Over a century ago, the Chicago River underwent a significant transformation as its flow was reversed to divert sewage away from Lake Michigan, which serves as the city’s primary source of drinking water.
The canal responsible for this drastic change has been known as the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal.
However, efforts are underway to possibly rename this waterway to better reflect its current and future significance beyond its historical context.
Organizations such as Friends of the Chicago River and Friends of the Forest Preserves are advocating for a new name.
Margaret Frisbie, the executive director of Friends of the Chicago River, highlighted the necessity for a name change, stating that the current title is too fixated on the canal’s past.
Frisbie emphasized that a new name would mirror both the progress made and the opportunities the canal offers for those living along its banks, granting them a voice in its future.
The term ‘sanitary’ might have served its purpose at the time, but it does not accurately depict the canal’s current role, according to Frisbie.
Rich History
The canal stretches 28 miles from Chicago’s Lower West Side to just north of Joliet, where it meets the Des Plaines River.
Originally opened in 1900, it provided a crucial link for navigation between the Great Lakes Waterway and the Mississippi River.
The project received praise from civil engineers and was considered a major public health advance at the time.
However, the reversal of the river’s flow implicated the canal in various environmental issues, including a documented decline in water levels in the Great Lakes during the 1990s.
This water level drop raised alarms among environmental advocates, especially regarding heightened barge traffic on the Great Lakes and its potential repercussions.
Over the years, the interplay between the canal’s construction and its ecological impact continued to attract the scrutiny of environmentalists and ecologists.
Despite discussions around the possibility of reversing the flow of the river once again, the idea has not gained traction.
The presence of invasive species has raised additional concerns about the health of local ecosystems in the years since the initial reversal.
In 2011, conversations among river enthusiasts centered on the implications of invasive species such as Asian carp on the environmental health of the waterway.
Historical accounts also suggest the canal had adverse effects on agriculture, evident shortly after its opening when around 300 landowners in the Illinois Valley filed a lawsuit against the Sanitary District of Chicago in 1905.
These landowners included a group of sisters who witnessed their formerly fertile farmland devolve into a site filled with debris and waste.
Environmental controversies surrounding the canal continue to this day, with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agreeing last year to investigate a minor offshoot of the canal due to findings of heavy metal contaminants and cancer-causing chemicals.
This scrutiny led LRS garbage hauler to withdraw its proposal for using the canal to transport the city’s refuse downstate.
Public Participation
What could the new name for the canal be?
That remains to be determined, according to Frisbie.
The coalition pushing for the name change has released a survey allowing the public to suggest names and express their views on how the canal should be maintained and utilized.
Frisbie mentioned that after gathering suggestions, the community will have the opportunity to vote for their preferred names before a formal application for the change is submitted to the U.S. Board on Geographic Names.
The target is to submit this application by the end of the year.
Renaming a geographical landmark is a rare occurrence; in fact, only 13 name-change applications in Illinois were received by the board in the past ten years, out of a total of 1,400 applications nationwide.
Anyone is eligible to propose a change to a geographic name.
However, for an application to be approved, proponents must demonstrate local support, as stated by Shellie Zahniser, executive secretary for the U.S. Board on Geographic Names Domestic Names Committee.
Before making a decision, the board consulta local and tribal governments and federal agencies, among others who may have a stake in the outcome.
“The board does not initiate name changes or advocate for specific outcomes,” Zahniser explained.
“It evaluates proposals neutrally, based on the merits of each suggestion.”
While the board helps standardize geographic names for federal purposes, its verdicts do not influence the names that local or state agencies may use for these landmarks.
Support and Future Steps
Although it remains uncertain whether the coalition will succeed in renaming the canal, the group is working hard to gain governmental support prior to submitting their application.
Allison Fore, a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, urged the community to share their opinions through the survey.
Fore noted, “The naming committee is still in the early phase of gathering input and information, so the MWRD cannot comment on the overall likelihood of success.”
She highlighted the importance of community feedback in ensuring that any new name would accurately reflect the canal’s history as well as its present and future roles.
Prominent voices supporting the name change include Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle and U.S. Rep. Bill Foster of Naperville.
Foster stated, “Modernizing the canal’s name will better reflect its role as an economic driver for the region and its potential for recreational development.”
As the campaign progresses, residents have the opportunity to be a part of this significant change in their community.
image source from：chicago
