By Brian Laskowski
laskow26@gmail.com
Great Lakes Echo
Oct. 8, 2009
Editors note: This is part of a series about issues relevant to the biennial meeting of the International Joint Commission.
Over the summer of 2008 environmental groups and Great Lakes shippers were on the edge of their seats. Congress was working on water quality standards to prevent invasive species from entering the lakes from the dumping of untreated ballast water on freighters.
See poll
Then…nothing happened.
The bill passed the U.S. House of Representatives and died in the Senate, 20 years after the zebra mussel was found to have invaded the Great Lakes. Zebra mussels are among the 180 species that have invaded the Great Lakes in the past 50 years through the St. Lawrence Seaway.
Now there is new hope as a public hearing opens in Washington D.C. today on a U.S. Coast Guard plan to regulate ballast nationwide.
The earlier attempt stalled because it would have taken away some of the state’s rights to sue environmental violators. But in August the Coast Guard proposed new regulations under existing laws.
Invasive species can be picked up by oceanic freighters in other freshwater ports when they take on ballast water to balance their ships. Once they arrive, they jettison the water to offset cargo that they take aboard. The International Joint Commission estimates that between 55 and 70 percent of the foreign species in the Great Lakes were brought in ballast water.
The binational organization drafts reports and recommends Great Lakes policies to the American and Canadian governments. It meets today in Windsor as part of its biennial review of Great Lakes issues.
For invasive species, the commission will be looking at how to deal with them once they have already entered the lakes, what they call rapid response; however the commission’s report on invasive species says, “The best approach is to prevent the introduction of aquatic invasive species.”
The Coast Guard first proposes to adopt the International Maritime Organization’s regulation governing water ballast by between 2014 and 2016. The rules apply to both large animals such as fish and to bacteria and viruses. This rule would be a step above current U.S. and Canadian rules that only require ocean vessels to flush their ballast tanks with saltwater before reaching the lakes.
Phase two would be as much as 1,000 times as strict. However, the Coast Guard says in the rule proposal that this is subject to a feasibility study. If the Coast Guard finds that these standards are not possible but there is the ability to get a “significant improvement” over the phase one then they will propose a new intermediate standard for phase two.
Environmental groups are happy to finally see movement on a federal regulation of water ballast.
“The proposed regulations, if finalized, would be a leap forward in protecting the nation’s waterways,” said Jennifer Nalbone the campaign director of navigation and invasive species for Great Lakes United a binational coalition of groups devoted to the lakes.
Shipping industry officials agree.
“This [federal regulation] is long overdue,” said Steve Fisher the executive director of the American Great Lakes Port Association, a lobbying group for all of the ports on the American side of the Great Lakes.
While there is broad support for a federal rule there still remain some lingering questions.
“Is the timeline too lengthy?” asks Nalbone, “and another thing we’re looking at is this thing called a practicability review, where the Coast Guard has to review whether technologies are available. We want to make sure that this doesn’t become a loop hole.”
Fisher cites concerns that the regulations are too broad and wonders about the necessity of equipping so called “lakers,” vessels that travel only in the lakes, with ballast treatment technology.
“The question we are going to raise with the Coast Guard is what real value is the region getting from forcing these local ship owners to install tens of millions of dollars of equipment when the [invasive species] are just going to migrate around the Great Lakes on their own anyway,” said Fisher.
Others say the expense is a worthwhile investment.
“My position is if a ship can’t afford to put a treatment system on a boat then it doesn’t belong in the Great Lakes,” said Jeff Alexander who works for the National Wildlife Federation and authored a book on the history of invasive species in the Great Lakes.
Other hearings are slated for Oct. 27 in Oakland, Calif., and Oct. 29 in New York City. The Coast Guard will issue a final decision in November on if it will put the rule into effect.
Nalbone warns though, “Passage of the rule is not the end. It’s the start of a whole new challenge of implementing it.”