Participant-Designed Workshop: Integrating Lake Management Systems

Reporter: Jerry Sherk

3 August 2007

One of the lessons learned from IWC3 was that lakes should be considered “in the context of other ecosystems.” Specifically, lakes cannot be separated from their watersheds nor can they be separated from either surface or groundwater.

This reality was reflected in the challenges that were identified prior to IWC4. Numerous respondents noted the need for an ecosystem approach as well as a need for Integrated Water Resource Management. Other respondents stressed the relationship between both land use and water quantity/quality. Examples included livestock waste management, solid waste management, nutrient reduction and loss of critical habitat.

With this as background, the Workshop focused on Integrating Lake Management Systems, specifically on the use of a systems engineering approach to understand and integrate all of the subsystems that influence the management of lakes. These subsystems, all of which exist within the context of the hydrologic cycle, include land use patterns as well as applicable laws, regulations and institutions.

Only three people attended the Workshop and one of left early. Nonetheless, the comments of Nic Mendoza (DENR, Philippines) justified both the Workshop and a systems approach to lake management issues. Mr. Mendoza used as an example the need to manage a system consisting of Laguna de Bay (the largest lake in the Philippines) and Manila Bay as well as the Pasig River which connects the two. Issues being addressed by Mr. Mendoza included the need to control both point and nonpoint sources of pollution, the need to fulfill the requirements of the Philippine Clean Water Act, the need to integrate the actions of multiple agencies through a working group, the need for regulatory consistency and the need to integrate science into the policy process. These needs require a systemic approach to lake management. In addition, the need for capacity building presents an interesting “twinning” possibility including both lakes and bays.

In terms of collaborative initiatives and follow-up, LakeNet will work to assist Mr. Mendoza. Copies of relevant documents (e.g., the Chesapeake Bay Agreement and the new draft compact and agreement on the Great Lakes) will be sent to him. Additional inquiries from him will be sent to the LakeNet Board of Trustees for a response.

A conclusion to be derived from the Workshop is that the TDA/SAP process for GEF projects should include all components of the hydrologic cycle and all subsystems that potentially could be impacted adversely by the project.

Converted with Word to HTML.