Watching the tall ships float through the Duluth-Superior Harbor this summer reminded me of how much we depend on our natural environs. The wind that filled the ship’s sails and the water on which they rode are critical but fickle partners in their journey.

The large sailing ships may be no more than a novelty today, but the health of Lake Superior is still critical for our communities.

The Great Lakes, including Lake Superior, have been an economic engine for the region for centuries. The firms and individuals in states around the Great Lakes account for almost one-third of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. Lake Superior provides habitat for salmon, lake trout, whitefish, sturgeon and many other important fisheries. It also supports communities all along its expanse, from port cities like Duluth to quiet hamlets like Tofte Township. This economic development has left a legacy of pollution along Lake Superior’s shores and scattered across its bottom.

Progress has been made in cleaning up the pollution and in slowing the inflow of new contamination. Canal Park has been transformed into an area that draws hundreds of people each day. Efforts to clean up the toxic sediment in the Duluth-Superior Harbor and in the St. Louis River are ongoing; Hog Island has been cleaned up. Restoration work is beginning on the Knife River and other rivers along the North Shore. People in our communities have worked tirelessly to realize this progress.

Laws like the Clean Water Act provided the foundation for this success.

But all of this is at risk and future progress is threatened because the Clean Water Act is broken. Supreme Court rulings and misguided policies of the Bush Administration have left more than half of Minnesota’s streams at risk of losing Clean Water Act protections. Lake Superior, the St. Louis River and the Knife River all are fed by smaller streams and wetlands. High school science and common sense tell us that pollution dumped into these smaller streams and wetlands will eventually end up downstream.

In order to protect our iconic lakes and rivers, we must also protect all of the small streams that don’t run all year and the scant, seemingly inconsequential wetlands.

U.S. Rep. Jim Oberstar has introduced a bill to restore the Clean Water Act to its intended vigor. The America’s Commitment to Clean Water Act would return Clean Water Act protections to the small streams and wetlands that are critical to the continued health and viability of our area’s waters.

Some of those in opposition to Oberstar’s bill mislead the public by suggesting it imposes new limits on individual rights. What it is does is return the Clean Water Act to where it was in 2001 — no more, no less. Discharges and activities that were allowed in 2001 would continue to be allowed— no more, no less.

Clean Water Act protections can be thought of like police officers protecting our streets and roads. The officers are there to protect us from drivers running stoplights and running over pedestrians. They don’t tell law-abiding drivers to turn left at the next intersection or that they have to drive to the grocery store at 3 p.m. on Tuesday. The Clean Water Act protects us from people dumping pollution into our waters. It does not control choices for legal uses of the water, for example whether the water is used for irrigation, fishing or producing paper in a paper mill.

Much like the tall ships that graced the Duluth-Superior Harbor this summer, the future of our communities rides on our water resources. We have the power to choose whether our waters will get cleaner or dirtier. If we are going to go in the right direction we must have the wind of the Clean Water Act at our backs. We need the America’s Commitment to Clean Water Act.

Darrell Gerber is a program coordinator, based in Minneapolis, for Clean Water Action