Protecting the Great Lakes in the Face of a Water Crisis: The Need for Immediate Ratification of the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact, and for an Amendment to the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article seeks to establish the importance of providing permanent maximum protection to the Great Lakes from future diversions outside of the basin in the face of increasing water shortages. It will examine the shortcomings of the four governing laws currently in place to protect the Great Lakes and demonstrate the need to make the New Compact binding as quickly as possible in order to compensate for these shortcomings. Part I of this article will discuss the geography of the Great Lakes region in order to put the matter in its context. Part II will examine the content and problems with the current legislation aimed at protecting the Great Lakes from large diversions. It will emphasize the weakness of these current laws and the urgent need to finalize the New Compact. Part III will discuss recent attempts and discussion of Great Lakes diversions, which have sparked the creation of the New Compact. Part III will also examine the content and current status of the New Compact. It will discuss the recent opposition to the New Compact in early 2008, which nearly destroyed the New Compact's chances for success, and how this opposition was completely overcome by summer 2008. Part III will distinguish the New Compact from current legislation in an attempt to explain why the New Compact will offer greater protection than the existing framework. This article will conclude with a proposal to protect the Great Lakes through swift enactment by the House of Representatives, followed by approval from the President. If the New Compact is not signed into federal law, it will not be binding, and the region will suffer from weak protection under the current laws. Unfortunately, finalizing the New Compact will not necessarily provide permanent protection to the Great Lakes region because a subsequent Congress could revoke its acceptance through retraction or passing inconsistent law. As fresh water becomes increasingly scarce and the Great Lakes states lose congressional delegates to the drier western states after the 2010 census, such future revocation is possible. It is important that this tempting short term solution does not occur. Finally, the conclusion will propose an amendment to the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 between the United States and Canada. This Treaty is greatly flawed and must give way to a more comprehensive version. The scope of the amended Treaty should include the rivers, tributaries, and ground water of the Great Lakes. It should also include Lake Michigan, which even though it does not border Canada, is connected to Lakes which do. The vague language of the Treaty should also be amended to be more specific and incorporate many of the protections promulgated in the New Compact. Finally, the amended Treaty must expand the International Joint Commission's (IJC['s]) jurisdiction to hear disputes between the two countries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".