1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND AND SCOPE

The Secretariat of the Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP) commissioned URS Australia Pty Ltd (URS) on 1 December 2003 to compile and briefly review literature and material available globally on best practice for the management of introduced marine pests.

To help achieve this goal, URS consulted with a range of bioinvasion managers and researchers to locate recent published and non-published information from various published, non-published and internet sources.

The desktop compilation and mini-review of existing information is required by GISP as the first step in its plan to produce a toolkit specifically for the prevention and management of invasive marine species. The scope and objectives of the initial step have been as follows:

1. Provide a compilation of all relevant literature and material available globally, rather than an in-depth analysis of the pros and cons of different approaches.

2. Cover all possible pathways/vectors of ‘invasive alien species’ (IAS) in the marine environment with a focus on actual rather than hypothetical cases, including intentional and unintentional introduction pathways, plus natural range expansions resulting from climate change and other human activities.

3. Include case studies demonstrating ecological, economic and social impacts (such as the Caulerpa taxifolia ‘aquarium strain’ in the Mediterranean and elsewhere), best practice manuals (e.g. the Rapid Response Toolbox in Australia’s National Introduced Marine Pest Information System), information on relevant technologies (especially new developments and voluntary guidelines such as the IMO guidelines on ballast water management), and recent regulations at sub-national, national and international levels (e.g. the New Zealand Biosecurity Act 1993).

4. Cover all aspects of IAS management, i.e. from prevention through early warning and surveillance systems, eradication, containment and monitoring, management and control.

5. Make the maximum possible use of web-searches and appropriate mailing lists within the time constraints of the study to provide the broadest possible coverage of reports, many of which are grey literature.

A review summarizing the collated material was also needed, as well as lists of the literature, websites, manuals, experts etc, reviewed or consulted. This included compiling a bibliographic appendix to list the collated published and grey literature references, species databases, toolkit materials, web-based information sources, and the home page or contact address of all national, regional, international and multilateral organizations and agencies relevant to marine pest management. Because many terms used in bioinvasion management are by no means clear cut and often confusing1, the review also provides a comprehensive glossary (Section 2). The text has tried to avoid unnecessary jargon and highly technical terms wherever possible, to assist international readers whose first language may not be English.

1 see Carlton (2002) for more on this topic (in Chapter 2 of Invasive Aquatic Species of Europe [eds E

1. INTRODUCTION

1.2 APPROACH AND METHODS

The overall approach was to widen and up-date the literature, database sources and case histories provided in GISP’s previous publication on invasive species management (Wittenberg & Cock 2001), with the focus on marine taxa. A wide geographic spread of workers was messaged by email or telephone to solicit information and material allowing preparation of case histories. The short project schedule and its seasonal timing constrained our ability to solicit and receive contributions from workers around the world for updating old and/or providing new case studies (many were away or had taken early Christmas/New Year leave). Nevertheless information was sourced from researchers/administrators in the pilot countries of the Global Ballast Water Programme (Brazil, China, India, Iran, South Africa, Ukraine) plus workers in Argentina, Australia, Canada, Croatia, Germany, Israel, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, Sweden, the United States and United Kingdom.

Based on the materials and responses obtained in time for this report, over fifteen cases covering a range of geographic regions, invasive species and management outcomes have been included. Although the brief is focussed on marine species, euryhaline freshwater cases have been included since several European seas, American embayments and internal

‘seaways’ (including the Bohai Sea in northeast China) contain species in this category which have been spread via marine shipping – including the Asian golden mussel to South America and the many NIS exchanged between the Ponto-Caspian and North America (e.g.

Leppäkoski & Olenin 2000). It is also worth noting the ICES (1999) definition of a marine species, which is “any aquatic species that does not spend its entire life-cycle in fresh water”.

Although bioterrorism is a potential vector for transmission of harmful aquatic organisms, it is not covered in this report as the species most likely involved would be non-marine taxa for disrupting water supplies or agricultural resources.

1.3 STUDY TEAM AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The study team comprised Rob Hilliard, John Polglaze, Tim Mitchell, Ian LeProvost and Jill Regazzo (URS) and Kerry Neil (CRC Reef Research Centre, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland). Gratitude is expressed to the following for their kind assistance in providing advice, information, case history materials, reports and contact information during and/or before the drafting of this review:

Dr Boris Alexandrov, Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas (Odessa Branch), Ukraine Academy of Sciences, Odessa.

Dr A.C. Anil, National Institute of Oceanography (NIO), Dona Paulo, Goa, India.

Mr Craig Astbury, WA Department of Fisheries, Perth, Western Australia.

Dr Ian Austin, URS, San Francisco, California.

Dr David Barnes, Antarctic Research, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Dr David Blair , James Cook University, Townsville

Dr Michael Browne, ISSG, University of Auckland (Tamaki Campus), New Zealand.

Dr Steve Coles, Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii

Mr Matej David, University of Ljubljana, Portoroz, Slovenia.

Mr Zhao Dianrong, China Maritime Safety Administration, Beijing.

Dr Flavio Fernandes, Instituto de Estudos do Mar Almirante Paulo Moreira, Arraial do Cabo, Brazil

Dr John Gilliland, South Australia Government.

1. INTRODUCTION

Dr Barbara Hayden, National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Dr Keith Hayes, CSIRO Marine Research, Hobart, Tasmania

Dr Chad Hewitt, Biosecurity Unit, New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries, Auckland.

Mr Steve Hillman, Australian Ballast Water Consortium, CRC Reef, JCU, Townsville Mr John Lewis, Defence Science & Technology Organisation (DSTO), Melbourne, Australia Mr Tomohiko Ike, Environmental & Energy Solutions Inc., Kamata, Tokyo, Japan

Professor Erkki Leppäkoski, Åbo Akademi University, Turku, Finland.

Dr Andrew Marshall, Department of Business, Industry & Resource Development, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia.

Mr Jawahar Patil, CSIRO Marine Research, Hobart, Tasmania

Mr Ian Peebles, AQIS, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra, ACT Dr Brian Steves, SERC, San Diego, California

Dr Rupert Summerson, Fisheries & Marine Sciences Program, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra, ACT.

Ms Simona Trimarchi, Ports Corporation of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

In document A REVIEW BEST PRACTICE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF INTRODUCED MARINE PESTS (Page 8-11)