Search Results for: Line 5

FLOW’s Pioneering Work on Right to Water, Commons and Public Trust Join the Mainstream

The launch of FLOW’s new website comes at the same time FLOW’s work (beginning back in 2009 when Terry Swier, President of Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation, my brother Eric Olson, Ted Curran, and a few others, saw the need to educate leaders and the public on the overarching  principle known as the public trust doctrine)  has been recognized by the most highly regarded body in the Great Lakes Basin—the International Joint Commission.  As part of a 15-year review of its efforts to protect the waters of the Great Lakes Basin, in January of this year, the IJC issued a landmark recommendation that the states, provinces, and countries implement the public trust framework as a “backdrop principle” to safeguard the integrity of the Great Lakes in the 21st century.   The launch also comes at the end of the second year of teaching the new water and sustainability course at Northwestern Michigan College’s Water Studies Institute.   This past week, the students heard a wrap-up lecture on the unifying principle of the course and water policy in the future—the framework for problem solving under the commons and public trust doctrine in water.[1]

What does this mean?  It means that FLOW’s vision, work,  and our supporters are at the forefront of efforts to educate and help leaders, citizens, businesses, and our communities address the systemic threats that face the Great Lakes region – and beyond—including climate change and water levels, invasive species, algal blooms, diversions and excessive and wasteful losses of water, exports, intensive aquaculture farming on the surface of public trust waters, and crude oil transport in, over, or near the Great Lakes. As highlighted by the IJC in a recent public opinion poll, fully eighty-five percent of citizens in the Basin put their concern for the Great Lakes at the top of their list – that’s 34 million out of the 40 million people who live in the Basin.  But the problem is we need to understand what we can do about the systemic threats to the Basin, and what principles will lead us there.  At FLOW we think the most fundamental principle is the public trust doctrine.

What is the public trust doctrine?

The public trust doctrine (as recounted by Traverse Magazine’s editor Jeff Smith in an article on FLOW’s pioneering work when he created the by-line name for this BLOG – H2Olson) is a background principle connected to the Great Lakes and other bodies of water.  It holds that these waters are held by the state as trustee and must be managed and protected for the benefit of the legal beneficiaries of this public trust – the 40 million citizens in the Great Lakes Basin.  It imposes a legally enforceable duty on government and leaders to affirmatively and perpetually take action to prevent harm or impairment to these waters, their ecosystem and public uses that depend on them – navigation, fishing, boating, swimming, drinking water, and sustenance.  It prohibits any person or entity – public or private – to enclose or transfer these waters for a primarily private purpose – these waters are held for the public. It means no public or private person can measurably impair the integrity of the quality and quantity of these waters from one generation to the next.  It means all of us share, collectively and individually, a right to water as beneficiaries of this trust.

Why public trust principles?

Before the victorious court decision curtailing Nestlé’s bottled water exports from Michigan, the common law prohibited diversions or exports that diminished the flow or level of a lake or stream.—this means the very heart or integrity of a stream or lake cannot be impaired.   After the decision, this “non-diminishment” standard was weakened in favor of a “substantial harm” test that arguably would allow water exports, diversions and losses from the waters of the Great Lakes.  In effect, the court left the door open for foreign and domestic interests outside the Basin to claim the right to divert or use large quantities of water, and if challenged, potentially seek damages or other relief in private tribunals under the auspices of NAFTA or other trade agreements – possibly even the recent TPP.  Moreover, the Great Lakes Compact diversion ban left the door open for water prospectors to package raw water in any sized container (not just bottles) and ship water out of the Basin as a “product.”  The Compact also exempted diversions for public water supplies in communities that straddle the Basin, like the ongoing controversy over Waukesha, Wisconsin’s request for water  that looks more like a plan to grow communities outside the basin that meet current public need for water.   These and other events have sounded the horn for caution and action.

FLOW’s public trust vision converges with the human shift toward saving and promoting the “common good.”

In 2011, FLOW convened a conference to address systemic threats to the Great Lakes that fall outside water laws from the 20th century.  In 2012, FLOW with the Council of Canadians presented an in-depth study to the International Joint Commission, a binational body charged under a 1909 treaty to protect the Great Lakes.  The study urged the IJC to adopt a new overarching principle based on the ancient pubic trust doctrine:  This doctrine charges government, as trustee for citizen-beneficiaries, with a perpetual duty to prevent impairment or private control of water, as a commons, from one generation to the next.

From 2013 through 2015, FLOW submitted additional reports with the IJC and other governments to demonstrate how this this game-changing principle would address threats to water as a commons and human right. FLOW launched public presentations, a new water policy course with Northwestern Michigan College, and recommended solutions to address algal blooms, extreme water levels, climate change, invasive species, and recent scientific and policy reports that called for removal of oil in a pipeline in the Straits of Mackinac.

Since 2011, we’ve witnessed massive algal blooms shut down Toledo and Monroe’s water supplies and destroy fishing in Lake Huron.  We’ve seen law and high swings in water levels exacerbated by climate change effects.  We’ve seen the shut-offs of water  that services thousands of  Detroit residents and families, the Flint water crisis and exposure of thousands of innocent children and people to lead poisoning.   We see continuing in action on the time-bomb of shipping crude oil in or near the Straits or other waters of the Basin.  We see efforts to legalize private occupancy of acres of public waters and bottomlands of the Great Lakes to operate concentrated fish farms, when farming belongs on land and the surface of the Great Lakes belongs to the public.

In summer 2015, FLOW submitted a report on the IJC’s 15-year review of protecting the Great Lakes.  FLOW demonstrated how public trust principles would act as a backstop against known and unknown threats to the Great Lakes.  In January, 2016, FLOW’s work took a giant step forward.  As noted at the outset, the IJC issued a landmark recommendation that the states, provinces, and countries implement the public trust framework as a “backdrop principle” to safeguard the integrity of the Great Lakes!

Recently, in his encyclical letter on climate and our earth’s predicament, Pope Francis captured the awareness and reality of a world faced with massive loss of water, soil, and social and economic injustice.  He pointed out two ethical principles: Protect the common good and do so from one generation to the next.   All other endeavor, including economic, must honor and respect these principles.

What we are excited about at FLOW is, we find ourselves lockstep with the solutions to crises and threats to water here and elsewhere because the public trust doctrine in water brings legal principle to ethical principles to  promote the common good.

[1] For those readers who want to gain a general understanding of FLOW’s work and the commons and public trust framework,  watch the wrap-up lecture and discussion at the NMC’s WSI 230 water and sustainability class. https://ensemble.nmc.edu/Watch/Xa45Sfy9

 

Aquaculture in the Great Lakes

Challenging Harmful “Net-pen” and Antiquated “Flow-through” Aquaculture Operations in the Great Lakes

Commercial aquaculture or fish farming takes various forms in tanks, ponds, rivers, lakes, and the ocean. Current legislative proposals are now on the table to use the open waters of the Great Lakes on the U.S. side for commercial net-pen aquaculture and to expand antiquated “flow-through” operations on some tributaries such as the Au Sable River, one of the most prized blue-ribbon trout streams east of the Rockies.  

The industry promises a local, sustainable source of protein, but commercial aquaculture operations typically deposit high concentrations of fish waste, feed, and antibiotics directly into public waters. In addition, diseases and escaped fish threaten wild fish populations.

Environmental Risks of Aquaculture

Environmental Risks of Aquaculture


With clear warnings from the scientific community that current commercial aquaculture practices can cause substantial harm to wild fish stocks, FLOW is working with a coalition of public interest, angler, and conversation groups to ban commercial cage aquaculture in the Great Lakes. Such a private use would expressly violate public trust law, which requires the Great Lakes to be managed for the long-term use and enjoyment of
all people. Privatizing the bottomlands for the benefit of a few puts the entire system at risk — a system that current supports an annual $7 billion sports and commercial fishery according to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission.

In summary, proposed net-pen aquaculture in the Great Lakes and existing antiquated flow-through aquaculture operations on our rivers violate our public trust and environmental laws and threaten the health and vitality of the Great Lakes by:

  1. Releasing waste laden with nitrogen and phosphorous from both of these types of operations directly into our waters. This creates another substantial input for the harmful algal blooms and hypoxic conditions that have been devastating the Great Lakes for decades. A typical 200,000-fish salmon farm releases as much fecal matter as a city of 65,000 people does.

  2. Leading to the inevitable escape of fish, which threatens the genetic diversity and health of wild fish populations. Farmed fish are domesticated livestock that have been bred for certain traits that are different from the wild fish prized by the state’s sport fishery and essential to our ecosystem.

  3. Increasing the risk of disease. Diseases started in net-pen and flow-through aquaculture operations can quickly spread to wild populations, threatening our ecosystem and our sport and commercial fishing industry.

  4. Undermining more environmentally friendly aquaculture systems. Self-contained operations capture and treat their waste, instead of dumping it into our common waters and shifting the cost to the public.

  5. When combined with climate change, water levels, invasive species, nutrient levels and algal blooms, the cumulative threat to the Great Lakes is unknown and unacceptable.
Help Us Protect the Great Lakes

Learn More

Recent Posts

Join the Movement

Water, Food, Energy, Climate Change Nexus

Prioritizing Great Lakes Protection in Key Discussions about Our Shared Future

The Great Lakes hold one-fifth of the earth’s fresh surface water. More than 35 million people rely on the Great Lakes for drinking water, jobs, and a way of life. Yet all too often protecting our water is not part of the equation when leaders make key decisions about our energy choices, food systems, and climate security.

Citizens and leaders alike are searching for viable long-term policies and principles that improve and protect these waters, particularly as the demand for water for drinking, growing food, and generating energy is expected to double worldwide by 2050.

FLOW is elevating water as a key consideration in the decisions and plans that communities, states, provinces, and the private sector make concerning energy, food, and climate resilience in the Great Lakes Basin. We believe current and future leaders will make smarter plans and investments in energy supplies, transportation and land use, climate resilience, and environmental protection when water frames the conversation and is protected as a shared resource.

Boats going through an algae bloom on Lake Erie near Toledo, Ohio.

Widespread blooms of toxic algae from agricultural and municipal phosphorous runoff into Lake Erie left 400,000 people without clean water.

For a real-life lesson about what happens when water is not part of the discussion, recall Toledo, Ohio, in the the summer of 2014, when widespread blooms of toxic algae from agricultural and municipal phosphorous runoff into Lake Erie left 400,000 people without water for drinking, cooking, or bathing.

Poor urban planning and weak farm regulation failed to consider and protect the freshwater supply, while starkly revealing the limits of our legal framework to deal with pollution from “nonpoint” or diffuse sources.

 

Advocacy and Education That is Making a Difference

FLOW’s strategy is to share these ideas of the commons and water as the nexus among energy, food, and climate change decisions with citizens, business leaders, and officials through policy papers, presentations, conferences, and curricula. In a short time, our approach has started to penetrate; for example, some of our recent successes include:

  1. Local Environmental Protection: Persuading the International Joint Commission to adopt our public trust legal framework as one of its 16 final recommendations to address Lake Erie’s harmful algal blooms.

  2. Education Reform: Partnering with the Freshwater Studies Institute at Northwestern Michigan College to offer a first-of-its-kind freshwater policy curriculum as part of the school’s science program. We aim to inspire and shape the critical thinking of the next generation of leaders regarding the defining role of the commons and public trust principles in natural resource management and water as the nexus in guiding energy-food-climate change decisions and policies.

  3. National Environmental Protection: Convincing the International Joint Commission to recommend that "states and provinces consider developing, harmonizing, and implementing a binational public trust framework as a backstop to the Agreement and Compact” protecting the Great Lakes.

 

 

Help Us Protect the Great Lakes

Join the Movement

U.S.-Canadian Boundary Water Governing Board Recommends Game-Changing Public Trust Framework to Safeguard Great Lakes

IJC Report Released Today on Great Lakes Diversions, Consumptive Uses, and Climate Change Adopts Policy Prescription from FLOW, Great Lakes Water Law and Policy Center

TRAVERSE CITY, MI — The International Joint Commission issued a much anticipated report today on the success of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Sustainable Water Resources Agreementand Compact ban on diversions and excessive consumptive water practices. While the IJC gave the Compact and efforts by states and provinces a positive grade, it also noted there is more work to do to assure these efforts are not undermined by lack of vigilance or unanticipated effects such as impacts from climate change and regional and local competition for water, energy and water in the coming decades.

“This is for the most part a good news story,” the IJC report concludes. The report notes that particular advancements are needed to address pressures for diversions and exports from droughts, worldwide water scarcity, and algal blooms from agriculture and sewage treatment plants, exacerbated by climate change. The report recommends immediate support for more data and better assessment of cumulative impacts from smaller incremental diversions, consumptive uses, or other human-induced changes such as global warming. It also emphasizes that decision-making standard for exceptions like the proposed Waukesha diversion must be strictly applied to avoid undermining the Compact.

Michigan water and environmental lawyer Jim Olson, President of FLOW (For Love of Water), a Traverse City-based Great Lakes water policy center, who submitted formal comments to the IJC on its initial draft of today’s report, said, “The IJC report and the in-depth consultants’ report not only document the success of the Agreement and Compact among the provinces and states to ban diversions and control consumptive uses to protect and conserve the waters and ecosystem in the Basin, it also spotlights the importance for governments to consider implementing a new game-changing, public trust principle as a ‘backdrop’ to safeguard the Great Lakes and citizens. It will prevent the Agreement and Compact from being undermined by possible political, economic, or uncertain or unexpected natural forces.”

At the outset of its report, the IJC observed that public comments from organizations and others “broadened considerations and strengthened the report,” including FLOW’s proposal to add “a new recommendation that states and provinces consider developing, harmonizing, and implementing a binational public trust framework as a backstop to the Agreement and Compact.”

“The recommendation of the public trust doctrine is leadership at its best,” Olson said. “This ancient principle holds that the waters of the Great Lakes are owned by the states and provinces in trust for the benefit of all citizens.  Governments have a solemn duty as trustees to sustain these waters unimpaired as much as possible from one generation to the next. Understanding and applying public trust principles as a beacon to do the right thing will not only strengthen the diversion ban and the regulation of water use under the Compact,” Olson said, “it also will empower and guide governments, communities – including our tribes and indigenous peoples, businesses, and citizens – to find solutions to the massive threats that we face in the 21st century.  What better way to harmonize our differences and focus our science and energies than bringing us back to the basic reality that we all live in a common home.  It’s a traditional body of law that sets constructive guideposts, which, if we follow, will keep our countries, states, provinces, and people on course in protecting these highly valued public waters.”

The IJC report finds that “the Agreement and Compact will not necessarily be sufficient to protect the long-term ecological integrity and the many public and private uses of the Great Lakes. Binational adoption of public trust principles could provide an effective backstop,” and “it will fill the gaps and deal with as-yet-undefined stresses likely to negatively impact the Great Lakes in the future.”   

Background to the IJC’s 2016 Report on Diversions and Consumptive Uses

An attempt by a corporation to divert water out of Lake Huron and ship it in tankers to China in 1999 sounded the alarm for Canada, the United States, all eight Great Lakes states, and two Great Lakes provinces to adopt an international agreement among all of these jurisdictions, and a separate Great Lakes Compact among the states. Prior to entering into any agreements, the IJC issued a scientific and policy report in 2000 on a protocol for protecting the Great Lakes from diversions and consumptive uses of water within and outside of the Basin. Negotiations between the jurisdictions and stakeholders from industry, communities, nonprofit organizations, tribes and public participation led to a draft agreement in 2004.

In response to more than 10,000 comments and letters, the draft was renegotiated around a call for the prohibition of any diversions of water outside of the Great Lakes Basin, with a handful of narrow exceptions, including one-time transfers for humanitarian purposes or to meet the needs of communities that straddle the Basin’s divide (such as the currently contested diversion of Lake Michigan water from Milwaukee to cities and towns in Waukesha County).  In 2005, the governors of the states signed a Compact, and the governors and premieres of Ontario and Quebec signed a parallel international Agreement.  The Compact was signed into law in 2008.

The 2016 IJC Report and the Future of the Great Lakes

In 2014, as part of its continuing responsibility to protect the flows, levels, and integrity of the Great Lakes and ecosystem, the IJC began an in-depth study to review its findings and conclusions in its 2000 report to account for significant changes or events each decade.  Expert consultants to the IJC, Ralph Pentland, a Canadian water policy expert, and Alex Mayer, a U.S. science and engineering professor at Michigan Technological University, released draft findings for public review and comment from spring to the end of June in 2015.

IJC’s consultants Pentland and Mayer wrote in their 83-page report, which forms the basis of the IJC 2016 report, that the public trust would help address future water issues and trends, including the “uncertainty of climate and lake levels” and “losses that could approach the magnitude of losses related to diversions and consumptive uses.” They also found that “increasing droughts, storm events and the ‘nexus’ of intense competition for water sources for food, energy and development could override commitment to protect the Lakes,” and cited the California drought as “a reminder of communities literally running out of water.” Their findings also noted the current and evolving state of science that may better measure effects from human and natural forces in the future, prompting the need for a harmonizing public trust framework.  An “uptick” in NAFTA or other international trade law claims against water restrictions and outside political pressures could shackle the Agreement and Compact in the future.

FLOW submitted comments on the draft IJC report last summer. Since 2011, FLOW has concentrated its work on the public trust doctrine as a potential framework for protecting and managing the Great Lakes, when it submitted, along with the Council of Canadians, a request to the IJC to review the public trust doctrine as a principle for its decisions under its 1909 treaty.  FLOW has continued to submit research comments and published papers demonstrating the practical application of public trust standards to water levels, algal blooms, adaptive management practices, the straddling diversion exception in Waukesha, Wisconsin, net pen aquaculture, oil and gas state land leases, and crude oil pipeline transport on the bottomlands of the Great Lakes.

FLOW’s June 2015 comments on the IJC draft report analyzed the potential importance of the public trust as a guiding background by applying to the issues facing the Great Lakes. There is a vast body of precedent that shows that governments have a perpetual and affirmative duty to take necessary actions to protect water, people, public health, and the integrity of watersheds and ecosystems.

FLOW board member Keith Schneider, the senior correspondent for Circle of Blue’s Water News, said, “Elevating the public trust doctrine to a modern governmental strategy to secure water resources is an idea of momentous import for our region and North America.”

“The Agreement and Compact recognize water is a ‘public treasure’ that is ‘held in trust’ to benefit our citizens and communities,” Olson added. “Why not use it given the threats we see from climate change, invasive species, water exports and diversions, and increased water scarcity and greater competition? Without developing a legal framework that transcends the multi jurisdictions in the Great Lakes, we’re seeing increasing public health and environmental crises like the Flint water crisis, poisoning residents with lead and other chemicals for 18 months, and algal blooms in Lake Erie shutting down Toledo’s municipal water supply. Why wouldn’t we want a time-tested body of public trust law that applies equally to all 40 million beneficiaries designed to safeguard the Great Lakes?”

 

For References, see:

IJC 2016 10-Year Review Report

FLOW’s Public Trust Report on the Great Lakes to IJC

Holiday Thoughts on the Paris Climate Change Agreement: A Christmas Gift of Hope and Reality

By Jim Olson, President

FLOW (For Love of Water)

 

We can be thankful that nations of the world have opened the door to the foyer to address climate change. Most encouraging is the senses of cooperation to protect this home we call earth.

The other end of the promise and hope of the Paris accord is the reality that the thick tail of climate change has been rampaging and will continue to do so, erasing soil, melting glaciers, flooding and erasing people, landscapes and communities from the face of the earth.

Keith Schneider, NY Times journalist and senior editor at Circle of Blue, once again, in his true to form visionary hard-core journalism, lays bare this reality in his article in the New York Times. The whipsawing swing of climate has, is, and will strike hard. In the midst of humanity’s hope, so the message is clear: We must face reality, start the change, start finding and living the new renewable life, move toward inevitable near fossil-fuel free economies and lives, and we must do so as fast as possible to shift to the inevitable renewable energy economy.

Many places and people need this, we owe it to them as co-citizens.  We owe it to ourselves and our children, and the unborn children to come.  Earth is our common home — as Pope Francis puts it in his encyclical on climate and sustainable environment and communities. And, in the middle of this change, there is another shift, one that is based in ancient and modern principles — the commons of this world — air, water, soil, species, life itself, and the liberty of humans, depend on understanding and respecting this commons.  To do this, we must view and manage these as held in trust, a public trust, one that brings us to an ethical and legally implemented framework that manages and passes on these commons by maintaining or restoring a sustainable integrity of air, water, soil, species, including we sapiens, for centuries to come.

If we can shift to seeing our individual goals, dreams, needs as dependent on and fostered by the commons, we can solve these threats with incredible resilience, creativity, cooperation and entrepreneurship. But we must start this shift in paradigm to a comprehensive, unifying principle of commons and public trust now – in 2016– to guide our decisions, force the right decisions that if not made trespass on and impair the commons in violation of this trust, so that we truly solve these threats at the level of the problem. If we do this, the gift this Christmas may be the protection of liberty and dignity and survival that depend on this, a gift of reality that encourages us to change along the lines of both the hope and reality of climate change and our future.

Home

Watch How Spilled Oil Could Spread Across the Straits

A new animated video by the University of Michigan and the National Wildlife Federation shows how devastating an oil spill beneath the Straits of Mackinac would be for the Great Lakes, wildlife, and communities. The animation shows that if an oil spill occurs, oil could reach popular tourist destinations like Mackinac Island, blanket 50 miles of Lake Huron shoreline, and reach Lake Michigan landmarks such as Beaver Island.

The University of Michigan research scientist says that “one million gallons is conservatively the amount of oil that resides in the pipelines in the Straits at any time.”

An Overview of the Flint Water Crisis

By Meredith Murray, FLOW intern

What are regulatory agencies doing to fix the problem?

Currently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is conducting an investigation over the steps taken to address Flint’s drinking water issues following State Representative Dan Kildee (D-Flint) and State Minority Leader Jim Ananich’s (D-Flint) written requests. Along with the EPA investigation, Michigan legislators are pushing for a review of the controversy over the EPA’s oversight on Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).

State Representatives Sheldon Neeley (D-Flint) and Phil Phelps (D-Flushing) assert that MDEQ withheld information on the water quality from the Flint River in order to meet federal drinking water quality standards. The legislators are also requesting for the dismissal of Dan Wyant as the Director of the MDEQ.

What went wrong?

Flint’s drinking water crisis began in April of 2014 when the city of Flint decided to stop receiving their drinking water from the Detroit water supply. The plan was to switch over to a new water supplier (Karegnandi Water Authority). The high water rates imposed on Flint residents and budget cuts in the Flint financial management plan were the reasons behind the switch in suppliers.

But there was a problem: Karegnandi will not be done constructing their new water lines to draw water from Lake Huron until sometime in 2016. In the meantime, Flint officials decided to temporarily draw their drinking water from the Flint River. However, as soon as the switch was made from the Detroit water supply to the Flint River, Flint residents complained about the odor and coloration of their drinking water.

Resident complaints grew, and ‘boiling advisories’ were soon issued to kill off harmful bacteria  in the water due to the aging water lines. Water tests soon revealed high levels of a chlorination byproduct linked to cancer and other associated health problems.

Even with the drinking water advisory notices, residents were told by city officials that the water was safe to drink.

In September of 2015 – over a year after extracting water from the Flint River – a group of researchers from Virginia Tech tested hundreds of water samples and found 40% of the samples to contain high levels of lead. Due to the corrosive nature of the Flint River water, lead from the aging pipes was leaching into the City’s drinking water, and blood tests of Flint children showed elevated lead levels.

These results clearly indicated that Flint had to stop receiving their drinking water from the Flint River, and reconnect to the Detroit water supply. The switch was made October 16, 2015 to the Detroit water supply with the help of $9.35 million authorized by Governor Rick Snyder.

Is the problem fixed?

The problem to Flint’s water crisis is not resolved. Even after three weeks with the city of Flint reconnected to the Detroit water supply, advisories are being given to hold off on drinking the tap water unless there is an installed water filter. Leaching of lead into the drinking water from old pipes is still possible because the protective layer to prevent corrosion in the pipes is worn away.

Flint residents are also facing the issue of water shutoffs. Many Flint residents stopped paying their water bills once they found out their water was not drinkable. But after Flint reconnected with the Detroit water supply, the city started notifying those residents that they will issue shut offs if bills are not paid.

For up-to-date information on the Flint water crisis you can visit: http://flintwaterstudy.org/

 

GrowNY’s Earth Day Celebration of Buffalo’s Outer Harbor & Lake Erie Commons

When: 
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
“Green Drinks” at 5:30 p.m., Lecture at 7 p.m.

Where:
Tifft Nature Preserve’s new auditorium, Buffalo, NY

What:
A lecture with national expert Jim Olson, President and founder of FLOW (For Love of Water)—a national organization dedicated to advancing public trust solutions to save the waters of the Great Lakes. There will be a “Green Drinks” social in partnership with GreenWorks Buffalo Niagara, optional tours, and discussions focused on how the existing principles of public ownership can frame the community’s response to the Lake Erie Shore prior to the lecture.