http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/buffaloerie/story/83075.html
To protect the lakes, ban is sought on oceangoing ships
By John F. Bonfatti NEWS STAFF REPORTER
Updated: 05/24/07 7:04 AM
A group of Great Lakes advocacy groups Wednesday called for a moratorium on oceangoing ships on the lakes, blaming them for an influx of invasive species that have had negative impacts on the lakes.
“A small sliver of Great Lakes shipping — oceangoing vessels — has caused and will continue to cause” the impacts, Jennifer Nalbone of Great Lakes United said during a conference call.
Earlier this year, Great Lakes United called for a ban on these ships, which are believed to have brought nonnative invader species like the zebra and quagga mussels to the lakes in their ballast water.
Now, the Healing Our Waters Great Lakes Coalition, which consists of more than 90 conservation and environmental groups, has joined the effort. The coalition’s campaign director, Jeff Skelding, says the proposal is drastic but necessary.
“What is more extreme, offering a solution . . . or standing by complacently as wave after wave of new invasives come into the lakes?” he asked.
“We choose to stand up for the millions of anglers, small businesses, municipalities and residents who depend on the Great Lakes,” Skelding added.
The groups say that there are alternate modes of shipping — including lakers, rail and truck — if oceangoing vessels were not allowed in the lakes.
They pointed to a 2005 study showing that the use of these alternatives would cost shippers an additional $55 million, and another study that said invasive species cost Great Lakes businesses and municipalities $5 billion a year in damage and control costs.
“The [added] cost [of alternative transportation] is overshadowed by the cost of stopping the next billion-dollar invader,” said Nalbone, who is Great Lakes United’s director of navigation and invasive species.
Nalbone blamed the federal governments of the United States and Canada for not coming up with a proper regulatory response to the spread of invasive species, despite general consensus that such a response is what is needed.
“When environmental and conservation interests are calling for the same thing as the industry, it should be a political softball,” Nalbone said. “Despite the chaos, Congress has failed to act.”
The United States Great Lakes Shipping Association, an organization representing Great Lakes agents for shippers, agrees that a comprehensive, binational agreement is needed but disputed other points made by the moratorium advocates.
Stuart Theis, the shipping association’s executive director, said the cost of transferring cargo from oceangoing vessels would be much more than $55 million.
He said he understands why states like Michigan are pushing forward with their own standards, but said enacting legislation on a state-by-state basis is the wrong approach.
“It will cause huge confusion. It will damage commerce. It will cost jobs,” said Theis, adding that such laws may also possibly violate international treaties.
---
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed an interest in receiving aquatic invasive species information for research and educational purposes.
