now or never on Great Lakes invasives

The answer to the ballast-water problem is to drop the idea of developing a ballast-treatment system and ban all saltwater ships from the Great Lakes. Then we can solve the threat from the Mississippi end by plugging the Chicago canal, cutting off the man-made connection that was created 103 years ago.

A university study has shown that making salties transfer their cargoes between lakes freighters, railroads or trucks would add only about $55 million a year to the cost of doing business, a fraction of the $l50 million to $250 million we spend cleaning up after zebra mussels alone.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007703220395

Let's not forget the problems of invasive species were foreseen over 25 years ago:

In a 1981 document submitted to Environment Canada, Bio-Environmental Services Limited sampled the ballast water of 55 ships entering the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River system from 10 regions of the world. Almost every ballast tank sampled contained aquatic organisms “in a viable state,” totaling more than 150 distinct genera and species of phytoplankton and 56 aquatic invertebrates. The company concluded:

 

There are numerous examples of innocuous organisms in their native habitat becoming serious pests in a new habitat. The absence of natural enemies and other environmental controls permit the introduced species to proliferate and develop into serious problem organisms…A number of nonendemic aquatic organisms found in the ballast water samples and capable of establishing themselves in the Great Lakes are in this category.

 

The company specifically mentioned the still-distant zebra mussel, whose scientific name is Dreissenia polymorphus.Although the mussel was not found in ballast water during the study, the report warned, “in some ports of Europe,it still occurs in estuarine conditions. This situation, coupled with the occurrence of its veliger larvae in the plankton for up to 3 months, greatly enhances its potential for introduction to the Great Lakes in ship ballast water. If introduced, Dreissenia could establish itself in North America."

Joseph Schormann, a senior program engineer with Environment Canada convinced of the threat posed to the Great Lakes  by organisms in ballast water, commissioned the study. After his retirement, Schormann expressed regret about the failure of both Canadian and  U.S. agencies to close the door before the zebra mussel entered the ecosystem. “After it came out,” Schormann said of the study, “it was reviewed by a lot of people from both coast guards. The opinion was 50-50 whether it was worthwhile to pursue it and do something or do nothing. Much to my regret, the do-nothing vote won the day, and it was shelved.”

University of Windsor aquatic biologist Paul Hebert said more tartly, “I think it was a very, very expensive mistake. There’s just no question there will be a multi-million dollar cost to the Canadian population forever. I think it’s just unacceptable that when this report was in, no action was taken upon it. It didn’t take someone with a crystal ball to recognize this problem.”

 

---

Comments

[Jerry Van Wormer]

Where can I obtain a copy of the Bio-Environmental Services Limited report mentioned in the above posting?