When it comes to measuring the health of Lake Superior, researcher Tim Hollinger says the fact fish caught in Thunder Bay, Ont.’s harbour can be eaten is a “huge win.”
It’s a sign that efforts to remediate the northwestern Ontario city’s waters are making headway, says Hollinger, co-ordinator for the North Shore of Lake Superior Remedial Action Plans (RAP).
However, he’s concerned about potential changes on the horizon, especially when it comes to the U.S. and its funding of research of the Great Lakes on its side of the border.
The North Shore of Lake Superior RAP, housed at Lakehead University since 2008, is working to delist the four federally designated environmental areas of concern (AOC) in the area.
Hollinger said Thunder Bay could be federally delisted as an AOC in the next five years, given the safe consumption of some fish caught in the city’s harbour and the team’s work in restoring coastal wetland habitats.
In late July, his team was among recipients of a $346,250 grant from the provincial government to continue their remediation efforts. Others receiving the funding for local Great Lakes initiatives include Bare Point Developments Inc. and the City of Thunder Bay.
The Lakehead-based team is helping to restore coastal wetland habitats at the former Superior Fine Papers site in Thunder Bay alongside Bare Point Developments, and the improvement of drainage and nearshore wildlife habitat near the city’s Pool 6 cruise ship terminal alongside the City of Thunder Bay.
The federal government deemed Thunder Bay an AOC in 1987 under the Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA), due to industrial contamination and changes to the city’s watercourse. The legally binding, binational agreement was first signed in 1972, and obliges both countries to co-ordinate and co-operate on programs and research aimed at restoring and maintaining the ecological health of the Great Lakes.
The other areas of concern along the north shore are Nipigon Bay, Jackfish Bay and Peninsula Harbour.
“It can be a bit of a blemish to have an area of concern designation on a harbour or a community,” Hollinger said, adding that a delisting can “be a cause for celebration for the community.”
However, Hollinger is concerned the U.S. government’s recently announced plans to cut Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funding by 54 per cent for 2026 could reduce research south of the border and increase industrialization along Great Lakes shorelines.
“If we do lose an arm or a part of that research that’s happening, you do feel it is a significant hit to the research that’s being done and our greater understanding of the lake,” he said.
Researchers on admin leave after opposing EPA cuts
In the U.S., Great Lakes researchers are already finding themselves in a precarious position, even before the 2026 fiscal year begins on Oct. 1.
In July, the EPA announced it would be shuttering its Office of Research and Development (ORD) and laying off thousands of employees.
In the same month, dozens of Great Lakes researchers signed a letter of dissent against the agency and its proposed cuts, resulting in many being put on administrative leave, according to Nicole Cantello, president of Local 704 of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), the union representing the EPA’s Great Lakes researchers.
Cantello said the ORD is the primary scientific research arm of the EPA.
Over the past two decades, ORD scientists, particularly those in its Great Lakes Toxicology and Ecology lab in Duluth, Minn., have been critical in examining the chemical impact on Lake Superior. For instance, in the St. Louis River, the second largest U.S.-based AOC, researchers are conducting sediment remediation at Duluth’s Munger Landing and environmental dredging of the city’s C Reiss Superior Dock Terminal.
Kris Eilers, who lives along the St. Louis River in Minnesota, has seen how the work of EPA researchers has vastly improved the river’s water quality over the past decade in cleaning up much of the toxicity.
“This river was so dirty and so polluted. I mean, kids couldn’t swim in it and even 15, 20 years ago, there were so many things that were just devastated on the river,” said Eilers, executive director of the St. Louis River Alliance, a Minnesota-based river stewards group
In March, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin unveiled a plan to roll back environmental regulations on power plants, mercury and air toxic standards, and wastewater regulations for oil and gas development.
The announced rollbacks has Eilers concerned about the immediate impacts increased pollution could have on the ecological health of Lake Superior overall, particularly as it involves the mining industry.
In May, the NorthMet Project, owned by NewRange Copper Nickel and first proposed in 2005, was included in a list of projects the U.S. government is looking to fast-track through its permitting process. The mine has a proposed location along the St. Louis River watershed.
In 2022, the EPA objected to the mine receiving a permit that would allow it to discharge dredged and fill materials into local water bodies.
Concerns fish mercury levels may rise
Hollinger worries regulation rollbacks could also increase northwestern Ontario fish mercury levels.
“We’re starting to see improvements in our lakes and atmospheric mercury deposition, and we’re starting to see that in the fish too,” he said. “The second we start burning more coal and it gets kicked back into the atmosphere and into the lakes, it just reverses all the good progress we’ve made.”
For years, First Nations along the north shore of Lake Superior, including Biigtigong Nishnaabeg, have been involved in efforts to reduce levels of mercury contamination, which can also have financial implications, said Chris Surita.
The second we start burning more coal and it gets kicked back into the atmosphere and into the lakes, it just reverses all the good progress we’ve made.
