Republican Legislator Mentions 'Taking Up Arms' In Regard To Threats To Tap The Great Lakes
by John Laumer, Philadelphia 
on 11.11.07
A water shortage can bring out the 'Yosemite Sam' in the most genteel of persons, as well as join politicians in a common defense against water pilfering outlanders. On TreeHugger posts, and elsewhere, Great Lakes-area residents' comments on the acceptability of Great Lakes water transfers to quench the thirst of other states boil down to this: 'If you want our water, move up here.'
When the well runs dry, snowbirds will just have to move back home to the land of ice, snow and water.
Due to a US Congressional committee effort, it looks as if this topic is heating up a bit. And, as parochial as some of this sounds, we think it's a good thing to make the debate public through verbal provocation-- before the worst case might come to reality. More on that down-post.
Two Michigan members of Congress fired a stern warning Thursday to colleagues in faster-growing, drought-stricken parts of the nation: Don't even consider using a seemingly harmless bill to study the nation's water usage as cover to begin a process aimed at taking Great Lakes water."I don't think I'm being too alarmist about this," said Rep. Candice Miller, a Harrison Township Republican. "Do not look to the Great Lakes to solve the nation's water problems."
Her Michigan colleague on the House subcommittee on water resources and environment, Grand Rapids Republican Vern Ehlers [pictured], predicted what might happen if anyone attempted a water grab."I would suspect we'd call up the militia and take up arms," Ehlers said. "We feel that serious about it."
You have to wonder how welcoming Michigan residents would be to a drought-driven diaspora of 5 to 10 million new residents, given that the Great Lakes states are already suffering for jobs. The meta message is more like this: 'we'll take your jobs and taxbase and maybe some of your best and brightest.'
Contemplate this for a minute and you'll see how difficult and complex a real worst case water crisis in the Southeast could become. Katrina can't begin to approach the long term significance of a temporarily abandoned metropolis of 5+ million, for example.
In a worst case drought for the US Southeast, what's most likely to happen is that, by the end of the summer of 2008, residents would begin to relocate to periphery of the drought, awaiting return of the rains. Hotels and relatives homes and homeless shelters would fill. Needs would accelerate for those without vehicles. They'd need much more than water.
There's not going to be any need for Michigan Militia or the like. But plenty more compassion and social services will be needed where people settle in to wait and to facilitate evacuation.
Time to stiffen the social safety net. Is the US Congress or FEMA up to that? (Please, we beg you, no FEMA Administrator quotes along the lines of "Who could have guessed this would happen?")
Back to the call to arms provocation.
Their comments came Thursday during a discussion about legislation called the 21st Century Water Commission Act, which would authorize a study of how the nation uses water, where it comes from and how long it will last.
Apparently, the [Congressional] panel talking about the legislation included speakers from Arizona, Georgia and Texas -- and none from the Great Lakes region - while the commission and a possible national water policy were being proposed by someone representing a drought-stricken area.'
Via::Detroit Free Press, "Legislators: Hands off our water, Two House members from Michigan demand no diversion of the Great Lakes to other states" Image credit, Washington Post, Votes Database, Vernon Ehlers, R. Michigan
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Is School Food Harming Kids? Enlist a Labor Day Eat-In To Promote Fresh, Healthy Food
- A Green Bath Soothes Your Aching Bones and Saves Water Too
- Save Water in Your Garden: 5 Tips for Maximum Conservation
- 5 Reuses for: Watermelon
- Support Obama's Ocean Policy with a Friendly Letter
- How to Make Your Own Infused Vodka
I find it fascinating that so many problems in the world stem from the same sources, and that the same handful of solutions would take care of so much.
If we stopped building Mega-Mansions and McMansions—and stopped all the unnecessary driving—we could open up so much more open green space. Restoring natural green areas helps to keep water around! It also helps mitigate CO2 and other pollutants, and reducing hard-paved surface would reduce heat-island effect, allowing water to percolate in instead of evaporating off.
Our whole country needs to move towards the principles of permaculture.
As a Canadian, from Toronto, this concerns me greatly. I'm not sure what measures are already in place to insure that the American population surrounding the lakes doesn't deplete our shared resources, but the threat of using these already overused lakes for the entire USA is truly scary. It seems to me that a lot of people take water for granted. I'm currently living in California (Bay Area) where people rave about the beauty of California, which is true no argument. However, when they talk about the vast gardens and huge trees in the residential areas down here I only need to point to the dry brown hills which surround the Bay to indicate how out of place those things are. There are very few rivers around the Bay and it rains once a month during the summer, it doesn't take a genius to see how unsustainable this is. The communities around the Great Lakes, American and Canadian, are living a much more sustainable life, water-wise at least. I fully believe that if someone insists on using as much water, as most of us currently do they should choose to live in a place where water is readily available (see Minnesota or Ontario).
Population growth produces job growth. Michigan has the capacity in terms of resources and housing to absorb refuges from drought stricken areas, the jobs follow the population. In Detroit there are thousands of acres of abandoned homes, all of which are connected to an EXISTING (but aging) infrastructure. These old neighborhoods are walk-able, have mature trees, and just require a good clean-up.
If Congress wants to TRULY address the issue of drought and global warming, they should create incentives to re-develop neighbors connected to existing infrastructures, where there is capacity to support growth.
The Great Lakes Governors Association was formed over just this issue; a proposal was made to Jesse Ventura when he was in office and he turned it down. Seeing it for what it was, he contacted other governors bordering the Great Lakes, including the provincial governors in Canada. Sure enough, as it turned out they were even willing to go through the Dakotas and come down on Lake Superior from the north before they were through, having contacted all the state governments up to Vermont, although it just borders the St. Lawrence river.
Droughts are regional. Why hasn't anyone proposed a national reservoir/transit system? It's virtually the same idea, except we dig some holes instead of draining the lakes. Northern California pretty much depends on such a system already, which is why years of light snow are of such concern there.
greenscaper is totally spot on. The growth in the population and decrease from the South East and maybe even the South West would lead businesses to move as well to take advantage of the relocated labor source.
I am glad these senators and the Great Lakes Governors Association are on top of this. Digging huge canals or aqueducts a la So Cal would only forestall the problem. LA drained huge lake, forgot its name but drove by it on the way to San Fran all the time. The lake is barren, looks like the salt flats folks use to break the land speed record. We can't have that happen to the Great Lakes.
I hope this water problem will lead to our old rust belt cities starting to regain some population.
I think it would take as much or more energy to clean and transport the Great Lakes' water as it would to de-salinate near-by ocean water. A new de-sal plant could be built to use clean energy, but I'm dreaming...peole are really to cheap for that. Let's just look for a quick fix that won't cost any money or convenience.
FACE IT, THE WORLD IS ENDING, ENJOY THE LAST FEW YEARS AND GO DEEP DEEP IN DEBT LIKE OUR GOVERNMENT.
Let Arizona dry up in the hell-hole, armpit they created. If they want to live in the dessert where there is no water, let them live there... with no water.
Precisely. This is, always, all about choices. A desert has no water. If you choose to move to a desert, you're moving to... a place without water. Bed, made, lie.
States like Michigan (and the others in the Great Lakes basin) initially became populated because they were so rich in agricultural resources - fresh water, arable land, etc. Turns out these are what we need most after all.
Now if only we'd realize it, and start changing the Rust Belt economy accordingly, to produce wind power to sell and alternative fuels and electric cars rather than gas guzzlers.