Water withdrawal legislation is pending on the floor of both the Michigan House of Representatives and Senate that is tie-barred to the Great Lakes Compact legislation. While the competing bills are in agreement regarding 90% of their content the differences, however, are significant. The current Senate bill SB 860 S-3, would allow water removal from Michigan’s cold water streams and rivers that resulted in a loss of up to 5% of the thriving species. The water removed would be about 25% of the low summer flows. The pending bill in the House limits the effects of water withdrawal on cold water streams and rivers only to the point where less than 1% of the thriving species is impacted. Senator Prussi offered a floor amendment to SB 860 that reduces the coldwater adverse impact limit to less than 1%.

We believe that the Michigan legislation is going to try to wrap up the Great Lakes Compact legislation this month. It is critical that we continue to contact our Senators and Representatives and let them know that we cannot accept water withdrawal legislation that sanctions any adverse impact on cold water streams and rivers greater than 1%. We cannot accept a compromise on this position because the companion assessment tool is untested and needs to be implemented cautiously.

You spoke up a month ago and you were heard. We ask that you do it again. Let your elected official know how you feel about this incredible important issue. The future of Michigan’s coldwater resources depend on it. We have attached a sample email for your reference. You can find your appropriate legislators online at www.house.michigan.gov/find_a_rep.asp and www.senate.michigan.gov/SenatorInfo/find-your-senator.htm. Of particular importance is contacting your Republican legislators, as Democrats are already largely in favor of the better House bill, but letting all of the legislators know your opposition or support is crucial. Please make the phone call to express your opinions on this. If you are not comfortable making a phone call, than at least send an email. Let them know that you are a voter in their district and that this matters to you.

Please edit it as appropriate.

I am a member of the Paul H. Young Chapter of Trout Unlimited. I support the Great Lakes Compact and believe that protecting the waters of the Great Lakes is critical to the health and success of our State. I am aware that a lot of work has gone into the ideas that are the basis for Water Withdrawal legislation pending in the Senate and specifically SB 860 S-3.

I am writing to ask that you amend the portion of SB 860 S-3 that defines the adverse impact limitations with respect to cold water streams and rivers. Trout Unlimited opposes any law that sanctions any destruction of Michigan’s coldwater fisheries. I urge you to reject SB 860 S-3 in its current form and instead accept the amendment to SB 860 offered by Senator Prussi that lowers the adverse impact to less than 1% for cold water streams and rivers. Even at this level the water withdrawal assessment tool predicts that 11% – 15% of the low summer flow will be available for other users.

In its current version, SB 860 fails to embrace the huge economic value of the state’s tourism/recreation sector. By doing so, it fails to acknowledge the value of "Water in its place," and instead assigns greater value to water as a commodity ingredient for future commercial products and processes. Here in Michigan, water has value for both purposes.

At the beginning of the 20th century, grayling thrived in many of Michigan's northern streams. Unfortunately, they were on the short end of an "economic trade" that fueled Michigan's lumber industry and are now extinct in this state. We should learn from past mistakes and not allow a "water trade" to have a similar impact today.

Please do not accept the adverse impacts concerning coldwater streams and rivers (3% and 5%) as proposed in SB 860 S-3. Please do not encourage nor accept a compromise on either limitation. The business lobby does not represent the interests of Michigan's citizens, you do. The right answer is <1%.