Saturday, January 16, 2010

IL Senator Durbin Briefing On Asian Carp Control

Jan 12: U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Congresswoman Judy Biggert (R-IL) hosted a briefing by Federal, state and local officials regarding the containment of Asian carp in Illinois. Representatives from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. EPA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, the City of Chicago, the Office of the Attorney General, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the Illinois Department of Natural Resources all provided perspectives on the current situation, further mitigation options, and likely next steps.

According to a release from Senator Durbin, Asian carp threaten the Great Lakes ecosystem because they consume large quantities of phytoplankton, which is critical to the stability of the ecosystem. The fish can grow to an average of four feet and 60 pounds, and can consume up to 40 percent of their body weight in plankton per day. Durbin and Biggert indicated they have a long history of working together to combat the spread of Asian carp and outlined their efforts in securing funding for the electric Asian Carp Barrier project of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers which has received $41.2 million in federal funding since 1998.

Durbin said, “We don’t know yet what course of action will ensure that these carp don’t reach the Lake, but we do know that every level of government is committed to restoring and protecting our Great Lakes. Today’s meeting is just one step on our path of working together to establish and implement a long-term, comprehensive Asian carp containment plan.” If the carp reach Lake Michigan, they have the potential to damage the economy and ecosystem of the Great Lakes region, where the fishing industry alone is valued at $7 billion annually. Yet the community and economic implications of closing the locks of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal must be considered. The shipping industry used the canal to move nearly 7 million tons of cargo in 2008 through tens of thousands of vessel passages, and the Army Corps estimates that closing the O’Brien lock alone would back-flood 14,000 homes.

Durbin said, “If you ask the people in the Chicago area what they treasure most about the area, most of them will put Lake Michigan at the top of the list. Not only does Lake Michigan provide entertainment and recreation year round, it supports industry -- primarily fishing and shipping. We need to protect the ecological and economic well-being of this treasured resource.”

In its brief opposing Michigan's request for a Preliminary Injunction, the State of Illinois indicates that "there are no alternate water routs for shipping and delivering cargo and there are not enough trucks and train cars to haul the freight that passes through the waterways. One barge typically has a dry-cargo capacity of a least 16 rails cars and a liquid-cargo capacity of 46 rail cars, and some 500,000 additional truck loads would be needed to move the amount of cargo currently hauled by barges on the Canal each year.

"And even if trucks and rail cars were available, the financial and environmental cost of substituting rail or truck transportation for waterway transport would be devastating in terms of increased emissions of hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter. Substituting rail and truck transportation for commercial navigation would also lead to untenable congestion on the rails and roads, raise the cost of maintaining roadways... and cause increased traffic fatalities. Michigan's efforts to downplay the economic impact that will result if its request for preliminary relief is granted, as well as its silence of the public health effects associated with even a temporary closure of the locks and sluice gates, cannot disguise the fact that neither the balance of equities nor the public interest weighs in Michigan's favor."

The U.S. Supreme Court was scheduled to take up the lawsuit January 15, 2010. Reportedly, the justices will review the legal briefs -- but a ruling is not expected until later. The Michigan case, filed by Attorney General Mike Cox, would reopen an old case from the Supreme Court 1966 term, an “Original” lawsuit i.e. filed directly with no lower court activity -- the docket is termed Original Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Since filing his suit on December 21, 2009 [
See WIMS 1/4/10], Cox has been joined by the states of Minnesota, New York, Ohio and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario.

Access a release from Senator Durbin (
click here). Access a video from the briefing (click here). Access the Michigan, Illinois and all legal filings in the case (click here).

1 comment:

  1. Another problem that the southern fish farmers pose is the interstate transportation of fish using natural waters.
    As bills like H.R.3669 address the problems of invasive species by private pet owners, it should be noted that fish farmers have had meetings with officials of the Federal government discussing their belief that waters of fish being brought into our country need to be considered for problems. As industry will play an important role in helping keep our waters clean, I sent to the vice president a disk containing a published copy of meeting minutes, a member of the Federal government had in 2005 with southern fish farmers, along with information on chemical use by these same farmers. Problems including interstate transportation with no federal endorsement, disease and invasive are discussed from a fish rearing business perspective for both bait fish an ornamentals. These problems are discussed from their point of view, it should be noted that not all of their plans are environmentally sound. They seem to want to be able to move their fish through state lines without considering the quality of water used or what is added, while using an international set of standards regarding testing of the fish only. They also suggest that the state of Maine, who has not allowed importation of bait fish, is a problem that should be remedy and that the state of Arkansas (largest fish producer in nation) should be considered a disease free zone, along with many other questionable practices. Some of these fish farmers will deliver fish through fed –ex by air to all states. They even have a bait fish that has a patent pending that will live in salt or fresh water, which they will deliver this way. As the Presidents ocean and great lakes initiative is aware of this problem and how states such as mine did not bother to address water as problematic so long as the fish had an inspection in the last year in another state out of their jurisdiction. Fish transported and sold in the US often change hands many different times with many different water changes and chemicals often are used without regard for state laws during transportation and can be brought into my state from anywhere in the country without worrying about disposal. I have seen the transport water and it is often milky, suds, full of scales, invasive (crabs, pollywogs, etc.) with the possibility of pathogens and virus. In the mid 1990’s as the fish being delivered from Arkansas to me were dying of disease, it was not uncommon to see bait fish, ornamentals, food fish on the same truck being spread out from tank to tank as space was freed up, as I know I often added more water to take them to their next delivery. This water and the fish are often unloaded from tanks on trucks through pipes to tanks fed by natural water where the overflow is back into natural waters. I am in the industry and do believe that mandatory safe procedures can solve this. As high level administration officials that now negotiate trade with China involving water movement through ballast systems, did not recognize virus and pathogens in natural waters for fish transport when they were involved as a senator from NY, despite knowing that our state university helping formulate policy about baitfish was busy studying virus in water, with a grant, I doubt whether they will care about the dangers of ballast water or the carbon footprints associated with bring foreign products into our country in order to keep our large retail employers shelves filled with foreign manufactured products.

    ReplyDelete