Hello, after reading this awesome piece of writing i am
too happy to share my knowledge here with mates.
Sounds like american carp, too many bones. Only good for the garden.
Probably a few thousand bighead and silver carps escaped in AR around 1980. 35 years later I estimate there are 30 to 60 million fish in 6,400 river miles of the Mississippi Basin. Every year these fish expand their territory. There is a new land barrier at Eagle Marsh near Ft. Wayne, IN and plans in place for barriers in Ohio. A lock in Minneapolis was closed and there is a study to close a lock in the Erie canal. The focus in on IL but the problem is much greater. From 2011 to 2018 the Federal government spent $420 million mainly for barriers, followed by education/enforcement/early detection and finally population control. Harvesting is the only population control in place. As noted above it is expensive. The $1.1 to $1.6 million per year for the last 5 or 6 years was for just 50 miles of river. The $12 million government pesticide solution is based on Antimycin A/beeswax. Antimycin A is a red labeled, highly hazardous, broad spectrum pesticide that the EPA wanted to remove as a legal pesticide in 2005. There is no commercial source of Antimycin A. Beeswax must be used because if the fish even get a hint of Antimycin A, they will not eat the formulation. I invented a selective (digestive like the USGS Antimycin A/beeswax), safe (all FDA ingredients) and low cost (1/12 to 1/3oth of the USGS Antimycin A raw material if the government could buy them). For more information see http://www.carpfree.com or email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. No pesticide, the bighead and silver carp will get into the Great Lakes, it is just statistics.
Some clarifications that might make the government and environmental efforts make more financial sense:
1. The first electric barriers aren’t just to keep Asian carp(s) out of the Great Lakes, but other species going in the other direction as well; they were originally built to keep Eurasian round goby—a highly invasive fish in the Great Lakes—from entering the Mississippi Basin. The fish beat them out, however, being found downstream of the barrier before it was finished.
2. There are currently some 13 non-native fish species poised to make their way from the Mississippi Basin into the Great Lakes or vice-versa through the Chicago-area canal system, which considerably raises the stakes for its utility and makes the price of inaction far greater than current costs of prevention.
3. Maintaining the current Great Lakes $7 billion/annual fisheries jointly costs the U.S. and Canada upwards of $30 million a year in sea lamprey control, and they have been doing this for 63 years; if they had to control Asian carps as well the cost would be unaffordable and the fisheries would collapse—never mind the environmental and ecosystem damage that would likely do the same.
4. Climate models and risk evaluations for Asian carps (most done by Canada’s DFO but including info from U.S. agencies) show that they would do just fine in most of the Great Lakes (Superior excepted). Yet, allowing the four species conflated under the rubric of “Asian carp” into the Great Lakes would be like dropping a trophic bomb in the lakes—a phytoplanktivore (silver carp), a zooplanktivore (bighead carp), a molluscivore (black carp), and an herbivore (grass carp) could combine to do a huge amount of damage to the already tenuous base of the Great Lakes food chain. In addition, for instance, grass carp (which have now been found in small numbers in Ontario, Erie and Michigan) vector some serious fish parasites and eat up to 40% of their body weight in aquatic plants a day—plants that are used by other fish to lay their eggs on. All in all it will be a disaster if any of these species really get going in the lakes.
What about often overlooked but very serious health advisories for fish in the waterways where carp are found? Most states have advisories for mercury, PCBs and other contaminants that advise a limit on the safe consumption of local fish, which is even lower for pregnant women and children and could have dangerous health effects if consumed regularly.
Is their any research being done by biologists to make them sterile and limit their reproduction? With all the money spent could this be an alternative?
They will simply breed in the rivers and multiply, eventually overwhelming the great lakes.
I have a chum that will draw them into areas to be harvested. Instead of chasing them why not call them to you.
Pitchin1 – A 2017 study by the USGS predicted they would have sufficient food and habitat in Lake Michigan within at least a mile of shoreline, in bays, inlets, and river mouths. https://www.usgs.gov/news/asian-carp-would-have-adequate-food-survive-lake-michigan
The environmental and conservation coalition is not pushing for a permanent separation, as this article continuously claims. In public comments, groups including the National Wildlife Federation have advocated for the Brandon Road plan as an alternative to completely shutting down navigation. The claim that the front line of Asian carp hasn’t advanced in decades is a little misleading, too: decades ago, there were only a few fish where now there is a population. And if you make a market for Asian carp, then you’ll induce illegal introductions by people looking to cash in on that market.
There is not enough current in Lake Michigan for Asian Carp to spawn, the water temps in upper lake Michigan are below needed spawning temps. The summer water temps in lower lake Michigan are on the b0ttom edge of needed spawning temps. The fish would simply die of old age in the lake if they did make it past the chemical barrier.
Could you please identify the tributaries connected Lake Michigan that provide the current and temperature needed for Asian Carp to spawn and list them. if there are none we are spending a lot of money to keep a few fish out of the lake that would simply die of old age.
Comments are closed.