[Zipperfish]

Brenda Brenda:

It's convenient that this comes out at the same time the water-genius says we have to pay more for water, because it's scarce...

Maybe that's one of the reasons he said that.

[BartSimpson]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

The last stat I saw for this was fairly recent. Lake Superior is down a few inches from "normal" while Lakes Erie and Ontario are down about a foot and the St. Lawrence is down almost 2 ft.

Just saw a program on Discovery not so long ago that said the lake levels are not actually falling, it's that the lake beds are rising several feet per century due to accelerated bounce back from the last ice age.

[Gunnair]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

The last stat I saw for this was fairly recent. Lake Superior is down a few inches from "normal" while Lakes Erie and Ontario are down about a foot and the St. Lawrence is down almost 2 ft.

Just saw a program on Discovery not so long ago that said the lake levels are not actually falling, it's that the lake beds are rising several feet per century due to accelerated bounce back from the last ice age.

[Chumley]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

The last stat I saw for this was fairly recent. Lake Superior is down a few inches from "normal" while Lakes Erie and Ontario are down about a foot and the St. Lawrence is down almost 2 ft.

Just saw a program on Discovery not so long ago that said the lake levels are not actually falling, it's that the lake beds are rising several feet per century due to accelerated bounce back from the last ice age.

You mean and increasing amount of silt deposit and decaying plant life, etc?
I would think if the amount of water is the same and the lake beds are rising, then the lakes would become more spread out. Or the rivers and streams leading out from the lakes would have greater volume.
I suppose that more spread out shallow lakes would be countered in part by a greater area exposed to evaporation.

[fifeboy]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

The last stat I saw for this was fairly recent. Lake Superior is down a few inches from "normal" while Lakes Erie and Ontario are down about a foot and the St. Lawrence is down almost 2 ft.

Just saw a program on Discovery not so long ago that said the lake levels are not actually falling, it's that the lake beds are rising several feet per century due to accelerated bounce back from the last ice age.

The lake beds are rising, but not the land around them?

[Hyack]

Bart has got it pretty well right, I saw the same program, the whole area is still rebounding from the Iceage, it seems the northern parts are rising faster than the southern, making the north end of the Great Lakes shallower while the souther end is getting deeper. Although with everything else the fresh water throughout the whole area seems to be diminishing.

[fifeboy]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

The last stat I saw for this was fairly recent. Lake Superior is down a few inches from "normal" while Lakes Erie and Ontario are down about a foot and the St. Lawrence is down almost 2 ft.

Just saw a program on Discovery not so long ago that said the lake levels are not actually falling, it's that the lake beds are rising several feet per century due to accelerated bounce back from the last ice age.

OK, let me get this straight. Glacial rebound, which is greater in the north causes the lakes to "rise up" thus lowering their water levels. Here is my problem. Why would Lake Superior, which is further north, have less water lowering than Erie, Ontario and the St. L? If you put water in a kids swimming pool and lift up one end, the water lowers in the lifted end and any outlet on the less lifted end would have a greater outflow. But than who am I to doubt the word, which is written!