I read this story on MSNBC today. It seems several states on the great lakes are suing to close the Chicago Locks to keep the invasive Aisian Carp out of the lakes. If they do indeed close the locks, how will that frieght move south down the Mississippi? I imagion most of it would have to go by rail.
They will NOT close the locks, the shippers will not allow it.
I did hear however, that they will DERF some asian carp at Deshler.
Eleanor Roosevelt enjoys DERF’ed carp.
I am not sure that was her style.
Eleanor DERF’ed her carp with this:
I don’t think any of you fully understand the situation that will be WHEN (not IF) the Asian Carp gets into the Great Lakes. It ain’t FUNNY. Do you think the environmental disaster in the gulf is funny? Did you think that Katrina was funny? Were the floods of 2008 funny? Closing the locks will delay the introduction of the fish to the Lakes, and it might be a good thing for Railroads. But it (Asian Carp in the Lakes) will be a MAJOR disaster to the ecconomics of the entire area of all the adjacent states and Canadian Provinces.
I fully understand both the economic, and biological impacts. The reality says however, the tree huggers cannot win versus the shippers on such a large waterway as this. And mind you, this is not news to me. I have followed the story for almost a decade now.
I use as a prime example, the history of the invasive Zebra mussle. Look who won that game.
How I enjoy carp:
Just imagine them folks in DERF land getting cultured.
[:-^] Asian Carp is a new threat to the waterways ? they have been here for a while. Wonder what became of the Zebra mussel threat ? Old story ? no intrest?
Jim
I’m not sure about carp, let alone barbecued carp. I enjoy seafood, though, and (with the proper lack of other options), would probably try barbecued carp once.
Traces of DNA from the Asian carp have been found beyond the electric barrier set up to attempt containment, and also in Lake Michigan. Beyond that, no evidence of the fish themselves has been found. I suppose it’s naive to think that the fact that Lake Michigan is higher than the level of the Calumet and Chicago waterways will keep them out for any length of time. There is no pumping involved in either set of locks–they just open the appropriate set of gates to alter the water level. Swoosh, splash, like you’re taking a bath. I’ve been through them.
Only recently has an announcement been made about an attempt to gasp! process the carp for export to China, where it’s a delicacy. It sounds like there wouldn’t be much worry about overfishing.
There doesn’t seem to be much story left about zebra mussels. I know they got to Lake Michigan, but couldn’t say whether the threat was less than anticipated or the impact hasn’t been fully felt yet.
As for rail shipping alternatives, never say “never”. The old Com Ed plant in Romeoville, Illinois, used to be dependent on barges for its coal supply. They now receive trains via UP and the old EJ&E. I haven’t seen the entire layout there, but they have their own locomotive for unloading. I’m not sure that a rapid conversion from barges to rail would be feasible, but it’s happened at least once, and that’s good revenue!
Make the disaster an opportunity. Make fishmeal of the flying fish. Hopper cars of fertilizer to make the prairies more fertile.
Any chance of fishmeal pipe lines built with tax subsidies?
Eleanor Roosevelt served hot dogs to the King and Queen of England. White House state dinners featuring Illinois River illegal aliens?
Please post answers at Eleanor Roosevelt’s running commentary.
We in northern Ohio take this issue very seriously, indeed. We have seen this before with Zebra mussels and the Lamprey eel. We can thank the much-touted St. Lawrence Seaway for most of these ecological disasters. Not many of their assurances seem to have turned out as promised. I’ll suppose the same shipping interests that promoted the Seaway now think that their interests in Chicago trump that of everyone else who has an interest in the Great Lakes. Imagine! A few shippers have the “right” or “won’t allow” (as one contributor put it) the canal to be shut because it would harm their interests.
Theodore Roosevelt said, “Americans don’t learn from experience; they only learn from catastrophes.” These shipping interests in Chicago are the BP of the North Coast. I tremble for everyone who loves and depends on the Great Lakes.
If this is not a case of the federal government needing to “promote the common welfare,” then I don’t know what is.
“Won’t allow”….indeed!
It raises the question then, who is going to pay for the increased shipping costs? Are you willing to accept that? Since you want the waterway closed, you and those who desire this, should pay the extra costs, not the consumers, who are innocent bystanders.
Who then is going to pay for all the jobs you are going to cause to be lost because of your environmental activism???
What about the jobs lost when fish practically disappear from the Great Lakes? Are you saying this country can’t afford to have the Great Lakes even in the condition they are today? That they have to be a kind of giant retention pond without aquatic life? Yes, of course I’m willing to pay more if that’s what it takes to prevent a disaster, not just an ecological disaster, but an economic one, too. As taxpayers, are we not paying for the mess caused by Hurricane Katrina? Are we not paying for the disaster in the Gulf?
These same arguments were used in Cleveland in the 1960’s when the first attempts were made to install pollution controls on the steels mills. We were told that if this was required the mills would go out of business. Well, the mills pretty much did go out of business but not chiefly because of the cost of pollution controls but for other complex economic reasons. The remaining steel industry in Cleveland is almost never cited as a polluter these days and they are apparently making a profit.
I repeat my question: Do the economic interests of a few trump those of everyone else? What about the interests of Canadians? Are they to be told to simply learn to live with a degraded and economically ruined Great Lakes? Why?
Do not mis-understand me: There is an economic cost for doing nothing that far, far exceeds the costs that will be incurred by closing the gates of a canal in Chicago. This is not simply an ecological problem.
And all I am saying, is you can pay for the result if you want it. Not the consumers or shippers. Their costs should remain status quo.
It’s a lost cause - the fish will get to the great lakes (if they aren’t already there).
It’s funny how some people expect to have a global economy with goods moving around the globe, yet think the little bugs and critters are going to stay in their little corner of the world.
Instead of hoppers, how about using fish belly gondolas?
Maybe the threat won’t be as bad as some think.
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/asian-carp-threat-real-or-exaggerated/
I like the quote at the end, “If you can’t beat 'em, eat 'em.”
Jeff