White House to spend $78 Mill on stopping Asian Carp

[I'mHooked]

Chicago Suntimes

 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obam...-carp09.article

 

 

The Obama administration said Monday it will spend $78.5 million to help keep giant Asian carp out of the Great Lakes as the ravenous species of fish threatens the water's ecosystems as well as nearby home values.

 

The U.S. seeks to reduce the number of times Chicago's waterway navigational locks are opened to slow carp movement into the Great Lakes, the White House Council on Environmental Quality said in a statement. The U.S. also will use sonar, electrical shocks, netting and expedited carp DNA testing to control the population of the fish.

 

DNA from Asian carp was found in Lake Michigan for the first time last month, hours after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to order the closing of locks and dams on rivers in the Chicago area. States including Michigan and New York have said immediate action is needed to keep the fish from hurting commercial fishing.

 

The White House plan includes 25 short- and long-term actions, including the expedited testing of environmental DNA and doubling the testing samples to 120 per week.

 

Also, the federal government will award a $13.2 million contract in March to build barriers between the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and the Des Plaines River.

 

And it will award a $10.5 million contract to build a third electric barrier.

Edited February 9, 2010 by I'mHooked

[BUSTER]

[bassmaster4]

they would have to be closed all the time until they found a way to get rid of the carp. Besides even if they do follow through with that there will be some idiot he decides to let them go into lake michigan. I heard it is considered good luck for asian ppl to throw them into the water, who knows if they havent already done so, as you said they did find asian carp DNA in there. In no way shape or form did i mean to bash asian ppl, the carp couldve just swam through the amazing electrical barrier they put up

[Dara]

Sounds like too little too late to me

[MCTFisher9120]

Time to go Carp hunting! Who's bringing the guns and crossbows??

[Mykester]

Certainly better than nothing.

Edited February 10, 2010 by Mykester

[fishinguypat]

alright time's up let's do this ...LlEEEEERRRRROOOYYYYYY JJJJJJEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNNNNKKKKKKKKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNSSSSSSSS!!!!

[Twocoda]

now that we know what the yanks are going to do ....only question left is .....

 

what is Kanata going to do

 

 

http://www.greatlakesdirectory.org/zarticl...reat_lakes2.htm

Edited February 10, 2010 by Twocoda

[Jigger]

Lets see, skim 30mil off the top that just vanishes, another 30mil thats spent on assessments and 10mil in wages, gas, food and 5mil for the project itself. Which will inevitably be over-budget within a few months.

[Vanselena]

It's political solution, now when the carp do get in Obama can say they tried! It's like saying to a thief that we will guard the doors 3 days a week.

[BUSTER]

Edited February 11, 2010 by BUSTER

[aplumma]

Lets see, skim 30mil off the top that just vanishes, another 30mil thats spent on assessments and 10mil in wages, gas, food and 5mil for the project itself. Which will inevitably be over-budget within a few months.

 

 

I just cant believe you would be proud or even voice such an outrageous statement. 78 million is a sizable amount of money to put into protecting the waterways and for you to make lite of it is nothing short of disrespectful to the country that shares a border.

 

 

Art

[dickie]

Doesn't matter anyway. In 10 years California will find a way to drain the great lakes. Mark my words.

[Jigger]

I just cant believe you would be proud or even voice such an outrageous statement. 78 million is a sizable amount of money to put into protecting the waterways and for you to make lite of it is nothing short of disrespectful to the country that shares a border.

 

 

Art

 

Yes its a sizeable amount. But... We all hear outlandish numbers being thrown about to solve this problem or that problem, but what really becomes of it? This is a case of throwing money at something in hopes that it will go away. Guess what, it won't. Obamas facination with spending got the better of him this time. He had the power to close the waterway and establish a better plan once that had happened. He chose not to and is proposing that a number of small solutions be implemented. Small solutions rarely get rid of ENORMOUS problems. And proud has more to do with it then my first post leads on. I'm Freacking furious with the inaction of our neighbours, YOUR presidents apparent lack of concern for this extremely big problem. So forgive me if the pride I exhibit over this matter gets the best of me.

[dickie]

Jigger, Don"t give us this song and Dance. If the U.S. had nothing to gain by doing this they wouldn"t spend a dime. Remember who caused the problem. You guys also messed around with the waters of the Great Lakes in 1988 when you send billions of gallons of it's waters down the mississippi when all those barges went aground. You guys didn't ask for our approval then. Remember you guys need all the resources that we got. That's the reason you guys want to build a pipeline through from the arctic to the U.S. It not at all about anyone else, It's all about what you guys want and need.

[aplumma]

You can actually take pride in your second reply it has made a statement that you believe is true and explains how you got to that conclusion. Your first statement is not factual and does not add anything to the discussion. I still disagree on your view but I now see that your dislike for our President will cloud any action that we take short of closing a major waterway. The closure would have major economical repercussions that outweigh a rash act on our parts. Yes I know the carp getting in to the waterways of OUR (both the USA and Canada) also has major repercussions but at this point so did the SmallMouth bass, Lampreys, Gobies,zebra mussels etc.... all were called a disaster and while they have changed the waters none have collapsed the economy as much as closing the waterway would.

 

 

Art

[Marc Thorpe]

TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. – With marauding Asian carp on the Great Lakes' doorstep, the federal government has crafted a $78.5 million battle plan that offers no assurance of thwarting an invasion and doesn't use the most promising weapon available to fight it off.

 

The surest way to prevent the huge, hungry carp from gaining a foothold in the lakes and threatening their $7 billion fishing industry is to sever the link between Lake Michigan and the Mississippi River basin, created by engineers in Chicago more than a century ago.

 

The strategy released by the Obama administration this week agrees only to conduct a long-range study of that idea, which could take years. The government also refuses to shut down two navigational locks on Chicago waterways that could provide an easy pathway for the carp into the lakes, although it promises to consider opening them less often.

 

Instead, the plan outlines two dozen other steps, from strengthening an electric barrier designed to block the carp's advance to using nets or poisons to nab fish that make it through. That's an expensive gamble that may not keep enough carp out of the lakes to prevent an infestation.

 

"We're spending close to $80 million just for a short-term deterrent," said Joel Brammeier, president of the Alliance for the Great Lakes, an environmental group. "We need to stop pushing money toward temporary solutions and get everyone on track toward investing in one that works for good — and that means absolute physical separation."

 

To be fair, the solution environmentalists prefer — cutting ties between the lakes and the Mississippi — would mean reconfiguring some 70 miles of canals and rivers. That's a massive undertaking that could not happen quickly and is fervently opposed by barge operators who move millions of tons of commodities through the Chicago locks each year.

 

Bighead and silver carp — both native to Asia — have been migrating toward the lakes since escaping from Deep South fish ponds and sewage treatment plants in the 1970s. The biggest can reach 100 pounds and 4 feet long, consuming up to 40 percent of their body weight daily in plankton, the base of the aquatic food chain. Once established in the lakes, the carp could starve out the prey fish on which popular species such as salmon and whitefish depend.

 

The carp have already infested parts of the Mississippi and Illinois rivers, driving away many native fish. Silver carp are known to hurtle from the water at the sound of passing motors and slam into boaters with bone-breaking force.

 

While scientists differ on whether the carp would thrive in the Great Lakes, which are colder, deeper and ecologically different than rivers, many say the risk is too great to take any chances.

 

"None of us know for certain what their impact would be," University of Notre Dame biologist David Lodge told a House subcommittee this week. "There's only one way to find out, and I don't think any of us want that."

 

Pulled in different directions by the fishing and the barge industries, and politicians in Illinois and those from the other Great Lakes states, the Obama administration says the only realistic approach is to confront the carp on multiple fronts instead of taking the bolder step of severing Lake Michigan from the Mississippi basin.

 

"We cannot fight biology with engineering alone," Cameron Davis, the Environmental Protection Agency's spokesman on the issue, told the congressional panel.

 

Yet the federal plan is heavy on technological innovations. Among them: barriers using sound, strobe lights and bubble curtains to repel carp and biological controls to prevent them from reproducing. They're promising measures — but still on the drawing board.

 

Environmentalists and Great Lakes governors outside of Illinois who want to close the Chicago locks claim it's the best short-term option. But it isn't a foolproof solution, as young carp might still be able to slip through the leaky structures. The Chicago waterways also have other access points to Lake Michigan.

 

Army Corps of Engineers officials are putting their faith in a two-tiered electric barrier in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal about 25 miles from Lake Michigan, to which they will add a third section this year. It emits pulses to scare off the carp or knock them unconscious if they don't turn back. No carp have been found above the barrier, although biologists have detected their DNA in numerous spots past it and even within the lake itself.

 

"While we're all talking," Lodge said, "the fish are swimming."

 

That almost certainly means at least some carp have eluded the device and reached the lake. The government's plan aims to keep their number low enough to prevent them from breeding. The problem is that no one knows how many carp need to make it into the lake to establish a foothold that can't be turned back.

 

"This is a lot of money to pile into stopgap measures," said Phil Moy, a University of Wisconsin Sea Grant researcher. "It may do some good in the short term, but in the long term it's not going to solve the problem of invasive species on both sides of the divide. Ecological separation has to happen for this to be successful."

[Roy]

The problem is that no one knows how many carp need to make it into the lake to establish a foothold that can't be turned back.

 

I can probably help clarify that for them. The number they're looking for is TWO!

[Dara]

You can actually take pride in your second reply it has made a statement that you believe is true and explains how you got to that conclusion. Your first statement is not factual and does not add anything to the discussion. I still disagree on your view but I now see that your dislike for our President will cloud any action that we take short of closing a major waterway. The closure would have major economical repercussions that outweigh a rash act on our parts. Yes I know the carp getting in to the waterways of OUR (both the USA and Canada) also has major repercussions but at this point so did the SmallMouth bass, Lampreys, Gobies,zebra mussels etc.... all were called a disaster and while they have changed the waters none have collapsed the economy as much as closing the waterway would.

 

 

Art

 

 

It always comes down to a buck doesn't it.

 

Kinda why you guys are in the mess you are in now.

 

But today you have companies boycotting Alberta oil because its bad for the environment...what a joke

Edited February 11, 2010 by Dara

[bigfish1965]

Can you guys keep this on topic please...

And some of my fellow Canadians...please get your facts straight. Soooo far off base it is embarrassing.

[blaque]

Can you guys keep this on topic please...

And some of my fellow Canadians...please get your facts straight. Soooo far off base it is embarrassing.

 

agreed, i can only read these for so long until i see

 

"You Guys" and "Your President" like we make the decision to leave a waterway open or play cards with him on friday nights and have some influence on decisions that are made once in office.

 

I know for a fact that I myself do NOT have companies boycotting Alberta oil because its bad for the environment...Seriously......I really dont......swear

Edited February 11, 2010 by Blaque

[CLofchik]

Sarah Palin would've closed the canal and gone bow hunting for carp out of helicopters herself.

 

Just sayin'.....

 

 

 

 

 

[canadadude]

Great News at least our neighbours to the south are putting money and resources into dealing with the problem, I wish Canadian powers to be would take a similiar interest into the plight of the Great Lakes. I applaud Obama and the rest of the bordering states for once again putting there $$$$$$$ first and there mouth second. We as Canadians are the first to critisize our neighbours but when it comes down to actually investing in our great lakes we come up empty everytime, give it a rest Canada we do crap compared to our neighbours from the South in perserving or maintaining our Great Lakes.

[Jigger]

To be fair, Obama is being beset on all sides for cash and cannot by any strech of the imagination know the full extent of this and many other problems that hes throwing money at. So he just signs off and has to rush to the next matter begging for his attention. As was stated earlier, 78mil is a sizeable amount. Fair enough when you look at it from a standpoint of a person who has no idea what that kind of money means. I'm one of those people for sure. But the numbers are so overblown these days, its impossible to consider it good money. Do a quick Google search on Obama spending. The figures out there are absolutely astronomical! The people in charge of the dispensation can't know where its all going.

 

As for the topical measures themselves and their impact on economy, couldn't plans for closing the waterways a good thing? Think about it.

A) The goods still have to get to where they're going. How about building a new rail system?JOBS

You're going to need to get things on and off the boats. Shipyard.JOBS

C) Closing down and sealing the waterways themselves would create new JOBS as well.

 

The mention of gobies, zebra mussels and sm bass are all fair. Because they were supposed to be the next apocalyptic event for the great lakes. Its also fair to look back at Obamas campaign strategy and get the US what they really need. JOBS and strategies to get the jobs to the people who need them. In this case the major stumbling point is getting the goods to where they need to go. Thats a solution that can be remedied. IF the Carp get into the great lakes and end up causing minimal damage to the ecosystem as it stands, this will have no bearing at all. But if the tables are turned, and this particular threat does turn out to be the real deal. Then we'll look back to this time and realize that this minute patch of a "solution" was a major turning point in the history of OUR Great Lakes. And I say that last statement with great pride and value of our neighbours to the south. Regardless who is in the drivers seat.

[Twocoda]

IF the Carp get into the great lakes and end up causing minimal damage to the ecosystem as it stands, this will have no bearing at all. But if the tables are turned, and this particular threat does turn out to be the real deal.

 

 

even if it doesnt harm the ecosystem ....there is still a price to pay in damage

 

 

 

i suppose i should start working on a mould to manufacture boats out of hockey puck rubber

Edited February 11, 2010 by Twocoda