Tag: EGLE

Flow Water Advocates statement on Whitmer administration’s Line 5 tunnel permit decisions.

Published on July 15th, 2026 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts, Reports & Media Releases

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 15, 2026

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. — In a pair of key permit decisions announced today by the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) regarding Enbridge’s proposed pipeline tunnel through the Straits of Mackinac, the state has failed to carry out its duties under the Michigan Wetlands Protection Act (Part 303), the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act (Part 325), and the Public Trust Doctrine to protect Michigan wetlands and submerged lands. It has also disregarded over 70,000 public comments EGLE received during the public comment period last summer and instead sided with Enbridge and its pipeline that ends in Sarnia, Ontario and primarily delivers crude oil to Canada.

“That these heartbreaking permit decisions were announced during a period of dangerously bad air quality due to climate change-related wildfires is sadly poetic,” said Liz Kirkwood, Flow Water Advocates executive director. “It’s a stark illustration that building this tunnel and further entrenching the burning of fossil fuels isn’t just wrong for the Straits and Michiganders, it’s wrong for the planet.”

Flow Water Advocates holds that under the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act, the tunnel project cannot be lawfully permitted unless the state has found that adverse effects to the environment and public trust are minimal, and that there are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the applicant’s proposed activity (in this case, Enbridge’s proposal to bore a 4.5-mile tunnel through the Straits).

No such finding has been made, and feasible alternatives — including utilizing excess capacity elsewhere in pipeline and rail networks, as detailed in a pair of reports by energy supply chain analysts PLG Consulting (Likely Market Responses to a Potential Shutdown of Line 5 (2023), Prospective Line 5 Closure Boosts US Energy Dominance (2025)) — are available. The decisions are particularly egregious given the fact that feasible and prudent alternatives are also identified in the state’s own record.

And just last week, the CBC reported that Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith are backing a new “Northern Shield” oil pipeline that would stretch from Western Canada to Sarnia, bypassing the U.S. and the Great Lakes. Last fall, the Ontario government began a feasibility study for the project, which would bolster Canadian energy independence — and potentially render Enbridge’s Line 5 and proposed tunnel redundant.

In joint comments submitted to EGLE, Flow Water Advocates, the Sierra Club, and Surfrider Foundation wrote “Enbridge’s pursuit of the Line 5 tunnel runs in direct contradiction to the public interest in Michigan’s invaluable freshwater resources and the ecosystems they support; in the sacred cultural sites within and surrounding the Straits and the Tribal rights that are inextricably tied to them; in a healthy climate future and a resilient Michigan economy; and in the vested rights of all Michiganders to use and enjoy the State’s public trust resources free from the threat of substantial impairment.”

The permit approvals announced today are a blow to Michigan’s public trust resources, Tribal rights and interests, and Governor Whitmer’s own Healthy Climate Plan and commitment to carbon neutrality.

Enbridge cannot begin construction of this proposed tunnel under the Great Lakes until it has secured final approval for two other major permits, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from EGLE, and the federal permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A permit issued by the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) has been appealed to the Michigan Supreme Court by Flow Water Advocates (For Love of Water v. MPSC) and a coalition of tribal nations joined by the Environmental Law & Policy Center and Michigan Climate Action Network (Little Traverse Bay Bands v. MPSC). A decision is expected in late July.

###

Flow Water Advocates is an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Traverse City, Michigan. Our mission is to ensure the waters of the Great Lakes Basin are healthy, public, and protected for all. With a staff of legal and policy experts, strategic communicators, and community builders, Flow is a trusted resource for Great Lakes advocates. We help communities, businesses, agencies, and governments make informed policy decisions and protect public trust rights to water. Learn more at www.FlowWaterAdvocates.org.

Deep concerns raised at Line 5 tunnel public hearing

Published on June 25th, 2026 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts

Last week, over 200 participants gathered over Zoom for the public hearing on the proposed reissuance of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Individual Permit (NPDES) for Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 tunnel through the Straits of Mackinac.

Line 5 is a pair of aging oil pipelines that travels across the bottom of the Straits of Mackinac, where Lake Michigan meets Lake Huron. Enbridge, the Canadian company that owns Line 5, is proposing to replace the Line 5 pipelines with a tunnel that will be bored underneath the lakebed. The U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers (USACE) found that the tunnel will result in detrimental impacts, including loss of wetlands and wildlife habitats; potential release of drilling fluids; construction noise, lights, traffic, and vibrations; limits to recreational resources; and impacts to property values and tourism.

Enbridge is requesting a reissuance of the now-expired NPDES permit that the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) granted in 2021. If re-approved, the permit would allow Enbridge to dump massive amounts of warm waste water into Lake Michigan, take up to 2 million gallons of water per day from Lake Michigan, and discharge unknown toxic chemicals into the water as a result of the tunnel boring. The proposed draft permit and other related documents can be found here.

Out of the 200+ participants at last week’s hearing, around 90 people spoke up and gave public comments in support or opposition to the NPDES permit. EGLE took comments for nearly 6 hours, as the hearing stretched on until almost midnight.

A majority of commenters opposed the permit, noting an array of concerns, including the lack of information on what chemicals Enbridge will be using for water treatment; Enbridge’s lack of trust and various failures at Line 3 in Minnesota and Line 6B in Kalamazoo; the company’s lack of good will in Wisconsin over the Bad River Band territory; concerns on the cultural impact to Indigenous Peoples and safety concerns about the construction camps near Indigenous lands, among others. Folks in attendance also highlighted concerns regarding the safety of dumping potentially contaminated wastewater into Lake Michigan, with several commenters noting that the temperature limit for wastewater as established in the permit was too high for the Great Lake’s cold water ecosystem.

Comments in support of the permit had an eerie familiarity as a number of commenters followed the same formula – establishing that they are a life-long Michiganders who love the outdoors, and highlighting the same language that we see from Enbridge itself about how the tunnel is the “most environmentally sound option” despite heavy evidence to the contrary. Supporters also argued that the tunnel will provide energy security to the Upper Peninsula, despite the fact that most of the fuel transported by Line 5 goes to Canada. There was also support for the permit from industry groups and unions because of alleged job creation.

However, over 60% of commenters opposed the tunnel. And, perhaps the most inspiring part of the evening: a majority of those commenters in opposition appeared to come from young people. The youth are showing up to protect the future from the devastation that the Line 5 tunnel could bring. The youngest commenter of the evening, a 3 (and a half) year old named Lola, spoke with more wisdom than some adults, saying “we can’t drink oil.” A seemingly simple, but essential thought that cannot be lost when it comes to the Great Lakes.

Sacrificing our freshwater, our drinking water, and our survival comes at an incredibly high cost, with little benefit for Michiganders. The great activist, scholar, philosopher, and author Dr. Angela Davis once said: “Youth always leads struggles for change. No revolution has ever happened without young people being in the forefront.” Building on the energy of these young people, Flow encourages readers to submit a comment to EGLE if you haven’t already. This may be the last chance for folks to submit comments urging EGLE to reject Enbridge’s dangerous and unnecessary tunnel project and protect Michigan and the Great Lakes for generations (like little Lola) to come.

Last chance to speak up: Reject Enbridge’s discharge into Lake Michigan

Published on June 2nd, 2026 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts

What is happening:

Enbridge is requesting a permit from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) for its proposed Line 5 pipeline tunnel under the Straits of Mackinac. If approved, the permit would allow Enbridge to:

Dump billions of gallons of wastewater into Lake Michigan — enough to fill 9 Olympic-sized swimming pools every day
Take up to 2 million gallons of water per day directly from Lake Michigan
Discharge chemical additives, chlorides, solids, as well as pollutants from the heavy machinery used to bore the tunnel (like metals, oil, and grease)

The discharges may also affect the temperature and pH of the water, altering its chemistry and stressing fish and other aquatic life.

What you can do:

EGLE is now taking public comments on Enbridge’s requested National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, now and through June 30.

1) Tell EGLE and the State of Michigan to say NO to Enbridge’s plan to take millions of gallons of clean water from Lake Michigan, and discharge billions of gallons of dirty wastewater back into Lake Michigan. DEADLINE: June 30.

2) Attend the virtual public hearing on June 18 at 6:00pm. The public meeting will include a presentation and Q&A session, after which the public will have an opportunity to provide comments for the record.

Enbridge must receive multiple state and federal permits for its troubled tunnel proposal. You may have already commented on a previous federal or state permit application for the tunnel (thank you!), but it’s important to comment on this new permit too.

This is likely our last chance to tell EGLE and Governor Whitmer to reject Enbridge’s dangerous and unnecessary tunnel project and deny Enbridge permission to pollute the Great Lakes.

Additional resources:

Michigan gets the risk, Canada gets the oil

What every Michigander needs to know about the Line 5 tunnel

REPORT: Enbridge's tunnel plan costly and ill-advised

Flow Water Advocates opposes Gratiot County CAFO permit

Published on October 31st, 2025 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts, News, Reports, Reports & Media Releases

Register for the hearing on February 3, 6pm:

Learn more about the proposed permit:

Flow Water Advocates and commenters oppose Gratiot County CAFO expansion; request public hearing.

DOWNLOAD: Comments and Request for Public Hearing on Draft Permit MI0060380, KB Farm LLC-CAFO (PDF)

Traverse City, Mich. — Flow Water Advocates (“Flow”), on behalf of its thousands of members, is joined by concerned Michigan residents and organizations in filing public comments opposing a NPDES-CAFO Individual Permit for a 3,450-head dairy CAFO expansion proposed by KB Dairy LLC. The proposed expansion is contiguous with and uses the same address as the 8,400-animal De Saegher Dairy in Middleton, Michigan. If approved, the permit would create the largest dairy CAFO in Michigan. Flow and co-signers ask the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) to deny the permit, and hold a local public hearing to facilitate awareness and meaningful public participation.

Support Flow’s work to defend the Great Lakes.

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), commonly referred to as factory farms, are large livestock facilities that house several hundred to tens of thousands of animals. Gratiot County is home to some of the largest dairy CAFOs in Michigan, and over 400 million gallons of CAFO animal wastes are spread on saturated fields each year — equivalent to the daily sewage generated by Los Angeles County. Dennis Kellogg, a sixth-generation farmer in Gratiot County, describes the CAFO waste management practices:

“When the CAFOs spread their manure, there is required to be a reasonable setback distance from the edge of the field. I’ve noticed they apply right up to the lot lines of residences, businesses, schools, and other public use areas…These facilities are polluting our local communities with excessive amounts of manure, and are not being held accountable for it. Who pays the price for this?“

The comments detail several concerns, including improper separate permitting of the fully contiguous proposed KB Dairy CAFO, which is owned by the same investment corporation as the De Saegher CAFO; failure of the existing De Saegher CAFO to obtain the required groundwater discharge permit; deficiencies in the Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP); and the public health threat posed by groundwater contamination in a rural area that relies on private wells for drinking water.

The comments also note EGLE’s obligations under the public trust doctrine and the Michigan Environmental Protection Act (MEPA) to protect Michigan’s water from impairment, for the benefit of all residents.

“These massive livestock operations have contributed to unchecked environmental destruction and soaring cancer rates in other parts of the upper Midwest,” says Carrie La Seur, Legal Director for Flow Water Advocates. “Michiganders take rightful pride in their role as defenders of the Great Lakes. It’s time to take a stand for healthy food, healthy animals, and healthy water.”

Flow is joined in its comments by the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center, farmer Dennis Kellogg, Michigan Farmers Union, Michigan Lakes and Streams Association, Michigan Organic Food & Farm Alliance, Michiganders for a Just Farming System, Progress Michigan, and Socially Responsible Agriculture Project.

###

Flow appeals EGLE rejection of FOIA request; seeks public disclosure of factory farm sewage land application.

Published on October 29th, 2025 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts, News, Reports, Reports & Media Releases

Traverse City, Mich. — Flow Water Advocates (“Flow”) has filed an administrative appeal of a Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) decision to reject Flow’s FOIA requests for logs Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) are required by permit to maintain and disclose to EGLE and the public. These logs from fourteen CAFOs provide details on land application of livestock sewage in a heavily impacted watershed. As Great Lakes water quality and access advocates, Flow has a long-standing interest in protecting Michigan’s surface and drinking water.

Support Flow’s work to defend the Great Lakes.

CAFOs, commonly referred to as factory farms, are large livestock facilities that house several hundred to tens of thousands of animals, producing sewage equivalent to large cities. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permitting program under the Clean Water Act regulates their animal waste disposal. CAFO operators typically dispose of waste by applying it to fields — often in amounts far greater than can be taken up by the soil and crops. Rural watersheds across Michigan, and in turn the Great Lakes, are heavily impacted by CAFO waste runoff and leaching.

“For many rural residents, dealing with CAFO odors, runoff, heavy trucking, and water quality destruction — surface and ground — has become an exhausting, expensive, year-round ordeal,” says Flow Legal Director Carrie La Seur. “Michigan has something priceless in its natural heritage. This is not just a paperwork exercise, it’s essential information citizens need to protect their health and quality of life.”

The logs detail the time, date, quantity, method, location, and application rate for each location where CAFO wastes are applied to land; a description of the weather conditions at the time; and whether the land was frozen or snow-covered. Crucially, they also include the total amount of nitrogen and phosphorus applied to each field that receives CAFO wastes. Overloading these nutrients can cause toxic algal blooms, closed beaches, and fish kills. The disclosure Flow seeks is critical to understanding how CAFO waste impacts lakes, streams, and other waters.

By Michigan law, the public has the right to access any document “prepared, owned, used, in the possession of, or retained by a public body in the performance of an official function, from the time it is created” (MCL 15.232). If the documents do not exist, the failure to maintain records by all fourteen CAFOs would represent egregious NPDES permit violations, and require immediate enforcement action by EGLE to protect the health of Michiganders.

###

Michigan’s new FY 2025-26 budget, and what it means for water.

Published on October 21st, 2025 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts, News, Reports, Reports & Media Releases

Flow’s mission is to ensure Michigan’s waters are healthy, public, and protected for everyone. Our priorities include water infrastructure funding, tackling nitrate contamination in drinking water, factory farm pollution, and the need for a statewide septic code. We track state budgets closely because they signal real-world priorities.

The newly approved FY 2025-26 budgets for Michigan’s environmental agencies offer both encouraging developments and areas of concern.

Signs of progress.

Several bright spots align with Flow’s goals.

The budget maintains investments in drinking water infrastructure. Lead service line replacement efforts received a net increase of $13.4 million, and another $34 million is set aside for local water projects through the State Revolving Fund. While much of this funding is one-time rather than permanent, it represents real dollars for pipes, treatment upgrades, and safer drinking water in the near future.

There is also forward progress on transparency. New reporting requirements will make the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) more accountable for how quickly it issues permits and how well it meets performance targets. These kinds of changes don’t grab headlines, but they matter, especially when communities struggle to understand or navigate the regulatory process.

One especially helpful provision is a new investment in permitting guidebooks for industries like large livestock operations. For groups like Flow working to halt pollution from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), clearer rules mean fewer loopholes and stronger protections for lakes, streams, groundwater, and rural communities.

Areas Michigan must not ignore.

Still, there are warning signs worth watching.

The State Revolving Fund—the backbone of Michigan’s water infrastructure financing system—lost $34 million in ongoing annual support, which was replaced with one-time funding. In other words, the funding exists for now, but it’s no longer guaranteed in future years. That kind of uncertainty makes it harder for small towns and rural communities to plan long-term water projects.

An even more glaring omission is the decision not to fund a statewide septic system database. Michigan remains the only state in the country without a uniform septic code, and failing septic systems are a major source of groundwater and drinking water contamination—especially in areas already facing nitrate pollution. Knowing where systems are, and whether they’re failing, is the first step toward fixing them. That step is now delayed.

Another area of grave concern is reduced staffing. Across EGLE, the DNR, and the Michigan Department of Agriculture & Rural Development (MDARD), the FY 2025-26 budget reflects a net loss of 49 full-time positions compared to the previous year. EGLE alone loses 15 positions, including staff responsible for water quality programs, contaminated site remediation, and municipal water assistance. The DNR loses 30 positions, and MDARD loses four, including staff involved in pesticide management and laboratory monitoring.

These reductions may look like mere numbers on paper, but they translate directly to fewer boots on the ground—fewer inspectors, engineers, hydrologists, and scientists who ensure that permits are enforced, wells are tested, pollution is contained, and communities receive timely support. Michigan’s environmental laws are only as strong as the departments tasked with administering them. When staffing is cut, delays grow longer, backlogs increase, and the state’s ability to respond to urgent, immediate, and emerging threats—whether from PFAS, nitrates, failing septic systems, or industrial spills— diminishes.

Michigan has made meaningful investments in water infrastructure and transparency. To fully realize those gains, the state must also preserve the workforce required to carry them out.

Moving forward.

The takeaway is not that Michigan is abandoning clean water efforts—but that much of the current progress depends on temporary funding. That leaves big questions for long-term water protection.

Flow will continue to advocate for permanent, reliable infrastructure funding, stronger well and septic oversight, and protections for rural communities facing pollution burdens.

Budgets reflect priorities. This one keeps Michigan moving, but not yet fast enough toward the stable, long-term protections that our water and people deserve.

Flow, Sierra Club, and Surfrider Foundation to EGLE: Reject the Line 5 tunnel permit.

Published on September 9th, 2025 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts, Reports & Media Releases

PRESS RELEASE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2025

Download the written comments to EGLE (PDF)

Traverse City, Mich. – On August 29, 2025, Flow Water Advocates, a Great Lakes water protection organization, together with the Sierra Club and Surfrider Foundation, submitted written comments on Enbridge’s application for a Water Resources Permit for its proposed Line 5 tunnel project through the Straits of Mackinac. The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) is reviewing the application for compliance under the Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), Parts 303 and 325.

Flow’s comments demand that EGLE’s review consider the entire project, and detail the many adverse environmental impacts that will or are likely to result from the project’s approval, including:

a projected six years of construction traffic and noise, light, and air pollution;
the destruction of precious wetland ecosystems;
climate impacts from the tunnel’s construction and the products it will transport for the duration of a 99-year lease, and
the potential impacts resulting from a project failure, including a catastrophic oil spill.

Flow’s comments also highlight the expert reports and Enbridge’s own expert testimony that have confirmed available alternatives for transporting the products currently flowing through Line 5.

Because the proposed tunnel will have significant–and potentially catastrophic–impacts on Michigan’s public trust waters and natural resources, and because these impacts can be avoided through available alternatives, EGLE must deny the permit under Michigan’s controlling environmental laws and regulations.

Michiganders are counting on the State to uphold its responsibility to protect the public trust rights of current and future generations who depend on the Great Lakes for their drinking water, subsistence, and way of life.

An additional public comment period for Enbridge’s application to EGLE for a wastewater discharge permit under NREPA, Part 31, is anticipated in the coming months.

###

Flow Water Advocates is a nonpartisan 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Traverse City, Michigan. Our mission is to ensure the waters of the Great Lakes Basin are healthy, public, and protected for all. With a staff of legal and policy experts, writers, and community builders, Flow is a trusted resource for Great Lakes advocates. We help communities, businesses, agencies, and governments make informed policy decisions and protect public trust rights to water. Learn more at www.FlowWaterAdvocates.org.

FAQs: Making public comments to EGLE on the Line 5 tunnel

Published on July 28th, 2025 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts

The Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) is taking public comments on Enbridge’s proposed Line 5 pipeline tunnel through August 29, 2025. The State of Michigan now has the power to deny the tunnel permit, and protect the Great Lakes from years of construction upheaval, wetlands damage, and other risks.

Michigan can assert its sovereignty, stop the exploitation of our publicly-held resources for private profit, and protect the waters today, and for future generations. Here’s how you can engage with EGLE on this important issue:

(1) Attending a virtual public information session on August 12 (6:00pm EDT). This is an opportunity to ask EGLE representatives questions and learn more about the application and next steps.

(2) Attending the virtual public hearing on August 19 (6:00pm EDT) and providing oral comments that will be considered by EGLE in its review of the application .

(3) Submitting written comments that will be considered by EGLE in its review of the application by August 29.

Here are answers to some of the questions we’ve received about the EGLE permit process, and how to get involved:

If I have already submitted comments on the project, can I submit comments during this public comment period?

Yes. The current application for a Water Resources Permit under Michigan’s Wetland Protection Act (Part 303) and Michigan’s Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act (Part 325) is distinct from the review of earlier permit applications for the project, so it is important to submit comments on the current proposal to ensure your voice is heard.

Flow Water Advocates will be providing both oral comments at the August 19 hearing and written comments by the August 29 deadline, and we encourage interested members of the public to do the same.

Do I have to live in Michigan to contribute comments?

No, we all have an interest in protecting the Great Lakes and there are no restrictions on who can participate in the public comment period.

What makes a strong public comment?

The most effective comments are grounded in the facts of the proposed project and its likely impacts, and the requirements for permit approval under the law. Highlighting your personal connections to the waters, ecosystems, communities, cultural resources, and economies that stand to be impacted by the project is also powerful.

When preparing to provide oral comments at the public hearing, we recommend that you write down what you would like to say in advance and practice sharing it a couple times, as each person is usually allowed only 3 minutes to speak. Three minutes of speaking time is about 400 words, depending on how quickly you speak.

What are some of Flow Water Advocates’ major concerns with Enbridge’s permit application?

First, Enbridge has not provided sufficient information–on the full project, its potential environmental impacts, or the available alternatives–for EGLE to properly consider its application for a Water Resources Permit under Part 325 and Part 303 of Michigan’s Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act .

Second, when all of the necessary information is considered, it is clear that the tunnel project cannot be lawfully permitted because the project will have more than minimal environmental effects, and because the shutdown of Line 5 is a viable, and much preferable, alternative to constructing an unprecedented tunnel project to house a new section of oil pipeline through the heart of the Great Lakes.

Finally, Enbridge does not have the necessary legal authorization to operate the proposed tunnel project in the Straits, as required under the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act and Michigan’s public trust doctrine.

For more information on the potential environmental impacts of the project, deficiencies with the application materials, and the viable alternatives that must be considered, visit our website: https://flowwateradvocates.org/line5/.

If we don’t have time to comment on everything, are there any aspects of the permit that we should prioritize?

There is certainly a lot to cover–the gaps in the application, the many potential environmental impacts, and the available alternatives to the project that must be considered.

When you have limited time to prepare comments, a good strategy can be to focus your comments on an issue or two that you care about or in which you have particular insight or expertise, knowing that others will do the same.

Oil and Water Don’t Mix has compiled a list of several issues that can be raised and expanded on in public comments.

Earthjustice has also provided a helpful comment submission form with a message to get you started.

If you have additional questions about submitting comments, we encourage you to attend the public information session hosted by EGLE on August 12.

When you register for the session, there is the option to include questions that you would like to be addressed by the agency and there will also be time for additional questions at the end of the session.

Factory farm webinar: Weigh in on how Michigan regulates factory farm waste.

Published on July 21st, 2025 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts

Factory farms, or Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), threaten our waters with immense quantities of sewage, which too often are sprayed on fields where it can then runoff into streams and leach into groundwater — including into our drinking water.

On August 8, the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE ) will hold an hybrid remote public hearing in Lansing on the long-contested 2020 NPDES-CAFO General Permit, to regulate factory farm waste discharges to our waters.

To prepare for this important hearing, join Flow Water Advocates on July 31 at Noon for a briefing on the issue, and learn how you can weigh in to support effective regulation and clean waters in rural Michigan and the Great Lakes.

Flow has been an intervenor in an administrative contested case and litigation on this permit over the past 5 years.

How to join the EGLE public hearing on August 8 at 9:00am:

Location: Microsoft Teams Meeting
Meeting ID: 293 614 609 636 1
Passcode: 6FV72vK3
Call in (audio only)
Telephone: 1-248-509-0316 (Toll)
Phone Conference ID: 581 485 136#

Science alone won’t save the lake: Agricultural runoff in the Western Lake Erie Basin.

Published on July 16th, 2025 by FLOW Editor - Blog Posts

Facing facts and moving forward: Notes from the 2025 State of the Western Lake Erie Basin Conference.

On June 26, the State of the Western Lake Erie Basin (WLEB) conference, hosted by Michigan’s Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE), brought together researchers, agency staff, and community advocates working in one of Michigan’s most heavily farmed—and heavily polluted—regions.

The focus was on advancements and priorities in the WLEB, especially efforts to tackle harmful algal blooms (HABs). Highlighted tracks included:

Implementation Science in Agricultural Systems: Potentials for and Assessments of Innovative Behavior Change Interventions
Healthy Soils, Healthy Waters: Understanding Links Between Soil Health and Water Quality on Farms in the Western Lake Erie Basin
and Understanding Legacy Phosphorus in the Western Lake Erie Basin.

A common theme ran through all sessions: the problem is well understood—now is the time to implement real solutions to reduce pollution.

Agricultural runoff is the main issue.

EGLE made it clear that the biggest threat to the WLEB is non-point source pollution, particularly runoff from agricultural sources. That aligns with what they’ve stated in their MI Environment article about harmful algal blooms (HABs). The article explains, “In May, the State of Michigan updated its Domestic Action Plan (DAP) for combating harmful algal blooms (HABs). The plan contains measures to reduce phosphorus runoff by a sustained 40% from a 2008 baseline measurement by targeting nutrient-rich releases from wastewater treatment plants and phosphorus runoff from farm fields and fertilized lawns.”

Presenters reiterated throughout the day that this problem isn’t new and it’s not only about current practices. Decades of fertilizer use have left legacy phosphorus in soils and sediments. Addressing these long-term consequences is critical to building effective, lasting solutions and achieving sustainable land management.

People are trying new things.

Despite the challenges, there were some encouraging updates. One session focused on using behavioral science—not just facts and figures—to help understand how farmers make decisions. Findings show that simply providing more information doesn’t always lead to action; real change requires meeting people where they are.

Another panel showed how improving soil health can also help reduce runoff. However, even with these promising tools, a major theme emerged again: none of it will scale up without stronger policies to support it.

Policy support is the missing piece.

A major challenge is the damage resulting from environmental rollbacks. During the Trump administration in 2020, agencies like the EPA and USDA weakened review processes, referring to it as “permitting reform.” In truth, these changes limited public input and undermined environmental protections. Fact sheets from that time detailed reduced deadlines and page counts—presented as cutting red tape—but in practice, these reforms made it easier for large-scale projects, including agricultural operations, to bypass environmental scrutiny. That’s a serious concern in regions like Western Lake Erie.

Science alone won’t save the lake.

The conference underscored a key takeaway: science alone isn’t enough to solve nutrient pollution. Policies rooted in strong science—and the enforcement to support them—are essential. Otherwise, even the best ideas remain stuck in pilot programs.
The case of the Western Lake Erie Basin shows what happens when known problems go unaddressed—but also what’s possible when land use and water protection are treated as urgent, interdependent priorities.

At Flow Water Advocates, the work continues to advocate for policies that protect Michigan’s water and communities. Clean water depends on effective protections—and real accountability—when it comes to farming, development, and pollution.