Trump administration promises Illinois it will pay to keep carp out of the Great Lakes
After a delay that has stretched on since February, Illinois officials are set to resume closing on property they need to continue work on a project that will generate vast bubble curtains to deter the carp, stun them with electrical fields and play sound frequencies to disorient them.
Here's what to know:
The project has been on the drawing board for years
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers along with state officials in Illinois and Michigan have been planning since 2020 to install a gantlet of technologies in the Des Plaines River near Joliet, Illinois, to deter invasive carp from entering Lake Michigan.
The Corps and the states signed a deal in 2024 to work together on the project using $226 million allocated through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. And elements of the Water Resources Development Act adopted last year call for the federal government to cover 90% of operating and maintenance costs.
Pritzker demands assurances from Trump
Construction on the project began in January. Pritzker's administration was set to close in February on a parcel of property for the project and transfer it to the Corps.
Everything appeared on track until late January, when the Trump administration froze federal grants and loans as it reviewed whether spending aligned with Trump's priorities on issues such as climate change and diversity. The administration rescinded the freeze less than two days later but questions persist about the federal government's spending commitments.
Pritzker, a billionaire heir to the Hyatt hotel empire and a potential 2028 Democratic presidential contender, is one of Trump's fiercest critics. He has described the early months of the Trump administration as 'true villainous cruelty by a few idiots.'
Days before Illinois was to finalize a property deal for the carp project, Pritzker hit pause and demanded assurances that the federal government would honor its spending commitment. Site preparation has continued since then, but substantial work to install technology has been on hold.
Trump signals the project is a priority
The White House issued a memo late Friday saying the Trump administration recognized the threat invasive carp pose to Great Lakes recreation and fishing and that it's committed to protecting the lakes.
The federal government is prepared to do its part so long as states cooperate, according to the memo, which calls on Illinois to complete the property deal by July 1 and promises the federal government will streamline permitting and environmental reviews.
'My Administration fully supports preventing the spread of invasive carp,' the memo said. 'The State of Illinois, where the (project) is located, must cease further delay in cooperating with this effort, for the sake of its own citizens and economy and for the sake of all of the Great Lake States.'
Pritzker's office issued a news release late Friday evening saying the governor was satisfied.
Work on the project isn't slated to finish until 2032, but Joel Brammeier, president and CEO of the nonpartisan Alliance for the Great Lakes, said Monday that prospects suddenly look dramatically better than they did last week.
'We're back to business as usual. That's a good thing,' he said.
Why the carp would be bad news for the Great Lakes
Winnipeg Jets Game Days
On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop.
Four species of carp were imported to the U.S. from Asia in the 1960s and 1970s to clear algae from sewage ponds and fish farms in the Deep South. They escaped into the Mississippi River and have moved north into dozens of tributaries in the central U.S.
Government agencies, advocacy groups and others have long debated how to prevent the fish from reaching the Great Lakes, where scientists say they could out-compete native species for food and habitat in waterways where the fishing industry is valued at $7 billion.
A shipping canal that forms part of the link between the Mississippi and Lake Michigan has a network of fish-repelling barriers, which the Corps says is effective, but critics consider inadequate.
The new project at the Brandon Road Lock and Dam on the Des Plaines River near Joliet will provide another layer of protection at a downstream choke point between the Illinois River, which is infested with invasive carp, and Lake Michigan.
'I'm hopeful everyone is taking this project seriously now and we're not going to see any more delays,' Brammeier said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Observer
2 hours ago
- National Observer
A Canadian researcher was 'indispensible' to helping Trump dismantle climate action
A Canadian economist and conservative columnist who recently called Prime Minister Mark Carney a "climate zealot" played a critical role in the Trump administration's push to eradicate US climate rules. Ross McKitrick, an associate professor at the University of Guelph and a senior fellow at libertarian thinktank the Fraser Institute, was one of five co-authors recruited by US Energy Secretary Christ Wright to author a 150-page US Department of Energy (DOE) report that undermined the US government's ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. He was "indispensible" to the project, wrote co-author and climate denier Roy Spencer in his blog. The report argues "CO2-induced warming appears to be less economically damaging than commonly believed," and "mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial." The report was published last week as part of the Trump administration's proposal to repeal the Environmental Protection Agency's Endangerment Finding — the legal mechanism underpinning most US climate legislation. Eliminating the finding, a longstanding goal of climate deniers, lets the government undermine standards that limit emissions, including from oil and gas operations, power plants and landfills. There is a widespread scientific consensus that human activity, mostly burning fossil fuels, is the main driver of climate change. That finding was backed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the European Climate Risk Assessment, and the US's Fifth National Climate Risk Assessment, published during the Biden era. Bill McKibben, the prominent climate scientist, journalist, climate advocate and co-founder of told Canada's National Observer McKitrick's involvement is a rare example of climate denial flowing from Canada to the US. "I suppose it's proof that once in a while the damage goes the other way across the border," he said. If the Trump administration successfully eradicates all US climate measures, the country is projected to emit an extra seven billion tons of greenhouse gases between now and 2030 — like adding an additional 10 Canadas to the world's emissions. A Canadian economist and conservative columnist who recently called Prime Minister Mark Carney a "climate zealot" played a critical role in the Trump administration's push to eradicate US climate rules. McKitrick has been downplaying the impacts of climate change and bolstering the fossil fuel industry for decades. As far back as 2000, he joined a briefing by the so-called "Cooler Heads Coalition," a group with close ties to the oil industry, to criticize the IPCC's Third Assessment Report. "The inclusion of Ross McKitrick, whose work is widely debunked and who isn't even American, tells you just how hard it is to find researchers who will question the overwhelming scientific consensus on carbon dioxide emissions and climate change," said Simon Donner, a climate scientist at the University of British Columbia and a lead author on the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. As the conversation continued around climate change, McKitrick continued to publicly criticize climate science and renewable energy throughout the 2000s and 2010s through his work writing reports for the Fraser Institute and other thinktanks, in news media and as a public speaker. In 2020 he published an op-ed for Troy Media that claims we must ' fight climate extremists before they upend society" and slammed Canada's then-proposed plastic pollution rules for imposing " costs and inconvenience … while doing nothing to fix the [pollution] problem." He remains a prominent voice against climate action, contributing climate-skeptical columns to the Financial Post, the National Post and the oil and gas outlet Energy Now. He also continues to write for conservative thinktanks, including a 2025 report for the Fraser Institute that concludes achieving Canada's net zero goals isn't worth the economic and social cost. A spokesperson for the US DOE said in an emailed statement that McKitrick and his co-authors, the prominent climate contrarians John Christy, Judith Curry, Steve Koonin and Roy Spencer, "represent diverse viewpoints and political backgrounds." Wright, the US energy secretary, wrote in the report's preface that "media coverage often distorts the science" on climate, pushing "many people [to] walk away with a view of climate change that is exaggerated or incomplete. To provide clarity and balance, I asked a diverse team of independent experts to critically review the current state of climate science. "I've reviewed the report carefully, and I believe it faithfully represents the state of climate science today. Still, many readers may be surprised by its conclusions — which differ in important ways from the mainstream narrative," Wright, a former oil and gas executive, continued. In February, Wright described the global effort against climate change as "sinister" and a "tool used to grow government power [and], top-down control, and shrink human freedom' while speaking at Jordan Peterson's Alliance for Responsible Citizenship conference. A few weeks later, he attacked Biden-era climate measures as a "quasi-religious' agenda 'that imposed endless sacrifices on our citizens.' Climate experts have slammed the new DOE report. Ben Sanderson, senior researcher on climate mitigation at the Centre for International Climate Research (CICERO) in Oslo, dismantled the paper in a thread on Bluesky. The "tiny" list of authors and lack of external peer-review undermines the report's credibility, he wrote. (Reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change usually contain contributions from hundreds of authors.) McKitrick and his co-authors presented "minority contrarian viewpoints" by "isolating specific talking points and presenting them as a comprehensive assessment. "Each chapter follows the same pattern. Establish a contrarian position, cherry-pick evidence to support that position, then claim that this position is under-represented in climate literature and the IPCC in particular. Include a bunch of references, most of which don't support the central argument," he wrote. In a Tuesday post on X, McKitrick claimed that he and his co-authors weren't involved in designing the government's push to repeal the Endangerment Finding and "only knew what was in the news." However, the post links to blog posts by his co-authors Curry and Spencer where they address the key policy head-on: Spencer wrote that the group"suspected the Endangerment Finding would be the topic of greatest interest" to the Trump administration when they were commissioned to write the report. Curry wrote that "the looming US policy issue is the EPA Endangerment Finding" and that she hopes the report will break "Breaking the link between energy policy and human-caused climate change".
Vancouver Sun
2 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Trump, other high-profile people had names redacted from Epstein files by FBI for privacy reasons
The Federal Bureau of Investigation redacted President Donald Trump's name and those of other high-profile individuals from government files related to Jeffrey Epstein, according to three people familiar with the matter. The redactions were made by a team of FBI employees tasked with reviewing the Epstein files for potential public release. The names were withheld under privacy protections because those individuals, including Trump, were private citizens when the federal investigation into Epstein began in 2006, the people said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. The appearance of a person's name in the documents does not indicate they were under investigation or even accused of wrongdoing. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The review was part of a broader effort sparked by Trump's campaign promise to 'declassify' files related to Epstein, which his MAGA base has long requested. In March, FBI Director Kash Patel directed his special agents from the New York and Washington field offices to join the bureau's FOIA employees at the agency's sprawling Central Records Complex in Winchester, Virginia, and another building a few miles away. Responding to public pressure, FBI personnel were instructed to search for and review every single Epstein-related document and determine what could be released. That included a mountain of material accumulated by the FBI over nearly two decades, including grand jury testimony, prosecutors' case files, as well as tens of thousands of pages of the bureau's own investigative files on Epstein. It was a herculean task that involved as many as 1,000 FBI agents and other personnel pulling all-nighters while poring through more than 100,000 documents, according to a July letter from Senator Dick Durbin to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. The employees reviewed the records using the Freedom of Information Act as their guide for deciding what information should be withheld. That alone isn't uncommon. In the FOIA, Congress established nine exemptions as a way to balance the public's right to know against the government's need to protect sensitive interests, such as national security, official deliberations, ongoing law enforcement proceedings or privacy. When such competing interests arise in non-FOIA matters, those exemptions are often applied even if the exact language set forth in the FOIA statute doesn't appear in the final record. While reviewing the Epstein files, FBI personnel identified numerous references to Trump in the documents, the people familiar with the matter said. Dozens of other high-profile public figures also appeared, the people said. In preparation for potential public release, the documents then went to a unit of FOIA officers who applied redactions in accordance with the nine exemptions. The people familiar with the matter said that Trump's name, along with other high-profile individuals, was blacked out because he was a private citizen when the federal investigation of Epstein was launched in 2006. Last month, the DOJ and the FBI concluded that 'no further disclosure' of the files 'would be appropriate or warranted.' Epstein avoided federal sex-trafficking charges in 2008 when he agreed to plead guilty to state charges in Florida for soliciting prostitution. In July 2019, following an investigation by the Miami Herald that also scrutinized the integrity of the government's probe, Epstein was indicted on federal charges of sex trafficking of minors. A month later, he died by suicide in his jail cell, federal law enforcement authorities said, while awaiting trial. A White House spokesperson would not respond to questions about the redactions of Trump's name, instead referring queries to the FBI. The FBI declined to comment. The Justice Department did not respond to multiple requests for comment. In a statement on Friday after Bloomberg first reported the redactions, Durbin said that Trump 'has the power to unilaterally help fix this by consenting to the release of his name in the files to the public to fulfill the promises of Attorney General Bondi that the public would see the 'full Epstein files.'' Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
Edmonton Journal
2 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
Trump, other high-profile people had names redacted from Epstein files by FBI for privacy reasons
The Federal Bureau of Investigation redacted President Donald Trump's name and those of other high-profile individuals from government files related to Jeffrey Epstein, according to three people familiar with the matter. Article content The redactions were made by a team of FBI employees tasked with reviewing the Epstein files for potential public release. The names were withheld under privacy protections because those individuals, including Trump, were private citizens when the federal investigation into Epstein began in 2006, the people said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. Article content Article content The appearance of a person's name in the documents does not indicate they were under investigation or even accused of wrongdoing. Article content Article content The review was part of a broader effort sparked by Trump's campaign promise to 'declassify' files related to Epstein, which his MAGA base has long requested. In March, FBI Director Kash Patel directed his special agents from the New York and Washington field offices to join the bureau's FOIA employees at the agency's sprawling Central Records Complex in Winchester, Virginia, and another building a few miles away. Article content Responding to public pressure, FBI personnel were instructed to search for and review every single Epstein-related document and determine what could be released. That included a mountain of material accumulated by the FBI over nearly two decades, including grand jury testimony, prosecutors' case files, as well as tens of thousands of pages of the bureau's own investigative files on Epstein. Article content Article content It was a herculean task that involved as many as 1,000 FBI agents and other personnel pulling all-nighters while poring through more than 100,000 documents, according to a July letter from Senator Dick Durbin to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. Article content The employees reviewed the records using the Freedom of Information Act as their guide for deciding what information should be withheld. That alone isn't uncommon. In the FOIA, Congress established nine exemptions as a way to balance the public's right to know against the government's need to protect sensitive interests, such as national security, official deliberations, ongoing law enforcement proceedings or privacy. When such competing interests arise in non-FOIA matters, those exemptions are often applied even if the exact language set forth in the FOIA statute doesn't appear in the final record.
