Sport fishing has taken the biggest hit: $123.5 million in 2006, the year on which the data are based, the report said. Participation is 11 to 35 percent lower on the lakes than it would have been if fish populations hadn't fallen because of the invasive species.
Other damaged sectors of the economy include wildlife viewing ($47.6 million loss); raw water use by municipalities, power plants and industry ($27 million); and commercial fishing ($2.1 million).
A separate report issued by the National Research Council rejects calls to stem the species invasion by closing the St. Lawrence Seaway or declaring it off-limits to oceangoing freighters.
Instead, the U.S. and Canada should work together to make sure that saltwater ships exchange their ballast water _ or rinse their tanks if empty _ while still at sea, the council's report said.
Both reports come as environmentalists are prodding the U.S. Senate to approve a bill ordering ships to install systems for killing invasive fish, mussels and other critters that can disrupt the Great Lakes' ecosystem. The measure has cleared the House but supporters say its prospects will be dim unless the Senate acts before its August recess.
Of the 185 exotic animals and plants that have established populations in the lakes, 84 have arrived since the St. Lawrence Seaway opened in 1959, providing a navigational link between the lakes and the Atlantic.
Fifty-seven of the newcomers likely caught a ride in ballast water scooped up in foreign ports and dumped into the lakes when ships took on cargo, the Notre Dame report said. Among them: the round goby, the spiny water flea and the Eurasian ruffe.
They also include zebra and quagga mussels, which have been especially damaging to the regional economy by clogging water intake pipes and gobbling algae at the base of the aquatic food chain.
Estimates of their cost to the economy have varied widely. The Notre Dame scientists suggested losses of $300 million last spring. But their latest report, using a different analytical method, pegged the loss at $200 million.
The total refers only to costs for the eight U.S. states on the Great Lakes. Canada also has suffered from the species invasion, said David Lodge, director of the university's Center for Aquatic Conservation.
"The distributions of losses we found with invasions from shipping may be the tip of the iceberg," Lodge said.
-
-
- huffamoose2k
- added this
- added July 17, 2008
- flag
-
This is an important problem that almost no one is paying any attention to. These invasive species are forcing native plants and animals out of their natural areas.
-
-
- huffamoose2k
- 6 months ago
-
-
I don't see how this Great Lakes problem or any invasive species problem can be solved for good. There will always be invasive species in habitats around the world. Non-native plants and animals in a place other than where they originated is the natural way of things. What about when animals migrate? Or when a seed is relocated by a bird. It seems that, as bad as it is for the natural species of the Great Lakes, that this is the way that things sometimes work out on our planet. In the meantime, I'm sure they could put some finer screens on the intake valves of cargo ship ballast tanks.
-
-
- LuckyPenny
- 6 months ago
-
