Phil Moy University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Aquatic Nuisance Species Dispersal Barrier Phil Moy University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute

Dispersal Barrier Project Authorized by NISA (1996) Create a barrier to prevent dispersal of invasive species via the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal The Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal is a cross-drainage link between the Great Lakes and Mississippi basins A two-way avenue for AIS dispersal

Chicago Waterways Locks C o n t i n e n t a l D i v i d e Illinois River Chicago North Shore Channel Locks Lake Michigan Plaines River Des Sanitary and Ship Canal Illinois - Michigan Canal C o n t i n e n t a l D i v i d e Stony Creek Cal-Sag Channel Calumet River Saganashkee Slough Grand Calumet River Little Calumet River Illinois Indiana

SPREAD OF INVASIVE SPECIES VIA THE ILLINOIS WATERWAY WI L. Michigan IA Miss. R. Illinois R. IN IL Missouri R. MO Ohio R.

Chicago Canals First identified as a potential escape route from the Great Lakes for the Eurasian ruffe Targeted round goby until 1999 Now bighead & silver carp The Eurasian ruffe only recently entered northern Lake Michigan and has not yet been found in southern Lake Michigian. The round goby was found in Calumet Harbor in southern Lake Michigan in 1993 and extended its range downstream through the Cal-Sag Channel past the barrier site on the San-Ship canal in June 1999, nearly 3 yrs before the first barrier became operational.

Bighead & Silver Carp Large bodied (>100 lbs) CARP SUCK Large bodied (>100 lbs) Planktivores – zooplankton, phytoplankton Fecund, rapid development (10” in yr 1) Adapted to northern temperate zones Can travel >50mi/yr (125 mi/month) Tend to jump when startled Two bighead carp were captured on the Des Plaines River about 22 miles below the barrier in 2002. No other individuals have been caught at that location since. Bighead carp reach 59” in length and up to 125 pounds. The feed on plankton by filtering water over their specially adapted gill rakers.

Barrier Constraints and Obstacles Commercial navigation Recreational navigation Storm water discharge Sanitary Discharge: 1.3 Billion gal/day Obstacles: Permits Safety

Chicago Waterways Illinois Indiana North Shore Channel Lake Michigan River Chicago North Shore Channel Lake Michigan Plaines River Des Sanitary and Ship Canal Illinois - Michigan Canal Stony Creek Barrier Reach Cal-Sag Channel Calumet River Grand Calumet River Little Calumet River Illinois Indiana

Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal near Romeoville, IL This photo taken from the Romeo Road bridge looking north. The arch in the distance is a natural gas pipeline. The first barrier site is on the right bank about even with the front of the barge. P. Moy

Potential Barrier Approaches Physical Chemical Other * Weirs Screens Low/No DO Nitrogen Ozone Toxicants Rotenone Antimycin TFM Chloramine Electrical Acoustic Hydraulic Biological Thermal Visual Bubble Screens Lights An advisory panel consisting of local stakeholders has met twice a year since 1996. Physical barriers were not investigated due to their interference with navigation. At the time when the barrier panel considered these options, bubbles, light and acoustics were not considered effective. Chemical options were considered as a stop-gap measure due to cost and other public concerns.

Electric Barrier Micro-Pulsed DC; Graded field Few permitting issues Available technology - used in irrigation canals and for lamprey control High chance of success Electrodes on the bottom and recessed in the walls to avoid damage by barges The graded electric field is weaker on the edges and stronger in the middle. Fish can feel the electricity before they are stunned. This allows them to go back the way they came instead of getting stunned and floating through the barrier. This feature is most important for fish coming downstream. Barges in the canal tend to run right along the canal walls. Anything protruding from the wall will simply be torn off.

Recommended Barrier Features Electrodes railroad rails – 20yr life Back-up generator Suction trough to capture stunned gobies Emergency egress ladders Boat launching crane Estimated annual operating cost ~ $40,000 Budget constraints reduced the scope of the original project as envisioned by the advisory panel.

Barrier I Electrodes steel cables – 3yr life Construction cost ~ $1.25 Million Annual operating cost ~ $24,000 Began operation April 11th 2002 Barrier Site

Barrier I Control building 165 Feet 1-1/2” cables pass through holes drilled in bedrock 25 Ft The electrodes (cables) generate an electric field from the bottom of the canal to the water surface. People in boats are not affected, neither are navigational equipment onboard vessels. If oyu put your hand in the water in the barrier site it feels prickly like your hand is “asleep”. A person in the water would not be able to swim or control their muscles so it is important to wear a personal flotation device. P. Moy Canal cross section view

Barrier Operation Fall 2002: GLFC, IJC & USEPA fund purchase of back-up generator March 2003: IJC helped secure USEPA funds for: Egress/Access ladders Boat hoist Submerged antennas for improved fish monitoring Photo illustrates the barrier site. The white building houses the control equipment. The black or gray rectangular box houses the exposed ends of the electrodes. The antennae are for monitoring tagged fish in the canal used as part of the biological monitoring effort. The boat launching crane is at the far end of the compund. Natural gas pipeline can be seen in the background.

Barrier Monitoring Univ. of Illinois & Illinois Natural History Survey To date, radio-tagged & released 118 common carp below the barrier March 2003 found a radio-tagged carp upstream of the barrier Data from fixed antennas indicated the fish passed through the array between 2:30 and 2:35 PM on April 3rd We used common carp for monitoring because they are abundant in the canal, easy to obtain and large-bodied which enables use of long-lasting transmitters.

Barrier Operation Barrier site sensors indicated a barge passed though at that same time The power output (voltage, pulse rate) of the barrier was doubled on April 16th, 2003 On April 17th circuit boards on all four pulsators shorted out. This photo shows barge congestion on the canal. It was taken about 7 miles upstream of the barrier site. Power output of the barrier is about 2 volts per inch.

Barrier Operation Power restored 25 hrs later System failure was due to line voltage problems No other tagged fish passed through the array during the outage No problems with tagged fish since Prompted a study on barge hull impacts on the barrier = Field Effects Study We expected the power supply to drop somewhat when the voltage was increased. This did not occur and as a result the barrier control components overloaded and blew out.

Field Effects Study Barges create a weak area in the barrier field under the barge hull Could allow (or drag) a fish through the barrier field Barrier II double-array design addresses this problem The two array design will allow a fish that is pulled or pushed into the field by the barges a chance to recover and escape between the two electrical arrays.

Barrier Safety Tests Barge crew observed arcing at barrier site Completed January - March 2005 Confirmed arcing could occur between barges USCG established a restricted activity zone: No passing, mooring, single barge-wide tows Special safety requirements – steel cables All vessel occupants to wear PFDs Test Barrier II when operational Arcing between barge hulls is a major concern for barges that carry flammable cargoes – especially and empty gasoline barge.

Asian Carp On The Way? July 2002, 2 Live Asian carp found 22 miles below barrier in Des Plaines River 50+ miles from Lake Michigan Two locks between capture site and barrier Developed a proposed rapid response plan Considered several control options: netting, herding, heat, explosives, sonic disruption, flow rates, oxygen depletion, attractants & repellents, killing w/ barrier A 14-agency committee considered the possible control and rapid response options. All options had drawbacks. We settled on chemical control as being most effective.

The Asian Carp Response Management and Eradication Management Monitoring of distribution boundary Monitoring is an integral part of response plan Capture and depletion of downstream population Dispersal barrier as backstop Eradication – poison out a section of the canal if needed

Asian Carp Monitoring Area River Chicago North Shore Channel Lake Michigan Locks Barrier Site Plaines River Des 4 sites Monthly samples Fyke, trammel nets Electrofishing Sanitary and Ship Canal Calumet River The IL DNR, USFWS, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago share the monitoring duties for Asian carp. Grand Calumet River Cal-Sag Channel Little Calumet River Illinois Indiana

Asian Carp Monitoring No Bighead or Silver carp seen or caught in 2003 through October 2004 Dead silver carp found in November 2004 32 inches long; 5-7 years old A barge crewman found this Asian carp floating in a barge slip. He recognized it as an Asian carp and reported it to authorities.

Silver Carp Found 1.5 mi below barrier in a barge slip Dead for several days May have been on the deck of a barge Subsequent sampling found no other individuals Have expanded the monitoring area

Barrier II Cost $9.1 million; 75% Federal IL DNR provided $1.8 million Other 7 Great Lakes States provided ~ $70,000 each Located 850 feet downstream from Barrier I Two arrays with independent power & back-up 500 feet long (10X Barrier I) 6x6” Steel electrodes = 20-year service life Photo illustrates the site of the new barrier in the foreground. The original barrier site is the white building in the upper left. The black pipes extending from the ground will encase the wires for one set of the electrodes.

Barrier II More effective on small fish Construction started late October 2004 Expect completion June 2005 Illinois will become owner without new legislation Expect operation to cost $20,000 / month The long steel “rails” are the electrodes for Barrier II. The pipes sticking out of the ground will encase the electrode wiring. The men in the lower right photo are working on water-cooled switches that will control the electric pulses.

Ultimate Barrier A combination of barrier methodologies will likely be required for best success Acoustic-bubble barrier w/ electricity Educated public Prevent new introductions Funds requested for hydrologic separation reconnaissance study The general public plays an important role in preventing the spread of invasive species to new inland waters. People must be aware of what these plants and animals look like, how they spread and what steps to take to prevent their spread. Natural resource agencies rely on reports from the public to locate and identify new infestations.

Dispersal Barrier Website: www.seagrant.wisc.edu Aquatic Invasive Species Dispersal barrier Photos Video Background What’s new