To: Michael Butler, CEO – Tennessee Wildlife Federation
From: Timothy Joseph, PhD. Chairman – Watts Bar Ecology and Fishery Council
Dear Mr. Butler:
Thank you for responding to my WBEFC article. You stated in your letter: “While we all want to stop the challenge that carp present to our native fisheries – closing Watts Bar Lock (previously proposed by Dr. Jospeh) is not a reasonable or feasible solution either.” The WBEFC indeed wants to “stop” the silver carp. Though you state you all want to “stop” them, clearly you do not. You and TWRA are only wanting to reduce the number of silver carp swimming upstream, which will only “slow” them—so which is it—stop or slow? Furthermore, closing Watts Bar Lock until a barrier is built is indeed feasible. St. Anthony’s lock was permanently closed to stop the silver carp. Too, the Watts Bar Lock would have to be closed to construct a barrier. If it was immediately closed and barrier construction started, there would be no unnecessary closer time. This is very feasible, it only needs action.
I understand TWRA is not responsible for the final decision where barriers are to be placed, however TWRA has jurisdiction over the state’s wildlife and is thus accountable for the protection of our ecosystems and recommending where barriers are built. Their recommendation is critical. Recommending barrier placement behind the carp cannot possibly prevent the fish from reaching the uninvaded upper basin—as a biologist you know this is fact.
The positive increase in zooplankton populations you mention will only continue if commercial fishing continues—that does not make it positive. The silver carp are the reason for the reduction of zooplankton, so the increase of zooplankton and tending toward natural levels prior to the silver carp devastation, does NOT represent an overall positive impact, it is reducing the NEGATIVE impact, big difference. Commercial fishing expense is only reducing the serious negative impact on the natural zooplankton populations, thus there has been NO benefit compared to the “natural” zooplankton populations. Same thing with the improved “fishing success.” It is not improved compared to the natural ecosystem “Prior” to the silver carp invasion, it is merely lessening the negative impact of the silver carp. Tell it like it is. Don’t try to make a “reduced negative” a positive, for it is not. I’m talking about the natural ecosystem, not a silver carp infested ecosystem. As a biologist you certainly understand this.
For you to think lack of a spawn is the answer to saving the Upper TN River Basin, is simply counter to everything known about the silver carp, basic ecology, and 45 years of silver carp history. The entire central U.S. wasn’t overtaken by the silver carp because “some years” they don’t spawn. It’s great that there hasn’t been a spawn for a year or more, but that does not predict the future. You stated they have successfully spawned, isn’t that enough? The factors for successful spawning definitely work in our favor, but to think because they have only spawned once, they won’t spawn again is simply nonsensical—your word. History proves they will eventually spawn. If you are willing to risk the economic and ecological health of the uninvaded lakes on the nonsensical “hope” they won’t spawn, well, I doubt any experienced biologist in the country would be willing to risk the entire upper basin on your reckless speculation.
You said it is “nonsensical” to sacrifice the lower basin for the upper basin. First, we are not asking to “sacrifice” the lower basin, the silver carp are already there. We are saying “postpone” trying to manage them in-place and work FIRST to “Prevent” them from entering uninvaded lakes so you won’t have to try to manage them in-place later. This is not only “sensical” is it clearly the proper priority. What is “nonsensical” is to think a barrier behind them will prevent them from reaching our silver carp free lakes.
You are correct, the silver carp cancer injury to Kentucky Lake is “Massive” as you stated. Millions of silver carp are in the lake and the cancer is spreading. You are willing to allow the spread of silver carp cancer to our lakes so you can merely lower the number of silver carp entering Kentucky lake. This is unconscionable. Ideally, reducing recruitment could take place simultaneously, but if this is not possible, PREVENTION of cancer must be the priority. Because other lakes have the cancer, you won’t work to prevent the disease from reaching our lakes. This is not a “skinned knee” as you illuded to in your letter, it will be a full out “Massive” injury as you stated is in Kentucky lake. Why you don’t understand this is beyond me.
This is not merely a “Tim Joseph” statement. The USFWS and the MICRA guidance state clearly that PREVENTION must come FIRST. MICRA goes on to specify that prevention must come before trying to manage them in-place (read it). USFWS had a 30-member panel of experts, and MICRA has about 50-members. In addition, our nation’s two leading silver carp experts, Jerry Rasmussen (MICRA coordinator for 18 years), and Dr. Peter Sorensen (Foremost silver carp population modeler) stated this to TWRA. I am only echoing these 80+ experts. Please tell me why the USFWS, MICRA, and the leading silver carp experts are wrong? Explain why you are more qualified than all these recognized experts.
You stated in your letter, “The agencies, in fact, have a lot more information than most people are aware of”. I’ll ask once again, please provide the data or studies that show why reducing recruitment into invaded lakes should be undertaken before preventing invasion into new ecosystems as these 80+ experts state should be done first. Show me why all these experts are in error so I can pass this on to our 700+ WBEFC stakeholders. If you have no such studies, then do what these experts say and prevent the silver carp from reaching the Upper TN River Basin.
Please, don’t repeat TWRA”s standard reply that they are following the experts, because the experts they refer to are ONLY addressing the best way to reduce recruitment and removal of silver carp. I agree with what they say, for their barrier recommendation study was not designed to address “Preventing” silver carp movement into uninvaded lakes. Reducing recruitment must continue, but it cannot preempt stopping the silver carp from reaching uninvaded lakes—period.
I await your reply and any studies you have showing barriers behind the silver carp at Kentucky and Wilson locks will prevent them from reaching the uninvaded lakes in the Upper TN River Basin. I’m certain such studies do not exist, but if I happen to be in error, I apologize, and please include them in your reply,
Professional Regards,
Dr. Timothy Joseph,
We do not want this in our silver carp free lakes
” src=”blob:https://wbefc.com/96152977-f4a5-4923-ad1f-2c4afb07cfd7″ alt=”clip_image001.jpeg” v:shapes=”Picture_x0020_1″ apple-inline=”yes” class=”Apple-web-attachment Singleton” style=”outline: currentcolor; text-decoration: none; border: medium; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; opacity: 1;”>