The Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems Research
A new Great Lakes regional research institute
1 July 2007 – 30 June 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Signed Title Page ....................................................................................................................... 2
II. Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 3
III. Results from Prior Research ..................................................................................................... 5
IV. Project Description ................................................................................................................... 7
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Overview ................................................................................................................................ 7
CILER Vision, Mission, Goals and Objectives ..................................................................... 9
Research Themes – Tasks I, II, and III ................................................................................ 12
Educational Resources ......................................................................................................... 54
Business Plan ........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Performance Measures ......................................................................................................... 60
V. Budget Justification..................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
VI. Vita .........................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
VII. Current and Pending Support ................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
1
I. Signed Title Page
The Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems Research:
A new Great Lakes regional research institute
A Proposal to the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Principal Investigator:
Donald Scavia
School of Natural Resources & Environment
University of Michigan
440 Church Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1115
Phone: 734-615-4960
scavia@umich.edu
Budget period – July 1, 2007 – June 30, 2012
Year 1:
Year 2:
Year 3:
Year 4:
Year 5:
Total:
$2,999,468
$4,998,032
$4,996,881
$4,999,303
$4,999,938
$22,993,622
09/18/2006
________________________________________________________________________
Donald Scavia
Date
2
The Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems Research:
A new Great Lakes regional research institute
Principal Investigator: Donald Scavia
Co-Principal Investigators: Anders Andren (University of Wisconsin-Madison), Jeff Gunderson
(University of Minnesota), Robert Light (Penn State University), Phil Mankin (University of
Illinois Urbana-Champaign), Jack Mattice (Stony Brook University), Jeffrey Reutter (Ohio State
University)
Co-Investigators: Rosina Bierbaum, Dmitry Beletsky, Carlo DeMarchi, Tomas Höök, Thomas
Johengen, Donna Kashian, Maria Carmen Lemos, Larissa Sano, Alan Wilson, Steven Yaffee
(University of Michigan), James Bence, Joan Rose (Michigan State University), Kevin Brown
(National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago), Rosanne Fortner (Emeritus, The
Ohio State University), Johan Gottgens, Carol Stepien (University of Toledo), Val Klump
(University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee), Praveen Kumar, James Wescoat (University of Illinois
Urbana-Champaign), Ed Mills (Cornell University), Gerald Niemi (University of Minnesota –
Duluth), Eric Obert (Penn State University), Alan Steinman (Grand Valley State University)
Collaborators: See Table 1
Total Budget: $22,993,622
Budget Period: July 1, 2007 – June 30, 2012
II. Abstract
This proposal is for a five-year plan to establish a Great Lakes Cooperative Institute to facilitate
and engage in a range of research, educational and outreach activities in the North American
Great Lakes region. The Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems Research
(CILER) is proposed as a center of excellence, with a primary mission to support critical
research objectives of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). CILER
will accomplish this mission by providing partnering opportunities that will complement
NOAA’s internal research capabilities, lending essential technical support to high priority
research areas, strengthening and integrating knowledge across Great Lakes’ Universities, and
serving as a focal point for NOAA research in the Great Lakes region. Another high priority
area for CILER will be to facilitate educational and outreach opportunities in the Great Lakes,
both by highlighting regional research programs and by providing essential educational, research,
and training opportunities for students. The proposed research mission of CILER parallels
NOAA’s research priorities and includes six broad themes: 1) Great Lakes Forecasting; 2)
Invasive Species, Control, Impact, and Assessment; 3) Great Lakes Observing System; 4)
Protection and Restoration of Resources; 5) Integrated Assessment; and 6) Great Lakes
Education and Outreach.
The more than 150 collaborators from 30 different institutions that constitute the new
Cooperative Institute will bring a wealth of physical resources and intellectual expertise for
addressing a broad range of high priority research, educational, and outreach issues in the Great
3
Lakes region. In addition, the formation of a management team to oversee CILER’s operations
will further enhance the Institute’s performance by providing guidance to the Institute and by
facilitating and strengthening the Institute’s regional collaborations.
4
III. Results from Prior Research
The participants on this proposal bring a strong record of demonstrated success and excellence in
conducting Federally-funded research in the Great Lakes region. The lead principal investigator
of this proposal, Donald Scavia, has a demonstrated record of success in conducting research in
the Great Lakes and in running large, multidisciplinary research programs, including several
integrated assessment projects of coastal hypoxia causes and consequences. Dr. Scavia also has
extensive experience participating on, and coordinating, regional educational and outreach
efforts. The other principal investigators on this proposal also bring experience in leading
regional research, outreach, and education initiatives. Jeff Gunderson brings experience as a lead
PI on several regional outreach projects. Dr. Gunderson was lead PI on a NOAA Sea Grant
National Strategic Initiative Project, to assess the application of hazard analysis and critical
control point applications for preventing the spread of non-native species. Phil Mankin similarly
brings to this project extensive experience leading projects in the Great Lakes region, including
several funded by NOAA, USFWS, FAA, and the USGS. Co-principal investigator Jeffrey
Reutter has experience leading several Federally-funded research and educational programs,
including an NSF-Funded program to develop a biocomplexity proposal to model human,
biological, and physical processes in Lake Erie. He was also the lead PI on a NOAA-funded
proposal for the Great Lakes Regional Research and Information Network (GLRRIN).
The other co-investigators on the proposal similarly bring strong records of experience in
conducting research, education, and outreach in the Great Lakes region. Some examples are as
follows: Rosina Bierbaum, the current Dean of the School of Natural Resources and
Environment, brings extensive experience Federal experience related to climate change. Dr.
Bierbaum spearheaded several Federal assessments related to climate change and was lead
author on reports that formed the foundation for U.S. policy on the issue. Dmitry Beletsky has
experience working on multidisciplinary teams in the Great Lakes region. He co-led the
hydrodynamic modeling component of a joint NSF/OCE NOAA/COP program, the Episodic
Events – Great Lakes Experiment (EEGLE), which was a five-year multidisciplinary program on
the impact of episodic events on the coastal ecosystem of the Great Lakes. Tom Johengen has
experience leading regional field projects, including participating as a lead research scientists on
parts of the EEGLE field program. Rosanne Fortner has a history of coordinating and
developing educational initiatives in the region. More recently, Dr. Fortner collaborated with Dr.
Scavia, and several of the other investigators on this proposal, in leading the regional proposal
effort for a Great Lakes Center of Ocean Science Education Excellence (COSEE), co-funded by
NSF and NOAA. Maria Carmen Lemos has expertise in researching human dimension of global
climate change and in assessing the impact of seasonal climate change in policy making. Dr.
Lemos has served as co-PI on NSF-funded proposals to evaluate the human dimensions of
climate change in Latin America. James Bence has extensive experience concerning fishery
resource issues in the Great Lakes. He has led initiatives to develop centers of excellence for
quantitative fisheries science at Michigan State University. Johans Gottgens has experience in
coordinating and administering large research grants. He is currently a participant on a large
project funded by the USDA to assess the design of passive biological treatment systems for
arsenic. Carol Stepien, director of the Lake Erie Center at University of Toledo, brings a range
of experience to this proposal, including her research efforts related to the application of genetic
5
techniques to studies of fish ecology in the Great Lakes. Dr. Stepien also has extensive
educational experience, demonstrated by her participation in the Research Experience for
Undergraduates program at the University of Toledo. Praveen Kumar has served as the principal
investigator on several NOAA, NSF, and NASA projects focusing on large-scale hydrology,
climate change applications, and hydroinformatics. Steven Yaffee is currently director of the
Ecosystem Management Initiative at the University of Michigan. He brings to the proposal more
than twenty years of experience related to public lands and ecosystem management policy. Joan
Rose is currently the director of the Center for Water Sciences at Michigan State University. She
brings to this proposal extensive experience in a broad range of topics related to water quality.
Finally, the current Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems Research has a long
track-record of coordinating and conducting regional research programs in the Great Lakes area
and a demonstrated record of working with NOAA and other federal funding agencies to address
critical research needs. The Cooperative Institute recently completed a successful 5-year review
in June 2005. The highlights of the Institute and its progress are highlighted in this report
(http://ciler.snre.umich.edu/review/CILER_Review_Binder_Final.pdf). Some of the relevant
successes of CILER’s initiatives include participating on the EPA-funded Lake Michigan Mass
Balance Study (LMMB). LMMB was a five-year study designed to develop a sound scientific
base of information with which to guide future toxic load reduction efforts. This study
developed the most comprehensive ecosystem scale model ever attempted in order to forecast
containment levels in top-level fishes starting with land-derived sources and incorporating
multiple, sub-component water quality and trophic dynamic models. CILER also helped NOAA
to bring to fruition a major research effort titled, The Impact of Episodic Events on the
Nearshore-Offshore Transport of Biogeochemically Important Materials in the Great Lakes.
This program represented a culmination of nearly 20 years of regional planning and coordination
by the NOAA and the academic research community. The overall goals of the program were to
establish an integrated observing program and numerical modeling effort to identify, quantify,
and develop forecasting tools to assess the impact of nearshore resuspension events on the
transport and transformation of biogeochemically important material and the ecology of the
ecosystem. More recently, CILER played an active role in the major research program in Lake
Erie (IFYLE) to examine the ecological effects of hypoxia in the central basin of Lake Erie and
the factors contributing to the increased predominance of harmful algal blooms. The IFYLE
program involved approximately 40 scientists from NOAA, 17 different universities, and private
institutions spread across 7 states and Canada. A final example of the benefits and contributions
of a regionally based CI is the establishment of CILER as the Great Lakes regional partner for
the Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT). ACT is a national consortium or research
institutions working with NOAA to promote the development and application of coastal
observing systems to support resource management needs. ACT offers numerous ways to
support the ongoing research efforts of IOOS and the developing regional observing system
associations, such as GLOS, through its sensor-testing program, technology needs assessment
workshops, training programs, and information clearinghouse on sensor technologies.
Specific information about these grants and awards is provided in Appendix A.
6
IV. Project Description
a. Overview
Introduction
This proposal is for a new Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems Research
(CILER) that will facilitate research and education in the Great Lakes region by forming a center
of research excellence and by increasing education and outreach opportunities in the Great Lakes
region in support of NOAA’s missions. This proposed Cooperative Institute will replace an
existing one bearing its name: The current CILER is housed at the University of Michigan,
where it has been facilitating NOAA research in the Great Lakes region since 1989. The new
proposed Cooperative Institute will build off of the strong foundation that CILER has created
during its history at the University of Michigan. This new Institute, however, will differ
substantively from its predecessor: It will be a truly regional initiative, culling intellectual
expertise and physical resources from throughout the area. This will be accomplished through an
extensive network of university collaborators and a formal regional consortium that brings
together collaborators from a multitude of research establishments to address the most pressing
natural resource issues and their related human dimensions in the Great Lakes region. To this
end, this proposed Cooperative Institute will provide a range of capabilities to conduct, integrate,
and coordinate research in the Great Lakes region addressing priority science needs across
NOAA. The proposed Cooperative Institute will also engage in extensive educational and
research activities that provide substantial opportunities for undergraduate and graduate students,
and for postdoctoral fellows in order to help train and mentor the next generation of scientists.
Finally, the Cooperative Institute will integrate outreach components into its research and
educational missions, in order to disseminate information to the public, generate useful
information for decision makers, and generally strengthen the relationship between the research
and policy communities in the region.
Great Lakes Regional Resources
The North American Great Lakes region is characterized by expansive wilderness areas,
productive agricultural lands, and numerous stream, riverine, and lake environments. The
habitats of the region range from sand dunes to coastal marshlands, from forests to rocky
shorelines, from lake plain prairies to savannas. Many of these habitats and ecosystems are truly
outstanding: The Great Lakes sand dunes, for example, are one of the largest freshwater sand
dune systems in the world and home to several native and unique species (Albert 2000). Perhaps
the most defining feature of the region is the Great Lakes themselves, which are arguably one of
the nation’s greatest natural resources. The five Great Lakes combined contain more than 22,000
km3 of freshwater and comprise the largest single body of freshwater in the world, containing
20% of the Earth’s surface freshwater supply and 90% of the surface freshwater in the United
States.
The diversity of ecosystems in the Great Lakes creates a region rich in natural resources. The
various habitats and ecosystems within the basin contain more than 130 rare species and
ecosystems. As many as 180 species of fish are native to the Great Lakes, including small- and
7
large-mouth bass, muskellunge, northern pike, lake herring, lake trout, yellow perch, walleye,
and whitefish (Scott and Crossman 1998, Coon 1999). Other aquatic organisms, such as
phytoplankton, zooplankton, aquatic insects, freshwater clams, and snails also play important
roles in Great Lakes ecosystems. They not only provide a forage base for recreationally and
commercially important fisheries, but also support ecological functions that provide ecosystem
services such as potable water and high human living standards. The long term viability of such
resources is key for the future sustainability of the Great Lakes, both for native biodiversity and
for human populations.
The Great Lakes region is also home to more than 35 million U.S and Canadian residents and
houses some of the nation’s major metropolitan and manufacturing areas. This combination of
large urban populations and abundant natural resources has often resulted in overexploitation of
ecosystems and environmental degradation. Today, fewer than half the region’s original forest
and wetland areas remain. Important fishery resources, such as lake trout, yellow perch, and
walleye, are vulnerable to overexploitation. Human activities have facilitated the introduction of
numerous terrestrial and aquatic non-native species into the region. Numerous aquatic and
terrestrial non-native species have become established in the region and are currently threatening
native populations and impair ecosystem functions. Clearly, careful management of these
natural resources, including both protection of remaining aquatic resources and restoration of
disturbed aquatic ecosystems, is of vital importance.
Several recent community-wide efforts (e.g., Great Lakes Regional Collaboration, Healing our
Waters coalition, The Nature Conservancy Biodiversity Assessment) have identified the most
critical threats to natural resources in the basin and developed recommendations to help protect
and restore Great Lakes resources. Some of the key recommendations from these efforts are: 1)
stop the introduction of additional invasive species into the region; 2) augment habitat
conservation and species management; 3) protect nearshore water and coastal areas to preserve
water quality and recreational opportunities; 4) remediate and restore areas of concern; 5)
decrease non-point sources of pollution; and 6) reduce toxic pollutant releases in the region
(Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy 2005). These recommendations are paralleled in
recently introduced Federal legislation on Great Lakes restoration, and have been supported and
refined in the white paper, “Prescription for Great Lakes Ecosystem Protection and Restoration:
Avoiding the Tipping Point of Irreversible Changes.” This paper has been endorsed by more
than 200 scientists from both within and outside the Great Lakes basin.
CILER Support to NOAA’s Mission in the Great Lakes Region
The Cooperative Institute will support NOAA’s mission to “understand and predict changes in
the Earth’s environment and conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to meet our
Nation’s economic, social, and environmental needs (NOAA Strategic Plan FY2005-2010)”,
with special emphasis on the Great Lakes Region. To help achieve this mission, NOAA has
identified the following four programmatic goals:


Ecosystems: To protect, restore, and manage the use of coastal and ocean resources
through an ecosystems-based approach to management.
Climate: Understand climate variability and change to enhance society’s ability to plan
and respond.
8


Commerce & Transportation: To serve the nation’s commerce with information for safe,
efficient, and environmentally sound transportation.
Weather & Water: To serve society’s needs for weather and water information.
NOAA has also outlined strategies to help achieve its goals, including: 1) Monitoring and
observing the land, sea, atmosphere, and space to create an observational and data collection
network that tracks Earth’s changing systems; 2) Understanding and describing how natural
systems work together through investigation and interpretation of information; 3) Assessing and
predicting the changes of natural systems and provide information about the future; 4) Engaging,
advising, and informing individuals, partners, communities and industries to facilitate
information flow, assure coordination and cooperation, and providing assistance in the use,
evaluation, and application of information; and 5) Managing coastal and ocean resources to
optimize benefits to the environment, the economy, and public safety These strategies will also
guide CILER’s objectives.
In addition to the overarching mission and associated goals, NOAA has several Federal mandates
for pursuing research in the Great Lakes region. These include the Regional Marine Research
Programs (16 U.S.C. § 1446B), the National Climate Program Act (15 U.S.C. § 2901), the
Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998 (33 U.S.C. § 145), and the
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978 – Amended 1987, among others. NOAA’s
research investment in the Great Lakes region is further reflected through its Great Lakes
Environmental Research Lab, which is located in the Great Lakes region with a mandate to
conduct research related to the Great Lakes and other coastal ecosystems.
b. CILER Vision, Mission, Goals and Objectives
To meet the needs for ecosystem and human systems research in the region that are reflected in
NOAA’s mission and objectives, the expertise of a range of disciplines is needed. The new
proposed Cooperative Institute will provide this expertise by serving as a center of excellence for
scientific, education and outreach expertise in the Great Lakes basin, and a portal to the
universities of the region.
CILER Vision: To fully engage participants from universities throughout the Great Lakes region
that carry out research, education, and outreach in order to help address NOAA’s highest
priorities in the Great Lakes region.
CILER Mission: To engage in research that improves understanding of the fundamental physical,
chemical, biological, ecological, social, and economic processes operating in the Great Lakes
region and identifying the critical socio-economic drivers and feedbacks shaping natural resource
use and conservation in the Great Lakes basin.
CILER Goals: 1) To improve forecasts that facilitate restoration and protection of critical natural
resources, help guide management decisions, and support sustainable economic development in
the region; and 2) To disseminate scientific information for the general public, highlight NOAA
research initiatives in the region, and provide training opportunities for students, teachers, and
the general public.
9
CILER Objectives:
 To engage in research on Great Lakes forecasting, Invasive species, Environmental
observing systems, Protection and restoration of resources, Integrated assessment, and
Education and outreach in support of NOAA’s mission and strategic goals
 To coordinate and facilitate regional research programs in the Great Lakes fegion.
 To mentor and train the next generation of researchers through research and educational
opportunities.
 To provide educational and outreach opportunities in aquatic research for both NOAA and
the academic community.
 To disseminate and communicate research results for the general public.
CILER Tasks: CILER will accomplish these objectives through the following tasks:
Task I: Administrative Activities: Activities that fall under this task are related to CILER
management and education and outreach activities of the Institute. The latter include support for
a competitive postdoctoral fellows program, a Great Lakes student fellows program, a visiting
scientist program, a competitive grant program for undergraduate and graduate students, and a
joint NOAA-CILER Great Lakes seminar series.
Task II: Projects that are conducted in collaboration with NOAA scientists. The projects are
usually facilitated through co-location of Federal and CILER employees. For the majority of
projects, these will involve direct collaboration with researchers from the Great Lakes
Environmental Research Lab or another regional NOAA Office (e.g., Thunder Bay Marine
Sanctuary).
Task III: Projects that generally require only minimal direct collaboration with NOAA scientists.
Projects that fall under this Task will include, for example, research that is funded by other
NOAA competitive grant programs.
Implementation Timeline
Our goal is to transition targeted, individual research projects to more coordinated, larger,
regional, collaborative research. The emphasis in the first two years will be on streamlining the
research plan and on initiating several regional research programs related to the five primary
research themes.
Year 1
- Continue research on currently-funded NOAA proposals.
- Begin searching for a permanent CILER Director.
- Lay the groundwork for implementing the full CILER research agenda.
- Create opportunities for all universities in the Great Lakes region to participate in CILER.
- Encourage interactions between interdisciplinary teams in related sub-themes with the goal
of achieving a specified agenda and developing the foundation for future collaborations.
10
This will be accomplished largely through workshops and associated needs assessment
documents.
- Identify new opportunities for regional research projects.
- Implement new educational activities by initiating a competitive postdoctoral program, a
distinguished visiting fellows program. Revamp and expand the existing Great Lakes
Summer Student Fellows program.
- Pursue outreach activities to strengthen partnerships with stakeholders, including regional
policymakers. This may include assessing the use of legislative forums to update elected
officials throughout the Great Lakes on CILER research, new initiatives, etc.
Year 2
- Continue to identify topics of importance for regional research initiatives.
- Begin to implement the full CILER research agenda.
- Develop proposals to pursue the research outlined in this proposal effort and as identified
from Year 1 efforts (particularly new initiatives identified from workshop efforts).
- Fully implement educational programs.
- Hold outreach activities identified in Year 1 which will strengthen partnerships with
stakeholders. This may include a legislative forum to highlight NOAA-CILER partnership
and research, education, and outreach initiatives.
Year 3
- Continue activities as defined in Year 2.
- Implement, where possible, collaborative research projects identified in years 1-2.
- Actively pursue research proposals and education and outreach opportunities.
- Continue hosting and facilitating workshops that facilitate development of regional research
programs and identify critical research needs in the region.
- Emphasize scientific and education/outreach output, in terms of publications, papers,
outreach materials, education events, etc.
- Continue with outreach activities initiated in Year 2.
Year 4
- Continue activities and research projects from Year 3
- Emphasize productivity across research themes.
- Identify new research opportunities, strengthen existing ones.
- Continue with outreach activities
Year 5
- Continue activities and research projects from Year 4.
- Evaluate and highlight 5-year achievements for performance review.
- Begin laying groundwork for next 5 years of research.
11
c. Research Themes – Tasks I, II, and III
TASK I – ADMINISTRATION
Administrative Task I Activities (Task 1A)
The primary role of CILER administration is to support research carried out under the auspices
of the Cooperative Institute. Two of the most important administrative tasks will be facilitating
financial elements of the consortium and developing, implementing, and coordinating multiuniversity, regional research programs. The other administrative activities that are important to
the Cooperative Institute include interacting with principal investigators, communicating with
NOAA research and administrative staff, and providing administrative support for CILER
postdoctoral fellows, visiting fellows, student fellows, and research staff. The administrative
structure and organizational relationships of the Cooperative Institute are further detailed under
the business plan section.
Non-administrative Task I Programs (Task IB)
Non-administrative Task I programs will include education and outreach efforts that serve
CILER and all collaborating scientists. These programs will provide resources, such as visiting
fellows and research grant awards, to CILER investigators both at the University of Michigan, at
Consortium universities, and at any location with CILER investigators. Additional education
and outreach activities, outside of Task 1B, will also be pursued as part of separate project
activities, such as the ones that would result from Task II and III research. Funding for these
Task 1B programs will be sought from numerous sources, by encouraging the use of a 2%
program development change on Task II and Task III research projects will be used to fund Task
1B activities. These activities, in turn, would benefit all participants in the Cooperative Institute
and assist both NOAA and CILER in achieving their missions.
Postdoctoral Fellows Program – This program provides salary and research support for one
post-doctoral fellow a year who will work closely with a CILER investigator on a project of
mutual interest. The program is administered as a Task I activity, because it will be a
competitively awarded position based on funds that are not associated with a specific research
project. All CILER investigators will be eligible to participate in the program by submitting
descriptions of opportunities for a post-doctoral fellow. A single position will be selected based
on a review, and then advertised to solicit applications from potential postdoctoral fellows. The
most qualified applicant will then be awarded the position, with guaranteed funding for the
position being provided for the first year of the fellow’s appointment. The placement could be at
a NOAA lab or at any other site in the Great Lakes region where a CILER investigator is located.
The goal of this program is to enhance training and research opportunities for postdoctoral
fellows and to provide opportunities for CILER investigators to engage in new research projects
that help support NOAA’s mission in the Great Lakes region.
Visiting Distinguish Scientist Program - The purpose of the visiting scientist program is to enrich
the research environment for NOAA scientists and CILER investigators by promoting
collaborations between researchers. The program will provide travel costs and an honorarium
12
for distinguished scientists interested in collaborating with NOAA researchers or CILER
investigators at any site within the Great Lakes basin.
Great Lakes Summer Student Fellows Program – As part of its efforts to educate and train a new
generation of research scientists, the new Cooperative Institute proposes to expand upon the
current Great Lakes Summer Student Fellows Program. The objective of this program is to train
promising young scientists under the mentorship of a Great Lakes researcher. In turn, the
program provides students the opportunity to work on a substantive research issue in the Great
Lakes that supports NOAA’s research missions in the region. In the current manifestation of the
program, approximately 25 student fellows per year are placed with NOAA and CILER scientists.
The new Cooperative Institute would seek to build upon the success of the current program, but
also expand it to include other regional institutes. In addition, the new fellows program would
better integrate with other fellowship programs in the region. For example, several Great Lakes’
universities in the region have successful Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU)
programs. The University of Toledo hosts one of the nation’s longest running REU programs
(http://remotesensing.utoledo.edu/resch/reu/REUONE/index.html) in which students
participate in various aspects of an interdisciplinary research project (e.g., environmental
protection of the Maumee River watershed: ). The new fellows program will provide students
with more opportunities throughout the Great Lakes region and will, in turn, help foster
additional collaborations between different Great Lakes institutions and NOAA offices.
Undergraduate and Graduate Research Enhancement –To enhance undergraduate and graduate
research opportunities in the Great Lakes region, CILER proposes to administer a competitive
research award program. This program would award funds to undergraduate and graduate
students working with a CILER investigator on a project that supports NOAA’s mission in the
Great Lakes and as outlined in this proposal. This would include any NOAA-relevant research
that occurs under the auspices of CILER collaborators at universities and research labs
throughout the basin. Approximately 5 stipends of $6,000 each will be awarded annually. These
funds can be used by the awardees to cover a range of items including stipend, travel, research
supplies, and publication costs. This program will be modeled after similar competitive
programs, such as NOAA’s competitive fellowships in Fish Population Dynamics and Resource
Economics. Research proposals will be evaluated by the Council of Fellows, with final decisions
made by the CILER Director.
NOAA-CILER Seminar Series – As part of its efforts to achieve its scientific vision and its
education and outreach missions, CILER proposes to sponsor and coordinate a joint NOAACILER Seminar Series. This series will bring in regional, national, and international researchers
to talk about pertinent new and emerging scientific topics both to GLERL and the University of
Michigan and to other universities and sites within the Great Lakes region. These events will
facilitate collaborations between researchers, provide an educational opportunity for NOAA and
university scientists, and serve as an outreach forum for stakeholders and the general public to
attend.
13
CILER RESEARCH PROGRAM – TASKS II AND III
Overview of Institutional Resources
The Principle Investigator and Co-Principle Investigators on this proposal are the Directors of
the Great Lakes Sea Grant programs. Additional collaborators on this proposal are from
institutions that are members of the broader consortium and represent a range and diversity of
universities and institutions from throughout the Great Lakes Region. This collaboration of
universities from throughout the Great Lakes region represents a unique opportunity to identify
the intellectual and educational resources of the region. The Cooperative Institute would
capitalize on this opportunity by working to integrate knowledge across disciplines and
organizations in order to enhance the research, educational, and outreach opportunities that serve
the scientific community and larger society as a whole.
At the time of proposal preparation the proposed Cooperative Institute will includes 239
scientists from 39 institutions in 10 states in the United States and Canada. Some of the schools
represented include the University of Michigan, Bowling Green State University, Buffalo State
College, Case Western University, Clarkson University, Cornell University, Georgia Institute of
Technology, Grand Valley State University, Indiana University, Kent State University, Miami
University of Ohio, Michigan State University, Michigan Technological University, Niagara
University, Purdue University, The Ohio State University, Penn State University, Rochester
Institute of Technology, Stony Brook University, the State University of New York (at Albany,
at Brockport, at Buffalo, and at ESF), University of Chicago, University of Minnesota at Twin
Cities, University of Minnesota at Duluth, University of Notre Dame, University of Illinois
Urbana-Champaign, University of Toledo, University of Toronto, University of Wisconsin –
Green Bay, University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, University
of Windsor, University of Vermont, Wayne State University, and Western Michigan University.
We anticipate the list to grow over time. The intellectual capabilities within these institutions are
outlined below within each of the Themes, and the infrastructure capabilities are detailed in
Appendix B.
Theme I: Great Lakes Forecasting
Section 1: Overview of Research Needs and Priorities
The ability to forecast and project physical and ecological dynamics the Great Lakes region
supports all four of NOAA’s missions goals: 1) To protect, restore, and manage use of coastal
and ocean resource through ecosystem approach to management; 2) To understand climate
variability and change to enhance society’s ability to plan and respond; 3) To serve society’s
needs for weather and water information; and 4) To support the Nation’s commerce with
information for safe, efficient, and environmentally sound transportation. Developing new, and
improving existing, forecasts also supports several areas of critical need in the Great Lakes
region including physical hazards, water levels, water quality, harmful algal blooms, fish
recruitment and productivity, and invasive species impacts (GLERL Science Strategy 2006).
14
The development and application of these types of forecasts rely on a solid understanding of the
integrated effects of physical, chemical, biological, and anthropogenic influences that determine
current ecosystem state and allow for predicting future ecosystem responses. To support
NOAA’s short- and long-term research objectives in the Great Lakes, The proposed Cooperative
Institute has set four objectives for this theme:




To develop and improve physical forecasting models, with an emphasis on connecting
weather, climate, and lake conditions.
To integrate physical and biological models for improving ecosystem forecasts.
To develop methods to assess potential environmental risks to human health.
To enhance the understanding of climate changes in the region and improve the ability to
project regional impacts under different climatic conditions.
A range of research approaches will be used to meet these objectives including empirical
analyses of current and historic datasets, field-based experimental and monitoring programs of
ecosystem conditions; and development, parameterization, and validation of integrated
forecasting models. Consistent with the goals of the Cooperative Institute, proposed research in
this theme will enhance NOAA’s technical base and foster ecosystem-based approaches to
resource management in the Great Lakes region.
Section 2: Cooperative Institute Capabilities
The collaborators for the proposed Cooperative Institute bring a wide range of resources and
intellectual capabilities to conduct research related to Great Lakes forecasting, including more
than 130 CILER investigators coming from throughout the Great Lakes region and beyond
(Table 1). The breadth of expertise of these investigators will allow CILER to address current
NOAA research objectives and missions and to respond to future critical research needs. To
adequately address the research objectives described above, the intellectual capabilities of the
Cooperative Institute span multiple disciplines and are as follows:
Intellectual Capabilities
Physical Forecasting - Expertise in this area includes environmental dispersion modeling,
environmental fluid mechanics modeling, fate and transport modeling, lake circulation and
dynamics, wave generation and propagation, sediment processes and transport, aeronautical and
environmental engineering, surf zone processes and environmental transport phenomena,
groundwater flow and multi-component reactive transport modeling, integrating subsurfacesurface water connections, and hydrodynamic modeling for predictions of temperature and
circulation patterns.
Ecological Forecasting - Expertise in this area includes sedimentation and historical
reconstructions of past ecological communities, microbial ecology, phytoplankton ecology and
physiology, zooplankton food web dynamics, and community and ecosystem ecology; watershed
hydrology, remote sensing applications to ecosystem models; assimilation of measured data with
computer models and time series analysis to improve prediction in ecological systems;
15
experience with developing regional ocean modeling systems for applications in ecological box
modeling of nutrient-oxygen-plankton dynamics; application of in-situ sensor data to establish
scale-dependent correlations between organisms and their environment; development of genomic
indicators of ecological and environmental health; application of biogeochemistry and
metagenomics studies of P, N and C in the Great Lakes; and biomarker development for
measuring exposure and effects of emerging contaminants of concern.
Human Health Risk Forecasting - Expertise for this area includes experience with source
apportionment, transport, and degradation of environmental pollutants, multiple toxicity models,
water and wastewater treatment, bioremediation, and pollution prevention programs, research
into pathogen transport modeling and prediction of beach closures in the Great Lakes,
assessment of factors influencing the time-dependent inactivation or die-off of bacteria, viruses
and protozoan parasites, and model-based hypothesis testing to identify key point and non-point
sources of bacteria and pathogens.
Section 3: Proposed Research Areas and Projects
Below we outline example research projects under this theme. Many of these research efforts
also contribute to projects in the Integrated Assessment Theme (V), and many of the efforts
outlined in the Education and Outreach Theme (VI) will build from this research.
A. Physical Forecasts
The ability to predict physical conditions in the Great Lakes region is fundamental for most other
forecasts described in this proposal. In addition, physical forecasts themselves provide important
information about hazardous weather and water conditions that impact transportation, emergency
response systems, and human health. This type of research is critical to all of NOAA’s mission
goal areas identified in the NOAA Strategic Plan. The Cooperative Institute will undertake
research directed at improving current physical models to better predict weather and water states
in the Great Lakes and promoting the application of these models to ecosystem, human health,
and climate change forecasting.

Physical hazard forecasting. High-resolution observations and predictions of the physical
aquatic environment are required by boaters and by planning and decision-making
entities, including water quality managers. Proposed research under this sub theme will
focus on developing and improving forecasts of the lake environment including ice
conditions, wind waves, nearshore and offshore currents and mixing, water temperature,
coastal erosion, and water levels. The effort will focus on developing and improving
models to forecast hazardous weather and lake conditions through model verification and
transition to operational status.

Biological and chemical hazards forecasting: Physical processes have a strong influence
on biological and chemical hazards in the Great Lakes region. Because physical
processes largely control the transport and mixing of bacteria, pathogens, and chemical
hazards, these models are critical for predicting conditions that may be hazardous to
human health. The Cooperative Institute will undertake research that applies physical
16
models to predict a range of hazardous conditions caused by chemical spills, water-borne
bacteria and pathogens, and contaminated sediments. The proposed projects will
integrate hydrological and hydrodynamic models with field data and remote sensing data
to predict transport of pathogens and bacteria to public beaches. Field studies and
modeling will examine the role of physical processes in contaminant transport, mixing,
and resuspension. Biological and hydrodynamic models will be integrated for harmful
algal bloom prediction. In addition, the development of these forecasts have several
important applications, including for homeland defense uses such as assisting with port
security and evaluating exposures from biohazardous releases, etc. Research conducted
in this area will strongly support efforts described under Human Health forecasts
(described below).

Water quantity forecasting. Assessing seasonal and interannual changes in the water
balance of the lakes is fundamental to the operational management and long-term
planning of hydropower, maritime transportation, marina operations, lake-resort
operations, coastal economic development projects, and drinking water extraction.
Further, water levels directly affect the quality and availability of important nearshore
habitats, which provide nursery habitat for many important Great Lakes fish species. The
proposed Cooperative Institute will undertake and coordinate projects related to water
quantity forecasts by supporting the further development and refinement of the physical
models (e.g., hydrological models, watershed models, meteorological models) to improve
predictions of water quantity in the Great Lakes. Many of these applications will provide
partnering opportunities with a range of stakeholders, including the National Weather
Service, power companies, and maritime companies.
B. Ecosystem Forecasts
Improving the ability to predict ecosystem state and condition (Valette-Silver and Scavia 2003,
Clark et al. 2001) is part of NOAA’s essential research mission. Adequately predicting
ecosystem state can improve management of natural resources in the region and assist in
forecasting potential threats to ecosystem and human health. The development of ecosystem
forecasts, however, depends critically on both the physical models that drive many ecological
processes and a basic understanding of the biology and ecology of the ecosystem of interest. The
proposed Cooperative Institute will support NOAA’s missions related to Ecosystem Forecasts
both by integrating physical-chemical-biological models that form the basis for describing and
predicting ecosystem conditions and by collecting additional data on biological resources that are
essential for developing and validating these models. Because the Great Lakes region is also
heavily affected by the coupling of terrestrial and aquatic systems, an emphasis of this section
will be on modeling approaches integrating land-water connections. Proposed projects in this
sub theme are as follows:
 Assessment of biotic resources: The ability to manage and forecast biological resources in
the Great Lakes region depends upon accurate and adequate data on organism abundance and
distribution. In addition, these data are essential for developing and validating any type of
forecasts of ecological resources. Efforts in this sub theme will be directed at gathering and
synthesizing data about Great Lakes biota including: 1) assessment and mapping of
17
phytoplankton community structure and productivity and relationship between phytoplankton
community composition and water quality; 2) acoustic monitoring of fish stocks to identify
vertical and horizontal distributions of fish; 3) assessment and mapping of nearshore biota
throughout the Great Lakes region; 4) quantification and characterization of the genetic
delineation of critical biological resources; and 5) identification of meta-populations and
communities within the Great Lakes to facilitate resource management decisions.
 Modeling biological-physical interactions: It is well known that environmental conditions
have an important effect on biological production of both terrestrial and aquatic resources. In
many cases, however, the nature of these connections is still unknown. The ability to
develop ecosystem forecasts in the Great Lakes depends on understanding these connections.
Proposed projects under this sub theme will help assess the connections between
environmental conditions and biological production, including: 1) experimental assessment
of the influence of environmental conditions (such as turbidity, food quality and nearshore
nursery habitat) on survival and growth of early life stages of fish; 2) integration of a
Nutrient-Plankton-Zooplankton-Detritus ecological model with the Princeton Ocean Model
to explicitly connect physical processes with lower trophic web dynamics; 3) modeling the
impacts of terrigenous subsidies, such as dissolved organic carbon and nutrients, on the
ecology of coastal regions; and 4) development of statistical and mechanistic models that
identify the physical and biological drivers of inter-annual variability of recruitment of
important fishery stocks.
 Watershed forecasts: Watersheds of the Great Lakes region represent a critical resource,
draining more than 200,000 square miles, contributing to nearly half of the total inflow into
the Great Lakes (Neff and Nicholas 2005), and containing extensive urban areas, serving as
home to nearly 35 million people. Understanding and forecasting watershed processes is
essential for predicting water quality, beach closings, harmful algal blooms, and water levels.
To address these issues, the Cooperative Institute proposes to engage in the following types
of projects: 1) characterizing the relationship between land use and watershed water balance
using semi-distributed hydrologic models such as Soil Water and Assessment Tool (SWAT);
2) augmenting current models, and developing new modeling approaches, to generate more
detailed, site-specific, eco-hydrologic forecasts; 3) evaluating the effect of agricultural nonpoint source loadings on water quality through the coupling of non-point source pollution
models with river quality models; 4) developing detailed urban hydrology and water quality
models to forecast the effects of combined sewage overflow on water quality; 5) improving
the representation of the subprocesses driving watershed nutrient dynamics; 6) studying the
impact of multiple stressors on nutrient dynamics at the watershed level; and 7) assessing the
impact of wetland removal/restoration on pollution loading in the Great Lakes.
 Hypoxia forecasting: Assessing the causes and effects of hypoxia in the Great Lakes and
forecasting its evolution, is an important element of ecosystem forecasting in the region.
These types of forecasts require a sustained and coordinated research effort in a variety of
sub areas ranging from exploring the microbial dynamics at the sediment-water interface to
quantifying the hydrologic and water quality dynamics of entire lakes and watersheds. The
proposed Cooperative Institute is well positioned to pursue research related to hypoxia
forecasting, as many collaborators are actively working on hypoxia issues in Lake Erie (e.g.,
18
the IFYLE and EcoFore programs). The approach we propose is to continue and extend the
monitoring program of Lake Erie established during IFYLE to better understand the physical
and ecological dynamics in the Lake. To this end, we propose to engage in the following
types of research: 1) additional experimental and modeling analysis of the role of sedimentwater interactions in the development of hypolimnion hypoxia; 2) experimental studies to
identify the impact of hypoxia on trophic webs; 3) improvement and validation of
hydrodynamic, water quality, and ecological models that are currently under development;
and 4) improving the current methodologies for downscaling general circulation models for
the Great Lakes region to assess the impact of climate changes on hypoxia.
C. Human Health Risk Forecasts
The health of more than 35 million inhabitants depends on the ecosystem health and condition in
the Great Lakes region. Impacts on human health can occur through exposure to both natural
and anthropogenic toxins. In addition, physical and biological processes can lead to high
bacteria loads and the spread of water-borne infectious diseases. To better predict human health
risks in the region, the Cooperative Institute will pursue research in the following areas:

Contaminants of concern: The Great Lakes are susceptible to many pollutants, including
those from agricultural soil runoff, municipal waste, industrial discharges, and atmospheric
pollutants deposited through wet and dry deposition. In order to improve our understanding
of these contaminants of concern, the Cooperative Institute proposes the following types of
research projects: 1) Mass balance studies quantifying the relationship between mass loading
of contaminants of concern and concentrations in water, sediment and biota; 2) Arsenic
pollution studies in the Great Lakes region in order to assess the extent and degree of impacts
and health risks in exposed populations; 3) Methlymercury transfer studies to identify the
transfer of methylmercury from wetlands into Great Lakes food webs; 4) Emerging
contaminants of concern research with an emphasis on the distribution and ecological
impacts of pharmaceuticals; and 5) Assessment of legacy contaminants (such as PCBs,
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and pesticide) in Great Lakes Areas of Concern in order
to identify the role of legacy hot spots as they contribute to compromised recreational uses
and fish consumption advisories.

Harmful algal blooms: Harmful algal blooms (HABs) present a serious potential threat to
human health. Although these events have occurred historically in the Great Lakes, the scale
and frequency of blooms appears to be increasing. To understand the environmental drivers
of these bloom events and to help protect ecosystem and human health, the Cooperative
Institute proposes the following types of projects: 1) continued monitoring and tracking of
HABs to better characterize the nature and vertical/horizontal distribution of bloom activity;
2) investigating and characterizing the physicochemical conditions and processes (such as
light, temperature, nutrients, currents) that contribute to bloom formation and duration; 3)
augmenting existing algal bloom models with algal population models to allow for HABs
tracking; 4) assessing toxicity and human health risks associated with algal toxins, such as
microcystin; and 5) investigating site-specific conditions that may lead to increased bloom
activity in certain parts of the Great Lakes (e.g., mouth of Maumee Bay, Saginaw Bay).
19

Beach closure forecasting: Beach bacterial contamination and resulting beach closures
remain critical resource issues in the Great Lakes region. Currently, detection methods limit
the ability of public health authorities to announce beach closures in a timely manner. To
improve beach closure predictions, the Cooperative Institute will engage in the following
types of research projects: 1) developing models that integrate remote sensing with water
quality models to predict beach closures; 2) modeling of surface and subsurface, physical and
chemical, ands transport processes from the upper beach (particularly near storm water
outfalls) to the lakeshore itself; 3) developing a nested grid modeling system that produces
regional forecasts of E. coli and Enterococci concentrations along Great Lakes coasts
impacted by a specific river plume and based on the Princeton Ocean Model; 4) identifying
sources of bacteria and pathogens through genetic fingerprinting and biomarker studies; 5)
linking watershed models with near-shore hydrodynamic and transport models to better
understand upstream influences on the lake; 6) supporting development of new sensor
technologies that can provide real-time estimate of bacterial contamination in offshore and
beach areas; and 7) risk-based assessment modeling of beach closures throughout the Great
Lakes region.

Infectious diseases: The occurrence of many infectious diseases is strongly seasonal,
suggesting that climate and the environment affect disease transmission. For example, St.
Louis encephalitis outbreaks in the Great Lakes region have been associated with extended
periods of temperatures above 85oF (29oC) and little rainfall. To better understand
connections between environmental conditions and infectious disease outbreaks in the region,
the Cooperative Institute proposes the following types of research: 1) assessments of the
environmental drivers of water pollution and waterborne infectious diseases, such as
cryptosporidiosis or giardiasis, with an emphasis on the parthenogenesis of the parasites and
effective water treatment strategies; and 2) evaluation of the impact of land-use changes, and
local climate changes on vector-borne disease, such as Lyme disease or West Nile
encephalitis, in the region.
D. Climate Change Impacts
Improved understanding of climate dynamics in the region combined with recent projections of
future climate conditions raise serious concerns for the health of the Great Lakes ecosystem and
the potential impacts on human, social and economic systems. Climate changes in the region are
expected to result in 1) regional temperature increases, 2) hydrological regime alterations, 3)
seasonal changes in precipitation levels, and 4) decreased net precipitation due to increase
evaporation and transpiration (Kling et al. 2003). Anticipating and planning for the impacts of
change to minimize future damage may include providing recommendations to fisheries
management, the transportation industry, restoration efforts and public health management to
prepare for environmental changes likely to occur in our near future. A critical research need for
the Great Lakes region is to improve our ability to predict ecological responses to a range of
possible environmental changes. To address this need, CILER will engage in coordinated
regional research projects that help characterize possible ecosystem responses in the Great Lakes
region to different climate regimes. Because this response depends on a fundamental
understanding of weather-climate-lake responses, the research described in preceding sections
20
will contribute substantively to these research projects. The potential projects we will undertake
in this sub theme are as follows:

Impacts on physical processes: An understanding of changes in physical conditions under
different climate change scenarios is critical to understanding the range of potential impacts
on ecological systems. The Cooperative Institute will undertake projects that address climate
change impacts on physical processes including: 1) effects of climate change on regional air
quality (e.g., ozone, particulate matter, etc.); 2) effects of climate change on lake-levels; 3)
characterization of inter-annual variability in the development of thermal structure in the
lakes under different climate scenarios; 4) application of empirical, long-term data to predict
responses of the epilimnion (mixed water layer) and other hypolimnetic (i.e., subsurface)
processes to climate change; 5) assessment of changes in weather-lake connections under
various climate change scenarios; and 6) identification of the causes and consequences of
changes in ecosystem health though consideration of the atmospheric environment and its
impact on, and interaction with, the Great Lakes.

Impacts on terrestrial ecosystems: Changes in regional climate associated with larger-scale
climate change are predicted to strongly impact precipitation cycles and evaporation and
transpiration rates in the Great Lakes region. These changes will have a strong impact on
terrestrial ecosystems and associated natural resources. To better characterize these types of
changes, CILER will engage in research projects that help: 1) assess the potential interaction
between land-use practices and climate change on habitat conditions, particularly in terms of
impacts on tributary stream habitats and critical nearshore nursery areas; 2) investigate
potential synergistic effects of watershed processes under different climate change scenarios,
including changes in precipitation patterns, terrestrial photosynthesis rates, etc.; 3) determine
the influence of land use change on terrestrial carbon dynamics; 4) determine the effects of
CO2 and O3 on soil arthropod communities, which are critically important for litter
decomposition, 5) assess how changes in community organization and trophic dynamics
affect key ecosystem processes such as nutrient cycling; 6) evaluate climate change effects
on conditions and processes that facilitate invasive species introduction and establishment; 7)
model potential effects of climate change on tributary ecosystem function in the Great Lakes
region; 8) integrate field work and models to examine historical, current, and future carbon
sequestration and release patterns in the Great Lakes region; and 9) investigate potential
synergies of watershed processes under different climate change scenarios, including changes
in precipitation patterns, terrestrial photosynthesis rates, etc.

Impacts on aquatic ecosystems: The impacts of climate change and climate variability on
biological and ecological processes will be assessed through investigations that focus on food
web modifications. Multiple approaches will be used for projecting potential impacts,
including laboratory experiments to directly assess organism response to different
temperature conditions and modeling approaches for projecting trophic-level responses to
different climate scenarios. CILER proposes to use both of these approaches to address the
following: 1) projecting changes in phytoplankton community composition under global
change scenarios; assessing connections between climate-induced stress, mortality of native
and non-native aquatic species and ecosystem health; 3) evaluating the impact of climate
change on circulation and transport of bacterial spores in suspended sediment; 4) applying a
21
stressor gradient approach to biological samples of fish, invertebrates, diatoms and water
quality from Great Lakes coastal areas in order to quantify stressor-response relationships to
climate change; and 5) characterizing potential changes in invasive species patterns and
impacts associated with different temperature regimes.

Synergistic effects: The Great Lake ecosystem is subject to multiple stressors that occur at
different temporal and spatial scales. We propose to evaluate the impacts of multiple
stressors in relation to predicted impacts of climate change. To this end, CILER proposes the
following types of projects: 1) investigate synergistic effects of climatic changes in
combination with UV radiation and/or changing land-use patterns on water quality, aquatic
biodiversity, and ecosystem functioning; 2) conduct a systematic assessment of climate
change impact on trace metals and organic contaminants in the Great Lakes basin, and the
likely consequences in terms of human exposure to these contaminants; 3) examine impact of
climate change on beach health and closures by integrating data on bacteria sources with
large-scale lake-circulation models; and 4) assess the adaptive capacity of society in the
region to respond to large-scale, synergistic environmental changes associated with
alternative climate projections.
Theme II: Invasive Species
Section 1: Overview of Research Needs and Priorities
Consistent with NOAA objectives for the region, the proposed Cooperative Institute will
undertake research focused on the protection, restoration, and management of the Great Lakes
ecosystem, including the Great Lakes, inland lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, and associated
watersheds. A critical component of this mission is research related to aquatic and terrestrial
invasive species. The Great Lakes, in particular, have been heavily impacted by a multitude of
invasive aquatic species. Between 1810 and 1999, more than 160 nonindigenous species
invaded the Great Lakes (Ricciardi 2001). In the past seven years, another 20 exotic species
have been discovered in the Great Lakes (Ricciardi, personal communication). Intercontinental
commercial shipping among the ports of the Great Lakes, North-West Atlantic Ocean, North Sea,
Baltic Sea, Mediterranean Sea, and the Black-Azov Sea region has accounted for the majority of
the introductions of nonindigenous species established in these areas (Leppakoski et al. 2002;
MacIssac et al. 2002; Reid and Orolva 2002), while the aquaculture trade has also been
implicated in the introduction of exotic species in the Great Lakes region. These invasive species
have had a tremendous impact on the region: It is estimated that economic losses in the Great
Lakes region associated with invasive species average $5.7 billion a year (Pimentel 2005).
Furthermore, important ecological and aesthetic costs have also occurred through the loss of
native species and the reorganization of important habitats.
To help coordinate information about invasive species in the Great Lakes and coastal regions,
NOAA created the National Center for Research on Aquatic Invasive Species (NCRAIS) in 2003.
Because this Center provides an important focal point for invasive species research, the proposed
Cooperative Institute intends to foster a productive relationship with NCRAIS to better address
the most critical research questions related to invasive species in the Great Lakes region. Based
22
on our interactions with NCRAIS, we will develop targeted research projects that combine
effective research, management, and outreach programs aimed at limiting the spread and impacts
of exotic species throughout the Great Lakes region.
To support NOAA’s missions related to invasive species, the proposed objectives for this
research theme are as follows:




To identify high-risk pathways in order to reduce the risk of future introductions into the
Great Lakes region.
To support research developing new technologies to reduce the risk of invasive species
introductions.
To develop observational and experimental research programs to detect new invaders and
assess the status and impacts of current invasive species.
To help coordinate research related to invasive species in the Great Lakes region
Below, we describe the capabilities of the Cooperative Institute to conduct invasive species
research and provide examples of the types of research projects that our institute will undertake
to limit the introduction, spread, and effects of exotic species in the Great Lakes region.
However, it is important to keep in mind that many of the projects are ambitiously large and
multifaceted and will be most effectively addressed if conducted under a large research
consortium including scientists, policy makers, and educators.
Section 2: Cooperative Institute Capabilities
Intellectual Capabilities
The Cooperative Institute has substantial capabilities to engage in a wide range of research
related to invasive species. The intellectual resources of the institute include more than 31
collaborators from 12 institutions who are actively engaged in a range of research related to
invasive species in the Great Lakes region (Table 1). These collaborators bring expertise to this
topic ranging from lab to field experience including: tracking and monitoring of terrestrial and
aquatic invasives, analysis of genetic composition of invasive populations, small-scale and largescale experimentation, analytical capabilities needed to isolate and produce important chemical
compunds associated with controlling invasives, and familiarity with socioeconomic tools. The
collaborators in this research area also have experience studying multiple invasive species
including, but not limited to, Dreissena polymorpha (zebra mussel), D. bugensis (quagga mussel),
Bythotrephes longimanus (spiny waterflea), Gymnocephalus cernuus (Eurasian ruffe),
Petromyzon marinus (sea lamprey), Neogobius melanostomus (round goby), Cercopagis pengoi
(fishhook waterflea), Myriophyllum spicatum (Eurasian water milfoil), and Lytrhum salicaria
(purple loosestrife).
Section 3: Proposed Research Areas and Projects
23
Below we outline example research projects under this theme. Many of these research efforts
also contribute to projects in the Integrated Assessment Theme (V), and many of the efforts
outlined in the Education and Outreach Theme (VI) will build from this research.
A. Prevention
Because populations of invasive species are difficult to control or eradicate once established,
preventing the initial introduction of these species is critical to protecting the Great Lakes region
from invasive species effects. These preventive efforts necessarily include identifying the most
important vectors for invasive species. To improve prevention efforts, the Cooperative Institute
proposes the following types of research projects:

Conduits for Invasive Species: Identifying the most important conduits for invasive species
into the Great Lakes region is critical for developing management approaches targeted at
preventing future introductions. To this end, the Cooperative Institute proposes to engage in
the following types of research: 1) identify the highest risk species that might be introduced
into the Great Lakes and use this information to effect policy approaches that limit
introductions (e.g.., by limiting live trade of organisms); 2) assess the risk of river and stream
systems as conduits for invasive species introduction and spread; 3) investigate the efficacy
of barriers for preventing the spread of invasive species through critical canals and rivers in
the Great Lakes.

Prevention technologies and approaches: The release of nonindigenous species through
ballast water has been a major vector for the introduction of species into the Great Lakes.
Unlike most other coastal regions, the primary source of invasive species in ballast water
comes from unballasted vessels (or no-ballast-on-board). These vessels are not currently
covered by ballast water management regulations and are a potential source of nonindigenous
species through deballasting operations. To help reduce the risks from this vector, the
Cooperative Institute proposes to 1) lead empirical studies to evaluate treatment options for
NOBOBs, including treatment with sodium chloride brines (salt solutions) and other
compounds; and 2) evaluate the efficacy of current best management practices guidelines for
unballasted vessels.
B. Monitoring, Detection, and Control

Monitoring for and Early Detection of Invasives: Long-term environmental monitoring
programs provide a unique means for assessing both the effectiveness of invasive species
prevention approaches and the continued vulnerability of specific lakes to invasive species
establishment. We propose to implement monitoring systems in other Great lakes systems
similar to the Lake Ontario lower food web assessment that was initiated in 2003. The goal
of this monitoring effort will be to implement lake-wide, temporal assessment of lake
conditions, with an emphasis on trophic web conditions and dynamics. The data from this
effort would both address critical research needs related to generating ecological data to
assess ecosystem health and allow for assessment of vulnerabilities and responses of different
lakes to invasive species.
24

Genetic Analysis to Identify Invaders: Temporal and spatial waves of introductions
originating from multiple founding sources may fuel the genetic diversity of invasions,
enhancing the ability of invasive species to adapt to new and changing environments. The
high genetic variability of these exotic species is likely key to their relative invasive
successes, adaptedness, and spread to new habitats. We propose to investigate the genetic
basis for invisibility by applying high-resolution, low-cost DNA technologies to identify the
source of origin of new invaders and to use this information to assess the genetic patterns of
exotic species, across the spatial and temporal scales of their invasions.

Invasive Species Control Efforts: Once established, populations of invasive species are
difficult to manage or control. One of the greatest successes in terms of invasive species
control has been with the sea lamprey in the Great Lakes. The Cooperative Institute proposes
to engage in research directed at improving potential control efforts for invasive species: 1)
identify potential pheromones that can be used for helping control the sea lamprey and
invasive fish populations; 2) develop biocontrol programs for invasive plant species; 3)
application of mathematical models to assess efficacy of biological control of invasives, with
an emphasis on mean first passage times to extinction or development or alternative stable
states in systems with low densities of invaders.
C. Ecosystem Effects

Trophic-level Impacts: Some of the most profound and disruptive effects of invasive species
relate to food web alterations and impacts. These effects can dramatically alter the
composition and function of entire ecosystems. The Cooperative Institute proposes to
engage in research characterizing the nature and magnitude of food web disruptions in the
Great Lake region such as: 1) field experiments to assess impact of different aquatic (floating
and submersed) and emergent plants on native organisms (fish, invertebrates, amphibians)
and nutrient balances throughout littoral and wetland areas impacted by exotic macrophytes;
2) experimental, observational, and modeling approaches to understand the food-web
consequences of exotic zooplankton species; 3) experimental approaches to assess the
impacts of invasive species on benthic populations, such as Diporeia and Hexagenia; 4)
empirical approaches to assessing the impacts of invasive species on trophic communities in
riverine and stream ecosystems; 5) quantifying the impact of important invasive species, like
quagga mussels (Dreissena bugensis) and round gobies (Neogobius melanostomus), on
trophic structure, nutrient dynamics and energy flow in nearshore regions within the Great
Lakes.

Synergistic and Multi-Stressor Effects: In addition to their direct impacts on food web
dynamics, invasive species can indirectly impacts ecosystem processes either through
synergistic interactions or from the combined effects of multiple stressors. The Cooperative
Institute proposes the following research areas to investigate these impacts: 1) investigating
the synergistic effects of invasive species on fish populations, through a combination of
literature surveys, experimental work, and model development; 2) integrating data from field
monitoring efforts to assess site-specific effects of multiple stressors such as zebra mussels,
alewives, eutrophication, and climate change; 3) assessing the linkages between invasive
species, such as zebra mussels, and the bloom-forming cyanobacterium, Microcystis
25
aeruginosa; 4) investigating potential gene-mediated mechanisms for harmful algal bloom
initiation.

Economic Impacts: Invasive species pose serious economic threats to invaded ecosystems.
For example, the introductions of exotic species, such as sea lamprey, dressenids, and gobies,
have been linked to the failure of recreational fisheries in Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.
As part of the consortium, we will survey recreational anglers to develop economic models
of recreational fishing demand and value and then use this information to build empirical
models to quantify potential economic losses associated with invasive species and other
impairments to recreational fisheries.

Ecosystem Rebound and Restoration: Restoration of native food webs is essential after
controlling invasive species. In many systems, native organisms fail to respond once
invaders have been controlled by biological or chemical methods. As an initial step, we
propose to investigate the restoration of native aquatic macrophyte communities and the role
of propagules of both the invader and the native plant community in restoration processes.
Questions we will pose include – Are native seedbanks depleted in systems that have been
invaded for several years? How long do invasive plant propagules persist? Are there cost
effective methods to induce or enhance native plant propagation after invasive plant control?
Theme III: Observing Systems
Section 1: Overview of Research Needs and Priorities
Effective environmental management requires ready access to real-time and historical data on the
climate, meteorology, chemistry, geology, and biology that affect the Great Lakes ecosystem.
These types of data are also essential for monitoring and understanding ecosystem responses to
natural and anthropogenic conditions. The most effective approach for generating these types of
real-time observations is through expansive networks of observing systems that can take
consistent measurements for comparison across the region, and can be seamlessly integrated with
terrestrial, nearshore, mobile, and airborne systems. Developing, implementing and coordinating
this type of regional observation system will both provide essential data for addressing
ecosystem concerns in the region and will directly support two of NOAA’s critical mission
goals: To protect, restore and manage the use of coastal resources and to serve society’s need for
weather and water information.
In the Great Lakes region, there is a long history of monitoring and collection of physical,
chemical, biological, and social science data under various agencies, organizations, and
academic research institutions. In many instances, however, those monitoring programs are of
insufficient spatial and temporal resolution, longevity, or coordination to adequately address
ecosystem changes or to effectively benefit either the users or the managers of these resources.
The need for coordination and enhancement of observing programs has been recognized at many
levels and is being planned for at the national level under the Integrated Ocean Observing
System (IOOS). The IOOS program is subsequently being developed at the regional level
26
through a national federation of regional association under the IOOS umbrella, including the
Great Lakes Observing System (GLOS) association. The regional goals established by GLOS
are as follows: 1) Enhance and expand observation resources including both open lake system
and integration with land and atmospheric-based monitoring systems; 2) Foster integrated
ecological forecasting on a regional scale with targeted expansion at coordinating individual
research and forecasting programs; 3) Promote education and outreach that incorporates data and
models generated by observing systems to the broadest group of users and managers; 4) Develop
regional specific monitoring programs for, and forecasts of, public health parameters; and 5)
Promote regional specific modeling and analysis of economic impacts and benefits that support
recreational activities, transportation activities, and invasive species concerns.
Despite these national and regional initiatives, there remain many critical data gaps related to
observing systems in the Great Lakes region. Research developed under CILER in the thematic
area of observing systems will address these deficiencies by aligning with ongoing efforts of
GLOS and IOOS and engaging in projects that directly support NOAA’s mission goals in the
Great Lakes region. The objectives of research conducted under this theme are:
 To develop the technology and associated observing platforms for measuring a range of
physical, chemical, and biological variables in the Great Lakes region.
 To facilitate the application of observing system technology and data to improving Great
Lakes forecasting.
 To coordinate and facilitate the flow of data and information to and from system
components, observing systems, and end users.
Research designed to meet these objectives will also support the goals identified in the other
CILER research themes by providing the basic data to monitor Great Lakes conditions and to
develop and validate models used for forecasting.
Section 2: Cooperative Institute Capabilities
To address pressing issues related to observing systems in the Great Lakes region, CILER brings
together more than 24 researchers representing 8 different institutions (Table 1). These CILER
investigators bring a broad range of expertise and demonstrated track records in conducting
research related to observing systems and in developing technology to advance the science of
observing systems. This intellectual expertise includes the following:
Intellectual Capabilities
Technology Development - The collaborators in this sub-theme have experience with the
application of theoretical models and experimental approaches for understanding the functioning
of mult-instrument measurement systems, the development of theoretical foundations of image
and video processing, computer vision, statistical modeling, and sensor development, and the
implementation of networked, multi-buoy systems capable of real-time data acquisition.
Technology Application - CILER investigators in this research theme have experience and
demonstrated capabilities applying Observing System technologies for a variety of applications
including: assessing both modern and historic lake processes; generation data to understand
27
water-climate and water-weather connections; conducting regional GIS analyses and spatial
modeling; modeling pollution dispersion and transport based on observing system data;
monitoring and modeling of biophysical changes in the landscape; developing, evaluating, and
applying a variety of spatial analysis to modeling methods, conducting spatial and agent-based
simulations and computational habitat suitability studies; developing physical modeling
capabilities using remote sensing and in situ sensor data; integrating multi-sensor remote sensing
image technology with GIS; modeling applications of remote sensing technologies to assess
earth rotation and geodynamics; and employing remotely operated vehicle systems to gather data
about aquatic conditions. In addition, collaborators also have experience in validating and
testing sensor performance; developing quality control programs for open-lake observing
systems; and developing protocols for appropriate maintenance and calibration of in situ water
quality sensors;
Data Management - In addition to developing and applying Observing Systems technology,
CILER investigators have expertise in manipulating and analyzing the copious data generated
from these systems. The expertise of these investigators include data processing of large
volumes of data, data analyses of multivariate time-series, data mining and pattern recognition;
development of cyber-environments and cyber-informatics, software engineering, automation of
information processing, development of user-friendly decision-making systems.
Section 3: Proposed Projects and Research Areas
Below we outline example research projects under this theme. Many of these research efforts
also contribute to projects in the Integrated Assessment Theme (V), and many of the efforts
outlined in the Education and Outreach Theme (VI) will build from this research. The research
that the Cooperative Institute will engage in related to Observing Systems can be separated into
three broad categories: (1) observing systems components including platforms, sensors, data
logging and transmission, (2) data management and communication involving the organizing,
archiving, and disseminating information and products; and (3) generation of forecasts and
products through data analyses and modeling to meet user and management needs.
A. Observing System Platforms and Sensors
Because of the dynamic nature of conditions in the Great Lakes region and the strong
connections between terrestrial and aquatic systems, a coordinated, regional effort is needed to
develop observing systems platforms and sensors. Overall, this type of effort is essential for
providing technical expertise that supports NOAA’s leadership in observation system
development in the Great Lakes region. Conceptually a Great Lakes Observing System would
consist of a network of universal buoy-based hubs that would take measurements for
comparisons across the Great Lakes and that would be integrated with existing open-water and
land-based observing systems. These buoys would have sensors that are standard throughout the
Great Lakes and have the capability to plug in any sensor and transfer the data to shore in realtime for archiving or web display. Research will be directed to develop an integrated system of
autonomous sensor platforms equipped with mission critical sensors and computational tools
capable of integrating the accumulated data from autonomous sensor platforms to reliably
forecast the real-time spatial and temporal structure of mass released in the Great Lakes. Mass
28
releases are specifically meant to include accidental or purposeful releases, as well as, natural
event driven transfers of materials or contaminants. Proposed projects in this sub-theme include:

Testing and Application of New Sensor Technology: Research in this area will be aimed at
developing and testing new sensor technology. Some of the proposed projects in this area
include incorporating improved dissolved oxygen sensors (optical) to help monitor for lowoxygen concentration in Lake Erie and other low oxygen regions and developing in situ
nutrient sensors to help monitor nutrient inputs at critical tributaries and sites within the
Great Lakes. All of the projects emphasizing sensor development will include a rigorous
verification element to ensure a known, and mission-critical, quality level for the in situ data
being collected.

Moored Integrated Observing Systems: Developing the capability to monitor and forecast
natural and anthropogenic mass releases (e.g., oil spills, suspended sediments) including the
deployment of autonomous platforms and sensors with temporal/spatial fidelity and the
ability to detect low-level mass signatures of analytes of interest; incorporation of data
assimilation and decision making tools within a physics-based model to optimize real-time
collection of field data and the computational flow modeling tool; and development of
predictive computational algorithms working autonomously and within a network of sensors
and decision makers, to track mass signatures to their source (e.g., an inverse model). The
specific deployment arrays and sensor packages that are needed will likely differ among
coastal ecosystems and individual users. Flexibility in buoy deployment capabilities and
available sensor packages will be critical to provide maximum usefulness.

Integrating New and Existing Sensor Systems and Platforms: Develop and demonstrate an
integrated observing and surveillance system, including vertical profiling, that has the
capability of providing real time monitoring information and data in a large, complex
freshwater system and coordinate observing efforts in different lakes systems to collectively
enhance capabilities to engineer Great Lakes observing system components and to provide
for continuous real-time collection of ecosystem data;

Autonomous Underwater Vehicles: The temporal and spatial scales on which environmental
processes evolve are often under-sampled using present day ship-based cruises. Research
projects will further advance the integration of AUV technology into the hands of
mainstream science users by developing cooperative and adaptive sampling strategies to
more effectively monitor and characterize ecosystem health and ecological impact. A
specific research application for autonomous gliders would be to characterize spatial and
temporal variability in the hydrographic distributions within the lakes to provide a continuous,
near-real-time, view of hydrodynamic conditions. In addition, two-way communication with
the glider will allow us to alter monitoring efforts adaptively to specific, spatially constrained
events within the lakes.

Remote Sensing (Satellite) Observing Systems: Research using a variety of space geodetic
and remotely sensing observations of the Great Lakes, including water level changes,
shoreline changes, ground-stations (e.g., GPS), meteorological and climate changes, lake
circulation, and adjacent hydrologic fluxes will be pursued to help develop improved
29
operational forecasting capability. To this end, the Cooperative Institute will pursue: 1)
analysis of land-use and land-cover change in the region, leading to development of
conceptual and technical frameworks for coupling these observations with systems for
observing the lakes and the aquatic systems that deliver water and materials to them; and 2)
integration of data from multiple remote sensing platforms (e.g., AVHRR, Modis, Landsat)
to define characteristics of river plumes at sites throughout the Great Lakes.
B. Data Management and Communication
Because of the large data sets produced by observing systems, data management and
communication (DMAC) is essential for ensuring that the data are used properly and to their full
potential. The critical needs in this sub-theme include coordinating and facilitating the
distribution of data and information to and from the system components, the observing systems,
and the end users at all levels.

Data Transmission: Many of the available environmental sensors (such as optics, video,
Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers, transmissometers, integrated CTD/oxygen sensors) or
future applications of existing biological sensors (such as fisheries and zooplankton highfrequency acoustics) can collect data at rates much higher than those that can be transmitted
to shore via satellites or cellular phones. Proposed projects in this sub-theme will focus on
developing and providing high-speed, reliable and low cost data transmission capabilities for
the range of observing systems used throughout the Great Lakes region.

Data Management: DMAC within CILER will focus on ensuring that all projects to comply
with the recommendation of GLOS to apply the Federal Geographic Data Committee
metadata standards and produce data compatible with one of the Distributed Oceanographic
Data Systems protocols. As needed, CILER will encourage developing standards and access
tools so that outputs from the observing system can be made available to scientists, policy
makers, educators, and the general public.

Grid-Based Sensor Network: Research will be directed to apply Grid-based sensor network
technologies to design and implement a coastal database management system and provide a
geospatial-ecological information infrastructure to support multi-sensor data integration,
multi-dimensional and heterogeneous information analysis, and ecosystem modeling and
impact prediction. Through this research, we will thoroughly examine various sensor
platforms and existing databases and coastal modeling and observing systems. A sequence of
grid services will be designed to link these resources to support multi-dimensional coastal
data access, query, integration, and analysis.

Data Communication: Where data from observing systems will be applied to critical realtime services there will need to be reliability and redundancy procedures developed to assure
uninterrupted access and storage of the data to support day-to-day operations and emergency
response. Research to provide proper security, reliability and redundancy in the DMAC
subsystem will be critical. Lastly policies and error-checking protocols will need to be
developed for all data that is generated and archived in order to provide a known quality at
all times. Scientific and analytical efforts need to work from known degrees of error to
30
produce useable results, while some mission critical tasks such as navigation and emergency
response will demand a specific level of accuracy at all times.
C. Data Products and Forecasts: Many of the projects undertaken within the Observing
Systems Theme will support efforts in the other research themes, particularly Great Lakes
Forecasting. The structure of the Cooperative Institute will permit fluidity between research
themes and will focus on coordinating and facilitating projects that overlap. An example of the
opportunities for synergistic activities between GLOS and Great Lakes Forecasting is our plan to
integrating development of offshore observing systems with the Great Lakes Forecasting efforts
aimed at studying land-water connections. The integration of these two research projects will
facilitate the ability to predict key threats to ecosystem and human health including fluxes of
contaminants, nutrients, and pathogens from terrestrial regions to open-lake areas.
Research Theme IV: Protection and Restoration of Resources
I)
Overview of Research Needs and Priorities
The Great Lakes region sustains an economy for some 30 million people and provides the
ancestral homeland of 35 federally-recognized Indian Tribal Nations (GLRC 2005). At the same
time, we use the lakes and their tributaries to dispose of large volumes of wastewater, dredged
sediments, and runoff from urban and agricultural areas. In addition, we have eliminated more
than half of the original forests and wetlands around the lakes and the region would be
unrecognizable to the people who settled here less than 200 years ago. Clearly, careful
management of the remaining basin ecosystem, including both protection of remaining aquatic
resources and restoration of disturbed aquatic ecosystems both in the short-term (NOAA 2005)
and the long-term (NOAA undated), is of vital importance.
The ecological integrity of the Great Lakes ecosystem is supported by an impressive biological
diversity. Yet, already more than a decade ago, 131 elements of this diversity (ranging from
ecological communities to individual species and subspecies) were identified as critically
imperiled, imperiled, or rare on a global basis (TNC 1994). Such findings accentuate the need
for a vigorous and forward-looking strategy of resource protection, restoration and management.
Such a strategy parallels NOAA’s emphasis on four Mission Goals (NOAA 2005) emphasizing
focal areas for interdisciplinary research in ecosystems, climate, weather and water, and
commerce and transportation. This focus recognizes the connection between our environment,
our economic well being, and human health.
In order to boost NOAA’s investments in short- and long-term research, the proposed
Cooperative Institute will give the highest priority to research in this theme that develops
technology, research tools and scientific approaches that protect, restore, or enhance priority
coastal land and water habitats to promote healthy systems,; protect habitat and NOAA Trust
Resources from priority threats; restore habitat through national or large-scale, ecosystem-based
approaches; and increase knowledge about Great Lakes ecosystems so that stakeholders can
make informed management decisions. It is clear that the Cooperative Institute will be designed
31
to integrate research priorities in this theme with work done in other thematic areas. To
accomplish this, research under this theme is organized under the following objectives:
 Assess the vulnerability and resilience of Great Lakes regional resources.
 Support the restoration and rehabilitation of degraded habitats.
Success in translating research findings into effective resource protection, restoration and
management depends on building environmental literacy and public awareness to encourage
stewardship of these resources. This, in turn, can be accomplished through a productive
partnership among researchers, educational institutions and organizations, government agencies
at all levels, and private industry. (See Theme VI: Education and Outreach).
II)
Cooperative Institute Research Capabilities
The proposed Great Lakes Cooperative Institute brings together a productive partnership of
researchers, educational institutions and governmental agencies. The mission of the Institute
requires collaborations between scientists that extend beyond traditional discipline boundaries as
evidenced in the composition of our team and its intellectual capabilities. Twenty Theme IV
participants, representing seven academic institutions and organizations (see Table 1), are
actively involved in applied research that is focused on protection and restoration of resources in
the Great Lakes region.
Intellectual Capabilities:
The collaborators in this theme bring strong expertise and a range of capabilities to the protection
and restoration of resources in the Great Lakes region. The intellectual experiences and
qualifications of Theme IV collaborators include: application of deterministic and probabilistic
modeling of environmental systems; development of environmental chemistry fate and transport
contaminant models; applied experience with coastal wetland restoration, brownfield and landfill
re-development; bioremediation of polluted environments; identification and control of fecal
source contamination; ecosystem restoration; valuation studies for natural resources; application
of genetic and other techniques to help restore and maintain biogeographic structure of
populations of aquatic organisms; and characterization of spatial and temporal variability of lakebed morphology and habitat. Other capabilities include (1) a state-of-the-art biological resources
laboratory with a flow-through lake water system to test hypotheses relative to aquatic ecology,
(2) a well-equipped molecular genetics laboratory researchers to develop and apply genetic DNA
markers for, among others, restoring, maintaining, and evaluating the population and
biogeographic structure of native fishes in the Great Lakes region, (3) a modern Geographic
Information System and Remote Sensing Laboratory that supports interdisciplinary research on,
for example, land-lake interactions, (4) a complete fluvial geomorphology lab for stream and
river research, (5) modern equipment for conducting all basic field and laboratory procedures for
aquatic sampling and analyses, (6) sophisticated labs for hydrological work for GIS-mediated
hydrologic modeling at the watershed level, and (7) radio-isotope facilities that are employed to
analyze sediment chronologies, dynamics in Great Lakes’ food webs, nutrient cycling and
hypoxic zones. In addition to teams of university faculty, post-docs, students (undergraduate and
32
graduate), lab managers, administrative staff, and field and lab technical staff, participating
institutions contribute secure computing facilities (PC and Mac compatible), fully-networked and
electronic libraries, vehicles, and research vessels with dockage/storage support.
III)
Proposed Research Projects
Below we outline example research projects under this theme. Many of these research efforts
also contribute to projects in the Integrated Assessment Theme (V), and many of the efforts
outlined in the Education and Outreach Theme (VI) will build from this research.
A. Assess the vulnerability and resilience of Great Lakes regional resources
The Cooperative Institute will engage in research that protects critical habitat and NOAA trust
resources (e.g., recreational fisheries, anadromous fish populations, critical coastal habitats, and
National Marine Sanctuary resources) in the Great Lakes region. These types of projects will be
focused on assessing the vulnerability of these important resources to natural and anthropogenic
threats, including assessments of emergency responses to hazardous material spills. More
specifically, the Cooperative Institute proposes to pursue research in the following areas:

Chemical and hazardous material response: The release of hazardous substances in the Great
Lakes region can pose a critical threat to important natural resources. To help assess the
potential for these threats and to respond to emergency release situations, the Cooperative
Institute will engage in the following types of projects: 1) developing contaminant fate and
transport models to simulate trajectories, pathways, and persistence of hazardous materials in
the Great Lakes, 2) . Research in this sub-theme will integrate with efforts related to Great
Lakes forecasting, particularly the development and refinement of physical hazards modeling
and ecosystem forecasting outlined in Theme I.

Priority Threat/Sensitivity Assessment: To support NOAA’s role as trustee of coastal
resources, the Cooperative Institute will pursue research that identifies priority threats to, and
sensitivity of, natural resources in the Great Lakes region. The types of projects pursued in
this area include the following: 1) identification of sensitive habitats that are critical to
NOAA’s trust resources, including information about species that spawn, live, and feed in
these areas; 2) identification of contaminant threats to these resources, including developing
models to assess contaminant risks and utilizing multi-criteria decision support tools to help
manage contaminant threats; 3) application of molecular genetic technology and population
genetic theory to estimate probabilities of population persistence of important fishery
resources; 4) application of evolutionary theory and life history analysis to identify
compromised fishery resources; 5) identification of genetic resistance and susceptibility to
pathogens of important fishery resources; 6) prediction of spatial pattern variation in
demographic and genetic characteristics of vertebrate populations and effects of
anthropogenic influences; and 7) assessment of the impact of nearshore vegetation on fish
habitat and identifying critical impairments to these habitats.
B. Supporting restoration and rehabilitation of degraded habitats
33
NOAA plays a critical role within the U.S. Department of Commerce by acting as a trustee for
natural resources, and is charged with protecting and restoring aquatic organisms and their
habitats for future generations. The Cooperative Institute will support this important role with
research aimed at assessing and evaluating the potential for habitat restoration and remediation
and resource rehabilitation throughout the Great Lakes region.

Remediation: Remediation of degraded and polluted areas and habitat is one component to
restoring environmental quality in the Great Lakes region. To assist with remediation efforts,
the Cooperative Institute will engage in the following types of research: 1) identification of
local and native plant species and microorganisms that are critical in the remediation of
polluted and compromised sites; 2) development of alternative uses for dredged material for
shipping channels, to help maintain and improve water quality.

Habitat Restoration: Proposed projects that may be pursued by the Cooperative Insitute that
fall into this category include: 1) Identification and integration of site-specific factors (such
as native or local organisms) in developing habitat restoration plans; 2) advancing
approaches to wetland restoration that serve multiple functions (e.g., increase fecal retention
of wetland areas while providing important habitat for varied fauna); 3) utilization of dredged
material (from shipping channels) for habitat restoration and an a priori investigation of sitespecific factors and conditions that would increase the success of such restoration projects; 4)
field-testing and monitoring of new marsh management techniques, with an emphasis on
assessing changes in ecosystem function; 5) evaluating impacts of restoration of small
headwater streams on water and habitat quality; 6) comparative study of stream restoration
efforts in forested vs. agricultural vs. urbanized drainages; 7) assessment of response of
functional attributes of streams and rivers to ecosystem restoration efforts; 8) effects of
removal or restoration of wetlands on nutrient and heavy metal loading to the Great Lakes.

Dam Removal: Dams are a particularly unique problem in the Great Lakes region, due to the
prevalence of streams, rivers, and lakes throughout the area. They have a profound effect on
tributary streams in the Great Lakes: Not only do they block the migration of fish species to
critical spawning and nursery areas, they also alter the delivery of sediments and water to the
Great Lakes. Dam removal is becoming increasingly appealing as an ecosystem restoration
tool, but little scientific information is available to properly guide dam removal projects. The
Cooperative Institute proposes to undertake research to better understand the impact of dams
and dam removal on ecosystems throughout the Great Lakes. Potential projects are as
follows: 1) assessment of sediment dynamics after dam removal; 2) impacts and recovery of
tributary stream ecosystems of dam removal and potential effects on nearshore habitats of the
Great Lakes; 3) impact of dam removal on the structure and composition of the fish
community as well as the associated unionid assemblages, and (4) assessment of the
population genetics of affected species before and after dam removal.
Thematic Integration – Climate Change
34
Climatic change, manifesting as alterations in precipitation and temperatures, combined with
human activities have significant impacts on Great Lakes hydrology by altering the fundamental
hydrologic processes, water pathways throughout both surface and subsurface systems, and
spatial and temporal distributions of water in the hydrologic cycle. Such changes in hydrology
subsequently affect fate and transport of water-related pollutants and health of the entire
ecosystem. To address these issues, the Cooperative Institute proposes to examine the response
of hydrologic systems to decreasing precipitation, increased temperatures, and continued human
impact. Specifically, we will address this issue by combining watershed-scale hydrologic
modeling methodologies and GIS techniques to characterize the transfer of water between
different hydrologic/hydrogeological units in the Great Lakes Basin, quantify interactions
between surface and subsurface systems and water exchange with the atmosphere, and evaluate
the impacts on the hydrologic cycle. This hydrologic project will provide fundamental
information for other environmental and ecological studies. The research findings will be
essential to development of effective strategies for resource protection, restoration, and
management.
.Theme V: Integrated Assessment
Section 1: Overview of Research Needs and Priorities
Most environmental management and policy decisions require the improved science described in
other parts of this proposal. However, the era of addressing issues piece by piece and from a
natural science or a social science/political perspective is over. Resource managers, policy
makers, and taxpayers increasingly need and are demanding an integrated science that addresses
both natural and human dimensions of the problem. The Integrated Assessment theme of our
proposal addresses this need in the context of NOAA’s broad mission in the Great Lakes region.
Environmental issues in the Great Lakes region are complex, multi-dimensional, and in need of
more integrated approaches. Some of these issues include fisheries, forest, and agriculture
management; habitat restoration and conservation; protected areas management; surface and
ground water allocation and protection; climate change impacts and adaptation in urban and rural
environments, changes in Great Lakes water levels, toxic contamination, beach closures,
invasive species control, environmentally sustainable maritime commerce, coastal community
development, and replacing a decaying manufacturing economic base with sustainable ecotourism and a knowledge-based economy.
To address these issues more effectively, there is a need to synthesize and integrate existing
biological, chemical, physical, and social science information to provide assessments of
landscape change, and policy, planning, and management options. Parson (1997) defines
assessment as “gathering, synthesizing, interpreting, and communicating knowledge from
various expert domains and disciplines to help responsible policy actors think about problems or
evaluate possible actions.” In particular, integrated assessment involves assembling information
from a broader set of disciplines than in traditional scientific analysis, and from end-to-end
(cause-effect-options). Thus, integrated assessment is a comprehensive analysis of existing
35
natural and social scientific knowledge in the context of a specific policy or management
question. It aims specifically to produce knowledge that is robust but also usable, that is,
knowledge that directly reflects expressed constituent needs, is understandable to users, is
available at the times and places it is needed, and is accessible through the media available to the
user community (Lemos and Morehouse 2005).
Although there are several approaches for integrating the sciences, we propose to use Integrated
Assessment (IA) as a guiding framework. To ensure that the questions being addressed are
approachable with scientific analysis, as well as relevant and usable in decision making, IA is
best done through dialog among scientists, policy makers, and key stakeholders.
Following the IA framework, we propose to carry out the following steps:
1. Document the status and trends of appropriate environmental, sociopolitical, and economic
conditions related to the specific issue at hand. While traditionally the natural and social
sciences strive for value-independent descriptions of current conditions and historical trends;
it is important to recognize that descriptions and interpretations of these trends are often
value-laden.
2. Describe the environmental, sociopolitical, and economic causes and consequences of those
trends. These can often include simulation, statistical, and other explanatory models and
analyses; however, many causes and consequences deal with differences in values and
interpretations, requiring rigorous inquiry of the factors shaping those differences in values.
3. Provide forecasts of likely or plausible alternative future conditions under a range of policy
and/or management actions. This can be quantitative forecasts from models or other trend
analysis tools, as well as more normative or participatory scenario analyses. These are
subject to considerable scientific evaluation and interpretation.
4. Provide technical guidance for the most cost effective and politically feasible means of
implementing each of those options. These efforts are designed to provide those who are
responsible for implementation of a suite of approaches available to them, along with some
evaluation of their potential for success and cost-effectiveness
Characteristics of Integrated Assessments
Unlike output of traditional research, the quality and impact of IA cannot be evaluated through
traditional peer review and publication alone. Therefore, it is important for us to establish
additional means to evaluate our IA efforts. We will use the four broad “meta-criteria” suggested
by Clark and Majone (1985) and modified and extended by Clark et al (2001) for this – adequacy,
value, legitimacy, and effectiveness.

Adequacy focuses on technical adequacy - a judgment of whether the assessment uses
appropriate methods, avoids known technical pitfalls, characterizes uncertainty accurately,
and uses methods such as peer review or other means to assess ‘quality’ control of
information.
36

Value refers to the policy-relevance of the assessment – whether the assessment question
truly is important to policy, whether the spatial and temporal scales of the study match policy
makers’ needs, and whether the results of the assessment are well communicated.

Legitimacy, specifically “civic legitimacy”, involves the discovery of differing views, their
incorporation into the process, freedom from bias, and the degree to which stakeholders are
involved in the assessment, perhaps through an extended peer review, opinion survey, and
stakeholder engagement comment processes.

Effectiveness considers the actual impact of the assessment on the policy decision or debate.
While the above was the definition of effectiveness in Clark and Majone (1985), they have
subsequently broadened it, based on a broader perspective on the science-policy interface to
include the ability to shape the agenda or advance the state of the debate (Clark et al 2001).
In addition to these meta-criteria, we will use basic principles suggested by Morgan and
Dowlatabadi (1996): recognizing and characterizing uncertainty, explicit and parametric use of
numerical values when possible, placing the problem in its natural and human context, and using
coordinated multiple analyses. Where appropriate, we will employ key attributes suggested by
Rabalais et al. (2002) in their review of the integrated assessment of the causes and consequences
of hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico: policy-relevance, broadly integrative and synthetic,
predictive, shaped with public participation, quality controlled with independent expert peer
review, and based on high-quality monitoring data.
Section 2: Integrated Assessment Capabilities
The Great Lakes universities have tremendous capabilities in all aspects and disciplines required
for effective integrated assessments – natural sciences, social sciences, ecological design, and
modeling. We also have extensive experience in conducting integrated assessments on a wide
range of issues from eutrophication and climate change, to marine transportation and water
resource allocation. Examples of those capabilities are outlined below.
Natural Sciences - There are strong capabilities within our network of universities to conduct IA.
These capabilities in the natural sciences (e.g., physics, biology, aquatic and terrestrial ecology,
limnology, and biogeochemistry) are outlined in the other theme areas of this proposal.
Social Sciences - We also represent strong capabilities in the social sciences (e.g., economics,
anthropology, political science, business, education, sociology, and geography). In addition to
the individuals listed below, our network of universities houses a number of relevant programs
and institutes. For example, at the University of Michigan, these include the Ecosystem
Management Initiative, Environmental Justice Initiative, Center for Sustainable Systems, Erb
Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise, Graham Environmental Sustainability Institute, and
the Institute for Social Research). In addition, the Michigan Sea Grant program has recently
refocused all of its research funding toward supporting IA.
37
At the Annis Water Resources Institute (AWRI) of Grand Valley State University, researchers
are using social profiles to identify relevant social issues, collect information about such issues,
and summarize this information as part of effective watershed management plans. A social
profile describes characteristics of watershed stakeholders to craft education and information
programs to motivate changes in personal behavior and result in support for implementation of
Best Management Practices.
The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago has a long and
distinguished history of social research in the public interest. Policy-makers, planners, resource
managers, and other clients in a broad variety of fields use NORC’s research to discover and
measure the awareness, attitudes, and opinions of target populations. This includes both
qualitative research using such techniques as focus groups, as well as quantitative research using
classic opinion survey methods and collection and analysis of economic and health data.
Specific projects of relevance to NOAA priorities include supporting the Mission of the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). These services include site-based
investigations in communities where environmental health concerns have been raised, follow-up
and surveillance of at-risk and exposed populations, identification and tracing of persons
exposed up to five decades previously, and administering medical tests.
Ecological Design- We are poised to translate research on sustainable design to the built
environment through the University of Michigan’s program in Landscape Architecture. This
translation can provide a tangible platform to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of policy
and is an effective means to educate policy makers and community members about the nature
and value of green technologies.
At the University of Illinois, the Department of Landscape Architecture has concentrations in
ecological design, community-based design, and cultural heritage conservation that contribute
toward integrated assessment. Specific capabilities include constructed wetlands for NPS water
treatment, floodplain and watershed planning for comprehensive stormwater management, and
water-conserving design to manage water withdrawals and consumptive use.
Modeling – Quantitative and mathematical modeling is often an important element of integrated
assessment, and our network has significant capabilities. In addition to the individuals listed
below, the Univeristy of Michigan’s Center for the Study of Complex Systems and the
Environmental Informatics program at the School of Natural Resources and Environment houses
strong capabilities for modeling and understanding nonlinear, dynamic, and adaptive systems.
At Grand Valley State University, AWRI is using population allocation models together with
hydrologic and non-point source models to estimate environmental impacts from different land
use scenarios. The development of new models together with enhancements to existing models
have led to the creation of user friendly interfaces and the incorporation of effective visualization
techniques, resulting in more effective stakeholder input and informed decision making in regard
to multiple development options.
Economic analysis and modeling also plays a key role in integrated assessment. University of
Chicago economists affiliated with NORC’s Academic Research Centers conduct a variety of
38
research projects involving methods and models with direct relevance to integrated assessment.
For example, Robert Townsend and his colleagues, working in Thailand, make extensive use of
GIS data to integrate ecosystem features such as waterways, rainfall, and water-related economic
activity such as shrimp harvesting into more general economic models. Although the project is
based in Thailand, the techniques and models it is developing can be applied to the Great Lakes
region.
Also at Chicago, economist Don Coursey has done extensive work in measuring public
preferences for environmental outcomes relative to other social and economic goals. For
example, his 1994 report, The Revealed Demand for a Public Good: Evidence from Endangered
and Threatened Species, was widely noted for its analysis of public expenditures per animal on
the endangered species list. He also consulted with NOAA in the wake of the Exxon Valdez oil
spill to develop guidelines for federal response to environmental disasters.
IA Experience - Finally, our network includes individuals with extensive experience in IA. At
the Univeristy of Michigan, Rosina Bierbaum, Ted Parson, Don Scavia, George Kling, and
Maria Carmen Lemos had key roles in the national assessment of the causes and consequences of
climate change. Joan Nassauer led scenario development for the first EPA/NSF Water and
Watersheds program IA beginning in 1997. Don Scavia led a multi-sector IA for the causes and
consequences of hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. In addition, the Michigan Sea Grant initiated
funding for a series of IA’s focused on policy questions identified by state resource agencies.
These new studies will provide additional expertise in IA over the next several years.
At GVSU, Al Steinman helped author the Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan, as part of the
Everglades Restoration effort. James L. Wescoat, at the University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign, chaired a National Research Council review of the Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River
Studies commissioned by the International Joint Commission (NRC, 2006).
Section 3: Proposed Research Areas and Projects
Below, we describe a series of potential integrated assessment efforts that focus on integrating
social and natural sciences for analysis of policy development and management alternatives on
issues within the Great Lakes region. Many of these will draw on the research output generated
under Themes I-IV, and use the Education and Outreach efforts of Theme VI for communicating
results.

Lake Erie Hypoxia: While once considered under control, there have been recent increases
in the extent and duration of hypoxia in Lake Erie, and CILER is currently funded to conduct
an integrated assessment of its causes and consequences. This model-based effort, funded by
the NOS/CSCOR ECOFOR program, examines the relative causes of hypoxia (changes in
nutrient loads, climate, and invasive species), and the potential impacts to Lake Erie fisheries.

Climate Impacts, Coping, and Adaptation: The Great Lakes region is susceptible to
significant impacts of climate variability and change (e.g., Kling, et al 2003), including
geographic shifts in terrestrial species, changes in Great Lake levels with impacts on both
ecosystems and maritime commerce, extirpation of cold water species, and increased nutrient
39
loads from changing precipitation patters. CILER is well positioned to lead an integrated
assessment focused on identifying regional vulnerabilities, capacities, and adaptation
strategies.

Dam removal: Many of the hydroelectric dams in the Great Lakes region are reaching their
design life and are being considered for decommissioning and removal. Conflicts among
those with interests in flood control, land-values, and in-stream ecological function can be
very high. CILER has access to capabilities to conduct a series of integrated assessments on
options for dam removal/retention throughout the region.

Cormorant impacts: As cormorant populations increase throughout the Great Lakes region,
there is significant controversy over their role in competing with commercial and recreational
fishing as well as habitat destruction. CILER is well situated to conduct an integrated
assessment on the causes, consequences, and potential controls of cormorant populations in
the Great Lakes region.

Potential Protected Area evaluations: There are several fish habitat refuges in the Great
Lakes, one National Marine Sanctuary (Thunder Bay), and one Estuarine Research Reserve
(Old Woman Creek). There is a growing need to further protect special areas in the Great
Lakes, and CILER has access to capabilities to conduct integrated assessment on the
ecological need and social viability of additional protected areas.

Phosphorus Control strategies: Phosphorus is once again emerging as a growing concern in
the Great Lakes, although non-point sources have replaced point sources as the main concern.
Recommendations emerging from MI’s new Phosphorus Management Advisory Council can
serve as a basis for an IA to tackle this problem.

Groundwater Sustainability: Groundwater is abundant in most areas of the Great Lakes;
however we need a proactive strategy to ensure its sustainability. We can build on the
findings of Michigan’s Groundwater Conservation Advisory Council to analyze and integrate
the social, economic, and environmental issues associated with groundwater use and
protection in the Great Lakes basin.

Coastal Community Development/Eco-tourism: The delicate balance between habitat
protection and economic development can often be achieved through ecotourism. We can
assist numerous communities throughout the Great Lakes region that are currently interested
in increasing lake access and developing ecologically sensitive hike and bike trails that will
act as a catalyst for greater tourism while minimizing the impact on the surrounding natural
systems. Some specific examples of such communities include those in both the northeast
and northwestern parts of Michigan in addition to the Sleeping Bear Dunes National
Lakeshore. These sites can serve as test cases for community development, which can then
be expanded regionally.

Brownfield redevelopment and persistent contaminants. The Great Lakes region is
dominated by Rust Belt ports and associated contaminating and economically marginalized
industries. Assessing the long-term ecological, economic, and social costs and benefits of
40
alternative remediation and redevelopment strategies will help to assure the public health,
environmental health and longevity of brownfield redevelopment, which has had its greatest
success primarily as an urban economic development tool.

Economic benefits of Great Lakes sediment remediation –Using information from real estate
markets and citizen surveys, estimate the community economic benefits of eliminating
contamination at Areas of Concern. We have conducted studies of the impacts on real estate
values and the property tax base at three AOC sites and could include additional site-specific
studies as well as an effort to generalize the site-specific studies to the Great Lakes Basin.

Coastal urbanization and water management policy. Changing relationships between the
public trust doctrine and lakefront land use planning and design. This issue is the subject of
very recent Michigan case law regarding beach access; it has a 150-year historical record of
experimentation on the Chicago lakefront; and a much longer record in international water
law and policy. Analyzing how Great Lakes policy has, and might in the future, affect
coastal land planning and design is the goal of this research.

Optimize Sustainability of Water Supply and Ecosystems in the Great Lake Region - There
exists a patchwork of high quality information resources in many local areas in the Great
Lakes Region but no systematic or systems-oriented integration of information to support
modern large-scale watershed management. This project would assess and integrate
information needed to support sustained ecological and environmental quality while meeting
water supply needs of growing populations.

Risk-based Drought Vulnerability Assessment and Preparedness Planning - Climate change
will likely result in greater frequency and severity of droughts than have been experienced in
recent centuries. To face sectoral vulnerability to drought and necessary institutional
adaptations, there is a need to move from crisis management to risk management. This
project would integrate engineering, economic, and sociological analyses at a watershed
scale to characterize individual and institutional vulnerability to drought and to propose
policy changes that will allow targeted risk management.

Applications to Improve Great Lakes Resource Management - The ability to protect, restore,
and manage resources in the Great Lakes region relies on integrating knowledge of natural
resources with socioeconomic factors to enhance decision-making processes. CILER will
support NOAA’s mission related to the protection and restoration of resources by conducting
IA for key potential restoration areas in the Great Lakes region. These projects would
include: 1) valuation studies to assess willingness of Great Lakes residents to pay for
improving impaired water quality uses related to harmful algal blooms and pathogen-based
beach closings; 2) application of network theory to sustainable land-use planning in
nearshore region of the Great Lakes in order to identify priority coastal land habitats needed
to promote healthy and productive coastal ecosystems; and 3) examination of collaborative
adaptive ecosystem management approaches across North America and application of
learned lessons to watershed and subwatershed-level restoration projects in the Great Lakes
region.
41
Theme VI: Education and Outreach
Section 1: Overview of Needs and Priorities
Use of scientific information in environmental decision-making is limited at least as much by the
capacity to translate information into a useful form as it is by our research capacity. Effective
use of scientific information often is hindered by lack of access to research findings, the mass of
information available, and the technical nature of reports. Reaching policymakers and the
concerned public is often addressed by repackaging information into accurate but readable
digests of research that has been selected for quality (e.g. by a panel of experts) and then
disseminating that information effectively and to appropriate audiences. This theme does that,
but much more.
NOAA recognizes the importance of both education and outreach in meeting the needs of
decision-makers and the general public. “Increased public knowledge of ecosystems and the
principles of sustainable development, and the active involvement of the public as stewards for
coastal and marine ecosystem issues in their communities, are critical components of [the
NOAA] mission.” NOAA’s strategic plan directs the agency to “Engage, advise, and inform
individuals, partners, communities, and industries to facilitate information flow, assure
coordination and cooperation, and provide assistance in the use, evaluation, and application of
information.” The NOAA Strategic Goals to Enhance Society’s Ability to Plan and Respond,
Serve Society’s Needs for Weather and Water Information, and Support the Nation’s Commerce
with Information all require extensive education and outreach efforts to realize progress. The
NOAA strategic plan further recognizes promoting environmental literacy, and marine/aquatic
literacy in particular, as a cross-cutting priority.
Enhancing education and outreach capacity and coordination is a high priority for our proposed
Cooperative Institute. The primary goal of CILER’s Education and Outreach theme is to
facilitate education and outreach activities for NOAA in the Great Lakes region. Engaging
appropriate education and outreach partners and coordinating efforts form cornerstone in
developing this capacity. In addition to working with education efforts inside NOAA and across
the region, CILER will work specifically with the Great Lakes Sea Grant Network in this regard.
Sea Grant has long recognized the public demand for translation of science into a format that can
be understood by the general public and used in decision-making, and has established a Marine
and Aquatic Literacy Theme to address needs in formal and informal education. We will take
advantage of that expertise.
The following 5 objectives lay the foundation for meeting this goal.
 To develop and implement, and evaluate mechanisms to facilitate collaborative education
and outreach.
 To coordinate CILER education and outreach programs with other regional efforts (e.g., the
Great Lakes Sea Grant Network, COSEE Great Lakes, the Great Lakes Observation System
(GLOS), and the Great Lakes Regional Research and Information Network (GLRRIN)).
 To develop education and outreach programs for the other CILER research themes, including
incorporating these elements in research projects.
42
 To broaden NOAA’s education and outreach programs to cover all states and Great Lakes.
 To demonstrate how education research complements science research through mutually
supportive programs.
Section 2: Education and Outreach Capabilities
Extension – The Great Lakes Sea Grant Network (GLSGN) has an outstanding record of
achievement in transferring the results of university research to a wide range of audiences and
giving special assistance to coastal communities, businesses and individual citizens. Each
program of the network has base capabilities in extension including more than 50 extension
specialists scattered across all 8 states in the region. Extension programming areas of expertise
include fisheries (commercial and recreational), aquatic invasive species, restoration, water
quality, coastal aquatic habitat, contaminants, seafood safety, aquaculture, coastal/water safety,
coastal hazards, climate, technology/GIS, economics, maritime transportation, coastal
community development, land use planning, tourism, and underwater cultural resources.
Education – The Center for Ocean Sciences Education Excellence – Great Lakes (COSEE Great
Lakes) is sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Great Lakes Sea Grant Network. COSEE Great
Lakes was created in 2005 to connect formal and informal educators, students in grades 4-10,
and the public with the science of the Great Lakes and world oceans. COSEE Great Lakes is a
network of universities, educators, and public outreach specialists throughout the Great Lakes
region. To date, more than 30 institutions have signed on as formal COSEE Great Lakes
collaborators including federal agencies, binational (US-Canada) organizations, universities and
colleges, public schools, museums and non-profit organizations. From 2005 to 2010, more than
2,000 teachers will enhance their Great Lakes/ocean science knowledge and develop working
relationships with more than 350 researchers through COSEE Great Lakes activities and
workshops. The current CILER director, Dr. Don Scavia, serves as the Principal Investigator for
COSEE Great Lakes; the program is a stellar example of the type of collaborative
education/outreach programming that can be achieved through our vision for the CILER program.
Each program of the GLSGN has base capabilities in education including more than 12
education specialists. The Network hosts such a variety of key Great Lakes education sites
including NAB the Aquatic Invader, project FLOW (Fisheries Learning on the Web), WOW
(Water on the Web), & the COSEE-Great Lakes’ website. Many of the CILER partners and
collaborators co-host NOAA-CORE National Ocean Science Bowl activities for high school
students and teachers. The Rochester Institute of Technology, Center for Imaging Science is
developing a rigorous science education and outreach program in the Center for Imaging Science.
In particular, they will provide the capacity to (a) develop standards-based K-12 education
curricula in formal and informal settings, (b) work with museums and science centers in
developing relevant education programs, and (c) facilitate “scientist in the classroom”, family,
and summer camp type programs.
Communications – Each program of the GLSGN has base capabilities in communications
including more than 25 communications specialists. Collectively, the programs produce 8
newsletters with a print distribution of 600-10,500 each (many of the newsletters also are
distributed electronically). Wisconsin Sea Grant hosts Earthwatch Radio – a weekly syndicated
43
radio program focusing on environmental news. Each program has an extensive website and
professional web development capabilities. The Network hosts such National Sea Grant web
resources as SGNIS and the ANS Clearinghouse. The Rochester Institute of Technology, Center
for Imaging Science has particular expertise in all areas of imaging science and communicating
science through imagery.
Outreach for federal agencies – Since 2001, the GLSGN has included an Extension Educator at
GLERL. Dr. Rochelle Sturtevant provides information based on GLERL research to Sea Grant
extension agents located throughout the Great Lakes region for use in their local extension
programming and provides feedback to GLERL researchers on the research needs of the coastal
constituencies served by Sea Grant extension as well as coordinating joint efforts of the Great
Lakes Sea Grant Network (GLSGN). Dr. Sturtevant currently serves as (a) the Regional
Fisheries Extension Enhancement Coordinator for the GLSGN, (b) the Sea Grant Extension
representative to the Great Lakes Panel of the ANS Task Force and Chair of the Panel’s
Information and Education committee, (c) COSEE-Great Lakes Science Liaison, (d) NOAANCRAIS Outreach Coordinator and Great Lakes Regional Coordinator and (e) NOAA Invasive
Species Program Outreach representative. Sonia Joseph, a Michigan Sea Grant Extension
Educator acting as Outreach Coordinator for NOAA’s Center of Excellence for Great Lakes and
Human Health (CEGLHH), is also based at GLERL. The GLSGN also includes 2 IL-IN Sea
Grant Extension Specialists, Elizabeth Hinchey-Malloy and Susan Boheme based at EPAGLNPO in Chicago.
Great Lakes Observing System (GLOS) Education and Outreach – The Great Lakes Sea Grant
Network will be providing its expertise and experience to the Great Lakes Observing System to
lead GLOS Education and Outreach functions. Education in the GLOS context is defined as
those endeavors directed toward establishing information-sharing relationships with educators
and their students. Educational materials developed through GLOS must be designed for a wide
variety of age groups and audiences, including both formal and informal educational settings.
Formal settings will include K-12 classrooms to university and post-graduate programs. Informal
settings will include public libraries, museums, aquaria, education camps and field trips,
schoolship programs, and environmental learning centers, among others. GLOS educational
products will meet all approved curricula standards to maximize their classroom use,
incorporation in existing lesson plans, and accessibility. Outreach in the GLOS context is
defined as those efforts used to establish information-sharing relationships with all other user
groups outside the education community. Outreach materials developed through GLOS will be
designed for a wide variety of age groups and audiences, including scientists, emergency
management agencies, natural resource management agencies, industrial and commercial
resource users, recreational users, educators, the press and legislators, among others. Outreach
methods will involve these audiences in needs assessments, conferences, demonstrations,
seminars, workshops, site visits, cooperative programs and projects, news reports, newsletters,
publications, television and radio programs, instructional video, and webcasts.
Social Science and Surveys – The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) is a social science
research organization affiliated with the University of Chicago with offices in Chicago,
Washington, D.C., and Berkeley, California. NORC’s contact center for conducting telephone
interviews and data preparation is located in Chicago and NORC maintains a national field
44
operations presence for conducting in-person surveys. NORC’s clients include government
agencies, universities, foundations, and other nonprofit and commercial organizations. NORC
enjoys a core strength in its ability to efficiently design and field social science surveys of the
highest quality and to manage survey, administrative, program, and other data for research
purposes. From the development of survey instruments to the design of efficiently executable
and scientifically valid samples through survey administration and data acquisition, data
processing, and analysis, NORC staff members bring world-renowned expertise to social-science
research activities. NORC’s permanent national field interviewing staff of approximately 600
individuals is a prized asset. NORC’s Field Interviewers come from varied backgrounds and
display a broad array of talents and skills. NORC uses this diversity to support high completion
rates across a spectrum of target populations and communities. NORC’s experience ranges from
small studies with as few as 500 respondents to longitudinal and cross-sectional studies with
more than 60,000 respondents. NORC staff has expertise in working with researchers to create
effective dissemination strategies.
Section 3: Proposed Project Types
Meeting our education and outreach objectives will require careful coordination of an array of
education and outreach projects. A team consisting of education and outreach staff for GLERL,
Sea Grant, and the Joint Institute, as well as other interested collaborators, will be responsible for
developing the strategic plan and project array.
Each project should be tied to one or more of the general education/outreach objectives (above)
as well as having project-specific objectives defined in terms of audience and outcome. In
determining the array of specific projects (implementation plan) the team should carefully
consider balancing effort, audiences, and outcomes. Figure 1 provides an example schema for
balancing projects of the types suggested in this proposal.
Devising the final array of projects will entail a variety of assessments ranging from needs
assessments (formative evaluation) to impact assessments (outcome evaluation). Some of the
formative evaluations (surveys) are presented here as projects types; all education and outreach
project types should include an evaluation component which looks at impact through the lens of
the general and project-specific objectives.
45
Figure 1. Impact distribution chart illustrating variation in effectiveness of education and
outreach efforts.
The following are examples of the major types of education and outreach projects that we
propose to undertake:

Institutional Surveys - An institutional survey that aims at taking a regional inventory of all
education and training programs in the region that address various aspects of environmental
science and related social sciences and policy issues would have many uses, not least of
which would be as an instrument that CILER could use to guide its own E&O activities.
There are many education and training programs in the region that address various aspects of
environmental science and related social sciences and policy issues. For example, the
University of Chicago offers an M.S. program in Environmental Science and Policy, an
undergraduate concentration in Environmental Studies. Many other area Universities have
similar offerings. By making the information available on a website, CILER could provide a
valuable centralized resource for the entire region, which might be consulted by resource
managers looking for appropriate training programs for their staff, for example. Such an
effort would go a long way toward making CILER truly regional and collaborative.

Development of Outreach/Education Programs and Materials – The Great Lakes Sea Grant
Network has a long history of working cooperatively with each other and with our partners in
the development of Outreach and Education materials and programs which help to leverage
resources and reach regional and national audiences. The proposed CILER provides a
framework to build upon that capacity. Such efforts may focus on specific CILER research
projects and themes or other priorities of the partners. Recent cooperative efforts of the
Great Lakes Sea Grant Network exemplified by the Great Lakes Fisheries Leadership
Institute could have benefited from the existence of such a framework. Likewise, Great
Lakes region participation in National Campaigns such as Habitattitude would benefit from
centralized regional coordination and administration that CILER could provide. Outreach
46
methods and materials could include workshops and trainings, symposia, “invasive species
field days”, presentations at conferences, video teleconferences, PowerPoint presentations,
printed materials such as factsheets and posters, and websites. In addition, the Cooperative
Institute will make efforts to interface with the Outreach Committee of the International
Association for Great Lakes Research (IAGLR) in order to improve outreach and educational
efforts of the two organizations.

Coordinated Regional Science Workshops for Stakeholders - The Great Lakes Fisheries
Leadership Institute (http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/seagrant/GLFLI/PublicNotebook/Notebook.html, 20032004) is a model for teaching citizens about Great Lakes subject matter. This series of
workshops was coordinated at state, lake, and regional scale as an integrated regional
program. Coordinated regional workshops could be developed around any of the CILER
themes. We could also generate State of Great Lakes Science workshops for the general
public. Teachers, charter captains, angling club members, boat & yacht club members and
others could be target audiences for outreach efforts for new CILER research results.

Invasive Species Education: To date, most Great Lakes invasive species educational
materials and programs have addressed specific invaders in and along the shores of the Great
Lakes. We propose to extend the outreach efforts to include effects on the entire Great Lakes
ecosystem, such as inland lakes, river, streams, and watersheds. We will include all
stakeholders affected by invasive species in the Great Lakes region, such as elected and
appointed officials and state and local government agencies; natural resource managers;
outdoor recreators; homeowners; educators and students; 4-H and scouting staff and
volunteers; the agriculture, horticulture, turf grass and forestry industries; cooperators within
weed management areas; invasive species task forces and regional aquatic nuisance species
panels; the NYS Invasive Plant Council; environmental organization representatives; and the
media. Outreach methods and materials could include workshops and trainings, symposia,
“invasive species field days”.

Invasive Species Monitoring: Most aquatic invasive species are first reported by fishermen,
recreational boaters, or other ‘average citizens.’ Sea Grant has frequently involves targeted
stakeholder groups in AIS monitoring efforts ranging from the population WatchCards that
Sea Grant has produced for more than 10 species.

Observing Systems Education - The preliminary GLOS needs assessment found that the most
frequently cited education needs include readily accessible real-time information about
physical lake conditions, weather and associated forecasts and advisories; easy-to-understand
analyses of trends in lake conditions and water quality over time, based on data collected,
compiled and analyzed through GLOS; and information on localized lake conditions,
nearshore data collection and alerts for riptides or other phenomena. The preferred delivery
methods identified were: teacher training, Internet-based distance learning (i.e., “virtual”
learning opportunities), mobile GLOS learning centers and traveling displays, and nearshore,
underwater camera surveillance to promote knowledge and interest in what lies beneath the
water. The results of these preliminary findings will assist in the development and execution
of a comprehensive educational needs assessment once the GLOS is operational.
47

Observing Systems Outreach - Priority GLOS outreach activities and products will be
identified through targeted constituent needs assessments appropriate to each GLOS
subsystem. Typical outreach activities and products include conferences, demonstrations,
seminars, workshops, site visits, cooperative programs and projects, news reports,
newsletters, publications, television and radio programs, instructional video, and webcasts. It
is anticipated that each subsystem will involve multiple constituencies, therefore GLOS
outreach products will likely be multiple within each subsystem.

Technology Transfer: Several of the research themes for the proposed CILER include a
component of technology development. These range from development of new sensors and
transmitting capacities for GLOS to development of watershed models for Ecological
Forecasting. Each of these new technologies will realize its full potential only when the
technology has been successfully transferred to targeted audiences of scientists, managers
and decisionmakers. For example, a new model of the transport of bacteria from sewage
outfall (or other source) to beach will need to be transferred to beach managers and public
health officials before it can be employed in their decision-making processes. This includes
not only making the model available, but also identifying suitable audiences and applications,
teaching them how to use it, and ensuring they understand its strengths and limitations.

Socio-economic research training/workshops - Many of our proposed activities directly
mention or imply socioeconomic analyses and/or the integration of socioeconomic and
ecosystem research frameworks. A workshop to present Great Lakes and marine resource
managers and ecosystem researchers with latest information on tools for integrating
economics with ecosystem management would be one approach to facilitating this
integration. Such a workshop could also include a series of case histories of successful
application of economics into management decision–making. Survey research is an essential
component of any initiative that seeks to take stakeholder views into account – one which is
not generally well-understood or correctly interpreted outside its discipline. Survey training
could be provided for researchers, resource managers and policy makers either via face-toface training or by developing online learning resources.

Opinion Assessments - Identifying key environmental issues in which public opinion plays
an important role in policy making for the GL region will help to provide resource managers
and policy makers with an accurate view of public awareness of and attitudes toward the
issues. Survey results might also serve to guide development of outreach and education
programs. Since the survey results provide a baseline, follow-up surveys could then provide
a reliable performance indicator for such programs. Surveys of the professional
environmental community, such as academic researchers, resource managers, and policymakers could serve to provide NOAA with valuable insight into the thinking of the
professional communities both locally and regionally, and gauge of their receptivity to, and
assessment of, NOAA strategies, programs, etc.

Open Houses – Citizens, educators, and students are very interested in touring field
laboratories and learning more about what scientists do and how they go about their efforts to
learn more about the Great Lakes. The Stone Lab open house, for example, is host to
hundreds of citizens annually and provides a teachable moment to explain key concepts and
48
important recent scientific findings to the public. Such open houses could feature new
research by any of the CILER partners. One example of such open houses, are the public
forums and public lectures offered by the University of Toledo’s Lake Erie Center
(http://lakeerie.utoledo.edu).

Expeditionary Learning - TREK is one example of an expeditionary learning scheme that
enables youth (ages 11-15) to (1) visit scientists working on the research projects and (2)
conduct their own relevant experimentation ‘in the field’ while discovering the region. The
development of a CILER-based Trek experiences would allow the integration of science
themes and research from the institute. Once developed the trek experiences could be offered
though collaborations of the participants in the project, or leveraged into experiences that, for
example, teachers could offer to school groups or science centers or partner institutions could
offer as summer programs. Having the partner scientists participate in the development of the
expeditionary learning experience ensures a direct connection between the science and the
developed outreach. Though this type of program reaches a smaller number of individuals, it
does give them a more meaningful and in depth experience, which can provide a contrast to
outreach programs that are designed for broader, less deep impacts. In past experience,
providing scholarships to encourage participation from underrepresented and underserved
groups can broaden the scope of the impact.

Family Programs for Outreach Centers – One suggested model is to develop a sequence of
family programs. Each sequence would be created in kit form that could be delivered to area
museums and science centers, with training on its use included. The programs are given by
trained facilitators at museums, science centers or outreach groups of research institutions (or
even in schools). Training and promotion of the materials could be conducted at, e.g., the
regional National Science Teachers Association meeting, state science teacher association
meetings or state/regional museum and science center meetings to maximize reach.

School-based programs – A variety of models are available to consider for increasing
interactions between CILER partner scientists and classroom teachers. COSEE offers several
models as do many of our other partners. Appropriate CILER roles could include developing
a range of suggested activities, developing partnerships & recruiting partners, and providing
training to both teachers and scientists. Any school-based activities developed would connect
the science research being conducted with the national and state science standards. Such
products could also be utilized by home schooled individuals and groups.
49
TABLE 1. Listing of collaborating CILER investigators by institution
Michigan State University
Sandra Batie (Theme V)
Jim Bence (Theme I)
Geoffrey Bryon Habron (Theme V)
Daniel Hayes (Themes I, II, IV)
Reuben Goforth (Themes I, II, V)
Michael Jones (Theme V)
Jay Lennon (Theme II)
Weiming Li (Theme II)
Elena Litchman (Theme I)
Frank Lupi (Theme II)
Brian Maurer (Theme II)
Scott Peacor (Themes I, II)
Mantha Phanikumar (Theme I)
Joan Rose (Themes I, II, IV)
Orlando Sarnelle (Themes I, II)
Rochelle Sturtevant (Theme VI)
Kim Scribner (Themes II, IV, V)
Jan Stevenson (Theme II)
William Taylor (Theme I, VI)
Merritt Turetsky (Themes II, IV)
Illinois
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Peter Bajcsy (Theme III)
John Braden (Themes I, V)
Nicholas Brozovic (Theme V)
Ximing Cai (Theme V)
Carla Cáceres (Theme II)
Sergiusz Czesny (Theme I)
J. Wayland Eheart (Themes I, V)
Marcelo Garcia (Theme I)
S. Gasteyer (Theme V)
Katherine Hayhoe (Theme I)
E. Herricks (Theme V)
Rob Holmes (Theme I)
Rob Hudson (Theme I)
Praveen Kumar (Themes I, III)
Ken Kunkel (Theme I)
Xin-Zhong Liang (Theme I)
Bruce Rhoads (Theme I)
Arthur Schmidt (Theme I)
M. Sivapalan (Theme V)
James Wescoat (Themes I, V)
Donald Wuebbles (Theme I)
University of Michigan
Sara Adlerstein (Themes I, II)
Arun Agrawal (Theme V)
David Allan (Theme I)
Rosina Bierbaum (Theme V)
Dmitry Beletsky (Theme I)
Joel Blum (Theme I)
Dan Brown (Themes I, III, V)
Aline Cotel (Theme I)
Carlo DeMarchi (Theme I)
James Diana (Theme I)
Ryan Eustice (Theme III)
Gloria Helfand (Theme V)
Stephen Henderson (Theme I)
Tomas Hook (Theme I)
Mary Carol Hunter (Theme V)
Valeriy Ivanov (Theme I)
Tom Johengen (Themes II, III)
Donna Kashian (Theme I)
George Kling (Theme I)
Maria Carmen Lemos (Theme V)
Guy Meadows (Themes I, III)
Indiana
University of Notre Dame
Kevin Drury (Theme II)
Gary Lamberti (Themes II, IV)
David Lodge (Themes I, II)
Jennifer Tank (Theme IV)
Michigan
Grand Valley State University
Bopaiah A. Biddanda (Themes I, V)
Xuefeng Chu (Theme IV)
John Koches (Theme V)
Alan Steinman (Themes I, V)
Don Uzarski (Themes I, V)
Janet Vail (Theme VI)
Michigan Technological University
W. Charles Kerfoot (Theme I)
50
University of Michigan (con’t)
Michael Moore (Theme V)
Joan Nassauer (Theme V)
Jerome Nriagu (Theme I)
Ted Parson (Theme V)
Jennifer Read (Theme V)
Sander Robinson (Theme II)
Richard Rood (Theme I)
Ed Rutherford (Theme I)
Larissa Sano (Themes I, V)
Donald Scavia (Theme V)
Paul Webb (Theme I)
Michael J. Wiley (Theme I)
Alan Wilson (Theme II)
Mark Wilson (Theme I)
Steven J. Wright (Themes I, IV)
Steve Yaffee (Themes IV, V)
Christopher Pennuto
Alicia Perez-Fuentetaja
Christopher Riley
Clarkson University
Thomas Holsen (Theme I)
Philip Hopke (Theme I)
Michael Twiss (Theme I)
Hung Tao Shen (Theme I)
Cornell University
Mark Bain (Theme I)
Bernd Blossey (Theme II)
Paul Bowser (Theme I)
Wilfred Brutsaert (Theme I)
Edwin Cowen (Themes I, III)
Peter Diamessis (Themes I, III)
Cliff Kraft (Themes I, II)
Philip L-F. Liu (Themes I, III)
Ed Mills (Theme II)
Charles O’Neill (Theme II)
Lars Rudstam (Theme I)
Wayne State University
Dan Kashian (Theme I)
Western Michigan Univ.
Chansheng He (Theme I)
Niagara University
William Edwards (Themes I, II)
Minnesota
University of Minnesota – Twin Cities
Richard Axler (Themes I, VI)
Jay Austin (Themes I, III)
Valerie Brady (Theme I)
George Host (Theme I)
Lucinda Johnson (Theme I)
Ray Newman (Theme II)
Gerald Niemi (Theme I)
Euan Reavie (Theme I)
Peter Sorenson (Theme II)
Rochester Institute of Technology
Jake Noel-Storr (Theme VI)
Anthony Vodacek (Theme I)
Stony Brook University
Robert Cerrato (Themes I, III, IV)
Roger Flood (Themes I, III, IV)
Jeff Levinton (Themes II)
SUNY – Brockport
Joseph Makarewicz (Theme I)
University of Minnesota – Duluth
Donn Branstrator (Theme II)
SUNY-Syracuse
Gregory Boyer (Themes I, IV)
Jack Manno (Theme V)
New York
Buffalo State College
Mark Clapsadl
Gordon Fraser
Suresh Gupta
Subodh Kumar
Jagat Mukherjee
University at Albay
Katherine Alben (Theme I) – Affiliation NY
State Department of Health
51
University at Buffalo
Joe Atkinson (Theme I)
Christina Tsai (Theme I)
Daryl Dwyer (Theme IV)
Kevin Egan (Themes IV, V)
Johan Gottgens (Theme IV)
Cyndee Gruden (Theme IV)
Anne Krause (Themes IV, V)
Christine Mayer (Themes I, II, III)
Daryl Moorhead (Themes I, III)
Alison Spongberg (Theme IV)
Carol Stepien (Themes I, II, III, IV, VI)
Ohio
Bowling Green State University
Jim Evans (Theme IV)
Jon Farver (Themes I, II, IV)
Michael McKay (Themes I, II, IV)
Jeffrey Mine (Themes I, II, IV)
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania State University
Hunter Carrick (Theme IV)
Eric Obert (Theme IV)
Case Western Reserve
Joseph Koonce (Theme I)
Kent State University
Robert Heath (Theme I)
Wisconsin
Carthage College
Arthur Cyr (Theme V)
Miami University
David Berg (Theme II)
Lawrence University
Bart DiStasio (Theme I, II)
Ohio University
Warren Currie (Theme I)
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay
Kevin Fermanich (Theme I, III)
Tara Reed (Theme II)
Michael Zorn (Theme III)
The Ohio State University
Ann Carey (Theme IV)
Yu-Ping Chin (Theme IV)
David Culver (Themes I, II, IV)
Pat Fox (Theme IV)
Rosanne Fortner (Theme VI)
Tim Haab (Theme V)
Elena Irwin (Theme V)
Rongxing Li (Theme III)
Berry Lyons (Theme IV)
Xulong Niu (Theme III)
Alan Randall (Theme V)
Jeff Reutter (Themes III, VI)
Richard Sagre (Themes I, IV)
C.K. Shum (Theme III)
Matt Thomas (Theme III)
University of Wisconsin-LaCrosse
Kristofer Rolfhus (Theme I)
Mark Sandheinrich (Theme I, II)
James Wiener (Theme I)
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Marc Anderson (Theme III)
David Armstrong (Theme I)
Terrance Barry (Theme I)
Richard Bishop (Theme V)
Harvey Bootsma (Theme III)
Ken Bradbury (Themes I, V)
Hector Bravo (Theme I)
Steven Carpenter (Themes I, II, V)
Jonathan Chipman (Theme III)
Gene Clark (Themes I, VI)
Michael Hansen (Theme I)
Victoria Harris (Themes I, VI)
David Hart (Themes III, VI)
University of Toledo
Defne Apul (Theme IV)
Thomas Bridgeman (Themes I, II, VI)
Jonathan Bossenbroek (Themes II, III)
James Coss (Theme III)
Kevin Czajkowski (Themes III, V)
52
University of Wisconsin-Madison (con’t)
Warren Heideman (Theme I)
Randall Hunt (Theme I)
James Hurley (Themes I, III, VI)
James Kitchell (Themes I, II, IV, V)
Rebecca Klaper (Theme I)
Val Klump (Themes I, III)
Carol Lee (Theme II)
Charles Lehner (Theme I)
Qian Liao (Theme I)
Thomas Lillesand (Theme III)
Rick Lindroth (Theme I)
James Lubner (Themes I, VI)
Philip Moy (Themes II, VI)
Richard Peterson (Theme I)
Paul Roebber (Theme I)
Kenneth Potter (Theme III)
Jamie Schauer (Theme III)
Martin Shafer (Themes I, III)
Emily Stanley (Theme I)
Jake Vander Zanden (Themes I, II, V)
Steven Ventura (Theme III)
Joy Zedler (Theme II)
Georgia
Georgia Inst. of Technol.
Philip Roberts (Theme I)
Vermont
University of Vermont
Ellen Marsden (Theme II)
Canada
University of Toronto
C. Shuter (Theme I)
University of Windsor
Jan Ciborowski (Theme I)
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
John Berges (Theme II)
Harvey Bootsma (Theme III)
Hector Bravo (Theme I)
Russell Cuhel (Themes I, II, III)
Michael Hansen (Theme I)
John Janssen (Theme I, II)
Rebecca Klaper (Theme I)
Val Klump (Themes I, III)
Qian Liao (Theme I)
Rick Lindroth (Theme I)
Sandra McLellan (Themes I, III)
Paul Roebber (Theme I)
Craig Sandgren (Theme II)
James Waples (Themes I, III)
University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh
Gregory Kleinheinz (Theme I)
Michael Lizotte (Themes I, II)
Colleen McDermott (Theme I)
Robert Pillsbury (Themes I, II)
53
References
Albert, Dennis A. 2000. Borne of the Wind: An Introduction to the Ecology of Michigan Sand
Dunes. Michigan Natural Features Inventory. 63p.
Clarke et al 2001. A Comparative History of Social Responses to Climate Change, Ozone
Depletion, and Acid Rain. In: Learning to Manage Global Environmental Risks – Vol. 1.
The Social Learning Group. MIT Press.
Coon, T. G. 1999. Ichthyofauna of the Great Lakes basin. In W. W. Taylor and C. P. Ferreri,
eds. Great Lakes Fisheries and Management: a Binational Perspective. Michigan State
University Press, East Lansing, Michigan.
GLERL Science Strategy. 2006. DRAFT. 27 pp.
GLRC. 2005. Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy of National Significance.
http://www.glrc.us/documents/GLRC_Strategy.pdf. 70 pp. (accessed on 20 Aug 2006)
Kling et al. 2003. Confronting Climate Change in the Great Lakes. Report to the Union for
Concerned Scientists. 92 pp.
Morgan and Dowlatabadi. 1996., Learning from integrated assessment of climate change,
Climatic Change 34(3,4) 337–368.
NOAA. 2005. New Priorities for the 21st Century – NOAA’s Strategic Plan (Updated for FY
2006-FY 2011). United States Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Wahington, D.C.: 24 pp.
NOAA. Undated. Understanding Global Ecosystems to Support Informed Decision-Making A
20-Year Research Vision. http://nrc.noaa.gov/Docs/Final_20-Year_Research_Vision.pdf
15 pp. (accessed on 20 Aug 2006).
Scott, W. B. and E. J. Crossman. 1998. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Galt House Publications,
Ltd., Oakville, Ontario, Canada. 966 pp.
TNC. 1994. Conservation of Biological Diversity in the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem: Issues
and Opportunities. The Nature Conservancy, Great Lakes Program Office, Chicago, Illinois.
Valette-Silver, D. Scavia. Editors. Ecological forecasting: new tools for coastal and ecosystem
management. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum
NOC NCCOS 1. 116 pp.
54
d. Educational Resources
The collaborators on this proposal represent more than 30 universities from the Great Lakes
region. Collectively, these universities provide innumerable educational opportunities for
students in the form of degree offerings, faculty mentors, research facilities, and research,
education, and outreach opportunities. The educational resources associated with the
Cooperative Institute range from degree programs in all the traditional science areas that support
Great Lakes research, including biology, chemistry, genetics, physics, mathematics, engineering,
statistics, zoology, public policy, economics, education, and political science (see Appendix C).
These universities also offer multidiscipline degree programs that combine approaches from
different disciplines to address pressing environmental resources issues. Some examples of these
multidiscipline programs include environmental and resource economics, human dimensions of
environmental systems, natural resource and environmental sciences, people, society, and the
environment, human and community resource development, and environmental health sciences.
More details about the nature of degree offerings of some of the universities associated with the
Great Lakes Research and Outreach Consortium are provided in Appendix C. Data from only a
few of the institutions are provided. One proposed project of the Cooperative Institute is to
conduct a systematic regional evaluation of educational resources in the Great Lakes region in
order to better describe and summarize these educational opportunities.
The lead institute of this proposal, the University of Michigan, is internationally recognized for
its strengths and capabilities in a range of disciplines. The core disciplines of earth, biological,
engineering, social, and health sciences have strong bases at the university. In addition the
university continues to improve its interdisciplinary approaches to address complex research
issues. There are also multiple centers associated with the University of Michigan that focus on
issues of potential importance to the Cooperative Institute consortia including, for example, the
Center for Complex systems (http://www.cscs.umich.edu/), the Graham Environmental
Sustainability Institute (http://provost.umich.edu/gesi/), Center for Sustainable Systems
(http://css.snre.umich.edu/), and the Erb Institute for Sustainable Enterprise
(http://www.erb.umich.edu/ ).
In addition to providing access to educational resources through both the lead institute and the
other university institutions represented on this proposal, the proposed Cooperative Institute will
provide substantive educational and research opportunities for undergraduates, graduates, and
postdoctoral fellows. In terms of the former, the proposed Cooperative Institute will integrate
undergraduate and graduate students into appropriate research, education, and outreach projects
through the Great Lakes Summer Student Fellows program. Similar to the current successful
CILER program, this fellows program will place qualified students with NOAA or CILER
mentors to work on substantive projects that support NOAA’s missions in the Great Lakes region.
The program will work to recruit a range of students from across the nation and will work to
develop fellowship opportunities at universities throughout the region. The proposed
Cooperative Institute will also directly facilitate research opportunities for students by offering
small grants to allow students to engage in research projects affiliated with a CILER investigator
or NOAA mentor. These grants will allow students to pursue research that benefits NOAA’s
missions and to work directly with a Great Lakes researcher at any site in the region.
55
In terms of the postdoctoral fellows program, the proposed CILER will provide training and
mentoring opportunities for postdoctoral fellows by creating opportunities for fellows to work
closely with CILER investigators and NOAA mentors. This will be accomplished in two ways:
1) through a competitive postdoctoral program that is run under Task I non-administrative
activities; and 2) by consistently requesting funding for postdoctoral fellows on grants submitted
to NOAA and other funding agencies. In terms of the former, CILER proposes to administer a
competitive postdoctoral fellows program that will select one highly qualified applicant per year
to work on a research project proposed by a CILER investigator or NOAA researcher. All
member institutions of the Consortium will have the opportunity to compete to host this
postdoctoral fellow and the program will provide the first year of salary for the position. The
second way CILER will promote training opportunities for postdoctoral fellows will be by
emphasizing these positions when developing budgets for CILER proposals. By including
postdoctoral fellow salary on most CILER proposals, the Institute will create numerous training
opportunities for fellows interested in conducting research in the Great Lakes area.
e. Business Plan
Fiscal and Human Resources Management - The Cooperative Institute will be housed at, and
administered through, the School of Natural Resources and Environment (SNRE) at the
University of Michigan. All researchers and support staff hired through CILER will be
employees of the University of Michigan. As such, all University of Michigan human resources
related rules and benefits apply. Consistent with the guidelines for Cooperative Institutes,
CILER research and technical staff will be supervised by an appropriate University of Michigan
employee. In cases where CILER technical staff work on-site with NOAA scientists, the
supervisor will work with the Federal mentor and the employee to maintain amicable and
productive working relations.
Strategic Planning and Accountability – A revised CILER Strategic Plan will be developed by
the Council of Fellows and approved by the Executive Board and Management Team. The
CILER Director holds ultimate responsibility for accountability of the Institute and is responsible
administratively to the Executive Board and programmatically to the Council of Fellows. Within
the University of Michigan, the Director will report to the Dean of the School of Natural
Resources and Environment.
Organizational Structure – CILER will operate consistent with the NOAA Cooperative Institute
Handbook, including an Executive Board, Council of Fellows, Director, and staff. The
consortium of universities from which CILER draws its collaborators will be represented through
the Council of Fellows and the Management Team.
Cooperative Institute Executive Board: The CILER Executive Board will provide executive
oversight to the Cooperative Institute through the Management Team (see below). The
Executive Board shall consist of: 1) the Deputy Assistant Administrator of Ocean and
Atmospheric Research (OAR) (or his/her designee); 2) Deputy Assistant Administrators of other
NOAA Line Offices with substantive involvement in the Institute (or his/her designee); 3) the
Vice President for Research of the University of Michigan (or his/her representative); 4) the
56
Dean of the unit housing CILER, if not in the office of the Vice President; and 6) the CILER
Director, as ex officio. The Executive Board will convene 1-2 times per year.
The Executive Board will be responsible for:





Making recommendations to the Management Team concerning the administrative policies
of the Institute.
Reviewing the annual budget of the Institute and making recommendations regarding
budgetary issues.
Reviewing and implementing agreements or addenda to the Institute’s cooperative agreement
as may be entered into in the future and making recommendations in regard to such
agreements to the Management Team.
Reviewing the general policies of the Cooperative Institute and initiating appropriate
recommendations.
Approving the appointments of Fellows to the Council of Fellows of the Institute.
Cooperative Institute Council of Fellows: The Council of Fellows will provide programmatic
advice to the Cooperative Institute. The Council will consist of scientists drawn from the
universities participating in the CILER consortium and the participating NOAA line offices.
These representatives will include: 1) three senior NOAA scientists; 2) two University of
Michigan scientists; 3) one representative each from participating consortium universities such
as Grand Valley State University, Michigan State University, the Ohio State University, the
University of Illinois of Urbana-Champaign, the University of Minnesota, the University of
Toledo, and the University of Wisconsin (or comparable universities within the Great Lakes
region); and 4) the director of the Great Lakes Research Consortium (a consortium of
universities of the SUNY system). To reflect the broader research interests of the new CILER,
the scientists appointed to the Council of Fellows will include representatives from both the
social and natural sciences. The members of the Council will be recommended by the CILER
Director and approved by the Executive Board and Management Team. Additional Fellows will
be nominated by the Council of Fellows and then recommended by the CILER Director for
approval by the Executive Board and Management Team. The CILER Director will be an ex
officio member of the Council of Fellows. The Council of Fellows will convene for meetings
approximately quarterly (and via teleconferences).
The Council of Fellows will be responsible for:





Providing leadership in maintaining high standards of research of the Institute.
Developing the direction of interdisciplinary, regional research to be conducted by the
Cooperative Institute, including developing its Strategic Plan.
Analyzing the Institutes’ programs and scientific direction and recommending new research
theme areas.
Advising the Director on the selection of new Fellows and reappointment of current Fellows.
Reviewing grants and applications from Task I non-administrative programs, including the
Postdoctoral Program, the Visiting Fellows, and the Undergraduate and Graduate Grants
Program and making recommendations to the Management Team about priority applicants.
57
Management Team: The Management Team will make programmatic and operational
decisions for the Cooperative Institute consortium with feedback from the Executive Board and
Council of Fellows. The representatives on the Management Team will include: 1) the CILER
Director; 2) the GLERL Director; 3) senior representative(s) from other NOAA offices that are
funding CILER; and 4) three representatives of the Council of Fellows. The Management Team
will meet every one to two months and will be responsible for providing annual updates to the
Executive Board about CILER executive issues. The Management Team will oversee combined
NOAA and university contributions to CILER including Task 1B activities.
Cooperative Institute Director: The Director of the Institute shall have a tenured faculty
appointment through the University of Michigan’s School of Natural Resources and
Environment and shall serve as the chief executive officer of the Cooperative Institute. As such,
the Director will be responsible for scientific leadership and for maintaining and developing the
scientific programs. In addition, the Director shall be the primary representative of CILER and
is responsible for oversight of the Cooperative Institute’s budget and for all personnel actions
and commitments of resources by the Institute. The Director shall also convene and preside over
meetings of the CILER Executive Committee, the CILER Council of Fellows, and the
Management Team. The Director shall be appointed by the Regents of the University of
Michigan, recommended by the Dean of the School of Natural Resources and Environment in
consultation with the Executive Board.
The responsibilities of the Director are as follows:








Providing scientific leadership through active development of research programs,
coordination of regional research programs, and planning and priority setting for the
Cooperative Institute, with the advice and assistance of the Council of Fellows.
Maintaining accountability for all funds supplied to the Institute.
Developing mechanisms to facilitate coordination between the different universities of the
consortium.
Reporting on the performance of the Cooperative Institute with an annual research report that
is provided to the Executive Board.
Serving as Chairperson of the Council of Fellows and serving as a non-voting member of the
Executive Board.
Reviewing all research proposals sent to outside agencies
Reviewing and making final decisions regarding Task 1B activities as part of the
Management Team.
Advising NOAA on the appropriateness of non-Institute research proposals for funding
through peer-review by the Fellows.
Administrative Officer – The Administrative Officer will be responsible for the processing of
grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements; as well as ensuring CILER operations adhere to
University of Michigan policies regarding fiscal and human resource operations.
Education and Outreach Coordinator – The Education and Outreach Coordinator will oversee
a range of education and outreach activities at the Cooperative Institute, including the Great
Lakes Summer Student Fellows Program, the Great Lakes seminar circuit, the National Ocean
58
Sciences Bowl, and coordination of additional education and outreach activities associated with
the consortium. Part of these efforts will updating the CILER website to highlight education and
outreach programs and events. In addition, the coordinator may serve on other outreach
committees, such as the outreach committee for the International Association for Great Lakes
Research, to help coordinate public outreach and educational programs in the Great Lakes region.
Council of Fellows
Executive Board
Programmatic
Advice
Executive
Oversight
Management Team
Administrative Officer
Scientific and
Technical Staff
Education Coordinator
Figure 2. The organizational structure of the proposed Cooperative Institute will consist of an
Executive Board, a Council of Fellows, a Management Team, a Director, an Administrative
Officer, and an Education and Outreach Coordinator. See the proposal text for additional details.
Operations
CILER will select projects that will be pursued through the Cooperative Institute in one of the
following three ways: 1) based on a direct solicitation from a NOAA office in response to an
immediate or impending research need (primarily Task II projects); 2) from an RFP associated
with an open NOAA competition (Tasks II and III projects); 3) from a CILER-initiated effort for
proposed projects based on an assessment of a critical NOAA-related regional research need.
These latter would emerge largely from needs assessment workshops conducted in the years 1
and 2, as identified in the CILER timeline. These Research, Education, and Outreach Workshops
will be used to bring together existing and potential CILER investigators to discuss critical issues
in each of the six CILER subthemes. The outcome of these workshops will be an assessment of
critical needs in the Great Lakes region related to specific research topics or for education and
outreach needs. These workshops will then be used to identify research areas that are of
importance in supporting NOAA’s missions. This approach will capitalize on the intellectual
resources of the Cooperative Institute and work to facilitate regional research, educational, and
outreach approaches.
59
f. Performance Measures
In order to assess its progress both annually and for its five-year review, CILER proposes to use
the following four criteria:
1.
Scientific Productivity:
The performance of CILER as a Cooperative Institute will include an assessment of scientific
productivity in the research areas described under Tasks II and III. These performance measures
will include, but are not limited to, the number of peer-reviewed journal articles, the number of
book chapters, and the number of conference proceedings. CILER performance in this area will
also be gauged by the number of grants it successfully competes for and the number of regional
projects it helps coordinate. Finally, the scientific productivity will also be assessed by the
number of research theme workshops that are conducted and the results from scientific needs
assessments that emanate from these efforts.
2.
Performance Reporting:
CILER performance will also be assessed based on the quality and timeliness of progress reports
for projects pursued by the Institute. Per NOAA guidelines, an annual (or semi-annual, if
needed) performance report will be submitted to NOAA describing the activities of the
Cooperative Institute during the appropriate reporting period. The reports will follow the
appropriate Cooperative Institute guidelines and be consistent with 15 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Parts 14.51 and 14.52. The performance of CILER will be partly based on
the quality of these reports and the reported progress in all areas of operation of the Cooperative
Institute.
3.
Education and Outreach Efforts and Productivity:
Productivity in education and outreach efforts at CILER will be judged, in part, by the success of
Task 1 non-administrative programs such as the Postdoctoral Program, the Great Lakes Summer
Student Fellows Program, and the Undergraduate and Graduate grants program. Indicators of
success in this area will focus largely on output, such as the number of competitive postdoctoral
fellowships awarded, the number and range of summer student fellows accepted to the program,
and the number and range of grants awarded through the competitive grants program. Education
and outreach activities in Task II and III also will be judged based on the number of workshops
conducted, the number of outreach events participated on, the number of informational sheets
produced, and the quality and timeliness of updates to the CILER website. As in the research
themes, publication of results will be used to assess performance in these areas. In addition to
assessing output for outreach activities, another metric that may be used is an assessment of the
impact of these efforts and materials, including substantive testing of how users choose, apply
and respond to outreach publications, curriculum, and training programs.
4.
Employee Performance:
60
All CILER employees will be employed through the University of Michigan. The performance
of these employees, both technical and research, will be evaluated annually as part of the School
of Natural Resources and Environment’s merit review process. For technical staff, this
performance plan involves setting 6-month achievement criteria that are used to assess work
progress. For research staff, performance is based on scientific productivity and
accomplishments for each annual reporting period.
61