Restoring Great Lakes Basin Waters Through the Use of Conservation Credits and an Integrated Water Balance Analysis System Institute of Water Research, Michigan State University Great Lakes Protection Fund 4th ADVISORY TEAM MEETING Monday, February 13, 2006 (9:30 – 3:30) (Corniche Room, Kellogg Center, MSU)

Restoring Great Lakes Basin Water Through the Use of Conservation Credits and an Integrated Water Balance Analysis System Principal Investigators Dr. Jon F. Bartholic The Institute of Water Research & Dr. Sandra S. Batie Dept. of Agricultural Economics Michigan State University Funding Source: The Great Lakes Protection Fund Project Duration: 24 months Starting Date: January 2005

Project goal Overall project goal is to explore the necessary conditions for a science-based decision support system that will assist policy decision makers involved with ground water management in Great Lakes Basin restoration. Case Study approach

Spatial Limitation and Assumptions With the spatial limitation on state-wide modeling, we are interested in protecting critical fish habitat from groundwater withdrawals. The Augusta Creek Watershed is selected as a case study. Trout is the key species to protect. We look at the impact of water withdrawals on groundwater discharge (water quantity) and its affect on trout and their habitats.

Augusta Creek Watershed 2001 Land Use/Cover

Specific Objective Our specific objective is to provide science-based information to assist in making better decisions with respect to ground water withdrawal management in critical watersheds of Michigan to protect trout habitats.

Gathering Inputs for Development & Improvement Identifying Market based Alternatives Developing a Decision Support System “Water Balance Analysis System” Surface Hydrology Model Aquifer Model Aquatic Ecosystem Model  Environmental/Conservation Organization  Business/Industry/Utilities  Agriculture  State Planners  State government  Citizens Inputs from Advisory Team Comprised of Reps. From :  Law, regulations, and institutions  Identification of Alternatives  Impact of Alternatives on Trout Survival  Identification of Offsets and Mitigation and Impacts  Monitoring Dispute Resolution Implementing a Market Based Alternatives System Site Selection Developing a Web Site for Transactions Web-Site for Transactions User Assistance Interface Market-based Alternatives (A Hypothetical Demonstration Project ) Market-based Alternatives (A Hypothetical Demonstration Project ) User Assistance Interface Vulnerability Mapping Developing a User Assistance Interface Database Integration Central Tracking Database System Linkage and Flows of the Entire Study Process

Current Advisory Team Members Representatives from: Consumers EnergyGreat Lakes National Resource Center, National Wildlife Federation Michigan Turf Grass FoundationNational Association of Conservation Districts Ice MountainWisconsin Department of Natural Resources Trout UnlimitedMichigan Department of Agriculture Tip of the Mitt Watershed CouncilMichigan Department of Environmental Quality Michigan Farm BureauOffice of the Great Lakes, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Public Sector Consultants Inc.Michigan Municipal League Michigan United Conservation ClubsMichigan Manufacturers Association

Three major project components Water Balance Analysis System Market-Based Alternatives User Assistance Interface

First project component “Water Balance Analysis System” Identify critical watershed Integrated assessments Dynamic with trade-offs Impacts of land-use changes on water surface/ground water and groundwater withdraws on base flow and trout habitat

Second project component “Market-based Alternatives” Identify the necessary market conditions and legal framework necessary for a market based alternatives With a hypothetical case embedded with real data from Augusta Creek watershed, examine alternative market based mechanisms for maintaining a safe minimum standard of water temperature for brook trout. Examine mitigation and offset alternatives and their impacts on water temperature and trout survival

Third project component “User Assistant Interface” Develop a User Assistance Interface which identifies critical habitat by clear watershed boundaries Provide information on impact on cost of mitigation and offsets

Project Team Site Visit, Augusta Creek Watershed, September 21, 2005

Evolution in Ground Water Allocation: State Experiences William E. Cox Civil and Environmental Engineering Virginia Tech

Trading Programs for Environmental Protection: Lessons and Experiences Kurt Stephenson Virginia Tech May12, 2005

Today’s Meeting Goals Update on project progress and water policy issues Discuss the use of the Assessment Tool for assisting the permitting process and how our project components fit within this tool Demonstrate the impacts of management scenarios on base flow in the Augusta Creek using ground water model Suggestions for future development of the “User Assistance Interface”

Today’s Agenda

9:30Welcome, Updates, Agenda, and the Context and Components of the Project (Jon Bartholic/Sandra Batie) 9:40Growing Water (David Rankin) 9:50Ground Water Resource Management in MI (Bill Rustem) 10:00Assessment Tool: Water Balance Analysis System and Water Conservation Offset Trading Process  Overview (Jon Bartholic)  Illustration of the Process (Jeremiah Asher)  Evaluation/Screening (Steve Miller)  Experts & Additional Models (Modeling Team)  Mitigations/Credits Offsets (Sandra Batie/Mike Kaplowitz) 11:30Discussion 12:00Lunch 1:00Case Study: the Water Balance Analysis System/Integration Results and Applications for the Augusta Creek Watershed (Steve Miller) 1:15Demonstration the Use of Water Balance Analysis System for Conservation Credit Offsets (Bill Northcott/Shu-Guang Li/Lizhu Wan) 2:15Discussion 3:10Next Steps and Next Meeting (Jon Bartholic and Sandra Batie) 3:30Adjourn