries helps to assess the impacts of 

management practices, extreme weather events, 

and land use change on the timing and magnitude of 

delivery of nutrients and sediments to the Great 

Lakes. Finally, USGS works collaboratively with 

NOAA, USEPA, states, universities, and NGOs on 

several projects to better understand how nutrient 

and sediment loading from Great Lakes watersheds 

affect hypoxia, HABs, and biological communities in 

the river mouths and open lake environments. 
63

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOI USGS HABs Toxic Substances 

Hydrology Program

USGS investigates the origins, occurrence, 

transport/fate, effects, and mitigation of HABs and 

associated toxin mixtures. These investigations have 

transfer value to the Great Lakes. In doing so, the 

agency pioneers new methods, including toxinspecific analytical methods and development of 

targeted and non-targeted ground-to-space field 

and laboratory methods. Current and planned 

research, which includes investigations of 

metabolites and related biota, characterizes the 

spatial/temporal extent of understudied aspects of 

toxins associated with HABs; evaluates 

environmental controls responsible for HAB 

proliferation and associated toxin production; and 

evaluates environmental health implications and 

impacts. In addition to contributing to basic 

understandings of the biogeochemical 

underpinnings of algal toxin occurrence and 

associated environmental health threats, 

researchers can use this information to assist with 

standardization of study designs, field, laboratory, 

and interpretative techniques and to inform 

mitigation activities. Current and planned 

collaboration is ongoing with multiple Federal and 

state agencies and tribes as well as through outreach 

efforts such as participation on the Inland HAB 

Discussion Group. USGS fosters industry 

collaborations to facilitate acquisition of lower cost, 

higher throughput screening assays and more 

advanced interpretative capabilities where the 

program provides validation support for the benefit 

of program research and stakeholder collaboration.

DOI USGS HABs

Environmental 

Health/Toxic 

Substances 

Hydrology Program

Pioneer new field monitoring methods (sensors), 

assessment techniques, and laboratory methods 

needed to address harmful algal bloom issues in 

freshwaters. New methods include a multi-toxin 

method that can quantify cyanotoxin mixtures, and 

DNA- and RNA-based molecular methods for 

detecting microcystin and microcystin producers.

DOI USGS HABs and 

hypoxia Ecosystems

USGS has ongoing research characterizing ecological 

and food web impacts of cyanotoxins and hypoxia. 

For example, USGS studies in Lake Erie are exploring 

fish behavior mediated by effects of western basin 

HABs. Research conducted in and around the central 

basin of Lake Erie to measure effects of hypoxia on 

prey and game fish recruitment.
64

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

DOI USGS HABs and 

hypoxia GLRI

Edge of field monitoring stations: The USGS has 

installed GLRI-funded edge-of-field monitoring 

stations on farms in the Maumee River basin, the Fox 

River basin, the Saginaw River basin and the Genesee 

River basin. These stations will gather weather data 

and sample runoff water during storm events. 

Researchers plan to analyze the water samples for 

their phosphorus, nitrogen, and sediment content. 

USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service 

(NRCS) staff will assist the cooperating farmer with 

installing conservation practices in the field above 

the stations. This analysis will help quantify the value 

of conservation practices in reducing sediment and 

nutrient delivery from these fields, under these 

conditions, in order to improve water quality.

Multiple 

agencies

Multiple 

agencies

HABs and 

hypoxia GLRI

Nutrient and sediment reduction projects in 

targeted watersheds: Through the GLRI, Federal 

agencies and their partners are reducing nutrient 

loads into the Great Lakes. During FY 2015, Federal 

agencies and their partners funded nutrient and 

sediment reduction projects on over 100,000 acres 

of targeted watershed in the Great Lakes Basin using 

GLRI funding which are projected to prevent over 

160,000 pounds of phosphorus from entering the 

Great Lakes annually. During FY 2015, Federal 

agencies and their partners also funded urban runoff 

projects that are anticipated to capture an average 

annual volume of more than 37 million gallons of 

untreated urban runoff per year. These projects 

reduce flooding, increase green space in urban 

areas, and return vacant properties to productive 

use.

Multiple 

agencies

Multiple 

agencies

HABs and 

hypoxia GLRI

Conservation demonstration farms for watershed 

farmers: The GLRI is funding the implementation of 

conservation practices including cover crops, silage 

leachate containment areas, a waste storage 

structure, and nutrient management on 

conservation demonstration farms in the Fox River 

basin. The farms are open for annual tours where 

other farmers in the watershed can view the 

installed practices, hear farmers’ opinions on the 

value that conservation farming practices can add to 

their farming operations, and ask questions.
65

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

Multiple 

agencies

Multiple 

agencies

HABs and 

hypoxia GLRI

Real-time continuous water quality observation 

buoys and forecasting: During FY 2015, GLRI partners 

established a network of four real-time continuous 

observing buoys to track detailed water quality 

conditions to support modeling, forecasting, and 

public warnings of HAB conditions throughout 

western Lake Erie. The observing buoys are capable 

of tracking water quality and bloom conditions and 

measuring dissolved phosphorus concentrations at 

hourly intervals. During the 2015 bloom season, 

these buoys collected over 7,000 in-lake nutrient and 

water quality measurements, providing 

unprecedented spatial and temporal details of 

internal lake dynamics and bloom development. In 

addition to providing real-time tracking of HABs 

conditions for water intake managers and 

recreational users, the observing data will be used to 

improve ongoing forecasting efforts covering a range 

of spatial and temporal scales including seasonal 

HABs forecasts, 5-day forecasts, and vertical 

distribution forecasts.

Multiple CDC, USEPA, 

NOAA HABs Interagency Analytic Workgroup

Additional research is necessary to characterize and 

understand fully the health risks from drinking water 

provided by public water systems when 

cyanobacterial toxins contaminate that water. There 

is a need to establish standardized biological sample 

collection and analysis protocols to support 

assessment of toxin-associated health effects. 

Multiple Federal agencies are working together to 

assess sampling and analytical capabilities related to 

analysis of biological specimens collected from 

human and animals exposed to cyanobacteria toxins 

via contaminated water, including drinking water. 

The goal is to combine expertise to develop robust 

analytic methods to detect biological evidence of 

exposure to cyanobacterial toxins, to optimize 

laboratory and emergency response capacity in the 

collection, analysis, and response to harmful algal 

bloom-related illnesses.
66

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

Multiple 

agencies

Multiple 

agencies and 

partners, 

including but 

not limited to 

USEPA, FWS, 

NOAA, NPS, 

USACE, USDA, 

USGS

HABs and 

hypoxia Water Quality Portal

Participants in the Water Quality Portal, a 

cooperative data service that makes data publically 

available. The data are derived from the USGS 

National Water Quality Information System (NWIS), 

the USEPA Storage and Retrieval data warehouse 

(STORET), and the USDA ARS Sustaining the Earth's 

Watersheds - Agricultural Research Database System 

(STEWARDS). With data from over 400 Federal, 

state, tribal, and local agencies, this effort will 

improve understand progress in nutrient reduction 

efforts. 

Multiple 

agencies

Multiple 

agencies and 

partners , 

including but 

not limited to 

USDA ARS, 

NOAA, NPS, 

NSF, USEPA, 

USFS, USGS

HABs and 

hypoxia

National 

Atmospheric 

Deposition Program

(NADP)

The NADP, a consortium of Federal and non-Federal 

partners, monitors precipitation chemistry and 

publically provides information on atmospheric 

nitrogen deposition.

Multiple 

agencies

Multiple 

agencies: CDC, 

NASA, NOAA, 

NSF, USDA, and 

USGS

HABs

Exposure Science 

(ES)21 Federal 

Working Group on 

Exposure Science

Exposure assessment is instrumental in helping to 

forecast, prevent, and mitigate exposure that leads 

to adverse human health or ecological outcomes. 

This vision expands exposures from source to dose, 

over time and space, to multiple stressors, and from 

the molecular to ecosystem level. ES21 Working 

Groups on Biomonitoring, Citizen 

Engagement/Citizen Science and 

Sensors/Dosimeters addresses HAB exposure 

assessments.

Multiple 

agencies

Multiple 

Agencies, USEPA 

and NOAA

HABS

Volunteer 

Freshwater 

Phytoplankton 

Monitoring Program

Volunteer monitoring program that collects baseline 

data on harmful algal species and builds capacity by 

providing data to NOAA Phytoplankton Monitoring 

Network and USEPA. Agencies train volunteers to 

identify algae, collect water samples, conduct basic 

water quality analyses, and preserve samples for 

further analysis NOAA Analytical Response Team. 

The network went operational in 2015, with stations 

in the western basin of Lake Erie and in seven lakes 

in USEPA Region 8, with plans to expand to Lakes 

Michigan, Superior, Huron, and Grand Lake St. Mary 

in 2016.
67

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

NASA NASA HABs

The Ocean Biology 

and Biogeochemistry 

Program

Basic HABs research resulting in publications and 

new retrieval algorithms.

NASA NASA HABs

Applied Sciences 

Program - Health and 

Air Quality 

Applications Program

Monitoring and surveillance of cyanobacterial 

harmful algal blooms in drinking and recreational 

water supplies. Satellite derived products developed 

for western Lake Erie are analyzed for their use in 

other regions (e.g., Chesapeake Bay and inland lakes 

in Ohio and Florida). This project establishes

methods to identify environmental thresholds that 

indicate the potential for cyanobacterial blooms to 

form or persist, and these data sets are available to 

CDC. 

NSF

Joint initiative 

between NSF 

and NIEHS

HABs

Oceans and Human 

Health (OHH) 

Initiative and the 

NSF's Division of 

Ocean Sciences

The NIEHS supports multiple studies focused on the 

effects of HAB toxins on human and mammalian 

physiology, development of biomarkers for chronic 

toxin exposure, and the design and testing of novel 

technologies for in situ detection of algal toxins in 

fresh and saltwater environments. For example, a 

number of supported, ongoing studies analyze the 

effects of domoic acid on neurotoxicity as well as 

cognitive impacts in human cohorts, non-human 

primates and rodent models. In addition, NIEHS is 

accepting unsolicited applications for support and 

use of time sensitive mechanism to allow research 

support for unanticipated bloom events.

NSF NSF HABs and 

hypoxia

Ocean Observatories 

Initiative and the 

National Ecological 

Observatory Network

Provides environmental data for studies of HABS 

(both marine and freshwater) and hypoxia.

NSF NSF HABs

Division of Ocean 

Sciences (OCE), NSF 

Ocean Observatories 

Initiative

Observational capabilities for research in marine 

systems.

NSF NSF HABs

Directorate for 

Geosciences, 

Prediction and 

Resilience Against 

Extreme Events 

(PREEVENTS)

Focused interdisciplinary research projects.
68

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

NSF NSF HABs

Division of Biological 

Infrastructure, 

National Ecological 

Observatory Network 

(NEON) 

Observational capabilities for ecological research.

NSF NSF HABs Division of Ocean 

Sciences

Research Support, unsolicited proposal in marine 

ecology.

NSF NSF HABs and 

hypoxia

Collaboration 

between NSF GEO, 

SBE, and ENG 

directorates, as well 

as USDA NIFA.

Program supporting interdisciplinary research to 

understand and predict the interactions between 

the water system and extreme weather events, land 

use, the built environment, and ecosystem function 

and services though research and models. Several 

research projects focus on nutrient movement and 

hypoxia mitigation strategies. 

NSF NSF HABs

Ocean and Human 

Health Initiative, a 

collaboration 

between NSF's 

Division of Ocean

Sciences, and the 

National Institute for 

Environmental 

Health Sciences

Studies of the effects of HAB toxins on human and 

mammalian physiology, development of biomarkers 

for chronic toxin exposure, and the design and 

testing of novel technologies for in situ detection of 

algal toxins in fresh- and salt-water environments. 

Also accepting unsolicited applications for support 

and use of time sensitive mechanism to allow 

research support for unanticipated bloom events.
69

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

USDA

USDA/Multiple 

agencies, led by 

USDA NRCS, 

Partner with 

ARS, NIFA, FSA, 

and NASS. Also 

includes USGS, 

NOAA, FWS, 

USEPA, BLM, 

NASA, USDA 

Economic 

Research 

Service and US 

Forest Service

HABs and 

hypoxia

CEAP-1, Analyses of 

Agricultural Practices 

in 2003-06 

The Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) 

is a collaborative, multi-agency effort to quantify the 

environmental effects of conservation practices and 

programs and develop the science base for 

managing the agricultural landscape for 

environmental quality. Project findings guide USDA 

conservation policy and program development, and 

help conservationists, farmers, and ranchers make 

more informed conservation decisions. USGS will 

incorporate conservation data collected by CEAP 

into their surface water quality monitoring. 

The National Cropland Assessment combines 

information from NASS producer surveys and 

conservation practice data as inputs into two 

models, the APEX (Agricultural Policy EXtender) 

field-scale model and the Soil and Water Assessment 

Tool (SWAT) watershed model, to estimate the 

environmental impacts of conservation practices 

and conservation treatment needs within major 

drainage basins of the United States. These include 

sub-basins of the Mississippi River Basin, 

Chesapeake Bay and Great Lakes. In addition, the 

Watershed Assessment Component of CEAP 

conducts small watershed scale studies across the 

United States to quantify water and soil resource 

outcomes of conservation practices and systems and 

enhance understanding of processes. Interactions 

among practices are investigated as well as modeling 

enhancements, watershed targeting approaches, 

and socioeconomic factors. Practice standards are 

developed or updated to improve effectiveness and 

address gaps.

USDA

Multiple 

agencies, led by 

USDA NRCS. 

Partner with 

ARS, NASS and 

FSA

HABs and 

hypoxia CEAP 

In 2012, NASS worked with NRCS to administer a 

“Special Study” CEAP-Cropland survey focused in the 

western Lake Erie basin. Data from 2003-06 and 

2012 cropland surveys and other sources was used 

to assess conservation effects in the Western Lake 

Erie Basin and compare trends and progress in 

conservation as well as evaluate additional 

treatment needs in that region. The agencies 

released the edge-of-field assessment report in

March 2016, with the SWAT modeled delivery 

estimations’ anticipated release in 2017.
70

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

USDA USDA NIFA and 

NRCS Hypoxia CEAP

As part of the CEAP Watershed Assessment Studies, 

USDA’s NIFA and NRCS jointly funded 13 projects to 

evaluate the effects of cropland and pastureland 

conservation practices on spatial and temporal 

trends in water quality at the watershed scale. In 

some projects, participants also investigated social 

and economic factors that influence implementation 

and maintenance of practices. The NIFA-CEAP 

projects occurred from 2004 to 2011. They were 

mainly retrospective, in that they focused on 

conservation practices and water quality monitoring 

efforts that had been implemented before the NIFACEAP projects began.

USDA USDA Hypoxia

Small Business 

Innovation Research 

program (SBIR)

The USDA SBIR program supports the research and 

development of technologies that contribute to the 

protection and conservation of air, water and soils 

resources. This program has supported (among 

others) the development of technologies involved in 

the monitoring and measurement on nutrients such 

as N and P. The USDA SBIR Program provided 

support to the Nitrate Elimination Company, Inc., 

which has developed a portable nitrate biosensor 

system for quantitative nitrate detection. This will be 

the first portable kit certified by the USEPA and will 

be used by the USGS.

USDA NIFA Hypoxia

Agriculture and Food 

Research Initiative 

(AFRI) Water for 

Agriculture Challenge 

Area

This program focuses on solutions for conserving 

higher quality water and understanding the human 

behavior and its influence on decision making for 

agricultural water use. The program will focus on 

developing solutions for water management that 

link food, water, climate, energy, and 

environmental issues. 
71

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

USDA NIFA Hypoxia

Agriculture and Food 

Research Initiative 

(AFRI) Foundational

Bioenergy, Natural Resources and Environment 

(BNRE): This program area supports research on 

healthy agro-ecosystems and their underlying 

natural resources. Program areas focuses on the 

physical and biogeochemical processes affecting the 

flow, fate and transport, transformation, movement, 

and storage of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) and 

innovative agro-ecosystem management practices 

with the potential to enhance ecosystems services. 

Agricultural Economics and Rural Communities 

(AERC): This program support projects related to 

interactions between agriculture, environment and 

communities in rural areas; demographic changes 

and impacts; consumer preferences or behavior; 

decision-making under uncertainty; market 

structure and performance; policy design and 

impact; or agricultures impact on the environment. 

Critical Agricultural Research and Extension (CARE): 

This program area addresses critical challenges and 

opportunities to improve the Nation’s agricultural 

and food systems. It focuses on critical problems that 

despite prior investments in basic and applied 

research, it continuous to impede the efficient 

production of agriculturally-important plants and 

animals, producing safe and nutritious foods, and to 

meet environmental challenges for agriculture. 

Projects are expected to produce results that lead to 

practices that are rapidly adopted by end-users. 
72

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

USDA NIFA Hypoxia

Climate and Cornbased Cropping 

Systems CAP (CSACP) 

(also known as the 

Sustainable Corn 

Project

This USDA-NIFA funded project gathers data from 35 

field sites and thousands of farmers in 9 Midwestern 

states, with the goal of creating a suite of practices 

for corn-based systems that:

a. Retain and enhance soil organic matter and 

nutrient and carbon stocks

b. Reduce off-field nitrogen losses that 

contribute to greenhouse gas emissions 

and water pollution

c. Better withstand droughts and floods

d. Ensure productivity under different 

climatic conditions.

This program has developed a vast number of tools 

and resources that can be helpful for researchers, 

farmers, extension agents and policy makers. 

Examples include the Nitrogen Rate calculator, 

Decision Support Tools, and several reports, videos, 

a YouTube Channel, blogs and publications in all 

topics related extreme weather events, nutrient 

management, water and soil quality, crop 

production, resiliency and others. It received $4 

million USD per year up to 2015 (it is in a no-cost 

extension in 2016).

USDA NIFA Hypoxia

Sustainable 

Agriculture Research 

and Education (SARE)

A significant portion of the broad research and 

extension portfolio funded by the SARE program 

contributes to hypoxia solutions. Significant topic 

areas where SARE has provided funding include 

cover crops, nutrient management, and systems 

diversification to include use of more perennial 

forage crops. The SARE Professional Development 

Program is a train the trainer program that has 

focused on training agricultural professionals, 

especially in the Midwest about using cover crops to 

improve soil health. The SARE program funds 

multiple grant types and sizes ranging from Research 

and Extension Grants, which go primarily to 

academic institutions to smaller research grants that 

go directly to farmers. Funding for the overall SARE 

program is $22.667 million per year.
73

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description)

Program Activities

USDA NIFA Hypoxia Hatch Multi-State 

Projects

Through capacity (Hatch) funds, NIFA provides 

financial assistance to multistate projects 

addressing issues with Hypoxia. Some project 

examples are:

• Framework for Nutrient Reduction 

Strategy Collaboration: The Role for Land 

Grant Universities (SERA-46);

• Organization to Minimize Nutrient Loss 

from the Landscape (SERA-17);

• Drainage Design and Management 

Practices to Improve Water Quality 

(NCERA-217);

• Enhancing Nitrogen Utilization in CornBased Cropping systems to Increase Yield 

(NC-1195);

• Southern Region Integrated Water 

Resources Coordinating Committee

(SERA-43); and

• Catalysts for Water Resources Protection 

and Restoration: Applied Social Science 

Research (NC-1190).

USDA NRCS Hypoxia

Regional 

Conservation 

Partnership Program 

(RCPP) and 

Conservation 

Innovation Grants 

(CIG)

• RCPP: This NRCS-funded program 

promotes coordination between NRCS 

and its partners to deliver conservation 

assistance to producers and landowners. 

RCPP combines the authorities of four 

former conservation programs – the 

Agricultural Water Enhancement 

Program, the Chesapeake Bay Watershed 

Program, the Cooperative Conservation 

Partnership Initiative and the Great Lakes 

Basin Program. Around $14.6 million USD 

has been invested in programs along the 

Mississippi River Basin. 

• CIG: These are competitive grants that 

stimulate the development and adoption 

of innovative approaches and 

technologies for conservation on 

agricultural lands. CIG uses Environmental 

Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) funds 

to award competitive grants to nonFederal governmental or 

nongovernmental organizations, 

American Indian Tribes, or individuals.
74

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

USDA ARS and NRCS HABs St. Joe Watershed 

CEAP Study

Nested (edge-of-field to headwater stream-scale) 

research to quantify the effects of conservation 

practices on surface runoff and subsurface (tile) 

drainage nutrient transport. Develop novel 

conservation practices (i.e., blind inlets) to minimize 

the water quality impacts of agricultural 

management.

USDA ARS and NRCS HABs Western Lake Erie 

Basin

CEAP and Long-Term Agro-Ecosystem Research 

(LTAR) edge-of-field research to quantify effects of 

in-field conservation practices (e.g. 4Rs) as well as 

novel field edge practices (e.g. drainage water 

management, blind inlets and steel slag filters) on 

nutrient transport in surface and subsurface (tile) 

drainage pathways.

USDA NIFA and ARS HABs

Support of extramural and intramural research on 

the effects of HABs and HAB toxins on food safety, 

aquaculture, and livestock.

USDA ARS HABs and 

hypoxia

Research on nutrient management, nutrient 

contribution to hypoxia, and aquaculture. LongTerm Agro-Ecosystem Research (LTAR) and 

Watershed Research Centers.

USDA NIFA and ARS HABs and 

hypoxia

Supports research on best management practices for 

nutrient management, aquaculture, and plant 

breeding, among others. Specific concerns 

addressed by this research include manure 

management from animal feeding operations and 

water use and conservation on cropland. 

USDA

NRCS, ARS 

(partnership 

with The Nature 

Conservancy)

HABs and 

hypoxia

CEAP— Wildlife —

Western Lake Erie 

Basin

The Nature Conservancy-led Western Lake Erie Basin 

CEAP-Wildlife project was conducted to assess and 

forecast benefits of NRCS conservation practices to 

stream fish communities, to help advance strategic 

conservation of riverine ecosystems. A similar 

project was completed for the Saginaw Bay. This 

project used pre-existing water quality and stream 

fish community data alongside CEAP-Cropland data 

and treatment scenarios adjusted for use at smaller 

scales. It links SWAT modeling with fish community 

condition at small watershed scales (NHD+ scale) to 

reveal relationships between conservation practice 

implementation and fish community response 

within the streams. The effort provides sciencebased estimates of the priorities, scope and costs of 

restoring stream fish communities throughout the 

Western Lake Erie Basin watershed. Coordination 

with other groups is evaluating connections to Lake

Erie water quality.
75

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

USDA HABs and 

hypoxia

Nonpoint Education 

for Municipal 

Officials (NEMO)

The National NEMO Network is a collection of 

outreach programs across the United States that 

educate local (town/city/county) land use decision 

makers about protecting water quality as 

communities grow. There are currently NEMO 

program in 30 states, most led by either Universitybased Extension and/or Sea Grant programs.

USEPA USEPA HABs and 

hypoxia

Water Quality 

Management

Diversified approach to better understand 

cyanobacterial HABs ecology and the development 

of watershed and source water management 

techniques, including the development of models for 

nutrients loadings, the optimization of watershed 

placement of phosphorus and sediment BMPs, and 

the use of water quality trading (WQT) to costeffectively reduce nutrient loadings. It also includes 

an assessment of the impact of land use and 

infrastructure on watershed changes, and the 

evaluation of ecological contributors to 

cyanobacterial HAB development and toxin 

production. This research program also includes the 

use of molecular methods to characterize the risk for 

toxin and algal blooms, and the analysis of the 

impact of HABs on creating disinfection by-products 

(DBPs) precursors. 

USEPA USEPA

HABs Human and 

Ecological Health

Research support to address data gaps associated 

with health, ecosystem, and economic effects of 

HABs. Research activities include the 

characterization of cyanobacteria and their toxins 

and allergic components, the evaluation of the 

toxicity of multiple congeners of microcystins, and 

identification of biomarkers of exposure for human 

health risk assessments. USEPA is also assessing 

occurrence and health information for the inclusion 

of cyanotoxins in the Contaminant Candidate List 

(CCL) and the Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring 

Rule (UCMR) program. In addition, USEPA is 

developing Human Health Water Quality Criteria 

(HHWQC) for cyanotoxins in recreational waters.
76

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

USEPA USEPA

HABs

Monitoring and 

Analytical Methods 

Development (CyAN, 

NARS)

A collaborative effort of USEPA, NASA, NOAA, and 

USGS to provide an approach for mainstreaming 

satellite ocean color capabilities into United States 

fresh and brackish water quality management 

decisions. The Cyanobacteria Assessment Network 

(CyAN) for freshwater systems will develop 

approaches to relate nutrient loads and land use to 

the frequency, location, and severity of 

cyanobacterial blooms in lakes of the United States.

It will include assessing risk to human health from 

satellite multispectral data to assess biological 

conditions and risk to human health in lakes and 

reservoirs in the United States.

USEPA also provides nationally consistent and 

scientifically defensible assessments of aquatic 

resources through the National Aquatic Resource 

Surveys (NARS), including indicators associated with 

cyanotoxin exposure. USEPA and its regions are also 

working on monitoring efforts including the Great 

Lakes Restoration Initiative projects and Phosphorus 

Reduction Strategy. USEPA is also working on 

monitoring projects to improve identification and 

removal of HAB toxins in drinking water, and 

evaluating the impact of temperature on bloom 

development. 

USEPA is developing analytical tools including the 

use of real-time sensors, quantitative polymerase 

chain reaction and fluorescence based technologies 

of micro spectrophotometer and flow cytometry to 

detect cyanobacteria organisms in source water.

USEPA USEPA

HABs Drinking Water 

Treatment

USEPA is working collaboratively with regional 

offices to assess the presence of HABs-related 

organisms and toxins in drinking water treatment 

plant intakes nationally, characterize the 

effectiveness of drinking water treatment 

techniques in reducing toxin concentrations, and 

assist drinking water treatment facilities in 

optimizing their existing facilities for toxin control 

while maintaining compliance with other SDWA 

finished water quality standards

USEPA USEPA

HABs Outreach 

USEPA conducts webinars and provides online 

resources to promote public awareness and 

information sharing.
77

Office/

Dept. Agency

HABs/

Hypoxia/

Both

Program Title

(brief description) Program Activities

USEPA USEPA

Hypoxia Monitoring

The USEPA GLNPO annually monitors the DO 

concentration at ten sampling stations in the central 

basin of Lake Erie throughout the stratified season. 

This program began in order to monitor and track 

hypoxic conditions in response to the phosphorus 

reduction programs implemented by the 1978 

GLWQA. Oxygen and temperature profiles help to 

determine the annual corrected oxygen depletion 

rate. Researchers also can use data from these 

surveys to assess the extent and/or duration of 

hypoxia/anoxia in the Central Basin of Lake Erie. 

GLNPO has been conducting this program since 1991 

(with several short breaks), and the procedures used 

have been successfully employed with minor 

variations since 1983 by two other collaborators 

[Ohio State University (1983-1986) and U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (1987-1990)].
78

Appendix 4

Great Lakes HABs and Hypoxia Toolkit

The prevalence and duration of harmful algal blooms (HABs) and hypoxia (low-oxygen conditions) in the 

marine waters and freshwaters of the United States, including the Great Lakes, are generating public 

concern. From extended shellfish closures on the west coast in 2015, to a larger-than-predicted hypoxic 

zone in the Gulf of Mexico, these events negatively impact resources across thousands of miles of the 

Nation’s coastal and inland waters, and represent some of the most scientifically complex and 

economically damaging aquatic issues.

HABs and hypoxia have serious effects on a community’s social and public health. They may threaten the 

safety of seafood, drinking water, and air quality. They may also result in lost revenue for lakefront and 

coastal economies that are dependent on aquatic/seafood harvest or tourism, disruption of subsistence 

activities, loss of community identity tied to aquatic-resource use, and disruption of social and cultural 

practices. The impacts cause us to ask critical questions: Is it safe to drink the water? Can we swim at the 

beach? Can we eat this fish? Are my pets and ecological resources at risk? How will this affect my business 

or job? These questions became apparent for many Great Lakes basin residents when almost 500,000 

people in the Toledo, OH, metro area were advised not to drink their tap water for three days in 2014 due 

to HAB toxins.

It is important to note that most algal and cyanobacterial species are not toxic, and that they play an 

important role in maintaining healthy ecosystems. Scientists consider algae and cyanobacteria to be the 

cornerstones of life on Earth and form the basis of the food chain as food for zooplankton and fish. Given 

human and environmental health impacts, however, it is important for communities to be aware and 

prepared.

The intent of this toolkit is to help communities, big and small, to have a central source of information on 

HABs and hypoxia. It includes information and a worksheet to help communities better understand and 

prepare for these events and their impacts.

What is a HAB?

HABs are a naturally occurring, small subset of microscopic, or larger and plant-like cyanobacteria or algal 

species. When promoted by human-influenced ecosystem changes such as nutrient-loading, extreme 

weather events, and invasive organisms, these naturally occuring species can form dense overgrowths 

that can disrupt the environment and local economies, or can produce toxins that are harmful to people 

and animals. These blooms can cause damage by blocking light from bottom-dwelling plants, restructuring 

food web dynamics, reducing oxygen availability during decay, and promoting pathogens (Lopez et al., 

2008; Auer et al., 2010; Paerl et al., 2016). Some HAB species can harbor waterborne pathogens or 

produce toxins that are harmful to humans and wildlife.

What is hypoxia?

Hypoxia is a naturally-occurring condition where the concentration of dissolved oxygen in the water 

column decreases to a level that can no longer support living aquatic organisms, typically at or below 4 

mg/L. Areas of hypoxia are commonly called “dead zones” because of their inability to support fish and 

other organisms. Hypoxia can force fish out of refuge into waters where the fish do not grow as well 

(Arend et al., 2011). Hypoxia also affects drinking water, causing taste and odor problems due to high 

manganese and iron levels. 
79

What causes HABs and hypoxia?

HABs and hypoxia occur from several factors acting together, and indeed, the two types of events often 

are linked. Although they are both naturally occurring, natural and human-induced environmental

changes can exacerbate the issues. Low-oxygen conditions, for instance, occur in waterbodies due to the 

confluence of physical, chemical, and biological processes. Algal blooms also reduce water clarity and 

prevent sunlight from penetrating into the water and reaching submerged aquatic vegetation and seafloor 

microalgae, causing them to release less oxygen that would normally help to replenish the water’s oxygen 

supply. In these ways, HABs can contribute to hypoxia (CENR, 2010). Nutrient pollution that stimulates 

algal blooms can result in much more organic matter reaching bottom waters, effectively driving hypoxic 

conditions to much more severe levels than would occur naturally.

Where do HABs and hypoxia occur? We haven’t had them – should I be worried?

Every state in the United States now experiences some kind of HAB or hypoxia event, in many cases 

annually. The incidence of hypoxia globally has increased tenfold over the past 50 years, and by almost 

thirtyfold in the United States since 1960, with more than 300 aquatic systems recently experiencing 

hypoxia (Diaz and Rosenberg, 2008; CENR, 2010). Previously unrecognized HAB species have emerged in 

some locations.

This increase largely occurs due to ecological changes, food-web alterations, and the introduction of HAB 

species into new regions due to international commerce, water-flow modifications, and increased water 

temperatures. Another important driver of HABs and hypoxia events is the export of large quantities of 

nutrients, such as phosphorus and nitrogen, and organic matter into coastal waters in areas of high 

population density or near developed watersheds (CENR, 2010). Excess nutrients and organic matter can 

stimulate harmful algal growth. Nutrient pollution can come from both direct (“point”) and indirect 

(“nonpoint”) sources, including agriculture; municipal, and industrial wastewater; urban and suburban 

storm water runoff; and aquaculture. In addition, atmospheric pollutants—especially nitrogen from fossilfuel combustion, volatilization of fertilizer and animal waste, and industrial outputs—can be deposited 

from the air to watersheds or directly into water, leading to increased nutrient levels. Overall, the greater 

the input of nutrients and organic matter into a body of water, then the greater the chance of hypoxic 

conditions developing and continuing.

In the Great Lakes, the presence of invasive zebra and quagga mussels may promote some HAB species, 

although the connection is not always clear (Vanderploeg, 2001; Conroy et al., 2005; Bridgeman and

Penamon, 2010; Fishman et al., 2010; Millie et al., 2011). Selective feeding on HAB species and nutrient 

excretion by the invasive zebra and quagga mussels has the potential to influence HABs and hypoxia (Tang 

et al., 2014). Herbicides and pesticides that wash into lakes during application or times of high 

precipitation can also promote Great Lakes HAB species by killing their natural competitors (Peterson et 

al., 1997; Lürling and Roessink, 2006; Saxton, 2011).

A changing climate may lead to or exacerbate HABs and hypoxia in many environments (Paerl and 

Huisman, 2008; Davis et al., 2009; O’Neil et al., 2012; Paerl and Otten, 2013; USGCRP 2016; Visser et al., 

2016) by raising air and water temperatures that increase algal growth and reduce water-column mixing, 

and by causing changes in precipitation patterns that increase stream discharge, and promote 

phosphorus- and nitrogen-loading into nearshore waters (Paerl and Paul, 2012; Michalak et al., 2013; 

Scavia et al., 2014; Visser et al., 2016). Extreme weather events also may lead to warmer bottom water 

temperatures that could lead to higher respiration rates and faster oxygen depletion (Bouffard et al., 

2013).
80

What can I do to protect my community?

Remember some of these basic guidelines:

• Don’t: 

o Swim, wade, or otherwise recreate in; drink; or cook with water that has a smell or strange 

color, or that has dead fish floating in it. 

o Eat fish or other types of seafood that come from these waters.

• Do: 

o Tell your local health department if you see a dog, bird, or other type of wildlife behaving 

strangely.

o Follow the news before you plan to go swimming or fishing, and listen for reports of HABs 

in your area.

o Speak up! Tell your friends about HAB events that may affect them.

The below worksheet is designed to help communities be aware and prepare, regardless of whether 

you’ve experienced a HAB or hypoxic event. Understanding the risks to human, economic, and 

environmental health is the most important step to minimizing how you and your community are 

impacted.

● What is/are my community’s primary industry(ies)? What do each produce in annual revenue? 

What is the value of each?

○

○

○

● Are any of our industries/sources of employment or revenue dependent upon water resources?

● Have we experienced a HAB or hypoxic event before (of which we are aware)? __________

○ If yes:

■ Did anyone get sick? If so, how many people/animals? Was it reported to the 

health department?

■ Did we lose revenue? 

● If so, how much?

■ What happened?

● What did/would a HAB or hypoxia event cost us?

○ Potential lost revenue: _____________________________________________________

○ Social impacts: __________________________________________________________

o Cost to clean up HAB, treat or remove affected wildlife: __________________________

o Cost of water treatment: ___________________________________________________

o Cost for monitoring/detection methods: _______________________________________

o Cost of medical care for sick humans: _________________________________________

o Cost of medical care for sick animals: _________________________________________

o Type of water such as drinking water or source water treatment? __________________

● Am I connected to my local Chamber of Commerce?

○ If so, do we have a strategy for reducing HABs and hypoxia in our area

○ Are there any gaps that we have identified?

○ Are there other groups, such as academics, that I could connect with convey that 

information?
81

● In the event of a HAB or hypoxia event, do citizens have alternative resources....

○ Financially, for employment/revenue? (Tourism, fishing, etc.)

○ Emotionally/culturally?

○ For a drinking water supply?

○ For food?

○ For recreation?

● Do we have emergency funds for this type of event? If so, how much? How do they need to be 

disbursed? How quickly can we access them>

● How can we use this information to reach constituents, to help reduce personal, bodily harm as 

well as economic harm? 

○ For example, can communications about a hypoxic event allow recreational fishermen to 

plan their fishing time in a way that maximizes the fishing experience? 

○ Is there a similar activity that makes the fishermen similarly happy and that does not 

require excessive additional resources?

● Do we have protocols for divers and other recreation users? 

● Do we have presences on social media, television, and/or radio that allow us to inform audiences 

of the presence of a HAB or hypoxia? 

● Do we have local signage at waterbodies, in the event of a HAB?

● Do we have general information flyers or signage discussing how to detect a HAB, or be aware of 

HAB or hypoxia impacts? 

● How can we convey information regarding toxicity of fish during HAB season? 

For additional questions or resources, please visit these sites:

• Marine HABs, hypoxia; the Great Lakes: http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/hazards/hab/

• HAB and hypoxia forecasting: https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/hab/

• Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act:

https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/research/habs/habhrca

• Freshwater HABs: https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/harmful-algal-blooms

• Monitoring nutrient inputs: http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/sparrow/

• Conservation programs and nutrient reduction strategies:

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/technical/nra/ceap/

• National Sea Grant College Program: http://seagrant.noaa.gov/

• Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)-Associated Illness: http://www.cdc.gov/habs/index.html

• Drinking Water Advisory Communication Toolkit:

https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/emergency/pdf/dwact-2016.pdf

In recognition of the challenges presented by harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, the Harmful Algal Bloom 

and Hypoxia Research and Control Amendments Act of 2014 (HABHRCA 2014, P.L. 113-124) emphasizes 

the mandate to advance the scientific understanding and ability to detect, predict, control, mitigate, and 

respond to these types of events. This legislation established the Interagency Working Group on HABHRCA 

(IWG-HABHRCA). It tasked the group with coordinating and convening Federal agencies to discuss HAB 

and hypoxia events in the United States, and to develop action plans, reports, and assessments of these 

situations.
82

References

American Water Works Association (AWWA). 2010. Algae: Source to Treatment, Manual of Water Supply 

Practices M57. First Edition. Denver, CO. ISBN: 9781583217870. 

Anderson, D.M., P.M. Glibert, and J.M. Burkholder. “Harmful Algal Blooms and Eutrophication: Nutrient 

Souces, Composition, and Consequences.” Estuaries 25(4B/2002): 704-726. 

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1353028. Last accessed: October 18, 2016.

Anderson, D.M., A.D. Cembella, and G.M. Hallegraeff. “Progress in Understanding Harmful Algal Blooms: 

Paradigm Shifts and New Technologies for Research, Monitoring, and Management.” Annual 

Review of Marine Science 4(2012): 143-176. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-marine-120308-081121.

Arend, K.A., D. Beletsky, J.V. DePinto, S.A. Ludsin, J.J. Roberts, D.K. Rucinski, D. Scavia, D.J. Schwab, and 

T.O Höök. “Seasonal and Interannual Effects of Hypoxia on Fish Habitat Quality in Central Lake 

Erie.” Freshwater Biology 56(2011): 366-383.

Auer, M.T., L.M. Tomlinson, S.N. Higgins, S.Y. Malkin, E.T. Howell, and H.A. Bootsma. "Great Lakes 

Cladophora in the 21st Century: Same Algae-Different Ecosystem." Journal of Great Lakes 

Research 36, no. 2 (2010): 248-255. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2010.03.001.

Barrett, N.J. “Effects of Toxic Cyanobacteria (Microcystis aeruginosa) on the Feeding and Reproduction 

Ecology of the Copepod Eurytemora affinis from Green Bay, Lake Michigan.” (2014). Lawrence 

University Honors Projects. Paper 60. http://lux.lawrence.edu/luhp/60.

Bastrup-Birk, A., and P. Gundersen, “Water Quality Improvements from Afforestation in an Agricultural 

Catchment in Denmark Illustrated with the INCA Model.” Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 

Discussions 8(4/2004): 764-777. http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/8/764/2004/. Last 

accessed: November 11, 2016.

Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act of 2000 (BEACH Act; P.L. 106-284). (2000). 

Last accessed October 26, 2016. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-

04/documents/beaches-act-2000.pdf. 

Beeton, A.M. “Eutrophication of the St. Lawrence Great Lakes.” Limnology and Oceanography 10(2/1965): 

240-255. DOI: 10.4319/lo.1965.10.2.0240.

Belore, M., A. Cook, T. Hartman, K. Kayle, C. Knight, J. Markham, C. Murray, M. Thomas, M., and L. 

Witzel. Report of the Lake Erie Yellow Perch Task Group to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission.

Windsor, Ont. (2014). 

http://www.glfc.org/lakecom/lec/YPTG_docs/annual_reports/YPTG_report_2014.pdf. Last 

accessed: May 31, 2016.

Bentrup, G. “Conservation Buffers: Design Guidelines for Buffers, Corridors, and Greenways.” General 

Technical Report SRS-109 for the Southern Research Station, Forest Service, United States 

Department of Agriculture. http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/gtr/gtr_srs109.pdf. Last accessed: 

November 3, 2016.

Bertani, I., D.R. Obenour, C.E. Steger, C.A. Stow, A.D. Gronewold, and D. Scavia. “Probabilistically Assessing 

the Role of Nutrient Loading in Harmful aAlgal Bloom Formation in Western Lake Erie." Journal of 

Great Lakes Research (2016). DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2016.04.002.

Betanzo, E.A., A.F. Choquette, K.H. Reckhow, L. Hayes, E.R. Hagen, E.R., Argue, D.M., and A.A. Cangelosi. 

“Water Data to Answer Urgent Water Policy Questions: Monitoring Design, Available Data and 
83

Filling Data Gaps for Determining the Effectiveness of Agricultural Management Practices for 

Reducing Tributary Nutrient Loads to Lake Erie.” Northeast-Midwest Institute Report. (2015). 

ISBN: 978-0-9864448-0-7.

Biddanda, B. A., S.C. Nold, S. A Ruberg, S. T. Kendall, T.G. Sanders, T. G., and J.J. Gray. “Great Lakes

Sinkholes: A Microbiogeochemical Frontier. Eos, 90(8/2009): 61-68. DOI: 10.1029/eost2009EO08.

Bierman, Jr., V.J., J. Kaur, J.V. Depinto, T.J. Feist, and D.W. Dilks. “Modeling the Role of Zebra Mussels in 

the Proliferation of Blue-Green Algae in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron.” Journal of Great Lakes 

Research 31(1/2005): 32-55. DOI: doi:10.1016/S0380-1330(05)70236-7.

Bingham, M., S.K. Sinha, and F. Lupi. Economic Benefits of Reducing Harmful Algal Blooms in Lake Erie.

Environmental Consulting and Technology, Inc., Report. (2015). 

http://ijc.org/files/tinymce/uploaded/Publications/Economic-Benefits-Due-to-Reduction-inHABs-October-2015.pdf. Last accessed: May 18, 2016.

Bocaniov, S.A., R.E.H. Smith, C.M. Spillman, M.R. Hipsey, and L.F. Leon. “The Nearshore Shunt and the 

Decline of the Phytoplankton Spring Bloom in the Laurentian Great Lakes: Insights from a ThreeDimensional Lake Model.” Hydrobiologia 731(1/2014): 151-172. DOI: 10.1007/s10750-013-1642-

2.

Bocaniov, S.A., and D. Scavia. “Temporal and Spatial Dynamics of Large Lake Hypoxia: Integrating 

Statistical and Three-Dimensional Dynamic Models to Enhance Lake Management 

Criteria.” Water Resources Research (2016). DOI: 10.1002/2015WR018170.

Bosch, N.S., M.A. Evans, D. Scavia, and J.D. Allan. “Interacting Effects of Climate Change and Agricultural 

BMPs on Nutrient Runoff Entering Lake Erie.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 40(3/2014): 581–

589. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2014.04.011.

Bouffard, D., J.D. Ackerman, and L. Boegman. “Factors Affecting the Development and Dynamics of 

Hypoxia in a Large Shallow Stratified Lake: Hourly to Seasonal Patterns.” Water Resources 

Research 49(5/2013): 2380-2394. DOI:10.1002/wrcr.20241. 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wrcr.20241/full. Last accessed: May 13, 2016.

Bourne, D.G., G.J. Jones, R.L. Blakeley, A. Jones, A.P. Negri, and P. Riddles. "Enzymatic Pathway for the 

Bacterial Degradation of the Cyanobacterial Cyclic Peptide Toxin Microcystin LR." Applied and 

Environmental microbiology 62(11/1996): 4086-4094.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC168230/. Last accessed: July 25, 2016.

Bridgeman, T.B., D.W. Schloesser, and A.E. Krause. “Recruitment of Hexagenia Mayfly Nymphs in Western 

Lake Erie Linked to Environmental Variability.” Ecological Applications 16(2/2006): 601-611. 

http://www.jstor.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/stable/40061680. Last accessed: May 18, 2016.

Bridgeman, T.B., and W.A. Penamon. “Lyngbya wollei in Western Lake Erie.” Journal of Great Lakes 

Research 36(1/2010): 167-171. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2009.12.003.

Brooks, C., A. Grimm, R. Shuchman, M. Sayers, and N. Jessee. “A Satellite-Based Multi-Temporal 

Assessment of the Extent of Nuisance Cladophora and Related Submerged Aquatic Vegetation for 

the Laurentian Great Lakes.” Remote Sensing of Environment 157(2015): 58-71. DOI:

10.1016/j.rse.2014.04.032. 

Brooks, B.W., J.M. Lazorchak, M.D.A. Howard, M.V.V. Johnson, S.L. Morton, D.A.K. Perkins, E.D. Reavie, 

G.I. Scott, S.A. Smith, and J.A. Steevens. “Are Harmful Algal Blooms Becoming the Greatest Inland 

Water Quality Threat to Public Health and Aquatic Ecosystems?” Environmental Toxicology and 

Chemistry 35(2016): 6–13. DOI: 10.1002/etc.3220.Brown, L.J., V. Taleban, B. Gharabaghi, and L. 
84

Weiss. “Seasonal and Spatial Distribution of Atmospheric Phosphorus Deposition to Lake Simcoe, 

ON.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 37(2011): 15-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2011.01.004. 

Bullerjahn, G.S., R.M. McKay, T.W. Davis, D.B. Baker, G.L. Boyer, L.V. D’Anglada, G.J. Doucette, J.C. Ho, E.G. 

Irwin, C.L. Kling, R.M. Kudela, R. Kurmayer, A.M. Michalak, J.D. Ortiz, T.G. Otten, H.W. Pearl, B. 

Qin, B.L. Sohngen, R.P. Stumpf, P.M. Visser, and S.W. Wilhelm. “Global Solutions to Regional 

Problems: Collecting Global Expertise to Address the Problem of Harmful Cyanobacterial Blooms. 

A Lake Erie Case Study." Harmful Algae 54(2016): 223-238. DOI: 10.1016/j.hal.2016.01.003.

Burnett, E.A., R. S. Wilson, B. Roe, G. Howard, E. Irwin, W. Zhang, and J. Martin. “Farmers, Phosphorus and 

Water Quality: Part II. A Descriptive Report of Beliefs, Attitudes and Best Management Practices 

in the Maumee Watershed of the Western Lake Erie Basin.” (2016). Columbus, OH: The Ohio State 

University School of Environment and Natural Resources. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3317.0805.

Burns, N.M., D.C. Rockwell, P.E. Bertram, D.M. Dolan, and J.J.H. Ciborowski. “Trends in Temperature, 

Secchi Depth, and Dissolved Oxygen Depletion Rates in the Central Basin of Lake Erie, 1983-2002.” 

Journal of Great Lakes Research 31(Supplement 2/2005): 35-49. DOI: 10.1016/S0380-

1330(05)70303-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0380-1330(05)70303-8.

Byappanahalli, M.N., D.A. Shively, M.B. Nevers, M.J. Sadowsky, and R.L. Whitman. “Growth and Survival 

of Escherichia coli and Enterococci Populations in the Macro-Alga Cladophora (Chlorophyta)." 

FEMS Microbiology Ecology 46(2/2003): 203-211. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-6496(03)00214-9.

Byrne, D.G., G.J. Jones, R.L. Blakeley, A. Jones, A.P. Negri, and P. Riddles. “Enzymatic Pathway for the 

Bacterial Degradation of the Cyanobacterial Cyclic Peptide Toxin Microcystin LR.” Applied and 

Environmental Microbiology, 62(11/1996): 4086–4094. 

http://aem.asm.org/content/62/11/4086.full.pdf. Last accessed: April 22, 2016.

Calhoun, F.G., D.B. Baker, and B.K. Slater. “Soils, Water Quality, and Watershed Size: Interactions in the 

Maumee and Sandusky River Basins of Northwestern Ohio.” Journal of Environmental Quality

31(1/2002): 47–53. DOI: 10.2134/jeq2002.4700.

Carmichael, W.W., L. Backer, L.M. Billing, S. Blais, J.B. Hyde, L. Merchant-Masonbrink, M. Palmer, J.M. 

Reutter, S. Watson, M. Sanborn, P. Allen, J. Boehme, T. Buchanan, V. Serveiss. “Human Health 

Effects from Harmful Algal Blooms: A Synthesis.” International Joint Commission. (2013). 

http://www.ijc.org/files/publications/Attachment%202%20Human%20Health%20Effects%20fro

m%20Harmful%20Algal%20Blooms.pdf. Last accessed: November 2, 2016.

Carmichael, W.W. and G.L. Boyer. “Health Impacts from Cyanobacteria Harmful Algal Blooms: The North 

American Great Lakes.” Harmful Algae 54 (2016): 194-212. DOI: 10.1016/j.hal.2016.02.002.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Drinking Water Advisory Communication Toolbox.” (2016). 

http://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/pdf/emergency/drinking-water-advisory-communicationtoolbox.pdf. Last accessed: November 2, 2016.

Chaffin, J. D., T. B. Bridgeman, and D. L. Bade. “Nitrogen Constrains the Growth of Late Summer 

Cyanobacterial Blooms in Lake Erie.” Advances in Microbiology 3(2013):16-26. DOI: 

10.4236/aim.2013.36A003.

Chapra, S.C., and D.M. Dolan. “Great Lakes Total Phosphorus Revisited: 2. Mass Balance Modeling.” 

Journal of Great Lakes Research 38(4/2012): 741-754. DOI: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2012.10.002.
85

Charnley, G., and B.D. Goldstein. “A Public Health Context for Residual Risk Assessment and Risk 

Management Under the Clean Air Act.” Environmental Health Perspectives 106(9/1998): 519-521. 

DOI: 10.2307/3434224.

Chen, D. J., H. Huang, M. P. Hu, and R. A. Dahlgren. “Influence of Lag Effect, Soil Release, and Climate 

Change on Watershed Anthropogenic Nitrogen Inputs and Riverine Export Dynamics.”

Environmental Science and Technology 48(2014): 5863-5690. DOI: 10.1021/es500127t.

Chorus, I., and J. Bartram, eds. 1999. Toxic Cyanobacteria in Water: A Guide to their Public Health 

Consequences, Monitoring and Management. World Health Organization. 

http://www.plannacer.msal.gov.ar/images/stories/ministerio/intoxicaciones/cianobacterias/tox

cyanobacteria.pdf. Last accessed: November 6, 2016.

Chow, C.W.K., M. Drikas, J. House, M.D. Burch, and R.M.A. Velzeboer. “The Impact of Conventional Water 

Treatment Processes on Cells of the Cyanobacterium Microcystis aeruginosa.” Water Research

33(15/1999): 3253-3262. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(99)00051-2.

Christianson, L.E., Harmel, R.D., Smith, D.R., Williams, M.R., and King, K.W. “Assessment and Synthesis of 

50 Years of Published Drainage Phosphorus Losses.” Journal of Environmental Quality

45(2016):1467-1477. DOI: doi:10.2134/jeq2015.12.0593.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Senate Bill No. 563, Session of 2015. General Assembly of Pennsylvania. 

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=PDF&sessYr=2015&s

essInd=0&billBody=S&billTyp=B&billNbr=0563&pn=0603. Last accessed: May 19, 2016. 

Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR). Scientific Assessment of Hypoxia in US Coastal 

Waters. Washington, DC: Interagency Working Group on Harmful Algal Blooms, Hypoxia, and 

Human Health of the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology. 2010. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/hypoxia-report.pdf. Last 

accessed: May 18, 2016.

Conroy, J. D., D.D. Kane, D.M. Dolan, W.J. Edwards, M.N. Charlton, and D.A. Culver. “Temporal Trends in 

Lake Erie Plankton Biomass: Roles of External Phosphorus Loading and Dreissenid Mussels.”

Journal of Great Lakes Research 31(2005): 89-110. DOI:10.1016/S0380-1330(05)70307-5.

Conroy, J.D., L. Boegman, H. Zhang, W.J. Edwards, and D.A. Culver. “‘Dead Zone’ Dynamics in Lake Erie: 

The Importance of Weather and Sampling Intensity for Calculated Hypolimnetic Oxygen Depletion 

Rates.” Aquatic Sciences 73(2/2011): 289-304. DOI: 10.1007/s00027-010-0176-1.

Correll, D.L. “The Role of Phosphorus in Eutrophication of Receiving Waters: A Review.” Journal of 

Environmental Quality 27(1998): 261-266. http://nature.berkeley.edu/classes/espm120/Website/correll1998.pdf. Last accessed: May 19, 2016.

Cory, R.M., T.W. Davis, G.J. Dick, T. Johengen, V.J. Denef, M.A. Berry, S.E. Page, S.B. Watson, K. Yuhas, and 

G.W. Kling. “Seasonal Dynamics in Dissolved Organic Matter, Hydrogen Peroxide, and 

Cyanobacterial Blooms in Lake Erie.” Frontiers in Marine Science 3 (54/2016). DOI: 

10.3389/fmars.2016.00054.

Cousino, L.K., R.H. Becker, and K.A. Zmijewski. “Modeling the Effects of Climate Change on Water, 

Sediment, and Nutrient Yields from the Maumee River Watershed.” Journal of Hydrology: 

Regional Studies 3(1/2015): 762-775. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2015.06.017.

Cuthbert, F.J. and L. Wires. “The Fourth Decadal U.S. Great Lakes Colonial Waterbird Survey (2007-2010): 

Results and Recommendations to Improve the Scientific Basis for Conservation and 

Management.” Electronic PDF.
86

Daggupati, P., H. Yen, M.J. White, R. Srinivasan, J.G. Arnold, C.S. Keitzer, and S.P. Sowa. “Impact of Model 

Development, Calibration and Validation Decisions on Hydrological Simulations in West Lake Erie 

Basin.” Hydrological Processes 29(26/2015): 5307–5320. DOI: 10.1002/hyp.10536.

Daloğlu, I., K.H. Cho, and D. Scavia. “Evaluating Causes of Trends in Long-Term Dissolved Reactive 

Phosphorus Loads to Lake Erie.” Environmental Science and Technology 46 (19/2012): 10660-

10666. DOI: 10.1021/es302315d.

Daloğlu, I., J.I. Nassauer, R. Riolo, and D. Scavia. “An Integrated Social and Ecological Modeling 

Framework—Impacts of Agricultural Conservation Practices on Water Quality.” Ecology and 

Society 19(3/2014): 12. DOI: 10.5751/ES-06597-190312.

Davis, T.W, D.L. Berry, G.L. Boyer, and C.J. Gobler. “The Effects of Temperature and Nutrients on the 

Growth and Dynamics of Toxic and Non-Toxic Strains of Microcystis During Cyanobacteria 

Blooms.” Harmful Algae 8(2009): 715-725. DOI: 10.1016/j.hal.2009.02.004.

Davis, T. W., M. J. Harke, M. A. Marcoval, J. Goleski, C. Orano-Dawson, D. L. Berry, and C. J. Gobler. “Effects 

of Nitrogenous Compounds and Phosphorus on the Growth of Toxic and Non-Toxic Strains of 

Microcystis During Cyanobacterial Blooms.” Aquatic Microbial Ecology 61(2010): 149-162. DOI: 

10.3354/ame01445.

Davis, T.W., G.S. Bullerjahn, T.T. Tuttle, R.M. McKay, and S.B. Watson. “Effects of Increasing Nitrogen and 

Phosphorus Concentrations on Phytoplankton Community Growth and Toxicity During 

Planktothrix Blooms in Sandusky Bay, Lake Erie.” Environmental Science and Technology 49(2015): 

7197-7207.DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00799. 

http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/pubs/fulltext/2015/20150039.pdf. Last accessed: March 4, 2016.

Dayton, E.A., S.D. Whitacre, and C.H. Holloman. “Demonstrating the Relationship Between Soil 

Phosphorus Measures and Phosphorus Solubility: Implications for Ohio Phosphorus Risk 

Assessment Tools. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 40(3/2014): 473–478. DOI: 

10.1016/j.jglr.2014.04.001.

Delorme, L. D. “Lake Erie Oxygen: The Prehistoric Record.” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic 

Sciences 39(1982): 1021–1029. DOI: 10.1139/f82-137.

Diaz, R.J., and R. Rosenberg. “Spreading Dead Zones and Consequences for Marine Ecosystems.” Science

321(5891/2008): 926-929. DOI: 10.1126/science.1156401.

Dolan, D.M., and S.C. Chapra. “Great Lakes Total Phosphorus Revisited: 1. Loading Analysis and Update 

(1994-1998)”. Journal of Great Lakes Research 38(2012): 730-740. DOI: 

10.1016/j.jglr.2012.10.001.

Drikas, M., C.W.K. Chow, J. House, M. Burch. “Using Coagulation, Flocculation, and Settling to 

Remove Toxic Cyanobacteria.” Journal of the American Water Works Association

93(2/2001): 100-111. 

Drinking Water Protection Act (P.L. 114-45). https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ45/PLAW114publ45.pdf. Last accessed: November 11, 2016.

Dyble, J., G.L. Fahnenstiel, R. Wayne Litaker, D.F. Millie, P.A. Tester. “Microcystin Concentrations and 

Genetic Diversity of Microcystis in the Lower Great Lakes.” Environmental Toxicology

23(4/2008):507-516. DOI: 10.1002/tox.20370.

“Ecological Forecasting: Hypoxia Assessment in Lake Erie.” (EcoFore.) http://ecofore.org/hypoxia/. Last 

accessed September 2, 2016.
87

Eimers, M.C., and S.A. Watmough. “Increasing Nitrate Concentrations in Streams Draining into Lake 

Ontario.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 42(2/2016): 356-363. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2016.01.002. 

Fahnenstiel, G.L., D.F. Millie, J. Dyble, R.W. Litaker, P.A. Tester, M.J. McCormick, R. Rediske, and D. Klarer. 

“Microcystin Concentrations and Cell Quotas in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron.” Aquatic Ecosystem 

Health & Management 11 (2/2008): 190-195. DOI: 10.1080/14634980802092757

Fan, J., R. Daly, P. Hobson, L. Ho, and J. Brookes. “Impact of Potassium Permanganate on Cyanobacterial 

Cell Integrity and Toxin Release and Degradation.” Chemosphere 92(5/2013a): 529-534. DOI: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.03.022.

Fan, J., L. Ho, P. Hobson, and J. Brookes. “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Copper Sulphate, Chlorine, 

Potassium Permanganate, Hydrogen Peroxide and Ozone on Cyanobacterial Cell Integrity.” Water 

Research 47(14/2013b): 5153-5164. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2013.05.057.

Fan, J., P. Hobson, L. Ho, R. Daly, and J. Brookes. “The Effects of Various Control and Water Treatment 

Processes on the Membrane Integrity and Toxin Fate of Cyanobacteria.” Journal of Hazardous 

Materials 264(2015): 313-322. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.10.059.

Fang, X., and H.G. Stefan. “Simulations of Climate Effects on Water Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and 

Ice and Snow Covers in Lakes of the Contiguous United States Under Past and Future Climate 

Scenarios.” Limnology and Oceanography 54(6/2009): 2359–2370. 

Feyereisen, G.W., W. Francesconi, D.R. Smith, S.K. Papiernik, E.S. Krueger, C.D. Wente. “Effect of Replacing 

Surface Inlets with Blind or Gravel Inlets on Sediment and Phosphorus Subsurface Drainage 

Losses.” Journal of Environmental Quality 44(2/2015): 594-604. DOI: 10.2134/jeq2014.05.0219.

Fishman, D.B., S.A. Adlerstein, H.A. Vanderploeg, G.L. Fahnenstiel, and D. Scavia. “Causes of 

Phytoplankton Changes in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron, During the Zebra Mussel Invasion." Journal 

of Great Lakes Research 35 (4/2009): 482-495. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2009.08.003.

Fishman, D.B., S.A. Adlerstein, H.A. Vanderploeg, G.L. Fahnenstiel, and D. Scavia. “Phytoplankton 

Community Composition of Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron, During the Zebra Mussel (Dreissena 

polymorpha) Invasion: A Multivariate Analysis.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 36 (1/2010): 9-

19. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2009.10.004.

Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. (P.L. 110-234). https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW110publ234/pdf/PLAW-110publ234.pdf. Last accessed: November 11, 2016.

Forster, D.L. “Public Policies and Private Decisions: Their Impacts on Lake Erie Water Quality and Farm 

Economy.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 55(3/2000): 309–327. 

Forster, D.L. “Effects of Conservation Tillage on the Performance of Lake Erie Basin Farms.” Journal of 

Environmental Quality 31(1/2002): 32–37. DOI: 10.2134/jeq2002.3200.

Forster, D.L., and J.N. Rausch. “Evaluating Agricultural Nonpoint-Source Pollution Programs, in Two Lake 

Erie Tributaries.” Journal of Environmental Quality 31(1/2002): 24–31. DOI: 

10.2134/jeq2002.2400.

Forster, D.L., E.C. Smith, and D. Hite. “A Bioeconomic Model of Farm Management Practices and 

Environmental Effluents in the Western Lake Erie Basin.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 

55(2/2000): 177–182. 

Francesconi, W., C. O. Williams, D. R. Smith, J. R. Williams, and J. Jeong. “Phosphorus Modeling in Tile 

Drained Agricultural Systems Using APEX.” Journal of Fertilizers and Pesticides 7 (166/2016). DOI: 

10.4172/2471-2728.1000166.
88

Francey, D.S., J.L. Graham, E.A. Stelzer, C.D. Ecker, A.M.G. Brady, P. Struffolino, and K.A. Loftin. “Water 

Quality, Cyanobacteria, and Environmental Factors and their Relations to Microcystin 

Concentrations for Use in Predictive Models at Ohio Lake Erie and Inland Lake Recreational Sites, 

2013–14: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015-5120. 2015. 

DOI: 10.3133/sir20155120.

Gademann, K., and C. Portmann. “Secondary Metabolites from Cyanobacteria: Complex Structures and 

Powerful Bioactivities.” Current Organic Chemistry 12(4/2008): 326-341. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.2174/138527208783743750.

Gibble, C.M., M.B. Peacock, and R.M. Kudela. “Evidence for Freshwater Algal Toxins in Marine Shellfish: 

Implications for Human and Aquatic Health.” Harmful Algae 59(2016): 59-66.

Gobler, C.J., J.M. Burkholder, T.W. Davis, M.J. Harke, T. Johengen, C.A. Stow, and D.B. Van de Waal. “The 

Dual Role of Nitrogen Supply in Controlling the Growth and Toxicity of Cyanobacterial 

Blooms.” Harmful Algae 54 (2016): 87-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.hal.2016.01.010.

Gobler, C. J., T.W. Davis, K. J. Coyne, and G. L. Boyer. “Interactive Influences of Nutrient Loading, 

Zooplankton Grazing, and Microcystin Synthetase Gene Expression on Cyanobacterial Bloom 

Dynamics in a Eutrophic New York Lake." Harmful Algae 6(1/2007): 119-133. DOI: 

10.1016/j.hal.2006.08.003.

Great Lakes Environmental Assessment and Mapping Project (GLEAM), and S. Ruberg, personal 

communication. “Hypoxia: Mapping Hypoxia as a Great Lakes Stressor.” (2011.) 

http://greatlakesmapping.org/great_lake_stressors/6/hypoxia. Last accessed July 13, 2016. 

Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). “Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Action Plan II.” (2014). 

http://greatlakesrestoration.us/actionplan/pdfs/glri-action-plan-2.pdf. Last accessed: May 19, 

2016.

Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) Annex 4 Objectives and Targets Task Team. 

“Recommended Phosphorus Loading Targets for Lake Erie.” (2015).

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/report-recommendedphosphorus-loading-targets-lake-erie-201505.pdf. Last accessed: January 29, 2016. 

Hamidi, S.A., H.R. Bravo, and J.V. Klump. “Evidence of Multiple Physical Drivers on the Circulation and 

Thermal Regime in the Green Bay of Lake Michigan.” World Environmental and Water Resources 

Congress 2013: Showcasing the Future. (2013): 1719-1726. DOI: 10.1061/9780784412947.169. 

Han, H., N. Bosch, and J.D. Allan. “Spatial and Temporal Variation in Phosphorus Budgets for 24 

Watersheds in the Lake Erie and Lake Michigan Basins.” Biogeochemistry 102(2011): 45-58. DOI 

10.1007/1s0533-10 0-9420-y. 

Hansen, K., L. Rosenqvist, L. Vesterdal, and P. Gundersen. “Nitrate Leaching from Three Afforestation 

Chronosequences on Former Arable Land in Denmark.” Global Change Biology 13(6/2007): 1250-

1264. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01355.x.

Harke, M.J., T.W. Davis, S.B. Watson, and C.J. Gobler. “Nutrient-Controlled Niche Differentiation of 

Western Lake Erie Cyanobacterial Populations Revealed via Metatranscriptomic Surveys.” 

Environmental Science and Technology 50(2015): 604-615. DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b03931. 

Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (P.L. 113-124). (2014). 

[https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-113publ124/pdf/PLAW-113publ124.pdf.

Hawley, N., T.H. Johengen, Y.R. Rao, S.A. Ruberg, D. Beletsky, S.A. Ludsin, B.J. Eadie, D.J. Schwab, T.E.

Croley, and S.B. Brandt. “Lake Erie Hypoxia Prompts Canada-U.S. Study.” EOS Transactions

87(32/2006): 313-324. DOI: 10.1029/2006EO320001.
89

Health Canada. “Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality: Supporting Documentation –

Cyanobacterial Toxins — Microcystin-LR. Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Drinking 

Water.” (2002). http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/sum_guideres_recom/index-eng.php. Last accessed: November 6, 2016.

Her, Y., I. Chaubey, J. Frankenberger, and D. Smith. “Effect of Conservation Practices Implemented by 

USDA Programs at Field and Watershed Scales." Journal of Soil and Water 

Conservation 71(3/2016): 249-266. DOI:10.2489/jswc.71.3.249.

Horst, G.P., O. Sarnelle, J.D. White, S.K. Hamilton, R.B. Kaul, and J.D. Bressie. “Nitrogen Availability 

Increases the Toxin Quota of Harmful Cyanobacterium, Microcystis aeruginosa.” Water Research

54(2014): 188-198. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.01.063.

Huang, A., Y.R. Rao, and W. Zhang. “On Recent Trends in Atmospheric and Limnological Variables in Lake 

Ontario." Journal of Climate 25 (17/2012): 5807-5816. DOI: 10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00495.1.

International Joint Commission (IJC 2013). Human Health Effects from Harmful Algal Blooms: A 

Synthesis. 9 (2013). 

http://www.ijc.org/files/publications/Attachment%202%20Human%20Health%20Effects%20fro

m%20Harmful%20Algal%20Blooms.pdf. Last accessed: May 19, 2016.

International Joint Commission (IJC 2014). A Balanced Diet for Lake Erie: Reducing Phosphorus Loadings 

and Harmful Algal Blooms. Report of the Lake Erie Ecosystem Priority. 2014. 

http://www.ijc.org/files/publications/2014%20IJC%20LEEP%20REPORT.pdf. Last accessed: May 

19, 2016.

Jenny, J.-P., P. Francus, A. Normandeau, F. Lapointe, M.-E. Perga, A. Ojala, A. Schimmelmann, and B. 

Zolitschka. “Global Spread of Hypoxia in Freshwater Ecosystems During the Last Three Centuries 

is Caused by Rising Local Human Pressure.” Global Change Biology 22 (2016): 1481–1489. DOI:

10.1111/gcb.13193. 

Kay, R.T. “Hydrogeology and Groundwater Quality at Monitoring Wells Installed for the Tunnel and 

Reservoir Plan System and Nearby Water-Supply Wells, Cook County, Illinois, 1995–2013: (ver. 

1.1, May 2016).” U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report (2016): 2015–5186. DOI: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20155186.

Keitzer, S.C., S.A. Ludsin, S.P. Sowa, A.M. Sasson, G. Annis, J.G. Arnold, A. Brennan, P. Daggupati, A.M. 

Froehlich, M.E. Herbert, C. Vollmer-Sanders, M.J. White, C. J. Winslow, and H. Yen. “Quantifying 

the Potential Water Quality Benefits of Agricultural Conservation Practices for Stream Fish 

Conservation in the Western Lake Erie Basin. Final Report submitted to NRCS Conservation Effects 

Assessment Project.” 2016. http://lakeerieceap.com/wpcontent/uploads/2016/09/Final_Report_with_Appendices.pdf. Last accessed: September 27, 

2016.

Kenow, K.P., Z. Ge, L.J. Fara, S.C. Houdek, B.R. Lubinski. “Identifying the Origin of Waterbird Carcasses in 

Lake Michigan Using a Neural Network Source Tracking Model.” Journal of Great Lakes Research

(2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2016.02.014.

King, K.W., M.R. Williams, and N.R. Fausey. “Contributions of Systematic Tile Drainage to Watershed-Scale 

Phosphorus Transport.” Journal of Environmental Quality 44(2015b): 486-494. DOI: 

doi:10.2134/jeq2014.04.0149.
90

Kleinman, P.J.A., A.N. Sharpley, R.W. McDowell, D.N. Flaten, A.R. Buda, L. Tao, L. Bergstrom, and Q. Zhu. 

“Managing Agricultural Phosphorus for Water Quality Protection: Principles for Progress.” Plant 

and Soil 349(2011): 169-182. DOI: 10.1007/s11104-011-0832-9.

Knoll, L.B., O. Sarnelle, S.K. Hamilton, C.E.H. Kissman, A.E. Wilson, J.B. Rose, and M.R. Morgan. “Invasive 

Zebra Mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) Increase Cyanobacterial Toxin Concentrations in LowNutrient Lakes.” Canadian Journal of Fish and Aquatic Sciences 65(2008): 448-455. DOI: 

10.1139/F07-181.

Kraus, R.T., C.T. Knight, T.M. Farmer, A.M. Gorman, P.D. Collingsworth, G.J. Warren, P.M. Kocovsky, and 

J.D. Conroy. “Dynamic Hypoxic Zones in Lake Erie Compress Fish Habitat, Altering Vulnerability to 

Fishing Gears.” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 72(2015): 797-806. DOI: 

DOI/10.1139/cjfas-2014-0517. 

Kröger, R., E.J. Dunne, J. Novak, K.W. King, E. McLellan, D.R. Smith, J. Strock, K. Boomer, M. Tomer, and 

G.B. Noe. “Downstream Approaches to Phosphorus Management in Agricultural Landscapes: 

Regional Applicability and Use.” Science of the Total Environment 442(2013): 263-274. DOI: 

10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.10.038.

Kutovaya, O.A., R.M.L. McKay, B.F.N. Beall, S.W. Wilhelm, D.D. Kane, J.D. Chaffin, T.B. Bridgeman, and G.S. 

Bullerjahn. “Evidence Against Fluvial Seeding of Recurrent Toxic Blooms of Microcystisspp. in Lake 

Erie’s Western Basin.” Harmful Algae 15(2012): 71-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.hal.2011.11.007.

Lake Erie Nutrient Targets Working Group (LENT). “A Joint Action Plan for Lake Erie.” A Report of the Great 

Lakes Commission Lake Erie Nutrient Targets Working Group. (2015). 

http://glc.org/files/projects/lent/LENT-Joint-Action-Plan-FINAL-Sept-2015.pdf. Last accessed: 

May 19, 2016.

Lan, C.C., C.I. Kahn, A.J. Borchert, M.N. Byappanahalli, R.L. Whitman, J. Peller, C. Pier, G. Lin, E.A. Johnson, 

and M.J. Sandowsky. “Prevalence of Toxin-Producing Clostridium botulinum Associated with the 

Macroalga Cladophora in Three Great Lakes: Growth and Management.” Science of the Total 

Environment 511(2015): 523-529. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.12.080.

Lopez, C.B., E.B. Jewett, Q. Dortch, B.T. Walton, and H.K. Hudnell. “Scientific Assessment of Freshwater 

Harmful Algal Blooms.” Washington, D.C.: Interagency Working Group on Harmful Algal Blooms, 

Hypoxia, and Human Health of the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology. 2008. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/frshh2o0708.pdf. Last 

accessed: May 19, 2016.

Lowrance, R. “Riparian Forest Ecosystems as Filters for Nonpoint-Source Pollution.” In: Michael L. Pace 

and Peter M. Groffman (eds.): Successes, Limitations, and Frontiers in Ecosystem Science. (New 

York, New York, USA: Springer New York, 2007): 113-141. ISBN: 978-0-387-98475-9. 

Lürling, M., and I. Roessink. “On the Way to Cyanobacterial Blooms: Impact of the Herbicide Metribuzin 

on the Competition between a Green Alga (Scenedesmus) and a Cyanobacterium (Microcystis).” 

Chemosphere 65(4/2006): 618-626. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.01.073.

Makarewicz, J.C., T.W. Lewis, M. Winslow, E. Rea, L. Dressel, D. Pettenski, B.J. Snyder, P. Richards, and J. 

Zollweg. “Utilizing Intensive Monitoring and Simulations for Identifying Sources of Phosphorus 

and Sediment and for Directing, Siting, and Assessing BMPs: The Genesee River Example." Journal 

of Great Lakes Research 41(3/2015): 743-759. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2015.06.004.
91

Mallin, M.A., V.L. Johnson, S.H. Ensign, and T.A. MacPherson. “Factors Contributing to Hypoxia in Rivers, 

Lakes, and Streams.” Limnology and Oceanography 51(2006): 690-710. DOI: 

10.4319/lo.2006.51.1_part_2.0690.

Matisoff, G., E.C. Bonniwell, and P.J. Whiting. "Soil Erosion and Sediment Sources in an Ohio Watershed 

Using Beryllium-7, Cesium-137, and Lead-210." Journal of Environmental Quality 31(1/2002): 54-

61. DOI: 10.2134/jeq2002.5400.

Mayer, P.M., S.K. Reynolds, Jr., M.D. McCutchen, T.J. Canfield. “Meta-Analysis of Nitrogen Removal in 

Riparian Buffers.” Journal of Environmental Quality 36(4/2007): 1172-1180. DOI: 

10.2134/jeq2006.0462.

McCarty, C.L., L. Nelson, S. Eitniear, E. Zgodzinski, A. Zabala, L. Billing, and M. DiOrio. “Community Needs 

Assessment After Microcystin Toxin Contamination of a Municipal Water Supply – Lucas County, 

Ohio, September 2014.” MMWR Morb Mortal Weekly Report 65(2016): 925–929. DOI: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6535a1.

McDonald, C.P., N.R. Urban, and C.M. Casey. “Modeling Historical Trends in Lake Superior Total Nitrogen 

Concentrations.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 41(2010): 715-721. DOI: 

10.1016/j.jglr.2010.07.008.

Meals, D.W., S.A. Dressing, and T.E. Davenport. “Lag Time in Water Quality Response to Best Management 

Practices: A Review.” Journal of Environmental Quality 39(2010): 85-96. DOI: 

10.2134/jeq2009.0108.

Meals, D.W., D.L. Osmond, J. Spooner, and D.E. Line. “Chapter 4: Water Quality Monitoring: National 

Institute of Food and Agriculture–Conservation Effects Assessment Project.” In: Deanna L. 

Osmond, Donald W. Meals, Dana LK. Hoag, and Mazdak Arabi (eds.): Water Quality Monitoring: 

National Institute of Food and Agriculture–Conservation Effects Assessment Project. How to Build 

Better Agricultural Conservation Programs to Protect Water Quality: The National Institute of 

Food and Agriculture–Conservation Effects Assessment Project Experience. (Ankeny, Iowa, USA: 

Soil and Water Conservation Society, 2012): 58-83. ISBN: 978-0-9769432-9-7.

Meehl, G.A., F. Zwiers, J. Evans, T. Knutson, L. Mearns, and P.R Whetton. “Trends in Extreme Weather and 

Climate Events: Issues Related to Modeling Extremes in Projections of Future Climate Change.” 

Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 81(3/2000): 427-436. DOI: 10.1175/1520-

0477(2000)081<0427:TIEWAC>2.3.CO;2.

Michalak, A.M., E.J. Anderson, D. Beletski, S. Boland, N.S. Bosch, T.B. Bridgeman, J.D. Chaffin, K. Cho, R. 

Confesor, I. Daloğlu, J.V. DePinto, M.A. Evans, G.L. Fahnenstiel, L. He, J.C. Ho, L. Jenkins, T.H. 

Johengen, K.C. Kuo, E. LaPorte, X. Liu, M.R. McWilliams, M.R. Moore, D.J. Posselt, R.P. Richards, 

D. Scavia, A.L. Steiner, E. Verhamme, D.M. Wright, and M.A. Zagorski. “Record-Setting Algal Bloom 

in Lake Erie Caused by Agricultural and Meteorological Trends Consistent with Expected Future 

Conditions.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110.16(2013): 6448-6452. DOI: 

10.1073/pnas.1216006110.

Millie, D.F., G.L. Fahnenstiel, G.R. Weckman, D.M. Klarer, J. Dyble, H.A. Vanderploeg, and D.B. Fishman. 

“An Enviro-Informatic Assessment of Saginaw Bay (Lake Huron, USA) Phytoplankton: Data-Driven 

Characterization and Modeling of Microcystis (Cyanophyta).” Journal of Phycology 47(4/2011): 

714-730. DOI: 10.1111/j.1529-8817.2011.01022.x.
92

Miller, M.A., R.M. Kudela, A. Mekebri, D. Crane, S.C. Oates, M.T. Tinker, M. Staedler, W.A. Miller, S. ToyChoutka, C. Dominik, D. Hardin, G. Langlois, M. Murray, K. Ward, and D.A. Jessup. “Evidence for a 

Novel Marine Harmful Algal Bloom: Cyanotoxin (Microcystin) Transfer from Land to Sea Otters.” 

PLoS One (2010). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012576.

Molder, B., J. Cockburn, A. Berg, J. Lindsay, and K. Woodrow. “Sediment-Assisted Nutrient Transfer from 

a Small, No-Till, Tile Drained Watershed in Southwestern Ontario, Canada." Agricultural Water 

Management 152(2015): 31-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2014.12.010

Nakao, M., and Sohngen, B. “The Effect of Site Quality on the Costs of Reducing Soil Erosion with Riparian 

Buffers.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 55(2/2000): 231–237.

Napier, T.L., “Human Dimensions of Conservation Adoption Behaviors: The United States Experience.” in 

Ted L. Napier (ed.) Human Dimensions of Soil and Water Conservation: A Global Perspective. 

(Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc., 2011).

National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP). “Critical Loads of Atmospheric Deposition Science 

Committee: 2015 Summary of Critical Load Maps.” (2015). 

http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/lib/CLAD/Cladreport14.pdf. Last accessed: November 10, 2016.

National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Comprehensive 

Research Plan and Action Strategy: An Interagency Report. (2016). Pub.: Office of Science and 

Technology Policy. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/habs_hypoxia_research

_plan_and_action_-_final.pdf. Last accessed: May 19, 2016.

Newcombe, G., J. Dreyfus, Y., Monrolin, C. Pestana, P. Reeve, E. Sawade, L. Ho, C. Chow, S.W. Krasner, and 

R.S. Yates. “Optimizing Conventional Treatment for the Removal of Cyanobacteria and Toxins.”

Water Research Foundation: Order Number 4315. 2015. 

http://www.waterrf.org/ExecutiveSummaryLibrary/4315_ProjectSummary.pdf Last accessed: 

November 6, 2016. 

Obenour, D.R., A.D. Gronewold, C.A. Stow, and D. Scavia. “Using a Bayesian Hierarchical Model to Improve 

Lake Erie Cyanobacteria Bloom Forecasts.” Water Resources Research 50(2014/10): 7847-7860. 

10.1002/2014WR015616.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OH EPA). “Ohio Nutrient Reduction Strategy.” (2013.) 

http://epa.ohio.gov/Portals/35/wqs/ONRS_final_jun13.pdf. Last accessed: February 10, 2017.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OH EPA). “Public Water System Harmful Algal Bloom Response 

Strategy.” (2015.) 

http://epa.ohio.gov/Portals/28/documents/HABs/PWS_HAB_Response_Strategy.pdf. Last 

accessed: November 6, 2016.

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OH EPA). “Generalized Cyanotoxin Treatment Optimization 

Recommendations.” (2016). 

http://epa.ohio.gov/Portals/28/documents/habs/Generalized%20Cyanotoxin%20Treatment%20

Optimization%20Recommendations.pdf. Last accessed: November 6, 2016.

O’Neil, J.M., T.W., Davis, M.A. Burford, and C.J. Gobler. “The Rise of Harmful Cyanobacteria Blooms: The 

Potential Roles of Eutrophication and Climate Change.” Harmful Algae 14(2012): 313-334. DOI: 

10.1016/j.hal.2011.10.027.

Osmond, D., D.W. Meals, D.L.K. Hoag, and M. Arabi (eds.) (2012a): Water Quality Monitoring: National 

Institute of Food and Agriculture–Conservation Effects Assessment Project. How to Build Better 

Agricultural Conservation Programs to Protect Water Quality: The National Institute of Food 
93

and Agriculture–Conservation Effects Assessment Project Experience. (Ankeny, Iowa, USA: Soil 

and Water Conservation Society, 2012a): 58-83. ISBN: 978-0-9769432-9-7.

Osmond, D., A. Sharpley, C. Bolster, M. Cabrera, S. Feagley, B. Lee, C. Mitchell, R. Mylavarapu, L. Oldham, 

F. Walker, and H. Zhang. “Comparing Phosphorus Indices from Twelve Southern US States Against 

Monitored Phosphorus Loads from Six Prior Southern Studies." Journal of Environmental Quality

41(6/2012b): 1741-1749. DOI: 10.2134/jeq2012.0013.

Ou, H., N. Gao, W. Chaohai, D. Yang, and J. Qiao. “Immediate and Long-Term Impacts of Potassium 

Permanganate on Photosynthetic Activity, Survival and Microcystin-LR Release Risk of Microcystis 

aeruginosa.” Journal of Hazardous Materials 219-220(2012): 267-275. DOI: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.04.006.

Paul, M.J., and J.L Meyer. “Streams in the Urban Landscape.” Annual review of Ecology and Systematics

(2011): 333-365. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.32.081501.114040.

Paerl, H.W., and J. Huisman. “Blooms Like It Hot.” Science 320(2008): 57-58. DOI: 

10.1126/science.1155398.

Paerl, H.W., and J. Huisman. “Climate Change: A Catalyst for Global Expansion of Harmful Cyanobacterial 

Blooms.” Environmental Microbiology Reports 1(1/2009): 27-37. DOI: 10.1111/j.1758-

2229.2008.00004.x.

Paerl, H.W., and V.J. Paul. “Climate Change: Links to Global Expansion of Harmful Cyanobacteria.” Water 

Research. 46(2012): 1349-1363. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.08.002.

Paerl, H.W., T.G. Otten. “Blooms Bite the Hand that Feeds Them.” Science 342(6157/2013): 433-434. 

DOI: 10.1126/science.1245276.

Paerl, H.W., W.S. Gardner, K.E. Havens, A.R. Joyner, M.J. McCarthy, S.E. Newell, B. Qin, and J.T. Scott. 

“Mitigating Cyanobacterial Harmful Algal Blooms in Aquatic Ecosystems Impacted by Climate 

Change and Anthropogenic Nutrients.” Harmful Algae 54 (2016): 213-222. DOI:

10.1016/j.hal.2015.09.009.

Peterson, H.G., C. Boutin, K.E. Freemark, and P.A. Martin. “Toxicity of Hexazinone and Diquat to Green 

Algae, Diatoms, Cyanobacteria and Duckweed.” Aquatic Toxicology 39(1997): 111-134. 

DOI:10.1016/S0166-445X(97)00022-2.

Qiu, H., J. Geng, H. Ren, X. Xia, X. Wang, and Y. Yu. “Physiological and Biochemical Responses of Microcystis 

aeruginosa to Glyphosate and its Roundup® Formulation.” Journal of Hazardous Materials

248(2013): 172-176. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.12.033.

Rabalais, N., R.J. Diaz, L.A. Levin, R.E. Turner, D. Gilbert, and J. Zhang. “Dynamics and Distribution of 

Natural and Human-Caused Hypoxia.” Biogeosciences 7(2010): 585-619. DOI: doi:10.5194/bg-7-

585-2010.

Raikow, D.F., O. Sarnelle, A.E. Wilson, and S.K. Hamilton. “Dominance of the Noxious Cyanobacterium 

Microcystis aeruginosa in Low-Nutrient Lakes is Associated with Exotic Zebra Mussels.” Limnology 

and Oceanography 49(2/2004): 482-487.

http://www.jstor.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/stable/3597857. Last accessed: May 19, 2016.

Reavie, E.D., M. Cai, M.R. Twiss, H.J. Carrick, T.W. Davis, T.H. Johengen, D. Gossiaux, D.E. Smith, D. 

Palladino, A. Burtner, and G.V. Sgro. “Winter–Spring Diatom Production in Lake Erie is an 

Important Driver of Summer Hypoxia.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 42 (3/2016): 608-618.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2016.02.013.
94

Richards, R.P., and D.B. Baker. “Trends in Water Quality in LEASEQ Rivers and Streams (Northwestern 

Ohio), 1975–1995.” Journal of Environmental Quality 31 (1/2002): 90-96. DOI: 

10.2134/jeq2002.9000.

Richards, R.P., D.B. Baker, and J.P. Crumrine. “Improved Water Quality in Ohio Tributaries to Lake Erie: A 

Consequence of Conservation Practices.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 64(3/2009): 200-

211. DOI: doi:10.2489/jswc.64.3.200

Richards, R.P., D.B. Baker, J.P. Crumrine, and A.M. Stearns. “Unusually Large Loads in 2007 from the 

Maumee and Sandusky Rivers, Tributaries to Lake Erie." Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

65(6/2010): 450-462. DOI: 10.2489/jswc.65.6.450.

Robertson, D.M. and D.A. Saad. “Nutrient Inputs to the Laurentian Great Lakes by Source and Watershed 

Estimated Using SPARROW Watershed Models.” Journal of the American Water Resources 

Association (JAWRA) 47(5/2011): 1011-1033. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2011.00574.x

Ross, C., L. Santiago-Vásquez, and V. Paul. “Toxin Release in Response to Oxidative Stress and Programmed 

Cell Death in the Cyanobacterium Microcystis aeruginosa.” Aquatic Toxicology 78(2006): 66-73. 

DOI: 10.1016/j.aquatox.2006.02.007.

Rowe, M.D., D.M. Dolan, and R.G. Kreis Jr. “Reactive Nitrogen Mass Budget for Lake Michigan. Journal of 

Great Lakes Research.” 40(1/2014): 192-201. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2013.11.005.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S038013301300172X. Last accessed: August 1, 

2016.

Rowe, M.D., E.J. Anderson, T.T. Wynne, R.P. Stumpf, D.L. Fanslow, K. Kijanka, H.A. Vanderploeg, T.W. 

Davis. “Vertical Distribution of Buoyant Microcystis Blooms in a Langrangian Particle Tracking 

Model for Short-Term Forecasts in Lake Erie.” Journal of Geophysical Research – Oceans

121(2016). DOI: doi:10.1002/2016JC011720.

Ruberg, S.A., E. Guasp, N. Hawley, R.W. Muzzi, S.B. Brandt, H.A. Vanderploeg, J.C. Lane, T.C. Miller, and 

S.A. Constant. “Societal Benefits of the Real-Time Coastal Observation Network (ReCON): 

Implications for Municipal Drinking Water Quality.” Marine Technology Society Journal

42(3/2008): 103-109. DOI: 10.4031/002533208786842471.

Ruberg, S. Personal email communication. Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory. April 25, 

2016. 

Rucinski, D.K., J.V. DePinto, D. Beletsky, and D. Scavia. “Modeling Hypoxia in the Central Basin of Lake Erie 

Under Potential Phosphorus Load Reduction Scenarios.” Journal of Great Lakes Research (2016). 

DOI: 0.1016/j.jglr.2016.07.001.

Saxton, M.A., E.A. Morrow, R.A. Bourbonniere, and S.W. Wilhelm. “Glyphosate Influence on 

Phytoplankton Community Structure in Lake Erie.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 37(2011): 683-

690. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2011.07.004.

Scavia, D., J.D. Allan, K.K. Arend, S. Bartel, D. Beletsky, N.S. Bosch, S.B. Brandt, R.D. Briland, I. Daloğlu, J.V. 

DePinto, D.M. Dolan, M.A. Evans, T.M. Farmer, D. Goto, H. Han, T.O. Höök, R. Knight, S.A. Ludsin, 

D. Mason, A.M. Michalak, R.P. Richards, J.J. Roberts, D. K. Rucinski, E. Rutherford, D.J. Schwab, 

T.M. Sesterhenn, H. Zhang, and Y. Zhou. “Assessing and Addressing the Re-Eutrophication of Lake 

Erie: Central Basin Hypoxia.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 40 (2/2014): 226-246. DOI:

10.1016/j.jglr.2014.02.004.
95

Scavia, D., M. Kalcicl, R. Logsdon Muenich, N. Aloysius, J. Arnold, C. Boles, R. Confesor, J. DePinto, M. 

Gildow, J. Martin, J. Read, T. Redder, D. Robertson, S. Sowa, Y.-C. Wang, M. White, and H. Yen. 

“Informing Lake Erie Agriculture Nutrient Management via Scenario Evaluation.” Graham 

Sustainability Institute, University of Michigan. 2016. 

http://graham.umich.edu/media/pubs/InformingLakeErieAgricultureNutrientManagementviaSc

enarioEvaluation.pdf. Last accessed: May 19, 2016.

Schmidt, J.R., M. Shaskus, J.F. Estenik, C. Oesch, R. Kidekel, and G. Boyer. “Variations in the Microcystin 

Content of Different Fish Species Collected from a Eutrophic Lakes.” Toxins 5(5/2013): 992-1009. 

DOI: http://doi.org/10.3390/toxins5050992.

Seilheimer, T.S., P.L. Zimmerman, K.M. Stueve, and C.H. Perry. “Landscape-Scale Modeling of Water 

Quality in Lake Superior and Lake Michigan Watersheds: How Useful are Forest-Based 

Indicators?” Journal of Great Lakes Research 39(2/2013) 211-223. DOI:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2013.03.012.

Sharpley, A., H.P. Jarvie, A. Buda, L. May, B. Spears, and P. Kleinman. “Phosphorus Legacy: Overcoming 

the Effects of Past Management Practices to Mitigate Future Water Quality Impairment.” Journal 

of Environmental Quality 42(2013): 1308-1326. DOI:10.2134/jeq2013.03.0098. 

Shuchman, R.A., M.J. Sayers, and C.N. Brooks. “Mapping and Monitoring the Extent of Submerged Aquatic 

Vegetation in the Laurentian Great Lakes with Multi-Scale Satellite Remote Sensing.” Journal of 

Great Lakes Research 39(2013): 78-89. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jglr.2013.05.006.

Smith, D.R., and S.J. Livingston. “Managing Farmed Closed Depressional Areas Using Blind Inlets to 

Minimize Phosphorus and Nitrogen Losses.” Soil Use and Management 29(1/2013): 94-102. DOI: 

10.1111/j.1475-2743.2012.00441.x.

Smith, D.R., W. Francesconi, S.J. Livingston, and C.-H. Huang. “Phosphorus Losses from Monitored Fields 

with Conservation Practices in the Lake Erie Basin, USA.” Ambio 44(2/2015a): 319-331. DOI: 

10.1007/s13280-014-0624-6.

Smith, D.R., K.W. King, L. Johnson, W. Francesconi, P. Richards, D. Baker, and A.N. Sharpley. “Surface 

Runoff and Tile Drainage Transport of Phosphorus in the Midwestern United States.” Journal of 

Environmental Quality 44(2015b): 495-502. DOI: 10.2134/jeq2014.04.0176.

Sohngen, B., K.W. King, G. Howard, J. Newton, and D.L. Forster. “Nutrient Prices and Concentrations in 

Midwestern Agricultural Watersheds.” Ecological Economics 112(2015): 141–149. DOI: 

10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.02.008.

“State of Knowledge of Cladophora in the Great Lakes Workshop: Executive Summary.” (2016). Workshop 

held January 26-28, 2016, NOAA-Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Ann Arbor, MI. 

State of Michigan (SOM). Act No. 299, Public Acts of 2010. Enrolled House Bill No. 5368. 

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/publicact/pdf/2010-PA-0299.pdf.

Steffen, M.M., B.S. Belisle, S.B. Watson, G.L. Boyer, and S.W. Wilhelm. “Status, Causes, and Controls, of 

Cyanobacterial Blooms in Lake Erie.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 40(2/2014a): 215-225. DOI: 

10.1016/j.jglr.2013.12.012.

Steffen, M.M., S.P. Dearth, B.D. Dill, Z. Li, K.M. Larsen, S.R. Campagna, and S.W. Wilhelm. “Nutrients Drive 

Transcriptional Changes that Maintain Metabolic Homeostasis but Alter Genome Architecture in 

Microcystis.” The ISME journal, 8(10/2014b): 2080-2092. DOI: 10.1038/ismej.2014.78.

Stoermer, E.F., R.G. Kreis, Jr., N.A. Andresen. “Checklist of Diatoms from the Laurentian Great Lakes II.” 

Journal of Great Lakes Research 25(1999/3): 515-566. DOI: 10.1016/S0380-1330(99)70759-8.
96

Stonehouse, D.P. “Economic Evaluation of On-Farm Conservation Practices in the Great Lakes Region of 

North America.” Environmetrics 10(4/1999): 505–520. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-

095X(199907/08)10:4<505::AID-ENV371>3.0.CO;2-X.

Stow, C.A. and T. Höök, Eds., with D. Beletsky, R. Beletsky, A. Burtner, J.H. Bredin, J. Cavaletto, Y. Cha, C. 

De Marchi, J.V. DePinto, J. Dyble, D.Fanslow, S. Francoeur, D. Gossiaux, N. Hawley, C. He, T.H. 

Johengen, D.R. Kashian, M.D. Kaplowitz, W. Keiper, P.J. Lavrentyev, F. Lupi, D.F. Millie, N. 

Morehead, T.F. Nalepa, T.J. Newcomb, D. Palladino, S.D. Peacor, S.A. Pothoven, T. Redder, M. 

Selzer, H.A. Vanderploeg, E. Verhamme, and K.Winslow. “Saginaw Bay Management Report.” 

NOAA Technical Memorandum GLERL 160(2013). Ann Arbor, Michigan: NOAA, Great Lakes 

Environmental Research Laboratory. 

http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/ftp/publications/tech_reports/glerl-160/tm-160.pdf. Last accessed: 

May 19, 2016.

Stow, C.A., Y. Cha, L.T. Johnson, R. Confesor, and R.P. Richards. “Long-Term and Seasonal Trend 

Decomposition of Maumee River Nutrient Inputs to Western Lake Erie.” Environmental Science & 

Technology 49 (6/2015): 3392-3400. DOI: 10.1021/es5062648.

Stumpf, R.P., L.T. Johnson, L.T., T.T. Wynne, and D.B. Baker. “Forecasting Annual Cyanobacterial Bloom 

Biomass to Inform Management Decisions in Lake Erie.” Journal of Great Lakes Research (2016). 

DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2016.08.006

Stumpf, R.P., T.T. Wynne, D.B. Baker, and G.L. Fahnenstiel. “Interannual Variability of Cyanobacterial 

Blooms in Lake Erie.” PLoS One 7 (8/2012): e42444. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042444.

Stumpf, R.P., and T.T. Wynne. “Experimental Lake Erie Harmful Algal Bloom Bulletin.” National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science and Great Lakes 

Environmental Research Laboratory. Bulletin 27. November 10, 2015. 

Stumpf, R.P., L.T. Johnson, T.T. Wynne, and D.B. Baker. “Forecasting Annual Cyanobacterial Bloom 

Biomass to Inform Management Decisions in Lake Erie.” Journal of Great Lakes Research (2016). 

DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2016.08.006.

Syswerda, S.P., B. Basso, S.K. Hamilton, J.B. Tausig, and G.P. Robertson. “Long-Term Nitrate Loss Along an 

Agricultural Intensity Gradient in the Upper Midwest USA." Agriculture, Ecosystems & 

Environment 149 (2012): 10-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.agee.2011.12.007.

Tang, H., H.A. Vanderploeg, T.H. Johengen, and J.R. Liebig. “Quagga Mussel (Dreissena rostriformis 

bugensis) Selective Feeding of Phytoplankton in Saginaw Bay.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 

40(2014): 83-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2013.11.011. 

Teresa, F.B., L. Casatti, M.V. Cianciaruso. “Functional Differentiation Between Fish Assemblages from 

Forested and Deforested Streams.” Neotropical Ichthyology 13(2/2015): 361-370. DOI: 

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1982-0224-20130229.

Thomas, Mridul K., and Elena Litchman. “Effects of Temperature and Nitrogen Availability on the Growth 

of Invasive and Native Cyanobacteria.” Hydrobiologia 763 (2016): 357-369. DOI: 10.1007/s10750-

015-2390-2.

Tomer, M.D., E.J. Sadler, R.E. Lizotte, R.B. Bryant, T.L. Potter, M.T. Moore, T.L. Veith, C. Baffaut, M.A. 

Locke, and M.R. Walbridge. “A Decade of Conservation Effects Assessment Research by the USDA 

Agricultural Research Service: Progress Overview and Future Outlook.” Journal of Soil and Water 

Conservation 69(2014): 365-373. DOI: 10.2489/jswc.69.5.365. 

Torres, G.S., and Z. Adámek. “Factors Promoting the Recruitment of Benthic Cyanobacteria Resting Stages: 

A Review.” Croatian Journal of Fisheries 71(2013): 182-186. DOI: 10.14798/71.4.696.
97

United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA, 2011). 

“Assessment of the Effects of Conservation Practices on Cultivated Cropland in the Great Lakes 

Region.” (2011). http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1045480.pdf. 

Last accessed: May 15, 2015.

United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA 2016a). “Effects 

of Conservation Practice Adoption on Cultivated Cropland Acres in Western Lake Erie Basin, 2003-

06 and 2012.” (2016a). 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd889806.pdf. Last accessed: April 

14, 2016.

United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA 2016b). “Western 

Lake Erie Basin Initiative.” (2016b). 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/newsroom/releases/?cid=NRCSEPR

D892606. Last accessed: April 14, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA 2004). “Optimizing Water Treatment Plant 

Performance Using the Composite Correction Program.” EPA-625-6-91-027. Office of Water, 

Office of Research and Development. Cincinnati, OH.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA 2007). “Report to Congress: Combined Sewer 

Overflows to the Lake Michigan Basin.” (2007). EPA-833-R-07-007. 

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-

10/documents/cso_reporttocongress_lakemichigan.pdf. Last accessed: April 8, 2016. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA 2015a). “A Compilation of Cost Data Associated 

with the Impacts and Control of Nutrient Pollution.” (2015a). EPA 820-F-15-096. 

http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-04/documents/nutrient-economics-report2015.pdf. Last accessed: May 15, 2015. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2015b). “Health Effects Support Document for the 

Cyanobacterial Toxin Microcystins.” (2015b). EPA-820R15102.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/microcystins-support-report2015.pdf. Last accessed: April 28, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2015c). “2015 Drinking Water Health Advisories for 

Two Cyanobacterial Toxins.” (2015c). 820F15003. 

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/cyanotoxins-fact_sheet2015.pdf. Last accessed: March 4, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2015d). “Preventing Eutrophication: Scientific 

Support for Dual Nutrient Criteria.” (2015d). EPA-820/S-15-001. 

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/nandpfactsheet.pdf. Last accessed: 

February 10, 2017.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2015e). “Health Effects Support Document for the 

Cyanobacterial Toxin Microcystins.” (2015e). EPA-820R15102.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/microcystins-support-report2015.pdf. Last accessed: April 28, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2015f). “Health Effects Support Document for the 

Cyanobacterial Toxin Cylindrospermopsin.” (2015f). EPA-820R15103.
98

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/cylindrospermopsin-supportreport-2015.pdf. Last accessed: April 28, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2015g). “Case Studies on Implementing Low-Cost 

Modifications to Improve Nutrient Reduction at Wastewater Treatment Plants.” (2015g). Draft, 

version 1.0. EPA-841-R-15-004. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-

08/documents/case_studies_on_implementing_lowcost_modification_to_improve_potw_nutrient_reduction-combined_508_-_august.pdf. Last 

accessed: November 11, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2015h). “Health Effects Support Document for the 

Cyanobacterial Toxin Anatoxin-A.” (2015h). EPA-820R15104.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/anatoxin-a-report-2015.pdf. 

Last accessed: April 28, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2015i). “Recommendations for Public Water Systems 

to Manage Cyanotoxins in Drinking Water.” (2015i). EPA-815R15010. Washington, DC. 

http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/cyanotoxin-managementdrinking-water.pdf. Last accessed: November 6, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2016). “Control and Treatment.”

https://www.epa.gov/nutrient-policy-data/control-and-treatment. Last accessed: June 10, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2016a). “Report to Congress: Combined Sewer 

Overflows into the Great Lakes Basin.” 

file:///C:/Users/caitlin.gould/Downloads/Report%20to%20Congress%20-

%20CSOs%20into%20the%20Great%20Lakes%20Basin%20.pdf. Last accessed: October 20, 2016.

United States Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board (USEPA SAB). “Reactive Nitrogen 

in the United States: An Analysis of Inputs, Flows, Consequences, and Management Options.” 

EPA-SAB-11-013. (2011). 

https://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/WebBOARD/INCFullReport/$File/Final%20INC%2

0Report_8_19_11(without%20signatures).pdf. Last accessed: November 10, 2016.

United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). “The Impacts of Climate Change on Human 

Health in the United States: A Scientific Assessment.” (2016). Crimmins, A., J. Balbus., J.L. Gamble, 

C.B. Beard, J.E., Bell, D. Dodgen, R.J. Eisen, N. Fann, M.D. Hawkins, S.C. Herring, L. Jantarasami, 

D.M. Mills, S. Saha., M.C. Sarofim., J. Trtanj, and L. Ziska, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research 

Program, Washington, DC. DOI: 10.7930/J0R49NQX. 

Vanderploeg, H.A., J.R. Liebig, W.W. Carmichael, M.A. Agy, T.H. Johengen, G.L. Fahnenstiel, and T.F. 

Nalepa. “Zebra Mussel (Dreisssena polymorpha) Selective Filtration Promoted Toxic Microcystis 

Blooms in Saginaw Bay (Lake Huron) and Lake Erie.” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic 

Sciences 58(2001): 1208-1221. DOI: 10.1139/cjfas-58-6-1208.

Vanderploeg, H.A., A.E. Wilson, T.H. Johengen, J. Dyble Bressie, O. Sarnelle, J.R. Liebig, S.D. Robinson, and 

G.P. Horst. “Role of Selective Grazing by Dreissenid Mussels in Promoting Toxic Microcystis

Blooms and Other Changes in Phytoplankton Composition in the Great Lakes.” In: Nalepa, T.F., 

and D.W. Schloesser (eds), Quagga and Zebra Mussels: Biology, Impacts, and Control. Second 

Edition. (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2012). DOI: 10.1201/b15437-40.
99

Van Esbroeck, C.J., M.L. Macrae, R.I. Brunke, an dK. McKague. “Annual and Seasonal Phosphorus Export 

in Surface Runoff and Tile Drainage from Agricultural Fields with Cold Temperate Climates.” 

Journal of Great Lakes Research. (2016). DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2015.12.014.

Vidon, P., C. Allan, D. Burns, T.P. Duval, and N. Gurwick. “Hot Spots and Hot Moments in Riparian Zones: 

Potential for Improved Water Quality Management.” Journal of the American Water Resources 

Association 46(2/2010): 278–298. DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2010.00420.x.

Visser, P.M., J.M.H. Verspagen, G. Sandrini, L.J. Stal, H.C.P Matthijs, T.W. Davis, H.W. Paerl, and J. Huisman. 

"How Rising CO2 and Global Warming May Stimulate Harmful Cyanobacterial Blooms." Harmful 

Algae 54(2016): 145-159. DOI: 10.1016/j.hal.2015.12.006. 

Walker, H. W. Harmful Algae Blooms in Drinking Water: Removal of Cyanobacterial Cells and Toxins. 2015.

CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL. ISBN: 9781466583054.

Williams, M.R., K.W. King, M.L. Macrae, W.I. Ford, C.V. Esbroeck, R.I. Brunke, M.C. English, and S.L. Schiff. 

“Uncertainty in Nutrient Loads from Tile Drained Landscapes: Effect of Sampling Frequency, 

Calculation Algorithm, and Compositing Strategies.” Journal of Hydrology 530(2015):306-316.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.09.060.

Williams, M.R., K.W. King, W. Ford, and N.R. Fausey. “Edge-of-Field Research to Quantify the Impacts of 

Agricultural Practices on Water Quality in Ohio.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

71(1/2016): 9A-12A. DOI: 10.2489/jswc.71.1.9A. 

Wilson, C. G., R. A. Kuhnle, S. M. Dabney, R. N. Lerch, Chi Hua Huang, K. W. King, and S. J. Livingston. “Fine 

Sediment Sources in Conservation Effects Assessment Project Watersheds.” Journal of Soil and 

Water Conservation 69 (5/2014b): 402-413. DOI: 10.2489/jswc.69.5.402.

Wilson, E. K. “Danger from Microcystins in Toledo Drinking Water Unclear.” Chemical Engineering News, 

92(32/2014a). DOI: 10.1021/cen-09232-notw8.

Wilson, R.S., G. Howard, and E.A. Burnett. “Improving Nutrient Management Practices in Agriculture: The 

Role of Risk-Based Beliefs in Understanding Farmers’ Attitudes Toward Taking Additional Action.” 

Water Resources Research, 50(8/2014c): 6735–6746. DOI: 10.1002/2013WR015200.

Wilhelm, S.W., G.R. LeCleir, G.S. Bullerjahn, R.M. McKay, M.A. Saxton, M.R. Twiss, and R.A. Bourbonniere. 

“Seasonal Changes in Microbial Community Structure and Activity Imply Winter Production is 

Linked to Summer Hypoxia in a Large Lake.” FEMS Microbiology Ecology 87 (2/2014): 475-485. 

DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1111/1574-6941.12238.

Wires, L.W., S.J. Lewis, G.J. Soulliere. S.W. Matteson, D.V. Weseloh, R.P. Russell, F.J. Cuthbert. “Upper 

Mississippi Valley/ Great Lakes Waterbird Conservation Plan.” 

http://pwatol.us/mibci/fileadmin/user_upload/ResearchMonitoring/UMVGLWaterbirdPlan5-26-

10.pdf. Last accessed: July 27, 2017.

Wood, R. “Acute Animal and Human Poisonings from Cyanotoxin Exposure—A Review of the Literature.”

Environment International 91(2016): 276-282. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2016.02.026.

Wynne, T.T., R.P. Stumpf, M.C. Tomlinson, R.A. Warner, P.A. Tester, J. Dyble, and G.L. Fahnenstiel. 

“Relating Spectral Shape to Cyanobacterial Blooms in the Laurentian Great Lakes.” International 

Journal of Remote Sensing 29 (12/2008): 3665-3672. DOI: 10.1080/01431160802007640.
100

Wynne, T.T., and R.P. Stumpf. “Spatial and Temporal Patterns in the Seasonal Distribution of Toxic 

Cyanobacteria in Western Lake Erie from 2002-2014.” Toxins 7(5/2015): 1649-1663. DOI:

10.3390/toxins7051649. 

Wynne, T.T., R.P. Stumpf, M.C. Tomlinson, G.L. Fahnenstiel, J. Dyble, D.J. Schwab, and S.J. Joshi. “Evolution 

of a Cyanobacterial Bloom Forecast System in Western Lake Erie: Development and Initial 

Evaluation.” Journal of Great Lakes Research 39 (2013): 90-99. DOI: 10.1016/j.jglr.2012.10.003.

Zhou, X., M.J. Helmers, H. Asbjornsen, R. Kolka, M.D. Tomer, and R.M. Cruse. “Nutrient Removal by Prairie 

Filter Strips in Agricultural Landscapes.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 69(2014): 54-64. 

DOI: 10.2489/jswc.69.1.54.

Zhou, Y., D.R. Obenour, D. Scavia, T.H. Johengen, and A.M. Michalak. “Spatial and Temporal Trends in Lake 

Erie Hypoxia, 1987–2007.” Environmental Science and Technology 47 (2/2013): 899-905.

DOI: 10.1021/es303401b.

Zhou, Y., A.M. Michalak, D. Beletsky, Y.R. Rao, and R.P. Richards. “Record-Breaking Lake Erie Hypoxia 

during 2012 Drought.” Environmental Science and Technology 49 (2/2015):800-807. DOI: 

10.1021/es503981n.
101

Acronyms

Below are acronyms that are used for the purposes of organizing the activities in this report. They are 

non-statutory in nature.

APEX Agricultural Policy/Environmental eXtender

ARS Agricultural Research Service 

BMP Best management practice

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

CEAP Conservation Effects Assessment Project 

CWA Clean Water Act

DHHS Department of Health and Human Services

DOC Department of Commerce

DOD Department of Defense

DOI Department of the Interior

EQIP Environmental Quality Incentives Program

FDA Food and Drug Administration

GLRI Great Lakes Restoration Initiative

GLOS Great Lakes Observing System

GLWQA Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

HABs Harmful Algal Blooms

HABHRCA Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act

HAB-OFS Harmful Algal Bloom Operational Forecast System

IOOS Integrated Ocean Observing System

IWG-HABHRCA Interagency Working Group on the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research 

and Control Act

LEOFS Lake Erie Operational Forecast System

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NCCOS National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NOAA)

NIEHS National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

NIFA National Institute of Food and Agriculture

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NORS National Outbreak Reporting System

NPS National Park Service

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service 

OHHABS One Health Harmful Algal Blooms

OSTP Office of Science and Technology Policy

PCM Prevention, Control, and Mitigation

PCMHAB Program that transitions promising PCM technologies and strategies to endusers and is authorized by the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and 

Control Act (1998, 2014)

PMN Phytoplankton Monitoring Network

RCPP Regional Conservation Partnership Program

RRAF Runoff Risk Advisory Forecast

SPARROW SPAtially-Referenced Regression on Watershed attributes mode

SOST Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
102

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

USGS United States Geological Survey

WLEB Western Lake Erie Basin
103

Glossary

Below are definitions the IWG-HABHRCA used for the purposes of organizing the activities in this report. 

They are non-statutory in nature.

Congener: When referring to HAB toxins, a congener is toxin of the same type (e.g., microcystin-LR and 

microcystin-LA) or within the same group, but with a different chemical structure that may affect how 

toxic it is and what methods can be used to differentiate between the forms.

Control (or suppression): Strategies that directly kill HAB cells or destroy their toxins, physically remove 

cells and toxins from the water column, or limit cell growth and proliferation. These strategies aim to 

reduce the impacts of HABs and hypoxia events on people and commerce by targeting the immediate 

causative agents of these events. 

Dissolved Reactive Phosphorus: A form of phosphorus that is more biologically available to organisms, 

such and algae and cyanobacteria, and therefore can more readily promote growth.

Lysis: Breaking of the cell wall or membrane

Mitigation: Responding to an existing or ongoing bloom by taking steps to restrict, inhibit, or prevent 

associated undesirable impacts on the environment, human health, or human economies and 

communities. Prohibiting seafood that is contaminated with HAB toxins from entering commerce is an 

example of a management strategy to mitigate human-health impacts. Mitigation is the area of HAB 

management where the most immediate potential exists to reduce impacts, given that many such 

activities are already underway.

No-Till: No-till is a farming practice that aims to minimize soil disturbance and maintain as much crop 

residue on the soil surface as possible.

Nowcast: A description of present conditions.

Prevention: Environmental-management actions taken to reduce the incidents and extent of HABs and 

hypoxia events.

Resuspension: Water movement that stirs up the sediments and associated nutrients and organisms that 

then become suspended in the water column.

Stratification: Formation of a layer of warm surface water above colder water, which limits exchange of 

nutrients and oxygen and favors some algal groups over others