7837 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE ISSUE Nonindigenous aquatic species have been and continue to be a source of socio-economic bene- fits and costs to many sectors of American soci- ety and a threat to the maintenance of biological diversity. Despite this significance, nonindige- nous species issues in general are vastly under- recognized. Nonindigenous species are used extensively in research, biocontrol, the aquarium industry, pub- lic and private aquaculture, and public fisheries management. Hundreds of species are imported by the aquarium industry on a regular basis for resale or as broodstock for domestic production. Much of marine aquaculture on the Pacific Coast is based on the nonindigenous Pacific oyster. Fisheries management in many States has involved the use of nonindigenous species. Pacific salmon, for example, are not indigenous to the Great Lakes but form the basis of a large recreational fishery. Despite these benefits, there are risks associated with intentional introductions of nonindigenous species. In the context of this report, the defini- tion of "intentional introduction" encompasses more than deliberate stocking activities. It includes escapes from aquaculture or aquarium facilities and activities such as dumping of bait- fish and home aquarium species. Such introduc- tions may lead to the decline of indigenous species through predation or competition for resources. Introduced species may alter habitat affecting human activities and those characteris- tics of the habitat on which indigenous species depend. If not properly screened, introduced organisms may carry serious pathogens or para- sites. Local adaptations of wild stocks may be genetically based, and an inadequately consid- ered introduction may affect their viability. Such risks are as likely to be associated with inten- tional introductions as with unintentional introductions. THE FRAMEWORK Primarily in response to the introduction of zebra mussels into the Great Lakes, Congress enacted the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (Act). Zebra mussels probably were unintentionally introduced via bal- last water, and the major focus of the Act is to set up a framework to reduce the risk of uninten- tional introductions and to monitor and control nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species. The Act establishes an interagency Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force (Task Force) responsible for developing a framework to address the problem of nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species. The Act also contains specific provisions for control- ling zebra mussels and a mandate that the Coast Guard promulgate regulations to prevent further ballast water introductions into the Great Lakes. Several Federal agencies have been involved in zebra mussel control activities. The Coast Guard ballast water management regulations became effective on May 10, 1993. Section 1207 of the Act mandates that the Task Force conduct an Intentional Introductions Policy Review. The purpose of the review is to provide Congress with recommendations for "reducing the risk of adverse consequences asso- ciated with intentional introductions of aquatic organisms." This report is the product of that review. The policy review process involved a broad spectrum of potentially affected entities and benefitted greatly from their diverse views and approaches to these complex issues. Two central concerns of the Task Force that reflect this complexity are: 1) the need to make ecologically credible decisions, and 2) the need to strike a balance between greater risk reduction and accommodating current activities and economies that depend on the use of nonindige- nous species. Because of the difficulty in extir- pating established aquatic species if they should become nuisance species, the Task Force has adopted the principle of adequate review before an introduction takes place. The Task Force con- cluded that: 1) to the maximum extent possible, decisions should be based on ecosystem consid- erations, and 2) the recommendations should