39 



tional price tag for crop pest prevention and abatement, what we 

 get out of the task force is a real bargain. 



We as a Nation need to do more to prevent and manage the im- 

 pacts of destructive aquatic species from foreign lands. Yet, the 

 budgets of key agencies assigned to spearhead this effort really do 

 not reflect a commitment to get the job done. In particular, NOAA 

 has never allocated funds to ftilfiU its obligation to develop and im- 

 plement a nationsQ aquatic nuisance program even though it is a 

 co-chair of the Interagency Aquatic Nuisance Task Force. Instead, 

 the agency seeks to reprogram the limited funds that Congress has 

 provided for Great Lakes-related provisions of the Act to address 

 its national concerns. This approach is a dead-end street. It will 

 only spread the already inadequate resources so thin that nothing 

 will get done. 



So I would urge NOAA and the other agencies involved to get se- 

 rious about this environmental program and commit new resources 

 to a solid national effort. If there ever was a situation in which an 

 ounce of prevention equals a pound of cure, this is it. 



In closing, I want to emphasize the importance of this hearing 

 in raising the awareness of those in other coastal areas to the 

 threat exotic species pose to their industries and their environ- 

 ment. I should point out, when our original legislation was intro- 

 duced it would have created a ballast management and discharge 

 requirement protecting all of our coasts. But without an infestation 

 comparable to the zebra mussel, there was not much awareness of, 

 or support for, this provision in other regions of the country. 



I want the record to be clear that we in the Great Lakes region 

 were not being selfish or insular in the approach we have under- 

 taken. I do hope when we seek reauthorization of this legislation 

 that many of my colleagues on this Committee will seek to include 

 their States in a prevention program similar to what we have now 

 in the Great Lakes. 



I would also call attention to another bill I have introduced, the 

 Innovative Ballast Management Act, which would help develop 

 technological solutions to ballast transfers of exotic species. I am 

 honored to have Senator Akaka's support for this initiative. 



So, again, I want to thank Senator Akaka for his leadership and 

 interest. It has been a growing problem, one he is addressing 

 across the board. I express our appreciation to our witnesses today, 

 many of whom have helped to get the 1990 Non-indigenous species 

 program off to a fairly positive start. We appreciate your work on 

 that. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN GLENN 



Good Afternoon. I want to thank my distinguished friend and colleague, Senator 

 Akaka, for holding this important hearing today on the impacts of exotic species on 

 our Nation's environment and economy. 



Now you wouldn't think that the Great Lakes region, Hawaii, and Florida would 

 have much in common — besides, of course, our beautiful beaches— but we all share 

 a real vulnerability to the irreparable damage which can be caused by exotic species. 

 I would like to take a few minutes to talk about my special concern with aquatic 

 nuisance species, and describe the good work done by the Great Lakes Task Force, 

 which helped to secure the passage of the Non-indigenous Aquatic Species Preven- 

 tion and Control Act (PL 101-646) of 1990. 



