Great Lakes Regional Research Information Network Lake Michigan Coordination Team

1
Great Lakes Regional Research Information Network
Lake Michigan Coordination Team

• Brian K. Miller Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant
• Jennifer Fackler Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant
• Phil Mankin Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant
• Paul Horvatin Environmental Protection Agency,
  GLNPO
• Anders Andren Wisconsin Sea Grant
• Steve Brandt National Oceanic and Atmospheric
  Administration

2
How it all began

• Requested by NOAA in 2006 through Sea Grant
  programs in all regions.
• Great Lakes proposal called for 5 committees (one
  for each lake).
• Each lake was to form a committee, conduct a
  needs assessment, and implement a strategy to
  coordinate/focus research in each of the
  respective lakes.

3
Task 1 Establish a regional coordination group
to oversee the planning and implementation of the
research and information strategy.

• Anders Andren - Wisconsin Sea Grant (academic)
• Steve Brandt - National Oceanic and Atmospheric
  Administration (NOAA) (agency)
• Paul Horvatin Environmental Protection Agency
  (EPA) (agency)
• Brian Miller - Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant
  (academic)

4
Task 2 Conduct a bottom-up needs assessment
with broad user and stakeholder input.

• Web site searches revealed 294 organizations with
  a strong interest in Lake Michigan.
• 45 had stated priorities/goals.
• All 294 were contacted to review priorities/goals
  or to add some 3 sent revisions, 7 new
  organizations sent priorities.

5
Priorities and Goals

• 52 organizations provided 379 priorities or needs
  
• Priorities reported per organization ranged 140.
  
• Priorities provided by organizations represented
  general topic areas and, in some cases, specific
  objectives.
• Many of the priorities listed by organizations
  were not research oriented, but more outreach
  based or policy/management.
• If an organization listed partner institutions,
  these partners were also added to the list and
  queried for priorities.

6
Task 3 Identify research and information gaps.

• The 379 priorities aggregated into 74 categories.
  
• These categories were sorted based on the number
  of organizations focusing on a specific priority
  category.
• The most frequently listed priorities fell into
  five categories
• The top five categories contained 154 priorities.
  These priorities were closely examined and broken
  down into subcategories of specific topic areas
  under which agencies and academic institutions
  conduct research, education, and extension
  programs.
• These topic areas were prioritized by the number
  of organizational priorities occurring under each
  topic. 14 top topic (subcategory) areas emerged.

7
5 Major Categories Associated Topic Areas
Category Org. N52 Topics/Subcategories N (154 total priorities in 5 cat.) of priorities in category (N)
Ecosystem 36.5 Protection/Restoration - 13 Management/Stewardship - 5 78.3 (23)
Pollutants 34.6 Non-point Sources - 7 Atmosphere - 6 Toxics 5 40.0 (45)
Education 30.8 Miscellaneous - 7 Appreciation - 4 Stewardship - 3 Students - 3 68.0 (25)
AIS 26.9 Prevention - 13 Control - 8 55.3 (38)
Water 25.0 Quality - 7 Quantity - 6 Use - 5 78.3 (23)
8
Assumptions

• We made the assumption that the 52 organizations
  working on Lake Michigan issues had selected
  their priorities on needs assessment processes
  and/or inputs from their membership.
• Therefore, the top 14 topic (subcategory) areas
  in the five categories reflect where future
  research is needed to support organizational
  priorities for Lake Michigan.

9
Conclusions

• To address problems in these topic areas,
  specific research projects will be dynamic and
  change frequently as new discoveries are made and
  new problems arise.
• Frequent coordination among the agencies and
  institutions sponsoring and conducting research
  is needed to prioritize specific research
  questions and distribute agency attention and
  resources to these questions as conditions
  change.

10
Focus turned to identifying high priority
research needed in 5 Categories

• Problems encountered by management agencies
• Monitoring and indicator trends
• Researcher and institutional direction

11
Top priority issue selected

• Changing Food Webs and Influence Aquatic Invasive
  Species have on these changes
• Addresses priorities in all 5 categories

12
Task 4 Develop a research and information plan
for the region that prioritizes actions according
to management-critical needs.

• The Lake Michigan team will conduct a workshop on
  June 3-4, 2008.
• During this workshop the team will bring together
  Lake Michigan scientists and funding agency
  officials to determine critical research
  questions, time and space scales, and data gaps
  to be addressed in the 2010 field season.
• Agencies funding research on Lake Michigan will
  then discuss which research questions and data
  needs are most appropriate for each agency's
  upcoming RFP and/or field season. (For example,
  the Lake Michigan Sea Grant programs can then
  incorporate a specific research priority
  consistent with their available dollars into
  their respective RFPs.)

13
Workshop June 3-4 in Chicago

• www.iisgcp.org/glrrinworkshop

14
Agenda
15
Who should attend?

• Researchers or Resource Managers working on
  invasive species and food web issues in Lake
  Michigan.

16
Task 5 Develop coordination mechanisms to
ensure the transfer of technology and information
to the appropriate end users.

• Various organizations have databases of
  investigators conducting research on Lake
  Michigan issues. The level of completeness of the
  information varied considerably between
  databases.
• The regional coordinators for GLRRIN determined
  that it would be more efficient and effective to
  develop a central web-based database for all
  investigators involved with the Great Lakes.
• Coordination for technology and information
  transfer is in place with the creation of the
  GLRRIN web site, www.glrrin.info.
• End users, researchers, and others interested in
  Lake Michigan and the other Great Lakes may join
  for free.
• Users can explore research priorities for the
  Great Lakes, search for research topics or
  researchers, access news, and find funding
  options.

17
GLRRIN web site www.glrrin.info
18
Task 6 Provide an ongoing platform for
coordination, collaboration, and resource sharing
among participants.

• The Lake Michigan team will coordinate a one-day
  workshop every two years to bring together Lake
  Michigan scientists and funding agency officials.
  
• The first workshop will be held in Chicago June
  3-4, 2008,
• The results of each workshop will be discussed
  by participating funding agencies and will inform
  their next funding cycle and/or field season.

19
Workshop June 3-4 in Chicago

• www.iisgcp.org/glrrinworkshop

20
Please Join Us

• At this workshop you will engage in a
  facilitated dialog that is designed to identify
  specific research questions, data gaps, time and
  the space considerations needed to conduct
  research investigating the invasive species
  impacts on food webs in Lake Michigan beginning
  in the 2010 field season. Please join us and help
  set the research and funding agenda needed to
  address this important ecological issue.