Congress needs to protect lakes
The Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition calls for a moratorium because ocean-going vessels have introduced invasive species, like the zebra mussel, to the Great Lakes
Date posted online: Thursday, May 24, 2007
BY SAM BARRETT
Medill News Service
A coalition of environmental groups called for a moratorium Wednesday on ocean vessels on the Great Lakes.
For the most part, it was a call for attention, rather than a call for action, with the groups having no answer to whether the moratorium will be observed.
The Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition called for the moratorium because ocean-going vessels have introduced invasive species, like the zebra mussel, to the Great Lakes. The invasive species have caused an $5 billion worth of damage annually, according to the coalition.
"We are looking to our congressional champions to act on legislation," said Jeff Skelding, campaign director for the coalition. "Congress has failed to respond."
Ships entering the Great Lakes from the ocean carry aquatic organisms from the ocean water. When the ships entering the lakes discharge their ballast water, invasive organisms can be released into the lake, causing damage to fish and plants.
"Invasive species are wreaking havoc on the Great Lakes and the longer we wait to address it, the problem will get more and more costly," Skelding said.
Although the situation has not been solved by federal legislation, proposed legislation has languished in the House of Representative. The Great Lakes Collaboration Implementation Act, introduced by U.S. Rep. Vernon Ehlers, R-Mich., in March, requires companies operating in the Great Lakes to have invasive species management plans, and makes the importation of those species illegal.
"It is time for Congress to realize that this threat continues to grow and will not go away unless we act," Ehlers said Wednesday in a statement relating to companion legislation on ballast water management and discharge standards.
Meanwhile, the Collaboration Implementation bill has been slowly moving through Congress. It is awaiting approval from the subcommittee on Energy and Environment, and the subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Oceans, among others.
Getting legislation passed in the United States would be a step forward. Because the Great Lakes traverse the boundary between the U.S. and Canada, legislation is needed in both nations.
Detroit Free Press:
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007705240391
Invasive creatures have put lakes in crisis, coalition says
May 23, 2007
By TINA LAM
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
Oceangoing vessels should be banned from the Great Lakes until Congress passes a law requiring ships to sanitize their ballast water, an environmental coalition said Wednesday. The goal is to prevent the release of more nonnative creatures into the world's greatest source of surface fresh water.
"Invasive species are destroying the Great Lakes," said Jeff Skelding, campaign director of Healing Our Waters, which includes 90 groups in the United States and Canada. "It's time to fight back."
The annual cost to try to control species such as zebra mussels has ballooned to $5 billion each year, he said.
A sweeping Great Lakes funding bill that includes requirements for ships to sanitize their ballast do we mean ballast water? Yes. Ballast is whatever is used to counterbalance, in this case, water has languished in Congress for five years, Skelding said. Another bill that targets ballast was introduced this week.
On Jan. 1, Michigan became the first state to require ships to get permits to prove they have treated their ballast before entering Michigan ports. The shipping industry has sued the state in federal court to stop the requirement.
"We're getting at least one new species each season," said Jennifer Nalbone, campaign director of Great Lakes United, which first called for a moratorium in March. At least 183 invasive aquatic species have entered the Great Lakes since the 1800s.
A transportation consultant said banning salties, or oceangoing ships, from the lakes would cost industries that use them an extra $55 million per year. Most ocean vessels bring steel to the state and leave carrying grain, he said. They could use alternate transportation such as trucks, rail or lakers, ships that only ply the lakes, said Jim Roach, a consultant and former Department of Transportation manager.
Ocean ships that come through the St. Lawrence Seaway take on salty seawater to keep ships stable while sailing without a load, but then discharge it once they get to ports in the Great Lakes. The seawater harbors the invasive species.
Nalbone said zebra mussels have moved beyond the Great Lakes and have been found as far away as Nevada's Lake Mead.
Skelding said a moratorium is a last resort and legislation is the groups' main goal. The organization wants measures that require the ships to sanitize their ballast regardless of which ports they use, something the Coast Guard would need to monitor.
Booth News:
http://www.mlive.com/news/statewide/index.ssf?/base/news-8/117996540675060.xml&coll=1
Invasive species worries prompt plan to ban shipping
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
By Sarah Kellogg
Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- Oceangoing freighters should be banned from the Great Lakes until Congress passes legislation to force ships to kill or remove invasive species in their ballast water, environmentalists say.
Fed up with federal inaction, a coalition of national environmental groups called Wednesday for a moratorium on oceangoing shipping to ensure that no more exotic aquatic species, such as the zebra mussel or round goby, make it into the lakes via discharged ballast water.
"Our call for a moratorium stems from the fact that the Great Lakes are under attack and Congress has yet to respond," said Jeff Skelding, campaign director for the Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition. "We have solutions. It is time to use them. Congressional delay is exacerbating the problem and costing citizens more money."
Legislation has been pending for years in the House and Senate that would set stringent federal standards for ballast water tank cleaning. It would require that ballast water be treated before being discharged and that the U.S. Coast Guard inspect vessels and certify their treatment systems.
About 7 percent of shipping traffic on the Great Lakes is ocean vessels. A Grand Valley State University study found that 569 ships carried about 12.3 million metric tons of cargo in 2002. If oceangoing vessels were eliminated, it would cost an extra $55 million to transport cargo by alternate means, the study said.
Environmentalists believe lawmakers' failure to act may be responsible for the introduction of additional aquatic invasive species.
"The Great Lakes are ground zero for fresh water invasions coming into North America," said Jennifer Nalbone, a spokeswoman for Great Lakes United, an international public interest group. "One new species enters the seaway each season. The changes (they bring) to the lakes are permanent."
The call for a moratorium comes as the Great Lakes face another non-native pathogen -- the viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus, which causes anemia and hemorrhaging in fish. While it is not certain that the virus entered via ballast water, oceangoing vessels are considered a possible source.
There are about 185 invasive species in the Great Lakes. Scientists say that of the 85 species discovered in the lakes since the St. Lawrence Seaway opened to oceangoing vessels in 1959, 54 of them entered through ballast water. On average, about one new species is discovered every 28 weeks.
Some members of Congress question whether a shipping ban would work, but are frustrated with federal inaction.
"I think banning the shipping is kind of a draconian step, but I'm not sitting here opposed to it," said U.S. Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Holland. "That kind of threat may be what's finally necessary to take the regulators and others who have been stonewalling on this and to force them back."
Along with Hoekstra, Michigan lawmakers -- including Rep. Vern Ehlers, R-Grand Rapids, and Sen. Carl Levin -- have championed efforts to limit invasive species by cleaning up ballast water, but they have never gotten enough support to pass a bill.
Environmentalists blame much of the delay on the powerful shipping industry, which fears the cost of the technology that would be required to strip invasive species from ballast water.
But shipping officials blame the delay on the difficulty of bringing federal agencies, states, Canadian provinces and shipping companies to the table to reach a compromise on final and comprehensive standards.
"It is very, very frustrating, I know," said Stuart Theis, executive director of the United States Great Lakes Shipping Association, which serves as the local agent for many foreign vessels in the Great Lakes. "The states and Congress and the U.S. government and Canada can't get together to solve the problem. It's complicated and it's hard to nail down a standard and the technology to do it."
A 2006 Michigan law that regulates ballast water discharges is being challenged in federal court by the shipping industry, which claims the statute is unconstitutional and places an unreasonable burden on shipping companies for the limited benefit gained.
Chicago Post Tribune:
http://www.post-trib.com/399537,glwater.article
Coalition aims to stop lake invasion
May 24, 2007
BY STEVE WALSH Post-Tribune staff writer
A coalition of Great Lakes environmental groups are calling for a moratorium on international shipping to stop the introduction of more invasive species like the zebra mussel.
Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition called Wednesday for the halt of all international ships entering the system. Its backers said the moratorium would call attention to the stalled effort to create federal standards for handling ship ballast water, which has been a prime culprit for foreign invaders.
The damage caused by invasive species tops $5 billion annually, though federal legislation to tackle the spread has stalled for five years without a hearing.
The package supported by environmentalists would include creating a single standard to clean the ballast tanks of international ships entering the Great Lakes and building dams to stop the Asian carp from entering the Great Lakes, said Jeff Skelding, campaign director for Healing Our Waters-Great Lake Coalition.
A study, co-authored by transportation consultant Jim Roach, estimated it would cost an additional $56 million to route international shipping around the Great Lakes by using trains, trucks and the Port of Montreal. Only 7 percent of shipping in the Great Lakes comes from international sources, said Roach, as part of a teleconference with Great Lakes environmental groups.
But even a temporary ban would cripple the Port of Indiana at Portage. The largest percentage of the international shipping comes from steel and agricultural products. Indiana accounts for half the international goods shipped through all of the Great Lakes ports, said Jody Peacock, director of Corporate Affairs for the Indiana Port Commission.
"Ballast water is an easy target but it's not the only factor for invasive species," Peacock said.
The port also supports a single federal standard for treating ship ballast water. Until the federal government sets a standard, the shipping industry is reluctant to invest millions in on-board treatment systems, Peacock said.
Regardless of the source, the number of foreign species invading the Great Lakes are a serious threat to anglers, industry and the supply of drinking water throughout the system, Skelding said.
Given the difficulty of passing federal legislation, the group did not release its strategy for imposing a moratorium on international shipping in the Great Lakes.
It would be, at best, a stop-gap measure until federal standards are in place, Skelding said. "We want to remain focused on passing comprehensive legislation to deal with invasive species," he said.
---
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed an interest in receiving aquatic invasive species information for research and educational purposes.
