There have been some fears that Asian Carp will find there way into the Great Lakes, despite blockades created to keep them out, and this has lead to some drastic measures in order to protect the Great Lakes’ ecosystems, and more accurately, their thriving fishing industry that would be compromised if the Carp managed to consume all species lower on the food chain.
This week, in order to prevent such an occurrence in Illinois, 2,000 pounds of poison was dumped into the Chicago River in order to stop the Carp in their tracks. The poison is a natural substance that prevents fish from being able to absorb oxygen through their gills. As a result of this initiative, 200,000 of dead fish must be removed from the Chicago River, and according to experts, it doesn’t look like there are any Carp amongst them. This indicates that species in the ecosystem they were trying to protect, have been killed off in order to protect them from predators that were not a threat anyways.
It’s clear by the way the Carp situation has been handled, that this isn’t an environmental issue – no one’s attempting to preserve and protect the species present in the lakes; they’re simply trying to protect them from the natural food chain so they can continue to earn revenue in the huge fishing industry.
Image Via: Flickr User Jibby7 with a Creative Commons License
You need to think this through further, especially when some officials are calling for a permanent seperation of the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River watershed. If that seperation is made, then cargo transportation to and fro will be wiped out — at great economic cost.
Look at this statement you wrote: “It’s clear by the way the Carp situation has been handled, that this isn’t an environmental issue – no one’s attempting to preserve and protect the species present in the lakes; they’re simply trying to protect them from the natural food chain so they can continue to earn revenue in the huge fishing industry.”
How is protecting the natural food chain from an invasive species not an environmental issue? Of course it is. The huge fishing industry is vital to the region, from a food standpoint and economically, of course, but that fishery is theoretically managed for at least some sustainability and not upsetting the ecosystems is in everyone’s best interest, humans and sea creatures alike.
If the environment is being protected for economic reasons, that’s better than not protecting it at all. I hope you would agree.
Bringing back the oyster and crab populations in the Chesapeake Bay, for example, are designs championed by all. Yes, they are partly economic, but they are also critical to the well-being and environmental balance of the ecosystem.
They killed a lot of fish with this poison, to be sure, but stopping these monstrous fish from getting into America’s Great Lakes is absolutely critical. Those fish are nothing but nightmarish pollution.
Get it together here on this Web site. Please.
So they killed 200,000 fish they were trying to protect… and people wonder why it’s better for nature for humanity not to intervene.
Would it not be appropriate to name the organisation/s who decided to take this incredibly unfortunate decision so they can be improved… or dissolved?
Your use of “natural” is curious. Your line of argument brings to mind the fact that cockroaches and all matter of vermin are natural, so we should embrace them in our homes? Same for disease bearing mosquitoes and flies. Indeed, Ebola is natural, as is AIDS.
200,000 fish were removed?
Where did these fish go? Were theyeaten? Were they just put in a landfill? Were they juust used as fertilyzer?
My response isn’t actually printable. Are these real people who did this ? Do they have neighbours ? Is the whole population similarly retarded – and having acces to tons of “natural” – i.e. organic ? – poison.
Is there a “natural poison” to remove short-term memory do you know ? I could use some.
there are more crap than carp in the great lake to me.
let me see.. poisons are good and carps are bad?
I think it is funny how this article does not even MENTION the actual reason the river was poisoned – as a safeguard to keep the carp from crossing into the lake during maintenance on the electric fish barrier.
Also, saying the Great Lakes has a “thriving fishing industry,” is silly. Look at harvest totals compared to decades past (before the fisheries collapsed) – they are next to nothing. Lake Superior, in fact, is phasing out commercial fishing altogether; no new permits have been issued for years.
The Asian Carp would have a devastating impact on the fisheries of the Great Lakes, which are already plagued by invasive species. I, for one, support taking drastic measures to ensure we don’t further corrupt the natural ecosystem, if we can even still call it that.
This is either lazy, or blatantly unbalanced, biased journalism.
In fact the lakes are now being managed as giant fishing holes. State DNR’s stock non-native species on a yearly basis in order to facilitate the sport and charter fishing industries. Dumping commercial fishing was a public policy decision driven by the state of Michigan. This is short sited, poor fishery management and bad ecology.
The ecosystem of the Great Lakes has changed irreparably from when it was the rich fishery of 200 years ago. Its current ecological state is not favorable to the species that were there in abundance then. It is a now a rich environment for species without predators in the ecosystem and those that are adapted to human disturbance. I would be very surprised if carp are not there in abundance in 20 years, no matter what we do, unless we could restore the water chemistry, the shorelines and the drainage basins around the Great Lakes (including the vegetation and hydrology). This is far to expensive accomplish right now, and with current technology would also require the removal of most humans from the entire basin. Oh well.
Gerard Vaughan. Do you have a cat or a dog. Both of these pets are carnivores. Huge numbers of animals, fish and cattle are killed every day for pet food. Your outrage should be directed at pet owners (unless the pet is a gerbil or rabbit). This is not to mention the wildlife that cats and dogs kill.
Thanks for all the comments.
The question of human intervetion of the sake of environmental preservation (particularly when it’s protection from itself) is not one that’s likely to be resolved. Everyone has a different perception on the issue, which is much bigger than carp. It’s clear, even from these responses, that there are many different viewpoints on this…for, against, and somewhere in the middle.
John in DC – yes, I’m with you on environmental protection, even if it’s motivated by economic progress. However, am not sure how I feel about humans interfering with what nature intended (ie the food chain). That being said, carp were not originally native species in the Great Lakes, they were introduced by humans and have now become a fixture so that adds something else to the debate.
The fact that you’re also missing is that no carp were found amongst all of the fish that were killed – so even if you are of the viewpoint that for the sake of ecological soundness the Carp should be eliminated – all that was accomplished in this circumstance is that the fish that they were protecting were killed. I was not saying that “Carp were not a threat” in terms of their effect on the ecosystem, but in this circumstance where it appears they weren’t actually present.
I hoped that this would an article that would inspire debate – since there are a lot of perspectives on this issue and a lot at play.
Heartlander – yes, there is bias with the idea of enticing discussion on an issue that is controversial and depends upon personal perspectives. This is a blog, not investigative journalism, each side of the argument doesn’t need to be analyzed with specific statistics. Though I’m happy to hear them in support of your personal stance on the issue!
Also, I did make reference to the original article written which introduced the carp issue, this was a follow-up on actions that have since taken place.
Keep the comments coming – it’s fascinating to hear where everyone stands in this debate
I have paid a fair amount of attention to the history of the Great Lakes, the introduction of Salmon, and this recent ASIAN CARP situation.
I’ll TRY and keep this simple……
Once upon a time the ‘alewife’ got into Lake Michigan.
Went nuts. Big problem. We introduced salmon and steelhead from northwest stocks. The salmon and steelhead helped control the Alewife. That worked very well with ups and downs over the years (semi-natural balance ensued). A great sport fishery for the salmonids came to be. A win-win-win for all parties and the eco-system thank god. COOL.
These ASIAN CARP are another matter altogether. If they make it into Lake Michigan it would be a worst case time bomb scenario. Don’t take my word for it google them up and you will be shocked at what these fish are like. Look for them on you-tube…you’ll be SHOCKED again.
Little lesson story:
Maybe 6 to 8 Lionfish were in a fellows aquarium in Florida when Andrew? went thru. The Lionfish escaped into the ocean and they have ZERO enemies there as opposed to their native Indian Ocean. No one knows what to do about the Lionfish problem now. They TAKE OVER every reef they get to and the rest of the reef fish practically dissappear. I got stung by a relative of the Lionfish, called a Spotted Scorpionfish. Wound up with no pulse and no blood pressure by the time they got me to an emergency room.
Google up the Carribean Lionfish problem.
Google up the Asian Carp problem.
Google up the Northern Snakehead Fish Invasion.
Final statement: The 200,000 non-targeted fish kill in an attempt to prevent the ASIAN CARP from entering the Great Lakes was NOTHING compared to the potential NIGHTMARE of these fish getting loose in the Great Lakes system.
Later folks.
It is a common occurrence that authors who don’t research a topic in depth, produce a writing that makes them sound clueless. A 3rd. grader can comprehend the topic at hand: the attempts of governments to stop whatever threatends billions of dollars made on revenues from selling commercial and recreational angling licenses, with whatever means.
No true environmentalist will ever support or encourage the use of toxic chemicals to be introduced into waterways to “remove” unwanted fish species. The price tag at stake is high: water becomes unsafe and dangerous chemicals threaten not only the environment but also human life.
While we are daily learning the effects of global climate change, governments and industry of North America continue to poison off entire eco-systems in the name of saving one. It is a pathetic attempt to stop evolution. Read more on chemical fish eradications and about the dangers associated with Rotenone base chemicals: http://sites.google.com/site/stopkilling4profit/
I agree very much with Dan’s December 5 statement as to the likelihood of the Great Lakes being abundantly populated by [Asian] carp in 20 years. Yes, the kill in the canal reported in the initial article was unfortunate, but the risk to the greater ecosystem of the Great Lakes is too great to allow the possibility of the carp penetrating the supposed barriers while work is being done on them.
That being said… it’s gonna happen anyway. Murphy’s Law gets proved right every single day. If something can go wrong, it will. There was statistically a near-zero chance that the economic collapse we have been going through for the last two years could have happened. This, according to the brilliant mathematics PhD’s who created the environment that led to the collapse. So if these fish have already shown that they can move way beyond other barriers that have been erected for them, what’s to stop them now? It’s not a matter of if, but when.
Still, we have to try. And we have to develop procedures to put into practice when it does happen. We can’t just focus on preventing something from happening that’s gonna happen anyway. We have to have a plan in place to take care of the situation once it does happen.