What started out as a tradition to hunt and kill as many birds as possible, turned into something much different 125 years ago. People decided instead to count the birds.

In Michigan, the Audubon Christmas Bird Count is taking place at about 80 sites across the state. There are more than 70 sites in Ohio. There are thousands of sites around the world.

Stephanie Beilke is senior manager of conservation science with Audubon Great Lakes. She said it’s not too late for you to get involved too. You can start at the group’s website.

“It’ll show a map of where counts are happening near you. And then you find your nearest circle. It’s a seven-mile-radius circle and it’ll tell you who is leading the count, who to be in touch with, and you would just email that person and they’ll get you set up and where you can help out.”

This season’s count is already underway. If you want to get participate, you should look into it right away.

The data gathered helps determine how well populations of different species are doing and if climate change affects where they spend the winter.

“Because it’s been going on for so long, it’s contributing to a massive data set that can give us an idea of, you know, a trend of populations for birds over the winter,” Beilke said.

The count ends on Jan. 5.

Almost two decades ago, a Republican-majority Legislature and Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm struck a deal. The state’s environment agency would be allowed to raise fees on businesses for a pollution program, but in exchange, the agency could not make any new rules regarding certain water pollution issues.

Surface and groundwater protection is covered under Part 31 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. The Legislature prohibited the then-Department of Environmental Quality from making new rules under Part 31 after December 31, 2006.

That is still the case.

During the current lame duck session, the Legislature is considering bills would lift that ban on making rules for what is today known as the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE).

“And this piece of legislation, House Bill 5205, Senate Bill 663, just simply strikes that language, that they cannot promulgate any new rules and then would open EGLE to be able to do what they’re actually charged with doing, which is protecting the waters of the state,” said Megan Tinsley with the Michigan Environmental Council.

Democratic Rep. Emily Dievendorf is sponsor of the House version of the bill. Democratic Senator Susan Shink is the Senate sponsor.

EGLE has been unable to keep regulation up to date with some federal standards and updated science since its authority was taken away in 2007.

Since then, we’ve learned about new pollutants such as PFAS.

“So there’s things like this that are just lingering out there that are public health threats, certainly threats to the environment. And this is a very straightforward fix that we just have to get through the process,” Tinsley said.

The Michigan Farm Bureau is among the opponents to the legislation. It’s urging its members to oppose the bills. It characterizes the legislation differently, saying it “would significantly increase EGLE’s regulatory power” as opposed to restoring it as originally written. In a Farm Bureau news release, Legislative Counsel Ben Tirrell is quoted as saying, “Our members prioritize transparency and insist that rules and standards be grounded in sound economic and scientific analysis.”

The group said the legislation would grant EGLE nearly unchecked authority over Michigan’s water.

If restored, EGLE’s regained regulatory authority would be the same under Part 31 as it is under the rest of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act.

The Michigan Environmental Council’s Tinsley said it’s urgent that the Democratic majority restores the law before the lame duck session ends.

Hundreds of schools and day care centers will receive grants for water filters. The filters are to protect children from lead exposure. While lead was banned from use in plumbing in the 1980s, there could be lead in older pipes and fixtures in schools, such as drinking fountains.

The action stems from a law referred to as Filter First.

$50 million of federal American Rescue Plan Act money is being distributed among public and private schools and daycare centers.

“The goal is to make sure that we are protecting the children from the risk of lead exposure in drinking water at schools and childcare centers,” said Holly Gohlke, a school drinking water specialist for the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy.

She said drinking fountains are going away.

“They need to be replaced with a filtered bottle-filling drinking station. And many people see those out in the public already. You know, where you just put a bottle to fill there or you can get a drink without a bottle.”

Additionally, all sink faucets will be filtered.

Michigan is still making changes in light of the Flint water crisis, which resulted in elevated blood lead levels in many children across the city. That prompted Michigan’s “strictest-in-the-nation” Lead and Copper Rule which is intended to eliminate lead in public water supplies.

Lake Superior’s top predator fish is at a sustainable population. The lake trout population has recovered to the point it no longer has to be stocked. The fish had dropped to extremely low levels.

Ever since European settlement, overfishing took a vast toll on lake trout in Lake Superior. Then the invasive sea lamprey, a parasite, nearly wiped out the population by the 1990s. It took the states, tribes, Ontario, and the two nations decades to come to an agreement that would eventually restore the lake trout.

“We have the largest freshwater lake in the world, the top species in that freshwater lake that was driven down 95 percent because of overfishing and lamprey predation, today declared restored,” said Marc Gaden, executive secretary of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. That organization is primarily known for controlling the invasive sea lamprey population.

The Lake Superior Committee made the announcement about the milestone. That committee, coordinated under the auspices of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, consists of fishery managers from three of the Great Lakes states that border Lake Superior (Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota), the Province of Ontario, and the U.S. Tribes represented by the 1854 Treaty Authority, Chippewa-Ottawa Resource Authority, Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, and the Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, according to a news release by the committee.

Not just number, but diversity

Gaden said the sustainability milestone is not just about the increased number of lake trout; it’s also about diversity. He said the different subspecies — lean trout, humper trout, and siscowet — have all recovered to sustainable levels.

Between 1920 and 1950, an annual commercial harvest of 4 million pounds was taken, according to the fishery commission. By 1964, the harvest was down to 210,000 pounds.

The Lake Superior Committee estimates the current abundance of naturally reproduced lake trout is at or above the estimates prior to the sea lamprey invasion that reached Lake Superior in 1938.

Michigan and Ohio are both struggling to reduce the fertilizer runoff getting into Lake Erie which feeds cyanobacterial blooms, also called harmful algal blooms. Those toxic blooms can be hazardous to people and animals.

Both states are working toward a 40% reduction goal set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Canada is working toward that same amount of reduction. So far, the efforts are not meeting the goals.

Michigan cautious but steady

Michigan is spending a lot of effort on determining where the greater sources of phosphorus and nitrogen are getting into streams in the watersheds that ultimately flow into the western basin of Lake Erie.

Last January, the state used some American Rescue Plan Act money to conserve, acquire or restore some small wetland areas in targeted regions in an effort administered by Ducks Unlimited.

The Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy have tried to determine where there are hydrogeological choke points where it would make sense to prevent or filter nutrient pollution.

One of those sites is in Lenawee County, not far from the Ohio border. Michigan is in the process of restoring one 300-acre wetland as a pilot project.

Michigan also offers incentives to farmers at those choke points to encourage grass buffer zones, small constructed wetlands, and other approaches to prevent nutrients from getting into streams. The state often goes through third-party partners such as local conservation districts. That’s because some farmers are suspicious of federal and state government agents and embrace Ronald Reagan’s quote, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’”

The Michigan approach presumes it’s more cost effective to be selective about incentives for farmers, choosing sites that could be the most beneficial.

Ohio goes deep and wide

Ohio’s approach has been to offer incentives to all farmers who are willing to use conservation methods that could reduce nutrient pollution.

Beyond that, through its H2Ohio program, the state has 183 wetland projects underway, encompassing 16,000 acres of wetlands and associated habitats. Ohio has invested more than $147 million in that effort.

As explained later in this article, Ohio has spent a lot and done a lot, but it is not yet certain whether it has had successful results in reducing the nitrogen and phosphorus pollution that causes the expansive growth of cyanobacterial blooms over a large part of the western basin of Lake Erie.

It will take several years to determine because so many factors go into each season of harmful algal growth in the lake.

The State of Ohio has launched a decade-long project to monitor those wetlands to see how well they’re working to filter out agricultural nutrient pollution. It will make adjustments as it goes.

Michigan’s data gathering plan

The watersheds in Michigan that drain into Lake Erie are not as large as those in Ohio, but they still contribute a substantial amount of agricultural runoff. There are other sources, such as wastewater treatment plants which release nutrients, but those are easier to identify and rectify.

So far, tackling farm field nutrient runoff has been expensive in both Michigan and Ohio and has been ineffective in reducing the pollution in Lake Erie.

The Alliance for the Great Lakes proposed that Michigan gather more information so that the state can take action that will make a difference without over-spending taxpayer dollars.

The goal is first identifying what creeks and rivers are carrying the biggest loads of nutrients to Lake Erie and what conditions cause those releases.

Recently, a few researchers, politicians, and government workers gathered on a small bridge over the Saline River, where it is little more than a channeled creek. The group had to move to the side of the bridge to allow farm equipment and pickup trucks traveling the gravel road to cross. They were there to learn about a data collection plan.

“This project is a really important kind of first step in getting better information and better data on water quality in the headwaters of the western basin of Lake Erie for hopefully the ability to make kind of different and improved decisions on how to manage that issue,” said Tom Zimnicki, Agriculture and Restoration Policy Director at the Alliance for the Great Lakes.

Zimnicki invited the group to see some of the monitoring equipment that’s being used to track precipitation, water flow, soil moisture, and other factors that affect nutrient runoff. The equipment samples and analyzes right on the site, and the data can be observed online in real time. Fifty sites are being monitored, paid for by about $5.5 million in grants. ($600 thousand from the Erb Family Foundation and $4.86 million from the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development).

Tim Boring is the Director of MDARD. He said the agency needs to better understand how, when, and where nutrients are washing off the land and into ditches, creeks, and rivers, such as the Saline River site.

“I think a piece of getting on track with that and having a better path on how we’re prioritizing investments is having a more complete picture of exactly where losses are coming from and being able to correlate that back to the management practices on the land,” Boring said.

And that starts at monitoring stations placed in those streams running through farmland, taking samples and analyzing them on-site in real time.

“We’re prioritizing, making sure that we’ve got more monitoring in streams so that we can understand and apply this not only on a specific, smaller watershed level like we’re standing in here today, but how do we relate that across a few different watersheds and scale that up, so we’ve got just a more complete understanding across the entire basin,” he said.

Among the handful of people who came to learn about the project was a legislator from the area, Democratic Senator Sue Shink. She said the approach of suggesting to farmers they might be able to do more to reduce nutrient runoff doesn’t mean much if there’s no information to back it up.

“I know that there’s a lot of sophisticated equipment in terms of farming and how people apply fertilizer. This equipment is sophisticated, (and it) is going to tell farmers how much is coming off of the field. And that’s really important information for everybody,” Senator Shink said.

Shink believes that once farmers understand they’re losing nutrients, which means losing money, they might take a second look at their farming methods.

“And that information is going to give farmers the information they need to change their practices to keep the nutrients and the soil on their fields,” she noted.

Ed Verhamme is with the consulting group LimnoTech and the President of a subsidiary Freeboard Technology which built the monitoring stations. Michigan State University’s Institute of Water Research is also providing technical assistance.

Verhamme is working with both Michigan and Ohio. He said Ohio’s wetlands monitoring program is much larger and twice as expensive. But that more expensive monitoring project is a pittance compared to the money Ohio has already spent on wetland restoration.

“They’ve chosen a large investment in wetlands and they want to understand the performance of those wetlands. So, a lot of instrumentation and lessons learned, we’ve applied to wetlands in Ohio and now agricultural streams here in Michigan,” Verhamme said.

He added, the immediacy of the data gives Michigan an advantage in its efforts to plan and invest in the nutrient pollution reduction effort.

“I think the project is going to generate data that we can see what’s happening right now. For scientists and researchers, there is usually a one-to-two year delay in gathering, analyzing, and publishing results,” he said, adding that this system will be much faster because of that on-site and real time sampling.

Ohio’s data gathering plan

Under the state’s H2Ohio program, the main strategy is restoring or constructing wetlands to filter out the nutrients from fertilizer used on farm fields. Plants and the soil in wetlands can absorb some of the nitrogen and phosphorus that gets into streams headed for Lake Erie.

Lauren Kinsman-Costello, Associate Professor at Kent State University, is the Research Team Lead of the H2Ohio Wetland Monitoring Program. She said in themselves, nitrogen and phosphorus are not bad.

“Every living thing needs these nutrients, but it’s too much of a good thing, especially in places like the western basin of Lake Erie. It leads to an overabundance of growth of photosynthetic organisms like algae and cyanobacteria. It produces a toxin called microcystin that’s harmful to people’s health and is really costly to treat for drinking water purposes.”

More wetlands should help filter out the nutrients before they get into the lake. At least, that’s the expectation. But, like a lot of things in nature, it’s more complicated than that. 

Kinsman-Costello said teams around the state from several universities are studying how well that’s actually working. They’re finding every wetland is different. Some of them might be doing very little when it comes to keeping nutrients out of Lake Erie.

“Are there even nutrients coming in to this wetland? For the wetland to prevent nutrients from going downstream, it has to have some nutrients going into it in the first place. So, things like that have been some of the early lessons that we’ve been able to communicate because we work with them (Ohio Department of Natural Resources) really closely,” Kinsman-Costello said.

That agency has only recently shifted its thinking about wetlands.

“For a very long time, wetlands or restorations were conducted in a way to focus on biological health, which is really important,” said Janice Kerns with ODNR. She oversees the Ohio Wetland Monitoring Program for the state.

Now, when Kerns says restorations for “biological health,” she basically means human-made wetlands that were designed to attract ducks and geese for hunters.

“But focusing now on nutrients and water quality is a little bit of a change from a restoration manager designing a restoration project,” she said.

Is this working?

At a wetland that was restored near Lorain, Ohio, Kinsman-Costello and a small team are taking samples and measurements.

Connor Gluck is a Field and Lab Research Technician. He monitors several wetlands in one region of the state.

“You can build a wetland and just be like, ‘Okay, cool, we’re filtering nutrients,’ but that’s just assuming that it’s working. You don’t know that it’s working until you’re going out here and routinely collecting these samples,” he said.

He’s checking wetlands every month to see if they’re doing the job or not. If they’re not, researchers need to learn why so they can recommend changes for future constructed or restored wetlands.

Helping Gluck take samples and measurements, Daiyanera Kelsey, a graduate student at Kent State University, said in the past, she’s studied how road salt flows into wetlands, but it doesn’t flow out. She said wetlands are “really cool systems” and this research is reinforcing that for her.

I’m learning how to look at soil phosphorus storage capacity, which is basically like how much phosphorus can a soil hold? And I want to see if a wetland is going to release it or if it’s going to basically hold on to this.”

The H2Ohio Wetland Monitoring Program is planned to be a ten-year long effort, assuming the Ohio legislature continues to fund it. At a total projected cost of ten million dollars, it’s relatively cheap compared to restoring or constructing future wetlands.

Janice Kerns at the Ohio Department of Natural Resources said the program will eventually have enough information to make solid recommendations. Understanding what works and what does not work could really help the state in the future.

“So, now we can either go back to the restorations we’ve already done to maybe tweak them to make them even better or how we plan moving forward in terms of project selection and how we engineer those projects,” Kerns said.

If the existing wetlands that need it can be redesigned to do a better job of filtering out nutrients, Ohio could go a long way in reducing the phosphorus getting into Lake Erie by the 40 percent the U-S Environmental Protection Agency wants.

There are pros and cons to the different approaches Ohio and Michigan are taking. But, their options are limited by law. Unlike so-called point source polluters such as factories with pipes releasing gunk into a stream, there are no laws to regulate non-point sources of pollution such as farms, except in cases where there are direct effects such as fish kills that can be traced back to a specific site. It’s impossible to show cyanobacterial blooms in Lake Erie are caused by a particular farm.

Across the U.S., drinking water and wastewater utilities are losing experienced workers at an escalating rate. It’s part of the “silver tsunami” of baby boomer retirements.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says that “silver tsunami” is just beginning to sweep across the nation.

“We’re seeing between 30 and 50% of our water workforce being eligible to retire within the next 5 to 10 years,” said Bruno Pigott, the EPA’s acting assistant administrator of water.

He was quoting from a report released six years ago by the Brookings Institution. While the data are hard to confirm, it appears the country is heading toward that projection.

An analysis by Michigan Public finds automation will replace some workers, but retirements will exceed that and lead to shortages.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics expects a drop in water operator jobs nationwide over the next decade as automated systems take over more tasks. Despite that, an estimated 10,000 positions will need to be filled each year to make up for people who leave these jobs to go to another industry, return to school or retire.

Finding workers interested in working in drinking water, stormwater, or wastewater systems is not always easy. Many public workers are fairly high profile. We often see police, firefighters, and teachers at work.

“But there’s a whole group, and that’s our water and wastewater professionals, that are less well known because as long as we are able to flush our toilet, as long as we’re able to ensure that when we turn on the tap, the water flows freely and is high quality, we don’t think about it,” Pigott said.

But failure to replace water workers is not like the workforce shortages we see in other areas.

“It’s not something that you can just shut off because you have a workforce shortage,” said Barb Martin, director of engineering and technical services at the American Water Works Association. Government and private water utilities are hoping to entice people to train for those jobs.

“The workforce of now, and really looking at the workforce of the future, needs to be well-skilled in digital technologies because that does seem to be the direction that the industry is heading,” Martin said, although not every position will need high tech skills.

Many water workers are on the streets, repairing water lines. In systems that still have the position, some workers read meters. Others could be billing customers or ordering chemicals to clean water or disinfect it.

In a 2024 report by the American Water Works Association, worker shortages is one of the top 10 concerns among leaders in the industry. The top concern is protecting water sources.

The water works association trains workers who have some experience already, including high-level courses for the next generation of water utility leaders. They not only have to manage the utility, but they also have to solve community problems and manage the cultural shifts that encourage community building, according to a brochure on the association’s Transformative Water Leadership Academy.

The Michigan Section of the association also regularly holds training sessions for current waterworks employees around the state to help them maintain certification or advance their skills for that next promotion.

But association members also know entry level positions need to be filled.

The Brookings report said 53% of water workers have a high school diploma or less. So they can get their foot in the door. But they’ll need on-the-job training, learning a variety of tools and technology.

There are training programs for people with no experience in waterworks.

Grand Rapids Community College won a $1 million grant from the EPA to work with the city of Grand Rapids to attract and train people. Often, they’re recruiting students from disadvantaged communities who typically are unaware of job opportunities in municipal waterworks.

The sound of hammers and drills echoed in a GRCC construction lab recently. Student carpenters and electricians were practicing on mock housing sections. But there is no waterworks lab.

“Our people are actually on site on our internship with the city of Grand Rapids and the drinking water or the wastewater treatment facilities,” said John VanElst, interim dean of the college’s School of Workforce Training.

He said a unique part of the Water Career Program is a year-long internship with a mentor on the job. Students are paired with a city employee at one of the Grand Rapids municipal plants.

VanElst said it only made sense to work with the city.

“We decided three years ago, let’s look at a grant with the EPA that just came out and write for this together with the City of Grand Rapids to see if we can help them with this retirement that they’re going to be facing and are facing right now.”

There are other elements. A student study course is provided by Bay College in Escanaba. Those online courses are needed to pass state certification tests.

VanElst said the combination of online work and on-the-job work gives students a real-world look at different kinds of jobs.

“It’s nice because they get a good idea of what they want to do right and maybe what they don’t want to do. And the best part, too, is that they have mentors along the way.”

He added they hope to soon help surrounding cities such as Wyoming, Holland, Muskegon, and others build up their water workforces.

One thing that should be noted about these jobs in the water workforce is that the jobs pay better than average. That’s especially true among the positions lower on the pay scale, according to the Brookings Institution report.