The recent identification of a harmful mussel species in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta has raised alarm among experts, who allege that California authorities have not efficiently implemented laws aimed at safeguarding waterways from invasive species transported via ships’ ballast water.

California enacted a law two decades ago mandating that officials inspect 25% of incoming vessels and analyze their ballast water prior to discharge. However, true testing only began two years ago when guidelines were finally established, and such testing remains an uncommon practice. Of the approximately 3,000 ships expected to have disposed of ballast water near the coast, officials have managed to sample only 16 thus far.

There are calls from experts for stricter regulations and improved enforcement measures regarding these practices. “It’s not surprising that another invasive species has emerged in the Delta,” stated Karrigan Börk, a law professor and interim director at UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences. “This trend is likely to persist.”

The invasive mussels, which originate from eastern Asia, have been found in multiple locations including the Port of Stockton. They are the first of their kind discovered in North America. Should eradication efforts fail, these mussels could proliferate extensively across California, threaten native species, and hinder the infrastructure responsible for distributing Delta water to urban areas and agricultural operations.

Ted Lempert, a former Bay Area Assemblymember who introduced legislation in 1999 to prevent the introduction of alien species via ships, expressed frustration at the current situation. “We aimed to be proactive, so it’s disheartening to see some of the scenarios we tried to avoid realize,” he commented.

However, Greg Ruiz, a marine ecologist with the Marine Invasions Research Laboratory at the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, argues that the occurrence of invasive species flooding new areas frequented by vessels is a numbers dilemma, which can happen despite stringent regulations and oversight. “This is not indicative of system failure,” he remarked.

Ballast water serves an essential function for ships, providing stability while out at sea. Typically collected at a port of origin and released at destination ports, it is a significant channel through which invasive species—and potentially harmful pathogens—can spread.

The environmental risk spurring these invasive species has prompted enforcement by the State Lands Commission, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Coast Guard through overlapping regulatory frameworks. The objective of these regulatory bodies is to minimize the number of living organisms in ballast water discharged into natural waters. Operators can reduce organism levels in their ballast water by employing methods such as ultraviolet light exposure, filtration, and chlorine treatment—which must be removed before discharge.

According to Chris Scianni, environment program manager for the State Lands Commission’s Marine Invasive Species Program, around 1,500 vessels each year release ballast water upon entering California waters. Officials are able to conduct inspections on nearly all of these ships, as well as an additional thousand vessels selected for various inspection criteria. During these evaluations, agents check ballast water logbooks, conduct interviews with crew members, assess water treatment systems, and occasionally collect water samples for analysis.

Despite robust regulations, adherence is still lacking. Though a state law from 2003 mandates sampling from at least 25% of vessels, commission representatives claim that this translates to inspecting 25% without specifying sampling requirements, leading to insufficient checking of incoming ships.

In 2023, official sampling began following the establishment of testing protocols by the commission. This process is substantial; acquiring a cubic meter of ballast water—amounting to one metric ton—can take over an hour while the vessel is discharging, with additional wait times for analysis results.

Federal authorities maintain their own oversight program but rely largely on self-reporting from ship operators, a practice criticized by many as ineffective. Effective compliance evaluations occur either through desk audits or on-site inspections, according to an EPA spokesperson.

Experts generally agree that while state and federal constraints on the organisms allowable in discharged ballast water are sufficient, enforcement remains inadequate. “We possess the highest ballast water management standards globally, yet actual enforcement never materialized due to inadequate technology,” noted Ben Eichenberg, an attorney with a local environmental organization.

Ted Grosholz, professor emeritus at the UC Davis Coastal and Marine Sciences Institute, concurred, asserting that the details of compliance are critical, as monitoring all incoming ballast water from ships is nearly impossible. Ruiz pointed out that records from the State indicate ballast water discharges at Stockton have aligned with state regulations since 2008. However, some vessels still arrive without inspection, and there are instances of operators deceiving safety checks by using clean ocean water to mask ineffective treatment equipment.

It is estimated that the golden mussel might have entered the Delta possibly a year ago, or even a decade ago, according to Ruiz, suggesting that such occurrences could have happened during a period when ballast treatment measures were less stringent.

The introduction of the mussel has created issues that lawmakers like Lempert sought to prevent with the Ballast Water Management for Control of Non-indigenous Species Act, which aimed to either have vessels retain their ballast water, drain it far offshore, or use environmentally sound treatment systems. Furthermore, California’s existing Marine Invasive Species Act and subsequent laws created by the legislature were designed to bolster these protections, establishing an ambitious goal for “zero detectable living organisms” in ballast by 2040.

While existing federal laws seek to curb the introduction of species like the golden mussel into U.S. waters, penalties for violations have been minimal. Over the past six years, the state has issued merely 24 fines totaling just over $1 million, with the federal government imposing only nine penalties amounting to approximately $714,000 since 2013.

Commission officials assert that the prevalence of noncompliant discharges has significantly decreased since the introduction of stringent regulatory measures in 2017.

California officials contend that achieving a target of zero organisms in discharged ballast water may be impractical, estimating it would necessitate a network of treatment facilities at coastal ports costing about $1.45 billion over 30 years, alongside another $2.17 billion for shipping lines to adopt ballast water transfer systems to link with these plants.

However, Eichenberg remarked that some vessels already use commercially viable systems that exceed current industry standards, indicating that the state has failed to mandate the most advanced technologies that could nearly sterilize ballast water, thus facilitating the introduction of the golden mussel.

The regulations established by both state and federal authorities, based on international standards, provide limits on zooplankton-sized organisms in ballast water, capping their level at 10 per cubic meter. Although the allowances for smaller organisms are higher, researchers have shown that even treated ballast water may still carry significant zooplankton concentrations.

As the landscape of ballast water management shifts toward federal oversight, concerns are mounting regarding potential relaxation of regulations that California has implemented. New regulations from the EPA set to roll out in approximately 18 months will likely render state laws ineffective, maintaining existing organism concentration standards, yet disallowing states from enacting stricter guidelines. Advocates for environmental protections fear this change could promote leniency within the shipping sector.

Numerous environmental advocates argue that the federal standards fall short of environmental necessities, pointing to existing technological capabilities that can nearly eliminate organisms in ballast water. The EPA remains adamant, asserting their stances justify the standards established in the new regulations based on available test data.

The detection of the golden mussel in California has mobilized urgent responses from state and federal authorities, given the widespread damage these species have caused to water systems internationally. Experts warn that past examples highlight that eliminating nonnative species is most successful early on, making any delays in action potentially detrimental.

Biologist Andrew Chang has likened the challenge of managing invasive species to sealing toothpaste back in its tube, emphasizing that the more delay experienced, the harder the task becomes. MacIsaac warns that California may face the potential onset of a relentless mussel invasion, rising to a level of significant concern.