The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District has several opportunities to impact the regional environment, including the following:

• The MWRD has reviewed all of their treatment centers to ensure they will be able to meet anticipated water treatment needs until 2040, and they developed a master plan for making all necessary improvements. As part of this plan, MWRD will be analyzing ways to reduce their power consumption, especially when it comes to the use of blowers that are part of their aeration system (these blowers consume the single largest portion of the MWRB's energy budget).
• Work continues on the Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP) that will substantially reduce the number of flood incidents due to runoff after severe storms. The completed tunnel and reservoir near O'Hare has been operating for four years and has only flooded once (during the heavy rains of this past August).
• The MWRD worked with the City of Chicago to assess potential impacts on the MWRD due to climate change. While the existing TARP should be able to handle any runoff from increased levels of precipitation, operational costs for the MWRD could increase by ten percent if precipitation forecasts are accurate.
• The MWRD is working with local and regional bodies to develop a master plan for storm water management. These plans focus on the six watershed areas across the Chicago region, and they address issues of flooding, erosion, water quality, and wetlands preservation.
• The research department of the MWRD regularly tests the chemical makeup of water in the system, and recently MWRD preformed a three-year microbial risk assessment of Chicago-area water. The assessment found that the incidence of illness tied to exposure to area waterways is well below federal guidelines. Continued testing is underway to attempt to measure possible illness among various recreational users of the area's waterways.
• The MWRD has been conducting a global warming initiative to measure greenhouse gases their system adds to the environment (as opposed to existing gasses like carbon dioxide that are released from water as part of the treatment process). As part of this measurement, the MWRD is evaluating how they can use plant growth on land they own to sequester greenhouse gases.
• The MWRD has worked to turn some of the land it owns and parts of some other waterways into open space reserves that contain plant life native to the plains.
  
  At the session, participants also heard about initiatives to get people across the region involved in improving the waterways while reducing storm runoff, education programs to improve understanding of methods of preserving wetlands and capturing rain run-off, techniques for using natural landscaping to reduce flood dangers, and other ideas for addressing water and land-use concerns at the local level.
  

Environmental Grantmakers Group Field Trip
June 12, 2007 - The field trip began with a tour of Chicago Park District (CPD) conservation projects along the Montrose Beach, lead by Zhanna Yermakov, Natural Areas Manager for the Department of Natural Resources at the CPD. There are 9 acres of land along the beach blocked off for state listed plants and wildlife, especially endangered migrating birds. The Department of Natural Resources created a two year grant for a "sand civilization Project" during which 4,000 plants were planted to stabilize the upper part of the beach, preventing sand from moving on to the paths.

The project also involved building a dune protection fence, which is often ignored by beach visitors. The clumps of wildlife along the beach protected by the fence are the only sight in the Chicago Park district that is natural, as it was originally formed without human intervention.

One of the plants protected by the project is the panne habitat, a geological formation with only 120 acres left in the world. The panne grow in the area between dune ridges, which are wetter therefore house plants better. The team protects the panne habitat from invasive plants such as the sandbar willow, which spreads fast and thick preventing other things from growing around it. Trails through the vegetation areas were also created to help protect from people walking through the area while birding.

The group was then led through the Montrose Bird Sanctuary and the world famous "Magic Hedge", a line of shrubs and trees resembling a landing strip. The Magic Hedge was given its name due to its strange appeal to birds, housing over 300 different species and attracting to birders from all over the world. The surrounding prairie offers hundreds of plants that were planted by volunteers to increase the number of native plants and protect against invasive vegetation.

The group was joined later at Burnham Prairie Path by Peggy Stewart, who briefly went over CPD's "No Child Left Inside" programs developed to encourage parents to get their kids involved in outdoor activities. They continued to Burnham's Japanese Garden, built specially with steep bridges and zigzagging paths so visitors are forced to slow down and enjoy their surroundings.

The group continued the tour on the Burham Prairie Path, a restoration project over 10 years old. When the restoration project began cutting down non native shrubs, the public cried out and the project came to a halt. The purpose of cutting these plants is to replace invasive plants that prevent growth of other vegetation. If these plants continue to spread, the oak trees in the area will die and there will be no seedlings left to restore the lost vegetation.

The nonprofit group Friends of the Parks is holding a program to attempt to educate the public on the reasons to cut down invasive pants, and hopes the project will be able to continue its course shortly.

Whither Chicago As a Green City
May 3, 2006 - The Environmental Grantmakers Group hosted a discussion entitled Whither Chicago as a Green City. Introduced by Ed Miller, Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation, and Kimberly Riordan Van Horn, Field Foundation of Illinois, the discussion featured a presentation from Sadhu Johnston, Chicago Department of Environment.

Foundations looking to support Chicago's sustainability and greening efforts have a number of possible approaches. Among them are:

• Adding incentives to encourage green practices in new construction and rehabilitation. Grants can be structured to offer bonus money if organizations meet certain standards, such as those required for LEED certification. Not only would such incentives produce more green buildings in Chicago, but they would also give these organizations the chance to educate others about the process of making buildings sustainable (for example, the Museum of Broadcast Communications contains a small display about the construction of their building).
• Leading by example. By using green technology in their own offices, by serving organic food at their events, and by finding ways to build sustainability into their everyday actions, foundations can be a model for green action.
• Making Chicago a showplace for sustainability strategies. The City is trying to attract green businesses to the area, and also to train ex-offenders in environmentally friendly landscaping, building weatherization, and other jobs that promote sustainability. Foundations may be able to partner with the City to expand these efforts.
• Help persuade the general populace about the importance of green actions. Residents are not yet motivated enough on this issue to continue moving it forward if the City and other organizations stop pushing it. Communicating the importance of conservation and sustainability in ways to which the public responds can build momentum for green projects. To date, the communication on the City's sustainability actions has often been reactive and not comprehensively planned; better integration between City departments, as well as integration with foundations and their grantees, could present a clearer, stronger message.
• Support analyses that measure the benefits of green actions. Though the City has undertaken several green projects, including the construction of a number of LEED-certified buildings, there is not yet a simple summary illustrating the benefit of these actions. A cost-benefit analysis that could be shown to both public and private bodies would help demonstrate the overall savings from these actions and could build momentum for other sustainable projects. As architects and builders become more adept at planning green projects, the cost of these buildings when compared to other buildings goes down. At present, LEED-certified buildings constructed by the City cost only two percent more than non-certified buildings, while Seattle is able to construct green buildings without any increase in cost. Keeping initial costs low maximizes the savings that come from green construction.
  

A Perfect Storm: Energy Costs and Chicago's Economic Future
December 15, 2005 - The Environmental Grantmakers Group hosted a discussion entitled A Perfect Storm: Energy Costs and Chicago's Economic Future. Introduced by Margaret O'Dell, The Joyce Foundation, the discussion featured presentations from Kathryn Tholin, Center for Neighborhood Technology; Scott Bernstein, Center for Neighborhood Technology; and Bob Lieberman, Illinois Commerce Commission.

If Chicago has a normal winter, the Northern Illinois area will experience approximately $1.3 billion in added home heating costs due to rising fuel prices (a colder-than-average winter would make that figure go even higher). Chicago-area households are also paying an extra $1 billion for gasoline in 2005. Energy prices, as well as the volatility of those prices, have increased across the board.

One of the major factors behind these increased costs is the increased demand. Demand for electricity, especially by commercial and residential users, is expected to grow rapidly in the next 20 years, partially fueled by the ever-expanding use of air conditioning in summer. Detached homes, which are the least efficient form of housing when it comes to heating and cooling, are increasingly popular. Most of the new plants built to meet this growing demand use natural gas to generate electricity, and since the cost of natural gas is rising that means the cost of electricity will go up as well, especially since Illinois is moving to a more market-based plan for energy rates in 2007.

On the gasoline side, demand is escalating both in the United States, as a decreasing percentage of workers use public transportation, and globally, as automobile ownership explodes in countries such as China.

Rising energy costs hit lower-income households hardest, particularly at present, since wages have been stagnant in recent years. Non-profit organizations and churches are also vulnerable to increased energy costs. Generally speaking, suburban households tend to spend a higher percentage of their income on energy than urban households, since they are more likely to live in detached homes and use multiple cars.

Illinois has a program to help people pay their heating bills (the Low Income Energy Assistance Payments program, or LIHEAP), as well as programs to help lower-income households or their landlords reduce their energy use. The balance is tilted heavily toward LIHEAP, meaning Illinois is not emphasizing conservation as much as it could. There are an estimated 175,000 households that are eligible for LIHEAP assistance but not currently receiving it, while there is a huge backlog of houses waiting for energy efficiency assistance.

In the 1980s, Illinois experimented with three different energy programs that helped cut energy costs by reducing usage in 12,000 housing units and several non-profit organizations. The last of these programs ended in 1989.

Compared to other states, Illinois is unbalanced when it comes to complementing bill-payment assistance with energy efficiency assistance. As a counter-example, California has been working on energy efficiency measures for 30 years, with the end result that California's per capita energy consumption is about 60 percent of the overall United States per capita energy consumption.

Illinois needs a cadre of leaders to advocate for energy efficiency, particularly for a dedicated funding source that will pay for energy efficiency well into the future. Efficiency programs should have a significant component targeted directly at lower-income households. Other approaches to deal with increasing energy costs include increasing transit pass distribution programs to all area universities and possibly including some low-income communities in the program; increasing shared car programs like I-Go; and alerting consumers 24 hours in advance about high energy price spikes so they can adjust their usage accordingly.

Developing solutions now is crucial because, unlike the energy price spike of the late 1970s, energy prices are not likely to fall again-the demand has simply grown too high and will continue to grow. The fossil fuel industry was experiencing some production problems and other difficulties even before Hurricane Katrina hit, and the impact of Katrina only made the problem worse. There are possible new sources of oil, such as tar sands, but the cost of extracting oil from tar sands is higher than current production methods.

The Illinois Commerce Commission recently adopted a Sustainable Energy Plan that would increase the electricity supplied by alternative sources of energy (wind, solar energy, etc.) while slowing the growth of energy demand. However, the plan is currently endangered.

The problem of increased energy costs will carry with it part of its own solution as consumers respond to price increases by reducing usage. For example, after the gasoline price increases of the past year, nearly all automobile manufacturers saw a dramatic reduction in full-size SUV sales. However, this is not a complete solution, as the high prices hit lower-income homes very hard, and they need assistance in mitigating the impact and increasing their energy efficiency. Sustainable programs to help low-income households improve their energy efficiency would be an additional way to address the problem of high energy prices.

Mercury Contamination: Health & Environmental Effects
December 8, 2005 - The Environmental Grantmakers Group and the Health Program Affinity Group co-sponsored a discussion on Mercury Contamination: Health & Environmental Effects. Ed Miller, Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation, introduced the program, which featured presentations by Dr. Henry Anderson, State of Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services; Dr. Dan Hryhorczuk, University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health, and Faith Bugel, Environmental Law & Policy Center.

Discussions of mercury contamination have often focused on the effects on children and infants, but studies show it can be a problem for adults as well. Elevated mercury levels can often be found in adults who eat a high quantity of fish, especially those who catch their own fish. Sport fish often have elevated levels of mercury, and generally speaking the bigger the fish, the more mercury it is likely to contain. Salmon, catfish, and smaller tuna fish tend to have lower concentrations of mercury, while shark, swordfish, and albacore tuna often have higher concentrations of mercury.

The symptoms of mercury poisoning in adults include decreased dexterity, decreased ability to concentrate, and memory problems. In adults, many of these symptoms go away as mercury levels in the body and brain decrease, but it is not always possible to return to the state before the contamination took place. Children are particularly vulnerable as mercury poisoning may interrupt the development of their brain, causing damage that cannot be completely repaired.

Warning people about the problem of mercury contamination comes with a number of difficulties. The first is that eating fish comes with many health benefits, and the general public has heard many messages touting these benefits over the years. Educating the public about possible harm due to mercury contamination and helping them learn how to balance the health benefits of eating fish with the risk of mercury contamination can be difficult, especially in an environment where there are many other health warnings or advisories. Getting the word out about mercury contamination can mean competing for space with other warnings on the walls of doctors' offices and other places where health information is available. Also, the information on mercury levels can be inaccurate or outdated, thereby not providing reliable information about how much consumers should eat of different types of fish.

The type of mercury that is harmful to humans is organic mercury, which occurs when inorganic mercury enters into and is absorbed by nature (for instance, being absorbed into fish's bodies). Sources of mercury entering nature include coal-fired power plants and gold mining and panning operations. In the United States, coal-fired power plants are easily the single largest source of non-naturally occurring mercury, accounting for 40.8 percent of mercury emissions. No other single source contributes more than 8.5 percent of the mercury found in the environment due to non-natural causes.

Illinois has 24 coal-fired power plants which emit varying amounts of mercury, mainly based on the size of the plant. There have been efforts to control sulfur emissions from power plants, but mercury emissions have not been as tightly controlled, and recently passed national mercury standards will not greatly reduce the emissions from plants in Illinois and other states. However, the law allows individual states to adopt stricter standards on their own (some states, including Connecticut and New Jersey, have already done so), and existing technology could support higher standards. The use of activated carbon injections along with scrubbers to remove sulfur dioxide and baghouses to remove particulate matter has been shown to reduce 95 percent of mercury emissions at a relatively low cost-by one estimate, these measures could be implemented by increasing the average electric bill in Illinois by 70 cents per month.

The group discussed possible alternative ways of passing along information about mercury contamination besides using doctors' offices, which to this point do not seem to have been successful at getting the full range of information into the public consciousness, especially where minority communities are concerned. Using locations where people congregate and talk, such as barbershops and beauty salons, may be one way of getting the information to a broader audience. Posting notices in supermarkets is another possible approach.

Environmental Grantmakers Peer Exchange
October 6, 2005 - The Environmental Grantmakers Group hosted a peer exchange on the matrix of environmental funding in the Chicago area. Group co-chairs Ed Miller, Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation, and Kimberly A. Riordan Van Horn, Field Foundation of Illinois, introduced and facilitated the discussion. Elizabeth Cisar, Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation, Ed Miller, and Michael Sands, Liberty Prairie Foundation, provided the handouts on environmental activities in Chicago that were the starting point for the discussion.

In discussing the handouts as well as their own experience with organizations listed on the documents, the group commented on two trends; first, there are only a handful of organizations with large, diverse bases of funding; and second, there is often not a large degree of collaboration in the environmental field. The larger organizations in the field could profit from a better understanding of each other's work, which could help them take regional approaches to environmental issues, while smaller organizations could benefit from being able to draw upon the skills and capacities of the larger organizations.

As part of the effort to connect the different groups to each other, participants discussed ways to increase the interaction between environmental groups that focus their efforts on specific minority groups and other organizations that do not always have success in reaching out to minorities. Funding connections between these types of organizations (for example, giving a grant to one organization that they can use to hire the second organization) is one possible way to increase interaction.

Participants discussed how the isolation of the various organizations often prevents them from addressing large environmental issues like global warming and pollution prevention. Since these are large, cross-cutting issues, funders may often find ways that their existing program areas can tie into these larger questions and help increase work on those areas by local organizations.

The participants planned to meet and discuss particular groups and the ways in which funders could help these groups make the kind of collaborative efforts discussed during the meeting. For some of the planned meetings, the group decided it would be best to have a member of the environmental organization present to answer questions about the group's activities and ways in which their skills, capabilities, and plans might be of use to funders, even if the funders do not plan on making a grant to the organization in question.

Participants exchanged information about some of the smaller groups listed on the information passed out at the meeting, updating each other about what kind of activities the groups are engaged in and what these organizations are planning for the future.

Some of the funders present noticed that groups were not always working within their core competencies, and this could be because they are trying to adapt to available funding. For example, there has been a significant increase in organic farming in Chicago lately, and it is unclear if this happened because groups suddenly became interested in the idea on their own or because funding was available for organic farming so groups adopted it as one of their activities. If funders wish to see more collaboration in the future, this tendency of groups to follow funding streams can be used to help build cooperation. However, trying to steer groups in a particular direction brings with it concerns of paternalism, as organizations need to be able to add their own thoughts and innovations rather than simply following a funder's lead.

The gathering concluded by discussing future meetings, including a joint session with the Health Program Affinity Group on mercury contamination in the Great Lakes and possible meetings with a group called Healing Our Waters that is concerned with Great Lakes restoration. There is also a planned meeting of the Chicago Grantmakers for Effective Organizations on November 3 that some EGG members may be interested in attending as it will discuss the intersection between grantmaker and grantee effectiveness.

Intersecting Issues: Environment and Health
March 3, 2005 - The Environmental Grantmakers Group and the Health Program Affinity Group held a joint meeting to discuss Intersecting Issues: Environment and Health. The discussion was moderated by Ada Mary Gugenheim, Chicago Community Trust, and the panel included Dan Hryhorczuk, M.D., Great Lakes Centers for Occupational and Environmental Safety and health, University of Illinois at Chicago; Juan Miguel Turnil, Little Village Environmental Justice Organization; and Aaron Rosinski, Southeast Environmental Taskforce.

Environmental effects on health receive far less overall funding than direct health care services, but their impact on individual and societal health can be more profound. Environmental problems can by addressed through two different approaches; first, by addressing a particular medium (e.g., water, air, solids, radiation) and reducing pollution in that medium; second, by taking a strategic approach focused on prevention or some similar strategy.

Environmental health concerns, which are second only to malnutrition in terms of global risk factors, may be divided into the following four groups:

• Air (particulates, carbon monoxide, etc.)
• Water (bacteria, chemical contamination, etc.)
• Place (lead poisoning, mold and moisture, cigarette smoke, etc.)
• Food (bacterial food poisoning, organic mercury, pesticide residues, etc.)

Children often bear the brunt of these risks, as their metabolism, their growing brains, and their relatively small body size can magnify the effects of environmental problems.

Chicago faces significant challenges in the areas of lead poisoning and asthma. Chicago has led the nation in number of lead poisoning cases, and these are often concentrated in poorer neighborhoods that lack the resources to pay for lead mitigation. These same neighborhoods often suffer from high asthma mortality rates. This information countered the occasional perception that participants said they encountered that lead poisoning and asthma are issues that have already been adequately addressed.

Combating lead poisoning is especially important because it has implications for education as well as health. Even relatively small amounts of lead have been shown to reduce a child's IQ, which can hinder educational achievement and cause greater numbers of children to be labeled as needing special education.

On the neighborhood level, the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization (LVEJO) and residents of Little Village are working to address some of their environmental concerns. Of particular concern is the proximity of one of Chicago's two functioning coal plants and the relative lack of green space (with the only significant park in the neighborhood located close to the coal plant). The poor air quality not only affects asthma in the community, but, combined with the lack of green space, can contribute to obesity by reducing the amount of exercise residents get. This was exacerbated by the CTA's transit cuts of 1997, which removed a crucial bus line that connected Little Village to shops and services and eliminated weekend and evening service on the blue line. Many community residents who worked at O'Hare were forced to buy cars after the service cuts, decreasing both the local air quality and the exercise they received through walking. Residents of Little Village are using 17 Principles of Environmental Justice put together in 1991 to help them work toward a better environment for their neighborhood.

The Southeast Environmental Taskforce (SETF) is working with the East Side and South Deering neighborhoods, which face challenges with high levels of active industry and air pollution from diesel fumes, coal, and lime processing. They are partnering with local industry to monitor weather and daily air pollution conditions so they can better address pollution problems when they arise. They are also working with industry and state officials to promote the use of biodiesel fuel, which reduces harmful emissions.

A key strategy for both LVEJO and SETF is organizing and educating community residents to heighten their involvement and leadership in addressing their communities' issues. Community organizing strategies offer funders another means of improving environmental and health conditions.

Several of the participants said the material presented helped them better understand the links between environment and health, as well as providing them ways to conceptualize the issue for their boards. Some of them discussed possible collaborative funding efforts, where certain broad issues (such as air pollution or lead poisoning) could be approached from a number of different angles, with different funders each taking a different tack that would add up to a comprehensive approach to the issue.

Chicago Wilderness Update
December 14, 2004 - John Rogner, Co-Chair of Chicago Wilderness and Elizabeth McCance, Director of Conservation, also of Chicago Wilderness, presented an overview and update on the strategic planning, operations, infrastructure, key recent accomplishments and direction for the future of Chicago Wilderness. This program was held at the Field Foundation of Illinois Inc.

Chicago Wilderness (CW) is focusing on its biodiversity plan, building public awareness of and protection to plant and animal diversity in the region, and preserving genetic variation. Northeastern Illinois has a high concentration of endangered species and quality environments, and a high number of emergent marshes. CW cited ¼ million acres of conserved land in Illinois distributed among several owners: county forest preserves, park district, federal agencies, and Illinois Department of Natural Resources.

• Habitat fragmentation
• Land use and land development
• Invasive species
• Fire deprivation and related plant succession
• Low level public understanding and support
• Support for open space is typically for reasons such as human health or traffic pattern development, not a concern for plant and animal protection.

Chicago Region Biodiversity Council is a multi-institution consortium made up of about 180 members. CW is not incorporated separately; the staffs of member organizations make up its committees and turn the strategic priorities into projects to meet the goals of CW. The CW team addresses projects under the topics of: Science, Natural Resources Management, Education and Communication, and Sustainability.

• Public education through, for example, the Mighty Acorns program for grades 4-6.
• Monitoring and research efforts such as volunteer stewardship, ecowatch program, and the "woods audit" to establish a baseline of species composition in a region.
• Manage protected land and maintain and restore biodiversity.
• Manage watersheds to protect water and aquatic biodiversity.
• Refresh local and regional development policies to protect biodiversity and build toward sustainability. Examples are: create buffer strips, management runoff, and install native landscaping in common areas.

CW has multiple roles:
Advocacy, building consensus, identification and communication on issues, and mobilization of members to act through strategic projects. CW has become a model for other regions of collaborative, strategic change management in the field of supporting biodiversity. CW will work toward understanding the diverse ethnic communities in Chicago.

At this session, CW sought feedback on its infrastructure and fundraising strategies. EGG members made comments and suggestions about CW's infrastructure and operations, seeking clarification on how to determine whether specific projects are part of CW or not. It was suggested that CW establish a protocol that requires consortium proposals to include a CW support letter to forestall questions about affiliation, and to bring additional planning and implementation resources to the table.

Update on Illinois Environmental Policy
September 29, 2004 - The Environmental Grantmakers Group held a discussion on current and proposed environmental legislation. Jonathan Goldman, Illinois Environmental Council Education Fund, and State Representative Julie Hamos spoke about statewide environmental policy issues.

Policy issues were categorized in three groups: water quality; natural areas and habitat conservation; and clean air issues. The residents in Illinois share a consensus around clean water as a core value. Primary issues in water quality discussed included: reducing mercury levels; protecting wetlands; issuing water pollution fees; surface discharging septic systems; operating mega-livestock facilities; and withdrawing water from Great Lakes. An Illinois EPA report to be released in October will have statistics on coal plants that had grandfathered under the most recent legislation. The report is expected to propose legislation to tighten emission standards in Illinois.

Natural areas and habitat conservation funding was targeted by a proposed budget cut in this past session. Partnership for Parks and Wildlife, a coalition of 130 organizations that was formed in response to the budget cut announcement, was able to persuade representatives to not decrease funding.

Clean air and energy issues including a renewable portfolio standard, energy efficient measures and deregulation, had been at the center of attention in legislation over the past two years.

Overall, the state budget has a great impact on many of these issues. The panelists identified the most pressing environmental issues for 2005: energy issues surrounding utility deregulation and renewable energy issues; protecting wetlands; and decreasing mercury levels.

A peer exchange was held following the presentation. Comments included an awareness generated by Rep. Hamos on the increased support of environmental issues by women representatives. Additional comments highlighted the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) decreased budget size and its affect on the Natural Areas Inventory. December 14, 2004 from 8:30 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. was set for the next EGG meeting. Suggestions for the spring 2005 field trip included a visit to the butterfly release site in McHenry County or to the Rock River Valley grasslands.

Energy, the Environment and Illinois
April 1, 2004 - Ed Miller, Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation, led the Environmental Grantmakers Group in a discussion on climate change and its impact in Illinois and on the Great Lakes, state energy policy and green power.

Current climate change projections for Illinois and the Great Lakes region included significantly higher air temperatures, a longer growing season, and summer drought. Agricultural pests and diseases not previously found in Illinois are likely to become prevalent. Climate change may make it significantly more costly to meet water quality goals and make it difficult or impossible to meet some remediation targets.

Changes to the Great Lakes water supply will include a decrease in annual runoff, a reduced or eliminated ice cover season and new calls to transfer water out of the basin. Models call for lake water levels to drop up to 8 feet by 2100.

Energy supplies are decreasing while energy consumption is increasing. Energy policy in Illinois continues to support the use of coal and ethanol. Funding available to support renewable energy has declined and the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) has stalled. There are few historical energy efficiency requirements imposed by ICC and state support for energy efficiency is minimal.

A market for green tags, tradable renewable energy certificates, is emerging. Green tags represent the positive environmental attributes of power generation. There are no uniform standards or regulations regarding green tags.

Potential funding opportunities included:

• Fund Illinois environmental protection policies.
• Identify and fund nontraditional groups to influence the environmental sector.

Environmental Grantmakers Group - Great Lakes Update
February 5, 2004 - The Environmental Grantmakers Group sponsored a program with featured speaker, David Rankin, Great Lakes Protection Fund, to provide members with an update on the Great Lakes. The group also discussed: the Illinois Natural Areas Inventory; the Chicago River collaboration; Environmental Grantmakers Group leadership succession; and the remaining FY04 programs.

A discussed of the history of the Great Lakes included: land development around the Great Lakes; ecological response to pollution and industry; and current systems of recovery. Organizations have tried to restore the Great Lakes through a top-down, bottom-up response. Trade-offs include: non-native species being introduced; increased public and private costs; and institutions favoring approaches that worked rather than the results that were achieved. Solving emergencies resulted in bigger chronic problems: toxic pollutants; contaminated fish; impaired flow regimes; and habitat loss.

Challenges for the Great Lakes water included:

• Plumbing - A big issue that includes storm sewers and irrigation and drainage in fields.
• Invaders - Over 160 plants and animals have been introduced into the system. Ships are the number one invader, carrying foreign biota into the local water.
• Chemicals -Includes inplace pollutants, atmospheric deposition, and emerging pollutants.
• Bottled water - Revisiting the Great Lake Charter of 1985, the governors are discussing a new water management framework. It would mandate that any new water taken from the Basin would require an improvement of some kind to the source.
• Ground water - In the Milwaukee area, ground water sources have moved 10 miles west and the flow pattern of water to the lakes has been reversed.

Options for funders: look for grants where land use was as important as water use; beware of non-point pollution or storm water phase II projects; and look for real connections to resource health. Suggested funding opportunities included:

• Educational programs addressing the origin of our rain and the role of ground water.
• Green Purchasing Programs.
• Clean cargo programs addressing the foreign pollutants that invade the local drinking water.
• Advocacy and policy awareness, including information on the implementation of the Clean Air Act.

Funders were encouraged to support change by becoming focused on outcomes and asking questions, such as "How are the Great Lakes better off with this program?"

Ed Miller provided an update on the Illinois Natural Areas Inventory. The Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation was meeting February 5th to decide if they would fund the first phase of the Nature Conservancy project. If funding were granted, the Nature Conservancy would pursue the remainder of the needed funds from other sources.

Jim Bartell commented on the perceived overlap between the McHenry County Conservation District project and the Nature Conservancy. McHenry County Conservation District remarked that the Nature Conservancy skipped important local areas in their past survey. Members commented that the original intent of the project might have been to focus instead on the larger areas of interest.

Protecting Illinois' Most Important Natural Areas
September 25, 2003 - Francis Harty and Carl Becker of The Nature Conservancy and Dr. David Thomas, chief of the Illinois Natural History Survey, were featured in a discussion about the Illinois Natural Areas Inventory (INAI), developed 25 years ago to help foundations and public agencies target their land acquisition funds to protect the most important places in our state. Judith Stockdale, Gaylord and Dorothy Donnelley Foundation, and Ed Miller, Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation, facilitated.

Carl Becker and Francis Harty of The Nature Conservancy and Dr. David Thomas, chief of the Illinois Natural History Survey, provided background on the development of the Illinois Natural History Survey, emphasizing how the INHS has added scientific and independent credibility to the inventory of natural areas in Illinois, making it a model of such inventories in all 50 states. The inventory found, described and classified natural areas in the state through a rigorous sampling and grading process.

The first Natural Areas Inventory was conducted by INHS from 1975 to 1978. It is codified in statutes and has been used to identify corridors for highway projects and other development. The speakers pointed out that no other organization in the state has the skill sets in biodiversity to conduct the inventory except the Illinois Natural History Survey. It was noted that it is critical to keep the inventory up to date; additions and deletions of areas has not happened on a planned basis over the years.

Speakers stressed that an update on natural areas is needed now in order to protect resources, and recommended that the update could be conducted in two phases. The first phase should begin with all federal, state and local public land to determine whether previous land should still be on the inventory and what should be added. The second phase should be the same inventory on private land. Conducting the private land inventory through resources outside government is critical to gain trust of landowners. The Illinois Nature Preserves Commission (INPC) concentrates on talking with private landowners about considering giving INPC the right of first refusal to acquire areas in the Illinois Natural Areas Inventory.

Key elements that it will be important to include in the inventory process are:

• a critical trends assessment program, asking what is the state of grasslands, wetlands, streams, etc. to identify vegetation and insect habitats, particularly on private lands;
• areas already protected;
  
• an initiative in state parks; some fear that finding protected species may inhibit other plans for these areas.

1. Inventory identified sites in order to identify ecologically relevant sites;
2. Protect it through acquisition;
3. Manage it;
4. Defend it.

Strategies suggested for launching the next inventory included clustering teams around local areas at the closest universities. A side benefit would be engaging local people who can become spokespersons on protecting the areas. Another strategy would be to centralize the inventory in one place and radiate out from there. It was estimated that the next inventory, like the first, would be a multi-year effort. The new inventory would be aided by work from airplanes, adding to costs and to effectiveness in identifying gross changes in the landscape and resources. A rough estimate placed costs for the first phase, covering a two- to three-year inventory of public lands, at $2 to $3 million. The effort is not ready for funding, and is likely to require funds to support planning activities.

Key questions for future discovery:

• What other states have completed natural areas inventories?
• What states have completed an inventory most recently? What did they learn?
• Who else should be in the planning group to develop and implement the natural areas inventory plan?
  

Group notes: Send active grants list to Pat Wallies by November 10.

Lake Calumet Bus Tour
May 9, 2003 - The group was invited on a tour of the natural areas in the Lake Calumet region. The sponsoring organizations, BOLD Chicago, Chicago Department of Environment, Chicago Field Museum of Natural History, and Southeast Environmental Task Force presented their ideas on how to meet the area's current and future civic, environmental and educational challenges.

Group Meeting
March 27, 2003 - The Envirnomental Grantmakers Group co-chairs Pat Wallies and Nancy Fishman provided a brief history of the group in an effort to ascertain opinions and concerns about relevancy from the participants. Ed Miller, from Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation, presented a brief update for the group on the need for the Illinois Natural Areas Inventory to be updated and to gauge the possibility of members of the group providing funding for that purpose. Also, the group heard an overview of the partnership on the Chicago River Project (specifically the "Chicago River Walk") from Laurene Von Klan (Friends of the Chicago River), Christine Slattery (Trust for Public Land), Joyce O'Keefe (Openlands Project), and Nancy Kaszak (CoreLands).

December 5, 2002 - For the Environmental Grantmakers Group inaugural event, the group welcomed Jill Arango from the Land Trust Alliance, who gave an update on local capacity building efforts for land trusts. She highlighted the efforts of the Northeast Illinois Land Trusts Matching Gifts Program, which offers a 6-12 month mentoring program for land trusts. The group also heard from Ders Anderson and Arthur Pearson, who led a discussion on recent activities in the Lake Calumet region. They identified the three primary areas for involvement as land acquisition, restoration and organization capacity through interfacing with non-local organizations.

Back to Environment main page