Editorial: Coast Guard's Aquatic Nuisance Species Program Goes Awry

We just learned from a recent Associated Press article that the Coast Guard's Aquatic Nuisance Species Program has gone awry. They didn't say that exactly, but what they did say demonstrated that the program's coordinator is stonewalling.

Rewind to July 2004 when New York, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin petitioned the Coast Guard for more aggressive regulations.

Skip ahead to January 18, 2005, when the environmental group Great Lakes United called for an immediate crackdown on vessels that are exempt from regulations meant to keep out invasive species capable of wreaking havoc on the ecosystem. Supposedly, the Coast Guard is moving to tighten controls. But did you know that 80 percent or more of ocean going vessels that enter the Great Lakes are subject to little more than paperwork requirements? In our opinion, no one has been minding the store.

The AP points out that these vessels, known as NOBOBs—short for no ballast on board—are not necessarily without stowaways. The vessels may carry tons of residual ballast water and/or sediments that can mix with new ballast water once on the Great Lakes. It can then be discharged, according to a Coast Guard notice in the Federal Register this month.

Jennifer Nalbone, of Great Lakes United, told the AP, "The Coast Guard's program has a loophole big enough to drive a cargo ship through." She maintains that the Coast Guard has a very clear statutory authority to regulate all ships entering the Great Lakes.

"These NOBOBs are coming in unregulated," Nalbone said. "They don't have to do anything."

Beivan Patnaik, the regulatory coordinator for the Coast Guard, responded to the organization's requests in astounding fashion:

"We have to engage in full public participation before we can do anything." He said the NOBOBs are required to file reports on their residual ballast water as they enter the Great Lakes but face no regulations on how to manage the water.

Call us crazy, but we think that's stonewalling. For how many decades have various businesses in the United States spent big bucks to maintain water intake pipes against zebra mussels? It is known that utility companies on the Great Lakes spend millions of dollars each year just for this purpose. The little rascals have spread up and down the Mississippi. The AP article points out that since 1993, oceangoing vessels equipped with ballast tanks have been required to exchange the tank contents in the open ocean or to seal their tanks before entering the Great Lakes. The loophole? Ships declaring no pumpable ballast are exempt.

Just what, exactly, did the Coast Guard and its program director think the ballast issue was all about? It has been going on for more than 12 years. Zebra mussels have invaded inland waterways, passing this scourge from tributary to tributary, increasing maintenance costs as utilities attempt to keep their water intake pipes clear.

Patnaik said the Coast Guard recognizes the importance of the issue and is addressing it. How? According to the AP, Congress is trying to pass ballast water regulations. After 12 years! We should think so. So what is holding it up? Universities around the nation have established centers for the study of zebra mussels and probably other invasive species. The network is broad and knowledgeable. These centers have gone a long way toward advising average boaters how they can prevent transporting zebra mussels from one body of water to another. So what has the Coast Guard done? With all of the required exhibits already entered into evidence all across the land, what is the further need to "engage in full public participation?"

We are well aware that the Coast Guard has a full schedule. Homeland security is no small matter. But saving the fresh waters of the United States from invasive foreign species is a form of homeland security, isn't it?

Our nation is facing gigantic budget deficits, huge negative trade balances and a deteriorating inland waterway system that impacts our economy negatively. Failing to regulate how foreign ships entering the Great Lakes manage their ballast water has resulted in the introduction of the zebra mussel and additional unnecessary expenses. The impact of these invaders is also costing our economy millions.

If the Federal Register regulations cited are the key to ballast control, then lawmakers should shrug off the assumed need to make a public campaign out of it and just pass them. If it takes congressional action, then Congress should get it done now.

The Waterways Journal encourages letters to the editor.
Have something on your mind?
Send letters to: jshoulberg@waterwaysjournal.net.
(Please indicate whether or not your letter is intended for publication.)