Asian Carp AFF

1AC

Inherency

Asian Carps poised to invade the Great Lakes now, most recent peer reviewed study JS Online 8/16/12 (“Where are their solutions to the Asian carp threat?,” http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/where-are-their-solutions-to-the-asian-carp-threat-m26h4sh-166471876.html)

The seriousness of that threat was detailed in a report released last month by the U. S. and Canadian governments, which says that two species of Asian carp - bighead and silver - "pose a substantial risk to the Great Lakes if they become established."¶ The peer-reviewed report, 16 months in the making, was led by Fisheries and Oceans Canada and drew on work from scientists from both sides of the border, according to a Journal Sentinel article by Dan Egan.¶ "This Asian carp risk assessment is sobering," Michael Hansen, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission's vice chairman, told Egan. "It concludes that arrival of Asian carps is looming, and should the fish become established in the Great Lakes, that their effects on the ecosystem would be severe."¶ There's not much now to stop the carp. There is an electric fish barrier on the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, about 30 miles downstream from the Chicago lakeshore, but authorities were reluctant to turn it on full force or to add more significant barriers. Only one bighead carp has been found above the barrier, but water samples taken since 2009 have shown traces of bighead and silver carp above the barrier.

And, there is insufficient federal funding and no control mechanism to halt Asian CarpsReeves 8/15/12 (Andrew, This Magazine, citing Becky Cudmore who is manager of the Centre of Expertise for Aquatic Risk Assessment (CEARA) at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ Canada, and spent the last 8 years studying Asian Carp, “Attack of the killer carp,” http://this.org/magazine/2012/08/15/attack-of-the-killer-carp/)

In the past sixty years, efforts to control invasive species in the Great Lakes is as replete with exemplary international co-operation as it is with insufficient funding and soaring mitigation costs. The failure to success ratio is 90 to 1. Former GLFC chair Dr. Michael J. Hansen delivered some sobering news to the U.S. House Committee on

Transportation and Infrastructure in February 2010. “Currently, control mechanisms do not exist for Asian carp, if they become established,” he told the committee. “Scientists do not know of a pesticide that would target the carp, nor weaknesses in their

spawning behavior that could be exploited.” Prevention, in other words, is key—eradication, said Hansen, is not possible. Once established, invasive species become a permanent, destructive force in the ecosystem they have colonized, forever altering the region’s

ecological and economic health. Unfortunately, he added, the effort to find solutions has not exactly been robust: “The short answer to the question ‘What can be done if Asian carp enter the Great Lakes?’ is ‘Not much.’”

New Army Corps legislation doesn’t solve WSJ 7/5/12 (“5 states to continue suit demanding Asian carp fix,” http://online.wsj.com/article/APd6e216cfe7e5496086151576aeb34bb7.html)

Five states are moving forward with a lawsuit against the federal government demanding steps to prevent Asian carp from reaching the Great Lakes, despite recent congressional action, the Michigan

attorney general's office said Thursday.¶ Legislation approved last month requires the Army Corps of Engineers to complete a plan for shielding the lakes from the invasive carp within 18 months, or toward the end of 2013. A quicker timetable was one of the requests in a suit filed three years ago by Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio and Pennsylvania.¶ But the states will

continue pressing their case because the legislation doesn't guarantee that the corps ultimately will sever a man-made link between Lake Michigan and carp-infested waters near Chicago, said Joy Yearout, spokesman for Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette. The lawsuit seeks a court order for such a step.¶ "The bill passed by Congress puts a limit on the Army corps' endless studies but doesn't address future actions," Yearout told Associated Press. "We're hopeful the lawsuit could result in permanent separation."¶ The case recently was transferred from U.S. District Judge Robert Dow to another judge, John Tharp, as part of a docket reshuffling, Yearout said. It has not been scheduled for trial. A government motion to dismiss the suit is pending.¶ Invasive bighead and silver carp have infested the Mississippi River and many of its tributaries, including the Illinois River, which is linked to Lake Michigan by a waterway

network that includes a navigational canal near Chicago.¶ The corps contends an electric barrier in the canal is blocking the carp's path northward toward the lake. But Asian carp DNA has turned up repeatedly in water samples collected as recently as June in waters beyond the barrier.

Action now is keyBuffalo News 7/13/12 (“New alarm sounded about Asian carp threat to Great Lakes,” http://www.buffalonews.com/city/capital-connection/washington/article946166.ece)

"The report underscores the severity of the Asian carp threat and the need for leadership so that we can solve the problem once and for all," said Andy Buchsbaum, director of the group's Great Lakes office. "... his report shows

that the cost of inaction will be devastating."¶ Buchsbaum called on President Obama and his Republican rival in the current presidential race, Mitt Romney, to commit to building "an effective physical barrier to keep the Asian carp out of the Great Lakes."¶ The authors

of the Canadian report did not offer specific recommendations on how to prevent the carp invasion. But they said that the fish are so close to invading the lakes that government authorities should be looking both to preventing the invasion and controlling the Asian carp population if prevention measures fail.¶ Environmentalists and New York's senators remain focused on separating the Chicago waterway system from Lake Michigan, an expensive engineering task that's strongly opposed by Chicago-area

business interests.¶ But the senators said the Canadian report was one more argument for action.¶ "We cannot afford to wait, and I will continue to push the Army Corps of Engineers to finalize the Great Lakes - Mississippi River Interbasin Study as soon as possible and look at all options available, including hydrological separation, to keep Asian carp from migrating into the Great Lakes," said Sen. Kirsten E. Gillibrand, D-N.Y.

And, a recent court case by the States seeking federal action was thrown outHarris 12/3 [Andrew, Bloomberg, Great Lakes States’ Asian Carp Case Toss by U.S. Court, http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-12-03/great-lakes-states-asian-carp-case-toss-by-u-dot-s-dot-court]

States surrounding the Great Lakes lost a lawsuit that sought to force the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to stop Asian carp from possibly migrating into the lakes from the Mississippi River basin.¶ U.S. District

Judge John Tharp in Chicago today dismissed the suit filed two years ago by Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio

and Pennsylvania, ruling their demand to sever the lakes from the basin was trumped by federal laws that require the Army Corps. to keep connections navigable between the water bodies.¶ “It is not the province of the courts to order parties to take action that would directly contravene statutory mandates and prohibitions,” Tharp said in his 46-page decision.

Environment

Asian Carps are moving towards the Chicago Area Waterway System, risks invasion of the Great LakesCRS 7/12/12 (Congressional Research Service, Eugene H. Buck, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy, Harold F. Upton, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy, Charles V. Stern, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy, Cynthia Brougher, Legislative Attorney, “Asian Carp and the Great Lakes Region,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41082.pdf)

Four species of non-indigenous Asian carp are expanding their range in U.S. waterways, resulting¶ in a variety of concerns and problems. Three species—bighead, silver, and black carp—are of¶ particular note, based on the perceived degree of

environmental concern. Current controversy¶ relates to what measures might be necessary and sufficient to prevent movement of Asian carp¶ from the Mississippi River drainage into the Great Lakes through the Chicago Area Waterway¶ System. Several bills have been introduced in the 112th Congress to direct actions to avoid the¶ possibility of carp becoming established in the Great Lakes.¶ According to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Asian carp pose a significant threat to¶ commercial

and recreational fisheries of the Great Lakes. Asian carp populations could expand¶ rapidly and change the composition of Great Lakes ecosystems. Native species could be harmed¶ because Asian carp are likely to compete with them for food and modify their habitat. It has been¶ widely reported that Great Lakes fisheries generate economic activity of approximately $7 billion¶ annually. Although Asian carp introduction is likely to modify Great Lakes ecosystems and cause¶ harm to fisheries, studies forecasting the extent of potential harm are not available. Therefore, it is¶ not possible to provide estimates of

potential changes in the regional economy or economic value¶ (social welfare) by lake, species, or fishery.¶ The locks and waterways of the Chicago Area Waterway System (CAWS) have been a focal point¶ for those debating how to prevent Asian carp

encroachment on the Great Lakes. The CAWS is the¶ only navigable link between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River, and many note the¶ potential of these waterways to facilitate invasive species transfers from one basin to the other.¶ The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers constructed and is currently operating electrical barriers to¶ prevent fish passage through these waterways. In light of recent indications that Asian carp may¶ be present upstream of the barriers, increased federal funding to prevent fish encroachment was¶ announced by the Obama Administration. Part of this funding is being spent by the Corps of¶ Engineers to explore options relating to the “hydrologic separation” of the Great Lakes and¶ Mississippi River drainage basins. The potential closure of navigation structures in the CAWS is¶ of particular interest to both the Chicago area shipping industry and Great Lakes fishery interests.

Asian Carps will thrive in the Great Lakes – perfect climate and habitat, and ideal for spawning Hansen 2/9/10 (Dr. Michael Hansen, Professor of Fisheries, College of Natural Resources, University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point; Commissioner, U.S. Section, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Ann Arbor; Great Lakes Fishery Commission's vice chairman, holds a Ph.D. of Fisheries & Wildlife, Michigan State University, 1994, M.S. Fishery Science, Cornell University, 1983, B.S. Fisheries, University of Wisconsin Stevens Point, 1979, testimony to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources & Environment Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chair, “Asian carp and the Great Lakes,” http://www.glfc.org/fishmgmt/Hansen_testimony_aisancarp.pdf)

Risk assessments carried out by officials from the U.S. Department of Interior (Kolar et al. 2005) and the Department of Fisheries and

Oceans Canada (Mandrak and Cudmore 2004), and overall experience with¶ biological invasions, give little reason to be optimistic. For starters, these assessments indicate that the carp are certain to tolerate the Great Lakes basin’s climate, because the basin is well within the fishes’ native climate range. Mean annual air temperatures range between -2ºC and

22ºC for bighead carp and¶ -6ºC and 24ºC for silver carp, a temperature span that would support Asian carp populations in much of the United States and Canada, including the Great Lakes.¶ Risk assessments also indicate that the carp would likely find the Great Lakes to contain an abundant and diverse supply of food. In the Great Lakes, the bighead carp would consume zooplankton and silver carp would prey heavily on phytoplankton, thereby

competing with the young of many native species and all life stages of native planktivorous fish species. To make matters worse, Asian carp do not appear to be too finicky about what they eat. For instance, bighead carp diet in the Mississippi River is more varied than in their native range, because they feed on algae, detritus, and zooplankton. This means that the carp appear to be able to feed

opportunistically. Also, by feeding on plankton, the Asian carp feed on the “low end” of the food web. That is, they will compete for food with the young of many native fish species and with all life stages of planktivorous native fish. Little doubt exists that bighead and silver carp would have significant negative impacts on the food web by causing large-scale changes at the low end of the structure.¶ The Asian carp need certain

types of habitat to feed and spawn successfully, including tributaries greater than 30 miles (50 km) of unimpeded length. The carp would also thrive in areas with vegetated shorelines that afford them suitable habitat for feeding. The Great Lakes basin contains numerous streams with suitable spawning habitat and large areas of vegetated shorelines, particularly large bays, wide river mouths, connecting channels (e.g., the Saint Marys River), wetlands, and lentic areas (areas of

still waters). While the carp may not thrive in large portions of the basin—for example, in the deep, cold, open waters of the lakes—all lakes, including Lake Superior, contain ample habitat for spawning and feeding.

Once they invade the Great Lakes, the global ecosystem is at riskDFP 11/23/09 (Detroit Free Press, “Asian carp invasion: Prepare for the worst,” http://www.glu.org/en/asiancarp/headlines/asian-carp-invasion-prepare-worst)

Here’s something else to think about – if Asian carp become established in the Great Lakes, they aren’t going to be confined there. Like invasive mussels, it’s only a matter of time before they show up in inland lakes and reservoirs. The mussels were moved to the inland lakes mostly by anglers transporting boats from place to place. The Asian carp most likely will be moved by anglers as well when juvenile carp get mixed in with bait minnows.

Asian Carps will unleash incalculable and irreversible damage to the ecosystem - depletes nutrients in water, worse than Zebra Mussels, and will outcompete all other native speciesReeves 8/15/12 (Andrew, This Magazine, citing Becky Cudmore who is manager of the Centre of Expertise for Aquatic Risk Assessment (CEARA) at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ Canada, and spent the last 8 years studying Asian Carp, “Attack of the killer carp,” http://this.org/magazine/2012/08/15/attack-of-the-killer-carp/)

Four fish lay motionless on the metal slab in the laboratory, lying good side up. Their wide, recessed eyes are blank and unseeing. Traces of blood pool underneath each recently dissected Asian carp, though surprisingly there is only a faint smell of fish in the air. Beside the tray of fish are two industrial-sized boxes of purple rubber gloves. “They’re essential when you work with dead fish,” says Becky Cudmore.¶ The 39-year-old scientist is the manager of the Centre of Expertise for Aquatic Risk Assessment (CEARA) at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ Canada (DFO) at the Centre for Inland Waters in Burlington, Ontario. She has spent the past eight years studying Asian carp, an aquatic invasive species

that has the potential to wipe out most native fish species in the Great Lakes. These particular carp are donated evidence from a January 2011 Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) seizure at the Windsor/Detroit border. Seeing them under

the bright fluorescents of the lab, it’s easy to wonder what all the fuss is about.¶ Each carp is seven-pounds and little more than 23 inches long, “market size,” according to Cudmore. They seem nothing like the monstrous invaders I have spent the past three

months researching. Report after report has described a voracious creature, one capable of growing to massive weights, decimating native fish species, and destroying local fisheries and recreational areas. Some

carp jump so high and with such force that recreational boaters have shied away from the carp-filled Illinois and Missouri rivers after a woman was struck in the face by a 30-pound Asian carp in 2005 while water-skiing, knocking her unconscious. She lived. “I’ve been struck before,” says Cudmore. “And believe me—it hurts. Boats are now being rigged with protective shields for the drivers.”¶ To get to her office, we walk through the halls of the monolithic concrete building, past other research labs and government offices with views of the polluted Hamilton Harbour and the Burlington Skyway. Inside, the space is strewn with binders, awards, and a life-size fiberglass bighead carp. Here, from a desk covered with family photos, Cudmore manages DFO’s Centre of Expertise for Aquatic Risk Assessment. Founded in 2006, the centre operates with a long-term, national perspective of invasive

species. It both mitigates and manages current threats and those that could spell future disaster for the Great Lakes and its tributaries. Asian carp are at the top of CEARA’s priority list. “I’ve been working on invasive species for a very long time,” says Cudmore, and

“[Asian carp] are the first species that are breathing down my neck.”¶ Thanks to their seemingly unstoppable spread, Asian carp are on their way to becoming the latest household name in aquatic threats—joining such past invasive species as zebra mussels, sea lamprey, and alewives. Already, their presence in midwestern waterways has proven a history of ecological destruction on a tremendous scale. Over the past 40 years, the

carp have spread hundreds of miles north from the American south, outcompeting native fish species, destroying ecosystems and spawning with alarming fecundity. They’re now poised to invade the Great Lakes. There they would unleash incalculable damage on freshwater ecosystems already plagued by a litany of environmental problems—unless Canadian and U.S. governments can figure out a way to stop them.¶ Asian carp is an umbrella term, the collective expression for several carp species (bighead, silver, black and grass) that belong to the Cyprinidae family. Of them all, bighead and silver pose the largest threat, and therefore receive the most attention. What makes these carp so devastating, ironically, is exactly

what attracted early aqua-culturalists: bighead and silver are filter feeders with gluttonous appetites, capable of thriving in a broad range of habitats. This makes them ideal pond cleaners. It also makes them ideal invaders. Bighead and silver outcompete native species through sheer volume. Researchers cannot begin to estimate how many Asian carp now exist in America, but have determined carp have cultivated the entirety of the Mississippi River and much of the

Illinois and Missouri rivers and their hundreds of tributaries. More than that, they are huge: Over a 20-year lifespan, carp can grow to 100 pounds. Both feats are achieved largely through destruction.¶ Some carp filter feed plankton by straining water through their gills and eating whatever they catch, allowing them to consume upwards of 20 per cent of their body weight in a single

day. They are also opportunistic feeders, devouring whatever is available at multiples levels of the aquatic food web. The hazards of their filter feeding on native species are two-fold. Asian carp out-feed secondary consumers that rely on phytoplankton and zooplankton as their primary food source and also reduce available food supplies for tertiary consumers across the food web. Both bighead and silver are highly tolerant species, capable of building sustainable populations in diverse habitats. Rapid spawning during multiple annual peaks means Asian carp also typically outbreed their native competition. This destruction of natural ecosystems can rarely be fixed—no matter how hard humans try to mitigate the damage. Ultimately, the intricacies of healthy, working ecosystems are “little understood and too sophisticated for [humans] to reproduce even with the most advanced technology,” reports the Australian-based Ecosystem Services Project, which studies the services humans obtain from their environments and their economic and social worth.

Environmental destruction causes extinction Paul Warner, American University, Dept of International Politics and Foreign Policy, August, Politics and Life Sciences, 1994, p 177

Massive extinction of species is dangerous, then, because one cannot predict which species are expendable to the system as a whole. As Philip Hoose remarks, "Plants and animals cannot tell us what they mean to each other." One can never be sure which species holds up fundamental biological relationships in the planetary ecosystem. And, because removing species is an irreversible act, it may be too late to save the system after the extinction of key plants or animals. According to the U.S. National Research Council, "The ramifications of an ecological change of this magnitude [vast extinction

of species] are so far reaching that no one on earth will escape them." Trifling with the "lives" of species is like playing Russian roulette, with our collective future as the stakes.

Even 10 mating pairs in the Great Lakes trigger our impactWUWM News 7/12/12 (“Just a Small Number of Asian Carp Could Lead to an Established Great Lakes Population,” http://www.wuwm.com/news/wuwm_news.php?articleid=10773)

A report released Thursday says just 10 mating pairs of Asian carp could cause big trouble for the Great Lakes.

The report is from the agency Fisheries and Oceans Canada. It says bigheaded carp “would find suitable food, and thermal and spawning habitats in the Great Lakes basin that would allow them to survive and become established.” Asian carp could spread to all five Great Lakes within 20 years, according to the report.¶

Environmentalists and others fear the huge, voracious invasive species could destroy the Great Lakes’ ecosystem. The fish have been making their way toward Lake Michigan through the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, which connects to the Mississippi River basin. The Army Corps of Engineers is tasked with the job of finding ways to stop the fish from making it into the Great Lakes.¶ The Alliance for the

Great Lakes released a statement Thursday, saying the report confirms the organization’s “worst fears.”

Independently, Carps will move to CanadaDFO Science ‘06 (Citing Dr. Nick Mandrak, of the Great Lakes Laboratory for Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, the Executive Director of the CEARA, and chair of the National Executive Committee of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, “Will Asian Carp Invade Canada?,” 1/1/06, http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/Publications/article/2006/01-01-2006-eng.htm)

A thin, underwater “electric fence” in a canal near Chicago, and vigilance by governments and citizens, are all that prevent a group of invasive fish species from disrupting aquatic ecosystems across the Great Lakes.¶ Four species of Asian carp, the grass, bighead, silver, and black, could readily move from the United States into Canada. Freshwater fisheries scientist Nick Mandrak, of the Great Lakes Laboratory for Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences (GLLFAS) in Burlington, Ontario, says that “people tend to think of Asian carp as semi-tropical. But I've seen them thriving under a metre of ice in frozen Russian lakes. They could survive right across Canada. And they can do great damage.”

High chance they move to Canada, which distorts the entire food webDFO Science ‘06 (Citing Dr. Nick Mandrak, of the Great Lakes Laboratory for Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, the Executive Director of the CEARA, and chair of the National Executive Committee of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, “Will Asian Carp Invade Canada?,” 1/1/06, http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/Publications/article/2006/01-01-2006-eng.htm)

Dr. Mandrak and colleagues have analyzed Asian carp characteristics to see how each species would survive in fish habitats across Canada. They have determined that once introduced, every variety would have a high chance of establishing itself. There appears to be no threat of interbreeding; the carps are too different genetically to

create hybrids with native species. The damage would come from other effects, as in the Mississippi. Asian carp would distort the entire aquatic food web, to the vast detriment of existing fishes. On top of that, they can provide a pathway for new parasites and diseases.

Loss of biodiversity causes extinction – the impact is bigger than a nuclear warRichard Tobin, associate professor of political science at SUNY-Buffalo, 1990, The Expendable Future: U.S. Politics and the Protection of Biological Diversity, p. 13-14

Every time a human contributes to a species’ extinction, a range of choices and opportunities is either eliminated or diminished. The demise of the last pupfish might have appeared inconsequential, but the eradication of other species could mean that an undiscovered cure for some

cancers has been carelessly discarded. The extinction of a small bird, an innocent amphibian, or an unappealing plant might disrupt an ecosystem, increased the incidence and areal distribution of a disease, preclude the discovery of new industrial products, prevent the natural recycling of some wastes, or destroy a source of easily grown and readily available food. By way of analogy, the anthropo-genic extinction of a plant or animal can be compared to the

senseless destruction of a priceless Renaissance painting or to the burning of an irreplaceable book that has never been opened. In an era when many people believe that limits to development are being tested or even breached, can humans afford to risk an expendable future, to squander the infinite potential that species offer, and to waste nature’s ability

and willingness to provide inexpensive solutions to many of humankind’s problems? Many scientists do not believe so, and they are fearful of the consequences of anthropogenic extinctions. These scientists quickly admit their ignorance of the biological consequences

of most individual extinctions, but widespread agreement exists that massive anthropogenic extinctions can bring catastrophic results. In fact, when compared to all other environmental problems, human-caused extinctions are likely to be of far greater concern. Extinction is the permanent destruction of unique life forms and the only irreversible

ecological change that humans can cause. No matter what the effort or sincerity of intentions, extinct species can never be replaced. “From the standpoint of permanent despoliation of the planet,” Norman Meyers observes, no other form of environmental degradation “is anywhere so significant as the fallout of species.” Harvard biologist Edward

O. Wilson is less modest in assessing the relative consequences of human-caused extinctions. To Wilson, the worst thing that will happen to earth is not economic collapse, the depletion of energy supplies, or even nuclear war. As frightful as these events might be, Wilson reasons that they can “be repaired within a few generations. The one process ongoing…that will take millions of years to correct is the loss of genetic and species diversity by destruction of natural habitats.” David Ehrenfeld succinctly summarizes the problem and the need for a solution: “We are masters of extermination, yet creation is beyond our powers… Complacency in the face of this terrible dilemma is inexcusable.” Ehrenfeld wrote these words in the early 1970s. Were he to write today he would likely add a note of dire urgency. If scientists are correct in their assessments of current extinctions and reasonably confident about extinction rates in the near future, then a concerted and effective response to human-caused extinctions is essential. The chapters that follow evaluate that response in the United States.

The impact is not inevitable, but action now is keySutley ‘10 (Nancy, Statement of Nancy Sutley, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, Testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, “Invasive Species,” July 14, 2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-111shrg62181/html/CHRG-111shrg62181.htm)

Invasive species pose serious threats to our ecosystems. The Great ¶ Lakes in particular have been devastated by invaders such as the sea ¶ lamprey, zebra mussel and the round goby. The Great Lakes now face ¶ perhaps their most significant invasive species threat yet from Asian ¶ carp. This time, however, we have an opportunity to prevent the ¶ environmental and economic harm that this invasive species could cause, ¶ and are working urgently to do so.

Economy

Multiple internal links

First, Asian Carp invasion jacks the GL tourism and Fishing industriesCommittee on Energy and Natural Resources ’12 (Hearing before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources to the United States Senate, One Hundred Eleventh Congress and Second Session to Examine the Federal response to the discovery of the Aquatic Invasive Species Asian Carp in Lake Calumet Illinois, “Invasive Species,” July 14, 2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-111shrg62181/html/CHRG-111shrg62181.htm)

The Great Lakes are a national treasure, a significant economic ¶ resource and an invaluable recreational ecosystem. The Asian carp have ¶ the potential to debilitate a multi-billion dollar fishing industry and ¶ significantly impair the tourism industry. Of far more significance, ¶ though, is the threat this invasive species poses to the

ecological ¶ viability of the Great Lakes. Preventing the Asian carp from entering ¶ Lake Michigan should be a national priority.

Second, Carps decimate the commercial and sport fish populations, net loss of 7 billion annuallyAsian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee ’11 (“Asian Carp- The Problem,” http://www.asiancarp.us/documents/AsianCarp-TheProblem.pdf)

The health of the Great Lakes is important to the U.S. economy. The Great¶ Lakes provide over 1.5 million jobs to U.S citizens and over $62 billion in¶ wages. The establishment of Asian carp could decimate commercial and¶ sportfish populations, hurting the Great Lakes’ commercial, tribal, and sport¶ fisheries, valued at more than $7 billion annually.

Anglers and Fish populations Key to overall Economic GrowthSouthwick Associates ‘7 (“Sportfishing in America: An Economic Engine and Conservation Powerhouse,” http://www.southwickassociates.com/portfolio-view/u-s-2007-sportfishing-in-america-an-economic-engine-and-conservation-powerhouse/)

Although Ed certainly isn’t thinking of this, his expenditures are rippling out through¶ the local economy, much like the

spreading ripples of a stone tossed in a lake. His¶ day on the water helps support salaries and wages in his local community. While¶ individual expenditures may seem insignificant, when multiplied by nearly 40 million¶ anglers nationwide over the course of a year, the economic effect is enormous.¶ If enough money is spent—as in the case

of sportfishing—businesses benefiting¶ from the rippling cycle will add employees whose wages and salaries, when spent, will¶ support still more jobs. Taxes will be generated, too. Economic multipliers, while

subtle,¶ can be immensely powerful.¶ That’s why and how the 2006 spending numbers of America’s nearly 40 million¶ anglers had an overall economic impact of $125 billion and supported over one¶ million jobs nationwide. These aren’t

just jobs as fishing guides or sporting-goods¶ clerks, but include telephone linemen to truck drivers whose wages are supported in¶ part by the dollars spent on fishing.¶ The remarkably simple activity of Ed’s weekend fishing trip truly is an economic¶ driving force in this nation’s economy.

Third is jobs, 1.5 million will be lost, which collapses the GL and regional economyHinderer and Murray ‘11(Julie Mida, Great Lakes Commission’s Sea Grant Fellow, B.S. degree in environmental science, and an M.S. degree in aquatic sciences, both from the University of Michigan, and Michael W., Staff Scientist for the Great Lakes Natural Resource Center, PhD in environmental chemistry at the University of Wisconsin, “Feast and Famine in the Great Lakes: How Nutrients and Invasive Species Interact to Overwhelm the Coasts and Starve Offshore Waters,” National Wildlife Federation, October 2011, http://www.nwf.org/~/media/PDFs/Regional/Great-Lakes/GreatLakes-Feast-and-Famine-Nutrient-Report.ashx)

The abundant freshwater resources and wildlife of the Great Lakes form the foundation of the region’s¶ economy. If it were its own country, The Great Lakes–St. Lawrence River region (encompassing the U.S. and¶ Canada) would be the fourth largest economy in the world.6 Industries such as manufacturing, shipping, and¶ commercial fishing that depend on the lakes are key components of the regional economy. In the U.S. alone,¶ more than 1.5 million jobs are tied directly to the Great Lakes.7 Perhaps the most vital contribution of the Great¶ Lakes to the region’s economy,

however, is their importance to recreation and tourism. The unique beauty of¶ Great Lakes shorelines is showcased through four U.S. National Lakeshores and a National Park,8 in addition¶ to countless state and local parks and recreation areas

across the basin. Recreational fishing in the Great Lakes¶ is worth more than $7 billion annually,9 and

recreational boating creates an economic impact of over $30 billion¶ each year.10 More than 200,000 jobs in the region are supported by Great Lakes recreation and tourism.11¶ A healthy Great Lakes ecosystem is vital to sustain and promote the wealth of recreational opportunities in the¶ region. Water quality and wildlife must be protected, restored and enhanced to support tourism, economic growth,¶ and other benefits provided by the lakes. There is a long history of cooperative efforts in the U.S. and Canada to¶ protect and restore the Great Lakes, as summarized in Section 5. Coordination was enhanced on the U.S. side in¶ 2005, when federal agencies, governments of the eight Great Lakes states, tribes, industry and nongovernmental¶ organizations recognized the need for a coordinated restoration effort and joined forces to create a shared vision for¶ the lakes under the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) Strategy.12 Through the creation of the GLRC¶ Strategy, the region showed that it was ready to invest in projects that would directly advance common restoration¶ goals. In response, the federal government created the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), a five-year¶ investment that included $475 million for restoration and protection programs in its first year.¶ So far, the GLRI has funded numerous projects across the basin that are restoring wildlife habitats, cleaning¶ up beaches, and educating the public on invasive species, to name a few.13 In addition to ecological benefits,¶ the GLRI is providing an economic boost to the region: the

Brookings Institution estimates that for every $1¶ invested in Great Lakes restoration, $2 of economic benefit are produced.14

Great Lakes Economy key to US economy – 27% of GDPVaccaro and Read ‘11(Lynn, B.S. in Geology-Biology, Brown University M.S. in Natural Resources, Cornell University M.A.T. Science Education, Cornell University, Coastal Research Specialist for Sea Grant Michigan, Jennifer, Assistant Director and Research Coordinator for Sea Grant Michigan, executive director of Great Lakes Observing System, former research associate at the Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research, University of Windsor, former program specialist at the Great Lakes Commission, former Fulbright Doctoral Fellow at the University of Michigan, Ph.D., University of Western Ontario (London, Ontario) M.A., McMaster University (Hamilton, Ontario) B.A., King’s College, University of Western Ontario (London, Ontario), “Vital to Our Nation’s Economy: GREAT LAKES JOBS,” Sea Grant Michigan, 2011, http://www.fws.gov/glri/documents/11-203-Great-Lakes-Jobs-report%5B1%5D.pdf)

Water is huge draw for people — coastal trails, clean beaches and¶ waterfront businesses add tremendous value to both

metropolitan¶ and semi-rural areas. In this new economic era, growth will be less¶ linked to traditional manufacturing and more focused on quality of¶ life and quality of the region’s natural resources. Unless we protect¶

and restore our best environmental asset — the Great Lakes — we¶ will not be able to retain and attract strong new businesses and great¶ human resources.¶ The Lakes are vital not only to the basin states, but are also an¶ integral part of our nation’s economic and environmental health.¶ With 83 million people, the region produced 27% of the gross¶ domestic product5 and 24% of country’s exports in 2009.6 The Great¶ Lakes basin

is home to 38% of the Fortune 500 companies7 and one¶ of the largest concentrations of research universities in the world.8¶ Great Lakes colleges and universities award 32% of the nation’s¶ advanced science and engineering degrees,9 providing the human¶ capital needed for innovation and entrepreneurship.

Independently, Carp invasion of the GL’s will destroy the economy; long-term savings outweigh short term spendingReeves 8/15/12 (Andrew, This Magazine, citing Becky Cudmore who is manager of the Centre of Expertise for Aquatic Risk Assessment (CEARA) at the Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ Canada, and spent the last 8 years studying Asian Carp, “Attack of the killer carp,” http://this.org/magazine/2012/08/15/attack-of-the-killer-carp/)

Indeed, it’s worth examining the financial risks associated with the spread of Asian carp into the Great Lakes. Currently, the total cost to Canadian governments for dealing with 18 minor invasive species is pegged at $34 billion annually—not one-time costs, but annual financial burdens. Asian carp could increase that number greatly. Much else must be considered: lump sum and annual costs spent on prevention and damage control once a species is established; revenue lost to commercial, recreational, and tribal fisheries due to native species destruction; jobs and wages dependent upon healthy ecosystems; and damages to the

immeasurable services offered by a healthy ecosystem that is no longer functional. Plus, if Asian carp break through the barriers in Chicago and enter Lake Michigan, they could become the most expensive invasive species to manage in North American history.¶ Currently, the United States spends $50 million annually on controlling Asian carp, and the Obama administration has slated an additional $51 million in 2012-13 for researching alternative control methods, a move both Cudmore and Ullrich welcome. That number rises when you factor in money spent by the Canadian, Ontario and Quebec governments, both cash and in-kind offerings, including roughly $5 million to complete the CEARA-led risk assessment study. Cudmore says the federal government shares the same level of concern as Washington towards Asian carp but financially, “they are not on the same playing field.” Too bad

considering prevention—as opposed to maintenance—can generate up to $9.5 billion in long-term savings. “We have learned the critical nature of prevention. This is now the number one strategy for dealing with invasive species,” says Eder. “Once [an invasive species] is in the system they are virtually impossible to eradicate or control or manage.”¶ Yet the cost of controlling an invasive species is only the tip—there is also the mountain of associated costs and lost revenue. Take the Great Lakes fishery: the GLC estimates that $16 billion is spent annually on boating trips and equipment, with some of this money trickling down to Aboriginal groups

specializing in fishing expeditions on tribal lands. Commercial and sport fisheries generate an additional $7 billion in economic activity annually as part of 1.5 million jobs the Great Lakes directly sustain, generating an estimated $62 billion in annual wages. If Asian carp enter the waterways, the recreational fishing industry could likely not survive such a monumental blow.

GL Economy key to global economy and overall US competitiveness Austin et al ‘7(John C., directs the Great Lakes Economic Initiative, Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute, Metropolitan Policy Program, and Soren Anderson, Assistant Professor of Economics, and Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics at Michigan State University, doctoral candidate in economics at the University of Michigan, and Paul N. Courant, Professor of Economics and of Information, director of the Center for State, Local and Urban Policy at the University of Michigan, Harold T. Shapiro Collegiate Professor of Public Policy, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor, Faculty Associate in the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan, former Associate Provost for Academic and Budgetary Affairs, Chair of the Department of Economics and Director of the Institute of Public Policy Studies, former Senior Staff Economist at the Council of Economic Advisers, MA and PhD in Economics from Princeton University, Robert E. Litan senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and vice president for research and policy at the Kauffman Foundation, “Healthy Waters, Strong Economy: The Benefits of Restoring the Great Lakes Ecosystem,” The Brookings Institute, September 2007, http://www.brookings.edu/metro/pubs/20070904_gleiecosystem.pdf)

The 12-state Great Lakes economic region is a vital part of the U.S. economy. Over the¶ past 150 years, many of the economic and social innovations that have driven U.S.¶ prosperity were created here—from the auto to

the airplane to the Internet. It is a¶ huge domestic marketplace, home to nearly one-third of the country’s population and¶ producing one-third of its Gross State Product.15 And its innovation infrastructure is unrivaled:¶ 300 of the nation’s Fortune 1000 firms are located here, and it has the world’s leading network¶ of universities, which together produce 38 percent of the nation’s bachelor’s degree holders,¶ and 37 percent of the its advanced science and engineering graduates.16¶ But the region’s industrial dominance has also left many challenges, including a lack of¶ entrepreneurialism, lagging education attainment levels, and a drain of talent to

more dynamic¶ communities elsewhere in the country.¶ That needs to change.¶ The Great Lakes and its waterways offer a tremendous opportunity for reinvigorating the¶ economy of the region, and boosting the competitiveness of the nation as a whole. While other¶ regions face long-term sustainability challenges from lack of water,

congestion, costs of infrastructure,¶ sprawl, and natural disasters, the country’s “North Coast” offers the prospect of¶ environmentally and financially sustainable commercial and population growth. But in order to¶ capitalize on this asset, policy makers need recognize its value, and invest accordingly. This can¶ happen in two major ways.

Plan

The United States Army Corps of Engineers should construct permanent hydrological separation barriers in the Chicago Area Waterway System.

Solvency

Plan is the Army Corps and Congressional AuthoritySutley ‘10 (Nancy, Statement of Nancy Sutley, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, Testimony to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, “Invasive Species,” July 14, 2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-111shrg62181/html/CHRG-111shrg62181.htm)

The Army Corps of Engineers has also undertaken the actions ¶ laid out in the framework. In April, using the authority from ¶ Congress, under section 126 of the Energy and Water Development ¶ and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, the Corps awarded a ¶ multimillion-dollar contract for construction of a concrete ¶ barrier and fencing between the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal ¶ and the Des Plaines River. This is designed to prevent fish ¶ passage around the electric barrier in flooding events where ¶ the 2 water bodies mix.¶ We urge Congress to extend, in time and in geography, the ¶ Corps' 126 authority, which expires in October 2010 and appears ¶ to be only limited to CAWS, so that we can continue the ¶ emergency actions to battle the Asian carp.

Army Corps of Engineers key, and hydrological separation solvesHughes 7/19/12 (Holly, Rep. Holly Hughes, R-White River Twp., represents Muskegon County in the 91st State House District. “Viewpoint: More science, less politics needed on Asian carp issue,” The Muskegon Chronicles, http://www.mlive.com/opinion/muskegon/index.ssf/2012/07/viewpoint_asian_carp_by_holly.html)

Stakeholders have been working diligently to convince the administration that the Asian carp threat is real and an issue of importance to our region. The Army Corps of Engineers has the tools and expertise to tackle the problem. Most experts agree that the only definitive way to stop the migration is the hydrological separation of the Great Lakes and Mississippi River basins.¶ After past statements from a member of the administration saying that Michigan had failed to show likely irreparable harm from the invasion of Asian carp, the administration has recently shown renewed interest in the subject. But instead of taking action, the president suggests a “speed up” -- not in taking action, but in

having the Corps come up with a plan to share with Congress.¶ The concern is that politics is getting involved where we have a serious issue that needs serious attention. The Cleveland Plain Dealer editorialized last month that the administration's announcement “seems more like an election-year ploy to mollify critics furious over Obama's failure to recognize the gravity of the carp threat.

These plankton predators are in the Chicago Area Waterway System that connects the Mississippi River to Lake Michigan. Without urgent action, it is only a matter of time until they lay waste to the Great Lakes' multibillion-dollar commercial and sports fishing industry and the 800,000 jobs it supports.”¶ By most estimates, the Great Lakes currently has about 185 non-native species, and some experts believe the Great Lakes’ ecosystem is threatened not just by the Asian carp, but by the gulping quagga mussel and zebra mussel which possibly number a quadrillion

along the bottom of Lake Michigan. The bottom line is the current administration must take action to preserve the delicate balance necessary in order to preserve a crucial component of our region’s economy.

Electrical Barrier solves, but action now is criticalHansen ‘10 [Dr. Michael, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources & Environment Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson, Chair, “Asian carp and the Great Lakes,” 2/9/10, http://www.glfc.org/fishmgmt/Hansen_testimony_aisancarp.pdf]

The short answer to the question “What can be done if Asian carp enter the Great Lakes?” is “Not much.” At least,

not much at the moment. Currently, control mechanisms do not exist for Asian carp, if they become established. Scientists do not know of a pesticide that would target the carp, nor weaknesses in their spawning behavior that could be exploited, nor predatory

pressures that would help reduce populations. That said, the effort to find solutions has not been robust. The sea lamprey control program has been a success because of a concerted effort to apply science to discover control techniques. Sea lamprey control has worked because lines of accountability are clear—the Great Lakes Fishery Commission is responsible. Sea lamprey control has worked because the governments of Canada and the United States have committed resources to do the job. Currently, no such effort exists for other invasive species, including Asian carp. Granted, universities and government agencies are conducting solid, promising research on invasive species, but until governments redouble their efforts—both in terms of resources and in terms of vision—viable solutions for any invasive species are probably decades away. The Great Lakes Regional Collaboration’s Aquatic Invasive Species Team noted as much and recommended the establishment of an “Integrated Pest Management Program” to focus attention of government. The commission strongly agrees and recommends a concerted effort to find solutions to some of the most pressing invasive species problems. Such solutions include both the

development of control techniques and the establishment of accountability so that an agency remains motivated toward progress.¶ This paucity of control options has been a strong force motivating prevention. The Great Lakes Fishery Commission has been a partner with other primary agencies to seek preventative measures for Asian carp for more than a decade. These measures were discussed in greater detail by other panelists during today’s hearing. The commission has joined its partners over the years in pressing for construction of an electrical dispersal barrier, stopping trade of live Asian carp, and supporting other steps taken by management agencies in

the Chicago region. The commission strongly supports current efforts to complete the electrical barrier, to build a structure of some kind to prevent species transfer between rivers that parallel the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, and to plug other holes (such as culverts and pipes) that might allow species migration. The commission is heartened by the strong interest that Cameron Davis, the Senior Advisor to the EPA Administrator, has taken in this issue, because the administration’s interest in coordinating a multi-agency response is badly needed.¶ While current work to prevent Asian carp

migration are certainly appropriate, the only solution to this problem is to achieve what is called “ecological separation,” that is, altering the canal system in a way where it is impossible for species of any kind to move from the Mississippi basin to the Great Lakes or vice versa. This separation was included as a recommendation of the Aquatic Invasive Species Summit convened by Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley in 2003 (Anonymous 2003).¶ The recommendation from

2003 was to achieve that separation “within 10 years,” so much needs to be done in a short amount of time. In fact, the Great Lakes do not have any time to lose. Ecological separation must occur immediately. To kick-start the investigation into the feasibility of ecological separation, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission and the Great Lakes Fishery Trust co-commissioned a study to examine transportation patterns on the waterways, the hydrology, and options for achieving separation. That report (Brammeier et al. 2008) was completed about a year ago and its conclusions have never been more relevant. The commission appreciates Mr. Brammeier and his co-author’s work on this issue and thanks the chair for including him at this hearing, because his insights are critical to understanding ultimate policy solutions.

More evidence, Hydrological Separation keyCommittee on Energy and Natural Resources ’12 (Hearing before the Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources to the United States Senate, One Hundred Eleventh Congress and Second Session to Examine the Federal response to the discovery of the Aquatic Invasive Species Asian Carp in Lake Calumet Illinois, “Invasive Species,” July 14, 2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-111shrg62181/html/CHRG-111shrg62181.htm)

A few weeks ago, Chairwoman Stabenow and I introduced a bill ¶ directing the US Army Corps of Engineers to undertake an expedited ¶ study of hydrological separation. The idea behind a hydrological ¶ separation is to create a physical separation between the Great Lakes ¶ and the Mississippi water basins. This may offer the best hope for a ¶ long-term solution for containing not only this, but other invasive ¶ species.¶ Hydrological separation is a complex feat of engineering. While the ¶ Army Corps of Engineers has already started a broad examination of ¶ methods to control the spread of invasive species, we cannot wait for ¶ that comprehensive study. Our bill would create a separate, expedited ¶ study of how hydro separation could work, its environmental impact, and ¶ an estimate for construction time.

2AC – Case

Inherency

Current plans are directed south of the Chicago Waterways and destroys wetlandsCaylor 11/17 [Bob, The News-Sentinel, Army Corps proposals could carve up Eagle Marsh to prevent species spread, http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20121117/NEWS/121119625/1005]

To block invasive species such as Asian carp from reaching the Lake Erie basin, the Army Corps of Engineers has proposed a menu of multimillion-dollar projects that could permanently change the face of Eagle Marsh, the natural preserve on Fort Wayne's south side.¶ The plan rated as the best alternative by the Corps would have the worst impact on the 716-acre wetland. It would erect an “I-wall” averaging 8 feet high across the marsh at the

point where the waters of the Mississippi basin and the Great Lakes basin can mingle during floods. It's a costly solution, too, estimated at $12.8 million to build.

Solvency

2AC – T

2AC – CP

2AC – States

The CP is illegal for the StatesHarris 12/3 [Andrew, Bloomberg, Great Lakes States’ Asian Carp Case Toss by U.S. Court, http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-12-03/great-lakes-states-asian-carp-case-toss-by-u-dot-s-dot-court]

“Neither the MWRD or the Corps has the authority to close off the waterways in Chicago,” David St. Pierre,

the executive director of the district, said in a phone interview. “We simply can’t do it. It would be illegal for us to take that action.”¶ While environmental traces of carp DNA have been found in Calumet Harbor, a small body of water adjacent to Lake

Michigan, no traces of the fish have been found in the Great Lakes, St. Pierre said.¶ Tharp gave the states until Jan. 11 to try to replead their case in a way that doesn’t accuse the defendants of failing to do something that by law they’re required to do.¶ “Many organizations, including the Corps, are actively working to stop Asian carp from migrating in to the Great Lakes watershed,” wrote Tharp. “The plaintiffs acknowledge that the defendants and others are taking steps

to prevent Asian carp from reaching Lake Michigan, but they argue the defendants are not doing enough.Ӧ The case is State of Michigan v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 10cv4457, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).

2AC – DA