Jump to content


another likely balast water invasive...


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_smbass_*

Guest_smbass_*
  • Guests

Posted 08 March 2007 - 11:39 AM

I don't think anyone has posted anything about this one on here yet, there has been another mysid shrimp found in the great lakes at two separate locations. This is another species from the same region as the two mussel and two goby species. http://www.glerl.noa..._factsheet.html They just keep coming, they really need to outlaw dumping ballast water in the lakes.

#2 Guest_Histrix_*

Guest_Histrix_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 March 2007 - 12:13 PM

They just keep coming, they really need to outlaw dumping ballast water in the lakes.


I don't think the invasion will ever really stop until salties are prohibited from entering the Great Lakes entirely. About 90% of all freighters coming through are no ballast on board already. But recent investigations of these empty ballast tanks have revealed a plethora of potential invaders (mostly planktonic, like the new Hemimysis) hiding out in all of the sludge that invitably accumulates inside. We need to develop an economical way of transporting goods, perhaps moving them from salties to lakers without actually having the salties enter the Great Lakes-- otherwise, we will never completely eliminate the risk of introducing new NIS regardless of how careful we are.

#3 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2007 - 11:05 AM

Perhaps this is a naive question, but this is a freshwater species, no? Would exchanging ballast while at sea or taking on salt water ballast for a certain amount of time kill a decent number of these species? I suppose then the ballast would have to be re-exchanged in tidal areas prior to coming into fresh water?

#4 Guest_hmt321_*

Guest_hmt321_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2007 - 12:26 PM

Perhaps this is a naive question, but this is a freshwater species, no? Would exchanging ballast while at sea or taking on salt water ballast for a certain amount of time kill a decent number of these species? I suppose then the ballast would have to be re-exchanged in tidal areas prior to coming into fresh water?



I am not even sure that dumping ballast at sea and refilling would be an option. If these ships are not loading or unloading, or being repaired/refitted they are underway. The amount of ballast a ship carries is absolutely no more or less than will aide in safe transport of the ship. I would think a better option would be to have the ship poison the ballast water when they get with in x many miles of port. I am not sure what type of poison should be used, I would think bleach in large amounts would work, and I would think be dispersed when pumped out into a body of water.

I am sure there are substances that are extremely toxic in high quantities that once dispersed into large bodies of water would become safe.

#5 Guest_Histrix_*

Guest_Histrix_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2007 - 12:38 PM

I am not even sure that dumping ballast at sea and refilling would be an option. If these ships are not loading or unloading, or being repaired/refitted they are underway. The amount of ballast a ship carries is absolutely no more or less than will aide in safe transport of the ship. I would think a better option would be to have the ship poison the ballast water when they get with in x many miles of port. I am not sure what type of poison should be used, I would think bleach in large amounts would work, and I would think be dispersed when pumped out into a body of water.

I am sure there are substances that are extremely toxic in high quantities that once dispersed into large bodies of water would become safe.


But even that isn't fool-proof. A number of these planktonic invaders have resting stages that will survive even if you treat the ballast water. Most of the invaders are also euryhaline, so they would theoretically be able to survive a ballast water exchange at sea.

And also keep in mind that most of the ships coming into the Great Lakes today carry no ballast water with them, and yet the mud and debris inside the ballast tanks are swarming with non-ingenous species. Simply regulating ballast water exchange isn't going to solve this problem.

#6 Guest_Brooklamprey_*

Guest_Brooklamprey_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2007 - 01:42 PM

But even that isn't fool-proof. A number of these planktonic invaders have resting stages that will survive even if you treat the ballast water. Most of the invaders are also euryhaline, so they would theoretically be able to survive a ballast water exchange at sea.

And also keep in mind that most of the ships coming into the Great Lakes today carry no ballast water with them, and yet the mud and debris inside the ballast tanks are swarming with non-ingenous species. Simply regulating ballast water exchange isn't going to solve this problem.


Well put Kate.

So now lets go seal the Welland canal and fill the CSS before a Kamikaze carp blows the fuse to the electrical barrier.

If only it was that simple :neutral:

#7 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2007 - 02:01 PM

But even that isn't fool-proof. A number of these planktonic invaders have resting stages that will survive even if you treat the ballast water. Most of the invaders are also euryhaline, so they would theoretically be able to survive a ballast water exchange at sea.

And also keep in mind that most of the ships coming into the Great Lakes today carry no ballast water with them, and yet the mud and debris inside the ballast tanks are swarming with non-ingenous species. Simply regulating ballast water exchange isn't going to solve this problem.


I'm curious - if there isn't any ballast exchange, how does a critter get from the mud/debris in the tank into the outside water? Are the tanks leaky or something?

#8 Guest_hmt321_*

Guest_hmt321_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2007 - 02:24 PM

I'm curious - if there isn't any ballast exchange, how does a critter get from the mud/debris in the tank into the outside water? Are the tanks leaky or something?


once they are in the lakes they may take on ballast for stability in rough weather, some ships will fill ballast tanks and pump them out as they take on weight (cargo)

#9 Guest_Brooklamprey_*

Guest_Brooklamprey_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 March 2007 - 02:59 PM

I'm curious - if there isn't any ballast exchange, how does a critter get from the mud/debris in the tank into the outside water? Are the tanks leaky or something?


Basically as stated above..Even though some of these ships empty ballast in the ocean then enter as a No BoB (No ballast on board). They still have the sludge and residual crap that can be easily resuspended as the ship takes on small amounts of native water and dumps it in the coarse of being in the region.

It is interesting to note that in one ballast water study one big salty that was investigated was found to contain organisms from Asia, Africa, and Europe just in the residual sludge alone.

#10 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 05:22 PM

once they are in the lakes they may take on ballast for stability in rough weather, some ships will fill ballast tanks and pump them out as they take on weight (cargo)


Ah. I didn't realize that they would fill them and then empty them at the same port.

#11 Guest_Brooklamprey_*

Guest_Brooklamprey_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 07:04 PM

Ah. I didn't realize that they would fill them and then empty them at the same port.



Well not usually at the same port. these ships take on or release water as needed as they go throughout the various lakes, ports, locks or stops.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users