News

Carp threat still on, White House to listen

Published on February 2, 2010

The U.S. Supreme court decision to reject a proposal to cut off the Illinois river from Lake Michigan, a move to prevent a fugitive carp species from invading and shifting the eco-balance in the world’s largest freshwater lake system, has triggered initiatives to both introduce the issue in the US Congress and gather a White House Great Lakes Summit.

The Asian imports, the bighead and silver carps, were brought to America for aquaculture purposes, but escaped fish farm into the Mississippi river following floods in the 1990s. Consuming up to 40 percent of their body weight daily in plankton, they can considerably exceed one metre in length and 50 kilos in weight, starving out other less aggressive species.

As a consequence, they may threaten species that are traditionally popular both with anglers – a $7 billion enterprise in the Great Lakes – and commercial fishermen.

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox had filed a suit to in effect sever the connections between the Illinois River, a tributary to the Mississippi, and Lake Michigan. His action found support from the states of Indiana, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, as well as from Ontario, the only Canadian state that borders to the Great Lakes.

Only the state of Illinois itself opposed the suit, along with the American Waterways Operators, a national trade association representing the U.S. tugboat, towboat and barge industry. The Chicago-area canals are used to transport millions of dollars worth of goods and commodities each year.

Immediately after the Supreme Court decision, several governors from the states supporting the suit called for a White House summit to deal with the issue. The White House, which had originally sided with Illinois – it may be noted that President Obama stems from Chicago politics – reacted favourably to the call, and a meeting with the Great Lake governors is set up for early February.

Meanwhile, following the Supreme Court decision, moves to introduce new legislation to seal off the lakes were made both in the House of Representatives and the Senate.