STEVENS T. MASON BUILDING ● P.O. BOX 30028 ● LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909-7528

 

State of Michigan

 

JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM

governor

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Lansing

K. L. COOL

director

 

                                                                March 25, 2003

 

 

1.                  Bill Number and Sponsor:

 

Senate Bill 229

Senator Birkholz, et al.

 

2.                  Purpose:

 

To amend 1996 PA 199, Michigan Aquaculture Development Act, by adding a definition of Genetically Engineered Organisms (GEOs) and Recombinant Nucleic Acid techniques.  The bill also distinguishes each variant of a species as a separate aquaculture species, and excludes GEOs from aquaculture research permits unless specific permission is granted from the Director of the Department of Agriculture.

 

3.                  How Does This Legislation Impact Current Programs in the Department:

 

Many nonnative aquatic organisms, including GEOs, pose serious risks to native aquatic species and environments.  By prohibiting their importation into the State, future introductions and biological catastrophes can be prevented.   

 

4.                  Introduced at Agency Request?

 

No.                                                                             

 

5.                  Agency Support?

 

Yes.

 

6.                  Arguments Against the Bill:

 

Certain aquatic organisms considered harmful and/or unwanted in Michigan are legally reared in other states and countries.  As part of the aquaculture and aquarium trade, they represent a commodity to be bought, sold and transported.  Whether for food, cultural practices, or biological control, multiple values are associated with these species.  GEOs, due to their faster growth rates, represent a more efficient, and therefore more profitable, product for aqua culturists.  It is likely that the private aquaculture industry would be interested in experimenting with GEOs.

 

7.                  Arguments For the Bill:

 

As part of a package of bills, this legislation assures that unwanted aquatic organisms will not be brought into aquaculture facilities in the State.  GEOs species disrupt native ecosystems, present difficult challenges for natural resource managers, and can out compete, displace or even exterminate native species.  Additionally, once a new aquatic nuisance species or variant species is established, it can be extremely expensive to control and oftentimes impossible to eradicate. 

 

8.                  State Revenue/Budgetary Implications:

 

None.

 

9.                  Implications to Local Units of Government:

 

None.

 

10.              Administrative Rules Implications:

 

None.

 

11.              Other Pertinent Information:

 

None.

 

12.              User Groups/Constituents that Support this Legislation (if known):

 

Michigan United Conservation Clubs, Michigan Environmental Council Trout Unlimited, Michigan Bass Federation, Michigan Steelhead and Salmon Fishermen’s Association, Federation of Fly Fishers, and others.

 

 

 

 

 

                                                         K. L. COOL

                                                         DIRECTOR

                                                         MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

FI