Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Supreme Court Denies Request To Close Waterways
Jan 19: The U.S. Supreme Court issued a brief notice with no further explanation indicating, "The motion of Michigan for a preliminary injunction is denied." On December 21, 2009 [See WIMS 1/4/10], Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox joined by the states of Minnesota, New York, Ohio and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario filed a request for a preliminary injunction to immediately order Federal, state, and local officials responsible for Chicago-area locks and waterways to close them in order to stop Asian carp from entering the Great Lakes. Cox said, "The fish are an aggressive invasive species that could quickly devastate Great Lakes fish populations, causing severe damage to Michigan's economy by ruining the Great Lakes' $7 billion fishing and tourism industries."
In their response brief, the State of Illinois said, "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." Illinois said the Army Corps estimated that closing the O’Brien lock alone would back-flood 14,000 homes; and some 500,000 additional truck loads, with associated pollution and road maintenance concerns, would be needed to move the amount of cargo currently hauled by barges on the Canal each year [See WIMS 1/16/10].
According to a report on the SCOTUS blog, "the Court refused to issue a permanent injunction that would have closed waterway locks and required other temporary measures in reaction to the discovery of the carp upstream in Illinois rivers. The Court’s order did not dispose of Michigan’s plea to reopen a decades-old decree to address the carp migration issue on its merits. That will come later in cases 1, 2 and 3 Original, Wisconsin, Michigan and New York v. Illinois." Last Friday, January 15, the Court reviewed the various briefs that had been submitted.
Groups supporting the close of the Mississippi River-Lake Michigan connection including --Alliance for the Great Lakes; Great Lakes United; Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition; National Wildlife Federation; and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) -- issued a joint release on the Supreme Court action. The groups indicated that although the High Court did not comment on the decision, at the same time, it did not yet act on Michigan’s request to reopen a nearly century-old case allowing Chicago to divert its wastewater from Lake Michigan to the Illinois River.
Alliance President Joel Brammeier said, "Unlike the court, Asian carp don't heed jurisdictional lines. If emergency measures to stem the tide of carp are the wrong play, we need a new playbook -- and we need it yesterday. Without that, there's no time to build the permanent separation the Great Lakes and Mississippi need." Henry Henderson, director of NRDC's Midwest Program and the first Commissioner of the Environment for the City of Chicago said, “Illinois cannot breath too big a sigh of relief, as the Supreme Court could take further action on Michigan’s case."
Henderson said the new DNA findings reinforce Michigan’s assertion that the Chicago Diversion threatens the health of the Great Lakes. “Whether they are forced by the Supreme Court or not, Illinois’ elected officials need to follow up on their statements in recent weeks and take leadership in finding timely solutions to this problem." The groups reported that Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm called for an immediate summit at the White House with President Obama and the eight Great Lakes governors to address the Asian carp threat.
Access the Supreme Court Order (click here, scroll to page 3). Access the SCOTUS blog post (click here). Access the joint release from the groups (click here). Access a media report from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (click here). Access a media report from the NYT (click here). Access the Michigan, Illinois and all legal filings in the case (click here).
In their response brief, the State of Illinois said, "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." Illinois said the Army Corps estimated that closing the O’Brien lock alone would back-flood 14,000 homes; and some 500,000 additional truck loads, with associated pollution and road maintenance concerns, would be needed to move the amount of cargo currently hauled by barges on the Canal each year [See WIMS 1/16/10].
According to a report on the SCOTUS blog, "the Court refused to issue a permanent injunction that would have closed waterway locks and required other temporary measures in reaction to the discovery of the carp upstream in Illinois rivers. The Court’s order did not dispose of Michigan’s plea to reopen a decades-old decree to address the carp migration issue on its merits. That will come later in cases 1, 2 and 3 Original, Wisconsin, Michigan and New York v. Illinois." Last Friday, January 15, the Court reviewed the various briefs that had been submitted.
Groups supporting the close of the Mississippi River-Lake Michigan connection including --Alliance for the Great Lakes; Great Lakes United; Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition; National Wildlife Federation; and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) -- issued a joint release on the Supreme Court action. The groups indicated that although the High Court did not comment on the decision, at the same time, it did not yet act on Michigan’s request to reopen a nearly century-old case allowing Chicago to divert its wastewater from Lake Michigan to the Illinois River.
Alliance President Joel Brammeier said, "Unlike the court, Asian carp don't heed jurisdictional lines. If emergency measures to stem the tide of carp are the wrong play, we need a new playbook -- and we need it yesterday. Without that, there's no time to build the permanent separation the Great Lakes and Mississippi need." Henry Henderson, director of NRDC's Midwest Program and the first Commissioner of the Environment for the City of Chicago said, “Illinois cannot breath too big a sigh of relief, as the Supreme Court could take further action on Michigan’s case."
Henderson said the new DNA findings reinforce Michigan’s assertion that the Chicago Diversion threatens the health of the Great Lakes. “Whether they are forced by the Supreme Court or not, Illinois’ elected officials need to follow up on their statements in recent weeks and take leadership in finding timely solutions to this problem." The groups reported that Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm called for an immediate summit at the White House with President Obama and the eight Great Lakes governors to address the Asian carp threat.
Access the Supreme Court Order (click here, scroll to page 3). Access the SCOTUS blog post (click here). Access the joint release from the groups (click here). Access a media report from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (click here). Access a media report from the NYT (click here). Access the Michigan, Illinois and all legal filings in the case (click here).
Labels:
Army Corps,
Barrier,
Coast Guard,
Illinois,
Invasive Species,
Lake Michigan
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment