While doing this blog throughout the semester I can say I've learned a lot about aquatic invasive species that I didn't know existed, including many regulations and techniques to prevent the spread and growth of invasives.
While doing research on all the different types of ways we try to stop the the spread and growth of aquatic invasiveso made me really agree with Evans in that we need both government and governance to be working as one in order to really make a difference in this field. I think while we need to have the government involved to not only provide funding but to also help with enforcement in certain situations when getting people or companies to work along is difficult. We also need the governance from small organizations to make sure that the work is actually being implemented and done.
One of the limitations of this area is that both of these groups don't always work together and it makes things difficult to accomplish. I covered mostly the area of Sea Lamprey regulation and while in the past few years there has been a lot of progress made there is still a far way to go. While many of the different tactics for stopping the spread of invasives have worked, I think one of the better ones is education. If we can educate people on ways they can help and give them better descriptions of what they should be looking for than I think we could see even more of a decline in aquatic invasive species.
Thursday, December 24, 2015
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
Assessment of roles in maintaining AIS
There have been multiple actors involved in combating AIS addressed throughout the semester by myself and the members of my blog group. Some of the major actors include the DNR, NOAA, and the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). I feel that the role these actors play are quite significant in combating the problems that are linked to invasive species in the Great Lakes. These organizations work with others in order to tackle issues. Networks are a crucial aspect in dealing with these environmental dilemmas.
I agree with Evans in that both government and governance matter when approaching environmental issues. I find that it is important for the DNR to enforce the Invasive Species Rule in Wisconsin. Educating the public, in general, is an important approach in combating the destruction invasive species cause to the ecosystem. The strengths of actors involved is providing education and setting limits, in particular.
The manner in which individuals deal with the environmental issues related to AIS may vary, but most people want to see changes. Change will happen much quicker and seems to be more effective through the form of governance, rather than government.
I don't think there is any quick resolution to the infestation of the Great Lakes with invasive species. However, we do have the ability to minimize the spread of them. I think all the science/technology available provides a huge advantage in prevention of AIS. Prevention of foreign species seems to be the most cost-effective and logical approach.
I agree with Evans in that both government and governance matter when approaching environmental issues. I find that it is important for the DNR to enforce the Invasive Species Rule in Wisconsin. Educating the public, in general, is an important approach in combating the destruction invasive species cause to the ecosystem. The strengths of actors involved is providing education and setting limits, in particular.
The manner in which individuals deal with the environmental issues related to AIS may vary, but most people want to see changes. Change will happen much quicker and seems to be more effective through the form of governance, rather than government.
I don't think there is any quick resolution to the infestation of the Great Lakes with invasive species. However, we do have the ability to minimize the spread of them. I think all the science/technology available provides a huge advantage in prevention of AIS. Prevention of foreign species seems to be the most cost-effective and logical approach.
Overview of Aqautic Invasive Species Managment
Aquatic invasive species is a wicked problem, not due to unclear definitions on what the problem is exactly but due to the impossible task of completely eradicating (or solving) an invasive species in a lake or body of water. Though I’ve shown examples of how eradicating isolated and low populations of aquatic invasive species (AIS) through chemical treatment, there is no technical answer to eradicating dispersed AIS with large populations, which brings me to my first limitation pertaining to solutions.
Most of the actors and regulations I’ve gone through in my blog only pertain to the dispersion of AIS into other bodies of water rather than focusing on eradicating methods. Needless to say my actors are concerned about infested lakes through monitoring and maintenance techniques, but are more highly concerned with the problem expanding, as only 5% of MN lakes are infested. In my mind a major limitation to solving AIS is that infested lakes are deemed to be doomed for eternity, and that there’s really no hope for a lake to bounce back after the arrival of an AIS. By transportation being the main concern, the focus is on public boat launches, as they are at risk for possible transportation of AIS on boats and equipment from lake to lake. The DNR is the main actor in monitoring boat launches, inspecting and cleaning equipment as needed. Boat launch inspectors are prioritized at launch sites that have a lot of traffic on big lakes, but it will be impossible to deploy inspectors on every single boat launch on all “at-risk” lakes. So a major limitation is having the resources to inspect boat launches on all lakes at all times, but this problem is addressed by a new boat decal initiative.
I find the boat decal initiative to be a strength with confronting AIS as it mandates boaters to become knowledgeable about AIS and how to prevent travel from lake to lake. Starting in 2016 all boats using a public boat launch must have a decal sticker symbolising they have passed an AIS assessment. This initiative helps garner a knowledgeable network of lake goers, which aims to cut the transportation of AIS at its source, in hopes to reduce the reliance on boat launch inspectors. I also find the use of networks of stakeholders to be a strength. This problem affects lake goers and lake homeowners most directly and leads to very proactive and concerned network of people worried about this problem. Whether you're a removal business or a concerned lake home owner you have many opportunities to get involved with a variety of agencies combating AIS.
Connecting this problem to J.P Evans 8 hypothesis I find myself agreeing that markets and networks “are the best thing we have” to solving this particular problem. The DNR and other publicly funded agencies don’t have the resources to confront lakes that contain massive amounts of AIS. Removal of AIS has been commodified and gives business a market incentive that generally helps the cause. Although these removal companies are in it for the money they function as buffering the adverse effects AIS have on lakes. People in the removal company I worked for told me that they’ve noticed a decrease presence of Eurasian milfoil on properties we return to annually. The removal companies remove tons and tons of invasive biomass from lakes, which must provide some sort of “leg room” for other animals to thrive. Networks are proving their effectiveness to combat limitations in lake monitoring across the state, through the DNR lead Zebra Mussel Monitoring program. This vast network of people saves the DNR a lot of manpower and resources. Monitoring all of the lakes in Minnesota that are “at-risk” to AIS would be impossible without the use of networks. As for the other 7 hypothesis I don't believe they’ll be more important than networking and markets due to the nature of the problem. There is only so much you can do when it comes to invasive species and I feel that a lot the solutions fall under the 1st order of governance rather than addressing it through a hybrid government or other actions on the 2nd or 3rd levels. The thing with AIS is that we clearly defined the problem and know generally know how to stop or slow it down, but the uncertainty is getting citizens involved on a proactive basis or educating the masses on how to prevent AIS from dispersing.
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Consuming Asian Carp
Before starting this particular post, I had recalled reading a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article from February 2015 pertaining to a chef at Potawatomi who offered Asian Carp as an option on the menu (it has actually been on the menu since 2012). My initial thoughts after glancing at the headline were that nothing sounded appetizing about eating invasive carp at Potawatomi Bingo Casino. It sounded like a horrible joke to me. However, after reading the short interview with chef Peter Gebauer, I was impressed by the approach he was taking in dealing with invasive species. I would certainly try Asian Carp if given the opportunity. Apparently Potawatomi is the only restaurant in Milwaukee which offers the fish. I have a strong aversion to said establishment, so I suppose I will have to hunt down other places that serve the carp.
The interview with chef Gebauer led me to wonder if there were other individuals, communities, organizations, establishments, etc. that have been encouraging the consumption of the carp and what the possible benefits of doing so may be. I have learned that there are numerous reasons we should consider utilizing the fish as a more regular resource for food, etc. The multitude of benefits that can possibly be derived through using Asian Carp to our advantage are the driving force for network governance.
For example, in Missouri, there is an initiative to eat more carp. Mark Morgan, a researcher at the University of Missouri is encouraging more people to try the invasive species. Some of the hangups individuals have with the idea of consuming the Asian Carp involve their less than attractive appearance. Also, they are a very bony fish and are often confused with the bottom-feeding common carp. However, it is said that Asian Carp taste more like cod.
"The Missouri Department of Conservation has always tried to promote responsible harvest which means when you hunt when you fish you utilize what you take out of the wild ,” Francis Skalicky from the Missouri Department of Conservation says. "From a biological standpoint the more carp are harvested, the more they're taken out of our ecosystem, the better it is for our natural fish."
The Department of Conservation will be demonstrating how to filet the carp this weekend at the Bowfishing Tournament at Bass Pro in Springfield. Also during this event on Saturday, Morgan will be selling carp food dishes from a stand in the parking lot. It does not cost money to attend, and he encourages people to come give it a try."
The way in which the Missouri Department of Conservation and Morgan are coming together is a perfect example of a network form of governance.
There is desire to use the Asian Carp as a food source to combat hunger issues in America.
The Eat Mo Carp project works to turn invasive carp into a healthy food option for hungry individuals. The Eat Mo Carp team, based at the University of Missouri, is working to expand culinary use of Asian carp, while studying the associated behaviors of consumers and business-owners through the lens of social science theories.
“This fish is so good, I’d take it over tilapia,” said chef Philippe Parola of Baton Rouge, La., who has conducted Asian carp cooking demonstrations in Illinois in conjunction with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources’ “Target Hunger Now!” program. The initiative encourages hunters and anglers to donate deer and Asian carp to food banks in Illinois.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman also expresses how hunger is a reality in this country and that it’s time to educate and introduce Asian Carp into humanitarian food aid program.
There are many actors involved in the initiative to utilize Asian Carp as a viable food resource. For example, the Illinois DNR, chefs, researchers, the Missouri Department of Conservation, universities, etc. all play a role. Network governance is possible and has been effective in some cases mentioned. Other collaborative goals are still being shaped. What it comes down to, in terms of this initiative, is that people from various backgrounds understand the importance of protecting our ecosystem from this damaging species. In addressing the effect the carp have had on the environment, clever and resourceful ideas continue to emerge due to dialogue and collaboration among different groups/individuals.
Sources:
http://www.jsonline.com/features/food/asian-carp-just-another-unusual-dish-to-try-for-potawatomi-chef-peter-gebauer-b99436383z1-292672681.html
http://www.ozarksfirst.com/news/mo-initiative-eat-more-asian-carp
http://cafnrnews.com/2014/12/eat-mor-carp/
http://digitalrepository.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=upjournal_research
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/carpe-eat-um-invasive-asian-carp-leap-into-restaurants-grocery-stores/
http://www.sj-r.com/article/20120808/News/308089913/?Start=1
The interview with chef Gebauer led me to wonder if there were other individuals, communities, organizations, establishments, etc. that have been encouraging the consumption of the carp and what the possible benefits of doing so may be. I have learned that there are numerous reasons we should consider utilizing the fish as a more regular resource for food, etc. The multitude of benefits that can possibly be derived through using Asian Carp to our advantage are the driving force for network governance.
For example, in Missouri, there is an initiative to eat more carp. Mark Morgan, a researcher at the University of Missouri is encouraging more people to try the invasive species. Some of the hangups individuals have with the idea of consuming the Asian Carp involve their less than attractive appearance. Also, they are a very bony fish and are often confused with the bottom-feeding common carp. However, it is said that Asian Carp taste more like cod.
"The Missouri Department of Conservation has always tried to promote responsible harvest which means when you hunt when you fish you utilize what you take out of the wild ,” Francis Skalicky from the Missouri Department of Conservation says. "From a biological standpoint the more carp are harvested, the more they're taken out of our ecosystem, the better it is for our natural fish."
The Department of Conservation will be demonstrating how to filet the carp this weekend at the Bowfishing Tournament at Bass Pro in Springfield. Also during this event on Saturday, Morgan will be selling carp food dishes from a stand in the parking lot. It does not cost money to attend, and he encourages people to come give it a try."
The way in which the Missouri Department of Conservation and Morgan are coming together is a perfect example of a network form of governance.
There is desire to use the Asian Carp as a food source to combat hunger issues in America.
The Eat Mo Carp project works to turn invasive carp into a healthy food option for hungry individuals. The Eat Mo Carp team, based at the University of Missouri, is working to expand culinary use of Asian carp, while studying the associated behaviors of consumers and business-owners through the lens of social science theories.
“This fish is so good, I’d take it over tilapia,” said chef Philippe Parola of Baton Rouge, La., who has conducted Asian carp cooking demonstrations in Illinois in conjunction with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources’ “Target Hunger Now!” program. The initiative encourages hunters and anglers to donate deer and Asian carp to food banks in Illinois.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman also expresses how hunger is a reality in this country and that it’s time to educate and introduce Asian Carp into humanitarian food aid program.
There are many actors involved in the initiative to utilize Asian Carp as a viable food resource. For example, the Illinois DNR, chefs, researchers, the Missouri Department of Conservation, universities, etc. all play a role. Network governance is possible and has been effective in some cases mentioned. Other collaborative goals are still being shaped. What it comes down to, in terms of this initiative, is that people from various backgrounds understand the importance of protecting our ecosystem from this damaging species. In addressing the effect the carp have had on the environment, clever and resourceful ideas continue to emerge due to dialogue and collaboration among different groups/individuals.
Sources:
http://www.jsonline.com/features/food/asian-carp-just-another-unusual-dish-to-try-for-potawatomi-chef-peter-gebauer-b99436383z1-292672681.html
http://www.ozarksfirst.com/news/mo-initiative-eat-more-asian-carp
http://cafnrnews.com/2014/12/eat-mor-carp/
http://digitalrepository.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=upjournal_research
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/carpe-eat-um-invasive-asian-carp-leap-into-restaurants-grocery-stores/
http://www.sj-r.com/article/20120808/News/308089913/?Start=1
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the fight against the Sea Lamprey
In my last post I talked about how the Department of Natural Resources had put in place the Invasive Species Rule to prevent the spread of many invasive species including the one I discussed, the Sea Lamprey. For this weeks post I want to talk about the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service because in my research I’ve found that they work with several different groups in order to not only prevent the spread and increasing of Sea Lamprey populations but they also try to work with people to develop new technologies to decrease the threat of the Sea Lamprey. The different people and organizations that I’ll talk about in this post are all working with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service under the Sea Lamprey Control Program.
One of the groups the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service works with is the Great Lakes Fishery commission. Acting as an agent through the Great Lakes Fishery they try to prevent the growth of Sea Lamprey by using the chemical control such as the lampricides to kill off the larvae, they use the mechanical and electrical barriers to trap the Sea Lamprey but still allow other fish to make their way through. One of the more interesting ways how they use pheromones to attract the Sea Lampreys which than leads them into the barriers or traps. One factor that I found in my research is that once the Sea Lampreys are captured they are actually sterilized which increases the possibility that a female will mate with a sterile male and in turn will also decrease the populations.
The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service also works with the Marquette Biological Station and they have developed the Larval Assessment Teams. These teams go to different streams and tributaries that they know have Sea Lamprey larvae or ones that they think they could have made it to. These teams find streams and tributaries that could be harboring Lamprey larvae, and what these teams do is they use specialized electrofishers to irritate larvae which than causes them to leave their burrows and allowing them to be captured and identified. The data that the teams collected has several different uses. The data can estimate Sea Lamprey larval populations in infested streams, it allows them to know which streams can be treated wit lampricides the following year, areas where the lampricides will need to be applied and how much larval populations are distributed within each stream. These teams survey between the months of April and October at a total 428 different streams and waterways with a total of 3,082 different sites. One aspect of these teams that I really liked was that when they survey states that are along the U.S and Canadian border they will actually work with the Department of Oceans and Fisheries of Canada staff. I really liked that they work together to address this problem because only through cooperation will this problem be able to be appropriately addressed.
Another fact about the Sea Lamprey Control Program is that the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service also use it to work with people to develop new technologies to control the Lamprey populations.
One idea that has been developed is the use of pheromones and alarm cues which would influence the Sea Lamprey migration behavior. Using the pheromones they can pull the lamprey into particular areas that will allow them to be trapped and than treated with lampricides. The alarm cues in turn push the lamprey away from areas that can’t be treated with lampricides.
 |
| Biological Science Technician Sean Soucy monitoring the push-pull study site where alarm cue and larval sea lamprey odor responses are being tested on the Upper Ocqueoc River (Lake Huron). - Photo Credit: Erica Adams, Michigan State University. |
Another interesting tactic is the idea of eel ladders. When trapping lampreys it’s difficult to trap them without also trapping other non-target species, the eel ladders allow it to be easier to trap and sort through the species caught and allow the release of non-lamprey species into better conditions. The eel ladders work by being placed upstream of fish passages and they have wetted ramps with vertical pegs that take advantage of the lamprey swimming style. When the lamprey’s scale the ladder they are than dropped into a retention basin, while the non-lamprey species are allowed to swim freely at the base of the ladder.
 |
| Biological Science Technicians Matt Bach and Bruce Eldridge monitoring eel ladder style traps at the Cheboygan River (Lake Huron) trap site. - Photo Credit: Savannah Bell, Biological Science Technician, USFWS. |
Another technology is the Pulse Direct Current which is a portable and low-voltage fish guidance system called NEMO that directs the lampreys into traps. The advantage of using NEMO besides the fact that it has a fun name is that they have been found to be very effective. It’s also a great tactic because it’s portable, easily deployed and capable of handling high flow events and debris loads.
 | |
|
What I really like about the Sea Lamprey Control Program is that it works with several different groups and organizations to address the problem of controlling the lamprey populations. I think it was a smart idea by the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service because it opens up room for several different opinions on the issue which can allow for different ideas that may not have been thought of by just one group, it could also lead to the further development of an idea already in place which could make it more effective.
Zebra Mussel Monitoring Program
Volunteering as a
network to combat the spread of invasive aquatic species is an initiative that
the DNR loves taking advantage of. In general, the DNR recognizes volunteering
as a productive way to get communities and a diverse set of actors involved in
all sorts of Environmental problems. In 2014 the DNR has saved 7 million
Dollars in active volunteering across all divisions. But, over the past 6 years
MN DNR volunteering has dropped significantly, about 10,000 volunteers less in
2014 than they were in 2008. Although, volunteers for the Ecological and Water
Resources division has gained about 1,500 volunteers in that time frame. The
DNR is rolling out new volunteer opportunities that monitor the location and
spread of aquatic invasive species.
The Zebra Mussel
Monitoring Program is a citizen volunteer program that assists the DNR in the
siting and geographical trends of zebra mussels. Volunteers act as an extension
of the DNR, by reporting their findings directly to them. Volunteers mostly
consist of residents who live along rivers and lakes, so this information is
readily available in their backyard. These volunteers act as stakeholders since
they are directly affected by AIS on their lakeshores, creating a proactive set
of volunteers in the monitoring program. The reward of their voluntary actions
is very direct by having a clean lake and recreationally usable lake, which
also increases their lakeshore property value.
 |
| The classic tire in a river |
It’s required that registered
volunteers submit at least one monetary report each year, but since monitoring
is as easy as looking around the dock, many people go above and beyond that
requirement. Volunteers can also set monetary devices, (basically an underwater
buoy) to submit more controlled and specific data to the DNR. Volunteers are
usually the first to discover the arrival of zebra mussels into new lakes, the
significance of this cannot be understated because removal really only is
possible in the early stages. If it wasn't for the diligence of the monetary
volunteers, examples such as eradicating Christmas Lake (talked in earlier
blogs) couldn't have been made possible.
 |
| The report for volunteers submit to DNR |
The DNR has done
monitoring techniques on their own but it is a really costly process and is
unattainable to reach every lake or river in the state. Aside the Zebra Mussel
Monitoring Program, volunteers can travel around and monitor lakes. There were
6 of these volunteers last summer and have saved roughly 10,000 in monitory
costs. This just goes to show the economic importance of the Zebra Mussel Monitoring
Program, so that spending can be focused on other aspects of the problem, such
as the costs of herbicides and pesticides in the treatment process. It is
also unfeasible for the DNR to obtain appropriate data on all lakes that are at
risk of zebra mussels, so this network is a solution to monitoring a vast
geographical area. The networking of these volunteers help connect a broader
scale web and trends of AIS infestation across the state, a task that would be
hard to accomplish by a single entity.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/volunteering/zebramussel_monitoring/index.html
http://gradworks.umi.com/15/46/1546091.html
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/volunteering/zebramussel_monitoring/index.html
http://gradworks.umi.com/15/46/1546091.html
Tuesday, November 3, 2015
Laws, Regulations, and Policies: Aquatic Invasive Species in Great Lakes Region.
I am going to focus on Asian Carp for the majority of this post. I am also choosing to touch on multiple examples of the how laws, regulations, policies, etc. have influenced the ongoing debates and concerns over these well known invasive fish. It is rather necessary to discuss a handful of factors that contributed (or contribute) to the very real threats our Great Lakes are facing, especially given the Bighead and silver carp were imported to the U.S. in the early 1970s. It is safe to say that all of these implications didn't occur over night.
As with most environmental dilemmas, there are typically other issues that end up overlapping (such as economics), thus resulting in disagreements and either insufficient, untimely, or improper action. I will discuss this in more detail shortly.
As with most environmental dilemmas, there are typically other issues that end up overlapping (such as economics), thus resulting in disagreements and either insufficient, untimely, or improper action. I will discuss this in more detail shortly.
Before I continue, I would like to mention that from the research I have done on laws and policies in relation to invasive species in general, but particularly Asian Carp, there seems to be major issues with effective laws/decisions/agreements at both regional and national levels in this country.
For example, we can start with The Lacey Act, which was passed by Congress in 1900. The initial goal of this Act was to prohibit any foreign wild animals or birds into the country without a permit.
Not surprisingly, the Act was modified over the years. Below is a nice little chart that puts into perspective the progression of the invasion of the Asian Carp under The Lacey Act.
Not surprisingly, the Act was modified over the years. Below is a nice little chart that puts into perspective the progression of the invasion of the Asian Carp under The Lacey Act.
A clear issue with The Lacey Act was that many of the injurious taxa that were acknowledged on the list had already been present in the U.S. and most continued to spread on. The Act was created to prevent the import and export of species, but uh yeah, if these species are already established it is not going to be any simple task to hinder their growth/movement.
In case you weren't familiar with the word in this context, Under The Lacey Act, an injurious wildlife listing means the species has
been demonstrated to be harmful to either the health and welfare of
humans, interests of forestry, agriculture, horticulture, or the
welfare and survival of wildlife or the resources that wildlife depend
upon.
The Asian Carp Prevention and Control Act (signed by Obama on December 14th, 2010)-Amends the Lacey Act to add the Bighead carp to the list of injurious species that are prohibited from being shipped or imported into the United States.
Aside from some minor gestures from government, I have not been able to find any actual laws that address what the next crucial step(s) will be to prevent a seemingly possible Asian Carp invasion in the Great Lakes. I sense frustration in the articles I read because there are actual options to prevent the carp from getting into the lakes.
"Current state and federal strategies to prevent an Asian carp invasion center on the use of electric barriers. A December 2013 federal study concluded that there was “no evidence that Asian carp are bypassing the barriers.” However, that same study warned of evidence that shows the use of electric fields in the water doesn’t always stop the movement of fish.
A 2012 bi-national study found that, if Asian carp were to enter the Great Lakes system, they would likely spread to all five lakes within a decade and have a severe ecological impact."
The region needs to come together on an action plan,” Eder says.
( http://www.csgmidwest.org/policyresearch/0214Asiancarp.aspx)
The big reason nothing is moving forward is due to the Chicago Area Waterway Systems.
I think the chart below puts some rather complicated options into a little more perspective. Overall, it is very clear that agreements need to be made and control needs to be taken in order to maintain our lakes.
Sources
http://www.fws.gov/midwest/news/369.html
http://www.csgmidwest.org/policyresearch/0214Asiancarp.aspx
http://msue.anr.msu.edu/news/the_lacey_act_failed_to_keep_asian_carp_out_can_new_bills_before_congress_d
The Asian Carp Prevention and Control Act (signed by Obama on December 14th, 2010)-Amends the Lacey Act to add the Bighead carp to the list of injurious species that are prohibited from being shipped or imported into the United States.
A simple, informative website about Asian Carp from the Wisconsin DNR:
Aside from some minor gestures from government, I have not been able to find any actual laws that address what the next crucial step(s) will be to prevent a seemingly possible Asian Carp invasion in the Great Lakes. I sense frustration in the articles I read because there are actual options to prevent the carp from getting into the lakes.
"Current state and federal strategies to prevent an Asian carp invasion center on the use of electric barriers. A December 2013 federal study concluded that there was “no evidence that Asian carp are bypassing the barriers.” However, that same study warned of evidence that shows the use of electric fields in the water doesn’t always stop the movement of fish.
A 2012 bi-national study found that, if Asian carp were to enter the Great Lakes system, they would likely spread to all five lakes within a decade and have a severe ecological impact."
The region needs to come together on an action plan,” Eder says.
( http://www.csgmidwest.org/policyresearch/0214Asiancarp.aspx)
The big reason nothing is moving forward is due to the Chicago Area Waterway Systems.
I think the chart below puts some rather complicated options into a little more perspective. Overall, it is very clear that agreements need to be made and control needs to be taken in order to maintain our lakes.
Sources
http://www.fws.gov/midwest/news/369.html
http://www.csgmidwest.org/policyresearch/0214Asiancarp.aspx
http://msue.anr.msu.edu/news/the_lacey_act_failed_to_keep_asian_carp_out_can_new_bills_before_congress_d
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)