Oral Legislative Testimony on proposed Ballast Water Legislation

There is a threat of national legislation overruling the groundbreaking standard adopted by New York. In particular, the regulations proposed by the Coast Guard or the Interior and Environment Appropriations bill as amended by the LaTourette amendment would prohibit states from receiving EPA funding if they have adopted ballast water requirements that are more stringent than federal requirements. Therefore, we tried to convince the Senators to adopt a national standard containing the biological performance standards adopted by the States of California and New York.

Before the Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works:

Thank you, members of the Committee, for this opportunity to testify before you today. My name is Corina Helfenstein. I am the campaign coordinator of the National Wildlife Federation’s Great Lakes office. NWF is America’s oldest and largest conservation organization. But I am also a resident of the beautiful shores of Lake Ontario. As such, I have personally witnessed some of the disastrous consequences of the deterioration of Lake Ontario’s ecosystem. And I can tell you, the concern about invasive species that I address today is real, and it is most urgent.

I know that this particular problem has been and is currently a big concern for this Committee as well. And I applaud your commitment to the protection of the wildlife habitat of the Great Lakes, one of our nation’s most valuable natural resources.

My testimony today will focus on two issues: first, the threats by invasive species the Great Lakes are currently experiencing; and second, the importance of effective and stringent legislation against such species. The bottom line is this: the New York standards, which implement the national ballast water discharge permit, provide an effective means to fight invasive species. It would be regrettable and a huge lost opportunity to overrule them by laxer federal standards.

Aquatic invasive species are one of the biggest threats facing the Great Lakes and their tributaries today. These species have few natural predators, so they outcompete native species, reproduce massively, and damage the Great Lakes ecosystem. Once they have established themselves in the Great Lakes, it will be basically impossible to get rid of them. To give only one example, there is the Asian Carp, who’s entry into the Great Lake ecosystem is imminent, Because they eat primarily plankton and they can attain such a large size, scientists suggest that these carp have the potential to deplete zooplankton populations. Thus, they basically leave none left for many populations of native species that rely on this food source, including fish with a high value for the fishing industry. Apart from causing great ecological damage, invasive species also imply enormous economic costs. Research suggests that the annual cost to the Great Lakes region from invasive species introduced by shipping exceeds $200 million annually.

Thus, ballast water discharges from cargo ships are by far the largest source of invasive species in the Great Lakes. The groundbreaking standard adopted by New York implements the national ballast water discharge permit of the Clean Water Act. It adopts very stringent biological performance standards. This basically means that no ship can enter the Great Lakes unless it has the technology to disinfect its ballast water to stop the discharge of invasive species. Therefore, the New York standard provides exactly the stringent regulation that we urgently need to face the threat of invasive species. In contrast, the rules currently under discussion by EPA and the Coast Guard clearly fall short of this aim.

It has been claimed that with current technologies, it is impossible to meet the New York standards. But this is not true. The required technology will soon be widely available. While it is not yet in widespread use, this is simply because there was no market for it. If the New York standard is adopted nationally, this will provides sufficiently strong incentives to drive development and implementation of the technology. This is just the sort of development that Congress wanted to see when it adopted the technology-forcing Clean Water Act.

Some opponents of the New York standard claim it to be "scientifically unsupportable." However, I would call the alternative of not having stringent standards “economically and ecologically unsupportable”. We have to keep in mind that the ecological and economical costs generated by invasive species will be borne for centuries to come.

Therefore, I encourage you to dismiss any proposal for a national ballast water control less stringent than the standard introduced by New York.

Thank you.