Andy Buchsbaum

Fri, May 7, 2010 : 10 a.m.

It's hard to know where to start in responding to this post; there are so many inaccuracies. All of the scientists we know here at NWF, and that is a lot of scientists, are saying that this is likely to be very devastating to the lakes. I'll quote extensively from one, Dr. Michael Hansen, a professor of fisheries at University of Wisconsin Stevens Point and the chair of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. Here's what he said in testimony before Congress: "Risk assessments carried out by officials from the U.S. Department of Interior (Kolar et al. 2005) and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (Mandrak and Cudmore 2004), and overall experience with Asian carp and the Great Lakes biological invasions, give little reason to be optimistic. For starters, these assessments indicate that the carp are certain to tolerate the Great Lakes basins climate, because the basin is well within the fishes native climate range. Mean annual air temperatures range between -2C and 22C for bighead carp and -6C and 24C for silver carp, a temperature span that would support Asian carp populations in much of the United States and Canada, including the Great Lakes. "Risk assessments also indicate that the carp would likely find the Great Lakes to contain an abundant and diverse supply of food. In the Great Lakes, the bighead carp would consume zooplankton and silver carp would prey heavily on phytoplankton, thereby competing with the young of many native species and all life stages of native planktivorous fish species. To make matters worse, Asian carp do not appear to be too finicky about what they eat. For instance, bighead carp diet in the Mississippi River is more varied than in their native range, because they feed on algae, detritus, and zooplankton. This means that the carp appear to be able to feed opportunistically. Also, by feeding on plankton, the Asian carp feed on the low end of the food web. That is, they will compete for food with the young of many native fish species and with all life stages of planktivorous native fish. Little doubt exists that bighead and silver carp would have significant negative impacts on the food web by causing large-scale changes at the low end of the structure. "The Asian carp need certain types of habitat to feed and spawn successfully, including tributaries greater than 30 miles (50 km) of unimpeded length. The carp would also thrive in areas with vegetated shorelines that afford them suitable habitat for feeding. The Great Lakes basin contains numerous streams with suitable spawning habitat and large areas of vegetated shorelines, particularly large bays, wide river mouths, connecting channels (e.g., the Saint Marys River), wetlands, and lentic areas (areas of still waters). While the carp may not thrive in large portions of the basin-for example, in the deep, cold, open waters of the lakes-all lakes, including Lake Superior, contain ample habitat for spawning and feeding. "Should the silver carp become established in the Great Lakes basin, they will likely inflict harm directly on people. The Great Lakes Commission estimates that nearly 1 million boats and personal watercraft operate on the lakes (GLC 2003), which thereby places millions of people in potential contact with the silver carp. Knowing the hazards of boating, Jet-skiing, and waterskiing on the Illinois River system, the problem of projectile fish would be compounded on the Great Lakes by a significantly larger boating population in the region. "Overall, citizens of the Great Lakes region should be deeply concerned about the prospects of Asian carp." http://www.glfc.org/fishmgmt/Hansen_testimony_aisancarp.pdf You can also check the US Fish and Wildlife website (they have a few scientists), where they say: Great Lakes sport and commercial fisheries are valued at $4.5 billion dollars annually, without including the indirect economic impact of those industries. Degradation of those fisheries would have severe economic impacts on Great Lakes communities that benefit from the fisheries. Waterfowl production areas are also at risk from Asian carp. Hunters spend more than $2.6 billion annually on their sport in the Great Lakes, so reduction of waterfowl populations there would decrease the economic value to communities that benefit from hunting. http://www.asiancarp.org/documents/asiancarp.pdf On your suggestion that the shipping industry is the cleanest form of transportation of goods, let me remind you of two words: zebra mussels. Shipping (via ballast water discharges from ships) has contaminated the Great Lakes with the most virulent form of biological pollution: invasive species like zebra mussels. And don't forget quagga mussels and dozens of other invasives. No mode of transportation is perfect; trucks and rail emit air pollution, for example. But the shipping industry has caused far more environmental damage to the Great Lakes and to inland lakes than any other transportation mode. The claim that a canal built in the 19th century to transport Chicagos raw sewage is the best we can do to transport goods is pretty sad. Already there are several efforts under way to improve Chicago's transportation system. Anyone who has sat in the Dan Ryan Expressway in bumper to bumper traffic knows there's a lot that needs to be done to create an intermodal transit system that moves goods and people in a much more efficient manner than what we are doing now. Lets not be fixated on the Asian carp issue as a win-lose/zero-sum game -- that's 20th century thinking and we can do better. We can protect the Great Lakes, lower regional transportation costs, AND bring significant new economic development to the Chicago area -- but only if the naysayers dont drag us down. I've written more about the win-win solutions to Asian carp on my blog, www.GreatLakesOnTheGround.com.