[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 39 (Tuesday, March 11, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3495-S3496]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           THE NATIONAL AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES ACT OF 2003

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, last week, I joined several of my 
colleagues in introducing the National Invasive Species Council Act, 
which addresses how the Federal Government would coordinate itself in 
combating aquatic and terrestrial and aquatic invasive species. I was 
also pleased last week to join my colleagues in introducing the 
National Aquatic Invasive Species Act of 2003, NAISA.
  The National Aquatic Invasive Species Act of 2003 would reauthorize 
the Non-indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act, which 
Congress first passed in 1990 to better deal with the invasion of zebra 
mussels in the Great Lakes. The Great Lakes are still plagued by 
invasive species. In fact, over 160 non-indigenous species have been 
established in the Great Lakes since the 1800s.
  The economic damage that invasive species, like the zebra mussels, 
Eurasion Ruffe, purple loosestrife, sea lamprey, and so many more cause 
to the Great Lakes is quite high. The zebra mussel has raised the cost 
of doing business for raw water users in the Great Lakes region by $24 
million per year, and the Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that the 
economic impact to industries nationwide from zebra mussels over the 
next 10 years will be $5 billion dollars. The Eurasian Ruffe, another 
invasive species that fortunately has been found in just a couple ports 
in the Great Lakes, is estimated to cost the Great Lakes fishery $119 
million if it spreads throughout the system. Considering that the value 
of the Great Lakes fishery is approximately $4 billion per year, I 
believe that Congress needs to take the next important steps to 
minimize the risk of new invasions into the Great Lakes.
  NAISA would improve the Great Lakes aquatic invasive species program 
by authorizing the State Department to pursue a reference to the 
International Joint Commission, IJC, to analyze the prevention efforts 
in the Great Lakes. Last fall, the IJC released its 11th biennial Great 
Lakes Water Quality Report, and in that report, the IJC recommended 
this reference. Because controlling invasive species in the Great Lakes 
is an international effort, it is necessary for the IJC to review, 
research, conduct hearings, and submit to the United States and Canada 
a report that describes the success of current policies of governments 
in the United States and Canada having jurisdiction over the Great 
Lakes.
  Our bill also would improve and expand upon the dispersal barrier 
project in the Chicago Ship and Sanitary Canal. The dispersal barrier 
was originally authorized in the National Invasive Species Act of 1996, 
and the project became operational in 2002. The electric barrier is 
proving to be effective in preventing the movement of carp up and down 
the canal, but this barrier is imperfect. This canal supports maritime 
commerce, and finding a permanent solution to preventing the inter-
basin movement of invasive species is important. Therefore, NAISA would 
authorize the construction of a second barrier in the canal and mandate 
other improvements to this project so that if an invasive species 
breeches one barrier, there would be a backup barrier. Additionally, 
NAISA expands the barrier authority so that the Corps and the Fish and 
Wildlife Service would study additional waterways that would be good 
candidates for a dispersal barrier.
  To address the largest pathway of invasive species introduction--
ballast water--NAISA would establish a nationwide mandatory ballast 
water management program that would apply to ships entering the Great 
Lakes system. Because these ships still contain small amounts of 
unpumpable water that may contain organisms, ballast water management 
practices would help address the problem of ``No Ballast On Board'' or 
``NOBOB'' vessels, which are ships that enter the Great Lakes reporting 
no ballast on board. By encouraging the regular flushing of sediments 
from ballast tanks in Great Lakes ships, management practices can 
further reduce the likelihood of new invasions.

[[Page S3496]]

  Ships operating exclusively in the upper four Great Lakes, Superior, 
Michigan, Huron, and Erie, do not introduce invasive species into the 
Great Lakes, so it would be unnecessary to expect the lake carriers to 
comply with the mandatory ballast water management program. However, 
all ships, including those in the Great Lakes, would be required to 
have an Invasive Species Management Plan on-board outlining ways to 
minimize transfers on a ``whole ship'' basis and to abide by best 
management practices. Also all ships constructed after 2006 must have 
ballast technology on-board.
  Finally, NAISA would include new authority to set up procedures for 
screening importations of live aquatic organisms to ensure that 
potential invasive species are not intentionally introduced into the 
Great Lakes System. I was very surprised to learn that currently, there 
are no processes for screening aquatic organisms that are shipped to 
this country. Our bill would direct the Invasive Species Council to 
develop a set of screening guidelines for federal agencies to use to 
determine whether a planned importation of a live organism from outside 
the country into the United States should proceed, and if so, whether 
that importation should be conditioned.
  This is a very good bill with bipartisan, bicameral support. Though 
it is national in scope, the bill improves upon the existing 
authorities relating to the Great Lakes, which is vital to my home 
State of Ohio. Aquatic nuisance species are a threat to biodiversity, 
an economic burden, and a danger to human health. So I urge my 
colleagues to support the quick passage of this legislation.

                          ____________________