7837 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CONCLUSIONS AN D RECOMMENDATIONS This section presents the Task Force's conclu- sions and recommended approaches for reducing the risk of adverse consequences associated with intentional introduction of aquatic organisms. Various aspects of the recommendations are directed at a wide range of entities, including State and Federal agencies, private industry and Congress. Recommendations are accompanied by explanatory text and printed in bold face for easier recognition. A discussion of some of the options considered but not adopted by the Task Force is presented first. In the Options Paper circulated for public review, the broad spectrum of options from total bans on introductions of nonindigenous species to total regulatory noninvolvement ("laissez faire") was discussed. Though a single participant in the review process expressed the sentiment that only "profit and image" should be primary considera- tions, no participant fully supported total regula- tory noninvolvement nor does the Task Force. Several participants did support essentially total bans on introductions of nonindigenous species. The Task Force does not support total bans on the use of nonindigenous species (see also "Prohibitions and Enforcement" section below), Other general approaches that the Task Force considered but does not recommend include requiring extensive Federal permitting for all interstate movements and linking tough, Federally mandated guidelines (e.g., a rigid Model State Code or set of Federal minimum standards) to financial disincentives (fines) for failure to comply. The Task Force felt that both would be extremely difficult to put in place (both financially and legislatively). An interesting twist to the linkage of a Model State Code to disincen- tives was to link compliance instead to indemnifi- cation-i.e., if a State does comply with the Model Code, it would not be subject to liability suit by an adjacent State or other entities with standing. Though the Task Force is not ready to recommend this approach, further consideration is warranted. Despite the hesitance of the Task Force to sup- port these particular variations on the approaches, the basic concepts of a Model State Code and some form of Federal involvement in interjurisdictiona] cases received considerable support and are at the core of some of the rec- ommendations. The Task Force is not ready to support the punitive nature of such a linkage, the extent of Federal control, and the inordinate costs of implementation. Recommendations that the Task Force does support are ones that pro- mote education, cooperation, and accountability. These were recurrent themes in participant responses throughout the review process. Further, because the Task Force believes that prevention is key to risk reduction, most of the recommendations center around the decision- making process. A GENERAL RECOMMENDATION: For the recommendations in this report to be implemented effectively, both agency funding authorizations and appropriations must be consistent with the level of activity required by Congress in the authorizing statute, and requested in the President's budget. Effective implementation of the recommenda- tions presented in this report will require the sup- port of Congress-perhaps with additional legislation; in supporting the President's budget request for these activities; in all cases with appropriate oversight. EDUCATION AND EXTENSION: One of the most important conclusions of the policy review process was that there was broad consensus that while nonindigenous species issues were extremely important, in general they were poorly recognized and not well understood. Consequently, "education and extension" and "research" (following section) were by far the most widely supported concepts presented in the Options Paper. The Task Force therefore feels strongly that "education and extension" and "research" recommendations should be aggres- sively pursued regardless of the eventual form in which other options are adopted. 13