This week the Obama Administration announced $47 million in new projects aimed at keeping invasive Asian carp from migrating into the Great Lakes. The 2011 carp action plan calls for new biological controls and increased e-DNA monitoring but does not include closing the locks in the Chicago waterway system.
The Associated Press reports:
A $47 million battle plan for 2011 calls for refining technologies that detect the presence of Asian carp by identifying their DNA in water samples, and for developing better means of trapping, netting or starving carp already in waterways that lead to the lakes. It also pledges to continue initiatives begun this year, such as researching ways to prevent the unwanted fish from breeding.
“The ‘plan’ remains an unintegrated menu of disconnected potential actions, random activities, and no sense of what will be done with new evidence of carp on emergency or long-term basis,” Henry Henderson of the Natural Resources Defense Council told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel .”There is no articulated strategy, no sense of urgency, no apparent commitment to use the best tools such as (environmental) DNA to focus immediate action and build toward a permanent solution.”
“The extra efforts to control carp further downstream are good, but the Great Lakes remain at risk as long as the locks are open,“ Rep Dave Camp (R-MI) told Booth Mid-Michigan. “The only sure way to keep Asian carp out of the lakes is to close the locks and achieve permanent hydrological separation.”
Back in January Camp and other members of Michigan’s congressional delegation, sponsored legislation to require the shutdown of the locks but the measure never came up for a vote.
Legal efforts to shut the locks have been unsuccessful so far.
Earlier this month an Illinois federal court refused to order the closure of the locks in a lawsuit brought by Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania and the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians.
This week Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox asked the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to review that ruling.