1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

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

5. 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.

6. 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 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.

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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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 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.

12. 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.

13. 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.

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

15. 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

16. 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.

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. 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.

20. 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.

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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.

26. 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

27. 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.

28. 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.

30. 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.

31. Dispersal Barrier Website:
Aquatic Invasive Species
Dispersal barrier
Photos
Video
Background
What’s new