<DOC>
[110th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:43278.wais]
HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS:
THE CHALLENGES ON THE
NATION'S COASTLINES
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND
ENVIRONMENT
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 10, 2008
__________
Serial No. 110-113
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science and Technology
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.science.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
43-278 PDF WASHINGTON : 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free(866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
______
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. BART GORDON, Tennessee, Chairman
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois RALPH M. HALL, Texas
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER JR.,
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California Wisconsin
MARK UDALL, Colorado LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
DAVID WU, Oregon DANA ROHRABACHER, California
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
NICK LAMPSON, Texas JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
JERRY MCNERNEY, California JO BONNER, Alabama
LAURA RICHARDSON, California TOM FEENEY, Florida
PAUL KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey BOB INGLIS, South Carolina
JIM MATHESON, Utah DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington
MIKE ROSS, Arkansas MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri PHIL GINGREY, Georgia
CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
BARON P. HILL, Indiana ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia
CHARLES A. WILSON, Ohio
ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
------
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment
HON. NICK LAMPSON, Texas, Chairman
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois BOB INGLIS, South Carolina
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
JERRY MCNERNEY, California RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
MARK UDALL, Colorado MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
PAUL KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
BART GORDON, Tennessee RALPH M. HALL, Texas
JEAN FRUCI Democratic Staff Director
CHRIS KING Democratic Professional Staff Member
MICHELLE DALLAFIOR Democratic Professional Staff Member
SHIMERE WILLIAMS Democratic Professional Staff Member
ELAINE PAULIONIS PHELEN Democratic Professional Staff Member
ADAM ROSENBERG Democratic Professional Staff Member
ELIZABETH STACK Republican Professional Staff Member
TARA ROTHSCHILD Republican Professional Staff Member
STACEY STEEP Research Assistant
C O N T E N T S
July 10, 2008
Page
Witness List..................................................... 2
Hearing Charter.................................................. 3
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Nick Lampson, Chairman, Subcommittee
on Energy and Environment, Committee on Science and Technology,
U.S. House of Representatives.................................. 7
Written Statement............................................ 7
Prepared Statement by Representative Ralph M. Hall, Ranking
Minority Member, Committee on Science and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 8
Prepared Statement by Representative Bob Inglis, Ranking Minority
Member, Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, Committee on
Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.......... 8
Prepared Statement by Representative Jerry F. Costello, Member,
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, Committee on Science
and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.................. 8
Panel I:
Hon. Connie Mack, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Florida
Oral Statement............................................... 9
Written Statement............................................ 10
Hon. Allen Boyd, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Florida
Oral Statement............................................... 11
Written Statement............................................ 12
Discussion....................................................... 13
Panel II:
Dr. Robert E. Magnien, Director, Center for Sponsored Coastal
Ocean Science, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Oral Statement............................................... 15
Written Statement............................................ 17
Biography.................................................... 24
Dr. Donald M. Anderson, Senior Scientist, Department of Biology,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; Director, U.S. National
Office for Marine Biotoxins and Harmful Algal Blooms
Oral Statement............................................... 25
Written Statement............................................ 33
Biography.................................................... 53
Mr. Dan L. Ayres, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Coastal Shellfish
Lead, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Region
Six Office
Oral Statement............................................... 54
Written Statement............................................ 56
Biography.................................................... 65
Dr. Hilton Kenneth Hudnell, Vice President and Director of
Science, SolarBee, Inc.
Oral Statement............................................... 66
Written Statement............................................ 67
Discussion
HABHRCA Reauthorization........................................ 108
HARRNESS....................................................... 108
Obstacles in Predicting Harmful Algal Blooms................... 109
Satellite Capacity............................................. 110
Algae Blooms for Biodiesel..................................... 111
Reducing and Controlling Algal Blooms.......................... 111
Climate Change's Impact on Algal Blooms........................ 114
Predicting Algal Blooms........................................ 115
Algal Bloom Causes: Fertilizer Runoff and Climate Change....... 116
ECOHAB......................................................... 117
More on HARRNESS............................................... 118
Freshwater Algal Blooms........................................ 119
Removing Phosphorus From Discharge............................. 120
Drinking Water Quality......................................... 122
HARMFUL ALGAL BLOOMS: THE CHALLENGES ON THE NATION'S COASTLINES
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 10, 2008
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment,
Committee on Science and Technology,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:03 a.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nick
Lampson [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
hearing charter
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Harmful Algal Blooms:
The Challenges on the
Nation's Coastlines
thursday, july 10, 2008
10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.
2318 rayburn house office building
Purpose
On Thursday, July 10, 2008 the Subcommittee on Energy and
Environment of the Committee on Science and Technology will hold a
hearing to examine Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) recent trends and
impacts on the coast, ocean, and Great Lakes.
The purpose of the hearing is to examine the challenges harmful
algal blooms and red tide events impose on the coastlines and in marine
and freshwaters. The hearing will also examine the current research on
the microbial bloom ecology as well as the options for prevention,
control, and mitigation. In addition, the hearing will examine the
state of the science and recent trends on an international level as it
relates to national and global changes. The hearing will examine the
National Plan for Algal Toxins and Harmful Algal Blooms, and how the
plan will affect our nation's ability to control the HABs problem.
Witnesses
Dr. Robert Magnien is the Director of the Center for Sponsored Coastal
Ocean Research in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
NOAA. Dr. Magnien will discuss the current state of federally funded
HABs research at NOAA, as well as options for prevention, control, and
mitigation. He will also discuss the National Plan for Algal Toxins and
Harmful Algal Blooms.
Dr. Donald Anderson is a Senior Scientist and Director of the Coastal
Ocean Institute at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Dr. Anderson
will discuss the current research on the ecology of the blooms of
microorganisms on both the east and west coasts. He will also discuss
the issue and the state of the science on an international level, as
well as comment on the National Plan for Algal Toxins and Harmful Algal
Blooms.
Mr. Dan Ayres is a Coastal Shellfish Manager and Lead Biologist at the
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Region Six Office. Mr.
Ayres will discuss the challenges harmful algal blooms and red tide
events impose on the coastlines. He will also discuss the impacts of
harmful algal blooms on beach closures, tourism, human health, and the
science behind these toxins. He too will comment on the National Plan
for Algal Toxins and Harmful Algal Blooms.
Dr. H. Kenneth Hudnell is Vice President and Director of Science at
SolarBee Inc. SolarBee is a solar-powered technology to improve water
quality through high-flow, long-distance circulation. Dr. Hudnell will
discuss the challenges and impacts of harmful algal blooms,
specifically in freshwater. He will also discuss the applications of
new technologies for prevention and control of biotoxins in water.
Background
What Are Harmful Algal Blooms?
Algae are photosynthetic, plant-like protists. Algae are vitally
important to marine and freshwater ecosystems, and most species of
algae are not harmful. Blooms occur in both marine and freshwater
environments when some algal species out-compete others and reproduce
rapidly to produce large numbers of algae. An algal bloom can discolor
the water due to the large number of algal cells. To the human eye,
blooms can appear greenish, brown, and even reddish-orange depending
upon the algal species, the aquatic ecosystem, and the concentration of
the organisms. Blooms can kill fish and other aquatic life by
decreasing sunlight available to the water and by using up all of the
available oxygen in the water (hypoxia).
A harmful algal bloom (HAB) is a bloom that produces toxins which
are detrimental to plants and animals. These outbreaks are commonly
called red or brown tides. These produced toxins accumulate in
shellfish, fish, or through the accumulation of biomass that in turn
affect other organisms and alter food webs. In recent years, many of
the Nation's coastlines, near-shore marine waters, and freshwaters have
experienced an increase in the number, frequency, duration and type of
HABs.
Blooms can be caused by several factors. An increase in nutrients
can cause algae growth and reproduction to increase dramatically just
as fertilizing a lawn makes the grass grow faster. In other instances,
an environmental change allows certain algae to out-compete others for
nutrients which can result in a bloom of the algae with the advantage.
This environmental change can be water quality, temperature, nutrients,
sunlight, or other factors.
Impacts of Harmful Algal Blooms
Harmful algal blooms are one of the most scientifically complex and
economically significant coastal management issues facing the Nation.
In the past, only a few regions of the U.S. were affected by HABs, but
now all U.S. coastal regions have reported major blooms. These
phenomena have devastating environmental, economic, and human health
impacts. Impacts include human illness and mortality following direct
consumption or indirect exposure to toxic shellfish or toxins in the
environment; economic hardship for coastal economies, many of which are
highly dependent on tourism or harvest of local seafood; as well as
dramatic fish, bird, and mammal mortalities. There are also devastating
impacts to ecosystems, leading to environmental damage that may reduce
the ability of those systems to sustain species due to habitat
degradation, increased susceptibility to disease, and long-term
alterations to community structure.
The Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act
Scientific understanding of harmful algal blooms and hypoxic events
(severe oxygen depletion) has progressed significantly since the early
1990's, but major impediments still remain for prediction, control and
mitigation of these complex phenomena. Practical and innovative
approaches to address hypoxia and HABs in U.S. waters are essential for
management of aquatic ecosystems and to fulfill a stronger investment
in the health of the coasts and oceans called for by the U.S. Ocean
Action Plan\1\ and recent reports on ocean policy. Recognizing this
need, in 2004 Congress reauthorized and expanded the Harmful Algal
Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-383)
by passing the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Amendments Act of 2004
(Public Law 108-456).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. Bush Administration, 2004.
http://ocean.ceq.gov/actionplan.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1998 Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act
(HABHRCA) established an Interagency Task Force to develop a national
HAB assessment and authorized funding for existing and new research
programs on HABs. This includes two multi-year research programs at
NOAA that focus on HABs, the Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal
Blooms (ECOHAB) program and the Monitoring and Event Response for
Harmful Algal Blooms (MERHAB) program. These programs involve federal,
State, and academic partners and support interdisciplinary extramural
research studies to address the issues of HABs in an ecosystem context.
HABHRCA was reauthorized in 2004, requiring assessments of HABs in
different coastal regions and in the Great Lakes and plans to expand
research and address the impacts of HABs. The law also authorized
research, education, and monitoring activities related to the
prevention, reduction, and control of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia
and reconstituted the Interagency Task Force on HABs and Hypoxia.
The law also directed NOAA to produce three reports and a research
and technology transfer plan. These were to be provided to Congress and
made publicly available within one to two years after the date of
enactment (e.g., by December 2006). The Prediction and Response
Report,\2\ released in September 2007, addresses both the state of
research and methods for HAB prediction and response, especially at the
federal level. None of the other products mandated by the legislation
have been completed. The National Scientific Research, Development,
Demonstration, and Technology Transfer Plan for Reducing Impacts from
Harmful Algal Blooms (RDDTT Plan) is undergoing interagency approval.
This plan will establish research priorities to develop and demonstrate
prevention, control and mitigation methods to advance current
prediction and response capabilities. The Scientific Assessment of
Freshwater Harmful Algal Blooms is reported to be complete. However, it
is not yet available. The law also required a scientific assessment of
hypoxia to be produced within two years of enactment. This report is
not yet completed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Prediction and Response Report, 2007 http://www.cop.noaa.gov/
stressors/extremeevents/hab/habhrca/
Predict<INF>-</INF>Resp<INF>-</INF>IntRpt<INF>-</INF>0107.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also provided for the development of local and regional
scientific assessments of HABs and hypoxia. These were not required to
be produced by any specific date. These assessments were to be
initiated at the request of State, tribal, or local governments or for
affected areas identified by NOAA. No reports have been produced
through this provision.
Current Federal Research Programs and Plans
The following are examples of ongoing research programs that
support interdisciplinary research studies to address the issues of
HABs and hypoxia:
<bullet> Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms
(ECOHAB)--a multi-agency partnership between the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA), National Science Foundation (NSF),
NOAA's Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research (CSCOR) and
the Office of Naval Research (ONR)
<bullet> Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal
Blooms (MERHAB)--NOAA
<bullet> Coastal Hypoxia Research Program (CHRP)--NOAA
<bullet> Interagency Research Efforts on Gulf of Mexico
Hypoxia
Northern Gulf of Mexico Program Ecosystems & Hypoxia
Assessment (NGOMEX)--NOAA
Gulf of Mexico Program--EPA
Hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico--USGS
For the past 12 years, the science community has been guided by the
National Plan for Marine Biotoxins and Harmful Algae (Anderson, et al.,
1993).\3\ This plan has served as the foundation for the development of
national, regional, State and local programs and the advancement of
scientific knowledge on HABs and their impacts. HABs have increased in
their type, frequency, location, duration, and severity yet the
decision-making and management systems have not changed. Thus the
national plan has been updated to reflect the current state of the HAB
problem, needs, priorities, and approaches. The new plan, Harmful Algal
Research and Response: A National Environmental Science Strategy 2005-
2015\4\ (HARRNESS) is composed of views from the research and
management community and outlines a framework for actions over a ten-
year period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Anderson, D., Galloway, S.B., Joseph, J.D. A National Plan for
Marine Biotoxins and Harmful Algae. 1993. http://hdl.handle.net/1912/
614, https://darchive.mblwhoilibrary.org/bitstream/1912/614/1/WHOI-93-
02.pdf
\4\ HARRNESS, Harmful Algal Research and Response: A National
Environmental Science Strategy 2005-2015. National Plan for Algal
Toxins and Harmful Algal Blooms. http://www.esa.org/HARRNESS/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The HABs issue has been approached at a multi-agency level because
no single agency has the resources or mandate to address the many
dimensions of the HAB problem. There is presently a range of programs
and agencies that address specific aspects of HABs including: the
ecology, the toxicology, monitoring, and human health impacts. The new
U.S. plan, HARRNESS, is designed to facilitate coordination by
highlighting the needs and priorities of research and management of
communities. As outlined in the plan, the major priorities and critical
needs for additional capability and understanding fall into four
thematic areas:
1. Bloom ecology and dynamics
2. Toxins and their effects
3. Food webs and fisheries
4. Public heath and socioeconomic impacts
In addition to the programs listed above, there are several other
national research programs that support research on HABs:
<bullet> NSF/NIEHS Oceans and Human Health Initiative
<bullet> National Sea Grant College Program
<bullet> EPA Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program
<bullet> Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Programs to support
State-based surveillance for human illness associated with
HABs.
Chairman Lampson. Good morning. I want to welcome everyone
to today's hearing on harmful algal blooms, HABs, and how these
HABs are impacting our coastlines, marine and freshwaters. Our
marine and freshwaters are overflowing with life. However,
under the right conditions, some of the naturally occurring
microorganisms found in these waters can create toxic
conditions.
Harmful algal blooms can cause a tremendous amount of
damage through the production of toxins and by reducing oxygen
in the water. Many of our coastal areas and the Great Lakes are
experiencing the impact of these blooms. These impact include
alteration of the ocean's food web, human illnesses and
economic losses to coastal communities and commercial
fisheries. Our Texas Parks and Wildlife Department monitors
these blooms to communicate pollution threats to the public.
They have continued to work hard to respond to incidents where
fish and other animals have been harmed.
The research and response needs for the United States have
grown since the last reauthorization of the Harmful Algal Bloom
and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 2004. There has been an
increase in the number, frequency and type of HABs in recent
years.
We need to use the advances in our understanding of these
blooms to better predict their occurrence and to prevent them,
if possible. Fishery and beach closures are very costly events
that can devastate the economies of coastal communities. We
have a distinguished panel of witnesses here today and I hope
they will offer us recommendations on how we can improve the
prevention, control and management of harmful algal blooms. I
want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today
[The prepared statement of Chairman Lampson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairman Nick Lampson
Good morning. I want to welcome everyone to today's hearing on
Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) and how HABs are impacting our coastlines,
marine, and freshwaters.
Our marine and freshwaters are overflowing with life. However under
the right conditions some of the naturally occurring microorganisms
found in these waters can create toxic conditions.
Harmful algal blooms can cause a tremendous amount of damage
through the production of toxins and by reducing oxygen in the water.
Many of our coastal areas and the Great Lakes are experiencing the
impacts of these blooms. These impacts include alteration of the
ocean's food web, human illnesses, and economic losses to coastal
communities and commercial fisheries.
Our Texas Parks and Wildlife Department monitors these blooms to
communicate pollution threats to the public. They have continued to
work hard to respond to incidents where fish and other animals have
been harmed.
The research and response needs for the U.S. have grown since the
last reauthorization of the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research
and Control Act in 2004. There has been an increase in the number,
frequency, and type of HABs in recent years.
We need to use the advances in our understanding of these blooms to
better predict their occurrence and prevent them, if possible. Fishery
and beach closures are very costly events that can devastate the
economies of coastal communities.
We have a distinguished panel of witnesses here today, and I hope
they will offer us recommendations on how we can improve the
prevention, control and management of Harmful Algal Blooms.
Chairman Lampson. At this time I would like to recognize
actually not the Ranking Member of the Committee but the
Ranking Member of the Full Committee, Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. I thank my friend, fellow Texan, and I have a
statement and I would ask unanimous consent to place it in the
record and not take the time.
Chairman Lampson. So ordered.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Ralph M. Hall
I have to admit, we don't get many harmful algal blooms in my
district. We are usually more concerned with drought than with excess,
stagnant water. Nevertheless, harmful algal blooms have detrimental
effects on our coastal communities and these effects can be felt even
up in the 4th district with higher prices or limited selections of
seafood.
The 105th and the 108th Congresses enacted legislation that directs
NOAA to put together a national policy on research of harmful algal
blooms and outline potential mitigation strategies. I am happy to know
that such plans are now in place and will help coordinate the Federal
Government's efforts on algae research. I hope that they have
remembered the Department of Energy's research program on fuel from
algae several decades ago, and that this outside-the-box thinking is
characteristic of our national strategy on dealing with harmful algal
blooms. Sometimes environmental problems can have a silver lining, and
I hope that our scientists look for that lining in addition to looking
for a cure.
I look forward to hearing from our distinguished panelists about
what research is currently going on, and what is planned for the
future. Thank you again, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Lampson. If there are additional opening
statements, they will be placed in the record at this point.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Inglis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Bob Inglis
Thank you for holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman.
South Carolina is home to the Phytoplankton Monitoring Network, an
outreach tool that unites the community in monitoring marine
phytoplankton and harmful algal blooms. This network has grown to
include educators and scientists in several states such as North
Carolina, Georgia, Florida in the Southeast, to as far away as Hawaii,
the Virgin Islands, Massachusetts, and Alaska. This network has
reported more than 70 blooms since it started in 2001, quite a feat for
an all volunteer network!
However, this monitoring program would be useless without
simultaneous research on harmful algal blooms, how to mitigate their
adverse effects and adapt to their presence. In the last ten years,
Congress has enacted legislation for research on harmful algal blooms
and directed NOAA to develop strategies on how to mitigate them. I am
pleased that so much progress has been made since we passed these laws.
I know there is still much to be done, particularly on the freshwater
side. I hope our witnesses will give us insight on how we can address
the shortcomings in existing law.
I look forward hearing from our distinguished witnesses, and I
yield back the remainder of my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Costello follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Jerry F. Costello
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the Subcommittee giving attention to
this matter and holding a hearing on the recent trends of Harmful Algal
Blooms (HABs).
As you know, Mr. Chairman, this is not the first time this
committee has looked at this issue; unfortunately however, HABs
continue to adversely affect our coasts, oceans and Great Lakes.
Whereas before, HABs only affected select locations in the United
States, more recent trends have touched virtually every coastal state.
As a life-long resident of a Great Lakes state, I am well aware of
the importance of these vital natural resources to the economic health
and well being of our state. Whether as a source of drinking water for
our largest cities, a major transportation corridor for the movement of
goods and services, or as a center for recreation, the Great Lakes are
integral to the regional economies and livelihood of those states that
line their shores.
I am pleased we continue to examine and explore these issues as
there are significant policy and organizational challenges that remain
in this nation's efforts to restore and protect our natural resources.
We must build upon the 2004 expansion of the Harmful Algal Bloom and
Hypoxia Amendments Act of 2004 to help coordinate organizational
efforts to combat HABs harmful effects.
I welcome the witnesses here today, and look forward to their
testimony.
Panel I:
Chairman Lampson. At this time I am pleased to introduce
our first panel of witnesses. We have two of our colleagues
from Florida--well, we have one of our colleagues from Florida
with us today, Representative Connie Mack. We may be joined by
Representative Allen Boyd. Congressman Mack, you are recognized
to make your statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. CONNIE MACK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Mr. Mack. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and if it is okay with
the Committee and the Chairman, I have my written statement
that I would like to submit to the Committee, but if it is all
right with the Committee, I would like to just talk openly
about red tide and algal blooms and the effects that they have
in my part of the country and what I think the overall impact
is, if that is okay with the Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. It is absolutely perfect with us. Please
proceed.
Mr. Mack. Thank you. And I am sure that most--I know that
most people behind me and also people on the Committee are
aware of the problems, and I will refer to as red tide. There
are lots of different names for these algal blooms and the
toxins that are produced from them, but from my perspective
growing up in Southwest Florida, we would have a red tide
incident that would last maybe a week a year, and now we see
red tide off our shores and approaching our coastlines 13
months in a row. So obviously the problem is getting worse.
And as we try to learn more about red tide and the causes
of red tide, we always bump into competing research. Someone
will say that well, research shows that it is not tied to maybe
runoff, let us say, from fertilizers running off into our
bodies of water, and others will say, well, the science doesn't
prove that at all. And then we get Members of Congress such as
myself who would like to go home and take a couple million
dollars and go to our local university and hopefully help them
with their research projects but then we find that we end up
duplicating research projects.
And so one of the things that I have proposed and I think
we have four-some co-sponsors on the bill, is to have a peer
review research so that when we move forward with red tide
research, the monies are being distributed by scientists who
understand the research so we don't duplicate research as we
move forward and there is more efficiencies. This is not just a
Florida problem. This is all along the coastal United States,
also the lakes, and red tide, these algal blooms are different
in every part of the country. But we can use, if we can
combined our dollars, if we combined our research and our
efforts and we let the science and the scientists direct where
those dollars are going, we will get a much better product. The
research will be much more reliable. And from that research, we
can then move into how to better track red tide, how to use the
research to develop technologies that will limit the red tide
outbreaks. And if you have ever had the opportunity to visit
southwest Florida, some of the most beautiful beaches, I know,
you know, other parts of the state might disagree, but some of
the most beautiful beaches in the country or in the world, but
when you have a red tide event, people have a hard time
breathing. It runs people out of our hotels. The economy
suffers and there is a lasting--a long-lasting impact to the
citizens of southwest Florida who have a hard time breathing
and their eyes will swell and tear up and it is very
uncomfortable. I am encouraged that the Committee is again
looking at how we move forward, how do we continue to have
research that is done in a way that is reliable, that is
efficient, that we don't waste taxpayers' dollars on
duplicating of research, and I think that the Committee and the
wisdom of the Committee will find a way to ensure that we use
peer review research instead of powerful Members of Congress
fighting just for their backyard but fighting for all of us
around the country and taking on red tide.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Mack follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Connie Mack
Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking you and the
Committee for holding this important hearing. I appreciate the chance
to testify on harmful algal blooms (HABs) and how they are affecting
our nation's coastlines, oceans, and inland waters. I would also like
to thank my friend Mr. Boyd for showing his commitment to this issue.
As you all can see this is not a Republican or Democratic matter,
rather, it is one that affects the health of our entire nation.
I represent the coastal areas of Southwest Florida. If you haven't
been there, it's a beautiful part of the country, with miles and miles
of white sandy beaches. Our economy hinges in great part on tourism.
People love to come to our shores to fish, to relax on the beach, and
to enjoy our unique way of life. For Southwest Florida, like many
communities, a healthy environment and a healthy economy go hand-in-
hand.
When I was growing up in Cape Coral, Florida, red tide blooms were
short-lived nuisances that lasted just a few days. Today, however, red
tide blooms continue for months at a time, and they have drastic and
long-lasting implications that threaten the environment, the economy,
people's health, and our overall quality of life.
It is imperative that we do more to understand and combat red tide
and other harmful algal blooms. From New England to the Great Lakes,
from California to South Carolina, these toxic blooms are a national
problem that affects us all.
Harmful algal blooms occur when algae produces toxic or harmful
effects on people, fish, shellfish, marine mammals, and birds.
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), HABs have been reported in almost every coastal state and
within the Great Lakes. These blooms cause dangerous respiratory
distress, burning eyes, and other ailments to individuals in affected
areas, as well as the nationwide potential of severe food poisoning
from the consumption of contaminated shellfish.
Harmful algal blooms not only affect our personal health, they also
affect the health of our economy. Red tide and other toxic blooms cost
approximately $80 million annually to communities across America. Since
HABs are affected by many variables, including weather and currents, it
is difficult to predict their location, timing, or duration. For
coastal communities like mine that rely on beaches for tourism, the
potential economic losses could be crippling.
Legislation regarding these toxic blooms was first introduced in
1998 under the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act
of 1998 (HABHRCA). This bill authorized appropriations for NOAA to
research, monitor, and manage activities for the prevention and control
of HABs. This law established an inter-agency task force to develop a
comprehensive coordinated federal response to harmful algal blooms and
hypoxia. In addition, the legislation required the task force to submit
annual reports to track the progress and effectiveness of the
departments and agencies.
The HABHRCA legislation has been reauthorized several times, most
recently in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008. Current law
authorizes $30 million per year for the next three years.
Unfortunately, the existing law passed through the appropriations
process, and not through your committee. The Members of this committee
and your staff understand and recognize the importance of this issue.
By bringing it up through regular order and holding the hearing today,
your committee can finally give this issue the attention it deserves.
Last year I introduced the Save Our Shores Act to increase our
commitment to researching HABS, and to improve the process by which
those research dollars are accounted for and awarded.
Although existing law incorporates the increased funding levels
within my bill, the Save Our Shores Act would reinforce the importance
of peer-reviewed research and strengthen the annual reporting
requirements.
While NOAA has recognized the importance of having scientists and
experts in the field involved in the peer review process to determine
where research money is going, Save Our Shores ensures that all HAB
funding, not just HABHRCA, would be awarded on a competitive peer
reviewed basis. Additionally, by improving reporting requirements
Congress and NOAA will be able to measure the effectiveness of these
research efforts.
Finally, we need to reduce the gap between authorized and
appropriated funds, to ensure research can be continued. Annual funding
has fallen far short of authorized levels and we need to close this
disparity.
Once again, I commend the Committee for bringing up such an
important issue. The sooner we can understand what factors may
contribute to harmful algal blooms, the sooner solutions can be
developed to save our nation's coastlines, oceans, and inland waters.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Mr. Mack. We appreciate you
being here.
Mr. Boyd, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. ALLEN BOYD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
Mr. Boyd. I needed my friend, Connie Mack, to show me how
to turn this thing on. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and
Representative Hall and the other Members of the Committee for
allowing us to appear before you today, and thank you for
holding this hearing, and I apologize for being a moment late.
You know, most committees are a little bit starting on time,
Chairman Lampson, but obviously you are not, and I am grateful
for that.
I am also grateful for my friend, Connie Mack, and his
leadership in this issue, and he is absolutely right that
Southwest Florida has some of the most beautiful beaches in the
world. His problem is, he doesn't have the most beautiful
beaches. That is in North Florida in areas like Panama City,
Destin, the Fort Walton area, an area that we so endearingly
call the ``Redneck Riviera.''
Chairman Lampson. They are not on commercials, are they?
Mr. Boyd. But red tide has gotten to be a very serious
problem and it has become more severe. I know when I was
growing up, it was something we didn't see very often and we
dreaded it when we did see it, but in the last 15 years or so,
we have had maybe five or so severe outbreaks, and I think the
important thing to understand is when that outbreak comes, it
really renders the coastline and the use of the coast
worthless, not only for commercial activity like fishing
because of what it does to the fish but also it renders it
useless for human use. People can't use the coast when there is
red tide. So we see that those of us who live in coastal areas,
and in Florida, 80 percent of our people do live within 12
miles of the coast. That is what Florida is built on, is our
beautiful coastline. So it does extreme damage to us
economically in addition to the ecosystem environmental damage
that is done also.
Specifically, I think in our area, we have a very
aggressively growing community up in the Destin, Fort Walton,
Panama City area that has turned into quite a tourist spot, but
we also have a long and historical productive fishing industry,
particularly in the Apalachicola Bay area. We are home of the
world famous Apalachicola Bay oyster, and when the red tide
comes in, then all of that is rendered useless, particularly
this last outbreak we had after Katrina. We had an outbreak and
then subsequently the drought, which happened in Georgia, and
the reduced amount of freshwater coming down the Apalachicola
River, we weren't able to flush that red tide out and it stayed
with an extra long time.
So those are the kinds of problems that we experience with
the algal bloom that causes the red tide, and Mr. Chairman, I
want to again thank Connie Mack for his leadership on this
issue and also for you and your committee for holding this
hearing, and we will be glad to answer whatever questions that
we can, hopefully with the understanding that you know that we
are not technical experts on this but we just know how it
affects our people and our communities. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Boyd follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Allen Boyd
Chairman Lampson and Ranking Member Inglis,
Thank you for inviting me to this important hearing to tell you
about the hardship that my constituents suffer every time we have a red
tide, or Harmful Algal Bloom, outbreak in the Gulf. I would also like
to thank my friend Mr. Mack for being a leader on this issue for the
Florida Delegation.
When I was growing up, red tide was a very rare occurrence.
However, in the last 15 to 20 years, the incidence of red tide has
jumped to at least four or five outbreaks in that time period. This has
been very hard on the oyster and scallop industries as well as on the
tourism industry in my district and across Florida.
I represent North Florida along the coast line of the Gulf of
Mexico. My district has some of the most famous and beautiful beaches
in the country as well as an important fishing industry and pristine
natural, protected environments. Our local economies, our environment,
and our very way of life are threatened every time the algal blooms
near the coastline.
The most recent incidence of harmful algal blooms was in 2005 after
Hurricane Katrina. As you all probably know, red tide originates out in
the Gulf. Hurricanes and storms push it in to the estuaries where the
damage to wildlife is enormous. One area in my district, Franklin
County, produces oysters and was hit particularly hard then. This
affects the entire oyster industry because Apalachicola Bay provides 90
percent of the state's oysters.
The toxins released by these harmful blooms have a particular
affect on ``filter-feeders.'' Filter feeders are fish like oysters or
scallops that absorb the waters and filter out the microscopic
organisms. If eaten, they can cause a person to become very ill.
As the hurricane pushed the red tide into the Apalachicola Bay, it
was trapped in the enclosure of the Bay and slow moving water. With
drought above Florida in Georgia, water was not flowing down to the Bay
and the entire area had to be closed because we could not flush out the
algal blooms with freshwater.
Unfortunately the affects of red tide are not felt only by the
fish. Along with the rich natural resources that Florida is known for,
we are also known as a very popular tourist destination. The toxins
released by the blooms can lead to respiratory and eye problems in
people who are exposed. So you can see how the yearly outbreaks of red
tide in the Gulf can affect the $53 billion dollar tourist industry in
my state.
For example, during the primary months for oyster harvest,
September-December, through three previous years, red tides have forced
closures of the oyster beds in Apalachicola Bay for well over 50
percent of the season (Table). Total damages from lost production of
seafood, canceled reservations, regional defamation and respiratory
illnesses exceeds multi-millions per year.
In conclusion, the economic welfare of coastal communities, seafood
commerce and public health about Apalachicola Bay, Florida remains
vulnerable to increasing occurrences of potentially toxic red tides.
The adverse occurrence is currently unpredictable and difficult to
resolve in terms of controls and monitoring methods for resolution. The
consequences restrict harvest of valuable seafood, devalue coastal
properties and deter tourism.
This situation is anticipated to increase with the diminishing flow
of freshwaters from the northern reserves that are necessary to
maintain Bay water salinities levels that are less favorable for red
tides. It is imperative to all of the states around the Gulf of Mexico
to learn more about this harmful bloom. Many vital industries and the
fragile ecosystem rely on us coming to a better understanding of where
this bloom originates and how we can prevent it from further damaging
our environment.
Thank you again for your attention to this issue Mr. Chairman. I
stand ready to work with you in whatever way I can, so that we can
ultimately develop responsible and effective methods to predict and
detect red tide.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Discussion
Chairman Lampson. Thank you very much, Mr. Boyd and Mr.
Mack.
Are there any questions of this panel? We have got some
experts that are sitting behind them that we are going to be
hearing from but we have time for questions if anyone wants to
now. Yes, sir?
Mr. Hall. I would just say it is an exceptional panel here
that are here with similar problems of a mutual state, and I
like the way they rag on their particular districts because I
am reminded that Pike's Peak is not by far the highest peak
over in that area. There are four or five other higher peaks
but if Pike's Peak is the one that that Congressman brags
about, then that's where everybody goes. So maybe even of you
have a Pike's Peak in your district but all the parts of
Florida that I ever visited are just absolutely breathtaking,
and I have great opportunity to be with you, Mr. Boyd, almost
once a year for the last several years and you are a gracious
host and you represent a beautiful part of the country. My
first home during World War II was Daytona Beach, Florida, and
my wife and I always intended to go back there, but, you know,
you can't do that when you have families at home and fathers
and parents and all, but it is a great state. You do a good
job. Thank you for coming before the Committee.
Mr. Boyd. Mr. Chairman, if I might thank my friend, Ralph
Hall, for those comments, and Connie Mack and I certainly would
agree that the Atlantic coast is the second most beautiful
coast in the State of Florida with the Gulf of Mexico being
first.
Mr. Mack. I would agree with that.
Chairman Lampson. They are together on something. You know,
I would question as to whether or not the best fishing is in
the eastern Gulf or the western Gulf, but we won't get into
that either today.
Mr. Mack. Well, since you brought it up, Mr. Chairman, it
depends on what you are fishing for.
Chairman Lampson. That is very true.
Mr. Mack. On a serious note, I know that the--I had an
opportunity to talk to Members of the Committee and I know that
you are going to hear from the experts on this, and I am
fortunate enough to have had the ability to have many
conversations with who I believe are the experts, and I think
my colleagues recognize the need for us to once again move
forward with the ability to have research that is meaningful
because research is what we rely upon to develop the
technologies to protect our waterways from these toxins, and so
I am very honored to be here and to have the opportunity to
speak, but I really look forward to you hearing from the
experts as well.
Chairman Lampson. We thank you both for being here, and
clearly it is a huge issue. It affects the food chain, it
affects our tourism activities, it affects the economy
significantly, and we hope we come up with some of the right
conclusions. So thank you both for joining us today.
We will take a very short break as the next panel takes its
place at the table and we will begin very shortly.
[Recess.]
Panel II:
Chairman Lampson. I want to welcome our second panel of
witnesses. Dr. Robert Magnien is the Director of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Sponsored
Coastal Ocean Research. Dr. Donald Anderson is Senior Scientist
and Director of the Coastal Ocean Institute at Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution. I am going to skip Dr. Ayres for
just one second and I will go to Dr. Kenneth Hudnell, who is
the Vice President and Director of Science at SolarBee
Incorporated. And I would call on our colleague, Mr. Baird, to
make an introduction.
Mr. Baird. I am just pleased to have Dr. Dan Ayres here,
Coastal Shellfish Manager and Lead Biologist for Washington
State's Department of Fish and Wildlife Region Six. My dear
friends from Florida spoke earlier, but as Dan knows, we have
harmful algal blooms off our coast in the Puget Sound as well
and Dan has been a real leader in trying to deal with those,
and I am glad he is here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Mr. Baird.
You will each have five minutes for your spoken testimony.
Your written testimony will be included in the record for the
hearing, and when you all complete your testimony, we will
begin with questions. Each Member will have five minutes to
question the panel.
Dr. Magnien, you may begin.
STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT E. MAGNIEN, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR
SPONSORED COASTAL OCEAN SCIENCE, NATIONAL CENTERS FOR COASTAL
OCEAN SCIENCE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
(NOAA)
Dr. Magnien. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Subcommittee. My name is Robert Magnien and I am Director of
NOAA's Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research. My center
is responsible for administering the competitive research
program called for in the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia
Research Control Act, also known as HABHRCA, which includes the
only two national programs devoted solely to harmful algal
bloom research, and you will hear me refer to harmful algal
blooms as HABs in the rest of my testimony. I appreciate the
opportunity to discuss NOAA's role in the national response to
HABs in our coastal waters and our Great Lakes. I will briefly
discuss what HABs are, highlight NOAA's approach to this
problem and touch on some of our accomplishments to date.
Harmful algae are often invisible microscopic organisms but
they can also appear as visible scums or be seaweed-like. Some
harmful algae produce potent toxins that cause illnesses or
death in humans and marine life including fish, sea birds and
marine mammals. Humans and animals can be exposed to algal
toxins from the food they eat, the water they drink or swim in
or the air they breathe. Other algae harm ecosystems by
smothering valuable habitat such as corals or grow to such
proportions that their subsequent decomposition depletes all
life-giving oxygen in the water, thus killing most of the
resident organisms.
HAB events have been increasing in frequency and now affect
all major regions in the United States and the Great Lakes to
varying extents from year to year. The widespread occurrence
and diversity of blooms challenges our ability to keep pace
with the needs of coastal managers to protect human health and
local economies. Reports just days ago of people being
hospitalized in New England from eating tainted shellfish show
how real these threats are.
Our approach in NOAA to these problems are national in
scope. They are targeted to the different regional needs and
they are relevant at the State level where managers are on the
front lines and need new tools and knowledge to efficiently and
effectively combat existing and emerging threats. Partnerships
with State managers like Mr. Ayres and research scientists like
Dr. Anderson, who will address you shortly, bring a wealth of
expertise to our HAB programs and keep us focused on the
management needs. Coordinating and collaborating between
programs within NOAA and other federal agencies ensures broad
engagement and efficient use of our resources in addressing
these difficult problems. As our research programs yield
valuable products, we are transferring this knowledge to
operational programs in NOAA as well as supporting the
transferred adoption of successful technologies to sustained
operations at State agencies or other local or regional
entities.
We have a long record of accomplishments since the passage
of HABHRCA in 1998 in virtually every coastal state including
improved HAB monitoring and detection capabilities,
identification of methods to prevent the development of blooms,
and forecasts to provide more efficient and comprehensive ways
of assisting State managers and warning the public of potential
exposure. I will mention only three examples to provide a sense
of the progress we have made together with our partners.
NOAA has developed a satellite-based warning system for the
devastating red tides in Florida, which you just heard about.
This is the HAB bulletin that comes out twice a week and
forecasts the progression of red tide and gives local managers
a heads up. We are hoping to expand that system to Texas and
then eventually go national with this system. A NOAA-funded
monitoring system off Texas recently detected a rare HAB
species, which alerted State public health managers to this
threat. Shellfish harvesting was suspended and shellfish
recalled just days before the Fulton Oyster Fest, a major event
in the region attended by thousands of people. Early detection
and quick warning prevented human illness, which could have
been a devastating blow to the local shellfish industry. The
current severe red tide affecting New England states was
predicted months in advance as a result of NOAA-funded
research. The prediction and subsequent data being supplied in
real time is allowing State managers and the shellfish industry
to deal effectively with this difficult situation.
So in conclusion, over the last 10 years we made
unprecedented progress in understanding the causes and
consequences of harmful algal blooms which has led to the
development of numerous tools that are already in service and
improving HAB management. We are working hard to build upon
these successes by continuing to move newly developed
technologies into application and operation at the national,
regional and State levels, and we also plan to spend additional
effort with managers and other partners to identify critical
future needs region by region and develop strategic plans to
fill those gaps.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of NOAA on
the topic of HABs, and I will be happy to answer any questions
that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Magnien follows:]
Prepared Statement of Robert E. Magnien
Introduction
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. My name
is Robert E. Magnien, Director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA's) Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research
(CSCOR). CSCOR provides extramural funding for multi-disciplinary
research focused on understanding and predicting the impacts of natural
and anthropogenic influences on coastal ecosystems, communities, and
economies. In this capacity, I administer the only two national
programs solely focused on harmful algal blooms (HABs): the interagency
Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms (ECOHAB) Program and
NOAA's Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms (MERHAB)
Program, which are authorized by the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia
Research and Control Act of 1998 (HABHRCA). I also serve on the
Interagency Working Group on HABs, Hypoxia, and Human Health (IWG-4H),
which, among other responsibilities, implements the reporting
requirements of HABHRCA 2004. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss
NOAA's role in addressing HABs in our coastal waters and the Great
Lakes. I will highlight the advances NOAA's efforts have made in
improving HAB management and discuss how we plan to build on our early
successes.
HAB Problem
Algae are simple plants that, in general, are beneficial because
they provide the main source of energy that sustains marine and aquatic
life. However, a small percentage of algae cause harm to humans,
animals, and the environment by producing toxins or by growing in
excessively large numbers. When this occurs they are referred to as
``harmful algal blooms'' or HABs. When these algae are present in such
high numbers that they discolor the water, HABs are sometimes called
``red tides,'' ``brown tides,'' etc., but not all HABs cause water
discoloration. Table 1 lists some of the major HAB organisms in the
United States.
Some harmful algae produce potent toxins that cause illness or
death in humans and other organisms--fish, seabirds, manatees, sea
lions, turtles, and dolphins are some commonly affected animals. Humans
and other animals can be exposed to algal toxins through the food they
eat, the water they drink or swim in, or the air that they breathe.
Other harmful algae are nontoxic to humans and wildlife but form such
large blooms that they degrade habitat quality through massive
overgrowth, shading, or oxygen depletion (hypoxia). These high biomass
blooms can also be a nuisance to humans when masses of algae accumulate
along beaches and subsequently decay.
HABs can have major negative impacts on local economies when, for
example, shellfish harvesting is restricted to protect human health or
when tourism declines due to degradation of recreational resources.
HABs can also result in significant public health costs when humans
become ill. A recent conservative assessment estimates that HABs
occurring in marine waters alone have an average annual impact of $82
million dollars in the United States.\1\ We know that local impacts of
single events can be large, sometimes larger than the average annual
impact. For example, in 2005, we saw $18 million in lost shellfish
sales in Massachusetts alone.\2\ Economic impacts can be difficult to
calculate as they vary from region to region and event to event, but
they are a primary concern of coastal communities that experience HAB
events.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Hoagland, P., and Scatasta, S. 2006. The economic effects of
harmful algal blooms. In E. Graneli and J. Turner, eds., Ecology of
Harmful Algae. Ecology Studies Series. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Springer-Verlag, Chap. 29.
\2\ Jin, D., Thunberg, E., and Hoagland, P. 2008. Economic impact
of the 2005 red tide event on commercial shellfish fisheries in New
England. Ocean and Coastal Management 51(5): 420-429.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The public health, ecosystem, and economic impacts can all have
social and cultural consequences. For example, along the Washington and
Oregon coasts, tens of thousands of people visit annually to harvest
razor clams recreationally whenever the beaches are opened but, due to
high levels of the HAB toxin domoic acid, there have been a number of
closures to the recreational fishery in recent years. These closures
have not only resulted in economic losses, but also in an erosion of
community identity, community recreation, and a traditional way of
living for native coastal cultures.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
The geographic distribution of HAB events in the United States is
broad. For example, all coastal states have experienced HAB events over
the last decade (see map of HAB events). Moreover, the problem is not
limited to the marine coasts of the United States, as freshwater HABs
occur in the Great Lakes and in many inland waters. Evidence indicates
that the frequency and distribution of these events and their impacts
have increased considerably in recent years in the United States and
globally.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ GEOHAB, 2006. Global Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal
Blooms, Harmful Algal Blooms in Eutrophic Systems. P. Glibert (ed.).
IOC and SCOR, Paris and Baltimore, 74 pp.
Heisler, J., P. Glibert, J. Burkholder, D. Anderson, W. Cochlan, W.
Dennison, C. Gobler, Q. Dortch, C. Heil, E. Humphries, A. Lewitus, R.
Magnien, H. Marshall, K. Sellner, D. Stockwell, D. Stoecker, and M.
Suddleson. 2008 Eutrophication and Harmful Algal Blooms: A Scientific
Consensus. Harmful Algae. In press.
Although all coastal states experience HABs, the specific organisms
responsible for the HABs differ among regions of the country (see HAB
map). As a result the harmful impacts vary in their scope and severity,
which leads to the need for specific management approaches for each
region and problem. Some species need to be present in very high
abundance before harmful effects occur making them easy to detect and
track. Others cause problems at very low concentrations and can in
essence be hidden among other benign algae, so they are difficult to
detect and track. The factors that cause and control blooms from
initiation to decline vary not only by species, but also by region due
to differences in coastlines, runoff, oceanography, nutrient regime,
other organisms present in the water, etc. Consequently, developing
strategies for HAB management requires a regional approach.
The causes of HABs are complex. Not only do they vary between
species and locations but they are not all well understood. In general,
algal species grow best when environmental conditions (such as
temperature, salinity, and availability of nutrients and light) are
optimal for cell growth. Other biological and physical processes
determine if enhanced cell growth will result in biomass accumulation
(or what we call a ``bloom''). The challenge for understanding the
causes of HABs stems from the complexity of these biological, chemical,
and physical interactions and their variable influence on growth and
bloom development among different HAB species. The complexity of
interactions between HABs, the environment, and other plankton
complicate the predictions of when and where HAB events will occur.
Knowledge of how all these factors control the initiation, sustainment,
and decline of a bloom is a critical precursor for advancing HAB
management.
Human activities are thought to contribute to the increased
frequency of some HABs.<SUP>3</SUP> For example, increased nutrient
pollution has been acknowledged as a likely factor contributing to
increased occurrence of several high biomass HABs. Other human-induced
environmental changes that may foster development of certain HABs
include changes in the types of nutrients entering coastal waters,
alteration of food webs by overfishing, introductions of non-indigenous
species that change food web structure, introduction of HAB cells to
new areas via ballast water or other mechanisms, and modifications to
water flow. It should also be noted that climate change will almost
certainly influence HAB dynamics in some way since many critical
processes governing HAB dynamics--such as temperature, water column
stratification, upwelling and ocean circulation patterns, and
freshwater and land-derived nutrient inputs--are influenced by climate.
The interactive role of climate change with the other factors driving
the frequency and severity of HABs is an important topic in the early
stages of research, but climate change is expected to exacerbate the
HAB problem in some regions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Edwards, M., Johns, D.G., Leterme, S.C., Svendsen, E., and
Richardson, A.J. 2006. Regional climate change and harmful algal blooms
in the northeast Atlantic. Limnol. Oceanogr. 52(2): 820-829.
Dale, B., Edwards, M., and Reid, P.C. 2006. Climate change and
harmful algal blooms. In Graneli, E., and Turner, J.T. (eds.), Ecology
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
of Harmful Algae. Ecological Studies. 189: 367-378.
NOAA HAB Programs
The long-term goal of NOAA's HAB programs is to prevent, control,
and mitigate HABs and their impacts in U.S. coastal waters, including
the Great Lakes. Since most HAB impacts are managed at the State and
local level, achieving this goal is mainly accomplished by providing
State and local coastal and public health managers and local
communities with the information and tools they need to protect human
health, ecosystem health, and coastal economies. NOAA, through its HAB
research and partnerships with academic institutions as well as other
efforts in coordination with multiple agencies, is developing tools and
applications to assist local decision-makers. A few examples include:
<bullet> more accurate methodologies for detecting and
tracking HAB cells and toxins that allow managers to assess
more quickly, and cost-effectively, the magnitude of a HAB
event;
<bullet> models for forecasting when and where HABs will occur
and testing prevention strategies;
<bullet> methods of diagnosing and treating toxin exposure in
animals and humans;
<bullet> risk communication and prevention strategies based on
economic analyses and risk assessments for human, animal, and
ecosystem health; and
<bullet> public education and awareness resources and
materials.
These efforts are guided in part by two strategic plans: (1)
HARRNESS: National Plan for Algal Toxins and Harmful Algal Blooms and
(2) Harmful Algal Research and Response: A Human Dimensions Strategy,
which have both provided direction for NOAA's HAB research and
management strategies. Developing useful products for HAB management is
a multi-step process that requires a variety of approaches, all of
which require a strong scientific understanding of the causes and
impacts of HABs.
NOAA leads two programs solely focused on HABs: the interagency
Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms (ECOHAB) Program and
the NOAA Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms
(MERHAB) Program, both of which were authorized by HABHRCA. ECOHAB is a
competitive research program focused on determining the causes and
impacts of HABs. The information and tools ECOHAB provides are
necessary for developing technologies for, and approaches to,
predicting, preventing, monitoring and controlling HABs. MERHAB is a
competitive research program that focuses on incorporating tools,
approaches, and technologies from HAB research programs into existing
HAB monitoring programs. MERHAB also establishes partnerships to
enhance existing and initiate new HAB monitoring capabilities to
provide managers with timely information needed to mitigate HAB impacts
on coastal communities.
Numerous other programs within NOAA also address HAB problems as
part of their specific legislative mandate. These include the Oceans
and Human Health Initiative, Sea Grant, the Office of Protected
Resources, fisheries management programs, the Integrated Ocean
Observing System Program, and numerous NOAA labs and centers that
conduct intramural research. There is close collaboration between all
of these programs. Many of NOAA's research accomplishments have
resulted from the efforts of more than one NOAA program.
Other agencies also contribute substantially to improving HAB
research and response. These include the Food and Drug Administration,
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Science
Foundation, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences,
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Centers for
Disease Control, and the U.S. Geological Survey. Interagency
coordination is provided by the IWG-4H, which has taken on the
functions of the HAB Task Force, designated in HABHRCA. Interagency
coordination has improved considerably since the IWG-4H was established
under the direction of the U.S. Ocean Action Plan governance structure,
through the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology.
Accomplishments Since 1998
The passage of HABHRCA in 1998 marked the formal beginning of
NOAA's HAB programs, although some efforts were already underway. In
the following 10 years there have been many accomplishments that have
improved HAB management and response in virtually every coastal state.
Below are just a few examples that highlight the benefits of NOAA's HAB
research.
In April 2008, NOAA-funded researchers predicted a severe outbreak
of Alexandrium fundyense off the New England coast. This organism
produces potent neurotoxins that are filtered by shellfish. When humans
consume contaminated shellfish they become extremely ill and can die
without immediate medical treatment. To prevent human health illness
and death, states in the region have extensive, rigorous shellfish
toxin monitoring programs. When toxins in shellfish reach regulatory
limits in a particular region, both commercial and recreational
harvests are closed.
The 2008 prediction was derived from a model, based on 10 years of
ecosystem research in the Gulf of Maine. The prediction was remarkably
accurate, but the severity of the event cannot be fully assessed until
the end of the HAB season. The prediction allows State managers and the
shellfish aquaculture industry to plan for a difficult season. By
showing the news media and the public that the event was expected and
State managers were prepared, the prediction may have also reduced the
``halo'' effect in which shellfish harvesting closures in one area
reduce shellfish and fish sales from areas unaffected by toxicity.
Subsequent weekly predictions and survey cruises have provided managers
with information about the location of high numbers of toxic cells and
where they are likely to be transported by currents in the next few
days, helping them to monitor more efficiently and effectively. A
simple listserv for State and federal managers and researchers keeps
everyone from the Bay of Fundy to the southern New England states
informed about the progress of the event.
Florida's harmful algal blooms are typically red tides caused by an
organism called Karenia brevis, which produces a very different
neurotoxin than that found in the species that causes the New England
blooms. Blooms occur most often along the west Florida coast, but also
in the Panhandle and occasionally on the east coast of Florida. Besides
contaminating shellfish, resulting in harvest closures to protect
public health, Karenia blooms also cause massive fish, bird, turtle,
and marine mammal mortalities. In addition, the toxin can be suspended
in the air as an aerosol along beaches and in near-shore areas, causing
irritation of the throats and eyes of beach-goers. In extreme cases
severe respiratory problems can result and require hospitalization.
Recent research shows that instead of one species, Karenia brevis,
there are multiple Karenia species that produce HABs, and which differ
in types of toxins and conditions favoring growth. Research is underway
to develop quick methods and sensors that can be deployed on moorings
to identify these species.
A Florida HAB Bulletin is issued twice a week by NOAA, providing
the location of current blooms, as determined by satellites, and
forecasting transport and impacts over the next few days. A pilot
project, funded by the State of Florida, is currently linking lifeguard
observations to the HAB Bulletin, to provide beach-goers with real time
information about beach conditions.
Many methods for detecting Karenia brevis and its toxins have been
developed with NOAA funding, for use in different applications. A quick
test for the toxins has been developed and is now undergoing approval
for use as an official monitoring method for public health. This test
has also been instrumental in investigating dolphin and manatee
mortality events, leading to the discovery of unusual toxin exposure
pathways in both organisms. Additionally, an autonomous underwater
glider has been developed that can optically map the distribution of
Karenia below the surface and send the data back to shore-based labs.
Several large regional studies have produced a model that, along
with observations, is being used to determine the environmental factors
that contribute to blooms. In particular there is a debate currently
about the source of nutrients fueling these recurring blooms. If land-
based nutrient pollution is an important cause, it may be possible to
reduce or prevent blooms by reducing nutrient inputs.
NOAA and other agencies have also funded studies to investigate
both physical and biological methods of controlling Karenia blooms. A
pilot project in the field has shown that spraying a clay suspension on
a bloom is highly effective in causing a bloom to sink to the bottom.
The control of blooms by both naturally occurring bacteria and viruses
has also been investigated. No suitable viruses were found, but several
algicidal bacteria were found that killed Karenia in laboratory
cultures. These studies hold great promise for future HAB control
strategies, and follow up research would be a priority topic in NOAA
competitions.
Karenia brevis blooms also occur in Texas coastal waters, although
much less frequently than in Florida. A Texas HAB Bulletin has been
provided by NOAA weekly since 2006 in a demonstration/testing mode, as
we reevaluate our models to incorporate the specific oceanographic
conditions off Texas. Because Karenia blooms are much more sporadic
along the Texas coast, routine monitoring is not conducted unless an
outbreak is occurring so early warning is especially important for
protecting public health.
Several NOAA projects have investigated the use of instruments
moored offshore that are capable of taking pictures, recognizing images
of Karenia and sending the pictures back to shore-based labs to provide
early warning. During a recent experimental deployment a HAB organism
was observed in very high numbers that had never caused problems in the
U.S. before, Dinophysis. State public health managers were immediately
notified and oysters were found to be toxic. Shellfish harvesting was
closed and shellfish recalled just days before the Fulton Oysterfest, a
major event in the region, attended by thousands of people. Early
detection and quick warning prevented human illness which would have
been a devastating blow to the local shellfish industry.
The entire west coast of the U.S. has problems with two HAB groups,
Alexandrium and Pseudo-nitzschia. The Alexandrium on the west coast is
a different species, but similar in many ways to the Alexandrium in the
Gulf of Maine. Much less is known about the factors that cause the west
coast blooms or their impacts. Pseudo-nitzschia are a group of species,
some of whom produce a potent neurotoxin and others do not. The toxin
accumulates in both shellfish and fish and has caused bird and marine
mammal mortality events. Particularly hard hit are sea lions, in which
the neurotoxin causes seizures. The effected sea lions are often
permanently impaired if they survive. In pregnant females, the seizures
have caused them to go into labor prematurely.
State and tribal public health monitoring is focused on shellfish
and Dungeness crabs. Through a variety of programs, NOAA has been very
active in developing and evaluating quick tests for detecting the
toxins from Alexandrium and Pseudo-nitzschia. These are being
incorporated into both State and tribal monitoring in order to better
protect human health. Monitoring partnerships between State and tribal
agencies and researchers have been fostered by NOAA projects in
Washington, Oregon, and several locations in California to incorporate
these new monitoring technologies and to develop new, more effective
strategies. One of these, the Olympic Region Harmful Algal Bloom
Partnership, is now funded by the State of Washington.
NOAA has jointly funded with NSF a large regional study along the
Washington coast to determine the off-shore source of toxic Pseudo-
nitzschia, which are occasionally transported into shore and make
shellfish, particularly razor clams, toxic. This study is developing a
predictive model and is the basis of a HAB Forecast that will be
released this summer on an experimental basis.
Some of the Great Lakes have experienced a resurgence of algal
blooms in the last few years, especially Lake Erie and parts of Lake
Huron. These blooms, comprised of a mixture of cyanobacteria (blue-
green algae), but usually dominated by Microcystis, can produce
hepatotoxins and neurotoxins that can cause animal and human illness
and death. The organisms also produce compounds which make the water
taste and smell foul and can impart a bad taste to fish. In addition,
the high biomass levels can lead to bottom water oxygen depletion
(hypoxia), which kills other organisms. Several NOAA projects have led
to development of capacity for measuring most of the common
cyanobacterial toxins and then determining when and where these toxins
occur. These projects have shown that all major groups of
cyanobacterial toxins occur in the Great Lakes at some times and that
concentrations can at times be very high. NOAA is developing a Great
Lakes HAB forecast, based on satellite remote sensing, in order to
provide early warning of blooms and bloom tracking.
Cyanobacterial hepatotoxins are structurally very different from
any of the other HAB toxins and little is known about their ability to
accumulate up the food chain and impact higher trophic levels,
including humans. Several NOAA studies are investigating accumulation
and impacts of these toxins in organisms that consume cyanobacteria and
could transfer the toxins through food chains that might lead to
humans. The link between the zebra and quagga mussel invasion,
alterations in nutrient cycling, and cyanobacterial blooms is being
investigated by both NOAA and EPA, as a jointly funded project under
the interagency ECOHAB program, to explain why these blooms have
recurred and, perhaps, lead to an effective prevention strategy.
In general NOAA-funded research has made the greatest improvements
in developing new methods of detecting HABs and HAB toxins: improving
monitoring capabilities; understanding the causes and impacts of
blooms; and predicting some of the most devastating blooms. Progress
towards prevention and control of HABs and their impacts is also moving
forward as a result of this advanced understanding and capability.
Development of prevention strategies and control technologies requires
a comprehensive understanding of HAB causes, adequate technology
development, and programs that foster the transition from research to
operations. The President's FY 2009 Budget Request will allow NOAA to
continue its efforts to advance the Nation's capabilities in HAB
prevention, control, and mitigation.
Future Directions and Challenges
The 2004 HABHRCA reauthorization mandated four HAB reports be
produced, which summarize the accomplishments of federal research and
response efforts and provide guidance on future directions for HAB
research and response. These reports, developed by the IWG-4H, include
the National Assessment of Efforts to Predict and Respond to Harmful
Algal Blooms in U.S. Waters and the National Scientific Research,
Development, Demonstration, and Technology Transfer Plan on Reducing
Impacts from Harmful Algal Blooms (RDDTT Plan). These two reports will
be combined and published under the name Harmful Algal Bloom Management
and Response: Assessment and Plan. The other two reports are the
Scientific Assessment of Marine Harmful Algal Blooms (Marine HAB
Report), and the Scientific Assessment of Freshwater Harmful Algal
Blooms. The National Assessment of Efforts to Predict and Respond to
Harmful Algal Blooms in U.S. Waters was transmitted to Congress in
September 2007; all of the remaining reports are undergoing review and
will be transmitted to Congress as soon as possible.
The RDDTT Plan lays out a comprehensive approach for improving HAB
prevention, mitigation, control, event response, and HAB research and
response infrastructure. As a result, NOAA is establishing an RDDTT
Program, which will be an extramural, competitive research program to
support the development, demonstration and transfer of tools,
technologies, and strategies to help resource managers, public health
managers, and researchers detect, monitor, investigate, control, and
reduce HABs and their impacts. Both the original HABHRCA and the 2004
reauthorization authorize a prevention, control, and mitigation
program, which the RDDTT Plan now defines. The purpose of the RDDTT
Program will be to transition new technology and information into tools
that can easily be used by managers and local communities.
Recent events and the increasing intensity and frequency of HAB
events have highlighted the need for enhancing event response
capabilities. The RDDTT Plan also gives a high priority to enhancing
event response capabilities. NOAA is considering approaches to
addressing this emerging issue.
The Marine HAB Report shows that most HAB problems occur
regionally. Consequently, most research is conducted and
accomplishments are achieved on a regional basis. In response to the
conclusions outlined in the Marine HAB Report and priorities within
NOAA, we plan to increase the regional emphasis of our programs.
Research in each region would be guided by a series of plans developed
through workshops attended by researchers, State and local resource and
public health managers, and other interested stake holders. These
workshops would assess the state of the problem, the tools that are
currently available to address the problem, and propose priorities for
future research and actions to improve management and response in that
region. NOAA has already sponsored workshops on specific HABs in the
Gulf of Mexico, southern California, and Gulf of Maine and has
workshops in the planning stages for the entire West Coast Region and
Hawaii.
One of the long-term goals of NOAA's research is the development of
operational HAB forecasts, similar in many ways to weather forecasts.
The purpose is to give advance warning that a HAB is or will be present
and predict where it will go. Depending on the region, the early
warning could be an annual prediction or a forecast for the next few
days. State public health and resource managers unanimously say that
the longer the warning lead time the more useful it is to them. These
managers primarily use warnings to guide State monitoring programs both
in the short- and long-term.
In summary, operational forecasts are provided in Florida. While
initially these forecasts were focused on the southwest coast, they are
now available for the Panhandle and the east coast of Florida as well.
NOAA is testing forecast models in Texas and the Gulf of Maine, and
plans to test forecast models for the Washington coast and in Lake Erie
later this summer. In the next few years, the plan is to transition the
forecast models we are testing into an operational mode. This will
require close collaboration with the developing U.S. Integrated Ocean
Observing System because HAB forecasts are dependent on real-time data
about ocean conditions. In addition, the development and deployment of
HAB sensors are critical for providing models with data about HAB
incidence and abundance.
Conclusion
Thank you for this opportunity to update you on NOAA's HAB
programs. Over the last ten years we have made enormous progress in
understanding the causes and consequences of HABs, which has led to the
development of many tools and information products that improve HAB
management, particularly in the area of mitigation. We anticipate that
in the next ten years this progress will continue and our ability to
prevent and control as well as mitigate will be greatly enhanced.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Biography for Robert E. Magnien
Robert Magnien has been Director of NOAA's Center for Sponsored
Coastal Ocean Research (CSCOR) since 2003. CSCOR is responsible for
administering the competitive research programs called for in the
Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (HABHRCA)
which include the only two national programs devoted solely to Harmful
Algal Bloom (HAB) research. CSCOR also administers the national
competitive Hypoxia research programs called for in HABHRCA and other
regional-scale applied research programs to provide the predictive
capabilities necessary for management of coastal systems in an
ecosystem context.
From 1983 to 2003 Dr. Magnien held several positions in the State
of Maryland's Chesapeake Bay Program from its inception and served in
numerous leadership roles (technical and policy) for the EPA-led
regional Chesapeake Bay Program. He last served from 1995 to 2003 for
Maryland's Department of Natural Resources as Director of the Tidewater
Ecosystem Assessment (TEA) Division and, additionally, from 2002 to
2003 as Director of the Resource Assessment Service, which oversees the
Maryland Geological Survey and three other Divisions which include most
of the State's science capabilities related to the management of the
Chesapeake Bay and freshwaters. In these capacities Dr. Magnien led
Maryland's efforts to respond to threats posed by HABs and reported to
the Governor and his cabinet as needed. He also provided leadership on
numerous other State and regional issues involving science and policy
including monitoring programs, hypoxia, water quality, habitat
restoration, dredging operations, toxic contaminants, ecological
forecasting, and information management.
Dr. Magnien has authored numerous peer-reviewed publications,
technical reports, agency documents and workshop reports and has also
made numerous invited and submitted presentations at international,
national, and regional scientific conferences. These publications and
presentations include his work on harmful algal blooms, hypoxia, large-
scale monitoring programs, environmental assessments and the
interactions between science and policy.
Dr. Magnien received a Ph.D. in Aquatic Ecology from Dartmouth
College and a B.S. in Biology from the State University of New York at
Albany.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Dr. Magnien.
Dr. Anderson, you are recognized for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF DR. DONALD M. ANDERSON, SENIOR SCIENTIST,
DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY, WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION;
DIRECTOR, U.S. NATIONAL OFFICE FOR MARINE BIOTOXINS AND HARMFUL
ALGAL BLOOMS
Dr. Anderson. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee,
my name is Don Anderson and I am a senior scientist at the
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, where I have studied red
tides and HABs for over 30 years. I have also been actively
involved in the formulation of the programs and legislation
that support our national HAB program. And to reinforce what
Rob Magnien just said, I would like to go through some images
here for you.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
HABs are caused by algae, many of them microscopic, as you
see here. These species make their presence known through
massive blooms of cells that discolor the water, sometimes
through the illness and death of humans who have consumed
contaminated shellfish or fish, through the mass mortalities of
fish, sea birds and marine mammals, and sometimes through
irritating or aerosolized toxins that drive tourists from
beaches.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Seaweeds can also cause harm, as seen as in these images
from China, where the sailing events in the Olympics are
threatened by massive blooms. These are some rather spectacular
images, I think.
Marine HABs affect every coastal state in the United
States. Now, Florida, Texas and other states in the Gulf of
Mexico are affected by HABs that make shellfish poisonous, that
kill fish and that release aerosolized toxins. The causitive
organisms can be found in the water year-round over wide areas.
These cells proliferate in certain areas and at certain times,
often offshore, and are then transported to shore by wind
events. Special features of the ocean bottom facilitate this
transport and focus cell delivery to sites of recurrent blooms,
as you see here. Studies are ongoing to address the highly
controversial issue of the potential link between red tides and
nutrient inputs from land including those associated with
agriculture and other human activities.
Now, in contrast, in the northeastern United States, a
different algal species produces toxins that accumulate in
shellfish but that does not cause massive fish kills or become
aerosolized. These blooms show no obvious link to land-derived
pollution. The organism is not present in the water year-round.
Instead, the blooms are heavily reliant on a cyst or a seed
stage that lies dormant in the sediments for most of the year
and then germinates to inoculate the surface water, so the
blooms are highly seasonal.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Here again, the transport pathways have been identified
that are critical in carrying the toxic shells to both near-
shore and offshore shellfish, as shown in this image. Industry
efforts to open a $50-million-a-year sustainable offshore
shellfish resource near George's bank are being severely
constrained by the offshore component of these blooms. So in
these and many other cases, research progress has been
significant and it is providing tools to managers. For example,
a computer model of HAB dynamics in the Gulf of Maine has
advanced to the level where we were able to forecast this
spring a major bloom for the region that did occur several
months later, an outbreak that closed shellfish beds from
Canada to Massachusetts. This is the first time a forecast of
this type has ever been attempted anywhere. This model is now
being used to provide weekly forecasts to managers and will be
used by NOAA as the basis of an operational HAB forecasting
system for the Gulf of Maine.
So research progress on HABs has been significant in the
United States, in part because the scientific and management
communities worked together 15 years ago to formulate a
national plan or research agenda. The 1993 National Plan is
outdated, however. We therefore formulated a new plan called
HARRNESS, a framework that will guide U.S. HAB research and
monitoring well into the future, and I enthusiastically support
this program.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Now, under HARRNESS, several existing national research
programs will continue but new programs are needed, and
prominent among these is a program on prevention, control and
mitigation of harmful algal blooms. This is something that Rob
Magnien described as the RDDTT program. I also endorse this
program and recommend that funds be provided for it that are
separate from existing fundamental research programs such as
ECOHAB. There are a number of promising HAB mitigation and
control strategies under development that are highlighted in my
written testimony. Perhaps we can explore these during
questions.
So in conclusion, the diverse nature of HAB phenomena and
the hydrodynamic and geographic variability associated with
different outbreaks throughout the United States pose
significant challenges, no doubt. As a result of research
funding through ECOHAB and other programs, however, the
scientific and management community has the skills and the
knowledge to deal with these issues and stands ready to partner
with Congress and federal agencies in an expanded national HAB
program that transitions science to practical applications.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my oral statement. Thank you
for the opportunity to present my views.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Anderson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Donald M. Anderson
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. I am Donald M.
Anderson, a Senior Scientist in the Biology Department of the Woods
Hole Oceanographic Institution, where I have been active in the study
of red tides and harmful algal blooms (HABs) for 30 years. I am here to
provide the perspective of an experienced scientist who has
investigated many of the harmful algal bloom (HAB) phenomena that
affect coastal waters of the United States and the world. I am also
Director of the U.S. National Office for Marine Biotoxins and Harmful
Algal Blooms, Co-Chair of the National HAB Committee, and have been
actively involved in formulating the scientific framework and agency
partnerships that support and guide our national program on HABs. Thank
you for the opportunity to acquaint you with the challenges posed to
the U.S. and other countries by HABs, the present status of our
research progress, options for prevention, control, and mitigation, and
the future programmatic actions that are needed to maintain and expand
this important national program. Other than a few general comments, I
will restrict my comments to marine HABs, as testimony on freshwater
HABs is being provided by my colleague Dr. Kenneth Hudnell.
BACKGROUND
Among the thousands of species of microscopic algae at the base of
the marine food chain are a few dozen which produce potent toxins.
These species make their presence known in many ways, sometimes as a
massive ``bloom'' of cells that discolor the water, sometimes as
dilute, inconspicuous concentrations of cells noticed only because they
produce highly potent toxins which either kill marine organisms
directly, or transfer through the food chain, causing harm at multiple
levels. The impacts of these phenomena include mass mortalities of wild
and farmed fish and shellfish, human intoxications or even death from
contaminated shellfish or fish, alterations of marine trophic structure
through adverse effects on larvae and other life history stages of
commercial fisheries species, and death of marine mammals, seabirds,
and other animals.
Blooms of toxic algae are commonly called ``red tides,'' since the
tiny plants sometimes increase in abundance until they dominate the
planktonic community and sometimes make the water appear discolored.
The term is misleading, however, since toxic blooms may be greenish or
brownish, non-toxic species can bloom and harmlessly discolor the
water, and, conversely, adverse effects can occur when some algal cell
concentrations are low and the water is clear. Given the confusion, the
scientific community now uses the term ``harmful algal bloom'' or HAB.
HAB phenomena take a variety of forms and have a variety of
impacts. With regard to human health, the major category of impact
occurs when toxic phytoplankton are filtered from the water as food by
shellfish which then accumulate the algal toxins to levels that can be
lethal to humans or other consumers. These poisoning syndromes have
been given the names paralytic, diarrhetic, neurotoxic, azaspiracid,
and amnesic shellfish poisoning (PSP, DSP, NSP, AZP, and ASP). All have
serious effects, and some can be fatal. Except for ASP, all are caused
by biotoxins synthesized by a class of marine algae called
dinoflagellates. ASP is produced by diatoms that until recently were
all thought to be free of toxins and generally harmless. A sixth human
illness, Ciguatera fish poisoning (CFP) is caused by biotoxins produced
by dinoflagellates that grow on seaweeds and other surfaces in coral
reef communities. Ciguatera toxins are transferred through the food
chain from herbivorous reef fishes to larger carnivorous, commercially
valuable finfish. Yet another human health impact from HABs occurs when
a class of algal toxins called the brevetoxins becomes airborne in sea
spray, causing respiratory irritation and asthma-like symptoms in
beach-goers and coastal residents, typically along the Florida and
Texas shores of the Gulf of Mexico. Macroalgal or seaweed blooms also
fall under the HAB umbrella. Excessive seaweed growth, often linked to
pollution inputs, can displace natural underwater vegetation, cover
coral reefs, and wash up on beaches, where the odor of masses of
decaying material is a serious deterrent to tourism. Finally, another
poorly understood human illness linked to toxic algae is caused by the
dinoflagellate Pfiesteria piscicida and related organisms (e.g.,
Karlodinium) that have been linked to symptoms such as deficiencies in
learning and memory, skin lesions, and acute respiratory and eye
irritation--all after exposure to estuarine waters where Pfiesteria-
like organisms have been present (Burkholder and Glasgow, 1997).
Distribution of HAB Phenomena in the United States
With the exception of AZP, all of the poisoning syndromes described
above are known problems within the U.S. and its territories, affecting
large expanses of coastline (Fig. 1). PSP occurs in all coastal New
England states as well as New York, extending to offshore areas in the
northeast, and along much of the west coast from Alaska to northern
California. Overall, PSP affects more U.S. coastline than any other
algal bloom problem. NSP occurs annually along Gulf of Mexico coasts,
with the most frequent outbreaks along western Florida and Texas.
Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina and Alabama have also been
affected intermittently, causing extensive losses to the oyster
industry and killing birds and marine mammals. ASP has been a problem
for all of the U.S. Pacific coast states. The ASP toxin has been
detected in shellfish on the east coast as well, and in plankton from
Gulf of Mexico waters. DSP is largely unknown in the U.S., but a major
outbreak was recently reported along the Texas coast, resulting in an
extensive closure of shellfish beds in that area. Human health problems
from Pfiesteria and related species are thus far poorly documented, but
some are thought to have affected laboratory workers, fishermen, and
others working in or exposed to estuarine waters in several portions of
the southeastern U.S. CFP is the most frequently reported non-bacterial
illness associated with eating fish in the U.S. and its territories,
but the number of cases is probably far higher, because reporting to
the U.S. Center for Disease Control is voluntary and there is no
confirmatory laboratory test. In the Virgin Islands, it is estimated
that nearly 50 percent of the adults have been poisoned at least once,
and some estimate that 20,000-40,000 individuals are poisoned by
Ciguatera annually in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands alone.
CFP occurs in virtually all sub-tropical to tropical U.S. waters (i.e.,
Florida, Texas, Hawaii, Guam, Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and many
Pacific Territories). As tropical fish are increasingly exported to
distant markets, Ciguatera has become a worldwide problem.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Economic and Societal Impacts
HABs have a wide array of economic impacts, including the costs of
conducting routine monitoring programs for shellfish and other affected
resources, short-term and permanent closure of harvestable shellfish
and fish stocks, reductions in seafood sales (including the avoidance
of ``safe'' seafoods as a result of over-reaction to health
advisories), mortalities of wild and farmed fish, shellfish, submerged
aquatic vegetation and coral reefs, impacts on tourism and tourism-
related businesses, and medical treatment of exposed populations. A
conservative estimate of the average annual economic impact resulting
from HABs in the U.S. is approximately $82 million (Hoagland and
Scatasta, 2006). Cumulatively, the costs of HABs exceed a billion
dollars over the last several decades. These estimates do not include
the application of ``multipliers'' that are often used to account for
the manner in which money transfers through a local economy. With
multipliers, the estimate of HAB impacts in the United States would
increase several fold. Furthermore, individual bloom events can
approach the annual average, as occurred for example in 2005 when a
massive bloom of Alexandrium species along the New England coast closed
shellfish beds from Maine to southern Massachusetts. The impact to the
Massachusetts shellfish industry alone was estimated by the State
Division of Marine Fisheries to be $50M, with similar large impacts
occurring in Maine. Additional unquantified losses were experienced by
the tourist industry and by restaurants and seafood retailers, as
consumers often avoided all seafood from the region, despite assurances
that no toxins had been detected in many of these seafood products.
Recent Trends
The nature of the HAB problem has changed considerably over the
last several decades in the U.S. Virtually every coastal state is now
threatened by harmful or toxic algal species, whereas 30-40 years ago,
the problem was much more scattered and sporadic (Fig. 2.). The number
of toxic blooms, the economic losses from them, the types of resources
affected, and the number of toxins and toxic species have all increased
dramatically in recent years in the U.S. and around the world
(Anderson, 1989; Hallegraeff, 1993).
The first thought of many is that pollution or other human
activities are the main reason for this expansion, yet in the U.S. at
least, many of the ``new'' or expanded HAB problems have occurred in
waters where pollution is not an obvious factor. Some new bloom events
likely reflect indigenous populations that have been discovered because
of better detection methods and more observers rather than new species
introductions or dispersal events (Anderson, 1989).
Other ``spreading events'' are most easily attributed to dispersal
via natural currents, while it is also clear that man may have
contributed to the global HAB expansion by transporting toxic species
in ship ballast water (Hallegraeff and Bolch, 1992). The U.S. Coast
Guard, EPA, and the International Maritime Organization are all working
toward ballast water control and treatment regulations that will
attempt to reduce the threat of species introductions worldwide.
Another factor underlying the global expansion of HABs is the
dramatic increase in aquaculture activities. This leads to increased
monitoring of product quality and safety, revealing indigenous toxic
algae that were probably always present (Anderson, 1989). The
construction of aquaculture facilities also places fish or shellfish
resources in areas where toxic algal species occur but were previously
unknown, leading to mortality events or toxicity outbreaks that would
not have been noticed had the aquaculture facility not been placed
there.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Of considerable concern, particularly for coastal resource
managers, is the potential relationship between the apparent increase
in HABs and the accelerated eutrophication of coastal waters due to
human activities (Anderson et al., 2002). As mentioned above, some HAB
outbreaks occur in pristine waters with no influence from pollution or
other anthropogenic effects, but linkages between HABs and
eutrophication have been frequently noted within the past several
decades (e.g., Smayda, 1990). Coastal waters are receiving massive and
increasing quantities of industrial, agricultural and sewage effluents
through a variety of pathways. In many urbanized coastal regions, these
anthropogenic inputs have altered the size and composition of the
nutrient pool which may, in turn, create a more favorable nutrient
environment for certain HAB species. Just as the application of
fertilizer to lawns can enhance grass growth, marine algae can grow in
response to various types of nutrient inputs. Shallow and restricted
coastal waters that are poorly flushed appear to be most susceptible to
nutrient-related algal problems. Nutrient enrichment of such systems
often leads to eutrophication and increased frequencies and magnitudes
of phytoplankton blooms, including HABs. There is no doubt that this is
true in certain areas of the world where pollution has increased
dramatically. A prominent example is the area of the East China Sea
near Qingdao--where sailing activities in the forthcoming Olympics are
threatened by mass quantities of seaweed that are a direct result of
unchecked coastal pollution. This problem is real, but less evident in
areas where coastal pollution is more gradual and unobtrusive.
It is now clear that the worldwide expansion of HAB phenomena is in
part a reflection of our ability to better define the boundaries of an
existing problem. Those boundaries are also expanding, however, due to
natural species dispersal via storms or currents, as well as to human-
assisted species dispersal, and enhanced HAB population growth as a
result of pollution or other anthropogenic influences. The fact that
part of the expansion is a result of increased awareness should not
temper our concern. The HAB problem in the U.S. is serious, large, and
growing. It is a much larger problem than we thought it was several
decades ago.
PROGRESS AND STATUS OF OUR NATIONAL PROGRAM ON HABS
More than a decade ago, the U.S. approach to research on marine
HABS was uncoordinated and modest in scale. Research groups were few
and their work was piecemeal and constrained by small budgets that
fluctuated with the sporadic blooms that would occur. There were
virtually no U.S. Government laboratories involved in HAB research.
Funding for academic scientists was largely available through
competitions within the entire oceanographic community since there were
no targeted funding programs for HABs. This situation changed
dramatically with the formulation of a national plan (Marine Biotoxins
and Harmful Algal Blooms; A National Plan; Anderson et al., 1993). This
plan, the result of a workshop involving academic and federal
scientists, as well as agency officials, and industry representatives,
identified major impediments to the goal of science-based management of
resources affected by HABs, and made recommendations on the steps
needed to remove those impediments. These impediments have been
addressed to varying degrees with funding programs targeting specific
topic areas within the broad field of HABs and their impacts. It is my
belief that the National Plan has been a major success, leading to the
creation of several multi-agency partnerships for HAB studies, and to
many individual agency initiatives on this topic. Two national,
extramural HAB funding programs, Ecology of Harmful Algal Blooms
(ECOHAB) and Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms
(MERHAB), have together funded approximately $100 million in marine HAB
research since the programs began in 1996 and 2000, respectively.
Another partnership between the National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) has
supported four Centers for Oceans and Human Health that include
significant HAB research and outreach activities. NOAA has also created
an Oceans and Human Health Initiative (OHHI) that supports extramural
research and focused activities at three federal OHHI centers. These
are just a few of many programs and activities that were motivated by
the 1993 National Plan.
Research and Management Progress
With the advent of ECOHAB, MERHAB, the OHH programs, and other
national HAB programs, resources have been directed towards the goal of
scientifically based management of coastal waters and fisheries that
are potentially impacted by HABs. These activities have already made a
significant contribution to HAB management capabilities in the U.S.
Here I will highlight several advances in our understanding of HAB
phenomena, as well as some of the program-derived technological
developments that are providing new tools to coastal resource managers
in regions impacted by HABs.
Enhanced understanding of HAB dynamics
In areas studied by the multi-investigator ECOHAB-funded regional
research projects, HAB phenomena are now far better understood than was
the case just 10 years ago when the program began. Knowledge is also
increasing for HABs in other areas through smaller, targeted research
projects. In the Gulf of Maine, the focus of the ECOHAB-GOM and GOMTOX
regional programs, survey cruises, experimental and process studies,
and numerical models have led to the development of a conceptual model
of bloom dynamics that is consistent with observations of Alexandrium
cell distributions, and with patterns of toxicity in shellfish along
much of the New England coast (Anderson et al., 2005). A key feature of
this model is the strong influence of dormant resting cysts in bottom
sediments on bloom magnitude. Cysts in several large accumulation zones
or ``seedbeds'' germinate in the spring and re-populate the water
column with swimming Alexandrium cells, which then multiply and cause
the annual PSP outbreaks. Major bloom transport pathways in the Maine
Coastal Current system have also been identified, with delivery of the
toxic algal cells to shore influenced by the patterns and strength of
onshore- and offshore-oriented wind events.
In the Gulf of Mexico, the ECOHAB-Florida program identified
transport and delivery mechanisms for the toxic Karenia cells that kill
fish, cause shellfish to become toxic, and release an irritating
aerosol that drives residents and tourists from beaches. In particular,
the Karenia cells are now thought to be transported onshore in deeper
waters through wind events that cause ``upwelling.'' Special
bathymetric features of the ocean bottom can facilitate this transport
and focus cell delivery to areas known to be the sites of recurrent
blooms. Studies of nutrient uptake by Karenia and surveys of nutrient
concentrations in the region are addressing the sensitive and highly
controversial issue of the potential link between red tide blooms and
nutrient inputs from land, including those associated with agriculture
and other human activities. This ongoing research has obvious
implications to policy decisions concerning pollution and water quality
in the region.
Consistent with the identification of ``source regions'' for Gulf
of Maine and Gulf of Mexico HABs, researchers in the Pacific Northwest
have identified an area west of Puget Sound that appears to accumulate
toxic diatoms responsible for outbreaks of amnesic shellfish poisoning
(ASP), a debilitating illness that includes permanent loss of short-
term memory in some victims. Other programs have been equally
productive in identifying underlying driving mechanisms for HAB blooms,
such as the brown tide blooms in New York and New Jersey. These dense
accumulations of tiny Aureococcus anophagefferens cells turn the water
a deep brown, blocking sunlight to submerged vegetation, and altering
the feeding behavior of shellfish. These blooms have been linked to
certain types of nutrients that seem to favor the causative organism--
in particular ``organic'' forms of nitrogen that are preferred by the
brown tide cells, and give it a competitive advantage in certain
locations.
Improved monitoring and detection of HAB cells and toxins
These are but a few of the advances in understanding that have
accrued from ECOHAB regional funding. Equally important are the
discoveries that provide management tools to reduce the impacts of HABs
on coastal resources. Management options for dealing with the impacts
of HABs include reducing their incidence and extent (prevention),
stopping or containing blooms (control), and minimizing impacts
(mitigation). Where possible, it is preferable to prevent HABs rather
than to treat their symptoms. Since increased pollution and nutrient
loading may enhance the growth of some HAB species, these events may be
prevented by reducing pollution inputs to coastal waters, particularly
industrial, agricultural, and domestic effluents high in plant
nutrients. This is especially important in shallow, poorly flushed
coastal waters that are most susceptible to nutrient-related algal
problems. As mentioned above, research on the links between certain
HABs and nutrients has highlighted the importance of non-point sources
of nutrients (e.g., from agricultural activities, fossil-fuel
combustion, and animal feeding operations).
The most effective HAB management tools are monitoring programs
that involve sampling and testing of wild or cultured seafood products
directly from the natural environment, as this allows unequivocal
tracking of toxins to their site of origin and targeted regulatory
action. Numerous monitoring programs of this type have been established
in U.S. coastal waters, typically by State agencies. This monitoring
has become quite expensive, however, due to the proliferation of toxins
and potentially affected resources. States are faced with flat or
declining budgets and yet need to monitor for a growing list of HAB
toxins and potentially affected fisheries resources. Technologies are
thus urgently needed to facilitate the detection and characterization
of HAB cells and blooms.
One very useful technology that has been developed through recent
HAB research relies on species- or strain-specific ``probes'' that can
be used to label only the HAB cells of interest so they can then be
detected visually, electronically, or chemically. Progress has been
rapid and probes of several different types are now available for many
of the harmful algae, along with techniques for their application in
the rapid and accurate identification, enumeration, and isolation of
individual species. One example of the direct application of this
technology in operational HAB monitoring is for the New York and New
Jersey brown tide organism, Aureococcus anophagefferens. The causative
organism is so small and non-descript that it is virtually impossible
to identify and count cells using traditional microscopic techniques.
Antibody probes were developed that bind only to A. anophagefferens
cells, and these are now used routinely in monitoring programs run by
State and local authorities, greatly improving counting time and
accuracy.
These probes are being incorporated into a variety of different
assay systems, including some that can be mounted on buoys and left
unattended while they robotically sample the water and test for HAB
cells. Clustered with other instruments that measure the physical,
chemical, and optical characteristics of the water column, information
can be collected and used to make ``algal forecasts'' of impending
toxicity. These instruments are taking advantage of advances in ocean
optics, as well as the new molecular and analytical methodologies that
allow the toxic cells or chemicals (such as HAB toxins) to be detected
with great sensitivity and specificity. A clear need has been
identified for improved instrumentation for HAB cell and toxin
detection, and additional resources are needed in this regard. This can
be accomplished during development of the Integrated Ocean Observing
System (IOOS) for U.S. coastal waters, and through a targeted research
program on HAB prevention, control, and mitigation (see below). These
are needed if we are to achieve our vision of future HAB monitoring and
management programs--an integrated system that includes arrays of
moored instruments as sentinels along the U.S. coastline, detecting
HABs as they develop and radioing the information to resource managers.
Just as in weather forecasting, this information can be assimilated
into numerical models to improve forecast accuracy
Prediction and forecasting of HABs
A long-term goal of HAB monitoring programs is to develop the
ability to forecast or predict bloom development and movement.
Prediction of HAB outbreaks requires physical/biological numerical
models which account for both the growth and behavior of the toxic
algal species, as well as the movement and dynamics of the surrounding
water. Numerical models of coastal circulation are advancing rapidly in
the U.S., and a number of these are beginning to incorporate HAB
dynamics as well. A model developed to simulate the dynamics of the
organism responsible for paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) outbreaks
in the Gulf of Maine is relatively far advanced in this regard
(McGillicuddy et al., 2005), and is now being transitioned from
academic use towards an operational mode. Earlier this year, my
colleagues and I were able to successfully predict a major regional PSP
outbreak in the Gulf of Maine on the basis of our cyst mapping and
modeling activities (www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=24039&tid=282&cid=41211).
This is the first time a major HAB event has been predicted several
months in advance, and is strong testimony to the benefits of the
ECOHAB program's regional research emphasis. Our numerical model for
Alexandrium bloom dynamics is now being used to provide weekly
nowcasts/forecasts to managers and other stakeholders affected by PSP
outbreaks in the region, and is slated to be used by NOAA's National
Ocean Service (NOS) as the basis of an operational HAB forecasting
system for the Gulf of Maine.
In the Gulf of Mexico, satellite images of ocean color are now used
to detect and track toxic red tides of Karenia brevis. Based on
research results from the ECOHAB-Florida program, bloom forecast
bulletins are now being provided to affected states in the Gulf of
Mexico by the NOAA NOS Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment.
The bulletins (see http://www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/habf/) are based on the
integration of several data sources: satellite ocean color imagery;
wind data from coastal meteorological stations; field observations of
bloom location and intensity provided by the States of Florida and
Texas; and weather forecasts from the National Weather Service. The
combination of warning and rapid detection is a significant aid to the
Gulf states in responding to these blooms.
Mitigation and control strategies
Other practical strategies to mitigate the impacts of HAB events
include: regulating the siting of aquaculture facilities to avoid areas
where HAB species are present, modifying water circulation for those
locations where restricted water exchange is a factor in bloom
development, and restricting species introductions (e.g., through
regulations on ballast water discharges or shellfish and finfish
transfers for aquaculture). Each of these strategies requires
fundamental research such as that being conducted in our national HAB
program. Potential approaches to directly control or suppress HABs are
under development as well--similar to methods used to control pests on
land--e.g., biological, physical, or chemical treatments that directly
target the bloom cells. One example is work conducted in my own
laboratory, again through ECOHAB support, using ordinary clay to
control HABs. When certain clays are dispersed on the water surface,
the tiny clay particles aggregate with each other and with other
particles, including HAB cells. The aggregates then settle to the ocean
bottom, carrying the unwanted HAB cells from the surface waters where
they would otherwise grow and cause harm. As with many other new
technologies for HABs, initial results are quite promising and small-
scale field trials are underway, but continued support is needed to
fully evaluate benefits, costs, and environmental impacts.
Another intriguing bloom control strategy is being evaluated for
the brown tide problem. It has been suggested that one reason the brown
tides appeared about 15-20 years ago was that hard clams and other
shellfish stocks have been depleted by overfishing in certain areas.
Removal of these resources altered the manner in which those waters
were ``grazed''--i.e., shellfish filter large quantities of water
during feeding, and that removes many microscopic organisms from the
water, including natural predators of the brown tide cells. If this
hypothesis is valid, a logical bloom control strategy would be to re-
seed shellfish in the affected areas, and to restrict harvesting. Pilot
projects are now underway to explore this control strategy in Long
Island.
In general, bloom control is an area where very little research
effort has been directed in the U.S. (Anderson, 1997), and considerable
research is needed before these means are used to control HABs in
natural waters given the high sensitivity for possible damage to
coastal ecosystem and water quality by the treatments. As discussed
below, this could be accomplished as part of a separate national
program on HAB prevention, control, and mitigation.
PROGRAMMATIC NEEDS
The 1993 National Plan is outdated. Some of its recommendations
have been fulfilled, while others remain partially or completely
unaddressed. Concurrently, the nature and extent of the U.S. HAB
problem changed with the emergence of several new poisoning syndromes,
the expansion of known problems into new areas, and the identification
of a variety of new HAB impacts and affected resources. Furthermore,
while new scientific understanding taught us that HABs and the toxins
they produce are complex in their mode of action and that the
ecosystems in which they proliferate are equally complex, decision-
making and management systems did not change to reflect that
complexity. Likewise, many new tools to detect HAB cells and their
toxins have been developed, but are not fully tested or incorporated
into existing research, management, and ocean observation programs.
These and other considerations led to the decision to revise and update
the National Plan. Several hundred scientists and managers, from a wide
array of fields, contributed to the knowledge base on which this new
national science and management strategy is based. Over a two-year
period, an intensive collaborative effort was undertaken, including an
open forum discussion among 200 participants at the U.S. National HAB
Symposium, a detailed web-based questionnaire yielding more that 1,000
targeted responses, a workshop of 50 U.S. HAB experts, an Advisory
Committee to guide, and a Steering Committee to assemble and review the
most current information available for use in developing the new plan.
Our new national plan is called HARRNESS (Harmful Algal Research
and Response: A National Environmental Science Strategy 2005-2015;
Ramsdell et al., 2005). This is the framework that will guide U.S. HAB
research and monitoring well into the future, and is one that I
enthusiastically support.
At the conceptual level, HARRNESS is a framework of initiatives and
programs that identify and address current and evolving needs
associated with HABs and their impacts. Four major areas of research
focus have been defined in HARRNESS: Bloom Ecology and Dynamics, Toxins
and Their Effects, Food Webs and Fisheries, and Public Health and
Socioeconomic Impacts. Each shares a need for a set of management and
research activities directed at various scales of the HAB problem.
These include highly focused or targeted research studies, regional and
inter-regional scale investigations, and policy-making and resource
management activities towards mitigation and control. Progress will be
facilitated through the development of activities and services
(Infrastructure) required by multiple program foci.
At the programmatic level, several of the existing national
programs will continue to function, and new programs will need to be
added. In the former category, ECOHAB will continue to address the
fundamental processes underlying the impacts and population dynamics of
HABs. This involves a recognition of the many factors at the organismal
level that determine how HAB species respond to, and potentially alter
their environment, the manner in which HAB species affect or are
affected by food-web interactions, and how the distribution, abundance,
and impact of HAB species are regulated by the environment. ECOHAB was
established as a competitive, peer-reviewed research program supported
by an interagency partnership involving NOAA, NSF, EPA, ONR, and NASA.
Research results have been brought into practical applications through
MERHAB, a program formulated to transfer technologies and foster
innovative monitoring programs and rapid response by public agencies
and health departments. MERHAB will also continue under the new
HARRNESS framework.
Two relatively new programs (the Centers for Oceans and Human
Health (COHH) initiative of NIEHS and NSF and NOAA's OHHI) are being
enthusiastically received by the scientific, management and public
health communities, and thus are expected to continue under HARRNESS.
They fill an important niche by creating linkages between members of
the ocean sciences and biomedical communities to help both groups
address the public health aspects of HABs. The COHH focus on HABs,
infectious diseases, and marine natural products, whereas the NOAA OHHI
Centers and extramural funding include these subjects in addition to
chemical pollutants, coastal water quality and beach safety, seafood
quality, sentinel species as indicators of both potential human health
risks and human impact on marine systems. The partnership between
NIEHS, NSF, and NOAA clearly needs to be sustained and expanded in
order to provide support to a network of sufficient size to address the
significant problems under the OHH umbrella. This is best accomplished
through additional funds to these agencies, as well as through the
involvement of other agencies with interests in oceans and human
health, including, for example, EPA, NASA, FDA, and CDC.
A number of the recommendations of HARRNESS are not adequately
addressed by existing programs, however. As a result, the HAB community
needs to work with Congressional staff and agency program managers to
create new programs, as well as to modify existing ones, where
appropriate. For example, a separate program on HABs and food web
impacts could focus resources on this important topic area in a way
that is not presently possible through ECOHAB. Chemistry and toxicology
of HABs, the underlying basis to the adverse consequences of HABs,
receives only piecemeal funding through support of other HAB efforts
and requires focused attention and a targeted funding initiative.
Likewise the practical aspects of HAB prevention, control and
mitigation are also presently, but inadequately included in ECOHAB.
This program is discussed in more detail below.
With the exception of the Great Lakes, which fall under NOAA's
jurisdiction, freshwater systems that are impacted by HABs have not
been comprehensively addressed in ECOHAB, MERHAB, or the OHH HAB
programs. This is because NOAA's mandate includes the great Lakes and
estuaries up to the freshwater interface, but does not include the many
rivers, ponds, lakes, and reservoirs that are subject to freshwater HAB
problems. Freshwater HABs are an important focus within HARRNESS, and
therefore targeted (and separate) legislation and funding initiatives
on freshwater HABs are needed.
The support provided to HAB research through ECOHAB, MERHAB, Sea
Grant, and other national programs has had a tremendous impact on our
understanding of HAB phenomena, and on the development of management
tools and strategies. Funding for ECOHAB is modest, but it is
administered in a scientifically rigorous manner that maximizes
research progress. Several five-year ECOHAB regional research projects
have ended, and new ones are beginning. HAB phenomena are complex
oceanographic phenomena, and a decade or more of targeted research are
needed for each of the major poisoning syndromes or regions. ECOHAB
support for regional studies must be sustained and expanded, and this
will require a commitment of resources well in excess of those
currently available. Underlying this recommendation is the recognition
that we need to form multiple skilled research teams with the equipment
and facilities required to attack the complex scientific issues
involved in HAB phenomena. Since HAB problems facing the U.S. are
diverse with respect to the causative species, the affected resources,
the toxins involved, and the oceanographic systems and habitats in
which the blooms occur, we need multiple teams of skilled researchers
and managers distributed throughout the country. This argues against
funding that ebbs and floods with the sporadic pattern of HAB outbreaks
or that focuses resources in one region while others go begging. I
cannot emphasize too strongly the need for an equitable distribution of
resources that is consistent with the scale and extent of the national
problem, and that is sustained through time. This is the only way to
keep research teams intact, forming the core of expertise and knowledge
that leads to scientific progress. To achieve this balance, we need a
scientifically based allocation of resources, not one based on
political jurisdictions. This is possible if we work within the
guidelines of HARRNESS and with the inter-agency effort that has been
guiding its implementation.
A National Program on Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of HABs
Congress mandated a program for HAB Prevention, Control and
Management in the legislation reauthorizing the Harmful Algal Bloom and
Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998 (HABHRCA). The strong
Congressional support behind this program element is further seen in a
section of HABHRCA that directs NOAA to ``identify innovative response
measures for the prevention, control, and mitigation of harmful algal
blooms and identify steps needed for their development and
implementation.'' Further rationale for this program is that much of
the focus of past HAB research has been on fundamental aspects of
organism physiology, ecology, and toxicology, so less effort has been
directed towards practical issues such as resource management
strategies, or even direct bloom suppression or control (Anderson,
1997). To meet this Congressional directive, a workshop was held, and a
science agenda prepared for Harmful Algal Bloom Research, Development,
Demonstration, and Technology Transfer (RDDTT). The Executive Summary
of this report is appended here as Annex 1. Another common name for
this program is MACHAB (Mitigation and Control of Harmful Algal
Blooms).
The proposed RDDTT program has three essential components. These
are 1) an extramural funding program focused on development,
demonstration, and technology transfer of methods for prevention,
control, and mitigation (PCM) of HABs; 2) a comprehensive national HAB
Event Response program: and 3) a Core Infrastructure program. These
components are interdependent and critical for improving future HAB
response
The PCM component of the RDDTT Program focuses on moving promising
technologies and strategies arising from HAB research from development
through demonstration to technology transfer and field application by
end-users. The Event Response component improves access to existing
resources through better information sharing, communication, and
coordination and provides essential new resources. Researching and
implementing new PCM strategies and improving event response will not
be possible without enhancing infrastructure, including 1) increasing
availability of adequate analytical facilities, reference and research
materials, toxin standards, culture collections, tissue banks,
technical training, and access to data; 2) improving integration of HAB
activities with existing monitoring and emerging observational
programs; and 3) enhancing communication and regional and national
coordination.
The need and community readiness for the three RDDTT program
elements varies with the status of existing research and the planning
required for each activity. The RDDTT program can, therefore, be
implemented in stages, with projected funding needs increasing as the
components mature. Implementation requires both changes in authorizing
legislation and increases in appropriations. Although RDDTT will be the
program that the public will most readily perceive as 'progress' in the
management of HABs, the program is part of an integrated approach to
HAB risk management that includes other research and response programs.
Thus, it is essential that the RDDTT program be established as a
separate element within the national HAB program (HARRNESS), with the
expectation that related HAB research and response programs will
provide the new technologies and approaches as well as the ecological
and oceanographic context to guide its practical and applied
activities. Since many agencies are involved in HAB research and
response, it will be necessary to specify that the RDDTT Program is an
interagency program and to provide funding to agencies with major
roles. In addition to NOAA and NSF, other agencies, such as FDA, CDC,
NSF, NIEHS, and USGS also contribute substantially and should be named
as partners in the national HAB program.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The diverse nature of HAB phenomena and the hydrodynamic and
geographic variability associated with different outbreaks throughout
the U.S. pose a significant constraint to the development of a
coordinated national HAB program. Nevertheless, the combination of
planning, coordination, and a highly compelling topic with great
societal importance has initiated close cooperation between officials,
government scientists and academics in a sustained attack on the HAB
problem. The rate and extent of progress from here will depend upon how
well the different federal agencies continue to work together, and on
how effectively the skills and expertise of government and academic
scientists can be targeted on priority topics that have not been well
represented in the national HAB program. The opportunity for
cooperation is clear, since as stated in the ECOHAB science plan
(Anderson, 1995), ``Nowhere else do the missions and goals of so many
government agencies intersect and interact as in the coastal zone where
HAB phenomena are prominent.'' The HAB community in the U.S. has
matured scientifically and politically, and is fully capable of
undertaking the new challenges inherent in an expanded national
program, exemplified in HARRNESS. This will be successful only if a
coordinated interagency effort can be implemented to focus research
personnel, facilities, and financial resources to the common goals of a
comprehensive national strategy.
In summary:
<bullet> Marine HABs are a serious and growing problem in the
U.S., affecting every coastal state; freshwater HABS are an
equally significant problem in inland states. HABs impact
public health, fisheries, aquaculture, tourism, and coastal
aesthetics. HAB problems will not go away and will likely
increase in severity.
<bullet> HABs are just one of many problems in the coastal
zone that are affected by nutrient inputs and over-enrichment
from land. They represent a highly visible indicator of the
health of our coastal ocean. More subtle impacts to fisheries
and ecosystems are likely occurring that are far more difficult
to discern.
<bullet> A coordinated national HAB Program was created over
15 years ago and partially implemented. That National Plan is
now outdated, and as a result, a new plan called HARRNESS has
been formulated to guide the next decade or more of activities
in HAB research and management.
<bullet> At the programmatic level, several of the existing
national partnerships (e.g., ECOHAB, MERHAB, COHH, OHHI) should
be sustained and expanded within HARRNESS, and new programs
will need to be added. In the latter context, a separate
program on HABs and food web impacts could focus resources on
this important topic area in a way that is not presently
possible through ECOHAB. The chemistry and toxicology of HABs
requires focused attention and a targeted funding initiative.
Likewise the practical aspects of HAB prevention, control and
mitigation need to be implemented through a targeted program.
<bullet> State agencies are doing an excellent job protecting
public health and fisheries, but those monitoring programs are
facing growing challenges. Needs for the future include new
technologies for HAB monitoring and forecasting and
incorporation of these tools into regional Ocean Observing
Systems.
Recommendations:
<bullet> Sustain and enhance support for the national HAB
program HARRNESS.
<bullet> Sustain and enhance support for the ECOHAB, MERHAB
and OHH programs, and implement new programs, such as
Prevention, Control and Mitigation of HABs (RDDTT or MACHAB)
that include Event Response and Infrastructure elements.
<bullet> Encourage interagency partnerships, as the HAB
problem transcends the resources or mandate of any single
agency.
<bullet> Identify and authorize freshwater programs that would
fall under the purview of relevant agencies, such as EPA, in
addition to the marine and coastal programs authorized in NOAA.
Separate funding lines are needed since NOAA has a geographic
mandate that includes marine coastal waters and the upper
reaches of estuaries, and the Great Lakes. Many freshwater HAB
problems fall outside these boundaries, however, and therefore
will need to be supported through separate appropriations.
<bullet> Support methods and instrument development for land-
and mooring-based cell and toxin detection, and for bloom
forecasting through instrument development support for the
Integrated Ocean Observing System.
<bullet> Support appropriations that are commensurate with the
scale of the HAB problem. The national HAB program is well
established and productive, but it needs additional resources
if new topics, responsibilities and tasks are added through new
legislation. Research should be peer-reviewed and competitive,
and should take full advantage of the extensive capabilities of
the extramural research community.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. Thank you for the
opportunity to offer information that is based on my own research and
policy activities, as well as on the collective wisdom and creativity
of numerous colleagues in the HAB field. I would be pleased to answer
any questions that you or other Members may have.
Literature citations:
Anderson, D.M. 1997. Turning back the harmful red tide. Nature 388:513-
514.
Anderson, D.M. (Ed.). 1995. ECOHAB: The ecology and oceanography of
harmful algal blooms--A research agenda. Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution. 66 pp.
Anderson, D.M. 1989. Toxic algal blooms and red tides: a global
perspective. pp. 11-16, in: T. Okaichi, D.M. Anderson, and T.
Nemoto (eds.), Red Tides: Biology, Environmental Science and
Toxicology, Elsevier: New York, Amsterdam, London.
Anderson, D.M., S.B. Galloway, and J.D. Joseph. 1993. Marine Biotoxins
and Harmful Algae: A National Plan. Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution Tech. Report, WHOI 93-02. Woods Hole, MA. 59 pp.
Anderson, D.M., P.M. Glibert, and J.M. Burkholder. 2002. Harmful algal
blooms and eutrophication: Nutrient sources, composition, and
consequences. Estuaries 25(4b): 704-726.
Anderson, D.M., C.A. Stock, B.A. Keafer, A. Bronzino Nelson, B.
Thompson, D.J. McGillicuddy, M. Keller, P.A. Matrai, and J.
Martin. 2005. Alexandrium fundyense cyst dynamics in the Gulf
of Maine. Deep-Sea Res. II 52(19-21): 2522-2542.
Boesch, D.F., D.M. Anderson, R.A. Horner, S.E. Shumway, P.A. Tester,
T.E. Whitledge. 1997. Harmful Algal Blooms in Coastal Waters:
Options for Prevention, Control and Mitigation. Science for
Solutions. NOAA Coastal Ocean Program, Decision Analysis Series
No. 10, Special Joint Report with the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation.
Burkholder, J.M. and H.B. Glasgow, Jr. 1997. The ichthyotoxic
dinoflagellate Pfiesteria piscicida: Behavior, impacts and
environmental controls. Limnology and Oceanography 42:1052-
1075.
Hallegraeff, G.M. 1993. A review of harmful algal blooms and their
apparent global increase. Phycologia 32:79-99.
Hallegraeff, G.M. and C.J. Bolch. 1992. Transport of diatom and
dinoflagellate resting spores via ship's ballast water:
implications for plankton biogeography and aquaculture. Journal
of Plankton Research 14:1067-1084.
Hoagland, P. and S. Scatasta. 2006. The economic effects of harmful
algal blooms. In E. Graneli and J. Turner, eds., Ecology of
Harmful Algae. Ecology Studies Series. Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Springer-Verlag.
McGillicuddy, D.J., Jr., D.M. Anderson, D.R. Lynch, and D.W. Townsend.
2005. Mechanisms regulating large-scale seasonal fluctuations
in Alexandrium fundyense populations in the Gulf of Maine:
Results from a physical-biological model. Deep-Sea Res. II
52(19-21): 2698-2714.
Ramsdell, J.S., D.M. Anderson, and P.M. Glibert (Eds). 2005. HARRNESS.
Harmful Algal Research and Response: A National Environmental
Science Strategy 2005-2015. Ecological Society of America,
Washington, DC, 96 pp.
Smayda, T. 1990. Novel and nuisance phytoplankton blooms in the sea:
Evidence for a global epidemic. In: Graneli, E., B. Sundstrom,
L. Edler, and D.M. Anderson (eds.), Toxic Marine Phytoplankton,
Elsevier, New York. pp. 29-40.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
The marine and freshwaters of many countries are increasingly
impacted by the growing environmental and socioeconomic problem of
harmful algal blooms (HABs). HABs are proliferations of marine and
freshwater algae that can produce toxins or accumulate in sufficient
numbers to alter ecosystems in detrimental ways. These blooms are often
referred to as ``red tides,'' but it is now recognized that such blooms
may also be green, yellow, brown, or even without visible color,
depending on the type of organisms present. HABs is a more appropriate
descriptor.
In U.S. waters HABs are found in expanding numbers of locations and
are also increasing in duration and severity. Further, new HAB species
or impacts have emerged to pose additional threats to human and
ecosystem health in particular regions. The expansion in HABs has led
to increased awareness of impacts such as poisonous seafood, toxin-
contaminated drinking water, and mortality of fish and other animals
(including protected and endangered species), public health and
economic impacts in coastal and lakeside communities, losses to
aquaculture enterprises, and long-term aquatic ecosystem changes.
The 1998 Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act
(HABHRCA 1998) established research programs to address the U.S. HAB
problem. When HABHRCA was reauthorized and expanded to include
freshwater in 2004 (HABHRCA 2004), it required four interagency reports
and plans to assess U.S. HAB problems and update priorities for federal
research and response programs. The first, the National Assessment of
Efforts to Predict and Respond to Harmful Algal Blooms in U.S. Water
(Prediction and Response Report 2007), assesses the extent of the HAB
problem in the U.S., details federal, State, and tribal prediction and
response programs, emphasizing federal efforts, and highlights
opportunities to improve HAB prediction and response efforts and
associated infrastructure. A strategy to address these needs for both
marine and freshwaters will be included in the follow up HABHRCA 2004
report, the National Scientific Research, Development, Demonstration,
and Technology Transfer Plan (RDDTT Plan) on Reducing Impacts from
Harmful Algal Blooms, which will be derived in part from this Workshop
Report. Besides addressing the needs identified in the Prediction and
Response Report, the RDDTT Plan will also address issues raised in
three recent reports developed by the HAB management and research
community, Harmful Algal Research and Response, A National
Environmental Science Strategy (HARRNESS, 2005), Harmful Algal Research
and Response: A Human Dimensions Strategy (HARR-HD 2006), and the
Proceedings of the Interagency, International Symposium on
Cyanobacterial Harmful Algal Blooms: State of the Science and Research
Needs (ISOCHAB 2007).
Process for Developing the RDDTT Program
Input for the RDDTT Plan was solicited from both the marine and
freshwater HAB research and management communities during a workshop in
Woods Hole, MA June 22-25, 2007. This RDDTT Workshop Report summarizes
the current status of the field, recommends a program to improve HAB
prediction and response (Box 1), and suggests an implementation
process. The RDDTT Plan, which will be written by the Joint Committee
on Ocean Science and Technology Interagency Working Group on Harmful
Algal Blooms, Hypoxia, and Human Health and submitted to Congress, will
draw from these recommendations.
The workshop attendees proposed approaches for an RDDTT Program
with three essential components, based on the opportunities for
advancement identified in the reports cited above. These are 1) an
extramural funding program focused on development, demonstration, and
technology transfer of methods for prevention, control, and mitigation
(PCM) of HABs; 2) a comprehensive national HAB Event Response program:
and 3) a Core Infrastructure program to support HAB research and
response. All three components require social science research related
to ``human dimensions'' and call for the meaningful engagement of at
risk and affected communities. These components are interdependent and
critical for improving future HAB response (Box 1).
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Prevention, Control, and Mitigation (PCM) Development, Demonstration,
and Technology Transfer
The PCM component or sub-program of the RDDTT Program focuses on
moving promising technologies and strategies, arising from HAB research
from development through demonstration to technology transfer and field
application by end-users. Programs that would feed technologies to the
PCM component would include programs such as the Ecology of Harmful
Algal Blooms (ECOHAB), Monitoring and Event Response (MERHAB), Sea
Grant, and Oceans and Human Health (OHH), As shown in Box 2, the
program work would flow in three distinct stages: 1) The Development
phase (Phase 1) advances and evaluates unproven but promising PCM
technologies and strategies. 2) The Demonstration phase (Phase 2)
tests, validates and evaluates technologies in the field across a broad
temporal and spatial scale. 3) The Technology Transfer phase (Phase 3)
facilitates the transition of proven technologies and strategies to
end-users. End-users, including local, State, and federal resource and
public health managers, non-profit organizations, and a variety of
businesses must be involved in all three phases. Projects can enter the
extramural PCM program at any phase and would be selected through peer
review competition. Socially responsible development and effective
implementation are ensured by the inclusion of social science research
in all phases.
Many promising options are already available to feed into the PCM
sub-program. Example focal areas within the prevention category include
modifications of hydrodynamic conditions in areas subject to HABs, or
methods to avoid introducing HABs cells and cysts as invasive species.
Although nutrient reduction is also a very promising strategy for HAB
prevention, many nutrient management programs already exist and are
motivated by issues other than HABs. Methods of control or bloom
suppression through the removal of HAB cells or toxins by biological,
chemical, or mechanical means are ready for further investigation. For
example, mechanical removal of cells and toxins by clay flocculation is
one approach that has already been tested in pilot field studies, so it
is ready for further Phase 2 evaluation. A number of biological control
methods are ready for Phase 1 development studies in the field, with
concomitant research needed in risk communication to foster public
understanding and participation in decision-making about potentially
controversial strategies. Many opportunities exist to improve
mitigation activities that reduce the impacts of HABs. A few examples
include new methods of monitoring and forecasting HAB cells and toxins,
maintaining safe seafood, water, and beaches, preventing and treating
human and animal disease syndromes, assessing the socioeconomic impacts
of HABs and the effectiveness of PCM strategies, and advancing
education and outreach.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
All PCM projects will be extramural, competitive, peer-reviewed and
funded through an annual request for proposals that will ensure
priorities for research and implementation are based both on societal
needs and scientific promise of effectiveness. End-user input to
proposals in all phases and external advisory committee guidance for
Phase 2 and 3 projects will facilitate technical success and maximize
socioeconomic benefits and opportunities. Involvement of researchers
and user groups throughout the PCM development, demonstration, and
implementation processes will ensure that projects with the most
societal relevance are supported and brought into operational use.
Event Response
In order to mitigate the impacts of HABs, there is an urgent need
to further develop the capacity for anticipating events and responding
rapidly. The range of stakeholders involved in event response depends
upon the nature of the HAB, the geographic area affected and the
implications for human, fish, and wildlife health. States, counties,
tribes, and academic researchers are generally the first responders.
The aquaculture industry in some instances has also acted as front-line
responders. When HAB events occur on small, localized scales, the
capacity and financial resources of individual states usually are
sufficient to respond quickly and effectively. A good example is the
Maine shellfish monitoring and closure program. Under normal
conditions, the state is able to mitigate adverse public health
outcomes through the imposition of carefully timed and positioned
shellfish closures. Many other states also have successful programs in
place to manage shellfish closures.
As HABs are occurring at larger scales, greater frequency and scope
of impact than in the past, or involve species that are new to State or
regional waters, the capacity for responding rapidly is sometimes
inadequate or nonexistent. In addition, freshwater HAB events are
occurring in states that have never before needed a capacity for
response. Toxic freshwater blooms can threaten public water supplies
and lead to widespread recreational impacts.
The insufficient capacity for adequate responses to new or large-
scale HAB events is in part a product of inexperience, lack of
resources, and the unpredictable nature of such events. It is costly
and time-consuming to develop a response capacity for events that are
sporadic or rare, or for those that have increased in frequency and
scale, and for which damages are uncertain. These characteristics argue
strongly for a national and regional approaches to event response. In
effect, such a program helps a region or the Nation insure itself
against the public health effects, ecological impacts, and economic
damages that could arise from unusual, unpredictable, and devastating
HAB events.
It is clear that HAB event response capacities need to be expanded
at a national level. Existing program will not be able to address
anticipated increases in HAB frequency and intensity.
The proposed Event Response component of the RDDTT Program improves
access to existing resources through better information sharing,
communication, and coordination and provides essential new resources. A
regionally based, federal HAB Event Response Program is proposed with
National Marine and Freshwater Coordinators, possibly residing in NOAA
and EPA, potentially linked to a network of Regional Coordinators.
Coordinators would maintain web sites cataloging regionally available
resources, assist in developing regional response plans, organize
training and information-sharing workshops, and provide coordination
during events, if requested by regional, State, or local authorities.
The Regional Coordinators would also request resources from other
regions and, if needed, request funding from a national Event Response
Contingency Fund, modeled after the current, but inadequately funded
NOAA Event Response Program (http://www.cop.noaa.gov/stressors/
extremeevents/hab/current/fact-ev<INF>-</INF>resp.html). A national
Technical Assistance Fund would provide extramural funds for activities
designed to improve response to future events; activities would be
selected by competitive peer review.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
CORE Infrastructure
The past decade has resulted in tremendous advances in the
community's understanding of HAB dynamics, from physiology and toxin
expression to bloom transport and economic impact. The general increase
in knowledge has been matched by rapid expansion in the capability for
toxin and species detection using laboratory, hand-held, and in- and
above-water technologies. Advancements in both basic knowledge and in
methods and tools have led to significant new opportunities for
furthering understanding and for protecting human health. However, as
the field has matured, the infrastructure needs of the community have
also increased. These core needs form the foundations upon which the
science and its management applications depend. Many of the associated
costs are far greater than can be borne by individual investigators or
end-users. These needs cross-cut science and management and bridge
individual agency interests. While in some cases they may intersect
with the goals of other U.S. programs already in place, existing
programs are inadequate to meet these requirements. The needs for
critical infrastructure were identified in the first National HAB plan
in 1993 and strongly reiterated in the revised national plan for 2005-
2015 (HARRNESS 2005). Critical infrastructural needs can now be
identified and efforts made to obtain the financial and administrative
support needed to make them a reality, with an ultimate goal of growing
a greater community through collaboration.
Researching and implementing new PCM strategies and improving event
response will not be possible without enhancing CORE infrastructure,
including 1) increasing availability of adequate analytical facilities,
reference and research materials, toxin standards, culture collections,
tissue banks, technical training, and access to data; 2) improving
integration of HAB activities with existing monitoring and emerging
observational programs; and 3) enhancing communication and regional and
national coordination. Two complementary approaches are proposed to
accomplish these goals: 1) Establish an interagency, competitive, peer
reviewed extramural funding program that will support CORE
infrastructure needs and 2) Develop a regional network with national
and regional coordinators to leverage existing resources, encourage
coordination and foster active communications with users and stake
holders within and between regions.
RDDTT Program Implementation
The proposed RDDTT Program (Box 1) is comprised of three
components: 1) a component for HAB prevention, control, and mitigation
(PCM), 2) an Event Response component, and 3) a Core Infrastructure
component. The need and community readiness for each varies with the
status of currently existing research and the planning required for
each activity. The RDDTT program can, therefore, be implemented in
stages corresponding to the reauthorizations of HABHRCA every five
years, with projected funding needs increasing as the components mature
(Box 4). The PCM component forms the core of the RDDTT Program because
it is only through PCM that the grave risks posed by HAB expansion can
be successfully confronted in the long-term. Thus, in the first stage
(FY09-FY13), the greatest emphasis is on developing the PCM component
because many promising technologies, developed through other HAB
research programs, are ready to be transitioned to operational use.
Since CORE infrastructure and Event Response are integral to developing
HAB response, these programs should be initiated in the first five
years, but not fully implemented until the next five year
reauthorization (FY14-FY18).
Implementation requires both changes in authorizing legislation and
increases in appropriations. Although the RDDTT will be the program
that the public will most readily perceive as `progress' in the
management of HABs, the program is part of an integrated approach to
HAB risk management that includes other research and response programs.
Thus, it is essential that the RDDTT program be established as a
separate element within the national HAB program (HARRNESS 2005), with
the expectation that related HAB research and response programs will
provide the innovative new technologies and approaches as well as the
ecological and oceanographic context to guide its practical and applied
activities. When HABHRCA is reauthorized, the RDDTT program should
therefore be highlighted along with the existing ECOHAB and MERHAB
programs, with the three components of the RDDTT Program specifically
listed.
Since many agencies are involved in HAB research and response, it
will be necessary to specify that the RDDTT Program is an interagency
program and to provide funding to agencies with major roles. In
particular the HABHRCA reauthorization should identify and authorize
freshwater programs that would fall under the purview of relevant
agencies, such as EPA, in addition to the marine and coastal programs
authorized in NOAA. Separate funding lines are needed since NOAA has a
geographic mandate that includes marine coastal waters and the upper
reaches of estuaries, and the Great Lakes. Many freshwater HAB problems
fall outside these boundaries, however, and therefore will need to be
supported through separate appropriations to the EPA. Other agencies,
such as FDA, CDC, NSF, NIEHS, and USGS, also contribute substantially
and should be named as partners in the national HAB program.
Funding to implement the freshwater and marine components of the
RDDTT program over the next five years (FY09-FY13) is roughly projected
to be equivalent to that of the ECOHAB and MERHAB programs. Full
implementation will thus require additional funding of $6.5M (FY08) to
$10.5M (FY13).
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Benefits of RDDTT Implementation
Full implementation of all the components of an RDDTT Program will
yield many benefits for the public health and management communities
and for residents, resource users, businesses and other stakeholders in
at-risk and affected communities. It will also address many of the
frustrations people living in HAB impacted communities experience and
provide them with new strategies to address the problems. These
benefits include:
<bullet> Healthier fisheries industries selling seafood that
is safer with respect to biotoxins;
<bullet> Reductions in the frequency and impacts of highly
toxic or large, unsightly and noxious accumulations of algae;
<bullet> Ecosystems that are less threatened by invasions of
non-indigenous HAB species;
<bullet> Mitigation of bloom impacts using a suite of
practical, previous tested strategies;
<bullet> Sophisticated yet less expensive, easy to operate
instruments for HAB detection;
<bullet> Teams of scientists, managers, and community leaders
prepared to respond to events;
<bullet> Improved prediction and early warning of blooms and
HAB impacts due to better predictive models, networks of moored
automated observing systems, and satellite surveillance
capability for detection and tracking over large distances;
<bullet> Improved human health and ecosystem risk assessment;
<bullet> Effective means of educating and warning the public.
The fully-implemented RDDTT Program will link science and
management to achieve vastly improved mitigation, control, and
prevention, and education. Full implementation will not be simple and
will require substantial investment. The socioeconomic costs of not
addressing these needs, however, greatly exceed the projected
investment.
Biography for Donald M. Anderson
Don Anderson is a Senior Scientist in the Biology Department of the
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, where he also serves as Director
of the Coastal Ocean Institute. He earned a doctorate from MIT in 1977
and joined the WHOI scientific staff in 1978. In 1993, he was awarded
the Stanley W. Watson Chair for Excellence in Oceanography, in 1999 was
named a NOAA Environmental Hero, and in 2006 received the Yasumoto
Lifetime Achievement Award from the International Society for the Study
of Harmful Algae.
Anderson's research focus is on toxic or harmful algal blooms
(HABs). His research ranges from molecular and cellular studies of
toxin genetics and regulation to the large-scale oceanography and
ecology of the ``blooms'' of these micro-organisms.
Along with an active field and laboratory research program,
Anderson is heavily involved in national and international program
development for research, monitoring, and training on marine biotoxins
and harmful algal blooms.
Anderson is author or co-author of over 230 scientific papers and
12 books.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Dr. Anderson.
Mr. Ayres, you are recognized now for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF MR. DAN L. AYRES, FISH AND WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST,
COASTAL SHELLFISH LEAD, WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND
WILDLIFE REGION SIX OFFICE
Mr. Ayres. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
I represent coastal fisheries and human health managers not
only from Washington State but also from around the Nation who
face the task of providing citizens with access to some of the
most productive fish and shellfish resources while protecting
those citizens from the threats produced by harmful algal
blooms. I have spent a significant portion of my career working
for the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife
managing a key shellfish fishery, the harvest of the Pacific
razor clam. This abundant and very delicious shellfish species
has long been a part of the lifeblood of the small communities
that line Washington's Pacific coast. Over 250,000 avid razor
claim harvesters are drawn to these small Washington towns
during the periods when this fishery is open, bringing with
them millions of dollars spent on lodging, food, gas and
entertainment. One local restaurant owner left me a message on
my office phone saying that a recent morning razor clam opener
meant an additional $8,000 in sales, important income for him
and his employees. Then just last week, as I sat in a small
restaurant in the Pacific county town of Long Beach, I overhead
a conversation between a waiter and some out-of-town customers.
He told them the only way the restaurant can survive the winter
is the few days each month the state opens the razor clam
fishery.
In addition to the economic impact, one cannot overlook the
significant role the ability to dig for razor clams plays in
the lives of so many Washington residents. The joy of joining
with family and friends to brave the elements to harvest these
shellfish and then return home to prepare a big meal of fresh
razor clams cannot be overlooked. These kinds of activities
have gone on for one for generations for coastal families and
they are a big part of the social fabric of these communities.
However, the opening of this fishery does not come cheaply
to the State of Washington. Each monthly opener must be
preceded by favorable results from work conducted both by my
agency and the Washington Department of Health sampling for
harmful algal species and the testing for levels of toxin in
clam tissue.
Razor clams are also important to tribal communities not
only for subsistence but also for income generated by the sales
of clams to commercial harvests conducted by the tribes. My
agency works closely with the Quinault Indian Nation to jointly
manage razor clams along a portion of the Washington coast and
we share the monitoring for harmful algae.
But amidst all the good news about successful harvests and
positive economic impacts on small communities is the very real
threat of closures as a result of significant increases in
harmful algal species and the uptake of toxins by these tasty
shellfish. These closures can be devastating events that have
lasted up to a year or more. Closures heavily impact the
citizens who count on these shellfish for a portion of their
livelihood.
Many other coastal managers from around this nation could
tell you similar stories of how important our coastal resources
are to the citizens of our nation and the devastating impacts
HABs have had on the fabric of other U.S. coastal communities.
Over the last several years, I have had the pleasure of
getting to know many of these other coastal managers as we were
brought together by NOAA to assist in the preparation of the
National Plan for Harmful Algal Toxins and Harmful Algal
Blooms, as Dr. Anderson referred to, the HARRNESS plan. This
document was made much stronger by bringing together federal
and academic scientists and the State-level managers. The
process was a unique opportunity for each of these groups to
teach the other about their work, their struggles and the goals
they share. This process and the resulting plan have spawned
other important endeavors including the Harmful Algal Research
and Response, a Human Dimension Strategy, which brought key
social scientists with HAB researchers and coastal managers to
define and dress the impacts HABs have on what I described
earlier, the social fabric of the affected communities. A more
recent NOAA-sponsored workshop brought together a larger group
of HAB researchers and coastal managers from around the Nation
to provide input into the National Scientific Research,
Development, Demonstration and Technology Transfer Plan on
Reducing Impacts from Harmful Algal Blooms, the RDDTT plan that
Dr. Magnien referred to.
In Washington State, we have also followed this model by
bringing together Northwest-based federal HAB researchers,
University of Washington oceanographers and algal experts,
State and tribal fishery managers and human health experts to
form a successful partnership, the Olympic Region Harmful Algal
Bloom Project. Begun in 2000 with funds from NOAA's Monitoring
and Event Response for HABs program, it is now solely funded by
State dollars generated through a surcharge on shellfish
licenses. Working together, we are doing what we can to monitor
our shellfish and our waters to ensure the safe continuation of
the state's important fisheries.
Using the example of Washington's razor clam fishery, I
hope I have provided you with a better understanding of what
our nation's ocean resources mean to the citizens of our small
coastal communities. I hope you also see the impact HAB events
have had on these communities and how important the continued
involvement of the Federal Government in bringing the experts
and the needed resources to the better understanding and
perhaps in the future control of these events is to our State
and local governments.
And finally, I hope you see the value in using federal
resources to continue to bring all the players, State, tribal,
academic and federal, to the table to jointly address the
issues presented by the presence of harmful algae.
Thank you again for the opportunity to be here today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ayres follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dan L. Ayres
I am pleased to submit this prepared testimony to Members of the
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment of the United States House of
Representatives. This testimony will provide Members of the
Subcommittee detail on the impacts that the continued presence of
harmful algal blooms have had on Washington State's ability to manage
important fisheries.
As a Washington State coastal shellfishery manager, I am part of a
large group of fishery and human health managers from around the Nation
who daily face the task of providing the citizens we serve with access
to some of the most productive fish and shellfish resources and most
beautiful, inviting beaches this nation has to offer, while still
protecting those citizens from the threats posed by re-occurring
harmful algal blooms.
Along the coast of Washington State our primary problems are
associated with the naturally occurring algal species--the diatom
Pseudonitzschia, which can produce dangerous levels of the neurotoxin
domoic acid.\1\ In the inland marine waters of Puget Sound, wide area
closures are associated with another naturally occurring algal
species--the dinoflagellate Alexandrium, which produces the neurotoxin
saxitoxin.\2\ The presence of these same species--along with a long
list of others--has resulted in major problems for resource users in
most of our coastal states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Eating of fish and shellfish containing domoic acid causes the
human illness known as amnesic shellfish poisoning (ASP). Symptoms
include vomiting, nausea, diarrhea and abdominal cramps within 24 hours
of ingestion. In more severe cases, neurological symptoms develop
within 48 hours and include headache, dizziness, confusion,
disorientation, loss of short-term memory, motor weakness, seizures,
profuse respiratory secretions, cardiac arrhythmia, coma. People
poisoned with very high doses of the toxin can die. There is no
antidote for domoic acid. Research has shown that razor clams
accumulate domoic acid in edible tissue (foot, siphon and mantle) and
are slow to depurate (purify) the toxin.
\2\ Eating of fish and shellfish containing saxitoxin causes human
illness known a paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP). Symptoms include
tingling of the lips followed by paralyzing of the diaphragm and
possible death.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having grown up on the Washington coast, I am blessed to have spent
a significant portion of my career working for the Washington State
Department of Fish and Wildlife, (WDFW), managing a key shellfish
fishery that occurs along the Washington coast--the harvest of the
Pacific razor clam.\3\ This abundant and very delicious shellfish
species has long been part of the lifeblood of the small communities
that line Washington's coast. Each year more than 250,000 avid razor
clam harvesters are drawn to the small Washington towns like Long
Beach, Ocean Park, Grayland, Westport, Ocean Shores, Moclips and Forks
during the periods when this fishery is open between October and May,
bringing with them millions of dollars spent on lodging, food, gas and
entertainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Washington State has actively managed razor clam populations
along 58 miles of its Pacific Ocean coastline for more than 70 years.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/shelfish/razorclm/razorclm.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One local restaurant owner left a message on my office phone--a
message I have saved to remind me of the importance our work has. In
the message he tells me that a recent morning razor clam opener meant
an additional $8,000 in sales--important income for him and his
employees. Then just last week--as I sat in a small restaurant in the
Pacific County town of Long Beach I overheard a conversation between
the waiter and some out-of-town customers. He told them the only way
the restaurant can survive the winter is the few days each month the
state opens the razor clam fishery.
We are excited to see the results of a soon-to-be-completed NOAA-
funded economic study by researchers at the University of Washington.
This study was designed to update decades-old economic information
regarding how much money was spent by each razor clam digger during a
trip. It will give WDFW new and clearer insight to the true impact this
shellfish fishery has on local economies.
In addition to the economic impact, one cannot overlook the
significant role the ability to participate in this fishery plays in
the lives of so many Washington residents. The joy of joining with
family and friends to brave the elements to harvest these shellfish and
then return home to prepare a big meal of fresh razor clams cannot be
overlooked. These kinds of activities have gone on for generations of
coastal families and are a big part of the social fabric of these
communities.
However, the opening of this fishery does not come cheaply to the
State of Washington. Each monthly opener\4\ must be preceded by
favorable results from regular sampling WDFW conducts to monitor for
the presence of harmful algal species. Then, the Washington State
Department of Health checks the levels of toxin in razor clam tissue.
The tissue testing, which can take some time, must have good results
before the go-ahead for a razor clam opener can be given.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ WDFW opens razor clam fisheries for a few days each month
between October and May depending on the number of clams available for
harvest and safe levels of marine toxins in razor clam tissue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Razor clams are also depended on heavily by tribal communities not
only for subsistence but also for the income generated by the sales of
razor clams through commercial razor clam harvests conducted by the
tribes. My agency works closely with the Quinault Indian Nation to
jointly manage razor clams along a portion of the Washington coast and
we share the work we need to do to monitor for harmful algae.
Researchers funded by the National Institute of Health are conducting
an on-going study of subsistence users of shellfish that have low
levels of some of these marine toxins. The results of this study could
potentially require major changes in the way some fisheries are
managed.
Amidst all the good news about successful harvests and positive
economic impacts on small communities is the very real threat of
closures as the result of significant increases in harmful algal
species and the uptake of toxins by these tasty shellfish. These
closures do not last just a few days they are devastating events that
have lasted a year or more.\5\ These closures heavily impact the
citizens who count on these shellfish for a portion of their
livelihood.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ HAB events first disrupted the harvest of Washington's razor
clams in 1992 and have caused three major coast-wide year-long closures
since then, with additional numerous smaller area closures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many other coastal managers from around this nation could tell you
similar stories of how important our coastal resources are to the
citizens of our nation and the devastating impacts HABs have had on the
fabric of other coastal communities.
Over the last several years I have had the pleasure of getting to
know many of these other coastal managers as we were brought together
by NOAA to assist in the preparation of the National Plan for Algal
Toxins and Harmful Algal Blooms--also know as HARRNESS--Harmful Algae
Research and Response National Environmental and Science Strategy.\6\
This document was made much stronger by bringing together federal and
academic scientists and the State level managers. The process was a
unique opportunity for each of these groups to ``teach'' the other
about their work, their struggles and the goals that they all share.
This process and the resulting plan have spawned other important and
similar endeavors. One of these, the Harmful Algal Research and
Response; A Humans Dimensions Strategy\7\ brought key social scientists
together with HAB researchers and coastal managers to define and
address the impacts HABs have on what I described earlier--the social
fabric of affected coastal communities. A more recent NOAA-sponsored
workshop I participated in brought together a larger group of HAB
researchers and coastal managers to provide input into the National
Scientific Research, Development, Demonstration, and Technology
Transfer Plan on Reducing Impacts from Harmful Algal Blooms, (RDDTT
Plan).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ http://www.whoi.edu/redtide/page.do?pid=15075
\7\ http://www.whoi.edu/fileserver.do?id=24153&pt=10&p=19132
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Washington State we have also followed this model by bringing
Seattle-based NOAA HAB researchers, University of Washington
oceanographers and algae experts, State and tribal fishery managers and
human health experts to form a successful partnership we call the
ORHAB--the Olympic Region Harmful Algal Bloom project. This endeavor
that started in 2000 with funds from NOAA Monitoring and Event Response
for Harmful Algal Bloom program is now solely funded by State dollars
generated by a surcharge on shellfish licenses. Working together we are
doing what we can to monitor our shellfish and our waters to ensure the
safe continuation of the important fisheries I have described earlier.
In Washington State another large, nearly completed NOAA-funded study
has also provided a better understanding of the oceanic processes that
result in large algal blooms forming off of our coast and bringing them
on-shore to affect the resources we manage. This multi-disciplinary
group of scientists from around the Nation was brought together as part
of the Pacific Northwest ECOHAB Project. While State fishery and human
health managers were not directly involved in the project, we were
invited into planning sessions to provide insight on what information
would be most useful to our work.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Several federal agencies currently collaborate to sponsor the
Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms (ECOHAB), a national
research program studying HABs in the coastal waters of the U.S. The
five-year ECOHAB Northwest project totals $8.7 million and is
specifically sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration and the National Science Foundation. http://
www.ecohabpnw.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is our hope you have a better understanding of what our nation's
ocean resources mean to the citizens of our small coastal communities.
We hope you see the impact HAB events have on these communities and how
important the continued involvement of the Federal Government is in
bringing the experts and the needed resources to better understanding
and hopefully control of these events. And finally, we hope you see the
value in using federal resources to continue to bring all the players--
State, tribal, academic and federal--to the table to jointly address
the issues presented by the presence of harmful algae.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Biography for Dan L. Ayres
Dan Ayres is a Fish and Wildlife Biologist who leads the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife's (WDFW) coastal shellfish unit based
in Montesano and Willapa Bay. He manages Washington's razor clam
fishery and oversees the unit's work managing the coastal Dungeness
crab, pink shrimp and spot prawn fisheries, the Willapa Bay oyster
reserves and research projects in Willapa Bay.
Dan is a life-long resident of the coastal Washington area and
began his career with WDFW in 1980. A University of Washington
graduate, he belongs to the National Shellfisheries Association and the
American Institute of Fishery Research Biologists.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you very much, Mr. Ayres.
Dr. Hudnell, you are recognized for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF DR. HILTON KENNETH HUDNELL, VICE PRESIDENT AND
DIRECTOR OF SCIENCE, SOLARBEE, INC.
Dr. Hudnell. Good morning, and thank you for inviting me to
testify about freshwater HABs.
I am Dr. Hilton Kenneth Hudnell and I served as a
neurotoxicologist at the U.S. EPA for 23 years, where I led an
interagency effort to address the freshwater HAB problem. I am
now an adjunct professor at the University of North Carolina
and Vice President and Director of science for SolarBee
Incorporated.
Today I will tell you about HAB cells and their toxins, the
risks they pose for human health and ecosystem sustainability,
the increase in occurrence and causes of freshwater HABs,
approaches to preventing freshwater HABs and the need for
improved legislation to address HABs in all of our nation's
waters.
Freshwater HABs are primarily caused by cyanobacteria.
Blooms are the rapid expansion of cells to huge biomasses often
seen as surface scums or mats. Cyanobacteria have been around
for three billion years. They developed the photosynthetic
process and pumped oxygen into our atmosphere. About 50 types
make highly potent toxins, much more potent than industrial
chemicals and about equally potent to cobra venom. Many make
multiple toxins and many make the same toxins. The toxins
affect the liver, nervous system and other organs. The toxins
threaten human health and the sustainability of our aquatic
ecosystems. Unfortunately, we are making the earth a better
place for them to live. The frequency of freshwater HABs is
increasing rapidly.
There are no U.S. regulations or guidelines for freshwater
HABs. The EPA has not assessed the risk or developed a national
research plan for freshwater HABs. The World Health
Organization and some countries have developed regulations and
guidelines. States and local governments are left without
federal guidance.
Humans are exposed to HAB toxins in drinking and
recreational waters. There is no affordable method for removing
all HAB toxins from drinking water. HAB toxins are causing
acute, chronic and delayed health effects. Acute effects range
from rapid death to severe gastrointestinal and flu-like
illness. Some people remain chronically ill. Science indicates
that repeated exposures cause cancers and probably
neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's. All levels of
aquatic life suffer lethal and sublethal effects from HAB
toxins. When HABs die off, they sink to the bottom and use up
all the oxygen. Millions of fish die annually due to lack of
oxygen.
Scientists and water managers know the incidence of
freshwater HABs is increasing rapidly in the United States and
worldwide. Each year HABs occur where they have not occurred
before and for longer duration. HABs require nutrients,
sunlight, warmth and calm water. HABs are increasing because
too many nutrients are going into our freshwaters, increasing
temperatures and decreasing flow rates. The nutrients come from
point sources like wastewater treatment plants and non-point
sources like fertilizer runoff from our yards and farms. Water
flow rates are dropping as demand increase and droughts are
more frequent. Climate change is exacerbating the problem.
Costs in the United States are estimated to be many millions of
dollars per year.
We can only target the HAB causes of nutrient input and
calm water. Nutrient usage should be reduced and nutrients
should be recaptured and reused. Water flow rates cannot easily
be increased. However, water can be circulated. I joined
SolarBee because I believe they make the best technology for
moving water cheaply. Floating platforms powered by solar cells
circulate water over long distances continuously. HABs are
prevented over a 35-acre area per unit with a success rate of
95 percent. Algaecide usage to terminate HABs is dangerous for
humans and cause long-term damage to aquatic ecosystems.
HABHRCA led to a national research plan for HABs in oceans,
estuaries and the Great Lakes. Funds authorized through
Commerce to NOAA support competitive HAB research grants. EPA
funding was not authorized but EPA was statutorily required to
help produce a scientific assessment of freshwater HABs and a
plan for a national research program to mitigate and control
freshwater HABs. I helped prepare those documents. However, the
EPA then unilaterally determined that its statutory
requirements were completed. There is no agency effort to
develop or implement a national research program for freshwater
HABs. The agency ceased virtually all participation in
freshwater HAB research and mitigation. The EPA quit funding
the interagency extramural HAB research grant programs and
ceased all HAB research in its National Health and Environment
Effects Research Laboratory.
Congress should pass freshwater HABHRCA legislation that
authorizes funding for and requires the EPA to develop and
implement a national research program for freshwater HABs. The
agency should be directed to form partnerships through a strong
extramural peer-viewed competitive research grant program open
to all private and public for-profit and non-profit
organizations. Funding should be directed to the existing
interagency grants programs and the newly proposed RDDTT/MACHAB
program for HAB control technologies. Legislation will provide
clarity to the EPA that freshwater HAB research is authorized
and required. Congress should then appropriate funds for
freshwater HAB research. I would urge the House Science and
Technology Committee, which has primary jurisdiction over EPA
research, to develop and advance a national freshwater HAB
research bill. I am pleased to offer my expertise to help
develop such authority for the EPA.
I thank the Subcommittee for allowing me to express my
views today.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Hudnell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hilton Kenneth Hudnell
Good morning to all in attendance today. Chairman Lampson and
Ranking Member Inglis, thank you for inviting me to testify before the
House Energy and Environment Subcommittee today concerning harmful
algal blooms (HABs) in our nation's freshwater bodies.
I am Dr. Hilton Kenneth Hudnell. I served as a neurotoxicologist in
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Health and
Environmental Effects Research Laboratory for 23 years. I focused on
the human health effects of biotoxins, toxins produced by single cell
organisms, for the last dozen years. I led an interagency effort to
provide the scientific basis for developing a National Research Plan to
address the risks of freshwater HABs--http://www.epa.gov/
cyano<INF>-</INF>habs<INF>-</INF>symposium/, as mandated by the Harmful
Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (HABHRCA, as
reauthorized in 2004). That effort culminated this year in the
publication of a book entitled Cyanobacterial Harmful Algal Blooms:
State of the Science and Research Needs (1) http://www.springer.com/
biomed/neuroscience/book/978-0-387-75864-0, and the Congressionally
mandated report, Scientific Assessment of Freshwater Harmful Algal
Blooms (2). I am currently Vice President and Director of Science for
SolarBee, Inc.--http://www.SolarBee.com/, a company that makes solar
powered water circulators to solve water quality problems such as HABs,
and an adjunct professor in the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill's Institute for the Environment--http://www.ie.unc.edu/content/
about/people/listing.cfm. Recently I was elected to the National HAB
Committee, headquartered at Woods Hole, Massachusetts.
Whereas Drs. Anderson, Ayres and Magnien's testimony primarily
concerns HABs in our oceans, estuaries and the Great Lakes, I will talk
with you about HABs in our nation's inland lakes, ponds, reservoirs,
streams and rivers. Just as salt levels differ between freshwater,
estuaries and oceans, so do their ecosystems and the organisms that
cause HABs in those water bodies. Some of the causes of HABs in those
environments are the same, such as over enrichment with nutrients. But
it is important to understand the differences if we are to successfully
develop strategies for controlling the increasing risks of freshwater
HABs to human health, the sustainability of aquatic ecosystems and our
nation's economy. Today I will discuss:
<bullet> Freshwater HAB cells and their toxins
<bullet> Freshwater HAB risks for human health and ecosystem
sustainability
<bullet> Occurrence, causes and costs of freshwater HABs
<bullet> Approaches to freshwater HAB control
<bullet> The need for improved legislation to comprehensively
address HABs from freshwater (EPA jurisdiction) to oceans
(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAH)
jurisdiction)
Freshwater HAB cells and their toxins
Freshwater HABs are primarily caused by cyanobacteria, although
similar organisms such as golden algae also cause some of the
freshwater blooms. Cyanobacteria (a.k.a. blue-green algae) are single-
cell organisms that appear in the fossil record from about three
billion years ago. This was a time when there was no oxygen in our
atmosphere. They were the first organisms to use the photosynthetic
process. They filled our atmosphere with oxygen, enabling the existence
of life forms such as our own. Cyanobacteria have proven to be highly
resilient organisms, surviving and even thriving over the eons as
dramatic shifts occurred in the physical and chemical characteristics
of our air, water and land. For example, some are able to ``fix''
nitrogen; they can take unusable forms of nitrogen from the air or
water and change it to forms they can use for nourishment. Some are
able to regulate their position in the water column through buoyancy
control so they can make maximum use of sunlight or nutrients at
optimal times. Now they are found in virtually all ecosystems, but are
primarily a problem in our fresh-to-brackish waters. The first problem
is that cyanobacteria ``bloom'' when conditions are right. They rapidly
expand their population from a few cells per milliliter of water to
dense mats of organic material floating on the water's surface or
suspended in the water column. These huge masses of organic material
create serious problems for humans and aquatic ecosystems, as explained
below. The second and more serious problem is that cyanobacteria often
produce cyanotoxins, some of the most potent toxins known. It's as if a
single cobra could become a hoard of cobras overnight, injecting their
toxic venom into the environment of all living things.
Cyanobacteria genera are known by tongue-twisting names such as
Microcystis, Aphanizomenon, Planktothrix, Anabaena, Cylindorspermopsis
and Lyngbya. Not all types of cyanobacteria are thought to make toxins,
although the ones I named can make multiple toxins. We don't know what
triggers their production of toxin, or what causes toxin production to
stop. We don't even know why they produce toxins; the toxins are not
essential for the cells to live. However, it is generally thought that
the toxins provide some survival advantage. For example, the toxins
kill some organisms with which cyanobacteria compete for space to grow
and multiply. The toxins also inhibit grazing by some organisms that
otherwise would be their predators. Zooplankton that graze the good,
``edible'' green algae, the base of the aquatic food chain, often avoid
grazing the ``inedible'' blue-greens. Some filter feeders such as the
zebra mussel seem to selectively ``spit out'' toxic cyanobacteria
cells. The arrival of zebra mussels in the Great Lakes coincided with
the resurgence of HABs in the Great Lakes in recent years, and some
scientists postulate this to be a cause and effect relationship. We do
know that many genera of cyanobacteria make not only one type of toxin,
but multiple types of toxins. We also know that many genera make the
same toxins. Other types of plankton also make some of the toxins made
by cyanobacteria. An example is highly potent saxitoxin, the cause of
Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning, made by both marine dinoflagellates and
cyanobacteria. The genes responsible for toxin production are
distributed widely within the planktonic world.
The cyanotoxins are often named after the organism first discovered
to produce the toxin, such as microcystins, cylindrospermopsins and
anatoxins. These are thought to be the priority toxins in the U.S.
because of their high potency and frequent occurrence. Not enough is
known about saxitoxin occurrence in U.S. freshwaters to determine if it
should be a priority cyanotoxin.
Cyanotoxins are among the most potent toxins known, far more potent
than industrial chemicals. They cause death at dosage levels in the low
parts per billion range. For example, the toxins named above are more
potent than strychnine, curare (the poison dart toxin) and sarin (a
nerve gas). One of the anatoxins is equivalent in potency to cobra
venom. Only a few toxins are more potent than cyanotoxins, such as
botulinum toxin (botulism) and ricin (derived from the castor bean). As
little as a mouthful of lake water containing cyanotoxins can have
immediate lethal and sub-lethal health effects.
The toxins are usually placed into one of three categories: 1)
liver or hepatotoxins, such as the microcystins; 2) neurotoxins, such
as the anatoxins and saxitoxins, and; 3) non-specific toxins, such as
the cylindrospermopsins. The classification is based on the organ
system in which failure is the cause of death at higher doses. However,
it is a mistake to think that any of these toxins affect only one organ
system. Lower dose exposures to many cyanotoxins result in multiple-
system symptoms, gastro-intestinal distress and flu-like illness.
Freshwater HAB risks assessment: human health and ecosystem
sustainability
HAB risk assessment. Whereas NOAA led the development of a National
Research Plan for addressing HABs in oceans, estuaries and the Great
Lakes, described in HARRNESS, 2005, Harmful Algal Research and
Response: A National Environmental Science Strategy (3), there is no
National Research Plan for addressing HABs in our rivers, streams,
ponds, reservoirs and other lakes. Although many risks of freshwater
HABs and their toxins for human health and aquatic ecosystem
sustainability are well known, there are no federal guidelines or
regulations concerning HAB cells or toxins in U.S. drinking or
recreational waters. The National EPA placed cyanobacteria, other algae
and their toxins on their first Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) for
drinking water toxins in 1998. Regulatory determinations concerning
contaminants on the CCL, and revised lists, are to be made within each
five-year period. However, no determinations have been made for
cyanobacteria and cyanotoxins. They are currently on the draft CCL3
list. The National offices of the EPA have made no regulatory
determinations concerning HABs in recreational waters.
The World Health Organization (WHO) and a number of countries have
developed guidelines or regulations for a few genera of cyanobacteria
and their toxins. For example, the WHO developed guidelines for
Microcystis and microcystins. Numerous mortalities in Brazil led to the
first regulations on microcystins in drinking water. In the U.S.,
states and localities confronted by HAB risks are increasingly relying
on the WHO guidelines to develop strategies for protecting human
health. States developing guidelines for cyanobacteria include
California, Florida, Iowa, Nebraska and Oregon. This year the Regional
EPA office in Sacramento ordered that California develop the first ever
Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for a cyanobacterium and cyanotoxins in
the U.S. The TMDL order requires California to develop a plan to
prevent dangerous levels of Microcystis and microcystins in portions of
the Klamath River. The Klamath regularly experiences some of the
highest levels of these cells and toxins seen anywhere in the world.
Contentions have developed between some State and local agencies as
localities hurry to develop regulations concerning fertilizer usage
before State legislation preempts such actions. Federal leadership is
badly needed to assist states and localities in meeting the challenges
HABs pose for human health, ecosystem sustainability and economic
vitality.
Human health effects. Exposures to cyanotoxins occur in recreational
and finished drinking waters. High-level exposures generally occur
through ingestion of recreational waters. Lower-level exposures occur
through inhalation and dermal contact. Data from Florida indicate that
toxin levels in finished drinking water often are higher than in source
waters. HAB cells are lysed or split open when filtered during water
processing. The lysed cells release their toxin load into the water.
Normal drinking water processing often does not remove the toxins.
There is no known and affordable method to remove all cyanotoxins from
drinking water. Few, if any, water utilities systematically monitor for
HAB toxins. However, high-level exposures through drinking water are
probably rare. Cyanobacteria often make non-toxic compounds that cause
noxious tastes and odors. Water utilities become aware of the taste and
odor problems. They either implement supplemental treatment processes
at high cost, or discontinue drawing water from the contaminated source
until the tastes and odors dissipate. The additional processing to
remove taste and odor compounds may reduce toxin levels sufficiently to
prevent the most serious, acute health effects. However, humans are
repeatedly exposed to lower levels of cyanotoxins in tap water. There
is potential for higher-level exposures because many HABs go
undetected; many do not produce taste and odor compounds or form
surface scums. The potential for cyanotoxin exposure through drinking
water is high because two-thirds of the U.S. population's tap water now
comes from surface-water sources. Cyanotoxins in potable and
recreational waters have caused acute human-health effects in the U.S.
and many other countries.
HAB toxins pose serious risks for human health, as well as the
health of domestic and wild animals. The health effects are generally
placed in one of three categories.
Acute health effects. Swallowing a mouth full of contaminated water
could cause serious injury or death due to respiratory arrest or organ
failure. Lower level exposures cause a multi-system, flu-like illness.
Every year there are multiple reports of animal deaths in the U.S. due
to cyanotoxin exposure. Some states have HAB surveillance systems based
on telephone hotlines for reporting animal deaths after water body
contact. Occasionally there are reports of human deaths. For example,
boys from a high school soccer team swam in a golf course pond after
practice in Wisconsin during the summer of 2002. Two of the boys were
horsing around, dunking each other under the water. They soon developed
gastro-intestinal distress and then seizures. One boy died from
respiratory arrest. Luckily, the other boy survived. Anabaena were
found in stool samples taken from both boys. The coroner attributed the
cause of death to anatoxins. The boys swallowed the ``cobra venom.''
Our book (1), mentioned earlier, has a chapter describing the
Nebraska experience with HABs. State officials first noticed HABs in
their surface waters during the summer of 2004. They determined that
the HABs were predominated by Microcystis species. The state
implemented a monitoring program for microcystins in surface waters,
and developed action levels based on WHO guidelines for increased
monitoring and closure. Over 700 samples were taken from 111 different
surface water bodies during 2004. Sixty-nine health advisories
(increased monitoring) and 26 health alerts (lake closures) were issued
in 2004. Some closures lasted for more than three months. The great
benefit to public health provided by the Nebraska HAB action plan
became evident when a mistake was made in 2004. Toxin levels exceeding
the health alert level for lake closure were observed in the popular
recreational lake, Pawnee Lake, on a Friday. Officials were instructed
to post signs at lake beaches notifying the public that the lake was
closed due to cyanotoxins. However, only one beach was posted. The
public used other beaches and the rest of the lake that weekend. The
state received over 50 reports the following week of severe gastro-
intestinal and flu-like illness in people that recreated on Pawnee Lake
the previous weekend. The actual number of poisonings may have been
much higher. It is believed that most physicians do not recognize
illnesses as being caused by cyanotoxins.
Chronic health effects. Most non-lethal cases of acute cyanotoxin
poisoning recover within days or weeks. However, an unknown percentage
of susceptible individuals continue to suffer neurological and other
symptoms for many months or years. Although few studies have
investigated chronic illness caused by algal toxins, the phenomenon is
best described in the literature on chronic Ciguatera-seafood
poisoning. It is estimated that a 1,000,000 people worldwide may
contract Ciguatera-seafood poisoning yearly due to the consumption of
reef fish contaminated with ciguatoxins. The U.S. Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that only two to ten percent of
Ciguatera-seafood poisoning cases in the U.S. are recognized or
reported. Approximately 20 percent of acute illness cases are thought
to develop a chronic condition characterized by extreme fatigue,
weakness, muscle pain, sensory abnormalities, and cognitive deficits.
The scientific literature contains reports of chronic illness following
acute exposure or repeated, low-level exposure to cyanotoxins, although
scientific studies of the condition are lacking.
Last month I reported a study of chronic illness in cyanotoxin-
exposed patients at a medical conference in Costa Rica. My research
colleague, Ritchie Shoemaker, MD, who specializes in biotoxin-
associated illness, collected the data. The 17 patients had residential
and/or recreational exposure to freshwater bodies that regularly
experienced HABs predominated by Microcystis. The average duration of
illness was about two years. Most patients previously consulted
numerous physicians and received numerous diagnoses, none of which
involved toxins. The patients displayed statistically significant and
severe deficits in vision, multiple-system symptoms, and biochemical
abnormalities, relative to control study participants. The biochemical
abnormalities indicated exposure triggered an inflammatory process.
Illness resolved and symptoms dissipated during cholestyramine therapy.
Cholestyramine is a non-absorbable polymer that binds many toxins,
cholesterol, and salts from bile in the intestines, causing them to be
eliminated rather than re-absorbed during enterohepatic recirculation.
These and other data indicate that there may be many unrecognized cases
of chronic illness in the U.S. and world wide that are caused by algal
and other biotoxins.
Delayed health effects. Little is known about the effects of repeated,
low-level exposures, but cancer and neurodegeneration are outcomes
implicated in the scientific literature. For example, laboratory
studies indicate that microcystins are a cause and promoter of liver,
colon and other cancers. Microcystin levels in drinking water were
associated with liver cancer incidence in Chinese epidemiological
studies. Other studies indicate that cylindrospermopsin and other
cyanotoxins also may be carcinogenic.
The results from decades of studying a neurodegenerative complex
common among natives of Guam recently spurred research on Alzheimer's
disease and the cyanotoxin, (b-Methyl Amino Alanine (BMAA). Scientists
reported a high incidence of a neurologic condition with aspects of
Parkinsonism, Alzheimer's disease and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
among the Chamorro population of Guam in the 1940s. The leading
causative agent is now thought to be BMAA. The cyanobacteria genus
Nostoc grows on the roots of the cycad plant and produces BMAA. BMAA
accumulates in the seeds of the cycad. A species of flying fox feeds on
the seeds and accumulates high levels of BMAA in its tissues. The
flying fox was a traditional food of the Chamorro. Autopsy studies
showed BMAA in case, but not control, brains. As the flying fox
population decreased to near-extinction levels, the incidence of the
Guam dementia complex decreased dramatically. Recent research produced
two important results. First, BMAA is produced by most or all genera of
cyanobacteria, and is often present in surface waters. Second, BMAA was
observed in Canadian Alzheimer brains, but not in control brains.
Evidence to date for a causative relationship between BMAA and
Alzheimer's is far from conclusive, but the potential ramifications are
enormous. Current studies continue to investigate the Alzheimer's-BMAA
relationship, while others investigate cancer and cyanotoxin linkages.
Ecosystem effects. HABs adversely impact many trophic levels of aquatic
environments through a variety of mechanisms during bloom formation and
collapse. As blooms form, the increased biomass of the cells reduces
water transparency. Resulting light limitations inhibit the growth of
plants, epiphyton, benthic algae and other phytoplankton. Water
alkalinity increases as the expanding biomass consumes carbon dioxide,
altering phytoplanktonic interactions and causing lethal and sub-lethal
impacts on fish populations. Cyanotoxins augment and expand these
effects as fish, zooplankton, macro-invertebrates, wading birds and
aquatic vertebrates suffer further lethal and sub-lethal effects. For
example, data from Florida show strong correlations between
Cylindrospermopsis and cylindrospermopsin concentrations and alligator
death rates. Another example is a new syndrome among wading birds such
as coots. The new syndrome, termed avian vacuole myelopathy, was first
discovered in the U.S. southeast during the mid-1990s. After feeding on
plants such as hydrilla in lakes, birds were observed to swim and fly
erratically before dying. Autopsies revealed vacuoles or holes in brain
and spinal cord nervous tissues. The cause of death is believed to be
an as yet unidentified toxin produced by a newly discovered
cyanobacterium in the order of stigonematales that colonized aquatic
plants. The lethality extended to predatory birds such as bald eagles
as they easily captured and consumed the impaired wading birds.
Bloom collapses often are associated with massive fish mortality.
HABs can completely infest smaller lakes, reservoirs, ponds and long
stretches of slow moving rivers. Cell densities can soar, creating
think mats of organic material that completely block out light.
Eventually, cold weather or other natural causes lead to a gradual
collapse of the blooms. The cells are lysed, release all of their
toxins into the water column, and sink to the bottom. Bacterial and
other aerobic processes deplete oxygen in the water column as the cells
are decomposed. At first bottom waters, and then upper levels of the
water column, become hypoxic (no oxygen) or anoxic (low oxygen). Fish
that are unable to escape to oxygenated waters die, often in massive
quantities. The decomposition of cells and fish trigger a vicious
cycle. The lack of oxygen at the sediment-water interface causes
chemical bonds to be broken, releasing nutrients (e.g., phosphorus) and
toxic, noxious gasses (e.g., hydrogen sulfide) from the sediment to the
water column. Because phosphorus is often a limiting agent for bloom
formation, the release of this and other nutrients sets the stage for
new bloom formations. Repeated bloom cycles may irrevocably alter
aquatic ecosystems, extinguishing biota that contribute to healthy
ecosystems, while creating conditions for continued bloom dominance.
Occurrence, causes and costs of freshwater HABs
HAB occurrence. There is widespread agreement among scientists, water
managers, local officials, and much of the general public that the
occurrence of freshwater HABs is rapidly increasing in the U.S. and
worldwide. Every year freshwater HABs occur where they previously have
not been observed. HABs are lasting longer than before. Freshwater HABs
occur in all parts of North America, and durations range from the
summer months in more northern areas to year round in more southern
areas. HABs may be readily visible due to the presence of surface
scums, or difficult to detect because some types bloom only at mid-
level depths. Although there are no national databases on freshwater
HAB occurrence, and only a few State or local databases, the evidence
for increasing spatial and temporal occurrence of freshwater HABs is
undeniable.
HAB causes. Freshwater HAB incidence and duration is increasing because
of increasing nutrient input into our water bodies, and rising
temperatures. Climate change is driving much of the increase. Average
temperatures on land and in water are increasing, an advantage for HAB
organisms over many types of beneficial algae. The frequency of storms,
heavy rainfalls and flooding is increasing, causing more nutrients to
be washed into our water bodies. Somewhat ironically, the frequency of
droughts is increasing at the same time. Slow-moving or stagnant waters
favor HABs over beneficial algae. Warm, quiescent, and nutrient
enriched waters provide the ideal setting for freshwater HABs.
There are four primary requirements for HAB occurrence--nutrients,
warmth, sunlight and calm water. HAB cells thrive and multiply only
when sufficient nutrients are available. Cyanobacteria and other algae
require carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus and some trace elements to grow.
Carbon is not a limiting factor; there is plenty of carbon in the air
and water for algal growth. In fact, some strategies for promoting the
expansion of beneficial algae have been discussed as a means of
removing carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, from the air. Nitrogen is a
limiting factor for only some types of HAB cells. When usable forms of
nitrogen are low, types of cyanobacteria that can ``fix'' nitrogen into
usable forms dominate HABs. Phosphorus is a limiting factor for all
types of HAB cells. Phosphorus enrichment of our water bodies is
driving much of the increase in HAB occurrence. The ratio of nitrogen
to phosphorus concentrations often determines the types of cells that
dominate HABs.
Types of cyanobacteria previously seen only in tropical areas have
become common in much of the U.S. in recent years. This pattern is
expected to continue as average temperatures increase. Sunlight is
required by cyanobacteria to produce energy through photosynthetic
processes. Some of the recently invasive types of cyanobacteria such as
Cylindrospermopsis, and others like Planktothrix, efficiently produce
energy under low light conditions. These types of cyanobacteria often
bloom deep in the water column, making them difficult to detect from
the surface.
Freshwater HABs occur almost exclusively in quiescent, stagnant
waters. Water flow rates decrease as an expanding population,
agriculture, and industry withdraw larger quantities for use. Aquifer
depletion forces increased withdrawal of surface waters and damming to
create new reservoirs. These factors and droughts are decreasing flow
rates and increasing the incidence of freshwater HABs.
HAB costs. Although a formal analysis of the total costs of HABs to our
economy has not been conducted, it is known that freshwater HABs
account for many millions of dollars in lost recreational revenue,
water treatment expenditures, monitoring and response activities,
health care and aquaculture losses. The development of control and
mitigation technologies and processes offers an opportunity for the
U.S. to avoid these losses, and create a world-leading industry. World
leadership in HAB control and mitigation is needed to sustain the
Earth's aquatic ecosystems, protect human health and vitalize the U.S.
economy.
Approaches to freshwater HAB control
Of the four causative factors for freshwater HABs discussed above,
only two can reasonably be targeted for HAB control--nutrients and calm
water.
Nutrient input control. Nutrient inputs enter freshwater from both
point and non-point sources. Point sources include outlets from
wastewater treatment plants, urban stormwater collection systems,
industries, aquacultures and concentrated animal-feeding operations.
Strategies are needed to reduce the amount of nutrients entering these
systems and exiting these systems. Representatives Stupak and Miller
recently introduced a House bill that would require the EPA to order a
reduction of phosphorus in detergents to help control HABs in the Great
Lakes. Senator Levin introduced a similar bill.
An ultimate goal should be to recapture and reuse the nutrients in
these systems. For example, phosphorus is not only essential for HABs,
but is essential for all living organisms and required for agricultural
production. There are no synthetic alternatives for phosphorus in
fertilizer. Scientists around the world warn that there is a looming
shortage of phosphorus on the horizon. Phosphorus production is
predicted to peak within 30 years, and reserve depletion is predicted
within 50-100 years. Countries such as India already face phosphorus
shortages. Ultimately, there will be no alternative to recapturing and
reusing phosphorus.
Non-point source inputs of nutrients to freshwater are much more
difficult to control than point source inputs. Nutrients enter ditches,
streams, rivers, reservoirs, ponds and lakes when rainwater washes them
off of lawns, roads, highways, fields, pastures and forests.
Development and expansion of watershed management plans and best
management practices for agriculture, industry and residential property
are needed to reduce nutrient usage and enable the recapture of
nutrients.
There is no question that reduction of nutrient inputs to
freshwater benefits water quality in many ways. Additionally, systems
developed to reduce nutrient inputs will likely reduce inputs of other
pollutants such as pesticides, metals and pharmaceutical products.
However, HAB control through nutrient-input reduction alone is a very
long-term process. Many years of excessive nutrient input to freshwater
bodies has resulted in high concentrations of nutrients in sediments.
Nutrients in sediment are released to the water column under hypoxic
and anoxic conditions, and whenever storms or other events stir up
sediments. Nutrient resuspension often triggers new HABs. To my
knowledge, there is no instance of sustained HAB elimination in a
freshwater body of more that 100 acres in size through nutrient-input
reduction alone.
Other approaches to nutrient reduction have proven to be cost
prohibitive, ineffective over the long-term, detrimental to the
environment or a combination of these factors. For example, alum
(aluminum sulfate) and other substances have been used to precipitate
phosphorus from the water column to the sediment. However, this
approach has the disadvantages of being effective at HAB prevention
only in the short-term, detrimental to much of the biota in aquatic
ecosystems, cost prohibitive over the long-term, and applicable only to
smaller water bodies. Other approaches to nutrient reduction, such as
hypolimnetic oxygenation, hypolimnetic withdrawal, dredging and
biological manipulations, also have some combination of these
drawbacks.
Calm water control. The calm water requirement for HABs can be targeted
through hydrologic manipulations. Although excess water capacity is not
usually available, increasing flow rates and decreasing water residence
time eliminates HABs even in nutrient-rich freshwaters. However, the
overall outcome of increased flow sometimes creates problems
downstream. Nutrients in freshwater are transported to coastal
environments where they stimulate HABs in estuarine and marine
environments. Another approach is to destratify or artificially mix the
entire water column. Diffused air system installed in ponds and smaller
water bodies frequently provide good HAB control. Disadvantages include
a small area of influence for each air diffuser, the continual need for
electric-grid power, applicability limited to smaller water bodies due
to cost and the vertical transport of nutrients sometimes stimulates
HABs. The installation of artificial waterfalls or fountains in smaller
water bodies often provides good HAB control with the only drawback
being the continual need for grid power.
I joined SolarBee, Inc., because I believe that they developed the
best technological solution to freshwater HABs in water bodies of all
sizes. Two engineers in North Dakota, Joel Bleth and Willard Tormaschy,
developed solar powered long-distance circulation (LDC) technology as a
cost-effective alternative to aeration in wastewater lagoons. They
fortuitously found that LDC not only provided the benefits of aeration
at a lower cost, but also prevented the occurrence of HABs in these
nutrient rich waters. LDC application for HAB control in 250 U.S.
freshwater bodies to date has a success rate of about 95 percent.
LDC is created by floating platforms equipped with high-efficiency
pumps powered by solar panels and a battery. The circulators operate 24
hours a day, seven days a week, and are designed for a 25-year lifetime
with little maintenance. The largest circulator transports 10,000 gal/
min of water from the bottom of the photic zone to the surface,
creating LDC sufficient for HAB control over an area of about 35 acres.
LDC deployment for HAB control is unlike other ``artificial
circulation'' approaches to HAB control in that it does not destratify
the water column or aerate the hypolimnion. The circulator's intake
hose is set at the base of the photic zone for HAB control, usually
just above the thermocline. A plate suspended below the bottom of the
intake hose causes near laminar-flow intake of water radially from long
distances. The water smoothly departs from the unit radially, both
above and below a disk positioned just under the surface. Only the
epilimnetic water is circulated, the upper portion of the water column
in which HABs occur. The thermocline or density-change barrier between
the epilimnion and lower, nutrient rich hypolimnion remains intact,
thereby preventing those nutrients from entering the photic zone and
further promoting HABs.
Unfortunately, a chemical approach to HAB control is commonly used
today. Algaecides such as copper sulfate are used to terminate blooms
after they form. This reactive, as opposed to preventive, approach is
dangerous for humans and has serious detrimental impacts in aquatic
ecosystems. Copper sulfate lyses HAB cells, causing the release of all
cyanotoxins to water instantaneously. These extreme levels of
cyanotoxins in water threaten humans even if they are not directly in
or on the water. Recent CDC and other evidence indicate that HAB toxins
become airborne due to wind and wave action. Humans miles away from the
affected water bodies inhale the toxins. The inhaled toxins cause
respiratory distress in asthmatic and other susceptible populations,
and may contribute to the chronic and delayed health effects discussed
earlier. Copper sulfate itself is toxic to many plants and animals
living in water. Furthermore, the copper binds with many pollutants
such as pesticides, making them more bioavailable and damaging to
aquatic organisms. Copper accumulates to high levels in sediment with
continued use. As with bacteria resistant to antibiotics, there is
growing evidence that some strains of cyanobacteria are becoming
resistant to copper sulfate toxicity. Aquatic ecosystems will not
survive repeated applications of algaecides over the long-term.
HAB control summary. I believe that the combination of nutrient-input
reduction and long-distance circulation provides the best approach to
near- and long-term HAB control. This dual approach is sustainable, has
no adverse impacts on aquatic ecosystems, provides many environmental
benefits in addition to HAB control, and is cost effective over the
long-term.
However, research is needed to develop more efficient and effective
strategies for controlling HABs in all water bodies. Specific research
needs are detailed in the book (1), the mandated Freshwater report (2),
HARRNESS (3), and the draft Management and Response report (4). A
research plan that comprehensively addresses HABs in all of our
nation's water bodies, coordinates agency efforts and prevents
duplication of effort can only be established through appropriate
federal legislation.
The need for improved legislation to comprehensively address HABs from
freshwater (EPA jurisdiction) to oceans (National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) jurisdiction)
Congress originally passed HABHRCA in 1998 to authorize funds for
research on HABs and hypoxia. This authority through the Department of
Commerce directed NOAA to conduct research and seek control of HABs and
hypoxia in U.S. oceans, estuaries and the Great Lakes.
The 2004 reauthorization of HABHRCA expanded the Act to include all
freshwater bodies. The reauthorization incorporated a reporting
requirement by an interagency task force on freshwater blooms. The book
(1) I mentioned earlier provided the scientific basis for that report.
The report, Scientific Assessment of Freshwater Harmful Algal Blooms,
Interagency Working Group on Harmful Algal Blooms, Hypoxia, and Human
Health (2), describes the environmental, health and economic
consequences of freshwater HABs. HABHRCA also mandated that the task
force develop and submit to Congress a plan providing for a
comprehensive and coordinated National Research Program to develop and
demonstrate prevention, control, and mitigation methods to reduce the
impacts of harmful algae. That report, Harmful Algal Bloom Management
and Response: Assessment and Plan, is in draft form (4). It recommends
the creation of a new interagency competitive-grant program, the
Mitigation, Control and Prevention of Harmful Algal Blooms program
(MACHAB). Implementation of MACHAB is critical for our nation to
develop cost-effective strategies for preventing HABs and mitigating
their consequences. My belief in the need for a HAB control strategy is
evidenced by my decision to leave the EPA and shift my research from
human-health effects to HAB control technology. I believe it is much
better to prevent HABs and biotoxin-associated illness than to have
people in need of diagnosis and therapy due to HAB toxin exposures.
I fully support the existing HABHRCA reauthorization bills,
including the ``clean'' reauthorization bill offered by Congressman
Connie Mack, and the legislation being developed by Senator Bill Nelson
that addresses some of the shortcomings of the 2004 legislation. I also
support the bills to lower phosphorus levels in detergents for the
Great Lakes area. However, these bills do not address the fundamental
obstacle preventing the development of a coordinated National Research
Plan for HABs in all of our nation's waters. Current and proposed
legislation does not authorize funding for the EPA or direct the Agency
to ``take ownership'' of the freshwater HAB problem. The current
legislation authorizes funding only for NOAA through the Department of
Commerce. That Department does not fund the EPA. It is the EPA that has
purview over water quality in inland water bodies through the Clean
Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. As the lead agency with
oversight over freshwater quality, the EPA must ensure the protection
of ``aquatic ecosystems to protect human health, support economic and
recreational activities, and provide healthy habitat for fish, plants,
and wildlife.'' I believe that the development of a National Research
Plan for all freshwater HABs is dependent on Congress passing a
freshwater act that parallels HABHRCA but is specific for the EPA and
all freshwater bodies.
Convincing the EPA to accept oversight responsibility for the
freshwater HAB problem may not be an easy task. Since completion of the
Freshwater (2) and Management and Response (4) reports, the EPA
unilaterally determined that its statutory requirements regarding
freshwater HABs were completed. There is no Agency effort to develop
and implement a National Research Plan for freshwater HABs. The Agency
virtually ceased all participation in freshwater HAB research and
mitigation activities. Prior to that decision, the EPA annually
contributed funds to one of the two interagency, competitive research
grant programs for HAB research, the Ecology and Oceanography of
Harmful Algal Blooms (ECOHAB). The EPA ceased funding that program this
year. Scientists at the EPA's National Health and Environmental Effects
Research Laboratory were ordered to cease all research on HABs. Staff
were ordered to decline requests from the EPA regional offices and many
State, local and tribal organizations seeking information on the risks
and management of freshwater HABs. In taking this position, the EPA has
failed to recognize the urgency of the freshwater-HAB problem, and that
freshwater HAB cells differ from those that cause marine HABs, just as
fresh and salt water and their ecosystems differ. Further, some of the
causes of HABs and potential control technologies likely differ between
freshwater and saltwater bodies. The EPA's shortsightedness can
substantially harm human health, the environment and the economy. The
EPA's decision to halt HAB research was likely influenced by unclear
Congressional directives, a lack of budgetary authority and lower
overall Agency funding. It is up to Congress to work with the EPA to
correct this situation for the good of our nation.
All Agency officials did not fail to adequately recognize the
importance of freshwater HABs. The Agency's National Center for
Environmental Research issued a competitive-grant request for proposals
in 2007 on research to develop sensors for HAB cells and toxins. The
EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment is attempting to
draft toxicological reviews for a few cyanotoxins.
My recommendation, and I believe I am joined by the vast majority
of scientists in this view, is that statutory requirements are needed
to direct the EPA to develop and implement a National Research Plan for
freshwater HABs. Freshwater-HABHRCA legislation that parallels the
current and proposed reauthorizations for HABHRCA can accomplish this
goal. Congress should pass Freshwater-HABHRCA legislation that
authorizes funding for, and directs the EPA to develop and implement, a
comprehensive freshwater-HAB research program. This Act will create a
unified approach toward protection our nation from the risks of inland
HABs, just as HABHRCA and NOAA have done for HABs in oceans, estuaries
and the Great Lakes. The research should be conducted through a strong
extramural, peer-reviewed, competitive-grant program and supplemented
through intramural research. The Agency should be directed to fund the
existing interagency grant programs, ECOHAB and the Monitoring and
Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms (MERHAB). The EPA should
further be directed to help institute and fund the newly proposed
MACHAB interagency grant program. The extramural grant programs will
form partnerships critical to developing a successful National Program
for Preventing HABs. These partnerships should include public, private,
for-profit and nonprofit institutions and organizations, including
states, local governments, tribes, appropriate industries (including
aquatic technology, fisheries, agriculture, and fertilizer), academic
institutions, and nongovernmental organizations with expertise in
water-quality science and management. Further, Congress must
specifically authorize and appropriate funds for these freshwater-HAB
research programs.
Legislation will provide clarity to the EPA that freshwater HAB
research is authorized, and that the Agency must contribute to HAB
research programs in order to develop solutions to the freshwater HAB
problem through partnerships. The House Science and Technology
Committee is an appropriate legislative body to develop a new bill for
establishing a National Research Program for Freshwater HABs because of
its responsibility for the environment and jurisdiction over the EPA. I
urge the Members of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee to address
this issue.
I am pleased to offer my expertise to help develop authority for
the EPA consistent with NOAA's existing research and response programs.
We must act now as a unified country to develop policy and interagency
coordination to mitigate and control HABs in all of our nation's
waters. HAB toxins are far more potent than industrial chemicals, and
the environmental load of HAB toxins is increasing at an alarming rate.
The potential consequences of increasing HABs for human health, aquatic
ecosystem sustainability and our economy are too great to ignore.
Inaction is not an option that we cannot afford.
I thank the Subcommittee for allowing me to express my views today.
References
1. Hudnell H. Kenneth [Ed.], 2008. Cyanobacterial Harmful Algal
Blooms: State of the Science and Research Needs, Advances in
Experimental Medicine and Biology, Vol. 619, Springer Press. http://
www.sprinper.com/biomed/neuroscience/book/978-0-387-75864-0
2. Lopez, C.B., Jewett, E.B., Dortch, Q., Walton, B.T., Hudnell, K.,
2007. Scientific Assessment of Freshwater Harmful Algal Blooms.
Interagency Working Group on Harmful Algal Blooms, Hypoxia, and Human
Health of the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology.
Washington, DC.
3. Ramsdell, J.S., D.M. Anderson and P.M. Glibert [Eds.]. HARRNESS,
2005. Harmful Algal Research and Response: A National Environmental
Science Strategy 2005-2015. Ecological Society of America, Washington
DC, 96 pp.
4. Harmful Algal Bloom Management and Response: Assessment and Plan,
2007 draft. Interagency Working Group on Harmful Algal Blooms, Hypoxia,
and Human Health of the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and
Technology. Washington, DC.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Discussion
HABHRCA Reauthorization
Chairman Lampson. Well, thank you very much and thank all
of you for your testimony. At this point we will begin our
first round of questioning, and the Chair will recognize
himself for the first five minutes.
Dr. Magnien, before we get into a discussion on how to move
forward on the issue, I want to ask a question about the last
HABHRCA reauthorization in 2004. There were a number of reports
and plans that were supposed to be done within a year or two of
enactment and I have only seen one transmitted to Congress. Can
you tell me about the status of each of these reports and why
it is taking so long to produce them? I am referring
specifically to the Research, Development, Demonstration and
Technology Transfer Plan, the three assessments of harmful
algal blooms, the freshwater harmful algal blooms and hypoxia.
Dr. Magnien. As you mentioned, there are four reports of
the 2004 authorization. One has been produced and the three
others are essentially completed. They are just going through
the final stages of review and will be transmitted to Congress
shortly. Part of the challenge in putting those together was to
fully engage both the research community, the management
community and the federal agencies in coming to consensus on
these reports so I think the product, even though it is a
little bit beyond the deadline, is well worth the extra effort
and we made all attempts to keep Congress informed throughout
the process of some of the delays that were occurring.
Chairman Lampson. NOAA leads two important competitive
research programs, the ECOHAB and MERHAB programs. These
programs got off to a very good start in funding many projects
that have contributed to the advancement of knowledge and
management capabilities that we have now. Are there any new
solicitations for these programs to continue these efforts?
Dr. Magnien. We had a competition in this fiscal year for
the ECOHAB program. We alternate between years between the
ECOHAB and the MERHAB program. Unfortunately, our funding
availability this year would not allow us to start any new
awards for the 2008 competition, although we did provide
funding for some of the multi-year awards for past
competitions.
HARRNESS
Chairman Lampson. Thanks.
Dr. Anderson, you mentioned that the current national plan
is outdated. Now we have the new plan, HARRNESS, to help
address this issue for the next decade or more. What specific
components of this plan should be incorporated into the new
HABHRCA reauthorization?
Dr. Anderson. Mr. Chairman, you have heard us mention
several possible programs. One that keeps coming up is this
RDDTT, or a better way to think of it perhaps is prevention,
control and mitigation of HABs. The way that report has been
written, and I have appended the Executive Summary of that
report to my written testimony, it has three components to it.
One is an actual research and demonstration program on
Prevention, Control, and Mitigation strategies, but then there
is also an Event Response element and then an Infrastructure
element. Without going into great details, each of those is
needed because we need programs that will help us test and
demonstrate mitigation and control strategies and practical
science, bringing science through to practical applications.
But we also need to help the states and the regions respond
with these massive outbreaks and unexpected outbreaks, so an
Event Response element is needed. And then we also need what we
are calling infrastructure, which means toxin standards for all
the measurements that are needed and culture collections and
many, many other things that we need to conduct our research--
infrastructure that everybody shares. That is an infrastructure
element. So we put all of this under this RDDTT umbrella. So
that is one program that I think really is needed and, as I
said, it needs to be separate from--and shouldn't steal funds
or shouldn't take funds away from the basic research that is
already there with ECOHAB and MERHAB.
Chairman Lampson. What are the major research gaps and
obstacles? And I guess you spoke about some of that, that make
predicting the occurrences of the harmful algal blooms
difficult, and are there other technologies that we could be
using to help make better predictions?
Obstacles in Predicting Harmful Algal Blooms
Dr. Anderson. One of the--I will use my own region as a
perfect example. We have developed what is probably one of the
best numerical models in the world for harmful algal blooms and
it is the one that allowed us to make predictions and give
forecasts for our managers, but at the same time it is
restricted by our ability to collect data during these
outbreaks. You get very good weather forecasts because there is
a continual flow of data from sensors and weather stations
everywhere that is being used to constantly update your weather
models. We don't have that in our system, so what we need is
one answer to your question. The ocean observatory system is
starting to instrument the coastal ocean. What we need are
instruments as part of that system that will detect HABs and
their toxins and relay that information to us so that we can
assimilate it into our models and improve those forecasts and
the predictions. To me, that is a very, very important step
forward.
Chairman Lampson. Can we do it with satellites?
Dr. Anderson. Satellites will only work in some parts of
the country with certain HABs, like in Florida. There,
satellites work very well in the predictive system that Dr. Rob
Magnien mentioned. In the Northeast, for example, or in the
Northwest, our blooms are never dense enough or are rarely
dense enough to be visible from space, so satellites are only
useful in some locations.
Chairman Lampson. Mr. Ayres, Dr. Hudnell, would you all
like to comment on that?
Dr. Hudnell. I definitely support what Dr. Anderson said.
There is a great need to give a window of opportunity to risk
managers to take action before harm is done, and the better we
can develop models like Dr. Anderson has to predict when these
events will occur, the better we can protect the public health
from these very potent toxins.
Mr. Ayres. The other thing I might add is, I did spend some
time working on the event response portion of the RDT workshop
report, RDDTT, however that goes, and event response really is
important to State managers and the ability to share resources
between states and be able to have federal experts come quickly
to the aid of states in the event of these blooms that occur
quite quickly is terribly important to State managers like
myself around the Nation.
Chairman Lampson. Mr. Inglis, you are recognized for five
minutes.
Satellite Capacity
Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Magnien, I understand that there is some question about
the capacities of the NPOESS satellite to see as well or get
images as good as we are getting now. Is that your
understanding as well?
Dr. Magnien. Well, I am afraid I am not a satellite expert
so I really wouldn't be able to comment on the specifics of
that satellite technology but I would be happy to provide that
information following the hearing.
Mr. Inglis. That would be helpful, because it is of concern
if NPOESS isn't going to get us as good of pictures as we are
getting now, and does anybody else have anything to say about
that or any information about that?
Dr. Anderson. I can't comment specifically other than I
have been to several meetings where the members of our
community who do work with remote sensing information have
spoken very strongly about the need for some strong guidance to
the government to improve the next missions that go out, the
instruments that are going into space because we are reliant,
as I understand it, on an Indian satellite that will be coming
up that we don't even know will have the correct wavelength,
the correct information that we have been getting or satellites
that are already beyond their design life, and so the next five
or ten years is sort of a black hole for some of these sensors
up in space and I have heard that there is a genuine concern
and that is perhaps what you are also referring to.
Mr. Inglis. And speaking of images, Dr. Anderson, I think
it is you that had the particularly, as you said, dramatic
images from China. Is that--is what is going on there typical
as to what we see elsewhere or is this particularly unusual
amount of growth?
Dr. Anderson. They truly are dramatic images. The answer
really is that in some parts of the world, that is, I won't
call it typical, but in many developing parts of the world
where there is a strong input of pollutants into coastal
waters, this is the type of event that you can see. China has
unfortunately over many years focused a lot of energy on
feeding its population, on agriculture and aquaculture in the
coastal zone, and you are now seeing the effects of that. There
is no question that those seaweed blooms are being driven by
pollution, much heavier pollution than we typically have in
this country, so we don't see some of those types of events in
that extreme, but down in Florida, for example, there are
seaweeds washing up on beaches and rotting and decaying and
that occurs up in the New England area as well. It just is not
quite as extensive as in China.
Algae Blooms for Biodiesel
Mr. Inglis. This may be a question better directed to the
Chairman because I think he has had some business experience
with this, but we could learn something from these rapid algae
blooms in using CO<INF>2</INF> to grow this algae into
biodiesel, right? It is sort of a two-for. I should recognize
the Chairman to speak on that. It is sort of a two-for to
figure how to prevent it from happening in the ocean but maybe
have it happen, rapid growth, where we want it so we can
harvest that material, right?
Dr. Anderson. I will offer a comment there. We all get
comments and questions these days from industry and so forth
about exactly that. Couldn't we harvest these blooms and turn
them into biofuel? The answer is that the economics aren't
really there for most of them, especially given that not all of
these blooms are as spectacular as some of the pictures you are
seeing, and you need to have a sustainable, continuous
resource. But there is no question that if you move this whole
process on land and develop the ability to grow these mass
quantities of algae, they are a much better approach to biofuel
than growing corn and going the ethanol route. You can grow
algae in desert locations. There are many, many advantages to
using algae for biofuel but I don't think one can do that with
natural blooms. I think they are too sporadic and in many cases
actually the harm we get is from very dilute suspensions of
cells that would not be suitable for biofuel.
Mr. Inglis. My time is up, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Chairman Lampson. I was wondering if we couldn't create
some giant vacuum cleaner and suck all this stuff up and filter
out the algae, squeeze the oil out of it and make fuel.
Apparently that is not the best idea in the world.
Mr. Baird, you are recognized for five minutes.
Reducing and Controlling Algal Blooms
Mr. Baird. I thank the chairman and thank our witnesses.
This is indeed an important topic, as mentioned earlier by my
colleagues. It affects not only our Puget Sound and our
offshore environment and also Vancouver Lake right near my own
home. One of the interesting things, Mr. Chairman, about the
amnesic form of this is how it functions, and it would scare
the willies out of you if you understand it. It attacks the
hippocampus. I am a neuropsychologist by training and the
hippocampus is a structure of the brain that is responsible for
basically transforming current experience in the long-term
memories, and when the hippocampus is bilaterally lesioned, you
get a phenomenon wherein you have your old-term memory, long-
term memory, but nothing gets in, so if we left the room and
came back a couple minutes later, you would not remember that
we had seen one another. Sometimes Congress seems to have
suffered from this. But it is really quite astonishing and
highlights the seriousness of this. You know, it is not just
about closing our shellfish industry. It is about a permanent,
severe neurological impairment that results and that is why
this topic is so important.
I would caution, by the way, the notion of commercial algal
use for petroleum production. There was just an article in
Science, I think last week, about a reef structure in India
that has been devastated by the release of algae apparently
used for commercial production purposes and is just flooding
over this reef, and you should see the pictures. It has been
wiped out.
But I want to get to the question of what do we do about
these things. I think you have talked about the monitoring. It
sounded like, Dr. Hudnell, that there are some approaches to
actually reduce--I mean, once you have got a bloom, these
things are pretty intractable. Are there--what do we know about
how to get rid of them once they are there, especially in
relatively small closed water environments? I know a big bloom
off a coast might be hard but what are the spectrum of
opportunities for this?
Dr. Hudnell. Yes. Well, speaking for cyanobacteria in
freshwater blooms and somewhat it pertains to the red tides
also, there are four requirements for blooms. They need
nutrients, particularly phosphorus and nitrogen as well as
trace elements. They need sunlight for photosynthesis. They
need warmth. Many of these develop in warmer areas south and
then move north as temperatures increase. And they need
quiescent, stagnant water. So when you are talking about
solutions for control, you look at the causes. You can do
something about nutrients. You can reduce nutrient input into
our water. We need to do that for many reasons, not only
because of HABs and water quality. We need to reduce nutrient
input because phosphorus, we are predicted to peak production
in 30 years, and be out of natural sources of phosphorus in 50
to 100 years. We need to be recapturing and reusing these
nutrients instead of let them run into the water and cause
problems. We can't do much about warmth and sunlight but we can
do something about quiescent, stagnant water. Unfortunately, we
can't usually just open the floodgates and let a lot of water
rush out because of increasing demand and droughts, but we can
circulate the water. That is why I went to work for SolarBee
because they made floating platforms that are solar-powered
with a battery and high-efficiency pumps. You put a big hose
down. You drawn in water horizontally from long distances.
Water is in different density layers so you draw in from one
layer long distances, bring it up at 10,000 gallons per minute
and push it out smoothly on the surface to circulate the water
over a 35-acre area, and it is strong enough circulation to
prevent these HABs over a 35-acre area per unit. So the effect
is additive. The more units you put in, the more area you can
protect. For example, now we have about 20-some circulators
protecting the water intake in Houston in their reservoir,
which has had bad HAB problems.
And so I think that we should combine our efforts to do two
things: control nutrient input to water through best management
practices, reduce the amount of nutrients we use. For example,
there are bills now to take phosphate out of detergents. We
should do some of that. Find other ways to use only what we
really need, not just throw all the fertilizer out and you
think the more, the better. And we need to recapture the
nutrients at the point sources where they come out of the pipes
into the water. There can be systems there that precipitate out
the phosphorus before it goes into the freshwaters, so we can
take it and reuse it. And we need to combine the approach of
nutrient input reduction with the circulation of water where
there is no other means for it to be anything other than
quiescent and stagnant. We need to keep it moving, and we are
doing research now to figure out why that works. We know it
works but we haven't done the research yet to figure out how it
works. So that is my approach to HAB prevention and control.
Dr. Anderson. To bring us to the marine side of that story,
we do have a number of technologies that we are looking into.
Some of them are very simple. In Korea and other countries in
Asia, they spray clay over the ocean, and it flocculates. It
makes large particles that carry these red tide cells to the
bottom and they have effectively protected their fish-farming
industry with a modest investment compared to the value of that
industry. Interestingly, though, and my lab has actually been
doing work on that, we have encountered quite a bit of
environmental opposition to this as you might understand. But
at the same time, it is rather frustrating from my standpoint
because we do everything I think we need to do to demonstrate
that this is much less damaging that the red tide itself and
that clay flows into the ocean constantly from rivers and
rainfall and yet there are groups that oppose it. And so what
is happening is, we are developing certain technologies, and I
could mention viruses and parasites and bacteria that will all
destroy these red tide cells, but there is a social issue that
we need to address and to get society to accept this in the
ocean is going to be a big step. We already accept spraying for
mosquitoes, spraying for pests on broccoli or corn or whatever,
but people are not yet ready to let us do the same in the
ocean, and I think this is an important issue to be addressed.
It is an important area for invasive species as well and it is
one that I think we can approach, and that is one of the
reasons that I think we need this separate RDDTT program
because when I write a proposal that tries to get funding for
clay work and it is competing against basic science proposals
from other investigators, guess which ones tend to get
supported? Because mine is much more controversial, some
reviewers say it is never going to work, it is going to cause
all these problems, and so you need to have a separate pool of
money where engineers and everyone else comes in and starts to
attack these problems while the basic research keeps moving on
a separate track.
Mr. Baird. Mr. Chairman, I know my time is up but I would
be very interested in following up with you on that, Dr.
Anderson. We have seen this with invasives in my own district
where an invasive species threatened to wipe out a marine
estuary, just was going to destroy it, turn it into a prairie
from an estuary, and the fight was to get herbicide labeled so
that we could kill, it was Spartena grass, and we almost lost
the estuary. We are beating it now in a remarkable success
story but we need at some point to gauge the cost-benefits in a
better way and just saying under no circumstances intervene
when the condition that you are trying to beat may be far more
destructive than the intervention and finding a way to deal
with that would be very helpful. Maybe we could pursue this in
this committee. Thanks, Dr. Anderson.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Mr. Baird.
Mr. McNerney, you are recognized for five minutes.
Climate Change's Impact on Algal Blooms
Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think I am going to say the same thing that Mr. Baird
said. This is a fascinating subject, and I don't know that much
about it, so thank you for coming and testifying.
Dr. Anderson, could you outline briefly or in detail, if
you wish, what you think the impact of climate change and
specifically ocean acidification would be on HABs?
Dr. Anderson. I will take the marine side of that and I
think Dr. Hudnell will probably have some comments to add about
the freshwater side. We get asked that question a lot and it is
a very difficult one to answer because HABs are very complex
phenomena. In my own region, again I will use that as an
example, we now have computer models for future climate
scenarios that would say, for example, we will have more
rainfall and warmer temperatures and things like this. We can
start to put those predictions into our models to ask what that
might do to our blooms. But these organisms are very adaptive.
As I said, they have a cyst stage that remains in the sediment.
It is a lot like a seed of a higher plant. So if the winter is
shorter, it just means the cyst will germinate a little bit
earlier and if it is a hotter summer, it may end its bloom
sooner. So it is very hard to say how much difference that
would make. But I think in general, we could say that we are
going to see a movement of these HAB problems from some areas
where they occur now into other areas where they don't just
because temperatures become more tolerant. But on the other
hand, you might actually see the disappearance of some species
from some areas as the temperatures become too warm, for
example. Acidification is an issue that I don't have any
specific answer for, given all of our different HAB organisms.
There are so many different kinds that each one would have to
be studied separately, and that research is just beginning. I
think on the freshwater side of the picture though, it is a
little more clear that with the warming temperatures and the
changes of stratification and pH, that one would see more
cyanobacterial blooms.
Dr. Hudnell. I believe that climate change is having an
impact on this and will continue to do so. First of all, the
issue of increasing temperatures. We are seeing organisms that
used to only occur south of the United States occurring in the
United States now, and spreading rapidly, for example,
Cylindorspermopsis makes highly potent cylindorspermopsin
toxins that affect multiple organ systems, stop protein
production. This is occurring in many places in this country
now and expanding because it is getting the warmth that it
needs. But on top of temperature, the precipitation and storms
is another issue. It is sort of ironic that with climate
change, it seems that you get on the one hand more frequent
heavy storms, and what this does is wash off more nutrients
into our freshwater. But on the other hand, you also get more
frequent and extended drought periods, and so when you get
droughts, you get slower water flow, more quiescent stagnant
water, so both of these factors tend to increase the occurrence
of these freshwater harmful algal blooms.
Predicting Algal Blooms
Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
Dr. Magnien, you went over the predictions of the New
England event. How effective would that modeling be in terms of
other types of these events around other coastlines, other
sections of our coastline?
Dr. Magnien. Well, that is a good question because it
speaks to the national scope of our programs as well as
tailoring things regionally, so there definitely are components
of all of these types of research whether it is a forecast or
detection or a control issue with a virus or a bacteria clay
that is transferable from one region to another, so the
knowledge that we have developed through our partners in New
England can definitely be transferred elsewhere, not
necessarily lock, stock and barrel but with adjustments to the
particular HAB species or the circulation patterns in a given
region with much less effort and shorter time frames. So we are
looking at all of those opportunities to get efficiencies and
transfer knowledge from one region to another and we have
already got a number of very good examples where that has been
done.
Mr. McNerney. So do you find coordination between agencies
or scientists to be at a beneficial state now or a non-
beneficial state?
Dr. Magnien. I think it is at a beneficial state and we are
working very hard in NOAA to help support that, and you have
heard a number of our efforts to support that through
workshops, through the HARRNESS report which we provided
funding for. We have had workshops in Florida recently. We are
going to have another workshop on the regional problems in the
West Coast. We have gotten great participation from the
managers, the social scientists, the federal agencies and we
are also working very hard with all of these groups in putting
together the reports for the HABHRCA legislation that the
chairman asked me about earlier, and that is, you know, a big
job but it is one worth taking on and doing to the benefit of
everybody.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you. My time is expired, but would you
let Dr. Anderson have a word?
Dr. Anderson. Just to add to the issue of the
transferability of the model results. It was our model that was
doing this prediction. These models generally have two
components, a physical model which is of the circulation of the
water, and those are being developed all over the country, and
into these we have to build the biology of these HAB organisms.
Many of the HAB organisms that we work on do occur in other
parts of the country so the one that causes problems in New
England also occurs along the coast of California and
Washington and even Alaska, so I actually have received
inquiries and have invited someone from Washington to my lab to
do some of the experiments that are needed to take their
organism and to just change the parameters slightly so that
they can use our model. So in many cases I think these modeling
efforts are transferable with some tweaking of the organisms so
that it reflects this region as opposed to that region.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. You are welcome, Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
Mr. Akin, you are recognized for five minutes.
Algal Bloom Causes: Fertilizer Runoff and Climate Change
Mr. Akin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and we have three
hearings at the same time. It is hard to be in three places at
once, so I missed your testimonies.
The first question I have is, the problem of fertilizer
runoff and things like that off of land, particularly farmland,
has long been a problem. I think of it more in connection with
Lake Erie and freshwater bodies more than saltwater perhaps,
and then there is also talk though about conditions in the
ocean where there is some pH change. It is not driven by
fertilizer I think as much as it is pH change, which then tends
to destroy coral formations and things like that. Are these in
any way connected or are they two totally separate situations,
and which is more serious?
Dr. Magnien. I assume you are talking about actually three
things here, the nutrient connection to harmful algal blooms
but also the ocean acidification connection to harmful algal
blooms.
Mr. Akin. Correct.
Dr. Magnien. I think before you walked in, Dr. Anderson
addressed some of the issues related to the ocean acidification
and that it is so early in the research phase there that we
really don't know how that particular situation is going to
affect the multitude of different species that compose the
group of harmful algae. The nutrient----
Mr. Akin. Do we know for sure that it is a pH thing that is
driving those conditions?
Dr. Magnien. PH is involved but nutrients are much more
overwhelming in importance for harmful algal blooms.
Mr. Akin. If you say the drivers, you are saying we know
for sure the nutrients is a huge part of it?
Dr. Magnien. Right.
Mr. Akin. The pH is not as clear-cut?
Dr. Magnien. Exactly, and the changes we are seeing at
least now in pH are fairly subtle, so it may become an issue
down the road and we certainly should look at that, but for
now, the immediate issue is nutrients and----
Mr. Akin. Is it nitrogen or phosphorus?
Dr. Magnien. It can be both. In marine systems, it tends to
be more nitrogen but phosphorus could be involved. In the
freshwater situations, it tends to be more phosphorus that kick
up these large blue-green algae blooms in freshwaters. And it
also connects with another important issue in HABHRCA, which is
the dissolved oxygen or hypoxia problem. So all these things
are interrelated, and that is why we----
Mr. Akin. But these reduce the oxygen in the water, don't
they, the algaes?
Dr. Magnien. Right. Well, you have a sequence of events
where the excess nutrients pouring into these water bodies
create an overabundance of algae, the algae eventually die,
decompose, settle to the bottom and the decomposition process,
they use up the oxygen, leading to fish kills and loss of
habitat, and that is one of the reasons why you have heard so
much about predictions here. We try to put all this complex
science together in models and in a way that managers can make
decisions. You know, we can't just wave our arms and say
nutrient pollution is a problem. We need to be specific and
say, you know, if you reduce it X percentage, this is how it is
going to affect the algal blooms.
Mr. Akin. But certainly the farmers have an incentive,
increasingly an incentive, to be sparing with their
fertilizers, so with the new GPS systems where you are
literally putting just the fertilizer in you need, has that
become pretty effective in knocking it down from where it was
10 or 20 years ago?
Dr. Magnien. Well, it is certainly helping but we still
have got a huge issue there and actually NOAA has been talking
recently with USDA to try to work with them and address this
nutrient problem as well with EPA and other State and federal
agencies that can influence the situation.
Mr. Akin. Can you comment on the change? I mean, if you
take, for instance, clean air--I am from the St. Louis area. If
you take a look at the air that I was breathing as a high
school student, which I thought was pretty good air, I didn't
have much other alternative but to breathe it, but if you take
a look at that air by today's standards, I mean, it is orders
of magnitude cleaner than it was when I was in high school. Do
we have the same kinds of improvements? Because this is a
problem that has been around for a long time.
Dr. Magnien. I would say we have comparable improvements on
what we call the point sources of nutrient pollution such as
wastewater treatment plants and industries. We have done
yeoman's work there just here in the Potomac River. Some of
those images that we saw earlier, the green paint-type covering
of the water used to be right here in the Potomac in the 1960s
and 1970s due to the wastewater treatment at Blue Plains and
other big treatment plants. That has made a remarkable recovery
comparable to the air issues. Where we are still struggling is
what we call the non-point sources which are primarily
agriculture, runoff from urban areas. It is much more
difficult. It is much more pervasive. It is not an engineering
fix at a particular pipe, so we need to continue to be vigilant
there and work with new technologies and methodologies to help
reduce that problem.
Mr. Akin. Mr. Chairman, I know that my time is expired but
I thank you for your patience and thank you for appearing all
of you as our witnesses.
ECOHAB
Chairman Lampson. Thank you for your good questions. The
chairman will recognize himself for five minutes.
Mr. Ayres, as a coastal fisheries manager, what NOAA
projects and efforts are most helpful to you in dealing with
the impacts of harmful algal blooms? What could this program
provide that would be more helpful in the management decision-
making process?
Mr. Ayres. Well, a recently completed or nearly completed
ECOHAB-funded study of the movement of Pseudonitzschia, the
plankton species that causes the problems the most significant
on the Washington coast, has provided us a lot of detail about
how that happens and has given us much better insight into how
those plankton species move and when we might expect problems
with the shellfish that we are managing along the Washington
coast. I mean, as Dr. Anderson pointed out earlier, continued
data collecting is so important to that, and the federal
funding--specific research. We have an understanding of how
that works but still continued visits to the area offshore, the
offshore sampling that the state does not have the capability
of funding needs to occur in some way, and Dr. Anderson talked
about ocean observing systems being a possible way of doing
that, whether it is opportunistic ride-alongs on NOAA vessels.
We have some staff out this week on a NOAA vessel offshore just
in an opportunistic way collecting some samples in this
specific area, the Strait of Wanafuka eddy. It is a region at
the mouth of the Strait of Wanafuka where these plankton
species tend to congregate and bloom and then eventually
perhaps move on to the Washington coast. We are also affected
by blooms that come from the south part of our coast and that
also affect the Oregon coast, widespread areas, and there was
an ECOHAB proposal that was identified for funding, and as Dr.
Magnien pointed out earlier, there wasn't enough funding to
actually allow that to go forward, at least during this fiscal
year, and hopefully it will happen in the future. So additional
work like that, ECOHAB, large studies over these large ocean
areas that can identify not only the oceanography but the
specifics of what is happening, how do these plankton species
move onshore would be very helpful to managers like myself in
Washington and Oregon and down into California. We are talking
wide areas. And, you know, we have a trans-boundary area as
well where a lot of these blooms are coming out of the Canadian
waters and affecting Canadian waters the same as they do in the
United States. So continued cooperation with researchers in
Canada is certainly important as well. We do a lot of work with
Canadians on a lot of issues because of that trans-boundary
issue in Washington State. So the continued collection of just
primary data and then the larger-scale projects like ECOHAB can
fund is very important to managers like myself, especially in
the Pacific Northwest.
More on HARRNESS
Chairman Lampson. From a manager's perspective, does the
new plan that the research community has published, the
HARRNESS plan, address the needed priorities and help in the
prediction part?
Mr. Ayres. Yes. HARRNESS did a very good job of doing that
and I think a very good job not only for a manager like myself
in the Pacific Northwest but for managers all around the
country, and that is because--and I give NOAA a lot of credit
for bringing managers into that process, and not only fishery
mangers but human health managers early on and so we had an
opportunity to provide a lot of input, and if you look at
HARRNESS, you will see comments by managers like myself
throughout the document pointing out what is important to us
and HARRNESS did a very good job of that. And the RDDTT plan
did the same thing and it was a great opportunity for managers
to be a part of that process in a workshop format where we were
able to provide a lot of input into that workshop plan that
will eventually then influence the plan.
Chairman Lampson. Can we improve it? And Dr. Anderson,
would you also comment after Mr. Ayres?
Mr. Ayres. Pardon me?
Chairman Lampson. Are there any ways to make it--can the
plan be improved?
Mr. Ayres. Funding. Funding, funding, funding.
Chairman Lampson. That is the story of our life.
Mr. Ayres. Yeah, I think that is the primary answer.
Chairman Lampson. Would you make any comment, Dr. Anderson?
Dr. Anderson. Funding is always the answer, but one of the
ways to make that happen is partnerships among federal
agencies, and we could use the help of committees like this to
forge some of those partnerships. There are many agencies that
have mandates where harmful algal blooms are involved at some
level, and in fact, a number of them are not participating in
this national program. I could name a few, Department of
Agriculture, for example, or EPA in some ways on the marine
side in particular. So if we could form partnerships and get
some of these agencies to put their resources, even limited,
together, we would start to have successes. ECOHAB is a success
in large part because it is a partnership, as NOAA, NSF, and
EPA were in it for a while, as well as the Office of Naval
Research, and even NASA. So it is a partnership of agencies
that would all jointly fund projects. So to me, that would be
one of the areas where we could get some help.
Freshwater Algal Blooms
Chairman Lampson. I will ask a question for Dr. Hudnell.
What are some of the possible options for addressing the
freshwater HABs? Is research needed to understand freshwater
HABs much like was needed for the marine and coastal HABs
issue?
Dr. Hudnell. In my opinion, I believe it is very likely
that nutrients are an issue both for freshwater and marine
HABs. As we have heavy rainfalls, nutrients run off the non-
point sources which are harder to control, and they enter the
freshwater and they flow to the coast, and the water is all
connected so you have first of all the nutrients starting HABs
in the freshwater. They move down to estuaries. At estuaries,
you may have the same species, same types of cyanobacteria or
other organisms, but then you also can pick up new organisms
that thrive better in the higher salinity range. And then I
think it is likely that this issue about marine HABs and
nutrients, I just believe that all organisms require nutrients
and that if more nutrients are coming in, it is going to
further stimulate it, and it may not cause the marine HABs to
start but it may, I believe, feed them and make them worse. The
nutrient input reduction is critical, I believe, for
controlling HABs, for addressing other water quality problems,
and we should make a better attempt to control the input into
the freshwater where it all starts.
Second of all, in freshwater particularly, we can circulate
water where we know that it is too stagnant, where there are
dams built, for example, new reservoirs put in. We are building
lots of new reservoirs. Two-thirds of our population now get
their drinking water from surface water as our aquifers are
becoming depleted. We are building more and more of these, and
unfortunately, we tend to have more and more situations where
the water is too stagnant, too quiescent, and that is causing
blooms to happen in freshwater. And if you look at a place like
the Klamath River that starts in Oregon and moves through
California down to the ocean, in recent years the problem has
just become phenomenal with species of cyanobacteria called
Microcystis, and it often starts with some problems in the
upper portions of the river but then when you get to the
reservoirs where there have been dams built, you start to see
these massive blooms of cyanobacteria occurring there, and it
is because the water is so stagnant, and there we have seen the
highest cell counts I have ever seen anywhere in the world and
the highest toxin levels, many thousands of times above the WHO
guideline level for what is a safe level. It is a very
dangerous situation. And what happens is, these dams will open
up and let water out, and last year for the first time there
were so many cells that enough survived that they kept moving
down the river and they would be in one reservoir, move down,
be in the next reservoir, and one of the slides I had flashing
by showed them hitting the ocean and it was just all over the
delta. So it is a problem of both nutrients and cells moving
down the water, and in my opinion, the best thing we can do,
particularly in sensitive areas like shellfish beds, is
circulate water in estuaries and places where it is too
stagnant and prevent the nutrients from getting there to feed
those HABs.
Chairman Lampson. Do any of your--the program that you
mentioned earlier that you have down in Houston, have they
tried that in larger--or have you tried it in larger open
bodies of water like a lake?
Dr. Hudnell. We have just begun to do some of that. Some of
these lakes are, you know, more than 100 square miles. We are
now starting to work in Lake Taihu in China, which is their
second-largest lake, I forget, hundreds of square miles big,
and they have terrible Microcystis blooms every year. In fact,
last summer the town of Wuzi of several million people, they
had to shut down all the drinking water plants because there
was so much toxin in the water so people survived off of
bottled water for weeks until the situation came under control.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you very much.
Mr. Inglis.
Removing Phosphorus From Discharge
Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Hudnell, you had mentioned earlier the possibility of
removing phosphorus from discharge. Where are the economics of
that? I take it not very good and that is why it is not being
done right now, or can they be somewhat positive?
Dr. Hudnell. You know, there has not been research on that
near enough and there are no places to apply for funds for that
kind of research that I know of, but at SolarBee, we have
recently begun to look at this issue and trying different
approaches. What we are trying now is, where you have this
floating platform pumping up all this water to put a metal ring
around the water where it is coming into the unit and run
solar-powered electric charges that pulse positive and negative
off this thing, and what you can do is magnetize the phosphorus
and attract it to these bars. If you can develop a system that
will attract the phosphorus in and then you can go and
periodically exchange the rings, you can take all the
phosphorus off those metal rings and then refuse it. And, you
know, this is just a very small-scale first attempt to do this
but I think that potentially technology will allow us to do
very large-scale things like this at water treatment plants,
for example, and recapture that phosphorus. We really have no
alternative in the future because the phosphorus is going to be
depleted and we cannot farm without phosphorus. There is no
synthetic alternative. Every living organism requires
phosphorus but we are using up all the natural reservoirs of
phosphorus that we now mine, and like I said before, production
is predicted to peak in 30 years and the sources be depleted in
50 to 100 years. So there are many reasons that this technology
needs to--research needs to invest in this type of technology
to look at how to best recapture in an economical way these
nutrients that we are going to need for use in the future and
we need now.
Mr. Inglis. Dr. Anderson.
Dr. Anderson. If I could just add to that, I want to make
sure that we have it clear that only some of the HABs that we
deal with, both marine and freshwater, are related to nutrient
pollution. Certainly more so on the freshwater side, but many
of the problems around this country, if there is a nutrient
impact, it is sometimes subtle, and so when we try to move
forward with policies and programs, we have to look beyond just
saying the problem is nutrients. So I just need to make that
clear. And so there are other technologies that we need to help
manage those problems, whether it be predictions and detection
systems and maybe even some efforts for bloom suppression that
are not using nutrients as a preventive tool but in fact going
after the cells themselves with chemicals or parasites or
something else like that. But I just want to make sure that the
Committee doesn't get the impression that the answer is
nutrient reduction for all HABs.
Mr. Inglis. What could be the other--just to recap that.
The other possibilities are a natural phenomenon that is
occurring. Is that right?
Dr. Anderson. Yes.
Mr. Inglis. And perhaps some other variables. What would
those be?
Dr. Anderson. Well, again, let us go to my region. We have
looked very hard. We have not found a nutrient relationship
with the Northeast shellfish poisoning problems. So if you are
trying to manage that problem or do something about it, you are
not going to change the river outflows or the way the wind
blows and the types of storms we get, so the best you can do
then is to be able to understand the system, to predict it, to
forecast it so the shellfishmen and the industries are aware of
what is coming. You develop better technologies to detect these
cells so that you know exactly which areas should be closed and
which should be open. You can in a sense start having surgical
closures of harvesting instead of closing an entire coastline.
You can close here and there but not over there. And so you
have to live with the fact that these are natural phenomena and
learn how to manage around them, and in that case, that is
plain management.
There are also other areas that we have talked about where
technologies can be used to suppress a bloom or control a
bloom. That is what everyone keeps asking me. If you can
control mosquitoes, why can't you control a red tide? It is a
complex answer to that, but there are technologies out there. I
have mentioned the clay, I have mentioned viruses, parasites
and so forth. They all need more research. They all need pilot
studies and then some actual demonstration projects to show
whether they will or will not work and then we can perhaps get
society to start to accept them. I mean, I will just say that
same thing. Imagine your estuary, the Puget Sound is about to
be invaded by some major organism that is going to destroy who
knows what, salmon or something like that. Right now, I don't
think we have the knowledge or the mandate, a government agency
mandate, to be able to go out and stop that invader. We have
those same problems for HABs, and I think that something needs
to change to help us fight that battle.
Mr. Inglis. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Lampson. Dr. Baird, you are recognized for five
minutes.
Drinking Water Quality
Mr. Baird. Mr. Chairman, I would say that one of the
reasons I particularly enjoy this committee is, we get to
address issues that are not on the political radar screen but
may actually be very profound both economically and from a
health perspective.
I want to ask for clarification or edification for myself,
the toxins that are produced from some of these HABs, my
understanding is, they are not--when we look at our normal
water filtration and treatment systems, my understanding is,
some of these toxins are not filtered out. In other words, if I
were a hiker going to a lake that had a HAB in it, I might get
my usual filter out and think oh, you know, I am thinking I am
going to get out, you know, Giardia or something like that, but
the toxins themselves can still be toxic even with normal
filtration. Is that accurate?
Dr. Hudnell. Well, I can speak directly to the freshwater
cyanobacteria toxins, and that in fact is one of the things
that worries me the very most. There is a lot of data from
Florida, for example, that shows if you repeatedly measure
toxin levels in the raw source water and in the finished
drinking water, many times you will find the toxin levels to be
higher in the finished drinking water than the raw source
water. The reason that occurs is because when you bring in
water to the plant, one of the first things you do is filter
it, and when you filter it, that lyses or breaks open the
cells, and then the cells release all their toxin into the
water. And normal drinking water processing as shown by the
Florida just does not get these toxins out. And I have looked a
lot into this issue with one of my colleagues who specializes
in this, Judy Westrick, and other people, and what you find
when you do laboratory tests is that even if you take only one
toxin, one cyanotoxin which is Microcystin, well, actually
there are over 80 known analogs of that toxin, and if you look
at different methods to try to deactivate, breakdown, or get
rid of that toxin, you find that some things work for a few
analogs, some work for a few other analogs. There is just no
way that we can get all of these toxins out with any kind of
affordable processing. The only answer I can see is that we
simply have to prevent these toxins from coming into the plant
in the first place, and surely if you go out camping with your
water filter and you see some green water, I would hope you
will not try to filter it and drink it because it is not going
to work.
Mr. Baird. I used that as an example because I think we
have become accustomed to think oh, we have water treatment
centers that will protect us from this, and the point is, this
is a different kind of entity that is our problem.
I want to go back to this issue of nutrients. You know, a
couple years ago, Dr. Ehlers and I were working on a bill
relating to harmful algal blooms and I put in a provision to
deal with the causes of it, and it was interesting, this
provision got completely hung up for reasons unknown to us. We
could not understand it. We had to put a lot of work in. Why is
someone blocking it? It turned out a staff member, who was also
on the ag committee, didn't want research looking at the causes
of this lest we demonstrate scientifically that runoff from
farms or agricultural operations, feedlots, whatsoever, were
causing HABs so this portion of the bill got just completely
hung up, and I am interested in--and Mr. Ayres, you deal with
the economic costs downstream of this. What are your thoughts
or your experience or yours or anyone else on the panel of
trying to reduce the upstream inputs that may contribute
collectively to damage downstream?
Mr. Ayres. Well, certainly the downstream economic impacts
are big, and not even well quantified, although in my written
testimony, you will see there is a study that is about to be
completed that will give us some insight in our specific case
in Washington State on the economic impacts of some of these
fisheries, and I agree with Dr. Anderson, at least in the
Pacific Northwest example, we are not sure if there is any
specific causes of the blooms that we are seeing. They are
naturally occurring. Are there some specific nutrients that are
coming out of the Strait of Wanafuka? I mean, the Strait of
Wanafuka empties water out of the Puget Sound region, the
Strait of Georgia, some big population centers, so it is not
impossible to believe that that might be the case. But I don't
think the science has proven it to this point to be the case.
But certainly if there were some proof like that and there was
some ability to reduce the impacts these HABs have on our
coastline as a result of reducing some of the upstream effects,
that would be a good thing, and I agree with that, but I don't
think the science yet in our case in Washington State says that
is the case. In other places in the Nation where that is the
case, certainly, the cost-benefit issues that you talked about
earlier should be looked at and balanced accordingly.
Dr. Hudnell. If I could, I would like to say that while
there is some controversy about how much nutrients are involved
in the red tides, marine HABs, there is really no controversy
for the freshwater HABs. It is very clear that nutrients are
the driving force. Nitrogen and phosphorus are the two most
important--cells need three things. They need carbon, nitrogen
and phosphorus and then some trace metals. But there is some
plenty of carbon. You can't do anything about that. There is
some nitrogen and there are species that can fix nitrogen. They
can take unusable forms out of the air or water and fix it in
the forms that they can use for nutrients. And then phosphorus
is the only thing that is limiting for everything, so it is
important for freshwater to keep the phosphorus out, and the
ratio between nitrogen and phosphorus determines which type of
cyanobacteria bloom. So it is important to get them all out.
But it is clear that with the freshwater issue, reducing
nutrients will reduce the occurrence, but it is a very long
time frame where you can reduce nutrients in an area that
always has--annually has HABs. It will be a long time before
you can get the nutrient level down to where you won't have
them, and there are a couple reasons for that. We have already
dealt some with the point sources by reducing nutrients coming
out of the pipe. As has been said, it is much more difficult to
deal with the non-point sources, and we need better research
and effort into best management practices to reduce the amount
of nutrient we are putting on plants to begin with and then to
find better ways to contain the runoff and maybe recapture the
nutrients there before it finally gets into the freshwater.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you, Dr. Baird, and thank all of
you. Dr. Baird, you are right: This has to be the most
fascinating committee in Congress. We get to hear some
significant things and hopefully learn enough to be able to
react to what it is that we are learning because of its impact
on us and----
Dr. Hudnell. If I could make one more comment about that?
Chairman Lampson. Please do.
Dr. Hudnell. I was in a kind of in the middle of an
uncomfortable situation in Florida related to this nutrient
issue, and you are talking about competing interests. The last
couple of years I was invited to talk at a number of localities
in Florida because they were trying to really rush legislation
that would say in our locality, you cannot use certain types of
fertilizer, you have to limit the amount you put down. They
wanted to pass restrictions on fertilizer usage because, you
know, they have grass up to the edge of canals and all that
fertilizer going in the water and big blooms, but on the other
end, you have the huge agricultural interests in the middle of
the state who are doing lots of farming and doing--using lots
of fertilizer and they are coming down the rivers and so there
was a situation where the state was trying to pass a fertilizer
regulation that would say this is what we are going to do and
localities cannot do beyond this. So the localities were trying
before the state passed theirs to get their placeholders in
place so that they wouldn't be blocked from passing legislation
on fertilizer. So we really need some kind of national
leadership to help the localities and the states see the best
road to take to do the right thing.
Chairman Lampson. Thank you very much, and thank all of you
for all your comments. We appreciate you being here.
Under the rules of this committee, the record will be held
open for two weeks for Members to submit additional statements
and any additional questions that they might have for the
witnesses. This hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]