Jul 8: The Sierra Club Great Lakes Program released its Citizen’s Guide to Protecting the Great Lakes. The guide identifies Great Lakes problems and solutions that individuals can implement to protect the Lakes. It also highlights the major policy changes that state and Federal governments need to make to ensure that future generations.
According to an announcement, the Guide was inspired by the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy (GLRCS) -- the comprehensive regional plan to protect our drinking water, economic future and way of life. The Great Lakes hold one fifth of the world’s fresh surface water and currently provide drinking water to over 42 million people. Each day, "the Lakes are damaged economically and ecologically by untreated sewage, industrial pollutants and invasive species." The Guide offers actions to reduce the threats and contains specific strategies that can be used to protect the Lakes. The release kicks off a series of Sierra Club Great Lakes Program meetings and activities that will be held in the region throughout the year to highlight actions needed to protect and restore the Great Lakes.
Access a release from Sierra Club (click here). Access the Guide (click here). Access the Great Lakes Program website for related information (click here).
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Monday, July 7, 2008
States Onboard With Compact; Congress Next
Jul 7: It's almost official that all of the Great Lakes states have now approved the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact legislation. On July 4, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell approved legislation passed last week; Ohio's Governor signed the Ohio legislation last week; and Michigan's Governor Jennifer Granholm has already praised the passage of Michigan's bills and is expected to officially sign the bills very soon. Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, New York and Wisconsin have all previously approved their legislation. The states-approved Compact will next go to Congress for Federal approval.
In a release from the Alliance for the Great Lakes, Sharon Cook, Water Conservation Program director said, “It is an historic moment for the Great Lakes when all the states, through both their governors and legislatures, recognize that this incredible resource is important to us collectively. It’s clear that the Great Lakes states can come together to regulate and manage the resource that we share.”
The National Wildlife Federation issued a release saying, "Over seven years ago, state representatives, environmentalists, industry groups, and others set out to protect the Great Lakes for future generations by drafting a binding regional agreement on water withdrawals. Many naysayers thought the agreement would never make it out of the negotiations, let alone through the state legislatures. Yet we are incredibly close to achieving our goal. We hope that Congress will act swiftly to close the deal."
The Great Lakes Water Resources Compact is the culmination of a multi-year process of negotiations among the eight Great Lakes States. The Compact is designed to protect Great Lakes water supplies by implementing a water management plan to protect against water diversions out of the basin and to promote water conservation measures within the basin. To become law, the Compact must be enacted by all eight Great Lakes States and consented to by the U.S. Congress.
While most interest groups are pleased with the various state approvals, a major unsettled issue remains in Michigan over the lack of a "public trust" doctrine provision that was advocated by two former Governors [Milliken (R) and Blanchard (D)] and many environmental interests [See WIMS 6/13/08]. Concerns were raised that without public trust language, the State's and Great Lakes waters are at risk of sale and export because of NAFTA and GATT -- international trade agreement provisions which prevent bans or strict regulation on water once it is a commodity.
Access a release from Governor Strickland (click here). Access a release from Governor Granholm (click here). Access the status of various state compact legislation from the Council of Great Lakes Governors (click here). Access a release from the Alliance (click here). Access a release from NWF (click here). Access a posting from Michigan Attorney Jim Olson on the public trust concern (click here). WIMS-Great Lakes Environment blog posts on the Compact approvals (click here). Access a media report on the upcoming Congressional consideration (click here).
In a release from the Alliance for the Great Lakes, Sharon Cook, Water Conservation Program director said, “It is an historic moment for the Great Lakes when all the states, through both their governors and legislatures, recognize that this incredible resource is important to us collectively. It’s clear that the Great Lakes states can come together to regulate and manage the resource that we share.”
The National Wildlife Federation issued a release saying, "Over seven years ago, state representatives, environmentalists, industry groups, and others set out to protect the Great Lakes for future generations by drafting a binding regional agreement on water withdrawals. Many naysayers thought the agreement would never make it out of the negotiations, let alone through the state legislatures. Yet we are incredibly close to achieving our goal. We hope that Congress will act swiftly to close the deal."
The Great Lakes Water Resources Compact is the culmination of a multi-year process of negotiations among the eight Great Lakes States. The Compact is designed to protect Great Lakes water supplies by implementing a water management plan to protect against water diversions out of the basin and to promote water conservation measures within the basin. To become law, the Compact must be enacted by all eight Great Lakes States and consented to by the U.S. Congress.
While most interest groups are pleased with the various state approvals, a major unsettled issue remains in Michigan over the lack of a "public trust" doctrine provision that was advocated by two former Governors [Milliken (R) and Blanchard (D)] and many environmental interests [See WIMS 6/13/08]. Concerns were raised that without public trust language, the State's and Great Lakes waters are at risk of sale and export because of NAFTA and GATT -- international trade agreement provisions which prevent bans or strict regulation on water once it is a commodity.
Access a release from Governor Strickland (click here). Access a release from Governor Granholm (click here). Access the status of various state compact legislation from the Council of Great Lakes Governors (click here). Access a release from the Alliance (click here). Access a release from NWF (click here). Access a posting from Michigan Attorney Jim Olson on the public trust concern (click here). WIMS-Great Lakes Environment blog posts on the Compact approvals (click here). Access a media report on the upcoming Congressional consideration (click here).
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
GLRC Releases Habitat/Wetlands Initiative Progress Report
Jul 1: The Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) Executive Committee announced the release of the report, Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Habitat/Wetlands Initiative: A Progress Report and Call to Action. A team of State, Federal, Tribal, City and non-governmental representatives wrote the report to describe progress and to advance the habitat restoration recommendations in the GLRC's December 2005 Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes. As a first step, the Initiative is focused on protecting and restoring 200,000 acres of wetlands in the Great Lakes basin.
The report notes the steps that Federal, State, City, Tribal and non-governmental interests are taking to improve coordination of habitat restoration programs and projects in the Great Lakes basin and describes two new tools that will facilitate collaboration: a habitat projects database and a funding source inventory. The report concludes by issuing a Call to Action that challenges the Great Lakes community to accelerate restoration efforts and to work together to accomplish more than could be achieved by working alone.
In May 2004, a Presidential Executive Order for the Great Lakes was issued that called for increased federal coordination and a Great Lakes Regional Collaboration to develop a strategy for protecting and restoring the Great Lakes. Among the recommendations are goals and actions specific to protect and restore habitat. The report describes recent progress since early 2006 to protect and restore wetlands and other habitat across the Great Lakes basin. The report addresses habitat in general, but focuses on wetlands as a particular habitat that has unique stresses and values, and which has been a focal point for collaboration activity. The report discusses the need for a tool to assess progress toward achieving regional habitat and wetlands goals. It presents the challenges in developing such a tool and summarizes some efforts that can provide building blocks for such a tool.
The report does not provide all of the answers. Rather, it recognizes the critical need to continue the momentum that has begun and offers the “Call to Action” to recognize that partnerships are the cornerstone of this Initiative and that the tools will help support it. The report and call to action set the stage for continued dialogue to achieve the Collaboration’s habitat goals.
Access the Habitat/Wetlands Initiative website for a June 2008 update and link to the 28-page progress report and call to action (click here).
The report notes the steps that Federal, State, City, Tribal and non-governmental interests are taking to improve coordination of habitat restoration programs and projects in the Great Lakes basin and describes two new tools that will facilitate collaboration: a habitat projects database and a funding source inventory. The report concludes by issuing a Call to Action that challenges the Great Lakes community to accelerate restoration efforts and to work together to accomplish more than could be achieved by working alone.
In May 2004, a Presidential Executive Order for the Great Lakes was issued that called for increased federal coordination and a Great Lakes Regional Collaboration to develop a strategy for protecting and restoring the Great Lakes. Among the recommendations are goals and actions specific to protect and restore habitat. The report describes recent progress since early 2006 to protect and restore wetlands and other habitat across the Great Lakes basin. The report addresses habitat in general, but focuses on wetlands as a particular habitat that has unique stresses and values, and which has been a focal point for collaboration activity. The report discusses the need for a tool to assess progress toward achieving regional habitat and wetlands goals. It presents the challenges in developing such a tool and summarizes some efforts that can provide building blocks for such a tool.
The report does not provide all of the answers. Rather, it recognizes the critical need to continue the momentum that has begun and offers the “Call to Action” to recognize that partnerships are the cornerstone of this Initiative and that the tools will help support it. The report and call to action set the stage for continued dialogue to achieve the Collaboration’s habitat goals.
Access the Habitat/Wetlands Initiative website for a June 2008 update and link to the 28-page progress report and call to action (click here).
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
GLRC Mercury In Products Phase-Down Strategy
Jun 30: The Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) Executive Committee announced the release of the Mercury in Products Phase-Down Strategy. A team of State, Federal, Tribal, and City government staff wrote the Strategy in fulfillment of a GLRC recommendation to phase out mercury in products in the Great Lakes basin by 2015. The Strategy makes more than 60 recommendations for action by Great Lakes states, cities and tribes to take in order to minimize mercury use and releases caused by remaining uses of mercury-containing products. Recommendations include state bans on the sale of some, but not all, mercury-containing products and a variety of mandatory and voluntary measures for managing the disposal of all mercury-containing products.
The Draft Mercury In Products Phase-Down Strategy was released for public comment through November 5, 2007 [See WIMS 9/11/07]. A total of 47 comments were received, including from the following organizations: American Dental Association; Council of Great Lakes Industries; DTE Energy Company; Mercury Free Wisconsin; Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP); Consumers for Dental Choice; Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers; Clean Air Foundation, Environment Illinois; Zero Mercury Working Group; Great Lakes Natural Resource Center - National Wildlife Federation; and Illinois State Dental Society.
Implementation of this strategy is one important element in achieving virtual elimination of mercury inputs into the Great Lakes as envisioned in the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (see Appendix D). The GLRC endorses the recommendations of the Strategy as valid options for consideration by Great Lakes states, tribes, and municipalities. The GLRC does not expect each state, tribe or municipality to commit to implementation of all of the recommendations, but rather to consider implementation of those recommendations that are appropriate and feasible in its individual circumstances. The Phase-Down Strategy also seeks to complement and enhance the recommendations in the Quicksilver Caucus’s Action Plan and Implementation Strategy for reducing mercury in the environment developed as a project of Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) and linked in the report.
The report indicates that while coal-fired power plants represent the largest air emissions source of mercury, a significant fraction of mercury emissions comes from mercury-containing products, whether from melting steel scrap that is contaminated with mercury contained in switches and other devices used in autos, industrial equipment, and commercial and consumer appliances, or from incineration of municipal, hazardous, and medical waste that can include mercury-containing products such as lamps, batteries, thermometers, and thermostats. Additionally, mercury-based amalgam used in some dental fillings is one of the primary sources of mercury in wastewater.
Access the Mercury in Products Strategy (click here). Access the GLRC website for additional information and background (click here).
The Draft Mercury In Products Phase-Down Strategy was released for public comment through November 5, 2007 [See WIMS 9/11/07]. A total of 47 comments were received, including from the following organizations: American Dental Association; Council of Great Lakes Industries; DTE Energy Company; Mercury Free Wisconsin; Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy (CIELAP); Consumers for Dental Choice; Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers; Clean Air Foundation, Environment Illinois; Zero Mercury Working Group; Great Lakes Natural Resource Center - National Wildlife Federation; and Illinois State Dental Society.
Implementation of this strategy is one important element in achieving virtual elimination of mercury inputs into the Great Lakes as envisioned in the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (see Appendix D). The GLRC endorses the recommendations of the Strategy as valid options for consideration by Great Lakes states, tribes, and municipalities. The GLRC does not expect each state, tribe or municipality to commit to implementation of all of the recommendations, but rather to consider implementation of those recommendations that are appropriate and feasible in its individual circumstances. The Phase-Down Strategy also seeks to complement and enhance the recommendations in the Quicksilver Caucus’s Action Plan and Implementation Strategy for reducing mercury in the environment developed as a project of Environmental Council of the States (ECOS) and linked in the report.
The report indicates that while coal-fired power plants represent the largest air emissions source of mercury, a significant fraction of mercury emissions comes from mercury-containing products, whether from melting steel scrap that is contaminated with mercury contained in switches and other devices used in autos, industrial equipment, and commercial and consumer appliances, or from incineration of municipal, hazardous, and medical waste that can include mercury-containing products such as lamps, batteries, thermometers, and thermostats. Additionally, mercury-based amalgam used in some dental fillings is one of the primary sources of mercury in wastewater.
Access the Mercury in Products Strategy (click here). Access the GLRC website for additional information and background (click here).
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Michigan Compromise Reached On Compact & Water Management Bills
Jun 23: Senator Patty Birkholz (R-Saugatuck Twp) and Representative Rebekah Warren (D-Ann Arbor) announced that they had reached consensus on Michigan’s landmark water protection legislative package to adopt the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact and implement a new standard for evaluating large quantity water withdrawals. Birkholz, chair of the Senate Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs Committee said, “This is a great day for the Great Lakes and everyone who lives near them. We started our journey toward water protection more than five years ago when we created the Groundwater Conservation Advisory Council. During that time, we have had one simple mission -- to protect our waters, the water dependent natural resources and the rights of those who use water wisely. The agreement we have reached will help us accomplish this mission.”
While most interest groups are pleased with the compromise, the major unsettled issue remains the lack of a "public trust" doctrine provision that was the central concern of former Governors William Milliken (R) and James Blanchard (D) and many environmental interests [See WIMS 6/13/08]. Governor Milliken said previously, "Without protecting the public trust in our waters, Michigan's sovereign power to safeguard our vital interests against outside forces will be diminished." Others had said without public trust language, the State's and Great Lakes waters are at risk of sale and export because of NAFTA and GATT -- international trade agreement provisions which prevent bans or strict regulation on water once it is a commodity.
Environmental organizations said, "The bipartisan compromise left some shortcomings, but keeps intact core principles. . ." The Great Lakes, Great Michigan coalition members said they would regroup in coming months to fight for additional protections not included in the package. Cyndi Roper of Clean Water Action said, “We are extremely disappointed that the legislature failed to strengthen our important public trust protections, which affirms that water is a public resource that belongs to Michiganders and not to corporations or profit-takers. We intend to revisit this issue.”
In a release from Senator Birkholz, she said, the Great Lakes Compact will develop common measures for each of the eight states in the basin to regulate in-state withdrawals and prohibit out-of-basin water diversions. In addition to the compact, the legislation would adopt the water withdrawal assessment process developed by the groundwater council. The automated point-and-click computer tool will allow new large volume water users to determine if a proposed withdrawal will have an adverse resource impact on state water levels and other natural resources.
Birkholz indicated that, "Once the compact has been approved, Michigan will have done what no other state has accomplished by passing the compact along with a water withdrawal tool based on sound science." Representative Warren, Chair of the House Great Lakes and Environment Committee said, “As protectors of 20 percent of the entire world’s fresh surface water, the actions we take to preserve this great resource will have long-lasting, widespread impact. Michigan’s Great Lakes, inland lakes, and streams play a vital role in our special way of life and are a driving economic force in our state, providing for thousands of jobs in the shipping, agriculture, tourism and manufacturing industries. This plan will keep our most precious natural and economic resource healthy and strong.”
The two legislators said the key changes in the legislation include: Creating language to confirm the State’s existing rights for water resource management and protect private property rights; Clarifying the implementation process of the water withdrawal assessment tool; and Lowering the water withdrawal permitting threshold to one million gallons a day. They said the legislation would protect Michigan's unique and popular trout streams by preventing withdrawals that would cause more than a 3 percent reduction in the stream's thriving fish population; and ensure that new standards for protecting against adverse resource impact will be in effect by February 1, 2009.
The legislation is supported by many organizations, including the Michigan Farm Bureau, Michigan United Conservation Clubs (MUCC), and The Water Works Coalition made up of 15 groups, including the Michigan Chamber of Commerce and Michigan Manufacturers Association; Michigan Environmental Council, Clean Water Action and the Sierra Club.
Doug Roberts, Jr., the director of environmental and energy policy at the Michigan Chamber of Commerce said, “We appreciate the opportunity to work with Sen. Birkholz and Rep. Warren and their willingness to gather input from Michigan’s business community in developing the water compact legislation. From the start, our goal has been to implement a process that continues to foster economic development in Michigan while protecting our state's natural resources for future generations.”
Access a joint release from Senator Birkholz and Representative Warren (click here). Access a second joint release (click here). Access a release from several environmental organizations (click here). Access a release from National Wildlife Federation (click here). Access the status of various state compact legislation from the Council of Great Lakes Governors (click here). Access links to various media reports on the compromise (click here).
While most interest groups are pleased with the compromise, the major unsettled issue remains the lack of a "public trust" doctrine provision that was the central concern of former Governors William Milliken (R) and James Blanchard (D) and many environmental interests [See WIMS 6/13/08]. Governor Milliken said previously, "Without protecting the public trust in our waters, Michigan's sovereign power to safeguard our vital interests against outside forces will be diminished." Others had said without public trust language, the State's and Great Lakes waters are at risk of sale and export because of NAFTA and GATT -- international trade agreement provisions which prevent bans or strict regulation on water once it is a commodity.
Environmental organizations said, "The bipartisan compromise left some shortcomings, but keeps intact core principles. . ." The Great Lakes, Great Michigan coalition members said they would regroup in coming months to fight for additional protections not included in the package. Cyndi Roper of Clean Water Action said, “We are extremely disappointed that the legislature failed to strengthen our important public trust protections, which affirms that water is a public resource that belongs to Michiganders and not to corporations or profit-takers. We intend to revisit this issue.”
In a release from Senator Birkholz, she said, the Great Lakes Compact will develop common measures for each of the eight states in the basin to regulate in-state withdrawals and prohibit out-of-basin water diversions. In addition to the compact, the legislation would adopt the water withdrawal assessment process developed by the groundwater council. The automated point-and-click computer tool will allow new large volume water users to determine if a proposed withdrawal will have an adverse resource impact on state water levels and other natural resources.
Birkholz indicated that, "Once the compact has been approved, Michigan will have done what no other state has accomplished by passing the compact along with a water withdrawal tool based on sound science." Representative Warren, Chair of the House Great Lakes and Environment Committee said, “As protectors of 20 percent of the entire world’s fresh surface water, the actions we take to preserve this great resource will have long-lasting, widespread impact. Michigan’s Great Lakes, inland lakes, and streams play a vital role in our special way of life and are a driving economic force in our state, providing for thousands of jobs in the shipping, agriculture, tourism and manufacturing industries. This plan will keep our most precious natural and economic resource healthy and strong.”
The two legislators said the key changes in the legislation include: Creating language to confirm the State’s existing rights for water resource management and protect private property rights; Clarifying the implementation process of the water withdrawal assessment tool; and Lowering the water withdrawal permitting threshold to one million gallons a day. They said the legislation would protect Michigan's unique and popular trout streams by preventing withdrawals that would cause more than a 3 percent reduction in the stream's thriving fish population; and ensure that new standards for protecting against adverse resource impact will be in effect by February 1, 2009.
The legislation is supported by many organizations, including the Michigan Farm Bureau, Michigan United Conservation Clubs (MUCC), and The Water Works Coalition made up of 15 groups, including the Michigan Chamber of Commerce and Michigan Manufacturers Association; Michigan Environmental Council, Clean Water Action and the Sierra Club.
Doug Roberts, Jr., the director of environmental and energy policy at the Michigan Chamber of Commerce said, “We appreciate the opportunity to work with Sen. Birkholz and Rep. Warren and their willingness to gather input from Michigan’s business community in developing the water compact legislation. From the start, our goal has been to implement a process that continues to foster economic development in Michigan while protecting our state's natural resources for future generations.”
Access a joint release from Senator Birkholz and Representative Warren (click here). Access a second joint release (click here). Access a release from several environmental organizations (click here). Access a release from National Wildlife Federation (click here). Access the status of various state compact legislation from the Council of Great Lakes Governors (click here). Access links to various media reports on the compromise (click here).
Monday, June 16, 2008
Agencies Conduct 13th Annual “Carp Corral/Goby Roundup”
Jun 10: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and its Federal, state and regional partners, including Chicago’s Shedd Aquarium, will resume annual search efforts June 18 and 19, in the Illinois Waterway from the Chicago suburbs to near Havana, IL, for three species of invasive fish, as well as for lethal fish pathogens. During the 13th annual “Carp Corral/Goby Roundup,” biologists will estimate the relative abundance and upstream distribution of bighead carp and silver carp -- two types of Asian carps -- and chart the downstream range of the round goby.
This year the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) will also be working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to expand an existing monitoring study of Asian carp movements to an upstream portion of the Illinois Waterway. Bighead and silver carp captured here will be implanted with ultrasonic transmitter tags and then released in order to detect the proximity of these fish to the Aquatic Nuisance Species Dispersal Barrier in Romeoville. The USACE will use information from this tagging study to develop a long-term monitoring plan that will evaluate the effectiveness of the electric barrier. Interconnected man-made channels and natural rivers of the Illinois Waterway System in metropolitan Chicago provide a direct link for water-borne movement of non-native aquatic nuisance species between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River basins. Together these watersheds encompass parts of 31 states and four Canadian provinces.
Sampling will cover nearly 200 miles, more than half the length of the Illinois Waterway, from Alsip downstream to Havana. Round goby are most abundant and likely to be seen at upstream sample sites like Alsip and Lockport while bighead and leaping silver carp are more common and likely to be encountered at a downstream area like LaSalle-Peru, Morris or Havana. Biologists will also collect tissue samples from captured fish to test for disease pathogens such as the non-native spring viremia of carp virus and the viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus, which can be lethal to a number of native fish species.
Viral hemorrhagic septicemia, or VHS, is one of the most feared fish diseases in the world, and has made its way into Lake Michigan. The virus was recently found (May 2008) in the southern basin of this lake for the first time where it killed thousands of round goby that later washed up along the Milwaukee shoreline, less than 100 miles from the Illinois Waterway. Biologists are now more concerned than ever before that the VHS virus could spread from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi and Ohio River basins via the Illinois Waterway.
The “Carp Corral/Goby Roundup” surveillance effort is critical in determining whether Asian carp have moved upstream of an electrical barrier near Romeoville, Ill., toward Lake Michigan, and whether round goby have made their way farther downstream toward the Mississippi River. An electrical fish barrier near Romeoville in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal -- designed to prevent and slow the spread of nonindigenous aquatic species -- has been operational since 2002. This experimental prototype consists of a single array of 14 electrodes. One of the electrodes failed soon after installation. The 13 remaining electrodes are still functional but are wearing out due to corrosion.
Construction of a permanent barrier is complete just downstream from the prototype. University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute’s Dr. Phil Moy, co-chair of the Dispersal Barrier Advisory Panel said, “The new barrier has 46 electrodes, has the capability to operate at higher voltage to more effectively repel small fish, and has five- by five-inch steel bar electrodes with a design life of 20 years.” It is hoped that the new barrier will become fully operational later in 2008. Biologists found one bighead carp 15 miles below the electrical barrier in 2007, about 50 miles from Lake Michigan. To date no bighead or silver carp have been collected above the barrier. However, reproducing populations of bighead and silver carp have expanded from lower portions of the Illinois River to as far upstream as the Starved Rock Lock and Dam near Utica.
Access a lengthy release from FWS with further details and links to additional information(click here).
This year the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) will also be working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to expand an existing monitoring study of Asian carp movements to an upstream portion of the Illinois Waterway. Bighead and silver carp captured here will be implanted with ultrasonic transmitter tags and then released in order to detect the proximity of these fish to the Aquatic Nuisance Species Dispersal Barrier in Romeoville. The USACE will use information from this tagging study to develop a long-term monitoring plan that will evaluate the effectiveness of the electric barrier. Interconnected man-made channels and natural rivers of the Illinois Waterway System in metropolitan Chicago provide a direct link for water-borne movement of non-native aquatic nuisance species between the Great Lakes and Mississippi River basins. Together these watersheds encompass parts of 31 states and four Canadian provinces.
Sampling will cover nearly 200 miles, more than half the length of the Illinois Waterway, from Alsip downstream to Havana. Round goby are most abundant and likely to be seen at upstream sample sites like Alsip and Lockport while bighead and leaping silver carp are more common and likely to be encountered at a downstream area like LaSalle-Peru, Morris or Havana. Biologists will also collect tissue samples from captured fish to test for disease pathogens such as the non-native spring viremia of carp virus and the viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus, which can be lethal to a number of native fish species.
Viral hemorrhagic septicemia, or VHS, is one of the most feared fish diseases in the world, and has made its way into Lake Michigan. The virus was recently found (May 2008) in the southern basin of this lake for the first time where it killed thousands of round goby that later washed up along the Milwaukee shoreline, less than 100 miles from the Illinois Waterway. Biologists are now more concerned than ever before that the VHS virus could spread from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi and Ohio River basins via the Illinois Waterway.
The “Carp Corral/Goby Roundup” surveillance effort is critical in determining whether Asian carp have moved upstream of an electrical barrier near Romeoville, Ill., toward Lake Michigan, and whether round goby have made their way farther downstream toward the Mississippi River. An electrical fish barrier near Romeoville in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal -- designed to prevent and slow the spread of nonindigenous aquatic species -- has been operational since 2002. This experimental prototype consists of a single array of 14 electrodes. One of the electrodes failed soon after installation. The 13 remaining electrodes are still functional but are wearing out due to corrosion.
Construction of a permanent barrier is complete just downstream from the prototype. University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute’s Dr. Phil Moy, co-chair of the Dispersal Barrier Advisory Panel said, “The new barrier has 46 electrodes, has the capability to operate at higher voltage to more effectively repel small fish, and has five- by five-inch steel bar electrodes with a design life of 20 years.” It is hoped that the new barrier will become fully operational later in 2008. Biologists found one bighead carp 15 miles below the electrical barrier in 2007, about 50 miles from Lake Michigan. To date no bighead or silver carp have been collected above the barrier. However, reproducing populations of bighead and silver carp have expanded from lower portions of the Illinois River to as far upstream as the Starved Rock Lock and Dam near Utica.
Access a lengthy release from FWS with further details and links to additional information(click here).
Friday, June 13, 2008
Meetings On Dry Cargo Residue Discharges In The Great Lakes
Jun 6: The Coast Guard announced two public meetings for the May 23, 2008 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) [73 FR 30014-30029] on dry cargo residue (DCR) discharges in the Great Lakes and its supporting Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to be held in Duluth, Minnesota, and Cleveland, Ohio, in July 2008. The meetings are scheduled for Duluth, MN, July 15, 2008, 1-5 PM; and Cleveland, OH, July 17, 2008, 1-5 PM. The proposed rule would allow the continued discharge of certain non-toxic and non-hazardous bulk dry cargo residues in the Great Lakes. Existing prohibitions on discharges in certain areas would be continued, and additional sensitive and protected areas would be defined as no-discharge zones. Recordkeeping and reporting requirements would be imposed, and the voluntary use of measures to control residues would be encouraged. Comments and related material must be received on or before July 22, 2008.
Under Coast Guard regulations that implement the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, 33 U.S.C. 1901 et seq., DCR is an operational waste and constitutes garbage, the discharge of which into the navigable waters of the United States is prohibited. If these regulations were strictly enforced on the Great Lakes, they would put an end to the practice of cargo sweeping. However, since 1993, Great Lakes ships have operated under a Coast Guard "interim enforcement policy" (IEP) that allows "incidental discharges" of non-toxic and non-hazardous DCR on the Great Lakes. The IEP allows cargo sweeping only in defined waters, most of which are relatively deep and far from shore. Additionally, the IEP prohibits or restricts discharges in special areas that are considered environmentally sensitive.
In 2004, Congress extended for the second time the IEP, this time until September 30, 2008. Section 623 of Public Law 108-293 gave the Coast Guard authority to regulate the discharge of DCR on the Great Lakes, notwithstanding any other law. House Report 108-617, the conference report prepared in support of the 2004 legislation, states: "It is expected that the [IEP] will be made permanent or replaced with an alternative regime that appropriately balances the needs of maritime commerce and environmental protection . . .''
On January 13, 2004, the Coast Guard announced in the Federal Register (69 FR 1994) that, if we could not promulgate new regulations before the expiration of congressional authorization for the IEP, they would begin enforcing a zero discharge policy on the Great Lakes as soon as the IEP expires. Enforcement of such a policy would end the practice of cargo sweeping on the Great Lakes. This could cause economic hardship and require a significant expenditure of Coast Guard resources. We are reluctant to impose such costs if there is no meaningful offsetting benefit to the environment. Therefore, they say, "in exercising our regulatory authority over Great Lakes DCR discharges, we seek an appropriate balance, as Congress intended, between commercial and environmental considerations. We also seek to avoid or minimize any gap during which enforcement of a zero discharge policy takes place by default."
Access the docket for this rulemaking with details on the meetings, the proposed rules, draft EIS and related background information (click here). Access a June 12, article in the Muskegon Chronicle by Jeff Alexander on the DCR issue (click here).
Under Coast Guard regulations that implement the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, 33 U.S.C. 1901 et seq., DCR is an operational waste and constitutes garbage, the discharge of which into the navigable waters of the United States is prohibited. If these regulations were strictly enforced on the Great Lakes, they would put an end to the practice of cargo sweeping. However, since 1993, Great Lakes ships have operated under a Coast Guard "interim enforcement policy" (IEP) that allows "incidental discharges" of non-toxic and non-hazardous DCR on the Great Lakes. The IEP allows cargo sweeping only in defined waters, most of which are relatively deep and far from shore. Additionally, the IEP prohibits or restricts discharges in special areas that are considered environmentally sensitive.
In 2004, Congress extended for the second time the IEP, this time until September 30, 2008. Section 623 of Public Law 108-293 gave the Coast Guard authority to regulate the discharge of DCR on the Great Lakes, notwithstanding any other law. House Report 108-617, the conference report prepared in support of the 2004 legislation, states: "It is expected that the [IEP] will be made permanent or replaced with an alternative regime that appropriately balances the needs of maritime commerce and environmental protection . . .''
On January 13, 2004, the Coast Guard announced in the Federal Register (69 FR 1994) that, if we could not promulgate new regulations before the expiration of congressional authorization for the IEP, they would begin enforcing a zero discharge policy on the Great Lakes as soon as the IEP expires. Enforcement of such a policy would end the practice of cargo sweeping on the Great Lakes. This could cause economic hardship and require a significant expenditure of Coast Guard resources. We are reluctant to impose such costs if there is no meaningful offsetting benefit to the environment. Therefore, they say, "in exercising our regulatory authority over Great Lakes DCR discharges, we seek an appropriate balance, as Congress intended, between commercial and environmental considerations. We also seek to avoid or minimize any gap during which enforcement of a zero discharge policy takes place by default."
Access the docket for this rulemaking with details on the meetings, the proposed rules, draft EIS and related background information (click here). Access a June 12, article in the Muskegon Chronicle by Jeff Alexander on the DCR issue (click here).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
