Top News

WASHINGTON (AP) ― Legislation aimed at preventing invasive species from entering the Great Lakes aboard oceangoing ships has languished in Congress for the past three years, as the shipping industry has pushed an alternative bill with weaker restrictions.

Environmentalists and Great Lakes officials want legislation that would keep invasive species from making the trip aboard ships' ballast water, which is used to balance the ships as they travel across the ocean.

Some of those species, including zebra mussels and the European round goby, are already wreaking havoc on the region's ecosystem and its multi-billion-dollar fishery.

The U.S. Coast Guard requires ships to exchange their freshwater ballast for saltwater in the ocean, in an effort to cut down on the amount of organisms that can survive in the Great Lakes. However, questions remain about the effectiveness of the approach because pumps aren't always able to flush out all of the water and organisms.

The problem is exacerbated by the fact that 80 percent of ships entering the Great Lakes do not carry ballast because they are carrying so much cargo they don't need the extra weight.

As a result, they are exempt from the exchange requirements. However, they may still be carrying residual water in their ballast tanks, and that water can harbor invasive species, which can escape into the Great Lakes.

"U.S. waters remain vulnerable to species invasions because many ships are still not required to conduct ballast water exchange," a recent U.S. Government Accountability Office report found.

The National Aquatic Invasive Species Act, or NAISA, calls for phasing out ballast exchange by 2011, to be replaced by the development of water treatment technology that would kill invasive organisms. The bill also calls for the screening of live aquatic organisms entering the United States via international trade; research on invasion pathways; and improved prevention efforts in the Great Lakes.

But the legislation, sponsored by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and co-sponsored by Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., has not moved in Congress. Meanwhile a rival bill, the Ballast Water Management Act, has made it through the Senate Commerce Committee this year with the support of the international shipping industry.

The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, is similar to an agreement adopted last year by the United Nations International Maritime Organization -- although not yet adopted by member countries.

The Inouye bill calls for standards 100 times more stringent than the IMO agreement's standards. But critics note that it gives the shipping industry more time to come up with technology to treat ballast water than NAISA.

"We see the Ballast Water Management Act as something that will prolong ballast water exchange, perhaps indefinitely," said Allegra Cangelosi, a senior policy analyst with the Northeast-Midwest Institute, a nonprofit group which advocates for the regions. The group prefers NAISA.

Inouye's office did not respond to requests for comment.

In July, attorneys general from six Great Lakes states wrote to Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, on the eve of the vote, urging him not to move forward on the Inouye bill.

The attorneys general, representing Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania, said that the bill would remove the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate ballast water, and would pre-empt state laws.

Helen Brohl, executive director of the U.S. Great Lakes Shipping Association, which supports the Inouye bill, argued that the EPA was not in a position to regulate ships' ballast water.

"Our position is that while EPA has a role to play with regard to reviewing and scientific vetting of technology, it's the Coast Guard's experience and expertise to implement," she said.

Brohl, whose group represents U.S. vessel agents that handle foreign ships in Great Lakes ports, also said it doesn't make sense to have individual state laws when implementing a federal standard.

NAISA, meanwhile, has the support of several environmental organizations, including the National Wildlife Federation.

"It may be the most important bill in Congress to protect the Great Lakes from ecological collapse," said Andy Buchsbaum, director of the federation's Great Lakes Natural Resource Center. "On average, once every eight months a new invasive species invades the Great Lakes. This is a catastrophe waiting to happen."

Not all shipping group are opposed to the more comprehensive bill. The Lake Carriers Association, which represents vessel operators on the Great Lakes, supports NAISA.

"It's a national issue that requires an international solution," said Jim Weakley, the Lake Carriers Association president.

(© 2005 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)