TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD

SPECIAL REPORT 291

GREAT LAKES SHIPPING, TRADE, AND AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES

Committee on the St. Lawrence Seaway: Options to Eliminate Introduction of Nonindigenous Species into the Great Lakes, Phase 2

Transportation Research Board

Water Science and Technology Board

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

Transportation Research Board

Washington, D.C.

2008

www.TRB.org



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
transportation research board special report 291 Great Lakes shippinG, trade, and aquatic invasive species Committee on the St. Lawrence Seaway: Options to Eliminate Introduction of Nonindigenous Species into the Great Lakes, Phase 2 Transportation Research Board Water Science and Technology Board Transportation Research Board Washington, D.C. 2008 www.TRB.org

OCR for page R1
Transportation Research Board Special Report 291 Subscriber Categories I planning, administration, and environment VIII freight transportation (multimodal) IX marine transportation Transportation Research Board publications are available by ordering individual publi- cations directly from the TRB Business Office, through the Internet at www.TRB.org or national-academies.org/trb, or by annual subscription through organizational or indi- vidual affiliation with TRB. Affiliates and library subscribers are eligible for substantial discounts. For further information, contact the Transportation Research Board Business Office, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001 (telephone 202-334-3213; fax 202- 334-2519; or e-mail TRBsales@nas.edu). Copyright 2008 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to the procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. This report was sponsored by the Great Lakes Protection Fund. Cover design by Beth Schlenoff, Beth Schlenoff Design. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on the St. Lawrence Seaway: Options to Eliminate Introduction of Nonindigenous Species into the Great Lakes, Phase 2. Great Lakes shipping, trade, and aquatic invasive species / Committee on the St. Lawrence Seaway: Options to Eliminate Introduction of Nonindigenous Species into the Great Lakes, Phase 2, Transportation Research Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies. p. cm.—(Transportation Research Board special report ; 291) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Nonindigenous aquatic pests—Control—Great Lakes (North America) 2. Discharge of ballast water—Environmental aspects—Great Lakes (North America) 3. Animal introduction—Great Lakes (North America)—Prevention. 4. Ballast water—Purification—Great Lakes (North America) I. Title. TD427.A68N38 2008 363.7'80977—dc22 2008025878 ISBN 978-0-309-11313-7

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the au- thority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meet- ing national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the re- sponsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of med- ical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the Na- tional Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Re- search Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leader- ship in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the compo- nent administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
Marine Board Martha R. Grabowski, LeMoyne College, Cazenovia, New York, Chair Malcolm MacKinnon III, MSCL, LLC, Alexandria, Virginia, Vice Chair Kenneth E. Arnold, K Arnold Consulting, Inc., Houston, Texas Michael S. Bruno, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, New Jersey Charles R. Cushing, C. R. Cushing and Co., Inc., New York Larry L. Daggett, Waterway Simulation Technology, Inc., Vicksburg, Mississippi Robert A. Dalrymple, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland Paul S. Fischbeck, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Stephen E. Flynn, Council on Foreign Relations, New York Judith Hill Harris, Department of Transportation, Portland, Maine John R. Headland, Moffatt & Nichol Engineers, New York William E. Jenkins, SeaRiver Maritime, Inc., Houston, Texas Robert E. Johnston, OSG Ship Management, Inc., New York Ronald K. Kiss, Consultant, Rockville, Maryland Robert C. North, North Star Maritime, Inc., Queenstown, Maryland Patrick E. O’Connor, BP America, Inc., Houston, Texas Robert W. Portiss, Tulsa Port of Catoosa, Catoosa, Oklahoma Jerry R. Schubel, Aquarium of the Pacific, Long Beach, California Richard H. Vortmann, RHV Co., LLC, San Diego, California John W. Waggoner, Hornblower Marine Services, New Albany, Indiana Transportation Research Board 2008 Executive Committee Officers Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas Department of Transportation, Chair Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Vice Chair C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin (Past Chair, 1991), Division Chair for NRC Oversight Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board, Executive Director

OCR for page R1
Division on Earth and Life Studies Water Science and Technology Board Claire Welty, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Chair Joan G. Ehrenfeld, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey Simon Gonzalez, National Autonomous University of Mexico Charles N. Haas, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania James M. Hughes, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia Theodore L. Hullar, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York Kimberly L. Jones, Howard University, Washington, D.C. G. Tracy Mehan III, Cadmus Group, Inc., Arlington, Virginia James Mitchell, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg David Moreau, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Leonard Shabman, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C. Donald I. Siegel, Syracuse University, New York Soroosh Sorooshian, University of California, Irvine Hame M. Watt, Independent consultant, Washington, D.C. James L. Wescoat, Jr., University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign Garret P. Westerhoff, Malcolm Pirnie, New York

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Committee on the St. Lawrence Seaway: Options to Eliminate Introduction of Nonindigenous Species into the Great Lakes, Phase 2 Jerry R. Schubel, Chair, Aquarium of the Pacific, Long Beach, California Richard M. Anderson, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina Stephen W. Fuller, Texas A&M University, College Station Trevor D. Heaver, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (emeritus) Geoffrey J. D. Hewings, University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign Philip T. Jenkins, Philip T. Jenkins and Associates, Ltd., Fonthill, Ontario, Canada Hugh J. MacIsaac, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada Steven W. Popper, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, California Frank H. Quinn, Consultant, Tecumseh, Michigan Thomas D. Waite, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne M. Gordon Wolman, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland Joy B. Zedler, University of Wisconsin, Madison Ann P. Zimmerman, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada National Research Council Staff Jill Wilson, Study Director, Transportation Research Board Stephen R. Godwin, Director, Studies and Special Programs, Transportation Research Board Lauren Alexander, Senior Program Officer, Water Science and Technology Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies Amelia B. Mathis, Administrative Assistant, Transportation Research Board

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Preface On June 26, 1959, Queen Elizabeth II and President Eisenhower officially opened the St. Lawrence Seaway, a series of locks and canals providing a navigation route into the North American heartland for deep-draft vessels coming from the Atlantic Ocean and beyond. Almost 50 years later, the seaway, which is managed and operated jointly by Canada and the United States, provides a route into and out of the Great Lakes for cargoes such as grain, iron ore, and steel. Between 1997 and 2006, an average of 33.5 million metric tons (tonnes) of cargo moved each year through the Montreal–Lake Ontario section of the seaway, which links the lower St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario. When the seaway was constructed, it was seen as offering impor- tant economic benefits for Canada and the United States through enhanced navigation and associated trade, as well as the generation of much-needed electricity by the associated Moses–Saunders hy- droelectric power station. An additional effect of opening up a route into the Great Lakes for international shipping did not at- tract attention until much later. The rapid spread throughout the Great Lakes of the European zebra mussel, discovered in Lake St. Clair in 1988, drew public attention to the fact that the seaway pro- vides a route into the North American heartland not only for ships but also for potentially troublesome stowaways—namely, aquatic invasive species (AIS) inadvertently taken aboard in ballast water at previous ports of call. In addition to the zebra mussel, invaders such as the Eurasian ruffe, round goby, and quagga mussel are all thought to have entered the Great Lakes in the ballast water of ships. Held in a ix

OCR for page R1
x Great Lakes Shipping, Trade, and Aquatic Invasive Species variety of tanks or holds, ballast water provides the stability re- quired for safe ship operations under a variety of conditions and is routinely loaded or discharged at various points during a voyage. When discharged, organisms loaded with ballast water at previous ports of call may be dispersed into new environments where, under favorable conditions, they establish new populations. Re- search has shown the ballast water of ships engaged in interna- tional trade to be a major vector for transferring species from locations such as the Baltic, Black, and North Seas across the Atlantic Ocean to the freshwater ecosystem of the Great Lakes. The economic and environmental impacts of AIS in the Great Lakes have been, and continue to be, severe. The cost of removing zebra mussels from piping in power generation plants, public and private drinking water plants, and industrial facilities; navigation lock and dam structures; and marinas has been tentatively esti- mated at over US$1 billion since 1989, and some put the estimate as high as US$5 billion. In addition, the zebra mussel’s rapid re- production, coupled with its consumption of microscopic plants and animals, has modified the aquatic food web and led to a suite of indirect effects, including increased water clarity and the accom- panying growth of rooted aquatic vegetation in shallow areas of the lakes and nuisance algae along shorelines. Efforts have been under way since 1989 to prevent further intro- ductions into the Great Lakes of AIS carried in ships’ ballast water. These efforts have focused primarily on the steps ships can take to reduce the risk of introductions, notably replacing (exchanging) their freshwater ballast with ocean water before entering the Great Lakes. Ballast water exchange (BWE) removes organisms from a ship’s ballast tanks by dilution and exposes freshwater organisms in the tanks to salt water, thereby killing many of them. Canadian and U.S. regulations require vessels in international trade entering the Great Lakes to manage their ballast water, and BWE is one of the options for vessels carrying ballast. Despite this requirement, re- ports of new AIS discovered in the Great Lakes continue. Recent estimates put the total number of such species, including algae, fish, invertebrates, and plants, at more than 180. Shipping is by no

OCR for page R1
Preface xi means the only mechanism by which AIS enter the Great Lakes. De- liberate releases, aquaculture, home aquaria, water gardens, and recreational boating have all been implicated in reported AIS introductions. However, the major role of shipping through the seaway as a vector for such introductions is not disputed. Against this backdrop, the Great Lakes Protection Fund (GLPF) asked the Transportation Research Board (TRB) and the Division on Earth and Life Studies (DELS) of the National Academies to convene an expert committee to develop a detailed plan for elicit- ing a wide range of transportation options and concepts for the Great Lakes region that would (a) promote global commerce and (b) eliminate the introduction of additional nonindigenous species and pathogens into the Great Lakes due to oceangoing vessels tran- siting the St. Lawrence Seaway. The project began as an effort to plan and conduct a design competition to develop innovative so- lutions to the problem of AIS introductions into the Great Lakes by commercial shipping. At the end of the first phase, however, both GLPF and the National Academies concluded that a design competition would not be the best strategy to identify such so- lutions. Phase 2 became a more traditional project to identify, develop, and recommend potential solutions. In Phase 1 of the project, TRB and DELS convened a 13-member committee that met twice, first in Washington, D.C., in May 2004 and then in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, in September 2004. In conjunction with the second meeting, a group of committee mem- bers visited the Port of Montreal and the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation’s St. Lambert Lock facility. At its meet- ings, the committee heard presentations from experts in invasion biology, ballast water management, and freight transportation and from stakeholders, including representatives of the St. Lawrence Seaway and the shipping industry. The committee also discussed lessons learned from design competitions in other fields (architec- ture, town planning, and aeronautics and astronautics) with ex- perts who had planned and administered such competitions. In December 2004, the Phase 1 committee delivered its proposal for a design competition to GLPF.

OCR for page R1
xii Great Lakes Shipping, Trade, and Aquatic Invasive Species In light of concerns about the feasibility of a design competition, GLPF, the chair of the Phase 1 committee, and National Academies staff explored alternative approaches to generating options for meeting the two project criteria. Subsequently, in late 2005, GLPF asked TRB and DELS to convene a second expert committee, which was charged with identifying and exploring options for the Great Lakes region that would meet two criteria: (a) enhance the poten- tial for global trade in the Great Lakes region and (b) eliminate further introductions of nonindigenous aquatic species into the Great Lakes by vessels transiting the St. Lawrence Seaway. These criteria are similar to those considered in Phase 1, but not identi- cal. Most notably, the requirement to eliminate further AIS intro- ductions targets all vessels transiting the seaway, rather than exclusively oceangoing vessels engaged in international trade. In addition, pathogens, which are very different in nature from most of the AIS studied thus far, are not included explicitly. As in Phase 1, the criterion relating to global trade is a broad mandate without specific directives. The committee was to commission papers, hold a symposium at which these papers would be presented and discussed, and de- velop a range of practical and technically feasible options that would meet both project criteria. In accordance with usual National Research Council (NRC) pro- cedures, TRB and DELS assembled a Phase 2 study committee of 13 members under the leadership of Jerry R. Schubel, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, California.1 Committee members have expertise in trans- portation and logistics, marine transportation operations, ballast water treatment, invasion biology, ecology and ecosystem manage- ment, environmental systems analysis, Great Lakes science, the Great Lakes regional economy, public policy, and decision analysis. The committee held five meetings between May 2006 and July 2007 (see Appendix A). It also commissioned a series of eight ex- 1 Dr. Schubel also chaired the Phase 1 committee, and four Phase 1 committee members (Captain Jenkins and Drs. MacIsaac, Waite, and Wolman) also served in Phase 2.

OCR for page R1
Preface xiii pert papers (see Appendix B) to inform its discussions. Prelimi- nary findings and conclusions from seven of these papers were dis- cussed by committee members and guests at the committee meeting held in Irvine, California, in February 2007. The authors then completed their drafts, which were reviewed by committee members in advance of a 1-day public symposium, held in Toronto, Ontario, in May 2007 in conjunction with the commit- tee’s fourth meeting. After presenting their major findings and conclusions at the symposium, the authors finalized their papers. The paper by Drs. Kelly and Kazumi on retroactive evaluation of the International Maritime Organization’s ballast water standards was commissioned, prepared by the authors, and reviewed by committee members between the fourth and fifth meetings. After the fifth meeting, additional committee comments on the draft paper were shared with the authors, who then finalized their paper. All eight commissioned papers are being made available in elec- tronic form in conjunction with this report. The reader is cau- tioned that the interpretations and conclusions contained in the papers are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the committee. After its fifth and final meeting in July 2007, the committee worked by correspondence to refine its recommendations and develop its report. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Funding from GLPF for the present study and for the preliminary Phase 1 effort is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks go also to the members of the Phase 1 committee: Jerry R. Schubel, Chair, Aquarium of the Pacific, Long Beach, California; Stephen B. Brandt, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Jerry E. Fruin, University of Minnesota, St. Paul; J. Richard Hodg- son, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia; Philip T. Jenkins, Philip T. Jenkins and Associates, Ltd., Fonthill, Ontario; Catherine T. Lawson, State University of New York at Albany; Kenneth J.

OCR for page R1
xiv Great Lakes Shipping, Trade, and Aquatic Invasive Species Leonard, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Madison; Walter R. Lynn, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York; Hugh J. MacIsaac, University of Windsor, Ontario; Henry A. Olson, Mat- son Navigation Company, Inc., Oakland, California; Evelyn A. Thomchick, Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Thomas D. Waite, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, and National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia;2 and M. Gor- don Wolman, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. The outcomes of their information-gathering activities and discus- sions laid a robust foundation on which to build during Phase 2. The contributions of all those who participated in the Phase 1 committee’s activities are also recognized, as is financial support from the International Joint Commission, U.S. Section, for the visits to the Port of Montreal and the St. Lambert Lock and for a preliminary study of freight flows in the Great Lakes region by David Kriger of iTRANS Consulting in Ottawa, Ontario. Thanks go to Jeffrey A. Hutchings of Dalhousie University, who attended the Phase 1 committee meeting in Montreal on behalf of the Royal Society of Canada. The Phase 2 committee thanks all those individuals and organi- zations who participated in the information-gathering sessions of its meetings, including the representatives of the Hamilton Port Authority and the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corpo- ration’s Welland Canal facility who hosted the committee’s site visits (see Appendix A). The interest and encouragement of Russ Van Herik, Executive Director of GLPF, and of David Rankin, GLPF’s Vice President and Director of Programs, are also grate- fully acknowledged. Particular appreciation is expressed to the authors of the com- missioned papers: J. Richard Hodgson, Hodgson and Associates, Halifax, Nova Scotia; Junko Kazumi, University of Miami, Florida; David W. Kelly, formerly at the University of Windsor, Ontario, and now with Landcare Research, Dunedin, New Zealand; John Lawson, Lawson Economics Research, Inc., Ottawa, Ontario; 2 Dr. Waite is now with the Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne.

OCR for page R1
Preface xv Frank Millerd, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario; Richard D. Stewart, University of Wisconsin, Superior; and M. Jake Vander Zanden, University of Wisconsin, Madison (see Appendix B). Their expert papers and their participation in com- mittee discussions contributed greatly to the overall effort. The committee recognizes the contributions of all those who participated in the symposium in Toronto in May 2007 (see the list of participants in Appendix C). The willingness of participants to share their perspectives with the committee and to engage in dis- cussion of various candidate actions for meeting the two project criteria proved valuable in informing the committee’s delib- erations. In addition, special thanks are due to Ivan Lantz of the Shipping Federation of Canada for providing the committee with information on international seaway shipping and related issues; to Jennifer Nalbone of Great Lakes United, whose AIS Listserv was a valuable resource in helping set the context for the project; and to Chris Wiley of Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Transport Canada for verifying factual details of current ballast water man- agement regulations. Jill Wilson managed the study under the supervision of Stephen R. Godwin, Director of TRB’s Studies and Special Programs Divi- sion, and with support from Lauren Alexander of DELS. Dr. Wil- son also drafted major portions of the final report under the committee’s guidance. Amelia Mathis was responsible for meet- ing logistics and assisted with communications with committee members. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in ac- cordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets in- stitutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.

OCR for page R1
xvi Great Lakes Shipping, Trade, and Aquatic Invasive Species NRC thanks the following individuals for their review of this re- port: Craig Alig, Ferrate Treatment Technologies, LLC, Orlando, Florida; Kenneth Eldred, Ken Eldred Engineering, East Boothbay, Maine; Jeremy Firestone, University of Delaware, Newark; Jerry Fruin, University of Minnesota, St. Paul; Chad Hewitt, Australian Maritime College, Rosebud, Victoria; Michael Hubbard, Transport Canada (retired), Ottawa, Ontario; Gail Krantzberg, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario; Walter Lynn, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York; and Gregory Ruiz, Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, Edgewater, Maryland. Although the reviewers provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the committee’s findings, conclusions, or rec- ommendations, nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by George M. Hornberger, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, and C. Michael Walton, University of Texas at Austin. Appointed by NRC, they were re- sponsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional proce- dures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Re- sponsibility for the final content of the report rests solely with the authoring committee and the institution. Suzanne Schneider, Associate Executive Director, TRB, man- aged the report review process. The report was edited and prepared for publication by Norman Solomon, Senior Editor; the prepubli- cation files for posting to the TRB website were formatted and pre- pared by Jennifer J. Weeks, Editorial Services Specialist; and the book design and production were coordinated by Juanita Green, Production Manager, under the supervision of Javy Awan, Direc- tor of Publications, TRB.

OCR for page R1
Acronyms AIS aquatic invasive species BOB ballast on board BWE ballast water exchange BWM ballast water management BWWG Ballast Water Working Group CWA (U.S.) Clean Water Act DWT deadweight tonnage EEZ exclusive economic zone EPA (U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency GLFC Great Lakes Fishery Commission GLPF Great Lakes Protection Fund GLSLS Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway IJC International Joint Commission IMO International Maritime Organization MDEQ Michigan Department of Environmental Quality MLO Montreal–Lake Ontario NANPCA Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act NOBOB no ballast on board SLSDC St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation SLSMC St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation VHS viral hemorrhagic septicemia x vi i

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 7 AIS and Seaway Shipping 9 Charge to the Committee 12 Committee’s Approach 12 Organization of the Report 14 2 The St. Lawrence Seaway 17 Historical Overview 19 Management, Operations, and Financing 21 Infrastructure 24 Traffic 27 A Changing Future 35 Concluding Remarks 39 3 Aquatic Invasive Species in the Great Lakes 43 Historical Overview 43 Invasion Vectors and Pathways 44 Impacts of AIS 47 Examining Trends in Invasion History 52 Future AIS Introductions 56 Concluding Remarks 58

OCR for page R1
4 The Ballast Water Vector 63 Vessels Transiting the Seaway 63 Fleet and Vessel Characteristics 65 Vessel Operations 69 Current Measures to Prevent AIS Introductions into the Great Lakes 76 Concluding Remarks 84 5 Identifying and Exploring Options for the Great Lakes Region: The Committee’s Approach 87 Identifying Candidate Actions 88 Candidate Actions to Enhance the Potential for Global Trade 91 Candidate Actions to Eliminate Further AIS Introductions 102 Options That Meet Both Criteria? 118 6 Committee’s Conclusions and Recommended Option for the Great Lakes Region 122 Compromise Options 123 Committee’s Rationale 124 Closure of the Seaway to Transoceanic Shipping 126 Committee’s Recommended Option 134 Ballast Water Management Technologies 138 Surveillance and Control Program 152 An Adaptive Process 156 Strengths and Weaknesses 160 Managing the Waters of the Great Lakes— A Vision for the Future 166 Key Points 168 Appendices A Committee Meetings and Other Activities 172 B Commissioned Papers and Authors 177 C Public Meeting Agenda and Participants 179 D Economic Benefits of Transoceanic Shipping Through the St. Lawrence Seaway 186 Study Committee Biographical Information 193