Jan 15: The National Wildlife Federation (NWF) and Wisconsin Wildlife Federation (WWF) announced they had filed a legal challenge that claims the State of Wisconsin’s new ballast water discharge permit violates State law and won’t prevent freighters from importing more invasive species, like zebra mussels, into the Great Lakes. Neil Kagan, senior attorney at NWF's Great Lakes Regional Center said, "Compliance with the Wisconsin ballast water discharge standards would not prevent invasive species from entering Wisconsin waters. Wisconsin officials have said prevention is the best way to protect the Great Lakes from new invasive species, but the state’s ballast water discharge standards won’t prevent new invasions. The state’s failure to follow its own laws to protect water quality is the basis of our lawsuit.”
NWF said Wisconsin released ballast water discharge standards in a permit in November. The permit, which is set to take effect February 1, would require ocean freighters to treat ballast water, but said "the discharge standards are too weak to be effective." They said the final permit is weaker than the draft version and contains a loophole that would allow ships to fall back to the weakest discharge standards. "The permit runs counter to a State law that prohibits degradation of Wisconsin’s waters."
The groups indicated that the Federal government has not enacted ballast water discharge standards despite numerous agencies working on the problem for the past two decades. The U.S. Coast Guard recently proposed national ballast water treatment standards [See WIMS 10/2/09; WIMS 8/31/09].
Access a lengthy release from NWF with additional information (click here). Access more information from NWF's Great Lakes Regional Center website (click here).
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
2005 & 2006 Great Lakes Regional Water Use Reports Available
Jan 19: The Great Lakes Commission (GLC) announced that the Great Lakes Regional Water Use Reports for 2005 and 2006 are now available. The GLC extended its appreciation to the states and provinces in providing this information. The Great Lakes Regional Water Use Database was established by the Great Lakes states and provinces in response to a recommendation in the Great Lakes Charter of 1985 that calls for a uniform, consistent base of data of Great Lakes water withdrawals, diversions and consumptive uses. Beginning in 1987, water use data have been submitted to the repository on an annual basis and reports provided to assist the jurisdictions in Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River water resources planning and management.
As specified by the Water Resources Management Committee in its 1987 report, Managing the Waters of the Great Lakes Basin, the database catalogs withdrawals by water use category, sub-basin and jurisdiction. The database became operational in the summer of 1988 following a multi-year cooperative effort. Design and development involved input from many state, provincial, and federal agencies, with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) providing much of the leadership. A Great Lakes Regional Water Use Database to provide comparable water use information on withdrawals, diversions and consumptive use is also called for under Article 4 of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact and Article 301 of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources.
Access an announcement from GLC with links to related information (click here). Access the GLC water use database (click here). Access a database query page to obtain customized search results (click here).
As specified by the Water Resources Management Committee in its 1987 report, Managing the Waters of the Great Lakes Basin, the database catalogs withdrawals by water use category, sub-basin and jurisdiction. The database became operational in the summer of 1988 following a multi-year cooperative effort. Design and development involved input from many state, provincial, and federal agencies, with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) providing much of the leadership. A Great Lakes Regional Water Use Database to provide comparable water use information on withdrawals, diversions and consumptive use is also called for under Article 4 of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact and Article 301 of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Water Resources.
Access an announcement from GLC with links to related information (click here). Access the GLC water use database (click here). Access a database query page to obtain customized search results (click here).
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).
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).
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).
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Webinar On Amending the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
Jan 14: Late yesterday (January 13), U.S. EPA's Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) announced that today, January 14, from 2:00 - 4:00 PM EST, Environment Canada and the EPA will be holding a binational webinar for Great Lakes partners, stakeholders and the public. The purpose is to inform all of the process for negotiations between the governments of the United States and Canada to amend the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. The webinar will provide opportunity for questions and answers and hopefully will be archived.
Access a Binational website on Amending the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement with further details, contacts and background information (click here).
Access a Binational website on Amending the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement with further details, contacts and background information (click here).
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Michigan Attorney General Launches StopAsianCarp Website
Jan 13: Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, who it should be noted is a leading Republican candidate for Michigan Governor, launched the StopAsianCarp.com, an online petition enabling residents across the Great Lakes region to help convince Federal and local authorities responsible for carp infested waters to close the locks connecting them with Lake Michigan and protect the region's $7 billion fishing industry and over 800,000 Michigan jobs connected to the health of the Lakes.
Cox has filed a lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court requesting that the connections between the Mississippi River and Lake Michigan be permanently closed [See WIMS 1/12/10 for links to all legal filings]. The action is supported by most other Great Lakes states, environmental and conservation organizations and other; but, the Obama Administration, through its Solicitor General, and Illinois officials have opposed the efforts.
In a release, Cox said, "Families can visit StopAsianCarp.com and join us as we fight to protect the Great Lakes and thousands of Michigan jobs from the biological threat known as Asian carp. If we don't protect the Lakes today, we won't have another chance tomorrow." He indicated that the StopAsianCarp.com offers residents the opportunity to voice their opinion directly to President Obama and leaders in Congress and offers a one-stop-shop for information and materials connected with Cox's efforts before the United States Supreme Court.
Access a release from the AG announcing the new website (click here). Access the StopAsianCarp website (click here). Access a separate release from the AG on the lawsuit (click here).
Cox has filed a lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court requesting that the connections between the Mississippi River and Lake Michigan be permanently closed [See WIMS 1/12/10 for links to all legal filings]. The action is supported by most other Great Lakes states, environmental and conservation organizations and other; but, the Obama Administration, through its Solicitor General, and Illinois officials have opposed the efforts.
In a release, Cox said, "Families can visit StopAsianCarp.com and join us as we fight to protect the Great Lakes and thousands of Michigan jobs from the biological threat known as Asian carp. If we don't protect the Lakes today, we won't have another chance tomorrow." He indicated that the StopAsianCarp.com offers residents the opportunity to voice their opinion directly to President Obama and leaders in Congress and offers a one-stop-shop for information and materials connected with Cox's efforts before the United States Supreme Court.
Access a release from the AG announcing the new website (click here). Access the StopAsianCarp website (click here). Access a separate release from the AG on the lawsuit (click here).
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Filings In Supreme Court Asian Carp Dispute & U.S. Position
Jan 11: Noah Hall, a law professor at Wayne State University and the executive director of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center in Detroit, has created a blog post that provides links to all of the Supreme Court filings regarding the Asian carp dispute, and will be updated as new filings are made. Professor Hall is representing State Senator Patty Birkholz (R-Saugatuck Twp) and Representative Rebekah Warren (D-Ann Arbor), the respective Chairs of the Michigan Senate and House environmental committees, who are seeking to join the Federal lawsuit via filing an amicus brief to protect the Great Lakes and Michigan’s multi-billion dollar fishing and boating industries from Asian carp [See WIMS 1/5/10].
As previously reported [See WIMS 1/7/10], Michigan and other interests are extremely upset with the Obama Administration which has opposed the Michigan Attorney General's action to permanently close the connection of the Mississippi River to Lake Michigan and the Great Lakes. The Michigan action has been joined by the states of Minnesota, New York, Ohio and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario. Michigan's Attorney General Mike Cox said he is "extremely disappointed by President Obama's choice to protect the narrow interests of his home state of Illinois while ignoring the pleas of Michigan and at least four other Great Lakes states" which have asked the United States Supreme Court for the immediate closure of Chicago-area waterways containing Asian carp.
According to the United States' Memorandum Opposing Michigan’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by the U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan, "Michigan states in its petition for a supplemental decree (at29-30) that its ultimate goal is a permanent injunction separating the Great Lakes from the Mississippi River system, undoing a connection that for well over 100 years has served the important purposes of flood control, navigation, commerce, and sanitation. A host of responsible actors -- federal, state, and even international -- are deeply and intensely engaged in studying all the considerations involved in preventing the transmission of invasive species through that connection. For this Court to pretermit that process and to decree that the answer is to sever the connection, based on a purported federal common law rule, would be altogether inappropriate.
"In a host of ways, the federal government has demonstrated its commitment to protecting the Great Lakes from the expansion of Asian carp. Nothing in federal law warrants second-guessing its expert judgment that the best information available today does not yet justify the dramatic steps Michigan demands. . . The motion for a preliminary injunction should be denied."
Access Professor Hall's blog posting with links to all filings in the dispute (click here). Access the Great Lakes Law Blog postings on the Supreme Court litigation (click here). Also access the recent filing directly from the Supreme Court website (click here).
As previously reported [See WIMS 1/7/10], Michigan and other interests are extremely upset with the Obama Administration which has opposed the Michigan Attorney General's action to permanently close the connection of the Mississippi River to Lake Michigan and the Great Lakes. The Michigan action has been joined by the states of Minnesota, New York, Ohio and Wisconsin and the Province of Ontario. Michigan's Attorney General Mike Cox said he is "extremely disappointed by President Obama's choice to protect the narrow interests of his home state of Illinois while ignoring the pleas of Michigan and at least four other Great Lakes states" which have asked the United States Supreme Court for the immediate closure of Chicago-area waterways containing Asian carp.
According to the United States' Memorandum Opposing Michigan’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by the U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan, "Michigan states in its petition for a supplemental decree (at29-30) that its ultimate goal is a permanent injunction separating the Great Lakes from the Mississippi River system, undoing a connection that for well over 100 years has served the important purposes of flood control, navigation, commerce, and sanitation. A host of responsible actors -- federal, state, and even international -- are deeply and intensely engaged in studying all the considerations involved in preventing the transmission of invasive species through that connection. For this Court to pretermit that process and to decree that the answer is to sever the connection, based on a purported federal common law rule, would be altogether inappropriate.
"In a host of ways, the federal government has demonstrated its commitment to protecting the Great Lakes from the expansion of Asian carp. Nothing in federal law warrants second-guessing its expert judgment that the best information available today does not yet justify the dramatic steps Michigan demands. . . The motion for a preliminary injunction should be denied."
Access Professor Hall's blog posting with links to all filings in the dispute (click here). Access the Great Lakes Law Blog postings on the Supreme Court litigation (click here). Also access the recent filing directly from the Supreme Court website (click here).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
