Michigan balks at Obama's stance in Asian carp fight

The Obama administration announced Tuesday that it is backing Illinois in a lawsuit over how to stop Asian carp from entering the Great Lakes. Officials in Michigan, who brought the lawsuit, claim that Obama is favoring his home state.

Michigan has reacted angrily to the Obama administration's decision to back Illinois – the president's home state – in a lawsuit about how to stop Asian carp from infesting the Great Lakes. In Tuesday, US Solicitor General Elena Kagan asked the US Supreme Court to reject Michigan's lawsuit against Illinois. The lawsuit calls for the closure of two Chicago locks on a key commercial canal that connects Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River.

On Wednesday, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox asked for an immediate meeting with Obama and Michigan congressional leaders to discuss the matter. He said in a public statement he “is extremely disappointed by President Obama's choice to protect the narrow interests of his home state.” Mr. Cox says that the invasive species will put at risk $7 billion in annual revenue from Great Lakes recreational and commercial fishing and tourism.

Illinois State Attorney Lisa Madigan countered the suggestion that presidential favoritism was involved, saying by phone Wednesday that the allegaton "sounds like politics to me, that doesn’t sound substantive.”

...

Madigan adds that Illinois “is committed to do everything can to prevent Asian Carp from getting into Lake Michigan.” For example, it actively monitors the canal for waterways and will perform fish kills as it did in early December when carp DNA was discovered, she says.

The US Supreme Court is scheduled to address the filings Friday.

more at: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0106/Michigan-balks-at-Obama-s-stance-in-Asian-carp-fight

Sometimes I think the White House is trying to piss off as many people as they possibly can. :banghead:

As someone who lives on Lake Superior, this pisses me off.

MI ATtorney General Cox who filed the suit is running for Governor, for what it's worth. That being said, I've not heard that the Asian Carp is any kind of a false issue, but I haven't exhaustively researched it, either.

being an international port, and all, so I get pissed at these kinds of things.

OT -- we passed through the UP last summer on our vacation. Loved the Keweenaw.

and local economies. Its unlikely that the Supreme Court will decide this on the basis of sound ecological principles.

"The lawsuit calls for the closure of two Chicago locks on a key commercial canal that connects Lake Michigan to the Mississippi River."

I'm not sure how that's done, but it doesn't sound like a long-term solution for what may become a huge problem.

everything else too.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5542199

apparently it isn't a bad tasting fish and if people can be fed with them, why not let the fisherman push them to extinction over killing them with toxins that kill other fish.

Fishing for these things isn't easy, but it can be done and rather effectively with the right mindset and equipment.

Fish kills are terrrible, because it essentially turns the area into a dead zone of most all life. Even then, it can contaminate further than its intended area and traces remain present in the initial area for a very long time.

What if the asian carp overtakes the over species in the lake? Has there ever been a situation where sports fishermen kept up with an invasive species?

They problem is just too dense and widespread for the recreational fisherman to have much effect (although every little bit helps for sure). It would have to be done with commercial or heavy duty fishing rigs to make a dent in the problem. The carp are typically bottom feeders and dealing with bottom feeders in a freshwater environment is not an easy task, because they can be very active - or very, very lazy. Either extreme can make it difficult to bring in a significant number of them.

Fish kills are typically a last resort and they may very well have to go that route. But I think that they could put a significant dent on the population to keep the fish kills at a bare minimum. Some states offer bounties for invasive species (although with budget cuts, it would be tough to do so) and that gets a lot of interest from all types of fishermen. It might be an option here.

You can't mess around with these invasive species. I may call the White House on this one.

As an arizonan, I know what non-native species can do (our saguaro population is declining VERY quiockly) but regardless, the WH should NOT take sides in SCOTUS decsions.

http://www.southbendtribune.com/article/20100107/Opinion/1070371/1062/Opinion


I called the White House about it. Once I convinced the operator I wasn't some crazy fish lady making a random call, she took my comments, though for some reason she asked me to also fax them and have all my friends fax their comments. She gave me the fax number (202-456-2461) and said I should put my comments into bullet points. I thought that was rather strange.

What, that's frowned upon now?

Though I probably did sound rather excitable because I thought I was going to leave a voicemail and then got a real person instead.

I will do the same.

I'm not a resident of the states affected, but I understand the threat that invasive species pose to the environment. Here in Tennessee, we have a lot of different non-native species that we are battling before they completely decimate entire habitats.

there was a thread in the last couple weeks in e/e about this issue. the chicago sports writer that was linked to had a long list of sightings in the city.