Cries to halt Chicago canal traffic because of carp are opposed: Fish-fighting measure too costly, some say

HOME > TOP NEWS & FEATURES > CRIES TO HALT CHICAGO CANAL TRAFFIC BECAUSE OF CARP ARE OPPOSED: FISH-FIGHTING MEASURE TOO COSTLY, SOME SAY

Cries to halt Chicago canal traffic because of carp are opposed: Fish-fighting measure too costly, some say
By Detroit Free Press
12/12/2009

By Tina Lam, Detroit Free Press

Dec. 13--As Michigan's attorney general prepares to file lawsuits this week to force Illinois and federal agencies to do more to keep Asian carp out of the Great Lakes, some members of Congress also are mounting an anti-carp assault.

They say the time has come to close off a system of Chicago canals that allows invasive species to move between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River basin.

Michigan, surrounded by four of the five Great Lakes, is leading the charge. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., is one of several authors of a letter circulating among members of Congress, urging federal agencies to take more immediate action.

"We're asking them to consider taking the difficult, but perhaps necessary, step of closing locks on the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and connected waterways," Levin said in a statement.

The letter has bipartisan support.

"The truth is, they should never have built that canal," which reversed the Chicago River and diverts 2.1 billion gallons of water a day from Lake Michigan, U.S. Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., said. "If I had my way, I'd shut it off completely."

For more than 100 years, people outside Chicago have criticized the city's boldest engineering marvel: the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and its related branches, which link Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River basin.

The canal, built in steps between 1892 and 1922, is credited with making Chicago a major economic power.

So, it wouldn't be easy to close it down.

But that's exactly what Michigan leaders -- and some elsewhere, like in Chicago and Congress -- say must happen to stop voracious Asian carp and other invasive species from using the canal as a superhighway to enter and decimate the Great Lakes and their $7-billion fishing industry.

"It has taken carp getting within 7 miles of Lake Michigan for everyone to realize there is no plan to permanently protect the Great Lakes from invasion," said Joel Brammeier, acting president of the Alliance for the Great Lakes in Chicago. "Until we have that, we're going to be playing catch-up and have our backs against the wall."

But opponents of the canal closure say not so fast.

"I don't think anyone will seriously consider closure, unless they do it based on emotion and not fact," said Lynn Muench, vice president of the American Waterways Operators, who said the cost of closure to commerce would run into the millions, though she didn't have an exact figure. "It would have such an impact on this industry and on the regional economy."

But the only foolproof solution to save the Great Lakes is to break the connection with the Mississippi forever, Brammeier said. In the short term, locks leading to Lake Michigan need to be closed to prevent Asian carp from getting in.

No barrier 100% effective

Brammeier is an author of a 112-page study, done a year ago, that looked at how the far-flung Chicago canal system could be blocked off from Lake Michigan, and who would be hurt by it.

The report concluded that no technology, including the electric barrier currently in place in the canal, will be 100% effective at keeping invasive species out.

The most effective closure would be at Lockport, about 28 miles south of downtown Chicago, but that would disrupt barge traffic the most, the study said.

Shutting the canal further north would allow more barge traffic, but would require multiple closures, since there are four different access points to Lake Michigan and all would need to be protected.

The Army Corps of Engineers is doing a feasibility study on closing off the canal, but it could take years.

And opposition is stiff.

Barge operators, who move cargo such as oil and coal to the Midwest through the canal, don't want to see the canal closed even temporarily.

Pressure from barge and tugboat groups kept the new electric barrier in the canal from being turned on when it was completed in 2006.

Their fears that electrical sparks would ignite cargo, or that people could be electrocuted, led to lengthy safety testing, which meant the barrier was turned on only last April -- and only at one-quarter strength.

The American Waterways Operators argue that moving goods on barges is the most economical method, saves wear and congestion on the nation's roads and is less polluting than trucks or railcars. Requiring barges to offload cargo like coal or gravel to trucks or railcars at some point along the canal would cost consumers more, they say.

But proponents of closing the canal argue that those concerns don't outweigh the potential harm and cost to the Great Lakes, which provide drinking water for 40 million people.

Canals built to remove waste

The canal system was started by the City of Chicago in 1892, not for barges, but to wash Chicago's waste away from Lake Michigan.

Until then, sewage, industrial chemicals and slaughterhouse waste was all dumped into the Chicago River, which flowed naturally into the lake. That led to disease epidemics because the city got its drinking water from the lake.

To rectify that problem, the city pulled off the engineering marvel of the century, reversing the flow of the Chicago River, drawing clean Lake Michigan water down the canal to help dilute its pollution.

Neighboring states sued, but lost.

Chicago was required by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1967 to limit the water it diverts from Lake Michigan to 2.1 billion gallons daily.

"That's still a significant diversion" that benefits only Chicago, U.S. Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., said. "It should never have happened."

The controversial canal also opened up shipping ports from as far away as Houston to the Midwest. Recreational boats use the canal, too. And marinas have popped up all along the canal's waterways.

Brammeier said these days, the canal is needed less and less for sanitation, as Chicago is improving its sewage treatment and flood control, and barge traffic has been flat at about 24 million tons per year for several years.

"It can be moved in other ways," he said of the cargo the barges carry.

And while recreational boat use is heavy, hydraulic lifts and sanitizing stations could be installed to accommodate them, he said.

19th-Century arrangement

Henry Henderson, Midwest director of the Natural Resources Defense Council in Chicago, said that just because it would be complicated to break up the Chicago canal system is no reason to keep it as is.

"This human-made problem is open to human solutions to fix it," he said. "There's no reason to live with a 19th-Century arrangement that's causing unintended impacts."

Muench, of the American Waterways Operators, said the canal system is a congressionally authorized waterway, and it would take congressional action to close it off.

Peter Annin, author of the book "Great Lakes Water Wars," said that just might happen.

"There's so much alarm from Minnesota to New York -- not to mention Ontario and Quebec -- over Asian carp," he said. "I wouldn't be surprised if Congress was willing to act on this."

Contact TINA LAM: 313-222-6421 or tlam@freepress.com

SONS 2010: Commander Thomas Jones, USCG Cutter Marcus Hanna