There has been historical opposition to diversion of water from the Great Lakes system, particularly to out-of-state interests. Reference the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources Agreement

http://www.cglg.org/projects/water/docs/12-13-05/Great_Lakes-St_Lawrence_River_Basin_Sustainable_Water_Resources_Agreement.pdf

and the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact

http://www.cglg.org/projects/water/docs/12-13-05/Great_Lakes-St_Lawrence_River_Basin_Water_Resources_Compact.pdf

This agreement and compact make the long-distance diversion of Great Lakes water politically unlikely.

Flows out of Lake Superior, via the St. Mary’s River, are regulated. See

http://www.glerl.noaa.gov/pubs/fulltext/2003/20030026.pdf

for a historical overview of L.S. regulation.

To complicate matters, Lake Superior is approaching a historic low level, with adverse effects on shipping, tourism, and ecological stability.

The water bullet project respects all these concerns, and addresses them as follows:

• Flexibility of the water bullet network: the proposed network would not rely strictly on a Lake Superior – to – Colorado water diversion. Such a diversion would only occur when the conditions were acceptable, namely when water levels were relatively high in Lake Superior. During periods of Great Lakes drought such as the present time, other areas along the network with higher water levels could be used instead. Refer to the Palmer Drought Index (http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_assessment/seasonal_drought.html) to indicate areas of relative abundance and scarcity at the time. At present, for example, water could be diverted from the Arkansas River Basin to Appalachian Watersheds. Water quality affects of such projects warrant investigation. The Great Bear Lake and Great Slave Lake of Canada also present potential water supply sources of excellent quality.

• A more detailed investigation of Lake Superior’s water levels is attached.

Lake Superior is indeed approaching record lows, and has been on a downward trend for 7 years. However, this fluctuation in levels appears primarily dependent on rainfall levels, albeit secondarily on increased water temperature. Note how in 1996 the lake approached the record highs observed in 1985. This project is proposed with the hope that lake levels will rise with seasonal fluctuations, and history indicates this upward trend is likely.

An arrangement could be developed so that diversion from Lake Superior could occur only when lake levels are in excess of the 75^th percentile (183.55 m). Under such an agreement, diversion would have taken place in 15 months out of the past 10 years. For an unusually wet decade (1970-1979), diversion would have taken place in 59 months. Such diversions would have minimal adverse affects on Lake Levels, since outflow levels are already higher during high lake periods. Flows into Lake Michigan – Huron would be affected, although not to a degree which would adversely impact their lake levels.

• The economic benefit of western irrigation cannot be underestimated, and the utilization of excess Great Lakes water could provide significant economic impacts for the region.