“Economic advance is not the same thing as human progress.” -John Clapham
Michigan waters have a history steeped in controversy, tragedy, and invasion. Ships traveling into our waters from far away oceans have introduced a multitude of invasive species that have resulted in decimating the ecosystems and ravaging the native fish populations. There have been public political battles waged over the use of the watersheds. Public outcry arose when a plan to install offshore energy producing wind turbines was unveiled.
Through over fishing, deforestation, and other damning practices that had profound negative impacts to our watersheds, native populations of grayling and brook trout have severely diminished or become extinct. Populations of other indigenous species have declined so much that they are more of a surprise when encountered, instead of a norm. A love affair developed for dams has lead to substantial blockage of primal spawning grounds for native species, rendering natural reproduction more limited than it should be. We are faced with the perpetual (seemingly inevitable) threat of asian carp invading our waters, if they haven’t already. The extent of their impact upon arrival is somewhat unknown, but we can all agree it won’t be good.
Historic low water levels, warming water temperatures, increased imbalances in critical chemical compositions of our lakes and rivers, degradation of habitat, expanded erosion, additional invasive species, draining of headwater aquifers, and other natural and human induced threats encroach upon our natural resources. The easy excuse is – these are out of our control. The reality is, they are a direct result of us as a human race.
Sure, you could argue that as a result of many of these negative events positives have come about. Positives like the multi-million dollar a year salmon and steelhead fishing industry. Or the increased ability for anglers to catch limits of walleyes in the reservoirs of dams. But at the end of the day, salmon populations are collapsing and dams are failing, and there is probably no way to fix either.
Haven’t we learned from the mistakes of our forefathers? Are we so shortsighted as to think that we can continue to place “band aid” style of fixes to man caused ecological issues and they’ll eventually just go away? Because we have “solved” issues in the past by introducing new species, doesn’t mean that is a sustainable solution.
Here’s a sustainable solution – realize that our waterways are precious and water is life. Click for the trailer on a great feature I watched at F3T over the weekend: Water is Life Trailer. Fish and other aquatic life is are the litmus testers, the canary in the coal mine, that provide insight into how healthy our resources are.
The proposed aquafarm on the Au Sable doesn’t just impact the fishermen that enjoy the resource named “the Holy Waters”. It affects the small towns that call the river home, it affects the entire economies in those areas that jobs are created as a result of the thousands of folks recreationally enjoying the resource every year.
Harrietta Hills Trout Farm has championed aquaculture tirelessly in the state of Michigan for a number of years. Recently, they have proposed significant expansion of an existing farm currently operated as a tourist attraction on the Au Sable into a full blown aquafarm.
In an interview with Michigan Radio authored by Lindsey Smith(Click here for more) Dan Vogler, co-owner and general manager of Harrietta Hills Trout Farm LLC states:
“It gets the community what they want, which is the opportunity to maintain this as a tourist attraction. And it gets us what we need, which is additional production space,” Dan Vogler said. Vogler is co-owner and general manager of Harrietta Hills Trout Farm LLC, the small business that’s leasing the hatchery.
How can he be so sure that is what the community really wants is my question. Does the community really want to be known for the good old days of cold, clean, fish filled waters that once were? Do they want to be known for the local businesses that used to line the streets but can no longer exist without the seasonal population booms that come to enjoy the resource?
The article at michiganradio.org goes on to state:
With all the fresh water Michigan has, Vogler believes Michigan could produce much more fresh, locally produced fish, adding value to the state’s economy and residents’ diets.
Here is information regarding consumption of farmed fish found at clevelandclinic.org (Click here for more), citing Kristin Kirkpatrick, MS, RD, LD, a registered dietitian and wellness manager for the Cleveland Clinic Wellness Institute.
Persistent organic pollutants (POPs for short) sound dangerous. They are. POPs have been linked to several diseases, including type 2 diabetes and obesity. Evidence suggests obesity might be even more of a risk factor for diabetes when POPs are present in your body. And specific types of POPs increase the risk of stroke in women. Why does this matter? Because PCB (one type of POP) levels are five to 10 times higher in farmed fish than in wild fish.
“The benefit-risk ratio for carcinogens and noncarcinogens is significantly greater for wild salmon than for farmed salmon.”
Farmed salmon comes with uncertainty about antibiotic use. Wild salmon does not.
There is an obvious threat to the high water quality the river currently experiences. Increased discharge of foreign chemicals and fish feces poses a substantial risk to the health of the ecosystem. In the previously cited interview with Michigan Radio, Vogler had this to say about monitoring:
“Monitoring is very expensive. It’s a lot of lab work and I pay the bill. So as you add more monitoring to my operation, you’re impeding my ability to make a living here,” Vogler said, “The reality is that I’m not a non-profit organization. So if I’m going to be here and run this thing and give the community the benefit of the summer tourist aspect, I have to be profitable. So adding more monitoring burdens without being able to demonstrate how that helps – I’ve got a little problem with that.”
This does not strike me as someone that is overly concerned with the health of the river, to me it seems he is more concerned with operating a profitable business at the potential expense of the resource. To further complicate matters Dan Sanderson writes for the Crawford County Avalanche (Click here for more):
Instead of grab samples, the fish hatchery operator will be required to take three-portion composite samples collected at equal intervals over the 12-hour period of maximum fish activity. A weekly monitoring frequency will be required for all levels of production.
If I am understanding this correctly, the hatchery is being asked to self monitor in this situation. That would be like asking me or you to turn ourselves in every time we exceed the posted speed limit. This does not seem like a viable plan to ensure the water quality does not diminish so much that it is destroyed.
At what point do we recognize that we are destroying the very things that give us life? Apparently, it requires an enormously catastrophic reoccurring event to open our eyes.
Here’s what you can do to help, go to the Anglers of the Au Sable site and read their statements regarding the issue and make a donation (if you are able to) to the cause. (Click here for more)
Order a shirt supporting the efforts (Click here for more)