Monitoring Our 
Great Lakes Neighbourhood 

Several years ago, I encountered the acronym NIMBY for the first time. It refers to the quite understandable Not In My Back Yard response of people confronted with the possibility that a landfill, toxic chemical storage facility, or some other undesirable operation will be slated for a parcel of land near their homes. NIMBY has been a rallying concept for hundreds of communities. While I understand and am sympathetic to the NIMBY response to toxic sites, the Marsh Monitoring Program (MMP) is one example of a movement which is an even more fruitful way of addressing many environmental problems and issues. People watchful of, and actively involved in, the natural spaces near their homes . . . declaring, This Is My Back Yard (TIMBY).

Wherever you live in the Great Lakes basin, the presence of the Great Lakes influences your life — weather patterns, recreation, and drinking water are just a few examples. Through water and air movements, our use of natural resources also impacts the Great Lakes. As anyone with a neighbour knows, what one person does with their yard can often affect the entire neighbourhood. In a sense, everyone in the Great Lakes basin is joined together in a basin-wide neighbourhood. Across this neighbourhood, communities are getting together to study, monitor and restore wetlands, prairies and forests — the habitats in the backyards of their communities.

Whether planting native plants or tracking the abundance of wetland-dependent species in a nearby marsh, people with TIMBY on their mind are making the cleanup of damaged habitats and the protection of sensitive areas a reality. The MMP assists in these rehabilitation and protection efforts. Those working in the 43 highly damaged coastal sites (Areas of Concern, or AOCs) require information to help guide and evaluate restoration work. Governments, communities and individuals concerned about areas of important biological diversity often need information to identify, and a program to monitor, those sites. Through your participation in MMP surveys, you are making a contribution to the conservation and cleanup of the Great Lakes neighbourhood. In this article I would like to introduce you to a couple of your neighbours. Along with several of the articles inside, I hope this helps demonstrate some of the ways the information collected by you and your neighbours is helping guide the conservation of the Great Lakes neighbourhood . . .

I recently spoke with two MMP participants about their routes and their reasons for doing surveys. Don Lee has surveyed in the St. Clair National Wildlife Area of southwestern Ontario since 1994. Don teaches high school geography and has used his knowledge of wetlands and his MMP survey routes to help illustrate how water management works in the Netherlands. He also does MMP surveys because of an interest in identifying some new bird species, becoming familiar with amphibian calls and his concern that many wetlands in the St. Clair area were disappearing. Don also told me about the time he was playing the marsh bird broadcast tape, when a young family of Virginia Rails almost ran over his boot in their effort to discover what noisy bird was invading their territory. They didn't rough him up, but they did seem upset!

Ken Sherburn, an auto-repair wizard by day and a veteran birder by morning and evening, has conducted MMP surveys in the Muskegon State Game Area (on Lake Michigan's eastern shore) since 1995. Ken and others in the area have watched water levels in the Muskegon River drop over the last few years, leaving many wetland and fishing areas dry. Although he seemed pleased with the decline in mosquito populations at some sites, Ken is part of a growing number of area residents interested in the problem and in finding solutions.

Both of these MMP surveyors have an interest in the conservation of local wetlands and their species . . . each is concerned about their backyard. Their concern, and their data, are coming together in the MMP database to help address conservation issues at scales as large as the Great Lakes basin . . . the neighbourhood. A selected portion of data from one of each of their routes, and for the basin as a whole, is summarized below for 1995_1997.

Each table includes the number of birds counted inside the station area (100_metre radius). To facilitate comparisons, the counts are presented as an average number per station. The maximum count for each species is also included in each table. These tables help illustrate the diversity of routes monitored under the MMP. Ken's and Don's routes are in wetlands protected from many potential impacts. Many other routes, such as those in Areas of Concern, are in more damaged areas, while many others are early on the road to recovery. Also note that bird numbers on each route fluctuate year-to-year. Long-term, consistent monitoring is required to discern natural from human-induced fluctuations. If our questions concern the welfare of species across large regions, the only way to address those questions is to bring Ken's, Don's, and your data together with data provided by hundreds of other participants. The longer species list in the basin-wide table only begins to suggest the tremendous resource represented by these collective efforts. To all my Great Lakes neighbours . . . thanks for your efforts and continue thinking TIMBY!

— Russ Weeber

Return to Top of Page
Return to Previous Page
Return to Marsh Monitoring Program Main Page