Town Hall Interview - Cameron Davis

Heather Kelso: Lake Michigan Sunset ~Enlarge

In June of 2009 EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson appointed long-time advocate Cameron Davis as a Senior Advisor for Great Lakes issues.

This is noteworthy because it was an attempt to address a decades-long criticism. That is, the need for one person to coordinate preservation and restoration efforts. Even though his exact role was unclear, creation of the position and the selection of Davis were roundly met with approval and enthusiasm.

Davis isn't a dawdler and he quickly set about the task of trying to sell Congress on the need to fund the multi-billion dollar 2005 Bush Administration plan. At the same time he and others hit the road to pitch the initiative while simultaneously seeking input from various stakeholders.

Congress did its part by appropriating the full $475 million that the President's budget had requested for the first year.

With the 2005 plan as the template and first year funding in place, the EPA has begun the process of requesting proposals for over 100 projects that span a dozen or so federal agencies over eight states.

A Great Lakes project of this scope is unprecedented in recent times.   

Davis's brief tenure hasn't been all smooth sailing though.

The initiative has the backing of the states, who will be beneficiaries of the federal money, and the  large and vocal Healing Our Waters environmental coalition which is led by the National Wildlife Federation.

But some Great Lakes policy experts question the plan's emphasis on money over regulation and enforcement.

Commenting on the plan in a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article, the Natural Resources Defense Council's Henry Henderson said "there is a deficiency in goverenance here that goes beyond funding." And the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center's Noah Hall has written that more could be accomplished by enforcing exist laws with a fraction of the money.

Henderson and Hall may have a point.

An example is the Chesapeake Bay restoration experience. The Washington Post has chronicled the limitations of money without the political will to regulate and enforce. The Chesapeake has been the recipient of $6 billion over 20 years and is still on the critical list because the hard decisions weren't made, according to the Post.

Toss in a curiously implemented exemption to new EPA emission standards demanded by the Great Lakes congressional delegation for a special interest, the shipping industry -- and the still simmering Asian Carp crisis, and you can see the path Davis must navigate has more than a few potholes.

The Town Hall editors caught up with Davis as he was winding down for the holiday break.  We sent him a list of questions that touch on his new position, Asian Carp, and the restoration initiative. He responded via e-mail.

gw

Here's the interview.

Great Lakes Town Hall (GLTH)  - Tell us about the transition from being a long-time NGO Great Lakes advocate to being on the EPA staff as a Senior Advisor to the Administrator.

Cameron Davis (CD) -   In some ways being an advocate is the best training in the world. First of all, 100% dedication to the public interest has to be a personal commitment. Second, saving the Great Lakes means listening to the perspectives of lots of complex interests: agencies, legislatures, stakeholders, and others. 

(GLTH) - What has gone well and what has surprised you? 

(CD) - You know, the only surprise has been how few surprises there have been!

(GLTH) - This whole discussion could be about the Asian carp issue but we'll leave it with a couple of questions.

After the waters past the electric barrier tested positive for Asian carp DNA, why weren't the locks immediately closed as a precautionary measure until it could be determined if any carp had made it as far as Lake Michigan?

(CD) - Thanks for asking the question because the call for lock closure has been really charged and it's important to have an honest discussion about it. 

First, the locks are old and leaky. Closing them would provide a false sense of security. But second and more important, the call for lock closure is largely based on eDNA sampling results. We're learning that eDNA is a good early warning system, but it shouldn't be relied on exclusively for making major management decisions. When rotenone (a piscicide) was applied near the Corps of Engineers' electric fences, where lots of Asian carp could have been, we only found one Asian carp. When the Illinois DNR contracted with commercial fishermen - these people's  livelihoods are based on capturing Asian carp among others - they didn't find a single Asian carp out of hundreds and hundreds of other fish captured. eDNA is a new technology. It's an important color in the palate that helps us paint a picture of what's going out there in a waterway, but it's one color.

(GLTH) - What does the Asian carp emergency teach or tell you about the federal and state response to ecosystem threats, both urgent and especially for the long-term?

(CD) - The agencies have an enormous sense of urgency about keeping carp out of the Great Lakes. The December Rapid Response action to keep carp out of the Chicago Sanitary Ship Canal while the Corps of Engineers' electric fence IIA was down was a textbook team effort  by local, state, provincial, federal and bi-national agencies that worked. Our goal was to keep carp out of the Great Lakes and in December we won. But that was just one battle. The agencies need to hit the gas on longer term, sustainable solutions. 

(GLTH) -   On to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI).  $475 million in new funding has been appropriated and the USEPA has requested proposals for projects. How will you define success at the end of the first year? The fourth year?

(CD) - We're defining success based in part on what the public told us in July and August 2009. The Great Lakes Inter-agency Task  Force, chaired by EPA, ran close to 20 meetings this past summer  to get feedback on an Action Plan that'll define success:  long-term goals, medium-term objectives and among other things  measures of progress for 2010 through 2014. We're shooting for this Action Plan to be complete in early 2010.  

Thanks to the public for turning out to these hearings. It was really encouraging to see everyone turn out, especially on nice summer  evenings when they could be having dinner with family or out enjoying  the weather...keep an eye on www.epa.gov/grtlakes/ for the Action Plan.

(GLTH)  - As you're probably aware, there has been criticism of the GLRI for being too focused on money as the solution while ignoring regulation and enforcement.

Policy expert and Law professor Noah Hall at the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center wrote the following on his website: "If we spent a fraction of the restoration money on enforcing existing laws to prevent new sources of pollution, we would see a better return on our investment with cleaner water and healthier families."

What is your reaction to Hall and others who have voiced a similar criticism?

Similarily, while praising the initiative the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editors commented that money alone wouldn't solve the problems and reported that you said "enforcement and regulation issues were high on your agenda." Would you elaborate with specifics?

(CD)  -  Funding alone isn't going to save the Great Lakes.  EPA Administrator Jackson has made water quality enforcement a  priority, and is dedicated to strategically harnessing the agency's regulatory authorities to better protect public health. But let's not forget: for years stakeholders and economists have been saying that a significant investment in funding to restore  the Great Lakes is critical. Some of the progress - or lack of it - will help inform future efforts

(GLTH) -  We're aware that this project is different with the EPA having control of all the funding that is passed out to the various agencies. But even with that measure in place, how will you insure effective action with measureable results when there are 100 projects spread out over multiple agencies and eight states?

(CD) - We'll use interagency agreements, grant conditions and can always re-direct funding to be put to better use if needed. 

(GLTH) - Representatives Obey and Oberstar, with the support of the Great Lakes congressional delegation, recently intervened for the shipping industry by demanding that it be exempt from new emission standards? We understand that politics can be messy at times, but how can we ever restore the Lakes if we continue to accommodate the special interests like the shippers at the expense of the environment?

(CD)  - Davis, through a spokesman, declined to comment.

(GLTH) - Most citizens who care about clean water and the Great Lakes aren't affiliated with an organization and can't attend public hearings.  How can their voice be heard?

(CD) - We're working to use the next generation of communications tools to allow people lots of different kinds of ways to communicate.  We're looking to launch a new website in the very near future at  www.greatlakesrestoration.us  that'll help in this effort. 

(GLTH) - Please share anything on your mind that is important for us to know about your position, restoration, and the future of the Great Lakes.

(CD) - The Restoration Initiative is about creating a new standard of care for the Great Lakes. We need to move away from a standard of "minimizing harm" to a standard of proactively leaving the Great Lakes better for the next generation than the way we inherited them.

                                         ----------------

Town Hall editors Dave Dempsey and Gary Wilson developed the questions, and EPA Media Relations Representative Mick Hans facilitated Davis's responses.