This probably isn't a story to anyone outside of the Great Lakes region, but invasive species has been a huge deal to a lot of us around here. Not only have they changed the face of the Lakes, they've also cost billions of dollars, both from killing off native species that are a part of the sporting industry, and from damaging ships, as zebra mussels do.
The biggest threat on our radar for awhile now has been Asian carp. Asian carp are voracious eaters of plankton, and it's feared that if they make it into Lake Michigan (after a long exodus from Mississippi all the way to the mouth of the Lake), they will eat so much plankton, it will starve the native species, as well as turning our gloriously murky lakes clear, which has other negative side effects.
Not enough has been done to stop the infestation, and a last ditch electrical barrier has been set up in front of the lock system that separates the river from Lake Michigan. When the barrier had to be turned off yesterday for cleaning, Chicago officals poured fish poison into the lake to kill an estimated 200,000 pounds of fish, in an effort to keep them away.
Michigan Governor Granholm has said that this is not enough however, and many quite agree with her. She is pushing for more to be done, and is threatening to sue the Army Corps of Engineers to shut down the locks that are the last barrier between the carp and Lake Michigan. Some even call for a permanent shutdown.
Such a closing would keep the carp out, but would have other dramatic impacts. This is one of the busiest waterways in the world, and shutting it down to commercial shipping would mean transporting all those goods overland to waiting ships, dramatically increasing shipping costs.
I don't see a good way out of this, but at the moment, I'm leaning towards shutdown. Michigan has been carping for years about invasive species from oceangoing vessels down the St. Lawrence Seaway who brought in most of our problems, and lack of Federal and State enforcement along the Seaway that was supposed to make those ships empty their ballasts before getting here has caused us headaches and billions of dollars. We can't afford billions more. If this is the sort of necessary wake up call, then let's do it. Otherwise, we're going to let everyone walk all over us until the Great Lakes are dead.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Shutting down the Mississippi does appeal to me. It's about time that the US did something about illegal immigration.
Edit to add: However, to consider both sides, Asian carp are probably pretty tasty. So there is that, although I don't know how safe actually eating fish from the lakes is.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:The biggest threat on our radar for awhile now has been Asian carp. Asian carp are voracious eaters of plankton, and it's feared that if they make it into Lake Michigan (after a long exodus from Mississippi all the way to the mouth of the Lake), they will eat so much plankton, it will starve the native species, as well as turning our gloriously murky lakes clear, which has other negative side effects.
Would there be positive side effects too?
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
There's some discussion that it would make fishing easier, assuming people wanted to catch asian carp, as the fisherman would be able to see the fish more clearly. But that apparently works both ways, and the fish could more easily avoid boaters. I haven't seen any positive side effects discussed, though it wouldn't surprise me if there were a couple.
Regardless, when you're talking destruction of a massive ecosystem, a couple positive side effects don't really seem to balance the equation.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
It does show the serious nature of the problem and some of the efforts being made to address it from "down river".
Zebra mussels and snakehead are other problem species.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
When an exogenous species settles into an area, I stop thinking about it in terms of "what was originally there" and "what is foreign." Organisms move into new ecosystems both naturally and synthetically. Thinking about it in terms of "what belongs" just seems unwise.
You have to look at the system objectively. The Colombian Exchange was a massive introduction of plant and animal species that in the past grew on separate continents. It's how potatoes found their way to Ireland. Why are we fine with that, but Asian Carp have to be eradicated? A few things I look at when it comes to invasive species are,
1: What organisms can realistically be removed from the ecosystem, taking cost, and effort into account? Bears have been removed from many Western states, without too much difficulty.
2: What organisms can't be realistically removed from the ecosystem? The Hemlock Woolly Adelgid is not going anywhere, and we have no solid means of removing it. The only options being seriously considered at this point is the introduction of exogenous fungi and insects, which begs the question, what will these new species do to the environment?
3: What are the short and long term effects of removing a specific organism from the environment? When the cougars, wolves, and many of the bears were removed from Yellowstone, the elk population exploded and nearly starved itself to death. Wolves have since been reintroduced into the park and their growth is being closely monitored. Their reintroduction into the ecosystem is designed to be a stabilizing influence.
4: If an organism cannot be removed from an ecosystem what can we expect the long and short term effects to be? We need to consider what we stand to lose if the Hemlock tree is killed off by the Woolly Adelgid. What is the total impact? Looking at some of the research there are components to the ecosystem specifically in the tree tops, that scientists have not studied and comprehended to their satisfaction. These components also disappearing has a sort of exponential effect on the environment.
5: What can we do to manage, with an emphasis on containment, this new ecosystem? I don't know anything about the Asian carp situation at Lake Michigan, but you cannot rule out the possibility that the carp might win, and all you can do is get used to the idea that they are there to stay, and other organisms in the ecosystem are going to leave.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Why are we fine with that, but Asian Carp have to be eradicated?
Well, for one thing, snakehead and asian carp are remarkably icky. No one wants to go fishing for pike and catch snakehead.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
The likelihood of them winning increases exponentially if we do nothing to stop them.
It's not really so much a matter of "what belongs" there. We aren't holding on to trout and white fish because we're wistfully tied to fishing days of yore. Asian carp will literally destroy the Great Lakes ecosystem. They'll starve both native and other exotic species to extinction. They'll destroy a vast swath of the fish and wildlife industry, which for Michigan is a multi-billion dollar industry. On a smaller scale, but still an important one, they're a danger to boaters, which we have a few of on the Great Lakes, as they are massive, growing up to 80lbs, and are known to jump out of the water when boats are nearby. Several injuries, and I believe even a few deaths have been recorded as a result of carp jumping out of the water and hitting people on boats.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
See pages 4 and 5 of the link I posted.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:The likelihood of them winning increases exponentially if we do nothing to stop them.
The likelihood of them winning is already very nearly 100%. Unless we can come up with some far more effective ways of controlling the population, it is just a matter of time.
Still I agree with your sentiment. We have to try. The longer we can delay their getting into Lake Michigan, the more hope there is that we can find a way to keep them from destroying the ecosystem when they inevitably do get in.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I would think shutting down the waterway would be a pretty effective barrier. Unlike some other invasive fish species, they can't travel overland.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Lyrhawn: Far be if from me to just surrender to the carp, I'm just positing that that possibility has to be considered while we push hard for finding a way to contain or eradicate them.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
They're a known quantity to a degree. They root out aquatic plant species while searching for food, they starve out competitors, and aren't much fun to fish since they're filter fish.
There's compromise, and there's just plain defeat. Letting them in is a defeat.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Unless you like how they taste, in which case it is sort of a win (as kmbboots brought up on page 4 of the pdf).
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
There's tremendous profit potential in SPARP.
Posted by Goody Scrivener (Member # 6742) on :
I'm sorry, I just had to laugh at this one:
quote:Michigan has been carping for years
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"Would there be positive side effects too?"
"The silver carp is also called the flying carp for its tendency to leap from the water when startled. They can grow to over 40 lb (18 kg), and can leap 10 ft (3 m) in the air. Many boaters traveling in uncovered high-speed watercraft have been injured by running into the fish while at speed. In 2003 a woman jet-skiing broke her nose and a vertebra colliding with a silver carp and nearly drowned. In another example, a teenager's jaw was broken by a silver carp while being pulled on an inner tube. Water skiing in areas where silver carp are present is extremely dangerous."
[ December 03, 2009, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
So Asian Carp take out Jet Skiers? Thank is a pretty big plus!!
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: So Asian Carp take out Jet Skiers? Thank is a pretty big plus!!
Seriously, get them out of the water. Go play in the ocean, it's more fun there for jet skis anyway!
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
[ December 22, 2009, 05:03 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
quote: In addition to closing those two locks, the lawsuit seeks creation of new barriers to prevent carp from escaping the Des Plaines River or neighboring waterways during flooding.
That sounds like the tricky part to me. If there's a reasonable concern that the fish are getting in no matter what, what's the point of closing the locks?
I guess I'd need to know more about the likelihood of flooding and where that water's likely to go. It sounds like a tough fight, but good luck, Michigan!
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
If the idea is to close the locks, which are the easiest access point, in order to provide time to create more permanent solutions that solve even the flooding issue, then there's a pretty good point in closing the locks.
Illinois is the problem. Well, if you want to source it back, a dozen other things were problems first, but they're the most recent. Michigan has been warning them for years about Asian carp, and they've dragged their feet. Now that we're at the precipice, it seems a little disingenuous of them to say we're being unfair when they've had years to prepare for this but have done nothing. Now they're dumping poison and throwing up electric fences, but where was all this years ago? I almost want the locks shut down as a wake-up call to inter-state relations so we don't get walked all over when we have legitimate concerns that are ignored. But that's a secondary concern. Sticking it to Illinois ranks respectable below trying to save the Great Lakes ecosystem.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I think you could partion out some of the blame to the folks who brought them here in the first place.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
They were probably from Illinois. Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Just eat them already. Overfishing on purpose should be easy considering how many times it has been done by accident Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
quote:"A few isolated incidents of Asian carp in this small section of the Illinois waterway does not mean existing barriers have failed..."
I'm confused. Isn't that exactly what it means?
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Well, there goes the neighborhood.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Time to introduce bull sharks into the lakes, that'll fix your problem.
Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
I suppose you think that the bull sharks will freeze to death in the winter?
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Lemons into lemonade:
quote:Illinois Gov. Patrick Quinn signed an agreement Tuesday with China to export up to 30 million pounds of Asian carp a year from the Illinois River.
The move is aimed at reducing the population of the invasive species in downstate Illinois, the Chicago Tribune reported.
"(If) you can't beat 'em, eat 'em," Quinn said of the carp during the signing ceremony.
quote:In addition, the investment will bring up to 180 new jobs to the Pearl and Pittsfield, where Big River's production facilities are.
"Just like people pay a premium for Angus beef, we believe people will pay a premium for this," Harano said. "We're marketing it as 'Wild Mississippi River Fish.' It's all in how you market it over there."
OK for a governor that's genius.
Posted by Wingracer (Member # 12293) on :
quote: "Just like people pay a premium for Angus beef, we believe people will pay a premium for this," Harano said. "We're marketing it as 'Wild Mississippi River Fish.'
I just love that something we call an Asian Carp here will be called a 'Wild Mississippi River Fish' over there.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
When this first came up here, I asked my cousin about it. He is a lake specialist who works for the EPA on the great lakes. His response? "Eat them."
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)