Rauner admin fighting Asian carp plan
Wednesday, Aug 16, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Greg Hinz on a fight over a new plan to keep Asian carp out of the Great Lakes…
Though some details are in flux, the fight pits Rauner against the state’s powerful green lobby, including the Environmental Law & Policy Center, the National Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club.
Those environmental groups are lined up with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which last week released a much-anticipated report concluding that the best option available is a $275 million plan to install a combination of electronic and sound barriers by the Brandon Road lock and dam on the Illinois River, near Joliet and about 47 miles upstream from Lake Michigan.
“The Asian carp have no natural predators in the Great Lakes and will disrupt the $62 billion economy based on fishing, boating and recreational activities,” said ELPC’s Howard Learner. “We cannot let the Trump administration’s war on the Great Lakes involve insufficient actions to prevent the Asian carp from threatening our fresh water system.”
On the other side is the Rauner administration, which is opposing the plan as too expensive—the state says it would have to provide $95 million of the construction cost, and provide about $8 million a year for maintenance—and too disruptive of the state’s lucrative barge industry. […]
[Lt. Gov. Evelyn Sanguinetti] did not offer a substitute, a particular point of contention. But Rauner administration officials who asked not to be named suggested that the corps itself is not big on its own plan and only wants to pacify critics in the Michigan congressional delegation.
* From Sanguinetti’s press release…
This new approach is neither cost effective nor environmentally sound.
Today’s report recommends the construction of a $275.4 million project, of which Illinois taxpayers would be on the hook for over $95 million in construction cost and another $8 million in annual operation and maintenance costs. This project will hurt our economy and the commercial navigation industry that moves over $28 billion of commodities annually through the Chicago Area Waterway System and along the Illinois River. Furthermore, this project at Brandon Road will separate the Des Plaines River and Illinois River ecosystems, disrupting native fish migration patterns.
The full report is here.
* US Sen. Tammy Duckworth…
“Invasive species are a growing threat to our entire inland waterways system and to the countless Illinois communities and businesses that rely on strong and vibrant aquatic ecosystems. Brandon Road Lock and Dam and other existing controls have successfully prevented Asian Carp from reaching the Great Lakes, and the Brandon Road Study is another important step in better understanding the challenges of limiting Great Lakes’ exposure to invasive species. I will continue working with the federal, state and local partners to find common sense solutions that protect the Great Lakes while ensuring reliable and sustainable transportation on the Illinois River.”
* And from a Rockford Register-Star editorial…
But let’s be rational about the Asian carp threat. Illinois has been dealing with Asian carp for more than three decades and its multipronged attack that includes commercial fishing, creating new markets and encouraging Illinois residents to deplete the fish population through fun events such as bowhunting tournaments has been working.
The Asian carp population has been decreasing, according to Kevin Irons, aquaculture and aquatic nuisance species program manager for the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.
There are about a quarter of the fish there were in 2010 when Irons joined the DNR. In 2010, it was estimated that Asian carp accounted for 70 percent of the fish population in the Illinois River. While the carp still make up a significant portion, that percentage has decreased.
Commercial fishermen on the Illinois River are using smaller nets because the bigger fish are not there anymore. They’ve been downsizing since 2010.
- Almost the weekend - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 11:49 am:
I’m not to up to date on this issue, but I don’t see why Rauner can’t actually govern/lead and work with other governors in Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin to pool resources and funds together to pay for this venture. All states benefit from Lake Michigan being Asian Carp free. But this means Rauner actually has to govern and have a forward thinking plan. I look forward to Madigan and Asian Carp being used in the same sentence by the time his tenure as governor is over.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 11:50 am:
Asian Carp have inflicted more violence on Illinois citizens than Syrian refugees, who have inflicted none.
Guess which one Rauner can live with, and which one he wants to keep out?
- Blue dog dem - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 11:52 am:
This story seems a bit fishy.
- Actual Red - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 11:59 am:
“Madigan and the invasive species of fish he controls”
- Reformed - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:03 pm:
“…war on the Great Lakes…”
The Age of Hysteria…
- Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:04 pm:
==But Rauner administration officials who asked not to be named suggested that the corps itself is not big on its own plan and only wants to pacify critics in the Michigan congressional delegation.==
They have it backwards. If the Corps were trying to pacify the Michigan delegation, they would close the waterway. Michigan and the other Great Lakes states worry about the carp, but they are much more concerned about the water diversion. This proposal is meant to pacify Illinois by allowing the state to keep the waterway open. If Rauner had a true sense of what is at stake here, he would jump at this proposal.
- JoanP - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:09 pm:
Once again, it’s “no, we don’t have an alternative, so what?”
- TopHatMonocle - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:09 pm:
Some of the other proposed options for dealing with asian carp and other invasive species had costs in the billions. If the Army Corps of Engineers aren’t big on the selected plan, it’s probably because it doesn’t go as far as they really want to go. This option is not as comprehensive, but it’s a comparative bargain. And the feds are paying for 2/3rds of it.
And speaking of carp, Sanguinetti’s statement is a load of it. On one hand she says she wants to fight to protect Lake Michigan, and on the other she doesn’t want to spend a dime to do it.
- Mr B. - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:13 pm:
Sorry Guv, this time it ain’t Madigan’s fault.
- DuPage - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:26 pm:
So Rauner will lose about $2 in federal matching funds to save $1 in state funds. Meanwhile the carp will get into the great lakes. Also the money that would be spent in Illinois on this project would add jobs, business activity, and income tax revenue to the state. If the project is delayed too long, the carp will get into Lake Michigan and it will be too late to do anything.
- Down South - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:30 pm:
Sure the populations on certain sections of the Illinois are decreasing - but the southern waterways remain choked and some smaller southern rivers are seeing a decrease in recreational boat traffic because the waters are so full of them. Not to mention, the degradation of the sport and commercial fisheries in the southern regions simply due the biomass of the silvers and big heads. There is more than just Lake Michigan at stake. THere is zero commercial market for them in any of the southern regions. There are no buyers, no flash freeze warehouses or offloading facilities. THey remain a serious problem.
- Newsclown - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:31 pm:
This is really about the barge companies being impatient and unwilling to break up their tows in order to process thru the locks and wait while the fish-zappers and grinders do their work. They are also afraid of higher insurance costs for insuring the barge tow workers against accidents falling into the electrified water or brushing against electrical lines. The barge companies are not concerned about the ecosystem as long as they have free navigation. I don’t get why the state is against spending infrastructure jobs to fix up these old locks - that’s construction jobs in the local economy. The most radical plan was to cut the river off and portage barge loads across a land barrier using rail or trucks. Zero fish crossing, but a lot of hassle.
A really good plan would be to rebuild those old existing locks larger/longer, which would help the barge companies process thru faster, while still keeping the carp out. It’s an investment and an economic stimulus too.
- The Colossus of Roads - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:33 pm:
Carpe diem. Alternate plan: Give the boys from Bath $10,000 in prize money.
- Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:41 pm:
== The most radical plan was to cut the river off and portage barge loads across a land barrier using rail or trucks.==
This is the plan preferred by the other Great Lakes states and provinces (not just Michigan). They want to halt the diversion of Great Lakes water into the Illinois River.
- Keyser Soze - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 12:50 pm:
I wasn’t aware that the Trump Administration had declared war on the Great Lakes. But, I do know that making dumb statements does not enhance one’s credibility.
- Michelle Flaherty - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 1:01 pm:
Gov and lt gov should take a trip down the Bath Chute and then decide if they want to low ball anti-carp barriers.
- Sugar Grove Stooge - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 1:13 pm:
The Feds should be playing a bigger role here, but Rauner’s gotta do something. Once the Asian carp get, they ain’t getting out
- thechampaignlife - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 1:18 pm:
They seem to always make it passed these barriers. What they need to do is install a couple temporary barriers upstream, use a mobile barrier to slowly push them back, then shift the temp barriers downstream. Repeat until they have been driven way back and you might make some progress.
It is either that or a nuclear option (introduce parasite/pollution, drain rolling sections).
- Grandpa2 - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 2:14 pm:
The feds should pay 100% of the cost. Illinois did not create the problem. These fish escaped from fish farms in Arkansas in the 1970’s. Maybe Arkansas should pay the state share.
- blue dog dem - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 2:21 pm:
How about we hit Wisconsin up for some help?
- Anon Downstate - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 2:51 pm:
“== The most radical plan was to cut the river off and portage barge loads across a land barrier using rail or trucks.==
This is the plan preferred by the other Great Lakes states and provinces (not just Michigan). They want to halt the diversion of Great Lakes water into the Illinois River.”
————
And then this plan brings an other player into this whole mess. That is, MSD (Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicagoland). Their Stickney, IL facilities (1.2 billion gallons per day) are located all along the Des Plaines River, which guess what, feeds directly into the Illinois River.
Much of the treated solid waste (sludge) is then moved by barge down the Illinois River to Fulton County for final processing (Re: Prairie Plan). Link is: http://www.mwrd.org/irj/portal/anonymous/waterreclamation
So, how’s the plan going to affect MSD? If the MSD barge option gets stomped on by these plans, then IMO, Rauner’s got a pretty valid case.
If you shut down the barges, what is MSD going to do with all that sludge resulting from the wastewater treatment for the Chicagoland area? This could get to be a particularly messy problem.
You can’t just dump that sludge into the Des Plaines River. Feds would probably have a giant issue with that. Even if you could, you would have to divert even more water from Lake Michigan down the Des Plaines/Illinois River to ‘flush’ the sludge with increased water flow. Not Happening.
If you can’t use barges, then think of all the extra truck traffic being generated to move all that sludge down to Fulton County.
Maybe we can pay for all of this by adding a new Cook County tax for metering wastewater production in place of the soda/sweetened drink tax.
Put ’smart meters’ on all the plumbing fixtures to read their wastewater production, and tax accordingly. JB Pritzker would probably be in favor of doing that.
There’s some real angles to this issue.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 3:28 pm:
This is a nobrainer. Fill the canal This is a huge economic risk allowing them into the great lakes.
- blue dog dem - Wednesday, Aug 16, 17 @ 9:58 pm:
All kidding aside. We deal with this invasive species on the Big Muddy and Kaskaskia Rivers. It has not ruined fishing or boating. Spooky at times..dangerous. could this be an expensive play by the USACE to pad their budgets?
- NorthsideNoMore - Thursday, Aug 17, 17 @ 9:16 am:
Whay don’t the USCoE / Feds fund the whole thing? This is navatagable waterway and they have complete juridiction I believe? While DNR may have control of whats in the river the USCoE has control of the river.